45 posts • joined Wednesday 11th April 2007 13:39 GMT
Re: TV Detector Van
They explained that the fluctuating brightness levels of a film or TV show when displayed on a plasma-screen or LCD TV created fluctuating power-consumption levels. This creates a power/consumption signature for a film that might be determined from the readings obtained by Discovergy's technology.
"However, the cameras aren’t autonomous and simply alert a CCTV operator to a potential crime in the making. From then on it’s up to the operator to decide if they want to call the boys in blue."
"likened the system to a modern-day night-watchman, but one that never blinks or takes a break."
Combined + Truth:
likened the system to a modern-day night-watchman, but one that never blinks or takes a break, that simply alerts the classic-day night-watchman that BLINKS and TAKES BREAKS!
As with all other cameras, if no-ones watching, nothing is seen!
"modern-day night-watchman" so like a modern-night-watchman
Choice of words
"The SNP had its knuckles rapped by the ICO three years ago for making automated marketing calls to Scottish households without gaining prior consent. Ironically, the LibDems had been among the voices of dissent against the SNP’s unsolicited automated calls."
I'm going swap the word 'ironically' with 'predictably'
"All subscribers realize, moreover, that the phone company has facilities for making permanent records of the numbers they dial, for they see a list of their long-distance (toll) calls on their monthly bills."
Well the process of Record > Bill > Delete doesn't seem unreasonable. As opposed to Record > Bill > Keep for all eternity.
I think most believe that bills/bank statements/etc are only stored for 12months or so.
"Applying that rationale to email, all (well, most) internet users realize that they must "convey" email content to the ISP, since it is through the ISP's routers that their emails are transferred."
I'm thinking that they might start logging all the envelopes sent in the post! deep packet inspection anyone...
"BBC says spoof video 'ill-judged'"
"The sketch was filmed for BBC London's assistant editor, Simon Torkington, who is leaving to work at the al-Jazeera news network in Qatar."
"Newspapers have branded the video, a reworking of Tony Christie's hit, a waste of licence fee money."
"But the BBC has denied that licence payers' money was spent on the film. "
A Conservative Party spokesman said: "While the British public is having to tighten its belts, the government is spending taxpayers' money on a completely frivolous project."
I think we've all been thinking that of the e-partitions site...
@glenn @RED DIESEL
"How many gallons a year do your hedge trimmer, lawn mower etc actually use?"
If people would actually read all my posts!
For domestic use chainsaws, little difference.
For commercial/large use much bigger.
As i have said already, generators are the biggie;
"A small genny (eg 12kw) can easily drink 4 litres of fuel an hour. Large generators (eg 1600kw) can consume 400+litres of fuel PER HOUR."
"I know that the large genny is a little OTT, but would mean (at 3p p/l) £300 of road tax PER DAY. £109,500 per year.
Even the little genny at £3 a day is still £1100 over a year."
"This means that that genny would cost 5 times more than my car tax, despite not being able to use the roads."
"If petrol/diesel is used in your company, whether for gardening, or quadbiking, outdoor events, anything. Why should that use be funding the roads."
Could someone show me that any commercial petrol/diesel powered equipment can be eligible for red fuel.
I think people have misunderstood who can use red diesel, it's mainly agricultural.
Private boats used to be able use Red Fuel, the EU has changed that, and in a couple of months it will be illegal.
Come november, boats should pay road tax (if glenn, Dodgy Geezer, AC, Tom Wood, Kevin Pollock & Lee got there way).
Even if commercials could use red fuel, private boats, private jet skis, private go karts, private generators would still fund VED (Road Tax)
JUST BECAUSE THE ONLY PETROL/DIESEL APPLIANCE YOU USE IS YOUR CAR (AND THUS SUITS YOU) DOES NOT GIVE THE RIGHT TO PUSH YOUR CHARGES ONTO OTHER USES
Apologies for the caps, but people aren't reading! I pay my road tax, i drive my car.
If i owned a canal boat, i would pay my waterways tax, i would use my boat.
Why put road charges on a liquid/fuel with so many uses outside roads/driving!!!
finding such enemies before our boys were in danger from them...
"The idea is that the robots could be deployed ahead of advancing British troops, finding such enemies before our boys were in danger from them."
So really all the crafts need to do is point at the Americans...
VAT, CO2 Tax, etc I can understand. My moaning was at the suggestion of rolling VED (Road Tax) into pump prices.
Lawnmower, Chainsaws etc all use little petrol/fuel for occasional use. My later posts was talking about the commerial/large scale use of these items.
My main moan is the genny where (even on small one) you talking gallons per day (please see previous post).
"How much unleaded do you use in your chainsaw etc? I assume not enough that an increase of 1-3p per litre will make any real difference"
Even a small sized genny fully loaded can easily consume a two car tanks worth of fuel in a day.
A small genny (eg 12kw) can easily drink 4 litres of fuel an hour. Large generators (eg 1600kw) can consume 400+litres of fuel PER HOUR.
Obviously the bigger the genny/load the more you consume.
I know that the large genny is a little OTT, but would mean (at 3p p/l) £300 of road tax PER DAY. £109,500 per year.
Even the little genny at £3 a day is still £1100 over a year.
This means that that genny would cost 5 times more than my car tax, despite not being able to use the roads.
If petrol/diesel is used in your company, whether for gardening, or quadbiking, outdoor events, anything. Why should that use be funding the roads.
@ AC - The least worst option...
"[The least worst option] is to remove VED and put it on fuel. Then if you choose to drive a gas guzzler and/or at congested times, you use more fuel and pay more. The infrastructure is there already - filling stations, cost to collect no more than today for getting fuel duty from filling stations."
I strongly disagree with this, ultimately a lot of people agree, it's a reasonable theory (at first).
However I have no intention on pay road tax on my lawnmover, hedgetrimer, chainsaw, generator or even use of my car off road (private land). Why should my generator cost more to run just to fund the roads.
Not a good idea!
'...The real question then becomes whether the arrest on suspicion is made on reasonable grounds...'
In one evening in London, I was stopped 4 times (3 times by one pair, 1 time by another pair). It was as I was waiting for the sunset, I never moved in that time.
In my eyes the problem is that you feel compelled to show them your photos.
By refusing to show them your pictures, you could be classed as suspicious.
You’re stuck either way!
'...Telephoto lenses on beaches - ANYWHERE - are unnecessary. Unless you've got release forms for everyone on the beach...'
I don't see a problem with a telephoto on the beach (and what implies that I'm even pointing it at people?).
And why would I need a model release at all? Especially given that a telephoto is likely to capture less people than a wide angle.
Plus what about people in the background of photos?
i love the clock next to it, that says "make time work for you", yes, im bored of march, how about october?
Not forgetting that the clocks go back an hour on the 28th October and, apparently, forward seven and a half months in early march.
would be quite amusing if it was tied to the same system that updates the windows system clock!.......evil plan.....
must be a leap year...
Shh! Top Secret!
"The exact date is being kept secret on security grounds, but is expected in the next few days"
Well that's clearly foiled all possible terrorist attacks....unless they've booked a hotel....
RE: And whose model is not out of the pages of Orwell nowdays?
"Frankly, compared to the Nectar abomination Phorm is a harmless marketing w**k."
You see, I always thought that the nectar was optional (and i can shop at nectar enabled outlets, without having a card, or could choose not to use it for buying particular items)
That said, whilst the payout is small, you do get a *slight* cut of the wealth.
Are you suggesting that a card that you present at your discretion in a handful of shops, is substantially more dangerous that all your shopping at *every store* (Given that SSL is only used at the card payment stage)?
the last line on the webpage (at the very bottom)
"This is our after building cleaning checklist. If you look closer you will find that we actually are doing everything. We even clean the walls. Nothing is omitted by our cleaners."
so they use it, then clean the walls.
Does anyone else find the fact that DRM crippled Vista can't play DRM crippled content slightly amusing ... in fact f-ing hilarious?
RE: Craig Collier
"you say everyone is free to get these services, but you have to pay a company like Samsung or Sony to get a TV in the first plac,e"
Correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I'm aware the TV market is not a monopoly.
There is competition which keeps costs down.
TV signals are a standard and are as such able to be received and interpreted by differing companies.
Buying a computer isn't a monopoly, nor is it free. If I want to run Linux I still have to buy hardware.
But I do have choices about how I buy my computer or parts from and of what make they are (just like you Sony/Samsung example)
Its a different matter if Samsung were the only company that could make TVs, not unlike the situation we have here.
Once you have a monopoly over something, such as M$ has here, that can be exploited (well...the users can be exploited, but given that they sure as hell dont give a damn about them, all is well).
"Somehow I find it hard to believe that Osama Bin Laden pays for his weapons via Paypal..."
....and there's me thinking that the US sold them to them in the first place!
RE:Really clever stuff, what?
"'ships that may conceal al Qaeda terrorists'
Suppose that narrows it down a bit."
Well ... it doesn't really matter what their looking for, so long as you say it combats terrorism or paedophiles it gets instant approval.
Theres a useful saying to be used here, it invoves a horse and stable, but I can't remember how the rest of it goes...
A different angle...
After reading this again, from the comments others had made I reallised that this wasn't just a problem for unsecured networks. But infact any networks.
If someone breaks the WEP or bruteforces the WPA as the owner of the wireless box it is you who is liable.
If the owner was on holiday and someone breaks into their house and connects a length of cat5 to their router, their still liable.
there is no unlocked door
We always talk about 'breaking into' other peoples network, a digital trespass if you will.
This applies on unsecured networks as well. People always use the comparison of leaving the door open or breaking into the house and connecting to the router.
*if* you live in house where a neighbor is broadcasting a service, they are beeming information into your house. Not vice-versa.
In the same respect if you have a walkie-talkie, its a public radio system, accessable by all.
If i have a walkie-talkie in my house, should a neighbor use his and I hear it, i have done no wrong. Equally if i talk on the same frequency i have done no wrong.
If a neighbor started hosing water over his fence into your garden and you bucketed it, you wouldn't be stealling.
Coming back to Chris's point about charging a reasonable price for products. Don't forget that the same product (ie the intellectual property) seems to cost 2x more in the UK.
I think that by charging a country more for the same product, they are more likely to pirate it.
James's point about it only becomes organised crime when they stop paying tax on it.
Think of itunes, that are in direct contravention of EU law by over charging the UK, are still selling illegally.
Which is fine ... unless you are a pirate, when its not.
Anyway, back to the main point. People get there credit cards cloned at the checkout throught dodgy staff. Givening them your SS number and address isn't going to help them.
And what happens if you sell the phone on after?
Well i'm still trying to understand the difference between 'Society Service' and 'Prostitution'.
Wow, they do sex lessons as well,
"Sexlessons without any sexual intimacy are also possible."
Ah, two things that don't go together, much like a prime minister and social responsibity.
"Rates for these lessons start at euro 400 per two hours per companion and are available for singles and for couples!"
Available for couples as well, hmmm, well thats not very likely is it, as you wouldn't be using the bloody service!
"Packages are excluding: travelexpenses, dinner and lunch"
Ok so add another £20 to the total to cover the cost of two dominos pizzas.
Ultimately I was disapointed not to find an easy jet style web booking system.
Which aisle sir...
And I couldn't help but notice that their website doesn't have a doctype or declaration. And contains one or more bytes that cannot be interpreted as the defaut utf-8. Frames as well ...
I can't seems find the skype button either...
"Crazy seems to come in all shapes, sizes and colors!"
Well they might come in all shapes but sizes, but crazy isn't a shade of brown.
"someone needs to apologise to all people of colour."
"We don't just need a personal apology" - but a lawsuit payout would help(!)
an apology for coloured people, $100,000,000,000,000 for me.
The Car Analogy
Whilst I agree with the car analogy in theory. I think the real world is slightly different.
If your numberplate is captured speeding, the owner is treated as guilty. If the owner doesn't know who was driving the car at the time (could be a family member and no-one owns up) the owner is likely to take the wrap.
Their car may have been on the drive at the time of the infringment, it may have been a cloned plate.
However it seems to be the defendant that has to prove they're innocent. Not the plaintiff to prove guilt.
A friend of mine had his car stolen, which he reported to the police. Two weeks later a car park reported to the police that a car had been abandoned there for about two weeks.
Eventualy some bright spark figured that the dumped car was the stolen car.
So reunited then? well not so easy. The cark-park operators wanted payment for the parking that had not been paid for (by the thief), Not cheep.
Again the analogy fails, because of the way people are dealt with.
Whilst it's a grey area, using a unsecured network in some cases can get you arrested. because it's 'wrong' to access to that resource. Unless of course your suing the innocent, when it's 'wrong' to have an unsecured network.
So who's wrong?
184.108.40.206 does not make me a criminal.
"Owen insisted that The Reg, and its readers, had got their facts wrong and denied that the personal details were still viewable yesterday."
As DoppelFrog pointed out yesterday the page was indexed by google.
The cached version has also changed, this time to a fella called Chris.
The information is still out there on the web, just not at the same web address.
RE: Kudos to El Reg
"Every organisation that has a database of personal information really needs to look carefully at their data protection strategy. I hope that the Information Commissioner's Office comes down like a ton of bricks on those who screw up."
I do feel companies are not punished enough, a while back when nationwide had a laptop stolen, they were fined (big).
My "favourite" bit was when nationwide said;
"In addition, we are taking the opportunity to write to all our customers to reassure them and to remind them of the practical steps they should take to keep their information secure."
Yep indeedy, they will remind us to keep our data safe(!)
They must have ordered a pallet of salt especially...
From reading the various reports I can find little to support the headline that "The number of websites making money by selling pictures and videos of children being sexually abused is continuing to grow."
Indeed it seems more to be a increase in reports/complaints rather than any documented increase in sites.
"The increase was in part due to greater awareness of the IWF and its reporting procedures" - IWF
Aside from this, what consitutes "money making websites"? Those that take credit card details or those that collect small amounts of money through advertising?
The report also mentions the rise in the use of "photo sharing websites" which I would believe would be "free" services. These doesn't fit with the headline of the rise in "websites *making money* by selling pictures and videos".
Sharing or selling, it all seems a bit muddled.
RE: And we all believe ...
Obviously(!) Any security breach from ID cards will have nothing to do with information being leaked, left unencrypted, placed in rubbish bins, left outside banks, left on trains or insecure offices, Lost usb keys or sniffed from envelopes by rfid readers. computer systems with default passwords...
None of those things could be to blame for id theft ... it will be the owner obviously not looking after the card properly (securely).
RE: What the government needs is something to scare us into ID...
You can always fall back on; "if you haven't got anything to hide..."
And then make the 'natural' and 'obvious' connection that indeed anyone without an ID card is either a) a terrorist or b) a pedophile
Pay as you Drive
So when all our cars are locked down with Pay-as-Drive (tracking) systems, and our cars won't start because the GPS network is floored. Then what are we supposed to do? Sit on the drive and admire the dash-panel?
Invasion of Privacy?
Surely public disclosure of any sexual preferences or personal information not relevant to the case should not be allowed? Does this not constitute an invasion of privacy?
It seems unfair to use irrelevant information to undermine the status of the defendant.
I further do not see why the police needed to browse the disk?
btw I thought "the freshly released evidence" was the contents of the nappies!