1094 posts • joined 12 May 2010
...Is it all its quacked up to be?
Indictment bombshell: 'Kremlin intel agents' hacked, leaked Hillary's emails same day Trump asked Russia for help
Re: Society Seems To Be Fragmeting or Declining in Standards
"the £350million per week not going to the EU, everyone knew it was metaphorical."
Bullshit was it. It was a direct statement of alleged fact that had no basis in reality. In any other sphere that would be false advertising at best and fraud at worst. I'll call it what it was; bullshit propaganda and lies.
"People in the UK were either severely affected by the EU policies"
Care to name one that's actually factual, or are you going to go on about the shape of bananas, the colour of your passport or how lenient we have to be on prison inmates? All of which are bullshit lies too.
"People wanted change - and they voted accordingly."
Yeah, that's right, democracy at work! The people voted for Boaty McBoatface too and they didn't get that because....drum roll...it was a referendum, advisory and not politically binding.
"For Brexit, the brexit bus could have said everyone gets a free corn fed chicken at Christmas, and people will still have voted to leave"
This much is true, because stupid is as stupid does. Also, I hope you look forward to your corn-fed chicken coming freshly bleached from the U.S.
Re: Smartphone pouches
"You don't need pouches, just turn off location when you are not on company business."
Not necessarily sufficient to turn off location reporting these days:
So, have I got this right....?
Provider pushes out an update that causes all your pictures to be sent, via MMS, to a random contact. Provider denies they did any such thing. Provider bills people for vast number of MMS sent at premium rates.
Not a bad scam.
Re: Entering New Zealand
"best collective noun..."
It could be a despair of managers, or perhaps a misunderstanding of managers, but I think I'll go for a gawp of managers as my entry.
Re: Made it here first!
"Drugs are bad. Mmmmkay?"
Are you including alcohol in that sweeping statement?
"Ah, I specifically said 'your family' for a reason, because I knew both of those were going to turn up"
You've come to the wrong forum if you're going to lean on semantics for the core of your argument.
"Perhaps we should just leave this EU single market thingy."
Last night, the Commons voted to transfer all EU law into UK law in a very short period of time. Once that exercise is complete, those laws can then be "amended" to suit the UK governments vision of Things to Come.
It'd be nice to think that they'd spot this particular one and throw it out, saying "we won't stand for our nations internet users uploads being spot checked for....ahem...copyright infringement! That's against our nations strong stance on freedom of speech and expression."
But, if I thought, for even one second that they are actually going to something like that, I might just find some worth in Brexit after all.
I believe that this particular issue may be a real red flag for anyone who believe in the "taking back sovereignty" slogan.
Does anyone else notice how, throughout this technical and complicated international discussion about the future of border security, intelligence sharing and anti-terrorist initiatives that there is zero mention of things such as public safety, effective policing or common defence?
Anyone would think that the PtB aren't concerned with such things really and that this is just another dick-measuring contest as they try to grab power over each other.
People may think that they've expressed their will and that Brexit is now the implementation of that will, but they'd be wrong. Its just a vehicle for realigning power to suit those that wield power.
It's not about us at all.
"..worked with our European colleagues to share *illegally gathered data on our citizens* to protect our *failing regime and political system*"
Re: Good Luck
" You comment would be better suited if applied to all politicians of all colours. particularly Tony Bliar."
A salient lesson
Never put down to conspiracy what can be explained by incompetence.
Re: Suggestive, but nothing more
"humans on Mars with deep drilling rigs to dig right down into known ice deposits "
Do you want to awaken dormant sci-fi monsters? Because that's how you awaken dormant sci-fi monsters.
So, you want to be able to shoot down drones over US airspace if you have suspicions about the intention of the operator. Ok. And to reinforce your argument, you showed footage of a drone, operated by ISIS, dropping a hand-grenade? Ok, good.
Where was that footage obtained? Was it in the US? How many ISIS cells are currently buying drones and hand-grenades in the US? How many times has ISIS undertaken any operation on the US mainland?
What do you think the range of one of these drones actually is?
Re: It's simple
"What you have to remember is that behind the elected officials are a group of unelected officials who do understand."
Oh, believe me when I say I am *very*, and *directly*, aware of that.
Re: It's simple
"What is it about elected officials that they don't understand "
Oh no; they understand alright. They understand it well enough indeed.
What they are relying on is that 90% of the population doesn't understand it, which means they can subvert it easily and use it for their own ends. It means the veneer of an excuse, a dismissive handwave at "experts", a few bespoke scary words and some technomumble will be enough for them to reach their goal of a universal panopticon.
Why do they want such a thing? Because they know that their methods of social control are out of date and threatened by the speed of direct modern communication. In order to retain power they must control the internet and all digital communication must be monitored.
Re: I'm wondering
"What was this person doing that was classified as violent behaviour?"
Not sure. I suspect this system will pick up dancing as violence too?
Re: The Real Threat is State Seizure of Corporate Surveillance Data
"They are deliberately manufacturing debt and then using analytics to identify low spots in your life when you are likely to cough up."
Interesting. Got any links or citations?
Re: They does
"I'm not sure how they would get political persuasion "
Believe it or not, the products you buy can provide indicators of your probable political persuasion. Do you buy sustainable products or frozen ready meals? Cheap alcohol or expensive spirits? Certain newspapers or magazines? All of this and more can puff up that all-important profile...
Here's one of many studies on that very subject examining the purchase of GMO products and political preferences.
"That this is insanity is obvious. Has anyone run into problems from not having an account?"
If you're travelling to the US regularly, and you don't have an account, I'd be wary of pissing someone off who knows you or working for a company that has a less than stellar reputation. There's always the chance that someone will create a facebook profile in your name, with a smattering of details and pictures, and then link it to all sorts of anti-US or extremist sites etc.
It might be hard to convince the morons in the US that not having a social media profile is not a crime, but I bet it'd be way harder to convince them that all those twitter, facebook and linked-in connections aren't really you.
Whilst I am a facebook user, regularly, (seeded with misinformation and carefully curated to avoid brain-cell losing nonsense), I have created various other accounts on various other platforms to prevent someone hijacking my identity on them.
I find it most irritating that I have to do that, but better safe than sorry?
Re: That's life
"life is a ruthless competition in which only the strong succeed"
It needn't be. All we have to do is drop that base animal attitude, be civilized to each other and disadvantage those that use that method to succeed at the cost of others. We can be better, and stopping the bullies is a good early step. It'd solve many of this worlds issues.
"But the cynical side of me can't but think that the plaintiff is suing Oracle to pay for his wife's alimony payments."
That may be the case, yes, but the employer equally probably fired him to protect the income stream from the accused platinum partner. This is America and all's fair.
Apologies in advance
"And we expect a happy ending too — I wiped all of our backups and got promoted, this sort of thing."
One should always wipe after a happy ending.
In defence of the vast superiority of British Comedy over American Comedy I give you "The IT Crowd", "The Inbetweeners" and "Shameless".
if dev == woman then dont_be(asshole): Stack Overflow tries again to be more friendly to non-male non-pasty coders
In a likewise moment, I came across the word "Feminsisting" as an antonym for Mansplaining.
"Etsy, Tumblr, and Foursquare."
Tumblr?! Oh, you're screwed now! There'll be shrieking, and half-baked, unresearched opinions about how it makes them feel in seconds! If you're not careful, they'll follow up with an article about eejit pies tailors and ten things you didn't know bout the word neutraility.
Red Letter Day
So, Rudd quit on the 29th April, which is only a couple of days before May.
...With some luck.
"Rouguelike games are a very niche concern these days"
Nuh-Uh. Do a quick search on Steam for Roguelike and goggle at the myriad returns. Of course, us old school purists might gripe that many of them are not really Roguelike, but it remains they are still very present as a concept in gaming.
Now, back to Dwarf Fortress with me.
"you'd have formalised that arrangement with an indefinite visa or a British passport and/or kept hold of the evidence of when you arrived"
Or, you know, we could assume they are in the right and take a look at other records to determine the validity of that. Records like NI contributions, educational history, health records, electoral role, tax payments...
But no, far better to assume that they are illegal and ignore all other evidence to the contrary. Typical of May and Cronies.
Re: "there was real anger out there..."
"And the same thing applied in the UK's 2016 Brexit referendum when it was Cambridge Analytica's sister firm in the SCL group, AggregateIQ, that did that same kind of work that secured the marginal win for the Leave campaign."
Here's a thought: We might consider CA to be the final balancing factor in the Brexit vote, yes, but it can be argued that surely one company can't have had the clout to be that final factor.... ...But what if CA isn't alone? What if the PtB used more than one company/method to rig/sway/influence the vote and we've only found ONE conspirator so far? If I were seeking to "influence the outcome" of such a pivotal and crucial vote I'd certainly not trust the result to a single actor.
Allow me a brief summation of the repeated, ongoing conversation between zucks and the US-PtB....
Senate: Zucks! You make good donation! You make money! Is good American Dream.
Zucks: Hi. Yes. Sorry. I'll try to do better.
Senate: Zucks, how internet work?
Zucks: because people let me. Sorry. I'll try to do better.
Senate: How you make money?
Zucks: I sell adverts. Sorry. I'll try to do better.
Senate: You make lot money?
Zucks. Yes. Its the American Dream. Sorry.
Senate: *open mouthed breathing & Confused looks*
Senate: what is internet?
Zucks: *smirks* Sorry. I'll get someone on that.
Repeat ad nauseum.
I don't get the logic.
If it's easy for a company to ignore the equal pay law, which it appears to be if any of this is true, and if there is a deliberate intention to subvert that law and pay women less than men, which seems to be the acceptable face of conspiracy theory, and if that gender pay gap is in a range of 12% - 70%, Depending on which source you are taking as authorative,) and if women are provably just as good at any job as any man, despite there being so many less women in STEM roles...
...why don't companies employ more women than men?
"demand an 18.6% pay rise"
Or, a 18.6% paycut for men due to "Legislative requirements *shrug*. Sorry" or, better still, only have female employees and save your company 18.6% in salaries each year. Nice.
It's all utter crap anyway; the ONS itself takes age range into consideration and it can be seen there that women under 30 tend to earn more than men across the board, whereas the largest gap is seen in comparing women and men over 50, where the gap is indeed substantially in favour of men. Now, why would that be? Could it possibly be that newer contracts follow the equal pay legislation that exists whereas the older contracts don't? Oh, what a shock!
These headline grabbing stats are highly manipulated. They ignore sector, age range, contracts, legislation and all sorts of other factors. Indeed, in some cases the biggest "gaps" are found by comparing part-time, low skill, female workers over the age of fifty against young, highly skilled, professional full-time+ male roles. Guess what? if you compare Mrs. Part-Time tea lady to Mr. CEO of Big Pharma, you get a big difference! Another shock!
Anyway, if we are going to uplift women who earn less then men are we also going to uplift men who earn less than men or women? No? Why not?
Re: Not really dispelling the idea that generally the police are a little dim ..
"year all organisations now have a duty to preserve human rights"
Anyone pointed that out to our employers and government recently?
Well done mr policeman...
"...if someone is a victim of an “Internet-enabled crime”, they should sue the platform involved."
I see. So those people who have been a victim of the recent spate of terror incidents involving cars running into crowds should sue the car manufacturers, sales divisions and perhaps even rental companies involved for allowing them to become the victim of a "vehicle-enabled crime"?
Re: Mutant 59
" who doesn't want to make life miserable for the greedy vermin who are constantly clawing private data and manuring the web with their pathetically awful adverts?"
Hmm. I don't like clawing, greedy vermin of any kind. Whether they are advertisers, or bankers, or lawyers, or finance lenders, etc. etc. They are all out to get their sticky hands in your pockets, and little else. Most of them see this as a morally good thing to do, despite it not being.
The issue is, if we do away with the advertising market, then how do we get these "free" services? I know, I know, I'm the product, but here's the thing - this trade of "I'll read your adverts, you harvest data from my habits to sell to the advertisers, who then advertise to me hoping I'll read it." is a form of barter isn't it? If we kill advertising, then the question surely becomes "how do we want to pay for that?", and that could, possibly, be the thin end of a wedge against net neutrality?
I know there are less scrupulous uses of my personal data going on (election rigging, for example), and that needs addressing, but is that a separate concern to targeted advertising? Are we trying to hammer all harvesters of data with the same club, and should we be doing so? Are some worse
I'm not sure I want a range of paid subscription based services that are probably still going to monetize my data/activity on their site - Perhaps the adverts that I generally block or ignore are preferable? Am I barking up the wrong tree here?
Glory to Arstotzka.
(If you've not played this, do so.)
"Shouldn't that be the approval of the person using it?"
I think there may be a misunderstanding here. I think what FB is saying is that if you submit an app to Facebook for use by Facebook members, then, if that app has a requirement for more data than name, photo and email, it will need further approval by Facebook before launch. Of course the end user can always refuse privileges to an app at the point of installation/use (at least in theory, eh?).
Re: British government: I don't care how you get the little Zuckwit here, but get him here.
""See how he likes it."
Erm....what exactly are you posting on facebook?
Re: British government: I don't care how you get the little Zuckwit here, but get him here.
Yeah, that Zuckerberg eh? Literally Hitler!
Re: Rule Britannia!
"told what to do by the vested interests of France and Germany"
Yay! Now we get told what to do by the Conservatives and their cronies, big media and get to be the rope in a tug of war between the US and China instead. So much better!
And the cons get to make up whatever laws they like without oversight!
Ah, paradise! But, we get to be the Empire again? Do we get uniforms?
Only complete morons think that we are taking power back to the nation. We're not. We're handing it to the psycho's who put us in this situation in the first place and removing our ability to appeal against their nonsense.
Re: Rule Britannia!
"Every time remainers spout this crap another 20k people convert to the cause because they realise how retarded their side is."
Quite so! *slowclap*
Now, can we have the promised £350 million per week into the NHS?
Re: Rule Britannia!
""Sounds like someone is still bitter about how democracy works... ""
What? Like how big data, bought out with big money, illegally, can be used to rig the result?
Ah yeah, I forgot I'm not meant to be bitter about that.
"A criminal act is a criminal act."
Except when its not a criminal act and is instead a civil infringement such as littering, parking poorly, or letting your dog crap on the pavement. Civil infringements attract fines levied via a magistrate. Criminal acts involve going to court and standing before judge and jury.
Its worth *every citizen* understanding this difference.
"pompous knownothings on the Ctee"
Nah, they'll have Amber Rudd, the well known tech expert, right there to insist that zuck applies the correct hashtags immediately.
Re: Shoot the Messenger
so the Beeb have spoken up a little now and are reporting on the story. In part.
Specifically, note how they are loudly mentioning that CA may have had something to do with Trumps election, but there's not a whisper of how they may have affected the Brexit referendum.
" hence the Mythic Cosmological record across Antiquity and our human conditioning in its likeness"
"The Drake equation is a probabilistic argument used to estimate the number of active, communicative extraterrestrial civilizations in the Milky Way galaxy."
I propose, tentatively, that this approach generates a narrow answer to a broader question. Surely what we want to know is "are we alone" and the Drake Equation seems to attempt to answer that in a very specific manner; it looks for "active" civilisations in its incipient form, and with the addition of time frame to the equation it delimits by those civilisations being "dead" or "alive".
But, I believe it was Arthur C. Clarke who suggested that our first contact with an alien civilization would probably be through remnant technology (as explored in novels such as "rendezvous with rama") or with automated probes (such as humanities Voyager program). Both of these possibilities are not bounded by timeframe, radio transmission ranges or even the carbon-life/death cycle that we presume all lifeforms will suffer from, and yet an encounter with such would provide proof of alien intelligence, whether contemporary or not.
My conclusion, therefore, is that the Drake Equation is an imperfect tool that really only asks the following question: "Are there alien civilisations active and alive right now, in our galaxy alone (thus precluding the infinite/finite universe question) that have the technology to communicate with us using methods with which we are familiar?"
A far cry from "Are we alone?".
[Edit: on review, this may come across as a "straw man" critique, but I still think its a view worth considering.]