> – were nicked shortly after he made his address and details of his bikes public on the popular biking app Strava,
Because it is obviously impossible that some guy saw him arrive home from a ride then came back later...
2545 publicly visible posts • joined 7 May 2012
No. Anyone who has had the, er, pleasure of using the my gov website would not be in the least part surprised. I am fortunate to have only rarely required to sign into that portal of hate, but my last memory of it was having to find a password simple enough for it. Then once it was happy with the credentials it basically pushed you back to the service it was supposed to be streamlining.
Problem is that they are trying to treat the Australian court like the US court. But that is not how IP law works here (oh, hi there TPP). They are looking for punitive damages but a court in Australia should restrict punishment to the iTunes price plus some reasonable reimbursements for administrative costs.
They are going for the US model of suing someone's Grandma into bankruptcy and then settling the vast majority for a few K.
I have one Windows 7 machine and one Windows 10 machine at home. I have nothing against Windows 10 once you disable the, er, telemetry. It is a genuine improvement on 8 and 8.1 that it had beforehand.
So why haven't I upgraded the micro-atx box that runs Windows 7, is plugged into the TV and has exactly one purpose? Hint Microsoft: a DVD player isn't an adequate substitute for what you are replacing.
FPTP also means that two similar candidates may split each other's votes thus leaving the victor to be someone who represents less of the electorate.
Imagine a conservative, a libertarian and a communist running for a seat. If the vote went 37, 23, 40 respectively, that would leave the communist as the winner in a FPTP count even though a libertarian is unlikely to favour a centralised control party over a conservative party.
Don't get me wrong, the senate does have problems in voting but this is because above the line allows backroom deals and the ridiculous number of candidates makes it too hard to actually rank them properly on the paper. My solution would be to scrap above the line but to force them to number 1 to 12 on full senate elections and 1 to 6 on half senate elections (with the option to keep numbering as far as you can be bothered)
> Preferential voting means that once a candidate reaches a quota, their votes pass to a voter's second preference
Kind of. The second preference of all voters for that candidate is considered, but transferred votes have a lower weighting.
(Votes for candidate minus quota) divided by votes per candidate.
Once transferred, the last place is eliminated (transferring) until all positions are filled.
> Special Agent Squire's reported action is squarely within his rights as a citizen
Completely agree (to his right of free speech, not his opinion on this matter).
When he raised concerns with the library, did he mention his concern was being raised in his capacity as a private citizen? If he used his dhs uniform/letterhead/email then it has to be within their policy and remit.
> but now non ASCII characters are being used - case folding is more complicated
You don't get complaints from me on that point, but my comment was addressing the statement "because a case-sensitive search is just comparing bytes whereas a case-insensitive search requires more effort" in the context of "Over half a century ago, " Unicode wasn't designed until the late 80s so certainly wasn't considered part of the effort when this decision was made.
Unicode not only makes comparisons fun, but some collations treat some accents as equal for comparison but different for sorting. There is a world of hurt in there for English speakers.
In programming, case is also by convention frequently used to indicate scope. You will have a public int VoteCount with a backing private field voteCount. Also used to make multi-word names readable.
I have worked heavily with languages that are case insensitive (eg. Delphi) and those which are case sensitive (eg. c#). There are pros and cons to both approaches. The more important thing is having a tool that polices the convention and fix the case for you (eg. Resharper).
If a program can be so insignificant to effective intelligence gathering that the relevant director can totally forget its existence even after being forewarned of the question and yet is so offensively invasive to innocent people, it does beg the question about why it isn't shut down.
Surely those funds could be used for other worthwhile causes?
The allegation of 54,489 in 60 days equates to close to 1 violation per minute if you assume that person had to sleep during that 2 months.
A reasonable person might consider such a large number of warnings as indicative that there was some sort of bug in either the collection, analysis or notification processes. Inability to produce the code used for that denies the accused the right to challenge the evidence used against them. The idea of secret evidence should be an anathema to anyone interested in freedom and the rule of law.
> Why are we talking about fuel economy now?
NOx emissions reduction requires higher fuel consumption (to a point) if you want to maintain power. If they achieve amazing fuel economy results and have been caught in other instances disabling emission controls, one is entitled to ask the obvious question.
> Also, the standards that "aren't being met" are close to impossible to meet
If true by some law of physics then all manufacturers will be equally affected. When the sorts of vehicles demanded by the population become unavailable, the standards would be relaxed.
I don't know enough about the engineering to comment on whether it is or isn't possible to hit the targets, but here is what I do know.
1. Cars are heavily judged by consumers on high power and low fuel consumption.
2. The combination of fuel, air and temperature that maximise the power and minimise fuel consumption are not so great when it comes to NOx.
Left to market forces alone, NOx reduction will be sacrificed to give better numbers that people actually care about. The problem of NOx is externalised. That is where regulation is required.
I wouldn't be holding up android. Too many OEMs "customise" the experience and then have no way to patch for things like stagefright. There are literally phones sitting on store shelves that will never see a stagefright fix.
Microsoft have plenty to criticise. Too many windows updates address being pwned by fonts for goodness sake and half of those patches end up breaking outlook. The blame here sits squarely on dell. They are appropriately being shamed.
> If the amount of money wasted on anti-terrorist surveilance was used on bounties instead, there would have been a grand total of zero surviving ISIS, Taleban and Al Qaeda "key personnel".
Probably not many taxi drivers either. (Search for Dilawar)
As soon as you start with bounties, [bad guy warlord supporter] will hand over [insert rival warlord], get some hard currency to carry on their work while you do their dirty work.
/the justifiability of mass surveillance can not be established by whether or not it is effective in identifying targets. That is merely an "ends justifies the means" rationale