Nah, he gets Rupert Murdoch's hand-me-downs. Murdoch long ago gave up on free-range urchin hearts - he now farms them in a huge facility under Slough.
For a few, yes, but look at the averages.
Yes, but you can easily set your device to wipe after 10 incorrect passcode entries. So, what this really means (assuming that Apple's statements are true) is that, in the event the police want access to your iDevice, their only option (unless they're willing to play 1000:1 odds) is to get the passcode from you.
The reason you don't think it's even close to a two way street is precisely due to the fact that the necessities of rural living are subsidized.
If they weren't, cost of living would skyrocket... and suddenly, all natural resources would be unaffordable to most people in urban areas.
This fundamentally doesn't make any sense. Say current subsidies to rural areas are $X. Those are clearly enough to get people to live there, work in agriculture, mining, etc. If the subsidies went away, then prices for some goods would rise, but they wouldn't rise by, in aggregate, any more than $X, by definition.
Things would, overall, work themselves out, absent the subsidies. Living in rural areas would become more costly, meaning you'd have to pay people more to live there, so food prices would rise.
$60k/home, 24 people, 3 mile radius. So, that's $1.44M to build out. 3 mile radius is about 28 square miles. Even if that minimum commitment was only 10% of the homes in that area, you're talking (at about 2.5 people per home) about only roughly 21 people per square mile. That's very rural. Typical suburban density is more like 2500 people per square mile.
Google Fiber is only building in VERY specific locations, with optimal physical characteristics (either all aerial plant, or ground that's easy to trench through), with optimal density, with optimal income levels. They're cherry-picking aggressively (which is the perfectly reasonable thing to do). Google Fiber certainly isn't talking about overbuilding areas which are rural enough to qualify for USF subsidies.
Please provide a citation, of what HHS _actually_ told him. Not Sessions's _description_ or _interpretation_ of what they told him.
No more than I'm "condemned" to substandard living by choosing to live in a city where I can't afford several acres in my backyard.
Rural areas often subside things like mass transit through regional governments as well so it's a bit of a two way street.
It's not even close to a two way street. Urban areas massively subsidize rural areas, even just in transport, and even after you include the very modest subsidies for public transit. Roads are funded with gas taxes, which are related to miles driven.
Certainly - the person I was responding too said "with the exception of rural areas," so that was what I was commenting on. Rural areas are even tougher.
Fiber builds cost, in urban and suburban areas, about $600-700/home passed, plus $200 or more for each house you actually connect to it. Somewhat less, if it's all overhead plant, a LOT more if it's underground plant. In rural areas, fiber build costs can easily reach $3k per home passed.
"everywhere in the US already has fiber optic cable capable of getting gigabit speeds"
If you define "has" as "has within a mile," then you're absolutely correct. If you define it as "has passing the home," then definitely not.
Actually, it's more the distinction between "they broke into the bank vault and went through your safety deposit box" and "they pickpocketed you, and used your key and a fake ID to get into your safety deposit box."
For the copyright alert notices, they're just forwarding on notices from the copyright holder, when the copyright holder says "hey, IP address XYZ is downloading Captain America." Comcast just sends on the notice to whomever has IP XYZ (or had it at the time in question).