Posts by Matt Bryant

Which country has 2nd largest social welfare system in the world?

Re: ecofeco More money !=more in return

".....$3.28 per US gallon....." LOL, just filled up today outside Atlanta - $2.64/gallon!!!!

Re: Zog Re: ecofeco More money !=more in return

".... the food, the awful food." Sorry, but that kind of nationalistic chauvinism is long since past its sell-by-date, especially when you consider that not all of us are food snobs. In the US I have often eat very high-quality meals prepared with organic food at a fraction of the cost of doing so in the UK or Europe. Sorry, but the so-called superiority of Continental cuisine is just another myth.

Re: Naughtyhorse Re: Ah but, who do they spend it on?

".....due to the vastly worse cost per outcome encountered in the US un-health business when compared to proper health care systems....." Ignoring the US (and I have ex-pat friends in the US which sing long and loud about how much better the health care they actually receive is in the States compared to the old NHS in the UK), my own direct experiences are from my wife seeking treatment for a back issue. It was misdiagnosed twice by the NHS, correctly diagnosed by BUPA, then mistreated by the NHS (after a six month wait for treatment), at which point she went back to BUPA and got what she needed at her convenience. TBH, we have received great service in other cases from the NHS, but to blindly insist it provides better care than private is simply denial.

Re: ecofeco Re: More money !=more in return

"Like everything else in the U.S. (and yes I do mean everything) you spend the most money to get the least in return....." So why is it that, whenever I'm in the US, I keep having the fun of sending copies of my petrol receipts back to my colleagues in the UK? $3.28 per US gallon, about 87c per litre, whereas last month it was £1.28 for a litre in the UK under the 'progressive' UK tax regime - LMAO! It's also a lot, lot cheaper to eat out in most US cities compared to London, Paris or Berlin, usually cheaper for a hotel and car rental, and have you seen the prices of houses? Most people I know in the UK say their biggest drain on their family's purse is their mortgage.

Re: Def Re: yay, statistics

"....Norway...." <Cough>cherrypicked<cough>

The internet is less free than last year. Thanks a bunch, Snowden

Re: pepetideo pepetideo clickbait at it's worse

"....arresting an individual under the terror laws....." The authorities (at least in the West) do not arrest without good reason/evidence. As to the authorities in whatever Third World country you got your education in I can't say.

".....and threatening him with a long jail sentence if he did not give them access to his computer files...." In the West, when arrested, even terrorists with no regard for the law get legal representation that will tell them exactly what they can and can't be threatened with. Idiots that commit crimes and then get surprised by how bad they could be sentenced usually learn so first from their defence lawyer trying to talk some sense into them, not from the coppers.

"....is completely lawful?...." Under a Section 49 request, made under the RIPA, obviously it is legal as the request has to be authorised. They are not just handed out by the coppers. Similarly with the use of the All Writs Act in the States, a judge has to issue the request, and will do so only in cases the prosecution can show reasonable cause, so again completely legal.

"....Also the forcing of the destruction of private property under the threat of a gagging order of one of the main newspapers in the land is completely lawful to you?..." What mythical happening are you going on about now? A D-notice just warns against publication, it does not destroy anything (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DA-Notice). If you are referring to the destroying of hard-drives at The Guardian that was because they contained specific secret material which it was against the law to have in their possession.

"....Let me guess... " By my estimation, all your posts are based on guesswork!

".....you see nothing wrong with the NSA tapping into underwater fibre-optical cables....." Not if it was in the US and the process was overseen by the FISC under a warrant, as it would then be completely legal. Same goes for TEMPORA in the UK (completely legal under the RIPA) and when done abroad with the permission of the host government (such as at Seeb in Oman).

".....and collecting bulk data from everyone without any sort of due process...." Which is not happening. Firstly, it is all done under due process, under warrants authorised by the FISC in the case of the NSA and under the RIPA in the case of GCHQ. Secondly, they are not bulk collecting anything, they are tracking metadata and intercepting and examining specific communications. You seem to need to go back and read the actual Snowden 'revelations' and not just the headlines.

".....All perfectly legal correct?...." Yes, it is, despite your whining about it not being.

"...Give me a break!" Try reading for a start.

Re: Hargrove Re: Wot?

"....A local cop has the questionable judgment to get macho...." No, Darren Wilson was enforcing the law. It applies to all, regardless as to their colour or bulk. The matter would have ended there if Brown had had the sense (and not been stoned) to just get out of the road when told to do so. Brown was the aggressor and criminal, his death was his own fault and the fact that Darren Wilson has had to give up his job just goes to show (IMHO) the lawless mentality of certain members of the Ferguson community.

"....it is not apparent to me that the situation warranted an attempt at a physical takedown...." When someone is resisting arrest you do not make it easier by letting them stand on their feet where they can swing away at you, you aim to get them down on the ground where they are easier to control. The police do so because it reduces the chances of injuries to both the cops, the suspect, and any byestanders. Even more so than Brown, Garner was at fault because he had previous experience of resisting arrest and criminal assault, he had to have known that refusing to let himself be handcuffed could only end one way, with the cops forcing him down and putting cuffs on him. The 'chokehold' was nothing of the sort, Garner's death was more to do with his poor health and being overweight. If Eric Garner had said he was thinking of running the New York marathon in his condition you would think him an idiot, but he gets promoted to sainthood when he puts his life at risk resisting arrest?

As for Miriam Carey, you forgot to mention the bit where she tried to use her car to ram her way into the Whitehouse grounds (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Capitol_shooting_incident_(2013)), despite commands to stop, ran over a security guard and knocked down another, and ignored all requests to surrender. My first suggestion would be to consider her mental state or the likely hood she was on drugs.

Indeed, your whole post missed the most pertinent case of a black person being shot for no reason by an US police officer, Akai Gurley (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/22/akai-gurley-nypd_n_6205492.html). Gurley was unarmed, walking in a stairwell in his building at a time when there was no open police call for any criminal event in his building. Two officers on patrol entered the building and one appears to have paniced and shot Gurley. But then you probably down't know about that case for the same reason it seems Al Sharpton ignored it - the cop in that case was American-Chinese.

Re: pepetideo Re: pepetideo clickbait at it's worse

".....so declining readership is synonymous with declining newspaper quality?...." Their subsequent financial desperation goes a long way to explaining their hyperventilating treatment of the Assange and Snowden stories.

".... I do not believe I know enough to be defending all the actions that the Guardian newspaper has done in the past....." Well, maybe if you had more than five minutes of experience to bring to bear on the matter.

".....illegal bullying and intimidation...." AGAIN, for something to be 'illegal' it has to be shown to be so in a court of law, so unless you have some actual and real cases to discuss, your opinion alone does not make anything illegal.

Re: pepetideo Re: clickbait at it's worse

"....Take a look at the Guardian​ as something to aspire to....." Really? A consistently loss-making newspaper with a declining readership (".....down from 350,000 to 180,000, has recorded a 48% six-year loss...." http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2014/oct/10/abc-figures-show-papers-efforts-to-stem-circulation-decline) and kept alive only by a dwindling trust fund (The Scott Trust Ltd, an attempt to garner investment funds for the failed Scott Trust 'charity' fund which had some fun when some of their investors failed The Guardian's ethics test), and KGB payments (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Gott)? I think the fact El Reg seems to be going from strength to strength financially and in terms of readership would actually make them the envy of The Guardian.

BTW, maybe you forgot that The Guardian not only was a noted supporter of Tony Blair, but their track record includes objecting to the creation of the NHS; supporting the disarming of Iraq's WMDs; and their hilariously ham-fisted attempt to influence the 2004 Presidential election voting in Clark County, Ohio (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian#Clark_County), which was credited with gifting Bush Jr the local vote and turning many undecided US voters his way. Not exactly a ringing endorsement for either effectiveness nor vision!

The Pirate Bay SUNK: It vanishes after Swedish data center raid

Re: theOtherJT Re: Didn't we already solve this problem?

".....You start a client, it fires off a few "hello, anyone else out there?" requests, hits a few other running clients, gets their parts of the index, plus a list of _their_ known clients, hits up _those_ clients, gets a few more chunks of index etc. etc. etc." Well, that did work. Then someone (allegedly) in the pay of the RIAA worked out that if they fired up lots of fake nodes, not only could they poison the database with duff copies of copyrighted files, but they could also corrupt the index and - as a bonus - send tracking messages to pin-point other nodes.

Feds dig up law from 1789 to demand Apple, Google decrypt smartphones, slabs

Re: UnfunnyScrub NumptyScrub

"Oh Matt, I'm not the one posting blatant ad hominem attacks, am I?....." No, you're just the one posting easily debunked gumph and little else. Like your insistence that the authorities made up paedophilia just so they could oppress you.

".....I'm not the one making any claims regarding the existence (or not) of paedophiles...." Er, yes you did! I'm glad to see you're smart enough to have decided to abandon the pretence.

".....I'm well aware of Mr. Elton....." Just not aware of him enough to provide anything other than the constantly rebleated Franklin quote.

".....I do however strongly believe in personal responsibility....I am responsible for my own safety...." LOL, so you run the fully-independent State of NumptyScrub, complete with your own police, armed forces and legal system? Yeah, like bollocks you do! You are a citizen of a state and the state provides those services and expects you to assist them in doing so by at least abiding by the laws and cooperating with your national law enforcement officers.

".....All of the community are responsible for the safety of the community, and pretending otherwise is idiocy......" So how do you propose to find, track and arrest those members of your community that seek to harm your community? What, ask them all nicely "are you a terrorist or supporter of terrorism?" (obviously, you wouldn't want the Muslim members of the community asked as that would be profiling and just not PC, right?).

".....I lived through the various IRAs bombing London from the 70s onwards, and yet I hold the views I do....." Then I suggest you get out and visit a few bits of the World suffering from the current Islamist threat. London under the limited threat of the IRA was nothing compared to what is happening daily in Afghanistan, Pakistan or Iraq, and the IRA had very limited lethal intent compared to even just Al Quaeda.

".....I refused to be cowed by the (p/r)IRA then....." Of course, you missed the bit where the IRA were defeated largely due to intelligence work, including phone taps by the GCHQ. No, you seriously think it was all down to just your brave front, because you 'manned up', that was what kept all London safe? LMAO!

Re: Arnaut the clueless Re: Camberwick Green Camberwick Green With a warrant

".....The clue is in the fact that Bryant and May was a company that made matches....." Once again, Arnie, your logic can only be described as.... Well, 'unique' would be the kindest way of putting it.

Tell you what, you missed something there - not only do Bryant & May make matches, but Theresa May is the Tory that tried to introduce stronger 'privacy invading' laws!

(Working his head round that should keep Arnie busy - and quiet - for the rest of the day.)

Re: UnfunnyScrub Re: NumptyScrub

"......Contains only supposition or strawman arguments....." Actually it only contains mocking of your blinkered outlook. TBH, I'm not really surprised you missed that. I note you don't want to post a counter to any of the articles I linked to, is that because you now are forced to admit that paedophiles were not 'imagined up' by The Man just to oppress you?

".....I said that RIPA s49 was extended to 5 years "because paedos" and the link above corroborates that assertion....." What, you're still trying to ignore that the Act specifically mentions terror? The Act itself (see here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/23/part/III/crossheading/offences if your blinkers allow) specifically links to the Terrorism Act 2006 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/11/contents).

And rebleating Benjie Franklin again? Seriously, you need to get some new material as your whole comedy routine is getting staler than Michael McIntyre's. I suggest you spend less time ovinely absorbing righteous froth sites and read up on a Leftie like Ben Elton, who is original and funny even when speaking absolute tosh (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vaXis4wi78w). Or is Mr Elton too old and no longer considered 'hip' by today's fashionably faux outraged youth? Then again, Elton did ditch his righteous outrage for a bit of commercial capitalism when he started making money of his novels and West End musicals (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Elton#Criticism).

"....Are you really so desperately scared of terrorists and paedophiles?....." Well, not paedos as, unlike you (going by your posts), I am well over the age of consent. But, having seen first-hand the effects of terror, having actually visited many parts of the Middle East over an extended period, and being able to read grown-up news sites, I am concerned at the threat of terror. Don't tell me, I have to now include a list of terror acts as you now want to insist terrorism doesn't exist as well?!?

Re: Camberwick Green Camberwick Green With a warrant

"I'm relatively new to the forum side of The Reg...." It seems very obvious that you are a complete stranger to intelligent debate. You posted your idea, I pointed out the gaping legal hole in it, yet you childishly tried insisting there was none.

".....I was somewhat bemused as to why someone would get so froth-mouthed so quickly....." Really? You must be a complete Internet virgin! Go read some slashdot forums and you'll soon realise how much you have missed.

".....It was immediately apparent you're in fact a serial mouth-frother...." It is becoming very apparent that, just like a similar number of failers before you, you have lost the debate, cannot post any form of argument, and so have resorted to childish whining about your hurt feelings. TBH, grow up, learn more and grow a thicker skin. It will help you if/when you get out into the real World.

"....I wouldn't dream of delving into your psychology....." Going by the farcical logic in your posts, I would suggest you are neither academically nor intellectually qualified to do anything of the type. You also seem to have zero legal knowledge.

"......I won't try to reason with you because you have the reputation of being unreasonable...." LOL, you are so limited you're even ripping off your fellow failers! So much for originality. Maybe you and your fellow failers can get together, share your meagre intellectual and creative capabilities, read up on the relevant laws and then come up with a reasoned argument to back your whimsy. Until the, TBH, cry more.

".....along with your grasp of due process....." So please do try and point out any error in my assessment of how stupid your idea is! But you can't, which is why your post is just an aggrieved whine. Fail!

Re: Camberwick Green Camberwick Green With a warrant

"I don't even know where to begin with this......" Oh, go on, give it a try if only for the unintended comedy value!

".....Equally pertinent: Apples have a skin and are of the genus Malus, whilst Oranges are segmented, have a rind and are the genus Citrus....." And you can try that argument/excuse in court too and it will be disregarded just as quickly.

".....You mean like, for instance, 'beyond reasonable doubt'?....." No, silly boy, I mean 'beyond where the idea takes hold in the minds of the jury that you deliberately sought to destroy evidence' - as any barrister will tell you, there's a big difference.

".....Reasonable doubt introduced by a defendant failing to deactivate a previously installed privacy-protection mechanism due to any number of stress factors involved in their arrest and/or seizure of their smart device?...." No, just doubtful that anyone would believe that excuse given that the prosecutor will take pains to show you set up the mechanism with the explicit intent to destroy evidence.

"......You seem to have a very different definition of legally provable intent than I do....." You seem to have no realisation that the coppers and CPS (and US equivalents) are not stupid, are not new to the game, and will make sure they have a ton of evidence even before they arrest you. When they find your kit they will power it down, neatly derailing your mechanism, clone the disk and then examine the cloned copy, providing both the original evidence and proof of the intent to destroy it when your tool tries to run on the cloned disk. At which point the coppers will give you an extra length of rope to hang yourself by asking you (a) to decrypt (in the UK that is an order to provide a copy of the data in legible text, so deleting the data is a direct breach of that order), and (b) asking you if there is any part of your system that might damage the evidence stored on it (which, thanks to the clone, they already know there is) - your subsequent lying will be used in court to demonstrate that you intentionally tried to destroy evidence and then lied about it. The laws of the land do not bend to your fantasy will anymore than the laws of physics, and the coppers will not be struck dumb just because you want them to be so.

".....You seem to have a very different definition of legally provable intent than I do. You also seem to confuse passive inaction with deliberate action, and the ability to prosecute for inaction." You fail to realise the criminal actions would be the setting up of the original mechanism and letting it run without informing the police, resulting in the destruction of data. If you wish to put your ideas to the test then please go ahead, I always enjoy watching some dumb skiddie getting their comeuppance in court.

Re: NumptyScrub

".....there has been talk of increasing it to 5 or more years maximum "because paedophiles"....." The five years only applies to terror investigations (even complete idiots (IMHO) like Christopher Wilson only got six months). Oh, and because, of course, paedos don't exist, right? They were just made up so The Man could 'oppress' you. And even if the did exist there was no chance they would use computers to exchange evidence of their illegal habits, or 'freedom-loving' systems like TOR, and no way they would ever use encryption in an attempt to avoid discovery of said evidence! No, Comrade, you've hit the nail on the head - paedophiles are just a lie to oppress Those Who Know The Truth!

Ahem -

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-27885502

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14169406

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/07/27/ripa_iii/

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/17/wales_auditor_charged/

Even your fellow tinfoil-wearers are not denying paedos exist, use encryption and do use TOR:

https://www.facebook.com/ArmyAnonymous/posts/402431969912755

".....We're degrading back to the "guilty until proven innocent" days." Not really when you consider the coppers could previously charge you with obstructing an investigation if you refused to decrypt, it's just the new law is a lot quicker and simpler for the Police to use, meaning less time and resources are wasted.

Re: moiety

".....they had to go back 225 years to find a process that fitted....."

(CENSORED)

(CENSORED)

(CENSORED)

Oh, and the All Writs Act was last rewritten in 1911 and amended several times since.

Re: Camberwick Green Re: Camberwick Green With a warrant

".....The simple rebuttal is that the mechanism is implemented with the intent of protecting privacy in case of loss or theft, not with the intent of destroying any supposed evidence....." LOL, please do try that! The result is the destruction of evidence, that is all the court will care about, and not your half-arsed excuse! How are you 'protecting your privacy' by destroying your data? That is going to look more like you were deliberately trying to hide something and destroyed it to prevent it falling into the authorities' hands and being used as evidence against you. Please consider the following application of your "honest, not my intent" argument and see if you still think it will work:

"M'lud, I was driving at 100mph, but my intent was solely to get home faster as I was worried I had left my backdoor unlocked when I left the house this morning. Therefore, my desire to prevent my house being burgled means I shouldn't be convicted of speeding nor dangerous driving....."

Having worked with Blackberry Enterprise Servers in financial companies, I know that even remote wiping of stolen BBs has to be accounted for - we only did it if we had a recent, full and verified backup of the phone's contents, especially emails, messages and calendar. Otherwise we could be accused of trying to hide evidence of financial irregularities. Same goes for PCs and laptops, when they were decom'd we put a full copy of the system (not just the Exchange mailbox) away for seven years. The company was much more worried about the regulators and the law than to just wipe units at random because intent does not need to be proven in court, simply reasonably demonstrated.

Re: king of fools Re: king of fools bad != stupid

".....than live in an Orwellian dystopia with people in positions of authority able to stop me on the street and say "papiere, bitte"....." Yeah, but the problem for that kind of conspiracy-theorist's wet dream is people have been insisting that we're all "one law away from" such a Neo-Facist outcome for at least the past four decades (that's my personal count of tinfoil-attired idiots making that claim), and possibly longer going on Orwell's 1984. Though he was more bitter with Communism, not Facism, after his dreams of Socialist "equality, justice and brotherhood" got a dose of Stalinist reality in the Spanish Civil War. Strange how the Lefties are so quick to forget that part, or maybe it's just because they like throwing round terms like 'Orwellian' without actually knowing anything about the man or his experiences.

Re: king of fools Re: bad != stupid

"It seems to me that the majority of folk think criminals are thick.....Or are the people requesting these powers of below average intellect?" Oh dear, your prejudices are showing. There are prisons packed with people who thought they were smarter than the cops. You should bear in mind that there is a minimum requirement for education and reasoning ability to be a law enforcement officer in the US, but no such restriction on being a criminal. If there are criminals that are not smart then having laws which make it easier to catch them is surely a good thing as it will free up police resources to concentrate on those criminals that are actually smart. Or is it the catching of criminals that you object to?

Re: AC Re: Another option

".....Some of the comments about US policing on here are unfair....." If you are a black male in the US, criminal or otherwise, it is a statistical fact you are much, much more likely to be killed by another black male than a white person, let alone a police officer.

But, since the majority of LEOs in the US are white (beyond even the ratio of white-to-non-white population), it is much more likely that if a LEO shoots a black criminal then he/she is statistically more likely to be white, that has nothing to do with racial bias, just statistical probability. And, given that black males are statistically more likely to be involved in violent or street crimes (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States), and therefore more likely to be in a situation leading to a police shooting, it is going to be even more likely the statistical norm that white LEOs will be shooting black males more often than white males, or black LEOs shooting either.

You can demonstrate this with a simple experiment - take two bags, one for 'cops' and one for 'criminals'. Put three white balls and one black ball in the 'cops' bag (US national average), then put five black balls (representing the US 52% of violent youth crime committed by black males, the type where police are overwhelmingly likely to end up using lethal force during an arrest) and five white balls (ignoring the rising occurrence of Hispanic crime) in the 'criminals' bag. Draw a ball from each bag, return them, record the results, repeat one hundred times. You are going to see a much higher occurrence of white 'cop' ball with black 'criminal' ball. If you want to play with Ferguson numbers, use fifty white and three black 'cop' balls and ninety-three black and seven white 'criminal' balls. Even if you up the number of black 'cop' balls you are still much more likely to end up with a black 'criminal'.

Even if the number of black LEOs was increased to reflect local or national population trends, it would still be statistically more likely that any such shooting would be by a white officer of a black male criminal. That is a simple, mathematical likelihood, and has nothing to do with racial bias, profiling or any other PC nonsense.

Snowden files show NSA's AURORAGOLD pwned 70% of world's mobe networks

Re: Loopy Re: Whatever NSA/GCHQ et al does at home...

".....they are acting illegally in many many other states." <Yawn> Yes, and you have the relevant court decisions to hand to back up that whimsy? Thought not. Bits you missed regarding TEMPORA - firstly, the taps done on cables on British soil are covered by warrants, therefore totally legal; secondly, where taps are on foreign soil (such as at Seeb in Oman) they are done with the full cooperation of the local authorities, therefore also legal.

Re: Brian Morrison Re: tom dial @chris lively

"....all those communications from people that are not targets of surveillance should remain entirely obscured....." Collecting metadata does not reveal the contents of the innocent message/communication, therefore it is still 'obscure'.

Re: Doctor Syntax Re: Ben Bonkers The lunatics are in the hall.

"..... All this meta-data harvesting then means that I'd then be a terrorist suspect....." Yes, but in your highly-contrived scenario, a simple bit of background investigation would reveal your innocence without anyone being carted off to a Gulag, Gitmo or 'dark site'. It's called due process and it does exist, respite your desire to believe otherwise.

".....Given that at the time I was working on a gig that required security clearance that could then have led to a sudden cut in the household income....." Why assume the cut would be automatic? It is much more likely they would put an investigation in place without alerting you, to see if you were a security risk and catch any fellow conspirators. Seriously, try granting the authorities with at least a modicum of intelligence even if doing so upsets your paranoid fantasies.

"....But once you ramp up the volume by mass surveillance the probability of someone being wrongly suspected becomes non-negligible....." Correct, so if it was anything at all to be worried about where are the hundreds of wrongly-convicted terrorists? At worst and being generous, there are a less than a dozen since 9/11, and their convictions resulted due to field intelligence in Afghanistan, Iraq or Pakistan, not wrongly dialled numbers on tapped lines. If you want to pretend otherwise then please do supply some details of the hundreds you want to insist were so entrapped.

Re: dan1980

"And yet, even with all this capability they have bugger all to show for it in terms of preventing the threats that they tell us all they are there to combat." Oh Dan, if only you read some real news for once. You could start by going and checking the current series of arrests of wannabe jihadis in the UK, caught before they could get their jollies with IS - do you really think they were caught by chance?

And, as I have pointed out to you many times, the threats are more than real. There is the violent threat to Western countries and their allies (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/thelist.htm), there is also the espionage threat (even your heroes like Shneier have stopped denying that exists - https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/02/more_state-spon.html) and the e-crime threat (El Reg has been reporting on it for years - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/29/cybercrime/), so for you to deny any threat is, IMHO, simply to hilariously and stupidly blinkered for words.

Re: Ben Bonkers Re: The lunatics are in the hall.

Seriously, you think anyone would be the slightest bit interested in you? Pour quoi? Sorry if it bruises your ego but it's much more likely you are just chaff, more noise to be discarded to get at the really interesting signal.

Re: tom dial Re: @chris lively

LOL, look at all the angry down votes because Tom posted a few and simply verifiable facts! I guess they'll be really upset to hear the ECHR judged that GCHQ hasn't breached any human rights (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30345801), despite Amnesty International's righteous shrieking. Did El Reg miss that story?

'Why do Register readers get so frothy-mouthed?' Thus started WW3

Re: nsld Re: nsld lol glad he didn't mention anything SUN related as well

"....got an Apple device recently in my quest to dumb down to your level." Which just goes to show you are wasting time and energy due to false preconceptions rather than facts. The only Apple device I make use of is an iPad2 my wife got as a present (from her employer). My own choice of devices are Windows and Linux (including Android) and Blackberry - not Apple.

Re: nsld Re: lol glad he didn't mention anything SUN related as well

"They do say that opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one...." Glad to see your grasp of anatomy extends further than that of your computing knowledge, nsld.

".....Except for Matt who has clearly been blessed with a veritable plethora of said sphincters from which he spouts forth." The amusing bit is you and your chums seem to think it takes a massive amount of time and mental recourse, "......a plethora of said sphincters....", to debunk and mock what you seem to think are your Herculean-level of mental gymnastics, whereas the reality is it takes only minutes at most. Maybe if you tried reading more?

Re: Florida1920 Re: If you have to ask

".....Suffering fools just isn't in my DNA....." Unfortunately we seem to be dealing with a whole new generation brought up on such claptrap as 'you can all be winners', 'all opinions are equally valid', etc. For them, the introduction of reality is often a brutal affair, and they tend to respond not with intelligent thought or an attempt to improve their knowledge or processes, having instead been inculcated with the idea it is 'right' to instead whine and stamp their feet.

Nothing illegal to see here: Tribunal says TEMPORA spying is OK

Re: dephormation Re: "Anyone" != "Everyone"

".... BT/Phorm?...." Nothing to do with the GCHQ or TEMPORA.

"..... The intrusion begins the moment a third party obtains a copy of a private/confidential message...." And again, commercial companies are nothing to do with the GCHQ or TEMPORA.

"....Subjecting the whole population to intrusive surveillance is simply undemocratic, offensive, and illegal." Once again for those to busy hyperventilating to understand - collecting metadata does not equal subjecting the whole population to intrusive surveillance, and using the results of analysing such metadata to make a very, very small number of actual intercepts (when the message content is actually read/heard) does not equate to subjecting the whole population to intrusive surveillance. And RIPA makes it all legal anyway and the European Court of Human Rights has decided your rights are not being breached (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30345801), so stop ovinely insisting otherwise and go do something useful instead.

Re: tantrum thrower Re: btrower The gloves are off

".....It was established at Nuremberg that some rules of conduct transcend the explicit laws of a particular state. Invading the privacy of every person at once goes well beyond any reasonable norm....." The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg (actually relevant to the matter, unlike Nurmeberg) already decided otherwise (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30345801). Oh, and I claim my Godwin for your ridiculous attempts to conflate the actions of the GCHQ with the Holocaust.

"....It directly conflicts with the letter of the most fundamental law in jurisdictions like the United States....." Getting very bored of continually having to remind you that TEMPORA belongs to the GCHQ in the UK, not the US.

".... It does not matter how many toadies you trot out bleating that it is OK....." If by 'toadies' you mean actual legal bodies and international courts, such as the European Court of Human Rights, then - actually - yes it does matter! You can shriek and whine as much as you like to the opposite but that will just make others laugh at you.

".....It is not OK and as far as I am concerned it is something that warrants eventual prosecution and punishment....." So, you being so powerful, mighty and righteous - more so than the highest court in Europe - what are you going to do to ensure 'prosecution and punishment'? Refuse to drink your milk and take a nap?

"....Crimes against international law are committed by men...." True, but RIPA make TEMPORA legal, therefore no actual 'crime' involved other than the ones TEMPORA uncovers. As the ECHR decided - you may recall I have pointed that out to you several times now.

".....The ultimate harm....well beyond the injury to mankind done by a few despicable acts done under cover of a 'hot' war....." <Yawn> And, once again, just pause the ridiculous melodrama and hyperventilating long enough to actually show me the 'harm' you insist is happening. Oh, you can't. This is my surprised face, honest.

Re: tantrum thrower Re: btrower The gloves are off

"No. How is that even a question?...." It would seem a quite obvious question, at least to me, but then that may be because I am not wearing your socio-political blinkers.

"....It is as if you are saying it is necessary to shoot my dog in order to keep him safely in the yard...." So your grasp of the matter and sense of proportion lead you to believe it equates to shooting your dog? Nothing I could post could expose your own failure more starkly.

"....Completely invading my privacy in every way imaginable, putting me under constant surveillance, reading my mail, listening in on my phone conversations, constantly monitoring my whereabouts, spying on my friends and family and similar insane stunts are not reasonable or necessary to protect my privacy....." None of which are likely to actually be happening. Indeed, IMHO, the fact you believe they are indicates you are suffering from some form of paranoid delusion, or you are already subject to some form of control order due to a criminal or suspected criminal past. If it the former than I can only suggest you seek help; if it is the latter then the authorities are legally doing exactly what I would expect them to do.

".... I said 'illegitimate use of force' because there is now some question as to whether or not laws passed in recent times are fundamentally legitimate....." LOL, what gobbledygook was that! If the laws have been passed they are legal and 'legitimate' (it does not mean what you seem to think it means, did you mean appropriate?), and 'force' means force, as in a physical manifestation of power. Therefore, no illegitimacy and you have failed to show any occurrence of force. Fail!

".....Plenty of laws have been passed and precedents set in the United States that do not pass muster against any reasonable reading of the Constitution....." Apart from the fact that has nothing to do with TEMPORA (remember the geography tip I gave you earlier; the GCHQ = UK, not USA), I am pretty certain your interpretation of 'reasonable reading' extends only to what you have been spoonfed, if only because those laws got passed by the US Government, which I'm pretty sure contains far more people actually qualified to comment on the Constitution than you. If you wish to pretend otherwise, please do provide some actual argument to support your statement.

".....The coercive power of the state sits behind any provocative action it takes....." <Yawn> Is that your attempt to equate the enforcement of the law with your claim of 'illegal force'?

"....Unless both warranted and necessary it is certainly illegitimate...." And TEMPORA has been judged both legal and warranted under RIPA, so you fail again! Oh, and third time of pointing this out to you - the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the GCHQ mechanisms such as TEMPORA do not breach your human rights (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30345801). Your continued insistence that it does is exposed as just an unsubstantiated opinion with no legal backing.

".....in any rational system....." Your arguments so far make you appear (IMHO) ill-equipped to judge rationality.

".....http://www.wnd.com/2014/11/swat-team-tasers-pepper-sprays-homeschoolers...." Did you even read the article you linked to?!? Very first line - "A Missouri homeschooling family is suing a sheriff and another officer...." Nothing to do with the GCHQ or even wiretapping! No wonder you're confused! Trying to debate with you is beyond shooting fish in a barrel, it's like the fish have all been fed dope and are offering their attacker a larger gun.

Re: graeme legget Re: no suspicion that the user has committed any offence?

"Has Mississippi got its own nuclear submarine force?...." Fail! The USN, which is partly owned and funded by Mississippi as part of the States, not only has a much larger nuke sub force but also real carriers!

"....But I put it to you that the editor of the Spectator is not a reliable economic source on comparing countries and states based on back-of-the-envelope calculations." And your detailed reasoning to support that statement is... Oh, less than what could be written in 42 font on the back of even the smallest envelope. Try again!

Re: tantrum thrower Re: btrower The gloves are off

".....does not fly with me....." So what? Your problem (well, one of your problems) is that what 'flies with you' is neither here nor there and carries no legal weight. What are you going to do, stamp your feet and hold your breath until you turn blue? What you could do is actually come up with a reasoned argument (not just misquoting, misapplying and editing select laws and conventions to suit your POV) and use it to convince the majority of voters to persuade the politicians in the UK of the righteousness of your stance, hence getting the respective laws changed. LOL, but then you would have to face the facts that (a) the majority do not agree with you now, and (b) a lot of smarter people are already trying to influence the voters and are failing because the majority do not accept your reasoning.

"....1) The article needs to be rewritten to properly accomplish what was obviously its original explicit purpose and that means striking the part you find so endearing.

2) The people and organizations doing the interpretation need a clean sweep to install people with some sense....." That tells me (1) you don't realise all the EU governments are either directly using TEMPORA-derived intelligence and/or doing their own such monitoring, so they are not going to cripple their own intelligence agencies; and (2) you are unwilling to accept the will of the majority when it does not meet your expectations, making you the one with tyrannical and undemocratic intent. You fail!

Re: AC Re: btrower The gloves are off

".....Blackmail and intimidation by the state is fine by you?....." Please pause your melodrama to provide some actual cases of blackmail and/or intimidation by the UK authorities as a result if TEMPORA-derived intelligence. Otherwise one might reasonably conclude you were talking complete bollocks.

Re: btrower The gloves are off

"At its heart, the right to privacy is another aspect of the right to security of the person....." But doesn't your right to security oblige the authorities to have the powers and means to ensure your security as but they can? You can't have one without the other.

".....Our society and government are contingent upon covenants that we make among one another. Our current emerging police state is able, for now, to breach the covenant by the illegitimate use of force...." Firstly, how are they using 'force' illegally, and how is their duty to protect the public not part of said covenant?

".....It remains unlawful in any meaningful sense...." Bullshit. It remains completely lawful as you have failed to show how it has breached any actual law.

".....Constant surveillance of ourselves and our loved ones in our private lives, our correspondence and our relationships is not something we could have sensibly agreed to...." And is not happening. Metadata collection in no way whatsoever corresponds to surveillance or interference in your private lives. Try keeping one foot in reality and not succumbing to paranoid delusions and melodramatic headlines, it would help.

".....No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence....." But again, you have failed to show that is happening. Once again, it is a case of show me the harm you insist is being done.

".....CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS....." GCHQ = UK, not Canada.

".....Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure....." Yet it is legal under RIPA and therefore NOT unreasonable nor illegal (and still nothing to do with Canada).

".....The United States Constitution....." Wow, your geography is really bad! Again, GCHQ = UK.....

".....The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures....." Any TEMPORA intercepts are not on US soil, so you are wrong even before we get to their legality under RIPA.

".....The Human Rights Act 1998 (the “Act”) incorporated the European Convention on Human Rights (the “Convention”) into UK law. Article 8(1) of the Convention provides that “everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.”....." Does not apply as your right to privacy has not been breached, as already established by the ECHR (see the BBC article previously linked).

All you are doing is repeating a lad of laws and conventions that do not apply. Fail!

Re: ecofeacal

"Millions of WW2 veterans just turned in their graves." I'm betting your personal knowledge of UK veterans and what they thought is negatively related to your ability to spout hyperventilating and melodramatic nonsense. Given that the latter you seem to have refined to an art, if such a failing can be considered so, your personal knowledge of veterans and what they would think is probably zero. I had two relatives with extensive combat experience from WW2 who I know would tell you where you could stick your preconceptions. Please stop sullying their memory by insisting your blinkered viewpoint would be theirs, I find it highly offensive.

Re: btrower Re: The gloves are off

".....violate one of the very most basic of human rights....." Go on, just for a laugh, please do explain which right you insist is being 'violated' and in breach of which respective law? Because it seems you and Privacy International (from the article - "....Privacy International and co-claimant Bytes for All will now challenge the IPT’s ruling at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).....") missed the bit where that already got kicked out by the ECHR (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30345801).

Furious GTA V gamers seek similar ban on violent, misogynistic title: the Holy Bible

Re: Tac Eht Xilef Re: It's about ethics in games journalism, right?

"....and I can't recall ever seeing a bible in either store..." Not just that, but why buy a bible when there are so many (IMHO) strange individuals that will knock on your door and offer you one for free (and 'save your soul' as a bonus)?

Megaupload overlord Kim Dotcom: The US has radicalised me!

Re: Kiwi AC I assume this was their intention all along... @Matt Bryant

"Jesus, where to start..." I would suggest a more pertinent strategy might be a bit more reading of the actual legal matters involved rather than relying on help from a mythical figure.

".....Matt, you clearly haven't been keeping up with the news on this....." The fact I have linked to news articles and relevant NZ legal pages, whereas you did nothing but insist you knew more about the law than the NZ courts, suggests it is you that has homework to do.

"....Megaupload had a way for copyright holders to remove links that was IN ADDITION to the DCMA....." Strange that he is so set against talking about that in court, then. Maybe it's because he doesn't want to admit that he financially rewarded the posters of the files that generated the most hits and downloads, despite knowing those being to be pirated material, and did not take down copyrighted material when requested.

"....I've been struggling to find the leaked pie chart...." Maybe because, along with a lot of the 'evidence' posted by Crim Dordumb's followers it's a work of fiction?

"....only responsible for something like 7% of the pirated files in the world....." So, first you want to claim he didn't host any pirated material, now you want to go with the figure of '7%'..... Make your mind up! Indeed, do a little maths - there are tens-of-thousands of pirate websites in countries like Russia and China alone, so having 7% could still make him the largest pirate! Do you need help with the sums?

"....Much smaller sites were (and still are) responsible for far more....." So what? Are you suggesting we just ignore muggers that keep below a quota of victims per week? Fail!

".....Various major companies were uploading their own files to Megaupload....." Again, so what? I know people who were uploading legit files to Mega, just as I know people with legitimate businesses that made use of Lloyds TSB's banking facilities. But that didn't stop Lloyds TSB getting fined millions for their part in the Libor scandal (http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28528349). Just because a company engages in legal activities, even if that is the majority of their business, it doesn't mean they get a free pass on any illegal activities. You are just desperately trying to excuse away Crim Dotdumb's alleged illegal activities.

"....The entire physical surveillance operation was illegal...." Once again, as I posted earlier, the NZ courts decided otherwise (they having actual legal authority, not torrentfreak) and all the evidence and the warrant used in NZ have been upheld as legit.

"....And yet you seem to think he should have gone to rot in a gaol cell for a few years...." Actually, if Crim Dotdumb had simply agreed to go to the US, it is highly likely he would have been granted bail. It is still possible he could be granted bail now as the prosecution still has to show him to be a flight risk. So, insisting he will 'rot in goal' whilst waiting for his trial is just another baseless myth.

".....I'll be interested to see what appears from the 38 million documents leaked from Sony...." I suspect you will sail right past any evidence gathered by Sony showing Crim Dotdumb's activities to have been illegal, in a desperate search for yet another excuse. I get it, you obviously don't think piracy is a crime, and hate the Yanks (despite Sony being a Japanese company), so that should be enough in your view to forgive Crim Dotdumb. Unlucky for you (and Crim Dotdumb), the legal system doesn't work on your whimsical approach to justice. Lucky for the readers as we get to laugh at your posts!

Re: Kiwi AC I assume this was their intention all along... @Matt Bryant

".....Why should he have to? What crime has he comitted there?....." READ THE EXTRADITION REQUEST! He and his co-defendants are accused of hosting, encouraging and financially rewarding the deliberate pirating of copyrighted material. Seriously, did none of the Crim Dotcom supporters even read anything factual relating to the matter?

".....To date he's not been accused of anything illegal against NZ law....." His copyright infringements would be illegal under NZ laws (I suggest you read here - http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_New_Zealand) but he is being charged in the US as portions of the Megaupload service were based in the US.

"......(NZ is quite a hard country to get in to if you have any relevant criminal history....." Evidently not, given that Crim Dotcom has a criminal record of e-crimes, stock manipulation, embezzlement and illegal stock trading (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Dotcom#Criminal_investigations). Crim Dotcom effectively bought his NZ residency with a promise of investment (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Dotcom#New_Zealand.27s_decision_to_grant_residency).

".....You really are that dense aren't you?....." Well, if you are struggling with the concept of a criminal trial and how it progresses to a declaration of guilty or not guilty, I would have to suggest it is you that is at least ill-informed or just dense.

"......The legal process in the US can take a very long time, all the while he would be sitting in custody....." But Crim Dotcom has been fighting his extradition for two years already, so if anyone is prolonging matters it is him.

".....for something that was not a crime in either country?...." Please go read up on NZ's copyright laws and international obligations (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_New_Zealand). Then come back and admit you are talking out of your rectum.

".....I am, however, intersted in the government following the laws currently on the books....." Yet you seem to know SFA about such laws! I suggest you start here (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Act_1994).

".....But that does not mean I should stand by and watch my country's government act in an illegal manner....." As I recall, the NZ courts ruled all the evidence seized is legit along with the warrant used (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/02/19/megaupload_warrant_legal_appeal/), which completely destroys the 'illegal' myth. Please do try and keep up!

".....I'm not exactly a fan of KDC....." So you're posting all this easily debunked male genetalia because...? An unreasoning dislike of the US? Hatred of copyright laws? Or just because you are ill-informed? It seems a lot of your argument is based on opinion and zero on actual facts.

".....If you could present any reliable evidence of any crime against NZ law....." Despite his alleged encouragement and financial rewarding of piracy being illegal under NZ copyright law (as well as the international copyright treaties NZ has signed up to), that is not the problem Crim Dotdumb faces - it is their illegality under US law (where some of his servers were based and many of the pirate uploads and financial rewards are alleged to have transacted) - that is his legal problem.

".....not prostitute themselves for some yankee scumbags." Ah, so your 'reasoning' does derive from a simple and blind hatred of the US. Maybe the old joke that the smartest Kiwis left New Zealand does have more than a grain of truth.

Re: AC Re: Kiwi AC I assume this was their intention all along... @Matt Bryant

"Why should he go to the US if he has never been there?...." Maybe you should try reading the extradition request, it might fill in one of what appears to be many holes in your knowledge.

".....It is aburd to assume that we have go around the world to defend ourselves against any group of people who decide that they have a beef against us....." Really? Yet I bet a 'right-on dude' as you seem to want yourself to be perceived approves of war criminals being extradited to stand trial at The Hague? Oh, and this is not 'a beef', it is a suspected encouragement and collusion in illegal activity under international as well as US laws.

"....Perhaps Matt Bryant should go to a far flung Pacific island...." Well, not New Zealand, thanks. Despite its appeal to many, it strikes me as too much like a bigger Wales, only with more cricket and less cottage burning. If you wish to spring for an all-expenses trip to Fiji I'd consider it, but then I suspect - given what seems to be your support for pirating - your funds might not stretch to cover even a trip to Southend.

".....to hang around for years while his case is processed and he is subjected to arbitrary imprisonment." Nothing arbitrary about it at all. You seem to have missed the bit where Kim Dotdumb was accused of running the World's largest pirate site, would you like some pointers to help you catch up on the whole affair? I would suggest you start Your homework here:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/09/dotcom_rejected_again/

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/06/07/mpaa_megaupload_files_returned/

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megaupload_legal_case

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/01/19/kim_dotcom_arrested/ (note the bit about US-based servers)

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Dotcom (includes bits on his prior e-criminal record)

systemd row ends with Debian getting forked

Re: Pierre Re: What is systemd

Whilst I haven't seen the issues Pierre has, at least his opposition to systemd is based on actual testing and not just froth. Bravo, sir, please continue, as actual problems and bug reports are what is needed.

Re: Potty Re: If systemd is so bad...

".....There is room for exactly one Linus Torvalds in the Linux ecosystem....." In that case it would seem quite reasonable to ridicule your statement by pointing out the dominance of Torvalds and the one kernel. Simply repeat your whole post, just replace the occurrences of "systemd" with "Torvalds' kernel". But then you could argue there is no one kernel due to the existence of BSD - those that don't want Torvalds' kernel can go use BSD, it is just that the Linux kernel is the overwhelmingly more popular choice, regardless of the lack of control the average user has on kernel development. Those that don't want to accept that systemd is probably going to be the more popular choice can now go play with Devuan and stick with init, you have your choice, just please go do it with less bile and volume.

Re: @John Hughes

"I dont want to configure logs to be text. I want them to be text by default and optionally something extra which I may come to accept in time given practical proof." Well, yes and no. What you probably want is an immediate error report in text, so you can get an idea of the impact of the issue, but capturing all the actual data relating to an issue in binary does make sense in that it means you don't have to go back, switch on full capture, then recreate the problem to get all the actual data you need. A binary log is a lot more compact and can store a lot more data. Most admins I know turn down a lot of logging because they say it generates too big text log files, which means they get the headlines but have to go back to recreate the issue to capture all the troubleshooting data required to find, deduce and fix the problem.

Legendary Brit physicist Stephen Hawking gets full Intel comms refresh

Re: Shannon Jacobs Re: Hmmm.

"Because he thinks better than trolls like you....." If you really think that then please do explain how noble you think it is of Hawking to support a country that stones raped women and persecutes homosexuals, or justify the oppression of Tibet. Yeah, I just bet you can answer that - not!

Re: Lamont Cranston Re: He's remarkable in other ways.

"I blame those NHS death panels, that leave disabled people on mountainsides, to be devoured by wolves." Uncorroborated story that did the rounds - a certain British TV celeb/survivalist was once asked whIch scientist would he like to take with him on an Arctic expedition, and replied Stephen Hawking. When asked if that was because of the interesting conversations and insight Hawking could supply, the celeb said it was because, in the event of a polar bear attack, you only need to run faster than the slowest guy in the group.....

Hmmm.

I really hope the Intel package includes some GPS tech that stops the legendary British physicist and notorious hypocrite (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/09/israel_boycott_stephen_hawking_intel/) communicating when he next takes a trip to Iran or China (http://leftfootforward.org/2013/05/so-why-did-stephen-hawking-think-it-was-ok-to-visit-iran-and-china/).

FBI warns of disk NUKE malware after Sony Pictures megahack

Ho-hum.

Hmmm, well, whilst I sympathise with Sony and I hope it doesn't put movie makers off making films that poke fun at despots, it still doesn't make me sympathise enough to buy a PS4.