Environmental regulations should be based on a deliberative scientific process, not on which interest group can shout the loudest.
Uhm, if that was the case, nobody would complain. There is a reason why most of TTIP is being drafted behind closed doors.
Also, ISDSes are unacceptable.
The counts can be hacked at the target computer. For example, by the government, by foreign governments or by the company providing the voting systems.
Or are the "electronic votes" counted manually by thousands of volunteers and leave a huge paper trail?
The key problem is that politicians rarely want to take the responsibility for abolishing a law, unless it is from 1900 and concerns lending vacuum cleaners to your neighbour in Colorado, whereas being a sharp 'law and order guy' often helps in getting more voters (mostly thanks to hysteric mass media). Hence, the laws accumulate and are getting broader and broader.
To be on the safe side, you should never teach math in Australia, especially not combinatorics!
Who cares? People died and everything should be done to prevent a similar accident in the future.
Oh, man, I'm glad you're here to tell us how policy making and risk assessment works. Let's just ground all flights of all planes forever. The least we can do is everything.
Anyway, why don't you just use an ad-blocker like uBlock or Adblock Edge?
If he wasn't telling the truth then he should be charged with making false statements.
You're so right. But why stop there? Not only he should be charged for making false statements, everyone who writes something false on the Internet should be charged!
If web sites can't find a way to pay for the content and hosting then they eventually will go away.
No problem for me. They can all go to hell, as far as I'm concerned. The web did just fine without them.
I have personally no problem with the death sentence, but I consider your justice system and your prison system an institutionalized crime against humanity. Your country is barbaric.
It is obviously not the right way, at least not to people who know how the Internet works. That's what this whole discussion is about.
The right way to deal with objectionable content is to take down the content from the server on which it is stored. Not from search engines. (There are fully distributed search engines, wonder how this nonsensical EU rule works with them.)
Whenever I get omitted search results, I use a proxy to go to Google.com and read what has been deleted. It's surprisingly informative.
Still waiting for someone to write a Firefox extension to do that automatically.
You mean he did the same as what spin doctors do for politicians?
No, that's not the problem. The problem is that every second secret agency in the world and every third Russian botnet owner could rig the election.
The whole story is lame, because it's not about the paper or his research but about his leisure time activities.
Who cares? How about a story about Joe the Plumber's sports at the local bowling center instead?
what used to be AOL == Gmail now
meaning, only morons and noobs use it
I know this is controversial, so let's start the flamewar and downmodding in 3, 2, 1...
The Macintosh is Xerox technology at its best.
