"It has been empirically shown that boys who had a history of high physical aggression, from age 6 to 12, were found to have lower testosterone levels at age 13 compared with boys with no history of high physical aggression. The former were also failing in school and were unpopular with their peers. Both concurrent and longitudinal analyses indicate that testosterone levels were positively associated with social success rather than with physical aggression"

Which put a crimp in "testosterone is baaaad".

The initial judgment was clear. The person which had debt but repaid them (the initial reason there was that judgement) did not have a right to change the news article because it was a fact, but they had a right to have the search engine not report them as a result. In fact this was how it worked before there was a search engine : if you wanted something forgotten you either moved out, or waited for some time. At that point if nobody checked the primary source directly (old journal article) then you were forgotten, as there was not a service/persons standing beside you permanently always telling everybody what you did wrong in the past. With google it is the case of having that person standing beside you telling everything you did so far as google can link it.

It was clear from the judgement and the right to be forgotten that further reporting it wide of the removal would go against the very basis of it. After all there is no difference between "mister ABC has fone stuff XYZ" and "mister ABC has asked google to remove link to article where he did stuff XYZ". Even if it was an error the first time it was clear after the first reported removal went that way , that google by continuing to do that went against the spirit and the basis of the right to eb forgotten. In fact i would argue that google did it intentionally, knowingly and contemptuously, respecting the letter of the law but hoping with a two pronged way this would undermine the right to be forgotten : 1) they intentionally continued reporting the link removal when they are not forced by law to do so, and it was obviously counter productive to the spirit of the law to tell that to news agency and 2) they intentionally agreed to remove link which were not covered by the right to be forgotten, for example from politician and prominent person doing illegal stuff.


Both actions shows this was not an accident and they did it to undermine the request. "doing no evil" is long gone. google now are clearly asshole.

The loss happened at the heigth of industrial revolution where there was a lot of other job openning, compeltely new job market for uneducated and untrained people.

Nowadays the job market for untrained and potentially uneducated job is *shrinking*. This is not the same as back when horse cariage were gone and automobile came in.

There is a high chance that untrained and uneducated job lost today, are definitively lost thru job market shrinkage. Think about that. Think about what that means for the economy as a whole when 100.000 jobs are lost. Nothing good for the economy or for the social stability.

If you can see how it was done, see what the flaw is, and improve on the flaw. A worthless system is a system which was tried and which you can learn from without trying yourself. That means million dollar of R&D spared. Plus not all part of the system will be worthless.

The treatment "true" cost in no way whatsoever the 7000$ price tag. Simply hospital and insurance are in a feedback loop leading to an increase of the price way over the production cost. That's why by the way governmental social insurance is better than private one, the private one and the hospital have all itnerrest into increasing treatment cost and premium cost, so there might be a few dispute , but in the end it is about who get which slice of the pie, NOT about making price lower. I am not saying it is a conspiracy , I do not think hospital and insurance are accomplice, but the environment and the fact they both profit from increased medical cost, lead to the situtation and pie splitting. A government social insurance does have all interrest into making sure price is lower. In this specific example rabbies emergency cost my neighbor 15 euro total, and rabbies vaccine and anti serum are actually massively produced by governmental institute.

Firstly not all animals in experimentation are killed or suffer. But even for those who do : one of the goal of ethical guideline is to avoid animal pain as much as possible. In fact in some case we go more out of our way to avoid unnecessary pain to animals in labs, than we do for human at end of life in hospital.

You simply have a warped view on lab experimentation which is not found in medical labs. Now you may have a point with *cosmetic* experimentation , but you won't find me defending those.

We do not "torment" and kill mice gratuitiously, a choice of word which certainly show quite inherent bias here. Usually you have to go thru an ethical comitee for animal experimentation (although the barrier is lower for lab mouse). Furthermore most of those animal experimentation have a clear goal to help develop cure or model for the human health. If you can't differentiate that from people misusing the computer of others, then I can't help you.

I bet you could not tell the difference between a civilian plane and a military plane flying at 30,000 feet over a war zone either.

I could. The civilian plane would have a radar transponder that said "Hi, I am Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17".

And an IFF on mode 3. And flying much higher than the military plane.

Whereas the palestinian Hamas terrorism and the various shananigan and threat from the various neighbors of Israel (or at least political show off) is undeniable, Israel policy is not that innocent either : the colonizing settlement do certainly poison further the situation.

The right to be forgotten was meant to be for normal individuals which went into a abd situation, then corrected it, but google always bring it up as first result thus meaning your chance of reintegration and finding a good job get NIL, and thus you enter a abd spiral or get your chance in life lowered. The example of that was a guy which went bankrupt paid back his debt, but still even after that the first result in google was his debt and bankruptcy, thus putting a burden on him.

It was NEVER meant for am public figure or a politician to hide their middeed or shameful action. >b>Google itnentionally allowed such removal as a kind of protest when such removal were not "granted" by the law. Google are the asshole here when they allow a public figure to remove their stuff.


Personally I am for the right to be forgotten. Previous generation including mine could do all sort of stuff including getting drunk, bankrupt, or get caught doing illegal stuff but never got punished foreever for it. It was always limited ansd people forgot, or you could move into another town. Nowadays it is different, you make a misstep, even something LEGAL but frowned upon, and BAM ! It is there for ever + longer.

A non forgetting society is a harsh society which I refuse. So excuse me if I think the slope was slippery before, when nothing was forgotten. Having a right to be forgotten remove a bit of that slope and make it more horizontal. Excellent.

It does not matter how high and how unreachable you set your throttling. If there is a throttling it is not an unlimited data plan but a data plan with a CAP.

"Getting ads is annoying, getting ads for African American hair styling products when you're a redhead is infuriating"

No it isn't for most people, because we got used a LOT for this with TV. TV nearly never showed us advertising targeted for us specifically but more to a watcher class. But you know to whom it is infuriating to not target ads ? Marketing people. Because targeted ads means a better probability to transform an ad into a sale. In fact if marketing people could totally break our privacy and put camera everywhere to enhance their probability to higher level, they would do it, and pretend people like it. That's justification post hoc. They enable msot amrketing people to never discuss their own moral and ethical choice. Just pretend people like it and are infuriated when ads are not targeted to them. As opposed to be totally creeped out.

Back before PCI DSS we used to store everything we got during the booking process. And that include FOP (Form Of payment, CA cash, CC Credit Card, CH Checks, government card have another code etc...), FOID (Form of Identification - often Passport number nowadays but used to be FF card and CC card) confidential remarks (financial data) non confidential remarks (address, tel numbers, etc... And for a web based system , yes the IP you used). Everything you have directly or indirectly was saved i the PNR. And when CAPS 2 came up yes all that was sent indiscriminately to the US government , privacy be damned. Only recently when PCI DSS came up the airline started to blank our new PNR , but in some case for interline you may need to still send the CC (Can't recall which interline ticketing scenario - not refund as interline refund is not allowed by any airline i know of - maybe exchange to keep old FOP and new FOP in synch). Old PNR were never really corrected, especially all that was sent to the US government.

Bottom line : that's sadly a non story.

We all forgot that, perhaps because it is not true? I seem to recall a murderous kleptomaniac thug being evicted from power on the strength of popular protest.

Hy ! Be fair with the OP, from all what we know from Putin's bloody politics and underhanded tactic "murderous kleptomaniac thug" and "elected pro-russian government" could very well be identical in the average Russian mind ;)

1) the IFF was in mode 3 so it was quaking as a civilian
2) the radar system identified as a civilian but the operator chose to override the radar expert system report.