Some govt/military sites won't let a camera phone on site, but will allow non-camera phones.
Birds are descended from a few small species that are classed as "dinosaurs", possibly descended from just one species that has left little if any direct remains. That species no longer exists as such, but I would contend that it isn't really extinct. They aren't descended from T-Rex, which along with 99.99%* of dinosaur species is extinct.
I suspect that I need more 9's in that, but no-one really knows.
GM is hugely unpopular in the UK.
Sure, mutations are random and indiscriminate. But the statement "mutagenesis is effectively an acceleration of the natural system of evolution" is false. It's an acceleration of mutation, but it's not an acceleration of the natural system of "evolution by natural selection" to give it its full title. It's evolution by manual selection. Sure, if sufficient selection has taken place to ensure that no undesirable mutations have crept in, I have no problem with this. I'm just clarifying the terminology, because it's no use having an uninformed debate.
The web is a kind of cloud, a limited subset of what cloud computing can do, but useful to mention specifically since so many peope are familiar with it.
If they have living descendants, then surely they didn't go extinct.
Third, many companies shared data "on a voluntary basis". Whether this is really voluntary or under some thinly veiled threat, there is nothing guaranteeing they won't lie on their own accord.
I guess only time will tell whether a company's canary tag is a genuine attempt to defy the police state, or a fig leaf to make you think they are on your side. As with all promises, you have to choose who you trust.
What would the United States do if employees of Google, Apple, Microsoft, or another too-big-to-fail tech company whose absence could cripple the economy decided to file into the county jail one by one?
Not many of them would do so.
If the government counters that releasing real-time stats on surveillance orders should be censored for reasons of National Security, let that one fly all the way to the Supreme Court.
So you get a secret order, that comes along with a "do not tell anyone about the existence of this order" clause, and you announce it to the world by incrementing your "secret order counter". Off to sing-sing with you, for sure.
Unfortunately this is probably correct. You can't avoid the law just by smart-alec shenanigans.
They are publicising the situation, giving the community the chance to have their say. What's the problem? If I have a problem with my company's policies, I voice them internally and carry on doing my job. I don't publish them on a blog or the company's internet page.
Most places have time zones that roughly correspond to the sun being overhead. Some local variance is acceptable, I do not reject the idea of time zones. There are some notable exceptions like western China that have the sun setting after midnight though, that's a bit extreme. And yes, I mostly work 9 to 5:30.
So what you're saying is, the working day should be 8 'til 4 instead of 9 'til 5? And we should just keep lying to ourselves about what the time really is, all year round? Maybe this is what is behind the plan to move the prime meridian to Paris. Then everyone can keep their time zone offsets, get rid of Summer Time, problem solved!
We aren't a hegemony. We are not the borg collective. We are all individuals (except for him at the back). Maybe the debate at the time was dominated by the more anarchic, individulalistic types, and now that time has passed, they are all too busy championing Snowden and Assange. Not that I'm saying that the cases are in anyway similar.
Of course. Your points are all valid, and are worth discussing.
The corollary, however, is that freedom taken to an extreme leads to anarchy and anarchy inevitably leads to feudalism, feudalism takes centuries of social reform to turn into a functioning and stable democracy, and that's how we got where we are now.
There needs to be a balance between freedom and regulation, because only regulation can provide freedom. Regulation requires some kind of governance, and that required taxes. I don't see any alternative. The only thing that is up for debate is how much governance and how much tax to pay for it. Right now, all western states seem to have much more governance than they are willing to pay for, leading to exponential national debt. Not ideal.