* Posts by Bernard M. Orwell

1177 publicly visible posts • joined 12 May 2010

CCTV warning notices NOT compliant with data protection laws – ICO

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: What about Bus Lane cameras

What about *all* CCTV cameras? If you're recording me, my actions or my movements, even passively, then surely I should have a right to know who you are and what you are doing with my data? Or does this fall under the same "Expectation of Privacy" rules we apply to photographers?

I fear we can't have this both ways....

Snowden documents show British digital spies use viruses and 'honey traps'

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: Pseudointelligence Coward @Matt Bryant "clutching your little red book"

I do enjoy it when you are called out on a point that you have trouble defending and have to resort to saying "Duhhh. I was being sarcastic" or "Duhhh. Don't you know when to take a joke."

My children do that too.

Fancy a little kinky sex? GCHQ+NSA will know - thanks to Angry Birds

Bernard M. Orwell

Is it just me.....

...that finds the idea of the NSA collecting Intel via an app wherein little black birds are propelled at buildings to demolish the defences of the fat, greedy piggies to be more than a little ironic?

Valve gives Oculus Rift a whirl with SteamVR mode

Bernard M. Orwell
Trollface

Re: Can you ask VALVe about the State of SFS

*Murphy's

'You win, Kanye': Coinye creators throw in towel after rapper sues

Bernard M. Orwell

It's clearly true...

....he loves fishsticks.

Snowden docs: NSA building encryption-cracking quantum computer

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: Boring Bernie None of this...

It is highly naive to believe that our "current situation" is driven by any need other than profit.

But I expect nothing less from you MB.

Bernard M. Orwell

None of this...

...requires any deep "conspiracy theory"

During the Cold War, spying was big business. A lot of money was spent by nations in the interests of "national security". Whole entities came into being as a result; GCHQ, MI6, NSA, etc etc, along with a vast industry to provide and support those services.

With the end of the Cold War, those financial interests were staring at The Wall and seeing their end in sight. With the events of 9/11 it was easy for those interests to create lobbying to convince a weak and ill-informed government that the threat was much larger and more cohesive than it appeared. Systems, technologies and methods were sold on the basis of that threat.

As time passed more systems were created, threats were expounded upon by NGOs, lobbyists and public groups that had all bought into the expertly created "null scenario" and the market expanded. New investment opportunities appeared and new business was created to take advantage. In an era of financial instability ANY new business was good business, even if it were founded upon complete nonsense. What was important was that money could be made.

Not only was it a "good day to bury bad news" but also a good day to turn a profit. Create a new tech, lobby the government to buy the tech, convince everyone that they need the tech to keep them safe, get the gov. to buy new, better tech and keep up the tales of imminent destruction and the need for security, pay for "research" to support that market, develop new tech..... repeat ad nauseum.

This is not without precedent, take a look at the drug industries and see how they "remap" pharmaceuticals every year to expand potential markets without the need to create new drugs. They just create new "conditions" that old drugs, it just so happens, treat.

No conspiracy required, no evil cabal plotting world domination, just day to day business-as-usual. Everything is exactly as it always is and all is driven the Great Good that is Profit.

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: skelband Anyone remember "Freedom is the right to be uncomfortable."

So deeply retarded a response I can't even be bothered to downvote it.

Your standards are dropping, MB.

Snowden to warn Brits on Xmas telly: Your children will NEVER have privacy

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: Boring Bernie Yawn

Well, I am very happy that the methods created by the NSA are working so well, as you have explained.

No need for any MORE measures to limit our freedoms then.

P.S. Could you learn to use paragraphs please? It'd make your nonsense easier to read, if not digest.

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: An Alien XSSXXXX Concept or SMARTR App .... for Clouds Hosting Advanced Operating Systems*

I'm almost willing to pay to see a debate between AMfM and MB....

...they are about as coherent as each other. Of course, AMfM is far more polite.

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: codeusirae Dear NomNomNom ..

"Producer3: "I know - Kim Chung- whatshisface, that guy from North Korea!"

Controller: "OK, fits the anti-Yank agenda and definitely scores high enough on the weirdo scale, but does anyone know if he's available? And cheap."

Producer1: "Could be a problem - last time his dad asked for thirty cases of Courvoisier and total dominion over Wales."

I oft don't agree with MB on things, but that was bloody funny. Still chuckling now! :D

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: Yawn

Also, it is a matter of record (from the capture of Bin Laden) that the "terrorists" did not use the internet, or even permanent mobile phones, for communication for the very reason that they believed such would be intercepted. For this very reason, runners and "trusted men" were used to carry spoken, and rarely written, missives from one "cell" to another.

It is by the intelligence forces own admission that this is they reason, they say, that it took so long to capture Bin Laden and track down other "Significant Targets".

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: Yawn

It's been a while since I saw any blue elephants stampeding down my high street.

I guess the surveillance, monitoring and spying on me protects us from those too. Well done GCHQ!

{$Sarcasm}

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: @Will Godfrey - Yawn

I agree with you - they didn't fight for Privacy; that's a relatively modern jingoism.

They fought to retain *our* liberty from oppressive would-be totalitarian masters. And its that that we are giving away today without a beat, in return for shiny apps and social toys.

It's not *just* privacy, we are also giving up our will and our intellect.

BT tweaks WORDING of sex-ed web block after complaints

Bernard M. Orwell

....And the government has ensured that parents have access to, and have been informed of the existence of, the tools to make an informed decision of their own.

They haven't introduced a "national firewall" or retained the power of censorship for themselves, just forced every parent, and by extension every internet user, in the UK to actually think about it and make a decision.

Isn't this what HUNDREDS of posts on El. Reg. have been yelling for for some years now, or are we so filled with hubris that we think non-technical parents have to actually figure out the entire technical solution for themselves from scratch?

Personally, I'm in favour of "Hey! Parents! Here are the tools. Read this webpage. Make a choice. You can change your mind later, and if you want you can even adjust the level of filtering to suit your own point of view. Yours, government."

Surely, it could've been a lot worse? (Remember what Wacky Jacqui wanted to do!).

[Caveat: I expect scope-creep and am basing my opinion solely on the premise that the system proposed will work as described. I take no stance on the future evolution of the system until such a time as it, inevitably, mutates into Something Hideous.]

The Pirate Bay changes domain again … TWICE!

Bernard M. Orwell

What I don't entirely get is why the DMCA doesn't protect TPB in the same way it does for Google et al.

Under Title II of the DMCA act (Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act) OSPs/ISPs are rendered immune from prosecution for content uploaded or distributed by the providers users. It's this specific clause that allows services like YouTube and Google to continue to link to copyright material and not be prosecuted for doing so.

What is it that TPB is doing differently (and wrongly) that causes them to be an exemption to this exemption?

[Citation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act#Title_II:_Online_Copyright_Infringement_Liability_Limitation_Act]

BT network-level STOCKINGs-n-suspenders KILLER arrives in time for Xmas

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: OK

"BT said that subscribers could use the default settings or police the content themselves by adding websites to a block list on the service...."

So, you'll be able to see "the list", and amend it, when the service is rolled out.

Personally, I'm not that unhappy with being presented with a screen that says "untick this box to remove filters"....

Desperate MS flaunts UNDEAD SPLAT TALLY to pep Xbox One fans

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: All tech specs and religious tendencies aside...

Same company which decided that "windows 8" was an appropriate name for an OS that wasn't in it's eight iteration by any measure.

Bless 'em.

Microsoft: Anonymous hacktivists DDoSed us? Really?

Bernard M. Orwell
Windows

Honestly!

"The activist attack would appear to be a coincidence and its supposed deep impact takes some believing, especially in the face of a denial from Redmond."

Because Microsoft always tell the truth and never hide failures in their security and software.

Honest.

UK.gov's web filtering mission creep: Now it plans to block 'extremist' websites

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: Clever Nanny!

"Only the adult account holder will be able to change the filter settings."

Ok, lets chew this over. Those of you that may have read any of my other posts on this particular subject will know I am rabidly anti-government censorship, ID Cards, Nanny state, privacy invasion etc. etc. but this...this is interesting.

It's clear, at least as far as porn-blocking goes, that the gubmint is placing the control over that filter in the hands of the end user - Us. They aren't going for mass-censorship or some kind of "great wall" filtering, they're just making sure the tools in question are shoved under the nose of everyone and that we make a choice, informed or not, as to whether that censorship is in place for us. If we change our minds, in either way, we can change the settings at any time.

Now, for us techie types, that might be a no-brainer exercise, but for the average Daily Mail reader type installing and understanding such software is often some sort of techno-sorcery that should be consigned to the devil immediately. How often, on these very pages, have I read the argument that the responsibility for protecting children online should reside with the parents? Well, surely here is our Gov. ensuring that that is precisely the case? Aren't they just saying "Here, unwashed masses, here is the tool you need, make sure you make a choice and don't blame us when Little Johnny goes looking at Teh Pr0n because we took the action that you asked for."

The introduction of filtering in this manner neatly sidesteps the more fascist methods favoured by groups such as MumsNet and their sophist arguments whilst as the same time taking some sort of positive action.

If they then extend that filtering to other types of sites that some people find undesirable but it remains our choice whether and when to implement that filtering then I have to say I think the gov. have taken an appropriate level of action.

....Now, I need a stiff drink whilst I wait for the downvotes.

Google: YouTube fights off HUGE ASCII PHALLUS MENACE

Bernard M. Orwell
Trollface

Re: Wondering

Conservative blue rinse brigade. They get scandalised so easily.

Bernard M. Orwell
Trollface

Re: "ASCII art pornography"

Be careful now....a drawing or depiction of someone in a compromising or provocative position can be deemed as pornography under UK law, even as extreme (illegal) pornography if the illustration can be "interpreted to depict someone under the age of 18". The ASCII art isn't quite so innocently annoying anymore.

Please YouTube, won't someone think of the chillerns?!

GCHQ was called in to crack password in Watkins child abuse case

Bernard M. Orwell
Stop

Careful! I'm not sure you want to be typing that into a browser under any circumstances!

Nookie becomes, um, a virtual reality for Oculus Rift gadget gamers

Bernard M. Orwell

Suprise!

I own an oculus rift and it's marvelous fun, but a constant problem I have with it is people creeping up behind me in the real world and scaring the bejesus out of me, as once I have my headphones on too my peripheral senses become nonexistent.

It's usually the wife who thinks that its funny to make me scream in surprise.

I dread to think what the screaming would be like if I added one of these to my...ahem...rig.

Smut-spreading copyright trolls told to return cash extracted from victims

Bernard M. Orwell
Trollface

Re: Huh!

Wouldn't it be ironic, amusing, karmic and just if the ACTUAL legal owners of the copyright now sued Prenda Law in the same court for piracy and breach of IP law?

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: Jail time would be more appropriate.

A sentence of death is appropriate for fraudulent activity?

Wow. Just wow.

Bernard M. Orwell

Because Prenda Law is being held liable and Prenda Law is a "Legal Person" under US law. The whole point of being an LLC is to avoid the company liabilities becoming personal liabilities. Of course, its impossible to lock up a company so a fine is levied instead.

Do yourself a favour and watch "The Corporation", which can be found, for free, on YouTube or many other sources.

Anonymous threatens cyberwar with Anonymous

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: SteveB299 Why on Earth...?

You've not met our resident troll before? He goes by the name of Matt Bryant. You'll like him.

Thought you didn't need to show ID in the UK? Wrong

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: That's Theresa May for you.

Yeah, that's right mate....you can vote for anyone you like... Eton OR Oxbridge!

A country gets the politicians its allowed to vote for.

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: do you mean ID or do you mean Proof of Age?

POID vs POA - I hadn't thought about it that way. You raise a good point!

Bernard M. Orwell

I could, actually, get behind a voluntary ID scheme provided two specific things were discussed and planned for:

First, anti-fraud/ID theft mechanisms. It has to be shown that the data cannot be easily stolen and doesn't provide a "one stop shop" for fraudsters. Last thing we need is a situation where a criminal can take a single card from you and then masquerade as you in *all* regards.

Secondly, data ownership - It must be the case that the State does not own the metadata generated by the system and that data controllers (those you hand the data too) have no right to retain that data indefinitely. The data ownership must remain with the individual who is the legal holder of the card and that data cannot be changed without the card and cardholder both being present and the consent of the cardholder being implicitly given, much like we would use a debit/credit card now. Furthermore any data handed over should come with a specific lease from the legal owner; a data on which that data MUST be deleted by the data controller, perhaps at the end of a contract or immediately after a transaction has been made and authorised. If you get on a plane then your data is verified and immediately deleted (this can be done by certs. held on the card, in a similar way to SSL certs, for instance, requiring no "central authority" to constantly check against but instead using a hashing algorithm). If you're renting a property then the landlord could be legally permitted, even possibly required, to retain the leased data for the duration of the tenacy and a given period afterwards.

Take the system out of the hands of the government and the "secret database" fans and we might, just might, be able to cut a deal.

Bernard M. Orwell

Why all the ID?

I can understand the need for ID when going to places that sell alcohol; thats a legal requirement and a sensible one at that, but I also think the retailers should be obliged, if not mandated, to use the IDAware system too. I can also see the use of positive identification in other situations - when dealing with a financial transaction for instance, or claiming for a benefit or other legal right. But, as for the rest, booking hotels, renting property and taking internal flights etc. I have to question why we need to present ID in those cases. I don't need to present my papers when getting on a bus, or hiring a cab, I don't need a passport if I get on a train so why for internal flights? As for renting and hotels, well surely the immigration & border services should be sufficiently funded and resourced to render this additional scrutiny unnecessary? If not, why not?

If this data isn't contributing to a reduction in crime, illegal immigration or some database intended to track movement then what is it even for? If it is for one of these things, can we see some evidence that it helps in some way?

In the meantime "papers please, citizen" will be met with "no".

Anonymous hacktivists' Million Mask March protest hits London

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: I don't know about you...

Yet another pillock who thinks they can get their way through violence. I don't want to live in your version of the world.

Bernard M. Orwell

Missed the point...

One cab driver, who was stuck in the middle of the protest at Parliament Square, told El Reg: "They don't seem to know what they're protesting about. They all seem to be here for different reasons."

Ooh. A london cab driver, that well known source of all political wisdom. Still, let's answer him, ad hominem aside.

You've missed the point, mr. Cabbie and, by extension, mr. Journalist; here you have a LOT of people who are VERY upset by a LOT of different things.

I think the Government, if it truly was working for the betterment of all Britain, should be paying attention, talking to the protestors and taking notes for consideration at the very least.

'Course, it isn't so it won't.

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: I don't know about you...

Well, we can give you a uniform, a couple of days training, a stick and a bit of gaffa tape to cover your badge number and you can smash all the noses you want.

The thing you aren't understanding is that this is called "democracy" and "liberty" and you wanting to use violence to get your way is exactly what these people are standing against.

Live with it.

Galaxy is CRAMMED with EARTH-LIKE WORLDS – also ALIENS (probably)

Bernard M. Orwell
Headmaster

Re: BOFFINS: BILLIONS OF EARTH-LIKE LIFE-FRIENDLY ALIEN WORLDS IN GALAXY

Erm.... sorry old chap, but it is English...

from the OED - "late Middle English (denoting a bung for the vent hole of a cask, or a tap for drawing liquid from a container)" - French origins, but widely used in English since the 16th Century.

Gotta be careful with this "Proper English" thing as most of our language is German, French, Greek or Latin in origin if you go back far enough. See what I did there?

Bernard M. Orwell

Hello bongorocks,

I'm afraid your unusual grammar and spelling gave your identity away partly.

Which version of which bible are you referring to? When was it written and by whom? (Please, don't say the holy spirit wrote it). The reason I ask is that the tale of the Nephilim and the Order of Heaven that you refer to are part of the Apocrypha and are pretty much "banned" from any contemporary version of the bible; they are certainly not recognised by the Catholic, Protestant and Judaic faiths and, as far as I recall, are not part of Islam either.

I'm afraid your bible cannot be trusted as a source of evidence of any kind, as its provenance is unclear and dubious at the very least. If you wish to test this, I'd be interested in your proof of demonic/satanic activity on earth which you have claimed is easy to prove. If that's so you might want to pick up the large monetary prizes offered by people such as James Randi for any substantial evidence of supernatural agency and make yourself rich.

Finally, a question; do you believe in the phenomenon of Alien Abduction and if not then why not, as there would appear to be just as much, if not more "evidence" (testimony, by religious standards) than there is for any actual deity or supernatural power.

You may, of course, choose to believe what you will, but stating such beliefs as facts, especially in a science-oriented forum like this, will require extraordinary proof to back up your extraordinary claim.

Facebook tests sinister CURSOR-TRACKING in hunt for more ad bucks

Bernard M. Orwell

AdBlocker Plus

AdBlock trackers are already a reality I'm sorry to say. If you go to ITV Player and run an adblocker on IE or Chrome, the player detects it and promptly pops up a nag screen telling you how bad a person you are. Said Nag screen sits in front of you for about the same amount of time it would've taken to watch the adverts before proceeding with playing your content.

very annoying indeed.

Vietnam jails man for Facebook freedom campaign

Bernard M. Orwell

Take a good, long look....

.... as that kind of "freedom" will soon be standard across the world.

US spy court says internet firms can't report surveillance requests

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: err ,,,,

I used to belabour this same argument about "unless" vs "until", but eventually someone who was actually a lawyer showed me that the case is "until" and always has been, dating right back to Roman law in essence and back to the 17th century in practice.

The bottom line is that in law neither Unless or Until are used, but instead it is called "presumption of innocence" and fundamentally means that the state (or prosecuting power) must begin with the assumed innocence of an accused party.

Even the universal charter of human rights says "until". So, whilst I might agree that "unless" would be more grammatically and linguistically accurate, it is not the case that using "until" is newspeak.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence

'Stupid old white people' revenge porn ban won't work, insists selfie-peddler

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: Um...

If you subscribe to [%RELIGIOUS_TXT] then you are missing a much bigger point.

Bernard M. Orwell

NSA's Project Marina stores EVERYONE'S metadata for A YEAR

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: without a West Germany to escape to

Yeah, now try actually *doing* that. Unlike most of our European counterparts, we are still being asked for passports and visas when travelling to other EU countries, despite being a signatory to "freedom of movement".

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: Data vs Meta Data

Alas, if only they WERE sticking to meta-data, but they're not, as seen in this article:

http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/1/2013/07/11/snowden_leak_shows_microsoft_added_outlookencryption_backdoor_for_feds/

"The audio portions of these sessions have been processed correctly all along, but without the accompanying video. Now, analysts will have the complete 'picture'," it says.

Audio and Video? well thats clearly content and not meta-data, isn't it? More lies?

[This was somewhat CopyPasta'd from my comment to the article mentioned]

Bernard M. Orwell

Re: How stupid does the NSA think we are?

Same country that says waterboarding is legal and not torture too.

Legal, but not Just or Right.

NSA justifies hacking world's digital communications

Bernard M. Orwell

Matt?

What do you think, MB?

NSA: Yes we 'experimented' with US mobile tracking. But we didn't inhale

Bernard M. Orwell

It's the one thats moving....

Latest Snowden reveal: It was GCHQ that hacked Belgian telco giant

Bernard M. Orwell
Happy

Re: Don Don Jefe @Matt Bryant

So, by your standards then, this...

"Well, the first obvious pointer is that Snowjob did not spread his info out as widely as possible and all in one go, instead it has been drip-fed out mainly by Greenwald for obvious Guardian profit. From there you have to ask how is Snowjob paying for his upkeep seeing as his US accounts have been frozen? Gee, do you maybe think he's taking cash payments from at least the Guardian? And then there are his continual interviews with papers which are nothing more than lifestyle pieces - they display his narcissism."

Is not evidence, but is merely shrieking of a different flavour? Conjecture, just like the rest of us.

Grand Theft Auto V: Violent, sweary and amazingly ambitious

Bernard M. Orwell
Meh

Another clueless review...

Really, El Reg, whilst I respect many of your fine, fine articles, reviews and submissions please stay away from game reviews as it would appear your writers are not skilled in this area. This reviewer clearly hadn't even played the game for more than 5 minutes before going straight for the moral-minority kneejerk reaction; I think perhaps he should've taken a leaf from the Radio 4 "Frontrow" review and given it a fair hearing before deciding that the bug-ridden Rome II, or the linear mindless shooter "Bioshock Infinite", were better. They simply aren't. Rome II isn't even available on consoles rendering this a poor comparison to being with.

GTA V is a biting satire of American culture of all kinds supported by a slick and intuitive control system, excellent graphics, first rate soundtrack and voice acting, intelligent story and sweeping environments, but he appears to have missed all that in favour of concentrating on moral outrage and misunderstanding the concept of adult content. I assume he's not got to the torture scene with Lester....er..I mean...Trevor yet?

If you'd like to hire a writer with a lot of gaming experience and a good understanding of the media and market, I'm available.