Once you get down sub 4-5 seconds everything is about traction, not about power. The fact that the P85D/P90D are four wheel drive means that they have a metric fuck ton more traction than a Camaro. Add to that that the Camaro you're talking about did 4 seconds on 1970s tyres, and you get quite easily to a car with 4 wheel drive and a lot of torque can do 0-60 in 2.8 seconds.

Admittedly that's into the range of current super/hyper cars (a McLaren P1, and The Ferrari The Ferrari will both do around 2.3 seconds), but that's not surprising when the current way that said super/hyper cars generate enough torque to do that is with electric motors.

I hate to break it to you, but almost all modern cars have some form of communication equipment, and will upload driving data to the manufacturer in real time.

That's trivial to deal with - you explicitly write it in the company hand book that looking at porn is banned. When the other person is offended, you quickly nip it in the bud by disciplining the person looking at porn.

As I said - if you don't trust the employees, don't employ them.

For reference, there are some enormous companies out there that don't filter the internet (I work for one). They survive just fine simply by saying "don't be idiots and look at porn at work".

Correct - the way the UK repeals a law is to make a new law saying "sections x to y of the blah blah act of 2015 shall be held delete".

Why on earth would not blocking internet access lead to sexual harassment charges?

Yep, I don't understand how companies don't get this. If you observe that your employees are spending all day dicking around, and they don't get their assigned work done, you fire them. If you don't observe that, then you have no reason to block their access to anything.

It's entirely reasonable to expect employees to take short brain breaks during the working day. It's entirely reasonable for those brain breaks to be spent on random web pages.

All this comes down to is simply trusting your employees. If you can trust them to get on and do their job, and only take reasonable breaks, then you don't need a filter. If you can't trust them, then 1) your culture is fucked up, fix that, and 2) why the hell are you employing someone so untrustworthy that they don't do their job.

Stop blocking access at all.

Just fucking trust your employees. An environment in which people are overtly not trusted to do their jobs just breeds resentment and in fact employees that can't be trusted. People who feel like they're being treated unreasonably tend to act unreasonably in return.

On this issue, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the tech companies stood side by side and said "fine, the UK gets no chat apps if the UK won't allow end to end encryption".

No, that's the point. The reason why iMessage, Facebook Messenger and SnapChat would be banned is exactly because these are messaging platforms where the vendor does not have the key.

The government wants to ban such messaging platforms.

Right, but what will actually happen (hopefully) is that the law will come into force, and WhatsApp, SnapChat, Apple, Google and Facebook will all say "okay, well, all your chat apps are now unavailable, sorry".

As you rightly point out, that'll make the law immensely unpopular, and hopefully it'll get repealed.

Yes, U238. That lovely "stable" substance that if you fire neutrons into it results in Pu239.

U238 will happily absorb neutrons (which are produced by the fusion) and become U239. U239 will happily absorb beta radiation (also production by the fusion) and become Np239. Np239 will also happily absorb beta radiation and become Pu239. Pu239 is nasty stuff that you don't want to get anywhere near you.

This is in fact exactly the reaction used in the production of Pu239 for nuclear weapons.

But the plutonium produced by firing neutrons into it is.

Go and read the article - the fusion is only a source of neutrons that then impact U-238 and cause fission to generate heat.