And don't forget this statement from the designer of the Death Star...
6902 posts • joined 19 Jan 2007
And don't forget this statement from the designer of the Death Star...
Yes, but then in the report to Vader the Commander says "An escape pod was jettisoned during the fighting but no life forms were aboard", so where was this "other" one?
Fine, so maybe, as I suggested, the didn't have a phone. Or perhaps they're out of battery. Whatever. The point is that a phone should always be able to make emergency calls, no matter who holds it, but that's not what the OP wants.
> it has been imposed by 'someone thinking of the children'
ORLY? So, let's try a hypothetical scenario:
* * * * *
You are in an accident, someone happens along but they don't have a mobile phone or they have one on a network that has no coverage in the area you're in.
Wait a minute! You've got a phone, but the keypad is locked and you're unconscious, so your erstwhile rescuer has no way of calling the emergency services.
What a shame nobody thought of allowing emergency calls *even when* the phone is locked...
* * * * *
Now maybe there should be more safeguards on the emergency dialler, but I don't know how other phones work. On mine (Motorola Moto-G) you've got to swipe up to get the unlock screen, hit Emergency Call, then dial the number and press Call, which seems pretty secure against accidental dialling to me.
... it's different when *they* are the ones doing it...
> It was a joke for fuck's sake.
No, jokes are funny. That just sounded like someone who's already bitched in previous posts having another bitch...
You're both right and wrong about that...
... meanwhile it's trebles all round for the Lawyers...
> Perhaps that cute little 'twitty' bird logo should be replaced by a vulture
Ahem! I think you'll find that logo is already taken by an esteemed(?!) publication not a million miles away from here...
And "Lessons Have Been Learned" is *not* a valid response!
> the "spirit" which is ENTIRELY non-definable, not-recognised, and very much open to personal interpretation.
I'm glad I'll never play board games against a rules lawyer like you...
Ω, Ω on the range...
... is really not getting to the top floor!
(Should I have said Space Elevator? Or would that just be another pinko-liberal, muslim-ophile conspiracy?)
Share and Enjoy!
Next time you do a Windows update, include something that, if someone starts to install a Remote Access program on their system, puts up a warning page saying "If you have had a call from someone claiming to be from Microsoft, it's a scam. (And don't pay any attention to them telling you to ignore this message)"!
Meanwhile, amongst all the back-slapping and high-fiving, what gets lost is that this establishes a precedent by which the FBI et al can say "well you didn't object us doing this with kiddie porn, so that means it's ok to do it for other things too..."
Which, after the Administrators have taken their huge cut, will probably be pennies on the pound...
"...comes not only from human rights violators, but also our own governments."
A tautological statement, methinks...
Even though I've signed up to Virgin's Anonymous Call Blocking "service" I am still getting junk calls saying "we do not have the caller's number".
In vain have I explained to their "technical support" department that if they do not have the caller's number it is *not* rocket science to block the call...
> the latter verging on an antisemitic conspiracy theory.
You really do have a bee in your bonnet about "The Jooz", don't you...
But, as always, it's different when *they* do it...
From right below that second entry:
"USAGE The use of refute to mean deny is thought by many people to be incorrect "
And here's a quote from my Collins English Dictionary published in 1986:
"Refute is often used incorrectly as a synonym of deny. In careful usage, however, to deny something is to state that it is untrue; to refute something is to assemble evidence in order to prove it untrue: all he could do was deny teh allegations since he was unable to refute them
Your cite is simply reflecting the fact that the word's meaning is changing *because* of its repeated incorrect usage.
This is obviously one of those strange definitions of the word "surveillance" that means "we troughed loads of data, but nobody physically *looked* at it, therefore people weren't under surveillance..."
Doubleplus good, Proles!
> You can hire a professional for anything. Just pay the right price.
> Take your Cobynite apologetic policies and you pay for them because I've got two small mouths to feed who will need a job someday.
Then stop voting fucking Tory because they have no interest in helping you feed those small mouths, they just want to help their rich mates get richer whilst screwing the little people who are actually doing the work to *make* the money.
And don't fall for Gideon's claim that he's going to pay the Living Wage because that's a lie, it's not until next April, its below the actual Living Wage and by 2020 it won't be above the London Living Wage *now*!
In the mean time he's taking away Working Tax credits, so will end up making people on low wages *worse* off.
Good luck in feeding your kids...
Boss: Our emissions figures aren't good enough, we need to make them better.
Minion: It would cost a lot of money to improve our engines to do that.
Boss: There must be *something* you can do... (sotto voce: "Will nobody rid me of this turbulent priest?")
Minion: Well, there is something we can do. Leave it with us, we'll deal with the situation...
... not a delivery *of* Mary Jane...
... only if a case presents "a novel or significant interpretation of the law,"
Right, so pretty much never, then if the NSA et al get their way because they *know* they're doing nothing illegal...
I own my own domain, so if I buy something from fredbloggs.com I use fredbloggs.com@mydomain as the e-mail address which lets me keep track of who is doing what with my details.
Also I never surf when logged in to google, I only ever log in if there's something I actually have to do on their system, all the other times I'm logged off. Their cookies are only allowed on per session and, of course, I use AdBlock to block google analytics.
Ok, it might not stop them completely, but it certainly makes life harder for them.
"Water is patient, Adelaide, water just waits. It wears down the clifftops, the mountains, the whole of the world. Water always wins!"
- The Doctor in The Waters of Mars
Well you know just how good countries (especially ones like the UK and the USA) are at protecting people's Rights and Liberties according to the Conventions they've signed up to...
...or, at least, protecting the Rights and Liberties of people they like and agree with...
Pink Floyd did try this, but, alas, not under a meteorological balloon...
This is the voice of the Mysterons... We know that you can hear us!
Chequebook journalism from El Reg? Say it isn't so!
(But if it is, I've got some great stories for the right price...)
So watch out which manufacturers suddenly find a reason to issue an urgent "safety recall" for a *completely unrelated* issue which, none the less, results in the ECU being re-flashed...
No, he probably doesn't, but he uses them as a reference.
From the bottom of the page he links to: "This is Money is part of the Daily Mail, Mail on Sunday & Metro media group"
Of course The Mail never has its own agenda...
So you'd prefer they just went ahead and did whatever they liked and then you bitch about them doing it afterwards saying "why didn't they ask people what they wanted"?
... he has "nothing to hide"...
> "I have AB blood," he said by way of example. "I don't particularly care that people know that. …
But what if someone gets hold of his parents blood type data and finds that his mother was type A, but his father was type O?
It's not just what is known about someone, it's how that data can be combined with *other* information which is where it really gets tricky.
And next on Murdoch's Agenda: Shutting down the BBC News Channel and convincing the public that the BBC should be cut back to a few "core services", thus ensuring that his empire continues to grow and dominate and control what we get told...
"The mobile industry has not previously had to pay us enough for access to this spectrum"
Exactly. Our data is *valuable* and needs to be kept secure, not made available to any Tom, Dick or Hacker out there simply so the Government can make a quick buck.
This is hardly news. Motorbike manufacturers do the same thing, for instance the stock version of my Yamaha FZ6 Fazer has a notorious "hole" in its power curve between 5000-6000 RPM apparently because that's where emissions testing is done, so they reduce the power to make the figures better.
The fact that it means that, if you're trying to do an overtake at those sorts of RPM, the engine bogs down until it crawls over 6000 RPM at which point the power comes back in which, if you're not expecting it, can be disconcerting if not downright dangerous.
I now have a Power Commander III which remaps the fuel injection system to avoid this happening, but it really shouldn't be a problem in the first place.
... that someone will manage to leave this list on a laptop or USB stick in a taxi...?
> We, with Willy the Conq etc, had the thieving, lying, aggrandising, but we ended up richer than those places with the idiots, no?
Sure, it only took the Black Death wiping out enough of the population to cause the downfall of the Feudal System (with a few of those thieving, lying, aggrandising bastards at the top and the vast majority at the bottom in thrall to them) by giving the majority the ability to say "hang on, *we* have the power to say that we're not going to work for a pittance any more whilst you cream off most of the profits".
Hopefully this time around (where we seem to again have a relative few of the thieving, lying, aggrandising bastards at the top and the vast majority at the bottom in thrall to them) we can find a better solution to the problem.
> So, what's worse for an economy?
Oh come on, Tim. I was actually enjoying feeling well disposed towards your arguments and then you blow it with a False Dilemma. They're both undesirable, arguing about which is worse doesn't help matters and just distracts from how to fix the problem.
As for DaveDaveDave's (unsurprising) claim, I think you'd agree that it doesn't matter how perfect the economic policies are if most of the money gets siphoned off before it gets to those who need it.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017