With regard to the switch, how far should the engineer take the weight of a possible key chain into account ie I have a pocket knife attached to mine. Now of course the real issue, why the fuck should important safety features built into the car be switched off when a change occurs in the switching of the ignition key when the car is in motion, seriously WTF. Airbags should always activate even when the vehicle is parked because driver and passengers might be present and if the impact is sufficient to warrant deployment it should occur. Brakes should always function even if only at reduced capacity.

Trademark, umm yes, people who bought the iPhone snap on keyboard were actually intending to buy a blackberry phone, yeah right. I think you missed the whole point of trademarks. Invention no, desperate greed by a dying company and a corrupt USPTO yes and yes.

A criminal act is a criminal act, get caught and you should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, spying is not an excuse for a criminal act. Germany as well as all other countries should actively pursue those involved and prosecute them to the full extent of the law, keeping in mind the death penalty for espionage still applies in the majority of countries. You want to behave in a criminal fashion expect the consequences you deserve, especially keep in mind there is no statute of limitation on espionage.

Where a government wants to pursue espionage via the internet, other countries have the right to pursue reparations via the WTO. Why the world trade organisation, it provides the means of fiscal recovery and of course this relates to the exportation of toxic bits and bytes on commercial import export channels.

Your deceit that "but mommy everyone does it", is just that a very juvenile deceit, every effort should be made to prosecute, recover costs and apply full penalties for criminal activities.

How about this as an extension of your idea. Flying body, quad copter aerial mine, with enhanced glide characteristics and upper surface solar panel, armed by reactive metal batteries with oxide opposing pole, where the oxygen can be released to trigger high speed chain reaction combustion (explode). Released from light aircraft at altitude, capable of ranges of fifty or more kilometres and targeted at specific individuals. Released in flights of three, one to break building skin, another to enter seek primary and a third to confirm and achieve secondaries. Any modern country should be able to manufacture and deploy them and the obvious targets politicians that oppose the desires of the deploying country. So as far as I am concerned, a desirable outcome, politicians who fail to diplomatically strive for peace become the primary targets, so when they take actions that lead to war they are the first to die, giving more sound politicians an opportunity. In the case of the US of course they could be targeted more effectively at corporate boardrooms, to ensure executives strive for peace and not war, else they will become the first victims of it.

Just about any country could deploy them ie Iran vs US oil companies, Russia vs EU Banking Cartels. Most of us would be left out of it as it would only end up targeting those at the top and as a excuse for war very difficult to prove where they come from and really as far as the majority citizens in the targeted nation were concerned there would be real conflict as whether to cheer or frown. So acceptable by your logic or not?

Reality. At the end of the day, what will the insurance company accept as sufficient security so as to replace the vehicle upon claim of theft, nothing more and nothing less. As for the balance of easy usability vs number of features vs security implementation, with a modern electric computerised vehicle that might best be left to a consultation between the sales consultant and the end user, with features not wished by the end user disabled and or other features set up.

Isn't it all really rather odd. China is prosecuting censorship of the variety that is the real intention behind censorship in the west. Censorship for the protection of society in the west is just the masquerade to hide paid censorship controlled by PR=B$ agencies and you can bet it will never ever be prosecuted in the West. Oh sure they'll get caught, as they already have been but everyone will tut tut and pretend like it never happened and try to do it again and again and again, often only to bring focus to what they are trying to hide.

No, that is fraud. A search engine can only return "whatever the hell they want" as long as they clearly state they are only returning "whatever the hell they want" and not attempting to imply they are returning a search of the internet. So the correct title for the web site should be "Baidu What Ever The Hell We Want Search Results" and they should not attempt to imply their search results are open. Of course more political correct speech might demand that they simply included censored in the title so the public is more aware of their nature.

They have a right to think 'WHO' because of course VR is a bioengineering problem not a programming problem. Once the bioengineering is solved, they can move onto computer engineering and then and only then programming, so programming last cab off the rank. Reality is people are already getting sick of the social invasiveness of Facebook, attempting to push it into a social exclusion environment wont solve that problem it in fact makes it far worse.

It's called 'arrogance' ie we are M$ and we have the right to snoop through all our users email as we own it, it is on our servers. So yes, caught by their own arrogance. So when you send or receive email, assume it has been read by every M$ employee who has any interest for any reason. M$ wont snoop, oh yes we believe you, oh my ;D. You can bet they also snoop your searches, your gaming access, your online application use, your MSN uses and anything else they can stick the creepy crawlies onto at any time their executives choose to. Well at least everyone has a direct/indirect channel via which to mock them, that channel being their own privacy invasiveness, something that harkens back to the secretly inserted data in all M$ Office documents to track user information.

It is a real shame that in the US, your comment is not satire but a reflection of reality. So who will be the Apple political stooges, I guess we will just have to wait and see.

Employer has no rights (other than those of any other individual), the employer must operate within the regulations set by law, that is to balance the theft of ownership and their privilege of having access to workers in a shared human society. Employers who do not understand that, only have the right to a legal defence during prosecution and prior to imprisonment, when society no longer requires the employers services.

This all pointing to the concept that all essential tech infrastructure should be locally produced in secured and audited facilities. Any time you import any essential tech infrastructure you leave that infrastructure at the mercy of the source location and it's vested interests. Including and not limited too espionage, industrial espionage, financial espionage and insider trading, targets for criminal extortion, political extortion, attacks upon democratic structures, gross wholesale privacy invasion for the most petty and perverse reasons, planting of false evidence of the most pernicious nature etc.

So Russia currently pushing Samsung, you can bet in the future Russia will pursue locally produced and sourced from secure facilities and the rest of those capable of doing so will do the same, not vassal states of course for reasons of control they will be forced to source their tech infrastructure from their ruling state like the relationship between the US and Australia much to the shame of many Australians.

The error in the article is down to the writer of the article and their preferences in conjunction with seeing the world in 'their image'. They have failed to step back and see the world in the shape of the majority of people, they kind of people that make up the facebook user market. They use facebook to extend their social experience not cut themselves off from it. Quite simply virtual reality can suit introverts as it adds to their non-social experience, a minority but altered reality suits extroverts the majority as it adds to the social experience.

How intense and all encompassing the virtual reality experience is can make it desirable to a much broader group for limited interaction at a much higher price which is where a full body harness and virtual reality gym/hotels come it ie you either charge a little for a whole lot of the time or charge a whole lot for a little of the time.

So does virtual reality suit facebook as a social web company, nope, not at all. Can virtual reality suit facebook as a investment tech company, looking to diverge its income base, certainly, if it can properly focus the investment beyond a myopic viewpoint of their social web business. Unfortunately tech companies have a history of being very bad at this ie M$ and MSN.

So your saying victims or prejudice should just suck it up and not complain because those who exercise prejudice and attempt to force their preferences upon others through law and distortion of democracy via money have a right to tell them to STFU bend over and take it. I thought that bending over and taking was the problem in the first place.

Right to strike, its fair and reasonable, right to strike for political and social reasons, somehow trickier. Lets see, the ceo uses his income to impact and attempt to control the lives of others to force them to adhere to his preferences, those who share his workplace and are the victims of those machination do not want to support his income opportunities to attack them. It would seem the right to strike for political and social reasons is very much down to the political and social reason. In this case it would seem reasonable. He is using his income role to attack them and they are using their income role to defend against that attack, whether or not they the engage in the specifically attacked behaviours, they find that kind of attack threatening.

The operative words being causational or just coincidental. Likely the reality is, it is just coincidental. Not just with people more likely to initiate calls while driving but also people who pay less attention to their driving, watch scenery, fiddle with make up and hair, drink and eat etc. are also likely to spend a substantive amount of time talking on the phone whilst driving and eliminating the phone will not increase their attention on the road. Want less accidents, automation, better public transport, promote telecommute etc ie get people off the road.

Of course it all points back to exploiting the patents of flash ram for as long as possible prior to reducing the price where it competes with optical storage both media and player. They can already fit ten full high definition movies in something the size of your thumbnail and it is only patent inflated profit margins on flash keeping optical storage alive. They could basically send you a huge chunk of the whole library in something the volume of a dvd/blue ray case and rather than stream the content you could stream just the access flag to allow you to view any particular bit of content at any particular time.