How is pointing out the flaws in the current release of firefox in any way trolling?

So the codebase is once more becoming bloated, in fact so bloated that they cant compile it in 3 gigabytes of address space, and their long term solution is to compile it in an enrivonment that allows more address space??? Instead of, maybe, getting the code base down to a non bloaty non total total disaster area?? Looks like this is one more confirmation that Mozilla have lost the plot with Firefox.

Is the high inflation making their money somewhat valueless, the lack of any international credibility in the business markets, other countries viewing them as a basketcase, and them ending up more isolated than they really want to be in the world in the current era. Their populace may think everything is ok, but even they must have noticed that imported goods are becoming expensive at a greater rate than home produce is.

There are multiple foss licenses out there, you use theone that suits your needs. The GPL exists for this reason: Software released using it is meant to be free as in speech, free as in beer, but NOT free as in a free lunch for developers wanting to rip off the code and repackage it as something else. If you don't mind people getting rich off of your own work, you can use one of the many fine BSD licenses, or even lgpl. If you want to contribute without someone taking advantage, you use GPL. If the code is all your work others who want to license your code for other uses can always approach you with an offer.

There's not always correlation between what they say, and what they actually corporately think. That statement is rhetoric, nothing more.

If you wish to use an Ubuntu Distro for Production work, then you really should stick to the LTS releases, because at least this way major function providers will remain stable. Using the bleeding edge releases as they come out, particularly without verifying precisely what is changing on a new release, on anything other than a box for fiddling about with/web browsing and email only is bound to cause you unwanted headaches.

I cant see the states agreeing to the necessary standards if they all had their own mass transit toys. It would require federal regulation of a state matter (a state railway system) in order to crack it, and somehow I cant see that not being unconstitutional.

And rip the bluerays.

Try basing your statements on FACT, rather than basing your FACTS on your belief :)

Remind me, how many people have died because there were Reactors at the Fukushima sites when the tsunami hit? (heres a quick tip, its a nice round number) How many people have actually suffered any serious ill effects from any emissions from Fukuskima? (another nice round number)

Stop trying to help spread the nuclear FUD lies, it's not big, and it's not clever.

No we dont!
 

So the traffic safety cameras (as i believe the term is for speed and traffic light cameras) aren't there to stop people doing nothing wrong? speeding and jumping red lights is OK now is it? On the subject of ANPR at least it can be used to help to try and reduce the number unsafe uninsured and untaxed vehicles on the roads. Are you saying that it's ok to drive cars with no tax, no insurance, that have failed their M.O.T. inspections? (or just not had one because the criminal driving it knows it wont pass) ANPR is also useful in catching 'vehicles of interest' as the police put it. This means vehicles used to commit a crime, oh and also is rather handy for tracking vehicles reported as stolen.

How, exactly do you expect to have a reasonable expectation of privacy in a public place without curtailing people's freedom? The public at large is perfectly at liberty to record people's movements too if they so wish, this is part of a free society, and rightly so. You think that the law enforcement services should not be entitled to use equipment that other people or organisations are perfectly entitled to use? (think photography in public for example, want to ban that as well?)

Want to cite some sources on that claim? Mostly crime has been falling over the last 20-25 years ( http://www.statistics.gov.uk/hub/crime-justice/crime/crime-trends/index.html#graphTabContent1 ) althouth the police reported crime figures seem rather high, one wonders how much of that is vehicle related crime (as well as the fact that alot more criminal law has been enacted over that timeframe thus increasing the number of actions that are actually crimes :)

I would say yes, for the simple fact that it is 'in public' and there can be no reasonable expectation to privacy in public places. For example urinating in public is a criminal offence all over the western world, because it is not in private, it is in a public place. It is certainly an evocative question however, and there are arguements for both viewpoints.

YMMV

Sigh, you mean laws that mean people can't end up being at the receiving end of an autonomous unchallengable unfair firing? This is something that people in the UK right now are rather glad of since it gives them just a little bit more job security than they would have if employers were able to treat their 'human resource' like so much chattel?

The political axegrinders are out in force today.

How about you stick to the story at hand, it's not tax 'dollars' it's Pounds Sterling, and BT had long since paid back the British taxpayer for the outlay prior to it being privatised (in terms more than just money, think security during the cold war for one). Labelling an ac an astroturfer when you clearly have a political axe to grind is just hilarious at best.

P.S. I think the way BT abuse their monopoly is outrageous, but the issue is NOT how that monopoly came about, it's the actions of those that are the controlling minds of BT that are at issue.