I imagine that few readers appreciate their position in society - as subjects of the crown, not citizens of this country. (Yes, it is true that the inclusion of the European Convention on Human Rights into British law recently changed this, but Dave Blunkett's Anti-Terrorist legislation has overturned these changes and we are, once again, subjects of her Maj).
Britain does not possess a written constitution. Britons are not citizens, endowed with inalienable rights defined in law, but subjects who are granted certain privileges by the Crown as the head of state. As such, basic freedoms exist only negatively: one may do that which is not expressly legally prohibited. Once a state of emergency is declared, the government can bypass many legal restraints.
That wasn't just "an independent survey". The Stand site was built specifically to submit valid feedback to the Home Office consultation exercise. Just like the developers' earlier work building FaxYourMP.
It would be *shameful* for the UK Government to ignore over 5000 presumably negative submissions -- from voters -- submitted via Stand. Especially when they know their figures don't add up, and they will be caught out. Expect a U-turn.
I'm not very tech-savvy, though I admire those who are. I hate spam, and used to get lots of it. Here's my fixes.
My ISP makes Brightmail spam filtering available to all users at no cost... if they opt in to it. All Brightmail's catches are held in a spam folder until you get round to reviewing and deleting them. It takes a couple of clicks to wipe out a dozen spams.
Anything that gets through Brightmail then is filtered through the Spamcop mail forwarding service I've set up - my ISP allows me multiple email ID's, so I don't download or read the "public" one any more. Anything that's blocked by Spamcop is ipso facto more insidious than the Brightmail harvest, so I happily punish the "clever" spammers by reporting them to their ISPs, web hosts, etc. With Spamcop's "quick reporting" option, it only takes a couple of clicks to report dozens of spammers.
Not much gets through both. If it does, I delete it. The problem's become almost invisible to me.
(I'd still kinda like my own Bayesian filter, though...)
You aren't supposed to trust the hardware or software - this system is not being created to protect the user from anything. The intent is to protect developers (of software or media) from the users.
See Ross Anderson's TCPA/Palladium FAQ if you really want to know what's going on.
It's not a diary as such, but this reminds me of the excellent Bloggus Caesari ("The Original Warblogger") - Julius Caesar's ruminations from Gaul, now in weblog form, a tad over two thousand years later.
Re:Look up the history of. . . `
on
Dow vs. Parody
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I forget who it was, but an ancient historian, commenting on the aculturation of the Britons under Roman rule, wrote something along these lines: "And so, the gullible natives, eventually came to call their slavery "culture.""
Tacitus, Agricola (hagiography of his father-in-law, a Roman governor of Britain), s.21.
"To accustom to rest and repose through the charms of luxury a population scattered and barbarous and therefore inclined to war, Agricola gave private encouragement and public aid to the building of temples, courts of justice and dwelling-houses, praising the energetic, and reproving the indolent. Thus an honourable rivalry took the place of compulsion. He likewise provided a liberal education for the sons of the chiefs, and showed such a preference for the natural powers of the Britons over the industry of the Gauls that they who lately disdained the tongue of Rome now coveted its eloquence. Hence, too, a liking sprang up for our style of dress, and the "toga" became fashionable. Step by step they were led to things which dispose to vice, the lounge, the bath, the elegant banquet. All this in their ignorance they called civilisation, when it was but a part of their servitude."
Here in Britain, any company over a certain size is forced by law to change it's accountants every year
Unfortunately, this is a lie. The accountancy profession in the UK is - so far successfully - resisting any proposal to impose mandatory rotation of auditors.
Exactly so: I printed out and gave a copy of this article to my boss today, after he'd more-or-less frivolously asked whether we should have a Linux strategy (re: MS license hikes).
Next up, I'll try to rework the Villaneuva letter into a principled Corporate Social Responsibility statement - i.e. why a reputable business with long term responsibilities to its customers and investors should go Open Source.
Caveat: I work in IT audit, not IT policy. But this is *just* what I needed to open the door.
The UK government isn't providing public transportation that fulfills *any* of "good, clean, reliable, affordable"... All it is doing is forcing people who are forced into using cars because they simply have no choice, to pay through the nose.
Charging for traffic in London is an initiative of the Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, and not of the UK Government.
And Livingstone is a genuine, long-time supporter of public transport: witness the "Fare's Fair" campaign of the 1980's, back when he led the Greater London Council.
Andrei Tarkovsky's Russian adaptation of Solaris (1972) was the first, of course, and is widely regarded as a sci-fi classic. Let's hope this isn't another unnecessary Hollywood remake.
The watchers of those watching the watchers can be watched by the watchers themselves, thus guaranteeing that all the watchers, even the watchers OF the watchers, are watched.
Re:Wow, taking on IBM mainframes...
on
'Unbreakable Linux'
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Of course, a lot of it is good old fashioned security through obscurity. How many 14-year-old kids have OS/360 / MVS / [insert your big iron poison here] experience? How many have linux experience? Right.
The long developmental time for films is a frustrating and, sometimes, sad thing. One of our greatest writers, Philip K. Dick, died just before getting to see the screen adaptation of his fabulous novel, "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?", Ridley Scott's Blade Runner.
That said, he apparently *loved* the bits of the unfinished film that he was shown. (My source: the rather excellent book "Future Noir: the Making of Blade Runner", by Paul M Sammon).
You bet it is, I wouldn't be surprised if Hitler takes this to the courts!
Not the first time American moviemakers have been worried about Herr Hitler and IP litigation: the song the German soldiers sing before the rousing Marseilleise scene in "Casablanca" (1942)is "Die Wacht am Rhein" (never a Nazi favourite), rather than the far more appropriate "Horst Wessel Lied," because the latter was still in copyright...
If they can go down a list and say "Ok, you're two points over the line for a 12. You can take out x laser blasts, x seconds of sabre duel, x punches, or this head-butt to get under the line again", I'm ok with that.
Seems that's how it used to work.
On the 5th of August 1974, Mark Forstater, a producer from Python (Monty) Pictures, wrote the following letter in respect of Monty Python and the Holy Grail:
'Dear Mike,
The Censors' representative, Tony Copell, came along to Friday's screening at Twickenham and he gave us his opinion of the film's probable certificate. He thinks the film will be AA [which is 14 and over] but it would be possible, given some dialogue cuts, to make the film an A rating, which would increase the audience [A being five and above].
For an A we would have to, quote, "lose as many shits as possible, take Jesus Christ out if possible, lose "I fart in your general direction", lose the oral sex, lose "Oh, fuck off", lose "we make castanets out of your testicles".'
He writes further:
'I would like to get back to the Censor and agree to lose the shits, take the odd Jesus Christ out and lose "Oh, fuck off", but to retain "fart in your general direction", "castanets of your testicles" and oral sex, and ask him for an A rating on this basis.
Please let me know as soon as possible your attitude to this.
Yours sincerely.'
I first read that letter 20 years ago. It amused me then and it still amuses me. You'd think it was something the Python team themselves had created, not something their producer had written in all seriousness. The thought of a group of people sitting 'round a conference table, heatedly negotiating these points, is quite bizarre. I mean, how many shits do you have to lose to keep castanets out of your testicles? Exactly how many Jesus Christs is fart in your general direction worth? Or is it a combination thereof? Maybe you can have oral sex for four shits, a Jesus Christ and a fuck-off.
I know it sounds very, very silly, but this type of negotiation is still going on today and will continue going on while we feel a need to classify films. Which I might add, is something I totally endorse in principle and by 'in principle', I mean except when it comes to my own films.
You won't allow your four year old daughter to see it if it's a '12'(without the headbutt), but you would if it was a '13'(with the headbutt)?
I don't have the choice. Under the UK's film classification system, if a film's rated '12' I can't take her to see it in a cinema.
Left to myself, I'd take her to see it anyway. And she'll certainly be watching it on DVD in a year or so. When she isn't helping me play 'Jedi Knight 2' (in non-dismemberment mode), 'Unreal Tournament' (with bots' verbal abuse turned off), 'Return to Castle Wolfenstein', etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Fuligin.
(cf. Gene Wolfe's "Shadow of the Torturer" for details).
And this:
What "current ID card"? We don't have one. Police here in the UK haven't been able to ask for "your papers, please" since the Fifties.
(Also, what "citizens"? We're "subjects," alas!)
That wasn't just "an independent survey". The Stand site was built specifically to submit valid feedback to the Home Office consultation exercise. Just like the developers' earlier work building FaxYourMP.
It would be *shameful* for the UK Government to ignore over 5000 presumably negative submissions -- from voters -- submitted via Stand. Especially when they know their figures don't add up, and they will be caught out. Expect a U-turn.
I am not a Fortune 500 CTO (IANAF5CTO?)
Almost. Try: IANAFDCTO
D = 500, using Roman numerals.
I'm not very tech-savvy, though I admire those who are. I hate spam, and used to get lots of it. Here's my fixes.
My ISP makes Brightmail spam filtering available to all users at no cost... if they opt in to it. All Brightmail's catches are held in a spam folder until you get round to reviewing and deleting them. It takes a couple of clicks to wipe out a dozen spams.
Anything that gets through Brightmail then is filtered through the Spamcop mail forwarding service I've set up - my ISP allows me multiple email ID's, so I don't download or read the "public" one any more. Anything that's blocked by Spamcop is ipso facto more insidious than the Brightmail harvest, so I happily punish the "clever" spammers by reporting them to their ISPs, web hosts, etc. With Spamcop's "quick reporting" option, it only takes a couple of clicks to report dozens of spammers.
Not much gets through both. If it does, I delete it. The problem's become almost invisible to me.
(I'd still kinda like my own Bayesian filter, though...)
You aren't supposed to trust the hardware or software - this system is not being created to protect the user from anything. The intent is to protect developers (of software or media) from the users.
See Ross Anderson's TCPA/Palladium FAQ if you really want to know what's going on.
It's not a diary as such, but this reminds me of the excellent Bloggus Caesari ("The Original Warblogger") - Julius Caesar's ruminations from Gaul, now in weblog form, a tad over two thousand years later.
Tacitus, Agricola (hagiography of his father-in-law, a Roman governor of Britain), s.21.
> If there is any justice, he will be hung from a tall tree in the morning.
You mean "hanged", Valenti, you illiterate poltroon! A picture can be hung; a man is only ever hanged. (Unless you mean he is "well hung"...).
If they do... well, I'm sure someone just lost their masterpiece pr0n directory, but otherwise, things like this happen. (ask Hemos)
Remind me: when did Hemos lose his masterpiece pr0n directory?
Now that we're ... darn near the world's sole economic superpower,
:-)
I guess that depends whose numbers you believe. All those missing millions and billions just keep on adding up...
SatireWire did a take-off of this three months ago, back when it was topical.
Andy_R writes:
Here in Britain, any company over a certain size is forced by law to change it's accountants every year
Unfortunately, this is a lie. The accountancy profession in the UK is - so far successfully - resisting any proposal to impose mandatory rotation of auditors.
Exactly so: I printed out and gave a copy of this article to my boss today, after he'd more-or-less frivolously asked whether we should have a Linux strategy (re: MS license hikes).
Next up, I'll try to rework the Villaneuva letter into a principled Corporate Social Responsibility statement - i.e. why a reputable business with long term responsibilities to its customers and investors should go Open Source.
Caveat: I work in IT audit, not IT policy. But this is *just* what I needed to open the door.
1) Driving to London from Exeter to see a show isn't *remotely* the same as driving into London every day as a commuter.
2) The cost paid by you to drive to London isn't *remotely* the same as the cost to society and the environment of you driving to London.
Me, I *love* these charging proposals. Make the road-hogs pay! Tip the proceeds into the Tube! Huzzah!!
Hope you enjoyed the show, though: come again soon!
The UK government isn't providing public transportation that fulfills *any* of "good, clean, reliable, affordable"... All it is doing is forcing people who are forced into using cars because they simply have no choice, to pay through the nose.
Charging for traffic in London is an initiative of the Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, and not of the UK Government.
And Livingstone is a genuine, long-time supporter of public transport: witness the "Fare's Fair" campaign of the 1980's, back when he led the Greater London Council.
Andrei Tarkovsky's Russian adaptation of Solaris (1972) was the first, of course, and is widely regarded as a sci-fi classic. Let's hope this isn't another unnecessary Hollywood remake.
The watchers of those watching the watchers can be watched by the watchers themselves, thus guaranteeing that all the watchers, even the watchers OF the watchers, are watched.
This is, more or less, the subject of David Brin's book "The Transparent Society".
Is the plural of "spam" really "spam"?
No, you have to repeat it.
E.g: "Spam, spam, spam, spam; spam, spam, spam, spam; lovely spam, wonderful spam..." (etc.)
(You really need the Vikings to appreciate this).
Of course, a lot of it is good old fashioned security through obscurity. How many 14-year-old kids have OS/360 / MVS / [insert your big iron poison here] experience? How many have linux experience? Right.
There's an interesting piece about exactly this topic in today's Register: security through obsolescence.
The long developmental time for films is a frustrating and, sometimes, sad thing. One of our greatest writers, Philip K. Dick, died just before getting to see the screen adaptation of his fabulous novel, "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?", Ridley Scott's Blade Runner.
That said, he apparently *loved* the bits of the unfinished film that he was shown. (My source: the rather excellent book "Future Noir: the Making of Blade Runner", by Paul M Sammon).
You bet it is, I wouldn't be surprised if Hitler takes this to the courts!
Not the first time American moviemakers have been worried about Herr Hitler and IP litigation: the song the German soldiers sing before the rousing Marseilleise scene in "Casablanca" (1942)is "Die Wacht am Rhein" (never a Nazi favourite), rather than the far more appropriate "Horst Wessel Lied," because the latter was still in copyright...
Seems that's how it used to work.
On the 5th of August 1974, Mark Forstater, a producer from Python (Monty) Pictures, wrote the following letter in respect of Monty Python and the Holy Grail:
He writes further:
I first read that letter 20 years ago. It amused me then and it still amuses me. You'd think it was something the Python team themselves had created, not something their producer had written in all seriousness. The thought of a group of people sitting 'round a conference table, heatedly negotiating these points, is quite bizarre. I mean, how many shits do you have to lose to keep castanets out of your testicles? Exactly how many Jesus Christs is fart in your general direction worth? Or is it a combination thereof? Maybe you can have oral sex for four shits, a Jesus Christ and a fuck-off.
I know it sounds very, very silly, but this type of negotiation is still going on today and will continue going on while we feel a need to classify films. Which I might add, is something I totally endorse in principle and by 'in principle', I mean except when it comes to my own films.
Source: Watch on Censorship (Australia)
You won't allow your four year old daughter to see it if it's a '12'(without the headbutt), but you would if it was a '13'(with the headbutt)?
I don't have the choice. Under the UK's film classification system, if a film's rated '12' I can't take her to see it in a cinema.
Left to myself, I'd take her to see it anyway. And she'll certainly be watching it on DVD in a year or so. When she isn't helping me play 'Jedi Knight 2' (in non-dismemberment mode), 'Unreal Tournament' (with bots' verbal abuse turned off), 'Return to Castle Wolfenstein', etc.