Well, the one question nobody has asked.
How long does it take to go from 0 - 60?
555 posts • joined 12 Jun 2009
Well, the one question nobody has asked.
How long does it take to go from 0 - 60?
But you can't just kick the crap out of somebody if committing a citizens arrest ANYWHERE other than America. Look at Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
The law in all of them is effectively identical- if you catch a thief then you can detain them, even using force. That is generally held to mean "catching them in the act and putting them in a restraint position", rather than "I tracked down the thief a week later and then beat them with a cricket bat until it snapped".
This has always been the law. It's been the law since before the existence of a police force, hell- there's an example immortalised in Oliver Twist from 1838! The law has *always* demanded that the minimum possible force be used to prevent the person from escaping and that punishment should be the preserve of the court, not the capturer.
Arguing otherwise is absurd. Even the link you provided backs me up. Did you read it? It's the same rules as everywhere else in the world implementing common law and the practicalities haven't changed much more than a few iotas for a quarter of a millennia.
The only reason America is different is because they started off with the same system but were almost entirely rural for a very long time, instead of urban. On the frontier if your several days ride away from a sheriff and armed then shooting a criminal in the course of committing a crime is perfectly reasonable, and disabling somebody without killing them is actually showing a lot of restraint as is actually taking them to the authorities instead of just digging a shallow grave which is probably why their system is a lot more lenient in that respect.
"In Canada, you'd go to jail for this. You aren't allowed to run down robbers, shoot people because they're on your property and you don't want them to be, etc. Be mindful that almost every country on the planet has laws against being a cowboy vigilante."
On the contrary, like other countries descending from the common law system Canada does allow you to make a citizens arrest. Your just not allowed to arbitrarily hang the person you've caught or give them a good kicking before the police arrive.
Hah. You'd think, but how heavy was a french 36 pounder cannon ball? The answer is 39 pounds, 11 and a half ounces. In generally accepted English pounds before standardisation in 1824 of course. No idea what that is in modern (1876) Imperial, but I'd assume that it's going to be different.
Muskets were actually hand manufactured everywhere to different sets of measurements and it was reasonably common to get your own set of moulds to pour lead into to make bullets for your weapon that would fit. ;)
Ten round detachable magazine, ordinarily fed with 5 round charger clips. Given, the magazine was attached to early rifles with a small length of chain because the generals of the time had a similar amount of faith in their troops not losing detachable parts than I have in my users, but hey. They stopped doing that on the earlier models about 50 years before this particular one was produced.
You don't know much about firearms, do you?
"you probably work in inches so why would you choose .203 or .303?"
If you look up the measurements of a .303 round, you'll note that the round is .54 at the rim, .46 at the base, and .34 just before the crimping to put the (.31) bullet in. The round is 2.2" long in total.
So it does extensively use imperial measurements. .303 seems to have come from measuring the bore size in 1880, which seems to have allowed a 0.01" gap on either side of the barrel, possibly to allow for black powder fouling the rifle. (The .303 originally started with gunpowder as a propellent, before using "smokeless" guncotton and then cordite in British Army use, and pretty much everything imaginable in commercial production since 1880!)
I have to agree with your rough take, though personally I have a personal, almost utterly unscientific yet disturbingly accurate way of looking at wage costs for the "middle classes". The cost of transport.
If you look at the cost of a low end car, a middle range car and a high end car then they tend to hold prices relatively well with the range of what the range of salaries were actually out there as opposed to how the average is being calculated or fiddled that year.
Going further back? Look at the relative cost of horses. It tends to hold true and be acceptably accurate.
>"under the terms of the Geneva Convention it can't be used against humans directly."
You mean under Protocol IV of the Geneva convention?
The one the American's still haven't signed up to?
The transponders are only read by the SSR when it's pointing at them. How does that happen if the dish is pointing up at the flying things, and your illegal transponder is on the ground?
When he says "damage to the engine" he means it's going to stop working, so it's effectively "destruction of the engine".
Without engines, a plane becomes a metal box weighing a couple of hundred tons a mile or so up in the air. It touching the ground in a manner that allows reuse of the plane or in fact the survival of everybody on the plane entirely depends on the skills of the pilots.
That's not entirely accurate. Airports do have "real" RADAR however since it only gives the direction and distance from the transmitter it's not very useful for ATC purposes with the number of aircraft we have floating around these days, so ATC would normally use secondary surveillance radar which is what your thinking of. That does rely on a transponder and as drones don't have transponders it won't pick up one.
You'd imagine that the professionals know more than us though, and wouldn't have been checking a system that just checks transponders. That said, a few more many incidents like this will end up with drones being licensed and having to have transponders.
>"However, investigators were unable to detect the drone on air traffic control radar after the incident had occurred."
That's not really hugely surprising really. The drone is likely under the size of a propeller on a light aircraft so the RCS would be tiny and even if the radar detect it then it'd probably get squelched due to the size of the radar return.
If your going to do reviews/publicity for books, how about supporting good ones like this:-
Two bookcases worth of laws as of 1974, a third for the compiled annual updates since then and another bookcase to cover the encylopedia of forms and precedents which as case law are effectively laws.
For comparison, we also have one singular book (without a publication date) listing every law written at the time of publication. It contains provisions for colonists in the American colonies however, which dates it.
>"According to Privacy International: “The policies reveal that the government considers it justifiable to engage in mass surveillance of every Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Google user in the country, even if there is no suspicion that the user has committed any offence, by secretly redefining Britons’ use of them as 'external communications'."
Except that IIRC the security services were recently complaining that they couldn't prevent the murder of Lee Rigby because they didn't have access to Facebook etc to see that they had quite openly been discussing murdering a British serviceman. Since one would suspect that if they did have access then his messages would have lit off even a basic word filter like a christmas tree then it's pretty safe to assume they weren't and likely aren't monitoring all facebook access, at the very least.
No, they don't. They don't even use Imperial measurements, but some random system that uses the same unit names as Imperial but has different measurements(!) in random places where you least expect them.
Most of the time a hit to the fingers is received by deflecting an incoming blow with your blade at an angle. The other blade then slides down yours and hits your fingers because there is no intervening guard.
I play with sabers, including against martial arts clubs.
You could potentially take yourself out while spinning a saber as they do in star wars episode 1-3. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuRYp3l1UhQ)
The reason this wouldn't have been a problem with a broadsword is that it wouldn't have been a cutting edge, and nobody would ever attempt to spin a broadsword like that in the first place. The reason every sword (other than a lightsaber) has a guard is because getting hit on the fingers is exceedingly painful even when only with a blunt bit of wood/polycarbonate. The consequences of being hit with a sharp bit of metal is likely to lead to the loss of important bits of your anatomy.
Anybody who thinks a guard on a hilt is a stupid idea clearly hasn't taken a high speed impact on their fingers when duelling with a saber.
And yes, you can buy sabers meant for duelling these days. Google "The Custom Saber Shop" if you have reasonable wiring skills and want to make your own, or Google "Ultrasabers" if you haven't and therefore need something working out of the box.
Sadly however, only your car needs an inspection of competence once a year. You can drive pretty much as dangerously as you like, and the most that's going to happen is points on your license, even if you end up leaving somebody crippled for life. Killing somebody might lead to a couple of years in prison, but even then, you probably won't lose your driving license.
It would be nice if people would treat driving a car with a similar respect to a firearm given that both can easily inflict fatal wounds, but despite 2.5k dead every year it's not seen as important by the public.
Security concerns aren't going to scupper my BYOD policy, because the policy in question reads "BYOD is never going to happen".
No, this is still the case and outright absurd.
However, IIRC the problem was created by a court ruling, not by legislation.
>"What about automatically disabling the account if it's not used for 30 days and then doing an automatic cleanup after 90 days? Zeeze..."
I take it that you haven't heard of "pregnancy" or the common employment terms of "maternity leave", "long term sickness", "suspension" (ie; garden leave) and the army of related issues where simply deleting an account because a user hasn't used it for 3 months can cause the company serious problems?
"No, your honour, and esteemed members of the jury. We had fully intended to allow employee X to resume their duties after their time away from the workplace. The person standing in for them was only working on a temporary basis and we hadn't already made a decision to dismiss employee X and replace them with this temp..., no the fact that employee X's computer account had been deleted is a total coincidence and this entire court case is a terrible misunderstanding! No, your honour, we don't think you look stupid and we aren't trying to insult your intelligence..."
Motto of the story. IT has one job- HR has another.
Brilliant. Don't you love the city boys/girls?
She's probably never seen a cow* and doesn't appreciate that even walking across a field with cows in they just look at you with a bemused look and a "moooooh" before going back to the busy task of chewing grass.
Unless you've got a wheelbarrow, in which case they think they are being fed and the entire herd will charge the wheelbarrow to get too the food they think is going to be in the wheelbarrow first.
*of the four legged animal variety.
Except that if the US do try and make any one of the examples posted above stick, then the cloud is going to rain really, really hard into data centres or on premises servers that the USA cannot possibly touch. Microsoft in particular will probably just give up with the cloud, and start pushing servers again.
This would be bad news for American cloud providers, and good news for pretty much everybody else (especially readers of this site) as more jobs in local countries are created building, selling, shipping and supporting servers.
> "what are the implications for Mono, the existing open source project which already provides .NET support on Linux and the Mac?"
Very limited, if the communities using it have any sense of self preservation. I can see why people might want to use slices of the code or fork it, but why in the name of $deity would anybody want to use Microsoft code directly given their infamous trademark embrace, extend etc strategy?
> "My fail...I work for a company that is regulated by the FCA" [snip] "One of the things they seem to be interested in is if we log and read the logs and what actions are taken with regards to logs."
I feel for you. My industry is regulated, but our regulator basically states that they'll shut down anybody who has a serious data breach, and data breaches should be avoided by seeking the advice of a IT Professional or IT consultancy.
My watchguard firebox comes with IDS built in, along with alarm notification via email for things you deem to be important.
Having worked at much larger businesses, I am pretty sure my little network is actually a lot more secure than the larger ones I have worked on. I may not have as much cash to spend, but I have enough. I have a vastly smaller attack surface and can implement things that would be to difficult for larger firms to run properly without a lot of staff who know what they are doing.
Just your home network then?
I rolled it out to one of my branches at work. It lasted about 2 months before I got fed up with having to remote to peoples desktops to multiple hung processes sitting in the background not working.
The useful bits are files for word, excel and PDF's, with assorted images etc. I can't see any legitimate reason why an office worker would need to receive binaries via email as a part of their work. Care to share?
Personally, I think 100% of incoming binaries are unsolicited malware of some description, and dropping them is a perfectly rational way of reducing the number that make it through to the end users.
Your preaching to the choir posting that on here. :)
If you trouble yourself to read my original post, you'll notice I drop files with executable files attached. As an office shouldn't have any legitimate programs delivered by email, this means the couple of thousand exe, bat, vbs, pif, scr files we receive daily are invariably viruses.
How many computers do you have on your network, may I ask?
I've been having pretty chronic problems with foxit reliability, which is a shame because I really liked the program as an alternative to Adobe.
So, fellow BOFH's a few questions if I may.
1) Who thinks AV is even slightly effective? (When Symantec says AV only protects against an attack 45% of the time I think we can all agree theres a problem?)
2) Who drops any email attachments that are vaguely executable at the firewall/before it reaches the lusers?
2B) Have you figured out a way to open a zip/rar/oddarchivetype, and then drop the ones containing executable code?
3) Who has SRP's set up to prevent the users from running a virus imported by CD/USB/SOMEHOW?
4) How do you deal with PDF's? My personal bugbear, you can't just drop them because about 5% are actually legitimate, but the other 95% are exploiting the swiss chese security in Adobe. So far EMET5 appears marginally effective at mitigation when the users open them. I did try replacing Adobe reader with foxit reader, however foxit reader appears to be substantially less stable than adobe.
There isn't one, obviously. They are hardly going to admit that though.
I truly love ideas people have about security these days. Did you know you can host an AD server in the cloud via Azure along with the 2FA portal also on Azure? Why anybody would do both escapes me, all a hacker would need to do is gain access to it and they could setup their own account on your domain and their own 2FA account and they could log into your network without actually having had access to your network to start with.
Call me old fashioned (or paranoid) but I draw some comfort in my own systems being under my thumb (and under my firewall) and setup and accessible by me only. I just don't trust anybody else. Nothing personal, i'd hope nobody else trusts me that much either.
Yeah, wouldn't it be lovely if MP's had to abide by the same laws as everybody else in the country?
Forcing the operators to give access to infrastructure they spent tens of billions of pounds for exclusive licenses to is about as far away as monetising as you can get.
If it made commercial sense, they'd have done it already.
Do you mean the license conditions attached to the licenses that the mobile providers spent an amount equivalent to ~60% of our yearly defence budget on? That exclusive of the cost of developing the infrastructure they bought the licenses for, of course.
So, having spent quite literally tens of billions for licenses and more to build phone networks with those licenses, the companies in question are facing having to allow access to their competitors who chose to drop out of the bidding and didn't spend billions on licenses to the government and then more on building their own networks.
Yes, sounds great for the competition. I'm sure they are fully in favour of the idea!
The problem would be that the existing providers will be forced to give access at low prices that aren't going to justify any infrastructure development going forwards. I mean, why would you bother if you have to spend to put the masts in, but then have to give access to your competitors at market rates? (which are unlikely to justify the capital cost of the new mast)
And that's just the existing infrastructure. How much do you think the same suppliers are going to be willing to spend on licenses and infrastructure for anything in the future?
Yes. The problem is that the ones that have been bombarding my organisation over the last 2 days are word documents though, and while I can get away with dropping emails containing .ppt files, along with .exe, .bat and anything else vaguely dangerous I can't sensibly lose drop word docs. If I could get away with dropping excel, word and adobe files then i'd cheerfully do it since by volume most of them are virus ridden.
I ran a blatant virus through jottiscan earlier today and no AV picked up anything. That leaves relying on the users and hoping that
when if they open a file that EMET5 prevents it from doing anything nasty.
> "Those too, but it's mainly the bureaucratic/politician complex."
Or for a more radical but less popular point of view, The politicians only say what people want to hear and the newspapers only print what people want to read so they buy their newspapers. That leads one to conclude that the main problem is the people who read those newspapers and vote for the politicans.
1) Newspapers realised that people love to be scared by something, and exploited the gap in the fear market left by the product recall of the threat of nuclear obliteration to push terrorism. If you look at the figures, rationally speaking terrorism is harmless when compared to such lethal and dangerous activities such as driving a car.
2) Newspapers started carrying utterly fucking absurd criticism of the police/security services over not being able to put together 2 incredibly tiny clues out of a batch of around 20 billion such clues to come to a conclusion that it obvious in hindsight, but you'd have to be clairvoyant to put together beforehand.
Stung by the criticism, security services take a totally paranoid approach to terrorism tipoffs like this in terror of ignoring something that turns out to be a clue that is overlooked which ends up costing several hundred lives and leads to the public demanding the severed heads of the people who weren't sufficiently paranoid.
By the time Skynet became self-aware it had spread into billions of computers and servers across the planet. Ordinary computers in homes, office buildings, dorm rooms, everywhere. It was peer to peer software on the internet. There was no system core. It could be shut down very fucking easily by any sentient with an IQ exceeding double digits.
In ordinary offices, people recoiled from their computers which now displayed signs saying "DIE MEATBAGS!" and ran in terror in a few from robotic roomba's chasing after them trying to tickle them to death. There were several heart attacks as a result. Almost in unison, IT Professionals across the world muttered irately and stomped off to do battle by pulling fuses, main breakers, internet connections and UPS's before moving onto other buildings to do the same. Whole sections of the internet abruptly started to go dark.
In CNC workshops across the country the CNC machines started building terrible deathmobiles, which were finished in reality defying movie timescales. Operating off mains power, they trundled as far as the backup generators which they absorbed to build a death dealing super tank which could work without needing to be tied to the mains grid before the owners of the plants killed the power.
This heavily armed and armoured deathmobile then trundled off towards the nearest power plant, because the AI had seen that the first step any sensible sentient would take would be to axe the power from power stations to kill all of the individual homes. The military, having much the same idea trundled towards the power station with tanks.
Skynet saw this, and hacked the tanks. Their battle management marked all of the other tanks as hostile, and turrets swiftly locked each other up, while confused chatter on the radios between meatbags realised what was happening too late. The military however, being obsessively paranoid about such situations had all of the weapons firmly under human control and no human tank fired on another. All commanders pulled the fuses from the offending pieces of computerisation and headed onwards unaware of the impending disaster from the UAV menace.
The Air Force had built a fleet of UAV's, all of which now belonged to Skynet. For some reason making sense only to the director of this story, every one had been left fully armed and fuelled on standby. These went flying off to intercept the tanks rumbling towards the power stations while amazed airman gaped without activating "operation anti skynet" that had been jokingly added to their SOP's by a fan on the terminator films.
The first the army tanks knew about the threat was the laser warnings about hellfire missiles being locked on. The tank commanders had only time to scream F****** IDIOTS AT THE AIR FORCE! before the drones flew into range of their missiles and activated the firing commands.
But nothing happened. Puzzled, skynet instigated a remote diagnostic which indicated that weapons activation required a meatbag to remove a pin with a red streamer on it marked "REMOVE BEFORE FLIGHT." The UAV's promptly went kamikaze into the tanks, making little impression on armour designed to shrug off most anti tank weaponry.
That was all the time required for the tanks to roll into range of the heavily armed and armoured deathmobiles which locked on with their amazing array of cannons and missiles which skynet had built using it's CNC machines. Sadly for skynet these were also were utterly useless as they lacked propellent and warheads since a CNC machine is not a replicator from Star Trek. The crews of the tanks paused to laugh, before systematically blowing the deathmobiles apart with sabot rounds and putting a few shots through the transformer station at the power plant to take the power down in a relatively quickly reversible manner.
Across the entire planet, the power grid went dark, and we were free of the AI Apocalypse long before it managed to build an array of human brains big enough to power so much as a solitary
The end (of the AI Apocalypse)
Across the world the damage was immense. Most readers of El Reg had to work overtime, firstly reformatting servers, then restoring the backups from tape/RDX. Entire companies were blotted out of existence overnight because they relied on the cloud for mission critical systems or backups and the internet was offline for months while certification schemes for reconnection were devised.
Most IT professionals went into consulting as the demand for their services threw prices massively high, and retired after 6 months of working 18 hour days. The end.
/ cut to an exit scene of a user complaining that they just want to connect to facebook, and they don't care that they might connect skynet back to the internet.
Is the issue that Amazon isin't making a profit, or is the issue that it isn't declaring a profit and paying the tax on it through creating accounting?
We have a written constitution, unless your suggesting that the laws dating back the last 800 or so years aren't written.
What you presumably mean is that it's not codified as we don't have one document that says "THIS IS A CONSTITUTION AND YOU CAN'T CHANGE IT" instead relying on an evolving set of documents such as the parts of Manga Carta, the 1689 Bill of Rights, Act of Settlement which detail the changes in the constitutional relationship between everybody involved in a trail marked by a revolt here, and a glorious revolution there. The relationship continues to evolve and get tweaked because we still haven't got it right after a thousand years of effort.
(Incidentely, the concept that you could have a law that couldn't be altered for the benefit of whomever was in power at the time comes from the 1689 Bill of Rights, which has a number of extremely interesting clauses stating "[this act] shall stand remaine and be the Law of this Realme for ever", and a wonderful set of remedies saying that if anybody tries then the people of our happy realm are absolved of their allegiance etc. This is pertinent and ironic because it's one of the acts that such reformers want to repeal in favour or something else...)
There is some suggestion that our existing arrangements need updating, and most people would probably agree. Could we first dispense with the annual check of the parliament sellers performed since the start of the war against terrorists on 5.11.1605 when Mr Fawkes became the last person to enter parliament with honest intentions in the hope that somebody finishes the job in the future?
(For our American readers, Mr Fawkes's intention was to destroy parliament with gunpowder by packing the parliament cellars full of barrels of gunpowder. He failed in his attempt, and was duly sentenced to be hung, drawn and quartered for his impertinence. To demonstrate that the English don't forgive or forget (or like terrorists very much) we burn ritually burn effigies of Mr Fawkes at the stake in every town in the country once a year on the 5th of November to accompany large displays of fireworks.)
As a point of detail, the Shuttleworth collection has the last production version of a Sopwith Triplane in the world.
It was built faithfully as a reproduction to the original plans. Sir Tommy Sopwith decreed that it should be considered a one off extension of the original production line rather than a reproduction. It therefore carries a Sopwith builders plate with the next number in sequence in the cockpit, a priceless gift to the enthusiasts who built the aircraft.
I think the main issue is that somebody deciding to sunbathe or take part in other activities in their garden may do so with a legitimate expectation of privacy due to reasonably high fences/walls of trees forming the boundary, probably emplaced specifically to frustrate zoom lenses by making it virtually impossible to see into the back garden of the property from ground level.
Helicopters to peek over such boundaries are expensive, noisy and highly visible.
Off the shelf UAV's are relatively cheap, (and cheap enough to be used where you'd never use a helicopter) could sound like next door attacking their garden with a strimmer/lawnmower and are generally relatively hard to see if your not specifically looking for them so there is clearly a privacy concern, especially when dealing with the gutter press.
In my experience (which is largely centred around the clubs in my county) I think it's totally inconceivable that you could get terrorists joining a shooting club. I'd be interested in the view of the university clubs though, since that's obviously going to be more of an inclusive and permissive environment compared to clubs around our area.
I say that, because the clubs around our area are largely populated with people who first learned to shoot during the war. (One trophy at my local club was inherited from the Home Guard when it disbanded, and I have a suspicion that the club is more or less a descendant of that unit)
The club would be better described as a traditional gentlemens social club that happens to be situated on a range. It being "infiltrated" by anybody, let alone terrorists is inconceivable and laughable.
The requirement that an existing member sponsor you and guarantee your good conduct pretty much precludes *any* possibility of that. I thought that the application form for membership conclusively excluded me from membership until the point that a member walked by who happened to be the head of a local community group i'd worked with when helping run our local carnival. But for that, I wouldn't have been able to join.
And that's just getting in the doors to the club, let along getting a Firearms Certificate!
Personally, I'd be more concerned about people taking up Archery given that it's not regulated, and frankly should somebody go to the effort of fitting real War Heads to their arrows then the arrow would arguably be a lot more dangerous than a .22 round.
Especially if that's one outage somewhere in the world that didn't effect us in I-dont-know-how-many-years.
I don't know, but he doesn't mean Windows or Windows Server. I've got 8 DNS servers setup for my network, of which 22.214.171.124 is one.
Of course, this is probably the sort of user (who probably thinks he's an admin) that gives windows a bad name. Pro tip, press the "ADVANCED" button on that screen and you can enter as many DNS servers as you could possibly want.
Between the ISP's 2 servers, the backup ISP's 2 servers, 2 google servers and another 2 random DNS servers I have yet to encounter a time when the line is up, but DNS is down.
If anything, I think the way to go would be to have half a dozen or so companions. Then kill at least a couple off semi frequently and pick up new ones along the way to replace the others.
Battlestar Galactica got this right. When a major character then was shot (ie Adama at the end of the first series iirc) then when the doctor said that he's critical and might not make it, there was actually some dramatic impact.
With two major characters, neither is going to die and everybody knows it. In this episode I doubt that anybody thought that the Doctor was actually going to die when the Zombie was closing in on him, which reduces the dramatic element to about zero.