Even better, how do I change my retina and fingerprints when it is stolen?
Luckily, this has already be solved for the fingerprints, and there has been some experimentation with iris patterns printed onto contact lenses which has had some success.
And of course the British public according to the polling organisations.
... and this is what saddens me the most! The "Great British Public" being hoodwinked again! Did you know that the ID Cards Roadshow put up by the Government banned the NoToID people from leafleting the crowd to try and put a different view?
Most people I have talked to who were for ID cards are easily persuaded to be against them. I'm not even going to say outright that ID cards are bad (although that is, rather obviously, my view!), but if people can be so easily swayed, in the worst case, it is presumably the last opinion they heard that they will agree with! Most people don't know enough about the issues (both pros and cons) to be able to make a reasoned decision. I have never had a conversation with a Pro ID Card person (or group) which has provided me with a solid reason why ID cards will be good for Britain.
Have you not noticed how the Gov keep changing tack? First it was terrorism, fraud, but then Charles Clarke admitted they would not have help fight terrorism or fraud.
Next they jump on the distinctly right wing agenda immigration bandwagon, but if an illegal immigrant doesn't have "papers", surely, and ID card is simply another "paper" they won't have?
Next, someone in the spin-doctor think-tank picks up on ID Theft, and now ID cards are going to do away with it all together. The people who know suggest it might actually make it easier to steal someone's ID, and actually harder to get your ID back! If someone discovers your password or PIN number, you can change it, but if someone forges your fingerprint you are right royally screwed!
Each time the Gov put forward some reason for ID cards, someone (and sometimes from within the Gov!) has debunked it. They are squirming around looking for a good reason. I'd really like to know why they think it is a good idea, but I don't think they've told us what they really think yet!
I can't say I'm really worried about the government abusing the database, it will probably not work when it's supposed to be ready, and even then it will be compromised by having too many points of access, rendering it's security useless. I don't suppose for a moment that the system will work properly...
You ain't whistlin' Dixie!
The National Gun Register, which was another knee-jerk reaction after Dunblane, is still late, and perhaps has 10's of thousands of entries and they can't connect it to the Police systems for some reason?
Frankly, it's laughable, but if they're having trouble with that (which could probably be done in Access!) there wouldn't seem to be a snowball's chance in hell of them actually getting this ID system off the ground. It's going to cost a fortune (making the Millenium Dome look like a wise investment!) and be useless!
Whatever cleverness the ID Card people think of, someone will find a way round it until the only people who are affected in their daily lives by ID Cards will be the law abiding, who will also be the suckers who pay for the priviledge!
... and to perhaps be even fairer, as I understand it, the a property was being watched because they thought some of the bombers were inside. This chap came out, and was therefore a suspect. This was communicated to the Police marksmen, incorrectly, that he was a terrorist suspect, so when he went onto the tube (subway) it could easily have been construed by the marksmen that he was going to detonate himself. If they hadn't shot him and he HAD detonated, where would we be now.
I don't blame the marksmen, as I believe they had no choice from the information (I understand!) they were given.
The people who gave them the wrong information are more to blame for his death than the people who actually shot him, but this was probably/possibly a simply mistake.
What I do find unpalatable is the way the Police seemed to rally round to try and cover it up. All the stories about him carrying a pack, running away, jumping over the barrier to get into the underground, which were allowed to propagate should have been stamped on immediately they surfaced, and the Police Chief should have stood up and said they shot an innocent man as soon as he knew. This would have been the right way to handle the unfortunate situation.
There should also be an enquiry (probably public so we know they are doing it!) to find out how the mistake actually happened, ie where did the mis-information originate, and how can we try and stop it happening next time.
i submit that before 2008 we'll see people 'defecting' from britain.
Just renew your passport before the 2008 deadline, and you've got 10 years for the Gov to come to their senses before you are forced (coerced) into getting one.
That's my plan. I'll leave the "moving to Canada" option for sometime after 2018, if we haven't booted the whole sorry idea out by then!
Of course, this doesn't mean I won't buy shares in which ever company Blair has already given the contract too! I wonder if he knows the Director?
... those hospitals and ambulances wearing the red cross were found to house weapons and transport enemies.
As some other poster has already said, this is part of the fallacy of a civilised conflict (or something like that). If you are losing, or otherwise facing overwhelming odds, you are likely to put the rules of engagement on the back burner, and expecting your foes to abide by some arbitary notions of "civilised" behaviour just before you wipe them out or capture them is the most stupid thing you can do and is often life limiting for your side.
Remember the Falklands when some Argentinian conscripts were involved in a "white flag" incident, where we also lost Colonel "H" Jones? If you are scared out of your wits I'm not surprised that people will do such things as it must simply be part of the human survival instinct to do whatever seems necessary to increase your chances. It would also seem far more likely to happen within a poorly trained (ie disciplined) force, or if you are fighting people who _think_ they really have their backs against the wall. So, fighting conscripts (as in the Falklands) or fighting a rag-tag band of religous zealots (*cough*) you should expect them to not abide by the rules, and, in my view, storing their arsenal in their hospitals makes the hospitals a valid target!
I loved Lego when I was a kid, and still can't resist building something if there's a bucket of Lego about, but I have to say that the whole concept of the "$100 kits" (obviously, £100 in the UK for some reason!) leaves me cold!
As I understood it, the concept was that there are a bunch of building blocks from which you can build pretty much anything your imagination can fathom, so why, in the name of all that is holy, do we want or need a special kit containing bespoke parts to allow us to build something someone else thought up!
The "fun", for me at least, is thinking of something to build, and building it using the Lego I have!
My favourite creation, to date, was a spider with articulated legs. Six legs, sure (somewhat negating the "spider" claim, especially here on Slashdot!), as there wasn't enough Lego, but the concept was sound.
Give me a big bucket of plain Lego over some over-priced "Millenium Falcon" kit any day!
... and as an aside, is the provision of these kits supposed to nurture our children's creativity or stamp it out completely?
That said, put me down for one of the Lego "Difference Engine" kits!
Changing to electric power only moves the problem (burn more coal/oil to make electricity).
I've seen this argument a number of times for presumably not using electric vehicles. Surely it is better to centralise the power generation allowing for economies of scale and single point of generation to always be as clean as technically and economically possible?
If everyone's second car (third/fourth/fifth car?) was electric and just used for the local driving it would cut down pollution in the towns and cities, where it is usually the worst.
Sure, there would need to be more power generation elsewhere, but it doesn't have to be coal or oil, and if it is coal or oil it doesn't have to be dirty!
The shifting to local travel by personal electric vehicles would mean the populace has decided it doesn't like living in smoggy cities, and the government can clean up the power generation as it becomes possible to do so.
Hmmm. Sure, there are other companies out there, and I'd agree that MS aren't "the industry" as such, but they're surely one of the most powerful, and definately the most widely known, so as an attempt at humour they're probably well placed to offer at least the illusion of "the industry" to counter the OP's "one company does not an industry make" (or whatever it was) remark.
I was being flippant, or skippy, or something, and I apologise.
A quick look at Amazon shows the book is still out there, but the last revision is 1986, so it's certainly a bit dated in some information.
Have women changed then? Granted, it's been a while since I saw one close up, but I was kinda hoping they'd be sufficiently similar next time so I'd know which bits to do what to, and stuff!
It wasn't that the 2p piece was bigger than other coins, it was that it was so big for such an insignificant amount.
Interestingly (or maybe not?), the UK 2p coin is exactly twice the wieght of the UK 1p coin. Why this should be so, I've no idea.
I wonder if there was some attempt to have all the copper coins (now just the 1p and 2p coins, but formerly we had 1/4 (aka farthing) and 1/2 pence pieces too) in increasing size/wieght, then a similar, though different, scale for the silver pieces, 5p 10p 20p 50p, though I think the 10p piece is actually bigger than the 20p (although of course the 20p and 50p have corners to help differentiate). Of course then we have the £1 and £2 coins, which are thicker coins.
We used to have 3d, 4d, 6d, 12d (AKA shilling), 1/2 crown (24p or 25? or whatever the hell that was!) in the "olden days" (notice 'd' and not 'p') as well as some commemerative £5 coins in recent years.
I expect someone spends a huge amount of time designing these coins, and I'd have to say I like our £1 and £2 coins over the old notes (though we didn't used to have a £2 note).
It does seem that coins are really old fashioned though, and why not use something like a cash-card (eg mondex or one of it's rivals) instead. The only problem with these cash-cards is that the Governments see it is some way to track cash, and that's why they don't work. The cash-cards should be just that, so if you lose your cash-card you have lost the cash that's contained on it, and if you find one, you can spend it.
I think society's need a cash equivalent and the Government could "mint" blank cash cards instead of coins. Give the cards out for free, even sell the space on the cards to advertisers, and it'd be way cheaper than the current system. It'd maybe offer all the advantages of cash without the costs of cash.
I was appalled when I got one of the giant 2c coins in England. I mean, pennies are annoying, but pennies that are bigger than loonies ($1 coin in Canada) are ridiculous!
I always find it hard to adjust to the fact that the ten cent piece (dime?) is smaller than the five cent piece (nickel?). Go figure!
... oh yes, and in the UK, it would of course be a "2p" piece.
What the article was basically talking about how all these safety systems allow bad drivers to actually become worse drivers, and the safety systems actually pick up the slack.
There's certainly something to be said for people taking less care when driving because of all the safety aids designed to protect them if they, or someone else, screws up!
If you removed the driver's seatbelt, and the driver's airbag, and added a nice shiney spike to the centre of the steering wheel, do you think the average driver (any driver) would tailgate anyone? I'm betting everyone would drive a bit slower and leave more room in case of emergencies, right!
How about a system that knows the speed limit everywhere and does not allow the automobile to exceed that limit?
Whilst I will agree that usually this would prevent accidents, there are occasions where I have needed to accelerate out of trouble. I would be pretty damn miffed if some speed limiter stopped me from being able to do so!
ABS provides shorter and better controlled braking than non-ABS.
If you added usually in there somewhere, I could have let it slide (*cough*), but without it there's a need for a correction.
If you are on gravel or snow, or anything else likely to "bunch up", you are better off locking the wheels! This is because the gravel/snow/sand will bunch up in front of your wheels (obviously, only ones having the braking force applied) and this will stop you far quicker than an ABS assisted stop on the same surface because, in essence, your braking wheels are digging into the surface.
This said, in normal motoring conditions, you are more likely to be assisted by ABS than not.
I would add to your distinction the observation that the holes left behind by a mole are permanent in the short term, while the "holes" behind the bird and the fish refill pretty much instantly.
... but isn't that just because the dopey old fishes don't swim fast enough (depending on your definition of short term)?
See perhaps cavitation and wonder if there may not be a similar behaviour for very fast fish (if there were any, which there aren't)?
Kinda off topic, although this story is about the New Year's Eve extra second... anyway... cough...
Why do people call it "New Years"? I think this is another Americanism that has crept in to the UK over the last few years. Surely, there's New Year's Eve, and New Year's Day (the days relating to New Year), but the time of year is "New Year" not "New Years".
Anyway, Happy New Year to all you Slashdottirs and Slashdotsons (as they'd maybe say in Iceland - the place, not the cheap UK frozen food outlet).
Yes, OK - point taken. Although I did also post a possible scenario, however far fetched, where the driver might not be guilty of speeding.
Condsider the lilies... er... no... consider a chap drives past the first of such a pair of cameras and then loads his car onto a truck. The truck is then driven by the truck driver (so our chap remains innocent) and above the speed limit to just before the next camera, and the car is taken off the truck and our chap drives past the 2nd camera in time to be issued with a speeding ticket. Assume also, that the truck driver waits sufficiently long before also passing the 2nd camera so as to not get a ticket.
Or maybe even switch drivers?
So, We haven't broken any laws of physics, or invented any new maths, and yet our chap is innocent of the charge, and still gets a ticket?
It would be interesting to setup such an event and challenge the ticket in court.
And what would have happened if the robbers had pulled over (out of sight of the cameras) and swapped plates?
My guess is that the APNR system would suddenly see a new number plate appear in the same place the old number plate mysteriously disappeared, and on a similar make/age/colour vehicle. Hmmmm [rubs chin] I wonder if there may be some correlation between these two events?
Simply swapping plates will not help the hapless crims, because the system will (well, should anyway!) be able to spot that. What the crims need to do is something that won't look "odd" to the APNR system.
ANPR was used to catch some robbers who shot a cop dead in Bradford recently.
Hmmmm. PC Sharon Beshenivsky was shot around the 18th November, and there was the story about the fab new CCTV system that tracked the car to London, but then the story all went cold.
Come the 25th of Nov there's a story about how they appear to have lost the car and are appealing to the public for info on it's whereabouts. But hang on, I hear you ask, there was all that news about how great the system was and they caught the purps? Hmmmm.
Now it's 13th Dec and the public are again asked to help find a suspect. But you had the car right? You told us your fancy new system followed it to London right?
How's this any different from just looking up the owner of the car and going and knocking on their door?
I submitted a story to Slashdot (that didn't get accepted) about this very thing. There was the story (referenced in the parent) about how great this new system was, but it had privacy issues, then it turns out all it has is privacy issues, because it didn't actually work in the first place.
Also funny how the Gov. were shouting from the rooftops about how this new APNR system was going to keep us safe in our beds, but nothing, zip, zilch, nada, to say Ooooops - actually we fumbled that one and we didn't catch them in the car in London after all!
Hence, if the average is greater than the limit, one necessarily has disobeyed the posted regulations at some point in time.
Of course, these cameras never make mistakes like the issuing of a
800 MPH (in a 30 zone!) speeding ticket to 73 year old Adalat Khan.
From the article (my emboldification):
Khan, a retiree, received a letter from the police claiming they had photographic and video evidence of his supersonic offense. Khan denies traveling beyond the speed of sound, which is approximately 750 MPH at sea level.
If your average speed is over the speed limit, then at some point in time you must have exceeded it.
I wondered about this myself. How about passing the first of such a camera pair, then loading you car onto a flatbed truck. Proceed above the speed limit on the truck to just before the second camera and unload your car to proceed past the second camera. The truck should wait to ensure it doesn't break the (average) speed limit before proceeding.
Now what happens? You get a ticket but are innocent, and the truck driver doesn't get one and is guilty.
Perhaps a bit contrived, but it would make an interesting defence. Perhaps someone could actually do it and go to court to set the precedent so all the damn cameras would be useless.
If you sell a car you cover the plate for the photographs. Especially if you're putting the pictures on the internet. If you don't, you'll have a stack of parking and speeding fines from all over the country.
Now I just had an idea. Why not post piccies of you car, including the plate, on the net and await the false parking/speeding fines, and show them to be false, then you can also claim any of your own fines are also false.
Slashdot Mirror
Luckily, this has already be solved for the fingerprints, and there has been some experimentation with iris patterns printed onto contact lenses which has had some success.
Just Say NO!
Most people I have talked to who were for ID cards are easily persuaded to be against them. I'm not even going to say outright that ID cards are bad (although that is, rather obviously, my view!), but if people can be so easily swayed, in the worst case, it is presumably the last opinion they heard that they will agree with! Most people don't know enough about the issues (both pros and cons) to be able to make a reasoned decision. I have never had a conversation with a Pro ID Card person (or group) which has provided me with a solid reason why ID cards will be good for Britain.
Have you not noticed how the Gov keep changing tack? First it was terrorism, fraud, but then Charles Clarke admitted they would not have help fight terrorism or fraud.
Next they jump on the distinctly right wing agenda immigration bandwagon, but if an illegal immigrant doesn't have "papers", surely, and ID card is simply another "paper" they won't have?
Next, someone in the spin-doctor think-tank picks up on ID Theft, and now ID cards are going to do away with it all together. The people who know suggest it might actually make it easier to steal someone's ID, and actually harder to get your ID back! If someone discovers your password or PIN number, you can change it, but if someone forges your fingerprint you are right royally screwed!
Each time the Gov put forward some reason for ID cards, someone (and sometimes from within the Gov!) has debunked it. They are squirming around looking for a good reason. I'd really like to know why they think it is a good idea, but I don't think they've told us what they really think yet!
Just Say No!
You ain't whistlin' Dixie!
The National Gun Register, which was another knee-jerk reaction after Dunblane, is still late, and perhaps has 10's of thousands of entries and they can't connect it to the Police systems for some reason?
Frankly, it's laughable, but if they're having trouble with that (which could probably be done in Access!) there wouldn't seem to be a snowball's chance in hell of them actually getting this ID system off the ground. It's going to cost a fortune (making the Millenium Dome look like a wise investment!) and be useless!
Just Say NO!
Er. *cough*, anyone thought of faking fingerprints?
Whatever cleverness the ID Card people think of, someone will find a way round it until the only people who are affected in their daily lives by ID Cards will be the law abiding, who will also be the suckers who pay for the priviledge!
Just Say NO
I don't blame the marksmen, as I believe they had no choice from the information (I understand!) they were given.
The people who gave them the wrong information are more to blame for his death than the people who actually shot him, but this was probably/possibly a simply mistake.
What I do find unpalatable is the way the Police seemed to rally round to try and cover it up. All the stories about him carrying a pack, running away, jumping over the barrier to get into the underground, which were allowed to propagate should have been stamped on immediately they surfaced, and the Police Chief should have stood up and said they shot an innocent man as soon as he knew. This would have been the right way to handle the unfortunate situation.
There should also be an enquiry (probably public so we know they are doing it!) to find out how the mistake actually happened, ie where did the mis-information originate, and how can we try and stop it happening next time.
But all this finger pointing really helps no one.
Just renew your passport before the 2008 deadline, and you've got 10 years for the Gov to come to their senses before you are forced (coerced) into getting one.
That's my plan. I'll leave the "moving to Canada" option for sometime after 2018, if we haven't booted the whole sorry idea out by then!
Of course, this doesn't mean I won't buy shares in which ever company Blair has already given the contract too! I wonder if he knows the Director?
As some other poster has already said, this is part of the fallacy of a civilised conflict (or something like that). If you are losing, or otherwise facing overwhelming odds, you are likely to put the rules of engagement on the back burner, and expecting your foes to abide by some arbitary notions of "civilised" behaviour just before you wipe them out or capture them is the most stupid thing you can do and is often life limiting for your side.
Remember the Falklands when some Argentinian conscripts were involved in a "white flag" incident, where we also lost Colonel "H" Jones? If you are scared out of your wits I'm not surprised that people will do such things as it must simply be part of the human survival instinct to do whatever seems necessary to increase your chances. It would also seem far more likely to happen within a poorly trained (ie disciplined) force, or if you are fighting people who _think_ they really have their backs against the wall. So, fighting conscripts (as in the Falklands) or fighting a rag-tag band of religous zealots (*cough*) you should expect them to not abide by the rules, and, in my view, storing their arsenal in their hospitals makes the hospitals a valid target!
I loved Lego when I was a kid, and still can't resist building something if there's a bucket of Lego about, but I have to say that the whole concept of the "$100 kits" (obviously, £100 in the UK for some reason!) leaves me cold!
As I understood it, the concept was that there are a bunch of building blocks from which you can build pretty much anything your imagination can fathom, so why, in the name of all that is holy, do we want or need a special kit containing bespoke parts to allow us to build something someone else thought up!
The "fun", for me at least, is thinking of something to build, and building it using the Lego I have!
My favourite creation, to date, was a spider with articulated legs. Six legs, sure (somewhat negating the "spider" claim, especially here on Slashdot!), as there wasn't enough Lego, but the concept was sound.
Give me a big bucket of plain Lego over some over-priced "Millenium Falcon" kit any day!
That said, put me down for one of the Lego "Difference Engine" kits!
I've seen this argument a number of times for presumably not using electric vehicles. Surely it is better to centralise the power generation allowing for economies of scale and single point of generation to always be as clean as technically and economically possible?
If everyone's second car (third/fourth/fifth car?) was electric and just used for the local driving it would cut down pollution in the towns and cities, where it is usually the worst.
Sure, there would need to be more power generation elsewhere, but it doesn't have to be coal or oil, and if it is coal or oil it doesn't have to be dirty!
The shifting to local travel by personal electric vehicles would mean the populace has decided it doesn't like living in smoggy cities, and the government can clean up the power generation as it becomes possible to do so.
I was being flippant, or skippy, or something, and I apologise.
Micros*cough*oft
Have women changed then? Granted, it's been a while since I saw one close up, but I was kinda hoping they'd be sufficiently similar next time so I'd know which bits to do what to, and stuff!
Interestingly (or maybe not?), the UK 2p coin is exactly twice the wieght of the UK 1p coin. Why this should be so, I've no idea.
I wonder if there was some attempt to have all the copper coins (now just the 1p and 2p coins, but formerly we had 1/4 (aka farthing) and 1/2 pence pieces too) in increasing size/wieght, then a similar, though different, scale for the silver pieces, 5p 10p 20p 50p, though I think the 10p piece is actually bigger than the 20p (although of course the 20p and 50p have corners to help differentiate). Of course then we have the £1 and £2 coins, which are thicker coins.
We used to have 3d, 4d, 6d, 12d (AKA shilling), 1/2 crown (24p or 25? or whatever the hell that was!) in the "olden days" (notice 'd' and not 'p') as well as some commemerative £5 coins in recent years.
I expect someone spends a huge amount of time designing these coins, and I'd have to say I like our £1 and £2 coins over the old notes (though we didn't used to have a £2 note).
It does seem that coins are really old fashioned though, and why not use something like a cash-card (eg mondex or one of it's rivals) instead. The only problem with these cash-cards is that the Governments see it is some way to track cash, and that's why they don't work. The cash-cards should be just that, so if you lose your cash-card you have lost the cash that's contained on it, and if you find one, you can spend it.
I think society's need a cash equivalent and the Government could "mint" blank cash cards instead of coins. Give the cards out for free, even sell the space on the cards to advertisers, and it'd be way cheaper than the current system. It'd maybe offer all the advantages of cash without the costs of cash.
I always find it hard to adjust to the fact that the ten cent piece (dime?) is smaller than the five cent piece (nickel?). Go figure!
There's certainly something to be said for people taking less care when driving because of all the safety aids designed to protect them if they, or someone else, screws up!
If you removed the driver's seatbelt, and the driver's airbag, and added a nice shiney spike to the centre of the steering wheel, do you think the average driver (any driver) would tailgate anyone? I'm betting everyone would drive a bit slower and leave more room in case of emergencies, right!
Whilst I will agree that usually this would prevent accidents, there are occasions where I have needed to accelerate out of trouble. I would be pretty damn miffed if some speed limiter stopped me from being able to do so!
If you added usually in there somewhere, I could have let it slide (*cough*), but without it there's a need for a correction.
If you are on gravel or snow, or anything else likely to "bunch up", you are better off locking the wheels! This is because the gravel/snow/sand will bunch up in front of your wheels (obviously, only ones having the braking force applied) and this will stop you far quicker than an ABS assisted stop on the same surface because, in essence, your braking wheels are digging into the surface.
This said, in normal motoring conditions, you are more likely to be assisted by ABS than not.
See perhaps cavitation and wonder if there may not be a similar behaviour for very fast fish (if there were any, which there aren't)?
Kinda off topic, although this story is about the New Year's Eve extra second ... anyway ... cough ...
Why do people call it "New Years"? I think this is another Americanism that has crept in to the UK over the last few years. Surely, there's New Year's Eve, and New Year's Day (the days relating to New Year), but the time of year is "New Year" not "New Years".
Anyway, Happy New Year to all you Slashdottirs and Slashdotsons (as they'd maybe say in Iceland - the place, not the cheap UK frozen food outlet).
Yes, OK - point taken. Although I did also post a possible scenario, however far fetched, where the driver might not be guilty of speeding.
Condsider the lilies ... er ... no ... consider a chap drives past the first of such a pair of cameras and then loads his car onto a truck. The truck is then driven by the truck driver (so our chap remains innocent) and above the speed limit to just before the next camera, and the car is taken off the truck and our chap drives past the 2nd camera in time to be issued with a speeding ticket. Assume also, that the truck driver waits sufficiently long before also passing the 2nd camera so as to not get a ticket.
Or maybe even switch drivers?
So, We haven't broken any laws of physics, or invented any new maths, and yet our chap is innocent of the charge, and still gets a ticket?
It would be interesting to setup such an event and challenge the ticket in court.
My guess is that the APNR system would suddenly see a new number plate appear in the same place the old number plate mysteriously disappeared, and on a similar make/age/colour vehicle. Hmmmm [rubs chin] I wonder if there may be some correlation between these two events?
Simply swapping plates will not help the hapless crims, because the system will (well, should anyway!) be able to spot that. What the crims need to do is something that won't look "odd" to the APNR system.
Hmmmm. PC Sharon Beshenivsky was shot around the 18th November, and there was the story about the fab new CCTV system that tracked the car to London, but then the story all went cold.
Come the 25th of Nov there's a story about how they appear to have lost the car and are appealing to the public for info on it's whereabouts. But hang on, I hear you ask, there was all that news about how great the system was and they caught the purps? Hmmmm.
Now it's 13th Dec and the public are again asked to help find a suspect. But you had the car right? You told us your fancy new system followed it to London right?
How's this any different from just looking up the owner of the car and going and knocking on their door?
I submitted a story to Slashdot (that didn't get accepted) about this very thing. There was the story (referenced in the parent) about how great this new system was, but it had privacy issues, then it turns out all it has is privacy issues, because it didn't actually work in the first place.
Also funny how the Gov. were shouting from the rooftops about how this new APNR system was going to keep us safe in our beds, but nothing, zip, zilch, nada, to say Ooooops - actually we fumbled that one and we didn't catch them in the car in London after all!
Of course, these cameras never make mistakes like the issuing of a 800 MPH (in a 30 zone!) speeding ticket to 73 year old Adalat Khan.
From the article (my emboldification):
Khan, a retiree, received a letter from the police claiming they had photographic and video evidence of his supersonic offense. Khan denies traveling beyond the speed of sound, which is approximately 750 MPH at sea level.
I wondered about this myself. How about passing the first of such a camera pair, then loading you car onto a flatbed truck. Proceed above the speed limit on the truck to just before the second camera and unload your car to proceed past the second camera. The truck should wait to ensure it doesn't break the (average) speed limit before proceeding.
Now what happens? You get a ticket but are innocent, and the truck driver doesn't get one and is guilty.
Perhaps a bit contrived, but it would make an interesting defence. Perhaps someone could actually do it and go to court to set the precedent so all the damn cameras would be useless.
Now I just had an idea. Why not post piccies of you car, including the plate, on the net and await the false parking/speeding fines, and show them to be false, then you can also claim any of your own fines are also false.
Nice