1459 posts • joined 5 Mar 2010
and no mention of the ring wraiths in the animated "Lord of the Rings" of the 70s ?
I recall at the time being very spooked by them ... such lifelike movement in a cartoon.
in the 21st century ? Really ????
Worked with a chap who was looking for a new job on the QT. Registered with an agency, whose first action was to email his CV to our company as a speculative punt. MD called him in and said "if you're not happy, you can go now" and fired him.
Re: "on every device"
Kindle e-ink readers have a browser. Are those covered ?
We have plenty of laws, we should try enforcing the laws we already have properly before creating more of them.
The problem is parliament (sees it's) job is to make laws. And given how many MPs have come from the legal professions, it's obvious that's what they will do: Make laws.
Curious as to how they'll try to spin this ...
Especially since Cameron made great play of being a really "in with the geeks" Tory, by appointing Jimbo in the first place.
And as for that Perry ... it really does seem she only opens her mouth to change feet.
It would be funny if we weren't paying for it.
If YouTube is anything to go by ...
*Paying* for content, means a search for (example) "Dynamo:Magician Impossible" would actually return as the top result "Dynamo:Magician Impossible", rather than a load of kids in their bedrooms with webcams telling us "how Dynamo did this trick".
I mean have you searched YouTube for music lately. Almost any song title will bring up someone warbling away, killing the original.
When the history of now is written, someone will highlight the irony that loads of people giving their "gift" away for free (down with the man !!!!!) drove the rest of us to *pay* to avoid them.
Reminds me of the old Alexie Sayle line
There's an 50s revival going on now ... whole familes trying to live on 8 quid a week.
How many of those XP machines
are - like mine - virtual machines on a Linux box ? Totally bulletproof (as long as you run from the Day0 install image).
Re: Simple Answer
The answer is simple, use either of the examples above of leaving earlier, getting paid for the time spent, or making it really quick.
I'd guess it would become self policing. If the employees are being paid for the time spent checking, the time spent checking will be as short as possible. Of course if the *employees* are paying for it, then it will become as long as possible.
Re: Shame their first recourse was "the law"
I am against it, because Apple are making their staff pay for *Apples* problem. Apple are free to introduce the security measures they feel appropriate (Clearly those security measures haven't gone as far as making an unsold/unactivated device inoperable) but they can't make the staff pay for such measures (with their time).
Personally I am against companies who want to own their employees - and the US leads the way here. Rafts of companies testing employees for alcohol, and inviting ones "with a problem" to "address the issue" or get a new job. If *my* employer want's to mandate what I do outside the office, they can pay up or shut up.
I had an interview for a US owned company* that included tobacco testing in their contract. Positive and you are disciplined. They only hired non-smokers.
*Kalamazoo for doubters.
Re: Shame their first recourse was "the law"
Alternatively, how long would Apple continue with this policy if the checks started taking hours rather than minutes ? After all, the security guards have to be paid for the time they are there. If these checks started costing Apple $200 per shift rather than $20, they'd get the message.
If the staff banded together, and agreed to suffer a little extra pain, for collective gain, they could *easily* win.
The problem is anything which looks and sounds like collective activism in the workplace in the US is regarded with deep suspicion as "socialist". You know. Like universal healthcare.
Luckily some of us did study a bit of history, and know the sacrifices our ancestors had to make to give us the conditions we have today. It would be a poorer world if they had decided against acting because it might "cost a few minutes".
Shame their first recourse was "the law"
Because there is so much fun, in an Ealing comedy way, to be had here.
Imagine *every* employee turns up with a bag with hundreds of dummy iPhone/iPads/iPods inside ?
And of course bags containing fermented Norwegian fish products ...
On a more prosaic note, could the staff and management not discussed this and come up with a solution ? I mean of the top of my head, how about secure lockers outside the stock area ? I.e. what any other company would have done ?
Re: Quantum coherence
Except for MPs, where you might get the arse instead.
In the novel ...
The first chapter is taken up with this very debate. McCoy worries if the "McCoy" post transporter has a soul or not. Spock finds such worries illogical, while Kirk has to go and meet the Umdorian ambassador in his quarters. Meanwhile Scotty points out that the soul is - by definition - indestructible, so McCoy should quite bitching like a girl, and get the next round in.
Re: "Spock must die !"
AIR it was because they were taken by surprise, given the anti-Spock a chance to swap ?
"Spock must die !"
Clearly no real trekkies here, or you would recall this novel (by James Blish, it was the first non-canonical story to be published, I believe).
The plot centres around a Klingon operation to neutralise the Organians, by cloaking Organia in a tachyon field. They reason (correctly as it happens) that since Organians are beings of thought, they exist as tachyons. Therefore the tachyon field will constrain them, meaning the Organian Treaty can't be enforced.
Meanwhile, far, far away, the Enterprise is safe from the war the Klingons are starting, and pondering why the Organians haven't interceded. They decide the only way would be to visit Organia. Unfortunately it's light years away, while the transporter only has range of 16,000 miles.
Luckily Scotty has an idea about modifying the transporter to use tachyons. This results in a detailed description of how the transporter currently works, with a whole slab of philosophising thrown in for good measure, to loop the narrative back to the opening chapter where McCoy is grumbling that he's is reality "dead" because the transporter has dissembled him and ressembled him, and therefore he isn't the same person.
Spock is chosen to be beamed to Organia. However when the transporter is energised, the tachyon cloak (which the Enterprise crew are as yet unaware of) reflects the beam, and a *duplicate* Spock is created. Unfortunately for the crew (but fortunately for the plot) Scotty had to shield the transporter pad with some protective material which just just happened to be opaque. So they couldn't tell who the original Spock was. It then transpires that the reflection process resulted in an "anti-Spock" whose mental functions were opposite to the real Spock, and whose motivations are to *aid* the Klingons, rather than the Federation. Of course much hilarity ensues.
Hows that for a precis of a book I last read 25 years ago. Did I leave anything out
Swipe to unlock ?
Mrs Pages Android HTC Wildfire has an option to unlock it with a series of swipe gestures. ....
A fellow juror was alerted when he made a comment involving a fact that hadn't been presented in court. That juror contacted the judge who quizzed the original juror who admitted it, probably thinking it was "no big deal".
Re: Why we have juries ...
And presumably illegal for you to research the fact that you can
not yet. But *if* we had a decent civics curriculum for our citizens, this should be very high on the agenda. It's a landmark in British jurisprudence, and something that sets British justice apart.
There is a quote, maybe from Edmund Burke, that a jury is it's own parliament, and the first act of any tyrant wishing to rule Britain would be to abolish juries, as they would be doing annoying things like acquitting innocent people, or acquitting where laws are unjust. Which, incidentally, why we no longer have the death penalty. Juries were becoming much less happy to convict if the accused would be executed ... the Home Office realised if they didn't act, eventually a murderer would go free.
Re: Why we have juries ...
It's rare for the court briefing to actually tell the jury they can decline to return a verdict.
A litigant in person can, although judges *really* don't like it, they can't stop you.
Anyway, fuck that. *I* would place my (not guilty) vote, and explain it to the rest of the jury.
Why we have juries ...
also - and worrying no one here has mentioned it - juries can judge THE LAW too. Google "jury nullification".
If you take that away, then you'll just have professional judges who will apply any old law.
There are a few laws in this country that I could not in all conscience send someone to prison for. And that is an absolute right any juror has.
Re: Not you as well.
Trolls = annoying, offensive but legal
Criminals = criminals.
The beauty of a *good* criminal justice system is it recognises that a criminal act is criminal, regardless of how it's perpetrated. Thus we have a law which says it's criminal to kill someone. Simples. No need for a list of methods of killing that are illegal.
Why did El Reg headline make me think Blackadder ?
"So, you think there's a big market for snot coloured jewellery ?"
Does MS publish stats on Bing usage ?
I'd be curious to know if they either surge or slump, given this news.
I'd like to say I'd boycott Bing, but since I never used it anyway ....
Hmmmm, real tin foil hat time ...
as alluded to by ShelLuser, I wonder if the real endpoint of this fun is to be able to ban ad/pop-up blockers ? That seems a much more rational reason than the guff spouted by Cameron.
And can we know what's on this blacklist ?
Or do we need a website where people can register terms that they have seen bring it up ?
Before Alan Turing - why not Ada Lovelace ?
or Linda Lovelace - either works for me
I wouldn't trust *any* ISP
my filters are set in my router. My responsibility.
One a serious note, with all of this heavy lifting being put on the shoulders of the ISPs, can anyone suggest the possible timings of:
1) Price increases to compensate them
2) someone suing an ISP because little Johnny saw a nipple, and their parents "thought the filters should stop that".
following on from 2, are we going to have a court case where it's decided the filters aren't 100% reliable (in which case (a) why have them and (b) how much more of a tit will Cameron look then) or that the ISPs are responsible and are liable for compensation (see point 1 above).
ACPO also issued guidelines on how to deal with photographers, pointing out that photography in a public place is NOT illegal. They were completely ignored.
Vaguely OT: Dara O'Briains science club ..
Did anyone see this last night ? The HAV NASA used landed in a 60ft tree, so the recovery team carry a chainsaw.
Is this part of the SPB kit ?
To paraphrase Nathaniel Hale (?) I regret I have only one thumbs-up to give you ...
No real surprise ...
Exactly what *is* Microsofts product ?
Desktop OS ?
Developer tools ?
Productivity tools (Office et al)
Server OS ?
Network software ?
Commercial products ?
Domestic products ?
Phone software ?
Yes, 20 years ago, the IT landscape *needed* one supplier of all these. But eventually customers started gaining experience in IT, and no longer needed one ring to rule them all.
I would hope, as a starting point, all companies would be ISO27001/27002 accredited ?
So let me see
HMG want the UKs security services to perform a security audit of our 350 most capitalised companies, and then store that all in one place.
What could possibly go wrong ?
Talk about brass neck ..
"This blunt approach is not the product of an informed, open, or deliberative process. We urge the House to reject the Amash Amendment, and instead move forward with an approach that appropriately takes into account the need for a reasoned review of what tools can best secure the nation," it added.
As if the original implementation was the product of open informed debate ?
A dictionary definition of "Chutzpah"
I suspect we will see a lot more of this ..
smaller, less well known e-commerce sites being targeted, on the assumption their security will be less bullet proof, and giving hackers access to a load of personal data they can then use on bigger sites.
Once again: NEVER REUSE YOUR PASSWORD.
It's NOT the filtering
it's the suggestion that Google et al should be required to adulterate their search results, if a user types in a "certain phrase". Because it's axiomatic that that phrase will go from being "Child sex pictures", to "Tory party plans".
Also, yesterday on R4, Cameron hinted that Google et al might be required to inform the authorities, if a person uses certain search terms.
Now Mr Ray may be happy with that, but I for one am not, and have already started researching for a router that will support a VPN so that my household is out of scope for this.
200 cameras ?
Good luck with that. The UK government already has a long established published policy (via ACPO) of harassing legal businesses they don't approve of. So it's not like you're going to be news to them.
No one spotted the other obvious flaw in this cauldron of fail ?
Presumably it's only English-speaking perverts that will be affected. Or will the blacklists be translated into the appropriate terms in other languages. I mean will "Chercher pour les enfants nue" be blocked ?
Although I suspect, most UK politicians aren't aware there's a world that doesn't speak English ....
Turing is a national hero ... but I don't agree
This is a cynical attempt to airbrush the repressive nature of the state out of history.
Let his conviction stand as a reminder to an age when we were less tolerant. Otherwise we might start to believe we've solved everything now ....
Re: All at once or none at all
"If you were starting from a blank sheet, you'd build your towns/cities/villages/etc so that vehicles and pedestrians were completely separated"
Wasn't Milton Keynes built like this ? The downside being with no mixing of cars and pedestrians, it can be a very dangerous place to walk at night, as you're out of sight ?
Indulgences ?! wft ?
Didn't they disappear with disco ?
Besides, is purgatory mentioned in the Bible (quick wiki) ah, I see ... Maccabees ... a disputed book of the bible.
"Two men say they're Jesus, one of them must be wrong ..."
Why am I reminded ....
of the line from H2GT2G about needing a receipt every time you go to the toilet ?
English acronyms ... only 26 letters
means we're starting to see some duplication ... I thought "POS" meant "Piece Of Shit", and that kinda supplanted "Point Of Sale" ....
Recently had an amusing experience when Mother in Law was signing off "LOL" thinking it meant "Lots Of Love". No real harm done, except when she said to her nephew on Facebook "Sorry you weren't too well, LOL" ...
Am I the only person who read this that this guy hasn't been *sentenced* to this time in jail, but that he is in jail (i.e. without bail) awaiting trial ?
In which case aren't there 2 amendments in the US constitution that are relevant ? The 8th (Excessive bail) and 6th (Right to fair and speedy trial)
Just saying ......
Important information's gone from being 4 or 5 levels deep to about 20.
I suspect that is probably intentional ....
- 'Windows 9' LEAK: Microsoft's playing catchup with Linux
- Review A SCORCHIO fatboy SSD: Samsung SSD850 PRO 3D V-NAND
- Was Earth once covered in HELLFIRE? No – more like a wet Sunday night in Iceland
- Breaking Fad 4K-ing excellent TV is on its way ... in its own sweet time, natch
- Every billionaire needs a PANZER TANK, right? STOP THERE, Paul Allen