I do sometimes see Fox and Washington Times but at no higher rate, more often less, than NY Times, BBC, etc. I also see articles from Al Jazzera and the Hindu Times.

Personally I use Google News specifically because it gives me a view from diverse perspectives. If it only showed sources from the left or the right I would stop using it. I believe the truth is usually somewhere in the middle and I can't find that if I only get news from only one perspective.

Not sure what you consider far right or Christian. Looking at the top 10 results in google news (signed out) shows NPR, Bloomberg (x2), BBC, CNN, NY Times (x2), Al-Bawaba, and Washington Post (x2). None of these strike me as either of those and some quintessentially the opposite.

Is this what you are thinking of when you have india in mind?

http://www.ubcitybangalore.in/

Have you ever been to India? And in particular have you ever been to Andra Pradesh? Or are you just stereotyping a nation?

I can tell you first hand that Andra Pradesh is a very different place from Deli, Mumbai, or Bangaluru (Bangalore). AP has a lot of very rural areas and getting from point A to point B is difficult because the roads are horrible (often dirt) and they have major issues when it rains (monsoon season) when the roads become mud.

India also is a country that is trying to modernize and create new jobs based on technology. This increases the standard of living for everyone there. You see this in Bangaluru where there are first class shopping centers catering to the new wealthy who made their fortunes in high tech. Your concern for the "peasants" looks to be both biased and short sighted to me.

I am not sure that regulations stating that every business must post TOS for everything that they believe is a good idea. Stores would have billboards declaring values and ideals.

First, my personal view is I abhor hate speech. But I can believe that something is wrong and still allow others to practice it. For example I don't use drugs but if that is something you wish to practice why should I tell you that you can't.

To deny one group freedom to manage their business as they see fit because they can censor hateful right wingers (which you as the government agree with) and tell another group that they cannot run their business as they see fit because their belief runs counter to yours is discriminatory and runs counter to the libertarian view. In that case you have proven their point that it is a leftist agenda.

While I totally agree with this idea it has not always worked this way in practice, leading the right (esp the extreme right) to feel that it is "leftist" censorship. The case of the baker who refused to make a cake for a gay couple, was sued and lost shows that corporations don't always have the right to do business the way they want. As a libertarian I think GoDaddy should be able to refuse to host anyone they see fit and bakers should be able to refuse to bake cakes for whomever they don't want to. The inequity gives the appearance of favoritism for one side.

AT&T. Verizon. Frontier. And a whole host of other player.

Google was interested in getting fiber with high speed access to more people because access means more google applications (and therefore revenue). Honestly I don't think Google ever cared about Google Fiber being successful as a business. What they cared about was kick starting the the above mentioned carriers into better faster networks so they can generated bigger faster revenue. It is the same reason Facebook is looking to deploy networks (e.g. wireless via blimps in rural areas). With the advent of the CORD project (under ON.Labs) higher speed access is being made less expensive through commoditization of the access interfaces. This means that they can deliver up to 10G services and can reduce the cost of 100M - 1G services which is what Google wanted. Really I don't think they have any interest in being in the access business.

I can tell you that this plan (if true) has largely worked. When I speak to the carriers (I do this for a living) they have OTT (Over The Top) envy, saying they need to be more like Google, Facebook, Amazon and Netflix

.

This is the exact space I work in. 10G PON (XGS and NGPON2) both have an OLT that still resides in the CO. Several of the carriers are working with a new technology called CORD which is coming out of ON.Labs (not a company but community) that uses open source software and commodity servers to backend the optics on the OLT.

The other interesting tech in this space is G.Fast which uses a 10G PON port from an OLT and a DPU to deliver HSS over existing copper in a building. So you drop a two fiber link, as you describe, in basement of an apt building and you can deliver up to 1G into the apts in that building. These technologies are the future.

Yep, lets close all the hospitals started by religion because they do no good, only harm. Let's close down charities that help the needy, they also are so harmful. Nice trolling.

In Soviet Russia SuperDre controls your freedom of thought!

You do realize this has been done before, right? The USSR banned all religion as did China. Are you saying these are shining examples of what we wished the world looked like? What you wound up with were human rights activists that tried to help the people of the Soviet Union and China regain their human right to freedom of thought. Why do you think the government should have the right to tell people what to think and believe?

Beyond that, who are you to enforce your belief system on others? As much as I think that Islam is to blame for the violent acts of some I would not steal the rights of those who practice it peacefully. If you take away the rights of people to think and believe what they want then you are the same as the religious police who in this case arrested the man. After all you will have to punish those who break your law and believe what they are not allowed to by your law. Will you too serve a death penalty for believing something that you don't like?

Taking away freedom of thought is never a good thing.

This. It amazes me how people have no idea what they are talking about post utter non-sense and then get on Slashdot. When AT&T acquired DirecTV they were required by the FCC to pass 12.5 million residents with high speed broadband and they are building the infrastructure to do that. How do I know? Because I work for a vendor who just completed an RFP to supply exactly that.

Time Warner is for content, not service delivery. TWC (Time Warner Cable) was spun off years ago and has already been acquired by Charter (Spectrum). AT&T has transport in the form of U-Verse and wireless, they have TV distro in the form of DirecTV, and now they are adding content.

People may have concerns about big companies and I understand that, but don't make stupid statements that make no sense if you knew the first thing about the industry.

I think the little green men on Mars heard that the the Europeans have a long storied history of bringing diseases to the New Worlds and they blew it our of the sky with their ray guns.

No, if I come to your house and I find a key under your flowerpot, open the door and enter am I authorized because the key gave me access? Clearly not. If simply having a password was authorization then not only every hacker (e.g. brute force) but every stolen ID would be "authorized". Just no.

North? I don't mean to be flippant about this but if you look at the history of mankind people have migrated due to physical needs from time long before recorded history. As the equator heats so do the northern regions, and that make those northern areas more habitable. You could say that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Problems at one part of the planet mean positive changes in another part. I know this may not be a popular idea but change is not always a net negative sum loss.

There are plenty of negative results due to a warming planet. Ice caps may melt changing the ocean levels and salinity, animals in areas may lose habitat. But it also means that crops can grow further north and those areas become more habitable. Of course migration does become a political issue but it seems to me that the migration issues that are extent today, caused by geopolitical reasons, are substantially worse than moving due to temperature change.

My point in all of this is that if you make a solvable issue sound insurmountable because you want to make a political point you weaken you position. Once they see you exaggerate in one area they assume you exaggerate (or make stuff up) in all areas because of your agenda. Be honest about the positive effects along with the negative and you won't have so many deniers.

Well, no. First you said you must pay tax on EVERYTHING. That is far from true and it largely depends on your state and area. Some states do tax everything, however most don't tax food bought in a grocery store (as opposed to restaurants which are almost universally taxed AFAIK) . Even there it gets tricky because they may not tax a bag of flour but some will tax soft drinks. Some states tax clothes (like TX), others (like PA) don't. There are many rules. Some states (like NJ) have areas that pay lower (e.g. 1/2) percentage in economically poor areas of the state. It's much more complicated than tax everything. Others add tax for counties, cities and even a public transit tax is added. All of this makes it not just difficult for remote vendors to collect but most people have no idea what they will pay when they ring out at the store.

In terms of paying the sales tax most states collect sales tax as a part of the income tax payment. That is when you pay your income tax there is a line that asks for how much you didn't pay in sales tax - the part that people skip. I live in a state with no income tax and I don't file to state - every. AFAIK there is no mechanism for me to pay sales tax on out of state purchases if I wanted to.

Oh, and Oregon isn't the only state with no sales tax. Delaware, Alaska, Montana, and Mew Hampshire also have no sales tax.