@Smurfette's dropkick: "People are getting sick of the government going beyond what they can afford right now". Then how about we undo those vile Bush tax cuts, pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and put the budget back into the black?

@scarbrtj: How is that quote relevant to this discussion?

@SAThorn: They money is going to the ISPs, not actual people. The ISPs get incentives to expand the coverage, then people in the newly covered areas pay for their service.

@moonshadowkati: Why not work on both?

@yantelope: This isn't a Constitutional issue. Congress' job is to make the laws, which can't violate the Constitution. Congress absolutely has the authority to make monetary incentives for ISPs to expand broadband into rural areas. They should because it would improve the lives of Americans, and because people…

How are 5% of people still on dial up?

@The5thElephant: I agree about the third party devices.

@zukny: For your friend and most podcasters, the front facing camera would be more desirable than a rear facing one. I would enjoy a front camera too, especially for Facetime and other video conferencing.

@Ioncloud9: I think the front facing camera is a good idea. Just not a rear facing one.

@Slinkytech: I guess. But the size and weight would still make it unwieldy. I'd rather use my iPhone for that.

@ignacio reyes: I think the front facing camera is more likely than a rear facing one. The front facing camera would work great for Facetime.

@Slinkytech: I have an iPad, and given the size and weight, it would be beyond awkward to have a camera on the device. Imagine using a hardcover book as a camera, and you have a general idea of what that activity would feel like. However, a small front-facing camera for Facetime would be nice.

@PoG: They might use Android. That would be the smart choice. A heavily skinned Android 2.x would be my bet for any Amazon device above the Kindle's functionality.

@nacatak: They signed the agreement because, in 2006, no manufacturer decided how to make their phones. The carriers decided what the phone would be, and the manufacturers just designed to those specs. Apple broke this mold by building the phone they wanted to build and THEN putting it on a carrier. AT&T, for their…

Apple isn't letting this happen. They would kill to be on all carriers. They Can't. They have an EXCLUSIVITY AGREEMENT with AT&T.

Is it just me, or do the quality of the new apps seem to be decreasing?

Not having been around in 1981, can anyone tell me if this procedure was controversial or not?

@FlawedHero: Precisely. That exactly what I'm thinking of doing.

@Diyomaro: You might be right. I'm not sure.

@Paul Bentham: Sorry, typo.