In all of the world - at least the parts of the world that can plug in a computer and get it to boot - I doubt there's another country that can so consistently turn government IT projects into tragi-comedy so consistently.

What is the secret? What is it about Britain that, whenever the phrase 'multi-billion pound government IT project' is uttered everyone knows that it's going to turn into yet another embarassing cock-up?

If anyone out there knows, please say because we may be able to use it as some kind of cyber weapon.

How awfully typical of the British parliament that, in the midst of "initiatives" to increase the spread of broadband (hah!) in the United Kingdom, they would also spend so much heat and light fizzing about protecting copyright on the internet.

Compared to other western countries, use of the internet in the UK is piddling, at best. Try finding information on companies with the ease that you can in, say, France or Germany and your results will be spotty - at best. Try getting broadband access at home that consistently performs at the promised speed and you'll be yelling, "Glory hallelujah!" if you succeed. (By 'promised speed' I mean the speed written in normal font, not that appended to the 6-point asterisk.)

Of course the gubmint will waste time and money wittering on about a subject most of them comprehend about as well as Mandarin - it's one of Britain's national addictions. (The general approach to problem solving among gubmint types in the UK is to ban something, tax something or make something unavailable in that country.)

I'll not live to see it but I pray for the day when, A) Politicos actually understand the subject of the debate and, B) British politicians switch to creativity instead of negativity to serve the citizens of their country. Don't worry, I'm not holding my breath.

Please reduce your forecast by 1.

At $120 to upgrade from the execrable Vista, I won't be joining the rush. (If there were any justice in the world, you'd be sending me a free copy of 7 with a note of apology for Vista attached.)

"Millions of Americans don't care, don't want broadband, don't want to pay for it, and find the internet either offensive or dangerous."

So, out of roughly 300 million people, 93 million (or, roughly 30%) don't use high-speed internet. And the comparable count in Britain would be?

"Do any of the play toys come with blue tooth or some other wi-fi so their 'partner' could control the fun?"

Yes. Perhaps you need to socialise more.

"A Republican congressman ............ the lead Republican on the House Intelligence Committee"

That was all you had to write.

By the way, it's 'Michigan'.

Nothing to add to the title.

Ah, freedom of speech - so long as it doesn't offend anyone who wields power.

Twas ever thus.

Why did he have a dental appointment in his birthday suit?

Aaron Kempf is what happens when you teach a right-wingnut Republican how to use the intertubes.

And you lot had to feed his ego.

Well done.

Yep, "another triumph of the American legal system", "unconstitutional", blah, blah, blah. Must be Friday afternoon in dearoldblighty.

This was a civil case. In a civil case (unlike a criminal case) the jury can find that "the weight of evidence" points to the defendant being guilty (instead of "beyond reasonable doubt"). Having found for the plaintiff, the jury can then recommend a penalty.

How much less democratic than having one's criminal case - and freedom - lie solely in the hands of some port-encrusted doddering old fart of a judge (as is about to happen in London) or to have one's own government agree to your deportation without even seeing evidence against you.

And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy neighbour's eye, etc.

""It does not happen with letters or telephones and it will not with emails."

What does not happen with letters or telephones (sic) is the long-term storage of their contents for later examination.

Lawful? In China, maybe. Oh, I forgot, China's what me old china - Brown - is modelling Britain on.

Any article that mentions BMI, any so-called 'research' that includes BMI - in fact, any reference to BMI whatsoever - is utter bolleaux.

Given that it is thoroughly discredited as a means to measure anything (except, perhaps, the perspicacity of researchers), it should be consigned to the same dustbin as the idea of Labour Party ethics.

Can we have a 'flush this' icon, please?

and, it being a sound idea, how about some training for the Home Office. Let's start with Effective Immigration Policies Made Easy, followed by The French Response To The EU Yoomin Rights Act And How It can Be Of Benefit To Britain - which, of course, must lead to Deportation Basics. The whole curriculum could be rounded off with How To Not Care If The Murderous Barsteward Gets Tortured When We Kick Him Back To His Country of Origin.

Isn't Britain wunnerful? Why, the place is so quaint and old-timey that they even employ folks to think up laws just to make us other people smile! Imagine! A tax that requires them to watch tv only in one place. Who wouldn't smile about that? /sarc off

Of course the license fee should be abolished. Will it be> Nope. Not so long as there are so many long beaks depending on its existence.

"Presumably, Schmitt hasn’t seen 2008's games sales figures for Germany. According to market watcher GfK, the country’s videogame sales topped €695m (£642m/$940). Grand Theft Auto IV was one of the most popular titles."

......... and that could have no bearing whatsoever on his decision to call for a ban?

I suppose it would be dreamland to wonder when a British food company will get media coverage for bringing out a dish that is affordable, tasty and healthy?

This, after all, is the logical next step in the sequence that goes: 1. Reduce the number of on-street police. 2. Replace on-street police with cameras and find that this is not an effective alternative. 3. Enlist the curtain-twitchers, busybodies and disaffected to do the police forces' detective work for them.

And the next logical step after this? Well, I can't describe it but if you can locate anyone who lived in the USSR I'm sure they'll be able to.

If it is acceptable for a politician to shrug off crime by saying, "The benefits outweigh any illegality" then shurely a new day has dawned.

Could anyone possibly argue that the benefits of stringing up politicians from the nearest lamppost do not outweigh any illegality?

"Lord Mandelson went a step further by suggesting to Nissan it should make its e-car batteries in the UK"

I imagine that, after he left, the Nissan executives had a suggestion for Mandy, too.

....the word 'verboten' could've been used somewhere in the story.

(From another esteemed organ): Steve Robertson, chief executive of Openreach, the division of BT responsible for the delivery of the plans, said: "...................it is great to announce this initial set of locations."

Nah, mate. 'Great' would be to tell everyone when the majority of Britain will have access to fibre. Good would be when you tell us that half of Britain will have it. 40% is, at best, an okay start.

Do you think it's great when your wife, partner, significant other says tonight you'll be having 40% of some really hot, kinky bedroom exercise?

Aye, there's a downside to all that free-market, to-hell-with-the-unions, American-style labour bargaining, isn't there?

What, no plain, overweight, balding blokes take their netbooks to the beach?

Wonderful word! I'd forgotten it and I thank you for re-introducing it to my vocabulary.

Interesting that it's still a felony in Texas. Hmmm. I know a few ambulance chasers up there.

"BT asked it to identify savings of between £300m and £400m in exchange for a payment of between ten and 20 per cent of any savings made.

The consultancy claims that BT never acted on its cost-cutting advice"

So, no savings actually made, 10 - 20% of zero is zero, why the bitchin'?

You mean there's going to be a big sign that says, "F off out of here and get to work, you sad barsteward!"?

You're surprised that people whose livelihood is disappearing would be so distraught and angry and the perceived injustice (getting a lower redundancy package than other workers at the same company in the same country) would take the law in their own hands?

Oh, perhaps it's better to be British. When your job disappears, when your savings disappear, when your police force monitors you via video in your pub, when your army's sent overseas to prop up another country's failed foreign policy, when your personal details are strewn in the wind by a government that doesn't know the first thing about privacy, when you're out of a job and out of money and out of a home and your stupid government lackwits and bullies are still living high off the hog - the important thing is to not break the law?

There's more stiff there than the upper lip, mate.

"It is business that will drive the UK out of recession", quoth Frost.

Careful about saying that, mate. Gordon 'the Messiah' Brown thinks it's only him can achieve it and, if he hears about your blasphemy you might find yourself smote.

"used the latest in 3D computing to achieve a much better grasp of women's bodies"

Hnur, hnur.

"Since it (Davenport Lyons) began demanding money to avoid embarrassing court action.........."

Is this not blackmail and, therefore, a crime?

There is, of course, an alternative to striking down Britain's ceaseless liability' libel law. That is for the editors of publications to insist on sufficient pre-publication investigation - ensuring that the subject is not libeled in the first place.

Or would that be placing to much of a constraint on the British press' freedom of speech?

Once upon a time, in a land far away, they had an insect problem. To solve the problem they brought in lots of lizards which, having no natural predators in that land, bred so much they became a problem. So they brought in rats to eat the lizards and the rats, having no natural predators, became a problem so the people brought in cats. The cats had no natural predators and became a problem so the citizens brought in dogs. Eventually, as the dogs had no natural predators, they bred and bred and became wild and ate all the people in the land.

Once upon a time in Britain, they had a criminal problem. To solve the problem, they invented the police force.................................................................

If you want to know why men like women to drink (no opinion here about how much), listen to Jack Nicholson explain to Shirley MacLaine in Terms of Endearment.

MacLaine: Are you trying to get me drunk to take advantage of me?

Nicholson: No........... I'm just trying to kill that bug you have up your ass.

"Recently, UK intelligence agencies have complained that the rise of VoIP makes it difficult for them to monitor communications."

Let me see: The rise of morse code did it, the rise of the Enigma encoding machine did it and the rise of digital communication technology did it.

Of course, in each of those cases, the intelligence agencies applied themselves and eventually developed technology that allowed them to monitor communications. So what's changed? A simple lack of faith. Once upon a time we (at least, me) believed the intelligence agencies were there to protect us. Then, along came a Republican government in the United States and a clunking, statist, 'New Labour' government in Britain.

Those clumsy, paranoid, control-freak politicians made it know that there is no longer any such thing as personal privacy. "You will be monitored for your own good!" was the cry. No-one is to be allowed to have a private life any more.

So, now, we (I) believe that the intelligence agencies will use any new power to increase their ability to monitor my tedious conversations and predictable movements. Life has an added spice. In addition to going about my daily business, I now have the fun of trying to do so in a way that makes it difficult for the 'agencies'.

The rise of VOIP makes it difficult for Big Brother to keep an eye on me? I'll open an account immediately!

The government - essentially - took over Northern Rock (all the while failing, spectacularly, to see the portent therein) and, after many tries and many foolish statements now owns RBS.

Would it not have been cheaper, less painful and more effective for the government to simply have allowed RBS to close and simultaneously reopen as a government bank - backed the the government's ability (and the citizens' apparent willingness thereto) to tax everyone in the UK until they drop? Instantly you have control over lending, assurance on so-called 'toxic assets' and - and this is petty and irrelevant but I like the idea - an immediate end to the disgusting payment of bonuses to abject failures.

Yes, it's 20/20 hindsight but then, I'm not a power-junkie who claims to know what's best for the country.

Gary McKinnon may - or may not - be guilty of violating US law (as the US won't present its evidence there's no way to judge) but his guilt or innocence is the smaller picture here.

The big picture is the one-sided 'extradition treaty' between the US and the UK. While the US can request/demand the extradition of a UK citizen without presenting any kind of evidence whatsoever (and our supine politicians will happily try all they know to comply), the same is not true in reverse. Should the UK wish to extradite a US citizen, the case for extradition and prosecution must be fully reviewed and judged in a US court.

So, who is the more dangerous criminal here? An autistic believer in UFOs who possesses the computer skills necessary to hack pentagon computers (i.e. the same computer skills that could be found in almost any twelve-year-old) or craven, treasonous politicians who knowingly abrogated their duty to protect the citizens of the country that nurtured and pays them?

Answers in a brown paper bag, please.

Would the 'researchers' at the University of Latest Irrelevance care to look at the relationship between what the kids text and the words they're abbreviating?

Knowing how to read, write and define the whole word that I'm abbreviating in text is an entirely different measure of 'literacy' than simply knowing the text abbreviation and having some sketchy idea of what it means.

Please, no more justifications of our declining abilities.

I love stories that draw scads of, "If-they-would-only-treat-their-employees-right-then-this-wouldn't-happen." comments.

Utter bolleaux. Most employees who utter such phrases are, in my experience, whining, money-for-nothing-seeking, juvenile twerps who wouldn't think they were being "treated right" if their employers gave them seven-hour lunchbreaks and a free pass to the local house of ill-repute.

Nicking the company's christmas-card list has naff-all to do with how the employer treated the employee and all to do with how the employee perceives the value of the information to a buyer or in his or her next job.

"In only they treated the employees right." What a laugh!

Dell "quietly" doing something adverse to its customers or employees?

Now I understand why these massive rises in Council Tax are necessary! All is clear at last.

Can we now expect next year's Council Tax increase to be even bigger to give our overlords the wherewithal to tackle those rogue colons and semicolons?

We have one Texas lawyer and one bank. The Texas lawyer got it in the bankbook for being as dumb as a box of rocks and the bank's being sued because..............well, that's what lawyers do.

Well there's my day gone. I'll spend it, sitting here in my boxicle, trying to work out which - the lawyer or the bank - I hope gets shafted in the court.

In these times of economic uncertainty and depression, the Swiss police have succeeded in closing down an immensely profitable business that employed a significant number of people.

Yes, the business was - strictly speaking - in contravention of some 'law' or other but come on! Shurely desperate times require desperate measures so it's time for the Swiss plods to get a little creative in their application of these 'laws' and to allow the spirit on entrepeneurism to drag us back from the edge of the economic abyss.

Two men - one a totalitarian with a penchant for hurting people, the other a monomaniac with no sense of social justice (you get to pick) - get into a minor translation difficulty at a conference for the elite of the world. One of them got what he deserved (you get to pick). The other got yet more worldwide publicity. (You get......etc.)

When I tell my friends that the UK government can be guaranteed to spoil a piss-up in a brewery, they take some convincing. Thanks you for furthering my argument.

The point of 'net neutrality' (although, in fact, there's no such thing) is that customers get the bandwidth they pay for (or as close to it as the SP can get away with). Those poor, condemned souls who spend their every waking moment chunking huge amounts of data around the 'net pay for a lot of bandwidth. Those who use the 'net for casual entertainment and communication pay for less.

Result? The SPs in the US have worked very hard to provide bandwidth in every possible market. That's how they make their money (not through content charging, not through 'traffic management').

Contrast and compare with poor old Blighty - where they're just about down to regulating and taxing farts. SPs have the power and the money and so - with the Easy Purchase Plan for MPs and Lords - they get to decide how and how much they can put the screws to their customer bases.

Brace yourselves, my British friends. You may all get 'access to broadband' but very, very few of you will be able to pay for it.

show vast bags of cash stashed under MEPs clothing?

Might be why they were so reluctant to install them in Strasbourg.

To all of the above who promised to not set foot in the United States "anytime soon", thank you. And could you please change that "anytime soon" to "ever"? We have enough lazy, ill-informed and opinionated people here already.

Before casting aspersions on the United States' border security and its problems, please examine your own. If you're in the UK, please ask someone (as I'm assuming you're too lazy to read) about fingerprinting you as you're leaving your own country. Ask someone about the searches you have to go through to get on a plane to leave your own country. And then ask someone, "With all of this security on leaving my own country, how come we can't stop foreign criminals from entering the country - seemingly as they please?"

El Reg, could you please stop printing this embarassing nonsense? It's hard enough being a Brit abroad without you and your ild dishing up every embarassing lapse that Britain has to suffer.

Could somebody show this article to Britain's ISPs please?

Entertaining article - and it would have been a good one too if you'd managed to stay away from the hysteria.

"They could copy the entire contents of your computer" "They could ....... create a database of your friends and associates"

Well, no, no-one's claiming they could do that (except, of course, you). The border agencies can look - just as they can look in your diary or address book if you're carrying such ancient things. They have no mandate to copy your diary or address book but, if they find incriminating evidence in your diary or address book, they can confiscate those things and use them as evidence in criminal proceedings against you.

Must do better. Excise hyperbole and rewrite.