Yeah, like driving to the mailbox.

I work for the government, and uh, bullshit.

The advantage to using Drupal for the White House is that it's a popular CMS and has lots of people patching exploits and vulnerabilities. The second a proof of concept piece of code or an easy exploit is discovered, a few thousand developers will descend to get their patches submitted.

As opposed to your homegrown CMS, where you only discover the security holes when 3gotiZt posts pictures of full frontal nudity on the home page of your site.

It is certainly the point. If you keep up with European politics, you know that's the big issue right now. "Access" is not the same thing as "paid for by someone else." No one can deny you *access* if you're guaranteed. End of story.

I think you're reading way too much into this. No one ever said broadband would be provided, any more than the US government provides people with firearms. The point, I think, is that this would prevent anyone from arbitrarily shutting you down the way France is considering doing in the event of IP violations.

Did you read the article? There's no indication there or in any of the source reports that the Finnish government ever said anything at all about prices.

Who said anything about price controls?

Who pays for the arms you have the right to bear?

Way to change the subject there.

Get yourself elected president and we'll talk.

Dude, give the guy props for not being George W. Bush. That's an accomplishment the U.S. can be proud of.

Er, uh, how is the genius engineer going to explain his/her idea to the communication genius if he/she is not capable of communication?

You understand that this isn't about marketing, right? The purpose of the essay is to distinguish between the engineer who can engage other engineers and the one who can't — it's not aimed at finding the engineer who can develop a branding campaign for his/her widget.

The notion that there is _any_ field of human endeavor in which communication is not essential is just ridiculous.

Yes. I think we can all agree that someone's facility with language is no indicator of the quality of their ideas. That's why the best TED talks are characterized only by grunting and the throwing of fecal matter.

Here's a suggestion: Why not simply split candidates' heads open and look at the ideas themselves?

I disabled my entire computer, so I don't have to worry about any malware at all.

Morevoer, there's not really any principle at work here. It's only duplication of functionality when the functionality they are citing is something they want to sell personally. There are a million fart apps.