Bloody whiny foreigners...
...coming over here, taking our apples.
221 posts • joined 18 Jun 2009
...coming over here, taking our apples.
... is that this is a casino in Nevada.
The casino staff informed authorities who couldn't get a warrant so lied their way to get enough evidence/probable cause for a warrant, then lied on said warrant about how the evidence was obtained.
So the Nevada court is OK with all of that, except the bit where the judge was butthurt by (the concept of a judge) being lied to when signing the warrant.
Copyright infringement is a civil offence, when it's not done on an industrial scale, so the police should not be involved.
However, civil cases are much easier to prosecute, being based on balance of probabilities rather than beyond reasonable doubt, so many defences are less likely to be acceptable. But, assuming you're not uploading then the damages should be fairly small too.
There is no illegal content on TPB, or the majority of torrent sites.
Torrent sites should not host any of the data their users/members are sharing regardless of legality as it should be based on a P2P network where users share data themselves.
Uploaders are responsible for the legality/copyright of the material they upload in the jurisdiction they upload from.
Downloaders are only legally responsible when the whole file(s) is(are) downloaded and if they feel the material is potentially illegal OR copyright protected they should remove it forthwith from their machines and possibly inform the relevant authorities in the jurisdiction they download to.
Or you can assume that everyone on TPB knows the legal status of every file before they have downloaded it and treat them all as criminals.
Can Germany be trusted with privacy?
" at least as functional – or more so –"
That's what 'at least' means...
3rd way - random selection, like jury duty.
4th way - direct, online democracy. Let the people represent themselves.
I remember the Lords used to stop the reactionary government of the day doing some crazy knee jerk reaction to some temporary threat by screwing with the people's civil liberties, even when the public are temporarily in favour of it (e.g. Sarah's law).
Of course Blair was head of the Met and was involved in all kinds of controversies (no IPCC access to the de Menezes shooting, lobbied for holding people for 90 days without charge etc.)
Where's the catch?
Got it - roaming mobile data charges.
So ... The FBI gets access to illegally obtained NSA data on law abiding Americans in order to investigate the hacking of a Japanese company by (cough) North Korea?
1. They're not terrorists until they are convicted in a court of law of doing something terror-y. Until then they're citizens.
2. The only way to deny possible-future-terrorists safe spaces to talk to each other, is to deny EVERYONE safe spaces to talk to each other.
3. Your duty in government is not to protect us, please stop repeating that falsehood. Drug wars and the nanny state that way lie.
Subject Under Surveillance
So, a supra-state unelected body (A) cannot perform oversight on a supra-state unelected body (B) because an unelected body (C) with limited oversight within a different state denies them access to B's internal documents.
Who do we vote for to change this situation? Oh...
The Ukrainians actually overthrew their democratically elected government, but why let facts get in the way of a good story?
Not exactly Tim. Absolute poverty is based on an arbitrary dollar income that is judged to be insufficient to maintain a living standard that someone has decided constitutes poverty. That we currently include lack of basic requirements for survival is a political choice and should we ever get beyond people not being able to meet their basic needs the dollar value will increase to include refrigeration, or lighting, or internet access etc.
I know exactly what you're trying to say, but in economics poverty is definitionally a relative term, ergo we literally cannot raise people out of poverty, (Except by some strange finagling of the figures, but assuming any kind of Bell curve then no.)
"All of those sums will eventually find their way back to consumers through their cell phone bills."
Sorry, but the costs of buying the bandwidth in a govt. auction are called sunk costs, and are fixed. Companies (want to) produce at profit maximising levels, i.e. where marginal cost = marginal revenue. Fixed costs play no part in determining where this level is and hence the amount the phone company pays has absolutely no bearing on the ultimate cost to the consumer.
Which isn't to say a company splurging their money on a license won't likely provide a worse service, money is in limited supply and money spent on licence means money not spent elsewhere (or given back to shareholders).
Mobile phones will be carried by corporate/state provided drones that watch over everything we do. It seems weird to us now to accept such intrusion but the added convenience of having your entire life recorded and available for upload to Facebook.gov is just too large to ignore. It also takes snippets of your conversations and posts them to twitter. As the algorithm only takes the most pithy or intelligent bits it makes you look great and have loads of followers and likes. You may recoil at the thought now, but that's because you're one of those luddite millenials.
I want my nanobots to be able to soak up the alcohol on command so I can drive home from the pub, then release it back into my bloodstream when I am back home.
Why is a service I pay for (govt.) Spending my money to see what I do online rather than spending money to ensure other people/countries can't see what I do online?
Except he was referred to as acting as out of control as a monkey in a tropical forest, not as a monkey (never mind an ape) and may have been intended as racist or not, but there is no need for our media outlets to state it as fact that it was racist.
BT was subsidised.
The 3g auction was an increase in fixed costs, it had literally zero impact on customer prices.
Plus the £22.5bn raised from 3G auctions that wouldn't have happened had we had a single state owned operator. And the many billions gained from the sale of BT. And the corporation tax from its profits.
I always think of this advert when I hear people complaining about the cattle trucks they endure to get to their sickness-inducing desks for the 9 hour (if you're lucky) grind to be able to afford their overpriced rent and £5 beers:
I quite like it - gives me wiggle room for reasonable doubt when I get the court case I so richly deserve.
My nuclear powered car should elicit a pretty swift response.
Okay, it's technically an electric car, but it uses nuclear fuel to generate the 1.21 gigawatts needed to run.
Sweet, sweet karma.
I remember when we were considered the good guys, was that just a naive child, or did we actually behave better than other countries back in the day?
Stick one of these little beauties in a home NAS for all your HD films, then stream a different movie to each room if you want.
The basic argument goes: "we didn't spot this needle in a massive haystack, so we need access to loads more hay to spot needles in future."
If you've pondered nothing wrong you have nothing to fear.
such as: Cameron shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Yep, I'm an extremist.
...where lightning rarely reaches ground level due to the big tall metal things.
"Net neutrality law ... rolls out the red carpet for the American giant"
Just like roads roll out the red carpet for Tesco (or did!) or running water does for Radox.
When will people realise the TSA are NOT there to keep you safe:
And the cops are the modern mob:
And the IRS likes the look of that:
Government of the people, by the people, for the people.
Their training costs must be astronomical - it must take ages to get an Indian to talk with an Irish accent.
There is no free money. Money is backed by the ability of those in power issuing said money to obtain, by force or threat thereof, the wealth and/or labour of others.
There is no copyright theft and definitely no piracy, there is only copyright infringement which is, or should be, a civil matter. By using taxpayer funds to investigate taxpayers and other companies the French government is subsidising large, multinational companies. I would have thought the French had more pressing matters to deal with than splurging cash to save companies paying lawyers going to court to protect their copyright, but what do I know...
"If revenge pornography were clearly illegal, they would, I am sure, ensure that such sites could not be promoted through their search engines."
So just because you make someone in the UK doing something illegal you want Google et al. to stop including sites in other countries where this is perfectly legal (like the UK currently) in their results?
"What happens to the one per cent is of course trivia"
Except the rich happen to run the political discourse that affects everyone: they write the laws and set the policies that the rest of us have to abide by. Their wealth alone is not important but the rules/barriers they put in place to maintain their, and their offspring's, wealth and political influence actively harm the rest of us.
Google deny reading people's Gmail emails because they are automatically scanned by a computer in order to serve up related ads and never seen by human eyes.
Unless the computers see some dodgy pics (or terroristic text?) and they alert the authorities, in which case plod certainly gets eyeballs on your emails.
Well, I for one, am particularly grateful that we have someone as benevolent and wise as Robert Long 1 to tell us what can, and should, be tolerated in a tolerant society. There was me worrying that we might overstep the mark and stifle debate and curtail the presentation of ideas, new and old, but that was silly - we have ROBERT LONG 1 to tell us what we can and can't think, say, do and tolerate.
Would be for them to suggest central planning for the necessities: housing, food, medicine, clean water, heat/power.
I wouldn't want that, but the resources required to provide these things, and information required to attempt to provide them centrally, would be orders of magnitude less than trying to work out an average utility function for the country.
Or, worse yet, deciding what the 'correct' utility function is so that we have Opera Houses on every second street and no pubs.
It's like that script I wrote at my bank that skims 0.1% off all transactions and puts it in my account. I only steal the money when I spend it.
Still, this was Google's argument in the first place when it claims it doesn't read your mail (because no human looks at it) but simply has a computer scan it to serve up ads relevant to the content of your mail. Unintended consequences of, and for, the "do no evil" company.
They take away your IT equipment for 'forensic analysis' - hey, you might be downloading child terrorism copyright infringement porn - and if that's your main tool for work you're screwed. They keep/destroy your equipment, you can't earn, so lose your house. Once you're destitute they drop all charges and everything's hunky dory, no misconduct, nothing to see here, move along.
Scientist: Extreme weather is caused by global warming.
Skeptic: There has been little/no warming for 15 years.
Scientist: Don't you see? That proves it. All the energy that should have gone to heating is being used up in making more energetic storms and weather.
Skeptic: But that's not what you said...
Scientist: I have adapted the model to allow for the data not matching my previous model.
Skeptic: And tomorrow you'll adapt it again when new data arrives?
Scientist: That's [climate] science.
It's up to the CPS to do the proving. However, the cops do the investigation and charging and leaking to the press which means you have the inconvenience of having your IT equipment taken away to be forensically investigated, the hassle of going to court, getting a lawyer, being banged up for a few hours, lots of questioning and then named in the paper as an internet kid-flik watcher - before being proven innocent in court.
And all that's before they bang you up for the bit of your hard disk with the old TrueCrypt area that you did when trying out TrueCrypt originally and have long ago forgotten the password for. Let alone that ancient USB key that's password protected but you never used more than once because it's more hassle than it's worth. Plus they want the passwords of all your online accounts because, well, children.
Won't someone think of the cartoon children?
Ban all manga now.
And burn all copies of lolita.
Methinks you don't understand how expensive pension liabilities are...
Game of Thrones?
Step 4 is unreachable as any decent compiler will tell you
1-3 is an infinite loop.
Goddam code review on el reg comments. Should be getting paid for this shit.