They'll make it politically correct and overly moral......
Will suck big time.
1112 posts • joined 10 Apr 2012
They'll make it politically correct and overly moral......
Will suck big time.
He should of taken them to court in Texas. Always worked for Apple.......
"You probably live in Gungahlin. How Telecom (Telstra?) was allowed to install twin pairing should be the subject of a royal commission. But for most of Australia, if you live in a metropolitan area, you get quite reasonable bandwidth off copper. If you don't, then by all means buy yourself a fibre connection, but don't do it with my taxes."
Reasonable bandwidth? Reasonable now or reasonable in the future? Copper is already at the end of it's life and at some time everybody's taxes will be spent on replacing it.
The other option is to let Telstra continue to sell sub standard services at a premium price because it's a monopoly.
As for tax dollars, Joe Hockey just spent $50K taking some bankers out to dinner. I'd rather my money was spent on a proper NBN than a Clayton's NBN that will have to be ripped out and done again because the Libs thought that they save a few bucks.......
"Fast network to the home is all well and good, but it doesn't really help when the trans pacific link is still dog slow. I'm sticking with ADSL2 for the moment because that isn't currently the bottleneck."
You assume there is something better than ADSL2. Most Australians consider themselves lucky to be able to get ADSL2.
Telstra is trying to push everyone to wireless internet which half of what you get with ADSL2 and has a data cap of 1/10th at a price double.
I'm lucky enough to live in an area of Australia that got fibre before the current government canned it. It's ridiculous to think that last mile copper is good enough. Once you're more than 300m from the terminal, the speeds are no better than ADSL, not to mention corroded old lines and line duplexing, the new NBN plan is a farce.
That's not true. It could be programmed to act like it cares (just like a bar keeper)
The vending machine will welcome you back, offer you the usual and ask how the wife and kids are. Kinda like a bar tender........
More of a suggestion really........
"US Secretary of State John Kerry told NBC's Today program that the administration would be happy to fly Snowden back to the United States to make his case before the American people."
Not only would they be happy to fly him back, but they would be happy to force down any plane flying over (or even near by) American airspace if they thought he was on it and then fly him back.........
Maybe they are telling the truth but the NSA hide everything they can and lie about everything else so even if it is true, nobody will believe them anyway.
"Why don't I ever get the sexy female AI?"
Why? Do you want it to offer you some cake?
Same here. With the highway patrol becoming more and more militant to try and raise roadside tax, self drive may become a necessity for everyone
"Now I hope Apple really do put that kind of energy into US patent reform, because as we've seen, they have submitted, and been granted, some incredibly dubious patents."
Yeah right. Patent reform would invalidate half of Apple's crappy slide to unlock / rounded corners patents.....
The pollies and their staffers already leak more than the Titanic....
We will just go back in time and kill the mothers of the committee members along with Sarah Connor......
With Australia bringing in a three strikes law, poor to no wireless security gives you plausible deniability when the jackboot squad comes knocking.
Government maybe but residents no. Most residents only have one thought about TPP and that's "Hell no"
"Do you think people always have choice about when they need the loo?"
So who is making you use GMail? There is 1001 "free" services out there or you can make your own mail server.
There is no such thing as free and preventing companies from monetizing the service just results in the service being close because it's unfinancial.
Actually I think they stopped because the English was so bad, the robots were getting confused......
"Yep they are. Google do not operate in a vacuum occupied by Google and their customer's alone. When they scan emails they can also build a profile for users emailing gmail users and also those who have never even sent email to a gmail user but whose emails have got captured in a conversation thread that has been. When Google read a users address book, they get the email addresses and contact details of users who don't use gmail. Their data-store analysis activity and the data they store itself have implications far beyond Gmail users. It has made Google one of the most powerful intelligence agencies on the planet. You have not been granted mandate to decide this is ok for all of us, because you think critics are "are dumb" and that Google should be allowed to continue un-examined and without criticism"
The problem with most people is that they don't know the difference between privacy and anonymity
The internet is like a public toilet with camera installed in each cubical. The cameras are already there and we can choose not to use the public toilet if we don't like them. We are told that the cameras allow the computer to scan the cubical so the company knows when to refill the paper and clean the toilet. The company makes it money selling the waste to fertilizer companies.
You don't want to pay for the toilet. You don't want the company to sell your shit. You don't want the cameras and you complain if the cubical runs out of bog paper or someone left a floater. Not only that you'll also complain if the company closes the toilet cause it's unfinancial because it's your god given right to have free toilets.
Sure the company could use the camera to look at your willy but there are thousands using the toilets every day and your willy isn't that special. If you have an issue, cover your willy or choose a toilet that is dirty because it has no camera or use your own toilet.
You're anonymous but not private. Learn the difference.
Is it just me or are some people dumb.
There is no such thing as a free lunch. Google's "free" mail service is paid for by ads. They can target ads and show things relevant to the user or they can show random stuff.
I'd rather have targeted ads. I don't need penis enlargement pills or feminine hygiene products but I can understand some of the commentards on here do......
"Too many people are under served by the current transport system. They are blind, or too young to drive, or too old, or intoxicated as well as stoned and/or retarded."
Did it in my twenties. It really isn't that hard. Buying the first property is the hardest but once the bank owns your soul, they will happily lend to you again and again.
I'm a software developer and I'm a millionaire. Mind you I didn't get rich from my day job other than being a geek with no social life left me money to invest.....
Mind you, millionaire really isn't a very high bar these days.
"What, a complete nutjob?"
No. A rich nutjob.....
(Most have got the nutjob part down pat already)
Saw it and thought exactly the same thing.
Just right for Australia.....
"Run out and find me a five year old child!"
Michael Jackson said that too and he got into trouble for it....
I don't know what's more disturbing, the fact that roboroo has a blinking anus, you for spotting his anus or me for watching the video again to confirm his blinking anus.......
Welcome our new robo skippy overlords.......
So are baseball cards but last time I checked, they're not a currency either.
I think people are confused because bitcoins have the word coin in the name. The law states that it's property and until they law says that bitcoins are money, you can't get charges with money laundering (at least until you exchange them for money)
I could argue the same for expensive paintings and wines. It's property that can be exchanged for money.
According to the law, it's property and never money.
"Not sure what you mean by "anonymous", but they are traceable. That's the whole point of the chain. The equivalent of laundering would be the pooling shops that mix the content of wallets, making the coins hard to trace -but not impossible."
No it's impossible to trace without the police having everybody's wallet. The wallets are anonymous and short of getting caught with the wallet, the police cannot identify the owner, let alone what the coins were spent on.
Think of it like anonymous credit cards. You can see the flow of money but without linking the cards to people, you can't see who's buying or selling.
"The bitcoin does not have to be a currency to achieve this. The money laundering process begins when the bitcoin was bought (or money changed hands for the goods that were then traded for bitcoin)."
That's true except Rob didn't change the format. He was paid in property (bitcoins) and left it as property (bitcoins). It's not until Rob changes it to actual cash that they can claim it. Considered the police seized bitcoins instead of cash, their argument falls flat.
Just image Rob was paid for with an expensive painting and hung the painting on his wall. You can claim laundering if he sold said painting for cash but you can't for him keeping it instead.
You can only do it if you declare paintings as a form of currency (and not property) or make a property laundering law.....
"and use that money to buy Ferraris, beach houses and hookers, which are all a drug lord really wants in the end"
Isn't that what we all just want?
"The government may need to prove a larger operation for the money laundering, but since the bitcoin are exchanged for cash, it's still a money laundering operation. Just because he only had the subcontract for exchanging property doesn't invalidate the operational basis."
Ah but your argument falls flat as the bitcoins hadn't been exchanged to cash. They were still bitcoins.
Rob was paid in bitcoins (which are property) and he left them as bitcoins (still property). You can't argue it was money laundering because at no stage while in Robs possession was it turned from or to an actual currency.
You can argue proceeds of crime but you can't argue money laundering without money. The government needs to declare bitcoins a legal currency or they need to drop the money laundering charges.
At the end of the day, the law is an ass.....
Yes but there is no property laundering laws and as such the money laundering charges have to be dropped.
As for the proceeds of crime, running a website isn't a crime just because said users used it for crime otherwise Google would be in trouble.
The law isn't about right or wrong, justice or injustice. It's always about the letter of the law. There are going to be some serious precedents set no matter who wins this.
As much as this is a joke, the future will be 3d printed buildings.
Google and the NSA win.
I'd of thought the skills writing a crypto currency would make him very employable.
We Aussies beat you to get an operational drone delivery service.....
Not if he spends on coke off the Silkroad.....
Lets solve the pollution problem by using more chemicals......
If you have to buy equipment to comply on the government's spying demands, then they should pay for it.
The only thing the government has a right to complain about is not getting a discount for spying in bulk...
Then stop bugging everyone.....
May TPP die a quick death and never be seen again
There is nothing more democratic than secret treaties that sell us out to multinational companies.
Quick, buy up Vasoline before parallel imports are banned and drives the price up.
Executive action one : Find free workers
Executive action two: Find free engineers
Executive action three: Find free lawyers.
These changes are the most you can do without actually doing something.
That 25 Mbit is fast enough for anyone with their fibre to the node NBN.