Yeah, this is a great idea because we all know how a company mandated monopoly supplier has such a great track record of providing cost effective services!!!

The real reason I Hated our IT people was that when I asked for something to help me meet my clients needs. I would be told "can't be done". Half a day of my own research later and I would posit a solution that was acceptable. That's not my fucking job it's theirs. And then they charge me criminal amounts of money for their "services". Morons!

not to belabor the point, but the amount of unused blank space is ... astounding. Please fix that -- it looks too unbalanced and bare.

My kids are heading towards this age and I feel this area is very complex.

I don't want my kids to be afraid to surf anywhere, but by the same token, I want to know where they are going, but then again I can imagine that there are things they might want to research that they don't want me to know about. So my regime at the moment is... everything will be logged through the access proxy installed at our home. Except for periods of time where they can go and look at anything they want, but during these times, they must be supervised by an adult that we trust, of which we know enough that are sufficiently broad minded that I know there is nothing they couldn't go surfing for if they wanted to.

In particular I am thinking sites about sexuality, drugs, medical issues or other controversial topics that theor parents could never understand.... :-)

If this goes well, they will be allowed to surf unsupervised and unlogged as they get older.

Some problems do not require technical solutions, or rather do not require gatekeepers but perhaps better chaperones.

How long must we sulfur these outrageous puns. Someone should put a radon these people until they argon. It is becoming more than I can barium and seems like some kind of silicon.

Here the offence for driving whilst influenced by alcohol has been revised to be "Prescribed Concentration of Alcohol" which in the jurisdiction is 0.05 for normal drivers, 0.0 for provisionally licenced drivers (recently licenced ones) and variously for other categories of drivers like Taxis and Trucks.

As a result the offence is not a subjective one about onces capacities to drive but rather just the amount of alcohol in your blood.

As a consequence, the application of "Random Breath Tests" or RBT is a fundamental part of driving. The police require no warrant to randomly sample the driving populace for testing their breath for the presence of alcohol. A result in excess of the PCA means a test at a more accurate machine and subsequently a blood test if a driver refuses the breath test.

As a driver, my privacy is not invaded, I am not "targeted by the state" but rather a part of the duties attached to my _licence_ to operate a motor vehicle is the requirement to drive with less than the PCA in my blood. End of story.

You USA folk need to get clear on the distinction between rights and duties, one cannot have one without the other.

A random breath test (as we call it where I'm from) is a completely acceptable price to pay when travelling on a limited public resource (the roads) with a bunch of asshats that continue to drive drunk putting me in danger.

Or more straightforward, let all the passengers vet the other passengers on their flight. Maybe a reality TV type approach where each passenger is voted on or off the plane by all the other passengers.

It's only half a joke.

similarly in Russian -- "poguglit'" (effectively, "to google around"). I've not heard "vyguglit'" used yet, but it'd work as well :)