He has been questioned on those charges, so where's the trial?

And Sweden regularly questions people over the phone or internationally where convenient, yet refuses to do so for this case. Why?

He was never even accused of "rape" but a lower sexual misconduct. He lied to obtain sex. In the US, that fraud is perfectly legal, but in Sweden, it's a crime. The sex was consensual, but it had conditions that were not met.

It was described as the only time in history where Sweden knew exactly where someone wanted for an interview was extradited, rather than interviewed. Also, he was interviewed. Then let go, only to be re-interviewed, of they require an interview before charges, and he's been interviewed already, why do they need to do it again?

Right. The US refuses to lay "official" charges because those come with responsibilities. The EFF could start petitioning on his behalf. Demands could be made for a speedy and open trial, and other things the US doesn't want.

It would be perfectly sane to do so. It would be a statement that he'd be held for the "crimes" he is of interest for, and any charges from anywhere else would not be considered. It's not unheard of for countries to do so. Perhaps a promise that he'll be deported to Australia at the end of the proceedings for the pending Swedish charges, regardless of any intervening actions from any other governments.

Reasonable, and not unheard of.

Are you kidding me? IE's interface is utter shit, as bad as Chrome. At least on Firefox you can set it up to a modicum of normalcy, especially with the Classic Theme Restorer add-on.

Nope, the only thing standing between him and the US is the UK. It's standard practice to "invade" embassies. The only requirement is that you give sufficient warning (so that they can evacuate official personnel). As Assange isn't an official attache, he'd be arrestable the moment the embassy recognition from the UK ran out.

That's been done before. Argentina closed the UK embassy after the UK invaded the Malvinas.

Consent was given. It was just conditional. Lying to meet those requirements is perfectly legal in the US, and not in Sweden. That's why there is such a misunderstanding. What he did would have been 100% legal in the US. But he wasn't in the US, but the Slashdotters have trouble separating out jurisdiction, and speak as if the US should force the world to live under US law.

Yes, lets. Sweden is, for the first time ever, refusing to interview a suspect abroad at their current location. So either they find something exceptional about him, or it was just a coincidence. The most simple answer is that there's something exceptional about him, and US involvement, or Swedish politics seem the most likely culprits. When asked for confirmation either way, the Swedes refuse to comment or clarify. If it were a simple matter, they'd have no reason not to. So the most simple explanation is the more complex one, as the simple one fails all basic logic.

I can't tell with the trolls if they are lying, or if they truly think themselves experts in events when they have the most basic facts wrong.

He committed what the conservative media calls "rape" by committing fraud for sex. He lied for personal gain. That's fraud. Fraud to obtain sex in Sweden is fraud. He is accused of fraud, no more. Consent was given conditionally. He violated that condition. Thus the sex was (At the time) unconsented. Strictly, that can be called rape. But because there was tentative consent, just not informed consent, it's not "rape", just a sexual misconduct without a legal analogue in the US, as lying for sex is called "sex", and lying for personal gain is a good thing.

The US has abused that tactic enough they England makes the US follow at least a few of the laws. Part of an extradition hearing is essentially trying the case and seeing if it has merits. If the US doesn't prove the merits of the case, then extradition should be blocked. But allowing a CIA kidnapping from Sweden has no such legal requirements. It was presumed a non-extradition extraction would take place. Perhaps a deportation to Australia with a stop in NYC (not necessarily the most direct route, but not an insane one), and in NYC he misses his plane.

The conspiracy theorists point out this is the first time in history Sweden knew the location of the suspect and refused to interview them at that location. Until Sweden can explain the uniqueness of this situation, it seems there must be some hidden agenda. If the agenda wasn't hidden, it would follow the previous times where interviews were conducted over the phone, video, or in person with Swedish officials who traveled abroad. Assange was never "in hiding". That was McAfee, who was at unknown/undisclosed locations. Assange gave Sweden his number, and they never rang, then complained that he didn't contact them.

Even a whiff of critical thinking skills would allow anyone to see that Obama's purely political stunt is the only nonsense in question. If he gave a crap about the illegal immigrants he wants to "bring out of the shadows," he'd have wave the same magic wand months ago, or years ago. But he knew that it would wreck his party's chances of hanging onto legislative power. But - to his shock, no doubt - his party got completely spanked in the election. So he's done what he just did entirely to poison the well for the upcoming election. That is all.

Nowadays it's not called UI, but UX. Maybe that has something to do with the fact that interfaces are turning into shit.

For these groups: middle management, "UX" design, human resources, and everyone at or above executive level...

They get their own building, with its own network. We''ll call it location "E." The network is in no way connected to the outside world. There is no mailroom, and no delivery access to the building. All vehicles in the parking lot are to be classic Pintos. The parking lot shall be liberally equipped with speed bumps.

Developers, Manufacturing and Shipping work in another building or complex. We'll call it location "D."

Location D requires its own badges. You can't get past the lobby security installations if you don't have one. If you try, you get dumped in an unmaintained pond over-populated with carnivorous ducks carefully selected for unusually unsanitary and highly aggressive natures. To protect these wonders of evolution, the pond shall be patrolled by duck enthusiasts with fully automatic weapons.

Location D has its own network, which is firewalled at every possible level against anything, in or out, from location E, as a prophylactic measure, should location E somehow arrange for a WAN connection.

At location D, the janitorial staff shall work hand-in-hand with the mailroom to heat the building by incinerating any mail or package that isn't (a) a paycheck, or (b) items that are on a list of things previously ordered by the occupants of location D.

Location D shall have its own high quality NY pizza shop, a Dunkin Donuts, and an Orange Julius. The mailroom shall be responsible for delivery of products from these to the developer's desks, and for running out to fetch non-local take out orders. Mailroom salaries to be commensurate with consistency of their on-time, still-fresh delivery records, which shall be kept in consummate detail.

At location D, female developers shall have hot male sexataries with pole- and stripping-experience. Male developers shall have hot female sexataries with pole- and stripping-experience. Poles shall be conveniently located in and/or near all developer offices. The sexatarial pool shall have both a shallow and a deep end, a selection of diving boards at varying heights, and a suitably awesome sound system and snack bar, and it shall be located adjacent to a well-equipped workout center. Fridays shall be devoted to data collection by careful developer examination of active poles.

Location D shall have a rooftop laser tag facility with long-range light-arms. Location E shall situate all offices such that they have windows facing location D, and all location E personnel shall be required to wear lasertag suits that (with one exception) simultaneously initiate a period of physical incapacitation (locked limbs) and a significant shock. The single exception to this rule is that at location E, the vests worn by UX designers shall be equipped to deliver fatal shocks, whereas the incapacitation feature is to remain uninstalled in order to save the company money.

At location D, any occupant of an office that wishes the title "rock star" to be affixed to, or adjacent to, his or her door must demonstrate the ability to actually perform rock and roll using an actual musical instrument to a panel of rock and roll enthusiasts suitably selected from the ranks of the developers. Air guitar does not qualify. Singing ability may qualify, at the discretion of the panel. Developers so qualified shall be additionally eligible for multiple sexatarial personnel/services, a small but well-equipped stage, and their own snack counter.

All developers shall receive 1 (one) exotic car of their choice leased for them for the duration of their employment, funding for which shall be achieved by garnishing executive salaries as needed. The location D parking lot shall provide direct access to both high speed oval and full scale Nürburgring-configuration tracks. There shall be no speed bumps in the location D parking lot, however, the west extent of the lot shall be configured as a 1/4 mile track with a 1/2 mile rollout at the end.

At location D, there shall be a Lego parts acquisition department, which shall be expanded as developer needs require. All offices shall have a lego assembly and display area.

But IT doesn't do that, so IT doesn't see that, so IT doesn't believe it exists, is part of a job or is important. IT is just as myopic as any other group of business people, they just think they have all the answers - just like every other group of business people.

My experience has been that managers care a *great* deal about users (read clients) calling in and complaining that their data is gone and threaten to sue.
Then again, I mostly worked in banking where reducing risk was a prominent concern for all parties.