Everyone at Bletchly park would have been in jail... yay for legislation to protect those to stupid to do a proper job of securinf something themselves.
well, presumably it'll be piggy-backed through various servers - maybe to an annoymous one which outputs to a tape drive, which auto opens into an envelope with a stamp and... well, I'm sure someone has come up with a way of not being traced.
What I want to know is how the creator intends to get this data. If it has anything like the worldwide penetration of sasser (s)he is gonna have a hell of a lot of data to sift through to find anything of value - I should image that they'd have to invest in some beefy computing to filter everything - just this post would give several hundred characters to sift through, and that's 2 minutes typing on one computer...
Over 75's do need a license.
They just don't have to pay for it.
(but they do have to fill out mucho-forms or somesuch to get hold of it)
On the first post (don't want to make 2) The people who object to paying a license fee are likely those who have cable or sky & don't actually watch the BBC's channels (or rarely do), and are understandably annoyed about having to pay for them.
ooh, and the could modify the score-screen music:
do-do-do-do
Re-boot!
open the case immediately.
de-deel-y-de-de-de-de-de-de-de
de-deeld-y-de-de-de-de-de
de-deel-y-de-de-de-de-de-de-de
de-de-de-de-e
(repeat)
And a science facility, and attach a physics lab!
Wraiths won't do! we need battlecruisers DAMNIT!
oh, and get the Yamato cannon & reactor upgrade too (as well as the various weapon/armour upgrades)
We'll show those evil Zerg that Earth won't just roll over & die quietly.
This insanity brought to you by the 'starcraft is real foundation'
I made a website of the pictures for my cousin's wedding (on the internet in under 48 hours from the words 'I do'), which earned me a massive chocolate bar (i.e. the biggest that you can get outside of Christmas/Easter), which was somewhat nice, althouhg if the aim had been to give me caffeine...
How long do nuclear power plants take to produce energy from the moment that you press the big red button?
One of the largest wastes on energy going at the moment with coal & gas stations is that they have to stay on 24/7 to be able to provide energy when it's actually wanted.
to take an example two power stations in my country. One is coal, the other is hydro-electric.
The coal one takes ~12 hours to start producing energy. The hydro-electric takes 12 seconds!
That is what we need in this day and age - If we need 1300 watts per house at the end of an episode of Corrie, with the coal systems we actually have to have the 1300 watts x 5 million houses being produced all the time, which is being wasted.
Spare capacity being produced is not what's needed. Spare capacity that can be created when it's needed, and switched off when it's not is the requirement.
Unless nuclear can provide this, it's still going to be contributing to the energy-drain of electricity produced that doesn't get used.
If you drink a larger coffee, you get more caffeine.
If you eat a larger portion of chips you get more fat.
Shouldn't this be obvious? Still with this new revelation I see a raft of lawsuits on the horizon;
"Starbucks is at fault for my caffeine addiction because they didn't TELL me that I'd get more caffeine if I drunk more coffee"
The sad part is that they'll probably win as well.
As far a criminal activity, you may be targetted if your car is identified as taking part in a crime, though you have a pretty good chance of being found innocent if you can prove you weren't driving the car.
I don't know about the US, but in the UK, the onus is on the prosecuting authorities to prove that you WERE driving the car, not vice-versa.
As it is, if you're caught speeding (basic driving offence) you get sent a letter asking "who was driving your car on such-and-such a date?" and when you write your name down, bam! you've incriminated yourself.
But in the US, you have the 5th amendment to stop something like that happening - presumably they'd need evidence that you were driving your vehicle at the time, rather than "he owns the vehicle, so he has to prove that he wasn't driving it"
But surely if they're using VOIP to get the call into the US; then the call, once on the telephone system, has to be originating in the US (putting it onto the telephone system anywhere else would defeat the object of trying to avoid international call charges), and would come under the US do-not-call list?
The potential for profit may well go down.
The BBC is paid for by a license fee, and is not-for-profit. No ad breaks, notice the lack of advertising on www.bbc.co.uk .
Apparently the BBC is planning on allowing people to watch TV shows after thay are broadcast form the website. This codec development could be related to this.
I don't know about such a treaty, but I do know that the UK has some anti-spam laws. You sign up to a list with your phone & fax numbers, and email addys, postal addys and the like, and it becomes illegal to start directing unsolicted advertising to those numbers/addresses.
We're on it, and we don't get any ad calls or posted advertising junk.
I don't see why you couldn't put a foreign fax number onto that list
Infact, if I remember correctly, it's illegal to send unsolicited advertising faxes at all, but only to individuals... If you can find some details of this company...
The Fax Preference service
I can't see anything on there either way about registering an overseas number to not be faxed.
Hope it helps
Yes, I saw this too.
I found it quite humourous actually - it was almost Micheal Howard on newsnight all over again.
Four or five times the reporter asked what was essentially the same question - about how much harder it was, and how lives were at risk. Every time, the costaguard station manager explained that it was a mild annoyance, but they were all trained in the use of paper maps and no-one was in danger. She also seemed to show suprising (to me at least) knowledge of the issue, to explain that they did have stand-alone laptops that weren't going to be affected... oh, and the computers were going to be back up in a few hours anyway.
She didn't even take the bait; "at least it happened today [tuesday], instead of yesterday [a bank holiday]"
Slashdot Mirror
Send them to Black Mesa?
Let's see how their '1337 hacking skills' hold up against those things that resemble a roast turkey gone bad.
Everyone at Bletchly park would have been in jail...
yay for legislation to protect those to stupid to do a proper job of securinf something themselves.
Am I the only person having difficulty extracting the mp3 file?
Perhaps it's really an old spice-girls number and my computer is cleverly stopping me from accessing it,
well, presumably it'll be piggy-backed through various servers - maybe to an annoymous one which outputs to a tape drive, which auto opens into an envelope with a stamp and... well, I'm sure someone has come up with a way of not being traced.
What I want to know is how the creator intends to get this data. If it has anything like the worldwide penetration of sasser (s)he is gonna have a hell of a lot of data to sift through to find anything of value - I should image that they'd have to invest in some beefy computing to filter everything - just this post would give several hundred characters to sift through, and that's 2 minutes typing on one computer...
I do believe that it's in standard ratio
(Thnaks to whoever posted the link to the site earlier)
1) get her hooked on WarcraftIII
2) Show her the map editor
My mum has issues finding the 'on' button (no seriously)
Fuller story here
Over 75's do need a license. They just don't have to pay for it. (but they do have to fill out mucho-forms or somesuch to get hold of it) On the first post (don't want to make 2) The people who object to paying a license fee are likely those who have cable or sky & don't actually watch the BBC's channels (or rarely do), and are understandably annoyed about having to pay for them.
ooh, and the could modify the score-screen music:
do-do-do-do
Re-boot!
open the case immediately.
de-deel-y-de-de-de-de-de-de-de
de-deeld-y-de-de-de-de-de
de-deel-y-de-de-de-de-de-de-de
de-de-de-de-e
(repeat)
*give up on career as musician*
Here
Another plug for the BBC, the radio is already available, with no RIAA trying to shut it down.
As the article says, TV is next, I can't wait.
And a science facility, and attach a physics lab! Wraiths won't do! we need battlecruisers DAMNIT! oh, and get the Yamato cannon & reactor upgrade too (as well as the various weapon/armour upgrades)
We'll show those evil Zerg that Earth won't just roll over & die quietly.
This insanity brought to you by the 'starcraft is real foundation'
I made a website of the pictures for my cousin's wedding (on the internet in under 48 hours from the words 'I do'), which earned me a massive chocolate bar (i.e. the biggest that you can get outside of Christmas/Easter), which was somewhat nice, althouhg if the aim had been to give me caffeine...
How long do nuclear power plants take to produce energy from the moment that you press the big red button?
One of the largest wastes on energy going at the moment with coal & gas stations is that they have to stay on 24/7 to be able to provide energy when it's actually wanted.
to take an example two power stations in my country. One is coal, the other is hydro-electric.
The coal one takes ~12 hours to start producing energy. The hydro-electric takes 12 seconds!
That is what we need in this day and age - If we need 1300 watts per house at the end of an episode of Corrie, with the coal systems we actually have to have the 1300 watts x 5 million houses being produced all the time, which is being wasted.
Spare capacity being produced is not what's needed. Spare capacity that can be created when it's needed, and switched off when it's not is the requirement.
Unless nuclear can provide this, it's still going to be contributing to the energy-drain of electricity produced that doesn't get used.
If you drink a larger coffee, you get more caffeine.
If you eat a larger portion of chips you get more fat.
Shouldn't this be obvious?
Still with this new revelation I see a raft of lawsuits on the horizon; "Starbucks is at fault for my caffeine addiction because they didn't TELL me that I'd get more caffeine if I drunk more coffee"
The sad part is that they'll probably win as well.
As it is, if you're caught speeding (basic driving offence) you get sent a letter asking "who was driving your car on such-and-such a date?" and when you write your name down, bam! you've incriminated yourself.
But in the US, you have the 5th amendment to stop something like that happening - presumably they'd need evidence that you were driving your vehicle at the time, rather than "he owns the vehicle, so he has to prove that he wasn't driving it"
But surely if they're using VOIP to get the call into the US; then the call, once on the telephone system, has to be originating in the US (putting it onto the telephone system anywhere else would defeat the object of trying to avoid international call charges), and would come under the US do-not-call list?
The potential for profit may well go down. The BBC is paid for by a license fee, and is not-for-profit. No ad breaks, notice the lack of advertising on www.bbc.co.uk .
Apparently the BBC is planning on allowing people to watch TV shows after thay are broadcast form the website. This codec development could be related to this.
I don't know about such a treaty, but I do know that the UK has some anti-spam laws. You sign up to a list with your phone & fax numbers, and email addys, postal addys and the like, and it becomes illegal to start directing unsolicted advertising to those numbers/addresses. We're on it, and we don't get any ad calls or posted advertising junk. I don't see why you couldn't put a foreign fax number onto that list Infact, if I remember correctly, it's illegal to send unsolicited advertising faxes at all, but only to individuals... If you can find some details of this company... The Fax Preference service I can't see anything on there either way about registering an overseas number to not be faxed. Hope it helps
Yes, I saw this too. I found it quite humourous actually - it was almost Micheal Howard on newsnight all over again. Four or five times the reporter asked what was essentially the same question - about how much harder it was, and how lives were at risk. Every time, the costaguard station manager explained that it was a mild annoyance, but they were all trained in the use of paper maps and no-one was in danger. She also seemed to show suprising (to me at least) knowledge of the issue, to explain that they did have stand-alone laptops that weren't going to be affected... oh, and the computers were going to be back up in a few hours anyway. She didn't even take the bait; "at least it happened today [tuesday], instead of yesterday [a bank holiday]"