That is trouble with democracy sometimes your side looses. The good news is free societies also let people move. That was not true of like the Soviet Union for example.

I highly doubt Scotland or Quebec will bar folks from leaving especially to return to their former Canada or UK nations.

The is nothing necessarily wrong with that. If they get a warrant to do than its fine. If they do so without a warrant they will CLEARLY have been acting as an agent of the state and the evidence will be in admissible.

What this does is give Apple cover from the accusation they are providing a convenient back door for the government to go on fishing expeditions. "We don't let the FBI/NSA/etc" just browse thru your stuff on our servers because we can't just browse thru it."

It does not mean for a second they won't cooperate with a legal warrant.

It used to be people only had one TV and everyone watched the same thing. It isn't a lie that 4Mbps is enough! You can utilize pretty much any online service offering with that. You are not missing out on any economic opportunities etc with access to that much speed. You can telecommute with that just fine.

Would you like more so everyone can use it at the same time, sure you'd probably also like everyone in the family to have their own bathrooms and their own car too but plenty of house holds can't afford those either. Unlimited wants limited resources is nothing new.

Lets be careful with "needs" vs. "wants" here. I think it would be a good policy to try and make sure everyone has access to "broadband" and that needs to be defined so 128k does not get called broadband, but we also need to avoid setting the bar to high so the effort does not fail or get written off as too pricey.

2 Netflix streams is asking a lot from 3Mbps but have you considered it might be your router that is the issue. I have a 3up/6dn connection and I don't have any of the problems all these people are complaining about with their 10Mbps+ connections.

So either their ISPs suck and are way over subscribed so the fact they get 10Mbps to the CO is meaningless because from there they just queue

Or their home routers are not up to the task. That 7 years Linksys probably can't handle large numbers of flows and high packet rates well. Probably not even enough to saturate 3Mbps connection in worst case conditions. Really get yourself and ASA off Ebay or go buy a nice shiny new higher end consumer device on Newegg. You will probably find things run much better.

Maybe you should consider living somewhere else than if you want a career in IT. Through all of history the characteristics and features of a geographic location have dictated the type of economic activity that goes on there.

Ever wonder why big cities tended to be near rivers or coasts ( at least prior the development of the automobile? ) there is a reason!

Wonder why all those orange groves get planted in Florida and not Maine?

I do IT consulting work mostly from home, but hop a plane about one a month currently. I am looking to live to more rural area myself because I am hiker and it would be nice to near on of the big State or National parks, but I have made it perfectly clear to my real estate agent that I can't look at properties unless they have good high speed internet service available at the location (by good I mean 800Kbps up down or better low latency; which is enough to remote into virtual servers where you do your real work from at the corporate offices).

You just don't always get to have it both ways! If you want to work in Information technology you probably have to stick close to where certain infrastructure is, and there are good economic reasons for where that is and isn't. You probably should consider another career path or maybe moving.

I am not sure where some of your numbers are coming from but you are correct about one thing. There are likely *many* unreported cases out there.

I hope we are not putting our service people into harms way against an enemy that they are not trained or equipped to fight; just to look like we are 'doing something'.

I got news for you a whole lot of people are going to die and suffer no matter what. The only question is where will the blame fall. As long as we are involved in the conflict there will be anti-western propaganda and spin that blames their problems and misery on us and there will be at least some who believe the lies and half truths.

Where as if we let a generation of those folks grow up without seeing a American war plane fly over, without knowing anyone first hand that dies in an American air strike, without watching NATO soldiers walking through their streets; the idea that all their problems are because of the "Great Satin" will ring a little more hollow.

Do you really think if expended even 1/4 the amount of resources we invest in the middle east on controlling our boards they'd have the slightest chance of being able to pull off another attack like that?

I don't.

We could be opening every shipping container unloading , inspecting every truck, doing background checks on every inbound traveler, before admitting them and probably save tons in both blood and treasure. It would be far more effective at controlling the risk and threat of terror.

I'll admit I bought into the "we have to fight them over there..." rhetoric when Bush fed us those lines too. I know better know. I think Obama is probably the worst president of this nation has had post WWII and am still glad we did not elect McCain.

We also need to "get real" about the seriousness of the problem. 9/11 was shocking but it was a one time event they have not been able to repeat. Its hard to say for sure with all the crazy government secrecy but the evidence that is out there suggests it has not been the security apparatus that has prevented a repeat but rather the extremists own inability develop the assets here will the skill sets required to execute a successful attack. Statistically you about as likely to die falling out of bed as you are from some kind of terrorism connected event.

Considering just the lives we have "invested" in this fight we could suffer at least more several 9/11s before it will have made any kind of economic sense.

Considering the dollars, I can't find many good numbers because its hard to separate the economic costs associated with the attack from the costs we incurred in our war runup/execution. I'd be they could crash lots of jets into lots of towers with all the economic knockon effects there in before it come close though to the wealth we have thrown away in the middle east.

Oh I don't either bank is threatening to stop or even reduce banking service available but to move their head quarters. Which dictates where the tax revenue goes.

Which is exactly why we should 'STOP' fighting them. If we want to see an end to militant Islam we ought to let ISIS have their run of things for a while. I am sure after a couple decades of ISIS rule the only holy war any Muslim will ever sign up to fight again will be against these 12th century throw backs!

That and as much noise Lloyds and RBS are making about moving to London assumes the will have time before the generally leftist Scottish government nationalizes them. That is not something I think they were planning but I would not be surprised at all if someone gets that idea when they make moves to flee.

I don't think its as clear cut as are you going to die without antibiotics. I and I think everyone pretty much believes they are over prescribed.

However you have to consider that most of us are not living in sparse populations with infrequent travel anymore. Its not like if you are sick you can do the minimal work to keep the farm running and for go that trip into town for a couple weeks while we convalesce.

Most folks have jobs they have to be at with only an handful of sick days and they have to go to shared grocery stores, many might use public transportation, children go to school, etc. If you don't treat them they will have higher levels of infection longer, and are more likely to infect others. More people infected means more bugs out there total, which probably also means more mutations and more potential for a really virulent strain to develop as well.

That is one of the concerns with the Ebola outbreak right now, there is concern that if some intervention does not arrest the total number of infected individuals it could evolve into something airborne and we may find a really uncontrollable plague on our hands.

So there is probably some fuzzier line the medial professionals will have to draw. As a lay person I can't say much more than its probably NOT a good idea to keep passing them out to healthy livestock. Doctors should probably stop giving them to kids they think have viral infections just to make parents feel like they are doing something, but perhaps if they feel it might prevent a complicating infection maybe they still should. We probably should continue to use them on people and pets when we believe the infection is bacterial; but really impress on patients the need to complete the therapy and ensure that the colony is completely wiped out.

The thing is AS admins have been lazy. Broadly speaking I agree with what you have to say and I agree a central authority would very likely cause more problems than it solves. AS admins do need to take a middle ground though, and implement some route filters. For instance if you have a route that sits on transpacific cable in California you should probably be filtering routes with at least a few broad rules like; !ARIN

A little direction for a central authority like IANA that laid down some rules like filter routes along political and regional boundaries could go along way to prevent things from happening like half the US getting routed via China, etc; while doing little harm to the resiliency of the network (so long as rules remain simple and few). Will it stop things like that bitcoin theft a few weeks back, nope but it will keep them in country where there will be a consistent legal framework in place to handle shenanigans

Its not novel but its simple and clean. Minix is really an education tool more than a production ready OS.

That is pretty much because the router you are using is weak sauce. Its partly true. Protocols without congestion control UDP/ICMP for example could saturate your connection. The Internet as it exists today though is mostly a TCP affair. TCP has congestion control. To manage the incoming priority what you do is have your local router queue the ACK responses and delay them for the TCP flows you have at lower priority. The remote side will slow down its send rate until the ACK response rate falls inside a window.