I just checked to see if the filter would block children from accessing the website of the UK's most important helpline for children, childline [www.childline.org.uk]. Guess what? It does - you really really really couldn't make this shit up. Lets hope the little darlings aren't feeling suicidal as a result, because it also blocks their access to the Samaritans [www.samaritans.org]. Speechless!

What scares you so? The notion that we might want to stop kids from doing stuff that their parents can do like drinking, smoking, driving, voting, standing for election, ... no wait, actually that last one might be a good thing.

The accuracy these filters, or rather their lack of, is a bit of a moot point. The biggest problem from my point of view is that these filters are optional. This means some kids won't be protected by these measures because they will still have access to unfiltered Internet content. One draconian option could be to make the filters mandatory for everyone, but even Cameron would probably think that that would be a bad idea. I'd like to suggest an alternative, namely that content filters should be mandatory on all Internet connections used by children. The UK public are quite happy with age based censorship in the film & video game industries, and there are plenty of other things that adults can legally do that children can't, so maybe what the government should be doing is to make it an offense to allow a child to have unfiltered access to the Internet.

Copyright would be fine if it benefited all those involved in the creative process, but it hasn't benefited those who have enabled the musicians to live for the rest of their life on the back of a few years work. I'm referring to the engineers & academics who designed the recording equipment and the means to then mass produce cheap copies of the musician's works. These engineers & academics will have gotten nothing more than a one time wage payment for their work, but without them, musicians would have to actually work for a living, just like everyone else.

Opera will be dust long before they get the chance of fixing the things they broke - though to be honest I've never understand how they've managed to keep going after they dropped their ad banner - how do they make money? I will miss Opera12 if it becomes too dangerous or impossible to use, but until that day I'm sticking with it. As to my next browser, I may well go for IE, especially if it keeps dropping down in the usage stats. After all, what self respecting crook is going to target a browser that is only used by 1% of their target market.

Its even more absurd in the UK. It is illegal to drive on our motorways unless you have passed your test, not even under the supervision of a qualified instructor, but once you've passed your test, you cam immediately take a 400 bhp sports car for a spin on any road, including motorways, without any further lessons. What is even more absurd, if I were a learner I would be allowed to drive on the A2 road near London. The A2 isn't a motorway, but does a good impersonation of one, albeit one with narrow lanes and shoulders. Why is the A2 OK for learners, but not the M25 motorway that crosses it? Bureaucratic madness!!!!!

The big pain is when you have to go back to old tech. My own car has cruise control, but on a recent trip to the USA I ended up renting what was probably the only vehicle in the whole state of Nevada that didn't have this. I then spent the next 2 weeks driving over 2000 miles along straight, empty roads. Constantly having to check the speedo was tiresome.

a) Just wondering why do you think I am a he - clearly some very narrow minded thinking on your part? b) Who is this traitor in chief? Obama? I deliberately did not mention the constitution of any country. The argument is about whether historic norms are always going to be acceptable centuries later. Clearly they are not. Slavery being a bloody good example.