mechanical door locks. no radio - in fact, put a smooth plate over the DIN hole. manual everything. as little electronic jiz as possible. Hell, the only reason for a battery in a diesel is to turn the starter motor. It's not needed after that.
It's a mode of transport, not a fucking bling statement. Bling statements are targets for theft.
to answer your last question: no, because they're implicated. To expand on that you'd have to read this, which also explains the other bit: https://www.academia.edu/57099...
[ABSTRACT]:
Freedom of Information Act 2000 requests made between October 2011 and May 2012 reveal that the majority of Local Authorities in England and Wales do not conform or abide by the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 1963. Most have neither policy nor practice with due regard to the basic tenet of s.37 of the Convention: the receiving State’s duty to inform relevant sending state Consuls regarding their foreign children that have been removed from parents in UK care proceedings. The UK signed the Convention in 1964. Signatories have the following duty, without exception, under Article 37 (b) of the Vienna Convention of Consular Relations 1963: Article 37 (b): “If the relevant information is available to the competent authorities of the receiving State, such authorities shall have the duty: -
to inform the competent consular post without delay of any case where the appointment of a guardian or trustee appears to be in the interests of a minor or other person lacking full capacity who is a national of the sending State.”
Nothing in the Convention states that adherence to Article 5 (h) is to be interpreted so as to exclude obligations under Article 37 (b).
Article 5 (h): “safeguarding, within the limits imposed by the laws and regulations of the receiving State, the interests of minors and other persons lacking full capacity who are nationals of the sending State, particularly where any guardianship or trusteeship is required with respect to such persons;”
There appears to be no domestic law or Convention signatory limitation obviating UK any of the UK authorities involved with removing and caring for foreign children from informing the sending states of their parents under legislative "limits imposed by the laws and regulations of the receiving State” Art.5(h) above.
The usual pattern appears to be that the UK local authority does not inform the relevant Consul once a foreign child is taken into care and judiciary refuse to uphold the same duty to the child and other States Parties to the Convention when the omission is raised in court. Other involved agencies, such as the Police, CAFCASS, Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Ministeries and regulators, also have no regard to their respective duties as State bodies under the Convention.
The practice is widespread, with foreign children stealthily processed with the full knowledge and consent of current and previous Presidents of the Family Division - alongside Lord Justice Thorpe who currently heads UK International Family Law. The dilemma for parents of what appears to be the unlawful removal of children is compounded when subsequent statutory safeguards and processes are ignored by both local authority and judiciary. For example, interim care orders are routinely renewed by post without written consent of the parents. Recent changes to law obviate previous duty to hold monthly interim hearings before care order renewal, making lawful practices previously unlawful. Those hearings now need only be applied for only when affected parents can produce evidence of ‘change’ to the circumstances claimed as justification for the removal of their. Few of the local authorities fully particularise their claims. Police have been known to assist local authorities with unlawful removals, including immediately after birth by forceful restraint and assault of the mother and at least one case where the baby was actually cut out of the mother (Pacchieri), enabled by the presentation of false court documentation to hospitals (MANY example cases of this kind exist). Most removals effectively amount to kidnap.
[END ABSTRACT]:
The report details admission by local authorities of the abduction of well over three thousand children of foreign nationals between 2007 and 2012. THAT IS WHAT THEY ADMIT TO.
this was a major issue in the Bulger case as well, the argument was that the two little bastards' parents should have stood trial for neglect, but because it was such a public murder (more to the fact that it was actually a murder, hence a capital crime, hence tripped the strict liability threshold), the two little bastards should be tried as adults. It ALMOST got scuppered as a murder trial because of some basic errors my the officer leading the investigation, in which case it would have ended up as a trial of the parents for neglect and a civil claim for damages by the Bulger family, in which case the two little bastards would've been out and who knows what else they might have gotten up to (one of them ended up back in jail after being paroled for kiddie fiddling).
physically harming someone puts the perpetrator squarely in the crosshairs of strict personal liability - which is a lot of cases ends up with the child being tried as an adult, particularly on capital offences. Vicarious liability is the usual result of neglectful parenting which results in claims for damages. You can have vicarious liability without strict personal liability, eg in the case of a broken window, or you can have strict personal liability on the part of the child without vicarious liability of the parent (ie a child in the care of the State absconding and murdering an old lady), or you can have both (ie a child in the care of his parents murdering his baby sister while the parents are out getting drunk).
Facebook *does* retroactively censor, and not for maintaining moral standards. Most of the time it's politically motivated. Two examples: I am aware of a page, and I have not only made Facebook and CEOP aware, I have also made the police aware. Said page advertises children for sale in the UK. Said page is still up after four YEARS. I created a page to raise awareness of missing endangered children in the UK, my page was not only deleted after three weeks, it was expunged from the database (I have the notification from the facebook online safety team) and I had three visits: one from Kent police, one from Sussex police and one from the Metropolitan police, all threatening to arrest and hold me on unspecified charges if I ever pulled such a stunt again.
So I asked myself, why would a social network pull a page intended to offer a conduit for parents searching for their missing/abducted children? Asked then answered: those children are victims of the aforementioned trafficking network - that just happens to be run by a private company which operates with Government sanction and police protection. I have screenshots of Google search results and the pages themselves of examples of children I am personally aware of having been abducted on entirely specious grounds ("risk of future emotional harm") and subsequently sold. It isn't just one or two children either. It's THOUSANDS.
XPS is/was a high end Dell laptop specification and branding touted as being the ultimate in desktop replacements (also marketed with the Alienware badge). The series started in the Dimension line of desktop machines when the Pentium first hit the market (source: have owned a Dimension XPS P60 desktop (since scrapped) and an Inspiron XPS 8200 laptop (which I still use because it's got 2GB RAM and a 1600x1200 screen)). The trademark for the laptop line is a lit "XPS" logo running down the left and right sides of the lid in red or blue, on rare occasions in green (mine has the standard lid because I managed to break the XPS badge). On the show Stargate Atlantis, XPS laptops were rebadged with the fictional logo depicting them as "SGI" laptops (SGI have NEVER made a laptop) but for anyone who's ever owned an XPS, Inspiron or Latitude the chassis were pretty recognisable. The biggest selling point for me with the Latitude/Inspiron PPx chassis wasn't the XPS badge on the high end machines but the fact that they're pretty much completely modular. You can switch batteries, optical drives, hard drive caddies, internal cards, graphics processors etc, among almost the entire line from the lowliest PII/233 up to the P4/2.0 - knowing this because I've been doing it since 2002.
would that be a fair comparison, a quad 3.9 with a FSB running well over 1GHz against something with a 400MHZ FSB and only two cores?
(I don't know what the original iPad had in it nor do I know what the new one has, but I suppose you could extend my argument to cover that as well. Is it 12x faster for having twice the core running at three to four times the core speed, or is there some strange benchmark going on here that takes advantage of some extended instruction that the older chip doesn't have? It can only be one or the other or both; in either case, you can't make a fair comparison unless you're running exactly the same benchmark on exactly the same platform (right down to the kernel) which I'm pretty damn sure isn't happening here).
there's that, although I find the ability to vertically compress the desktop to 1024x768 when needed, to be very handy and not too distracting. Anyone remember what the Dell C400 and L400s went for as new (I have both but secondhand - paid more for a new screen for the C400 than I did for both machines combined)? I do like those, even more than the EeePC in the perfect balance between screen size and almost-pocket-portability and battery life (notwithstanding the price tag of the C400 battery being over £100 when I had to fork out for one of those). I carry the EeePC these days because a: it's got a camera built in, b: it's got wifi and bluetooth built in, c: it's got 160GB storage and an SD/multi reader, d: two USB2 ports as opposed to a single 1.1, e: ten hour battery in the EeePC as opposed to two to three in the Dell... probably more points but nothing springs immediately to mind.
VAT in the UK was intended as a replacement for income tax, didn't work out that way since someone forgot to abolish income tax. Now we are forced to pay both.
prior art: Asus EeePC 1008HA I have has 1GB RAM and runs full Windows XP, with a nearly 10h battery life. I bought that in 2011 not long after they came out.
first and last: define what a tablet is? I can tell you now that the new iPhone 6 (larger model, can't remember what the model is) is considered a tablet even though it's marketed as a large screen phone. Hell, you can type on it almost as easily as you can type on an iPad. Yet, it's a phone. The Samsung Galaxy Tab 3G is a phone with a nearly 8 inch screen! Is it a phone? Yes. Is it a functional tablet? Yes. Where is the blurry line between phone and tablet?
What he said. I've had "Application tester" on my resume for years, always impresses the geek.
Truth of it is, I'm always sending in bug reports complete with hex dumps and screenshots. I just want my shit to work, and when it doesn't I want it fixed, letting the devs know what's up is the best way to accomplish that.
I used to have a TCP stack running on an Epson HX-40. Thing ran for two months on one set of AA alkalines. Still got the computer somewhere, it might even still work.
yeah that's always bugged me as well, at least since the market steered away from the reference to "XT compatible" or whatever it was and genericised it to "PC" or "Mac". My last Mac ran Linux, what category does that fall under?? Hell, for that matter, this laptop runs Mac OS, Linux, FreeBSD, DOS and xp sandboxed on a Win7 host. Hey, Computer Darwin - this one's got fur and a beak!
my ZTE F930 has all except wifi, is smaller than a WD Passport hard drive, is currently equipped with an 8GB SD card (it'll take a 16), and cost £35 in 2010. Still works, no need for an "upgrade" which pretty much means I get to keep my battery that's still good for a week between charges:)
Slashdot Mirror
for me, a car should come with:
mechanical door locks.
no radio - in fact, put a smooth plate over the DIN hole.
manual everything.
as little electronic jiz as possible. Hell, the only reason for a battery in a diesel is to turn the starter motor. It's not needed after that.
It's a mode of transport, not a fucking bling statement. Bling statements are targets for theft.
they're still capital crimes even if there is no death penalty.
Are you going to put your name to your bullshit or what?
to answer your last question: no, because they're implicated. To expand on that you'd have to read this, which also explains the other bit: https://www.academia.edu/57099...
[ABSTRACT]:
Freedom of Information Act 2000 requests made between October 2011 and May 2012 reveal that the majority of Local Authorities in England and Wales do not conform or abide by the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 1963. Most have neither policy nor practice with due regard to the basic tenet of s.37 of the Convention: the receiving State’s duty to inform relevant sending state Consuls regarding their foreign children that have been removed from parents in UK care proceedings. The UK signed the Convention in 1964. Signatories have the following duty, without exception, under Article 37 (b) of the Vienna Convention of Consular Relations 1963: Article 37 (b):
“If the relevant information is available to the competent authorities of the receiving State, such authorities shall have the duty:
-
to inform the competent consular post without delay of any case where the appointment of a guardian or trustee appears to be in the interests of a minor or other person lacking full capacity who is a national of the sending State.”
Nothing in the Convention states that adherence to Article 5 (h) is to be interpreted so as to exclude obligations under Article 37 (b).
Article 5 (h):
“safeguarding, within the limits imposed by the laws and regulations of the receiving State, the interests of minors and other persons lacking full capacity who are nationals of the sending State, particularly where any guardianship or trusteeship is required with respect to such persons;”
There appears to be no domestic law or Convention signatory limitation obviating UK any of the UK authorities involved with removing and caring for foreign children from informing the sending states of their parents under legislative "limits imposed by the laws and regulations of the receiving State” Art.5(h) above.
The usual pattern appears to be that the UK local authority does not inform the relevant Consul once a foreign child is taken into care and judiciary refuse to uphold the same duty to the child and other States Parties to the Convention when the omission is raised in court. Other involved agencies, such as the Police, CAFCASS, Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Ministeries and regulators, also have no regard to their respective duties as State bodies under the Convention.
The practice is widespread, with foreign children stealthily processed with the full knowledge and consent of current and previous Presidents of the Family Division - alongside Lord Justice Thorpe who currently heads UK International Family Law. The dilemma for parents of what appears to be the unlawful removal of children is compounded when subsequent statutory safeguards and processes are ignored by both local authority and judiciary. For example, interim care orders are routinely renewed by post without written consent of the parents. Recent changes to law obviate previous duty to hold monthly interim hearings before care order renewal, making lawful practices previously unlawful. Those hearings now need only be applied for only when affected parents can produce evidence of ‘change’ to the circumstances claimed as justification for the removal of their. Few of the local authorities fully particularise their claims. Police have been known to assist local authorities with unlawful removals, including immediately after birth by forceful restraint and assault of the mother and at least one case where the baby was actually cut out of the mother (Pacchieri), enabled by the presentation of false court documentation to hospitals (MANY example cases of this kind exist). Most removals effectively amount to kidnap.
[END ABSTRACT]:
The report details admission by local authorities of the abduction of well over three thousand children of foreign nationals between 2007 and 2012. THAT IS WHAT THEY ADMIT TO.
unlikely given that the account was still active and in use up to the day it was deleted.
this was a major issue in the Bulger case as well, the argument was that the two little bastards' parents should have stood trial for neglect, but because it was such a public murder (more to the fact that it was actually a murder, hence a capital crime, hence tripped the strict liability threshold), the two little bastards should be tried as adults. It ALMOST got scuppered as a murder trial because of some basic errors my the officer leading the investigation, in which case it would have ended up as a trial of the parents for neglect and a civil claim for damages by the Bulger family, in which case the two little bastards would've been out and who knows what else they might have gotten up to (one of them ended up back in jail after being paroled for kiddie fiddling).
physically harming someone puts the perpetrator squarely in the crosshairs of strict personal liability - which is a lot of cases ends up with the child being tried as an adult, particularly on capital offences. Vicarious liability is the usual result of neglectful parenting which results in claims for damages. You can have vicarious liability without strict personal liability, eg in the case of a broken window, or you can have strict personal liability on the part of the child without vicarious liability of the parent (ie a child in the care of the State absconding and murdering an old lady), or you can have both (ie a child in the care of his parents murdering his baby sister while the parents are out getting drunk).
you made claims, the burden is on YOU to provide proof. Otherwise, I call bullshit.
Facebook *does* retroactively censor, and not for maintaining moral standards. Most of the time it's politically motivated. Two examples: I am aware of a page, and I have not only made Facebook and CEOP aware, I have also made the police aware. Said page advertises children for sale in the UK. Said page is still up after four YEARS. I created a page to raise awareness of missing endangered children in the UK, my page was not only deleted after three weeks, it was expunged from the database (I have the notification from the facebook online safety team) and I had three visits: one from Kent police, one from Sussex police and one from the Metropolitan police, all threatening to arrest and hold me on unspecified charges if I ever pulled such a stunt again.
So I asked myself, why would a social network pull a page intended to offer a conduit for parents searching for their missing/abducted children? Asked then answered: those children are victims of the aforementioned trafficking network - that just happens to be run by a private company which operates with Government sanction and police protection. I have screenshots of Google search results and the pages themselves of examples of children I am personally aware of having been abducted on entirely specious grounds ("risk of future emotional harm") and subsequently sold. It isn't just one or two children either. It's THOUSANDS.
In the UK that equates to a 12 year old.
The minimum age for a Facebook account is 13. It's right there, in their terms and conditions.
Parental fail.
uh... have you seen the state of Detroit lately?
XPS is/was a high end Dell laptop specification and branding touted as being the ultimate in desktop replacements (also marketed with the Alienware badge). The series started in the Dimension line of desktop machines when the Pentium first hit the market (source: have owned a Dimension XPS P60 desktop (since scrapped) and an Inspiron XPS 8200 laptop (which I still use because it's got 2GB RAM and a 1600x1200 screen)). The trademark for the laptop line is a lit "XPS" logo running down the left and right sides of the lid in red or blue, on rare occasions in green (mine has the standard lid because I managed to break the XPS badge). On the show Stargate Atlantis, XPS laptops were rebadged with the fictional logo depicting them as "SGI" laptops (SGI have NEVER made a laptop) but for anyone who's ever owned an XPS, Inspiron or Latitude the chassis were pretty recognisable. The biggest selling point for me with the Latitude/Inspiron PPx chassis wasn't the XPS badge on the high end machines but the fact that they're pretty much completely modular. You can switch batteries, optical drives, hard drive caddies, internal cards, graphics processors etc, among almost the entire line from the lowliest PII/233 up to the P4/2.0 - knowing this because I've been doing it since 2002.
would that be a fair comparison, a quad 3.9 with a FSB running well over 1GHz against something with a 400MHZ FSB and only two cores?
(I don't know what the original iPad had in it nor do I know what the new one has, but I suppose you could extend my argument to cover that as well. Is it 12x faster for having twice the core running at three to four times the core speed, or is there some strange benchmark going on here that takes advantage of some extended instruction that the older chip doesn't have? It can only be one or the other or both; in either case, you can't make a fair comparison unless you're running exactly the same benchmark on exactly the same platform (right down to the kernel) which I'm pretty damn sure isn't happening here).
there's that, although I find the ability to vertically compress the desktop to 1024x768 when needed, to be very handy and not too distracting. Anyone remember what the Dell C400 and L400s went for as new (I have both but secondhand - paid more for a new screen for the C400 than I did for both machines combined)? I do like those, even more than the EeePC in the perfect balance between screen size and almost-pocket-portability and battery life (notwithstanding the price tag of the C400 battery being over £100 when I had to fork out for one of those). I carry the EeePC these days because a: it's got a camera built in, b: it's got wifi and bluetooth built in, c: it's got 160GB storage and an SD/multi reader, d: two USB2 ports as opposed to a single 1.1, e: ten hour battery in the EeePC as opposed to two to three in the Dell... probably more points but nothing springs immediately to mind.
VAT in the UK was intended as a replacement for income tax, didn't work out that way since someone forgot to abolish income tax. Now we are forced to pay both.
prior art: Asus EeePC 1008HA I have has 1GB RAM and runs full Windows XP, with a nearly 10h battery life. I bought that in 2011 not long after they came out.
first and last: define what a tablet is? I can tell you now that the new iPhone 6 (larger model, can't remember what the model is) is considered a tablet even though it's marketed as a large screen phone. Hell, you can type on it almost as easily as you can type on an iPad. Yet, it's a phone. The Samsung Galaxy Tab 3G is a phone with a nearly 8 inch screen! Is it a phone? Yes. Is it a functional tablet? Yes. Where is the blurry line between phone and tablet?
What he said. I've had "Application tester" on my resume for years, always impresses the geek.
Truth of it is, I'm always sending in bug reports complete with hex dumps and screenshots. I just want my shit to work, and when it doesn't I want it fixed, letting the devs know what's up is the best way to accomplish that.
citations needed.
Build you're own internet.
Fine! I will! With blackjack, and hookers!
I used to have a TCP stack running on an Epson HX-40. Thing ran for two months on one set of AA alkalines. Still got the computer somewhere, it might even still work.
watermarks and due diligence - how much are your photos worth to you in terms of litigation?
I had a Samsung with a DX4/100 processor and a USB port. Used that right up until around 2007, when it finally expired.
yeah that's always bugged me as well, at least since the market steered away from the reference to "XT compatible" or whatever it was and genericised it to "PC" or "Mac". My last Mac ran Linux, what category does that fall under?? Hell, for that matter, this laptop runs Mac OS, Linux, FreeBSD, DOS and xp sandboxed on a Win7 host. Hey, Computer Darwin - this one's got fur and a beak!
...this gives me ideas for monetising them... anyone fancy helping with runtesting them in a DOS sandbox?
my ZTE F930 has all except wifi, is smaller than a WD Passport hard drive, is currently equipped with an 8GB SD card (it'll take a 16), and cost £35 in 2010. Still works, no need for an "upgrade" which pretty much means I get to keep my battery that's still good for a week between charges :)