Where is your proof of so called "Terrorism" by the founders of Israel?

Um, it's pretty well documented by the British and at the UN, in their reports of the Stern Gang terrorism. Avram "Yair" Stern - who is pretty unequivocally one of the founders of modern Israel - blew up British military vehicles and bases, sabotaged rail lines, shot at trains, blew up a mine, destroyed international telegraph lines, attacked police stations, and robbed banks. His Lehi fanatics were completely unconcerned about civilian casualties (including any Jews who did not support them) and willing to ally with any military power that would send them weapons, including the Nazis.

This is all a matter of record and the state of Israel does not contest any of it; so why are you claiming otherwise?

The USA has terrorists among our founders, too. Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain Boys come to mind... although I guess they weren't in the same league as Stern.

And what about managers who steer the development effort in a direction highly likely to produce buggy code, those won't get measured?

Of course they get measured. In the long term if they deliver too many screwed up projects, their superiors stop giving them projects.

Ultimately it is the developer's responsibility to push back against stupid managers and give them honest feedback about what can and cannot be done.

I would like to know where the entrance is located to this magically meritocratic land you speak of, It is obviously not Earth.

You'll need an invisible hand to turn the invisible doorknob.

The report, from regulator Ofcom, didn't bother to judge if the filters actually work, however.

Because they don't know, and don't care if they work.

This is just another "oh god, we have to protect teh children" things, and there wasn't evidence to make the choice, so they're sure as heck not collecting evidence as to how well it works. This is purely a "we have to do something" kind of response.

Most of us know these things simply do not work, and end up blocking stuff they shouldn't, and missing stuff.

That most people have no interest in being baby sat by a state sponsored filter comes as no surprise.

But, hey, when you're still considered subjects to an archaic monarchy, that's what you get.

Citation needed.

Enron. Bernie Madoff. Asset Backed Paper Commodities. High Frequency Theft.

According to TFA, it does indeed. But far less than Socialism.

Meh. I read the paper as for this specific group of people, coming from a system which was pretty much flawed and unfair, people have decided that "fuck it, why play by the rules" is a perfectly good strategy.

I don't believe that socialism (or capitalism) inherently create more cheating.

I simply believe that once people believe the system is unfair, or the penalty of being a dick is sufficiently small, why bother playing by the rules?

Humans are greedy, self absorbed, and selfish. And any system which favors one set of people over another will lead to people deciding if the system isn't fair, why play by the rules?

It must always be referred to as the SHIELD Tablet.

I vote for El SHIELD.

Marvel's Androids of SHIELD?

Graphite. Is there anything it can't do?

Breast implants?

Targeted ads are a good thing

So says you.

I don't give a shit about someone's ads, targeted or not. I'm not interested in them, and I will block them at every chance I get, as well as the ability to collect enough information to target me.

You want to let them give you targeted ads, fine, no problem. That's your choice.

I trust neither regulators to get this right (because so far their ability to regulate anything technology related is abysmal), nor do I trust the corporations to not try to ignore it.

If they don't have your data, they can't misuse it.

You and I have different versions of the meaning of "problem".

Page don't load because cloudfront is blocked?

No problem, because I don't care.

I have yet to find a single site I need or can't live without that requires it.

If I have nothing to hide, then what reason do you have to spy on me as if I do? With altruism off the table (I am innocent, remember), the only explanation left is malice.

The corollary to "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" is that everybody has something to hide.

And the people who spy on you are certainly not willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, and they care not a whit about your presumed innocence.

NSA Guy 1: Hey, there's that one guy that shows up as a black hole on the Internet.

Oh, I very much doubt I'm anywhere near as successful as that.

NSA Guy 1: Yeah, he usually doesn't post his slashdot privacy rants until after browsing those "furry" sites for a half hour or so.

Only on weekends or when the wife is out of town.

Seriously though, it's your privacy. Nobody else is gonna protect it for you.

From experience; I would be willing to bet that ANYONE living with scarcity threatening day to day living is willing to cheat, lie, con, finagle and it can get so bad that you steal, mug, burgle,injure and could possibly kill, dependent on circumstances.

And, really, the same thing happens on Wall Street.

Capitalism leads to cheating and malfeasance just as well.

The difference is the rich feel entitled to it, and some people think it's the natural order of things.

Lucky bastards.

But being able to selectively disable it and block certain sites definitely helps.

You don't need to run the scripts for each of the 15 or so trackers in every page, just the ones which actually are needed.

Admittedly, in a few cases, they've made it more or less impossible to do anything unless you allow the 3rd parties.

In that case, the back button works just fine.