Technically speaking, SWIFT *gave* the USA all that lovely private data free to be mined for the good of the EU citizens being spied on.
Yes, it was entirely voluntary or SWIFT would be barred from operating within the US or with any US banks outside the US.
If you're not in the US or a US citizen, I have a very hard time believing you'd be targeted so specifically without having done something specifically to deserve being targeted. Rather, I'd be inclined to think that you might believe yourself part of a generalized data snooping conspiracy that you believe the US perpetrates in all foreign domains.
It was just me and about 200 million other EU citizens. The US decided it was going to revoke the permission of SWIFT, the largest interbank exchange company in Europe, to operate in the US unless they voluntarily handed over all financial data for data mining.
The US has also been caught demanding lots of information from individual banks and online retailers.
The US government is not a nice bunch of people.
And you do know the whole "Van that can detect your TV" is a myth, don't you? I think you've just discredited yourself...
Solaris is a technically good and high quality OS but its hardware support was limited. If you bought the Sun-branded boxes and Sun-branded cards, you were OK. However if you are white-boxing a server, you had to be careful to select chipsets that were on their compatibility list. Then support got murky at that point even then.
You sound like you've never had to mediate a 3-way vendor argument between the hardware vendor, the linux support vendor and the HBA vendor, all claiming that it's someone else's fault that the hardware/OS/HBA combo doesn't work, even though they assured you that it did before you bought it. Oh, and you're a top customer, so they want to keep you really really happy. But not "it actually works" kind of happy.
I really, really love Solaris, but let's face the facts. Outside of the SPARC platform, there is no reason for Solaris. Linux does everything as well or nearly as well. Linux is weaker in some areas, but not weak enough to justify the cost and lock-in of Solaris.
Spoken like someone who has never run them side by side in a large estate. Even 10+ years after Linux's enterprise debut, they're not even close. I've just had to reboot 3 RHEL 6 boxes twice each because for some reason they no longer scan the bus correctly. You have to add new disk, reboot, partition, and reboot again. Last time I had to reboot a Sun box because we added new disk was 2004, and that was because the site standards were rubbish and they were configuring their HBAs incorrectly. There's almost no comparison between Linux and Solaris, still, years after all kernel developers started concentrating on making Linux better for the datacentre. The last time I suggested sending a Linux kernel dump to RedHat or SUSE we all laughed. They don't even look at them, they just blame the hardware and suggest we update firmware. Then they cross their fingers and hope. And where's the fabled DTrace equivalent for Linux? I'm sure I missed that announcement, as when Solaris 10 was announced every Linux fanboy said it would be shipped and stable in Linux before Solaris 10 DVDs hit my desk. Fail.
Solaris exists for Oracle to milk legacy customers on support contracts who aren't ready or willing to migrate to Linux and commodity x86 hardware
Or who want to run large databases with more than a few GB of RAM. Small databases seem fine on Linux, but Oracle or DB2 or Sybase don't seem as stable on Linux as on Solaris when you get up to 32+GB RAM.
There isn't much if any new development going on, and Oracle is only pushing Solaris to new customers as part of their big data warehouse solutions (where customers have $$$$$ and want to spend it with one vendor) where they want to get people locked in to one vendor.
Yes, and it's a crying shame. Oracle are terrible. I know of whole enterprises who jumped ship when Oracle took over. But Linux still isn't there, even though most places I'm working at these days have more Linux than Solaris, HP-UX or AIX, and usually more than all other Unix combined. But there's still too much of the amateur around Linux.
It's also the case that, where Palestinians have land, they are never allowed permits to build, but that's just a by-product of a racist society that doesn't believe in equal rights or the rule of law. Institutional racism is common and encouraged by successive Israeli governments, who then brag about it to get re-election. The Arab 20% of Israel don't get 5% of the education budget, for example.
Where there is illegal construction by Jews and non-Jews side by side, the non-Jewish buildings are demolished at a rate of 5 times more often than Jewish buildings, for example in East and West Jerusalem, even though there are more illegal Jewish-built buildings in West Jerusalem than there are in East Jerusalem.
I could go on, but as you're either woefully mis-informed or lying your teeth off in an effort to hide the truth about Israel, you'll never admit that what you posted was utterly and completely wrong, so I'll just sign off and hope you don't demolish too many more Palestinian houses in 2013...
Israel would immediately cease to exist as a Jewish state. If the Palesinians don't outnumber them now, they'll easily outbreed them. And then outvote them. Its going to have to be a two state solution.
Actually, the current Israeli PM is expected to explicitly rule out a two-state solution as his running platform as there are elections looming. He ran and won the last election there under the platform of single-handedly destroying the Oslo Accords and preventing a Palestinian state from being formed. I doubt the Israeli electorate are suddenly going to change and decide that, actually, they do believe in democracy or human rights for non-Jews.
Which means, when the borders are all settled, some of the Jews who built settlements in the West bank will find themselves under a Palestinian government.
No, actually this was, again, explicitly ruled out by the last Israeli government during negotiations, where all Jewish settlement blocks had to be a contiguous part of Israel. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_Papers#Borders Apart from the obvious Israeli political abandonment of the two-state solution, the issue of water and resources means that it's just not practical for Israel to abandon the very lucrative occupation just for peace. Right now the occupation is funded by the UN and the EU, with the US flinging billions of dollars at Israel to keep it going. Why abandon such a lucrative source of income?
And I would be interested to find out if they run it to the settlements, or just the west J and metro areas.
It's an awesome excuse to steal more land and demolish more Palestinian villages in the West Bank - "We need it for a fibre optic connection to the settlements." (Never mind that it's likely to be run along existing telephone or power lines.)