Slashdot Mirror

Actually, the countries in Europe who have the most recent direct experience with Russia/USSR (and have borders with Russia) very much do want the Americans to stay and increase their local presence. Just last year Poland made a direct request for a US base on its territory.
https://www.euractiv.com/secti...
and
https://www.npr.org/2018/11/22...

Daily emissions of cruise ships same as one million cars
https://www.euractiv.com/secti...

So? Hillary couldn't have done more for for Wall Street than Trump actually and truly did even she had spend all her time trying - if only because the Republican dominated congress would have blocked her. https://heavy.com/news/2017/01... - https://www.euractiv.com/secti...

There have been two major developments recently, but no journalist seems to have reported both. The scientists have drawn up plans, but European governments have also taken action. Here's the rest of the story: Twenty-four EU countries sign artificial intelligence pact in bid to compete with US and China.

That would require someone do a multivariate analysis. And they won't do that because it would show civil war, oppressive governments etc are more strongly correlated to refugee flows than climate.

Actually one big driver was getting rid of people like Gaddafi who stopped migrants coming to Europe. The EU had a deal with Gaddafi. Then France and the UK toppled him and Libya became essentially a failed state.

https://www.theguardian.com/co...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Turkey also uses refugee flows as a foreign policy tool - they turn on the tap when they want more money from Europe.

https://www.euractiv.com/secti...

So how much is climate a cause? Not much. Weather probably does have some impact though - mainly because if you're going to cross the Med or walk across Europe you'd be better off doing when it's not freezing cold. But weather and climate are not the same thing.

And, there's no 'Crimean Sea' :)
Also, the Black Sea does have some oil, but so little compared to the Arab peninsula it wouldn't even show in a graph. Not to say us Romanians aren't happy with getting the Snake Island back from Ukraine, but that won't turn the country into Qatar, was mostly a 'fuck you' to our not-so-nice-when-they-don't-want-to neighbours.
The conversation about that is still quite hilarious: them - "but you killed thousands of us in Odessa", us - "mkay but that's our oil", them - "thousands dead", us - "our oil" sigh

The real problem is the mindset of "near enough" is "good enough". Few strive for perfection these days, and it has sweeping effects over society. The race to the bottom of cost, to make things cheap, and to maximise profit result in a wide sweeping tragedy of commons. Einstein said that things should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler. The same applies to economics, things should be made as cheap as possible, but no cheaper.

We hear the CEO of Tata Consulting Services, Amit Bajaj, talking about how Jugaad should be adopted by Europe. https://www.euractiv.com/secti...

How can we expect a first world society with third world thinking?

Not the first, second or third time Monsanto have been implicated in major scandals.

Products banned in Europe?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Hated by customers?
https://www.euractiv.com/secti...

A bad investment?
https://www.fool.com/investing...

Neither place is broken down, but people in the EU certainly shouldn't throw stones from glass houses. The EU has for several years now been putting MANY self-described fascists into its parliament, and very recently, participating in it in an official manner:

http://www.euractiv.com/sectio...

As for Trump, I'm not sure what to make of him. I think his actions are boneheaded because they're going to create international retaliation against US IT firms, thus likely harming the domestic tech sector (Trump seems to like mercantilism as well, which will have a similar impact in other industries) however we can at least definitively say that Trump isn't a fascist, and anybody who says otherwise is either using hyperbole or has no idea what fascism is actually about. The most obvious difference is Trump still favors the individual (and individual liberties) whereas fascism is founded on the premise of a single national identity and almost no individual identity.

No more Privacy, no more encryption Stop online banking Dead!!! Stop online buying Dead!!!! Stop Ebay Purchases Dead!!!! Stop Paypall purchases Dead!!!
You Americans and we Canadians whose messages may pass via your network to output locations, and for that matter, the world, will be under USA scrutiny.

The way to defeat this stupid bonehead edict, is to everyone send phony and real encrypted messages. There is no law in so doing. Drown them out by volumes of transactions, not tens, not hundreds, but millions.

Neither place is broken down, but people in the EU certainly shouldn't throw stones from glass houses. The EU has for several years now been putting MANY self-described fascists into its parliament, and very recently, participating in it in an official manner:

http://www.euractiv.com/sectio...

As for Trump, I'm not sure what to make of him. I think his actions are boneheaded because they're going to create international retaliation against US IT firms, thus likely harming the domestic tech sector (Trump seems to like mercantilism as well, which will have a similar impact in other industries) however we can at least definitively say that Trump isn't a fascist, and anybody who says otherwise is either using hyperbole or has no idea what fascism is actually about. The most obvious difference is Trump still favors the individual (and individual liberties) whereas fascism is founded on the premise of a single national identity and almost no individual identity.

There are currently many more countries asking to join the EU than those considering leaving

Yeah right, these are the third-world cesspools that are currently bidding to join: ALBANIA, MOLDAVIA, UKRAINE, SERBIA.

In the meantime, Iceland ( http://www.euractiv.com/sectio... ) and Switzerland ( http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new... ) recently repealed their own previous bids to join. The Icelandic case is the most interesting: after nearly going bankrupt in 2009, they rapidly recovered with a government-run recovery plan, mostly based on public expenditure, exactly the opposite of the EU-imposed austerity that Greece was forced to do. The comparison between the current state of the two countries speaks for itself, hence the obvious decision of the Icelandic government to terminate the accession negotiation.

And finally, this is the consensus among EU citizens about the EU itself: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/bus...

Sooner than later the EU project - and its backers - will end up in the very famous Lanfill of History.

> If TTIP gets through, the US's broken system will be exported. By "broken" I mean the way that wealthy lobbying groups bribe/finance politicians [...]

Ha, ha, ha. The EU system is more or less as broken as the US is. Guess with whom the EU commissars spend most of their time? Lobbyists (an example here).

Of course the whole purpose of TTIP is to render this broken process ever more efficient. That's why I oppose it.

Remember: rot and corruption is universal. Gotta fight it at home first.

Germany is the country with the highest reduction of CO2 of the world.

Fantasy.

In 2014 German CO2 emissions dropped by 4.3% -- the first drop in three years.

In 2015 German CO2 emissions rose by 1%.

Germany emits nearly twice the CO2 per capita that France emits. France reduced its CO2 emissions in the 1990's. Germany could have reduced its CO2 emissions by closing coal fired electricity generation plants but decided instead to keep emissions more or less constant by replacing low carbon nuclear plants by low carbon renewables.

Almost every post you make is full of unsupported lies.

Come back when your country has build a few nukes successfuly and/or has at least reached a fraction of the CO2 reduction Germany has.

I live in France you moron.

"Ignore the facts" meaning "healthy skepticism".

There's nothing "healthy" about your "skepticism". It is entirely one-sided and engineered to insulate your from inconvenient truths.

Like when the CRU at UEA was caught manipulating the numbers (and then conveniently "lost" them) ? Those facts?

I would refute your claims, except that you left out all specifics other than the target you wish you discredit with vague allegations, however, assuming you're referring to "climategate", eight separate investigations found that the claims you are repeating were invented bullshit based on quote-mining thousands of emails.

or the fact that the Polar Cap has more ice now than it should given Global Warming? (should be gone according to Al Gore!) Those facts?

More facts that aren't. Arctic ice losses are consistently out-pacing actual predictions, so there is less sea ice in the Arctic than the IPCC predicted there would be. Also, Al Gore (who is not a scientist) actually said that one study predicted ice could be gone in less than 22 years, and a second study by a U.S Navy researcher warned it could happen in as little as seven years.

Or the "starving polar bear" facts ?

What about starving polar bears?

Or any of the other 97.4% of the predictions gone wrong. Those facts?

http://www.westernjournalism.c...

Yea, a link to a conservative blog post written three years ago about a Fox News article about a Nature Climate Change article, is certainly evidence of something... It took me a while to find it, but the actual commentary article says that runs that they did of the CMIP5 models over-estimated warming from 1993 to 2012 according to the HadCRUT4 temperature data. So, it's 97.4% of the predictions from a single set of models as run by three researchers that are overestimating observed warming, and they then point out a number of reasons why that might be the case.

These fascists need the Benito treatment.

Umm, before we advocate the summary execution and public hanging of those involved, I might like to get a wee bit more information about what we're discussing. Stuff that, you know, the summary might have actually included such as:

• Which countries are potentially party to this?
• How do the provisions differ from currently accepted law in those countries?
• Who has enforcement rights over violations?

It's also worth noting that the story has only one link, to a blog which is politically opposed to the treaty. A cursory Google search would point you to a much wider range of viewpoints on the agreement. Some are pro-treaty, some against, but they all provide much better context than the linked article. I don't particularly care one way or another, but any story with only one viewpoint expressed is usually a sign of either a lazy editor or an agenda.

I hate to keep dredging up the "Slashdot flame bait post because it has no actual 'editors'" trope, but damn. I imagine that if I submitted a story that said "Apple CEO advocates eating puppies" and linked to a blog somewhere that suggested it, the story would be published immediately and without actual review or "editing." Which is, you know, what an "editor" is supposed to do.

The EU's trade commissioner, Cecilia Malmstrom, is notoriously in favor of ISDS (investor-state dispute settlement), as her remarks after the recent trade agreement with Canada prove:

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ceta-...

And Germany's economy's minister recently suddenly changed his mind:

http://www.euractiv.com/sectio...

You're nothing but an uninformed cretin. Sorry for the well-deserved insults.

There is not in any way "consensus" that "GMOs are safe"

Again the facts say otherwise.

The consensus is that they are safe.
American Medical Association
National Academy of Sciences
World Health Organization
Chief Scientific Advisor to the European Commission
Department of Agriculture
Food and Drug Administration
Environmental Protection Agency

Scientific consensus is that GMOs are safe.

Anti-GMO is anti-science.

This link gives better evidence than the GP.

http://www.euractiv.com/scienc...

You really ought to do better investigation of your claims.

For example this article seems to have statements that something like 90% of GMO research is paid for by NON-industry sources.

http://www.euractiv.com/science-policymaking/chief-eu-scientist-backs-damning-news-530693

âoeWe estimate that around 90% of the literature on which the conclusions of the report are based is on non-industry funded, peer-reviewed research,â said Sofie Vanthournout, head of the Brussels office of EASAC.

In other words the claim that it's all paid by Monsanto is an outright lie.

About 90% of studies on GMO are NOT funded by Monsanto.

http://www.euractiv.com/science-policymaking/chief-eu-scientist-backs-damning-news-530693

The idea that this work is all Monsanto funded is a huge lie.

Gilles-Eric Séralini has published a whole series of journal articles purporting to expose the dangers of GMOs, glyposate etc.

They are all lapped up and given great exposure by the mainstream media. They are all pointed at with great glee by the anti-GMO crowd as evidence that GMOs are really really bad for you.

They are all junk science that should have never been published.

The source of most of the funding for this work is Greenpeace.

No doubt there will be more crap like this in the future. Hopefully more people will be able to recognize the fact it's junk science and reject it.

It is amazing that Europe has fallen victim to these jerks. I thought their educational system was better than this. Apparently it's over-rated.

The point has been reached where EU scientists are recognizing the bans on GMOs in Europe are harmful.

http://www.euractiv.com/science-policymaking/chief-eu-scientist-backs-damning-news-530693

The included links of the submission don't provide any further details about this "white hat hacker".

This link does: http://www.euractiv.com/specialreport-cybersecurity/eu-parliament-investigating-hack-news-531877

"The hacker says his aim was simply to raise awareness about the vulnerability of the security system of the Parliament, at a time when the NSA spying scandal was shaking public opinion across Europe.

The hacker sat in a public place near the Parliament building in Strasbourg and managed to make nearby smartphones and computers pass through the “wifi” of his computer to connect to the internet. That was the hardest part of the procedure, he explained.

Then he accessed an application most MEPs use and which signals when new mail arrives in their inbox. The app does warn the user that an intruder is trying to access their data, but the message is “obscure”, the hacker said, and most users click OK, thereby giving access permission."

GMO's? Thought they were banned in the EU.

In fact some scientists are now saying the EU policy toward GMOs is harmful to the overall population quality of crops, agriculture and is leading to more rapid deterioration of the environment in Europe.

http://www.euractiv.com/science-policymaking/chief-eu-scientist-backs-damning-news-530693

Interesting thought anyway.

E. Coli is an usual species in our guts, but it is not always harmless

I am pretty sure IBM did not leave due to any reason directly related to the location. Semiconductor fabs can have a relatively short lifetime, depending on the technology. The IBM fab had been in operation for decades, if I am not mistaken.

If you want a leading edge fab, it is quite possible that some technology changes (e.g. wafer size conversion) make it uneconomical to upgrade an existing fab. In that case you need to build a new shell. Locations for new fabs are often significantly influenced by incentive payments from the local government. For example the new globalfoundries fab in new york state got billions of incentive payments. IBM most likely decided to discontinue the site after moving the products to a more modern fab that was build somewhere where they got more money...

The German, French, and Irish foundries Are losing on feature size. X-Fab is limited to around 180nm features, and the most recent French STMicroelectronics plant can barely do 32nm for relatively small die sizes. Most design houses these days are fabless, and the feature size is a determining factor on cooling requirements and power consumption. Frankly, Intel makes better chips, and they are pretty much willing to fab for anyone these days, If you don't care because you're doing a slower ARM design, then TSMC, UMC, or Samsung is good enough.

Given their relative production volumes from the European fabs that are out there, this is more or less a subsidy for X-Fab. Here is a nearly identical article from June of last year:

http://www.euractiv.com/innovation-enterprise/eu-eyes-airbus-chips-amid-market-news-513171 ...basically, they call for chip fabs every year, and it mostly goes to Germany.

I wouldn't second guess my doctor, and I'd avoid second guessing my air conditioning guy

Then you're a fool, because these people will often harm you or rob you blind, out of ignorance, greed, or both:

https://www.google.com/#q=contractor+scams

http://www.euractiv.com/health/unnecessary-surgery-weighs-eu-he-news-507491

Second guessing such people with little more than "I don't get it" is an error you should be expected to be called out on, unless you want to allege that they're all in league or conspiring to defraud us or something.

Oh, that stupid "conspiracy" canard. There's a third possibility: doctors and contractors are just acting independently in their own interest. Most of them harm and overcharge you while firmly believing that they are helping you.

We shouldn't make the naivite of people like you the basis of law, not in health care and not in climate change.

I think I remember seeing a few years ago that (total) taxes from the financial sector in the UK pay for nearly the entire education budget.

Considering financial services now make up 10% of UK GDP the taxes on it should be paying for more than just the education budget. Sounds like they are undertaxed compared with other industries.

"Pres. Medvedev is a great troll! Unfortunately, he doesn't decide anything in Russia - Putin does."

Uhuh. That was the initial view of him when he became PM from a position of relative obscurity. Unfortunately times change, I guess you don't watch the news:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12810566

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-31/medvedev-tests-limits-of-power-with-plan-to-oust-putin-allies.html

http://www.euractiv.com/en/global-europe/medvedev-putin-tensions-grow-2012-elections-get-closer-analysis-504662

Similarly look at Medvedev's history on justice, human rights and so forth. Without a doubt, Medvedev is a much more positive force than Putin and he's never been afraid to express that in his position as PM.

"You see, there's a mandatory 'performance fee' in Russia which goes toward central agency which then distributes gathered money to artists (minus 15% commission)"

Sounds like the PRS in the UK, or GEMA in Germany, or any number of other rights collection agencies that exist in pretty much every country.

What, you thought that kind of thing only happened in Russia?

"So Medvedev can talk all he wants, it won't change a thing."

Unless of course he beats Putin to the presidency next year, severely denting Putin's ability to control anything anymore.

Ah, but CO2 emissions fall during a recession.

http://www.euractiv.com/en/climate-environment/recession-cut-eu-co2-emissions-record-72-news-504252

How does this fit with the announcement that radiation risks from Fukushima (from food contamination) are 'no longer negligible' in Europe then? Oh, maybe you're simply confusing internal and external exposures? Such a tiny difference in words, isn't it?

Great effort in a noble cause. However, they note in the original article that:

'Right now, if you were to buy a CD of Beethoven's 9th symphony, you would not be legally allowed to do anything but listen to it. You wouldn't be able to share it, upload it, or use it as a soundtrack to your indie film- yet Beethoven has been dead for 183 years and his music is no longer copyrighted. There is a lifetime of music out there, legally in the public domain, but it has yet to be recorded and released to the public.'

Here in the UK, the copyright term on recorded music is currently only 50 years. This means that most of the core classical repertoire is already available in this form, often as very high quality recordings (they knew what they were doing by the 50s!) of great performances. Now that the cash cows of the 60s are about to fall into the public domain, the record industry has lobbied for an extension, and draft EU legislation aims to push back the term to 70 years:

http://www.euractiv.com/en/innovation/music-copyright-divisive-despite-meps-backing/article-181703

There are still some great performances of that Beethoven symphony from the 1930s, of course, but the 60s recordings in near-modern sound will be off limits for another couple of decades.

This seems structurally comparable to the legal and moral frou-frou over running MacOS on non-Apple hardware.

Discuss.

Happy to discuss and explain this.

The difference is that the Mac is a very popular platform but it's hard to see how one could claim that MacOS is a dominant operating system. It certainly isn't for desktops because the EU considered Windows to be dominant and under antitrust law you can at the most have one dominant player per market segment, never two. For smartphones, Apple would argue that Nokia still ships more units, that the total number of Android-based units sold is growing fast and probably also above the iPhone now, and they would point out that RIM is still a formidable competitor that grows fast and has a loyal customer base.

If competition is intact in a market, then regulators can't intervene even if they want. The theory is that competition should then take care of the problem, as a self-regulatory mechanism, meaning that if customers find Apple too restrictive, they might switch. I'll get back to Apple in a moment, but now on IBM:

IBM has a mainframe monopoly by now. That's the most extreme case of market dominance and it's where antitrust law comes in and can result in regulatory intervention. That's why the European Commissioned imposed a variety of requirements and levied hefty fines on Microsoft. Concerning IBM, there have already been antitrust cases going back to the 1950's, on that kind of basis.

But policy-makers have also begun to realize that Apple's customers -- all those fanboys who spent a lot of money on apps and phone charges -- should also get more protection. Right now they're beyond reach for traditional antitrust law. That's why the EU is preparing a legislative initiative to impose certain interoperability requirements on companies like Apple in order to protect consumers. For the mainframe market that new law isn't needed because IBM is clearly dominant (that term is an understatement for IBM's position in that market).

The internal combustion engines that currently exist are so much cleaner and more efficient than the powerplants that that currently exist that electric vehicles are an environmental nightmare.

You are completely and totally wrong. Internal combustion engines used in automobiles top out around 25% efficiency. Electric motors used in cars top out around 95% efficient, and they're even over 90% efficient when acting as a generator (during regenerative braking.)

We can talk again in 30 years, m'kay?

In thirty years, you might be right; we might be driving EVs.

But how efficient is the engine that was used to generate the electricity in the EV? You need to also take that into account. These folks say 31% on average, and Siemens reckons they can get 58% from a modern fossil fuel power plant.

So, an EV running on leccy from a modern power plant is more efficient (in terms of fossil fuel usage) than a regular car (and you have the bonus of all the emissions being in one place). But an EV running on leccy from an average fossil fuel plant is about equivalent or only marginally better (and you still have that bonus of collecting emissions in one place)

I know bribery is accepted practice in the US but here in the EU it is still frowned upon.
I'm sure it is frowned upon, (except in Spain, apparently, see third link), but the EU is hardly the place for a square deal:

• http://archive.corporateeurope.org/cunningbully/index.html
• http://www.euractiv.com/en/enterprise-jobs/commission-warns-bribery-opel-rescue/article-185759
• http://www.ethicalcorp.com/content.asp?ContentID=4560
• http://euobserver.com/9/27352
• http://www.thelocal.se/16974/20090116/
• http://blog.brusselssunshine.eu/2009/09/unnamed-french-eu-lobbying-firm-accused.html
• http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2907087.stm
• http://www.neurope.eu/articles/84689.php

And I could go on. I don't know where you're dreaming up this bizarre notions about the US (I assume you are another US-hating EU idiot, so I won't question it) but bribery is not an accepted practice, politicians are caught up bribery scandals here all the time; the latest being this Jefferson guy: http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE5AD01Z20091114, as he was just sentenced to 13 years I would hardly call what he did "accepted". You just sort of make up what life is like here based on your own twisted notions of hell and slums and what life must be like wherever you AREN'T, don't you? The moral is, don't write checks with your mouth your EU can't cash.

Show me a single SULEV diesel, for example.

Show me more than a handful of non-hybrid SULEV vehicles. Besides, since diesels hardly sell in the US, there hasn't been a lot of point in developing the technology. SULEV is a US (not EU) standard, and diesels only account for a small percentage of passenger car sales. Most of the diesel vehicles are produced by EU companies and there is no reason SULEV cannot be achieved by diesel.

The modern "clean diesels" generally barely meet modern US emissions reqs.

The regulations are arbitrarily established standards. Some gasoline engines "barely" meet the requirements and some exceed them. Same with diesels.

The only reason they're so widespread in Europe is because they have more lax emissions reqs.

The reason diesels are popular in Europe is because gasoline is so heavily taxed in Europe that the 10-30% improvement in fuel economy diesels get adds up to real money. Furthermore as of this writing the EU and Japan have more stringent emissions standards than the US.

It's almost 15% denser and releases correspondingly more CO2 per gallon

Even if that were true (and this study says you are wrong), diesel also uses 10-25% less fuel for the same power output thanks to that same energy density. Diesels get 10-25% better fuel economy which offsets their emmissions. It's a wash at worst. There are particulate differences and some other output differences but please at least think it through. There is no reason to accept that petroleum is inherently cleaner than diesel.

And it's no longer true, thanks to modern desulfurization reqs, that diesel takes significantly less energy to refine, offsetting the difference.

Yes cleaner diesel requires more processing but you haven't provided any evidence that it is worse than gasoline in this regard.

You're right. They haven't told Microsoft what is acceptable, and in the meanwhile Microsoft has a product to ship. They make a decision that ought to satisfy any reasonable logical human being.

But the EC says we're still going to pursue this as an antitrust case even though there is no longer any antitrust concern. We don't like your solution so we are going to come up with our own and mandate you use it even though the solution you put forth breaks no laws.

Furthermore, all of the information coming out of the EC's office for the last several months makes it very clear that what they intend to do is to force Microsoft to either bundle or provide a splash screen dialog to download alternate browsers. It isn't the least bit presumptuous to assume that the EC is going to do exactly what it has been threatening to do.

Apple already got into trouble for this - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6520677.stm

They were forced to equalise their prices across europe - http://www.euractiv.com/en/infosociety/eu-pressure-ends-itunes-price-unbalance/article-169446

Sure:
http://www.euractiv.com/en/infosociety/eu-court-ruling-brings-free-legal-downloading-step-closer/article-169941
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/3760.cfm

It was a while ago and I'm not going to spend a lot of time trying to find it but Google is full of resources. In that first article is also a link to a ruling.

The reaction to the same stuff from the European Parliament is worth a mention

The internet is commonly used by terrorist for propaganda communication, training, indoctrination, recruitment, and fund-raising. Certain terrorist organisations also use the Internet to plan operations and publicize claimed attacks... internet service providers now have to retain their data, as a consequence of the Data Retention Directive. The principle of availability has made its first step with the Prüm Treaty: soon, all Member States' databases on fingerprints, DNA and vehicle registration will be accessible to the authorities of other Member States.

The Commission plans to fund activities aimed at making this work or making it work better. Agreement has been reached to give law enforcement authorities access to the Visa Information System (VIS) once it becomes operational. Access to the VIS will allow police and other law enforcement authorities, as well as Europol, to consult data in the Visa Information System. It will store data on up to 70 million people concerning visas for visits to, or transit through, the Schengen Area [basically mainland West Europe]. These data will include the applicants' photograph and their ten fingerprints. The VIS will become the largest ten finger print system in the world...

The dissemination of terrorist propaganda, training of terrorists, financing of terrorism, circulation of information on bomb-making and explosives and public provocations to commit terrorist offences should be recognised as crimes and subject to appropriate criminal penalties across the European Union.

Recognizing counterfeit money is a specialization within the FBI. Also, there are few fake $20 bills, not worth the effort. They usually counterfeit $100s. And ever been in a casino where they authenticate with that special marker? This is because you can't tell unless you've got years of experience. We've all probably handled counterfeit money in your lifetime without ever knowing.

A small denomination is no obstacle to counterfeiters. Some people have been counterfeiting Euro coins. Euro banknotes are also being counterfeited, and people have gotten counterfeit bills from banks.

http://www.euractiv.com/en/infosociety/microsoft-f ights-keep-source-code-closed/article-143997

Again, the EU only requested enough code for interoperability.

Maybe they'll impose sanctions on themselves when they miss their Kyoto targets by an embarrassing margin despite their costly Enron-style cap and trade scheme, the same policy the US is rejecting in TFA.

The Cyprus dispute is a huge stumbling block for Turkey's EU membership. The EU granted Cyprus EU membership even though it preferred Cyprus to be united beforehand. The EU recognises Southern Cyprus as the rightful government of the whole of Cyprus. The European Court of Human Rights agreed with the Greek Cypriots that the Annan Plan was untenable. The EU is putting constant pressure on Turkey, and as a result, Turkey is now negotiating with Cyprus.

What gives you the impression that this is something that the EU is ignoring? Just because they are willing to sit down and talk to Turkey? They've said time and time again that Turkey aren't getting into the EU while the Cyprus dispute is unresolved, and they are completely supportive of the Greek Cypriot claims.

Serious question. Is there an international treaty that says they don't have the right to attempt to get a satellite up into space?

Not a treaty as such, but a decree titled "US National Space Policy" claiming space for the US. IOW, the Bush administration claims the right to deny US adversaries the use of space capabilities hostile to its national interests.

We all know the number one reason any nation tries to get a satellite into orbit is so the rest of the world knows that they can drop a bomb onto anybody else's doorstep

You're kidding, right? Number one reason? Any nation? Yeah, you're either kidding or you're .. what's the next step after paranoia? Ah, that would be hysteria, I guess.

"MS did endeavor to document a bunch of their interfaces. The response was that it was insufficient. MS tried to find out how it was insufficient, and was told that it was MS's responsibility to figure that out"

MS was instructed to publish the specifications of the protocols sufficent to allow third party apps interact with MS servers. MS misleading pretended to having not understood the Commission and produced some source code and API calls.

"What we're obligated to license, under the European Commission's decision, is specifications, documents that describe how those protocols work. We're not obligated to license their source code. But one thing is perfectly clear, if you want to understand these communications protocols, the source code is the ultimate documentation", Brad Smith.

"Normally speaking, the source code is not the ultimate documentation of anything, which is precisely the reason why programmers are required to provide comprehensive documentation to go along with their source code", Neelie Kroes.

"Providing MS with an EIGHT DAY deadline is just absurd"

They had since March 2004 to produce the information and were given 120 days to comply as you would be no doubt aware.

was Re:8 days isn't a lot of time to document.

You might find this table of voter turnouts in the past couple of EP elections interesting.

Last time I checked, Europe was a collection of countries with their own laws. Yes, the EU has had some influence in bringing some of those laws closer in recent years, but AFAIK this has not yet extended to Telecoms regulation.

It most certainly has extended to telecoms regulation: check out Regulation EC/2887/2000 for starters.

The incumbant telecoms operator has not been forced to open the local loop,

Of course, some countries may be slower than others at taking action—indeed it seems from the article I linked above that Germany in particular has taken a stand against the directive...

Hello AC, please take the time to make an account so that you can see the replies.

Of course it wasn't a battle of the US companies trying to impose their thinking on Europeans, most large software-based companies in Europe were also in favour of US-style patents, but that doesn't make them right.

Yes the battle was hard, but the EU parliament voted 648 to 14 *AGAINST* software patents. This is not a close battle, this was like a complete hammering. The pro-patents lobby tried to get in via the side doors using all the dirty tricks in and out of the book, but that simply didn't work. If it had it would have meant absolute mayhem. Moreover, the "rapporteur" on the issue was that rare thing, a political first-class mind who really understood the issue and made life very hard for the lobbyists. Of course there were the thousands upon thousands of activists who tried to educate everybody about the issue. Eventually it worked.

If you have been involved in it, congratulations ! very well done work.

From the point of view of the lobbyists I'm sure they found the battle very hard as well. In fact I'm positive they completely panicked at some point, when the EU very very nearly passed a directive which would have made US-style software patents impossible in Europe, imposing patents on inventions "with software" but not "software-based". This would have been a terrible disaster for the lobbyists. They themselves very nearly lost on all front. That's why I don't think they'll try again shortly, for fear of losing all again.

This certainly sounds like a terrific idea...not only do you get basically free power, but you also get desalinization in the bargain. Abundant power plus abundant fresh water has the potential to completely remake the countries in the equatorial region...the region, coincidentally, where these power/desalinization plants will be most efficient.

However, we really ought to know by know the policy of TANSTAAFL...earlier generations have blithely pursued their agendas without thought to the long-term consequences to the environment, and today we are slowly starting to recognize the signs of these consequences in our environment. Given that the slight amount of global warming we have so far witnessed has caused an unprecedented amount and rapidity of glacial retreat, with truly global consequences. If you doubt this, just ask the Europeans, whose traditionally balmy climate is fast disappearing due to the weakening of the Gulf Stream.

With this in mind, is it really wise to start monkeying with the thermal gradient of the oceans at the equator?