Brave lady saves child from pedophile

http://www.funny-city.com/2544/

obvious Trusted Surveillance example but note the pathetic quality of the CCTV images. Almost certainly not good enough to form the basis of a prosecution. Fortunately, in this case, there were obviously human witnesses as well so he probably got (or will get) his come uppance. But we desperately need better cameras!

Wired 8.04: Why the future doesnt need us.

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy_pr.html

I will almost certainly disagree violently with this but I’ll pay it the respect of reading if first!

Top drug boffin renews criticism of cannabis policy • The Register

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/29/nutt_drugs/

useful to have the Government’s own chief advisor pointing out the emperor’s nakedness, but on its own, his protest will be no more effective than mine. The gatekeepers in the media will always find another authoritarian to remind us all how “evil” they are (sorry, how evil Drugs are)

Doth I protest too much? | Mark Thomas | Comment is free | The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/oct/25/doth-i-protest-too-much

we desperately need more like Mark. He really knows how to take the piss out of the bastards-

Prof: Extremists tend to dominate debates • The Register

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/22/anti_extremist_extremism/

it ain’t just “extremists”, it is those who have (or believe they have) oratorial skills. If they happen to be extremists as well, you end up with Hitler. Otherwise, we just get the normal incompetence of government.

But the real problem is on the receiving side. We The People are a dreadfully unsophisticated audience. Who is most likely to stir a crowd to action? Alex Jones or Noam Chomsky? And who is most likely to be “right”?

This is easiest the biggest obstacle to genuine widespread democratic participation. It is one of the reasons I advocate that ALL important debates should take place on the Web – which is beginning to acquire the technology to “level the playing field.”

And once our debates are web-based it will be relatively easy to implement an appropriate debating algorithm which makes it impossible – for example – to ignore dissent or the reasons for it without creating a valid response to it (and separately voting on it). The result will be that whatever we finally decide will be genuinely “informed decisions”.

FBI and SOCA plot cybercrime smackdown • The Register

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/22/soca_fbi_cybercrime_strategy/

this’ll give you some idea of how well organised “organised crime” really is (on both sides of the legal fence)…

I&ve Changed My Mind on the Obama-Fox Showdown

http://www.newser.com/off-the-grid/post/310/ive-changed-my-mind-on-the-obama-fox-showdown.html

I would love to buy into this hypothesis. What I will concede is that if they succeed, they’ll be the first government ever to beat a “free press” at it’s own game. That would be an achievement of historical proportions.