Yeah, the person who wrote the article is an idiot. It's bad enough that it makes me wonder if he's a Google shill trying to distract from the actual invasions of privacy Google are constantly doing.

They look more like Christmas ornaments than they do grenades. Seems like an over-reaction by the TSA.

> based on the V8 JS rendering engine found in Google Chrome What's a "JS rendering engine". You don't "render" JavaScript.

I wouldn't say they are never critical. I just question their motives whenever they write a review, either negative or positive.

But there is always the good old "This game had one minor point that I strongly disagree with but most people won't care about. 0/10." that makes even the most basic of inferences entirely unreliable.

There's a difference between defending free speech and defending cyber-bullying. Randal's quote doesn't apply here since the argument is not that cyber-bullying is acceptable because it's free speech but that cyber-bullying should (sometimes) be protected as free speech.

It's almost like those laws and regulations were lobbied for by the taxi industry to make it impossible to compete with them!

Because previously the taxi industry, with lots of money in the bank used to force rules and regulations their way. At least Uber benefits consumers rather than driving up taxi fares to insane levels by creating an artificial monopoly.

It's fairly easy to prove the drive was destroyed. Almost any drive destruction facility will at minimum give you some kind of dated receipt and often give you a certificate of destruction too.

You are quite correct. I was under the impression that ISPs were required to implement this. It appears that Cameron simply pressured them into implementing it without passing a law requiring it.

The Anarchist's Cookbook is not banned or illegal and can be freely purchased in both the UK and the US on Amazon.

> The UK ISP filters are completely voluntary as well. No, they are not. Every ISP is required to offer this service and explicitly force customers to make a choice as to having it off or on. The only way to avoid implementing it is to tell customers who want filtered internet that they can't sign up, but if one of the major ISPs tried that Cameron would be closing that loophole pretty quickly.

But many ISPs already provided that functionality before the government mandated it and, if parents wanted it they were perfectly free to switch to an ISP that offered it.

As annoying as that sounds I actually think that yes it would. I would really like it if more ISPs did the same thing that mine did - if you try to opt for filtered internet they tell you to leave and find another provider.

How is Bitcoin artificially scarce? There is a technical limit to the amount that can exist. US Dollars would actually be closer to an artificially scarce investment.