4511 posts • joined Friday 19th January 2007 17:59 GMT
The intelligence agencies have neither the inclination nor the resources...
He missed out the operative word "... yet".
Now they have the inclination and they'll probably very soon have the resources.
All they need after that is a pet Home Secretary who thinks that introducing Stasi-like monitoring of everyone is a good idea...
... oh s$$t, they've already got Wacky Jacqui...
The sound of my BBC Model B Micro booting...!
£15m in the bank...?
... here come the new Carpet Baggers.
How about they spend some of the money to provide a better service?
... this killer was tracked through his use of Craigslist.
And the solution...?
Stop women from advertising services on Craigslist!
Wow! That's brilliant!
Don't think about ways of enabling women (and men!) to legally and legitimately advertise services in "the oldest profession", no, just make it *MORE* difficult for them and make them *MORE* vulnerable to nutters :-(
You're old? You're disabled? You're not supposed to have sex!
Apart from the large amount of GILF porn out there, I wonder how many people are aware of a group called "The Outsiders" http://www.outsiders.org.uk/ an organisation dedicated to helping those with physical and social disabilities explore their sexuality.
Protecting someone from assault or sexual abuse is one thing, equating people who are old or disabled (Does he take sugar?) with children who are unable to consent is simply insulting.
BTW The article by Dave Wedge linked to in that piece says "Pervs preying on the elderly or disabled could soon face harsh new penalties under a first-of-its-kind proposed law that would punish sicko peddlers of geriatric and handicapped porn the same as child pornographers."
I wonder if he's ever heard the words "Impartial" or "Unbiased" as applied to journalism?
Why am I reminded...
... of Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal"...?
> What they are basically saying is - "we care so little about who does the cleaning we couldn't identify them if we tried, "
Yeah, well they all look alike, don't they...
Seriously, though, I too, find myself in the unexpected position of agreeing with RMT strike action!
"Its should be expected that the police try to push the boundaries - infact its healthly that they do so."
No way in hell is it "healthy" that the Police push the boundaries, see the G20 protests (aggressive tactics, concealed ID numbers, assaults etc) for what happens when those boundaries start getting pushed!
The job of the Police is to Maintain the Queen's Peace so that people may go about their lawful business without let or hindrance and investigate breaches of the law, however they *MUST* do it within set limits otherwise they start becoming "Judge, Jury and Executioner".
Remember that the Police are a civilian organisation subject to the same laws as the rest of us.
Of course the Police aren't interested in these incidents, there's no Government targets for them to meet...
any fule kno the old ballute braking ploy...
Hmm, quoting from the Odyssey File (the book of the making of 2010 by Arthur C Clarke and Peter Hyams)...
"We have arrived at the Rectal First Big Ballute Plasma Shower Gas Saving Low Energy Fart Aerobraking Manoeuvre As Conceived By Arthur C Clarke (It can also be referred to as the old R.F.B.B.P.S.G.S.L.E.F.A.M. ploy)
Thank you for posting some of my comments to you, although I note that you didn't quote the bit where I pointed out that your "So Nazi [sic] are cool?" comment was a Straw Man.
I also added a PS saying "would you object if Max Mosley was a customer of mine...?" but you never replied to that...
Thanks for saving me having to type all of that lot!
Is it obligatory to yell...
... Fire In The Hole!
Won't someone think of die Kinder...!
"The rights of children carry more weight than unhindered mass communication."
Excuse me? Is she saying that the rights of children are more important than the right of everyone else to enjoy freedom of expression? Or that these two rights are somehow mutually exclusive? Or just that she's another clueless politician?
...will tend to reject new technologies that threaten revenues from existing business models without very good reasons.
See the MPAA, the RIAA, the BPA and a whole bunch of others for more details...!
Does anyone else...
... keep reading Omaha as Obama...?
Will the people examining it...
... also be searched for hidden cameras etc?
(And will they be tested to see if they have a photographic memory...?)
"Beside the obviously demeaning effects simulated rape has towards women, there is growing evidence that using extreme porn is bad for the men who do it and the relationships these men are in."
I'm sorry, but have you been reading the Government's Rapid Evidence Assessment instead of this article? Because that's the only way that you could actually come to that conclusion!
All the way through this article is pointing out how flawed this "evidence" you refer to is and the lack of factual basis for it, yet you trot out the tired old "it's demeaning to women" and "it's bad for men" arguments again.
Personally I think that Reality TV programmes are demeaning to their participants and being unfaithful to your partner is bad for relationships (for men and for women) yet I wouldn't call for legislation to ban them.
About the only point you get right is that the Government *SHOULD* "put their efforts into examining the relationship between porn and sexual disfunction / relationship problems and the relationship between the porn derived objectification of women in the media and the growth of eating disorders and plastic surgery amongs women in the UK." but only if they actually do an impartial and unbiased study (instead of cobbling together something from reports which already agree with the conclusions they want to reach) because if they do, they'll almost certainly find that there is no relationship between these.
Of course they won't do that because it wouldn't fit with their (and your) "emotion based policy making"...
Another excellent article from John Oz!
I was a member of the Backlash campaign against the so-called Extreme Pornography laws practically since its instigation, so many of the references above are familiar to me, yet even I have hardly seen a more comprehensive debunking of the Government's "evidence" for legislating against what we can read or see or do.
A link to this article is going straight to my MP!
You can do the same via http://www.writetothem.com
Whatever happened to Presumption of Innocence???
I have a mobile phone, but I very rarely carry it on because it is simply for *MY* convenience!
I don't need people to be able to contact me instantly, I don't need to get the latest gossip without delay, I don't need to be able to text someone or twitter whatever vague thoughts happen to be passing through my head at any particular moment...
I do carry it when I'm on my motorbike just in case I break down. I do carry it if I'm visiting someone and I'm running late. I do carry it if it is to my benefit.
If the State is going to track me whilst using it, then I'll keep the damn thing switched off unless and until *I* choose to use it!
Presumed innocence? Nope, it seems it's now Presumed Guilty if the State can't monitor my every movement...
was *last* week!
midnight oil to be burnt?
Well *that's* not very environmentally friendly...!
Try visiting your local Art House cinema and watch some of the stuff that is produced that equally has "no fucking plot development or acting," and some of which includes nudity.
The question is, simply, *WHY* should the BBFC be entitled to make decisions like this "for our own good" and the answer is that they shouldn't.
PS @ Richard: People have been coming up with post hoc justifications for banning stuff because of "copycat" incidents for a long time now, but that does not prove that the stuff they want banned *caused* the incident, only that there was a similarity in methodology.
And the "chances of another massacre" do not increase, only the chances of such a massacre getting widespread press coverage, hence the "epidemic of knife crime" last year that turned out to be nothing of the sort except for the fact that the media suddenly started making a big deal out of it.
May I be the first to welcome...
... our self-healing, self-replicating, self-improving machine overlords...!
French president Nicolas Sarkozy has said...
... such boss-napping is unacceptable and that workers could face prosecution.
But they're unlikely to because he knows that the French Unions hold too much political power...
Most of us view Government Ministers...
... as greedy bastards with their snouts in the trough for whatever they can get.
Of course if they were given a "fleet" of electric cars, no doubt they'd still be demanding milage allowances for the flash motors they drive to and from their constituencies because the electric cars "wouldn't be up to the job".
PS @ Tony Smith, Editor, Reg Hardware
Highway code paragraph 264: Lane discipline
"You should always drive in the left-hand lane when the road ahead is clear. If you are overtaking a number of slower-moving vehicles, you should return to the left-hand lane as soon as you are safely past. "
Which part of "Lane discipline" don't you understand?
This is just another attempt to bring in a law like that banning "glorifying terrorism" etc.
But how long before that ban on "Islamic extremist material" is extended to other "extremist material"? How long before the definition of "extremist material" is expanded to other content deemed "unacceptable" by the various state? How long before we're told that "you can't see this because we think it's bad for you"?
This is just another assault on the freedoms that the internet allows us and which are *so* threatening to our Great Leaders that they must be stopped.
@I don't know much about "art"...
And what scares *me* is people like you and Wacky Jacqui Smith and David Blunkett and Jack Straw and all other of your ilk who assume that simply by *watching* something, you're going to "encouraged" to go out and do it without any regard for the consequences or the safety of the people involved.
Ever since Socrates was sentenced to death for "corrupting the youth of Athens" there have been those who want to take us down the Thought Crime route of "if they don't see it, they won't do it", the so-called Extreme Pornography Legislation being just the latest example of this nonsensical argument.
Of course the fact that the BBFC has rejected this film's application for a certificate means virtually damn all now, not least because it will still be entirely legal to publish the film abroad and then import it into the UK, you just won't be able to buy it from a shop *IN* the UK!
The BBFC is an obsolete organisation that is still trying to give itself some sort of meaning in a world that has passed it by.
"just like that poor guy in America who had his artwork stolen and then got a bill from stockart.com for his own creations!"
This case might not be as cut and dried as it is being made out to be.
See the comment from anubis2night at
Home Office Press Release
Jacqui Smith today announced that the Government will be introducing new legislation to prosecute male chips who offer meat to female chimps without first ensuring that the female chimp is not under the control of another male chimp...
... Cyberspace, originally coined by William Gibson in Burning Chrome?
or Waldo - a type of remote manipulator from Robert Heinlein's story of the same name?
adding Chip and PIN to the ID card...?
What next? Making it an Oyster Card as well? Adding RFID and putting scanners on every lamp post? Requiring all computers to have a card scanner? Having you key in your ID Number and PIN before you make a phone call?
After all, if we can track and trace everyone's every move and download and e-mail and phone call that will make us *SO* much safer...
There's a myth that Henry VIII wrote "Greensleeves", tinny renditions of which can be heard on cheap phones with a "hold" facility.
... our Government shows its inability to control even what it owns itself, yet still thinks that it can (and should!) control what we can see and download...!
It's easy to make...
... all they need is a supply of unobtainium...
... so having unprotected sex with someone (of whatever age) is *less* risky than shagging someone outside your age group...?
Paris, because... oh figure it out!
You are accused of heresy on three counts....
... Heresy by thought, heresy by word, heresy by deed, and heresy by action...
... Four counts!
Let's try a little survey:
Over the next month or so (to be fair, because the weather is going to be warm enough to stand outside without freezing anything off) count the number of people in the pub and then count the number of people go outside and smoke. Divide one by the other and get a ratio.
Now consider what the pub would be like for all those inside who *aren't* smoking, don't want to breathe the stuff or end up reeking of it simply to enjoy an evening with their friends, but would be forced to endure it if there wasn't a smoking ban.
I entirely support the right of individuals to make their own lifestyle choices, but not when they force those choices on others out of selfishness.
you should be able to...
"...outsmart common security measures; gain access to a remote server; hijack TCP connections and more."
And then get arrested and extradited by the Yanks who you've embarassed because they had shite security on their systems...
"sexual perversions, extreme violence"
They're just jealous because the English Government got there first with their ban on "extreme pornography"!
"Personally I'm quite happy for the Govt to go round making stupid statements like this, and then to sit back and watch as the reality of what they are requesting slowly dawns.
"We all suspect they are idiots, so why not let them open their mouths and remove all doubt!"
Unfortunately they are idiots who have the power to pass laws like the "Dangerous Pictures Act" outlawing so-called Extreme Pornography.
It doesn't matter that this is a ridiculous law which will have no real effect on what it is targetting, it doesn't matter that it's effectively unenforceable unless the Police get their hands on someone's computer for some other reason, it doesn't matter that it's very probably in breach of at least two and maybe three articles of the European Convention on Human Rights, what matters is that the damn law got on the statute books in the *first* place!
These idiots don't just go around making statements, they go around passing laws to "make the world a better place" (at least in their minds) and then leave us and now ISPs suffering the consequences.
So don't be happy with this, write to your MP and complain via http://www.writetothem.com
- Facebook offshores HUGE WAD OF CASH to Caymans - via Ireland
- Microsoft teams up with Feds, Europol in ZeroAccess botnet zombie hunt
- Justin Bieber BEGGED for a $200k RIM JOB – and got REJECTED
- Review Bigger on the inside: WD’s Tardis-like Black² Dual Drive laptop disk
- Inside Steve Ballmer’s fondleslab rear-guard action