155 posts • joined Friday 21st September 2007 12:44 GMT
Not too sure about this
Guideline number 7 seems a bit off. There are plenty of people who are paid to act on behalf of many organisations, in order to promote their goods, services, or act as online reputation managers. Not quite sure why it would be that this is something which is not permitted to be said.
All that guideline number 11 needs is "and no Daily Mail readers" added to it, and it could be out of any sixth form college debating guide.
It was a satirical statement
I live in the UK, like the vast majority of posters on here.
A couple of years ago, that would have been commonly understood on here.
One of the few form of racism still acceptable. I wonder why that would be?
I live in a country which embraces the freedom to disseminate information without undue government censorship.
Instead of wasting time disabling js
You could have used that time to simply search for an authoritative source of information, rather than the deranged ramblings of a bunch of unemployable neckbeards.
Surely the people who are most likely to be subject to these measures are the people most likely to know how to open a CD tray and stick in a GNU/Linux live CD?
Write a letter, and send it 1st class recorded. It'll get there tomorrow , and you'll have your proof of them having received it.
Tor is not the issue
Isn't this merely a bruteforce mysql attack or similar?
I'm not quite sure how the compromising of a service would render a protocol used to connect to that service as being 'unsafe'?
Sure is paid posters in here...
More censorship, and restrictions on freedom.
Great, just what the UK needs.
He caused some electrons to be moved around which had the effect of some people seeing an advert on a monitor, it's hardly the 'crime' of the century.
Probably a good thing then,
that he lives in a country which values freedom unless you are found to be guilty.
Is there some reason
why the police think that the normal course of law does not apply to them?
If they have information that a site is being used for crime, then go to court, and get an order to close it.
If they're not going to do that, we simply have a police state where the police censor information they don't approve of.
"The identification, exposure, or termination of employment of or legal actions against current or former insiders, leakers, or whistleblowers could damage or destroy this center of gravity and deter others from using Wikileaks.org to make such information public."
I'm sure this is all just a big coincidence.
How are they going to ensure
that the people watching the streams are complying with the terms of the DPA, with regards to such things as data storage, SARs, and such like?
Sounds legally dubious to me.
I asuume that when you say 'Teh lulz'
that you actually mean criminal charges for disrupting the normal operation of a network.
How will all the angsty teenagers have straw man arguments now?
It's not really explained here
what the dickens does this case have to do with the US?
that's supposed to be a good thing?
Proportional representation is the way forward.
I haven't been following this much, but this DEA sounds like a way for companies with lots of money to bypass the bothersome task of actually having to take people to court to show how they have had their rights infringed upon.
The idea of running around record shops and independent retailers attempting to get them to sell your 'zine is totally unworkable ...
If it's popular, people will buy it.
I'm a regular on WoS. Why does such a site still exist? Because, even though there's no money left in it, people still want to talk about it.
Get your message prepared, and people will listen to it.
Making available for download a torrent file which points towards files hosted by other people is not a crime.
Denying access to that file by means of an attack on the network which hosts the torrent file is a crime.
I lived on a Council Estate (in Glasgow, for what it's worth) for 20 years
And never once was I assaulted by anyone other than the police.
If he gets it back unaltered once the police have viewed it
Can I just say
This is like SEO?
Pushing your link to the top?
Well I never.
Well, I know how to make the border change colour on a ZX Speccy, and I can totally hack Kevin Toms Football Manager to give my team a zillion quid.
I'm sure with suitable training I would be able to work out how PLOT, DRAW, CIRCLE and POINT work too.
>The religious mind relies heavily on ignorance.
And of course, classifying billions of people whom you have never met, as 'ignorant' must be the absolute apex of intellectual enlightenment.
I'll be glad when the school holidays are over, and all of the angsty 15 year old 'rebellious' crew are back in school.
The possibility that current employees or moles within DoD or elsewhere in the U.S. government are providing sensitive or classified information to WikiLeaks.org cannot be ruled out. It concocts a plan to fatally marginalize the organization.
- Geek's Guide to Britain INSIDE GCHQ: Welcome to Cheltenham's cottage industry
- 'Catastrophic failure' of 3D-printed gun in Oz Police test
- Game Theory Is the next-gen console war already One?
- BBC suspends CTO after it wastes £100m on doomed IT system
- Peak Facebook: British users lose their Liking for Zuck's ad empire