Yesterday's decision highlights the problem of trying to impose laws on something that evolves as rapidly as technology.

The rush to sling mud is gaining momentum, and "Farenheit 9/11" marks the polarization of yet another form of media. One medium after another has found it profitable to turn from information to entertainment, from nuance to table-thumping.

Troubled telecom equipment maker Nortel Networks has agreed to outsource most of its manufacturing in a deal worth between $675 million and $725 million.

It is worth noting that there is no general data protection law in the US. If Mr Smathers had stolen credit card details then he could have been charged under privacy law, but just taking details of e-mail accounts is evidently fine.

And AOL itself will not be charged for being reckless with the personal details of its customers, because the US government believes that the market should deal with companies who do not take care of personal information.

Over here we have a very different view, and European data protection legislation is among the most restrictive in the world, reflecting our belief that people have a right to control how their personal details are used and that it should be backed up by law and not simply rely on imperfect consumer knowledge.

The first step has to be greater awareness of the issues, so that we are at least asking the right questions.

The emergence of nanotechnology as a major science and technology research topic has sparked substantial interest by the intelligence community. In particular the community is interested both in the potential for nanotechnology to assist intelligence operations and threats it could create.

To explore these questions, the Intelligence Technology Innovation Center asked the National Research Council to conduct a number of activities to illustrate the potential for nanotechnology to address key intelligence community needs.

This is the sequel to Design Rules, Volume 1.

We are investigating the phenomenon of design and industry evolution as it occurred in the computer industry from 1980 to 2002 (approximately).

Our perspective is that of institutional economics: we think that the design of artifacts defines a technological architecture, in which economic agents play games. When a set of linked games creates a financially sufficient local system, the local system becomes a stable and self-perpetuating institution in the greater economy. A local system can be a firm, a group of firms, or a group of individuals, as in an open source development project. Over time, actions and learning within the local systems cause the designs to evolve, and resource flows to the different local systems cause the industry to evolve.

As advertising starts to climb out of its recent slump, the answer to their problem is easier to find as the real effects of advertising become more measurable. But that is exposing another, potentially more horrible truth, for the $1 trillion advertising and marketing industry: in some cases, it can be a lot more than half of the client's budget that is going down the drain.

The advertising industry is passing through one of the most disorienting periods in its history. This is due to a combination of long-term changes, such as the growing diversity of media, and the arrival of new technologies, notably the internet. Consumers have become better informed than ever before, with the result that some of the traditional methods of advertising and marketing simply no longer work.

Cnsumers are becoming far more sophisticated in their reaction to all forms of advertising and marketing, so smarter ways have to be used to reach them.