I agree it probably is a proof of concept with limited applications at the moment, but how about something like Hadoop, that was designed to work on a distributed set of cpus and discs.

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/08/16/2343249/dremel-based-project-accepted-as-apache-incubator

The statistics seem to indicate that might not be true.
http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_religions_and_babies.html

The Ghostery plugin http://www.ghostery.com/ does that, and more.

This is the important part, not now, but in the future. This is just a demonstration of what is possible, and how the mistakes that are being made now may effect all of us in the future.

From a recent talk by Cory Doctorow, http://boingboing.net/2012/01/10/lockdown.html

We need to change the way that the industry and the regulators think about these kind of devices. Security by obscurity is just not good enough.

As patients (now and in the future) we should require/demand that all of the software in these devices is open source or they won't get certified for use as implants.
Many people on this site have said something along the lines of "If I were designing these devices then I would use [xyz] to make them secure".
The important point is that geeks like us aren't designing these devices, and for the companies that are designing these devices security isn't a priority.

Good security is expensive, both in terms of employing extra staff with the relevant expertise, and in terms of developer time to implement and test it. Unless peer reviewed security is required by their customers or government regulations, then it is just not enough of a priority to justify the additional cost.

The worst result from this kind of research would be that our politicos jump at a sound bite solution and make it illegal to own or design a device that could intefere with implanted medical devices. Preventing the good guys from testing their own devices, while making it easier for the bad guys by allowing manufacturers to get away with poor security.

The best result from this kind of research would be that we make peer reviewed security and open source code part of the requirements for certification of implanted devices. But that won't happen unless we keep pushing to make it happen.

I did the same. I used to listen Last.fm a lot, and I discovered several artists that I hadn't heard of before, and bought quite a few albums as a result.

I had a monthly subscription, and I thought it was well worth the money. I wasn't that interested in the big name bands, what was interesting were the less well known artists from their huge database of music from around the world. But like you, I cancelled my subscription when they cut the "my loved tracks".

It was nice while it lasted, but .. the world moves on.

Missing option http://www.slicehost.com/

Excellent service, easy to use and reliable.
I've been using system for over 3 years and not had a problem.

That is absolutely essential.

First thing that occurred to me when I read the summary who controls the list .

Agree with you apart from the '.' in '.config'.

.... apps dumping hidden config files willy-nilly in my home is annoying as hell.

Not only is there no standard, but the convention of using hidden directories makes things worse.
Add to that the fact that many apps mix data (cache) and configuration (passwords) under the same hidden directory and it makes backing up the users settings a non trivial task.

Amazon don't store their inventory in the trucks. The trucks just collect the items that have been sold and deliver them to the consumer.

Amazon use large warehouses to store the inventory, large warehouses to store the data centers that coordinate the inventory, deliveries and purchases, and UPS use large warehouses to park the trucks when they aren't out delivering. All those warehouses will have nice big flat roofs - as opposed to the various sized odd shaped small roofs of all those individual brick and mortar stores.

I agree it would be good if the brick and mortar stores put up solar panels. But I don't agree that brick and mortar stores would somehow be better at providing solar power than online stores would. It would be better if the individual brick and mortar stores AND the large warehouses used by the online stores all used their roof space to generate some form of solar power.

Thank you. This is the first real evidence I've seen that the leaked documents do actually contain names.

Still not sure if the leak was good or bad. I'm working my way through the online documents myself, but this gives me a clue as to what kind of things to look for.

.. demanding that vendors include it as a compulsory package for Linux users who select "France" ..

What vendors ?

If you meant distributors (of Linux) ... there are 100's of them, and only a few that would be subject to French law.

A lot of the problems are due to the ambiguity in the way the various laws apply, and a lack of clarity in the way these are explained to the public, the security guards and police officers. This is not the security guards fault; they were probably instructed to 'watch out for suspicious activity', without a clear definition of what constitutes 'suspicious activity'.

One way to solve this might be for the local authorities to make a public statement to the effect that "Photography is legal and accepted behavior in public places; unless there are clearly displayed signs that prohibit it".

The important part of that is "the clearly displayed signs" bit. If the owners of a building or transport system don't want people to take photographs, then they must display signs that indicate that photography is prohibited. Without clearly displayed signs stating that photography is prohibited, then threatening arrest for taking photographs would automatically be considered as harassment and unlawful arrest.

We might see an outbreak of 'photography prohibited' signs almost everywhere, but at least it makes it clear where we stand. However, I suspect that there are many places where the owners or authorities are happy for their security personnel to discourage photography on an individual basis, but would balk at the idea of stating their policy in public. Requiring them to state the ban publicly, with permanent signs, may make them re-asses their policy.

"Is the potential threat really worth the cost of putting up all the signs, damaging our public relations and intimidating our passengers / visitors ?"

Once it is clear what places do prohibit photography, then if we (the public) are unhappy with the prohibition or feel that it is unnecessary at that location, we can petition the owners or responsible authorities to remove the ban (small print in the law could require that the sign clearly state who is responsible for the ban).

We do the same for parking in big cities. The penalty in London for parking your car where you are not allowed to is being wheel clamped or towed away. But, in order for this to be legal, there must be clearly displayed signs that state that parking is prohibited at that location and what the penalty is.

At least this might help to clear up the current confusion.