Posts by Daren Nestor 126 publicly visible posts • joined 5 Jun 2007
That's ridiculous, passengers and luggage are screened while boarding, not on arrival. This is standard, although the passenger manifest is sent ahead. Do you think that all luggage leaving the plane is screened? The only reason to check incoming luggage is customs, and this was an EU citizen on an internal EU flight, so customs isn't really an issue. There was simply no reason to check the guy. He wouldn't even act guilty, he didn't know about the RDX!
"As a quick anecdote... I was travelling via Stena Line from the UK to Ireland and under the apparent misunderstanding that both the UK and ROI were in the Common Travel Area. I mistakenly put my passport in my baggage which was stowed in the hold. Upon arriving at Dun Laoghaire, there was a single Garda giving a cursory look at Passports, I explained that I did not have mine and was given a "your fine sure, on you go". Very pleasant.."
Ha, love that Irish attitude. As a further anecdote, my brother was living in Japan and he travelled to Ireland with his Japanese fiancée. When she got to the passport control, he went through the EU chute, then waited for her. As the passport control officer went to check through her passport, he noticed my brother, and said "Is she with you?". He said yes, and got "Go on so", her passport was stamped and off she went :)
Heathrow, on the other hand... the staff were very pleasant actually, but the queues in Terminal one are always huge and I've never seen more than three metal detectors open at the same time. After a long flight, waiting in line for multiple hours is the last thing you want to do, and, of course, you can't take your duty free through the damn place. No "Go on so" there...
On an unrelated note - it would be nice to get basic styling in comments - bold and emphasis would be nice.
That we'll get some quality science fiction/fantasy style programming. God knows gamers tend to like it, and no-one else bothers.
HBO has made and aired an awful lot of extremely high quality series dealing with subjects that you just simply would not see anywhere else. I'd be happy to pay for something similar in genres I'm interested in.
Of course, that they've started with reality tv isn't exactly heartening...
"Play take no responsibility for late delivery due to ... failure on the part of the delivery partner."
Does not mean that they take no responsibility for non-delivery. In fact, if it takes more than 2 weeks to arrive after being dispatched, they will send you out another copy free of charge. This has happened to me a couple of times, and I've always got the second copy, and sometimes the original copy turns up a month or so later (usually covered in footprints and with a stamp from Vancouver, for some reason!)
It's kinda irrelevant whether or not the US has ratified the extradition treaty, the UK has, and they intend to abide by it.
Frankly the appeal was on the wrong grounds - they focused on the plea bargaining which (while strongarm-ish) is offering a possible reduction in maximum sentence if he spares the expense of a trial, something that happens in the UK also so there's no problem there.
What he should have focused on, and what might have swayed the Law Lords, is that it has not been confirmed what court he'll be tried in, whether it will be civil or military. This is altogether a more serious grounds for protesting the extradition. I mean, he's admitted he did it and whatever his motives they have to assume the worst happened and computers were compromised. He's effectively pled guilty, it's wrangling over jurisdiction now. A guarantee of a civil court and a high likelihood of low security and repatriation seems fair to me. Regardless of the US military's incompetence in securing their own networks. A military court is an altogether different affair.
Great points there.
May I say, I've often thought that at least half the problems with democracy is that the government is chosen from sitting MP's (or TD's as we call them in Ireland) who are still responsible to their constituency. As a result their ability to run the country is hampered by their responsibility to a small area.
I've thought that the process of choosing government should be made more transparent - by declaring what the cabinet is going to be BEFORE an election and having it as a separate vote. No-one on the cabinet would be permitted to run in any of the constituencies.
At the very least, it would allow like for like debates, and would somewhat remove the personality contest because it's very difficult for a committee to have charisma.
The chap makes some good points, and sounds genuinely bewildered by the strange actions of the US in this case.
This makes absolutely no sense from the American perspective. Why have they landed on this one issue? All the other "large" signatories to the GATS are delighted - Canada and the EU in particular have long running trade disputes over American "protectionism". Both of those will not hesitate in putting a public boot in if they think they can get away with it, and at this rate, they WILL be able to get away with it.
It's also the case that a new administration coming in won't be in as strong a position from the beginning and will almost have to compromise. Will this weaken them domestically?
Seriously, not only have other Irish universities been doing this (or similar) for a while, UL offer this undergraduate course "LM110 Bachelor of Science in Multimedia and Computer Games Development Honours Bachelor Degree" (info here http://www.ul.ie/admissions/newprospectus/Undergraduate/colleges/informatics/LM110.shtml),
as well as a taught masters on Interaction Design and have the Interaction Design Centre on campus.
Good marketing from Trinity though!
I've been complaining about this type of effect for some time. It's been a problem since some genius decided on white backgrounds for computer applications such as word processors, just because it looks like paper. It's a massive waste of light! Why aren't backgrounds dark and foregrounds (like text) light? It's much easier on the eyes!
It was especially bad on CRT monitors. I just don't get it! El Reg, perhaps a less blinding version of the website?
The point of those talking about the ineffectiveness of these attempts at criminal damage is that "terrorism" has been made a bogeyman, something to fear. You defeat fear by laughing at it and not allowing it to rule your life.
Terrorism is ineffective. It will not win a war. It will not cause substantial long term physical harm. Yes, people may die, and we can empathise with those they leave behind. But all that terrorists are trying to do is to make you give up. And we, here in the west, are giving up. Giving up basic liberties that our societies are founded on. Giving up our attitudes of openness, and the respect for other people's beliefs. The terrorists are winning by changing us.
Well, I won't change.
The "dorky story" comment is ridiculous. First of all, 1990 is the base year as agreed by the UN. Secondly, the events of September 11th, 2001 caused a massive depression in aviation related emissions - 36,000 to 40,000 flights per day were grounded (for 3 days - it was late September 13th before flying restarted). Thirdly, ONLY CO2 was used in the data.
Lies, damn lies and statistics. This was an example of massaged statistics at it's best, picking a serious outlier in the statistics, only showing it, and trumpeting your success.
Brian,
Not exactly the publicity you'd like, or the circumstances you wanted to hit the register with, I'd guess!
I've been keeping an eye on LiftPort for a while now, and I've been impressed. It's a shame that this kind of thing has happened and I hope you get through it. I think it's very important that those with a visionary ideal, and, more importantly, a viable plan, can go and try it. I know that you've put significant money into both lifting technologies and nanotube research.
Best of luck for the future.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
