For most people, yes. But as I understand things, there is still quite a lot of IT-infrastructure internal to various companies that will not work on anything other than IE. Thus these companies have a choice: live with IE, or invest a lot of money on modernising the IT-infrastructure. Since the cost of modernising anything will be a hit to the managers' annual bonus, guess what they choose?
In this instance, with the word "infrastructure" I don't necessarily mean the physically tangible things, but rather the intangible things like bespoke software or other similar things developed for one particular company's internal needs.
I'm sorry if I was unclear, but I mean that if I have a system that was running some software package X on operating system Y and this was working for me, I should be allowed to continue running these pieces of software as long as I want. I have no problem at all with older software running badly (or not at all) on operating systems that are newer. Also, I realise that sooner or later the manufacturers of the software I was using would stop providing updates, and I have no problem with that either.
Also, I don't have a problem with new features added to some software requiring changes in the files generated by the software. But I really hate when software is built to check whether or not the file you are trying to open was created with a newer version of the software than the one you are running. I had a neighbour who did a lot of CAD-work, and one day he had received a file from a client, who wanted him to do some work on this file. But he couldn't open it, so he called me (I was known to many neighbours as the "local computer geek") and asked me to help him.
I restarted his CAD-program and tried opening the file he had been sent, and I very quickly got some sort of error message. I can't remember the exact wording, but something about it made me suspect the CAD-program was checking whether the version used to create the file was newer than the version trying to open it. So I used a hex-editor to open the file, and found something in the first few lines of text that looked like it could be a version number. I changed one single byte in the file with the hex-editor, and saved it.
Behold, the CAD-program could now open the file with no problem at all! That is behaviour I hate. There is no reason I can accept for this kind of behaviour. I would have no problem if the newer version could do things the older couldn't, and this has an impact on the file structure, but in this case there was no impact at all on the file structure!
Just to be clear on what I would have found acceptable: suppose the old CAD version could only handle straight lines. Obviously then, the files created by this software would not need to handle anything other than straight lines. But suppose that the next version of the same CAD-software could also handle curves. Suddenly you would need to store information about curves in the files on disk, and the old version of the software would thus not be able to handle the files from the newer version. This would be perfectly acceptable to me.
While I agree with your basic idea (infinite support is an unreasonable expectation) I see no reason why I shouldn't be allowed to keep using old software as long as I want to. If I have legally bought a licence to use software X then I should be allowed to use it as long as I see fit, not as long as some other company sees fit. If I am happy using eg a fifteen year old word processor to type my important documents, why should I be forced to upgrade?
As for software that by design needs communication with a supplier-run server (most modern games) I think they should have some sort of fall-back mode, in which you can still play single player games when the company decides to switch off the servers needed for multi-player games. I can't see why any non-game software should need constant (or at least very often) contact with a supplier-run server for it's proper working.
I think you are wrong about the "Microsoft the company really don't care" bit: Microsoft do care. In fact, I think they care very much. The thing is that they don't care about you, the end user, they only care about themselves and their profits. To Microsoft you are just a source of money, and once you have payed your money and they can't get you to pay more, they have no interest in you what so ever; they will spend the time and energy they could have spent on helping you on finding another customer to loot for money, or another way to make customers pay more money.
The fact that the magnetic field is controllable (ie able to be controlled) does not actually imply that it _was_ controlled. Ideally it should, but things sometime go awry.
I can't agree more: when MS bought Skype, it didn't take long for Skype to turn to shit. And mostly the UI. I used to use Skype to help my 70+ year old mother when she ran into computer problems, and Skype was my number one choice since she already knew the UI (at least well enough) and she could share her screen with me. That seems to have been removed from Skype completely (at least from the Linux versions), and thus I have no reason to use Skype any more.
On a personal note, I remember when ICQ was still popular, and MSN Messenger was only just starting to get a foothold on the market: one of my friends was adamant that MSN M was better than ICQ, because you could send emojis! And it was prettier! If that really is what people want, then MS has made the right choices for Skype. It's a pity that they seem unable to satisfy the computer-savvy nerds at the same time.
I was wondering things along the same lines: how about, instead of putting so much work into making it possible to run Linux as a VM under Windows they put a bit of effort into making it possible to dual-boot Windows and Linux? When I bought the laptop I am currently writing on, it came with Windows 8 (YUCK!), and within an hour I had installed Linux on it. But then discovered I couldn't boot into Windows if I wanted, despite still having it on the computer. One purchased external HD and a few hours later, there was only Linux on the laptop...
I really don't understand this infatuation with removing something that, for better or worse, has been with us for several decades. It's not just this manufacturer, but it seems to be every manufacturer that is removing the 3,5 mm plug. And I really don't understand why: it can't take up that much space on the PCB, the technology is by now pretty well-known and understood by even the most tech-idiotic people on the planet.
If the manufacturer wants more battery life, why not make the phone a bit thicker? My HTC U11 is around 7 mm thick (guessing, not measuring. For those who want it in Imperial units, you will have to google it.) and I don't think another 3-7 mm would make much difference to me. Granted, I don't know if it would be technically feasible to build a battery in the shape this would force (or make possible) so maybe it couldn't be done in less than an extra 5-20 mm.
As for the question of how much we would use the 3,5 mm plug: in my case at least an hour a day, on my way to and from work. As it is, I have to carry a short cable, with a USB-C male plug on one and and 3,5mm female on the other in order to plug my headphones into my phone. And I don't want to use some other headphones, because when I get to work I plug them into my laptop while connecting the phone to a charger.
I don't think Microsoft is worried about only cheap computers: they ought to be worried about the very highest of high-end computers as well. According to top500.org the 500 fastest computers in the world all run Linux. The reason for this to worry Microsoft is that what today is a monster computer might very well, in 20-40 years be sitting in some office, being used for more ordinary tasks, like keeping track of the company payroll.
So Microsoft are under pressure from two directions: the very cheapest computers and the most expensive computers. Both of these fields have the potential to grow into neighbouring market segments, replacing whatever OS-maker held that segment earlier.
As far as Swedish media have reported (I live in Sweden), you are absolutely correct. But there are a few further facts that seem a bit odd:
- when he first left Sweden his attorney had previously asked the prosecutor if JA could leave the country. The prosecutor answered "yes."
- while in London JA has offered to be interrogated/questioned by Swedish police over internet or in person if Sweden would send a policeman to the UK. Sweden has rejected both offers on for me unclear grounds, most of which seem to be based on the fact that a Swedish policeman visiting the UK would not be able to apply the pressure of law on JA like he could in Sweden. However, this completely disregards the fact that UK police could apply the same pressure....
Even before the facts above took place, there were oddities in the case:
- according to media the first time the supposedly raped women contacted police, it was to find out whether or not they could force JA to take an STD-test
- somehow this inquiry was turned into a rape case by the policewoman they talked to
- the two supposed rape victim were interrogated over the phone and the conversation was not recorded, despite police regulations that rape victims _must_ be interrogated in the police station and the interrogation _must_ be recorded.
- both women were assigned the same attorney for defence. This verges on being illegal, as each victim of a crime should have a representative who cares only about them and no one else in the case: this way any possible confusion of who said what or what was done to whom (or similar confusion) is avoided.
- the first prosecutor who was assigned the case quite quickly came to the conclusion that there is not enough evidence to do anything, and dropped the case
- the next prosecutor who took the case (apparently voluntarily) just happens to be a well-known feminist and member of the party who had the power of government at the time. One of the supposed rape victims is also a feminist and member of the same party. This prosecutor has at least once said something along the lines that it must be possible to punish men even if a court finds them innocent.
- this second prosecutor called a press conference and announced to the world that JA was wanted for interrogation in connection with a possible rape. JA found out he was wanted by reading the news....
For me as a Swede, it is utterly inconceivable that there would be war between Sweden and any of our immediate neighbours. Unfortunately the same can not be said about Russia: although we don't share a land border, we do have the Baltic Sea as a common body of water. Russia could launch an invasion from St Petersburg or the Kaliningrad enclave. Considering the amount of Russian *cough*volunteers*cough* that have taken time out of their regular army jobs to help in the Donbass conflict, I don't think Sweden has a large enough defence.
I think if Russia were to invade Sweden, the likely target would be Gotland: it is ideally placed in the southern Baltic sea so you can use it for placing air defence and aiplanes. With control over Gotland and it's airspace you can easily control the airspace over the Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania), who are all members of NATO.
You are right in that Sweden and Norway are culturally very similar. But I think you are wrong about this leak.
If the rest of the world can see details about every single driving licence ever issued in Sweden, I see no real harm. But this leak has (at least potentially) exposed things like which vehicles the secret army units have (and how many of them), who the Swedish combat pilots are and where they live, which roads and bridges can support which vehicle types (good to know when invading a country, so the road you drive on doesn't suddenly collapse under the load).
Apart from a lot more discussion than is normal about a political issue in Sweden, the only real thing that has happened is that the director responsible for this has been fired and fined some three weeks worth of wages. My personal opinion is that she should have been tossed in prison and left to rot there, this leak may have damaged Sweden much more than all spies that have ever operated in Sweden in the past.
My sources: a lot of reports in Swedish media.
Full disclosure: I live in Sweden and am a Swedish native.
In my experience, there are two slightly separate message services on RDS: one set of messages cover the large roads (think interstate in the USA), and another set of messages cover smaller roads. The messages concerning the large roads are broadcast all over the country, but the messages covering smaller roads are only broadcast in the appropriate county. This may be wrong, but it is what I have experienced from driving long distances once or twice a year for the past 10-15 years.
It does not work with the radio off. If you want the traffic announcements without having to listen to the radio (or any other sound source), there is one trick that can be used: turn the radio on, and choose some sound source (you could eg choose to play a CD, and just let the radio wait for you to press the Play button). Then turn the volume down to zero. Most radios with RDS have one volume setting for the "normal" sound, and another for RDS messages.
It is not as stupid as you might think. Essentially all radios sold for use in cars today come with the RDS system as part of them, although it can be turned off. What this system does is give you some info: the channel you are listening to and so on. It also gives the radio the current time. But most importantly it also allows for interrupting _any_ sound source (radio, CD, DVD, USB....) to force your radio to play the voice message sent through the RDS system (I think it's broadcast on certain FM transmitters, so tuning in to them is no problem).
These messages are usually only about the situation on the roads: places where there have been accidents that impact the flow of traffic on large roads and so on. And once the message is over, your radio reverts to whatever it was doing before the interruption. I find these messages very useful, even if most of them are not about the roads I am on: the one time I was on a road affected, I was able (thanks to being told well before I got to it) to take a detour around the site of an accident, and save myself an hour or two of sitting in a traffic jam.
This RDS system can be turned off if you want to, in which case your radio will not play any of the traffic messages broadcast.
Full disclosure: I live in Sweden. I also happen to love the RDS messaging system, even if I am rarely need the information provided.
I may be picking on small details, but as far as I know JA has not been charged with anything, he is just wanted for questioning. Which is intself a strange thing: the European Arrest Warrant filed by Swedish authorities is only to be used for people already charged with a crime, not for those only suspected.
Full disclosure: I am a Swede, living in Sweden and think the entire case should be dropped by Swedish authorities. They might have been doing the right thing in the beginning, but now they are just trying to save face. Drop it and let the parties involved get on with their lives.
I think China's support of NK started out as supporting a political ally: China and NK had vaguely similar political ideas and government. After the Korean War China and NK developed into different countries, and I think China no longer sees NK as a political ally.
However, they probably still see USA as a potential enemy. And if NK were to collapse and get absorbed into South Korea, there could be US troops right on the Chinese border (there are a number of US troops in South Korea right now). If I were a Chinese general, I would not like that possibility. The cheap and easy way to see to it that it doesn't happen is to keep the NK govenrment in power.
As for NK having nukes, I don't see why China would worry: they are not the target. They might very well suffer some consequences of NK nuking SK, but even NK ought to realise that nuking SK would mean open war with a country (USA) that could wipe them off the map. NK might therefore actually have nukes, but using them seems very improbable. At least until they can be successfully delivered to mainland USA...
There may very well be good reason for JA to not want being extradited to Sweden, but there may be other reasons than discussed previously here that explain why the Swedish authorities are acting the way they are.
One reason is that the prosecutor in charge of the case may have found herself a useful tool that she can use to further her own ambitions in something completely unrelated: she is known to be a feminist and has stated in at least one interview that it must be possible to punish men even after a court has found them to be innocent. She is also a member of the same political party as one of the (possible) victims. Which just happens to be the same political party to which the defense attorney belongs! My conclusion is that the suspicion of internal politics cannot be put to rest until more evidence appears.
-----------
Just to point out a few strange facts in this sordid case:
- JA found out he was wanted for questioning not by being told be the authorities, but by being told be the media. I cannot remember another case where this has happened.
- the prosecutors office called a press conference to announce JA was wanted for questioning. I have never heard of them doing anything similar in any other case.
- the two (possible) victims of rape have the same lawyer. Also this is a first: it does not matter how many victims are involved in a court case, they get their own lawyer and do not share this lawyer with anybody else involved in the same case.
-----------
Full disclosure: I live in Sweden and it is my personal opinion that the prosecutor handling this case at the moment is doing so for personal reasons and should be removed from her position.
One thing I wonder about the "takes full responsibility" bit is this: if it is proven in the future (and I'm sure it will) that some drone strike has killed only innocent people and no 'legitimate target', would the friends and families of the killed people be allowed to kill Obama? If yes, then he is indeed taking full responsibility. If not, then he is not taking full responsibility. Settling the matter with money does not count.
Personally I could settle for having Obama (or the president of the day) put on trial for premeditated murder if/when it is proven that a drone strike only killed innocent people, but it's a more interesting discussion taken to the limit.
In winter I drive more now than I did ten years ago, simply because I live further away from my jobs. But in summer I hardly drive at all, preferring to take my bicycle. Even if I know I can find cheap (or free) parking instantly, I prefer cycling 15-20 kms to taking the car. And as I get better and better bicycles, the distance I an willing to cycle instead of driving increases.
Microsoft is fine. I agree with you, but with an important addition: for the moment. Microsoft is fine, for the moment. There are two things that, given enough time, will be a serious headache for Microsoft.
One of them is the abundance of smartphones and dead-cheap computers running any non-Microsoft OS: people will start to see that other manufacturers can make decent OSes. And if you want to make a dead-cheap computer you can't afford to pay Microsoft any money, so you use eg Linux.
The other thing Microsoft must think about is the fastest computers. The kind of computer that appears on top500.org. Linux, Unix and various versions of BSD have a crushingly large market share here, whereas Windows is hardly noticeable. (I can't seem to get any numbers from the site right now, so I am quoting from my memory of the last time I checked).
Since a large portion of supercomputers run something other than Windows, I think things will trickle down from them: you might buy a second-hand supercomputer for your company, and find that it comes with BSD. Or you notice that the computer lab you use to crunch numbers for you will give you a better experience if you use Linux to connect to it. Or some other event makes you realize there are other OSes than Windows. Whatever the reason, some people will sooner or later realize that it is cheaper for them to convert their entire organisation to something other than Windows than to convert their newly-bought servers/supercomputer.
With these two things I think Microsoft will be feeling pressure from the cheapest computers and from the number-crunching monsters. Given enough time they will have to do something to counter these threats, or they will find themselves reduced to one competitor among many. And the transition could potentially be very quick: Altavista disappeared in a matter of years because Google offered something better. Microsoft could end up the same way, though I don't think it could ever be that fast.
I agree exactly with you: I will tolerate non-moving ads if the delivery of the ads is such that I will not be tracked.
But quite honestly, I don't really see why the advertising community (and those that get money from it) is making a fuss. I can take myself as an example: when I watch the TV and the ads come on, I either change the channel or go and do something other than watch the TV. Thus all the advertising broadcast by the TV-channel I was watching is, in essence, blocked by me. The mechanism is different to that I use on my computer, but the end result is still that I don't see the advertising. What is so different?
More or less the same applies here in Sweden: I applied for a few ISBNs, and was given two with no fuss. The total cost to me was I had to write two emails, and read some instructions. No money was involved in the transaction. I don't see why this should change should I need more ISBNs in the future.
And in Sweden in particular, you yourself can go bankrupt by suing someone: in a civil case (copyright infringement is a civil matter, as opposed to criminal) the loser pays _all_ attorneys/lawyers involved. On top of that, if you have had to get any expert witnesses the loser will have to pay them as well. Granted, while the case is under progress in court, both parties pay their own costs, but the loser is forced to pay the winner when the matter is settled.
Slashdot Mirror
For most people, yes. But as I understand things, there is still quite a lot of IT-infrastructure internal to various companies that will not work on anything other than IE. Thus these companies have a choice: live with IE, or invest a lot of money on modernising the IT-infrastructure. Since the cost of modernising anything will be a hit to the managers' annual bonus, guess what they choose?
In this instance, with the word "infrastructure" I don't necessarily mean the physically tangible things, but rather the intangible things like bespoke software or other similar things developed for one particular company's internal needs.
I'm sorry if I was unclear, but I mean that if I have a system that was running some software package X on operating system Y and this was working for me, I should be allowed to continue running these pieces of software as long as I want. I have no problem at all with older software running badly (or not at all) on operating systems that are newer. Also, I realise that sooner or later the manufacturers of the software I was using would stop providing updates, and I have no problem with that either.
Also, I don't have a problem with new features added to some software requiring changes in the files generated by the software. But I really hate when software is built to check whether or not the file you are trying to open was created with a newer version of the software than the one you are running. I had a neighbour who did a lot of CAD-work, and one day he had received a file from a client, who wanted him to do some work on this file. But he couldn't open it, so he called me (I was known to many neighbours as the "local computer geek") and asked me to help him.
I restarted his CAD-program and tried opening the file he had been sent, and I very quickly got some sort of error message. I can't remember the exact wording, but something about it made me suspect the CAD-program was checking whether the version used to create the file was newer than the version trying to open it. So I used a hex-editor to open the file, and found something in the first few lines of text that looked like it could be a version number. I changed one single byte in the file with the hex-editor, and saved it.
Behold, the CAD-program could now open the file with no problem at all! That is behaviour I hate. There is no reason I can accept for this kind of behaviour. I would have no problem if the newer version could do things the older couldn't, and this has an impact on the file structure, but in this case there was no impact at all on the file structure!
Just to be clear on what I would have found acceptable: suppose the old CAD version could only handle straight lines. Obviously then, the files created by this software would not need to handle anything other than straight lines. But suppose that the next version of the same CAD-software could also handle curves. Suddenly you would need to store information about curves in the files on disk, and the old version of the software would thus not be able to handle the files from the newer version. This would be perfectly acceptable to me.
While I agree with your basic idea (infinite support is an unreasonable expectation) I see no reason why I shouldn't be allowed to keep using old software as long as I want to. If I have legally bought a licence to use software X then I should be allowed to use it as long as I see fit, not as long as some other company sees fit. If I am happy using eg a fifteen year old word processor to type my important documents, why should I be forced to upgrade?
As for software that by design needs communication with a supplier-run server (most modern games) I think they should have some sort of fall-back mode, in which you can still play single player games when the company decides to switch off the servers needed for multi-player games. I can't see why any non-game software should need constant (or at least very often) contact with a supplier-run server for it's proper working.
I think you are wrong about the "Microsoft the company really don't care" bit: Microsoft do care. In fact, I think they care very much. The thing is that they don't care about you, the end user, they only care about themselves and their profits. To Microsoft you are just a source of money, and once you have payed your money and they can't get you to pay more, they have no interest in you what so ever; they will spend the time and energy they could have spent on helping you on finding another customer to loot for money, or another way to make customers pay more money.
The fact that the magnetic field is controllable (ie able to be controlled) does not actually imply that it _was_ controlled. Ideally it should, but things sometime go awry.
I can't agree more: when MS bought Skype, it didn't take long for Skype to turn to shit. And mostly the UI. I used to use Skype to help my 70+ year old mother when she ran into computer problems, and Skype was my number one choice since she already knew the UI (at least well enough) and she could share her screen with me. That seems to have been removed from Skype completely (at least from the Linux versions), and thus I have no reason to use Skype any more.
On a personal note, I remember when ICQ was still popular, and MSN Messenger was only just starting to get a foothold on the market: one of my friends was adamant that MSN M was better than ICQ, because you could send emojis! And it was prettier! If that really is what people want, then MS has made the right choices for Skype. It's a pity that they seem unable to satisfy the computer-savvy nerds at the same time.
I was wondering things along the same lines: how about, instead of putting so much work into making it possible to run Linux as a VM under Windows they put a bit of effort into making it possible to dual-boot Windows and Linux? When I bought the laptop I am currently writing on, it came with Windows 8 (YUCK!), and within an hour I had installed Linux on it. But then discovered I couldn't boot into Windows if I wanted, despite still having it on the computer. One purchased external HD and a few hours later, there was only Linux on the laptop...
I really don't understand this infatuation with removing something that, for better or worse, has been with us for several decades. It's not just this manufacturer, but it seems to be every manufacturer that is removing the 3,5 mm plug. And I really don't understand why: it can't take up that much space on the PCB, the technology is by now pretty well-known and understood by even the most tech-idiotic people on the planet.
If the manufacturer wants more battery life, why not make the phone a bit thicker? My HTC U11 is around 7 mm thick (guessing, not measuring. For those who want it in Imperial units, you will have to google it.) and I don't think another 3-7 mm would make much difference to me. Granted, I don't know if it would be technically feasible to build a battery in the shape this would force (or make possible) so maybe it couldn't be done in less than an extra 5-20 mm.
As for the question of how much we would use the 3,5 mm plug: in my case at least an hour a day, on my way to and from work. As it is, I have to carry a short cable, with a USB-C male plug on one and and 3,5mm female on the other in order to plug my headphones into my phone. And I don't want to use some other headphones, because when I get to work I plug them into my laptop while connecting the phone to a charger.
I don't think Microsoft is worried about only cheap computers: they ought to be worried about the very highest of high-end computers as well. According to top500.org the 500 fastest computers in the world all run Linux. The reason for this to worry Microsoft is that what today is a monster computer might very well, in 20-40 years be sitting in some office, being used for more ordinary tasks, like keeping track of the company payroll.
So Microsoft are under pressure from two directions: the very cheapest computers and the most expensive computers. Both of these fields have the potential to grow into neighbouring market segments, replacing whatever OS-maker held that segment earlier.
As far as Swedish media have reported (I live in Sweden), you are absolutely correct. But there are a few further facts that seem a bit odd:
- when he first left Sweden his attorney had previously asked the prosecutor if JA could leave the country. The prosecutor answered "yes."
- while in London JA has offered to be interrogated/questioned by Swedish police over internet or in person if Sweden would send a policeman to the UK. Sweden has rejected both offers on for me unclear grounds, most of which seem to be based on the fact that a Swedish policeman visiting the UK would not be able to apply the pressure of law on JA like he could in Sweden. However, this completely disregards the fact that UK police could apply the same pressure....
Even before the facts above took place, there were oddities in the case:
- according to media the first time the supposedly raped women contacted police, it was to find out whether or not they could force JA to take an STD-test
- somehow this inquiry was turned into a rape case by the policewoman they talked to
- the two supposed rape victim were interrogated over the phone and the conversation was not recorded, despite police regulations that rape victims _must_ be interrogated in the police station and the interrogation _must_ be recorded.
- both women were assigned the same attorney for defence. This verges on being illegal, as each victim of a crime should have a representative who cares only about them and no one else in the case: this way any possible confusion of who said what or what was done to whom (or similar confusion) is avoided.
- the first prosecutor who was assigned the case quite quickly came to the conclusion that there is not enough evidence to do anything, and dropped the case
- the next prosecutor who took the case (apparently voluntarily) just happens to be a well-known feminist and member of the party who had the power of government at the time. One of the supposed rape victims is also a feminist and member of the same party. This prosecutor has at least once said something along the lines that it must be possible to punish men even if a court finds them innocent.
- this second prosecutor called a press conference and announced to the world that JA was wanted for interrogation in connection with a possible rape. JA found out he was wanted by reading the news....
Not only Visa: http://cphpost.dk/news/interna...
For me as a Swede, it is utterly inconceivable that there would be war between Sweden and any of our immediate neighbours. Unfortunately the same can not be said about Russia: although we don't share a land border, we do have the Baltic Sea as a common body of water. Russia could launch an invasion from St Petersburg or the Kaliningrad enclave. Considering the amount of Russian *cough*volunteers*cough* that have taken time out of their regular army jobs to help in the Donbass conflict, I don't think Sweden has a large enough defence.
I think if Russia were to invade Sweden, the likely target would be Gotland: it is ideally placed in the southern Baltic sea so you can use it for placing air defence and aiplanes. With control over Gotland and it's airspace you can easily control the airspace over the Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania), who are all members of NATO.
You are right in that Sweden and Norway are culturally very similar. But I think you are wrong about this leak.
If the rest of the world can see details about every single driving licence ever issued in Sweden, I see no real harm. But this leak has (at least potentially) exposed things like which vehicles the secret army units have (and how many of them), who the Swedish combat pilots are and where they live, which roads and bridges can support which vehicle types (good to know when invading a country, so the road you drive on doesn't suddenly collapse under the load).
Apart from a lot more discussion than is normal about a political issue in Sweden, the only real thing that has happened is that the director responsible for this has been fired and fined some three weeks worth of wages. My personal opinion is that she should have been tossed in prison and left to rot there, this leak may have damaged Sweden much more than all spies that have ever operated in Sweden in the past.
My sources: a lot of reports in Swedish media.
Full disclosure: I live in Sweden and am a Swedish native.
In my experience, there are two slightly separate message services on RDS: one set of messages cover the large roads (think interstate in the USA), and another set of messages cover smaller roads. The messages concerning the large roads are broadcast all over the country, but the messages covering smaller roads are only broadcast in the appropriate county. This may be wrong, but it is what I have experienced from driving long distances once or twice a year for the past 10-15 years.
It does not work with the radio off. If you want the traffic announcements without having to listen to the radio (or any other sound source), there is one trick that can be used: turn the radio on, and choose some sound source (you could eg choose to play a CD, and just let the radio wait for you to press the Play button). Then turn the volume down to zero. Most radios with RDS have one volume setting for the "normal" sound, and another for RDS messages.
These messages are usually only about the situation on the roads: places where there have been accidents that impact the flow of traffic on large roads and so on. And once the message is over, your radio reverts to whatever it was doing before the interruption. I find these messages very useful, even if most of them are not about the roads I am on: the one time I was on a road affected, I was able (thanks to being told well before I got to it) to take a detour around the site of an accident, and save myself an hour or two of sitting in a traffic jam.
This RDS system can be turned off if you want to, in which case your radio will not play any of the traffic messages broadcast.
Full disclosure: I live in Sweden. I also happen to love the RDS messaging system, even if I am rarely need the information provided.
I may be picking on small details, but as far as I know JA has not been charged with anything, he is just wanted for questioning. Which is intself a strange thing: the European Arrest Warrant filed by Swedish authorities is only to be used for people already charged with a crime, not for those only suspected.
Full disclosure: I am a Swede, living in Sweden and think the entire case should be dropped by Swedish authorities. They might have been doing the right thing in the beginning, but now they are just trying to save face. Drop it and let the parties involved get on with their lives.
I think China's support of NK started out as supporting a political ally: China and NK had vaguely similar political ideas and government. After the Korean War China and NK developed into different countries, and I think China no longer sees NK as a political ally.
However, they probably still see USA as a potential enemy. And if NK were to collapse and get absorbed into South Korea, there could be US troops right on the Chinese border (there are a number of US troops in South Korea right now). If I were a Chinese general, I would not like that possibility. The cheap and easy way to see to it that it doesn't happen is to keep the NK govenrment in power.
As for NK having nukes, I don't see why China would worry: they are not the target. They might very well suffer some consequences of NK nuking SK, but even NK ought to realise that nuking SK would mean open war with a country (USA) that could wipe them off the map. NK might therefore actually have nukes, but using them seems very improbable. At least until they can be successfully delivered to mainland USA...
There may very well be good reason for JA to not want being extradited to Sweden, but there may be other reasons than discussed previously here that explain why the Swedish authorities are acting the way they are.
One reason is that the prosecutor in charge of the case may have found herself a useful tool that she can use to further her own ambitions in something completely unrelated: she is known to be a feminist and has stated in at least one interview that it must be possible to punish men even after a court has found them to be innocent. She is also a member of the same political party as one of the (possible) victims. Which just happens to be the same political party to which the defense attorney belongs! My conclusion is that the suspicion of internal politics cannot be put to rest until more evidence appears.
-----------
Just to point out a few strange facts in this sordid case:
- JA found out he was wanted for questioning not by being told be the authorities, but by being told be the media. I cannot remember another case where this has happened.
- the prosecutors office called a press conference to announce JA was wanted for questioning. I have never heard of them doing anything similar in any other case.
- the two (possible) victims of rape have the same lawyer. Also this is a first: it does not matter how many victims are involved in a court case, they get their own lawyer and do not share this lawyer with anybody else involved in the same case.
-----------
Full disclosure: I live in Sweden and it is my personal opinion that the prosecutor handling this case at the moment is doing so for personal reasons and should be removed from her position.
One thing I wonder about the "takes full responsibility" bit is this: if it is proven in the future (and I'm sure it will) that some drone strike has killed only innocent people and no 'legitimate target', would the friends and families of the killed people be allowed to kill Obama? If yes, then he is indeed taking full responsibility. If not, then he is not taking full responsibility. Settling the matter with money does not count.
Personally I could settle for having Obama (or the president of the day) put on trial for premeditated murder if/when it is proven that a drone strike only killed innocent people, but it's a more interesting discussion taken to the limit.
In winter I drive more now than I did ten years ago, simply because I live further away from my jobs. But in summer I hardly drive at all, preferring to take my bicycle. Even if I know I can find cheap (or free) parking instantly, I prefer cycling 15-20 kms to taking the car. And as I get better and better bicycles, the distance I an willing to cycle instead of driving increases.
One of them is the abundance of smartphones and dead-cheap computers running any non-Microsoft OS: people will start to see that other manufacturers can make decent OSes. And if you want to make a dead-cheap computer you can't afford to pay Microsoft any money, so you use eg Linux.
The other thing Microsoft must think about is the fastest computers. The kind of computer that appears on top500.org. Linux, Unix and various versions of BSD have a crushingly large market share here, whereas Windows is hardly noticeable. (I can't seem to get any numbers from the site right now, so I am quoting from my memory of the last time I checked).
Since a large portion of supercomputers run something other than Windows, I think things will trickle down from them: you might buy a second-hand supercomputer for your company, and find that it comes with BSD. Or you notice that the computer lab you use to crunch numbers for you will give you a better experience if you use Linux to connect to it. Or some other event makes you realize there are other OSes than Windows. Whatever the reason, some people will sooner or later realize that it is cheaper for them to convert their entire organisation to something other than Windows than to convert their newly-bought servers/supercomputer.
With these two things I think Microsoft will be feeling pressure from the cheapest computers and from the number-crunching monsters. Given enough time they will have to do something to counter these threats, or they will find themselves reduced to one competitor among many. And the transition could potentially be very quick: Altavista disappeared in a matter of years because Google offered something better. Microsoft could end up the same way, though I don't think it could ever be that fast.
I agree exactly with you: I will tolerate non-moving ads if the delivery of the ads is such that I will not be tracked.
But quite honestly, I don't really see why the advertising community (and those that get money from it) is making a fuss. I can take myself as an example: when I watch the TV and the ads come on, I either change the channel or go and do something other than watch the TV. Thus all the advertising broadcast by the TV-channel I was watching is, in essence, blocked by me. The mechanism is different to that I use on my computer, but the end result is still that I don't see the advertising. What is so different?
More or less the same applies here in Sweden: I applied for a few ISBNs, and was given two with no fuss. The total cost to me was I had to write two emails, and read some instructions. No money was involved in the transaction. I don't see why this should change should I need more ISBNs in the future.
And in Sweden in particular, you yourself can go bankrupt by suing someone: in a civil case (copyright infringement is a civil matter, as opposed to criminal) the loser pays _all_ attorneys/lawyers involved. On top of that, if you have had to get any expert witnesses the loser will have to pay them as well. Granted, while the case is under progress in court, both parties pay their own costs, but the loser is forced to pay the winner when the matter is settled.