Posts by Matt Bryant

Romanian NASA hacker fights 'inflated' damage assessment

RE: RE: RE: @Matt Bryant

".....Surely that should be minimal with an effective backup regime?" You're just highlighting another area of cost. Not only do you have to rebuild your server from scratch - just to be sure, we're talking ANYTHING that could be recoded, so that's reloading the BIOS, checking the components like cards with writeable firmware - and then re-intsalling from a gold image as you may not actually know if your backup has been infected or altered. If the last backup was taken after the hack had started you are going to have to assume it is unreliable. Go ahead, keep pointing out ways the NASA charges are justifiable.

RE: @Matt Bryant

But the additional costs are for the security review the hack caused. And that was a direct result of SirVic's actions, so therefore I think it is justifiable. Anyway, this is NASA, notorious for their $20,000 hammers, don't you think they can be creative with the accounting to make it look like the cost of the added security was actually the cost of reviewing the hack?

I suspect the real issue is the comedy sentence passed down by the Romanian court, so the Yanks want to hammer him a bit more.

RE: The US protesteth too much

Cost of a DSL modem - $30.

Cost of time spent online hacking NASA servers - $3

Cost of thinking "I iz a 1137 haxor wiv skillz" - $240,000

Satisfaction at watching said gromless moron wriggle and squeal when he gets hit with a hefty fine and a criminal record - priceless!

RE: Clean up costs...

One of my colleagues has a vintage Porsche Speedster (yeah, I know, a girl with a car like that, and she's a weekend eco-warrior type too!) which was keyed last summer. The vandal scartched his tag into her paintwork. Are you saying that the gormless cretin, that vandalised her car out of petty spite and jealousy, should be let off because her classic car didn't have a modern proximity alarm? There is zero difference between acts of physical vandalism and those in cyberspace - they both have monetary impact and cause distress to their victims, and they are both the acts of small-minded idiots without any real excuse for their actions.

RE: I do believe...

The extent of criminal damage is not based on the security of the damaged property, but on the damage done. If a burglar breaks into your home, the judge trying him doesn't say "Well, they only had cheap locks on the windows so I'll let you off with a lighter sentence." The act of breaking in is still breaking in regardless. SirVic's lame excuse of "I just wanted to tell them they had security issues" is just complete male bovine manure, he wanted to brag about what a 1337 haxor he was and so defaced their sites. If all he wanted to do was warn them of problems he could have done so in an anonymous snail-mail letter.

I really hope the damages actually get ramped up to send out a message to the skiddies - you may think you're oh-so-clever, but you will get caught and you will be made to pay for your crimes.

Rebekah Brooks quits - Murdoch accepts this time

RE: The hypocrisy is astounding

Until she's sentenced to some serious porridge it's not enough.

IBM crams Lotus Symphony back into OpenOffice

So it's official then....

..... IBM want to kill OpenOffice! Why else would you lumber OO with cack like Symphony?

US court test for rights not to hand over crypto keys

RE: You would fail reading comprehension at a primary school

"....The key word is alleges...." Yes, until the trial finishes in a judgement, it is only an alledged crime. But, the evidence available to the public is already pretty strong (she's been identifed by the mortgage vendors as one of the three parties that made the fraudulent loan requests). I'm guessing the prosecution just need the contents of her laptop files to really tie a bow on their case. I'm not saying she shouldn't be allowed to defend her case, just that I don't think the EFF is right to be helping her out.

"....would you prefer they didn't file the motion and allow precedent to be set?...." You also fail to see that if the case fails because the judge simply doesn't like her, then it sets a precedent for use against people you might consider more worthy of the EFF's support.

"....And when you are accused of something that I find distasteful, I can sit and pontificate on how the EFF shouldn't defend the likes of you...." Whilst I'm sure your circle of tinfoil-attired friends encrypt all the mindnumbingly boring informtaion on their laptops, I don't have anything encrypted on mine because I'm a bit more realistic, so no need for the EFF's support.

The act of decryption is not self-incrimination.

The self-incriminating material is the data, not the act of encrypting or decrypting it. The analogy of the safe used above is a good example. Say Mr X is accused of shooting dead Mrs X, and the police suspect he has stashed the murder weapon in his safe, which he now refuses to open. If the police asked in court, "Is the gun you used to kill Mrs X in your safe?", then Mr X could plead the Fifth as answering would be incriminating. However, the incriminating evidence is the gun, not the safe door, so it is irrellevant whether it is locked or not, the act of opening the safe door in itself would not incriminate Mr X, it is the fact that the gun would be found after the door was opened that would do so. Similarly, the act of encrypting or decrypting the data on Ms Fricosu's laptop is not in itself a crime, it would have to be read afterwards to actually become incriminating. I suspect the material on the laptop either shows where she stashed the cash, or that others were accomplices to the act, or that she committed other as yet undetected frauds.

RE: Boo hoo...

It's truly a marvel of devolution that you can type with so many chips on your shoulder!

"Poor little frightened person... " Que? What exactly am I supposed to be frightened of? I'm more concerned that a body I normally support (the EFF) is dressing up as some sort of ACLU in techno drag.

"....or go read the Daily Mail..." Oh dear, you sad little wannabes really need to update your insults to something more 21st century. Or was that because someone hasn't spoonfed you any modern variations yet?

"....The law is (allegedly, although in practice...) to protect everyone from government arbitrariness...." Wrong! The law is there to outline what is criminal behaviour and the punishments that can be applied to those found guilty of said behaviour. The Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution covers a range of issues but also allows a defendent to not answer a question in court whilst under oath if the answer could incriminate them. It is not meant to protect against "government arbitrariness", it was actually intended to protect against extraction of a confession by torture. In application, in the US courts system, it was originally used so that the accused could not be found in contempt if they refused the judge's demand to answer a question. It has subsequently been used by less savoury types to obstruct investigations of a crime. The key is that the accused must be under oath in court to "plead the fifth", which Ms Ficuso plainly is not if it is still at the investigation stage.

Not even going to bother with the racial undertones in your final statement, just too silly for words. Please just grow up.

RE: They cannot compel you

".....If they cannot find them, then they cannot be used against you." Ah, but a good prosecutor would show that you tried to hide the files, which can be used to imply guilt in the minds of the jury.

RE: Have they tried "passw0rd"?

"Or they could just label him an "enemy combatant"....." It's a she, not a he, which just goes to show the complete lack of any background reading that went into your post, either on Ramona Fricosu or on the topic of enemy combatants. Don't worry, I'm sure there were a few equally unknowledgeable people that read your post and were stupid enough to actually think it was lulz good.

RE: Irelevant (sic)

I suggest you go read up on Pardongate if you seriously think only Republican's get away with anything (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton_pardons_controversy).

In the meantime, I would suggest the EFF sticks to software patents law.

Shielding a criminal, not a "hero".

A few more details on the actual accussations:

"....The third indictment alleges that several financial institutions and homeowners were defrauded in a scheme to buy properties under imminent foreclosure, pocket loan proceeds and then sell the homes without paying the outstanding mortgages....."

So, she's not some beacon of righteousness fighting The Man, she's accused of pretty base fraud. This is the best case the EFF could find to get all whipped up and frothy about? Besides, she is just being asked to decrypt the laptop or provide the key, not to actual read the file contents out loud - neither is an accusation of guilt nor provides the prosecution with a hammer to beat her with, they just make her data available so the prosecution can look through it for a possible hammer, so how is it self-incrimination? It's no different to the police asking her for the key to the office she ran her (crooked) business from. Some of the bleeding hearts at the EFF need to stop and think carefully about the assistance they are giving to those that only want to break the law.

MAJOR HACK: Voda femtocells open phones up to intercept

RE: Ah well

".....but I do wonder why in a more densly populated area one would need a femtocell in the first place." Radio reception can be affected by buildings. A colleague bought a 3G dongle for his laptop, only to find he could ony get a 3G signal in his upstairs toilet! Even town centres can have radio blackspots, often inside building structures. For many malls and superstores, being labelled a mobile blackspot is a no-no, so they pay out for femto-cells. Some out-of-town areas are also blackspots, such as remote theme parks, so they pay for femto-cells to give their customers mobile access whilst onsite.

RE: HAHAHAHAHAAHA!!!....

Well, firstly you'd have to make your own femto-cell, or steal one and modify it. The you'd also have to carry it around with you wherever you went, or cough up for hundreds of dodgy femto-cells just to cover a small town (and that's it you do femto-to-femto-cell transmissions, otherwise you have to invest in a complete network of mobile masts - just slightly obvious). Anyone buying enough kit to make even a small network would be flagged up on a simple check of equipemnt suppliers' databases. Secondly, a femto-cell has to connect back to the operator (in this case, VF) by a DSL or cable link in order to complete the call or rip off another user's account, so the appearance of a new and unexplained femto-cell connecting to the VF system would probably set the alarmbells ringing. The hundred required for your small network would be downright obvious.

Sucks to be a twit, doesn't it?

Videotree VideoSpa bathroom TV

RE: Not a luxury any more

I was thinking to myself that a mate has a waterproof TV in his boat, it doubles up as a large GPS display, and I was pretty sure he said it cost a lot less than £1200.

Anonymous spaffs Monsanto employees' details

Monsanto and the (whacky) protesters.

Monsanto has been a target for the "oooh-a-bandwagon" crowd for years, probably starting with the hysteria around saccharin. They got special attention from the left when Monsanto came up with the Agent Orange defoliant used in 'Nam, despite Monsanto having no say in how the product was used by the US military. They've also been criticised for patenting their biotech work on products like seeds. For those Anons now desperate to look like they actually know something about Monsanto's "evil deeds", check out probably the most concise (if not the most frothing) online dump at http://www.laleva.cc/pharma/monsantofiles.html.

IBM chases Itanium shops with 'Breakfree' deals

RE: Why don't you have info on IBM's plans?

You are asking the wrong question. Intel are standing up and publicly saying "We will make this." What you should be asking is why is Intel ready to make its plans public but IBM are not? The answer is because IBM doesn't want to be held to those plans when they slip or get changed or even cancelled. Go look at the slideset the IBM salesgrunt showed you, check for a footer phrase similar to "Subject to change" or the like. IBM will indemnify themselves at any of these roadmap sessions by telling you, as part of the NDA, that IBM will not be liable for any losses should you make business plans contingent on the roadmap actually coming to reality. In short, any current secret IBM roadmap session has no certainty to it whatsoever. Do you really think Big Blue fanbois like TPM haven't already seen the IBM NDA Power roadmap? Of course they have, they just know it's as vague as the Sunshine one for Oracle's CMT line.

IBM heaves new System z minis at mainframe shops

RE: @Paul Crawford

I think Kebbie is hoping IBM do a PSI on him and buy him out!

HP may replace 3PAR hardware

RE: BUT ...

OK, I come from an engineering background, so I too like the idea of tailor-made tech. But I work for a business that says "Fudge the tech, if cheap'n'cheerful does the job for less than buy that". Businesses have business requirements, not requirements for fancy tech. If the "brute-force" generic CPU solution allows a product to be developed faster, at less cost to the end user, do you really think CIOs care how many levels of software need to be on top? If it works and does the job, all they will look at is the bottomline cost. Just look back a few years and see how surprised EMC were when NatApp filers started replacing EMC arrays in a lot of businesses, because a cheap'n'cheerful NAS actually started to offer many Windows users more for less than a traditional SAN array. I get that you think the 3PAR is great tech, I'm not arguing that point, but great tech is often not a winning selling point (think classic argument of VHS vs Betamax). Instead of telling me how great the thin-provisioning tech is, try telling me what business advantage it gives me (which will be hard as I think thin-provisioning is largely a waste of time, TBH, and far down the list of features I want in a storage device).

RE: ASIC benefits far outweigh any of this nonsense!

Whilst I generally agree that an ASIC can be more tailor-made to a task than a generic CPU design, there is a point int he "brute-force" brings quicker solutions argument. I'm guessing it is also cheaper to manufacture. I'd also question the reliability claim - all hardware can fail, just make it double- or triple-redundant, please.

Oh poo!

I predict another hp death-by-PowerPoint session soon then. I'm pretty sure the current 3PAR kit are taking low-end XP array deals so how they expect to stop the next gen doing so will be an amusing question to ask.

ANONYMOUS: Behind the mask, inside the Hivemind

RE@ @MB

PS:

".....and we'll continue downvoting you and pointing out your hypocracy...." I'm not sure why on Earth you think I'm at all bothered by your reflexive downvoting, I wasn't really expecting you to actually read, consider and then possibly formulate a cohernet counter. Being downvoted by the clueless is just an amusing measure of how much the truth upsets them. "Ooh, grr, that Matt Bryant makes me soooo angry, he just won't be herded like the rest of the sheeple, but I can't think of a clever response, so I'll just downvote him!" Yeah, that really taught me - not! And since when did you "point out" anything? Your posts are nothing but noise, no substance whatsoever!

RE: Debate Fail

Number of actual arguments or facts relating to the thread topic in any of Solomon Grundy's posts? Big fat zero. So, who was it you were saying was such a massive fail at debating?

RE: Judging from the comments and the thumbs

"...... I think we have a majority ....." I think the reality is you could get all the Anons to emigrate to the island nation of Nauru and still not have a majority. Mind you, you would probably be quite popular seeing as Nauru's main export is phosphates from guano, and you Anons do seem to talk a massive quantity of male bovine manure.

RE: Anon

"....I have found a bunch of brilliant people that I hope to know for the rest of my life...." I hear lots of ex-gang members saying that they used to love being in a streetgang because of the thrills and the sense of belonging, and becuase other gang members looked out for them. Then they got caught, banged up and finally came to realise how stupid they were and how much misery they inflicted on others. You may think your mates are simply lovely now, but I hope the time will come when you grow up and realise they were just criminals all the same.

".......sometimes the world needs a few things to be broken by people doing stuff for shits and giggles....." If it's your own stuff then go ahead. I do target shooting, on private ranges, which is a destructive process for my own entertainment. I also like trackdays, which do nothing more than use up petrol and tires, again not really constructive and again for my entertainment. But I do both of those on land set aside specially for those activities, inside the law, and in a manner which does not inflict misery on others. I don't go to someone else's land, shoot their property or drive over it regardless. What Anon are doing is breaking other peoples' stuff, and they not only didn't give you permission to break it but also didn't even know you were trying to break it, so they are criminals and vandals, fullstop.

RE: Suck Scale

"......arguing (debating) on an Internet site is absolutely meaningless...." Oh, sorry, I forgot that you and your tiny little herd of the hip'n'trendy don't debate anything, you just swallow whatever is spoonfed to you! You haven't a clue how to debate anything because it's just not tolerated amongst the sheeple. Why should I let you twits post complete twaddle unchallenged? You and many others posting here profess undying faith in the righteousness of Anon, yet you can't even provide the flimsiest of justifications for their actions. Just smacks of blind faith to me.

".....your babble is wasting space on my giant monitors." Well, if Mummy was good enough to buy her ickle Grundy big monintors it was probably to keep him safely indoors, away from all those other nasty kids. How about you leave the monitors, get outside and see the real World? A bit of real life experience will soon let you see the stupidity of the Anons.

RE: @MB

So, Bernie, what you're saying is you don't actually have anything to say because you don't actually have any argumnets to support your blinkered faith in the zealous activities of the Anonyputzs? I think I'll just re-employ the reference to the vacuous nature of dogged's responses":

"Unfortunately, Bernie is merely offering the standard response of the Anon supporter - he can't argue ('cos he hasn't got a clue about the real issues or how to debate them), so he won't argue, just post vacuous non-arguments he thinks are funny'n'cool, just for the lulz. He goes away thinking he is clever, the rest of the World + dog just think he's a tragic waste of bandwidth."

I think you'll find the majority of the comments you have collected above are in reasoning as to why I think the Anonyputzs are just childish e-vandals. Care to post anything vaguely argumentative as to why you think not?

RE: image time

Hey, dogged, is this you?

http://twstheunagency.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/child_with_computer.jpg

BTW, really admire your ability to clearly articulate your views, you add so little to the discussion.

RE: I'm everyone!

".....But if you have then in each case you made no valid or sound argument for him to counter....." Unfortunately, dogged is merely offering the standard response of the Anon supporter - he can't argue ('cos he hasn't got a clue about the real issues or how to debate them), so he won't argue, just post pics he thinks are funny'n'cool, just for the lulz. He goes away thinking he is clever, the rest of the World + dog just think he's a tragic waste of bandwidth.

RE: MB

Thank you for your erasoned and eloquent participation in the discussion, you really helped me understand exactly what it is that drives the Anon mind with your precise disection of both the variety of their socio-political views and the non-centralised structure of their group.

Oh, hold on a sec - you didn't add anything, just resorted to childish insults! And you know what they say about those that fall back on insults knowing they've lost the argument....

Would you like to try a second go at posting something of value? Go on, it will be hard, but think of it as all part of growing up.

RE: Dear Everyone in this thread; re: Matt Bryant

"....Our dear friend the troll has used each and every one of them in this thread." Whereas your reply shows you are unable to counter a single argument, or even offer arguments of your own. Please try again, only the next time at least try.

RE: @Matt Bryant

"....Do you really think that people whose political ideas coincide with (which may or may not be equal to "are formed by") a news conglomerate, are going to spend time investigating and exposing its distortions and omissions?...." I would hope that keeping a competitive press would encourage them to keep each other honest. After all, headlines like "NoTW Hacked Milly's Phone!" are probably helping to shift a few non-Murdoch papers this week. I would hope it is in the papers' own interests to be keeping tabs on each other. As a positive example, try reading Private Eye some time.

Similarly, I hope that this is even more so on the Internet as it is far cheaper to set up and run a news'n'views website than a national newspaper (no printing presses, no need for massive offices, etc), so we should get a wide variation in views. That is good. I would find a narrow variation would be bad even if I found it politically agreeable, as you cannot form your own opinions if all you hear is just one side of an argument. Discussion and debate is good. One of the things I did find very amusing in the run up to the Obama election was the amount of space many major websites dedicated to debunking the websites representing the opposite end of the political spectrum. Some of it was wildly funny, some of it was just tragic, but a lot of it was actually much more informative than what was coming out of either the McCain or Obama camps.

RE: @Matt Bryant

".....You think NewsCorp, Thatcher and the NeoCons are the best representatives...." Now who's making assumptions. I wouldn't touch any of Mr Murdoch's "news" sources with a bargepole.

"......an intellectual fallacy to challenge them....." So how exactly have you challenged them, intelectually or otherwise? By hiding in your Mum's basement and defacing webistes? Ooh, so such skillz, such intellectual artistry - not!

LMAO!

"......Some are working inside big, important buildings and places where they are paid very well indeed for providing advice...." Asking "Would you like fries with that?" is not exactly important work.

RE: Re: Seen this?

".....If you were Anon and you were being revealed in posts like this, wouldn't you just start publishing random people's data on sites...." LOLZ! If you were Anon and your attempts to hide had been thwarted, wouldn't you be posting that idea?

RE: Great write up

"......I like the folks who compare Anonymous to the weather...." Is that because you think they are just such big egos that they think they have supernatural powers over nature itself? I prefer to compare them to the yobs that kick in the glass sides of bus stops - both think they're clever beacuse they're equally childish mates tell them they are; both do little more than make an inconvenient mess and waste other peoples' money; both talk big but then run and hide; and both only do it because they can't "protest" effectively in the normal manner as they have such a tiny level of support.

RE: @Matt Bryant

"......But, why would they attack the Socialist Worker? Anon is in it for the lulz, but not against other anons....." Speaks volumes both for your guillibility and your own partisanship. So, only big capitalist corporations can oppress the masses, eh? You really need to go back to school and start history from scratch.

RE: The co-conspirators of Guy Fawkes?

"Anonymous protesters don't wear the Guy Fawkes mask because.... character V in "V For Vendetta" wore it..." And because they desperately want to be fantasy freedom fighter heroes rather than just the dull, boring bunch of wannabes they are.

RE: Well, yes, actually

"....You appear to have missed the last 25 years (at least) of UK economic thinking....." You seem to have missed the last fifty-plus years of non-change in employee thinking. I interview people as part of my job, and I in turn have been interviewed. I have preconceptions of my "worth" which mean I would look for certain jobs with a certain level of renumeration. People I interview have similar thoughts, some wildly off-target. The idea of full employment was junked by all mainstream parties because it was becoming unrealistsic due to the mindset of the employees and their idea of self-worth - some just consider it a better idea to stay on benefits rather than do what they see as menial or mundane jobs. No-one goes to school thinking how they want to grow up to be a burgerflipper at Mcdonalds or an office cleaner, but some of us are destined to end up there due to the limits of our ability to employ our potentials in the economic environment they find themselves in. To deny that un-PC idea is to deny the simple diversity of the human race - some people can run faster than others, some people are much better at crosswords, and some people will simply be better at getting ahead. The idea of democratic equality does not magically erase that variation in ability. Hilariously, the lefties that rail against that idea seem to forget the only economy which ever came close to real full employment was Communist Russia, and that was because it assigned you a job - if you were graded as burgerflipper material that was your given job, regardless of your expectations or ideas of self-worth.

When I was a student I did some pretty cr*p jobs to pay my way because I had to. But then I was brought up with the idea that I should work to pay my way. The problem is people are now all brought up with an expectation that we "deserve" something better than burgerflipping even if we are actually limited in what we can offer. Hence there will always be a number of people unwilling to work, whose place will be taken by those willing to accept the mundane or menial jobs (yes, students, part-time working Mums, or foreigners) as a stepping stone to better things.

So, economic thinking adapted to include the idea that some segment of the population will always be unemployed. The new thinking didn't create the unemployemnt, it adapted to encompass it. It is not an aim to create or maintain a certain level of unemployment, it is simply accepting a fact of life. You could argue it is an unfortunate by-product of the Benefit State introduced by the economic policies of socilaist Clement Attlee (which did assume full employment), but that would be to ignore the impact of the World's economy over the last half-century. Don't get me wrong, I'm not calling for an end to the benefits idea, what I support is the idea that those that are capable of working but refuse to accept menial or mundane jobs should also lose their unemployment benefits. I would much prefer it if there actually was full employment as it probably would reduce street crime and vandalism, generally make for a happier populance, and put an end to the careers of self-serving political vultures like George Galloway.

RE: @Anon 12:31

"....People like Peter Tatchell...." Whilst I happen to think Mr Tatchell is bit of a berk, I do respect and support his willingness to say what he thinks and how he stands up for what he believes in, despite the threats of violence. Deomocracy and free speech is all about people accepting and supporting that others have different views. I suspect we'd share a few views but could probably have a great time debating the differences. The childish hacktivism of Anon simply doesn't bear comparison.

"....This lot need to grow up, get a life and put their energies into making a real difference to real people." Spot on!

RE: Sir

I suspect he is stretching the "birds of a feather" analogy to include an element of sheepleness.

RE: What if?

Mrs Bryant saw the pic and said; "Pfft! I bet she's a minger, otherwise why would she be wearing a mask?"

Thinking about it, and knowing the negative correllation between good-looking girls and those that know anything about IT, I'd have to agree with her.

RE: You didnt ask for my opinion, but here it is anyway!

"I believe that debunking Fox News, or any other major news outlet is a really valuable thing...." I actually agree whole-heartedly with that sentiment. I think all news outlets, from government-controlled ones like the BBC to corporations like Fox, should be held up to scrutiny. What I object to is the selective scrutiny of those intent not in finding the "truth", but who simply claim they are looking for the "truth" when their focus is only on players with views which conflict with their own political/religeous beliefs. The fascination with Fox just shows the bias of the Anons involved, it's been a lighteningrod for their attention ever since Obama identified it as being "anti" to his administration. I'm betting there was no Anon interested in funding someone to spend six months debunking articles in The Guardian (at least not until The Guardian had the falling out with WIkileaks and A$$nut). Any Anons looking to hack the users database of Socialist Worker? Honest, this is my surprised face - not!

RE: History??

"Those who have actually been awake have noticed a major shift of power away from people to the corporations...." Oh please, do back that up with some detail, even a tiny smidgen of fact to go with the blathering paranoia.

"....We are still allowed to vote, but not to have it make much difference when we do....." What you mean is you cannot find a political party that represents your point of view, becuase your POV is so rediculously unpopular it simply doesn't gain traction amongst the electorate. The Communist Party of Great Britain is still trundling blindly along, isn't it called Charter 88 nowadays? Go ask them about the failure to gain popular support as they've been failling since the early 1920s. If your POV did resonate with the electorate then you would already be celebrating success at the polls.

"....The boot has very firmly been on the other foot since the 1980s...." Try 1649. Read up on some people called the Diggers. The corporations of their day were the landlords and landed gentry farmers. The Diggers were probably the first real "communists" in the UK. Your lack of a view prior to the '80s (don't tell me, it's all Maggie Thatcher's fault, right?) is just the short-term revisionism of the Labout Party. Please go read up on the Winter of Discontent that was caused by a Labour government and allowed the Torys to get the popular support to get Maggie into No.10. In fact, please just go get some real knowledge rather than just repeating soundbites spoonfed to you.

".....anybody with a mortgage to pay...." Yup, got one of them, had a few over the years, and I think you're talking out of your rectum. At least you are a resounding success as an example of monumetal fail predicated by a blinkered outlook and a lack of knowledge.

WikiLeaks sues Visa, Mastercard over 'financial blockade'

RE: Free companies, hooray

"I find it disturbing that so many people will speak up for poor little Mastercard and Visa and their "right" to do whatever they want....." Nope, just trying to bring a bit of reasoning to the paranoiafest.

"....These are the same companies that will let you pay for hookers, booze, automatic weapons, whatever, with your credit card...." Yes, they will let you do so when it is legal to do so. Transferring cash to Wikileaks which could be used for the distribution of US secrets could have put both companies in court under the terms of the Espionage Act. Either way, the Ts & Cs for both companies allow them to chop any account whenever.

".....They are using their immense market power to assist the US in a lawless crusade to crush a political movement...." You missed the bit off the end where you meant to say "which I support without question or without in fact having done the tiniest bit of research into the issues, wha-wha-wha". I'm betting you wouldn't be squealling so hard if the same measures were being used to restrict cashflow to an organistaion which didn't have your political leanings. How about if I was to start an organisation to bring a civil action against A$$nut and Wikileaks, would you be objecting if Visa and MC cut off my account? Would you stand up for my rights? Yeah, right, I bet you would.

"....I don't know about your home countries, but here in Australia paying by Visa or Mastercard is often the only option presented...." So use cash only, should be the MO for a tinfoil-hat-wearer anyway.

"....All legal niceties aside, this conduct is disgraceful and should be condemned." HAHAHAHAHAHAA!

HP TouchSmart 610 touchscreen all-in-one PC

RE: I remembered that Apple patent too while I was reading this article.

"......and put the computer itself in the base...." The problem with that is the base then becomes too big and bulky and takes up nearly as much space as a regular slim desktop. Personally, I'd just buy an ultra-slim desktop and one of those monitor stands that lets you mount the base unit behind the screen - a lot cheaper! I really like the hp Touchsmart tech, it's really cool, but I don't really see the need for a touchscreen I'm going to have to clean every time I want to watch a movie.

Cambridge IT guy 'was the Spanish Guy Fawkes', say cops

RE: For flip's sake!

Maybe he thought he was untraceable, that he was truly ANONYMOUS online....

Oracle wants seal busted on HP's Itanium suit

The redacted bits.... and the plan?

Maybe the blacked out bits refering to the Hurd settlement included that hp had to foot the bill for any cutlery, towels and bathrobes "borrowed" from hotels by Hurd during his time at hp.....

In the meantime, Larry has made a simple statement - he said hp and Intel had a "secret plan" to kill Itanium in favour of Xeon that it was hiding from customers. Surely now he has to bring said plan to court with him and prove that it was kept from hp's customers. Anything less leaves him open to accusations of having pants on fire.

/More popcorn over here, please!