549 posts • joined Tuesday 25th May 2010 11:58 GMT
Re: Again please let
Again see my point below about conflating the sentence passed with the maximum. You might well get 12 years as a sentence for killing somebody with your car, the maximum being life.
Just as Aush0k, as Flannery is alleged to have called himself online, is in if convicted of the attack he could spend is 12 years in the slammer but that said this is a rather emotive description. What is far more likely is that "AushOK", whilst facing a maximum term of 12 years, will in fact get a couple of months community service.
I would agree that the Australian Federal police bragging rights that they have arrested a ‘leader of Lulzsec’ are unjustified, however I think the articles bias towards trivializing these activities misses a more serious point.
Specifically, as reported, the accused worked for a cyber security firm where presumably he had access to confidential client information. These clients included government departments, banks, and law firms.
Whilst the accused actually activities seem to be in UK terms equivalent to defacing the Canvey Island parish council website they are still illegal.
This then leads to the question having discovered his extracurricular activities should the police leave this individual in a position with access to sensitive data without some recourse?
As a final point the article is definitely guilty of conflating the maximum penalty for the offense with the likely charge with which a court would sentence the accused. This seems to be typical of these sort of articles, and indeed forum posts, that attempt to discredit law enforcement efforts against anonymous.
I think you might be paranoid.
What is the difference here between 'tracking' an IP, and using telephone data? From what you are saying above the same considerations would apply to, using the endpoint of an IP address, as would also apply to telephone data as circumstantial evidence.
I.e. just like inferring conclusions from IP information, using telephone calls as evidence, unless either seen or caught on CCTV, you still don't know who actually made the call.
Since you aren't sure what GCHQ are doing I would suggest they are advising the government along these lines?
You say that as if you feel the CRS hitting teenagers on the head with a baton is a bad thing?
Re: Let's face it...
And now from our department of recycled comments ........
^^^ Fruit loop batshit paranoia
Re: Lack of direction
Looking at your points ....
It tied all the credit card, internet history, oyster card usage together for that "total law enforcement" policy
Have you any evidence that this true? No, didn't think so.
It was a way of stopping and searching random (non-white male youth) and then nipping them down to the station for a quick DNA sample if they had forgotten theirs.
And yet the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 is still in force which whilst it defines powers of arrest also as a by product provides for civil liberties. Incidentally introduced by Mrs Thatchers government.
It was a way for local councils to be able to pull up something suspicous about your internet history or mobile phone usage if you went to complain about the bins.
It was a way of checking if you were a striking miner on their way to a picket ( well it does take a while to implement these things)
Given as these days a 'striking miner on a picket line' would be defined as an 'ethnic minority' there more than enough legislation to provide legal safeguards. Surely.
It was of checking if this was a nice middle class boy at a demo whose daddy may cause a row, or a chav scum that can be given a good kicking.
^^^ Fruit loop batshit paranoia
And yet strangely France is one of the countries where ID cards aren't compulsory. Yet more proof perhaps that they aren't necessarily the cause of 'La tyrannie'?
Re: Finger print readers
Yes they probably should have had iris recognition systems as well.
Amen to that one!
Yet the list of countries that already have a National ID card contains many that aren't know for being tyrannical dictatorships?
I agree with you on both points. However I thought your original misogynistic quip was somewhat more appropriate for the comment pages of the Sun.
Not only not politically correct, also juvenile, and offensive.
@Aldous Re: The USA was responsible
Err yes there are only vague rumours the trade predates human history and yet the last major investigation along these lines wasn’t so much about trafficking from Iraq but Rochdale.
Could this indeed have been an evil plot by the Lancashire branch of the CIA? That said this just maybe some other group of people forcing (or at least coercing) girls into prostitution.
@Lars The USA was responsible
The USA was responsible ... secret wars etc
As at theory I would think this is as about as credible as the ‘Climate change forces women into prostitution’ theory. If this was the case wouldn’t we expect to see trafficked prostitutes from places that have been on the receiving end of US policy?
This would suggest that human trafficking would be for people from say Iraq, and Afghanistan. The evidence in the UK suggests otherwise with reports of people trafficking from Lithuania, Russia, Albania, Ukraine, Malaysia, Thailand, the People’s Republic of China (P.R.C.), Nigeria, and Ghana.
Re: The UK gov has just turned Flickr intothe new WikiLeaks
Ever heard of the Official Secrets Act?
Re: This case proves...
So you would like to see a large corporate able to effectively defend an employee against a charge of harassment really on the grounds that they have more money to spend? Or perhaps where somebody is bullied and harassed they just have to put up with it?
Re: Who's laughing now?
It's pathetic that homegrown talent gets banged up while offshore nothing happens - they laugh in the face of America.
Re: Crime and Punishment
If that fella was brought in, suitable charged and then prosecuted what could his sentence be? would he actually serve that sentence? would the expense of the trial, his possible incarceration and the involvement of all the various agencies be justifiably balanced? Probably not, and its that cold harsh economics of justice that makes this story and others like it have inadequate outcomes.
And even if charged a custodial sentence seems to consist of dossing about at HMP expense playing Playstations.
Whilst not a great fan of outsourcing I think custodial sentences is an area where other countries could do the work a lot cheaper than the UK. Possibly an even better idea might be to make the chavtastic scum class pay their debts back to society.
People like this could be indentured out to countries that require this sort of Human Resource. There are plenty of Middle Eastern countries that have these sorts of employment arrangements. The term of the indenture would then cease once HMP had received enough money to cover compensation, trial, administration and travel expenses.
Re: I like it !
Lock him in a box and put him on Ebay ......
Who's laughing now?
Re: Respect !!
1) Unions have an important role to play in balancing the workplace environment between employer and employee. Although they were too strong before Thatcher came to power, they were left far too weak afterwards to be able to fairly represent their members.
No. Take a look at the heavily unionised industries where time served with the union is far more important than ability.
2) Yes, Argentina was such a wonderful war wasn't it. Lets have another one with them soon. </sarcasm>
How about Iraq and Afghanistan? Did either of these make any sense to you?
3) A lot more was done in Major's time to make peace with the IRA than Thatcher ever managed.
True. But she cope with the Grand Hotel bombing.
4) Thatcher basically made way for the cult of personality that was Tony Blair. She led to the destruction of any real Labour party representing workers, and to the creation of 'New Labour', who bore no resemblance to left-wing politics whatsoever.
Yes and they were like poor imitations. Tacky, wet, plastic rubbish.
5) Why do you think liberalism is a bad thing, or are you one of these people who think inequality is good?
Yes and no, and a very long discussion. Question for you should there be quotas for jobs so that equality is represented, or should there be an attitude that the best person should get the job regardless of colour, sexuality, creed etc?
6) If anything Tony carried on her legacy. PPIs are just privitisation by another name after all. Gordo was the man holding the purse strings while he did this. Tony and Gordo ARE her legacy .
Yes. Tony and Gordon carried on her legacy (badly) because there weren’t competent to do anything different.
Re: Between The Unions and Thatcher
and making things at a cost that competes.
Re: RIP Mrs T
70s Britain - its strikes, the work attitude of the state owing everyone a living and strikes all the time, and I remember the tide seeming to turn in the 80s
I have to agree, it is only a shame that the later governments left a whole generation still with the attitude that the state owed them a living this time on benefits ........
You have to respect the things she stood up for and against. In particular for this country being a modern economy and against:
The work shy unions
The monopolies and inefficiency of the pubic industries
The Labour Party
Politically correct Liberal policies
The list is endless. It is just a crying shame that Tony and Gordon wrecked her legacy.
Oh well at least he hasn't published classified information this time. However if he wanted to do the world a favour he should man up to his responsibilities and go sort out the accusations in Sweden.
What with the death of Margaret Thatcher today who now will save us from this sort of wishy washy liberal politically correct nonsense.
Re: Fingers crossed... Macclesfield
particularly if subject to a 'Resident Evil' style virus errm and nobody realises
You are conflating the maximum penalties with which he could be charged, and the penalty he is likely to actually get. assuming he is first off found guilty
The maximum penalty for murder is life, just as the maximum penalties listed in the article is 10 years..... just as a murderer may serve 20 years, assuming that this 'Anon' is found guilty he may not even serve one full sentence of 10 years.
Nope I don't see how that applies. It would seem he committed a number of offenses and has been charged.
It is then up to the courts to decide guilt or innocence and assign a penalty.
Re: Kid vandalises shop window.
And even with Criminal Damage to a shop window (assuming that the value was over £5000) the penalty could be up to 14 years.
Do the crime and so on ........
Re: Guarantee from Sweden
what pisses me off is the disproportionate approach taken by the UK. Assange hasn't been charged with any crime in the UK or Sweden ...... and the only reason Assange hasn't been charged with rape in Sweden is that he has so far evaded arrest.
Re: FAIL felt as far as Oregon
First direct here .... after the last major outage at the time thinking maybe 'lightning won't strike in the same place twice' , and then thinking that this analogy might not as such apply.
I feel very sorry for RBS staff who were really great to deal with after moving from my previous bank due to different circumstances. That aside I did think that the RBS response to the last 'glitch' did seem to be a triumph of style over substance.
Looking like the suggestions are First Direct or Coop...........
Both the “Rights of the child” and the more general “Human Rights “ are not so much ‘nonsense on silts’ but are a mixture of ideals both good and bad.
My observations would be:
You get the ‘rights’ at the same time that you understand and accept your ‘responsibility’ to respect the rights of others. Also you lose the ‘rights’ if you demonstrate enough that you don’t accept the ‘responsibility’.
The ‘rights’ aren’t some sort of part of the natural law, god given, or whatever, they are defined, defended and paid for by the society in which you live. If society either, doesn’t agree that you have or can no longer afford, a ‘right’ you aren’t entitled to it any longer (any whimpering, and protests that you are entitled to a right puts you at odds with your responsibility - see first point).
But that said and also taking the point that society is increasingly infantilising our young people.... how difficult is it to knock a default content lock off a mobile phone? My phone has one, and I have removed it.
As I have previously remarked the OP in this case seems to demonstrate a remarkable lack of consideration for others in justifying that he has a trouble free internet access for his own gratification.
@AC Mon 4th Feb 2013 13:34 GMT and 15:12
Don’t you feel that you are being a bit hypocritical? On the one hand your final statement is that it is OK now to be ‘me, me, me’ but all you’re proceeding paragraphs berate extensively children for being exactly that, and parents for eventually giving in to that pressure.
Bear in mind (maybe that should be bare in mind) net enabled phones are not now a specialist technology product they are sold to pretty well anybody along with cornflakes, tins of beans, and washing powder.... the cheapest costing about the same as a large box of washing powder.
The parents who buy these phones may well not have the technology background to understand the possible pit falls. So a question for you, does the supermarket
a. Check that the purchaser has the background to understand the risk
b. Warn the parent
c. Take the money .....
Given how these products are so prevalent just maybe the marketing of them should be a bit more responsible, or indeed just maybe there should be something in the technology to help out the unwary?
Your statement -
If someone's someones kid is too stupid to realise that sending someone at school a naked picture of themselves means that it can be sent to anyone
Aside from containing some incoherence ... the word should be the possessive i.e. someone’s but you covered both possibilities I guess..... shows an astonishing lack of understanding of the likely cognitive abilities of a 12 to 15 year old child.
A child under the age of 15 is quite unlikely to understand the possible consequences of sending somebody a naked picture of themselves. General thinking is that until children reach about 15 they aren’t capable of reasoning as an adult.
It is with some relief I read that you don’t have children, and I guess both of us are hoping that is the way your life stays. Personally this end I have my fingers crossed that with luck you don’t even have a partner.... as you don’t strike me as the caring sympathetic type were to have an accident along those lines......
But it is generally thought that one of the responsibilities of society is to protect vulnerable people. How do you reconcile that thought with your somewhat incoherent rant?
Are you trying to say that the sheer effort of removing a content lock on an internet connection is beyond you or what?
Re: Law Flaw
MPAA, RIAA, FBI etc. are all US organizations. I don't see how these can be conflated with statements about Data protection in the UK?
Re: Load the lawyers! @Matt
and having myself more than once shouted down the phone at HMRC,
An excellent plan, sir, with only two minor drawbacks. One, we don't have a power source for the lasers; and two, we don't have any lasers. .....
Or why would you shout at HMRC because:
a. they hold all the cards
b. the guy who answers the phone is just doing his job (albeit an offense)
c. did I mention cards
d. plus a small chokes and some (stage whisper) silent sobbing is more effective
Re: Burn the tax codes and start again...
Tax credits anybody ?
Labour MP Margaret Hodge, who heads up the Public Accounts Select Committee, said the Tory-led coalition government "only talks to those who have a self interest in reducing their tax contribution" when writing new rules.
..... what with our expectations that they wouldn't do exactly the same as the Labour government they replaced.
Re: Oh. My. Fucking Gawd/ess. @Jake
Errrm I did sort of think Gartner were a semi credible commentator on the IT world, but find I can't disagree with your evaluation.
Labour's Chris Bryant used the announcement as an opportunity for the inevitable pop at Home Secretary Theresa May, who he reckons "should be focusing on fixing the big problems in her department
Whilst not a fan of Ms May this comment made me think what Labour was saying was more along the lines of "Should fix all the problems we left for you so when we get back to power we can have an unimpeded run at wrecking everything again .... "
Re: @Matt Bryant 17:35
I can't disagree with you Matt I too remember a warm welcome from folks in the Southern States. My comment is partly based on a couple of trips one into one of the not so good areas in Cincinnati, and a drive in Kentucky.
I guess the visit to Cincinnati could be put down to it being one of the more central "civilized" areas. The drive in Kentucky may have just been prejudice in that I drove up a minor hill north of Frankfort, driving along thinking this is just like the Walton's, then getting a little further up the road. The road by now was getting pretty narrow and looking in around I though nah this is more 'deliverance' than the Walton's.
The phrase 'Good Ole Boys' as was explained to me by folks (the welcoming ones etc) it could have a couple of meanings, one being essentially defined as red neck folks in pick up, shot gun rack and being driven errm like an AUDI. These being folks that were well worth avoiding.
Re: @Alfred 2 - Argument for gun ownership
Nah I don't condone Mr Martin gunning them down. I think just maybe the evidence was open to interpretation, and in the States he wouldn't have been charged. Bear in mind his sentence was eventually reduced to man slaughter.
The bit that really astonished me was that a 'habitually criminal' was provided with legal aid to pursue Mr Martin for loss of earnings. So because he couldn't go and break into anybody else house for a while you think he should have got a pay off?
@Rampant Spaniel - Monday 28th January 2013 14:46 GMT
Oh and as for having a gun pointed .. removed a bit .. my skin was the wrong colour for the local gang or whatever they were. All 3 times in southern states. Shit happens.
Ah those ‘Good Ole boys’ from the Southern States. Ya knows here in the UK it is hard for us to conceive anybody like the folks (in certain areas) of the
Confe Southern states. I sort of understand having traveled a bit in Kentucky myself, and watched the Top Gear special road trip in the US of A (particularly the bit in Alabama).
That aside my thoughts on gun control are very much on the fence. I have spoken with at least one of the other 7 folks out you way capable of objectively arguing the case for gun ownership, but when I look at the statistics they tend to argue against.
Thinking about it I would guess the answer is probably to introduce more sensible gun ownership rules in the states that don’t yet have them? A license if you can prove you are responsible and sane, and have good reason to have a gun..... Difficult to imagine why a private home owner would need a military grade assault weapon however if you generate a reason.
Perhaps issue the licenses on a case by case basis onus, and costs entirely down to the gun owner ongoing?
You don’t find anything wrong with the concept that somebody injured as a consequence of criminal activities should be in any way shape or form be eligible for compensation?
@Rampant Spaniel 28th January 2013 13:13 GMT
> Not everyone who owns an Audi is a tit, I'm sure there are normal Audi owners who know how to use an indicator and don't tailgate you at 120mph.
Errm no you just can't say this .... they are all tits .... had enough run in's with Audi's
> Not everyone who owns a gun or supports the rights of others to do so is a loon :-)
I could be convinced.
Re: @Alfred 2 - Argument for gun ownership
I am reminded of that all time classic of UK justice? Tony Martin who was not only imprisoned for shooting a couple of burglars. But the subsequently sued by one of the miscreants for 'loss of earnings'.
Rather than trying to help Mr Martin the UK justice system provided the burglar with at least £5000 of legal aid. Justice eventually prevailed in the this instance when The Sun published photo's of the 'Plaintiff' cycling and climbing with little apparent difficulty suggesting that his injuries were not as serious as had been claimed.
This all seems wrong to me .....
Nope you have misread the context of my post. I have not characterised all disabled people, further than that I haven't really characterised any disabled people as Oxygen thieves I merely refer to folks who where described in the first paragraph who might then feel they were entitled to disability benefit.
The people I describe in the first paragraph certainly wouldn't be disabled but presumably might be able fake the symptoms sufficiently to qualify.