errr - that's not a tardis (hope this isn't a "swoosh" moment, it's a regular old-style public phone box (booth). You don't see them about much, although a while back an enterprising sculptor put a dozen together like this and flogged it to my local council for several tens of thousands of quid.
The tardis is supposed to be a police telephone box, which has a different design and colour like this. These boxes also contained equipment other than a phone - such as a first aid kit and an incident book.
On a last pedantic note, there were red police boxes in Glasgow, Scotland, for a time.
The definition of rape in Sweden is a lot more liberal than in the UK (or US, for that matter). I think the charge is something along the lines of "having sex without a barrier protection method on the assumption that the parties involved do not sleep around and then subsequently finding out that at least one does sleep around, thus increasing the risk of STDs to the injured party".
Oddly, I wasn't aware that you could be extradited from the UK to face a charge for something that isn't illegal in the UK - I think they're trying (and succeeding, so far) to peg it onto a "sexual assault" charge
Your status, photos and posts
Photos and videos you're tagged in
How hard is it to modify those settings to one that is not "all and sundry in the world"?
The alternative would be CDMA, a code based multiplex where everybody uses orthogonal codes, so no harmonics there either.
The ban is almost entirely a matter of regulatory inertia and risk of lawsuits. Since the bans are universal, no airline wants to risk paying higher damages in a lawsuit if there's a crash and someone is able to convince a jury that their policy of allowing electronic devices theoretically increased their liability by even
One interesting thing is that, AFAIK, under British law you have to prove the person not just the address for an alleged crime. For instance, more than a few people have defended a speeding ticket by stating something along the lines of "I own the vehicle, four of my family members are insured to drive it, I wasn't driving it that day and wasn't at home, and I cannot tell who was the driver". Unless the photos clearly show the driver's face or other distinguishing feature, you can't prosecute.
That loophole is now closed for speeding tickets - if the registered keeper can't say who was driving, then they still get slapped with at least the fine and, in this case, all 6 points. I've seen other articles where the fine and points were divided between potential drivers (in the case where they said "it was a long journey and we alternated, but can't say who was at the wheel at the time"). There's been quite a few cases of this nature getting thrown out.
This is a widespread practice in museums and art galleries as it protects their cottage industry of selling prints.
I wonder whether they might exert the same claims on someone who took a picture from off their property with a long lens?
"The way of the world is to praise dead saints and prosecute live ones." -- Nathaniel Howe