Because the Ecuadorian President decided to offer him sanctuary just to yank the US's chain. They couldn't care less about him. I see the situation developing in one three ways: (1) Assange gives himself up to the British authorities who will ship him to Sweden (2) Britain gets tired of the abuse of diplomatic privileges and tells the Ecuadorians to give him up or GTFO. At this point they could probably give Assange a diplomatic passport and take him back to Ecuador without him being arrested. (3) The Ecuadorians tire of their embassy guest and give him notice to find a new home. He could try his luck with Russia or, if he has any sense, go to Sweden. Of course Britain could just forcibly extract him any time they wanted. The SAS has a team permanently based in London and would enjoy a nice day out. However I'm sure this option has been categorically ruled out due to all the diplomatic fallout that would ensue.

You're being ridiculous here. The problem was not the language, it was the implementation. You can write crap code in any language.

Well apart from the quality of his work ... how can he even bear to look at all those hard-coded 'magic numbers' permeating the code, never mind the memory allocation issue.

Most of the Open Source code I've seen has been high quality and I assumed such a high-profile project as OpenSSL would be the same. Having dug out the code myself when this blew up I was shocked at how ropey it is. Magic numbers everywhere, memory handled in a cavalier way, no clear structure. Now I feel bad defending Open Source against FUD shills because I know they can whip out this example.

Yes I've always thought an interesting project would be to generate a magnetic field similar to the Earth's but a hundred times stronger and see if people could learn to detect its orientation.

Linux of course.

"Tax paid by the UK financial services industry rose from £63bn to £65bn last year, equivalent to 11.7 per cent of total tax receipts to the Exchequer" --- Financial Times, December 2013. Also the top 1% of earners paid 30% of all income tax. Banking is a regulated industry. The sort of dodges which sports stars and actors use to avoid paying millions in tax just aren't allowed. So the Square Mile isn't in fact the problem at all.

Exactly. But they want everyone else to get up earlier too!

Your right that my comment was slightly confusing since the "CET option" is actually "Single/Double Summer Time" but you're wrong if you think it wont mean 10 am sunrises. You're using London latitudes. From the Lighter Later site: "At Christmas in Edinburgh, for example, the sun is only in the sky between 8.44am and 3.42pm." So if we add an hour to 8.44 we get ... 9.44. And go further north? Then we get to 10. From Wikipedia: " it would mean that, in northern Britain and Northern Ireland, the winter sunrise would not occur until 10:00 or even later".

Take an opinion poll after months of sunrise after 9 am (BST all year), or even 10 am (the CET option) and see if people still agree. The RoSPA figures are just guesstimates based on the assumption that the rise in morning accidents wont offset the fall in evening ones. They're not facts.

Not so fast, I'm in the UK too and I vehemently disagree with this ridiculous idea. In fact it would make more sense to move the other way (lighter earlier) given our latitude. But really there's no need to monkey about with the clocks.

It's hard to imagine a subject on which there are more ill-informed opinions amongst supposedly intelligent people than Daylight Savings Time. Just read the arguments for and against here for confirmation. In the summer months sunrise is earlier and sunset is later so there is more light at both ends of the day. Daylight Savings [in its "Spring Forward/Fall Back" form] artificially shifts an hour of light from the morning to the evening. Whether this is a good idea or not is pretty much down to lifestyle choices. There's no underlying logic to it. Most people (including myself) wake up earlier in the summer. DST essentially removes the option for us to use those extra hours of daylight constructively by pretending it's an hour later than it is so we have to go to work instead.

But why do you have to steal an hour of the morning's warmth and light to achieve this?

Have you been on the Bucky? BST means there's an hour less daylight in the mornings and an hour more in the evenings for the summer months. You have the benefits completely back to front. Perhaps you're thinking BST is the norm and putting the clocks back is the benefit. If you want more light in the mornings then you should be shifting to GMT-1 in the winter and shifting to GMT+1 in the summer. Although this would make sense the two hour shift would not be popular.

It's not advantageous to me in the slightest if it gets dark at, say, 10 pm as opposed to 9 pm in the summer. Why would it be?