84 posts • joined 25 Aug 2012
9SU(Signals Unit) Boddington, had nothing to do with GCHQ it was more to do with RAF Innsworth (now Imjen Barracks) which was also just down the road in Churchdown. Boddington was the major comms exchange linking various Commcens (Communications Centres) at every camp in the UK and overseas. It was used for the formal messenging systems that were in use by the Armed Forces before email was used for everything.
(Former TCO (Telecommunications Operator) RAF, worked at both Innsworth and Boddington)
Re: *If* true that would make the Standard Model a pretty blunt tool.
Ohh cmon, you know Im not on about the average, run of the mill, garden variety religious nuts. Im on about the religious nuts who believe the world was created in 6days with a 7th for rest 6000 odd years ago or the whackadoodles that blow themselves up in the name of (insert invisible deity of choice here) to "further their cause"!
Re: *If* true that would make the Standard Model a pretty blunt tool.
If you want to test what would happen we could always use chavs! See they do have a use after all.
Back on topic, although not entirely understanding what the hell is going on at CERN (brain not big enough!). I applaud the fact that they are doing something to further figure out what is going on in the world. It shows that we don't know everything (and yes religous nuts, I am looking at you!), but we are not afraid to look! (still looking at you religous nuts)
This seems like.....
......(to me anyway) that they are more bothered about the fact that Google did this without asking first. The old "It is better to seek forgiveness than permission" argument in full force.
I dont believe any author would object to the extra advertising of their books, it would do their sales no end of good. But Google should of checked first IMHO.
I feel dirty now.....
...., but only because I am going to defend PC World for a change. Yes they are over priced, but a couple of months ago my wifes laptop power cable stopped working. I didnt know at first whether it was the power cable or the socket on the laptop (two kids things get rammed and pulled all over the shop!!). I rang the PCW helpdesk and asked if they could put me through to the Lincoln store after explaining what the problem was they put me through. I chatted to the guy and asked if they had a multi adaptor that I could bring the laptop down to the store and test it to see where the problem lay.
No problems whatsoever (except for not having the one connector I needed) he tried every one he had, didnt charge me or try to sell me anything and seemed genuinely apologetic that he couldnt help me. Maybe this guy was the exception to the standard rule, but I had no problem with following that visit with an email to his boss asking him to thank him for his service.
I am a big believer in finding something cheaper elsewhere, but if the service is shit I dont care how cheap it is I most likely wont shop there. If I get good service I would rather pay a bit more.
In this case I feel that PCW have been screwed over slightly more than likely to either a bullshitting salesman or an overzealous customer who didnt read all the T+C's in the contract
Not one to defend Apple but....
.....Why should they have to fork out for this? Why isnt it the parents fault for allowing the kids access to their credit cards??
Is this another case of whinging parents complaining that naughty company didnt do their job for them??
Does anyone think that with the camera and the battery all on the same side of the glasses, these things are not exactly going to sit straight on the face???
Re: Red Dwarf..
Cerberus had three heads, his brother Orphus had two heads
Keep the dog/hell theme of Pluto and add in Cerberus and Orthrus
Or if you just want to stick to Disney dogs then Goofy and his son Max
Re: @Jay Holmes (was: new god required)
Yeah I know, but I was thinking more along of the double meaning of Secure transfer as in if you are a bad boy you get a nice agent of the devil to help you with your secure transfer to do some networking in everlasting torture!!!!
See just because I dont pay attention in class, doesnt mean I cant make shit up on the fly lol
Re: new god required
Coming soon GOD V2.0
This upgrade replaces GOD V1.0/1.3.0 and V1.65
Unfortunately due to the way religion works, you will have to unistall your current GOD version and install the newest version (GOD V2.0). Don't forget to upgrade your associated software S.A.T.A.N. (Security Agent Transfer And Networking)
As this version is currently untested and unproven in the real world, there are likely to be numerous bugs that we havent identified as yet.
To report a suspected bug, please adopt a kneeling position with your hands clasped firmly together, close your eyes and explain your problem starting with "Dear GOD..."
I assure you someone is listening and as long as your problem doesnt interfere with any current dogmatic process and isnt to do with personal gain (lottery wins, ex wife death etc etc) then it should be fixed in time for your funeral
Heaven/Hell Support Desk
Re: MS Surface pro FAIL
All hope is now gone, after reading (and replying) to something you wrote the other day that came across as quite reasonable, you have devolved back to your normal rants, shame as some of your first post made sense.
Mac UI -> Windows UI << Really I thought the Mac UI was popular??
ARM -> ARM <<Doesnt this run on an I5
Make hardware -> make hardware <<Samsung make hardware too
iPod -> Zune << The iPod was not the first MP3 player on the market
iPad -> Surface <<They didnt copy this a quick look will tell you that they look completely different
App Store -> Microsoft Store <<App Store not the only one on the market to be copied
iPhone -> Win Pho 7/8 <<Unbelievable as this seems iPhone only made smart phones popular they were not the first Smart phone on the market
Go after the high end -> Go after the high end << 90% of the worlds companies do this, including MS that is why you have so many different releases of Windows from starter to Premium, aiming at differing levels of the market
Apple retail stores -> Microsoft Retail Stores << Cant argue with this
You need to find your pause button, some of your comments start off with semi intelligent comments which rapidly turn into anti MS rants, I know im going to be accused of being some kind of MS corporate shill because of this and if they want to pay me to point out the blindingly obvious then I wont stop them lol
Gaining access to the data isnt my main problem with this, its the storage afterwards that I have a problem with.
If something I say or do is flagged in any shape form or way. The following happens
It gets pinged by some automated system to an analyst,
Analyst (overworked and underpaid trust me) can't make a decision either way,
Pinged up to senior analyst who decides they need more information
A discrete info sweep is done on me, no probs as I have done nothing wrong.
Analyst realises that there is nothing further required, closes file deletes all information they received about me.
Now since I am in the forces I have no problems with this, same as I have no issues with ID cards Ive been carrying one around with me since I was 17. Its the data retention I have issues with as we all know how good government agencies (and the forces) are at keeping data secure. (big tip dont let people leave the bloody building with it!!!)
I dont have a problem with CCTV either if it is used in the right place for the right thing, and they use cameras that can actually identify people as opposed to the usual shitty screen grabs that you see pushed on crimewatch.
The security services in this country are extremely good at their job, not a lot slips through their net. They are hampered by the government ministers who are trying to build their little empires.
Re: Touch interfaces are expensive
Im impressed that for once seems like quite a balanced argument as to why W8 isnt doing so well. Touch interface doesnt work so well for Laptop/Desktop environment as it puts the user in an uncomfortable position, but is ideal for tablets/phones.
MS need to do a rethink, I can understand where they were coming from with the all platforms one (software) form factor idea, but they seem to have stopped the brainstorming session there without looking at the obvious problems. Maybe W8 SP1 could remove tifkam from the desktop/laptop environment and maybe that will make people happier and more inclined to use it! But who knows??
All jokes aside could this be the way that we eventually get a working station on the moon??
Someone puts the idea on kickstarter and shed loads of cash arrive from private enterprise and obligatory bored millionaires.
Would be interesting to see it happen!
Love the analogy, if people stop thinking about the internet as a massive library where all the information that they could ever want (and a fair bit they dont want!) and used your analogy of a massive park full of strangers, they may think twice about leaving their children unsupervised on the internet.
But as people (inc me) keep saying if parents took responsibility for raising their own children and not expect someone else to do it for them, then this wouldnt be a problem.
Children have to be trusted to fuck up, but when they do fuck up they have to be able to trust their parents enough to talk to them and not fly off the handle Daily Mail style. If they cant talk to you for whatever reason then they are less likely to tell you when something goes wrong and you will only find out when it is to late to stop it from getting worse.
Re: "ChildLine is sending workers to every primary school in Britain...
Yes to the first idea, I think that if ChildLine is going to be going into schools they should have two classes, one for the kids and then one for the parents. Educate everyone rather than enforce everyone. For some parents they have had no IT training past your basic Office functions for work or what they have picked up themselves, so generally have no idea about how to set up any kind of filtering. To be fair a lot of parents also use the computer as an electronic child monitor, if the kid is on the computer he is not annoying me is a great response.
However I think you are suffering from an excessive amount of hope if you think this generation of kids will grop up, go into government and change things. I think we are more likely to have another generation that just expects handouts from that government. If we can start bringing the education back to school, and the parenting back to the parents then maybe the next generation or the one after that may have the moral fortitude required to get off of their collective arses and change things for the better.
Yes I agree that kids should have lessons in how to stay safe online, but I believe that parents should be able to get lessons in how to secure their connection for their own kids and not expect someone else to do it for them.
If my kids see porn online, it will be down to one of two things either I havent secured my internet properly to keep them from seeing things that I believe are not safe for them. Or the little shits have become more tech savvy than me, which means I have to up my game.
But (and this is what I hope mainly) I am raising my kids to talk to me if they have problems, so that they can come to me with anything, knowing Im not going to go ballistic at them. If people took more interest in their kids and what they are doing online and in general then this wouldnt be a problem (IMHO)
Hopefully this will stay more faithful to the original than the film did. Even my son who tried watching the film a few months ago said it was rubbish compared to the tv show version that we had watched earlier in the day! This from a 7yr old, says a lot really doesnt it
Look forward to seeing this, just hope after the first episode I can look forward to the second and so on!!
Thanks for the reply to be honest I havent read enough about how the payments are taken or how many payments you can make before you need to make an authorised payment.
The arguement regarding payment limits however is subjective, for example if the limit is £20 and every 4th payment is authorised, potentially if some enterprising criminal figures out a way of scamming these payments (and with the way banks deal with security its at least plausible) thats potentially £60 gone before you realise. If the limit is only £5, then its only £15 before you realise which although not great is a lot easier for people to manage. The £5 argument is because the whole idea was (if I remember correctly) was you wouldnt need to authorise payments for small payments ie cup of coffee.
But then if your raking in the cash I suppose you can afford £20 for a brew lol
Not quite sure you are on the correct website if you are calling people luddites, but hey ho will treat it as a crap attempt at humour!
I have no problem with the whole NFC pay by bonk system as long as the security side of things is investigated seriously.
Up to £20 payments that dont have to be authorised is no good, is there a limit on these before some authentication is required, therefore stopping the criminal element from taking too much, because you know where theres a will theres a way and the fuckers will find it!
I think the maximum for unathorised transactions in one go should be £5, and every 4th payment in a day should have to be authorised so the maximum someone could take before you noticed would be £15, (instead of £60, although I wouldnt be happy about losing £15 I could handle it easier than £60 whilst it was investigated!) because the last £5 you would have to authorise. Therefore if you havent made any payments that day you would definitly investigate where your money has gone!!
Thats just one idea, while doesnt do anything about the inherant (sp) security issues, does put the user in more control.
Had a discussion with my 7yr old son the other day, apparently his friend had been grounded, when I asked him why he told me that the phone her parents had got her (for when she went to the park so they could call her in if needed) had been set to silent so her parents couldnt get hold of her so she was late in and got a bollocking.
I asked him if he thought that was fair, he said yes as she had been trusted and had broke that trust! (woo hoo I thought ive dragged this kid up proper lol)
I then told him that I would possibly do something similar ie get him a mobile for when he goes down the park, so I could contact him if I wanted him back in early or he could call me to ask me anything without having to run home first (can i go round friends house etc etc)
He was excited about being trusted with a mobile, however he had the wrong end of the stick as we were in Carphone Warehouse and he went straight to the smartphones, when I asked him what he was doing he told me he was looking for the phone he wanted. He wasnt too impressed when I showed him which phones I was talking about lol (didnt like the comment of well at least its got a colour screen, my first phone didnt!)
We have to trust kids to make their own mistakes and learn from them, but as parents we have to help our kids learn from their mistakes and keep an eye on them. Not in a massively big brother sense, but to help them from turning their mistakes into full blown cluster fucks! If you can trust your kids then they will trust you with everything.
I would rather my kid (or anybody really) come and tell me they have fucked up, than for me to find out from someone else!!
Re: A$$ange is yesterday's news
Be careful what you say about Assange, judging by my earlier comment either people didn't get the humour or they took exception to me referring to St Julian as an Oxygen thief!!
Anyway back on topic, has anybody said what the Feebs were doing in Iceland in the first place, or is it just 2+2=4 or 2+2=Assange, in other words were they looking at Assange or something completely unrelated to Wikileaks?
You seem to have misplaced your sense of humour!!
Piss myself laughing if they were actually there on holiday or even better doing something that had fuck all to do with Assange!!
Not that the oxygen thief is getting annoying now, but seriously a couple of FBI agents go to Iceland.....
.......mines the smoking gun on the grassy knoll!!!
Thanks for taking the time to answer. I can see your point with regards to teh censorship angle, to be honest hadnt really looked at it from that way. I hadn't looked at it from that point because as I said in my original message I either post or I dont and if I do post I stand by what I say and would back it up in the flesh just as I would online. (maybe I'm odd??? Hmmmmm!)
A lot of the time it can get annoying when you are replying to an AC@ (whatever time) or even reading someone elses reply to an AC as you then have to search through user names and times they posted. Is there anyway that when the user checks the "Post Anonymously" box a system name could be given to them, this could be a random name that is not connected in any shape form or way to the name they registered to the site with. Like bob, or dave something random lol. Purely and simply to make it easy to refer too
As for the idiots that track people down IRL then there is a place for them too, it has padded walls and they feed you 3 times a day whilst letting you wear a lovely jacket that fastens at the back!!
Why is the voting anonymous, it would be nice to know who exactly likes or dislikes your posts. Purely and simply to enable a conversation with that person for example if they like what you have said, they could either just agree with you or they are easily led and may be interested in joining your cult!! If someone dislikes your comment, they may not of understood the comment or they may just have a unique way of offering themselves up for ritual sacrifice!!
Also why post anonymously, I am in the RAF I have no problem posting under my real name if I believe the topic to be sensitive or could potentially get me into trouble I just dont post. However there are other options to the whole anonymous coward tag, assign a name to those that tick the "post anonymously" box just to make replies a bit easier.
Re: Playing Devils Advocate!!
Reading through this (to me anyway) it basically says that although Samsung made an error in the version of UEFI they should of issued (version 2 instead of version 1). It was actually the Linux module that over wrote the boot entry for setup. No way should that be even accessible so yes to some extent Samsung is to blame, but who wrote the code that enabled it to do that in the first place? (and before everyone says Samsung, they didnt the just supplied some code that this code was based on!)
"The implementation in Samsungs UEFI shows some weird behavior. Error code EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER should only be returned, if one of the given pointers to variables is NULL and pointing to an invalid memory section. Samsungs implementation also throughs this error, if the given memory blocksize is not exactly 128 bytes, so for example (like the Linux-efivars module does) 1024 bytes. The Linux module does not expect the strange error code (it checks for NULL pointers itself) and does not report any UEFI variables, no boot entries, no nothing. The installer accepts that and installs the Linux boot entry into the first slot, where actually the boot entry for the setup is located - overwriting that entry! Setup is dead since Linux took its boot entry.
This bug does not only cause Linux to stumble, also UEFI Shell version 2.0 does not start at all. The shell also allocates a larger buffer for the variable name, which causes the shell to exit with error trying to allocation the environment variables within the data section. A small change within the source code and it runs like a charm: Samsung UEFI-Shell 2.0 64Bit (patched 64-bit shell, put in on FAT16/32-USB-stick as /EFI/BOOT/BOOTx64.efi, then boot from stick with UEFI boot switched on)
The error probably has its origin in mixing up UEFI version 1 and 2. In version 1 variable names still had a fixed size of 128 Byte. Version 2 changed this, but Samsung didn't."
So Samsung didnt change the version of UEFI, probably because it was a working stable version with the OS they distributed (W7/8). Im not saying this is a correct way of business, but their attitude seems to be if its not broke, dont fix it. How can they be blamed for (and be expected to replace peoples laptops) this error? A group of users have basically downloaded some code from someone they dont know, they havent checked it, it has bricked their laptop and they want to blame the company that sold them a working laptop. Lets get this straight, they have probably invalidated the warranty by changing the laptop from what was sold.
Have a look at your warranties and see exactly what is and isnt covered, also for those that say Samsung (and to be honest any other large company) should test on more than just Windoze, do you honestly expect them to test every flavour of Linux/Unix out there or just test the software they are selling the laptop with???
Playing Devils Advocate!!
I know we all like to stick it to the man (Samsung) and we all fight for the underdog (Linux) but is this actually all Samsungs fault?
Yes a very serious bug has been highlighted here and at the very least I expect that Samsung should be doing something to plug this hole from their end, to avoid it becoming an exploit in the future. But should they (apart from good customer service/good will/great PR) replace the laptops that have been bricked?
People keep going on about this code that Samsung supplied so I re-read the article and the original story and got the following from this article
"Long ago Samsung told me that it was just fine to be doing this, and that there would not be any problems (I based the samsung-laptop driver on code that Samsung themselves gave me.)"
So a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away someone at Samsung told him he could do it. When did they give him this code? Recently or "Long ago"?
Is it just possible this exalted code monkey did something wrong? After all "To Err is to be human"!
And from the original article
"The Samsung laptop driver module source code is here. It was written by Greg Kroah-Hartman, who said he based it on code from Samsung."
Since we know GKH doesnt work for Samsung, he has written the code based on code from Samsung, again how old is this code?
Before everyone skim reads this and just sees Samsung good Linux Bad, this is not what I am saying. What I am trying to point out is that the majority of people are that blinkered into believing the major corporations are out to get them that they refuse to believe that when something goes wrong it isnt there (the corporations) fault!
It would be nice to see a little bit of objectivity from the comentards, maybe we might see it from the article writers then!!
Does anyone think they should specify "Apple Products" in this?
After a quick read through I saw this and had the thought, that this covers pretty much any store that sells all of this stuff, so shouldnt they specify Retail stores that sell Apple computers, etc etc?
"International Class 035: Retail store services featuring computers, computer software, computer peripherals, mobile phones, consumer electronics and related accessories, and demonstration of products relating thereto
In International Class 035, the mark was first used at least as early as 09/00/2006, and first used in commerce at least as early as 09/00/2006, and is now in use in such commerce. The applicant is submitting one specimen(s) showing the mark as used in commerce on or in connection with any item in the class of listed goods and/or services, consisting of a(n) Photograph of Applicant's store."
Also primary legal is a lass called "Widup" had to re -read that a couple of times to make sure it didnt say "Windup"!
IMHO, its all getting a bit of a joke now not just Apple, but all companies looking at blaming someone else for copying certain things. Instead why cant they just do something better and let their actions speak for themselves?
Where is Eadon to tell us how this is all MS's fault??
Apart from the title. Is there no way of reflashing the chip? And if there is surely it would be in Samsungs best interest to provide this help.
Customer service seems to be dead these days, with most companies only interested in taking your money there and then. Surely it would make more sense to give continued support/advise so that customer comes back and buys their next product from you. Or is this wishful thinking.
Final thing where is the rest of the story, we have comments from a Senior Ubunto developer, an Intel developer, but where is the comment from Samsung??
Quoting an Ubunto developer about what someone, somewhere else who spoke to someone, somewhere at Samsung told him isnt really getting the Samsung story is it??
Re: The Right to Free Speech
OK point taken, Subversive Literature probably does have its place as a catalyst to wake real people up who take a stand publicly. Subversive Literature by itself does nothing. People talking in code to avoid detection, agreed when this is used to good effect it works.
I asked about the London Riots, that were borne out of a so called peaceful protest. Most people decided to protest anonymously, masked up just like the student (University Tuition) protests.
My second point asked what Anonymous had done, havent really found out yet other than annoy people they havent really changed anything have they?
Correct Assange wasnt being annonymous the person supplying him the information was trying (doing a bad job of it too!) to be anonymous, but do you think if he had just been saying nasty things about the government they would of even bothered with him. Or do you think he got caught because he was doing something illegal??
You quote "American" law at me then, something which has no relevance to either my comments or the article in question.
Granted the Junius pamphlets did a hell of a lot for reforming the way most of Europe deal with things politically and democratically and they were written anonymously. But they didnt abuse people on the basis of their religion did they?
Since you just jumped to conclusions regarding what I had typed and obviously didn't read it, heres a quick summary
Freedom = Do what you want!
Law = Stop the bits of freedom that may hurt people!
Hopefully that was nice and simple for you, you dumb fuck!! (< see now Im insulting you as part of a political discussion, doesnt make it any less insulting though does it??)
"Or do you just assume that the law would naturally base itself on what you happen to find offensive in particular, and not consider that your political speech may be someone else's blasphemy?"
Nope I dont assume this at all, since I can find it written down in law I have no need to assume this>> See below stunningly relevant (unlike your law quotes) to this article law (that I have previously quoted and has obviously been ignored)
"The right to freedom of expression is recognized as a human right under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and recognized in international human rights law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Article 19 of the ICCPR states that "[e]veryone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference" and "everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice". Article 19 goes on to say that the exercise of these rights carries "special duties and responsibilities" and may "therefore be subject to certain restrictions" when necessary "[f]or respect of the rights or reputation of others" or "[f]or the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or morals".
Its that last line that gives me (and coincidentally all the right to find offense in what people say "[f]or respect of the rights or reputation of others" or "[f]or the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health and morals"
Does the following mean (in your own words) they don't deserve to call themselves free nations?
Here is the corresponding American Law (take note of Para 2 parts a and b, look familiar?)
Article 13. Freedom of Thought and Expression
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought and expression. This right includes freedom to seek, receive,
and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing, in print, in the
form of art, or through any other medium of one's choice.
2. The exercise of the right provided for in the foregoing paragraph shall not be subject to prior censorship but
shall be subject to subsequent imposition of liability, which shall be expressly established by law to the extent
necessary to ensure:
a. respect for the rights or reputations of others; or
b. the protection of national security, public order, or public health or morals.
3. The right of expression may not be restricted by indirect methods or means, such as the abuse of
government or private controls over newsprint, radio broadcasting frequencies, or equipment used in the
dissemination of information, or by any other means tending to impede the communication and circulation of
ideas and opinions.
4. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 2 above, public entertainments may be subject by law to prior
censorship for the sole purpose of regulating access to them for the moral protection of childhood and
5. Any propaganda for war and any advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred that constitute incitements
to lawless violence or to any other similar action against any person or group of persons on any grounds
Re: The Right to Free Speech
No what those videos showed was the over zealous nature of my American colleagues in prosecuting genuine targets in a war zone!
I assume that is what you are on about?
Since those were not the only files that were released please feel free (as is your right) to ignore everything else and focus on that.
Re: The Right to Free Speech
If you would like to consider my "ranting" with regards to "freedom coming with responsibility" then have the decency to consider it in context.
Nowhere do I mention the draconian laws the Chinese are held to!
Since this case happened in Europe, I quoted European law so yes they do have a responsibility and be accountable for their actions. The fact is if people dont have the courage to stand up and be counted then nothing will get changed. Making anonymous comments or acting anonymously doesnt get anybody anywhere.
Tell me one thing that has changed (for the better) since the London Riots, where lots of people covered up their identities in an effort to make a stand. What that stand was nobody really knows, but there were a lot of cheap tellys going round the area afterwards!
What exactly has Anonymous achieved in real terms!!
Julian Assange tried quoting freedom of speech when he released confidential diplomatic cables, they are confidential for a reason. Everybody held him up to be some kind of hero, your medical records are confidential would you be happy if he spread those around for everyone to see. The fact that by leaking those files led to real people getting killed, but "hey fuck it!" they were soldiers it was their job.
Although everybody has the right to say or do whatever they want there are laws their for a reason, to stop lines from being crossed. You have the freedom to walk into a Porsche garrage and take any car that is just sat there. Unfortunately there is a law to stop you from doing that.
You can call someone a faggot, nigger, fat twat. Believe it or not there are laws that stop you doing this as well. Its not simply a case of supressing your freedom of speech. Its supressing your freedom to be a twat!! Some people have thicker skin than others, someone comes up to me and calls me a nasty name I will probably ignore it the person next to me may take exception to being called the same thing. Thats when it becomes offensive.
Re: The Right to Free Speech
I don't disagree with you entirely. The only bit I do disagree with is "You may exercise responsibility along with that right if you wish" as you can see from the excerpt below from Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. So in one sense you "May" exercise responsibility along with that right, but if you don't then you can't really expect to not get held accountable. Like you (seem to be using a proper name ;-) ) I use my actual name when posting here as I have no problems with what I say being attributed to me. Yet so many people post as AC (it seems imho) just to say whatever they want!
The right to freedom of expression is recognized as a human right under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and recognized in international human rights law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Article 19 of the ICCPR states that "[e]veryone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference" and "everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice". Article 19 goes on to say that the exercise of these rights carries "special duties and responsibilities" and may "therefore be subject to certain restrictions" when necessary "[f]or respect of the rights or reputation of others" or "[f]or the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or morals".
Re: The Right to Free Speech
I really can't understand the reason for someone downvoting your post. It is perfect common sense that although you do have the right to free speech it should be tempered with a social responsibility to not act like a twat and use your so called "free speech" to abuse people from behind a mask of an anonymous username.
Walk into town see someone that looks like they have eaten far too many pies, your "free speech" means you can go and tell them, however common sense and social responsibility tell you that you cannot do that, without some kind of reprisal.
No you missed the point completely. OFCOM is a government mandated regulator as such it gets money from the government as far as I am aware it doesnt receive money directly from the companies it is regulating as this would create a conflict of interest (imho). I had never heard of ATVOD before, so the questions are following
1. Are they a government mandated regulator? Apparently they are a sub contractor of OFCOM
2. Where do they get all their funding from? Answer their fees http://www.atvod.co.uk/uploads/files/2012_13_Fee_Tariff.pdf
3. If the answer to the above is question 1 = No and question 2 = The companies they regulate. Then question 3 should be why pay them in the first place??
Hopefully that makes more sense, the only part of your post that was understandable was the fail icon as I obviously failed in conveying my meaning. Must type more clearly for the hard of understanding!!!
So correct me if I am wrong ATVOD are a regulator, that charges obligatory fees to companies that these companies have to pay!!!
Why dont they tell them to fuck off, who appointed these regulators in the first place and gave them this power. Surely if you have to pay to be regulated then it is not a government obligation, it is some kind of perceived notion that you have to be regulated so therefore you must pay.
I need to set up a regulation business with a snappy acronym pretty damn quick
Re: Shooting themselves in the foot? - yes, by releasing Win 8.
I am going to fuzz over the self-replicating issue as I understand the concept of self replication and it doesnt matter much to the point I was making.
The point was the prevalence of Windows as a user O/S. If Linux or even Mac OS had the user market that Windows has, do you not concede that there would be some clever bastard out there that would find away of infecting these machines in the traditional sense ie Viruses. I never singled out viruses, I used the caveat of "viruses/malware" that slash in between in general stands for "or" not "and". If you go out and ask a regular user what malware or trojans are they generally give you the answer of virus. But yourself and eadon just focus on the word Virus.
p.s. By telling people to stop slabberinig on about ELF viruses, because they are executable code that requires someone to run them meaning that they are not self replicating, you are negating your argument because all viruses need someone to run them initially. Does that stop them from being self replicating???
Re: Shooting themselves in the foot? - yes, by releasing Win 8.
Not confused in the slightest, but unlike you I gave the reasoning behind the amount of malware/viruses for Windows as opposed to other systems. You ignored that point completely, so when Linux distros or even Mac out number the amount of Windows installs feel free to revisit this as you will find that those tables will have turned.
You seem to get confused very easily though. You think installing Linux is easy (so do I as a matter of fact) however try doing a side by side comparison with someone who has basic computer skills and you will find that Windows comes out on top every time, because of how easy it is to use. The majority of PC users are basic users so its time to face up to that little fact and deal with it, if everyone was a power user then you would find these forums a bit fuller and you would probably be drowned out!!
A pint for the wishful thinking in my last sentance
Re: Shooting themselves in the foot? - yes, by releasing Win 8.
Okay I was ignoring most of your rant, but the one bit I cant ignore is
"it needs anti-virus (only Windows is susceptible to viruses)"
Since when has Windows been the only OS susceptible to viuses???
The main reason that Windows has the major share of the problem when it comes to viruses and malware is that, it is the most prevalent software on users computers. Compared to users who run Linux/Unix(insert flavour of choice here), or those who are running Mac OS(insert large cat of choice here) the numher of Windows PC users far outweighs the other two, so the majority of malware is written and designed to attack Windows.
I personally don't like Mac OS, but I dont tare holes in it that I can't prove just because I dont like it!
If you have something to say regarding the article then fine say it, otherwise shut the fuck up!!
Can't understand why this is such a drama, most companies do this bring something in at an introductory price then a couple of months later put the prices up. Its how the world works
New kit always appreciated!
Although not taken one into combat I have represented the RAF at shooting competitions firing with both variants of the SA80 and the also the Browning. In these conditions all were accurate any issues were operator related lol. The SA80 was accurate upto 500 metres (dont forget competition accuracy is a lot sharper than combat accuracy, you have more time to take your shot without someone firing back).
Im not going into the dumbass comments about bigger being better, because lets face it they are dumbass comments and not worth the time.
The Browning is a good pistol and yes there are better pistols out there, but since this is what we get issued it is what we have to use. Most people complain about it, because they are not given enough training in how to use it correctly. Before I joined the shooting team, I had no need to use the pistol and only fired approx 60 rounds through the rifle each year. Granted the Army do fire more, but thats a different point all together.
I am looking forward to the Glocks coming in as I have had the chance to fire it, it's nice, lighter, more responsive (for me anyway). I still like the Browning though lol
Random question, dont care if it gets down voted or not.
What exactly is all this bollox about hiring "Skilled" workers? Just because you are a graduate doesnt make you a "skilled worker" it means you are a potential worker with an aptitude for learning skills. A "skilled worker" is someone that can do the job already!
Also why should you get more pay for starting a job? In every job I have ever done I have started at the bottom and worked my way up why shouldnt they?
If thats even your "real" name!
Completely agree, with the real name case. Some, no scratch that MOST people need to realise that free speech doesnt come with a blanket ability to say whatever you want to whoever you want, it comes with an inherent responsibility to use your right to stand up for yourself not use it to abuse people online whilst hiding behind some anonymous tag.
However what the Chinese government are doing is removing that choice from their people, they are censoring for censorings sake because they are scared that if they dont do this the people will see what life is like around the rest of the world and they will want it too!!
Rant over lol
Board Games = Fun
Not often I say this, but no computer required for family fun.
Sure the Wii is good and the 360 have more family games available now (if you have enough space to set up Kinnect), but what is wrong with sitting round table with friends and family and just having fun.
My kids have developed a healthy taste for games and understand that not everyone wins someone has to lose every single time!
My 3yr old loves Candyland (counting game, sort of like snakes and ladders), Hungry Hippos (new version feels flimsy compared to original), and Yahtzee.
My 7yr old loves Yahtzee, Risk (transformers version naturally lol), First past the post (horse racing gambling/counting game) and Escape from Alcatraz.
We have a games cupboard which has everything from Murder Mysteries (which have the story and plot on a cassette tape (must get them digitized soon hmm!!)) to card games. The shelf above has the Xbox and Wii games. Teaching kids to win and lose is as essential as teaching them to read and count, so many children are growing up with an unbalanced sense of fair play in which they believe they are all winners and they dont have to earn anything to get something.
Re: Wow, just wow!
Why wait until summer mate, I know the weather is a bit of crap at the moment so leave off on the bike, but walk everywhere (good brolly and coat lol) (dont want to sound like a smug twat, have had to get off my arse this week instead of waiting for better weather!!)
I think this story is a piss take this company isnt interested in helping you lose weight, it is just purely and simply a means of taking money out of your pocket. But what do you expect from the inventor of the Segway which is as far as I can tell is a personal transportation system designed to be used in places where everyone walks. So you have one system that is designed to stop you from doing some exercise and then the "solution" a few years later!!
Re: The only advice I would offer to app developers targetting children
Agreed, I have lost count of the amount of time my kids have come to me complaining that an app has stopped working because they have accidentally (allegedly lol) clicked on the flashing advert and been taken to a download page.
I have no problems with adverts on apps, but if the app is designed for kids then they should be removed without me having to pay as the ad revenue can be picked up from multiple sources.
Either that or I should just stop being a tight arse and buy the damn thing lol
Can they refine the Kinect a bit more first?
I am in no way diminishing the efforts these guys are going to with the AR works. It is nothing short of amazing to be honest, but and it is a big but the kinect is designed to work at an optimal distance and in an optimal space that is bigger than most people have available to them. I know there are lenses that you can buy (3rd party of course) to reduce the focus of the lenses so it works in a smaller space, but I have found that they are not that good.
I have about 2/3 metres between my TV and my couch if I want to use the kinect I have to move the telly around so I can use the length of my living room. I love the kinect in the same way I think that Nintendo were ground breaking with the WII and how the controllers work there. It was a natural evolution to remove the controller. Surely the next evolution would be to enhance the kinect to reduce the space that it is required to work in? As I have already said what they are working on is outstanding, but it seems they are ramping the evolution up a hell of a lot for something that will not be ready for a couple of years when there there is still work to be done for what is out there now. That said keep up the good work, just please spare some people to upgrade the current tech, cheers.
Re: who cares !!
I can guarentee the passwords would of been starred out as usual and maybe the usernames would of been able to be seen, but unless you have access to one of those machines on camp you wouldnt be able to use the username in the first place. As for the being whisked away from danger, Prince William is in a demanding job flying SAR up at Valley and the way the weather kicks up at the drop of a hat up there then yes it is dangerous. Hovering a helicopter off of the side of a cliff face, oil rig or in the mountains is dangerous enough without having to compensate for swiftly changing weather patterns. After 4 years at Valley trust me I know what Im talking about.
As for his brother, yeah he has been whisked so far away from danger he went to Afghanistan to escape danger. In his Apache attack helicopter he is not a target and will never ever be fired upon!!!! Dumbass
Fail because of idiot comments, Flearider get a clue about what you are talking about, then once you have that clue do everyone a favour, go look for another one!
Re: And I thought the UK was bad?
I believe that this was the correct course of action in this case. The restaraunteer massively over reacted and started a hate campaign over something that was posted online about her restaraunt. So yes lock her up, fine her and give her community service, she might think twice before doing it again.
To come back to your "aside" what restrictions on speech do we have in the UK, I am not aware of any. Have just read through the correct part and their are restrictions that are writ in law as follows:-
Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides the right to freedom of expression, subject to certain restrictions that are "in accordance with law" and "necessary in a democratic society". This right includes the freedom to hold opinions, and to receive and impart information and ideas.
“ Article 10 – Freedom of expression
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
So the restrictions on freedom of speech are there to protect others got it. Its got sod all to do with stopping you from having an opinion the government doesnt agree with.
Why is it those that spout off about freedom of speech forget about the second half of that act?
- Just TWO climate committee MPs contradict IPCC: The two with SCIENCE degrees
- 14 antivirus apps found to have security problems
- Feature Scotland's BIG question: Will independence cost me my broadband?
- Apple winks at parents: C'mon, get your kid a tweaked Macbook Pro
- Driverless car SQUADRONS to hit Britain in 2015