The PDF is at http://www.newstatesman.com/sites/default/files/files/AWW%20New%20Statesman.pdf Also its in Mandarin so not sure how much more you will be able to read into it.

If you read the article, the New Statesmen themselves refer to it as "pirated" (in quotes). While one could pay money for the Magazine, those who can read Mandarin can get it for free using pirating methods where the print version will most likely not see the light of day due to state censorship. They are using this technique as its well known "the internet routes around censorship"

If you took time to read TFA you may have come across this little tidbit.

"One of the oldest techniques in the attacker's virtual arsenal, buffer overflows remain a problem. In December, Microsoft identified 2.6 million possible attacks that could be waged using a stack-based buffer overflow in the JRE (Java Runtime Engine)".

Well a gentleman's agreement between corporations are lubricated with money. Between a government and a company? I assure you Uncle Sam would appeal to patriotism and expect one to lay back and take it while thinking of their country with nothing more to ease the experience. Probably even given threats as to what would happen if one did not cooperate.

Now albeit through anonymous sources that government powers are developing malware, how will it be either through legislation, treaty or "gentleman's agreement" that anti-virus software manufacturers will have to look the other way for certain payloads? Is this already happening? Certainly the Third Amendment tells us we don't have to use our homes to quarter soldiers, but will the government use its citizenry's hard drives and bandwidth to host a weapon?

Does the line: "car security systems will begin have a real impact to every day use if a thief can simply walk up to your car and drive it away." seem to imply car thievery is a new thing? Thieves have been stealing cars since you had to hand crank the engine. Sure the techniques in 1911 were different from the techniques in 2011 but this is a a bit hysterical isn't it? Criminals are always getting better than security which leads to better security which leads to more cunning thieves, like any living system, it will continue to evolve.

If we are reading scrolling text, would we then be paying attention to the ad's content? This seems less like a way for users to see advertising content and more an exercise in dickery. I am finding more and more content behind 30 second video ads. My current behavior is just go read something in another tab and come back to it after the ad is done. My prediction? Captcha ads will tank site readership. Seriously there is nothing I can think of on a chewing gum site that would require me to answer a pop quiz to view.

Yes but you still need to type it when making a hyperlink in your mark up language of choice.

But they will still need Latin characters to type "http://"

My dreams of a robot girlfriend are one step closer to being actualized

Why did Google initially agree to censor search results in the first place if this was their philosophy? I am certain they have made money in China, they would not have gone there for altruistic purposes of giving China good search results and web based email if there was not profit in it. Sure they have the philosophy "Don't Be Evil" but they got in bed with China to do business there. Only after the Aurora Exploit did they finally say enough is enough. Taking an anti-censorship stance only AFTER the Aurora attacks makes it seem retaliatory to me. They got a bruised eye from the neighborhood bully and then after playing along fine for quite some time decided they wanted to pick up their ball and go home. I would have been more impressed if Google uncensored their search results from the beginning instead of reacting to overt actions from China to their bottom line.