Re: Jailtime for libel?
"still, it will give him time to think."
But will he?
16426 posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
gummint regulating IoT: yes they've done so WELL thus far, on regulating "teh intarwebs"
Yes, they have done well so far. The US govt. was instrumental in setting the whole thing up. Someone had to pay for all that work at DARPA. And don't forget that the net depends entirely on regulations. They're called protocols.
"Remember, companies like Google and Amazon have their own private networks outside the Internet."
They'll still want the internet around for customers to access them. Otherwise their internal components will be eking out a precarious living taking in each other's washing.
"Then a student with a double barrelled name joined the school with a hyphen separating the two last names."
Ah. The double barrelled surname problem.
Client's client had a database in which the names were properly structured but for some reason decided to amalgamate forename and surname into one string, surname first to send to us. We were then expected to transform it into the correct sequence to print. Hyphenated surnames would have been OK but non-hyphenated... After giving them a few examples they saw my point. However instead of a correct fix - either send it as two fields or concatenate it in the right order, they kept things as they were and sent an extra, numerical parameter, to shown where it should be pivoted.
"There are always reasons you're not privy to, and having to explain to every sulky admin the rationale behind the request is a ball-ache and unnecessary."
Actually it is necessary. If you have a rationale it should be shared unless there are good reasons otherwise. It's more likely to get buy-in to what may well be an otherwise incomprehensible idea or at the very least assures everyone that you aren't actually deficient of marbles. It ensures that new situations can be dealt with appropriately. It enables the process to be modified or dumped if circumstances change to make it inappropriate. At the very least it makes you check that your rationale was well enough thought through to enable you to put together a coherent explanation.
If it's a ball-ache explaining it maybe it wasn't a very good idea and even if it was, it was your idea, it's going to be an even bigger ball-ache for somebody so why shouldn't you suffer a little too?
"Don't get me started on Asian names which may have only 3 letters in the first and last name.... or worse yet only 2 letters..."
Interesting read here: https://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-personal-names
Worth pointing out to anyone who has ....erm...bright...ideas about naming schemes.
Think what Which's readership is like. I'd expect them to be more likely than average to be the sort of people who have taken saving and investment seriously. In that context don't you think the rating for pension contributions is surprisingly low?
The explanation which occurs pretty automatically to me is that these are replies from people in the same situation as myself:
I'm retired. I no longer have to pay pension contributions so I'd rate that zero. In fact, I'd make pretty similar responses, including rating broadband highly. The main difference is that given the craptitude of public transport round here I'd rate running a car somewhat higher than in the article.
Of course I don't have any interest in the game of FTTP promotion.
"Did Citrix think to ask the trusts whether they had their own extended support agreement?"
Or whether they have exposure to the internet?
There could be quite a number hooked up to expensive kit with XP-only applications for which there's no alternative. There's no chance of upgrading in such a situation and the best solution is to protect them.
"Seriously, when was the last time you said; "holy shit, I got to get one of those awesome Russian cars, or computers, or DVD players, or toasters?" Let me guess... never. They have a hill to climb, and nobody cares but them. Good luck with that."
Remind me again, how have NASA been getting to the ISS these last many years?
I was envisaging taking this to the limit. Apart from exhibitors, or at least the construction crews for their stands, everyone attends as a telepresence. It would mean the venue could be in the cheapest possible shed with no worries about Elf 'n' Safety, fire regs, etc. The lower cost would offset the promoters' ability to screw the attendees for extras.
'Well, when you install a qualifying PV array, the "feed in tariff" is paid for twenty five years, with an inflationary uplift every year.'
Unless it becomes politically expedient to cut it. Don't base your own budget on what governments offer. They're not to be trusted, especially beyond a general election.
The company said that existing Pebble watches ... will continue to work for now but there will be no support or warranties, and "functionality or service quality may be reduced in the future."
If I were in the market for such a thing I would find this soooo reassuring to buy a product from this company.
Do these people have any wits at all?
You forgot that many in Labour and the clueless Left/Greens/Anarchists at the last election waffled on about "mass surveillance" and "privacy rights", and lost the election.
We remember that Labour, when in govt, had similar ideas, including identity cards. We also remember that Labour have a long track record of appalling economic management. There are good reasons why they lost the election. Sadly, this seems to be a party-neutral issue. Home Secs. of any political persuasion seem to go native PDQ.
"Aww poor little flowers."
The poor little flowers are all of us.
What protection would you expect if you were wrongly accused? You'd expect the prosecution to have to prove its case against you. You'd expect that it wouldn't be allowed to take short cuts, to suppress evidence or to present false evidence. In short, you'd expect to be assumed to be innocent unless you were proved guilty in a fair trial.
But you might say "I know I'm innocent, I shouldn't be treated like those bad drug dealers who are guilty."
Well, you may know you're innocent but in advance of a case being heard I don't know whether you are or not nor do I know if those accused of being drug dealers are guilty or not. All I or anyone else including a court can do is make the same assumptions about all of you. It is arrant nonsense to think that there is some means by which you or I, if wrongly accused, are to get some rights and those rightly accused are not.
If from your point of view as an innocent wrongly accused, that assumption of innocence, then that assumption must be extended to all. And in the past that has been reckoned to be a fundamental right of all of us.
Another right, going all the way back to Magna Carta has been our right to due process of law. Due process has come to include the need for TPTB to present an independent judge or magistrate with a prima facie case sufficient to justify a warrant.
This Act sweeps all these rights away and not the least of the issues is that instead of being signed by an independent judge or magistrate warrants are now to be signed by a minister. That raises a whole new spectre of political persecution.
The poor little flowers are all of us.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019