Not that I know of, but if you're using older (versions of) browsers in general you're already exposing yourself to all sort of potential nasty business stemming from unpatched vulnerabilities, outdated encryption standards etc.

Time to upgrade. Now.

If that was an arguement against my statements you clearly failed, miserably.

Don't use Google or Facebook then.

They call them riders. The attached riders usually have little do with the existing legislative bill itself. They sneaked in rider provisions years and years ago and have been abusing the power ever since.

I'm sure you would be an assert in Government and yes (sarcasm).

No I wish to be professor in poltical science with the mind set and angle of being politically neutral and unbiased.

Time for Charlie Chaplin I guess:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8HdOHrc3OQ

I don't use facebook... But avoiding Google is a little more troublesome since i do enjoy my youtube videos...

Some people have switched to Dailymotion when Google took over Youtube, now's another good time to do so too.

I think in America you are half/third-right. There seems to be a very uneducated call back for segregation and limitations or the individual rights. A lot of the Universities who published demands wanted safe-spaces that would be segregated into black and white sections as well as choosing skin colour over ability in the faculty.
I also think I get now why the UK government is beginning to push the "how to survive a terrorist attack" matra again. We have not enough students protesting for mummying by their teachers here yet. So we might just go under another false flag early next year to get people to hand over their rights here too. So many people will also happily do it, they still believe that the government has their best interests and safety at heart.
After all you only have to look to France to see how they all knee-jurked into another pointless war that has absolutely nothing to do with them. Just as we did after 9/11 and the 7/7 bombings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAe7_kXTsbM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jxOXbpTmnk

You say about women being the majority of the supporters and on Facebook, Twitter, Tumbler and probably other places too, women do tend to be the first to call on people being hammered into line or out. So I guess I see where you are coming from. Even so, I really doubt that anyone with a functioning mind would actually be calling on the government to actively sweep through social media to ban bad words. They would probably be more likely (as they were with Google) to attack the companies running the sites to protect them. Really? Have you any idea how many university students have been demanding that security forces crack down on everything happening on their campuses in the USA. They want teachers to have to curb saying bad words that hurt their feelings and to have books edited so they no longer can offend.
This is the same crap as when Christians say ban Harry Potter for showing witchcraft, it is just being said by different people using different words. The reality is, people wont like it when it happens, but they will happily vote for it right now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJVZa9_Ha5c
Just look at the number of people on Twitter clambering for there to be better filters to stop people saying nasty things or all those who wanted Google to built up its wrong speak system. You know the reason when you log into Youtube it asks you do any of these videos offend or upset you? Also see the first 20 seconds of that same video.

Also in the UK people have become so accustom to having their privacy intruded that we now have the most CCTV cameras per person in the world, and we also have the highest amount of private (as in not owned by the government) CCTV's in the world. So again people might not like it when they see what it really happening, but they will at the same time happily encroach on others rights without a second thought.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/spy-britain-six-million-cctv-cameras-and-most-are-in-private-hands-8699934.html


In my opinion he was, he just underestimated them.
Just look at China to see what Europe and the USA want for surveillance in 5-10 years time. It really wont be the government feeling the need to enforce it, they will just persuade others to do it for them.

Maybe some people mistook his book for a guide instead of a warning.

Surely you don't think that political manual is a warning do ya?
/s

Should I actually give a crap about this? Will it have an impact in any form, whatsoever on my daily life?

I honestly don't think so....

Could you be a bit more serious, please?