* Posts by Cereberus

71 posts • joined 23 Apr 2015

Page:

As Uncle Sam flies spy drones over protest-packed cities, Homeland Security asks the public if that's a good idea

Cereberus

Re: I submitted my comment

Its such a shame you descended into abuse of Europeans as I agree that the 2 sentences are not mutually exclusive.

I can give my opinion anonymously, but I can waive that anonymity if I so choose is not the same as I have to give identifying information in order to give my opinion.

The only caveat is that if you do give any information you might as well give it all as it will all be linked on some database somewhere so it is arguably an all or nothing proposition. Using Tor is irrelevant as soon as you give your email address, but that is again a choice.

I would like to know if they filter the responses so that any that can be identified as coming through Tor are ignored as they could have come from another country.

Creeps give away money to harass recipients with abusive transaction descriptions on bank statements

Cereberus

Re: Three months early

I take it AC you are anonymous for a reason so you can do a bit of trolling - answer the below points if you would be so kind:

1) How is it anecdotal tripe? As I stated these are things I witnessed personally, not heard about specifically around the area of Hoppers Crossing

2) Where did I state domestic violence was greater in Australia? Where did I compare it to Europe or N.America?

3) Where did I make any comment about Aussies being wife beaters or red necks?

That's right I didn't make any of the comments you ignorantly suggested I did. I also clearly stated this was the situation I witnessed 10 years ago, not how it is today.

Please be careful you don't choke on your own tripe as it slithers back down your throat.

Cereberus

Re: One solution...

The only reason I can see for down voting (which I didn't do as I agree with the underlying principle) is that the vulnerable person doesn't see the middle account. It is highly likely that the alleged abuser already has the persons real bank details.

I would suggest you idea holds if the vulnerable person is given a new account which mirrors the existing account so any activity is matched on both saving the person having to update bank details with others unnecessarily as payments continue to go in and out the original account.

The original account would then have a flag on it for any inappropriate references which could allow money to go through but block the sender details which are then referred to the police who would possibly have a case file that could be used to then chase the abuser down.

2 problems - Would the bank want to take on the extra complexity and costs first of all as there isn't any real benefit to them beyond a customer service aspect (shouldn't be underrated)

The second problem is the referral to the police where experience suggests it will fall flat on it's face.

I have a friend who separated and then divorced her husband. He has then failed to pay any maintenance for their son but continues to drive around where she lives, sit in the car park where she works (out of town shop) hours before the store opens,send abuse from and his new partner etc. etc.

The police have taken all the evidence promising action would be taken, including an arrest, warnings and possible court action for harassment then decided they couldn't do anything despite all the evidence and it would need to be a civil action. When another incident occurred the police comment was they didn't know how no action had been taken but couldn't find the ex-husband, then got an address and didn't take action. The cycle still continues.

Child maintenance charge my friend for guaranteeing payment of child support, they have investigated the ex husband and worked out he owes over £5,000 back payments. In 2 years they recovered exactly zero but when he does make the odd small payment they take their cut for 'handling it'.

If the authorities took proper action then the banks might review it and decide there is a basis for putting in protections as there would be action at the end of it, otherwise why spend the money / investment in systems when nothing else will be done to stop the alleged perpetrator continuing what they are doing?

Cereberus

Re: Three months early

Having lived in Oz for several years I feel I can give a qualified response (10 years since I was there) that there is a lot of abuse and domestic violence there. Around that time it was in the news a lot about the misogynistic attitude of male politicians.

Part of the problem I witnessed was that they still had attitudes found in the UK in the 60's. The 'Sheila' at home bringing up the kids and doing the chores whilst the 'man of the house' earns the money, then drinks most of it.

If politicians think that attitude is acceptable would it really be that surprising if the voters do?

I don't know if it is still as bad - hopefully not - but I would like to know why the investigation ended early, only for a new one to be set up.

Tech set responds in wake of American protests, police violence and civil unrest

Cereberus

Re: "Sons of Obama"

I'm not sure which is worse. The comment made by EDE, or the fact that it has been upvoted 4 times (at time of writing).

Trump issues toothless exec order to show donors, fans he's doing something about those Twitter twerps

Cereberus
Happy

Re: Hitler, literally

Can I show them the difference between Hitler and Trump, using practical examples?

Cereberus

Re: Hitler, literally

I really don't see any comparison, and you denigrate the memories of all those who died from Hitler's policies by doing so - I've also tried to find your sarcasm tags but failed.

Trump is just a poor (in my view) imitation of what POTUS should be, who likes to shoot his mouth off with total disregard for how true his comments are, providing evidence to support his comments or appreciation of the impact of his comments. His basis for his tweets appears to be purely based around what he thinks his base wants to hear.

Hitler on the other hand had specific calls with the aim of removing certain groups within the human race.

But lets take a look at some of your points supplied without evidence:

<Some sarcasm>

First he locked up all the blacks and transsexuals

When did this happen? There have arguably always been racial issues / LGBTQ issues but how many of these people have been locked up?

put all the women back into homes and kitchens

Again, when did this happen. More importantly how did it happen. Did he pass an executive order or something? Is Ivanka really a man in drag and what is she doing out of the house? Should she not be in jail as a possible transvestite if she shouldn't be in the house?

by killing more than 100.000 Americans with Clorox injections

I thought it was Covid-19 which had killed these people, or at least contributed to their deaths. Did Donald personally go round and inject each of these people with Clorox? How did he disguise it as a virulent disease that results from Coronavirus. How did he get around all these people without someone realising?

</Sarcasm>

Annoying..........................Yes

Childish name caller ........Yes

Proven liar........................Yes

(By his statements) the best at everything in the entire world........debatable

Worse than Hitler, literally.....Very much not

Broken your new Surface Go 2 already? Looks like it's a bit more repairable this time

Cereberus

I suspect not

I think this should have read something like:

"The MicroSDXC reader can be removed easily enough. Along with the cameras, the USB and Surface Connect ports remain soldered in place."

Or a slightly less wordy option:

"The MicroSDXC reader can be removed easily enough. The cameras, the USB and Surface Connect ports remain soldered in place."

Based on these interpretations I would say they can't be removed easily.

UK COVID-19 contact-tracing app data may be kept for 'research' after crisis ends, MPs told

Cereberus

Re: No chance

What is a government department doing sending a mailshot to just one party's members?

Except if you bother to read it, it wasn't sent by a government department. It was sent by Matt Hancock as a member of the Conservative Party, specifically from bulletins@updates.e-mail.conservatives.com not H.M. Government

Arguably it shouldn't have been sent with the name of a government officials name attached to it, but it doesn't change the fact it was sent by the Tories to their party members not from the government to Tory party members. It could be said his name was used as the person defining the policy on testing - personally I still don't think it should be sent in his name but perhaps cut to the chase and comment on how the Tories should have sent it just from a generic email account.

Cereberus
Facepalm

Re: No chance

Disclaimer: I am a key worker but not a Tory. I am eligible for testing at any time but have not received an email from the Tories telling me this.

What you have described is typical distortion of the facts for political ends, I would even go as far as it being a good example of Trumpism. From what I can see it is a notification sent out by a political party to it's registered members to inform them that testing availability has been expanded and that they may now qualify.

It is the same message the government has been reporting through daily briefings, and hence through other source such as the news and news papers.

There is nothing stopping other political parties, or other interest groups for that matter, doing the same.

There is no preferential treatment offered or suggested, just information which is very much in the public domain being sent directly to people who have registered to receive information from a particular interest group.

Alternatively people would complain they received an email like this without having given express permission to be contacted - and how did the government get my email address anyway..........

Things could be better, they could be worse but comments like yours only come down on one side of the balance.

The Great British anti-5G fruitcake Bakeoff: Group hugs, no guns, and David Icke

Cereberus

No win possible?

As Roo states the WHO are a coordinating entity and based their comments on available confirmed information. Can they really be blamed for not saying it is China human to human transmission at fault because Taiwan said so.

Arguably China could have been assumed to be lying but the WHO explicitly stated that China had advised there was no evidence, they didn't say definitively that there was no evidence.

The same with the Pandemic status which iirc basically went through a process of x number of reported infections, something to be concerned about, now we would class it as an epidemic but not enough confirmed victims over a large enough area to be a pandemic, those criteria have been met and it is now officially a pandemic. They not only set their criteria for each stage but explained why a stage hadn't been reached at a given point in time.

The there is the whole 'Shouting Wolf' syndrome. If they had gone earlier with the pandemic status more live almost certainly would have been saved and number of infections would have been reduced. They would then have been accused of over reacting then in the future when they call a pandemic they would be ignored, except as a result the wolf and all his / her friends turn up and have a jolly good time ripping everyone's throats out because everyone thought it was just another false alarm and not as serious as was being made out.

America is a perfect example of this. The number of cases and deaths are lower than expected due to lock downs but a number of Republicans are saying the small number of cases show the lock downs were an over reaction rather than an effective method of dealing with the virus spread. Next time a lock down is called how many people will take it seriously?

Royal Navy nuclear submarine captain rapped for letting crew throw shoreside BBQ party

Cereberus
Joke

Re: Same property?

<SARCASM> (shouted just to be safe)

But they left the confines of their backyard / garden / home for the last 9 months or so.

How dare they be so blase about the risk they have put themselves and the rest of the country under by being definitely free of the virus and in the open air near nobody else.

Don't they realise that they were putting nobody at risk including themselves and the public - such shameful behaviour should result in them all being keel hauled whilst the sub is at sea after being made to climb out a torpedo tube.

And what about future risk - they may get the virus and not realise then go back to sea and dock in a port in another country and spread the disease there - it's not like it is already a pandemic or anything.

Who do they think they are anyway - just because they finish a tour of duty they think they can then just relax and enjoy themselves - they should be protecting our country not resting from a long tour.

</SARCASM>

Dixons Carphone top brass take 20% pay cut as swathes of Brit workforce furloughed

Cereberus

Re: What is this furloughing?

After the useful comment from the ever so friendly AC furloughing generally is unpaid leave, whilst still remaining technically employed by a company, and not doing any work for that company.

In this case it is a little different as if an employee is furloughed they are not allowed to do any work, and will receive 80% of their normal annual pay (not including extras like overtime as far as I know) which the employer claims back from the government - this payment being restricted to a maximum of £2,500 per month.

The idea is that when the lock down is lifted and businesses can get back to work they have the staff still in place and in the meantime haven't gone bust due to the cost of wages, operating cost (to a greater or lesser extent) etc.

Bose shouts down claims that it borked noise cancellation firmware to sell more headphones

Cereberus

Re: @EVP

All I can say is follow the link:

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/07/07/bofh_2017_episode_9/

UK judge gives Google a choice: Either let SEO expert read your ranking algos or withdraw High Court evidence

Cereberus

Re: Hobson's choice

I thought the same thing, then I thought some more and came up with:

Surely it isn't beyond the realms of possibility that someone who no longer works as an SEO could be appointed by Foundem to review the code independently, (could have moved to a different field or retired) and who could also be subject to an NDA so they can't pass info to another SEO to make use of any info they see.

Google would then either have to adhere to the judges decision (either way) or show how he code is of commercial relevance 14 years later in such a fast moving area.

Resellers facing 'months' of delays for orders to be fulfilled. IT gathers dust on docks as coronavirus-stricken China goes back to work

Cereberus

Re: Just an FYI

Whilst the figures may be correct it still feels to me like you are scare mongering..

The figures quoted are confirmed cases as reported by the various countries, health agencies, etc. and does not include any kind of margin of error which is quite an important factor when throwing these kind of statistics around.

Firstly the quoted mortality is believed to be around 2% overall.

Not 1%

Not 0.1%

Not 3.6% either

There is a reasonable position that the actual mortality rate will be less than this. Take the UK for example, just over 596 confirmed cases with 10 people having dies so far so slightly over 2%. It is believed there may be 5,000 to 10,000 people infected without realising who think they have a cold or flu. Taking the lower figure that would mean the mortality rate would be something like 0.2% of those affected and not of the population

Globally it will obviously differ due to the effectiveness of dealing with the problem, and the local health services capabilities but throwing out unsubstantiated figures doesn't help.

Also quoting the increase in cases as a major issue won't help. Anyone following the details will be more than aware the figures are expected to ramp up to potentially extremely high numbers.

Whilst this is a serious issue, it should not be made into something it is not which can cause fear and panic (including panic buying) which could end up making things worse.

It's official: In May, Microsoft will close the door, lock the vault, brick over the entrance of dreaded Windows 10 1809

Cereberus

Cant update, won't update

and holdouts still using the operating system version, for some reason, will be advised to move to at least the November 2019 build of the operating system.

I had 1809 and was in the position the updates were failing completely due to an error.

I tried everything I could think of or find on the net including resetting the updates, stopping and restarting the service.....

I then started getting page fault errors before finally hitting the point when shutting down the machine went into super hibernation and wouldn't wake up without a full power down by pushing the off button for several seconds the switching in back on.

I then started being unable to use other functions, such as a headset in the 3.5mm ports, but still able to use it via the USB port.

At this point I gave up and did a full re-install to 1909 and had no problems since.

How many people are in the position the updates are failing and they don't know, or they don't know how fix the problem / re-install the OS, and so are stuck on 1809 without support or updates, leaving them open to all kinds of malicious behaviours through no fault of their own - owning and using a Win 10 PC doesn't count as being their fault.

Tech can endure the most inhospitable environments: Space, underwater, down t'pit... even hairdressers

Cereberus

Taking it literally

My favourite was working for a mobile telecoms company, helping train and support the wonderful phone support staff.

One trainee complained that the computer wasn't doing what he wanted and my instructions were stupid - the instruction being use the mouse to click on the <program> icon. Everyone else seemed to be fine so I was thinking it might just be the mouse was faulty or had become unplugged.

I tried it and everything worked fine, although the trainee was too busy telling his neighbour how bad my course was to watch what I was doing. Anyway I closed the program and said to him to try again whilst I spoke to another trainee who was having fun playing with different menus.

2 minutes later he shouts up again. I went back over, tried again without any problems and asked him to open the program as I had asked whilst I watched to see if I could identify the problem. I quickly did. He picked up the mouse put it on the monitor and pressed the button. 'See, it doesn't work' - I then had to explain how to use a mouse without laughing or making him look stupid in front of the other trainees.

He did apologise though for saying my instructions were stupid so I didn't reply that they were written for people with basic computer use knowledge which he claimed to have, and weren't aimed at people who thought a toaster was a complex piece of equipment. Funnily enough he didn't stay with the company long.

Five years in the clink for super-crook who scammed Google, Facebook out of $120m with fake tech invoices

Cereberus

Re: Bad speech

There are 2 mainly (not exclusive) accepted theories referring to what was a pommie. Now it basically refers to a British immigrant to Australia.

1) Short form for pomegranate which is believed to have been rhyming Aussie slang for immigrant

2) Pommie refers to whinging pom which in turn related to British (primarily prisoners who were deported) immigrants to Australia who complained about the living conditions there - in this case pom referred to Prisoner of (his/her) Majesty.

We lose money on repairs, sobs penniless Apple, even though we charge y'all a fortune

Cereberus

No comparison

Your local back street repair person buys the screen glass for about $5 including shipping from Ali Express and does the repair for $80. The $75 margin allows them to cover their costs and make a reasonable living out of it.

<sarcasm - just in case> How dare you. Don't you realise that the fanbois doesn't just want a screen replacement, they demand a genuine Apple screen replacement. Yes they could replace the screen for $30 but it wouldn't then be an Apple iPhone - It would be a cheap knock off because it wasn't 100% Apple and they didn't need to give up their first born as part of the deal to get the new screen. A fanbois would prefer to be hanged, drawn and quartered than be accused of using non-genuine parts or not having a 100% genuine Apple product.</sarcasm>

EE customer: Creepy ex used employee access to change my mobile number, spy on me

Cereberus

I worked for their counterpart T-Mobile. There were different levels of access so normal staff couldn't access 'VIP' customer accounts.

I also had to investigate a colleague who was 'playing the system' to get cheap phones to sell on Ebay. The bosses were a little upset when they asked me to do it and my first response was send the request and authority on email. I certainly wasn't going to do it based on a word of mouth request which could be later denied.

Ho ho ho! Washington DC sends Zuckerberg a sueball-shaped present

Cereberus

Re: There is morality and there are laws

I think there are 2 main problems.

1 - If you sign up to Facebook, it is pretty much understood that they will take every last bit of information they can to sell on - that is after all how they make their money. Yes it could be perhaps clearer and yes you should expect that if you want everything kept private it should be private but only to a point. I think it would be reasonable for Facebook to say 'Here is a free account but you are limited on what you can keep private from us. You do have an option to pay a nominal amount to use the service at which point private is truly private and we won't collect information because you are paying for a service.'

2 - Collecting 3rd party data should just be banned. I haven't given permission for data to be collected on me by accessing John Smith's account which is free, especially if I don't have a Facebook account.

I do have a Facebook account which I use only for a small fishing syndicate. I have never posted anything, or read any feeds, beyond relating to this syndicate. I don't use Facebook to log into other things so they will have 'relatively' little information about me and I accept that what they get they will use.

Part of the problem is people expect 'free' to mean free and these companies should provide a totally free service for their use. I use free programs on the PC in a lot of cases because they do what I need but I also pay for the 'enhanced' program in other cases because I use the extra capability. That it how the business model works. If 10% of people pay for the fully working product the company is making money and can carry those who use the free version. I wouldn't complain that I can't use a particular function that is available in the paid for version when I am using the free one if I choose not to pay for the full version. If the software is good and does what I want I have no problem paying for it, if it isn't I don't. But I have full control over what I decide to do. With Facebook that seems not to be the case and someone who doesn't want their service should not have their information taken without their express permission.

Apple cops to iPhone 8 production oops, offers to fix borked phones

Cereberus

Am I being over cynical?

I sometimes wonder if Apple deliberately build in faults (hardware or software) so that they can offer a repair but only once any other issues have been fixed at the customer expense, especially since the make it so hard for 3rd party repairs to be done.

It's as if they treat it as an additional revenue stream. I wonder how much they make on the additional repairs compared with how much these recalls cost.

Surely a company that makes as much as they do wouldn't think of doing such a thing though.....

Devon County Council techies: WE KNOW IT WASN'T YOU!

Cereberus
Coat

Re: Thanks, Labour

So much for "Education, education, education".

Should that not be:

"Educaion, eductino, eduaction"

Swiss cops will 'tolerate' World Cup rabble-rousers – for 60 minutes

Cereberus

Being sensible

Personally I think this is just the Swiss applying sensible precautions. It seems to me that they are saying that people can celebrate or commiserate but try not to make it go on too long so it upsets other people, and so they have decided on a time limit for use of horns and a request not to interfere with traffic flow if possible. Any time limit could be said to be too short or too long so they have tried to pick a reasonable length.

On another point they don't say you can't cut your lawn on a Sunday, they say you can't between the hours of 20:00 and 08:00 on a Sunday or public holiday, which is reasonable to allow people to enjoy a lie in without being disturbed by someone insane enough to want to cut the grass when they get home from a back shift at 02:00 in the morning.

The bath one is a little strange but taken into context with it's counterpart example suggests that water pipes can be quite noisy and not to take a bath at night (which I would assume does not refer to the evening) so that additional noise from water pipes occurs.

Can't pay Information Commissioner's fine? No problem! Just liquidate your firm

Cereberus

Re: I'm confused

Thanks Aladdin, I need to get new reading glasses.

Cereberus

I'm confused

But the highest fine given out under both is £400,000, which is a fifth off the £500,000 maximum the body can dish out, although this will increase to 4 per cent of global turnover or €20m under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

Since when was £400,000 a fifth of £500,000?

That might explain why so little of the money is recovered.

Does Parliament or Google decide when your criminal past is forgotten?

Cereberus

A legal judgement?

This is a complex issue, and whilst the focus is on one particular person and his actions the consequences of the judgement could have much wider implications.

As has been mentioned certain offenses will always have to be disclosed, as they should be whilst others could be seen as irrelevant. Should somebody suffer after being in the papers 20 or 30 years ago after stealing a bar of chocolate when they were 10 years old? At the same time should a company have to take the risk that they have someone guilty of fraud employed in a financial / senior business capacity?

On the other hand should someone who has been punished have to suffer the stigma for ever ore of what may be a one time mistake (whatever the reasons they did it)?

The more I think about this the more I feel there should be a statute of limitations which would be declared based on the offense and the level of offense. The RoO should then take this into account and it would work along the lines (purely hypothetical based around the case in point).

You defrauded the company of £1,000 - the offense is linked to your name for 5 years after serving time

You defrauded the company of £1,000,000 - the offense is linked to your name for20 years after serving time

alongside would run the following

You committed one offense, the above applies

You have committed the offense more than once - no statute applies and your name will forever be linked to the offense(s).

Essentially this means you make a mistake and after a period of time based on the seriousness and impact your name search does not show against the offense, but if you are a repeat offender you give up that right. This means that a mistake / poor judgement does not impact the rest of your life but if you are shown to be a repeat offender your impact on others is reduced as it is demonstrably no longer a mistake / poor judgement.

The details would be issued as to length of term as part of sentencing.

Irony's lost on old Pope Francis: Pontiff decrees fake news a 'serious sin'

Cereberus

Re: Have you guys read the 10 commandments

You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them.

Think how many blasphemers there are though. The commandment (excerpt above) doesn't state you shouldn't make yourself an image and bow down or worship them.

So does this mean that anybody who has ever made a cuddly little rabbit, painted a picture of a dog, used a photograph with of anything ever is a blasphemer? It does say an image of anything in heaven, on earth or in the water.

Just asking, a proper response from a religious point of view is welcomed, but not the old get out clause of it being a story to represent......and isn't 'strictly' true.

Investigatory Powers Act: You're not being paranoid. UK.gov really is watching you

Cereberus

Re: sort of confused ?

I think you are confused.

but how does this impact on the likes of Google et al, whose entire reson detre is to slurp up EVERYTHING about EVERYONE ................

People know they record the data and choose to use the service with that knowledge. Same with Facebook, Twitter, etc, etc.

At the end of the day you have an option not to make use of these services and prevent them collecting the data. It may be inconvenient to not contact people using Facebook but you still have the option.

The government want to collect the data without your (or at least the general public) knowledge, then potentially use it to support taking punitive action which may or may not be warranted.

Totally hypothetical, and (using relatively minor breaches of the law) extreme example: You go on Facebook at 10:00 then put your phone down and drive 140 miles to another location and then pick up your phone and send a text exactly 2 hours later. Your are now guilty of:

a) Using your phone whilst driving

b) Speeding

This is because nobody could drive exactly 140 miles in exactly 2 hours since you have to spend some time on other roads with a speed limit below 70mph so you had to use the phone whilst traveling or have exceeded the speed limit to some extent to reach the average 70mph over the 2 hours. They also know you were alone in the car because of CCTV cameras.

Yes it is a little silly but the theory is sound to show that lots of little bits of info can lead to a conclusion when you have not knowingly done anything wrong - in the above example you might have been doing 70.5mph but it is still over 70.

In a surprise to no one, BT and TalkTalk top Ofcom's whinge-list

Cereberus

Re: Regulator needs to damn well regulate.

Make the worst provider each quarter refund all customers 50% and the second worst 25% (and no hiking the prices to compensate). If that doesn't bring about some improvement, nothing will.

Or it could just send that provider bust as by fining them you remove 50% (not taking into account profit share etc.) of the funding to make improvements so they will consistently under perform due to lack of funds to solve the problems making them the consistent worst performer.

A better option would be to enforce a restriction on profits, dividend payments and so on and make the provider spend more on investment to improve the service.

We have targets set by a government agency, which if missed result in potentially millions in fines. All this means is we have less to spend on infrastructure and keeping the service we provide running, which leads to more problems, which leads to bigger fines, and so on.

By forcing investment (overseen to ensure it is proper investment and not just a paper exercise) the result should be an improved service, which results in happier customers, more customers joining that provider due toa better service (hopefully) leading to more income leading to higher profits leading to happier investors - theoretically.

The mechanics of doing so I will leave to others to work out. :-)

Apple's 'shoddy' Beats headphones get slammed in lawsuit

Cereberus

Re: No opinion on the headsets

What the fuck could the headphones have done so badly that caused $5 million in damages?

That's easy. The breakdown is:

$200 refund because the product wasn't as advertised - $1,000 total as 5 claimants

$10,000 dollars each for the inconvenience of having to attend court, buy new headphones, etc. - $50,000 total

$800 each for the time explaining why they no longer use the headphones - i.e. they are stained with bodily fluids and the battery needs recharged after 4.3 seconds of use* - $4,000 total

$9,000 each - pay for the iPhone XI next year when it is launched, and headphones that are compatible with the faster than light connector that replaces the lightning connector - $45,000

$980,000 to help with treatment for PTSD caused by being seen with such crap Fanbois 'Fones'. - $4,900,000 total

What they should get is electroshock treatment for being mad to buy the headphones in the first place.

*Running time will vary depending on amount of use and how recharges were applied, including duration, initial charge level.....

Google bins white supremacist site after it tries to host-hop away from GoDaddy

Cereberus

My concern is.....

Where do you stop? I have no idea because I either don't have enough information or don't have the clarity of thought to make an informed decision.

Banning far right (or far left for that matter) extremist groups on the face of it is justified because they are a loathsome group who shouldn't be given the time of day. However, if you remove these groups completely then the next group towards the centre become the extremists, and so on. Who will decide when you have come far enough away from the existing extremists for it to be allowed?

By removing these groups you drive them underground much like, as has been mentioned earlier, with pedophilia. It doesn't stop them but makes it harder to monitor them. The aim should be to stop this level of thought and moderate peoples views to improve interpersonal / group relations.

Finally, free speech should be about being able to express your views 'freely' without fear or favour so long as they don't hit certain criteria such as incite violence. There are already laws in place to deal with such issues so use them. If people aren't able to air their views freely, you can't state a case against those views to hopefully persuade the people with them to change.

I think these days of global instantaneous vitriol, trolling and general attacks against people, no matter how justified you may feel, or how many people agree with you just adds to the problem as it causes greater polarisation between groups. People are scared to make a comment in the public domain because instead of a reasoned debate* they are attacked and threatened.

*I realise that trying to have a reasoned debate with some of these right wing groups is a contradiction in terms.

UK.gov cloud fave Amazon comes under fire for tax bill

Cereberus

... and yet that investment has resulted in an annual profit of £7.4. Either they are managing to get spectacularly low ROI, or they're cooking the books. Hodge is right.

As has been mentioned elsewhere the company spends a lot of the profits on investment. Shareholders might prefer it otherwise and receive more but the company has always operated on that basis. Some of this investment may provide larger ROI in the future, some won't work out and be a loss but that money has been paid into the country through investment costs, equipment, capital expenditure, etc.

The fact it doesn't come in to the treasury directly as tax doesn't mean it doesn't come into the economy. If you are looking for high ROI with no eye to the future Amazon would not be a company to invest in.

This by no means they are cooking the books, and shows a basic lack of understanding how the company operates by both 'Hodge' and yourself.

*Note: This is irrelevant to work practices and pay rates to the staff and the two should not be confused with each other.

FBI's spyware-laden video claims another scalp: Alleged sextortionist charged

Cereberus

Re: 15-30

Probably most of that will be spent in isolation for his own protection from the inmates, pity, being somebody's bitch would be poetic justice.

Such a shame people come out with these types of comments.

Jail time is supposed to be the punishment. If it isn't a punishment that is a separate social / justice issue.

How would it be if you went to jail for something and were subjected to a daily prostate exam by Bubba* using his 'medical equipment'? Would it be OK and acceptable as part of your punishment, or would it be rape and you would demand that action be taken to stop it happening? Should Bubba* get extra time on his sentence for raping you or should yours be reduced because of the extra 'punishment'.

At the end of the day this guy deserves prison but him 'being someones bitch would be poetic justice' is just sick.

You should consider as well that your are inciting the crime of male rape** to take place so it will (presumably) make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside at the thought of him getting what he deserves. You must sleep well knowing how well balanced you are with this kind of attitude.

Based on the article the guy also has some personality disorders by the way he taunted the authorities so that's alright then - he deserves what he gets.

*Note: Bubba is a fictional character and is unrelated to anyone alive or dead and is used for illustrative purposes only.

** Someones bitch in prison is, by context, inferring that specific actions relating to sexual assault would take place

Facebook's freebie for poor people under fire again

Cereberus

Re: That's what I don't get...

I would assume that this will link in with using old handsets that people have given to Charity for the starving (because phones are so nutritious).

All find and dandy except for the data-mining etc. which will then occur.

More appropriate questions would be:

Will they hand out solar chargers with the handsets?

If not will paying to charge the phone to Face book become more important than feeding your child (with whatever you can get)?

Will you need to pay for network access to connect the phone, even if the data is free?

If the data is dumbed down / limited then will it be Facebook that decides what is actually shown?

And finally - how many people are literate enough to use a phone in a 3rd world country.

This has potential to do great good with education, health awareness etc. but I have a feeling it will actually do great harm by exploiting the already poor and (assumed) poorly educated.

Thanks for U-turning on biz-killing ban, Ofcom – now cough up, say GSM gateway bods

Cereberus

Re: 999

If you dial 112 from a mobile phone it will tell the operator your location - this is the same as dialing 999 but with extras as it were.

Is it not possible just to put in a blocking system so that any emergency number (999 or 112 in the UK) must be routed directly and not through a gateway?

I find it hard to believe that all calls would be routed through a small number of sites, enough to block them up. But again it should be possible to drop calls if the network is congested to allow an emergency call through.

The bloke behind Star Fox is building a blockchain based casino. No, really

Cereberus
Coat

Re: Just throw your money out the window...

Now we have the internet there are other ways to exercise one's arm.

I know what you mean - putting my glasses on and taking them off again is hard work.

Australian regulator will decide if Uber drivers are staff or contractors

Cereberus

On the one hand it's good Uber employs rapists and murderers,

If only you had the word reformed after employs I would have agreed with your obviously non-sarcastic comment. (He says sarcastically).

I do think, on a serious note, that reformed convicts should be given a second chance albeit they should be perhaps monitored closely and not allowed in a position where they could re-offend. So Uber could employ a convicted rapist who is reformed but only give them jobs for couples, male customers, etc. and not ones where they would be left driving a lone female either directly or as a result of dropping her friends off first.

Of course not being an employer they wouldn't know about any prior convictions, certainly wouldn't charge customers a premium for searches they have carried out on drivers, or be expected to screen the drivers they don't employ.

Fighter pilot shot down laptops with a flick of his copper-plated wrist

Cereberus

Yes........

If for no other reason than you are there to hear it.

‪There's a ransom-free fix for WannaCry‬pt. Oh snap, you've rebooted your XP box

Cereberus

Re: Help! - Win7 Ports 445 / 135 just wont die...

Or alternatively apply the Microsoft patch to stop Wannacrypt being able to use the exploit?

Or am I just being naive?

Don't gripe if you hand your PC to Geek Squad and they rat you out to the Feds – judge

Cereberus

The bigger picture

Without referring to what the doctor may or may not have done, whether or not it is legal and whether a warrant was justified my concern goes outside the details fo the case itself.

If these guys are doing a search to find the picture in question it would suggest they routinely scan through all the files. I have confidential documents on my laptop when it shows signs of being about to break, not a problem as I have backups so I delete all the sensitive files and take it to Mr Snoopy the PC repair man. Mr Snoopy then pulls copies of these files and has access to this info.

Personally, as someone who knows what they are doing I wouldn't take it to a PC repair shop in the first place, and any sensitive files would be encrypted but how many doctors, politicians, business people would think to do this, never mind know how to do it? I know there other considerations like you should have a decent IT policy, backups, not have sensitive info on a personal machine and so on but time has repeatedly shown that these guidelines aren't followed. It doesn't give a repair man the right to lift this material when I put a machine in for repair.

Fire fighters get grinding on London man’s trapped genitalia

Cereberus
Facepalm

It's amazing.....

what some people will do. Moving away from men to the fairer sex the worst problem I came across, in a medical capacity, was a young lady(?) who had inserted a light bulb where it is usually very dark. The light bulb had then imploded.

Very messy, and very long time removing all the pieces from a confined space.

TalkTalk HackHack DuoDuo PleadPlead GuiltyGuiltyGuiltyGuilty

Cereberus

Re: admitted stealing

I can see the point of view. I would argue, however, that they have deprived Talk Talk customers of their security and privacy by taking a copy of the information which they have no intention of returning.

I am not being deliberately argumentative, but I do think there is a case for saying they did steal something whether it be by legal definition or by dictionary definition. If either option is correct then original comment is correct.

Cereberus

Re: admitted stealing

(To paraphrase) For crying out loud, they did steal something :

Definition: Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/steal

They removed (a copy of) data from Talk Talk without permission or any intention of returning it.

Trump's self-imposed cybersecurity deadline is up: What we got?

Cereberus
Mushroom

Re: "2). Calls an election in the hope that it will distract attention from #1"

And we are off - PM changes mind so obviously doesn't have a clue - running around like a headless chicken. Sack her, sack the government, sack everybody, the world is about to end. AAAAaaaaarrrrrrgggghhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!

Truth is that it perhaps wasn't the smartest idea to keep saying she wouldn't have an election, but the election should be a good idea. Why?

1) If the SNP lose seats - they have effectively reduced their mandate for a referendum that Sturgeon has as the sole central point in her life and won't shut up about.

2) Conservatives increase their majority - this gives the PM the mandate to proceed with Brexit without all the stupid little delays from opposition and the Lords

3) We have a bit of stability whilst the process occurs

4) If the Tories lose or reduce their majority it arguably signals that the country has thought again about leaving the EU

5) If the SNP gain the last few seats they didn't get in the last election they can then sod off and take Scotland out the UK and try to stay in Europe (this is by no means a given) if they can win a referendum that this result would indicate Scotland want.

6) If 5 happens we can stop all the arguments about how much money goes in which direction between Scotland and the rest of the UK. Sturgeon can keep her nose out of English affairs as she will no longer be able to extend and argument further and further until she can justify how it impacts on Scotland and Scottish MP's have a right to vote, although she adamantly refuses to let the reverse happen.

I could go on but you get the idea.

Disclaimer: I should point out that I am not anti-Scottish but I am anti-Sturgeon who has broken the once in a generation promise she and Salmond made and will use any excuse to justify another Scottish referendum. Additionally my wife is Scottish, and Iive very close to the border so theoretically could get extra benefits from exchange rates by jumping across it to get goods more cheaply.

Will the MOAB (Mother Of all AdBlockers) finally kill advertising?

Cereberus

Minority of 1?

Generally I don't have a problem with ads as I can avoid them if I want to - mostly.

Like it or not and previous comments suggest everyone is in the don't like group, ads do serve a purpose and can raise awareness of a new product, service, etc. which may (probably won't but may) be useful.

There are 3 types of ads I do hate however.

Pay day loans and their friends - mainly because these are aimed at the less well off who then have to pay exorbitant amounts back in return. Spot the shark anyone?

Charities - whilst I support charities and the work they do I worked out once when I wasn't in work that if I sent the £2,3 or 5 pounds to each charity advertised on TV that day I would have nothing left in the bank (including the overdraft I would have taken out specially for making these payment). Why do we have so many charities and how much do they (subsidized no doubt) pay for all the adverts. Whilst I can understand the reasons, why set up yet another cancer charity in memory of my 'special person' who died of xxxxx cancer. Why not fund raise and give the money to an existing charity in memory of that person. In theory more money should feed through to those needing help, or research etc. instead of all the admin costs for each charity. Of course this leads to more questions on how money is spent by the charities, but that is a separate discussion.

Finally the big one. I have no problem with ads on the web. However, they should not be pop up, pop under, buried, bandwidth hungry, overly intrusive or cover most of the site. If they advertise a product for example and say 'Click Here' for a video with more info and I choose to click then it is my choice to watch the video. None of this should be force on me so I am struggling to get the info I am actually after.

Euro Patent Office reforms hit another stumbling block: Reality

Cereberus

Re: How close, exactly?

As the old saying goes - Lies, damn lies and statistics.

If you take the figures in the story and change the spin to the opposite direction:

14.28% response rate because every one else is unhappy but don't see any benefit in responding either because it will impact on any future applications, or because they think it won't make a difference. This means 144 non-respondents with the 13 who did and weren't happy is 157 of the 168 sample.

Or tp put it another way 93.45% of are unhappy. As is often the case with these things the actual figure will be somewhere between but just as a purely speculative number for take it half of non-respondents were happy and half weren't. The satisfaction rate would then be 72 no response plus 13 who did = 85 of 168 = 50.59%

Seems to me that is still a much bigger unhappiness level than there was.

Video intercom firm Doorbird wants $80 for device password resets

Cereberus

Lesson teaching perhaps

It might seem extortionate at $80 but considering the time in doing the checks, cost of delivery via courier, etc. it isn't as unreasonable as it sounds. Let's be honest, you are more likely to take care of the password or complete the registration details if you know you are going to be charged that much for a reset.

Don't forget if you have registered an email address the reset is done free of charge.

3 points do spring to mind though:

1) If you pay for the reset they could offer a discount for sending it to an email address, as there are no courier costs

2) You should be able to change the password to one you would remember, then you aren't as likely to forget it if you lose the device you have it stored on, albeit not a guaranteed solution

3) Use a password manager which works across multiple devices, or store a copy of the file on multiple devices. Discounting the risk of the password manager being hacked would you store your passwords on a single small portable device which is open to breaking down, being dropped and damaged, lost, stolen..... as the single source for these passwords?

Help wanted: Uber boss Travis seeks babysitter for him and his execs

Cereberus

Re: Only one candidate

Out the whole A Team Mr T would be the worst option (or B A Baracus to be correct)

How can anyone have pity for Uber? Their drivers yes, the company no.

Better options:

Hannibal: He would at least have a plan to sort them out

Murdoch: Might not be the best choice to sort problems but being mad he would probably fit right in

Face: The company already appears to have at least two faces - one more shouldn't be a problem

Page:

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR WEEKLY TECH NEWSLETTER

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020