3286 posts • joined 28 Aug 2009
Did you mean bumpkins (subtitle)? Bumkins are probably something different and -this being the internet- I'm not going to look it up.
Re: Making law enforcement harder
To misquote Terry Pratchett, the police want you indoors with the lights on; curtains open; and your hands on the table.
Assisting the police is not the same thing as rendering yourself totally helpless to them misusing your data. I'm all for helping to stamp out crime; but I can't trust the police as an organisation as far as I can spit a hedgehog. They had free reign of our data before everyone caught on (illegally, I might add) and they abused it. So tough fucking luck, encrypted it is.
"The identity of what entity owns which domain names never seemed to me like data that needed to be protected or kept secret."
For organisations, sure. For solo operators like myself there absolutely is a reason...the internet is a big place, full of nutters, not all of whom would treat your personal information with the care that you would wish for. There's marketers who will waste your time trying to peddle their shit. There's identity thieves. There are plenty of full-bore turbo loonies who may take offence at something you do/say/type and want to point out your error in the most stabby way they can manage. And so on. Publishing my home address that way just is not a thing that is going to happen; legislate what you like. There is PO boxes and the like, of course, but that's a significant (comparatively) expense and doesn't help that much because it still gives out a fairly precise geographical location.
Phone books, yes, but they were printed on paper; were pretty local. And abuses still happened. WHOIS is both electronic text and globally published; which makes bulk manipulation easier whilst simultaneously engorging the pool of potential piss-takers.
"To be honest, why should the rest of the world comply with a law Europe has developed."
To be honest, why should the rest of the world comply with ICANN's wish -not even a law- to have our private information and publish it globally? And then charge you to hide it....that's like volunteering for blackmail.
Just lie on the forms. That's always been my policy for anyone who thinks they are entitled to my personal information, and it's worked pretty well so far. Poison that database. Bonus points for using details of marketers, so they can stay busy spamming each other.
Re: Unisys screwed up
"It would be nice to know why someone disagreed with a statement of the law..."
You haven't stated any laws, just opinion backed by some rather dodgy analogies. Secondly, this is a tech site and many of the audience have used the same methods to "download the lot and I'll sort it out later"....which is very much faster than clicking on every single link. I have done this myself, and it's a lot faster to deal with a directory full of random stuff than it is to fish out all the desired bits manually; waiting for a page refresh between each action.
More to the point, the website is specifically for the public to download documents. If the documents in question have not been properly processed (redacted in this case) then they have no business being on a publicly-accessible website. is is negligence on the part of the website operators, pure and simple.
Time to cut loose with a dodgy analogy of my own: The website operators are doing the equivalent of pointing at a random person and shouting "Thief!" in order to mask their own getaway. And that's wrong.
Re: outlook.com is not offering "end-to-end" email encryption
Of course it's end to end. But -same as WhatsApp etc.- they don't tell you where the ends are.
Re: Oh dear
I'm in Spain, so could run it for you at a totally reasonable rate. Or you could lie on the form.
...or possibly .f.eu
Re: Fake news
The wooden shoes make sense, at least. Making clothing out of stuff that floats seems like a sensible move. Something really floaty for the upper torso might be advisable, so that any floating is done the right way up.
I wouldn't trust anything D.H.Lawrence has to say on the subject of sex. Guy was pretty fucked up.
Re: Save a few dollars per year on my website
I've always taken the "lie glibly on the form" approach. No fucking way am I publishing my home address on the internet.
Even with the law; it's still a matter of trust that there will be no cock-ups; envelopes full of money; or people who have authorisation and use it for purposes that you would not approve of. No data, no problem.
Re: Document now online
Is this elusive 3rd direction the bit under the "Additional Review Functions" title? Because all I'm seeing is "we shall continue to make up the rules as we go along" which isn't much of a secret, really.
Re: ZBLAN is reckoned to be the a product that could be made at profit in space
"pull their wires" is about right.
♫ One town's very like another
When your head's down over your pieces brother♫
...sounds like his mankini was way too small.
"a month earlier and in pubic."
Re: A shorter term problem
Most of your examples, Ledswinger, are employers taking the piss out of desperate people who have no choice. Those employers would have to raise their games or lose their businesses, and that is no bad thing.
Not really. An automated clone/area heal tool plus adding your own clock.
I wonder if they kept the "mysterious equipment failure at convenient times" statistic. That would be interesting to know.
It's a trial, so unless the cameras are very very obvious, the public are going to behave like normal unless they spot them; by which time it may well be too late. I would expect some change in the behaviour of the police; unless the equipment can be easily nullified (which it probably can) in which case turn it off when convenient and carry on like normal.
Small sample size too.
Re: There's no need to install more spyware, thanks.
Well it repels dictionary attacks apparently and "password" would probably be amongst the first 3 in a "by-popularity" ordered list. I'm guessing whitelist of authorised IPs/machine name/whatever.
Why do they have to chain them down if they're so innocuous?
Is there anything at all about the banking industry that isn't dubious?
There is a .cat TLD? How come I'm only finding out about this now? Life could have been so different...
Re: Second time lucky?
The glasses weren't the problem for me. A visual and audio direct link to Google, however, was.
Re: Thanks for the Spam!
Not at all related, but I have just had a spendid idea. I shall buy moietys.org and just put a picture of my penis on here. That'll save me loads of time when texting/applying for jobs/etc.
Re: Maybe they did you a favour?
I investigate moving it to 1&1 and can't and can't find a price either.
I always keep domain registry and the working bit (website/email etc) separate because it's easier to move hosts then. Having to move hosts AND extract the domain makes it all complicated and time-consuming. Separate domains, you just change the nameservers to your new hosts and you're back in the game immediately.
Re: Little to do with automatic renewal
A straight .uk is better than the relatively pointless .co addition imo.
True on the face of it and taken by itself; except that you'll lose everybody who has grown used to typing in .co.uk for the last two decades
Re: Misleading headline.
I'm not a doctor, but I can tell you...
Get the fuck off my lawn. And get that hair cut: You look like a girl. I dunno, youth today. etc.
Probably says more about US antivirus software than it does about Kasperski
Re: 200 Queens?
That will deal with him once and for all
The hornets, or the bill for postage?
I dio see your points and I'm sure he's covered in the TOS that he can do what he wants; but it's a bad precedent to set. When one person acts as judge, jury and executioner -no matter how well intentioned- it is a bad thing. Always leads to the question "Who's next?"
Namecheap run a shitload of domains and statistically they are probably aiding and abetting worse sites than these alt-right guys. As a long-term customer of theirs I don't want them to start picking off stragglers....not because I have any particular fear of being picked off; just because it's the wrong thing to do. Arbitrary decisions from the people holding your domains is not a wholly comfortable feeling. There's no due process. There would almost certainly have been a takedown notice along shortly, so why not wait for that and blame somebody else?
I know he only did it for a free publicity wank; but not totally happy about it.
Not his call to make, IMO. Also, by accepting responsibility for one, it puts his company in a nightmare position. He bloody said that and went ahead and did it anyway.
Another example of the "It's OK because it's me doing it" malaise.
Re: The Trump Effect?
Comments in these forums has become untenably knee-jerk reactionary
Oooooooh noooooooo it hasn't!
Slurping people's info without a warrant? That's OUR JOB, Google, Facebook et al tell US Supreme Court
Thank you, I will try that. That is exactly what I want...Google the fuck out of my life and off my equipment. There's useful tools that I will be missing out on, but that's a price I consider worth it.
On a related subject, does anyone know what the absolute minimum Google exposure it's possible to have on an Android phone wile still being able to access the internet? I denied permissions to all the Google stuff, and my phone won't let me access the net now....everything comes up as blocked
You also have to consider the impression the whole thing gave people in Europe. If a non-Brit European sees two Brits they see 1½ racists.
Re: @Old Englishman
With free speech comes responsibility for what you're saying; how you're saying it; and who you're saying it to. And part of that responsibility is accepting consequences. A concept, alas, that many people -especially politicians- don't seem to be able to grasp.
You could bluetooth it, so that anyone within range gets it through their phone.
These puns are a bit clapped out and -frankly- not very apealing.
Re: Farage at Midnight
Future historians: "Nobody knew or cared who he was, but the face rings a bell..."
Basically, a backpacker with a modest Victorinox in their kit will be fine in Spain. A 'Crocodile Dundee' will be hard to justify."
...provided the Victorinox has a blade length of less than 11cm, yes. Fuck-all good for camping, though, unless it's the sort of on-an-official-campsite-with-showers-and-everything camping; in which case you don't really need a knife. A Crocodile Dundee" would probably count as an "armas blancas" and be illegal to own even at home, unless you're a collector (presumably registered). "Daggers of any type" are particularly mentioned as being outright illegal, even at home.
UKians don't have it all their own way with multitools either...you're not allowed to have locking blades which makes making use of such a tool considerably more hazardous (if you're using it as a tool whilst -ironically- not really hindering anyone who wishes to use it for intimidation or outright stabbery).
To be frank multitools were at risk even before the world became all wanky about blade length....police the thieving fucks just love them some multitools.
The relevant bit is tihs:
" It is against the law generally to carry, display or use any kind of knife in public, especially knives with pointed blades, unless one is on one's own property or is working or engaged in a legitimate sporting activity requiring the use of such a knife."
That's how the police are enforcing it round here anyway. A penknife as general pocket furniture is out.
Don't come to Spain then. Penknives -or any other sort of knife carried in public- are now illegal.
The thing is, everything's dangerous. A stick is a toy for a dog; a handy fulcrum; a life-saving source of heat; a crutch; a splint; a bludgeon; arrow...and so on.
Re: Assuming it was armed...
That'd just really piss off the guys on the top deck.
Re: CRISPR time
More to the point, lactic acid is what causes cramp when muscle tissue isn't getting enough oxygen. I know which I'd prefer between mildly squiffy and cramp.
Re: Do I need some weird thing listening to me in my house all the time?
That saved me looking up whose law it was
If a crime is being committed, it's being done ON VIDEO, so there's evidence. You would have thought it would be a police wet dream instead of them whining about it.
Sounds mostly sensible. This bit had me worried:
"The storage and transmission of data is secure and can be controlled"
...because it doesn't say what "controlled" means. Zooming in a bit via the original document (link) gives you:
Data must be sufficiently secure (confidentiality and integrity) when stored and transmitted so that only the intended recipient or system functions are able to receive and / or access it. Incoming communications are treated as unsecure until validated.
Personally identifiable data must be managed appropriately.
> what is stored (both on and off the ITS / CAV system)
>what is transmitted
>how it is used
>the control the data owner has over these processes
Where possible, data that is sent to other systems is sanitised.
Users are able to delete sensitive data held on systems and connected systems.
...which is a bit better, but still fails to nail down who the parties are. Users, presumably are going to be either the owners or users of the cars (might be the same person; might no in the case of fleets). "Data owner" is a bit slippery too....the manufacturers are going to own the software running the car and updates; but it's not clearly specified who owns journey data.
Also it's a certainty that the government/spooks/police are going to want to deal themselves in at some point in this process and this document doesn't seem to cover even the possibility of that.