I remember it in the 1960s. Robots (or machines) have certainly replaced some jobs, or changed them - we no longer have the office typing pool for instance. However for some jobs it is going to be hard to replace humans: hospital nurses, kindergarten teachers for instance.

Somewhat like the rationale behind many patent trolls: ''Just pay the £20,000 license fee, it is not worth a £1,000,000 legal fight''. I wonder if these guys are related ?

They might have only sold 15,000 units but for those that bought them it is their 'phone and many of them will be locked into a 2 year contract. So they will want the 'phone supported by HTC & Facebook for at least 2 years, preferably 4 -- OS upgrades, security/bug fixes, etc.

However I suspect that HTC will not bother. I bought an HTC 'phone, I got one OS upgrade and then they refused to do any more. They had my money so why bother to spend money supporting me ? It would not bring them any more income and might result that I might delay buying a new 'phone. Well: they are right on that last point, but as a result of the derisory way that they have treated me I will not buy another HTC 'phone, so (long term) they loose - plonkers.

Why on earth do they choose 2 colours that are hard to tell apart in that graph ? They were black & dark blue. It took me several seconds to work out which was which. Many other reports/... seem to do similar.

It is about the account owner forgetting his/her password.

+1. I wish that I had mod points!

How boring, maybe you could have said: ''fyrsta færslan'' :-)

I'm English and I used the last of my mod points yesterday; I would have modded you up. I don't like the spy cameras either.

I suspect that we will never meet:: I won't go to the USA since I don't want to be finger printed (& the rest of it) by the TSA, also it is unsafe to visit the USA since I might be arrested for doing something in my own country that is legal in my country.

The last migration that I did was about 16/17 years ago when I moved from Unisoft Unix (SystemV) to Red Hat (Linux). I also ran SCO in those days.

Shhh! -- don't tell his wife! :-)

Not that I have noticed. I will not pretend that I deliberately look at what is on other people's screens, but I have not seen anything. So if someone is looking at smut in public, but no one knows, what harm is being done ?

Is Cameron going to announce that people must not read playboy in a public place ? What would be the point, it is not a problem, so why fix it ? Oh: I see, this will appeal to those Torygraph & Daily Fail readers who have not yet come to terms with their own sexuality or have their minds infected with religious memes, so he will garner a few more votes. Others, like me, will soon forget this stupidity. On that basis I doubt that it will become law.

Lots of entropy here, more than most! Does that mean that I am super intelligent ?

They will only get hit by costly law suits if they are misusing the data. This is a measure that will keep them honest.

Tell your AssemblyCritter to: +1 - vote for this.

UK law also has a similar provision in the UK's E-Commerce Regulations (scroll down to Minimum information to be provided). Google does not comply, I talked to a Google employee who told me, something like, that it was not convenient/efficient and that I should use a web form.

I don't like putting questions via web form since I don't get to keep a copy as I do when I send email.