Still fondly miss Wildfire had it for a few years and as unreliable it could be was brilliant when it worked. Was a bugger to support though.
226 posts • joined 19 Dec 2007
Re: Say what...?
I quite enjoyed the message made me laugh a few times. Worth a look as the full thing is longer than I expected.
Re: No jail?
Unless of course you're talking about benefit fraud in which case current thinking is hanging's too good for them.
Penalties for financial crimes are ridiculously lenient a lot of the time but this one seems extreme if ban on directorship was the only action taken. Hard to understand why assets weren't seized under proceeds of crime and a custodial sentence wasn't imposed. If he had fraudulently claimed 1% of that in housing benefit would have faced much more severe sanctions.
I consider most forms of lobbying as (badly) disguised bribery anyway so yes that's exactly what I'm saying.
If Governments want to permit lobbying it should be under strict conditions.
My ideal scenario for the UK would be a purpose built building with numerous conference rooms. Lobbyists should register in advance and all appointments should be visible to the public online for at least 7 days prior to the meeting along with the agenda/bill being lobbied and names of people attending and the Org they represent. Once underway the majority should be streamed live on the internet for any interested parties to view and recordings retained indefinitely and available under the FOI act. Would also suggest we provide sandwiches and soft drinks so no need to treat an MP on your expense account.
Once this is in place any attempt to lobby outside of this environment is a criminal offence resulting in jail time a large fine and lifetime ban on lobbying. If the politician or civil servant involved didn't end the conversation and engaged in a discussion where they agreed to consider what was discussed then they should face misconduct in a public office charges.
Google, Amazon et al are well within their rights not to attend,
However failure to attend should mean no lobbying to the European Parliament is allowed for a set period. Say 12 months ban per employee per invite. Have a feeling if that was the case then suddenly a few people's diaries may open up.
I used to think the same as if it's not in my library then I wont be listening to it and I always carried a 160gb ipod classic. But now I mainly use the free Google Play Music, only lets you upload 20,000 songs so I had to be selective but does give me access on any device anywhere at no cost. Also means I don't need to carry the ipod as it was on the heavy side was happy to drop it.
Now use a mix of locally stored and cloud stored depending on what connection I'm on and how much data I have left to burn on my mobe.
Also useful when visiting parents to download your library to another machine but of course I wouldn't use it for those purposes.
Not sure if it still exists but Apple used to have a clause in the app store terms that you couldn't have an app to replace Apple features ie SMS or similar. Be curious to see if they dare try to retroactively apply this to competing cloud music services or if they are too worried this would make the antitrust claims even more compelling. Wouldn't surprise me if they don't pull existing apps but just refuse to approve any updated versions.
Certainly would be concerned if I worked at Spotify, Pandora or similar services that I'm about to lose a large chunk of customers.
Re: "...Rift VR headset is expected to ship in the first quarter of 2016."
Why can't people just understand that the vast majority of people don't need to purchase something for it to be a massive success. The Playstation 2 is widely considered to be the most successful console of all time yet was still owned by less than 2.5% of the world's population.
I'm certainly not suggesting that Oculus will sell that many in fact I doubt all manufacturers VR headsets put together will reach that many for at least a decade. But to suggest there is no demand for the product is just wrong. Many gamers myself included have been salivating at the thought of getting their hands on a Rift since it was first announced and even after the Facebook purchase I would expect this to be a big success.
I still struggle to see what facebook get out of this, can't imagine the worlds poorest appeal to many advertisers and as the percentage of FB users that fall into that group increases wont advertisers lose interest?
So in summary they are going to protect our right including free speech by limiting free speech why does my head hurt?
The only hope we have is that there are enough back benchers left to recognise this for the abuse it is and not follow the party whip. Then again there are probably enough gullible fools in other parties that accept the need for this to head off any Tory back bench fight back against this.
What about in the instance where the person uploading is the legitimate right holder even if the subject doesn't want it posting. Thinking of someone now famous that did a paid glamour shoot before hitting the big time.
Does this just apply to stolen pics or simply any that they don't want on the site?
Unlikely that reddit would be the location they would choose to share the pics but you never know.
Off the top of my head aware of Cameron Diaz and Geri Haliwell who both have early photo shoots they would prefer were forgotten but as they were paid for them not a lot they can do unless they reach an agreement to buy them back. Pretty sure there are more celebs out there with similar things that could come back to bite them.
Well I'm pleased the only Lenovo machine I own is an Android tablet which didn't seem to have too much bloat pre installed. Off to research what was bundled though on the off chance that something similar was included.
Up to now have been singing their praises to all but after recent revelations doubt many people would still be doing the same.
So MS are gouging the public sector once again, hardly surprising who cares about the price if it's being picked up by the taxpayer anyway.
Whomever came up with the cloud first strategy deserves a good kicking.
Re: Shocker. . . well no, not really.
If losing connection every time you landline rings are you sure you're using a filter?
Had that happen to me after last install took me a while to realise that was the cause and since plugging the filter back into the wall socket the problem has disappeared.
Is there a particular reason MP's seem to get away with resigning when this happens? In my opinion they should face charges ranging from misconduct in a public office up to treason depending on the specifics.
But in this case Cameron is assuring everybody theres no need to crack down on outside jobs so I'm sure it will all be fine.
In my experience ebay's complaint resolution process is useless and seems designed to be exploited by scammers. 70 million cases handled and closed to ebay's satisfaction of those probably a minority reached what would be the correct result. So for gods sake don't model our justice system on that steaming turd!
Anonymous you're doing it wrong
Boasting about it on social media not sure that really fits with the whole Anonymous thing. Hard to have any sympathy with the guy arrested when you see the targets it's not exactly going after Scientology or someone similar. If guilty I hope they throw the book at him.
Whom to believe the various FBI & NSA bods that have came forward and insisted if we could see the intelligence they have access to showing its the Nork's, or the random hacker spouting shite on the internet saying the Russians are coming the Russians are coming?
In my opinion its the random Russian/Ukrainian guy on the net, not because its more likely just at this point we have to assume he/she is more plausible than any US Gov mouthpiece.
Presumably now there will be an obscure link buried in the T&C's which takes you to a page where Google says they collect your data to stuff and things with it. Maybe the wording will be slightly different but I doubt they outline exactly what they do with it otherwise people could be horrified.
Possibly I'm too cynical but that's what I expect after reading that article, sounds like a good result for Google.
Charlies Angels 2, was forced to sit through it once have managed to block most of it from my memory but can recall how I felt after seeing it so that's enough for it to be high on my list. Have never actually watched any of the 3 mentioned in the article though and consider that a good thing.
Forget surgery the obvious use would be to make incomprehensible ikea instructions easy to follow!
By other people's attempt to steal bandwidth do you mean customer attempting to use the service they pay for?
Very good that you have found an ISP that your happy with but that's no reason to turn on the rest of us. If the ISP's are offering unlimited packages why is that the fault of someone like me that signs up for it? I think your ire is directed at the wrong target it's the companies that offer packages they can't deliver that are at fault in my opinion.
Whether it's this time or on the 50th attempt it seems the snooper charter will not die and is bound to be passed eventually.
It's disgusting that they always use the latest tragedy to justify more powers for the security service and Cameron, May et al should be called out publicly for it at every opportunity.
The danger with these unlike a standard military exercise taking place in the middle of no where is it could actually impact on civilians quite easily.
Wouldn't surprise me if orgs on both sides of the pond end up having outages as a result. I would imagine that isn't the intention of the exercise but could easily see it happening. Not sure how happy people will be if friendly activity by an ally results in a major outage at their bank or something similar.
Yep the thing travelled an immense distance taking more than six months and then something went wrong at the last minute. I bet the people involved are still absolutely gutted.
Nice to see that talking heads on the BBC comparing this to the Sony hacks this morning, as if hacking a twitter account is on par with what happened to them total muppets.
They also said no frontline cuts, no top down NHS reorganisations and no VAT rise, I wonder how that lot worked out.
After pretty much every attack the government want more surveillance and storage powers. Yet in most cases the offenders were already known and weren't being monitored correctly. What exactly does he think this will achieve other than giving the daily fail & mumsnet lot the illusion of something being done?
If the government could show any evidence that new powers would help they would, instead the default response to any crisis now seems to be more powers for the security services.
Good job we are on track to leave the EU and safely ignore those pesky laws. Can't have anything interfering with our surveillance state now can we, everyone knows we need to retain everything forever to protect the kiddies.
Wonder how this will go down considering the French & UK authorities seem to be ready to step up monitoring and retaining data since it worked so well in stopping the latest atrocities.
I may be missing the obvious but why are the US so upset. Sony as far as I know aren't a US organisation. Yes I'm sure they employ plenty of people in the US as well as many other nations but I thought they were a Japanese company.
Why then are the US imposing sanctions against one country for action taken against a third countries organisation? Should Sony not be lobbying either the Japanese authorities or whichever Island state they claim is their head quarters for tax purposes to take action against the nasty Norks?
I obviously don't understand the whole globalization thing as I can't see why the US feel the need to be the ones responsible for responding to the hack.
What's the bet that in a decade or so the only way they could get the rights holders on side is by agreeing to extend the length of copyright even further under these new harmonized laws?
Might actually be an incentive to a lot of orgs in around that time to try & extend further as there will be a lot of stuff nearing the end of the copyright period. Heaven forbid something should actually enter the public domain.
Looking at the valuation and comparing it to Apple's you would think they have a chance of really closing that gap. Can't see them coming near it but if sales continue to soar as they expand they could be on their way to being a big player.
In my opinion it's not Samsung or Apple that are worried it's Sony, HTC etc who you could see being overtaken by Xiaomi soon.
Re: Can they not use their powers for good?
Not sure about bankers, it would be popular but the far more popular choice would be for them to start monitoring all the FIFA execs.
Re: Questions to those opposing care.data
Care to inform us which private health care provider you work for? Posting AC to criticise someone wanting to protect their privacy yep that makes a lot of sense.
Sure it will have been mentioned previously but I do miss the most commented option alongside most read. Overall though relatively happy with the redesign but I would prefer something with less glare than white for the background.
Re: Sony should stop whining
I agree with most of what you are saying was certainly naive or irresponsible to expect the Nork's wouldn't respond. Would have to disagree with you saying it isn't costing them a penny, even if this film goes on to make Avatar money which comedies never do I bet the losses due to this long term are still far higher.
I still don't understand why these clauses are allowed to exist as to me they can be interpreted as price fixing.
Doesn't matter if it's Amazon with ebooks or booking.com with hotel room the only reason they exist is to limit competition and make sure the middle man takes theire cut.
What's the ginormous tablet in mission control and where do I get one?
Nice now I wonder if the lifts will be working correctly as the HR heavyweights leave the meeting
Re: Assuming nothing more material was said on Facebook etc.
Would what they are asking for even be legal under current UK law.
If they are suggesting that technology companies pro actively screen every conversation/post for potential illegal activity and then flag to the relevant local authorities would that not fall foul of RIPA?
Warrantless surveillance of everyone is what caused such a backlash recently these clowns need to stop requesting more powers and get on with their job of protecting the country instead of invading the privacy of every citizen.
Kill them with fire, I'm not against right holders enforcing copyright but the actions of this firm are abusive they are trolls pure and simple.
Has anyone successfully challenged any of these in court? I suspect every case has been settled before reaching a trial not sure if an IP address would be enough evidence to win a case.
Since it seems Nasa are being forced to outsource a lot of future missions does this not make sense?
I can be as anti Google as many people but I don't see the issue here as opposed to the fuel deal which definitely seemed suspect. If Nasa weren't going to use the site and it wasn't being maintained why not let Google spend 200 million upgrading the site and putting it to use?
Can understand people not wanting a historic site to be in private hands but unless Congress decides to properly fund R&D and future missions for Nasa I would expect more deals like this, I wonder how much they want for Cape Canaveral wouldn't mind having free roam of the Kennedy centre.
Why would anyone pay any attention to a word that man utters is beyond me. Hard to think of many ministers from the Blair era with a lower reputation. Not exactly shocking that he is spreading FUD around a move that has been almost universally received positively by everyone other than the security services.
All the encryption does is restore some semblance of privacy that Blunkett's government did more than most to erode.
Yeah pretty sure they mixed the titles up there have sent an email to their corrections address.
Pretty unsurprising study though, makes sense if people have a harmless outlet then for the majority that can only be a good thing.
Probably still a tiny minority that could be tipped the other way though.
Re: Not about revenge porn
"And on the subject of names - check out the other ammendments banning pseudonyns."
Since that particular piece of legislation is now hurting the mumsnet lot expect call me Dave to repeal it faster than they can cash an oligarch's cheque.
By they I do of course mean all three main UK parties.
This made me chuckle "comes at a crucial moment in the history of the free flow of information and of a healthy media in Europe and beyond" would love to know their definition of healthy media. I for one don't see the current situation largely driven by Murdoch of a small number of people owning so many newspapers and TV stations as healthy for anyone other than the media barons. Perhaps if he had bought Google instead of blowing the cash on myspace he would be singing a different tune.
Until someone manages to create a botnet of TV's mining for digital currency I don't see the issue.
That's assuming most people are like me and have completely ignored all the"smart" features of the TV hence no data to harvest.
As it's unlikely hacks will yield anything useful such as bank log in details what's the point in targeting TV's?
"smart enough to have backup is smart enough to avoid scamware"
Apologies in advance as I'm sure to give offence but that is one of the most fucking idiotic comments I've read this month.
I can assure you intelligence has SFA to do with being stung. Don't get me wrong stupid people are probably more at risk than average joe but I've seen plenty of people I consider to be very sharp caught out.
Re: UKIP ranter I expect
Sources please? That there are serious questions for Kim to answer regarding copyright infringement, the tax dodging claims seem to be something new and from what I see I suspect an organised campaign.
Can you provide links detailing charges for tax evasion or did you pull that one out of your arse?