Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

Google did not decide to remove anything.

It was ordered by a court, a weary giant of flesh and steel, to remove from its index all articles that anyone wants removed.

The articles themselves are not removed. That would be impossible. This is the internet.

The articles in question can no longer be found with Google. They can still be found with Bing, Duck Duck Go, Baidu, or your own toy web-crawler. This is the internet.

Is it poor judgement by Google to obey the law?

Or is it poor judgement by the people to publish things they don't want to be public?
Or to draw attention to the things they don't want you to know about?

I posit instead that fools did not have to suffer you.

It does not. Not only is the Linux kernel itself customizable at compile time to fit the needs of globally distributed supercomputers as well as wrist watches.
In Debian you have the choice between Linux kernels, a FreeBSD kernel, and the Hurd. (Unless your software requires systemd.)

No, and if that was all systemd was doing, there wouldn't be a problem.

Like, say, your identity.

If you start building a military presence in 1783, you might just fool them into thinking you haven't been there at all for 231 years.

Killing people is not the responsibility of bars.

If native life on Mars is found, they will say: "But it was created here."

Basically the producers of the show want people to poison themselves when they try something illegal. Technically it is not captial punishment.

Generation ships docking in space is an interesting concept.

Before ships couple their docking ports and become as one, they should first make sure that the other ship is trustworthy, it's intentions sincere, their expectations compatible. They should spend some time communicating to get to know each other before physical contact. There is also the magnetic potential to consider.

Once engaged, there will certainly be a lot of transfers between the ships: data, crew, atmosphere, maybe even liquids, but there is also the potential of communicable diseases spreading from ship to ship, that one crew or the other might not have built an immunity to yet.

Why would any generation born and raised on a starship ever want to colonize a planet?

"Infinite loop".

The only reason to be against it is because other people might be against it?

There ought to be a name for that.

Saddam Hussein wanted to trade the oil in Euros. With the new government, Iraq's oil is still traded in Dollars. In which country the oil is traded is immaterial; it is exported mostly to the USA anyway.

In fact, it was a war crime, violating article 2.4 of the UN charta, and public international law.

And Crimea's debt, which they now must help pay off. At least in the short term, the annexation of Crimea was a loss for Russia.

Their naval base in Sewastopol made it impossible for them not to be involved in some way.

The Autonomous Crimean Republic had existed since 1921. It was put under Ukrainian governance in 1954. When the Ukraine seceded from Russia in 1992, Crimea became an autonomous republic again, albeit as part of the Ukraine.

Crimea invited international observers to the elections because of these concerns. There is no evidence of vote rigging.

The spyware was installed on a computer in Iran. If installing spyware is illegal in Iran (as it would have been in the USA absent a warrant), then the FBI has commited a crime.

if war is a necessity, it will be because of crazy leaders in Iran more then anything else.

What does that say about the leaders in the USA that they went to war with Afghanistan because of a crime commited in the USA?

Installing software that exposes the location of a computer used in violation of a country's laws should not be an act of war under any sane interpretation of any country's sovereignty.

As long as the interpretation is sane: In 2011, the USA have declared that they might retaliate against cyberattacks with a nuclear strike (though to be fair the cyberattack would have to be on the scale of Stuxnet).

The FBI is a police organisation, not a spy organisation (though catching spies is also part of their duties). So everything you said about spying is not relevant in this context.

You have a point in that they first needed to find out what country the person of interest was in. When they found out it was Iran, it should have become the responsibility of Iranian police.

Whether Iran would have to hand over one of their citizens for crimes comitted in the USA depends on whether Iran and the USA have a mutual extradition agreement.
It is possible (IANAL) that the FBI violated Iranian laws by installing spyware on someone elses computer in Iran. (They didn't have a warrant from an Iranian judge.) Would the USA be willing to deliver those responsible, or would they rather harbour criminals within their borders and make war "a necessity"?