"These people had illegal activities and also happened to be journalists, they were not investigated for their journalism"

Wow, thats some impressive hair splitting there. Tell me - how would you know where their journalist activities stop and their illegal ones start without first investigating?

" Also do tell me what good was achieved by spying on Roy Greenslade, I am not familiar with his story."

Go read up on him, you're not in kindergarten and have to be spoon fed.

"Ultimately laws apply to everyone or they are meaningless"

The ECHR is a foreign law with a very lax interpretation and can cover a whole load of areas it was never intended to depending on the whim of the legal team and judges involved.

"we expect those kinds of things in Russia, China, Burma, etc. But a modern, western, democratic state, not so much"

You must've been asleep - or not born - when the US invaded Iraq and Afghanistan.

"they assassinate more journalists than any other country no matter how you measure."

If you're going to simply outright lie then why bother posting? 13 journalists were killed by russia in 2024 alone.

" and no history of spying illegally for good enough reasons"

Really?

Kim Philby
Roy Greenslade

I'm afraid you have a typical naive world view that people are divided up into good and bad with no grey areas inbetween.

Its always Israel isn't it. No mention made of the journalists who've been "accidentally" fallen out of windows, in front of cars or just shot in Russia. Ditto China, Burma - sorry , Myanmar - and a dozen african countries.

As for "truth coming out", if you think anything presented to reporters by Hama is the truth then there's a bridge for sale with your name on it.

"They relate to the right to private correspondence"

Thats all well and good, but taken literally no communications intercept could be undertaken on anyone. I doubt MI5 did this just for lols, they mustve had a damn good reason.

Just because something is new doesn't mean its better for every use case. When you grow out of short trousers you might come to realise that.

Ah, the standard issue "its not an issue for me so it doesnt matter" argument. Nice going.

I meant in the sense of coping with leverage forces and generally bumping, not waterproofing.

"The sooner type A goes away and is replaced completely with type C the better"

Depends on your use-case. Type A is a lot more robust and that matters when outdoors in certain enviroments.

Given the forces they have to put up with I very much doubt they're any less fragile than an aircraft fuselage and both Boeing and Airbus transport those around to the final assembly.

I don't remember anyway saying "Oh shit, the Empire State Building won't fit down 5th avenue, we can't erect it!"

What exactly is the problem with making the blades in sections and assembling on site just like buildings, aircraft, ships etc etc.

Bear in mind its only a small percentage of people who post like that, most people have better things to do with their lives that waste time getting into online arguments (says someone posting on social media right now albeit a tech site).

The UK government isn't corrupt - they're just the usual bunch of techno illiterate legal/political types who think the solution to any problem is more legislation. And not just the current Labour government, it was the same with the previous Tory ones too.

"If you are using regexes, you're outperforming Python by around a factor of 20, usually."

You do realise Python can also do regexes? In fact any modern language can, its not unique to perl. Perl simply made them part of its core syntax which is why its such a fucking mess.