But - as is the case with the infamous 'updated CDA' from the USA - nobody bothers to actually define the very fuzzy words 'offensive', 'indecent' and 'obscene' which means that you basically can get arrested and punished for saying ANYTHING as it just has to be offensive, indecent or obscene to someone, and you have no way of knowing in advance if you are breaking the law or not. This is exactly why the updates to the CDA has been struck down repeatedly.

It is sad that a supposedly civilized country like the UK has such laws that people can violate without knowing it.

No. No. No.

How many times do we need to repeat these facts?

* Copyright Infringements are not theft !!!
* ISPs are not a police department despite their three-letter acronym 'ISP' !!!

Hopefully some court will slap those stupid publishers with a massive fine for contempt in wasting the courts time and for harassment of random people using evil blackmail tactics.

I thought Google lived by their "Do no evil" motto, but I guess "Think of the Children!" is more important.

Good thing I only use my gmail as backup. My real mail is handled by my very own private mailserver. Of course a MITM attack is possible against traffic to and from the server but then they need to be explicitly investigating me and then I guess it's okay.

Nothing copied elsewhere or onto tape? - Guess not. The cloud is SOOOO secure...

A decade ago I was part of as team coding a fraud detection module for a payment system that looked up where the credit card had been used before and compared it with the current usage location and calculated a travel speed between the two. If the speed was reasonable and feasible all was well, but no consumer travels a warp speed between remote locations on our planet so that would raise a red flag. For online transactions it used the customer IP to geolocate the card user, not the location of the shop - of course.

Why reinvent a similar technology and add unnecessary complications like a cellphone, which may even be lent out during the vacation to avoid obscene roaming charges?

What facts? - The facts I know supports what SvnLyrBrto is saying.

Both Sweden and the UK are going above and beyond to get their hands on Julian Assange in connection with an insignificant charge of alleged rape of two women who both had consensual sex with him and later changed their minds. This screams bullshit, scam, and 'bad excuse' to get their hands on him, as none of these countries have ever made an effort like this to get at a real rapist - one of those that grab people on the street and rapes them - so it makes no sense not to just have a warrant issued at Interpol and then have him arrested the next time he crosses a border.

No, the UK police actually sits 24/7 outside the Ecuadorian embassy in London waiting for him to leave the building, and have done so for years now, and the Swedish police insists that they want to question him on Swedish ground, not using a video link or face to face at the embassy where he stays. This also makes no sense and is totally out of character. People appear in Swedish courts using video feeds from hospital beds and similar all the time, and they travel often to interview witnesses or similar outside Sweden. Even mass murderers get less attention than Julian Assange.

Most cars I've seen here in Denmark (in Europe for those with impaired geography skills) use only one key, from the old purely mechanical keys to the new ones with various electronics added.

1) Your girlfriend sends you naked pics and later you break up.

2) You break up and then you hack into her accounts and steal naked pics.

In the first you actually have the right to share the pics she sent to you.
In the second it's obvious the pics are stolen property and you have no rights to them at all.

Actually no. It is shared unless a signed contract says otherwise. Most models sign away their rights for money upfront.

It is actually a good thing if people are 'losing their religion'. It simply means they've started thinking for themselves and questioning things.

As long as we don't have to pay for the same product again and again and again... Today we pay when a movie hits the cinemas, then again when it hits pay-per-view movie channels, then again via advertising when it hits the general networks and then again when the DVD or blu-ray is out so we finally can take it home to view when we please... That's just insane.

It should be possible even at the very first premiere of a movie to decide not to go to the cinema and just take the movie home right away on blu-ray. The waiting (and exclusion) game is exactly what created the piracy culture.

But of course all parties should have equal access to the recording which hopefully includes audio so defamatory speech on both sides can be prosecuted.

The cameras should run continuously and the footage stored and handled by an independent third party. This way it can be trusted and used in court.

Nobody's using that crappy interface anyway. I use Windows 8.1 myself and it's fairly easy to completely hide almost all elements of that awful thing and stay completely in the classic desktop environment. With the addition of Start 8 you can have the START button back and disable all those useless 'charms' (stupid name too) and other 'modern' crap.

The classic Firefox works just fine on the desktop where it belongs, as do the other browsers by the way.

The idea might seem good until you realize that unless you have an army of thousands you cannot possibly manage to ask everyone in a wide shot for permissions and in wide shots it's hard to recognize anyone anyway... And if you take it literary a picture from inside a restaurant might include a window and people outside, including people in cars driving by... Good luck obtaining permission from them.

Not correct. It will trust the response if the Auth-flag is set. According to RFC1035 the Auth-flag must not be set with a NXDOMAIN response, but bind and others allow this to be configured.