I guess you wouldn't, you'd have a sort function afterwards.
...for Unix' insistence on composability, the shell tools are often unnecessarily monolithic, probably because that's the only sane way if the only type you have in interconnect is `string`.
It's not nearly as bad as it was when payout was still strictly by production. Nowadays, farmers are paid to let fields fall fallow so there's no insane overproduction, hence less market crashing abroad.
Some sort of CAP is a necessity: The point is to keep local farmers in business as to keep local production capacity (not necessarily production) alive so that when shit hits the fan when it comes to imports, Europeans won't starve.
Yes, there should be further fixes. But it's much better than in the past, and I think the fishing policy should be dealt with first.
> On the other hand, I wonder whether the German Pirate Party is able to look beyond what may be construed as an interest of German publishing industry.
It's not actually in that industry's interest and even if in were, no, the Piratenpartei is completely opposed.
Noone is seeing any problem with defending google in one instance, and bashing them in another.
The original case was a 16-year old newspaper article about a bankruptcy (but no fraud or such) that showed up as first result on a google search for a Spaniard's name, which impacted his employment prospects and such.
Hence why it's called "right to forget". People didn't have easy access to such data ten years ago, either, and the world provably didn't collapse. What this is battling is a new thing: The eternal online pillory, knowing neither restraint, remorse, nor forgiveness... nor research costs.
The European Courts aren't really a higher courts than the national high courts, just ask the German one. Which, yes, does include academics and even civil servants with extensive background in law. And unlike say in America, the academic qualification you need to be a judge is higher than the one you need to be a lawyer, in the first place: Whether your professional choice then is to become a judge or something else changes nothing about your qualification.
Yes, it might be topical, and I have a strong inkling that says that it's a case google shouldn't have accepted. They seem to be taking more down than is required of them.
But it's also a far cry from "banker censors report about his malpractice": The banker most definitely would not be allowed to do that under the law in question.
The article wasn't censored, it just doesn't show up any more when you search for the name of the commenter. It still shows up when you search for the name of the banker that was the subject of the article, the name of the bank, or any other keywords you can find it with:
All that has been eradicated is the searchable connection between the commenter's name and that article.
So you'd rather trust someone who rubber-stamped traffic infractions at a low-level court for 20 years than a professor of law to decide on highly abstract and generic cases?
Non-judges are a rather common thing among high European courts. And what would be wrong about putting someone whose publications have laid the groundwork for other judges' descisions in the past in such a position? It's not like the academic track is any less qualified.
...for Unix' insistence on composability, the shell tools are often unnecessarily monolithic, probably because that's the only sane way if the only type you have in interconnect is `string`.