I think that could, in the modern American political discourse, be the refrain. Have a look at a map. Generally speaking, urban areas vote blue and in favor of some sort of a national vision, whereas rural areas consistently lap up a steady diet of misinformation that says they are supporting the cities when every outlay from the state capitals to even the federal government suggests the opposite is true. The rural areas say they hate government and redistribution of wealth - fine - then let them do without the wealth redistributed to them and maybe cities, unshackled by them, can begin to turn their own finances around.

So how is the business model going to be different than that of Iridium? How much will they have to charge, will it be profitable, and what's different this time?

Laws prohibiting municipal broadband are entirely anti-city. In a country where politics is such that cities are routinely decried (while ironically states redistribute their tax revenues to rural areas and suburbs), I think it is time to frame broadband rights as a freedom from government for cities.

Cities should be allowed to be more independent from the states that hold them. They should not be stripped of the competitive advantages that localized economies of scale provide. They should be allowed to offer their own utilities, to toll the interstates that cut through them, and they shouldn't have to pay a gasoline tax that largely serves rural interests, and above all, part of that independence should be to allow them to offer broadband.

You invent externalities as if there is some kind of mandate that "Society has to bear the solution to some problem." Here's the reality. I absolutely do not. You can't argue in generalized terms about the affairs of humans in a digital age where everyone is perfectly capable of understanding their economic interests. If I live on a big hill, I don't have to care if your beachfront sinks. If it is cheaper for me to burn coal to heat with, I'm going to burn coal. It's that simple. Raising the taxes on my energy is really, to me, you screwing up my life so that you can have your fancy beachfront house. It's equally not fair, either way, and there's not so much as the notion of external costs as it is you are looking to raise a rent on the poor to preserve your beach property and fancy solar sailboats while the rest of us try and buy bread. We don't need you. We don't need your coasts. There's too many people already, as your side is fond of saying!

Your theory of damages is entirely ridiculous. If I burn a mount of coal in Kentucky, then the best you can say is that technically, perhaps, I helped make global sea levels rise. That would suck if you were living in New York or on the coast.

But, let's review the science:

a) CO2 is making sea levels rise and warming the planet and changing the climate. But no mathematical or climate model has been remotely accurate. The models do NOT actually predict climate, and that's really a huge problem. So you can't remove my burning coal mountain, then re-add it, and hold me culpable for anything, with any degree of certainty at all other than your lunatic religion.

b) Any contemplated action proposed by the environmental left, from carbon taxes to transaction taxes, has the effect of creating an enormous economic problem for the poor and middle class. If I 'm poor, I don't care if the coastlines sink. I don't own my building. Landlords do. So screw them! I'll move! Why should I care about your solar panel house in New Jersey with your scenic rich yardwork, when I'm poor in Kentucky? Answer is, I don't. All I see is that you want to make my fuel more expensive, my food more expensive, everything more expensive, when I'm trying to get the basics, and that cuts into whatever savings I have... makes me poorer, and having your cronies take those taxes to build a library for "me" doesn't cut the rusk as some kind of compensation.

So the bottom line is that. If you really want to save the planet, then go right ahead and invest your money in whatever it takes to make green stuff. If it is cheaper, I'll buy it. But if you are going to spend your life making my life miserable to save your beachfront property, when I don't even have property worth saving other than a burning pile of coal and a rifle, then show up claiming you are coming after me, then you're gonna get the rifle, and deserve it!

Did you just point out that those people insulted men twice as much as they insulted women?

Women who weren't there. The men were there.

When women are present in the discussion, the numbers skyrocket.

The Prez wants to hang with Aurini, because bitches, man.

I just did a cursory count on that 8chan GamerGate page. It's their clubhouse.

The word "autist" or "aut" appears 17 times.

The word "nigger" appears 8 times

The word "faggot" appears 26 times

These are the words they use when addressing each other. But when it comes to referring to women, they lose all creativity.

"Cunt" appears 12 times. "Slut" appears 5 times. "Pig" appears 3 times (in reference to a woman). "Whale" appears 5 times (again, in reference to a woman's appearance). I can go on, but I've got to get up early tomorrow.

Just in case you think I was being hyperbolic when I said I was speaking to the Gamergator in his own language.

If you wonder how GamerGate got it's reputation a for misogyny..

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/G...

I'm just using the vocabulary of GamerGate to talk to a Gamergator.

Don't believe me?

http://www.8ch.net/gamergate/ (Scroll past the stickies)

...a small formfactor regular Bluetooth keyboard strapped directly to your wrist would be more practical than the entire glove for this, especially since needlessly constraining the hand and fingers doesn't appear to add any functionality, just inhibit movement.

The artist in the video seems to be doing all right.

Anyway, who's to say what's best for an artist? I mean, Picasso painted the Sistine Chapel while lying on his back and that had to really suck, not to mention it cost him an ear.

Progressive in press release say 'we hypothesize it's because nerds don't party or stay out late'

Nonsense, I've been to board game parties where 6 of us went through almost a whole quart of 3.2 beer. We rocked the house until almost 10:30pm. I mean, it was a work night after all and I had to get home to watch the DOTA2 quarterfinals on Twitch.tv.

And yet, even with hundreds of millions of dollars worth of persuasion, not to mention all the coddling and discriminatory policies in favour of females, nothing has changed.

Actually a great deal has changed. It drew GamerGate out of the sewer and exposed the ugly side to men in tech.

Now it's on the front page. The neckbeards got the last thing they wanted, attention. And sunlight is a great disinfectant.

I thought we were talking specifically about the disproven child porn charges and not your little SJW anti-gamer spin-job?

Sorry, I had my autists mixed up. Here you go:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/G...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

No the reason they are doing that, is the same reason they are doing that in every industry. Lowering costs is good for profits, its a simple as that.

And nothing is more expensive than a workforce that nobody wants to be around.

Seriously, anyone here who works in tech: What do you think of the quality of your co-workers? Do you think maybe there's room for some improvement? When you've got senior tech guys talking in a mixed room who are making frat-boy jokes about their dicks, I guarantee you're not going to get the best people for the job.

Lol, the Daily Dot as a source.

Don't like that one? Here, take your pick of over 100 references:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

I realize you don't think Wikipedia is as authoritative a source as Encyclopedia Dramatica, but...Oh, just fuck off, aut.