Posts by Valerion 593 publicly visible posts • joined 12 Oct 2009
He was playing with this app and got me to say something - I noticed it wasn't playing it back and then realised it was in the middle of a phone-call to an 0906 number. I immediately hung up the call, not least because my charming boy had been asking me to say "Daddy needs a big wee" for some unknown reason.
Yes yes we all know that technically, TECHNICALLY, we elect our local MP and the PM is decided by the governing party and all that.
BUT, I didn't see my local MP on TV debating what "he would do when if was Prime Minister". In fact, i don't even know what my local Conservative MP looks like (I fully realise this is my own fault) but I voted for him anyway because I wanted Cameron in power. The same goes for pretty much everyone who voted, realistically. At the end of the day the candidate is not going to be sticking their neck on the block for any local issues, they are going to do what the party whips tell them to do.
The perception is that we are voting for the person we want to run the country even if we technically vote for our local MP.
Anyway, speaking of immigration (not that we were really) couldn't we have found someone in the UK to write this article? :)
"Hydronic" simply means the use of water to transmit heat generated in some other way - in this case by burning fossil fuel, specifically natural gas.
Genius! When I sell my house I'm going to say it's got a combined hydronic heating system instead of a combi boiler.
I'm guessing they were invested in the ponzi scheme and those payments were from the scheme not part of their actual salary.
Still... 30 years for writing some software that they were ordered to write by their employer (more than most murderers get). Yes they could've not written it but they'd have been out on their backsides. Leaving your job to take the moral highground might be nice and idealistic but when you have bills to pay in a recession you don't rock the boat.
I feel a bit sorry for them. Of course I could be wrong and they could have been totally in on it and doing it quite willingly.
I was fixing my next-door neighbour's daughter's laptop the other week. I booted it up and was faced with a password. I tried a blank password which didn't work, but then Windows gave me a hint. With that hint I guessed it in one try.
Guess that makes me a l33t hax0r too.
Ask exactly what authority they have to make you get off a train, or to detain you on the platform, or, in fact, to ask you to do anything at all.
When they reveal that they actually have no powers enshrined upon them by law you can happily go back to ignoring them.
When I was at school it was all about the ice-age returning. Then it was all about global warming. Now, again, it is about an ice-age returning.
Good thing with this complete lack of scientific consensus that they aren't trying to set taxes and financial commitments based on any of this.
Oh, wait....
Who at Google gets to be the moral arbiter of all posted content?
What is offensive to some people isn't offensive to all (except, yes, in this case it is obviously offensive to all people of normal sensibilities).
A stupid verdict. As much as there is irony in it in some ways, it is still a massive precedent to set. They cannot reasonably police all user-posted content. It's kind of like suing the council for allowing a mugging to take place on their streets.
Somebody can park a car with my number plate on (might be my car, might not, might be my IP address, might not.) and I get a ticket on it and then a "fine" comes through the post to me because the car is registed to me. It is not enforceable because a) It is not proven that the offence was commited by me (merely that a car bearing an identifier that could be spoofed was), and b) they have no authority to fine people. In fact all they can do is request damages according to their loss. That is known as an invoice.
I don't see this as any different. If you are accused of downloading 5 movies then the damages should be the cost of those 5 movies. In fact it should really be the studio and rights-holders margins, and not the retail cost. They have no authority to fine you, only the courts do.
If I hadn't read this and got one of those I would have assumed it was a scam along with the "send us £250 cos you've won the lottery and need to claim it!" scams and filed in the recycling bin.
Sorry, I was meant to be sarcastic but it didn't come over very well!
Even if it just speeds up queues I'll be happy. I got stuck for over ten minutes behind a dumb idiot who couldn't work out that any one of the 500 metal objects he seemed to have on his person could be setting off the bleepy machine.
There was no way she could pay $2m so there was no point in even trying to get the money from her. But $54,000 might be possible, and as she is not exactly wealthy will also have a fantastic effect on her quality of life, and that of any children she may have.
Everyone wins!!*
*As long as you are the RIAA.
My wife got a "parking ticket" the other day for the heinous offence of forgetting to display her permit in a small pub car park that she parks in every day.
Obviously I have no intention of responding to them, but so far they have wasted money on sending people to the car park, and will possibly waste money on the DVLA as well getting MY name and address (not my wife's name - the car is registered to me). I know enough to ignore it. It is an invoice, not a fine, and I did not enter into a contract with them so they cannot pursue me for anything. And if they did all they could claim in law is the cost of any loss. As my wife has a permit there is no monetary loss.
If the word gets out enough and people refuse to be bullied then these firms will eventually go out of business. In fact I'd like the DVLA to help them by putting up charges to £10 a time. Then they'll make a profit, too!
I see your point(s) and indeed wasn't that shoebomber guy white (or at least white-ish)? The point remains though that a white, middle-class family from Surrey flying to Disneyworld should be bottom of the "suspicious" list. Single men, fair enough. The only time I've been stopped by customs is when travelling as a single man, That tells us something. But as I said, I've no objection to me or my kids going through a scanner really.
More to the point though is the general stupidity of the situation. When travelling last year I wasn't allowed to take a small amount of medicine for my son on board ecause the bottle it was in could potentially hold more than 125ml, even though it only had about 30ml in it. That is just stupid. I was, however, allowed to take a cigarette lighter (for burning), a belt (for strangling), a pen (for stabbing) and a mobile phone (as a remote trigger). Good thing I didn't have that anti-histamine!
Does anybody want them? Another unelected quango staffed by idiots with no common sense.
Profiling makes perfect sense. My family, consisting of 2 adults and 2 young kids, going on holiday to Florida are blatantly not a threat. The guy with the ticking rucksack is. So why screen us?
You wait - the people who pose an actual terror threat will start screaming that it's against their religion to be viewed on a full-body scanner and so they'll be allowed through without it whilst the rest of us are forced through it. Not that I'd be that bothered by it really. In fact it's a great idea. However somebody will soon find a way around it, they always do.
GPS these days is better than 10M, especially with WAAS/EGNOS. It used to be a lot worse when Selective Availability was enabled but this was turned off years and years ago.
The Military version is still much more accurate though but only suitably-equipped military gear can read it (uses a different, much longer PRC IIRC).
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
