Dont get me wrong, the Metro interface is a serious PITA.

But seriously? In a lot of other ways, Win8 is just better than Win7, and theres ClassicShell to remove the one piece thats seriously annoying.

Honestly the only bit thats a real problem is the lack of OEM reinstall options. If everyone here is getting their pants in a bunch over a button thats seriously disappointing.

OK. I'll take this on...

You acknowledge that the interface is a serious PITA. So what does Microsoft do to resolve the issues people have with it? They move the charm from the lower left corner in 8.0 to the task bar in 8.1 that only takes you back to the interface that is a PITA. They did it thinking people were getting lost and had no easy way back to the start screen when the truth is people hated that start screen.

And shoehorning classic shell to the interface, although it is one solution, is a risk being a program you have to download and trust you got it from the right source and it won't harm your system in some weird way. I've had issues with it sporadically creating runaway processes that eat up processor cycles until killed.

Lastly, name one area where 8 is better than 7. Don't say tablet features because I had a tablet running 7 fine with all the touch features of 8 and then some including multi-finger gesture recognition and stylus recognition with automatic switching between the two.

I am going to play a bit of Devil's advocate here since I don't believe police departments need this capability but here we go...

I know it may be difficult for some here but harken back to 9/11 when it was found that capability the government possessed was not used or was brought in too late. There are whole sections in the 9/11 Commission Report on that very thing. Government employees all across the board were flayed alive for that. LA is a big city which makes it a ripe target and if it is found that the police had this capability and didn't use it, then the city officials, especially the police, will be flayed alive again.

As the old saying goes, you can't have 100% security and 100% liberty yet that is what the American public expects. The best you can achieve is a balance and this is a part of determining that balance. Limits will eventually be set for the use of these things. The best you can do is voice your concerns to your local government and keep the pressure on them to establish guidelines for its use.

You still didn't answer his question...

I can think of one thing. These devices have night vision capabilities and can look into windows where the lights are out turning them into glorified peeping Toms. There is no expectation of privacy in public spaces but when they start looking into windows there IS an expectation of privacy.

Oh for fucks sake. TELECOM = Phone companies. He received donations from CABLE companies. Completely different tech, somewhat related industry.

I agree that the cable companies aren't as regulated as the telcos however you left out one big thing in your rant above...

Cable companies=telecom=phone company+Internet service provider+Content provider.

They are indistinguishable these days since most if not all cable companies are providing VoiP as well as all the other internet related services. It is called "bundling". And the telcos are doing the same thing especially in the cellular area.

So you are correct that to level the playing field you either should lift the regulation on the telcos or bring the cable providers under the same regulation.

This has nothing to do with capitalism. It is about legalized bribery. When you have someone profiting off the rules they make that is actually anti-capitalism since it is skewing the playing field for other entities in the market.

I don't understand why Congress doesn't run afoul of the conflict of interest laws when they are allowed to write legislation that favors the ones funding their campaigns. It is a clear conflict of interest when you are writing laws that puts money in your own pocket. They should have to recuse themselves just like judges have to when they have a conflict of interest in a case. Can someone explain why this isn't a worse case than judges with a conflict considering how it is the law that judges are supposed to be interpreting?

That's why I have a recall right now on my Lincoln Towncar for steering rod corrosion that could cause loss of steering. Also why I am number 42 in line with the dealer working on number 3. They have to order the parts one at a time for some reason. At least that is what I was told. So keep on believing that Ford is better... Whatever the voices tell you.

In the meantime, if it does lose steering ability because of this they too will find themselves at the nasty end of a lawsuit.

Wow... Just wow! Methinks someone needs more ethics training...

Well, disregarding the fact that you would have documentation showing the defect was fixed and when, an attorney for the defense should get that email tossed as evidence well before any trial based on the fact that it is the prototype and not the production vehicle. Apples and oranges comes to mind.

"Mental anguish" gets tossed routinely by judges around here. You get reimbursed for real damage only. That may include time, provided you can somehow show that the time it took you to do what was necessary to mitigate the problem should have been spent by the other party, or that other party could have spared you that "expense" of time by simply doing what was right (that includes the time you spend in court for the whole bullshit).

Mental anguish is routinely tossed but punitive damages for willingly committing an act is often awarded. The idea being to punish the wrong doer, usually a corporation, where it hurts them most... In the wallet.

The other alternative for protecting yourself from lawsuits (besides never using the words the lawyers will find) is to delete all copies of all emails, memos, and presentations that are more than 6 months old. I have heard about a company that tries to use this method to reduce its legal exposure.

There's a better alternative... Don't make fucked up shit that has to be recalled to protect people's lives. If a recall is necessary, do it as soon as the problem is identified. Don't wait for years to pass in the typical bean counter fashion in the hopes that less people will be hurt than product sold. Don't cover it up and pretend the problem never existed.

In short, do the right thing and fix the damned thing before more people lose their lives. That is, after all, what we are talking about with most car recalls.

Thank you. I hadn't noticed that.

Is there an upside down to the Union Jack? I seriously can't tell.

I am not the original poster but I think I can answer that...

Those services are no better than hitchhiking since there is no vetting of the driver. Insurance won't stop you from being taken to the woods, beaten, raped, robbed and murdered (not necessarily in that order)... The same goes for the driver. They are not trained what to do in a situation where the passenger may be violent looking to rob them. True cabs are designed to protect the driver as much as possible usually with barriers between the driver and passenger. True cab drivers are trained to take the shortest route from point A to point B especially in cities like London where cab driver training takes years.

As long as you have property ownership, you will never have a true "smart city". Why? Because people will do what they want with their own property and if it doesn't profit them in some way personally then they will not do, or more importantly fund, the things they don't see as immediate personal profit. Cities own the property that is considered "public spaces" and there is no immediate profit for the city in making the changes you suggest for the city government. In fact, there are tremendous costs associated with what you suggest. Good luck getting voters to think long term when they can't even think 15 minutes into the future.