They aren't even pretending it's just anti-terrorism.

I'm sure it doesn't track every movement of every person in New York and store it in a database indefinitely. That will be version 2.0.

Yeah, we all want to edit our photos, videos, documents in the cloud. Why the fuck would I want to do that? I've got a workflow. I've got versions of Photohhop, Acrobat and Illustrator that are quite old, but I know how they work and they all can work together smoothly.

I don't need to send gigabytes of data back and forth to Adobe to do every edit. I don't have to worry about the interface changing overnight when I have a deadline. Or not being able to do anything because of a "temporary" service interruption, or because my system doesn't meet the requirements of the current software. And I certainly DO NOT want anyone trawling through all my work and indexing it so they can send me more fucking targetted ads. I don't want "Software as a service". I bought it once and don't need to pay for it again and again.

' Networks will need to support 58% compound annual growth rates in bandwidth on average, the IEEE claims, driven by simultaneous increases in users, access methodologies, access rates and services such as video on demand and social media. Networks would need to support capacity requirements of 1 terabit per second in 2015 and 10 terabit per second by 2020 if current trends continue, the organization says."

Just looking at the current rate of growth and extending it out indefinitely is clearly absurd. Exponential growth has to run into physical, or financial, limits sooner or later. Sooner in this case, I think.

Anyway, where I am, there has been no increase in speed for the last 10 years. In fact it's gotten worse, as more and more people hook up and try to stream video on their phones, pads, etc., etc., but the upstream capacity is still the same and the phone company just shrugs knowing we have no choice. So if I applied the same naive style of prediction, I'd say we are going to have 1.8 MB/sec forever. (Which may be true, unless fibre is activated in my lifetime.)

Well, in the Lost flashbacks, they gave the actor a shaggy hairdo to make them look "younger". Younger Ben Linus was hilarious. With Revolution, the fat Google guy is exactly as fat and bearded as he was after 15 years of post-apocalypse.

...which will put one hundred geeks on a plane for twelve hours to look for solutions to the global tech skills crisis. Ungrounded, as the project is called, will bring 100 âoeinnovatorsâ (Silicon Valley CEOs, thinkers and venture capitalists) on a private BA flight from San Francisco to London.

CEOs, venture capitlsts. To work in Silicon Valley they must be able to talk the talk, but I'll bet none of them is a "geek" as the word is used now. Though some might be adept at biting the heads off chickens.

Probably a good thing considering how clueless real geeks can be about how society works. They tend to be either libertarians, communists or anarchists. All equally unreal and unworkable philosophies in the real world.

Anyway, obviously the CEOs and venture capitalists will advocate importing cheap talent from poor countries to replace the expensive local workers. The only interesting thing is how they will present it to try to make it seem like a good thing for the first world workers. "You'll all be promoted to managers" maybe.

No, it weeds out the poor cranks. And researchers, say in climate change, or pharmaceuticals, or diet... who are friendly to corporations, would find the money easily enough. Leaving science that was inconvenient to business unpublished. Imagine how this would have affected research on the effects of smoking.

Well, with Revolution I watched it as it came out. Very, very dumb series. But everyone was telling JJ from the start that he HAD to have an explanation, that no one trusted him any more, after Lost, and the mess he made of Alias before that, when the ending was just pulled out of his ass and satisfied no one. Before the end of season 1 they do show you what caused the power to go off. But not who did it and why.

But the girl as the star is a Barbie doll and the plots are very repetitive and silly. The technology is terribly inconsistent. They keep having flashbacks, 15 years before, yet everyone looks exactly the same as they are "now".

They blew their chance to appeal to anyone except the (tiny) existing fan base. The Reaver conspiracy made little sense unless you were already a fan of the series. And they pissed off those fans by killing off two major characters. And yes, I know Whedon does that. Doesn't make it popular. It had its moments, of course, but wasn't near as involving as many of the episodes. And critical analysis aside, it was a commercial failure, didn't make its cost back until the DVD sale, despite fan campaigns to publicise it. Thats what killed the "franchise".

With Lost, it went all wishy washy long before the finale. They systematically erased all the possibilities of a rational explanation as the show went on. It was just Purgatory, like they swore blind in the first season it never would be. I kept watching, hoping they were going to pull it off, but it ended up like 1970s Sunday morning Christian telemovie. Very well produced and acted, but a terrible disappointment as you find out that nothing matters. The whole flash-sideways shtick even less so.

Well, I can't get Netflix. But I can download webrips. So I'm happy.

Same for BSG. But at least that you can just try to forget the last episode and the rest was pretty tremendous.

They financed "House of Cards", an adaptation of a UK political series, moved to Washington, starring Kevin Spacey recently. Pretty good. Also seem to have partnered with a Norwegian company to produce "Lilyhammer", about NY mafiosi, Steven Van Zandt, hiding out in Norway, which wasn't bad.

AMC was just doing what its name suggests, running old movies, until they started with Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Walking Dead. So this model can produce good stuff.

You don't have to kill them. Just unplugging their Internet connection would be enough, Then padlock the door and wait till they knock on it and ask to be let out. How long could that be? A week at the outside?

I don't believe the bullshit about then fending off SWAT teams anyway. That's what they say on their own website. No government really cares about spam enough to send in a SWAT team. It's all "protected commercial speech", and plenty of assholes in government are happy to let them do it. If they gave a shit, they know who is DDOSing and exactly where they are. They could arrest them. Freeze their bank accounts. Turn off their electricity, water. But they do nothing.