Re: Film @ 11
No, it's a farce!
6882 posts • joined 19 Jan 2007
No, it's a farce!
Thank you for that post.
Of course the fact is that, just with groups such as Alcoholics Anonymous, Gamblers Anonymous etc, there are ways of helping people come to terms with their desires and control them with the support of others, but, regrettably, they come up against the twin problems of the NIMBYs who would say "well, yes, I suppose these people should be able to get treatment, but not anywhere within 100 miles of a child" and the Tabloid Media, who would take great delight in "outing" any such organisation and broadcasting its location and membership to every witch-burner and vigilante out there.
"Nasty, horrific, criminal stuff."
Samantha Fox and other models like her posed for photographs when they were 16. This was perfectly legal and above board with no exploitation, nothing horrific and no criminality.
Then, some years ago, the Government of The Vicar of St Albions decided that this sort of thing wasn't acceptable to their prudish moralistic standards and decided to redefine "child" from "someone under 16" to "someone under 18".
So now such images are classed as "child pornography" or, if you prefer "abuse".
Of course our witch-burning tabloids were delighted that images of someone who is over the legal age of consent for sexual activity were now criminalised...
ITYM we should have to *opt in* to even be able to have such things happen on *our* phones...
"Do you want sites you visit with your mobile to be able to direct charges to your phone bill? [Y/N]"
"Pay or conditions a bit over market average will enable you to pick and choose who you employ [...] It's relative wages that count there"
In other words "Be happy you're getting a bit more money than those other poor bastards and don't rock the boat, otherwise you could be back at the bottom of the pile."
Meanwhile it's trebles all round in the board room...
*cough* Cui Bono? *cough*
"The first ERNIE was built at the Post Office Research Station by a team led by Sidney Broadhurst.The designers were Tommy Flowers and Harry Fensom and it is based on Colossus, the world's first digital computer. It was introduced in 1957, and generated bond numbers based on the signal noise created by neon tubes."
"ERNIE 4 uses thermal noise in transistors as its source of entropy for generating true random numbers; the original ERNIE used a gas neon diode. Pseudorandom numbers, often called simply random, can be recreated by anybody who knows the algorithm used to generate them as they are produced in a deterministic way; true random numbers can not. The randomness of ERNIE's numbers derives from random statistical fluctuations in the physical processes involved. ERNIE's output is independently tested each month by an actuary appointed by the government, and the draw is only valid if it is statistically random."
"...costs £360 (US$560) and provides a further 15 working days for the formal appeal. The formal appeal costs £3600 (US$5,600)."
Ah, "How much Justice can you afford?"
"...but is very probably not going to happen because National
Surveillance Security is so much more important that Civil Liberties and Freedom of Expression."
Which, surely, has benefits too...
"I arrest you for the crime of..."
"... you can't arrest me, I'm dead!"
"Ok, then we'll bury you."
"Nope, you can't do that either because a Doctor can't declare Life Extinct as there's no medical cause of death."
Dave Langford's version...
1) A robot will not harm authorized Government personnel but will terminate intruders with extreme prejudice.
2) A robot will obey the orders of authorized personnel except where such orders conflict with the Third Law.
3) A robot will guard its own existence with lethal antipersonnel weaponry, because a robot is bloody expensive.
Congratulations! You've just discovered that kids can be little bastards!
"...if that collaboration had been permitted," [This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed.]
Sorry, but that information is restricted as it may compromise National Security.
And, sorry, no, we can't tell you anything about what there is in there that would compromise National Security because that would compromise National Security too!
... This is the 21st Century calling...
Is it a suicide pact when Corporate America is holding a gun to your head...?
*cough* Allahu akhbar! *cough*
Paging Barbra Streisand...
> Nicely ripped out of context.
>> Also told them that that has nothing to do with what you actually do with the opposite sex. After all, porn is just for perverts and the insane.
If he'd left it as just the first sentence, I wouldn't have commented. Adding the second sentence, however, makes a big difference.
Unfortunately you also seem to have missed the point with your ridiculous Straw Man arguments of "Hands up who wants a 12-yo watching them get it on... anyone? As for the insane - well maybe those who think putting porn in the hands of a twelve-yo is a good idea?"
The "sex education" children get here in the UK is mostly useless nonsense, more designed to placate Middle England than actually helping children learn about sex and (more importantly) relationships.
Consequently they *don't know* that porn "has nothing to do with what you actually do with the opposite sex", so they try to replicate that (with all the deleterious emotional consequences that follow) and, because they don't know better, results in increased levels of teenage pregnancies and STIs.
We need to teach children what they need to know *before* they know it and not with the coy and embarrassed "education" they get at the moment. Compare this with countries like the Netherlands which start to teach children about sexuality from about the age of 6 (cue the Mail frothing at the mouth about our children being "corrupted"!) and you might start to understand the situation.
> porn is just for perverts and the insane
Nice open minded viewpoint you have there...
Nice comments section on that item...
> Ebola has been massively over-hyped.
Yeah, but nobody ever made a scary film about Flu, Malaria, TB or Motor Vehicle Accidents...
"... Pity I've run out of bullets", he thought.
- Bored of the Rings
Damn, you just beat me to that one...
... my first reaction of this was "WTF?" because it seemed to be a definite case of using a sledgehammer (or maybe a piledriver) to crack a nut, but as I read further and the reason for using this method to "print" a tablet, ie fast delivery of amounts of the drug which would normally take multiple tablets, I realised that actually it's a bloody neat idea.
Well done for some creative thinking guys!
> It's only a short step away from this to claiming Peter Sutcliffe was doing some good.
Is this some new form of Godwin?
Hello NoScript, my old friend
You've helped me stay safe once again
Because a website softly sneaking,
Watched my fingers while I was keying,
Within the sound of typing.
... but how many geeks on here would find it even more convenient if they could simply plug in a power cord and recharge, rather than have to waste valuable computer time cooking and eating food?
> I like very much the idea of only targeted surveillance with judicial approval; but sometimes shit goes down too quickly for that.
And then, six months *after* the "shit goes down", we find out that the Security Services had the information all along, but it was buried in such a huge pile of other crap that it was overlooked or discounted.
... it was kidnapped by Aliens and subjected to all sorts of probing.
It will then return a couple of hundred years in the future on a mission to find its creator...
Yes, they absolutely work.
And I'm willing to take a Lie Detector Test to prove that I really do have a bridge for sale...
> You get ONE LOUSY CHARACTER WRONG and this is what happens ;-)
You must be new here...
No, it's the rest of the world who are out of whack with the USA!
> Maybe NASA should offer a $10 million prize
I have a Mr Blofeld on the line...
... back to their old tricks again...
And how many False Positives did they get in that time...?
So perhaps we should tell the Police "If you can't stand the crime, don't do the time"...?
> When you sign up to such a service, you engage in a contract.
Which AIUI is unenforceable in many places because, for a contract to be binding, *both* parties should have the right to negotiate terms, instead of being told "this is how it is, take it or leave it".
... but at least someone is trying to do *something* to level the playing field.
Maybe it won't work, however it might just get people thinking about what's happening out there.
You haven't met some of the children I have...
"Kids should be allowed to run around and shout and scream and scribble on the walls without any supervision from their parents and then get off scot free and not have to take responsibility for what they've done or the mess they've left behind them."
Nope, I'm using broadband at home, that was for the benefit of those who aren't and don't want to a) use lots of data allowance or b) wait for ages for it to download (it took a couple of minutes on Virgin's "high speed" broadband) or c) both.
That's a 32MB PDF file if you're thinking of clicking on the link...
I find your lack of faith disturbing...
(Mine's the long black cape)
Let's ship ALL the copyright trolls out there on a ship designated, say "B"...
Which (if they don't already exist, I haven't checked) will simply result in people creating browser extensions that will send spoof data back to the trackers...
Oh and as for "an advertising-based revenue model that works much better – for readers and advertisers – when ads are tailored to users' interests" it may work better for the advertisers, but if I'm looking for something I don't want recommendations based on who has paid the most to the ad slingers to get their stuff in front of my face, I want ones based on whether the product is any good!
"...and be judged by an authoritarian regime!"
... a bully grabbing your arm and saying "Stop hitting yourself"...?