Thanks, perhaps that was what they meant and I read too much into it.
In that case, I would completely agree, there needs to be a real deterrent to make it clear that this behaviour isn't acceptable, and it does need to be meaningful for rich people as well. Things like losing the right to drive and ultimately, if they continue to drive anyway, their freedom for some period of time, not just fining them 10% of this year's earnings or crushing their car.
I've played plenty of games over the years that I have enjoyed greatly and wanted to play more. You know what I never found, though? I never found that I couldn't resist the urge to play them at the same time as I was in control of a heavy, fast-moving metal object in a crowded area full of vulnerable people.
Anyone who truly can't control that urge demonstrably has serious mental health issues that make them a danger to themselves and others, and they need to be taken into care and properly looked after for everyone's safety and preferably to help them recover.
But let's be honest, how many people really couldn't resist that urge and have genuine mental health problems, and how many could have controlled themselves just fine but simply didn't care and knowingly did something extremely dangerous without regard for the potentially tragic consequences?
Fine them and remove their licence? Seriously? They killed someone and it looks like they did it in a way that was entirely avoidable with no mitigating factors. This should be tried as whatever form of manslaughter/murder in the local laws represents causing death through gross negligence.
At a minimum, people like this should be locked up on public safety grounds, and should be prohibited indefinitely from controlling any vehicle if and when they are released until they can show that they are now safe and responsible.
Somewhere around 20-40% of the info in these documents will turn out to be wrong or misleading in some critical way.
I'm sure that will be a great comfort to the alleged witches as they drown.
Also, just because some personal data is correct, that doesn't mean the entire world has any right or need to know. People suffer unfair discrimination or worse because of perfectly legitimate personal matters all the time, which is the most compelling argument for the importance of privacy.
Wow, what kind of super-futuristic place did you live in with your fancy-pants downloading and modems and BBSes? In 1983, I think I was still typing the source code for games from books into my little ZX81, and praying that I didn't knock the 32K RAM pack loose and crash everything before I had a chance to play!
So if you are posting with any handle other than "Anonymous Coward" you will need to provide that handle to your friendly neighborhood spy.
Or just not travel to countries that don't treat their visitors with respect and basic human decency.
There are many places I would love to visit in the world, far more than I ever will be able to in one lifetime I expect. Why would I voluntarily subject myself to the kind of culture we're talking about here, when I can be welcomed as both a tourist and a business person in so many other places?
Obviously some people have no choice, and I hope things work out OK for them, but this sort of policy seems absurdly counter-productive for people who do have a choice and do care about the way they are treated.
Actually, there does appear to be a somewhat reasonable third choice: Microsoft will apparently also be offering a security-only bundle each month, though it looks like you'll have to install it manually if you're not using WSUS as it won't be fetched via Windows Update. You still won't be able to cherry-pick individual updates, but at least it won't come with all the other stuff you probably don't want -- unless they decide to call some of that "security".
(There's a specific question about this, and a response from the Microsoft guy confirming that a monthly security bundle will be available for all of the different Windows 7 variants, in the questions below the blog post itself.)
For comparison, the Win 7 Pro machine I'm running this on has a little over 200 installed security updates (relative to Win 7 SP 1, I assume). It also has about 100 other updates, the overwhelming majority of which were installed by the supplier before delivery since I stopped installing non-security Windows updates by default long before this machine arrived.
I, too, would love to see a slipstreamed image that could be used to reinstall Windows 7 if necessary after this new silliness has taken over.
We've stopped installing almost all recent updates from MS anyway, since we basically now consider them more dangerous than not patching anything except clearly identified security vulnerabilities.
My concern with the new plan is whether any machines that need a fresh installation after October will no longer be able to download the currently available updates of our choice. If Microsoft make the Windows Update system only work with the new monthly roll-ups and won't supply the previous individual patches any more, that would be significantly worse than just not offering any new patches outside of the monthly roll-ups.
The entire global technology infrastructure begins and ends with the United States. [...] Intel, AMD, Google, Apple, Microsoft, Cisco, Facebook.... All US companies.
That looks like a reasonable list of most of the biggest US companies in computing today. You might have added a few more, notably Amazon, and perhaps the big PC manufacturers like Dell.
However, for their size and resources, many of these companies have done remarkably little to advance technology infrastructure in the last few years. Almost all of them became big on the back of a small number of very successful products or services, but many of their more recent attempts to diversify have failed horribly. Today they mostly survive because they're so huge that they can afford to buy almost any other business that is actually innovative and potentially disruptive to their market dominance, and that's also how a lot of "their" innovation happens. Most of them are going to be in trouble if one or two geee that lay golden eggs die, and in several cases there are warning signs already.
Meanwhile, you kind of forgot all the Asian giants and quite a few European companies that actually make most of those smartphones you mentioned, not to mention many of the household appliances we buy, huge amounts of telecomms infrastructure, huge amounts of transportation tech...
Keep your regulations out of my voluntary exchange and contracts.
The trouble happens when your deal is no longer voluntary in practice, because the service is becoming essential to normal life but the service provider(s) available to you are all imposing undesirable terms so you have no option to choose an alternative.
I'm expecting that TTIP is dead at this point. It seems to have become a toxic issue in several EU member states and senior government officials have started overtly challenging its credibility. Plus with the US election coming up and Hillary Clinton publicly saying she won't support TPP, it would be difficult for her to come out in favour of TTIP, and with Brexit still a big issue, the last thing the EU needs is to be seen to be weak in international trade negotiations.
Regulations typically only set minimum standards. Showing you followed regulations might help to demonstrate good faith, but I don't see why it should be a get out of jail free card.
Failure is more frequently from want of energy than want of capital.