1909 posts • joined 25 Mar 2010
The more I learn about Bitcoin, the more amazed I am it's lasted as long as it has.
In other news, the price of Bitcoin - has not dropped at all since this story appeared.
Re: Team from Facebook are in their offices tonight?
Was there a team from Facebook there? All I see is a tweet asking very much the same question as you. That's not a report, it's an innuendo poorly disguised as a question.
You have to remember how ridiculously close the election was. The winning margin came to less than 0.1% of voters across three states.
So yeah, it's possible CA had that big an effect. Just that it wouldn't have meant anything without all the other things also having their effects. Giving all the credit to CA is like paying for a coffee with 1p coins, and saying it was the last one that bought it.
Re: Add spent convictions to the discrimination legislation
No, a valet is a gentleman's gentleman - and I don't see any exemption for them.
A butler is a household manager, with considerable authority for hiring and firing others. Plus, of course, they will almost by definition be employed only by stupidly rich people. I suspect that's the real issue.
Re: Add spent convictions to the discrimination legislation
@BlockChainToo: You'll be relieved to hear that accountants are specifically exempted from the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act: their convictions are never considered "spent".
There's an odd list of professions this applies to: among others, it also includes doctors, nurses and pharmacists, vets, unit trust managers, taxi drivers and...
wait for it...
FYI: There's a cop tool called GrayKey that force unlocks iPhones. Let's hope it doesn't fall into the wrong hands!
Physical security has always been the most important layer
That hasn't changed.
If someone you don't trust has unrestricted access to your phone, for two hours continuously...
... it's over. Forget it.
Historically this has always been true. It seems there was a brief period when we were all anxious to pretend it no longer applied, but that was only ever an illusion.
Re: Snowflake, much?
“Allah is a Gay God” is odious but I guess piss-christ is OK in your book...
There's a difference between an exhibit in an art gallery, where people have to go out of their way to see it, and plastering posters around the streets of Luton.
One of these things is Conduct Likely to Result in a Breach of the Peace.
That's what this is about: peace. No more, no less. If you're trying to make people so angry that they escalate to shouting and violence, then you're an enemy of the peace, no matter which "side" you claim to promote. And if you're doing that in a foreign country where you have no automatic right to enter and reside, you should bloody well expect to be barred from re-entering it.
Then you can go bitch and whine on Twitter about how your rights are being trampled by the oppressive librul establishment (like Twitter), and welcome.
I think the Daesh flag on the roof of his house constitutes shouting.
Err... no. People put all kinds of things on their houses.
When I was a kid, anarchist slogans were in vogue. If everyone who displayed a poster saying "If you don't hit it, it won't fall" - to say nothing of "everyone who expressed a liking for the Sex Pistols" - had drawn the attention of Special Branch, they'd have had a very busy time of it.
To this day there are people in the United States who proudly display the Confederate flag. A symbol whose entire raison d'etre is armed rebellion against the USA.
Should people who display Scottish flags in England be investigated? Those two countries have been at war for most of the past millennium. How about French flags, or - gasp - German ones?
None of these things "constitutes shouting" anything very provocative.
No, if you are going to "ban hate" then you need to warn people who are posting material that you feel infracts your rules, and if they ignore the warnings, ban them.
Note two points: targeting, and warning. No blanket bans, and anyone who is banned gets a warning first.
In this case, it's clear that Britain First were warned, and decided they'd rather raise a stink as Facebook martyrs than stop posting shit. And lookie here, no shortage of useful idiots on El Reg happy to oblige them.
Re: the white working class children in Rotherham, Telford and Rochdale
@Anonymous Coward (why anon, by the way)?
Not by "minorities" but by "Asians," even though none of the child predators are Korean, Japanese, Vietnamese, etc.
As you would know if you had been brought up in Britain, "Asian" in that country has always been broadly synonymous with "brown". Mostly Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi or Sri Lankan. East Asians (mostly Chinese/Taiwanese, plus a smattering of Malaysian/Singaporean - there are very few Koreans, Japanese, Vietnamese etc.) are an afterthought.
Tell me, how many jihadist that go around shouting they want all Christians and westerners to die have ever been challenged or even stopped before they go all stabby, killy or bomby on people?
Citation please. For "jihadists going around shouting (that stuff)".
I certainly didn't hear them. Who did?
Re: the only penalty is 'you can't do that again for 10 years'
"Real prison time" may still be on its way. Her comeuppance hasn't ended yet.
Re: Partnership requirement to read?
If you were planning to cause a significant long-term increase in their bandwidth bill, and to leech off their good name for your own commercial purposes, it would be at least polite to discuss the matter with them first.
I can see three things coming of this, none of them good. First, a whole new lot of nutjobs will start adding bullshit to Wikipedia. (Of course this already happens, but it will increase by a couple of orders of magnitude.) Second - as a result of that - Wikipedia will lock down a lot of articles, and it will become substantially harder to update. And third, Wikipedia will update its terms and conditions specifically to prevent other people from pulling this kind of crap again.
This is why we can't have nice things.
Re: Hello Mr Corfield!
@John Brown: And when every car rental company is abusing and gouging its customers...
... then I'll start my own car rental company, in which I'll use the data to protect myself from losses by charging drivers correctly, rather than random gouging.
If you want to abuse an incumbent position, you need high barriers to entry. Those don't exist in the car rental business. If you think you can do better than Avis? - Go nuts. Start now. There's literally nothing to stop you.
Re: Hello Mr Corfield!
If I rent a car from Avis, I have no objection to them observing what I do with it. They have a legitimate interest in that. Fine with me.
If the whole experience is substantially more intrusive or expensive than I bargained for, then I'll patronise some other car rental service instead. Avis doesn't have a monopoly. (And it's hard to see how overcharging or mistreating their customers will help them to acquire one.)
What's the problem?
Re: being wealthy on paper as long as they don't try to sell them
If anyone is fool enough to accept BTC as collateral for a (real money) loan, they deserve everything they get.
Re: "we are not outside the international rules of civilised nations and we don't want to be,""
@John Smith: please rid yourself of the idea that post-Brexit, Britain will be desperate to be Russia's friend. Granted it will need friends, but you'd have to be desperate indeed to bend over for Russia.
We all like to moan about America, but for all their faults - even with the Dumpster in charge - they're still better than the Russians. (So far. If the Democrats are fool enough to give him a second term, I guess that would probably change.)
Playing defence is hard
If you know in advance what tools your opponent is using, you can beat them.
Colour me astonished.
I assume that, like pretty much all laws in this area, this one is designed to increase the market for some kind of porn or other.
In this case, maybe they have shares in nudie magazines.
Oh yes, that'll totally work. Because improving education has solved every other problem, right?
Pro tip: if a report's keystone recommendation is "we need smarter people", that suggests the people writing it really don't have any ideas at all.
Re: Yet Trumps buddy...
The "dumping" happened at least a week before the announcement - we don't know exactly when, but that's when the sale was made public.
If you're going to smear people, at least get the facts right.
And a brief look at the company's stock price (here) shows that it was already in decline for some weeks before then, so selling doesn't look all that suspicious. Even after the announcement, the hit to the stock was hardly crushing.
I'm not saying it was all aboveboard and there's nothing to see here. I'm saying this is one way fake news spreads: claims get exaggerated and repeated by people who can't be bothered to check the facts, because they "feel" true.
I've bought four high capacity external hard drives in the past 10 years, for backups - and all four of them have broken down. Right now I have no offline backup.
This is when Google Drive looks attractive.
You are mistaking opportunism for planning. They look superficially alike, but opportunism works better.
Re: I actually am surprised
I would guess that most of the scum doing this sort of thing are not particularly concerned with the reputation, and hence long-term viability, of the business. They just want money now. Tomorrow is a whole other problem.
Not comparing like with like
A "true" news story generally gets reported by many different channels concurrently. A made up one has a single authoritative source.
To compare the two on Twitter, you'd need to aggregate all the "primary" sources of the real news story, vs following the propagation of just one tweet for the made-up story.
To put it another way: a BBC tweet may not get many retweets, not because no-one's interested in the story, but because they prefer the reporting in the Grauniad or Le Monde or the Chicago Tribune instead.
It's a bar association, not a college frat. There's such a thing as professionalism.
There's also such a thing as young female lawyers, who've been dealing with years of borderline demeaning and harassment from senior partners, and I've no doubt the bar association wants to be seen as a place where they don't have to put up with that kind of bullshit.
If I want to see tits on my computer, I'll do my own search thankyousomuch. I don't want you or anyone else emailing them to me. Particularly not disguised as a message from a professional association.
Re: Hypersonic Missiles
You can't "shoot down" a space station. It doesn't have an engine, or wings, or any other system keeping it up, that you can disable. And even if you did, it would just make it deorbit slightly faster.
We could maybe send Bruce Willis to blow it up.
No evidence of conspiracy
This looks to me more like routine pack behaviour by legislators. Someone in Rhode Island read up on the proposal from Kentucky, and thought "Hey, that's a good idea!"
Nobody much cares if the proposals pass: their sole purpose is to let the legislators grandstand and fundraise for a few weeks, then go back to their voters with a tale of having valiantly tried to stand up For The Children.
they can blend into their environment more easily, hiding behind trees or amongst a flock of birds.
I'd like to see that. A quadcopter trying to "blend in" to a flock of birds, I mean. Presumably not Australian wedge-tailed eagles, though.
The mental image of a drone "hiding behind a tree" and then leaping out to shout "boo!" at a passing GI is also quite appealing.
Definitely needs more reports. Ideally with dramatised or animated simulations. Sponsored by Netflix.
Re: Embarrassed to be American
Pai is Trump's creature. Expect to see many more like him, if your fellow citizens are fool enough to allow this administration to outlive the next election.
But on this story, I have some sympathy. To me, "4.3%" sounds - pretty low, actually. Disaster recovery always has a long tail of sites that are just frickin' hard to fix, for one reason or another. I suspect that if Pai weren't, independently of this story, one of the most hated people in America - we wouldn't be hearing about it at all.
Re: "That will not only make the world a less safe place"
They have had little interest in "projecting" power, because there was no point while America was intent on being top dog.
But since their military tech has pretty much caught up with America's, they've been getting more muscular. (Just ask Taiwan.) And the Donald has encouraged them, in all sorts of ways - by pissing on the US alliances with countries like South Korea, Japan, Australia, by telling them all that China can control North Korea, by pulling out of the TPPA, by telling everyone how great his mate Xi is...
Historically the Chinese empire has been land based, which is why aircraft carriers haven't been of much interest. And now that they are turning more outward - aircraft carriers are fast becoming obsolescent anyway. When your land-based stealth fighters have a range in the thousands of miles, who needs carriers?
@Mark 65: the US will never default on its debt as long as either Republicans or Democrats are in charge. It would upset all their donors too much.
They'd rather cut absolutely everything else, with the possible exception of their own salaries and expenses, before "cutting the money they pay out to rich people", which is what defaulting would mean.
Re: "That... depends... whose fleet"
Captain... Kirk... is that... you?
I'm pretty sure "modulating the output" is pretty darn' important, if you actually want to hit anything much smaller than an ocean at a range of 100 nautical miles.
It's very interesting what's happening right now. China has pretty much caught up with Western weapons technology, and is actually gaining an edge in some areas. Which has triggered an orgy of blame-calling in Western defence industries, which have been sucking off the public teat for decades on the pretext of assuring that precisely this couldn't happen.
Re: What a load of official bull
In case you haven't been paying attention for the past 50 years, which frankly is what it looks like: most terrorism is perpetrated by people who are already inside their native country, who don't have to pass through any borders to get there.
On the rare occasions when they do pass a border (e.g. the 11 September hijackers), they usually have clean criminal records at the time.
Watching airports and seaports is certainly not "enough to deal with terrorism". It is, however, quite enough to infringe on a lot of people's privacy.
Re: If Ed Sheeran is feeling hard up...
The entire basis of the story is about not making payments to artists who have a very high profile and can't by any stretch of the imagination be considered hard to trace.
If we're talking about the other tens of thousands of artists on Spotify, then that complaint doesn't work. This is what the copyright database is for.
Seriously: if I want to be paid by someone who isn't my direct employer, I have to send them a bill. As far as I know, that's the usual practice for self-employed people. I understand that musicians are in a slightly different position, and that's why they have the copyright database as a funnel set up to help them out; but if they can't be bothered to use it, what are you going to do?
Would you be any happier if Spotify went out of its way to pay Ed Sheeran, and everyone else who doesn't need it, and then just sat on the money for all those smaller artists?
If Ed Sheeran is feeling hard up...
He could always get the Copyright Office database updated.
Or, just send Spotify a bill.
And alternative headline for this story would be "Millionaire artists can't be bothered to claim royalties from Spotify". I find it hard to get too indignant about that.
Re: Show me...
@Donn Bly: Journalists would no doubt find it convenient to have access to all that directly from Google. It doesn't necessarily follow that there is any strong public interest in giving them that access.
"Making journalists' jobs easier" is - well, a good thing as far as it goes, but in terms of overriding public priorities? Pretty low down the list.
If you hire someone with a spent conviction, and a client blindsides you with the information, you can truthfully say "that conviction was spent, I am legally prohibited from considering it in my hiring decisions except in very specific circumstances that clearly don't apply here. You're not asking me to commit a crime, are you?"
Re: Policy FAIL
Yep. With a few provisions about offering said service to all comers on a fair and non-discriminatory basis, that's the way to go. And yes, everyone already knows it because we've all seen many other services that work that way.
You've mentioned electricity. See also: roads (which are not owned or controlled by delivery companies), or mailboxes (not owned or controlled by USPS). It's not a hard model to grasp, not hard to build, and doesn't take much regulation. And yet, it seems to be pretty much missing from the discussion.
Re: Instead of attacking the predators, reduce the vulnerability of the prey.
For 200 years now we've been saying education is the answer.
If it were that easy, we wouldn't be starting from here.
Unless you can propose a syllabus to teach these skills, and a structure to deliver it, complete with funding and metrics for success, you've got nothing.
Then you haven't thought it through.
Every media organ has its biases, certainly. But those that are based in your own country have at least this much in common with you: that they want to see your country successful, its people richer and healthier and happier, because those people will spend more money. You can certainly disagree - strongly - with their ideas of how this future should be brought about, but if you don't understand why they share many of your goals, you're being wilfully dumb.
And those organs are all operating independently, more or less. Journalists have a pack mentality, yes, but the bottom line is they're competing, not actively collaborating to spin you some mutually agreed narrative. The 24 hour cycle has damaged the media enormously - indeed, I once argued that if Trump won the presidency, it would prove that the US news media wasn't fit for purpose - but there's still useful information to be got there, if you can take the time to parse it.
The Russians on the other hand: they are both actively malevolent and well coordinated. They are attacking the soft underbelly of democracy. And Trump responds by taking off its shirt and telling it to close its eyes.
Re: Acts of war
Congress has tried to pass sanctions against Russia.
But what is an act of war anyway, if your own side's commander in chief point-blank refuses to fight?
So what do you suggest, spies should only pass on information that they've personally witnessed or have sworn testimony from multiple credible witnesses?
I don't think you've thought that position through.
Re: Anyone from the
And if it comes to turning American troops against civilians in the homeland, you know how it will be framed: as a clear and present threat of terrorism. If commanders can convince their subordinates that the enemy poses an imminent threat to peace and the safety of innocent people, they can convince them to act.
And you know what makes it really hard to make that case? The knowledge that the targets are mostly unarmed or, at most, lightly armed. If everyone knows they've got top-flight weapons of their own, then escalation becomes really easy. That's why swatting is a thing now.
Re: Anyone from the
"Domestic invasion"? So you'd be fighting your fellow Americans, then?
You have a curious idea of "unity".
Re: those cowardly cops in Parkland
I doubt if they said anything about consulting superiors, because that would shuffle responsibility upwards, which is not what anyone has in mind when drafting things like that. (The golden rule is to make sure the agency employing the cop can never be held responsible for anything, period.)
What they probably did say was something about obtaining the best possible information, and not making a move while the situation was still unclear. That would be quite enough to keep the cop outside for at least five minutes after he heard the first gunshots.
Makes no difference now, the poor guy is the official scapegoat for this episode. And the RoE won't change.
Re: Anyone from the
Seemed the Vietnamese, Iraqis, and Somalia did all right given their disadvantages (and the A10 was in Vietnam, too). Why can't we?
You make a good point, but the bottom line is: all those countries were repelling a foreign invader. Nothing unifies opposition quite like that. As humankind has repeatedly shown, it's amazing what people can do when they all work together.
What do you think would unify the American public to the same extent? Nothing short of foreign invasion, I suspect. Certainly I doubt that you could persuade everyone to take part in comparable operations if the US Army (and, most likely, also its law enforcement agencies) was on the other side. And a people divided are, as the poet says, well and truly screwed. (C.f. Brexit.)
The answer to your question: technically, it's not an NRA award, it's given by the CPAC. (The "NRA award" spin seems to have been introduced to this particular story by Russia Today, and subsequently parroted by basically everyone - including Fox and Brietbart News. Interesting, no?)
But the award was made by a prominent figure within the NRA (last year it was Chris Cox, this year Carolyn Meadows). So I think it would be fair to say that they endorse it.
Incidentally, in the course of researching this answer, I learned that in 2015, the award did involve handing over an actual gun on stage. So it's only sometime in the past 3 years that CPAC has decided to go gun-free. Also interesting, I thought, as a reflection of their confidence in Trump's pledge to fix violent crime.
Re: A pretty high bar
I'll be astonished if it becomes widely used by any generation. Requires website to actively forego information, just to "protect" user privacy (from whom, exactly?) I find it hard to think of any business case for that.