* Posts by Kiwi

2382 posts • joined 26 Sep 2011

Poor people should get slower internet speeds, American ISPs tell FCC

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Well, if they don't think it's fair...

Reality isn't obviosuly something you're well aquainted with, but a few little facts.

1) When you're desperate for a job you take every interview you can get. 4 in one day is pretty common. Last time I was on a benefit you had to prove you were applying for 5 jobs per day 5 days per week - that's 25 applications per week. If you turned down even one interview your benefit was cut unless you had a damned good reason, and only a direct scheduling conflict was enough. If you had 1/2 and hour to travel 50km then you could do it, if public transport wasn't available you were expected to find another way.

2) Not every where has public transport. Not every job is during times that public transport operates. Not every interview meets those schedules. I have interviewed for IT work at 2am. The first test was being able to reach the place at that time of the day. The town I grew up in did not have public transport except to other cities. It still doesn't, except for taxis.

3) You claim "none of that is true" and yet you're also claiming I don't know your life. You don't know mine, you don't know my name, where I grew up, what sort of school I went to, what education I have. You may've done OK with your life, but reality shows that your case is not common. Where it is not family help, it's luck. I know a lot of people including myself who have worked very hard and most get nowhere. I know a few who've always had it easy, and generally have family wealth to fall back on .

My example, BTW, came from my own life. I did miss jobs simply because I wasn't as clean and fresh as others who had family provide them with transport while I had to walk or jog to the interview. Nothing 'convoluted' about it, it's reality for a lot of people.

At least, when the next big crash comes, I'll happily live my life without fear of losing what I have while so many others will be struggling to get by with twice what I have.

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Well, if they don't think it's fair...

The rich and poor alike share the same external environment, thus the differentiator is primarily and heavily disposed to be their own failings. Sorry snowflakes, but in reality you get rewarded for effort and you don't get rewarded for lack of effort. In nature you'd just be dead, so first world "poor" is a pretty cushy place to land for zero effort.

I shall use a simple but real example.

Two graduates, same sex, same age, same fitness, same qualifications, marks and experience.

Both are going to the same places for interviews at roughly the same time. In a day they are going to 4 sites, each 5 miles apart, each interview start time is 2 hours apart (1st is 9am, 2nd 11am, 3rd 1pm, 4th 3pm).

It is a summer day.

The richer person is driven to each site in an air-conditioned car. They also have with them changes of clothes and a gym membership that means they'll be able to shower and change at least once during the course of the day. They can spend their time reviewing any material relevant to the interview. They will arrive to each site fresh and happy.

The poor person has to walk from site to site, or at best use public transport. While they started out clean they will not have time for a shower and do not have the resources for an extra set of clothes. They won't have much review time, and will arrive at each site tired, somewhat stressed, over-heated and less able to focus

Who will put in the most effort? Who is most likely to be hired?

Or there's the underwear example. You are poor, you have ONE set of underclothes. At the end of every day you have to wash and dry them so you have something clean for tomorrow. Someone gives you another set, you now have two. You still have to wash what you wear today so you have something for the next day. You also have to cook your own meals, do your own house cleaning and so on, and still be prepared for whatever work opportunity comes along.

You're rich. You have plenty of clothes (even just 7 sets gives you a once-a-week wash cycle). You have someone else to do your cooking and cleaning. Your time and mental energy can be devoted solely to your job.

Who has the better opportunity?

That's without looking at other things like having family who know someone and so on.

I know this from being orphaned young and having to make my own way while seeing friends get help from their family. I don't begrudge them that, but the effort they've needed to put in just to get to an interview has been far less than mine. And in many cases, their dad has been sitting there with them saying "If you give my son a job, I'll make sure my firm sends you some business" or "We'll up your discount by another 20% for the next 5 years".

Not even close to a level playing field.

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Well, if they don't think it's fair...

I'm a bloody awful christian, 90% agnostic, but I'll still be putting my name on the local night shelter roster this weekend

Sad to say it but.. That one act is more than most who claim to be Christians will ever consider doing in Western nations :(

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: No cost to the suppliers

Just as a little challenge to the so-called "Greatest Nation" : Poxy little NZ is doing a nation-wide broadband-to-every-house rollout (in fact we're doing fibre-to-every-house!).

Sure, we don't have some of the vast expanses with little population that you do, but we also don't have the huge numbers of populations that you do.

We have quite a few independent ISPs as well.

If a tiny bunch of what drumpf calls "free loaders" (because we're smart enough to pay a reasonable price for medication instead of paying $tupid$$$$$$!) can do it, then surely the nation with the "biggest", "bestest" and "mostest" can achieve something like this.

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Well, if they don't think it's fair...

Be careful, that cauldron is very large and includes folks' who also thought they were "safe".

I knew a US musician many years ago. Great fellow, did well especially in South American countries. Wasn't 'rich' but had a free-hold home and very healthy bank account.

Liking to do things himself is what literally killed him. He took a fall while painting his house, and messed up his back. His medical insurance wasn't quite as good as he expected, and of course your options for changing aren't great when you're already injured.

Not too long later he died while living on the street, his home long sold and his welfare not even beginning to cover his medical costs.

In the US it seems it takes ONE accident to make a huge change to anyone from upper-middle-class and down. If your partner doesn't have the income to support your costs, and your insurance doesn't come to the party.....

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Well, if they don't think it's fair...

@CrazyOldCatMan said: "because people like you refuse to do your Christian duty to help the poor"

Leave the religion out will you? Not everyone has invisible friend(s) but still help people in need nevertheless!

Thing is.. I believe that Bob has portrayed himself as Christian, and like a great many on the right-wing side of things, claim to be Christian while railing against the "lazy poor" every chance they get.

The big problem here, of course, is that Christians are supposed to help the poor every way they can (not necessarily to the "sell everything you have and give the money to the poor" level but certainly

Many so-called Christians seem to say "The poor are lazy and deserve to be stepped on". The Bible says "True religion is this : Help the widows and orphans in their distress" and talks elsewhere of helping the poor. Even scarier for the RW-lot, the early Christians lived in COMMUNES and SHARED ALL THEIR STUFF with each other. Often converts would sell their land or other property, use the money to help the poor, and live with the rest of the God-bunch in whatever housing the COMMUNE had available.

Almost like a bunch of pinko-hippy-commies if you ask me!

(Yes, I follow Christ, and while not living in a commune I do live a lot closer to the early ways)

Kiwi Silver badge
Thumb Down

Re: Well, if they don't think it's fair...

Bob, hope you never have an accident that means you cannot work for a while.

You'll discover very quickly just how shoddy the US medial and insurance scams[1] are.

You'll discover even more quickly the gulf between your rants and reality.

And even if you heal, a good bet you'll discover how hard it is to get a good job again when you've been out of work for a year, are poor, and desperate.

Welfare looks great when you think you can live off it. It looks terrible when you actually have to rely on it for a little while.

It's absolutely disgusting when every where you go you get turned down because you are on welfare.

You know where the downvote button is.

[1] I was going to use the word "system" but no, these are terrible scams through and through. Nothing about them could be called a 'system'.

Privacy, security fears about ID cards? UK.gov's digital bod has one simple solution: 'Get over it'

Kiwi Silver badge
Black Helicopters

Re: @ toilet duk

Don't get me wrong: I don't like the things myself but ultimately the state has ways of making us comply.

gentle civil disobedience often wins in the end. If you don't like it don't live with it.

Are they there for your benefit as a citizen, or theirs? If the government is for the benefit of the citizen then the citizen must remind them of this from time to time, and unpopular acts by the government must be dealt with and even punished by the citizens who employ them.

But as Franklin(?) said, those who give up liberty for security deserve to lose both.

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: another iteration

please someone introduce a minimal level of understanding prior to appointment to cabinet posts.

That's the problem. To qualify as a politician you truly need a minimal level of understanding!

Facebook spooked after MPs seize documents for privacy breach probe

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Off to the tower with Zuck

Televise the event, put it on PayPerView to make some *serious* money, & let the world watch as Zuck gets questioned between each shove off the roof.


1) Make it cheap, so even the poorer people can get to see it and enjoy.

2) For 1c/person/vote, also have the execs from MS, Google, Apple and various other nefarious types up there. You get to vote who gets pushed next.

3) You may also get to vote on the contents of the pool.

4) For $10/person/vote, you get to vote on the length of the rope......

Using a free VPN? Why not skip the middleman and just send your data to President Xi?

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: run your own? really?

good points you made here, especially the ways of using vpn, I can agree with that, but I don't see a point of making your own vpn. Especially when there are such a good ones like Nordvpn for a few dollars a month, they are well developed, if you lucky enough you can get it very cheap. And it still will get u some more advantages than what you can build at home.

My own VPN started life as an instance of OpenVPN + PiHole on a Media Centre box that was on 24/7 (collecting the 'necessary data' for the next series or a few movies we wanted to watch ;) ). The machine was on already, so all I needed was a few minutes to install the software and configure the software and a bit of port forwarding on the router. It is effectively free, as the bandwidth is 'unlimited' and the power is already being used. (FTR it now resides on my own cloud server).

Just make sure it is not a free vpn, because it does not go in one sentence with privacy.

I often watch a vid or two on YT before I go to sleep, using a tablet propped up against a pillow (it turns itself off after the video stops if I don't start another one). On Saturday I visited NordVPN for the first time, with JS off by default. Among the 4 lots of JS their site wants 2 are their own, one is discuss, and the last is google tag manager. Last night (Monday), I again went to watch a vid and what do I see in my list? Lots and lots of stuff about VPNS.

On my desktop maching and my tablet I have OpenVPN set up, but my VPN is not at my home now. I don't have OpenVPN on this laptop, so when I looked up NordVPN I did it from the same IP the tablet uses, however for this discussion I am coming from a different IP. Since the videos appeared in YT just after I visited Nord, and I haven't previously looked up any vids on YT nor do I use google to search for stuff, a reasonable conclusion is that google got a record of my visit to NordVPN from them, and from there got the idea that I am interested in that product. If Nord fed that data to google then they're hardly respecting my privacy, and as they use google products in their web site I think it's a fair bet that they don't truly respect your privacy. I have advised them that until I am satisfied such things are not going to occur in future (including the removal of all google js bs from their site) I will tell people to not be keen to trust them. I'm sure with the dozen or so people I might be able to add to their customer base of millions, they'll hop to it right away and perform a complete redesign of their systems to make sure google is as excluded as possible..... :)

Besides that, I'm not exactly sure where Nord operates from. They could well be subject to a court order which whilst I do not trust1 any online service I don't myself control, I still would not be happy with anyone trying to track anything I am doing.

1 There are degrees of 'trust'. I do not trust that the information I post to El Reg will make it's way to their servers without someone attempting to look at it, but I do not care because it is for publication. I do not trust that my emails will get through various ISP's without being looked at (pretty sure google et al mine your emails for stuff of interest to them), so I either don't send anything confidential or I encrypt it.

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: VPN advertising now on the telly

Probably the same crowd advertising in NZ.

1) Your firm appears to be in the US. Nope, no way no how, not a chance.

2) Your prices suggest that I am the product. Get stuffed!

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Own VPN?

1) Lots of ISP's (at least over these ways) do static IPs, or ones that don't tend to change, without charge (or with a nominal charge). I don't recall when my ADSL IP last changed but it has been more than 2 years.

2) If you don't use it for nasty behaviour, you don't need 'plausible deniability'.

2a) Can be aided by letting others use it if you're on Fibre. Unless you can pay your VPN provider in cash, there is potentially a paper trail. And if enough of a VPN's customers are acting nefariously, they may get a 'purchase order' from a government department knowing for buying rubber hose by the kilometre.

3) Vulture (that someone else mentioned in this thread) charge $2.5(us?)/month per instance, and you can set them up in a number of different countries if you wish - just from looking at their page for a few minutes.

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: run your own? really?

I tried viewing El Regs site over Tor the other day.

Cloudflare complained and wanted me to enable JavaScript.

El Reg really does need to dispense with clodfool. It drove me away for a while, though it seems better now.

There's always something like Whonix (think that's the name) which will let you run that JS BS in a VPN that can only connect to the internet via another VPN that acts as a TOR gateway. Not necessarily absolutely perfectly secure, but more than enough to keep you safe from clodfool's harrassment while you're innocently browsing El Reg.

(As if there was any innocence around here! Naivety maybe, but innocence?????)

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: run your own? really?

I'll also note that these days the BBC require those accessing their media to have an BBC account with a listed physical UK mailing address. VPNs can't help with that wrinkle.

That's not too hard to work around. Same way you can get stuff where you must have a delivery address in a certain country. Just be on good terms with someone over there :)

You can even do a VPN-swap if you can handle the hit on your data. You set up one there and give me a log in, and I set up one here and give you a log in (no, not offering sorry, my bandwidth is too limited for any more users!)

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: run your own? really?

Agreed! The statement is too vague, leaving out the only actual reason to create your own VPN: Access to an encrypted connection directly to your own computer. That may well be exactly what you need to deal with wide open, unencrypted WiFi hotspots.

That's why I run it as well. Plus it allows me SSH as if I'm on my own network whilst not actually leaving the SSH ports open to the public. I now have the port my VPN is on, and the ports for web and email servers.

I can trust any connection because the VPN is encrypted end-end, and it uses cert-based authentication to connect.

Kiwi Silver badge

+1 for OpenVPN and Pi Hole

I've had no trouble. It runs on a small laptop (Dell D630) in the cupboard my router is in, with it's own sub-domain, and I use cert-based authentication.

Pi-Hole helps a lot in keeping nasties out as well.

Makes using outside networks a lot safer, I know if I am at a friend's that my data is safe from their hands. Same for from a cafe, though I am much less likely to do my online banking even then (even though I can verify that the tunnel is encrypted over and above the HTTPS to the bank).

When a friend was in hospital recently we also had his system using it. Noted the hospital had blocks on the usual VPN port so we moved it - big advantage with home-grown.

It takes minutes to set up, and so far I've used it with Debian and Devuan based systems, Android (4&6 via the OpenVPN app) and even Win 7. Only issues I had was Devuan not using the server for DNS, which came down to a particular package not being installed that was used to update /etc/resolv.conf.

(Does pay to set the OpenVPN app to block all traffic on a disconnect, just in case it disconnects on your phone just before you start your banking session while at the local watering hole).

Microsoft menaced with GDPR mega-fines in Europe for 'large scale and covert' gathering of people's info via Office

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: What about Windows 10 that Office is sitting on?

From what Tim Cook has stated may times, they are small fry in the data slurp league when compared to MS, Google, Facebook and others but...

Many times during my school career I heard a whiny child-like voice saying "but he did it too!" as if that somehow excused bad behaviour. Even sometimes a similar whiny kiddy voice saying "but she did it worse".

That sort of behaviour should be gone by the time of your 10th birthday. It's not a fitting excuse for any adult, let alone the CEO of a large corporation.

Yet the fans will consider it to be a reasonable excuse regardless of who uses it.

SQLite creator crucified after code of conduct warns devs to love God, and not kill, commit adultery, steal, curse...

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Sigh...

Actually it is stated both as (paraphrasing because I don't want to look up verses for exact text right now) "Do not do to others what you would not want

There's also "love your neighbour as yourself", and 6 of the 10 commandments.

Astroboffins say our Solar System could have – wait, stop, what... the US govt found UFOs?

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Nice article, Ms. Quatch!

This seems to clearly be a case of pushing an offensive gay leftwing agenda where it doesn't belong.

I'm both gay and pretty much a lefty at that (left of centre with right-wing traits sure, but mostly lefty).

I am quite happy to say such stuff as what has been discussed here does not belong in Dr Who. They started this stuff with Eccleston(sp), continued it to some degree under Tennant, I don't recall much of it under Smith of Capaldi but by the time we got through half of the Capaldi stuff that was it for me+Dr Who. There's the old series around, and I'd rather watch an episode made up from poor quality still pictures where the audio is more hum than speech, where it's been through several VCR's and the early text to describe what was going on has largely lost its definition (and is thus unreadable) than watch the modern versions. I quite liked most of the writing during Tennant's tenure, didn't mind Eccleston or Smith, but the first season with Capaldi was just too much (it's not really him as an actor, though how he portrayed the Dr may've had a bearing - but actors can only do so much with that level of crap writing!).

I think it was the one with the monster hatching from the moon and laying another egg that instantly became a new moon that finally stopped us watching.

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Seriously, the god stuff?

Really? Biologists are not scientists?

Name one _respected_ biologist that says that evolution is nonsense.

I'll get to your other stuff later, just dropping this one here for now.

Would Raymond Damadian do for a start?

Of course, I also mentioned Francis Collins in the post you were replying to, or do geneticists not count in your books?

There's a couple. Or do you believe that the man credited with inventing the MRI and one of the leading physicians in the USA aren't exactly "respected scientists" - or despite their work being within the field of biology will you claim they're not biologists?

And I'm pretty sure I did not say that any of them claimed evolution was nonsense (they may have done but I am not currently aware of such claims). I was the one making that statement.

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Seriously, the god stuff?

> And yet there's a great many respected scientists who'll tell you that creationism fits the evidence far better than this evolution nonsense.

Except a) they are not 'scientists',

Really? Biologists are not scientists? Physists are not scientists? I guess that explains a lot about your posts.

I'd forgotten the likes of Einstein, Newton, Kepler, Faraday to name a very small few were not scientists and did not have the respect of the scientific community. There's that guy Francis Collins as well, but he's some unknown wannabe who has no standing or respect whatsoever in the scientific community. There's that guy Kelvin as well, but then he was forgotten - not like he had a temperature scale named after him or anything. Max Planck was, of course, as thick as 2 planks when it comes to quantum theory. Nope, you're right, not one of these people were scientists or in any way respected.

Oh, and tell me how you can test evolution? Can you present me with a copy of the dinosaur DNA that birds evolved from? It should be easy if it can be tested like you claim? Can you present one proven example of changes necessary for microbe-man evolution? Just one? there's supposed to have been millions of them, so just one verifiable change shouldn't be much to ask?

Just one? One teency tiny wee proven change?

No? Guess that means evolution is un-testable then.

Kiwi Silver badge

That no one was involved in a crash proves that it was done safely .

No it does not 'prove' that it was done safely at all.

Really? Everyone came out ok; no accidents, near-misses, surprises or anything like that, but it wasn't safe? No "pucker moments", no evasive braking or steering, nothing. Not safe?

I know of people who have driven in residential areas legally at speeds over 200km/hr without driving police cars. Remember when we used to have the Mobil 1 (IIRC was a long time ago!) in Wellington? The Hamilton V8 street racing? (and no I am not claiming I was involved in any of these)

That was in very controlled conditions and only by drivers that were rated for those conditions. That is a very different thing than driving fast where other drivers of variable skill may appear. For those races the road was aligned and resurfaced with a special mix that was rated for the speeds of those cars and it was levelled to ensure safety. No other roads in NZ are made to those standards.

Seriously? WOW! I didn't know they could do that! Re-align several Wellington streets, re-surface them with a "special mix", re-level them (taking out the camber which on many corners actually helps drivers), then put in some replica road markings and even fire-hydrants (see the video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIGREJAw8kU, at around the 10-minute mark (that yellow thing in the middle of the road is a NZ fire hydrant) (video is just the Nissan Mobil 500 so they probably don't reach the 200k mark in that "clip") - they do all that re-aligning and surfacing and changing the road markings etc etc, all in a day or so as not to upset the locals (especially the port, businesses etc etc for cargo handling and commerce), and then they undo it all to take the roads back to exactly as they were before suffice for a few replica skid marks?

(For something more recent, there's a clip of the Hamilton (NZ) V8 races at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qP8HikAT_wI in which you can clearly see the replica road markings they must put down (if what you say about resurfacing with "special mix" etc is true).

This is done all over the world; Isle of Man, Monaco, IIRC some of the V8 stuff in Oz (etc etc where they have street racing).

As to "driver ratings" - what of the many "open" races, including the many rallies on some of our wonderful gravel roads? We have races here on a variety of roads, often with drivers who've barely learnt how to use "big boy pants" let alone how to handle a car.

Ah, you must be one of those who have downvoted me

Actually, no, I have never downvoted _anyone_, nor upvoted.

My apologies then.

Are you one of those people who thinks that "nothing bad will happen ...

> One of those people perhaps who believes ...

No. No.

Thank God for that! Those people scare the hell out of me!

Oh. Because I know that our speed limit is arbitrary (that's why the government has just voted to raise it in certain areas!)

The speed limit is set based on the state of the road, its surface, its camber, curves, sight lines and many other issues. NO road is New Zealand is safe to be driven on at 180kph, not even by emergency services.

And yet, again, we have street races that top those speeds. We've had that done by emergency services as well. Admittedly this is for stretches rather than the whole road, but yes. The Auckland motorway with all onramps closed? Not a problem. In fact you could do over 300k on most stretches of that without issue (and no, I've not experienced those speeds in a stock road vehicle). The waikato expressway is able to support those speeds, and even the Kapiti expressway and SH1 through the Wellington motorway would easily be above 200 (for stretches under controlled conditions). SH2 via the Hutt Valley not so much, but there are stretches that'd be OK.

But explain the Ngarunga gorge road - a 6-lane motorway with a legal limit of 80Kph down most of it. However, before the corner at the bottom with a 75Kph advisory speed, it becomes 100Kph. Near the speed camera (the most profitable in NZ, which BTW cannot get photos of people speeding in the fast lane on the uphill side (where the most crashes occur) giving the lie to the "protecting people" vs revenue gathering line!). The only reason for the 80k limit is the camera, and when you're around the curve out of sight of the camera it becomes 100k. However, we have many tight, winding gravel roads that have a posted limit of 100k. Set on the condition of the road? Try driving on NZ roads and see if you can honestly say that!

You would be hard pressed to find tires that are rated to do 180kph, especially on the road surfaces found in NZ.

You are kidding, right? My bike has ultra-cheap ultra-crap ultra-nasty hard-rubber tyres. I don't drive in a way that needs higher grip tyres, I'm not really interested in pushing the bike hard (and I like gravel roads so soft-compound tyres aren't an advantage). Same for my car's tyres (both vehicles are "H" - rated for 210K).

I've checked a couple of friend's cars, both V rated, as in 240Km/hr.

H-rating is very common for bikes. Many bikes I know have V and W ratings, and one has a Z rating (but the tyre itself only lasts a few hundred K, that guy has way more dollars than cents!). These are not special order tyres but over-the-counter stuff. I'd love to show you sites that cover it but as always NZ businesses don't like to have their products readily listed on their websites. You can see the ratings if you visit https://www.franksmc.co.nz/Tyres-Oils#ROADTYRES and hover over the pictures of tyres - no one else locally lists ratings.

Or you can go in/phone any motorbike store and ask any about them if you want. For my car's tyres (170x70R13) I can only find H(210K) or T(190K) rated tyres locally - ie the only options for my car are over 180, so I'm "hard pressed to find" a tyre LOWER rated.

The road surface can be another issue, but safe driving takes that into account anyway. Many roads can handle the speed fine on straights and gentle curves, but the volcanic chip can be interesting if you push things. Fastest I've been on gravel on a bike IIRC is only about 130K, but that was on a private track, with the right tools for the job.

https://www.webbikeworld.com/motorcycle-tire-information/, http://www.weeksmotorcycle.com/tire-speed-rating.html and https://www.blackcircles.com/general/speedrating are some options for checking speed ratings.

Two roads have upped the limit to 110kph because they are new roads specifically engineered for faster speeds than has been the practice in the past.

7 by my count (though after much hunting (not much in the way of reliable sources) only 2 may currently have that limit), them being :

• Waikato Expressway: Longswamp, Rangiriri, Huntly, Hamilton, Cambridge, Ohinewai, Ngaruawahia, Te Rapa, Pokeno to Hampton Downs.

• Tauranga Eastern Link

• Upper Harbour Motorway

• Northern Motorway (Johnstones Hill tunnels to Lonely Track Rd)

• Southern Motorway (Bombay to Takanini)

• Kapiti Expressway (Mackays to Peka Peka)

(NZTA source)

However not all may be at that limit yet (I thought it was to be by the end of the year, which is yesterday, but ICBW). The southern motorway certainly is not new. Not unless you count 1970s as "new" (by which definition I am quite young despite well past the wrong side of 40 :( ) - see this wikipedia article for more info, maybe. (I was only doing a quick check there because I'm pretty sure the southern motorway fails any definition of "new").

What you have failed to notice is that I have not said half of what you imagine.

What you failed to notice is that I haven't imagined anything, I have only responded to exactly what you _said_. It is you that imagines things, such as me down voting, what you think I believe, or you being safe.

I've been an advanced safety instructor in the past. I've had training above most road users and keep my hand in. I have a much better idea of what is safe than most people, and I know my vehicles limits better than most people. You somehow think I have travelled at over 180k in unsafe and uncontrolled conditions. I've not opted to tell you what the conditions were but have given you many possibilities (some or all of which may or may not be what I experienced). You've written 'interesting' stuff about re-surfacing roads with "special mixes" for street races, and the speed rating of tyres, yet claim I don't know my stuff.

I made an assumption about your voting record which I got wrong, you have made assumptions about my driving experience and history which you got wrong. But you also went on to make up stuff (if not out of your own head where did you get the garbage about "special mix" and re-alignments etc being used on the Wellington and Hamilton roads?) to support your arguments.

I'm sure you can do better. If you try. Meanwhile, please tweet if you're ever driving on NZ roads because I'm concerned you may be putting to much of your mental resources into fabricating tales of miraculous road transformations being done in a few hours and not enough resources on the road around you.

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Seriously, the god stuff?

"Name one bit of scientific proof that the God I follow does not exist"

The utterly overwhelming observable evidence for evolution over creationism for a start.

And yet there's a great many respected scientists who'll tell you that creationism fits the evidence far better than this evolution nonsense.

How could life have started accidentally in a random pool of chemicls when even under controlled laboratory conditions our best minds cannot get the right mix of chemicals necessary to life? They can create a few amino acids but not in a form that supports life.

How could the chemicals form in the right order to make even the most basic chain of DNA that could allow for a simple organism that could reproduce? What about all the "machinery" needed to interpret DNA and make proteins etc after that? Remember, all this has to work right first time. Microbes that cannot reproduce cannot be a starting point, they have to be able to survive long enough to reach a reproductive stage even if it is "simple" splitting. And even that has proved to be far more complex than Darwin imagined in his worst nightmares.

Maybe you're one of those ones who believe life couldn't have evolved on earth, and the earth was seeded by aliens? How did they get their start? The same problem, just a different planet.

As yet there is not one observable proof of evolution. The "evidence" you claim is also used by Creationists to show that evolution is NOT something realistic.

So you've failed. I asked for something that is scientific proof, and you toss in something that has failed time and again? Surely with all those quoted "hundreds of thousands" of bits of proof you can come up with something much much better? No?

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

"Hell, you even believe that dinosaurs died out millions of years before the first man came along despite abundant proof (cave drawings, figurines, carvings, eye witness accounts etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc) that man and dinosaurs lived together."

No such evidence exists. And just LOL at "eye witness accounts" Someone is feeding you bs. I'm guessing you must be an American...or otherwise exceptionally gullible. Or trolling.

Ah, you must be one of the "They were tripping and drawing monsters they dreamed up" that just happen to bear an uncanny resemblance to dinosaurs?

IIRC as recent as the 1950s there were some interesting stuff out of some African and other areas. And of course there's the whole "dragon" thing. A look at many of those and you can see they've taken on all sorts of fanciful things, but there are "dragon" stories that don't involve the creatures breathing fire flying. Many of the descriptions bear an interesting resemblance to known dinosaur forms. The word "Dinosaur" only came to us I believe in the mid 1800's (1860-something?), and the concept of "dragon" does in most respects very closely resemble a "terrible lizard" in most tales. Many IIRC even refer to dragons as "Lizard".

Around the world creatures survive very much unchanged since the age of the dinosaurs. There's bacteria that are the same as their forms found in fossils, some fish, and larger creatures such as IIRC crocs and/or gators. An event that wipes out so much of life but leaves such a broad range of life around - creatures that appear not even slightly fazed by the changes to the environment? A large range of cold-blooded creatures at that who'd be among the first to die in an environmental catastrophe?

You buy all this stuff and swallow it without even the slightest bit of thought or tiniest application of logic to see that not all the material matches, yet you call me gullible?

Then again, your "I'm guessing you must be an American" comment indicates that you may have difficulty seeing even the extremely obvious when it goes against your views.

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

Yes, this is why I can't believe in the god of religions. I can accept the idea that there may be a god. But not a god who is so needy that it needs us to worship and pray all the time, or follow all sorts of petty rules, beyond the basic level of decent behaviour. God may not be a mere human invention, but god the High Bureaucrat certainly has been made in our own image.

Many do follow a god of their own design (and yes try as I might I have done that myself).

God does not need us to pray, however like any Father He does want us to have a personal relationship with Him, and of course a relationship involves communication.

The rules we should follow are just as you said, basic decent behaviour. Jesus phrased it as "Love God, and love your neighbour as your self" and that sums up the 10 commandments. Things like not stealing from people, not cheating on your partner nor taking your friend's partner, not murdering someone, not stressing yourself over what your neighbours own that you don't etc etc.

Most countries laws are based around the last 6 commandments.

And no, I have no idea why God chose the rituals the Israelites were expected to follow. That He hasn't told me :)

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

I've recently been exploring some of the evidence put forth to suggest that The Earth is flat. There are some very awkward observations being made, lots of bunkum too, but definitely worth digging for the nuggets that will stretch your mind.

Yup, in some of the ones I've watched there's some interesting stuff. Some can be the result of optical effects with the air between two points refracting the light, some is clearly deliberately misleading (eg they claim something can be seen from a place where it would be impossible if the earth was curved, but if you look into it what they claim can be seen cannot be seen)

Just don't ever read the comments. There's depths of weirdness in there you don't ever want to look into! Even the worst of us here in El Reg don't plumb those depths!

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

No one with two clues is going to be convinced, except maybe biblical literalists (because they lack or suppress critical skills).

Wow, you really need to upgrade your own skillset some.

Almost looks as if you're taking some of this stuff quite personally!

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

It is unlikely that any of the Torah was written down before 'First Temple'...


Wow. Do you also believe what Abraham Lincoln said about believe quotes on the internet? After all someone published it on the internet so it must be true!

But you will believe your dogma regardless.

Look who's talking!

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

at speeds up to (and maybe over) 180km/hr, and my still being alive means I have safely travelled at such speeds on NZ roads

It means no such thing, it means that you are deluded.

You have read stuff into the message that was not stated.

I said that I have travelled at these speeds, I did not say I was driving.

That no one was involved in a crash proves that it was done safely . I know of people who have driven in residential areas legally at speeds over 200km/hr without driving police cars. Remember when we used to have the Mobil 1 (IIRC was a long time ago!) in Wellington? The Hamilton V8 street racing? (and no I am not claiming I was involved in any of these)

Please send me a tweet when you are about to go driving so that I can stay off the roads.

Ah, you must be one of those who have downvoted me for talking about having done driver training and taking time to know the limits of my vehicle, taking into account things that could influence my driving and so on.

Are you one of those people who thinks that "nothing bad will happen if you drive at the speed limit" rather than driving to the conditions? One of those people perhaps who believes they should rely on airbags and other stuff to protect them in a crash rather than using their brain to see a problem coming (eg stopped cars) and to slow down/take action before they run into a bunch of stopped traffic?

I keep my vehicle maintained, I practice braking and other emergency manoeuvres (in a safe area, like an empty car park) so if something happens I don't get surprised by how my vehicle reacts, and I keep my eyes on the road and the users around me. What, in all of that, makes me dangerous?

Oh. Because I know that our speed limit is arbitrary (that's why the government has just voted to raise it in certain areas!) and because under some unknown-to-you circumstance I have travelled at a speed above that and survived. Perhaps I was involved in some legal street racing, or I could've been a passenger in a cop car or other emergency vehicle in an emergency. Maybe I was in a light plane that landed or took off from a NZ road way (we used to have light planes used as emergency transport and they used to land and take off from nearby roads before we got the Westpac etc helicopters). Maybe I was a passenger in a prime minister's car on the way to a sports event.

Travelling at, above, or below the speed limit is no guarantee of what will or won't happen to you, nor is it proof of safe driving. Travelling at a speed appropriate for the conditions is. A well-trained driver taking someone to meet a rescue helicopter at speeds above the posted limit is perfectly fine, especially when the road they are on is in good condition and closed to other traffic.

what you have failed to notice

What you have failed to notice is that I have not said half of what you imagine.

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

"would love to know what makes it a "cop out". Should I disbelieve a basic truth just because it is basic?"

But it almost certainly isn't "true" that there is a god. There is no evidence whatsoever.

We exist, despite the odds of it. That's evidence (not proof, but evidence).

It's just a made up story that you were gullible enough to believe.

You believe that nothing created everything by magic.

I believe that someone created everything by the use of knowledge.

You believe a bunch of chemical reactions that, despite decades of trying by some extremely intelligent minds, have not been able to be replicated in labs beyond very basic levels (one out of hundreds (if not thousands) of reaction needed) - reactions that are absolutely necessary to happen in life but absolutely cannot occur in nature.

I believe someone used knowledge and "tools" to make those necessary reactions.

You believe that a bunch of impossible events happened to create stars and planets etc - yet it is now believed by a number of physicists that the forces involved in the spinning of a clump of dust would cause it to fly apart long before it could have the force of gravity needed to draw enough material to itself. And you believe that despite it being utterly impossible for stars to form naturally (at least within our current physics knowledge) that somehow somewhere a single star formed, ignihted, went super-nova, the shockwave of that being the necessary start to cause other stars to ignite which later going nova caused more new stars - despite the initial one being impossible and the shockwaves not actually being big enough.

I believe someone used knowledge to work around these issues and build the planets, stars, and other bodies we see (and many we don't).

You believe in a pile of magical asteroids that "just magically happened" to hit things in the right way at the right time to create the solar system that we have, doing some pretty neat magical tricks like changing the orbit of planets and their moons.

I believe that the reason we see so much evidence of design and creativity in these things is that someone exceptionally creative used their abilities to design and build these things for us.

You believe that I can take a 1 byte file, copy it over and over and over, and get a full OS, application suite after a while.

I believe that information needs intelligence.

Hell, you even believe that dinosaurs died out millions of years before the first man came along despite abundant proof (cave drawings, figurines, carvings, eye witness accounts etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc) that man and dinosaurs lived together.

I believe that man and dinosaurs lived at the same time.

No, the gullible ones are the people who buy all the big bang and evolution nonsense, who believe in lots of impossible reactions and other events that came about by convenient magical asteroids and other such nonsense. The ones who won't take some time to look over the evidence and apply some real thought to such matters, and challenge their beliefs rather than the intellectual equivalent of a child sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting "I can't hear you" (take a look at the language you choose to use if you want evidence of your doing that in your own post). These are the gullible ones.

Just like many of the ~ 2999 other religions on the planet that have some sort of magical sky fairy.

At least they have the starting point of believing in something as a point of creation, rather than the logical fallacy of believing that absolutely nothing suddenly turned into a vast multi-verse.

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

"The show me how to do it in the hostile conditions of early earth. There is no shred of evidence this is possible by natural causes "

Well actually we can already get most of the way there in the lab. For instance creating amino acids, creating self replicating ribozymes, creating chromosomes.

The trick is.. NOT doing it in the lab but doing it outside. Try using a lightning strike to supply the energy and see if anything is left afterwards. Try going against the natural chemical reactions to create the un-natural ones so important to life.

When it can be worked out how to provide the energy needed to kick-start the reactions without over-cooking and how to get the reactions to work in the right fashion without creating an abundance of chemicals hostile to life at the same time.

Then when you have your chemicals, you also have to find a way to combine them in the correct one out of ~ 1x10^56,000 (iirc) possible combinations.

Making a tyre does not give you a car. Making a bonnet does not give you a car. Making a door does not give you a car. Making a wooden block that almost looks like an engine if you squint at it funny does not make a car.

This is not rocket science. In fact, rocket science and making extremely "exotic" materials and fuels is bloody simple compared to this stuff!

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

...gullible idiots...

Sorry, didn't think this was a thread about MS users?

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

"God created all. God exists outside of time and matter, is without begining or end. That seems pretty simple and doesn't go back any further."


Aside from being a cop out and also arbitrarily claiming you know that God exists acausally whilst claiming him as a cause, on your terms it could equally be applied to a universe without a god:

Would love to know what makes it a "cop out". Should I disbelieve a basic truth just because it is basic? Lots of other stuff could be called a "cop out" but that doesn't stop them being true.

I don't break the speed limit because I don't want any more speeding tickets. I believe the limit of 100km/hr to be arbitrarily set and I believe I can quite safely negotiate most highways and many other sections of road in NZ at speeds up to (and maybe over) 180km/hr, and my still being alive means I have safely travelled at such speeds on NZ roads (not saying I was the driver, not admitting to any such driving). Saying I limit myself to the speed limit or less because I don't want tickets is, to many, what could be called a "cop out" especially when I have been challenged to a race on public roads. It may be a "cop out" but it's also true. So what? Truth is truth.

1. The universe has no beginning or end; it has and will oscillate forever between big bangs and big crunches. Job done.

The "big crunch" has long ago been debunked. There is no mechanism by which the universe could collapse (short of Mantrid sending all of his arms into the same general area). Current theory (semi-quoting a New Scientist article I haven't seen yet) suggests that the universe is now actually increasing the speed of expansion, and will reach such a point that the very fabric of matter will start to break up (interestingly something else hinted at in the Bible - talk of the very elements breaking up!) in something called the "Big Rip" (and yes, I did just learn of this in the last week or two and long to get to read more on it). So no, no oscillating between bangs and crunches. No crunchbang for you!

2. The universe was seeded from another universe orthogonal to ours, and so it's time does not flow for us. This one can also imply a vast profusion of universes bring the side effect of quantum effects in parent universes. Again, this can be argued as turtles all the way down. Crisis averted!

Aye, it could be. Does "cop out" of the whole "beginning" thing though (like the "life was seeded from another planet" since all the theories thus far about abiogenesis(sp) on Earth falling flat). I have seen some weird stuff that could suggest a parallel universe or few..

Ultimately, a slightly asymmetric explosion+the effects of gravity then creating stars and eventually all the rest are a much easier and more believable and more observable thing than the spontaneous existence of a superbeing with the knowledge and ability to create a universe at will; and any fudge you apply to justify him can also be applied to the Big Bang, still making the God proposition seem ridiculous in comparison.

You claim everything came out of nothing. I claim everything came out of something. Mine seems the more logical and sensible. It is your proposition that seems "ridiculous in comparison".

Must be those beers.

I guess another wouldn't hurt you then... (I have no problem with people drinking alcohol, but I have a different view on beer)

Kiwi Silver badge
Paris Hilton

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

I guess you haven't heard of the Torah, which the bible is only a small part of...

The Torah?

You mean the writings of Moses, the first 5 books of the Tanach? The same Tanach that bears an uncanny resemblance to what Christians call the "Old Testament"?

What in my post makes you think that I've not heard of it?

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: The no true Scotsman argument

@Adair, 'complete misunderstanding of the nature of God' -- well, we have all sorts of ideas of God, but if God keeps handily being unable to be explained or proven to exist by humans, then what does it matter if he exists or not?

I had a neighbour I once accidentally offended. They went out of their way to effectively deny my existance. When I would give them a cheery greeting I'd be ignored. Try to help them, I'd be told (very impolitely) where to go. They made up some nasty false rumours about me.

In the end, I gave them what they wanted and made no more attempts to be nice to them.

It is much the same for those who refuse to acknowledge the abundant proof of God around them. He has given you many opportunities to see what is real, but you do not wish to do that. So for a time you will get your wish.

But He is patient and loving, and when you're ready, you will meet with Him, and He will be there for you!

(will this be my most downvoted post yet? Come on guys, trying to crack 1,000 downvotes here! :) )

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Guys!

An example of this is Christianity when the facts of the solar system were discovered. First, denial, then, their belief system was adjusted so that a heliocentric solar system was of course God's handiwork.

Actually, it wasn't Christianity that was denying a heliocentric solar system. There were some involved with another group who claims to follow Christ that denied this, but the Bible makes mention of things hateful to those (and to flat-earthers) eg referring to the Earth as a "ball" and also some stuff that could be hinting at orbital mechanics. But people here don't want to know that the Bible was talking of the "Big Rip" thousands of years ago, that thousands of years ago the expansion of the universe was mentioned in the Bible, and so much other stuff that science is "discovering" now that people who've been reading their Bible's could've told you hundreds of years ago (not that there was much reading of it back then but you get the idea).

Why do I continue to believe? Because I see scientific proof of God being discovered and reported in the likes of New Scientist on a very regular basis. That may not be their intent but when I see stuff that reinforces theories that Christians have come up with long past now being published in such places, I cannot help but smile, thank God for yet another bit of proof, and continue enjoying my day.

A few hundred years ago some Christians were claiming that the earth went around the sun as did the other planets, but the scientists of the day were telling the so-called "church leaders" that it was just not so and to claim the earth went around the sun was to somehow deny God.

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Seriously, the god stuff?

Can you disprove the existence of the christian/jewish/islamic god with 100% certainty? Yes, of course, it's already been done hundreds of thousands, if not millions of times. That god isn't real. it utterly fails every test. it does not exist.

Really? Then this should be a very simple challenge for you.

Name one bit of scientific proof that the God I follow does not exist. Just one, but it does have to be able to prove that He does not exist, as you yourself used the word "prove" in your statement.

Just one. Not much to ask if there are "hundreds of thousands" of examples out there for you to pick from.

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

There is no blind belief in science it is not like religion where the same "theory" is in place for 2,000 years and where you are not allowed to test or challenge it.

The Bible says "Prove that which is good", and also has several passages relating to testing and defending the faith.

A part of that is studying God's Creation and how it works. A great many early scientists were Christian and could trust experimental data because unlike many of the eg Greek gods, the Creator is not petty and does not change the laws of physics on a whim - you can trust that things will work according to the laws He laid down.

My faith is not blind. Parts of it especially in the earlier days have been, but all of it has always been subject to testing, proving, and if apparently in error re-thinking and perhaps removing. That God exists, created the universe etc - in that I have no doubt. The HOW and WHY of parts of that may have changed.

I count physicists and biologists among my friends, and in these I mean people of note.

And sadly yes, some Christians are quite rigid in their beliefs, especially on certain subjects. You can't imagine the number I've come across who would condemn me to some mythical "eternal punishment" because the circumstances of my life led me to being gay long before they led me to the Love and Forgiveness of Jesus - hence Romans 14:4 and 1 John 1:8-10 being amount my favourite verses (8&10 for them, 9 for me :) ).

You can test and challenge my faith. Sometimes I will bend (eg my nastier comments here), sometimes I will break (eg some of my moderated comments here), but I will heal and grow stronger in my faith. I welcome the challenge!

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

Replying to myself, I just want to point out that demonstrating that the idea that a god is needed to explain the complexity of reality (aka the Divine Watchmaker argument) is self-contradictory as it leads to infinite regress is part of the 1st year syllabus in theology degrees.

One of the fundamentalists Christians here (sometimes putting the MENTAL in fundamental, I know...).

Just wondering if you'd mind explaining why you believe it "leads to infinite regress"?

God created all. God exists outside of time and matter, is without begining or end. That seems pretty simple and doesn't go back any further. One of the many issues with the Big Bang - everything had to come from absolutely NOTHING, no matter no energy nothing - unless (as another poster mentioned) something from another universe did something to create/spawn our universe.

(I've got to remember to read up on The Big Rip as well - sounds interesting...)

BTW, I've met people with theology degrees. Seems they should spend some time reading the Bible rather than studying people's views on other people's writings on the words of someone who was the 3rd cousin twice removed from someone who once met someone whose uncle thought he once heard the word "Bible". Seems that those with said degrees are at least that far removed from having actually read the Bible! Some certainly have had great trouble understanding basic concepts!

Ubuntu 17.10 pulled: Linux OS knackers laptop BIOSes, Intel kernel driver fingered

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Accidental Aardvark

Remember - it's only M$-based machines that suffer mass virus infections!

That's NOT true! Why there was the.. er... er.. um.. Oh yeah, there was the Morris Worm! Proof that Linux, Unix, BSD and even OSX all get nasty mass infections just like Windows!

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: I still prefer Linux

Even if this was 100% Canonical's fault (or the blame could be 100% attributed to Linux and/or open source/free software) and I bricked an expensive laptop, I would still use Linux and would still fully support open source.

I'm pretty sure someone who knows how to use a search engine could find a huge number of reports of Windows effectively bricking hardware - at least to the point where "expert intervention" is required. I can see in my "your topics" list a link to a thread on an article about printers being knocked out, just for a start.


Kiwi Silver badge


KBBC Keyboard blocked by cat

[cautiously glances at fur-lined feline occupying neighbouring chair] Nope, no idea what that's like...

Kiwi Silver badge



...or as it is properly known, sexual assault.

Only if done unwillingly.

'Please store the internet on this floppy disk'

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Printer Power

That's the best thing to do to a printer. Can't imagine why so many people want the blasted things...

Putting 400Kv across it's terminals would certainly turn it into a "blasted thing" I expect, and would also be quite terminal for it.

Now, if I can also find the testicles of the bugger who invented the blasted things, I have another experiment in mind for 400Kv...

(El Reg : We do not have a suitable EHT icon!)


Judge rm -rf Grsecurity's defamation sue-ball against Bruce Perens

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: Look wookie

Look wookie

Talk some more shite

Wow. What a convincing argument! I'm gonna rush out now and and start supporting GRS. </sarc>

That was fast... unlike old iPhones: Apple sued for slowing down mobes

Kiwi Silver badge

Re: That probably explains..

Problem with sealed-in battery with water-proofed device is it's expensive and difficult to replace the battery and you usually lose the water-proofing too.

Doesn't have to be that way. We've had the ability to waterproof small devices with child-replaceable battery compartments for some 40 years. Maybe more.

Kiwi Silver badge

Ever heard the phrase "One bad apple spoils the bunch"? All those millions of working devices mean squat if you happen to draw the million-to-one that explodes and burns you.

There's a slim chance that reading a message on El Reg could trigger a stress response in your brain that could lead to a stroke or aneurysm or some other instantly fatal even. Only one in several hundred million chance maybe but that's too high a risk right?

Also one in a few thousand electronic devices suffer faults that lead to them catching fire. You should turn all electronics off just to be on the same side.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018