Re: Read the suit....
"Shitposting kept at a minimum."
Well, that's totally put me off!
Spotted that follow, did wonder - don't worry, you'll regret it pretty soon I'd imagine ;-)
2252 posts • joined 26 Jun 2007
"Shitposting kept at a minimum."
Well, that's totally put me off!
Spotted that follow, did wonder - don't worry, you'll regret it pretty soon I'd imagine ;-)
I've been off the smokes for six years now. Gone through the Egos, top wick tanks, bottom wick tanks, sub ohm tanks, multi coil tanks, RDAs, RDTAs, etc, anywhere from 5w to 235w.
Current device? Innoken T20 tank at 13.5w on whatever smallish battery pack I have to hand.
No need to post that, I was just reminiscing :-)
Number of electrical problems in that time with the devices or cells? None.
Except protected cells are invariably low power, and it's damned near impossible to get a regulated mod that doesn't have reverse battery protection and under voltage/overvoltage protection.
I really wish people would stop just assuming 'cheap chinese junk' when the devices they've used to make that comment were probably made in china too.
It's not cheap chinese junk - it's almost always a stupid user putting loose cells in his pocket.
It's almost never the device, not the battery, that's the problem.
Edit: I'm replying to AC, not 404, who has taken a similar tack in a slightly different direction to me ;-)
That's not *strictly* true - I've run multiple >200w devices (at greater than 200w, too...) and providing the batteries are even reasonably good quality, it's not so much of an issue because:
A: You can't inhale at >150w for more than couple of seconds (you don't have the lung capacity to match the vapour production for that long, it's that simple)
B: Most reasonable quality batteries can easily sustain that level of current as a pulse (IE under a few seconds, not a few minutes) without breaking a sweat.
Now, it's *possible* to run at 200w for more than that, if you're not using the device (IE accidental pocket press) but what tends to happen is that within a few seconds, the coils heat up so much (due to lack of airflow and wicking) that they break, and break the circuit.
Regulated devices also tend to have thermal detection on the board - if you run the device too hot (the cells will tend to sink any heat into the device) it'll refuse to trigger, full stop, till it's cooled down internally or you swap to nice, fresh, cool cells.
Of course, none of this quite the same with mechanical mods, (which are literally a switch, a coil/wick and a cell or two) or unregulated box mods (as a mech, but with some MOSTFETS and simple discrete compenentry to manage series/parallel, perhaps a POT to dial up/down power - nothing fancier than that though), but those are really quite specialist, and most users of mechs tend to be pretty switched on to battery safety, not letting them short out, etc.
Of course, not all of them do, so a minority of reported e-cig incidents involve mechanical mods that have failed in some way (pocket press, far too low ohmage coils, etc) but the vast, vast majority of these incidents are quite literally.
Someone buys some cells,
Someone puts them in their pocket with small change and house keys
Nature takes it course and attempts to seriously re-educate you.
There's some more nuance and detail involved (as with all these things - hopefully I've included enough info to clear a few misconceptions up at least, the rest, feel free to have a bit of a deep dive yerself, you're on a tech site, you're perfectly capable!) but basically, regulated devices are very, very reliable if looked after. That's why incidents like this make the headlines; despite hundreds of millions of these devices being out there, and cells too, fires from them are very rare indeed because 99.99999% of users are aware of basic battery safety that their parents and primary school drilled into them at a young age...
I've never been on reddit deliberately. I'm mostly a twittard for this stuff.
My argument doesn't get me £300/hr though, does it now?
Wait, does it?
But really, if you've got a link to LGs counter suit, I'd be interested to read it - always good to see how large corporations term the phrase 'are you a complete fucking moron, mate?' and couch it in nice, dry legalese....
Interesting, interesting - got linky, my good chum?
Steven "no, really" R
Why thank you very much my good fellow commentard.
If you skip through my post history, you'll see I've done this a *lot* on here ;-)
Steven "Knows his stuff when it comes to e-cigs" R
Sigh, it's quite sad in this day and age that I have to explain this to someone who should ostensibly have an interest in technology.
No-one claims e-cigs are completely safe or entirely non-hazardous, as nothing is, period - they are drastically safer and massively less hazardous than smoking - a habit which 99.5% of regular e-cig users were partaking of before trying e-cigs, either full time or experimentally. Literally almost no-one, proportionally, who uses e-cigs regularly (ie daily, habitually) is a previous non-smoker. We're talking <1% across the board, and <0.5% in most cases, in all age groups.
This means that almost everyone who uses an e-cig is getting a massive reduction in harm to themselves and those around them.
Saying e-cigs aren't entirely safe is like arguing that a car seatbelt might strange you in a crash - insomuch as it's completely missing the point and shows you to be an uninformed, puritanical moron who clearly doesn't even have the simplest grasp of the concepts involved in the subject matter.
Steven "Has read the science - almost all of it, thanks sci-hub - in case you were wondering" R
And the lawsuit explicitly states that he put them in his pockets.
Shorts can have pockets, too. Who says they can't?
Steven "more of a jeans guy" R
....or at least as much of it as I could without laughing my arse off.
Apparently, the lawyers client has convinced the lawyer to argue to that LG should have reasonably expected HG2 18650 cells to explode and warned clients as such.
This is the HG2 of which there are tens of millions in circulation, and dozens of incidents in the last decade of any 18650 related fires, never mind e-cig related ones.
In the last ten years.
Almost all of which are attributable to user-error-instigated short circuits (IE putting loose cells in a pocket or bag with loose metal - such as keys or coins).
So I'm now more of the case that it's the lawyer who has got a decent retainer up front, and is now going through the motions, because they don't have a hope in hell of winning anything other than some temporary publicity.
Either that or, less likely, the lawyer is going probono and doesn't realise just how badly they've just screwed themselves over.
Either way, the lawsuit all appears to be about the distributor, reseller and manufacturer taking responsibility - there's nothing in there about the end user actually having even the most basic battery safety knowledge. And I don't just mean specialist cells, the same shit applies to AAs, too....
Steven "paid attention in primary school science lessons" R
£5 says they were loose in his pocket, with change and keys.
Like they always are when shit like this happens.
And like everyone was told not to do with batteries as a kid.
I was told a similar story by an ex network-op of mine - as I recall (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) but it was something silly like Ghana (or at least, the state I was told about) having a very small netblock allocation as a country, or only having a single gateway in, or the whole lot being proxied through one server, or other similar 'brick wall' hard limit connectivity problem that up until then, hadn't been a problem.
Then 'something' occured that made their IP range get flagged up, the whole internet went down for the country.
I think the story I was told was about a Gulf state (Jordan? Qatar?) but it's apocryphal anyway, so it might be the same tale.
Anyway, reminiscence over, back to work, sigh.
Roger’s response? “At least it wasn’t a ghost!”
Pfft. Should have gone full scooby doo, given the symptoms.
Roger’s response? “At least it wasn’t a G-G-G-G-GHOST!”
Still, Roger probably wanted to keep his job...
"It seems odd that all ISP's don't offer email services. They surely cost practically bugger all and are a method of locking in customers."
Until you start dealing with being blacklisted because of spammers, maintaining relays, incoming spam filters (which are never as good as Google, et al), hardware maintenance and replacment (or expansion if you're doing it using your own internal cloud infrastructure) etc. And that's before you start looking at ensuring it stays secure, patching, minimising downtime etc.
People who think email is easy have never maintained a 'bare metal' email platform, in my experience. And those who have maintained a bare metal email service try to avoid it in future if they can help it...
Steven 'fingers burned' R
Fuck it I've bought one.
A gaming based set so that if I find it's not ideal for my needs, I can still play Stuntrace FX and Starwing on it.
Steven "hypocrite" R
"New SoC: I reckon about three years work. We need to ensure its robust, performant, certified with a solid SW base that works on day of release."
Ooh, from the horses mouth, it sounds like. And yeah, I reckoned it would entail more than just BGAing a new CPU in place and hanging some peripherals off it in the same form factor.
As a result of all this chatter, I've been looking at RasPis and their competitors quite a lot lately. And the more I look at it, the more a RasPi does seem to fit the bill well for the other stuff I'd like to use it for. It certainly seems to have a more mature ecosystem, although the Asus one looks pretty close when you trade the performance off against it...
IE, a simple setup for Docker testing (I'm fairly new to it) because that's A Thing you can do on them these days. HA broker for my little two box proxmox cluster (I don't want to sully my desktop machine with such things) and the like.
Steven "Turning to the dark side" R
James, cool - so I guess we're waiting for the current smartphone gen of SOCs (which have that sort of connectivity on board, or at least the capability for it) to mature and get cheapy cheap and well understood before a RaspPI would come with that sort of gear?
(hypothetically, of course).
Steven "I asked for those downvotes" R
Just things I'm thinking about off the top of my head. There are other uses for it, obviously (it'd make a fine broker for Proxmox/Ceph management I suppose).
I'd not turn one down at all (and I might actually have accidentally just blagged myself a free one from a colleague for sorting some stuff out for them last night) but I just keep wondering when they're going to have SATA and proper GigE.
You're not wrong, mind - GigE isn't essential, but when you don't have it, it's really noticable when you're shuffling images around etc. I think I just want to rationalise a RetroPi setup to myself that I could (reasonably) justify for works testing ;-)
Edit: While I toddle off to do some work, can anyone remind me why there's no true ethernet/sata/etc - is it a lack of a built in PCIe bus, etc? Genuinely curious, so if you're all going to downvote me, you can at least educate me at the same time, eh? :-)
That was the first thing I checked for, and again, why I haven't bought one.
I realise gigabit ethernet is power hungry when you're working at this scale, but proper GigE would make this far more appealing to me, in terms of picking a few up to play with containerization stuff, HA methodologies, etc (rather than messing with bulky old PCs).
I may still pick one up, but it's not a 'zero thought' purchase - again.
I'll probably get downvoted, it's still not quite a 'no brainer' purchase for me.
I get that reference!
I agree - as a sysadmin, the ability to pull a device out and be able to quickly through a terminal emulator and run basic diag, before dragging out the laptop if it's really necessary would be handy.
IE doing a quick htop, df -h etc - things that aren't as easy with a soft keyboard.
I think I'd need a reasonable linux distro on there, rather than Android, though.
I'll be watching this with interest.
"MalwareMustDie said it was unable to give any estimate on how many devices had already been infected"
I could tell you how many devices will get updated and patched against this though.
Hint - I bet it's not many.
People said the same thing about Lucozade, but they still haven't done it.
It started as a suggestion, then it was a voluntary thing, and now it's 'if you don't drop most of the sugar from your sugary drink, you'll be paying an extra tax per 100ml'.
Because according to some people*, sugar is the new tobacco.
Ah, S<censored>horpe, the bane of those suffering with poorly implemented content filters everywhere.
It's not about the hardware, or the architecture, it's about the control.
When people say the cloud is someone elses server, it's the someone else part that's the point - it's down to them what lives on that server, and you have basically zero say on that.
Your computer might not have whizzbang replication across multiple continents, but if you set up a script to remove all references to titties and run it on your porn collection, at least that's something you have done, and it's highly unlikely to have effectively done it itself.
Steven "doesn't back anything up because all his data is worthless" R
...is just grating.
I keep seeing ST200s and more recently, ST220s going fairly cheap on AutoTrader.
If I had a couple of grand burning a hole in my pocket, I can't help thinking one of those with a centre pipe removal and a decat would be quite a giggle.
Probably make more sense to fix my car first though (which hasn't happpened because I don't have a couple of grand burning a hole in my pocket...)
These days it's more likely to be the long and overreaching arm of Tobacco Control. You know, actual public health people.
It's becoming increasingly laughable, frankly. Or it would be, if they weren't taxpayer funded ideologues who are standing in the way of massively reducing the harm caused by the single most dangerous consumer habit out there.
What a load of rubbish.
I'm so sorry.
"Virgin Media broadband cabinet in Shropshire last year, resulting in, um, sluggish broadband services."
The wording suggests you're a bit ashamed of that pun, but we know the truth.
You love it.
And if Anna Soubry had actually read the contents of TPD2, she might have known that e-cigs were part of it, that the UK govt position on e-cigs was to keep an eye on them but not ban them, and that as such that required parliamentary scrutiny.
Except she didn't, she didn't, and we, as a result, didn't. It was nearly chucked out in the Lords, but for ASHs little sockpuppets being rushed talking points and scuppering the whole thing.
So we nearly didn't enforce it, and had it been fully debated in parliament, it likely wouldn't have been implemented at all, as it was against the broader government position of the day on the matter.
"Sure as anything in twenty or thirty years we'l discover that sucking vape juice into your lungs over the long term gives you some kind of nasty disease."
Based on the evidence, it can clearly be stated that the chances of any smoking related diseases is slim to nil, for obvious reasons. For diseases of that ilk....well.....
Obviously, anything which stresses the airways will increase the risk of late life issues, but the general consensus, based on the research and the material science, is that any risk would be small - like that of spending a lifetime working in a kitchen or a garage. Not one worth worrying about if it's something you enjoy.
And these aren't crackpots saying this - these are the cream of the crop of those who not only work in tobacco related fields, but who are also actually allowed to perform research that is applicable to human health, unlike most of those who claim to the contrary - failed engineers and social scientists, mostly.
"Just told my employer/HR that if they allow vaping in the building they can have my resignation."
As it's not illegal, not harmful and it's not recommended by PHE to throw e-cigs in with smoking rules (because that would infer similar levels of risk, which is evidentially false, and discourage people from trying to use them, because if you still have to go outside and sit with the smokers, what's the point?) then one would hope that they'd accept, or even offer for your benefit.
After all, wouldn't want to employ someone who makes such rash threats to business continuity based on such poor evidence - or even worse, their own personal tastes.
That'd be bad for business.
Smokers not spending 20 mins outside twice a day, but sitting in the office doing productive stuff, is good for business.
Steven "pragmatic" R
Given that the TPD was pushed through without parliamentary scrutiny by Anna Soubry, thanks to her utter rank incompetence - she thought e-cigs weren't part of the TDP...
...and that when the Lords - being aware of the above - were voting to scupper the implementation (TRPR), with testimony from various members who had clearly done the research, were familiar with it, and were speaking freely and openly about the problems of it...only to be scuppered by ASH putting pieces of paper into the hands of people they were owed favours by at the last minute (you can literally see some of them tripping over words and phrases they don't recognise or understand) who pulled the usual 'think of the children' bollocks.
I think it's damned right that the implementation that was, bluntly, forced through without proper debate in a parliament that's largely supportive of tobacco harm reduction - and has a long history in overall harm reduction (we pretty much pioneered it in the 80s with needle exchanges and other harm reduction strategies for injected drug users) - should be looked over again.
It's less about Brexit, and more about our utterly feckless MEPs screwing the pooch through their own lackadaisical attitude to their duties, taxpayer funded lobby groups desperate for more money, and the bad regulations that result from that.
"erm no, if people start vaping in my work place I will be insisting on working from home."
I think you'll find that if your boss hears your justification for that, you might welll end up spending a lot more time at home than you'd like....a bit like if you demanded the same thing because someone changed from Old Spice to Lynx Africa, given that there's absolutely sod all evidence of harm from second hand vapour.
"Some of the vape clouds make me (a non smoker, non vaper) cough / struggle to breathe when I inhale them (hard not to when walking past someone on teh street) even more than "real" cigarette smoke does."
It's likely psychosomatic (caused by unexpected flavour/sensation in your mouth as you breathe), or you would likely be in serious trouble. Second hand vapour has a barely detectable biological effect, never mind toxicological. Traffic fumes should, based on dose/response ratios and known toxicity levels you're describing, cause you serious problems any time you're half a mile downwind of a town centre.
That's not really an exaggeration either. There's no sound biological/biochemical evidence that second hand vapour has even a reliably measurable response from the body - which isn't a shock given that most second hand vapour has very low levels of anything unpleasant in it above normal exhaled breath, full stop.
I'm not saying you or Zanzibar don't notice the second hand vapour, or that you don't react to it - I'm saying that the chances of it being an actual biochemical response to the exhaled vapour is, effectively, next to nil based on the evidence.
Avatar of They
"You do seem to be missing the point during your rant.
The ban is about the propagation of a harmful very addictive drug with unknown side effects long term."
You don't seem to know much about nicotine. Without lit tobacco being involved, it's not accurate to describe it as either harmful (in the doses used - the dose makes the poison) or particularly addictive. I'm not joking, without tobacco smoke, nicotine just isn't that interesting from an addiction standpoint. Nicotine is well known to be pretty harmless long term; there's no recommended 'stop using this' period for gum or patches, after all.
"Which is currently and thankfully outlawed"
What, e-cigs in the workplace? It's not and the official advice is not to treat e-cigs like cigarettes. It's perfectly legal to vape in enclosed spaces where it's not otherwise proscribed.
"...so anyone with working taste buds is spared having to breathe in a mixture of possible and probable harmful stuff (no one knows long term except the popcorn lung chemical that is now banned - allegedly.)"
Possible - anything is. Probable? There's already much evidence that that isn't the case. Also, popcorn lung, otherwise known as brochial obliterans, has a pathway that may be caused by Diacetyl. A chemical found in quantities at least two orders of magnitude (that is, at least 100x) greater in cigarettes than it is in e-cigs. Yet, we don't see popcorn lung in smokers - only in those who were exposed to, as far as I can find out, the powdered form of diacetyl, in factories, in the mixing rooms where it's being agitated up.
"Everything you just listed is either proven safe to breathe in like perfume because it is extensively tested or has been around for year. Or is proven harmful (like bonfires) and has other laws surrounding it."
E-cigs have been on the market for ten years, and in widespread use for five. If there were signs of serious health implications, they'd be apparent by now, especially as 99.99 of users are, or were, smokers, who would have had compromised lungs and airways due to years of smoking.
But yet we don't see it, and there's very little evidence of any harms at all (I don't count research which involves injecting e-liquid into the body cavities of rats, and then being applied to humans, as 'research' ), and certainly nothing remotely justifying any kind of public use ban.
Hell, people can't even claim renormalisation as an argument given that youth smoking rates are dropping at levels not seen for decades...
Even if we were to take the absolute worst case scenario with flavourings into account - which the Royal College of Physicians did in their overarching study on the subject
We'd still be talking about a tiny fraction of a risk of smoking, and frankly, not a huge risk over baseline day to day risks, and certainly not one that justifies a huge public health intervention like demanding a ban in enclosed spaces - which would infer similar levels of harm to smoking, which just is not the case at all.
Also, I'll bet that any research that does show some kind of link is demonstrably methodologically broken - such as running a coil designed for 8w at 20w, or similar....because that's about the only way you get carcinogens out of e-cigs - rampant, utterly foul tasting, retch-inducing abuse.
Here's a comparator of smokers, and vapers, carcinogen levels, from CRUK backed research.
Here's that data compared to that of non-smokers - yes, Brad Rodu is pro tobacco harm reduction, but just scroll down to the data in the table which shows comparable levels of VOCs in e-cig users and non-smokers. Not that different, eh?
PS: If you're talking about popcorn lung, I've linked it elsewhere, but just for you:
AC, regarding the wiki link, let me talk to you about popcorn lung (bronchiolitis obliterans).
Ah, wait, Snopes beat me to it. Yes, fucking Snopes. That's how flaky that is.
(it's actually really very interesting)
That's why you never reference wikipedia directly, and why you read the research, to discover that most of it has horrific methodological flaws that mean it doesn't reflect actual real world usage of the devices.
Diacetyl and AP have been associated with respiratory harm in (as far as I could ascertain from reading up) airborne, powdered form in popcorn factory workers exposed to it eight hours a day in highly concentrated quantities in the mixing rooms - not in vapourised, liquid form - nor in in measures 100x greater than in e-cigs as it is in lit tobacco. The only exception to this is someone who claimed they got BO from sniffing their microwave popcorn. That he'd spent a lifetime working with harsh carpet cleaning chemicals didn't seem to be relevant...
This is what you learn when you do more than a basic wiki hunt and paste the first thing you find....
Steven "Has read the research, and a lot of it is fucking pathetic" R
"If passive smoking can harm people, how is vaping not going to do? I find the vapour from these machines extremely irritating, much more so than actual tobacco smoke."
Here are the three studies I posted earlier. That's how we know it's not going to harm people. It's a thing called evidence of lack of notable harm.
Just to be clear, we're not going to legislate on what you find irritating.
Steven "Count....Vapula...?" R
"Nothing worse that walking in a crowded area and suddenly being engulfed in a cloud of artificial-smelling nastiness because some bugger who lacks the self-discipline to quit properly has take a huge lug on a vape then blown the whole lot out... almost more disgusting that getting a whiff of the real deal."
Well, that's personal preference - if you run the business, it should be your choice, not a legal dictat, as to whether vaping is banned. That's sort of the point here.
"That plus I have witnessed several incidents where vapers who thought they were being sneaky and sly have set off fire alarms."
If they were americium based ones, I'd be amazed if enough vapour got in there to set it off before everyone else noticed - it needs to be fucking saturated to cause it to interfere. The optical ones can be more flaky depending on how cheap they are, but even they need serious provocation. I think this is a problem with people cheaping out on their fire detection equipment, or someone not being familiar with what 'sneaky' means. I need to seriously take the piss to set off my smoke alarms at home, and that's when using my big devices, with the windows closed...
"A full ban on all forms of smoking and vaping in all public places is long overdue... but of course it won't happen, not while it's a tax cash cow."
No, it's because it'd be hugely unethical, completely unsupported by the evidence, and would give a false impression that e-cigs are as harmful as lit tobacco.
As for your other post....
"No, because that's an entirely natural process. Whereas deliberately burning (or superheating) a chemical that has been proved to be addictive for the purpose of breathing it in - and as a byproduct, forcing anyone in your immediate vicinity to do so as well..."
1: Superheating - you keep using that word; either you don't realise that it doesn't mean what you think it means, or you don't realise that an e-cig does the literal opposite of what superheating is.
2: Nicotine, in any context other than lit tobacco, isn't addictive in any realistic sense (and certainly not any clinical sense). Even in lit tobacco, it doesn't fit pretty much realpolitic definition of addiction, which typically involve the user going to criminal lengths to get their fix.
E-cigarettes may be as or less addictive than nicotine gums, which themselves are not very addictive.
Nicotine is the drug in tobacco that leads to compulsive drug seeking or addiction. However, several lines of epidemiologic and laboratory evidence presented in this chapter indicate that tobacco-delivered nicotine is substantially more addictive than are pure nicotine forms. Other tobacco constituents, delivery methods, and processes may play a critical supporting role.
So I hope that clears up that little misconception.
3: Seriously, people need to stop insinuating that second hand vapour is a thing that affects anyone biochemically to any notable degree when used as directed. This is very well established. Here is one study, another study and yet another study that all say the same thing - there is little to no evidence of harm to bystanders in any measure that require attention.
You take the level of exposure to which someone working with a lifetime of daily exposure would be expected to show health effects (the threshhold level value, or TLV). The levels detected are under 5% of that. To the users of the devices. Second hand exposure is orders of magnitude lower.
Second hand vaping is, quite frankly, not a thing that needs attention other than in respect of etiquette, with plenty of evidence to back this up, and anyone purporting that it is a problem clearly isn't familiar with the evidence. This includes a large swathe of the public health world, too.
Steven "check my post history on this subject for more info - we've been here before" R
"Don't forget to add another 500 quids for your home charger ( to get a full re-charge overnight )."
If you're commuting 100 miles each way a day, I'm thinking that rather than dropping £35k (or equivalent lease) on an electric car, you'd be better moving closer to work.
Or buying a different car better suited to the task. Square peg, round holes and all that.
The average commute is waaaay less than 30 miles total per day based on info I can find (obviously outliers will be outliers), so a 13a socket would be fine for those who are happy to finance themselves to the hilt for the latest piece of shiny and who have a drive, etc (again, square peg, round hole - you're not going to buy an electric car if you don't have a socket near where it's parked) - although there are some interesting concepts being tested where you can plug yer car into a lamp-post. No, really.
....because a script to run 'certbot renew' once a day (it won't do anything unless the cert is due for renewal, whereupon it'll automatically overwrite the old one) and telling your webserver to look for it's SSL cert wherever you made Certbot dump it is just far too much work for a competent sysadmin.
"Names and dates of birth for all current and former spouses, or civil or domestic partners"
Could be problematic if forgetting birthdays is why they're former partners....
I could have a more mature, nuanced opinion on this matter, but I'm really tired. Although suffice to say, my days of not visiting the US are certainly coming to a middle.
Steven "Unfunny observations and mangling lines from Firefly are the best I've got tonight" R
Another said, "Let's hope Dell fixes it for free, the Dell Update software that was prepackaged, might I say, reminded me to update constantly. So I did... Well, I am not very happy with the update, so 2 stars out of 5."
So it sounds like it was Dells own update software that mandated the update happened.
The Slo Mo guys on Youtube tried this. It looks pretty damned cool at 170,000fps.
Grikath, I tend to agree with you to a large extent - it's more a point of interest on the legalities of it than me calling to arms the EFF and demanding that BK get sued into the middle of next week.
Steven "distracting himself from other more annoying, less fun things with this" R
Edit, because I missed the window on the original post - by 'not illegal' I was thinking 'not quite the same as breaking into an office' or hacking a network, but the unauthorised use/exploitation of a known feature on many devices is not massively dissimilar, no?
Isn't this the equivalent of unauthorised use of your computer?
It's effectively the same as leaning over to your desk, and typing in a search request. Yes, it might not be illegal, but it's unauthorised use of your system, and as it appears to be an auto-roll ad, it's likely unavoidable to the layman without an adblocker/noscript.
It's been a while since I read it in depth - anyone got an opinion on this? I'd be very interested to hear whether I am (or how far I am) off the mark on this.
That, and it's just a plain interesting idea that's tickling my brain.
El Reg Commentards - entertain me, you lovely misanthropes!
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018