Less.

Lame.

Like all telecommunications, internet service depends on infrastructure, either in the form of wires in the ground running through public right of way obtained through franchise agreements with state or local governments or using radio spectrum that is licensed via auctions. If you don't understand that using those public goods to deliver your product means that you're already operating outside the free market, then of course you don't understand why ending net neutrality is a threat to free speech. Internet access is ultimately a utility, and should be regulated as such.

As long as most elections in the US are single-member first-past-the-post contests, third parties are a non-starter. You can't express yourself by voting for a third party, because if you do, a megalomaniac real estate development and TV host might become president.

No, but they would threaten to.

They were saying that fifteen years ago. The domain name system isn't going anywhere because that shit works.

Now that it's been firmly established that Google will remove content that courts in whatever $COUNTRY deem blasphemous, I suppose it's only a matter of time before places like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Texas start to get in on the action and start censoring content they find offensive, like journal articles on evolutionary biology or pictures of women driving. Way to put (outdated) ideas over people's fundamental rights, Google.

To Eben, Liz and crew: Congratulations! Looking forward to watching you revolutionize computer education!

Your assumption is that once the sport channels are removed, the price of basic cable will fall. I am not sure that the cable companies are on board with you here.

I know I'm feeding the troll but...

I'm running the Windows 8 developer preview (64-bit) on a five and a half year old laptop. Granted, I kicked the RAM up to 4GB ($44 shipped from NewEgg) and replaced the Core Duo with a Core 2 Duo (a T5600, $25 used on fleabay buy it now), but it runs well at 1900x1200 on hardware I basically rescued from the dumpster. You need to update your stock lines and stop mindlessly bashing.

Similar story appears only five stories down. The editing on this site SUCKS!

Is this really that hard?

This is the same thing a misbehaving child does when he's about to get paddled.

"But Billy did it toooooooooooooooooooooo!"

Grow up already. This is the future of humanity we are talking about here, not a couple of children refusing to share some toys. Regardless of what China and India do, we are screwed unless the US reduces its carbon output. The difference is that we already have the resources and the technology to do something about it, our population is just a bunch of whining brats who can't accept that we can't go on the way we are going. I can't believe that you have the audacity to insist that over two billion people in China and India must be forced to remain impoverished and underdeveloped before you'll be willing to pay slightly higher taxes on the gasoline and electricity that enables you to live in a McMansion in the suburbs. Actually, I can believe it, I just don't want to.

Damn it.

Teens who spend 3 hours plus on Facebook a day and send 120 plus texts a day have more sex than those who don't? You're kidding?

Who would have ever thought that teens who spend more time maintaining their social relationships than their peers ended up having sex more often than those who didn't?

Next you'll be shocking us with the revelation that frequent texting is inversely correlated with library card use and Quiz Bowl participation.

If you manage a company for stockholders, you have a fiduciary duty to maximize profit. The article says that the company's founders claim they have a "sacred purpose", but if that's the case, they should have sought out donations, not investments.