I am confused. Don't the vulnerabilities lie in the proprietary ESXi software?

As an actual atheist, I would like to correct you here. I do not "beleve there is nothing". I "do not believe there is something" because all the claims of something have failed to convince me. If a jar is filled with pebbles, and you make and a unsubstantiated claim that the the number is even, you are an "evenist". If I say I don't believe you, then I am an "a-evenist" who "lacks a belief that the number is even", not an "oddist" who "believes the number is not even".

Anyone capable of understanding and using traceroute is capable of typing "apt-get install traceroute" or "yum install traceroute". If you want an O/S that does not change, here is a list for you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... If you don't like the way Linux is developed, don't whine on Slashdot, get involved. Systemd does not claim anything. It is code. Can you pick and choose? Of course. "systemctl disable ". Show me a single developer who said something was rewritten "simply because [it was] old."

Please read Asimov's "The Bicentennial Man." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...

I work for one of the listed companies. I support the law. We collect official criminal records and give them out to prospective employers. "Personal" data should not be trafficked without explicit consent. "Public" data, such as egregious criminal convictions, should be available to those whom it affects. (Determining what are "egregious criminal convictions" is not well defined, and should be publicly discussed and legislated.) A small proportion of criminal records are wrong. Some are disseminated by courts despite the fact that the records are sealed by a judge. Some are attributed to the wrong people. We give our reports to the person being looked up, so that they can correct it before we give a final version to a potential employer. We remove all racial and ethnic identifiers from our reports. Only one state law requires that, but we apply it to all records, as it seems like it is unnecessary and likely to be abused. The law is frequently laxer than we would be. For example we don't report on any old, minor convictions over, even when a state law specifically allows it. (Texas lawmakers, I am talking to you.) Bottom line: even though I believe my company is a good company and acting ethically, no company is in itself a moral actor. It depends on the people in the company. And since I can imagine my company with other people in it who are more willing to make a buck, I support the regulation whole-heartedly.

The first amendment does not apply to corporations. Peuple have rights. Corporations are fictions we make up, so we can apply whatever rules we want to them.

Let me think of a way to say this gently... you're an idiot. I think I failed. Sorry. Telepathy as generally defined by people is Not Real. Nor is homeopathy. Nor god. You can come up with a vague general sort of something that might pass for telepathy that you could claim was real, but the thing the common man calls telepathy does not exist. Thank you for your attention.

I'm confused.

What market do they monopolize?

In what situation does anyone not have a choice as to whether to use some product or service offered by google, or one offered by another entity?

If you're a (any free email service) user, your messages and emails likely aren't as private as you'd think. (Your email provider) reads each and every one, .....

Both the EFF (https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/03/new-backdoor-around-fourth-amendment-cloud-act) and the ACLU (https://www.aclu.org/blog/privacy-technology/consumer-privacy/proposed-cloud-act-would-let-bad-foreign-governments-demand) think the CLOUD act is a bad idea.

Not *everyone* would have to switch to it. And not everyone would (at least among those that had other options to start with).

But merely knowing customers had another option would hopefully put some pressure on the existing services to keep prices down and service levels up.

they plan to offer this on a competitive basis in all areas of the US (especially rural or suburban areas that currently have none or maybe just one existing broadband option, but even in areas that have both cable and phone options)

And that the pricing is within the reach of the average middle to low income person living in such areas.

Previously I've only seen experiments that focus on providing service to third world countries but ignore the bast under or unserved areas in the US (cough, project loon)

If this ever becomes fully available everywhere in the US, and is priced affordably, it may finally signal the start of the death of the monopolistic stranglehold the current broadband providers have on the market in the US.

That the current FCC seems to be approving of it, suggests to me that it WON'T. It will probably be priced similarly to other Musk offerings, so high as to only be affordable to people with 6 figure or higher salaries.

Because if there's one thing we know Pai protects, its the guaranteed mega profits of his corporate masters.

Got a link to a site or story that accused Trump of being a Russian agent?

If not, then your post is the exact sort of "fake news" that the story is about - putting words in other people's mouths.

1. Will the products be physically in stock for you to buy, load in your truck and take home? Or will it just be some sort of display where you have to order them and then wait?

2. Will they be anywhere near in a price range that someone could buy without taking out the equivalent of a 2nd mortgage?

Youd have the option to subscribe to cellular internet. Or you could opt to rely on using wifi (which could even be by tethering ti an existing cell)