Verizon takes the subsidies offered by the city/state/county/township, and is beholden to commitments made in order to get the subsidies knowing full well that they will hold up the lawsuits for failure to meet those arrangements in court long enough that no fines will get levied.
The control freak nature was an attempt to control and prevent competition. It served/serves them directly to stifle competition thereby protecting revenue and preventing change. So in short, they are consumed by money and the best way to protect their revenue is through being control freaks. Control of a means of communication is power and money.
A bird does the same if not more damage than a drone does/would. That is for a drone under 55 lbs. How many drones do you see in that weight class?
Yes, but liberty and constitutional republics.democracies have always come with a known cost/risk. It is a signifier of respect for the citizens and their capacity to reason what is right/wrong and act thereupon. It is a citizens right to operate within a law or not. (Civil Disobedience). What she is asking for is akin to statist control. We don't need controls when we already have a fully functional judicial system of laws and penalties.
A law is different beast altogether, than preventing your liberty to break those laws. This is a software limit enforced by the state. Put a law in place, don't put statist controls in place.
The FAA is already doing this. What part of Diane Feinstein needs to put input about what the updates to the software will be? I trust her lying Surveillance State pushing anti liberty perspective in no way whatsoever. The software and hardware I use is open source so people like her cannot control yet another aspect of my life.
If I drink and drone, and do something illegal I deserve the punishment. People like her would mandate we cannot drive our own cars, because what if we do something that endangers the children.
This is why the Flight Controller I use is Open Source. Control mongers like Diane Feinstein have no say in the software. This is the same lady pushing for back doored encryption. There is nothing in the interest of citizens that runs through her veins. One day she will attack open source as an enemy of the state.
Why make it easy for Assange? They want to use him as an example of why you don't fuck with US intelligence agencies run amok. If they wanted to solve for this they could've done this via phone or Skype etc at any point along the way. Also the justice department in Sweden might see this for what it is likely to be.
In the wake of Snowden, they are preventing the most obvious proof they were spying on their own country from within it's own borders.
Duh? Show me exactly where I said it was wrong to make profit asshat. For the rest... look it up yourself or post some more stupid youtube videos on your blog.
The reason they didn't want this to begin with (i'm speculating here) is profit. They wanted to make people buy newer and more games. That didn't work, so now they have to pretend when they said it couldn't be done that they weren't lying.
You have zero evidence about any of the ridiculous claims you concocted. As for eloquence, I'd dare say Ellsberg is/was brilliant and eloquent, but my suspicion (since you misspelled Chelsea Mannings name) is that you probably spend too much time listening to Alex Jones/Info Wars, rather than thinking. You also ignore the fact about the Snowdens Field Time as a CIA agent in Europe, in a lame attempt to pretend he was no better than a Devry tech student who could never possibly have this level of information.
What is the exact narrative you think Snowden is spinning, which others like Ellsberg who have given public support for his whistle-blowing, as well as the other 4 post 9/11 NSA whistle blowers who have supported his position equally?
This is what Obama is doing though. Don't conflate the two wrongs.
If by smackdown they deserve, you mean: The phone company who we cannot sue, holds the metadata they'd been giving to the NSA prior to this. Now that is legally encoded in law, not an Act with a sunset clause. Not much changed... yet, except for making their collection mostly legal.
Here's hoping this is the necessary kick in the pants for Open Source hardware/software, that people need to protect us from the "protectors".