* Posts by SimonK

6 posts • joined 20 Aug 2007

Parody is illegal, say barmy bureaucrats


You have all of those?!?

You say that "The parody ONLY works if you have read (or know) the original." Having received a copy of one of the Barry Trotter books as a birthday present a few years back, and having flicked through most of the others you mention, I can confirm that the parody doesn't work at all, certainly not in the case of any of these dull, cheap, obvious, unfunny, utterly pointless works.

If those books are illegal then I would say "good", and call for the full force of the law to be unleashed immediately, to stamp out this drivel forthwith.

Visa to tell shops where their punters' wallets went next

Paris Hilton

Plenty of wiggle room there

"A bank can disclose information ... if the bank's own interests require disclosure."

As a bank has a duty of care to its shareholders to maximise profits, it's own interests certainly require disclosure of any information that someone's prepared to pay it enough for money for.

Paris as she also has plenty of wiggle room and frequently requires disclosure.

London tenders for speed cameras


Which is exactly why...

I added the bit about not being linked to the ANPR system.

So to clarify, yes I absolutely oppose them if records of people who are not speeding are retained.

Thumb Up

Excellent news

I thoroughly approve if they get rid of speed bumps, which damage cars and make life thoroughly uncomfortable for cyclists, and replace them with average speed cameras.

I genuinely don't understand the opposition to speed cameras. I'm a liberal - I hate the surveillance state, the use of CCTV everywhere, and so on. But speed cameras (IF they are just that, and not linked to the police number-plate tracking big brother databse) are something very different. The idea of a system which only records your details if you are breaking the law - which only captures the details of criminals - how can you argue with that?

And don't give me that nonsense about "only 10% of accidents are caused by speed". It's not just what causes it - however your accident is caused, the consequences of it are going to be worse if you are speeding.

And before you ask - yes, I do have a car.

Punters 'confuse' netbooks with notebooks


I'll admit that I'm confused

Thing is, I think of myself as reasonably IT literate, though certainly no expert. I know who Linus Torvalds and Steve Jobs are, understand that there's a difference between an iPhone and a Palm Pre (even if I've never used either one), know when Wikipedia can be trusted (and no, the answer isn't "never") and when it should be avoided like the plague. I read at least something on The Register most days.

And yet, before I read this article, I'm not sure I would have known that there was a difference between a netbook and a notebook. At best, I'd have thought that it was a branding thing - I *might* have worked out that a netbook ran Linux and a notebook Windows, but I'm sure I couldn't have told you much more.

If I'm thinking like that, what chance your average joe punter?

Is Chernobyl behind academic slump in Sweden?


Sloppy reporting

Paragraph 2 of the article - "US researchers have discovered that Swedish children who were in the womb at the time of the accident have been mentally damaged by their exposure".

Paragraph 7 - "the researchers are clear that they have done no more than demonstrated a statistical link: they have not proven that the fallout from the explosion has directly caused mental impairment".

So, basically, another carefully worded piece of science spun by the media (in this case, El Reg) into someone much more than it really is. All the report says is that there's a correlation - it explicitly denies that it is making claims about causation.


Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020