And the battery.
The issue aside (Mac Pro is not a laptop), a modular laptop is very important for many reasons. Especially when it comes to upgrading RAM and replacing disks when you realise that your initial diskspace is not enough. I don't think there are that many other things you need to replace yourself in a laptop though.
The interesting thing is that the goodwill losses in reputation for the movie or Nordisk Film is probably a lot higher from the verdict being public, pissing people off, than it was from 100 people downloading the bad quality rip.
European SIGINT is much worse than the US SIGINT in many cases. While they tend to be stronger regulated, the SIGINT in Europe is effectively tapping every fiberoptic cable in the EU. NSA fiberoptic taps are on exit / entry points in the US, european state SIGINT taps the fiberoptic cables on exit / entry points of the country.
Consequently, if I email someone in NY from California, it is likely that the email content will never pass an NSA collection point/tap. If do something similar in Europe, say email from Spain to Sweden, the message is likely to be picked up by Spanish, French, Belgian, Dutch, German, Danish and Swedish intelligence.
The site in French Guyana was picked because it is close to the equator and you get an extra boost from the Earth's rotation there. Picking that site did not have anything to do with population density, though it would probably play a role if it was a problem.
Better to look at a site like ESRANGE in northern Sweden, this site was explicitly picked by the ESA because it was low on people.
British are not citizens, they are subjects.
Good question, wonder what happens if the Belgian police issues an EAW, does the GCHQ operators have immunity for their crimes in the UK? Does the EAW apply in this case; in my mind it should, it would put some needed control over this crap.
> "All in all, it's a really stupid idea. Which is what you'd expect from the EU."
Not really, this is a stupid idea made up by the Telegraph and The Mail with no basis in reality, which is what you'd expect from the Telegraph and The Mail.
If it sounds to preposterous to be true, it usually is...
No, the base speed is 110 on motorways in Sweden, however there are several places where there are signs explicitly allowing 120 km/h
Such systems are fitted already in many cars. As the Telegraph does not actually have any primary sources in this case, I would take the whole thing with a grain of salt. My guess would be that the Commission will be recommending that cars will be equipped with these systems, not that they are required to always be on.
That is a load of bullshit. Really, if you would spend some time outside your little memberstate that you come from you would notice that there is more stuff uniting us than dividing us.
Having lived and worked in 4 different member states, and being engaged with a woman from a 5th one, I can most definitely say that there is such a thing as a "European". About 500 millions of them by the way.
Yes, it uses the word will, but it takes time to prepare for the future. It is arguably so that, currently, EV does not really improve that much considering the average electricity plant in the world. But, we cannot ignore the future just because we live today. The fact is that we have to face the realities of today and the inevitabilities of the future.
Granted, an individual cannot really plan for the future in the same way as a society can, which is why a person not switch his brand of cigarets because of long term benefits. However, assuming either your private or public health care system offered you discounts if you switched your cigaret brand (or extra taxes on the old brand), because society see that on the whole, they will save money this way, would the average smoker still not switch, even if he/she saved money here and now?
As I mentioned, a society or a larger organisation have the ability to plan in long term in a way that you as an individual cannot do. Though the society can influence you to make the "right decision" in various ways. Meaning that, even something that may not make sense for an individual today from a utilitarian perspective, will make more sense from a financial perspective. In other words, society can plan for the "will happen" part and ensure that the current realities, at least in financial terms align with the future and the "will happen" part.
In addition to this, the fact is that infrastructure take a lot of time to build. Therefore, in order to build the infrastructure for the future, we need to invest in it today, because rest assured, at current consumption, oil (and natural gas) WILL run out (in reality it will just become ridiculously expensive, but that only gives us some additional time for the transition). When that happens, there better be a working infrastructure for EV (including fuel cells) in place, because neither coal nor nuclear is viable for direct installing in cars.
Perhaps, but this misses the point of EV or fuel cell vehicles. At present, it stands so that these will push power generation to coal or oil fired power plants in many areas.
1. Power plants will be transitioned as well, and it is substantially easier to place efficient and centralised greenhouse reducing technologies in a couple of power plants than in 2 billion cars.
2. Fuel will run out, and a transition must be starting now in any case.
3. In some places, most electricity already comes from nuclear / hydro / wind / solar (e.g. France and Sweden).
The transition away from petrol and diesel to battery or fuel cells, is not so much as cutting green house gasses now, it is about enabling a new infrastructure that is easier to control and manage. The being clean argument does however help to sell the electric vehicles now.
"The EU never was a Union. It has always been a trade treaty and some fools tried to make more out of it."
The intent of the EU / EC / ECSC was always to form a political union. Granted it is not there yet, but the founding fathers where quite clear on this, and any state joining signs up for this long term goal.
I can guarantee you that a lot of citizens who are involved with anything dealing with more than two EU members are quite happy with the Union influencing the local legislation.
I for example have been living in 4 different member states, and often spend weekends with the in-laws in a fifth. The Union's influence on local legislation using directives and the Euro is absolutely essential for making life bearable for millions of people. As an example, due to the EU influence on the local legislation, a person moving to another state does for example no longer have to exchange their drivers licence any more (in my case, I would have had to change it 3 times during the last 5 years if the old rules would have applied). In addition, no paperwork has to be filled in if you get a job in another member state, this saves tons of money for business and a lot of time for citizens who have to deal with the mess otherwise. I could probably write a full book on how the influence on local legislation simplifies matters a lot.
I am expecting that the newspapers soon find documents linking the NSA to the Athens affair and the death of Kostas Tsalikidis.