There was a good article in The New Yorker a few months ago about the Amazon business practices.
Their very tough negotiation position typically forces the publisher to give big discounts, and even extra money to be listed high enough in the sales results.
Amazon books are usually cheaper than in many other stores so from a consumer level, this seems like a win for the capitalist philosophy.
However, it turns out that these huge discounts have a snowball effect towards the authors: they now typically get lower royalties per book, sometimes much lower. I had this confirmed by a few authors I know.
The danger for the general culture is that authors would write far less as they (except the most popular ones) will have to do more other work to have a normal standard of living. Most of the midlist authors, and those are in my opinion often the most interesting ones, already had to combine writing with other professional activities. In essence there is nothing wrong with that, but when at one point they have little time left to write, books will come much slower.
In some European countries there are fixed price laws regarding books, these are exactly there to ensure that writers can focus enough on their craft, it is seen as a matter of national culture that should be stimulated, not necessarily mercantilised.
I do agree that a purely capitalist attitude in this matter can be detrimental to culture over the longer term.
Discuss.

You could turn it around and say: "If the material is illegal, then why would you want to access it? Law-abiding citizens wouldn't. For law-abiding citizens the site does not need to exist."

Well, you could be right. I am not an American. But I thought that let us say the artform was illegal in some American states. I read an article a few years ago about a particularly nasty actor/director in the genre (sorry, I forgot the name, others may chime in) who was jailed because of his extreme videos, while it was all consensual adults. If it were legal in that state, then why was he locked up?
Again, I am not American but because of this my perception is that it is not everywhere legal in the USA.
If it would happen, then the stars would need to find another job. I have no strong views pro or con myself, except perhaps that there is already enough of it to satisfy multiple lifetimes of self pleasure.

In general governments and "well-thinking" pressure groups don't like porn. It seems to me that a perfect and easy way to give that industry a heavy blow is to rule that porn cannot be copyrighted. So why is this not done?

>> The City of London Police are abusing their power to enforce civil matters and shut down legitimate search engines.

Yes, if you search long and hard enough you might even find some legitimately freely distributable content.

I can see it becoming successful, like Airplay which is adopted widely, and Carplay also gets lots of interest.
For me, I am imagine that i wear the iwatch while sitting in the sofa and with a touch on its display I can quickly dim the lights. Or, when I am about to drive home in wintertime I use an iphone app to start heating the house.
Yes, other systems exist but I like the convergence.
Despite all the hate here, what Apple usually does very well is make technology accessible and userfriendly.

Every 4 to 5 years would be good for servicing a mechanical watch, in your case with the extra mention of regulation.
A mechanical chrono is a terrifyingly complex device that needs pampering.to keep it at the top performance.
This service might be expensive, but still I would only order it from an authorised dealer.
Anyway, as I wrote elsewhere, 1 minute per month is an error of 1/(60*24*30) or only 0.02% (!!!), which in my opinion is very acceptable for a mechanical device.
Hence, I expect that it is within spec.You cannot expect the same accuracy as with a quartz watch.

People like thos "crappy" mechanical watches for far different reasons. For me it is not an "A or B" question, I can see myself alternatively wearing a mechanical wathc or an iwatch, depending on the occasion.

Fair enough, you are not in the market for a mechanical watch. If you'd buy a mechanical Grand Seiko or (usually) Rolex etc, then you could perhaps (!) reduce this to 20-30 seconds per month. Considering that this is all traditional mechanics, that would be as flawless and high a standard as you can get. Even 1 minute is an error of 1/(60*24*30), in my opinion a good result.
If you can't live with that, then quartz or atomic is the way to go. Nothing wrong with quartz, and in my opinion there is also nothing wrong with loving the intricate mechanics of traditional watchmaking, at the price of applying small adjustments from time to time.

For precision, buy any $20 quartz watch. A mechanical watch is for those who love the beauty of the pure mechanical engineering. Some watch aficionados are snobs, some are not. I have as mall collection of watches, none really expensive, half quartz, half mechanical. I like m mechanical as much as I like my quartz in different ways. 1 minute per month is a few seconds per day, something I can easily live with and fascinating from an engineering point of view.

Come on. It is still good, and falls within the COSC guidelines of something like +-4 seconds per day (sorry I forgot the exact deviation). For a mechanical construct, this is still well done. And what is wrong with liking the beauty of mechanics? For precision any $20 digital watch will beat all mechanical watches.

This Tag Heuer of the parent is an automatic, mechanical watch. Think about it, one minute accuracy over a month realised with only vibrating springs etc. That is technically impressive. FYI many quarts watches are rated +- 15 seconds per month, only 4 times better!
Nothing wrong with enjoying a mechanical watch for the joy of the fine engineering, and the pleasure of the nearly smooth second hand.
Interestingly, the mechanism of the modern Tag chronograpths is a close brother of a certain Seiko movement, something that the Swiis company prefers not to mention.

In fact the inflation of Rolex in recent years is such that you may well be able to sell a Rolex you bought say 5 years ago for the price you then paid for it.

Not sure if these were implied in the original question: Nikon F2, the electronical F3, and any Leica rangefinder camera and the Rolleiflex medium format camera.
They may need a very occasional lubrication but that's it. I hav ebene using a 1950s Rolleiflex very often (though now I mainly shoot digital). It is still capabable of outstanding results.
Also a number of mechanical watches can be enjoyed for decades. Rolex of course. But at the lower end of the price spectrum automatic Seikos will also last a long time, or Omegas from before they were a "serious" brand will also last for decades.

The Amish would survive rather well, I expect. Add a few young surgeons and you're set up for survival.