If FF is losing users it's for two reasons: they break existing functionality with every release, and they're unresponsive to bug reports. Having two drones reply to every report with unrelated cut-and-paste from the documentation, then marking the report as solved, does not count as a constructive response.
They have not been 'trying to remove the Jews'. That's a classic US media propaganda position. Their grievance would be just the same and just as valid if their lands had been seized by US-backed Methodist military colonists. The religion of their oppressors is entirely irrelevant.
I was with him 100% up to the 'privatisation' bit. But how he thinks that replacing the public airport Gestapo with private security guards (the SA perhaps?) will help, I cannot fathom.
Can't work out how that happened, but it's great news.
This is about one thing and one thing only, compiled/encrypted scripts so that users don't know what Google is downloading on their behalf and can't control their web experience.
Again, 'if he'd done something that was actually illegal, no one would have any doubt that he should have been imprisoned, therefore he should be imprisoned for doing something that did not constitute an offence' ?
This is the most ludicrous UK internet-related prosecution since the constructed misunderstanding over the Nottingham airport tweeter. And it's another example of the exciting possibilities the securitat have found recently in the concept that (allegedly) hurting people's feelings is illegal.
Interesting argument - 'if he'd actually committed a crime, he would have been punished, therefore he should be punished even though he wasn't actually committing an offence' ?
This is just something you like to fantasise about, right, rather than something you're admitting to having participated in? Either way, it puts you in no moral position to look down on alleged internet trolls.
No doubt the oligarchs have seen what an effective tool false copyright infringement claims have been in the civilised world - a no-trial, no-evidence way of cutting off websites that displease the authorities - and are keen to use them to give their future repressive moves a veneer of legality.
SOCA (or their successors) clearly seeking to expand their powers to punish people without evidence. New Labour laws have already made it possible for them to 'seize' money unless the owner can prove that they came by it honestly - this can be authorised by a court without any evidence other than the unsupported word of SOCA personnel.
Couldn't the anti-Klan statutes be used against these people? Depriving citizens of their rights while acting under colour of law?
Twitter in China = FREEDOM Twitter in the UK = NASTINESS Cameron you utter hypocrite.
Google v the Israeli government. Is there some way they can both lose?
I detect a tiny tiny amount of bias in the anonymous reader's summary of this story. He's just a lackey hoping that the ruling class will throw him a bone if he's a good dog.