Re: Why "chumps"?
And now with end-to-end encryption.
114 posts • joined 24 Sep 2010
And now with end-to-end encryption.
People seem to have trouble seeing emergency vehicles with every bit of warning kit lit up. Lack of engine noise would be the least of the problem for a lot of the motoring public!
~ $ curl -I theregister.co.uk
HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 20:18:05 GMT
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Server: Apache/2.2.22 (Debian)
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
(although I enjoy the BOFH header as well!)
Notwithstanding the author's clear bee in his bonnet (come on, El Reg, at least try for a whisker of impartiality), he misses the point entirely about the 'Protection from Harassment' letters.
In order for an individual to be convicted of a harassment offence, they need to pursue a course of conduct that they know or ought to know is unwanted. When you've got an ongoing issue between two parties, the police will issue a letter on behalf of the victim that basically says that any further contact is unwanted, and removing any doubt on that matter.
The letter isn't an order, and in of itself binds no one to anything. If you're going to ignore it, however, you're going to be hard pushed to defend further contact in the face of it; noting that it's issued on behalf of the victim, and it's the victim who gets to define 'unwanted'.
In order for the letter to be written, you've got to have an allegation of harassment in the first place. That results in a crime report, and that's going to remain on record as part of the Home Office counting rules. The fact that the letter has been written needs to be recorded, and the letter is going to be filed, what with it being evidence in a criminal matter.
Records are generally kept for seven years because that's the cut off for civil litigation - just imagine the issues if an officer is obliged to destroy his notes that describe an arrest of someone subsequently cleared or not proceeded against, where force was used and the subject wished to launch a civil claim.
Plus Inman has some experience with crowdfunding (after the Tesla museum), and isn't likely to stick his name on something that's going to never appear
When Blackberry do keyboards well, they are very, very good. Slide out keyboards, even when built in, aren't the same by a long shot and a crappy Chinese knock off on ebay isn't going to come close.
The fact that people are resisting upgrading their Bolds, etc. suggests that there is a market, but it's not the consumer one that Rim bet the farm on a couple of years ago.
TPLink appears to be the new low-end Netgear. In my limited experience, the netgear products could be divided into 'cheap plastic' and 'tank like metal' enclosure. The latter tended to go on forever, doing sterling yet unsung service in the back of cupboards and sealed behind plasterboard.
Irfanview. A must have.
You might want to read the linked article from 2012. The idea isn't that the spectrum is entirely empty , but that powerful TV transmitters will be tuned to avoid interfering with each other and the resulting shadow is ideal to stick a small, low powered transmitter in, provided there's a robust database saying what can and can't be used in a given location.
They've not really subsidised phones for a while now. All your two year contract is doing is providing a phone on credit at a bit of a discount to buying it unlocked on a credit card.
Think of an album, and you're listening to it. It's not for everyone, but I like being able to download practically anything - if I had to go away and buy individual CDs (or muck about with the pirate bays), I'd not listen to half the stuff I would do.
£500 pound gets you a box that scans and then prints a 3D object?
The future has clearly arrived! It might be clunky and the printed item might turn out to be the C21 equivalent of asbestos, but still...
Z10 isn't budget territory, though.
That's handy. I'm going to assume you don't work in environments where USB access is disabled by default.
There's a specific exemption for using the phone in an emergency.
In the meantime, organised gangs have been trawling London and exploiting CANBUS security flaws and making off with hundreds of BMWs and Range Rovers without needing to bother with pesky things like keys.
The reported flaw is probably nothing, but it highlights that vehicle manufacturers are failing to get to grips with the fact that the in-car IT is vulnerable and can be exploited, and this is just a symptom of the issue.
Why would the US put up a map of Yorkshire?
Waking up and being able to see without scrabbling for glasses, or being able to go to bed pissed and not worry about pawing a set of contacts out is a hitherto unrealised pleasure.
I had it done, and I can't praise it enough - I couldn't function without glasses, let alone get behind the wheel of a car.
You're thinking of Germany. Here, your conviction data stays on until you hit 100 years of age.
No it wasn't. The two have been cheerfully exchanging data since the ISA came into being.
Buy each other a pint and sit in the boozer talking shite about it. Which is how most of my gaming-meets-real-life things go.
When D&B were exhibiting their speakers at conventions they'd often challenge a speaker cable manufacturer to a listening contest between the premium product and any old mains cable that was kicking about.
Funnily enough, there were no takers.
I enjoy the fact that Hansard has been archived on the slightly scary sounding 'millbanksystems.com', like some sort of black operation based out of the bowels of Thames House.
However, had you looked at the farmer funny, they'd have nicked you for a breach and questioned you without access to legal representation.
It's not all honey and clover north of the border.
>You cannot do your job, because you have restricted computer access restraint placed upon you.
This is a bit misleading - you're unlikely to have that condition placed upon you during police bail (as distinct from court bail) as it is practically unenforceable.
Even if plod decides to give it a punt, you can ask that free lawyer you were given to appeal it to the magistrates court, who can vary or remove police bail conditions. If the condition is so onerous as to not let you earn a living, then it's more likely than not to be removed unless you not working outweighs the risk that you might pose whilst on bail.
Godwin refers to the tendency of any internet discussion to, in due course, make a comparison between the opposing view and nazis.
It's got nothing to with the mention of things like "little hitler" - it shouldn't be used as shorthand for political correctness.
Given that mobiles are leapfrogging fixed lines across the developing world and doing some frankly astounding good, no.
That was my reasoning, although given my purchasing habits, I may as well have just bought a betamax and be done with it.
Find me a way to sync my various different rss clients across my phone and various computers, for nowt, and I'd agree with you.
Looks all right, actually!
What, exactly, has been stolen?
The big problem is that, to date, there's been no appeals to the crown court so its relying on the fairly varied judgement of magistrates to define 'using'.
This isn't a bad thing as such, but it means that there are a lot of prosecutions that are being succesfully defended on the basis of some fairly sketchy arguments. Equally, there're a lot of prosecutions going forward that shouldn't (some over zealous traffic officers extending the definition of handheld to units firmly affixed to cradles, for example).
'under siege'? Or do you mean 'someone's got worked and is writing stuff that nobody's paying attention to unless they're interested in that kind of thing'?
I'm firmly of the opinion that if people simply didn't engage with trolls, they'll get bored and find something else to do. Honestly, internet drama only works if it's reciprocated.
I'm tied in to an android, (via an iphone) but do miss the BB I used to have, so will be interested to see how it pans out with a view to upgrade when I've shaken the shackles of my s3 contract.
That said, the Playbook is currently excellent value (£99? 64gb? Yes please!) and due to see the new OS, so might be a cheap way to have a play without committing to phone contract.
The kids who use BBM don't care about android. They want BBM, in part because it's cheaper and more interactive than SMS and doesn't use up their PAYG minutes. Stick a voice component into the proposition, and I can't see it exactly hurting sales.
They've clearly spent the cash on a half decent PR bot instead.
<quote>I'm sorry but if your getting money because you can't find a job, you can work for it and have money for then working instead.</quote>
If you're going to force people to work, then it should be for minimum wage.
Back when I was contracting (swings lamp, etc.) in government, I had a lot of content that needed to go on directgov.
The web design may have been apalling, but the editors were very firm on making sure that the wording avoided the worst of the civil service's tendency towards buzzwords and the use of words like 'tranche', as well as the use of eight words where one would do.
Oh, the fights we had, trying to convince policy wallahs that it was alright to start leaving some of the footnotes out.
Or dwarf bar-tenders. I think there's a clear need to expand the 'poorly stocked fridge' definition of a 'mini bar'.
You'd be very surprised at what can be entered as evidence and, more germanely, what might well prompt an out-of-court settlement.
If they're paying interest, that's your meal at the Restaurant at The End of The Universe sorted!
And Barclays hoovered up the Woolwich. Granted, the latter only had about ten account holders, but the principle still stands.
Probably because 'They' are GCHQ/Mi5/SOCA rather than CID down the local nick, who'd be going nowhere near that data even if they wanted to. And they probably wouldn't want to, as the local slag'll be using nicked PAYG blackberries, for which traffic analysis is about as useful as a chocolate fireguard, seeing as you've no idea who has what number anyway.
150ms? Luxury, kids today don't know they're born. When I were a lad, we were up at half five, tying the packets to rats, 'cause we couldn't afford pigeons and even if we could the rats would've et 'em.
stay for the lasers!
or possibly some difficulties with their short term memory!
Not being an OED subscriber, I can't comment on their entry. However, I note with interest that the Cambridge University Press dictionary sayeth that theft is "(the act of) dishonestly taking something which belongs to someone else and keeping it" and dictionary.com (Random House's offering) says "the act of stealing; the wrongful taking and carrying away of the personal goods or property of another; larceny."
Both definitions are heavy on the "taking" and "property" and very thin on the "copying" or "getting something for free" which you assert to be the common parlance for theft.
It's not a semantic argument. Theft (as defined by the helpfully named Theft Act 1968 in the UK) tells us that "A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it"
When you accuse someone of theft, you're accusing them of a very specific offence. An indictable one, at that. Copyright infringement is, simply put, not the same as theft. This is a matter of fact, not opinion.