Of course Water does fight dehydration, but so does Coka-Cola, Orange Juice as well as most drinks containing large quantities of Water.

The EU is simply refusing generic statements on products that don't have any distinguishing meaning compared to other products in the same class.

McDonalds might want to put "Two BigMacs will give you 70% of your daily calories need", which may be true, but it is highly misleading.

The whole purpose of this EU law is that consumers can trust the statements made by manufacturers are both true and distinguishing for that product compared to others in the same class.

So, sorry B&N, you would have gotten 2 new customers if you would just sell your books and stuff to Europe.

Why don't you consider one of the following:

[ ] mypsu.xxx
[ ] sexypsu.xxx
[ ] girlsofpsu.xxx
[ ] sexinpsu.xxx
[ ] gaypsu.xxx
[ ] psushowers.xxx
...
...
...
Come on, it is almost 2012, everyone should have understood a long time ago that people don't search for content based on the domain name.

China, India and the oil-rich Arab countries are spending on schools and education like there is no tomorrow.

I don't know what America's place in the world will be in the future, but I do know that it won't be what it used to be.

With Unity, the ever evolving Ubutu just turned into a Frog,, but no matter how much I kiss it, it doesn't turn into a Princess..

--Abraham Lincoln

Your post gave me a good laugh.. You obviously aren't from Europe or you have no clue about the laws that already protect your privacy. (But you are good at making funny horror stories)

Here in Europe you can already ask any company for a copy of all data they may have on you and force them to correct it if you find any errors. What companies can do with your data is also severely restricted.

Just so you have some idea about how strict the law for European companies already is, the French CNIL considers a "IP address" to be "personal information".

This "new upcoming EU law" is merely applying current law to companies like Facebook that don't respect even the minimum rules of handling personal data.

Don't worry, the world won't come to an end when the new law comes into effect, we are all civil and reasonable over here.

I think it is high time that companies realize that if you find some data on the internet it doesn't mean that it is yours to keep forever and do with as you please.

That practice has to stop.

Who wrote this summary anyway?

What is so *hostile* for social networks?

That when users press 'delete' on a post they made of facebook, then Facebook will actually have to delete the post instead of only hiding it like it does today.

If Facebook wants to play in Europe then either they start to follow privacy rules or they step aside and give someone else a chance that does.

I bet you anything that if facebook is faced with the choise of not doing business or folloing privacy rules, they will choose to stay in business.

Symantec and Microsoft still haven’t made the actual dropper file available to other antivirus companies yet, nor have they provided information about which Windows component contains the vulnerability that results in privilege escalation. However, indirect evidence suggests that the vulnerability is in win32k.sys.

We discovered a similar vulnerability (see MS10-073) a year ago when analyzing the Stuxnet worm. Another interesting problem in win32k.sys (MS11-077) was fixed by Microsoft on 11 October this year – a code execution vulnerability than can be exploited through font files.

Nonsense, there was even a article about this earlier on /.

This simply means that Apple is two years *ahead* of the competition.. in terms of electronic consumption.

From the FA:
"The installer, discovered by researchers at the Hungarian lab that first found Duqu, is a Word document that, once opened, exploits the kernel flaw and then installs the Duqu code on the machine. "

The answer, my dear Watson, is that it is much easier to get people to click on a .doc email attachment, than it is to get them to click on a .exe

If microsoft woudl just have looked at the "information they had" they would have figured out in 10 minutes that

A) the IP addresses of the bothet controllers did not belong to the company dotFree Group SRO and
B) The subdomain cz.cc used by the botnet controllers, is a free DNS service that anyone can use.

If you turned the table and accused Microsoft of something similar based on the same "evidence", you can be sure that Microsoft would sue you out of existence.

Inventing a new "tool", like a telephone, computer, or a car is innovation.

Solving old problems with new tools is not innovation, it is simply common sense.

Can someone please tell my why this does not count as prior art??