Actually it was decided (eventually) that the tweet in question didn't qualify. It wouldn't even have been affected by this bill anyway, as it as prosecuted under anti-terror legislation(!).

If anything, we need a new bill to clarify what does and does not count.

I tired to find some information about this but a quick search came up with nothing. Do you have links to details of the removals?

It's about pure abuse without threats too. There have been cases of people committing suicide after being harassed on the internet, e.g. via Ask.fm or Twitter. You could blame the victim for having a weak mind I suppose, but psychological bullying is well understood and can't be simply ignored because you think you are immune.

This seems to be the new standard spin on these stories after simply trying to claim that there wasn't a problem failed. Now it's just "we are sick of hearing about the problems". Had the same thing when it was the rights of black people and the rights of gay people. Standard tactic to avoid addressing the issue directly.

The you throw in a few straw feminist arguments and some insults, revealing your true motive.

That's an overly simplistic view.

"Men can run faster than women" is not sexist, it's a biological fact with masses of evidence to support it. On the other hand, there is little evidence to support the assertion that women are better at cooking, and in fact most top chefs are male.

One is an undeniable fact, the other is something a person who wants to keep women down and in the kitchen might say to justify their misogyny.

Similarly, in athletics there are separate men's and women's events. That's not discrimination, because discrimination requires prejudice that isn't based on facts.

Okay, let's actually look at that list shall we?

ApplePay - Google Wallet has been working for years
Lightning Cables - inferior to USB (e.g. no 1080p video), the only novelty being that they are reversible
iPad Mini - copy of all the other small tablets
Touch ID - okay, laptops had this for years but it was new on phones
Lager screens - copy of every other popular phone
iOS7/8 - wow, they keep developing software, no one else does that. Also, iOS7 wasn't exactly a design tour-de-force.
AppleWatch - smart watches are hardly new, and it isn't even out yet, and the interface looks unwieldy and crap
Healthkit - everyone else has been doing this for years, and doing it better with NFC (e.g. Omron products). Even Apple promoted the iPhone 5 as having a CPU with features to support low power health monitoring.
Homekit - copied all the other smart thermostats and energy monitors
iCloud - lol, really? Hardly new and woefully insecure.
64 bit - okay, first on a phone, but even so the iPhone 5S wasn't actually any faster than a Nexus 5 costing about 1/3rd as much and it only had 1GB of RAM, so hardly a massive achievement
Family Sharing - everyone has been doing that for years

No, the request applies to searches for the individual's name, not the article. The page will remain in the index, it just won't appear when searching for the person's name. Any other names or search terms that would normally lead to it will continue to work as normal.

The ruling is quite specific in this regard. The only intent is to prevent that information appearing when someone researches that individual by name.

No, Google have stated and you can check for yourself that the removal only applies to the specific search term of the requesting party's name. In the case of the first article removed, which was about a banker, searched for his name still show the article in the results.

That's not how data protection laws work in the EU. They apply to businesses that provide access to information about people, even if they didn't create the information themselves. The classic example is the credit reference agency, which merely catalogues credit information provided by third parties and publicly available information like bankruptcies. Even so, data protection laws require them to "forget" certain things, such as bankruptcies after a certain period of time.

Data protection laws are very important in Europe. They are what allow criminals to rehabilitate. The prevent companies selling or allowing access to private health or financial data for their own benefit. It allows you to have incorrect information corrected, or get a complete record of the data they have relating to you.

You are also factually incorrect about what Google is doing. They are not removing articles from their search results entirely. They are only removing those search results for a specific individual's name. Other search terms will still find those pages. Your approach, which I note seems to be the US approach, is to never forget or forgive any mistake or anything uttered by anyone in a public forum, for the rest of their lives. It's like the permanent record some schools keep, only a mistake made when young and blight your entire life and the only way to recover is to start a new identity. Europe doesn't do that.

Helvetica is print font, not a screen font. It isn't optimized for pixel displays, and even on fairly high DPI displays does not look a nice as fonts optimized for them. Screen fonts take account of the pixel grid and get hand optimized to look good on them.

Apple is clearly hoping that they have a high end DPI that can overcome these problems, but it doesn't appear they have. The 5k display is only around 200 DPI, and Helvetica tends to look a bit naff below about 600 DPI at small sizes. Of course it's a little more complicated because they have sub pixel rendering, but it only affects horizontal resolution and not vertical resolution. To counter this they have made the fonts a little larger, but of course that means everything takes up more space on screen.

Everyone else uses screen fonts. Bitstream derived fonts for Linux and Android. Microsoft has Segoe and Meiryo, designed specially for them. Some phones have reached the point where Helvetica will look good, around 450-500 DPI, although the iPhone 6 Plus is only around 400 DPI.

Jobs used to do yearly hardware updates of iDevices with at least one big new feature. Retina displays, Siri, that sort of thing. Apple seems to have stopped doing that now, unless maybe you count the rather underwhelming fingerprint scanner.

NFC and health apps are a good example of what they do now. Features that have been around for a few years, playing catch-up. In fact NFC is kind of a joke because you can only use it for payment, meaning a clunky Bluetooth interface is the only way to transfer small amounts of data between devices and you can't use NFC tags. It's a far cry from the glory days.

Modern HDDs are so high density that the data actually degrades over time if not refreshed, due to the earth's magnetic field and other near by electronics. When idle drives do a background scan of the disk, re-writing data where required. If you keep the disk offline for very long periods of time there is no opportunity to monitor and correct the degradation, so hard drives don't make good archival media.

According to TFA they are using off the shelf parts, with one that has an Apple logo slapped on it but isn't made by them. There is nothing special about it.

Also, Dell announced a 5k monitor before the iMac was announced, which probably uses the same panel. We should be able to compare the two soon. In the past Apple displays have proven to be exactly the same as other displays with the same panel and similar glass, so I wouldn't expect any surprises.

I borrowed a friend's Bose QC3s and compared them to my own Audio Technica and Sony noise cancelling headphones. They were on a par with the Sonys and slightly better than the ATs, but not by much. The Sony cans where more comfortable as well, especially in terms of the feeling of pressure in your ears you get from noise cancelling.

Having said that I use some fairly cheap Sennheiser in-ear monitors on aircraft now. The isolation is better than any noise cancelling headphones can ever hope to achieve and they are easier to sleep in too.

Japan has been putting up satellites to enhance and eventually provide an alternative to GPS over its territory too.

Bottom line is, something that valuable to your military can't be shared with potentially hostile or uncooperative countries.