
Is it home time yet?
I read DEFRA as DARPA and 'animal movement licensing system' was really not what I first thought it was.
I fail myself.
Thought the yuppie joke was quite funny though.
388 publicly visible posts • joined 4 Mar 2008
I work in the data protection field and have surprised myself by thinking this would be a good idea. Think of all those millions of cameras that we've spent all that money on. 90% of the time no-one's looking at what they're feeding anyway. Very few crimes are actually solved or stopped by CCTV so why not have an army of sad twats sat in their bedroom hoping to win a £1000 (whilst also secretly really hoping to see two people shagging in an alley) by combating crime.
If we've spent the money on the cameras and they're not likely to come down anytime soon then why not use them?
Yes, that's right - you're a troll.
Please try and add something more meaningful to the debate than a barely coherent right-wing rant. You might actually have some kind of point but wrapping it up in a ridiculously 'so-over-the-top-it's-verging-on-camp' Stalinist Russia analogy doesn't help.
This information Tribunal is well established as the authority on information rights cases. As someone who works in this area i actually know that if somethng can be done to increase their resources and clear the backlog of cases then that is actually a good thing. It would actually increase democracy.
Muppet.
Given the rather slow progress towards lasers that can be mounted on sharks I decided to look into a sea dweller that is more capable of carrying todays tech.
Unfortunately the quote for a new blue whale pool was hideously expensive and even my volcano lair would struggle to fit it in so plans are on hold for the moment.
Anyone want to buy two blue whales, sold as seen?
...is a good hard kick in the crotch for inflicting their tortured use of the english language on the us and for thinking that we should give more than a gnat's bollock sweat drop about what they say.
Anyway, enough grumpiness.
Happy New Year everybody!
A couple of very minor points.
Surely, Nuclear Company of Europe woud be NCE not CERN (unless that's what it stands for in French)?
Also, I wouldn't consider Large Hadron COLLIDER to be a peaceful name given that it implies the powerful smashing together of hadrons.
Fail x 2?
Also I'm pretty sure the energies of the big bang actually created a universe not destroyed it (clue: take a look around). To be honest on the grand scheme of things if it takes destroying the Earth to create a whole bright and shiny new universe then I'm pretty comfortable with that.
Referring to an earlier comment, maybe that's why we appear to be the most advanced race in the universe. Everyone else that's got to this level went *blink*.
I'n no physicist but I certainly have appear to have a better understanding reality than you, you fruit loop.
We need to test this theory. I suggest you and a girlfriend come to my place so we can all watch porn together and check out the results.
All in the interests of science of course.
@ The actual topic
So this basically reinforces that idea that if your mentally healthy and like to watch pr0n then it has no discernable effect on your personality?
How about research to say that if you're not reasonably mentally healthy you probably shouldn't watch pr0n or play violent videos games or watch violent movies etc etc? Note, this is not really a statement of opinion more a request for comments.
...we expect anyone to understand words of four syllables or more.
I agree that sometimes language can be used to obfuscate the facts, hell I've even done it myself on occasion and management speak can often be a case of using 200 ridiculous words where 2 perfectly sensible ones would do, but seriously? Attacking the use of long words?
Isn't that what dictionaries were invented for?
GO LOOK IT UP YOU INDOLENT ILLITERATE IMBECILES!
Anyone?
Anyone at all?
I'm such a child.
On a more serious note if the only (I say only like it's not significant) technical problems they've got is how to fit the kit into the testbed then they've already done a vast amount.
I am assuming the forcefield tech itself actually works of course. I look forward to the launch.
Well done, scf-fi realising, force field creating type science bods!
"Unless you tell us we're never gonna know... What is anybody gonna think?"
This is known as an inducement to confess and is widely regarded, even in the police's own training and guidance, as a very bad thing to do in an interview under caution.
Effectively it would make the results of any 'confession' inadmissable under the HRA.
Nice to see human rights aren't top of their agenda.
Sorry did I say 'nice'? I meant 'What a fucking atrocious state of affairs...'
Where are people keeping their pc's? Some of them look like they've just been lifted out of a swamp!
Truly truly hideous.
I both hate you El Reg for inflicting those images onto my poor distressed retina and admire your courage for having to wade through them in the first place.
Blergh.
"I don't make the distinction, my private data is my private data, regardless of whether you search my office, home, ISP's office, etc. A search is a search, whether it's my locker or my email."
A few things here. If you can't make the distinction then there's no point debating this with you because we're talking about different things. Just as a bit of RIPA 101, local authorities cannot access your home or your personal emails as part of an investigation the powers simply don't exist for that. And indeed it's not something that I've ever heard of a council doing or attempting to do (and please don't come back with "Of course you haven't because they cover it up." argument). That is of course barring most emails sent and received whilst at work (and that has nothing to do with RIPA because it's not your account). Your locker or your office can in some circumstances be classed as a private space, however these also do not belong to you and any proposd search of that needs to take into consideration the Human Rights Act again not really related to the discussion here of RIPA.
"Self regulation doesn't work in banking it doesn't work here." This is self regulation this is functioning in accordance with the law. It's substantially different. And Irealsie that you're going to come back with something along the lines of "The law's not working. People ignore it. Kill me now etc etc" (Ok maybe not the last bit.) But I'll ask you this question "Almost all human societies are based on laws of various descriptions and complexity. What do you propose to replace the rule of law?" Take a look at Somalia before providing a response. I'm not arguing that RIPA or indeed any law is perfect by any means. What I'm asking you is if the whole system of checks, balances, oversight and law that already exists isn't enough for you, what do you propose to replace it?
"To me it's simple, you create a system that is capable of being abused, that attracts the sort of people who would abuse such a system and eventually it becomes badly abused. This is the nature of all things." & "I don't do religion. I want checks and balances and a proper system of rights, not a faith based system."
All systems are capable of being abused. It is the extent to which that abuse is tolerated that is the issue.
Please don't mistake the fact that I have faith in people generally as a belief in the Flying Sphagetti Monster.
And you do realise that nihilism can be a religion too right? Your apparently concrete belief that everyone (minus yourself I'm assuming) is out to corrupt the system certainly amounts to a faith in the negative.
'So it's not impractical, it's US law. Your attempt to belittle it, suggests a weak argument.'
It appears we have a slight mix up here. When I refer to use of RIPA I'm talking about surveillance and obtaining communications information I'm not referring to searches. That's not an area I'm familiar with.
If you're also referring to surveillance then my point still stands. If you weren't, then ignore this paragraph. How do you expect to catch someone in the act of committing a crime if you've told them you're observing them? You can see why I was a bit flippant in my response.
'No, he has no idea if it's being abused, he just asks the person if they used it properly, they say 'yes' and he says, well that's OK then. If the person being spied on, is for example, the girlfriend of the officer, he has no idea. The girlfriend would know, but she never gets to find out.'
Yes, because that's exactly how the Assistant Surveillance Commssioner carries out his inspections. With regards to misuse of powers it is never in my experience the person that authorises the application is never the same person that carries out the surveillance. Indeed in the authority I work at the authorising officer has to be from a completely different department in order to avoid any conflict of interest. It is then the responsibiltiy of the authorising officer to check whether the application is satisfactory.
Of course it is possible the the applicant puts forward their application for their own nefarious ends and this would hopefully be picked up in the multilayered systems of oversight that any authority has. I can say with some certainty (but no personal knowledge obviously) that there are some police officers that misuse their powers too but should we disband the police force on that basis?
'...they're all just people, all flawed.'
Oh, how sad. But don't worry you'll die soon enough and won't have to suffer other people's flaws any more. Try and have a little more faith in people. There are professionals battling every day to do a good job. I even know a few. And it's not the end of the world now really is it?
Your comments, and some others here, and indeed anywhere, on this subject, show a lack of basic knowledge regarding RIPA.
'What is special about a director?'
Someone of director level is expected to hold significant and substantial responsiblity for the actions of an authority that are authorised or instigated by them and hence raise the level of responsibility assumed by the authority as a whole. This may not be the case with lower level officers. A local authority will no longer be able to use the excuse that it was a low level officer that authorised it and not consistent with usual practice.
'The problem is the lack of independent controls on these RIPA requests...' and 'The basic checks need to be put back in place...'
You've obviously never seen a RIPA application. Every appilcation has to demonstrate that several factors have been considerd before an application can be authorised. These include proprtionality, necessity, lack of alternative means of obtainign the information, possible collateral intrusion, among others. To say that there are no basic checks disregards the fact that, if they're doing it right, they have several hoops to jump through before any applciation is approved.
'IMHO every RIPA request to any body for any reason should be notified to the target of the RIPA request.'
That's just impractical, unworkable and downright silly.
'If they're doing nothing wrong, then they have nothing to hide...'
I've heard that line before.
'...and nothing to fear by an independent check on their RIPA requests.'
All authorities that are entitled to use RIPA powers are inspected regularly by the Office of the Surveillance Commissioner. At the authority I'm based at we have in the past been inspected by Lord Colville. I think it's fair to say that classes as an 'independent check' don't you?
On a general note RIPA IS FOR THE INVESTIGATION OF CRIMES. If it's being used incorrectly that is the fault of the Authority and the OIC inspector not of the Act.
As pointed out by El Reg itself, applications to use RIPA by local authorities are a tiny fraction of the overall number of applications that are mainly approved by the police and security services. Maybe the focus of this whole debate is a little off?
If you think a council is misusing RIPA then put in an FOI request for their inspection report. If they're not using it right the report should show that and you can take them to task. If it doesn't then you need to give the OSC a kick up the arse.
On a final point, all this will do is mean that the directors will have to rubberstamp applications that have been prepared by the, hopefully, trained officers that are already completing them. Just what we need another cog in the machine.
"Calling Dr Freeman. Dr Freeman to the red emergency phone please."
Second, don't you just love this stuff. Seriously, portals into other dimensions, you just couldn't make this shit up. Alright, you can, and have, but we're talking real life here people! Real life!
Bring on the end of the world! Mwuahahahaha.
Yeah, I'm done now.
Interesting comments however you yourself have failed to take into consideration the fairness aspect of Sch.1.
The word's not in there for the fun of it you know.
Is it really fair that a child's conviction for a minor offence returns to haunt them all through their adulthood. Really?
If so then what you're advocating isn't a judicial sytem based on rehabilitation but one based on life long punishment. I mean if that's what you're advocating then you go right ahead, everyone has a right to their opinion of course.
As far as this judgement goes though (and I've not read the full thing) it certainly appears to indicate that 'fair' is whatever the data processor deems it to be.
'If I believe it's fair then it's fair.'? I refuse to accept that this was the intention or the spirit of the Act as it opens the door to pretty much any processing of data that a controller can think up as long as it stays within the bounds of the law and we all know how flexible that can be in certain hands.
If they'd used their beaks to dig a little hole, shoved their buddy in it, covered him over, erected some kind of stick monument and had an owl divide up the dead magpie's belongings between the other birds, I'd've been more convinced about the theory.
But then again that's the good thing about theories, you can look at the evidence and make up any shit you like as long as you think it fits.
Bad scientist!
It actually looks a quite incongrous against the lunar surface. A bit like a bad photoshop smudge. Not that I'm saying someone's stuck it on the picture to cover up a massive fail or anything, that's just what it looks like.
To be honest I'm quite happy for them to make shit up as long as it keeps us going into space. I'm, just, young enough to still hope for my ticket when we decide to leave this rock.
'If the government made a real effort to let the populace know that the scheme was coming down the pipe, it's just possible that even more people would decide it was an issue worth flexing their electoral vote on.'
Too true. I'm sure the gov are more thah happy to just let ID cards drip their way into the consciousness of the population in order that they don't wake the sleeping bear that is anyone with a drop of common sense.
Turn around in 10 years time and people will be wondering why you don't have one.
I'm not convinced that any change of government will halt this. After all it's the security services (a misnomer if ever i heard one) and the police that instigated this and who votes them out?
'...i feel unempowered that I'm prevented from blowing stuff,...'
I feel you're a little of topic (as well as off website) there Spider. I've not read every comment but I'm pretty sure nobody's objected to you blowing anything. Blow away brother, blow away!
It's definitely Monday isn't it.
At our school we played 'tig' and that was the closest I came to touching a girl for the first 15 years of my life. Seems 'tig' has gone XXX.
Paris because you don't need a band with her, just a crapload of cash (not that I'm suggesting she's an expensive prostitute or anything).
That I'm just not getting this. I understand the 35 tonnes/sq m perpendicular, i.e. sliding past each other, part. But how easy is this stuff to pull apart? 7 tonnes? Or am reading it wrong?
Someone please help I'm having a Paris moment!
No, not in that way.
Or that way.
Stop it.