Gee
Telephone checkin ? It's almost like the 1980s again.
78 publicly visible posts • joined 13 Oct 2007
It's entirely possible that the council is legally forbidden to tell you how much they settled with the bin men for. This is one of the options you can choose when making an Employment Tribunal claim to open a case against your employer, and the bin men will have just ticked the "no publicity" box when they submitted their ET1 tribunal claim form.
However this does not extend to the council being forbidden to tell you how much money they wasted on their own legal costs and other expenses, outside the terms of the settlement. I think El Reg should perhaps press them a little harder on this.
What is even more disturbing is that henceforth, whenever I wait with that frisson of nervous and slightly moist excitement to see whether the Moderatrix will Approve my dubious and desperate choice of title or will merely Cast Me Into Utter, Utter Darkness, I will always experience a flashback to that first fresh first printout of file LISA.LISA ...
Ah, the "think of the chiiildruuun" plea. A good sign that someone hasn't any better-argued points to make.
You can read the ECHR at http://www.echr.coe.int/NR/rdonlyres/D5CC24A7-DC13-4318-B457-5C9014916D7A/0/EnglishAnglais.pdf
Article 8 is short (only two sentences) and it is clear from it that the expectation of privacy belongs to everyone, whether adult or child and whether or not either they or their parent is famous.
If this ruling leads to fewer examples of the paparrazi promoting their own cult of photo-celebrity I feel it can only be a good thing.
>Now then, what would you do with 1200 Stobs?
Hmm, so many choices ... well I'd start by installing Linux on 1/3 of them, BSD on another third, Windows on another third and MacOS on the last third (shurely some mistake ?). Then I'd get the whipped cream and chocolate spread out and .... err ....
+++ERROR IN FANTASY, REDO FROM START+++
NO CARRIE[[[_^QQQz
Richard Clayton first wrote about the Privilia link-spam network in August 2007 (http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2007/08/30/the-interns-of-privila/ ) and again in September 2007 (http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2007/09/03/mapping-the-privila-network/ ).
Google were entirely happy to index it and present it as relevant content for over six months despite the fact all sites in the network carried identical content specially to draw search engines to the links.
I am sure that the fact these pages also carried Google ads - making money for google - was of course wholly irrelevant to Google's decision to carry on indexing Privila after the network's workings became public knowledge.
I am equally confident that Google have now deliberately dropped these link spam networks, and I am 100% sure it is not the case that they just don't show up because of the blank results Privila now serve up to Googlebot and other search engines.
#include "large-pinch-of-salt.h"
... that some miscreant might do domain lookups on NetSol's website for as many dictionary combinations as they can fit in before their IP gets blocked.
It would never do if nobody was able to register any .coms anywhere because NetSol had pre-emptively protected all those domains from being tasted by anyone else, would it ?
That sort of thing might be counted as a DoS and I think it would be a very bad idea ...
And when they've mastered patch cables (which are after all easy because they don't kink badly and they slide over and through each other), they can move on to trickier tangles like:
* Christmas tree lights (extra bonus if all the lights still work when untangled)
* tiny silver jewellery chains worth about 60p but which somebody wants to wear to the function we should have left for ten minutes ago
* and for a gold medal, tackling my garden hose after it's woken up from its winter sleep in the shed.
That would sort the men out from the pimply faced youths ...
It's been obvious for some time that schoolkids are being softened up to be used to presenting smartcards / fingerprints / retina prints / RFID for everything via implementations in school. The Government ID cards team must be rubbing their hands at the thought of all these youngsters accustomed to being tracked by all means possible.
I'd have thought "graphics so real that they were believable" would have been the standard to aim for, not "almost unbelievable".
Is he basically talking about GPU functions on the CPU, or is there some less obvious advance here, I wonder - though not wondering very hard ...
Since I looked them up ...
Platform en voyage
http://www.boeing.com/special/sea-launch/mission_thuraya3/mission_album/page7/page7.html
Erecting launcher: http://www.boeing.com/special/sea-launch/mission_thuraya3/mission_album/page11/page11.html
Doncha hate it how this page doesn't wrap when someone posts a long URL ?
I haven't found the actual patents yet to try and work out what they claim, but the earliest one is as late as 1991. Desqview of 1985 and other EMM programs like 1984 Topview would in many ways seem to have offered a "User Interface with Multiple Workspaces for Sharing Display System Objects".