New Reg Unit?
"twice the pressure exerted by an elephant standing on one foot"
Will this become the official El Reg unit of pressure?
3317 publicly visible posts • joined 24 Dec 2007
The people running these sites will now be taking countermeasures, such as the obvious one of seeding a lot of false names into their database (i.e. real names, probably of prominent people, that have nothing to do with the site). Operation Ore shows how appallingly much trouble that is going to cause to innocent people the next time this happens.
"upon receiving a complaint, website editors would need to publish the complaint next to the original article"
I wish to complain because your web blog on what you and your friends did last Saturday didn't mention my web site at [url] that sells fake Viagra! You are now legally obliged to publish this complaint next to the original article.
So the law should apply equally to the net as well as offline?
"bring internet publishing and social media in line with the mainstream press."
Fine. So if I object to any article in any newspaper or on any television channel they are legally obliged to publish my objection with equal prominence? Sounds good.
"The sample of the Trojan obtained by the CCC was apparently placed on a suspect's laptop when he passed through customs at the Munich International airport."
Any electronic equipment that is taken out of your sight by German customs must be assumed to be compromised.
Better not have any commercial confidential information on it either - clean it before travelling.
Basically treat travel to Germany like travel to the USA.
Why should the landlord give them information for free, that they'll then sell back to him?
It's well past time the OS data was made freely available. There are all sorts of useful things that could be done with computerised access to top-quality mapping. The original maps were made using tax funding, and councils have to give them free information. Why are they still charging?
The problem is not just lots of false positives, but that some people will trigger the thing over and over and over again.
(And there's a strong chance that the "highly skilled" operator will see the record of them being flagged many times and take that as proof of guilt.)
They are helpfully going to tell you about things you might otherwise have missed.
After all, they're highly trained professional marketing people. Obviously they know what you want better than you yourself do.
And if some silly little end-user complains about it then he simply doesn't understand modern marketing.
Or of course it might just be that they're a bunch of slimy arrogant turds, but that can't possibly be true because they're highly paid.
"it is a criminal offence to disclose such information except for very specific purposes – and the offence is “strict liability”, so ignorance is no excuse."
Just how far does that go? If you went to a single sex school, would you then be unable to ever mention anyone you were at school with just in case they had subsequently changed their gender without you knowing?
Being willing to go to jail for your beliefs is fine.
Being willing for someone else to go to jail for your beliefs is not.
Once they got a court order they had a choice of:
1> Comply
2> Try to fight it - very expensive (might be too expensive to be possible without massive contributions), extremely unlikely to succeed.
3> Go to jail
They don't have the money.
NASA crewed craft tend to be horrendously expensive - the shuttle was a badly compromised design.
If private spacecraft companies can get working vehicles they should be very much cheaper.
So why do they want NASA to build more crewed vehicles? And what have they got against Russia, are they still trying to fight the cold war against the Soviet Union?
Haven't they noticed that the world economy is in a terrible state at the moment?
If they are pre-emptively avoiding getting taken to court when they release user information again, that seems to imply that they are planning to do it again. Or at least not bothering to put in reliable defences against doing it again.
I wonder if they could be charged with conspiring to do so? Since they are obviously preparing for it?
jQuery is for developers who want to get on with developing the application, not spend weeks re-inventing the wheel and trying to get the damn thing working with every version of IE back to 6.
Developers who think producing a working application is more important than showing off how macho your coding skills are.
The client doesn't want it perfect, he wants it Tuesday.
Too many existing versions? Obvious solution - invent yet another one. But make it different enough to throw away the existing investment.
Those various JavaScript frameworks will run on existing browsers - they're going to have a hell of a job getting a new language added to all the standard browsers, let alone to IE. Are they hoping to make it so superior that everyone switches to Chrome? (And to Chrome OS, and hey, everything everywhere runs on Google!)
If you want to standardise, standardise on JQuery. Build it into the browser.
For all occurrences of 'not' in that article, substitute 'not yet'.
Once it's in place, the first thing they will do is think up all sorts of reasons why it has to be expanded just a little bit. And just a little bit more. And ...
It's not a matter of pointing out previous times they've done exactly this. More a matter of has there ever been a single time when they have *not* done so.
What will happen to the out-patients staff that spend all day moving patients from the first queue to a second queue so that the waiting times stay within the official limit?
If they're not careful those staff might have to be deployed on, I don't know, actually helping the patients or something equally silly.
They know they've been hacked, but they refuse to give a full list of what fake certificates have been issued? Then untrusting all certificates issued by them is the only safe option.
Tough luck on them - letting themselves be hacked is incompetent, but letting known fake certificates circulate is grossly irresponsible.
What does it feel like to walk in these shoes, and does it make walking more difficult? I.e. is it extracting energy that would have gone as heat anyway, or do you end up using more energy to walk?
Of course it might be useful to use more energy if you're walking for exercise, but not for normal walking.
"it monitors ... and the activity that you undertake during secure sessions"
No legitimate application should ever be monitoring secure sessions - the *whole point* of them is to keep the information private.
Saying they'll make a vague stab at not really storing a few of the secure bits is *not good enough* - that data should never have been collected in the first place. Any application that even tries to monitor it is by definition a rogue.
What would they have done if he had suggesting starting riots in Minas Tirith?
Do they really want a society where you have to watch every single word you say in case someone deliberately misinterprets it? Where you dare not make a joke about anything? Where you must be suspicious of everyone you know in case they turn you in to the police for a casual remark?
Four months is a *ludicrous* over-reaction.
"there has never been a single reported incident "
Nobody has reported being killed by this?
And exactly how would they know that it had happened? A diabetic feels ill, or their sugar levels vary unexpectedly, or they drop dead - does anyone check their insulin pump? And would there be any evidence left behind, especially if the attacker set it back to normal levels again later?