Would it not be possible to prevent by setting up a RADIUS server?

The DMCA regulation like most only is "national" laws.
Google, Microsoft, Apple, and so on operate in many countries where such regulation is invalid.

Sure, they cannot have US researchers or other researchers who live in countries where DMCA matter do reverse engineering, but what if they hire a group of researchers in lets say Germany or India? They can continue business as usual, or am I wrong?

Or how does this regulation impact people in countries not covered by DMCA?

I as well as the majority of the world are located in countries not covered by DMCA regulations.

From the list of companies voting in favor of the standard, mostly all companies are American. (Microsoft, Google, Apple, ... )

- I would assume researchers from countries not covered by DMCA are can thus legally keep researching DRM content for malware and so on?
- Could it be even Google, Apple, Microsoft, and so on, can simply ignore DMCA by paying workers abroad not covered by DMCA to do the research they need?
- Does this regulation somewhat impact me and everyone else not covered by DMCA regulations anyway?

Equipment, such as tubes and containers, used for water would almost for sure require much more cleaning and maintenance than similar containers and tubes used for alcohol. The reason for this is that bacteria and algae easily grow in such environments whereas alcohol in fact typically is used to disinfect.

Where water cannot be stored in non-flowing situations without additives such as chlorides, alcohol can be stored for a long time without issues.

Water is also a substance that likely require much more testing for safety than alcohol.

I am thus thinking that back in time it might in many cases actually have been cheaper to safely produce a bottle of alcohol/beer than a bottle of water, though I am less convinced it is true today.

Beer is stated to be cheaper than satchet water in Ghana according to the following article of 27th of January 2016, https://yen.com.gh/35628-find-...

However, in that case it is claimed this is due to taxes rather than the actual production.

The plate readers represent a two edged sword which likely is a far more power tool for committing crime than it will help enforcing the law. Passively scanning cars will create a register for when a car passed a spot allowing criminals easy ways to match cars with for homes, owners and family members, letting criminals do passive and active planning of potential victims.

We cannot make the readers go away, so we would need to do something with the plates instead. This could technically be done as the plate could be replaced with a unique id through algorithm instead, allowing a constantly changing id together with a timestamp.

The driver may find the car using the alarm system, so the owner does not require the plate.

However the plate is also used by citizens to report on cars, such as when speeding, having an accident where the driver try to get away, when there is suspicious behaviour, and so on.

The problem is if pedestrians loose their ability to report on on cars. Unless we can find a good way for pedestrians to report particular cars without requiring them to have special reading devices, we cannot move away from plates and corresponding plate readers.

We may however make laws prohibiting the accumulation of such data without legitimate reason.

It was not simply washing the hands, but washing the hands with a chlorinated solution. I heard multiple alternative versions over the years - some wanting to use it to state the new theory did not get accepted until the old doctors died out, and so on. Others pointing to the scientific process - which is probably a more correct reason for the delay...: The 1st "theory" was that the chlorinated solution scared the evil spirits so the spirit would not jump from the previous patient to the next.... which was of course rejected flat by the lion share of the established doctors. The theory had to go through a large process to say why washing the hands with a chlorinated solution in a way doctors accepted, and by then some had already completely rejected the source due to the original reference to the supernatural cause...

That's a good configuration option! Is there options that are more site specific, like media.mediasource.enable.from ... or media.mediasource.disable.from that might work similar to hosts.allow hosts.deny?

The sources are always relevant - I do not really believe in "unbiased" sources - I recommend always checking news with multiple different sources who got different interest in a case. In this case the sources are ZDNet and Microsoft.

In this case the story give a different picture to what is claims
1. "Italian city dump OpenOffice for Microsoft After Four years"
Quotes from the text:
1.a) "we decided we had to keep a hybrid solution, using the two systems at the same time."
1.b) "Between 2011 and 2014, the municipality of Pesaro, in the Marche region, trained up its 500 employees to use OpenOffice, " (sentence continue to c)
1.c) "however, last year the organization decided to switch back to Microsoft and use its cloud productivity suite Office 365."

From the above we can clearly see the headline is biased, The original Microsoft Office package was also dropped alongside Open Office, and all this was likely part of a completely new deployment since the 2011-2014 time-frame indicate the baseline was Microsoft Windows 7 which had mainstream support only to January 13, 2015.

A more unbiased headline would have been something like: "Italian city decide to migrate from hybrid Microsoft Office and Open Office to a new web based Microsoft Office solution".

Next topic - they did choose to use Microsoft Office 365 rather than move to for example LibreOffice during the current deployment apparently due to an evaluation of Total Cost of Ownership (TCO), but then the question is how that TCO was calculated?

It should already be apparent to everyone that the TCO cost of the previous solution was due to their "Hybrid" problems. This cost would have disappeared regardless of choice as long as they did not keep a hybrid approach. And does it list the cost of having a web-based solution - there is not even any mention of potential downtime due to
1) no local access to internet
2) failures of internet providers
3) failures of the external service provider

All 3 appear to cause 100% downtime for the 500 employees in question compared with local install. Assuming 1% downtime and 99% up-time, and a 8 hour day, it might represent 4.6 minutes a day for each worker, or 4.79 full workdays each workday - is it more reasonable to assume zero downtime like the article that talk about TCO?

And what about additional lag time of constant work with web-app compared with locally installed software, - x milliseconds lost every minute times number of employees?

I would not actually be surprised a local install of Microsoft Office 2013 would have a lower TCO than Microsoft Office 365 in a lot of companies despite the higher licensing cost.

I just noticed TorrentFreak had a link to the English version of their site prior to it being taken down, and it had a video of using the application for watching copyrighted content such as HBO's "Games of Thrones", so I guess they really did mess up...

Confessed to have posted the information is one thing, confessed to that action as a crime is another. Imagine for an instance to replace "Popcorn time", with "Bit torrent". That I made an article of how to use Bit Torrent, for instance for downloading software such as Linux - is completely legal.

I have not used Popcorn time, but I believe it is used for much more than downloading illegal movies. For instance if I made an instructional movie for how to use the computer creative commons and made it available on Popcorn time, then posted instructions for how to use Popcorn time to see the instructional movie, I believe it should be legal. In this case, is it not also legal if I simply make the instructions for how to use the application as long as I do not use illegal content in my instructions?

The saying goes: You can have an as democratic election as you want as long as I can choose the candidates...

Bio-tech product considered banned due to research associating it with fertility problems, cancer, etc, are certainly tech related just as much as a CPU being banned due to harmful gasses emitted during operation or similar.

What always miss from these arguments is that such a tool is a two edged sword. If the government can do it, so can likely all other governments too, and it does not stop there. I know, you got nothing to hide for authorities, corrupted officials or not. Sooner or later you hear corrupt officials used their position to obtain and sell information such your vacation plan to criminals robbing homes, insurance companies about confidential information of your health, and so on...