... Don't legislate.
That is all.
6903 posts • joined 19 Jan 2007
... Don't legislate.
That is all.
" From what I've heard, it's a "don't ask/don't tell" type of thing in the Arab world."
No, it's more a case of "Don't ask/ don't get assaulted, flogged, stoned or murdered" type of thing.
On another forum I use there's someone from Denmark (I think) who posted a pic of a system they use.
You've got a 9 x 9 grid with thicker bars marking out 3 x 3 boxes (like Sudoku) and you write your PIN in four of these, then fill in the empty squares with the numbers 1-9. All you have to remember is that your PIN is eg the top left numbers in boxes 1, 2, 3 and 4 or the four corners of the middle box or the first four digits, reversed on the bottom row or...
... but think of all those new jobs that could be created for Telephone Sanitizers!
"The actual public's views are measured by bums in seats"
If that was the case, then Eastenders and Coronation Street should be winning BAFTAs...
"The worst that could happen is that the trader will know your PIN number. "
Yes and that's a prima facie excuse for the Card Company to deny liability for any fraud on the card.
And how difficult would it be to create a gizmo that, when you put the card in the slot, also reads the mag stripe?
And this doesn't even get near PayPal being so willing to reverse a transation and take money out of a Trader's account based on the say-so of a customer and *then* maybe start looking at whether the complaint was actually valid...
Then visit our website for details...!
"...to the physical, mental or moral welfare of a child younger than 17"
So how is this "likelihood" determined? What studies have *actually* demonstrated that such behaviour is "likely" to cause this? Or is it just based on supposition and narrow belief that "we think this is wrong, so it should be illegal" without any proof?
What do you think, boys and girls? (If you're old enough to be allowed to think about this, of course...!)
Well exactly! Bits of parachute, heat-shields, dead landers and rovers, not to mention deflated airbags ...
Honestly, how is an alien suposed to keep their planet tidy??
"When one day an expedition was sent to the spatial coordinates that Voojagig had claimed for this planet they discovered only a small asteroid inhabited by a solitary old man who claimed repeatedly that nothing was true, though he was later discovered to be lying.
"There did, however, remain the question of both the mysterious 60,000 Altairian dollars paid yearly into his Brantisvogan bank account, and of course Zaphod Beeblebrox's highly profitable second-hand biro business."
You're taking a big leap from parents being responsible for what their kids see to society being responsible for ensuring that that happens and, by inference, everyone else's rights being restricted to "think of the children".
As for your other Straw Man arguments, I'll treat them with the contempt they deserve.
"What about the children who have parents who don't give a shit about them?"
So *your* subtext here is that we should *ALL* be treated as children in the vague hope that, somehow, it will help protect those who have crap parents...
Ah, he's obviously someone from the Icelandic branch of the "I don't like this, so you shouldn't be allowed to see it" brigade...
"...which concluded that kids exposed to footage of extreme hardcore action and youngsters actually physically abused shared the same signs of trauma."
And did they study any and all *other* groups of children who had not been exposed to this footage, nor who had been actually physically abused to see if *they* also shared the same "signs of trauma"?
(And what were these "signs" anyway? Remember "shaken baby syndrome"??)
"Why is it always parental responsibility rather than societal responsibility?"
Because they are not MY children. They are not HIS children. They are not SOCIETY'S children.
They are *YOUR* children. YOU brought them into this world, it is YOUR responsibility to bring them up properly, NOBODY ELSE'S!
I'm being repressed!
A simple fine like this is pointless, taking money from one organisation and sending it to another one isn't going to make a difference.
What the ICO should do is say "You will budget this money to conduct a comprehensive review of your data security procedures and ensure that proper measures are implemented to ensure that it does not happen again".
That way the money will actually do some good.
Fining this guy, let alone fining the patient who gave him the information is ridiculously stupid and counter-productive because the only thing it's going to deter is someone else exposing completely inadequate security procedures!
These are people's health records, they should be kept completely confidential and only be individually accessible to those who have a need to view them for a specific purpose, not "log in and cruise around until you find something you like"!
... how it all ends?!
... "Put your head between your knees and kiss your arse goodbye!"
... ITYM Hypocrisy from the people who are trying to enforce laws which are to the benefit of the Media Companies' obsolete business models.
Not forgetting that that legalese is most likely presented in a tiny little window that shows about four lines making it virtually unreadable and meaning you have to scroll manually through it.
Not that they'd do that deliberately so you'll just click on "I accept" of course...
"...without the knowledge of those making them"
And, of course, it's only the Government and Security Services who should be able to do that...
"...may be willing to overlook the privacy failings of the bill in exchange for a chance to put one over on Obama."
So they're anti-Big Government and state snooping and all that sort of stuff, apart from when they can play partisan political games...
And what if you wish to experiment with erotic asphyxiation?
It's dangerous, certainly, so the best thing you can do is to find out as much information about it, but if something goes wrong in a consensual scene (cf the Jane Longhurst case) how is google going to know whether you were planning on killing them or it was just a tragic accident? Answer, they can't.
Forget about presumption of innocence, forget about privacy, forget about due process, google says you've looked at this, so obviously you're guilty!
The idea is not to "frighten the criminals" the idea is to get businesses and organisations to actually admit that they have flaws in their security and *DO* something about them instead of just trying to sweep it under the carpet for fear that it might affect their share prices (and thus bonuses).
Star Trek... what?
... just get a crappy old microwave oven with poor shielding and leave it running!
"...to talk about the issues affecting each age group"
I hope the parents are going to be there, because *THEY* are the ones who are responsible for their childrens' safety. Not the schools, not the ISPs, not the Government, not you or me, but *THE PARENTS*!!
Still, there's one possible good outcome of this, perhaps when this generation of kids grows up and some of them go into Government, we'll start getting rid of some of the ludicrous laws that have been introduced by the "We don't like this, so you aren't allowed to see it" brigade...
And when they're voted off...
... Look out, Captain... AAAARRRGH!
Unless you're the government (any government) of course.
"I've seen this done on a website. Not sure what the point was there"
Was it an online banking site? If so, the point is to stop the possibility of a trojan monitoring the position of your mouse pointer when you click on the characters of your password on screen.
Well that's a deal-breaker right there...
Yes, of course, because nobody should have *any* such "saucy snaps" just in case someone else gets their hands on them...
There's a couple of El Reg staff writers who wouldn't want to hear this sort of thing...
... since I have Flash Block installed meaning *I* get to choose when and if Flash content plays!
... my house!
I read some years ago about a Muslim who was in the US Navy and who had the problem that, since the ship could often be manoeuvring, it was very difficult for him to pray towards Mecca.
He asked his Imam who apparently told him "Which is more important? That you pray towards Mecca or just that you pray?"
Oh and to some of the posters above, I don't share his faith, I don't have any religious beliefs, but I'm willing to respect his Right to hold those beliefs in the hope that he will reciprocate and not say "You must think the same way as me" as certain fanatics do...
And wonderfully detailed replays of an over-priced prima-donna collapsing in feigned agony when they get the slightest touch on their ankle...
Ah, but you see it's *different* when we do it...!
The Automobile Association of America reckons you shouldn't use E-15 (gasoline with 15% ethanol) and car makers are saying if you do it will void your warranty!
... to all the other kids "sexting" or posing for naughty pics for their (at the time SO) or posting anything else about themselves online or in a form which could come back and bite them on the arse.
NB Please note I, in no way, approve of or wish to try to justify/ act as an apologist, for the scumbags who posted these images, but, as the title suggests, this should be treated as a warning to those who think that they can trust someone else with such pictures or information in this online world.
... didn't the Mice do this already? Then the Golgafrincham B-Ark turned up and corrupted the data...
... patent the condom as a firewall?
@Shagbag "There are a lot of very rich tax lawyers out there"
Fixed it for you...
@Paul_Murphy: Erm, I think you mean Dyson Spheres.
Of course there's also Plates and Orbitals and other such fun things from Iain M Banks' Culture stories.
Yes, I'm using my name because there's nothing in that post that would risk an intrusion on my privacy.
It's not rocket science.
"Maybe when the day comes that some idiot with their face covered decides to attack you in the middle of town you'll have a different view of people covering their faces from cameras."
Thus writes the Anonymous Coward!
Excuse me, I think I need a new Irony Detector, mine's just exploded...
... at least it won't affect Tharg the Mighty!
"...over whether adult content is allowed into the home or portable device or not."
Oh dear, here we go again. To protect the cheeeeldreen we have to *ALL* be treated as children!
We cannot be trusted to behave like adults, parents cannot be trusted to teach their children to think twice about what they post about themselves on the web or let others see, no, we're back to the Labour Party Nanny State nonsense of *they* are the only ones who know what is right for us...
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017