Actually it's not as undemocratic as leavers portray. Civil servants working for the EU propose laws, these are then debated and voted on by the elected MEPs. In Britain: Civil servants working for the government propose laws, these are then debated and voted on by the elected MPs. So basically it's the exact same process in the EU as it is in the UK :/

So leaving a block of 500m people to try and get trade deals and negotiate with other countries when representing 60m will make us stronger? Not even close we'll just become insignificant? We're now desperate for trade deals, so we'll take whatever scraps the US or Chine deigns to offer us and we'll thanks them for it. As for your predicted war that is the exact reason the EU was set up to promote peace between it's members - something it's been entirely successful at! But you're right a war with Russia is probably more likely as Europe being disunited is much better for their interests. As for Europe being the cause of the war you may want to look at where we got our power from when we had an empire - by invading, subjugating and committing war crimes. Presumably this is the glorious era you'd like Britain to return to? The British people made an ill informed choice based on blatant lies and wishful thinking.

but not between members of the EU though

True, I certainly fall into that category. But at the same time as a creator of a site when it comes to installing advert systems there's never a choice only serving your viewers non invasive ads. It's unfortunate because site owners suffer because of this. Hopefully this will reach a head some time in the near future and the ad companies/govt will realise that people need to have a choice over whether companies are allowed to track them across the web. Although given the governments love of tracking people online I can't see them doing much...

The tracker blocking was what made me switch adblocking on. I like the idea that they would only let through ads that don't track me, I want to support companies that rely on advertising, but not at the loss of my privacy. That said I understand why companies resent having to pay someone to allow them to make money by verifying their ads are 'acceptable'.

Time to swap those Euros for trading cards!

Perhaps we should stop building new browsers too, after all we have IE why would we possibly need an alternative ;p

24bit PNGs compress much worse. It really is an issue for the web, images form the majority of the payload for most websites, and whilst people on /. might be use to several Mb/s broadband the reality is many people don't have that. Even in the UK mobile speeds are very low outside of cities. And when you compare evena jpg at fairly high quality to a 24bit PNG there's no practical difference visually so there's just no reason to clog up the web with PNGs. Obviously I'm just referring to photos - PNGs are great for logos/icons/etc.

I'm not saying that understanding why you should do things isn't important, it is. But what I am saying is that a graduate should be able to come out of a course with skills that they can directly apply as well as understanding why to use them. And I'm not talking about the latest fads, but given that university curriculums normally take 2 years to get approval, and if it's a second year course you're looking at another two years to graduation, this means people are already four years out of date when they graduate. Four years will encompass massive shifts like responsive design, rather than javascript flavour of the month.

It's also about people learning useful skills. Lots of universities are teaching web design using dreamweaver! The university curriculums are too slow to reflect the latest tech in an industry that changes completely every year. It might not be the perfect solution with regards to pay, but it's certainly a step towards graduates coming out of uni with useful skills.

The slippery slope may sometimes be a fallacy but the reality is it happens regularly, look at RIPA - legislation brought in to tackle serious crime thatended up being used by councils to watch people walking dogs to see if they let them poop on the pavement.Or the NSA employees who were spying on their exes using the NSAs vast reserves of data they used to spy on people.

You're right the university professor isn't the right guy, and good spot on the British English! Try adding salisbury or wiltshire to that search. But to be honest you will still get a lot of results, even using terms like -film -university etc I still have loads of results that have not been delisted by google, the chances of us working out which ones have changed is pretty remote. I think we can let that go given the time that has passed! Just don't waste any more tea please...

if you search just "will brooker", in quotes, it also says some results have been omitted, so it may be the scam keyword is not a crucial factor and that search is actually just returning results for "will brooker" rather than '"will brooker" scam'

Thanks for checking, part of the problem of course is that I cannot see what has been removed to be able to tell whether or not it should have been removed!

Perhaps, but I can easily see situations where people do stupid stuff like getting drunk and making fools of themselves, but not causing harm to others. These are the sort of situations where I feel it's reasonable to censor their own search results. But where someone's actions have impacted on other people, especially where they've caused harm they should not be allowed to remove them.