I disagree. And it's one of many many things why I like eLinks over Links1/2/Hacked, w3m or other text-mode browsers (defined in Options: Protocols->URI Rewriting->Smart Prefixes). Sometimes one facility for multiple different functions is indeed a Good Thing.

There is little reason to limit browsers main text based access field to one access method (URI's) - especially if there's a way to limit what you can do from that field somewhere in browser setting (not sure, but I recall seeing such settings in FF). I've optimized my browser for quick keyboard only access (I also have add-on for mouse gestures, the point being avoiding having to change between the controlling devices unnecessarily) with such add-on's as Keysnail and Mouseless Browsing, yet I don't even remember the hotkey for search field (I only use it to select "Manage Searches..." or to add new search engines) as searching is way easier done from the general access field, prefixing the phrase or URL (latter comes handy when quickly accessing translate.google.com for current URL with C-l C-a t [space] [return]) with letter or short word for engine/site to search (s->startpage.com,g->google.com,w->wikipedia(en),wfi->wikipedia(fi),sana->sanakirja.org(multi-language dictionary),y->youtube, etc.).

I also like how it can list bookmark entries matching the word(s) you type, often giving access to what you want faster than through bookmarks menu - which I have naturally sorted into subfolders up to reasonable level, but that doesn't help at all when what you're looking for could reasonably exist in more than one subfolder; which is where matching your words to bookmark/subfolder names and keywords comes very convenient and quick.

I use that field for those three reasons, I know when I'm using it to type URL or search or to find bookmarks, and the browser knows it well enough to present what I'd expect in dropdown list just perfectly. God knows what could there possibly be that I would find better in usability (THE keyword) with having to use three separate fields for each access method but I'm sure that, with proper settings and possibly add-on's, it could be done with FF if someone likes it better that way. As it is now, I don't know what there is to complain in the way it currently works, even if you don't want to use the field for searching: Enter the URI you want and off it goes anyway. Only thing that annoys me is not knowing another way to access "Manage searches..." than through search field's drop down menu, which unfortunately keeps me from removing the separate search field from the UI alltogether.

Watched cops are less abusive cops.

+++This.

Modern technology is now enable to provide, if combined with proper laws and regulations, to the question of "who watches the watchmen", and I don't feel surprised at all to see some of the watchmen attacking this (as they always are with anything threatening to limit their powers). What worries me the most however is the number of people, who are claiming (and not dishonestly) to oppose any movement towards police state, attacking this because it supposedly is bigger invasion of privacy (in public or in case of police entering your house with your permission or warrant), all the while there are concrete breaches of privacy and/or other rights constantly breaken by police officers ready to back each others story who, if implemented correctly, would be unable to act so and use the shield of the law to break the law (on peoples rights at that) without facing severe consequences.

Some arguments though are good for discussion of what kind of laws and regulations are needed to make this actually work for the good of people - however some people are sadly using them to oppose the whole idea. Nevertheless they do bring forth issues that need to be taken for account.

Of course the vast majority of the time those who drive this distrust of the police are decidedly lawless themselves, and have good reason to fear the authorities.

Haven't I heard this kind of accusations, made by police or politicians, before on other subjects about new changes to limit police rights to invade and breach other (civilian) peoples rights as they see just based on their own discrimination, Mr. Officer?

P.S. You shouldn't really feel quilty about racism of other people - only your own. No large groups of people have zero people with racist (whether using the current "spoken language definition" or the dictionary/scientific one of the word) tendencies, in fact we are so far from being civilized societies (yet anyway) that the percentage in any groups is probably unfortunately high. Yet I take no personal shame of my species for the shortcomings of other's - my own shortcomings are burden enough for me, thank you.

...also, your link made me (again) wonder why the officers are so heavily armed and so trigger happy in the US the first place. Here in Finland the police has to do paperwork and explain each and any shot they take, and shooting an unarmed man just for escaping would unlikely come to consideration of even the most aggressive cops in the country. The police here are known to avoid using possibly leathal force and, in fact, even them shooting a "warning shot" in the air is so rare it makes to newspaper headlines.

After he talks you into turning off his camera, because you're both reasonable fellows

The police officer should not have any acceptable reason to even suggest such thing, and if a complaint was made it should count very strongly against him if he did - after all, up to the point the "talking into it" would have been recorded and any defence lawyer worth his shit should be able to use that to tear the officer a new one.

Of course I understand the laws are rarely written perfectly (and thus they need to be adjusted time to time) but, in comparison, the current situation would protect nobody any better if the cop wanted to beat your hiney.

I'm all for this and have little problem with the so called "privacy issues", provided that the laws (and the devices) are designed properly to minimize any risk of tampered and/or missing evidence. I see much more privacy issues without this than with this, and I would also like to extend these laws to require private security firms to use this and tougher laws to deal with so called "missing tapes"/"broken camera" issues to protect the rights of civilians.

Only fear that I have is that the "missing footage" type of stuff will be allowed to continue, as it is nowdays with security cameras and complaints against security guards or police (the latter not being much of an issue here in Finland, but in many countries it's different).

There should be serious investigations if a complaint is made and a camera, which is OK for most of the time, but conveniently doesn't happen to have the recording at the time of the incident the complaint is about - and serious consequences to those who have access to these things. Private security firms should in no case have more leeway than police has, but that is unfortunately not always the case :(

Why is there a baby wearing what seems to be an octopussy costume?

Aye, personally I couldn't respect the person who would use that statement on me.

Your ancestors were primadonnas who couldn't make it here so they bravely ran away, and it shows in you.

It's a *kernel parameter* to enable debug log printing, not "some legacy cruft" that's been deprecated or supported for whatever (er, what backwards compatibility would it preserve? Kernel developers would change it if they would think there were any good reasons for *debug* *kernel* *parameter* to enable debug printing).

systemd is outside kernel, but it is launched by kernel and as such the developers can pass parameters to it only via kernel command line - However there is specifically a method meant for this: Linux kernel passes parameters it doesn't understand to other programs and ignores them. To enable systemd debug log you should use something like systemd.debug instead. There's no fricking way that outside kernel code, that is *user space application* should ever be able to dictate over standardized kernel design. That's just stupid, and any system started by kernel could potentially start using known parameters for their own purposes that differ from the kernel's, and it would be right for the kernel developers to deprecate that parameter - which would be really confusing to users anyway, kernel documentation saying one thing and some non-kernel stuff saying other...

Considering you have no problem using proprietary software, why were you using nouveau and not the official but sadly not open nVidia driver? I have since 2002, back then you could not just pull them from repository... But they've always worked for me.

Oh, forgot... I don't do dualboot.

\o. It's the best system available for my preferences AFAIK. I have several systems, ranging from netbook to servers and I've used linux as internet server (HTTP,SSH), LAN (samba,vnc,X,etc.), gaming (though mostly via wine, dosbox or some console/oldtech emulator), multimedia/entertainment system, etc... you name it.

Agreed, totally - but the whole conversation here shows perfectly why the certain type of nerds are so hard to entertain. Arrogant, all-knowing and lacking the means to enjoy and not take things so seriously, they could be called Sheldon Cooperists.

This... It's always fun to ponder and speculate on how something could be possible in a world of TV show X, or even criticize them, but sometimes I think people take these things way too seriously - like letting relatively minor issues (really, they are minor now matter how big they feel to some - it is just entertainment after all) spoil the whole episode for them.