That's now seems to have fallen apart. DCS have the servers topaz and gem still, and CSV have primrose, but the actual lab systems can be just about anything. DCS have minerals, animals, wierd words, food, herbs and a few fish, plus some dull lab01.cslab type names. I guess DCS picked up a load of systems from the other departments when moving into the new building.
If anyone does leak this sort of data I can make enough from suing them to ensure I dont need an employer! The data protection act is a very powerful thing. Does the US actualy have an equivilent of the DPA?
Even if we assume that you're right and they're watching us and keeping files on when we go to the pub, or if we help our landlady carry out her rubbish (ok, it's almost a Matrix reference), why does it matter? Do I care if Agent Smith of MI5 knows that on a Friday I visit the Elm Tree freehouse on West End for 3 pints ? (those who read a similar post of mine last time will notice my weekly beer intake has increased by a pint) Frankly does Agent Smith give a damn anyway? I do nothing of any great interest. Perhaps if I was a member of some extremist group they'd pay more attention, but then it'd be quite justified - just look at the problems the anarchist groups have been causing recently, or the extremist green groups.
OK, the random email scanning thing is indeed something I dont agree with all that much as it falls into the same category as opening letters.
Indeed it is intended to watch mostly the common small time criminals. Those groups of people exist everywhere in the world (although those countrys that still go in for lopping off hands have a lot less of a problem).
> Your complaining here because you've been caught
> doing something you arguably shouldn't.
But who's to say your boss did do anything dodgy? Maybe the film you've aquired is simply him taking the secretary a bunch of flowers and bottle of wine as an appology for tripping her over and causing her to spend a week in hospital. However because his wife knows he's close to the secretary but isnt sure if it's anything more than just friendship the film could quite easily trigger her into beliving it's something closer than that.
> Please don't complain because a traffic light
> camera takes a picture of you running said
> light. You've broken the law.
Indeed, I have no problem if the traffic light takes a picture of me running it, I've broken the law and I deserve all I get (at worst a Volvo embeded in the side of my car, at best some points on my licence). Cameras that do just this are quite common in the UK, along with the automated speed cameras that some people seem to have a massive problem with.
> In your example, you've broken your marriage
> vows.
> * Surveillance cameras on highway bridges that
> track our cars by their license plates.
The only cameras dealing with the tracking of number plates are those in the automated speed cameras that are becoming common in the UK. As you are commiting what is technicaly a crime if you drive through them above the speed which triggers them you cant realy complain it's unfair.
> * Databases contianing all manner of personal
> informantion which are incerasingly becoming
> available to every Tom Dick and Harry.
In the UK we have the data protection act which prevents this (in theory).
> * People being discriminated on the base of
> their genetic makeup.
Find me a case of this happening.
The list of things that happened in the communist block states are nothing like the other list you gave! Having a file on someone means you are actively collecting information about someone and storing that information as linked to them. Having CCTV footage of the rush hour on the M25... ok, so you have film of large numbers of people going about their business, but you arent storing that data as linked to each individal - you're storing it as something like "M25 camera 7 Junction 2 29/11/01". The film of me walking to the pub is likely to be stored as "West End camera 1 2100-2159 28/11/01" and not stuck in a file with my name on with the tag "Jonathan going to the pub on the 28th".
Crime is not a always a symptom of poverty, take serial killers for example. Also the entire illegal drug industry, from the adicts who go shop lifting to raise funds for their next hit, to the dealers and drugs barons who are most certainly not poor. Finaly there are people who comit crimes simply because it's a challenge for them.
> The video on all those cameras should be made
> available to the public.
Errr, that DOES make it a privacy problem. Imagine the blackmail potential of the bit of footage of your boss meeting up with a secretary and doing something his wife wouldnt like all that much.
> Imagine pulling up mapquest with your route to
> work and being able to get a live video feed
> from those cameras that lie along your route.
> Now you can avoid traffic.
There are several services in the UK which give you traffic data that comes from Highways Agency's Control Centres, which base their data on the CCTV footage. They cannot, for privacy reasons, hand out the footage.
> Imagine your walking down a dark street, unsure
> of the neighborhood. You don't know whats around
> the corner, but you pull out your wireless
> handheld and get the video feed of that upcoming
> corner.
Imagine your hiding round a corner with a knife waiting for someone to get the cash off for your much needed fix. You pull out your wireless handheld and get the video feed of the street so you can spot a victim before they even turn the corner.
... for planting explosive devices
... for working out where the best place to mug someone is
... ensuring that when a crime is carried out by someone who's description matches you, you're not on tape as being somewhere else at the time
Need I go on?
The entire "CCTV cameras are evil" thing has just reared it's ugly head again. If you live in "the land of the free" and all that why the hell do you need to fear CCTV?
Try the London Underground at the dead of night... then remove the CCTV, make a big noise about how it's being done for freedom, and try paying the tube a visit at night again:-P The number of people surviving the Tube unscathed at night would drop dramatically.
Also CCTV isnt just used for security. A large number of the major motorways and road interchanges in the UK have full CCTV coverage which is monitored constantly to ensure traffic flow is uninterrupted. The control centre that watches the cameras has control over the electronic information boards by the sides of roads to allow them to impose temporary speed limits, and give warnings about hazards such as fog at a moment's notice. More info can be found in what I think is the original proposal (dating back to 1997) http://www.highways.gov.uk/info/tcc/rtcc/index.htm
Finally dont underestimate the power of CCTV for making the masses feel safe. It's a cheap way to make people feel safer, and also does a fair job at discouraging crime.
I wouldnt give a damn if MI5 kept a file on me thinking I was a threat to national security. It's only a problem for me when they show up and arrest me for being a threat (which in the case of the examples you gave, they didnt).
I'd prefer them to keep files on too many people, than to not keep files on the people that are truely a threat.
In these days of the internet it is very difficult for any government to hide it's actions from it's people by banning publication of those actions.
As we have easy access to news published outside the UK it would be an easy task to see what news (if any) is being hidden from us, and I cant think of any cases for a very long time that would cause me to distrust the government enough to make me suspect that they would be using CCTV to spy on me or for corporate purposes.
Most potential attackers wouldn't carry out the crime in view of the cameras, and if they do it is quite likely that they will find themselves arrested within a week thus preventing them from attacking anyone else.
I made a point of saying that our society is not crime ridden. CCTV cameras play quite a big part in reducing crime rate in areas that do have a crime problem, and make areas that dont have a crime problem even safer for the non-criminals.
And? I still dont see the problem. The only people who have anything to fear from these systems is the criminals, and I fail to see how that can be a bad thing.
I have heard several arguements like this before, and from reading the comments I see that a lot of people belive that CCTV is evil (or something like that).
CCTV is not some massive invasion of privicy. I cant walk down to my local pub without being 'seen' by the CCTV systems, but lets face it, do I care if Dave at GCHQ knows I've gone down the pub? Personaly I rather like the fact that the two guys that then jump me for my cash also get caught on camera. Dont take this as meaning Britain has a massive crime rate, because it doesnt, I've never been mugged and I suspect this is partly down to CCTV as mugging someone in front of a camera is hardly a great idea.
If the cameras were pointed into your house, or fitted in your bathroom I could see the problem, but they're not. They're in public places covering parks, major shopping areas, etc, not often do you see them in residential areas unless the area has a crime problem.
Much of the security network that's in place is due to the problem the UK has with the IRA. When a terrorist group spends most of it's free time blowing up chunks of your major cities you tend to get a little parrinoid about it. Anywhere that is likely to be bombed is covered with CCTV equiptment. Anyone who's been to London may have noticed the lack of any litter bins on the London Underground, they've all been removed as they were too easy a place to put bombs.
I'd far rather the police know I go to the Elm Tree for 3 pints of bitter every Thursday, have an email address for my dog and make mobile phone calls to people less than 2 metres away from me, than to find myself vapourised when a terrorist group decides my road would look nicer as a crater and no one notices them [plan to] leave a large quantity of Semtex lying arround.
If I'm not making much sense I appologise, it's 0200 and I've had a hard day:-p
Actualy I think you'll find they had the basics worked out by the time they got hold of one of the enigma machines... before that only a small number of messages could be decoded, and they took a long time.
All I can remember is that the ship supporting the operation was the HMS Bulldog:-) I seem to remember that it happened before the US got round to joining in with the war, but I cant be sure.
Uh oh, someone else who's been watching too many American films.
The British did indeed crack Enigma. The US however were a little slow to take up how useful this was and repeatedly ignored Enigma decodes loosing a lot of shipping to German U boats as a result.
I sugest you do a review of your WWII history:-p
Ah, but we dont have to suffer adverts on the BBC TV chans, or radio stations. After seeing how American cable TV is I'm damn glad we pay not to suffer things like that.
My company owns several domains (for use as IRC vhosts), several of which are registered with NSI. We planned to move all domains that were still registered with NSI to other, cheaper, registras as soon as they expired.
Recently one of those domains expired, but we had forgotten about it so didnt terminate it the day before the expiry. We didnt remember till a week later when I finaly recieved the Final Notice from NSI (how kind of them, one bit of paper telling us to pay before a date a week before:-P).
We thaught that they'd just delete it and we'd be able to re-reg our domain straight away... but no, they carried on holding onto it. So I tried to terminate the domain.. I got the auto replies from their system, but it was never deleted.
I am now left with one of our domains unusable, and no way to get it back. As you can imagine I am quite ****ed off with NSI over this as I'd very much like to be able to re-reg the domain.
Winmodems... what exactly is the deal with them ?
on
On Linux Laptops
·
· Score: 1
I've heard very little about winmodems. About all I know is that they are software driven and dont work under Linux. What are the advantages and disadvantages (apart from not working under Linux) of having a winmodem ? There must be some great advantage to make the CPU useage worthwhile (I guess they use quite a bit).
Slashdot Mirror
That's now seems to have fallen apart. DCS have the servers topaz and gem still, and CSV have primrose, but the actual lab systems can be just about anything. DCS have minerals, animals, wierd words, food, herbs and a few fish, plus some dull lab01.cslab type names. I guess DCS picked up a load of systems from the other departments when moving into the new building.
If anyone does leak this sort of data I can make enough from suing them to ensure I dont need an employer! The data protection act is a very powerful thing. Does the US actualy have an equivilent of the DPA?
Even if we assume that you're right and they're watching us and keeping files on when we go to the pub, or if we help our landlady carry out her rubbish (ok, it's almost a Matrix reference), why does it matter? Do I care if Agent Smith of MI5 knows that on a Friday I visit the Elm Tree freehouse on West End for 3 pints ? (those who read a similar post of mine last time will notice my weekly beer intake has increased by a pint) Frankly does Agent Smith give a damn anyway? I do nothing of any great interest. Perhaps if I was a member of some extremist group they'd pay more attention, but then it'd be quite justified - just look at the problems the anarchist groups have been causing recently, or the extremist green groups.
OK, the random email scanning thing is indeed something I dont agree with all that much as it falls into the same category as opening letters.
Indeed it is intended to watch mostly the common small time criminals. Those groups of people exist everywhere in the world (although those countrys that still go in for lopping off hands have a lot less of a problem).
> Your complaining here because you've been caught
> doing something you arguably shouldn't.
But who's to say your boss did do anything dodgy? Maybe the film you've aquired is simply him taking the secretary a bunch of flowers and bottle of wine as an appology for tripping her over and causing her to spend a week in hospital. However because his wife knows he's close to the secretary but isnt sure if it's anything more than just friendship the film could quite easily trigger her into beliving it's something closer than that.
> Please don't complain because a traffic light
> camera takes a picture of you running said
> light. You've broken the law.
Indeed, I have no problem if the traffic light takes a picture of me running it, I've broken the law and I deserve all I get (at worst a Volvo embeded in the side of my car, at best some points on my licence). Cameras that do just this are quite common in the UK, along with the automated speed cameras that some people seem to have a massive problem with.
> In your example, you've broken your marriage
> vows.
But has he? See above.
> * Surveillance cameras on highway bridges that
> track our cars by their license plates.
The only cameras dealing with the tracking of number plates are those in the automated speed cameras that are becoming common in the UK. As you are commiting what is technicaly a crime if you drive through them above the speed which triggers them you cant realy complain it's unfair.
> * Databases contianing all manner of personal
> informantion which are incerasingly becoming
> available to every Tom Dick and Harry.
In the UK we have the data protection act which prevents this (in theory).
> * People being discriminated on the base of
> their genetic makeup.
Find me a case of this happening.
The list of things that happened in the communist block states are nothing like the other list you gave! Having a file on someone means you are actively collecting information about someone and storing that information as linked to them. Having CCTV footage of the rush hour on the M25... ok, so you have film of large numbers of people going about their business, but you arent storing that data as linked to each individal - you're storing it as something like "M25 camera 7 Junction 2 29/11/01". The film of me walking to the pub is likely to be stored as "West End camera 1 2100-2159 28/11/01" and not stuck in a file with my name on with the tag "Jonathan going to the pub on the 28th".
Crime is not a always a symptom of poverty, take serial killers for example. Also the entire illegal drug industry, from the adicts who go shop lifting to raise funds for their next hit, to the dealers and drugs barons who are most certainly not poor. Finaly there are people who comit crimes simply because it's a challenge for them.
> The video on all those cameras should be made
> available to the public.
Errr, that DOES make it a privacy problem. Imagine the blackmail potential of the bit of footage of your boss meeting up with a secretary and doing something his wife wouldnt like all that much.
> Imagine pulling up mapquest with your route to
> work and being able to get a live video feed
> from those cameras that lie along your route.
> Now you can avoid traffic.
There are several services in the UK which give you traffic data that comes from Highways Agency's Control Centres, which base their data on the CCTV footage. They cannot, for privacy reasons, hand out the footage.
> Imagine your walking down a dark street, unsure
> of the neighborhood. You don't know whats around
> the corner, but you pull out your wireless
> handheld and get the video feed of that upcoming
> corner.
Imagine your hiding round a corner with a knife waiting for someone to get the cash off for your much needed fix. You pull out your wireless handheld and get the video feed of the street so you can spot a victim before they even turn the corner.
... for planting explosive devices
:-P The number of people surviving the Tube unscathed at night would drop dramatically.
m
... for working out where the best place to mug someone is
... ensuring that when a crime is carried out by someone who's description matches you, you're not on tape as being somewhere else at the time
Need I go on?
The entire "CCTV cameras are evil" thing has just reared it's ugly head again. If you live in "the land of the free" and all that why the hell do you need to fear CCTV?
Try the London Underground at the dead of night... then remove the CCTV, make a big noise about how it's being done for freedom, and try paying the tube a visit at night again
Also CCTV isnt just used for security. A large number of the major motorways and road interchanges in the UK have full CCTV coverage which is monitored constantly to ensure traffic flow is uninterrupted. The control centre that watches the cameras has control over the electronic information boards by the sides of roads to allow them to impose temporary speed limits, and give warnings about hazards such as fog at a moment's notice. More info can be found in what I think is the original proposal (dating back to 1997) http://www.highways.gov.uk/info/tcc/rtcc/index.ht
Finally dont underestimate the power of CCTV for making the masses feel safe. It's a cheap way to make people feel safer, and also does a fair job at discouraging crime.
I wouldnt give a damn if MI5 kept a file on me thinking I was a threat to national security. It's only a problem for me when they show up and arrest me for being a threat (which in the case of the examples you gave, they didnt).
I'd prefer them to keep files on too many people, than to not keep files on the people that are truely a threat.
In these days of the internet it is very difficult for any government to hide it's actions from it's people by banning publication of those actions.
As we have easy access to news published outside the UK it would be an easy task to see what news (if any) is being hidden from us, and I cant think of any cases for a very long time that would cause me to distrust the government enough to make me suspect that they would be using CCTV to spy on me or for corporate purposes.
Most potential attackers wouldn't carry out the crime in view of the cameras, and if they do it is quite likely that they will find themselves arrested within a week thus preventing them from attacking anyone else.
I made a point of saying that our society is not crime ridden. CCTV cameras play quite a big part in reducing crime rate in areas that do have a crime problem, and make areas that dont have a crime problem even safer for the non-criminals.
And? I still dont see the problem. The only people who have anything to fear from these systems is the criminals, and I fail to see how that can be a bad thing.
I have heard several arguements like this before, and from reading the comments I see that a lot of people belive that CCTV is evil (or something like that).
:-p
CCTV is not some massive invasion of privicy. I cant walk down to my local pub without being 'seen' by the CCTV systems, but lets face it, do I care if Dave at GCHQ knows I've gone down the pub? Personaly I rather like the fact that the two guys that then jump me for my cash also get caught on camera. Dont take this as meaning Britain has a massive crime rate, because it doesnt, I've never been mugged and I suspect this is partly down to CCTV as mugging someone in front of a camera is hardly a great idea.
If the cameras were pointed into your house, or fitted in your bathroom I could see the problem, but they're not. They're in public places covering parks, major shopping areas, etc, not often do you see them in residential areas unless the area has a crime problem.
Much of the security network that's in place is due to the problem the UK has with the IRA. When a terrorist group spends most of it's free time blowing up chunks of your major cities you tend to get a little parrinoid about it. Anywhere that is likely to be bombed is covered with CCTV equiptment. Anyone who's been to London may have noticed the lack of any litter bins on the London Underground, they've all been removed as they were too easy a place to put bombs.
I'd far rather the police know I go to the Elm Tree for 3 pints of bitter every Thursday, have an email address for my dog and make mobile phone calls to people less than 2 metres away from me, than to find myself vapourised when a terrorist group decides my road would look nicer as a crater and no one notices them [plan to] leave a large quantity of Semtex lying arround.
If I'm not making much sense I appologise, it's 0200 and I've had a hard day
Actualy I think you'll find they had the basics worked out by the time they got hold of one of the enigma machines... before that only a small number of messages could be decoded, and they took a long time.
All I can remember is that the ship supporting the operation was the HMS Bulldog :-) I seem to remember that it happened before the US got round to joining in with the war, but I cant be sure.
I prefer the tax to the adverts :-)
Uh oh, someone else who's been watching too many American films. The British did indeed crack Enigma. The US however were a little slow to take up how useful this was and repeatedly ignored Enigma decodes loosing a lot of shipping to German U boats as a result. I sugest you do a review of your WWII history :-p
Ah, but we dont have to suffer adverts on the BBC TV chans, or radio stations. After seeing how American cable TV is I'm damn glad we pay not to suffer things like that.
My company owns several domains (for use as IRC vhosts), several of which are registered with NSI. We planned to move all domains that were still registered with NSI to other, cheaper, registras as soon as they expired.
:-P).
Recently one of those domains expired, but we had forgotten about it so didnt terminate it the day before the expiry. We didnt remember till a week later when I finaly recieved the Final Notice from NSI (how kind of them, one bit of paper telling us to pay before a date a week before
We thaught that they'd just delete it and we'd be able to re-reg our domain straight away... but no, they carried on holding onto it. So I tried to terminate the domain.. I got the auto replies from their system, but it was never deleted.
I am now left with one of our domains unusable, and no way to get it back. As you can imagine I am quite ****ed off with NSI over this as I'd very much like to be able to re-reg the domain.
I've heard very little about winmodems. About all I know is that they are software driven and dont work under Linux. What are the advantages and disadvantages (apart from not working under Linux) of having a winmodem ? There must be some great advantage to make the CPU useage worthwhile (I guess they use quite a bit).
If BO2k is 'childs play' does that say much about the security of MS OS's ?