You misunderstand the purpose of the act. It's so people aren't forever branded with a label making them effectively unemployable. It is libel because it is the same as someone who didn't have that spent conviction. Because legally it has now never happened. Publicly accessible records of that conviction are expunged, which is the big difference. In US forever in public view will be everything illegal thing you have ever been convicted for, no matter what. And you tell *me* to read nineteen eighty four. You're living in it and defending it.

We've got this thing in UK called Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974. This plainly states that when a conviction is deemed "spent" (depends on offence for the timescale, some offences never expire of course) then that it deemed to have never happened in the first place. This can even include being sent to prison. Any use of that information is prohibited and there is no upper limit for a fine that can be imposed for doing so. Plus, use of that information will get you sued for libel, which you will lose and lose badly.

His Twitter feed makes for interesting reading, the replies tend not to be supportive...

I remember an episode of the A-team where they created a firearm No one got hit by it that time either. Maybe the sights were off.

Not much of a leap on my keyboard, / being next to . so an easy typo to make...

Then you're not using what the client uses. You can't get away with a "works for me / unreproducible" response if you aren't using the same setup.

My having to make sure sites still work in IE 7 didn't magically stop in April because my clients still run XP with support contracts (though I bet not all of them do).

And it took you lot less than 200 years to get to the raping. I don't call that progress, especially when you can see the responsible attitude just by looking across the pond...

Is there such a thing as a click-through NDA? Surely a signature is required at the very least. Something a EULA does not provide for.

It's funny how much attachment there is to some fabric with a certain pattern on it. Jihadists burning the US flag, uproar, they're EVUL, kill 'em all. When they decided to burn the Union flag as well because of British involvement, we were just bemused that they thought burning *a piece of cloth* would get up our noses. But then we don't swear allegiance to the flag; we just pity those who fly it upside down...

The veto will happen because they don't want to lose the ability to threaten ISPs with legislation *later* if the ISPs don't implement an unaccountable filtering system *now*. They want to keep their method of censorship censored by not wanting the publicity of court cases and judicial decisions that can be appealed.

You really think facts proving your innocence have any place in a US court when the cops and prosecutors have quotas to fill?

He doesn't need it, unless he's using that version of DOS that had a full networking stack built in that would allow hackers in. Oh, wait, there wasn't one. No, Novell doesn't count.

Funny how regulation of ISPs doesn't affect their profit margin too much for the rest of the planet...

We're not talking about satnav reliant random people with a car: Every black cab driver has to pass The Knowledge, comprising a comprehensive map of London and ability to calculate the most efficient route depending on roadworks / time of day / year *in their heads*. This takes years to master and is possibly the most difficult memory and spatial relationship exercise in the world. I doubt you could do it.