Thank you for that. Useful stuff.

Clearly something exists since it does exist and have value. So either your argument is over the nomenclature, or the philosophy. If the former, fine - invent your own nomenclature. If the latter, you have to recognise that people labour long and hard to produce 'something'. The question is whether those people should have any ability to take ownersship of the 'something' that they produce. If no, then you've just consigned a number of people to penury.

I think it is perfectly fine for people to create things that they want to create and then let other people use those creations by agreeing to the terms that the creator determines.

Why not link to the original article? http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/nov/05/google-maps-doubt-iphone

The problem that I have with this article is that Google seems to studiously avoid the question "Have you actually written and submitted the app?" If they haven't it seems rather like politicking on Google's behalf. This isn't the world's most complex app - just submit it and **then** complain if it is rejected.

The thing is though, it depends how you and your kid see the device. If it's coercive, sure they'll turn it off. If it's a device you both agree its worth using so that the kid can have a bit more freedom and 'it stops Dad worrying', then turning it off really isn't an issue.

I have 6 and 9 year old daughters and I live in East London. We're lucky enough to have a nice large open area close to the house, with woods and fields. I don't have a tracking device for my kids, but I do give them a walky talky. It means they can go climbing trees and mucking about on their bikes without me feeling I have to helicopter too much. I've *asked* them to just give me a buzz every half an hour or so just to say their OK and they're perfectly fine about it. They can roam further than I would normally feel comfortable letting them go solo, they get a feeling of independence and responsibility.

Win, win really.

Well, the UK for one.

This is akin to the way that kitchen appliance manufacturers work. Ovens, dishwashers and washing machines all have an 'Eco' setting - all of which will get the machine the coveted excellent energy rating but which will, in most cases never be used. I've seen something similar on a car.

Why not have a chat to the people who are teaching the course, explain your concerns, find out who devised the curriculum and when it was last revised. You may find that you have allies in the faculty, who also feel that it needs updating and they will be able to advise in terms of who the most effective people to write to are, and how you should couch your arguments to get the best effect.

I'd quite like Gilliam to have a stab at it.

Precisely. The false negative rate is sufficiently large to make it pointless. Would anyone here have unprotected with someone on the basis of this test's result?

Let me introduce you to my 8 year old daughter. She had quite a lot of fun trying to solve the maze problem and come up with an algorithm to do it. She was interested in the problem, trying to teach her the syntax of a programming language would have made the problem less accessible, I doubt she would have enjoyed it.

My wife's pretty happy with her iBook running 10.5 and an old version of Office v.X - she doesn't use it regularly, but gives her what she needs when she's off at a conference or whatever.

Actually a new interpretation of the rules from ICO last week changes this. Presumed consent is now OK-ish.

Where to start on this post. Let's kick off with DNA retention. Firstly it was the European Court of Human Rights that ruled on this - and that court is not an EU body, and has nothing to do with the EU. Secondly the UK Supreme Court has also ruled against the UK government on this one, and the government is **still*8 dragging its feet, so by your definitions, presumably the UK is not part of the UK since the UK government dissed a UK court.

Tobacco imports? As far as I can tell the UK is not breaching any elements of EU law on imports and indeed last time it came up the EU courts ruled in the UK's favour http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2006/nov/24/news.retail

You might like to Google the relationship between the European Court of Human Rights and the EU.

In the meantime, I'll give you a hint - the ECoHR is not an EU body.