Posts by Mike Crawshaw 508 publicly visible posts • joined 29 Nov 2007
"BT chief press officer Adam Liversage confirmed that opted-out traffic will pass through the system during the trial, but said it "will not be mirrored or profiled".
So if you opt out, your data still goes through the system, but they promise not to do anything with it. Well that's ok. After all, they're both reputable, trustworthy companies who would never lie to us.
Oh, wait....
Not In Any Way, Shape or Phorm!!!
They can bollocks. Issuing them to foreign residents before anyone else? I'm pretty sure that's got to break some sort of bullshit discrimination law, there's enough of 'em about. In fact, as a member of the CoFSM, I'm pretty sure that it's against my religious beliefs to be tagged like this, and forcing me to do so is incitement to religious hatred. Or something.
(I wonder if the Jewish communities are looking into the details? I reckon they've probably got a pretty decent chance of saying "fuck right off" based on history... and they have a lot of lawyers...)
(*No, I didn't get a council flat after being arrested by the British Navy...)
"There is in fact an international naval force operating in the Arabian and Red Seas called Combined Task Force 150 (CTF 150), currently commanded by a Canadian officer..."
WTF? The Canadian Navy consists of 2 blokes in a rowing boat with shotguns!!
(disclaimer: I'm Canadian, OK?)
I don't suppose that, as someone who signed up AGES ago, and has actually BOUGHT SOMETHING from C&C, I'd have a better chance of winning than one of these bandwagon-jumpers who're subscribing just for the competition and will unsubscribe again straight after, would I?
Yeah, thought not...! *humph*
The company was once a treasure-trove of tantalising tat.
Now, it's actually kinda morbid curiousity only that keeps me paying attention, in a loose kinda way, to see just how long it takes this Titanic to slip beneath the waves, whilst its customers are jumping for the lifeboats, and the band plays on.
E-Bay = Pirates.
Funny, I was talking about them with another music-lover this morning. Neither of us would even d/l any of their stuff for free, it's shit.
Hearing a lot from / about shite bands whining about piracy recently, saying it's affecting their sales and stealing the champagne from their swimming pools. Sorry guys, but your sales are affected because you're shit and nobody wants to buy them, no matter what the record company's telling you.
And remember that WP is an attention-seeking troll. The more you reply to him, the more he has his posts justified. He's a Crusader, y'see, bringing the light of Truth, Justice and The American Way to the limp-wristed heathens that benight our world with their Ungodly Ways.
Let's not get distracted from the article itself by his rant about dirty bombs and wishing death on the EFF who are obviously "peedyfile terrywrists!!!!!" a la Daily Mail headlines.
The US govt has been caught with its hands in the public's drawers. Now they're saying that, even though it wasn't legal at the time, now it is, and therefore it always has been, and we should be grateful that they are, in effect, able to wiretap any comms at any time for any reason, without following the processes (warrants) that were in place to prevent abuse of their power. It's for your own good. What's particularly scary is that the McCain / Palin partnership are even more god-bothering than Bush, and (based on some of Palin's emails that have come to light) she seems to be the type that will happily send in troops anywhere she likes because God told her to. Maybe God uses her neighbour's dog to talk to her...? (cf. Son of Sam)
"It is better that a thousand innocents suffer death than a single guilty man be free to spread his heresy"
Anyone guessing where that comes from wins a slightly-used teabag. No, it wasn't Bush, though I imagine if he heard it, he would use it...
<- cat, hat, out for a smoke.
HMV were e-mailing people to promote the entire "early access" thing - I got at least 2 emails from them about it, where they were pushing just this game. Apparently you get two exclusive in-game items as well, or something similar. Glad I decided against it (I love the Warhammer novels, but won't pay a monthly subs to play a game, as it's not worth it for the amount of time I would use it).
Bad HMV. There will be many beardlings adding the name of HMV to their Book of Grudges.
Something about them. Something fair and accurate. Something that clearly indicates that they are a lying, selfish, egotistical, back-stabbing, self-serving, conniving, sleazy, dishonest, imbecilic, inbred, technophobic AND technophiliac, interfering, power-hungry, dictatorial, hypocritical ASSHOLES.
Something like that. Especially that Gordon Brown, his eyes are too close together.
YouTube bans? HA!!! As there is free an unfettered access to dodgy 80's films like Ninja Terminator and Revenge of the Golden Ninja, my ninja training will continue.
By watching these over and over, I have already learned how to change into a (yellow) ninja costume (which I didn't have with me, complete with an arsenal of sword, staff, bow, throwing stars, knives, nunchaku etc) in the midst of a backflip, whilst making a loud **SPANGGGG!!!!** noise, then badly lipsynching everything I say.
<- pirates beware!
But tbh, I read this as "in science classes, we need to be able to show how Creationism is not a valid scientific theory if asked."
How is that a bad thing? If, in Science, a kid says "but teacher, my mommy and daddy and Pastor say that the earth was created in 6 days by a great big beard in the sky who then nipped off to the pub with a stern warning about leaving the apples alone!!" - should the teacher not be able to demonstrate why such is not the case in scientific terms?
I don't see anywhere that the Royal Society is saying "let's abandon Dawrinian evolution in class, and let the kids decide which they like best between Abrahamic Creation, Norse or Egyptian mythology (as Paul Buxton pointed out, the Egyptian one would be particularly entertaining!) and 'we just kinda turned up. who cares how?'."
Accepting something as a worldview just means that they have to say "some people believe that...." rather than saying it is true in any way.
For example, I can state that nazism and communism are both world views. Doesn't mean that I'm supporting either of these, nor does it mean that I am saying either is valid - I'm just accepting that there are people out there who believe these viewpoints. I *HAVE* to accept this position (that they are worldviews) in order to destroy the philosophical standpoint on which they rest through reasoned (and supported) argument.
All from the article:
“teachers need to be in a position to be able to discuss science theories and explain why evolution is a sound scientific theory and why creationism isn’t”.
"The Royal Society is opposed to creationism being taught as science."
"The statement quotes Reiss saying, "Creationism has no scientific basis."
"I have referred to science teachers discussing creationism as a worldview'," he goes on to say, "this is not the same as lending it any scientific credibility."
Or maybe this is actually an article about Paris. In which case, my sincere apologies.
Knowing a couple of people affected by these changes, I'd say he was being pretty generous with his comments. The mere mention of her name is enough to turn gentle, kind, caring people who just want to help and heal, into rabid psychotics foaming at the mouth with a taste for human flesh. Y'know, kinda like saying "Jaqui Smith" at a Liberty /Amnesty convention...
I'm not scared of Bill Ray...
Based on this, surely, if you're making a call from an (e.g.) O2 phone to another O2 phone, termination charges would not apply, as it's not travelling "outside" the network in the same way as an Orange-Vodafone call.
So, will they waive the incoming charge for the receiving phone in this instance? Or will they charge anyway "to prevent confusion"? My money is on the latter. How about ported numbers? 07710 is an O2 prefix, but might be pretty much on any network at the moment, and, as such, neither the calling nor called party can tell which network the other phone is with, even if they're familiar with which codes generally come from which network. If I receive a call from an 07710 number, which is O2, and I am on O2, why the hell should I pay a termination charge to receive that call when the network isn't paying one? This winds me up enough when calling a number that I think is O2 and cheap, and then finding out after 15 mins that they've ported to Voda!!
This is a money-spinner for the networks, and nothing else. They're envisioning the drop in profits from the caps in roaming charges, and wondering how else to pay for their yachts.
And no, I don't use VOIP - I have a landline and a mobile, that's plenty enough. And, also, no, I don't want to move my landline number onto my mobile or vice versa. I like having two numbers. My mobile number is fairly freely available, my landline number is only known to close friends and family. And no, if they introduce making me pay to pick up calls, I will simply turn off voicemail and reject the calls that I don't recognise / can't be arsed - leading to less traffic for the networks.
To summarise the above: No, No, and Thrice, NO!
"Anyway, originality is overrated. Lots of really terrible art is unlike anything that went before it."
Well said Sarah...!
Ladies and gentlemen, please direct your attention to the contents of the Tate Gallery... all the exhibits share two traits. Originality and terribleness.
That the scammers are using the phone first, at least. E-mail is less effort, more time-effective, and requires less manual input, not to mention easier to "scattergun", sending out hundreds of the same template at once.
Either way, scammers and lawyers - who can *really* tell the difference? Is there one?
Dammit, I was gonna say about the name too. But I'll just add a bit:
The story of Icarus was one warning of the dangers of over-ambition without taking dangers into account, where the central character, ignoring those who warned him against his foolish actions, over-reached - using what would then be regarded as experimental technology - and, as a result, became a red smear on the ground when it all went horribly pear-shaped.
Perhaps Lockheed Martin should take this into account before we all end up Reap(er)ing (sorry, couldn't resist...) the fruits of their labours by living out Terminator / The Matrix / Robocop / I Robot.
In the meantime, I'd like a plasma rifle with a 40-watt range. What d'ya mean, only what I see?
"The speech called for quicker data portability, compulsory data breach laws if private information is lost, more transparent pricing structures to make life easier for consumers, and more wireless broadband services to improve net access for rural types."
At times like this, she sounds halfway competent. Then I remember that she wants the called party to foot termination charges, and the illusion evaporates....
To the people saying the far left are better than the far right....
Stalin was far left. So was Mao Tse Tung. So was Pol Pot. Ho Chi Minh. Putin. Kim Jong Il. Whoever the hell's currently in charge in China.
When you take far left or far right, and keep going the way the majority do once they have any power, you go full circle, and although the justifications may be different, the actions are the same. It doesn't matter to the guy being gassed / sent to the Gulag / face-down in the killing fields / harvested for organs what the political motivations are.
Condoning this behaviour because you don't agree with someone is the start of nasty, nasty things. I seem to remember a certain vertically-challenged Austrian started by socially excluding and demonising those whose politics he didn't agree with...
(despite the flameproof leather jacket, I feel obliged to point out that I am not in any way agreeing with the neonazis/afas/scientologists/any other involved party. It's depressing that I feel I have to clarify this.)
a-d are pretty straightforward in themselves, as long as you don't get into the entire "appears to be" bit. E.g. you take a mobile phone pic of your mate on his stag night, pissed up and shagging one of those inflatable sheep - is that covered under (d)?
So. Is "Girls with Guns" covered? Strictly speaking, yes, as lives are *portrayed* as being threatened. But in reality? We don't know. It'll all depend on who decides whether the portrayal is "realistic" and who decides whether it is realistic or "offensive / disgusting / obscene".
"Fairly specific"? Not at all. It's all going to be judg(e)ment calls, and the results will be entirely subjective based on the interpreter. When our legal "professionals" are split as near to 50-50 as you can get with 5 people, it doesn't bode well.
You're all hideously wrong! Never mind, some of them were quite entertaining - especially the Futurama ref. I think some of you guys need to get yourselves on Countdown!
@ chrisw: I've had the address for years now, I guess people don't auto-add me to their books, or that they haven't been scanned - at least I haven't received spam as a result, either way. Maybe the spam lists can't handle the addy length? (19 chars before the @)
@ steogede: I could compare Hotmail to a lot of parts of a dog's anatomy, but none of 'em are complimentary.... I mainly use it for legacy reasons (had it for the best part of a decade, before GMail etc) and it's the address I use for a lot of forums etc - I'm just too lazy to change them all!
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
