Posts by strum 1172 publicly visible posts • joined 17 Jun 2009
>We arnt out of this galileo thing because we are leaving the EU , we are out of it because of a bunch of bureaucratic tit for tatting and point scoring
No. We're out of Galileo because the whole point of Galileo was to have its full facilities for members - with no dependence on outsiders. We have chosen to be outsiders.
>Whatever happened to that treaty which got signed after World War II which prevented both the USSR and the EU from expanding their borders?
You are letting your imagination run away with you. The EU didn't sign anything with the USSR. Yalta was a 'gentleman's agreement' (with few gentlemen present). No treaties have been broken.
>No, there is no expectation of privacy while in public and that includes images taken in public being published. It is polite to ask, but it is not a legal requirement, at least not in the US in general terms.
Nor in the UK. You cannot, however, suggest that the imaged person endorses some product, service, or policy, without their permission.
If anything, the legislation is too narrow. Why just pornography? Why would it be permissable in advertising, in politics, in anything - to pretend (convincingly) that X said or did something they did not say or do?
(Before anyone suggests this would outlaw impressionists - there's a huge difference between a body adopting someone else's mannerisms and someone else co-opting their image.)
>For the benefit of all you kool-aid drinking Democrats, here is no equivalency between the US and Russia.
First of all, most on The Register are neither Reps nor Dems.
'Equivalency'? No, not equivalent - but the US and Russia are becoming disturbingly similar, in their pseudo-democracy, their bully-boy behaviour towards others and their disdain for privacy and integrity.
If push came to shove, most would grudgingly accept that the US is a bit more benign - but the gap is narrowing.
>I'd wager that he's actually a pretty decent writer
Nah. Patterson delivers on quantity, not quality.
And Clinton's contribution is unlikely to help.
A few years back, I read a novel by Jimmy Carter - a man I rather admire, as an intelligent, humane man of affairs. The subject of the book was fascinating (Georgia's reluctance to join the Revolution) - but the writing was awful.
>Privacy is up to us. Third parties simply cannot be trusted.
So, each of us should pass our own GDPR law? Don't be daft.
Anything this big, wrangled by huge corporations, needs something even bigger to regulate it. That means government. Everything else is pissing in the wind.
>What would the Romans consider a 'dramatic' sign?
Vesuvius had been erupting for some time (24hrs or so) before the pyroclastic flow started. That's why Pompeii itself was largely deserted. Most of the populace had evacuated - some to Herculaneum, where the pyroclastic flow roasted them.
>As a percentage of the registered voters that's 37.73% Leave 34.98% Remain.
And, of course, we have no way of knowing what proportion of that 37.73% wanted out of the Single Market and the Customs Union. On the other hand, we can be pretty sure what the 34.98% wanted - the status quo.
>For the common market, which was a good thing. We should have kept it.
Hypocritical nonsense. In 1975, the 'No' campaign's main plank was 'loss of sovereignty'. Everyone knew that integration was part of the package. It was never just 'a common market' (and the text of the Treaty of Rome made it doubly clear).
> Iran has stated they want to wipe Israel off the map
For the hundredth time - no they fucking didn't. One chap said he wanted to erase Israel from history - a very different wish, involving the end of an exclusionary, arguably felonious state - but not involving wiping out anyone.
>Hillary knows how to play the system, how to get done what she wants to get done.
It's extraordinary that anyone would suggest that this is a bad thing. Competence is a positive thing, not a negative.
And if you are hoping that weakening gummint will hand power "back to the people", think again. All that power has to go somewhere, and it won't go to Joe Shmoe. It will go to the strong, the rich, the already-powerful. To corporations, to oligarchs, to pressure groups. Which is why all of these constantly attack 'gummint' (and why they supported 'man of the people' Trump).
>Life + 50? Why? So the person's freeloading relatives can make money with no work
The rationale was that a writer might work very hard to feed his family, after he could no longer do so.
It would seem unfair if the author kicked the bucket, a day after his best-seller was published.
(The real answer is that his publisher wouldn't entertain a work that might be a free-for-all in a few month's time.)
>As the article notes, the principle of copyright is simple. The creator should be able to benefit from their work.
But that's not what it's for. Copyright exists to encourage the creation of works - for the good of society. It is supposed to be an incentive to the living, not a meal-ticket for those exploiting a dead man.
Article I Section 8. Clause 8 – Patent and Copyright Clause of the Constitution. [The Congress shall have power] “To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.”
And these creative works are supposed to enter Public Domain, after copyright expires - hopefully before it ceases to be useful to anyone.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
