Yeah.. I've never come across a 4" floppy either. 3.5" and 5.25" yes, but never a 4".
1034 posts • joined 12 May 2010
Yeah.. I've never come across a 4" floppy either. 3.5" and 5.25" yes, but never a 4".
"Not a UN Special Commission, but a Working Group on Arbitrary Detention."
Thank you. I stand corrected on that point.
"And your evidence of this is? (I can't even believe that I'm typing this..)"
Yeah, I can't believe you typed that either.... here you go. No mouth breathers involved. Unless you consider these sources as such. If you do, there are plenty more to be obtained from a simple search.
"His lawyers already made such a suggestion and the judge ripped this idea to pieces."
Indeed. And a UN Special Commission disagreed. For whatever that is worth.
But then, its not like the UK to be in disagreement with international rulings, is it?
"Fuck the courts, don't we have "in the interest of national security" and "in the interest of the public"? Haven't we had those phrases used before when steamrolling over such minor details as "rule of the law"? :("
We can downvote this as much as we want, but we'd have to willingly forget the process of "extraordinary rendition" that was a part of our recent history. That happened, and we willingly took part.
Whatever we think of Assange, if you were to believe, as he does, that the US is out to get you, then maintaining a highly visible public profile like this is not a bad defence against being "disappeared".
Don't kid yourself that this doesn't happen. *IF* the US want it.
"Upvote from me. We need more options/variation."
Start a party? In principle, we should be able to do that....
"... about that accident you had recently ..."
Ways to get cold callers to strike you off their list quickly:
1. "Oh god, oh god, no. How did you know? I can still hear the screaming, and smell of burning flesh, oh the horror, please no. I don't want to remember! (cue screaming and weeping)"
2. "This is inspector Roberts of the CID. How did you get this number? What was your relationship to the deceased? How long have you had their details? Where were you at 1900hrs on Saturday evening? Can I take your full name and address to eliminate you from our enquiries. No, don't put the phone down...."
3. "Have you heard the good news about our lord and savior...? I'd like to read you some passages from our scriptures..."
4. "Oh! Hi! Its good to hear your voice. I've not talked to anyone in so long. (Pause). What underwear are you wearing today? is it red?......"
Commas are important, they can mean the difference between "At the weekend I helped my uncle, Jack, off his horse."
If this tech can be used for faking pr0n, then it can be used to fake other things too, can't it? Evidence of crime, evidence of alibi, propaganda, defamation, "fake" news....
In the hands of more sinister types than mere pr0n-mongers this could be extremely potent.
I was aged one when Armstrong landed on the moon. I'm told that I was kept awake to see it, but I don't remember.
My childhood was filled with the wonder and possibility of space travel. As I grew up in the seventies and eighties it seemed that within my life time the heavens would yield up to mankind and to science.
It didn't, and that made me into a more cynical adult than I might've been.
Today, I watched that launch and, more amazingly, the science-ficitonesque return of the boosters to Earth, and my hope was re-awakened. I might just believe that I'll see a Mars landing in my lifespan yet.
I'll be honest with you, as I also happen to be a huge Bowie fan, when I saw that mad car, with the comical dummy in it, orbiting the Earth to the strains of my favourite tracks and realized what it represented...
...I nearly wept.
"...meaning women need to get paid more per trip."
No, that's assuring equality of outcome rather than equality of opportunity. If operative A is spending 50% more time driving and thus is better at the task from practice, or from working unsociable hours, then there is no justification in giving operative B an artificial increase in pay to match operative A when operative B is not as good at the task and chooses not to work unsociable hours.
If you want to pursue the equality angle then the one valid point you put in there is a note about domestic demands. There is no good reason that such demands can't fall equally on male and female parents and is indeed a social trope that can be addressed (again, equality of opportunity; this time for men).
Also, please note its not women but those who *identify* as women, or would you choose to disadvantage males who identify as women? Tell you what, if I could get paid more for writing down on a job application that I identify as a woman, I'd do it.
We need to stop giving undue advantage to social groupings and start making sure everyone has the same opportunities to succeed regardless of gender and such.
"..going to go ahead with it anyway..."
Yep, because that way they can trumpet their achievements in doing something for the Mumsnet brigade, who are generally just as bloody clueless. I don't think the gov actually want a working technology for this; they just want to be seen trying to get it done and are quite happy to fail and throw their hands in the air because "interweb experts, eh? whatchagonnado? vote for us. at least we tried to protect you from terrorpedoes!".
A good question might be whether they consider society owes them anything, or whether effort is equated with reward in the workplace. You can further refine your search by asking if they have a pension, their own home, or have just took a payday loan for a night out drinking craft beers.
Also ask if they own, or know the function of, a pair of socks.
"...our democratically elected leaders.."
I think that's the bit we need to start doubting is true.
"..travel to the USA would be out of bounds for him.."
Nobody in their right mind wants to go there these days anyway.
"assuming the US actually provide any evidence, which in itself is perhaps unlikely..."
The US doesn't need to provide evidence under the current extradition treaty, unlike the UK who must. A very special relationship indeed.
But not illegal to wear makeup. Google search: Dazzle Makeup.
"Provided it is used properly"
And therein lies the issue. It may be that today, the powers in charge of it use it properly. Tommorow? Next year? Next government? Next administration? Still so sure?
What about if and when it gets hacked by some skiddie, or extra national hackers? What about when the data from the capture gets leaked by a disgruntled employee? What about when a police officer or other authorized user decides to use it for their own ends?
Can you be completely assured that none of these scenarios will ever occur? After all, there is evidence that they've occurred before with other systems. And if they do, is there sufficient judicial and independent oversight to ensure that the powers that be can't just bury any such incident, or excuse themselves with no public accountability?
And if you get through all of that still nodding your head, ask yourself this: if there was a silent, suited, unaccountable, un-answering, unelected government official following you around all day taking notes and pictures would you still be nodding your head? How different is it that they are on the other side of a remote camera lens?
You may have nothing to hide, personally, but you should fear the state that takes these steps.
" who would get the blame if the project when wrong"
When, not if.
"And let no the atheists forget..."
The distinction between atrocities carried out by atheists and those carried out by theists is that atheists did not carry out their atrocities in the name of atheism. Theists, however, carry out atrocities in the name of their religion, belief or deity.
" ...such as how bendy a banana is (another thing some people dont think exists)...."
The commissioners have no problem with straight bananas, it's the crooked ones they don't like so much, but they have never banned them. As Commission Regulation (EC) 2257/94 puts it, bananas must be "free from malformation or abnormal curvature". In the case of "Extra class" bananas, there is no wiggle room, but Class 1 bananas can have "slight defects of shape", and Class 2 bananas can have full-on "defects of shape".
No attempt is made to define "abnormal curvature" in the case of bananas, which must lead to lots of arguments. Contrast the case of cucumbers (Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1677/88), where Class I and "Extra class" cucumbers are allowed a bend of 10mm per 10cm of length. Class II cucumbers can bend twice as much.
We're missing the point with the US fine. It's a kick-back and everyone of any importance (from a capitalist point of view) has made a profit! win!
Paying a percentage of your profit to the government to avoid penalties such as jail etc. ; It's kinda like bribing a police officer.
"My late FIL, said it was "poke" as in "should I poke that icon?".
Did he "peek" afterwards?
"Guantanamo has a golf course?"
No,no. That's the bit labelled "Furriners Only" and has no one in it*.
*may not be accurate.
"They go to a special "prison" that even has a golf course."
Ah, that's the bit labelled "whites only".
"Do they have prison cells in the US?"
Yes, but unfortunately most of them are still labelled "blacks only".
"Therefore: Big John is actually ..."
Can't be. BJ understands technology enough to be here and, despite everything, he appears to be at least semi-literate.
KABOOM : Kit All Broken Out of Malice.
"extrapolating this to include mental ability is beyond stupid "
Yes, this. Couldn't agree more. I think the point I was trying to make is that any kind of generalization is both false and disprovable. My "People are people" argument can be extrapolated to "Not all women are better than all men at task XYZ" and vice versa. There are female weight lifters that can lift far more than me!
Surely this nonsense about "Women are never better than men at IT" is equally bullshit? People vary in their abilities as easily as their status. To judge someone by a single trait is an utter fallacy.
Note, however, that I believe this cuts both ways; feminists who run around saying "all men are patriarchal bastards" are going to get equally short shrift from me, and I make no distinction about the way I will argue/debate/shout at someone due to their gender, race or social status.
Equal treatment, no?
" believes because women aren't in general as strong as men they are somehow an inferior version,"
If this is not the case, why are professional sports almost completely gender segregated? Surely we should be demanding that the IOC immediately adopt all sporting events as mixed gender? Why can't we have football matches with male vs female teams? Why can't a football team be made up of mixed genders?
Why is it considered to be "unfair" to have women compete against men in physical sports?
Please note, I don't think the analogy of physical competition can be extended to non-physical activity. A quick browse for winners names from quiz shows, cooking contests and so forth shows a relatively even balance of genders. There are a couple of interesting outliers: More women have won Masterchef than men by a fair margin, but there are far more male winners of Mastermind. I doubt that means anything significant, but it struck me as interesting.
It's weird how we allow gender segregation in sports but not elsewhere. Imagine if a TV station announced a quiz show that only men could be on, or a cookery contest only for women.
...and with a very minor tweak of rhetoric, your statement becomes....
"This commenty says to me: 'I was rubbish at my job so I'll blame the *lack* of 'diversity' for the fact that I never got promoted."
Still not factual evidence.
"Therefore, black defendants who don’t reoffend are predicted to be riskier than white defendants who don’t reoffend."
Or, to put it another way, shows that black people, even those who don't reoffend, are more likely to be picked up by the police.
I've worn vari-focals, single vision and contact lenses in both Rift and Vive and had little to no problems.The Vive performed slightly better with contact lenses, but the vari-focals are the business.
As for VR not giving an "edge", it may not be what you were driving at, but in Elite Dangerous the Vive certainly delivers a competitive edge. Yeah, its true, that its not as gloriously pretty as a 4k monitor, but the sense of "presence" counters that very well. The ability to "g-lock" your view to an enemy like a fighter pilot is something else, and in CQC its saved my hide many times.
"very easy to build a bit of software that takes a submitted pic and compares it to a stored set of banned pics"
Almost as easy as using photoshop to rescale, resize, flip, invert, amend resolution, desaturate, recolour...
A piece of image recognition software that could see through all that to the original image? I know folks are working on it, but does it actually exist yet?
""Mass surveillance enacted in secret is fascism."
Or far more commonly it's a feature of communism / Trotskyism / socialism."
Fascism is a greatly misunderstood word, and I see posts like this all the time. Fascism is not a function of party politic; it is neither right nor left wing in nature, so this "debate" over whether Fascism is a property of right wingers (Trump, Nazis, the Conservatives), or that of left wingers (Sanders, Marx, Communists) is a nonsense.
Fascism describes an overly authoritarian governmental model that emphasizes control of the population, and the sublimation of the individual, in favour of empowerment of the state. This form of authoritarianism can be found in many instances of both contemporary and historical government.
It is widely held that the following features mark a fascist (authoritarian) government as such:
Nationalism or extreme patriotism, lack of human/civil/individual rights, identification of a unifying enemy, supremacy of the military, control of media, mass surveillance and social control, extreme national security, corporate power is protected, labour power is controlled, disdain for art and intellectualism, extreme police powers and uncompromising political rhetoric.
We identify fascism with the right wing more usually due to its origins in fascist Spain and Italy and its strong association with the rise of the Nazi philosophy, but it is far from absent in left wing national politics, being apparent in such places as north Korea and Cambodia (historically speaking).
"But as one of YouTube's biggest "stars"...."
I'm a YouTube watcher by habit. I probably watch more content on YouTube than I do on any other media, streaming or otherwise. I rarely watch TV these days at all.
But, in all of this time, I've never come across this guy before. Who the hell is he? Is this not the Streisand effect at work?
"Nobody cares enough to bother to chase him any more. A couple of press conferences and then fades into obscurity."
Which bit of this, and other such statements from the US, did you miss...?
"Jeff Sessions, the USA’s attorney-general, has made it abundantly clear that the book will be hurled, with extreme prejudice, directly at the leaker-in-chief."
It would appear that Assange may have had cause for his paranoia, at the least. The US has become...how shall we say... blunter under the Trump regime and less prone to dance around the point. Obama refused to comment on Assange, Clinton wanted to "drone him to death" and Trump wants the book chucked at him. It would appear that that champion of openness and free speech, the US of A, are determined to grab a non-citizen and take revenge for the embarrassment he heaped on them. I'm not sure we can deny that any longer.
"The problems caused by maternity leave in a small business are significant and expensive to resolve"
I've run a small business in the past, but I never had to deal with maternity as it happens (it was a short lived thing, alas). You raise some good points, but for me those point to a failing in legislation rather than a reason to employ men over women. My point was that parental leave can be shared between parents and there shouldn't be an assumption, either by legislation, the parents or the employer, that the onus would automatically fall upon the mother to "give up their career to be a parent", or that all benefits and responsibilities are those of the mother, de facto.
" I cannot see how this is somehow our fault."
You've not being paying attention in Social Conditioning Class, have you? The feminsisters* have been yelling "Because patriarchy!" for some time now, and they're getting proper loud lately.
*not a typo. A response to the nonsense that is "mansplaining".
"But the market value of women is lower. For instance many small business owners wouldn't dream of hiring a woman of child baring age."
Why the hell not? Is it because there is a presumption that a pregnant woman or new mother needs a lot of time off work? My wife worked up until a week before my daughter was born and then she and I split the parental leave period for a new child nearly equally. This was supported by both our employers and by new legislation about parental leave (yeah, bye bye maternity vs paternity leave!).
Neither of our value have been lowered by being parents. The continued assumption that only women can look after children and men cannot is part of the issue. Do you consider it "babysitting" when you have to look after your own children, or is it childcare or parenting? Ask your employer the same question. The answer you get can be very illuminating.
"Typical AC. Less balls than the women mentioned."
Downvoted because your comment doesn't advance the debate, doesn't address the argument (no matter the lack or presence of validity) and seeks to resolve by attacking the poster in ad hominem fashion.
Abandon the emotive response, address the argument as presented (even when its dumb as shit, from your viewpoint) and stop making assumptions about the opposition.
A lesson many parties in these debates should learn.
...for Mr. Comey.
Given that you believe that no communication, verbal, electronic or otherwise, and in extrapolation no communicated thought, feeling or memory, is a protected characteristic of a citizens rights, what, precisely, is your agency protecting?
If you dare answer with the word liberty once again then you need to do some hard thinking about what that, and similar terms, actually mean.
In the interim might I suggest you get a big tarpaulin, sling it over the statue in the harbor (you've forgotten about it, haven't you?) and pop a sign on it that says "Out of Order" until further notice.
Wake up, re-read the constitution, examine your history and remember who you actually want to be.
Time to invite the downvotes.
"...Jeff Sessions said the Trump administration would indeed file and proceed with charges against Assange should he be arrested."
" ...UK authorities have repeatedly said they'll nab Assange if he leaves. And as the UK and USA share an extradition treaty, that's not good news for the white-haired information warrior..."
Are we finally and really admitting that Assanges original stance of "I can't go outside, I'll end up being swiped by the US" is actually, potentially true? That's a bit of a 180 for not only The Reg but for a lot of other commentators on the subject.
*ducks and covers*
"...adult firm.... ...semi-emergency"
Sorry. I'll get my coat.
"Exclude or slaughter those who don't worship and pretty soon they all seem to conform."
Yep... here's an example. This was the fate of the Babylonians when they refused to accept the "lord".
"Every one that is found shall be thrust through; and every one that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword. Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished." (Isaiah 13:15-16)
"Your reply imagines a situation that avoids the original question; you 'solve' the problem of how everything started by saying there wasn't a start, that the origin was 'without beginning or end'."
Furthermore, your hypothesis can be defeated by scripture itself...
"In the beginning was the word....", So there's a beginning then.
"I am the Alpha and the Omega...", So, that's a beginning AND an end.
Therefore, using the same data source as your argument, your theory is invalidated.
"That God exists, created the universe etc - in that I have no doubt."
Then he should be charged with crimes against humanity immediately, as he is clearly not a benevolent deity.
"Then take some chemicals and go make me a simple cell."
Do try to keep up with science....
"This is the theologian version of "turtles all the way down"; the concept of a god leads to an infinite regress."
Unless, of course, God is an atheist. After all, surely he doesn't believe that anyone created him, right?
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018