It might be better with a bigger government that would then pay for the excavations... Or if you prefer small governments make a law such as this... And if companies can't deal with the risk of the business environment they operate in then either they shouldn't operate there or they should ensure themselves against such eventualities...

I don't think it is unusual to ensure against building on a toxic ground, fire or one of the many other things that only goes wrong occasionally, but incurs a big cost when they do. That's what insurance is for... If people isn't responsible enough to ensure, when necessary, a bigger government is a possible the solution.
Other solution is to make a law that an insurance is required, and so forth...

How about cars, can we get rid of them?

It ought to be feasible to make proper public transport both safer and cleaner in big citites.
(Eletric == Clean, self-driving on tracks == safer, how hard can it be)

I doubt civil war will solve anything... and talk like that only makes it easier for the government to say: look it's only criminals and lunatics who has something to hide.

Please do sign the petition. It's not enough but it's better than talk.
I'm not a US citizen, so I don't have a say: it's your mess, your government and your responsibility!

Oh, well... I suppose I'll never be voting for any politicians who are found of the US.

I some how think Trayvon Martin would disagree...

Anti-gun nut here (though I'm not really sure I'm the nut), and I certainly wouldn't want "smart" gun either...

IMO, smart most things aren't smart...
Smart guns, no thanks, just ban guns (for anything but recreational use).
Smart cars, no thanks, drop research in energy storage and smart driving, just layout electric tracks.
Smart glasses, no thanks, if I needed glasses, simple glasses, contacts or laser surgery would be smarter ;)
Smart cards, smart maybe, if there weren't so slow and not secure,
Smart phones, not really, it's a small tablet with an overpriced phone app :)

In the interest of entertainment: what smart tech don't you like? :)

Hmm... If you script everything in Python, that might actually be possible... Would be interesting to try...

I think Glass is a good idea... But at least give them the benefit of the doubt when they've clearly said, it won't do ads...

In any event, it's a toy... I don't mind Google experimenting... I seriously doubt they'll get this one right :)

Let worry about potential problems, when they become relevant. I'm fairly confident the EU has the backbone required to protect my privacy, should it come to that.
So why not chill?

What makes you think there aren't any penalties? You don't hear about it because the news only reports bad news...

In fact, there usually is penalty clauses in such contracts, even in IT, but that doesn't mean both parties doesn't loose when something fails.

Yes, governments (well, democracy) is inefficient, but the alternatives are a lot worse :)

You call that "A Modest suggestion" ? :)
I thought it was quite funny, but insightful or modest doesn't really fit...

<sarcasm> by the same arguments, if someone commits a crime with a 3D printed gun or knife for which you hold copyright, you go to jail.

On the topic of all 3D printed guns stories we've seen lately: I think it is the saddest most horrific thing in recent slashdot history. Why do people buy the idea that the ability to make guns have anything to do with freedom. It makes me so sad...

Seriously, a company does something nice for a group of people with a serious disability, and your first thought is that they want to exploit them.
Drop the paranoia... Some news is just good...

Are you sure? I don't know what maids in Sweden make, but I'd imagine they make a pretty decent salary (easily 3-4000 USD / month).

I just thought it was ironic when you make fun of the author who wrote "government ordered its partner" :)

Not taking a stand in the abstract, means that the paper is not concerned with this issue.
It doesn't mean that the author has no opinion on the subject.

I don't think many scientists spends much time on the question, as there's clearly a consensus that global warming is man made, so papers are more likely trying to predict and/or document effects.

No, only a few scientific advances has be been by "rogue" scientists... The vast majority of scientific advancement in any field today happens by lots of people working hard publishing papers, attending conferences, talking to each other and trying a lot of different experiments.

Most scientific advancement, and in particular the big advancements, are done one step at the time, but a large collective of scientists working hard.


We notice the few cases in history when a few "rogue" scientists changes the world, because it is unusual and we like to celebrate the individual. It's the exception that makes the rule. Science happens by hard work, not by a sudden moment of clarity (or in this case campaign contributions).

Exactly how did you deduce that from an article about a data center in Sweden ?

Actually, I don't understand why Google just doesn't says thanks for reporting the problem, and take a small administrative fee for fixing it (just to cover the 10 min. of fact checking the fix would require to apply).

On topic, I see the problem that you can be sued for things that an automated system says... On the other hand "when notified" it really shouldn't be hard to fix, certainly not for a company with the resources such as Google. Furthermore, as these are every day tools for millions of people the impact on the individual who is misrepresented is significant.