This should make commercial air travel much cheaper and safer as airlines begin to do away with the single-point of failure that costly human pilots represent, implementing instead a crowd-based solution that empowers all passengers to contribute equally to guiding the plane to wherever they decide will be the flight's destination.

This has always puzzled me. Why, in this so-called enlightened age of ours, is it so hard for us to realize that there's room under the bus for everybody?

What if that supposed pedestrian really is no more than a clear stretch of road, and it is we who err in notifying the road's next of kin, who are themselves no more than a dirt path and a pedestrian walkway?

you lost me

Why didn't you just send an anonymous message to HR requesting they enforce the cleavage policy?

Given that anyone can sign up for a VPN for $35 a year and use the US google (which presumably isn't governed by EU law), I'd say the biggest problem is that this law is completely unenforceable.

I look forward to next week's headline "Robbery Suspect Noticed Wearing Hawaiian Shirt and Killed"

you sound like that guy at the end of those life-affirming pharmaceutical commercials who reads all the horrible side effects super quick

Might as well face it, I'm addicted to love

Glances woefully down at wedding ring...

Thinks back on previous three weddings...

Sure we may be ready for a zombie apocalypse, but are we prepared for the poor plotting, derivative story-line, cheap jump-scares, wooden acting, gratuitous sex scenes, and corny self-referential jokes of the inevitable sequel?

I don't get how this will work. Will these rulings affect google's results in the US? Surely google.com can legally index an article in an EU newspaper. So can the EU then subsequently force google to remove this data from their server in the US? If so, it seems as if the EU is limiting information flow between a US company and US citizens (under the threat that the US company will be punished in the EU if it does not comply). This seems rather peculiar. Yet if this isn't how it works, then anyone in the EU could just visit google.com instead of their local google, thus rendering the whole system moot.

That is a response to your curious understanding of how free speech is handled in the US, not the EU.

This is a canard. Nobody in his right mind, even on this site, contends that free speech ought to allow one to break laws. Punching someone in the face is undoubtedly a form of speech, insofar as it communicates a message, but one cannot defend such an assault on free speech grounds. Likewise with insider trading and any other crime involving speech.

You appear to be framing the difference between the two approaches as one of Yosemite Sam on the one side, speechifying willy nilly without regard for the baleful consequences of his indiscretions, and on the other, the pasty-faced egghead Parisian intellectual in his black beret and turtleneck, heaving a weary sigh at the rusticated antics of his Yankee cousin, whilst making a few minor tweaks to the law in the interests of the basic human decency that so delights the heart of the European, but so quickly withers away in the harsh frontier conditions of the New World. You might bring some of that famed European nuance to bear on the question and consider whether this cartoonish interpretation does anything more than flatter your own ego.

this is fiendishly clever. if you're bad enough at it, you might end up getting your original job back.