Name one of the people who requested de-linking. You can't, because you don't have that information. It could have been anyone mentioned in the articles. At best you can make an educated guess, but who cares? There is no list, potential employers or lenders won't get that result when searching for a particular name, so it seems to have worked pretty well.

Apart from the first guy who made the first request, can you name a single person who has done so?

No. Criminals are not able to get removals under EU law until their convictions are spent, and for serious crimes convictions are never spent.

The removals will have been for other people mentioned in those articles, and only for searches of their names. If you search for the murder on Google the article will still come up. The articles have not been removed from Google entirely, just as results when searching for the specific person who made the request.

You could argue that it's a credit reference agency's job to report anything that might give a potential lender concern, but the law says otherwise because society decided that mistakes should eventually be forgiven and people should be allowed to reform.

Let's discuss this article that was the subject of a removal request: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-sco...

It's about a rape. The only people mentioned are the criminal, the police inspector in charge of the case and the criminal's friend. The criminal wouldn't have been able to make the request (it's relevant), and there is little reason for the inspector to want to, so it was almost certainly the friend. Or probably ex-friend now.

There is no suggestion that the friend did anything wrong. None at all. He was just caught up in someone else's crime, and the media decided to name him because they can. Is it reasonable to have reports of this incident immediately served up when any potential employer googles his name? It's not really relevant, but it is very embarrassing. It talks about his private sex life, and associates him with someone who committed a horrible crime. I'm sure a lot of employers would think twice about hiring someone like that, especially in a role where they deal with customers who might google their name. It sucks but it's also true.

Agreed, if *you* make something public. Unfortunately people can and do get caught up in things they have no control over. There are some things it is impossible to prevent becoming public knowledge too, such as your previous gender or matters of public record like bankruptcies or criminal convictions. The law does however limit reporting of those things in certain ways - for example credit agencies can't report bankruptcies past a certain time limit, and employers can't ask about and don't have to be told about spent convictions.

Actually this seems to be working quite well, as the court intended. Can you say how it is failing? Sure, the information is there, but it doesn't come up on Google when you search for that person's name. That's what they wanted, and I don't see any indication that it is not working. We don't even know the names of the people who made the requests in most instances.

There isn't, the problems are more subtle than that. It's been discussed a hundred times here, can we please move on from having to repeat the basics every single time?

What were the phones doing during that test? I'm guessing screen at maximum brightness and always on, maybe with an auto-refreshing web page open. Such tests tend to be useless because most phones spend most of their time with the screen off, and maximum brightness varies a lot etc. Also, the iPhone 6 Plus has a much bigger battery than most iPhones (2900mAh vs just 1800mAh in a normal iPhone 6) so isn't representative of what most iPhone users experience.

I have a OnePlus One and it will last three days on a charge with moderate use, or two days of heavy use.

GPS really shouldn't kill your battery that badly. A typical GPS module uses around 35mA in "active" mode, giving position updates once a second. So running for 10 hours needs 350mAh of your battery. IIRC iPhones have fairly small batteries, something like 1800mAh. My phone (OnePlus One) is 3100mAh, so running GPS all day should not be a huge problem.

That's assuming a fairly dumb phone and dumb module. With proper management much lower power consumption is possible. Better antennas mean less gain needed to pick up the signal. The update rate can be lowered if the app doesn't need 1 second updates, or if the phone isn't moving (low power accelerometer can tell you that). Much of the energy is used to process the GPS signal and calculate position, so reducing the update rate has a massive impact.

If iPhones are only getting half a day with active GPS use then something is wrong. I've had GPS tracking on all day on my OnePlus One (so that I can geo-tag photos from my DSLR by simply comparing time-stamps to the GPS log) and ended up with about 40% battery life remaining, and that's with lots of other use.

In the UK if you are fired because you badly screwed up you get nothing. I'm sure UCL would argue that his position as a lecturer was untenable because his initial comment appeared to show bias against women, and some of his students were women. Even after he clarified his statement it's hard to see how he could continue teaching mixed classes.

Netware stuff was disabled for security reasons, because Microsoft didn't see the business case for fixing it. Not many people bother with it any more.

How adequate EV range is depends on how adequate the charging infrastructure is. Tesla's range is fine for most trips because they built chargers at intervals that suit it. By the time their Model 3 comes out the density of chargers will be higher, so the only thing more range gets you is less time spent charging.

I own a Nissan Leaf, which has 120 mile range. It's absolutely fine because everywhere I go there are enough chargers to keep me running. If I did a lot of long journeys I might care about having to charge less, but usually I just charge at my destination while I'm doing something else anyway, or on the motorway while using the bathroom and grabbing a drink (20 minutes is all it needs).

If Facebook has very low numbers of non-white applicants it suggests that the way they advertise jobs isn't very good, because it fails to attract qualified candidates from minorities. Often it's because they advertise jobs informally via things like Linkedin contacts first, which tends to attract more of the same type of people they already have. Making sure to offer and mention things like flexible working hours or daycare can help attract female candidates.

Facebook is failing itself by not attracting many of the best candidates. Of course they should hire the best candidate, but to do that they have to make sure that candidate applies in the first place.

Depends who "we" are. His employer was immediately opened up to bring sued or having exam results for his classes questioned by female students who could argue he has demonstrated bias. It would have been nice to see them fight if they thought he was really joking (and it seems like he wasn't, as he publicly stood by his words later) but they were under no obligation to do anything other than limit their liability.

Didn't happen to my Windows 7 systems when 8 came out, or my two Windows 8 systems lately. Without hard benchmark evidence I'm inclined to chalk it up to the feeling that what you have is no longer the latest and greatest.

The OPs problem is most likely due to installing apps and a crappy anti-virus program.