Posts by S Seagal

So let me get this straight...

If a paedophile is prepared to risk some heavy jail time (and a stairwell nonce bashing that could leave them quadrospazed) by reoffending, is our illustrious Home Secretary seriously trying to tell us that the threat of a slap on the wrists for not registering a virtually untraceable email address will stop them?

Damn straight

My granny deserves everything she gets - silly cow should blatantly know all about the security settings on a wireless router! I mean come on, even for people who can only just manage to use a computer for emails, logging on to the router and setting up wifi encryption should be as obvious as closing a window...

But what about the guy who told everyone....

So while the surgeon who took the photo is now facing the music, is no one concerned about finding the other doctor who, on hearing the story in the privacy of the hospital staff room, decided that it was in the patient's best interests to phone the local newspaper and told them everything (including presumably the patients name and penis-tatoo details)?

Shoudn't he be getting a visit from the "Hot Rod" legal team too (surely they wouldn't miss a chance to double their money, dirty bastards that they are...)

Ummm...

Am I missing something here, or does the phrase 'or provide a clear text transcript of encrypted text' leave a rather large loophole to anyone unscrupulous enough to give the police any random files and claim that "these are the unencrypted versions, honest guv"....

Double standards...

Funny how when the crime is identity theft, people are up in arms decrying the police for not taking cyber crime seriously enough and not devoting enough people to the job, and yet when the police do come down on someone who is doing something illegal online (or at least immoral - just because you enjoy it doesn't make it right!) everyone accuses them of wasting their time and shouts that they should be out catching kiddie-fiddlers and gun toting drug dealers instead.....

Re: Backwards economics

Not sure I'd describe it as backwards economics - this is the same model used by people like Ryanair and Easyjet, and they seem to have done alright in recent years....

Nuremberg defence...?

It seems that Yahoo's argument of 'obeying local laws' bears more than a striking similarity to the defence of 'only obeying orders' used at the Nuremberg trials.

Is it wrong for people to expect companies to uphold what is considered a human right in their home nation (i.e. free speech) in the other countries in which they operate, or does that go out of the window once profits are threatend?

If the situation were more drastic (let's say a despotic German with a small moustache demanding the details of anyone supsected of being Jewish so that they could be rounded up and disposed of) are we saying that companies such as Yahoo should just take the Pontius Pilate approach and wash their hands of the matter?