putting volunteer rescue workers lives in danger
2101 posts • joined 5 Mar 2010
putting volunteer rescue workers lives in danger
And why does anybody give a flying fuck what they think ?
With pearls of wisdom such as :
"The analyst blamed falling consumer confidence, saying worsening economic conditions – factors that had had negligible impact on smartphone sales were finally taking a toll."
No, you idiots. Smartphone sales have eased because (look around you) everybody who wants one has one (any previous slowdown would be where anybody who needs one has one).
It really is *that* simple.
cf PC sales. Everybody who wants a desktop PC has one (or two, or three). Speaking for family Page, we have had since 1996, about 6 new PCs. However, our current one was bought in 2010 (and was a 2 year old model then).
My Smartphone is a Wileyfox Swift. Bought December 2015, and should last 3-4 years. Mrs Pages smartphone is a 2 year old MotoG, and she doesn't need a replacement anytime soon either.
"Are law enforcement officers permitted to commit other felonies whilst in pursuit of a larger crime?"
The final arbiter here, is the courts. If they allow evidence which has been illegally obtained to be presented, then the assumption is, it's "allowed". If they do not allow illegally obtained evidence, then it's not allowed.
The US has a doctrine "the fruit of the poison tree" which is a principle that illegally obtained evidence - and subsequent discoveries - are not permitted. It's a frequent plot device in shows like "Law & Order", and quite fascinating to a UKain, as there's quite a body of precedent and law around it (for example a cop is permitted to search an arrested suspect, but *only* to ensure his own safety (i.e. no hidden weapons).
Here in the UK, 99% of courts (i.e judges) have repeated made it clear they couldn't give a toss what laws may have been broken to bring a case to court. The (somewhat specious) reasoning being that to punish the state for breaking the rules would deny the individual victim in the case justice. Or, in other words (but not ones they'd like, no matter how accurate) "the end justifies the means". Personally, I subscribe to an old-fashioned notion that the law applies to all. But I know that's not really the vogue now.
UK cases where a judge has thrown out dodgy evidence are far and few between, and therefore newsworthy, The last one I can remember (so showing my age, and how shit the system is) is when the judge in the Colin Stagg trial went ballistic at the prosecutions use of tabloid-style psychobabble, and tore the CPS and Met Police a new one - very publicly.
that's it basically.
Closing courts makes sense when you reduce the criminal code, not expand it.
By the way, wasn't there a pledge sometime ago about "a new law in means an old one out" ?
What do I *Need* Windows 10 for ?
What I meant (as I suspect you knew) was that destroying the CV2 number on my card(s) reduces he risk of someone who has physical access to the card making a note of it and then using it online.
I *know* bank advice is to not hand your card to anyone. However there are a number of merchants who - for whatever reason - have engineered it so they "need" to put your card in the machine.
Normally I don't worry about being misunderstood. But I think destroying the CV2 is such a neat trick - and certainly within the skillset of an El Regger - that it needs promoting.
my hunch is contactless fraud is very low-level, if it happens at all. Mainly because it's already protected against to a certain degree by the fact that almost all card readers are overlooked by CCTV.
Bear in mind in the UK the maximum loss possible from contactless payments is £90.
And if (as I do) you destroy the CV2 number on your card, the chances of online fraud are vanishingly small.
I still have my grandfathers ax. I changed the shaft and my Dad changed the head .....
Isn't it DELETE FROM, not DELETE * FROM ?
I suspect there are some folk who would pay (I won't over-egg the claim by saying "willingly") to receive ad-free content.
Let's take El Reg, as an example. How much would we pay for an ad-free Vulture ? £12/year ? £24 ?
Either way, if it turns out that the number (and more importantly *worth*) of people who would pay to dodge ads exceeds what sites like El Reg make from advertisers, then the chill wind will blow through the world of advertising.
I return to my hobby-horse of the moment that I can't believe there are people who *pay* Sky, and STILL GET ADVERTS !!!!!! Surely if you pay for Sky, the very minimum level would be fewer, if not no, ads ?
occasionally do throw up well constructed cases which are eminently sensible and practical.
Must have been as mistake.
"Veep" is a documentary ...
You may not get where you were going, but you end up where you needed to be ...
Just tweak the satnav software to offer a random pick from the 3 top routes. This should spread the traffic out enough to realise some benefit with fuck all investment.
After all, how many people have any idea if the route the satnav has chosen is the best ?
As an aside, am I missing something, or is there no feature on any satnav where you can press a single button to say "give me the second choice route - the first is blocked". I noticed this after driving from Eastleigh to Birmingham. The motorway signs on the M3 warned the A34 was blocked. However, trying to turn off just had the satnav redirecting me *back* to the A34. No satnav/software I have seen allows you to "X" a road and circumnavigate it. Certainly not while driving :(
Of course, if the people who *build* the iPhones tried to band together to express solidarity, they'd be labelled commie bastards, and sacked.
If there's one thing worse than no principles, it's selective ones.
I have a vague memory that Roman soldiers had to buy their own kit.
"The jury is still out as to whether Universal Credit will go down as one of the major IT disasters of our time. "
Who cares what this "jury" thinks ? I know what *I* think.
Is it just me, or does this suggest a system not fit for purpose in the first place ?
Let's hope some of the employees exposed were the CEO and board of directors ...
I do price-check. Every so often, the differential between my tariff, and the cheapest makes it worth switching.
However, since 2012, when I did this, and within 2 weeks, the tariff I moved to became the most expensive, I am far less likely to switch when the difference between top-slot and my present tariff is c. £50-60 per annum.
It simply isn't worth my time.
No. Nationwide do too. In fact I thought it was standard in UK online banking.
If it isn't I suggest folks move to banks where it is, and apply some market forces.
With 2FA, even if you physically managed to take control of my session, you'd be scuppered as any transaction out of my accounts requires me to re-validate it with the reader.
What was a seasoned IT professional expecting from the outset ?
I can't say why they quoted that figure. And once they had taken the position that they should charge, I immediately lost any and all interest in EE/the-artist-formerly-known-as-Orange providing me with anything more than junk mail I can use as fuel. I'm sure if I had challenged/escalated they would have "waived" it (don't forget, the phone - bought outright - cost £5).
So I'm a *big* fan of unlocked handsets being sold new. And Wileyfox is worth a big-up (although their customer service isn't. Where's my free case ????).
Up until a few weeks ago, I had a box with all the old phones family Page had ever had - 12 of the buggers. They all worked, in that they powered up.
And I could not get single one working. All due to network locking.
The one which made me see red was a £5 Alcatel originally from Orange that refused to work with an EE SIM (remind me again, where EE came from ?). EE wanted £35 to unlock it.
So a network-free, telco-free phone sounds grand. Having had 3 months use of my Wileyfox Swift, it's the way to go.
But the "model" from subscription TV is not only do you pay for the content. You're *also* paying for the ****ing ads !
Why pay for GoT - with ads - from Sky, when you can download GoT - without ads - for free ?
not having to pay to upgrade their networks to handle the additional "unlimited" traffic they are selling.
It's rare, but fun (for a while) when you see two diametrically opposed juggernauts of "the market" collide with such momentum.
Popcorn and --->
that paid UK tax ...
if broadband provision was markedly better, there would be less need for HS2
I have a sneaking feeling that the world of work in 2032 will be a generation different to now.
older El Reggers may remember a very decent sci-fi/fact magazine of the 80s, called OMNI (had occasional interviews with Feynman, et al). They devoted a lot of column inches to alternative ways of getting into space - including laser sails.
Sadly the ultimate conclusion then (as I suspect now) was aiming beam at the target - when a 1cm laser beam diverges to 400m over the 250,000 miles to the moon ....
They even suggested bulking up the laser to shorten acceleration times !
So, 30 year old "news".
The upshot - and possible Holy Grail - of laser sails is you are accelerating towards the speed of light. I vaguely recall in terms of efficiency, laser sails the best bet of getting to a decent speed.
I notice a poster has asked how you slow it down. Back in the 1980s, the solution was proposed to ..... turn it off at the halfway point, and let deceleration take over.
petri dish to the world ....
My shopping list for a new phone is:
1) Dual SIM
2) No carrier/manufacturer bloat of any description
3) No network lock
4) removable battery
5) MicroSD slot
I arrived at this list, after my son lost (another) phone, and going through my box of 12 *working* phones, not a single one could be used. (The most annoying was a little 5 year old Orange phone bought for £10 that refused to work with an EE SIM - EE wanted £35 to "unlock" it).
So, I'm rocking a Swift with 2xgiffgaff SIMs. But, if I decide to change networks, I will.
Surely all that hardware weighs something ? So you need to factor that into your calculations ?
What is the maximum plated weight on a 53 seater coach ?
Also, it might be an idea to spread the ammo out over several coaches ?
I once shared a house with an Irish chap, whose brother spent all 1985s ESC with a pad, drawing a grid to "prove" the rest of Europe was out to "get the Irish".
Well, I say all ESC, we went down the pub. But when we got back, he had filled it all out ....
Only one icon for that memory ....
I'd rather drive at 60 for 2 hours, than 70/40/50/20/80/70/60/55/56/55/54/30/25/50/65
Better for the car. Better for me. Better for the environment. And I would probably get there *faster* than 70/40/50/20/80/70/60/55/56/55/54/30/25/50/65 anyway.
Which is where we're headed anyway, with autonomous cars. Even if private ownership of an autonomous car will be possible, the rewards for people who pimp out their cars in their downtime (e.g 10:00-16:00 weekdays when they are at work, and 19:00-06:00 when they are at home) will blur the boundaries further.
However, for MrsJP, whose sight isn't good enough to drive, the idea of mobility as a service isn't as cringeworthy as the (presumably fully able) author suggests.
Where's the "bring it on" icon ?
have it protecting my Lastpass, GitHub and Google accounts already. Quietly impressed.
Also, don't forget Facebooks 2FA verification system.
nice to see some reasoned exchange of physics here, along with the "gotcha" about decreasing mass.
But then I did laugh/appreciate the scene in "The Martian" where Matt Damon forgot to factor in his exhalation to the calculations for burning hydrazine ....
that the biggest challenge to space exploration is the earths' gravity.
Is there any work on a space elevator ?
<daydreaming>I wonder how trying to drop a 100km wire from orbit would work out ...
alternatively a stupidly long slightly inclined (magnetic ?) runway to accelerate a capsule to escape velocity (a la Netwons cannonball orbiter).
not that I am aware of.
The ACC half baked ideas reference is from an interview I read with him, where he commented he had floated so many ideas in fiction or speculation that had become reality.
The most famous idea being the geosynchronous communications satellite.
In a nod to another comment I have made today, he also proposed a space elevator, to reduce the energy required to get into LEO.
over 30 years ago, I vaguely imagined a crystalline lattice that could be addressed by laser to act as main storage. TBH, I'm surprised it took so long ....
I once worked on a sizeable project in Weath Managment.
Written in VB (I hail from a C/C++ background) they had tried to be "all grown up" and name variables correctly. So you had iCount, dblPrice, strName etc.
Problem was, they were all variants.
Which meant, if there was a fuck-up in the chain, and a string got accepted for a numeric value, the error could be propagated a long way from the source.
Here's an example
"Google introduced a limitation on Android 4.4 (Kitkat) and above, which unfortunately prevents the SMS blocking feature from working."
Can't speak as to Google Messenger blocking, as I gave up.
As usual, the Windows Phone implementation of this feature is flawlessly perfect.
Here's a whole thread on how you can't block SMS on Android post KitKat.
Admittedly, SMS blocking might be regarded as a niche feature by some. But Googles making it impossible without any warning, consultation or workaround is reason enough for me to stand by my assertion that Android is OK for toys, but not ready for business.
Cyanogen OS ?
Wileyfox ? (Although I can happily plug the phone, as a *company* Wileyfox need to get their act together sharpish).
Last year, I looked to implement WP8 "Block" feature on MrsJPs MotoG.
That's block *SMS*s - not just calls.
A deep trawl of the Play Store revealed an abundance of "Call & SMS" blocking Apps.
A deeper trawl revealed that SMS blocking had become impossible when Google went from KK to LL (if memory serves) they changed the architecture so apps couldn't access the SMS stack *before* they were processed. Meaning there were (are ?) shedloads of "sms blocking apps" which have to state upfront they don't actually work.
That's Android for you.
you are of course right, dear sir --->
I find myself leafing through my copy of Viz, on a bus. I got to "Jump Jet Fanny (and her magic minge)" and had to get off and walk for laughing.
Anyone else find the LIGO setup vaguely familiar ?
Have we found aether :)
Dr. Wibble is pretty much echoing my thinking, about the birthday paradox (the recent Challenger anniversary is a stark reminder of how easily statistics can be misunderstood).
However, it goes a lot deeper than that. Starting with the problem that until such time as the UK has a credible life/death/in country register, there's no way to CLEAN the fucker.
So slowly, and surely, the database will grow.
So, fast forward to 2026, when the DNA database contains (say) 60,000,000 records. Including some dead. Some left the UK. Some moved.
(Remember, the DNA database is a *hash* of the genome, not the entire genome itself).
So a crime is committed, and DNA recovered. SOP runs it through the database, and - horror of horrors - 5 matches are returned. (The real horror is that it means the police now have to do some fucking police work). Of course the 4 spurious matches are a god-given gift to a lawyer who remembers that "reasonable doubt" is all that is needed for an acquittal. So the police have to try and eliminate the 4 spurious matches.
My explanation of the DNA database it that it's like a surname, house number, and area-level postcode. Which means there will be lots of SMITH-16-NW in there.
*presumably, the ANPR system has a link with the DVLA so scrapped cars are archived off. Or will it face the same degradation issues ?
All this, in the face of my assertion that *any* non trivial database of personal data can never be more than 95% accurate. A rule of thumb I devised after seeing thousands of man-hours in a commercial organisation devoted (over summer) to calling every customer to update their details, and seeing the accuracy improve (from 90%) to 95%, only to slip to 90% within 2 months. Databases being snapshots of a transient reality.
None of which is understood by the bottom-feeders in parliament, and their lickspittle civil servants who all dodged anything vaguely technical as "for the proles".
We'll all be well fucked if it becomes possible to make DNA from scratch.