But can it run ...
478 posts • joined 18 Jun 2009
Thor came down and used his hammer to split the original into 2 new species.
How is that against Odin's marvelous creationism?
"The inclusion of a USB 3.0 may prove more of a stumbling block than the graphical requirements. GPUs that support DirectX 12 date back to around 2014, while USB 3.0 is more recent, only becoming commonplace in the last two to three years."
You are aware that it is November in 2016? These dates almost entirely align.
The law is arbitrary, changeable and often capricious. In country A(merica) I may not be a criminal because there is no law against (say) free speech but in country C(hina) I would be a criminal. Pretty sure my head shape doesn't change between the two countries.
Perhaps the head shape of the lawmakers is a better guide to the criminality of the people?
Spend $300 to reminisce about the good old days when I didn't have to spend $100 to have an unsightly dongle hanging out the side of my computer in order to connect the most basic of peripherals.
Lord Elpuss: ”For all you know, I work for the government and have classified data that must be securely destroyed."
Or left unencrypted on public transport.
Except his SC appointment(s) will still be there (Napolitano, Judge Judy?) And any executive action he takes and is approved by his SC will be there and available for any future president to use and abuse until a better SC comes along to overturn it.
Ah tazers. Introduced as non-lethal firearm alternatives. We were promised they, and pepper spray, would only ever be used in situations where the only alternative would be a potentially deadly firearm. Like when teenagers get mouthy or students need some reeducation about who's in charge or when black males ... ah no, they still go straight to deadly force in that situation.
He wants to murder the families of (alleged) terrorists.
I seem to recall some procession in favour of freedom of expression after the Charlie Hebdo attacks, was that just political posturing?
Like an LRAD?
This is just an incidental outcome of a system that has been set up to normalise the constant and intrusive surveillance of the population by so-called security services.
Staying under the radar is a new offence under RIPA 2.
Maybe I shouldn't give them ideas...
At least all this data slurping meant there were no terrorist attacks in the UK during those years.
Let me explain:
After 9/11 your black ops agencies saw an opportunity to use the fear and panic of the American people and politicians to engage in a wholly illegal operation of mass surveillance of the people of this planet. With the support of the administration and quiescence of the public, opposition, judiciary and, worst of all, the media, the constitution as we know it was ignored, torture performed, rendition, surveillance etc.
Since then all your agencies have been using 'national security' as a way to gather info from corporations and to get courts to allow blatantly unconstitutional practices. One of those is to get them to install software with backdoors that allow so-called law enforcement to access data without a court order. The result of back doors is that not only those we 'want' can use it to get in. Hence data, including that of honorable members, was stolen by parties unknown (ignoring the fact it was also collected by agencies known!)
Think of that next time you vote on a bill.
If you have nothing to
hide sell, you have nothing to fear.
"I would force her to step down immediately"
You and whose army?
If she's so fucking good, and the institution so wonderful, how come no country not already brainwashed into it is looking to have Liz adopt them?
No, I am suggesting, among other things, that she has never undertaken this constitutional rile that she was trained from childhood to fulfil. Others are suggesting that should she ever do so it would trigger a constitutional crisis that would take down the monarchy. I am then left asking: if she won't, and can't, perform her supposed duty, then what is the fucking point of the position of monarch? And perhaps some oil chosen by lottery would be less deferential.to the political classes, especially since their position, and that of their family, is not dependent on the largess of the already privileged using public money.
"What's the alternative?" [to an hereditary head of state]
Why are people so bloody unimaginative?
Selection at random, like jury duty.
A TV show called I'm a monarch get me out of here.
A cage fight.
Pistols at dawn.
A bake off.
Who cares? But it would be nice if the public has some say in, you know, a democracy.
It would also be nice if they could exercise their constitutionally granted powers without creating a constitutional crisis. Then perhaps Blair's massive mandate to smash our rights with 40% of the vote would not have happened.
As head of the armed forces hasn't she sent "our boys" off to illegal wars to commit war crimes without so much as a frown?
And in nonmilitary terms why hasn't she ever stood up for her subjects and refused to sign any bill that stripped our historic rights?
She's a waste of space and the institution is a national embarrassment for a so called modern democracy.
No you didn't.
If I spend $60k on a personal Uber I'd rather it didn't try to kill me when it mistakes a cat on the road for a baby.
But this is a very temporary problem, roads will not be accessible to people soon and automated will be the only, and safest, way to travel.
Security and freedom are not fungible. Neither should they be negotiable.
The cops should not be following anyone without good reason. Just because I drive on public roads does not mean the cops should constantly monitor my whereabouts and be able to track where I've been over time.
I forget, who are the bad guys again...?
10 Downing Street,
What now, bitches...
Netflix has reached the point where it plays by the usual.rules, no more double digit growth as is. They need exclusive, live content to keep growing, but sports are really expensive. They will eventually do it (games on phone, tablet, PC and TV is the ideal for consumers) but the pricing model is not easy to do for a company that says £X gets you everything we have. They have to start demarcating their customers (other than by legally enforced geography) and that won't sit well initially. But Netflix seem to be progressing to the point of being bigger than Disney, star wars be damned, pretty soon.
"Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon and Apple enlisted the Centre for Democracy and Technology to co-ordinate its defence of Backpage. “Digital rights” activist groups including the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Center for Democracy and Technology filed briefs in support of Backpage."
Do you think these groups are all in it because they want to advertise kids for sale? Or do you think they recognise that the government will always begin an assault on our rights by using terrorism, sex trafficking and/or children?
If people are openly advertising kids for rent on this site then surely that makes life easy for the cops?
"aiding and abetting criminal conduct makes one "punishable as a principal"
Like roads for bank robbers? Google maps for ... any number of criminals from burglars to terrorists? VPNs for anyone from 'pirates' to dissidents to Manning and Snowden.
There are criminals and victims here and justice should be served, but the 1st Amendment doesn't exist just so we can say uncontroversial things, and this is an extension of the right of people to allow people to speak without being held liable for what they say.
At least in the arms race during the cold war there were obvious reasons for not using the weapons, in the tech war they deploy these weapons as soon as they have them, often against their own citizens. Farewell sweet privacy, we barely knew you and now you're gone.
"the ability of minority communities to use ... emergency services"
Given what invariably happens when police show up to a situation involving minorities this is not necessarily a bad thing.
But "horse porn" IS my unlock phrase. And my homepage.
"Okay, we have access to their communications online, but these sneaky citizens can still communicate privately in their homes. Any ideas?"
"What if we make our listening devices have some kind of utility and people will then willingly buy them and put them in their houses?"
"I know smart phones had enough features to make people carry around our bugs, but what would we have to offer to get people to have this constantly on in their homes?"
"How about we let them look up the weather and start and stop music, by talking to it?"
And that's how the west was lost.
... should know the danger of going all in on one leading company in an unproven, immature market.
OK, having written that I'm now thinking of Google and Nest.
I think you'll find shouting fire will cause a rush of people whipping out their camera phones...
Or a bunch of smart arses to go over and see what all the fuss is about and whether they can sort it out.
"There is a good reason why "shouting fire in a crowded theater" is often held up as an example of the limits on freedom of speech."
To stop people speaking out against the draft?
If your theatre/home has Nest devices and can't evacuate safely during a fire, drill or false alarm then the fault is entirely yours, not the annoying person/device shouting "Fire!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3Hg-Y7MugU - Hitchens
Do I look like a Mexican drug cartel?
So when HSBC are complicit in money laundering for Mexican drug cartels and groups on the terrorist list then where do the officials get tried?
So, let me get this straight, because (some of) the cops are violent, law breaking scum, people are actually pushing for them to travel about scanning the public at large, feeding into a central database allowing them to add it into the face recognition and license plate scanning systems so that they can monitor us not just from static CCTV cameras, but mobile monitoring units (police)?
Seems to me we're actively asking for a panopticon because the people who really want it are misbehaving, i.e. we're rewarding their bad behaviour.
For those who say it will be a locally stored unit, only viewable under review when a complaint or court case requires it, well, tasers, RIPA, pepper spray, FISA courts, civil asset forfeiture, RICO etc. etc.
I recall a vast number of comments being down voted vigorously and repeatedly for saying this was possible and being ridiculed. Could you all go back and update your comments and votes?
Is that prolog course I did back in the day, along with the fuzzy logic maths, finally gonna be useful and marketable?
OK, so they now know that you have food with some number X, see that you travel with number Y and you have issues with the council (and probably which department). If the other people have location on then they know where you probably live, can see locations you may have visited. Using those other numbers they can find your possible extended group (true or not) and given your lack of communication you are a suspicious character and perhaps the police or other security services should be notified.
Allah help you if any of those 3 hop relationships happen to be on some watchlist. How's the weather in Cuba this time of year?
"someone who has your number uses it"
I can only hope that I'm a big enough PITA that they have me in as some epithet rather than my real name.
I recall Facebook and Whatsapp promise there would be no cross sharing of user info and anyone who thought otherwise was a paranoid freak
A bit like how tasers were only ever going to be used in situations where officers would otherwise have had to use firearms.
"*not my real name"
No wonder they wouldn't let you open an account. Try again with your real name.
Whine about that post all you like, but we have an unelected head of state and second chamber yet call ourselves a democracy. We also assisted in illegal renditions of innocent people for the Americans when we knew they were gonna torture them. And spy on people with no oversight. Democracy my arse.
Not at all like the national lottery. If I wanted to gamble in the casino but I had to pay a lottery tax to do so (to fund athletes and the opera and other nonsense) then it would be the same. The fact is that in order to watch advertiser funded live broadcasts, even online, I have to pay for the behemoth BBC.
If you want my opinion on other regressive taxes, or ones where they ostensibly take money for A but spend it on B then wait until there's an article about those but this one happens to be about the BBC.
The majority of people who don't like paying so much to the BBC are those who get little out of it and aren't won over by the same patriotic bullshit that makes people in the UK proud of the also Jimmy Saville-enabling NHS.
Regardless of your view of the BBC, as a national treasure or a state goliath destroying the free market for media, can we at least agree that it disproportionately costs the poor while benefitting the rich?
If I buy a TV (as a large screen monitor) in order to watch Netflix and Amazon Prime, why do I have to tell some spotty oik in Currys my address? Why does some public employee then use that address to check if I have a BBC license (let's not call it a TV license, eh?) and send me threatening letters non-stop and then try to use legally dubious tactics to access my property to see if I'm 'stealing' the BBC?
And, while I"m on a rant, why do BBC radio listeners get a free ride? Those free-loading pirates living it large off the back of artists and TV watchers. Seen from afar one could call this class warfare where the poor pay for the rich...