276 posts • joined 15 May 2013
Re: Did you read this?
Have you read beyond the headlines?
Re: HP Storage ROCKS!!!!
Well, at least you're open about your affiliation.
Re: Here is a hypothetical for you
It's not often I feel driven to say this with my work hat on...
You, sir, are talking complete horseshit. Kindly do not accuse Reg staffers of fabricating stories again.
In the interests of transparency, I spotted the tweets and tipped off Jasper myself. He then did all the legwork, contacted Neil Cooper and wrote the story. The "bomb" tweet is very clearly screencapped in the article itself. Cooper seems to have protected his account just after we published the story.
Enjoy permanent pre-moderation, by the way. You don't get away with making accusations like that about us in our own house.
Re: Manufactured story
Your tinfoil hat's slipping, AC. You seem to have confused El Reg with the Guardian.
No Register journalist manufactures stories. If they were (bearing in mind we have a subs' desk precisely to interrogate and corroborate everything we publish - there's no unverified/subless publishing here), they would cease to be a Register journalist in short order. Easy as that.
Please feel free to continue posting your conspiracy theories on a website whose URL doesn't end in theregister.co.uk.
I can confirm that's pretty much the same as what I heard him ask the plod press office down the phone.
Re: Quit news period!?
And the IT angle for those is what, exactly?
Re: And the point is?
You have to remember that senior police employees are obsessed with image and reputation management. A bit of lighthearted fun by the troops distracts the media from the deadly serious PR battle for control of the pages and airwaves. Such distractions could result in a missed promotion opportunity or a smaller pension ... and that just isn't acceptable in modern British policing.
Re: Errr neither post was criticising El Reg
Calling something on the Register a "complete non-story" is criticism, my dear chap.
End of correspondence. Have a nice day.
Re: Why are you not allowing me to comment on this story
Because you're a) a new user, and so subject to manual pre-moderation on all posts, and b) you're directly criticising El Reg, which is not permitted hereabouts. Read the comment guidelines to learn more: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/02/01/register_comments_guidelines/
Let's hope so.
Quite a few times, though admittedly it's the version that begins "A Frenchman went to the lavatory..."
Re: Re: Not wanting to defend plod, but
This sounds like advice borne of experience...
"Massively popular consumer thing is DEAD!" - once, er, it's no longer massively popular with consumers.
I won't be holding my breath.
Re: Re: and Ghostery tells me,
We're actually slurping all this data so we can build a digital copy of everyone's first-born children and sell them to narco-traffickers, because EVIL CORPORATION.
/quiet afternoon of moderation
Re: Re: Oz Re: Erroneous Cowherd Contempt
Be less abusive. Easy as that.
Re: Re: Confusing wording indeed
Chaps, if you've problems with the wording, please use the "send corrections" link at the bottom of the article rather than posting about it publicly. Not all comments get read by us and we're far more likely to spot and make the correction if you send it to the appropriate place.
Re: What fools
Says the user with almost 700 posts and who never once appears to have posted without the "anonymous coward" tag.
Re: "Vorsprung durch grossendatatechnik"
Was? Sagst du, dass unser Deutsch unleserlich ist? Quatsch!
(It's one of our things to deliberately mangle foreign tongues. We are British, after all)
Re: Re: Feature request: Per-Author pre-moderation setting.
We see posts that trip the moderation filters individually, without the context of the ongoing discussion. Hence something with lots of characters and few words looks like spammy gibberish (which, of course, your post wasn't) and gets canned.
I'm feeling charitable this afternoon so I've unfiltered that particular post.
Re: Feature request: Per-Author pre-moderation setting.
Or you could try, you know, obeying the forum rules. They're hardly onerous.
Re: Re: What's the problem?
That's certainly what PACE says about searches, though bear in mind that PACE has been buggered about with so many times by various governments that there's probably a loophole the police use instead of the authorised procedure.
A little-known fact for you: police must apply for a warrant whenever they want to search premises - unless the occupier is under arrest. So all they do is cook up a vaguely plausible, if false, reason to nick their mark and then they can go to town without oversight.
Good point, well made - and added to the article.
All spot on. The abolition of non-arrestable offences was a cunning move by New Labour to circumvent the protections of section 15 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act. Why bother applying for a court warrant, running the risk of being told to wind your neck in, when you can arrest someone for an imaginary offence and then turn their home and possessions over at your leisure in the hope of finding something that'll stick?
Re: Alternative to YouTube
Whenever I read the word "Dailymotion" it always makes me think of a regular bowel movement.
Re: Re: Sir
My first journalism job (in London) paid the grand sum of £18k equivalent, while my desk editor at that place was earning a whopping £22k. Starting salaries of £14k-£15k are fairly typical for trainee reporters on local papers.
Happily I can report El Reg is a darn sight more reasonable than that.
Re: RE: People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones
Would you care to disclose the nature of your relationship with NetApp, given that your posting history features little except stout defences of that poor, downtrodden firm?
Re: Off topic
We're a multinational publication. Bite us.
Re: different terminology please
You're not familiar with the Register's style or tone, are you?
Re: Re: Help!
People still vote Lib Dem? How quaint.
Re: Re: Are *any* of them qualified to talk about this?
They aren't a libertarian party by any means, despite their constitution. They've purged the higher profile ones they used to have and the rest just walked away. Party officials still use the label in the hope of attracting fresh votes, though.
Re: Whatever the answer may be......
I know of at least one mobile operator with a detailed 3G/4G coverage map which claimed accuracy to within 100 metres. It does so across large expanses of rural England - including the danger/impact areas for MoD training estates. Given that the impact areas are permanently off limits to everyone, meaning nobody could have got in there to measure the signal, I conclude the operator's coverage map is a steaming pile of horse manure.
Re: Re: Mephhead Maphhead All Governments are ...(@ MasterBollocks)
Matt Bryant, you have earned yourself a place on the pre-moderation naughty step - again - for misusing the report button in relation to the above post at 18.52.
This time I won't be limiting it to a week.
Re: Re: Nope, Sorry!
Gentlemen, please avoid being mean. We're more interested in Lily scooping up thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money she doesn't need for a project that benefits nobody.
Re: Re: Lower CO2 emissions maybe
Large body of water damages the environment? Oh my gods, DRAIN the OCEANS!
Re: Re: gaz Re: YawnGreen Typical. @Plump & Bleaty
The reported comment does not, in my judgement, breach the house rules.
Moreover, the reported comment does not, in my judgement, even come close to being a breach of our house rules. What material in the comment that could be construed as abusive is, in fact, as mild as soapflakes.
I've warned you before about your misuse of the report post button. As point 14 of the Reg Comments Guidelines, which you have helpfully linked to yourself, states:
"...don't abuse [the report post button]. A differing opinion does not make reasonable grounds for reporting a comment. You may end up getting flagged if you continually file unwarranted reports."
Re: Re: YawnGreen Typical. @Plump & Bleaty
Matt Bryant. Stop abusing the "report post" button to get this comment off display because you seemingly can't/don't want to argue with it.
One and only warning.
Re: Re: TheOtherHobbes
Not sure how you get designed-in fracture points when, looking at maps of Africa (fnarr fnarr) and the Middle East, most of the borders seem to be arbitrary straight lines drawn with a ruler.
I'm not saying this was a good thing, but the British colonial administrators of the time in the ME seem to have had more interest in sipping tea on the verandah than ensuring the chunks they divided their colonies into were actually governable.
Re: Why such a confusing title?
You've not read much of the Register before, have you?
A headline writer
Re: Oblig Grammer Nazi
We cannot vouch for inferior, sub-editor free web publications like the Telegraph. But we can stick a sic in there to make clear it's their typo and not ours.
Re: Re: Avoiding the Streisand effect
Oh no, not this one again!
If anyone can tell me what relevance this has to Kim Dotcom, please award yourself a cookie.
Re: Re: So much to do, so little time...
I remember my dad was really into speech recognition when it first came out in the mid-90s, thinking it would speed up document writing no end. Unfortunately, the software not being able to cope with a non-received pronunciation accent, he ended up going back to the keyboard.
Looking at the comedy howlers that Siri and the like still throw up today, I'm thinking the tech won't really move on at all.
Re: Nuclear is not safe (Fukushima and Chernobyl being fine examples)
It wasn't the maintenance that caused Chernobyl to go "bang" in a glow-in-the-dark way, it was the management's insistence on carrying out an experiment which ended up overrunning and so took place in the middle of a shift change. Human error caused the fatal chain reaction. Even though the crew scrammed the reactor once they realised what was happening, it was too late to prevent the overheating and explosion.
tl;dr nuclear IS safe as long as you understand what you're doing - and don't build your reactors next to the sea more or less on top of a known fault line.
Re: Re: Oh Thank You Rubbish EU
UKIP is a newspaper these days?
But who pays list price in this day and age?
Please do not abuse the "report post" button because other commentards are posting things you disagree with. The button is provided to help us keep the forums clear of posts that breach our comments guidelines, not for you to make it look like you've won an internet argument.
Re: Re: Clicking links ...
And if you don't like what the cheapo end of the free market offers you, pay more and get a better quality product.
There. Not hard, is it?
Re: THANK YOU for the text transcription
Interesting. All our videos have markup for text-only readers which is a brief summary of what the video's about. Is that not working for you?
- Review Reg man looks through a Glass, darkly: Google's toy ploy or killer tech specs?
- +Comment 'Stop dissing Google or quit': OK, I quit, says Code Club co-founder
- Nokia: Read our Maps, Samsung – we're HERE for the Gear
- Ofcom will not probe lesbian lizard snog in new Dr Who series
- Rejoice, Windows fans: Stable 64-bit Chromium drops for Win 7 and 8