"a bit like having a mugger hiding in the local police station nicking people's wallets when they come in,"
And we all know that the police prefer to empty our wallets via the Chief Constables ATM^W^W^W speed camera network.
Phishing fraudsters hacked a Home Office crime reduction website to host an Italian phishing website on Monday. An RFI (Remote file inclusion) exploit was used to launch the phished page off the webserver hosting crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk. As a result of the SQL Injection attack a page resembling the Poste.it site was …
1) I doubt that the attackers cared that it was a government site that they hacked. They where just looking for any site with an exploitable SQL vector.
2) Haven't the Numpties that write these sites heard of SQL prepared statements.
IT Icon because it's obvious that the the government web infrastructure is developed by people who haven't heard of IT
"And we all know that the police prefer to empty our wallets via the Chief Constables ATM^W^W^W speed camera network."
If you don't speed, you don't get fined.
I really am fed up of people complaining about this. You can't complain if you break the speed limit and get caught. Don't give me any claptrap about how the road was empty etc. etc. etc. Break the limit, get the punishment.
I'm a little (well, a lot) sick of the old "If you don't want the fine, don't do the crime" mantra.
In the old days, when front-line Plod were allowed to think for themselves and use discretion and judgement (remember those?), people who were a danger or potential danger to other road-users were nicked and rightly so.
Someone at speed limit+4mph might have been ignored or given verbal advice - depending on the circumstances - e.g. a stone-cold sober driver at 0600 on a Sunday morning is not exactly threatening the fabric of our society.
However, a totally pissed driver meandering around at speed limit-1mph won't get picked up by the robotic taxmen, yet they are a serious problem - but with no plod around, who's going to stop them?
I know which one worries me most, and which one should be on the receiving end of plod's attention.
Smug attitudes like AC's are manna to the likes of Bliar, Broon & the gorgeous pouting Jacqui - , who's going to stop THEM with people ready to spout the NuLab mantra/sophistry
Paris, 'cos I think she shares a mindset with the smuggies...
"The old days are gone. That's why they are the old days. Adapt."
Not necessarily the best move.
Why accept change just because it's change, if it's effects are adverse?
Nothing wrong with the old days coming back. Gone does not necessarily mean gone irreversibly.
Hitler told Germany that non-fascism was the old days, as Musso told the Italians.
Hitler & Musso are now "the old days".
Non-fascism is back.
The old "old days" are the new "now".
Adapt to and accommodate the crypto-fascist PC "liberals", and they win.
We don't need to let that happen.
And a lot of people are fed up of this sort of bollocks. In principle, you can't pick and choose which laws you should adhere to and which you shouldn't. Just because no-one's implemented one of the methods of stopping drunks starting their car (someone else could tho') doesn't mean you can moan when someone has implemented a method of catching people who speed.
You can question whether it's a "bad" law or not and then try and organize something to get it changed but don't give me this moaning claptrap if you know there's a law and then get caught. I've seen the results of what the traffic sergeant described as "the worst rta I've seen in 30 years on the force" caused by a speeding driver (an off-duty ambulance driver by profession of all things!) - two people dead: one with no toes on a foot and one with their brains splattered all over the road.
The question of whether there's a policeofficer around to catch the drunk has nothing to do with speeders but has everything to do with a lack of manpower in that situation and using that to justify your position just isn't on.
To say that you're fed up of the "If you don't want the fine, don't do the crime" shows a distinct lack of understanding of the situation and the consequences and just shows you up to be a smug Clarksonite who thinks that he has a divine right to drive as fast as he wants.
And that speeding ambulance driver? He got 3.5 years and with good behaviour he'll have been out in 1.5. Not bad for depriving two people of their lives in a violent manner.
What price your comments about the ACs "smug comments" now?
I reckon it's like Olympic high diving. You can just jump off the board, but you don't get many points. Alternately, you can attempt a triple twisting pike double somesault, diviculty tariff 3.7, and gets loads of points. Hacking www.jacksonfamilyofswindon.co.uk/bognorholidaysnaps2006 gets you no kudos, but a Home Office site - an Home Office anti-hacking site even - is mch mor eimpressive!
These guys are obviously now sitting back for the scores from the panel: 9.0, 9.0, 8.7, 9.0....
Just because someone has the maturity to understand that speeding costs lives, and you don't, it doesnt make them a troll. Stop bandying that word about as you obviously have no clue.
So, you believe we should get our overstretched police force away from trying to prevent/investigate murders, rapes, knife assaults, terrorism, muggings etc and back on to the roads because people are too selfish to adhere to laws put in place to save lives.
And who the hell are you to decide what time of day someone may or may not be on a road. In case you hadn't noticed, there are no opening times.
Wow you and Ted really are a pair of pr*cks.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019