You never know what they might be good for. Personally, i'm for saving species more from a respect for the infinite complexity of nature. But if you want to convince a society ruled by corporate thinking, this is a strong example of why giving a crap about nature might be useful to the human race.

Are these things 100% correct? Any false positives would create tremendous hassles for drivers and waste police resources.

Any policy with regards to retention of information is easily changed in the future. No matter what duration they state they will find/create justification to increase it at some point in the future.

I wish my children will have the judgement to figure things out without someone looking over their shoulders constantly. Teaching a child to recognize dangers will do far more than watching over their shoulders constantly. Mommy and daddy aren't going to be there forever to hold your hand.

I hate the notion that there are innumerable predators stalking children on the internet. The actual number of molestations ect barely registers on the actual list of dangers to a child. But it's just so scary in a parents mind that they will ignore real threats to their childrens lives. Fear triumphs over reality again!

So many posts here are about not using facebook, not having facebook ect... This isn't an option for everyone. A huge portion of my friends use facebook with ages that range from pre-pubescent family members to senior citizens. I have friends around the world with whom I'd have minimal communication if not for facebook. Facebook allows me to keep touch with my friends and acquaintances abroad and at home in a single place that they will check often (too often). I deprive myself socially by not having an account. I don't care for it, but so many people I know use it I have no option. I just avoid saying or posting anything anything remotely incriminating.

"Kohannes Caspar said his Hamburg data protection office had initiated legal steps that could result in Facebook being fined tens of thousands of euros for saving private information of individuals who don't use the site and haven't granted it access to their details."

I bet this is less than their monthly coffee expenses.

Yea cause that's just what we need, another source of fossil fuel to further delay action on the energy crisis.

Because there is a very large, very powerful industry whose best interests involve drilling.

This is why government needs to step in and make industry take actions which affect the bottom line adversely but are in the public interest. Will the industry suffer and lose profits from added safety regulation and oversight? Of course. But those profits are unfairly being funded by the damage and suffering resulting from this kind of reckless corperate activity.

RTFA this isn't a situtation of some reformed skilled hacker seek a job. These are a bunch of script kiddies trying to weasle their way into a job by pretending to be like Kevin Mitnick. After being turned away several times (justifiably) they then decided to threaten to expose a security vunerability they claimed to have discovered in the companies software. They are black hats through and through.

If you decided not to RTFA or say anything even remotely close to commenting on the subject, why the hell did you post?

I guess it's unclear that i'm not trying to criticize the experimenter. It's the authors use of phrases like "good data set", "objective analysis", and "the data had delivered a verdict" that anger me.

Ask the megacloud to track the writing pretention quotient rate of change across social networking superintelligence thegoogle synergy.

Each little personal anecdote in the article makes my inner statistician scream.

Lookie! I made a graph and it shows something! It MUST be causation, there is no other explanation.