Several people have suggested "Legos" as a classic toy.
The word LEGO® is a brand name and is very special to all of us in the LEGO Group Companies. We would sincerely like your help in keeping it special.
Please always refer to our bricks as 'LEGO Bricks or Toys' and not 'LEGOS.' By doing so, you will be helping to protect and preserve a brand of which we are very proud and that stands for quality the world over. Thank you! Susan Williams, Consumer Services.
The word LEGO® is a brand name and is very special to all of us in the LEGO Group Companies. We would sincerely like your help in keeping it special.
Please always refer to our bricks as 'LEGO Bricks or Toys' and not 'LEGOS.' By doing so, you will be helping to protect and preserve a brand of which we are very proud and that stands for quality the world over. Thank you! Susan Williams, Consumer Services.
And you obviously have no idea about my specific knowledge of it. Allow me to explain...
As soon as you give out your PIN, all your "two-factor" authentication is useless.
Bzzzt.. Wrong. What if the PIN is single-use only, because one of the two-factors is a semi-random number generator (e.g. RSA SecureID or low-tech scratch-off number sheets as used by some banks already.
Why?? Here is why. Your bank card is absolutely trivial to duplicate.
Bzzt... Wrong again. Firstly, how can a remote attacker copy your card without gaining access to it? A Russian phishing scammer can attack plenty more and physically obtain the cards. You are getting your various forms of card fraud confused.
Secondly, have a look at the Cardholder Verification Code at the end of the digits on the rear of your card. That number is generated using an algorithm completely different from the usual CC number and thus can't be readily guessed.
All a theif needs is a card from the same bank (easy to obtain by simply creating an account), and a 50 dollar stripe reader/writer.
Bzzzt... Again. What if the banks issue smart cards instead? How does your thief copy the seed in a Java machine built into the card which handles all crypto and signing?
In fact, this was the very point of the Amex Blue programme yet it appears the banks got distracted from the original idea of giving away card-readers to end-users.
I stand by my original comments that banks could kill Phishing dead tomorrow if they wanted to. Every card in the marketplace expires within 2-3 years. They could replace every single one of them with a smart-card or enable some other form of two-factor (or multi-factor) authentication IF THEY WANTED TO.
You need to be a lot more careful before throwing around phrases like "you obviously have no idea"...
The RIAA or any plaintiff in a civil action is likely to go after wherever the big money is. In this case, it's the university, not the starving students.
They are probably banking on a win or a painful settlement that means other universities will 'get the message' (whatever that is) and clamp down on students in turn.
My my... Losing your tempter somewhat before posting a series of wholly unsubstantiated reports aren't we?
Okay, let's dispell YOUR bullshit that "Israeli soldiers are deliberatly targetting UN personnel because they resent the fact that they appear to be siding with the palestinians."
Bzzt... Wrong.
Israel has frequently witnessed Palestinians using UN ambulances as transport for terrorists. They conceal weapons and murderers. Here's just one example filmed by a Reuters crew (and hardly screened on TV if you want to talk about media bias). But thanks anyway for trying to interpret Israeli actions and proving how clueless you are.
While I hear you talking all about "civilised nations" you have wholly exempted the Palestinians. I can see why, yet it seems therefore in your twisted little reality that the Palestinians can do whatever they want (including killing women and children with abandon) but Israel has to 'play by your rules'...
Despite Israel holding higher standards than any other country (e.g. most countries who would carpet bomb the whole of Ramallah versus Israel who loses troops by going door to door) it seems that still isn't enough.
I do not agree with Palestinian terrorist actions
Awww...Gee, you don't agree with a psychotic murdering death-cult. That's big of you.
But you are defending the indefensible by claiming that it is not as bad as the other side
No, merely stating fact. The reality is the Palestinians aim to kill as many non-combatants as possible. Israel does not. How can one possibly agree with the Palestinians a) absurd and immoral goals (destroying Israel, setting up an Islamic state), and (b) their immoral conduct of the war (deliberately killing civilians). The majority of Palestinians support the killing of non-combatant Israeli civilians. The reverse is not true.
Sorry pal, throwing tantrums, making totally unsubstantiated allegations and a having a total lack of knowledge about the whole affair. My debate with you is over.
I hate to feed a troll, but there is a world of difference between a Palestinian aiming to kill a child versus an Israeli whose intention is NOT to kill a non-combatant who happens to get in the way.
This is the difference between a civilised military force (Israel) and an uncivilised death-cult (the Palestinians).
Comparisons to Nazis are as wrong as they are distasteful. If Israel wanted to wipe out all the Palestinians, and indeed all the Arabs, they could, in a second. And yet they don't.
Despite that, the Palestinians have made NO secret of their desire to wipe out the Jews. All of the Jews.
Indeed the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem had met frequently with Adolph Hitler and was an admirer of his, so your comparison with Nazis is accurate for the Palestinians.
Two Arab terrorists executed each little girl at point blank range with a shot to each one's head, the youngest child being only a two-year-old, after they first blew their mother to bits.
Some "self defence" huh? From what? An unborn child who one day might cry too loudly?
Wake up, they are a murderous death-cult with no concern for human life, Israeli or their own.
They are a horribly oppressed minority and they fight back in the only way they can to protect their homes and families
Rubbish.
Why then do the "horribly oppressed" Tibetans not blow up children? Why do the "horribly oppressed minority" of *occupied* Native Americans not shoot pregnant women at point blank range?
Why do impoverished Ethiopians not teach their children to hate? Why do starving non-Muslim Africans not dance in the streets when Americans or Jews are killed?
The answer is Militant Islam and NOTHING to do with oppression, occupation or anything else unless you believe the propaganda.
they fight back in the only way they can to protect their homes and families
Hmmm... Let's see, man tells his son to blow himself up. Is that protecting him? The same man knows if he blows himself up, his home will be demolished. Is he really protecting his house or anyone? No. He's too busy trying to murder Israelis.
You seem to talk all about the alleged immorality of what Israel does to suicide bombers and their families, yet rather tellingly you have said nothing about what suicide bomboers do to Israelis and THEIR families.
Although your bias is quite transparent (not that there's anything wrong with an opinion) your historic knowledge of Israeli attempts at negotiation are deeply flawed.
It cannot be disputed that every Arab country which has been SERIOUS about peace and negotiated with Israel GOT IT.
The Palestinian leadership have NEVER been serious about peace with Israel however for that would mean giving up their intention of destroying Israel.
Go back to school my friend, things are not as you believe.
Facts are nuanced by the events that surround them
Bzzzt... Wrong. Very wrong.
Facts are facts. Only opinions are 'nuanced' or interpreted.
A fact is something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed, not an interpretation. That would be speculation or opinion.
I'm glad you are not a journalist!
Re:Middle East
on
Press freedom
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I hear stories of Israeli's bombing palestinians and of palestinians bombing Israelis. IMHO the balance is weighted in favour of the palestinians because Israel uses tanks, F-16 and apache helicopters against stone throwing children and believe that is justifiable policing
And right there, you have fallen for the problem with biased media.
You have been led to believe that Palestinians bombing Israelis is similar to Israelis bombing Palestinians. There is however a big difference - The Palestinian (and indeed all Islamic) terror aims to cause as much civilian death as possible. Women, children, the elderly are all fair game.
The same CANNOT be said of Israeli military actions, which whilst potentially resulting in collateral damage do not SPECIFICALLY and STRATEGICALLY aim to kill innocent non-combatants. Israelis don't dance in the streets when a Palestinian child is killed. Can the same be said of Palestinians? No.
Equally, if you believe that Israelis are randomly dropping bombs on poor stone throwing children, you are not aware of how these children are deliberately used as human shields by terrorists holding rifles and rocket launchers (see: here for a textbook example of this disgusting abuse of children by Palestinian terrorists. Now tell me how Israel is supposed to stop the guy shooting at them?
Of course, if the media weren't implicitly biased you'd know all of this wouldn't you?
Still, I'm glad you are debating me. Someone else decided to mod me down as a troll instead. Hardly an intelligent response!
I think that the reason the reporters might be biased against Israel...
And right there you proved the point.
There is a difference between op-ed reporting and news reporting. There can be no excuse for journalistic bias that is not stated and up front. In other words, journalists passing off as news their own opinions and bias.
Everyone is welcome to their own opinion but journalists have a responsibility to not let them cloud reporting of facts rather letting the reader/viewer form their own conclusions properly armed with all sides of a story, not merely the reporters' preference.
Re:How did they decide?
on
Press freedom
·
· Score: 1
this is a disgusting insult to decades of dedicated investigative journalists which have risked life and reputation to bring the truth to the people
I take your point however and exclude the quality journalists from my smear. I cannot but help feel they are becoming a smaller group...
Re:How did they decide?
on
Press freedom
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Basically, if correspondents say they don't have press freedom, they don't
But when have reporters ever looked deeper than a quote which they liked and which served their bias?
See: An Open Letter to Reporters Without Borders which includes the comment: "Given that Reporters Without Borders receives 44 percent of its income from the European Commission, you are in no position to criticize any government for using speech".
Given this, and other comments in this thread, I would apply a healthy dose of skepticism...
Re:Isn't Switzerland
on
Press freedom
·
· Score: 1, Informative
Depends how you look at it (or define "responsible").
Middle East
on
Press freedom
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
It's interesting to note the results and see why it's difficult to trust ANY news coming from Iraq.
How are we expected to know what's really going on when reporters feel threatened and ordinary Iraqis still don't trust the media after years of it being state controlled?
There are other documented examples or Arab gangs intimidating the press to sing their own tune and it pretty well rights off any ability for readers to discern between news versus propaganda.
Slashdot Mirror
Although meant in jest, you are not far from the truth of some of the people who abuse Indy Media's hopeless publication policies.
Source: http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Lego
Source http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Lego
What other classic toys do you remember from your youth that are still fun enough that kids will play with them today?
Firearms.
...That Evil couldn't run on Macintosh?
Errr... Fucking Google It.
You might find this: http://margo.student.utwente.nl/el/microwave/
Now I wonder what would happen to one of those new discs if you put one in the microwave for 5 seconds.
He writes that knowing full well what happens to current discs when you put them in the microwave.
That is.... Awesome lightshow caused by arcs between the thousands/millions of pits and hills on the disc's surface.
I highly recommend it, but suggest:
a) Not using your own microwave
b) Not using a disc you like to watch...
In case you can't resist,
c) Not putting it back into your own DVD player afterward.
And.. how many major US banks have SecurteID smart cards to access your account? Zero.
Actually you are mistaken. Several banks are implementing just that, albeit for their high-value customers.
In any case, I also mentioned a low-cost alternative (scratchy cards) which you neglected to mention.
Sad.
You live in Sweden and have been too busy playing with gadgets to notice hot blondes everywhere
You obviously have no idea how these scams work.
And you obviously have no idea about my specific knowledge of it. Allow me to explain...
As soon as you give out your PIN, all your "two-factor" authentication is useless.
Bzzzt.. Wrong.
What if the PIN is single-use only, because one of the two-factors is a semi-random number generator (e.g. RSA SecureID or low-tech scratch-off number sheets as used by some banks already.
Why?? Here is why. Your bank card is absolutely trivial to duplicate.
Bzzt... Wrong again.
Firstly, how can a remote attacker copy your card without gaining access to it? A Russian phishing scammer can attack plenty more and physically obtain the cards. You are getting your various forms of card fraud confused.
Secondly, have a look at the Cardholder Verification Code at the end of the digits on the rear of your card. That number is generated using an algorithm completely different from the usual CC number and thus can't be readily guessed.
All a theif needs is a card from the same bank (easy to obtain by simply creating an account), and a 50 dollar stripe reader/writer.
Bzzzt... Again.
What if the banks issue smart cards instead?
How does your thief copy the seed in a Java machine built into the card which handles all crypto and signing?
In fact, this was the very point of the Amex Blue programme yet it appears the banks got distracted from the original idea of giving away card-readers to end-users.
I stand by my original comments that banks could kill Phishing dead tomorrow if they wanted to. Every card in the marketplace expires within 2-3 years. They could replace every single one of them with a smart-card or enable some other form of two-factor (or multi-factor) authentication IF THEY WANTED TO.
You need to be a lot more careful before throwing around phrases like "you obviously have no idea"...
this will only affect users who have Windows Scripting Host enabled and certain ActiveX controls
Or in other words, this will probably not affect non-Windows or non-Internet Explorer users.
Well we could see plenty of comments along those lines coming, but here's a further thought:
Hey banks: All of your users have plastic cards that you issued. Mandate two-factor authentication already and watch Phishing scams go bye bye.
It's probably irrelevant.
The RIAA or any plaintiff in a civil action is likely to go after wherever the big money is. In this case, it's the university, not the starving students.
They are probably banking on a win or a painful settlement that means other universities will 'get the message' (whatever that is) and clamp down on students in turn.
BULLSHIT!!!!
My my... Losing your tempter somewhat before posting a series of wholly unsubstantiated reports aren't we?
Okay, let's dispell YOUR bullshit that "Israeli soldiers are deliberatly targetting UN personnel because they resent the fact that they appear to be siding with the palestinians."
Bzzt... Wrong.
Israel has frequently witnessed Palestinians using UN ambulances as transport for terrorists. They conceal weapons and murderers. Here's just one example filmed by a Reuters crew (and hardly screened on TV if you want to talk about media bias). But thanks anyway for trying to interpret Israeli actions and proving how clueless you are.
While I hear you talking all about "civilised nations" you have wholly exempted the Palestinians. I can see why, yet it seems therefore in your twisted little reality that the Palestinians can do whatever they want (including killing women and children with abandon) but Israel has to 'play by your rules'...
Despite Israel holding higher standards than any other country (e.g. most countries who would carpet bomb the whole of Ramallah versus Israel who loses troops by going door to door) it seems that still isn't enough.
I do not agree with Palestinian terrorist actions
Awww...Gee, you don't agree with a psychotic murdering death-cult. That's big of you.
But you are defending the indefensible by claiming that it is not as bad as the other side
No, merely stating fact. The reality is the Palestinians aim to kill as many non-combatants as possible. Israel does not. How can one possibly agree with the Palestinians a) absurd and immoral goals (destroying Israel, setting up an Islamic state), and (b) their immoral conduct of the war (deliberately killing civilians). The majority of Palestinians support the killing of non-combatant Israeli civilians . The reverse is not true.
Sorry pal, throwing tantrums, making totally unsubstantiated allegations and a having a total lack of knowledge about the whole affair. My debate with you is over.
Exploring the seas and looking after them are often mutually exclusive...
I hate to feed a troll, but there is a world of difference between a Palestinian aiming to kill a child versus an Israeli whose intention is NOT to kill a non-combatant who happens to get in the way.
This is the difference between a civilised military force (Israel) and an uncivilised death-cult (the Palestinians).
Comparisons to Nazis are as wrong as they are distasteful. If Israel wanted to wipe out all the Palestinians, and indeed all the Arabs, they could, in a second. And yet they don't.
Despite that, the Palestinians have made NO secret of their desire to wipe out the Jews. All of the Jews.
Indeed the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem had met frequently with Adolph Hitler and was an admirer of his, so your comparison with Nazis is accurate for the Palestinians.
Every nation has the right to self defence
Kindly explain how deliberately shooting pregnant women at point blank range constitutes "self defence".
Two Arab terrorists executed each little girl at point blank range with a shot to each one's head, the youngest child being only a two-year-old, after they first blew their mother to bits.
Some "self defence" huh? From what? An unborn child who one day might cry too loudly?
Wake up, they are a murderous death-cult with no concern for human life, Israeli or their own.
Self defence. Puhleese!
They are a horribly oppressed minority and they fight back in the only way they can to protect their homes and families
Rubbish.
Why then do the "horribly oppressed" Tibetans not blow up children? Why do the "horribly oppressed minority" of *occupied* Native Americans not shoot pregnant women at point blank range?
Why do impoverished Ethiopians not teach their children to hate? Why do starving non-Muslim Africans not dance in the streets when Americans or Jews are killed?
The answer is Militant Islam and NOTHING to do with oppression, occupation or anything else unless you believe the propaganda.
they fight back in the only way they can to protect their homes and families
Hmmm... Let's see, man tells his son to blow himself up. Is that protecting him? The same man knows if he blows himself up, his home will be demolished. Is he really protecting his house or anyone? No. He's too busy trying to murder Israelis.
You seem to talk all about the alleged immorality of what Israel does to suicide bombers and their families, yet rather tellingly you have said nothing about what suicide bomboers do to Israelis and THEIR families.
Although your bias is quite transparent (not that there's anything wrong with an opinion) your historic knowledge of Israeli attempts at negotiation are deeply flawed.
It cannot be disputed that every Arab country which has been SERIOUS about peace and negotiated with Israel GOT IT.
The Palestinian leadership have NEVER been serious about peace with Israel however for that would mean giving up their intention of destroying Israel.
Go back to school my friend, things are not as you believe.
Facts are nuanced by the events that surround them
Bzzzt... Wrong. Very wrong.
Facts are facts.
Only opinions are 'nuanced' or interpreted.
A fact is something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed, not an interpretation. That would be speculation or opinion.
I'm glad you are not a journalist!
I hear stories of Israeli's bombing palestinians and of palestinians bombing Israelis. IMHO the balance is weighted in favour of the palestinians because Israel uses tanks, F-16 and apache helicopters against stone throwing children and believe that is justifiable policing
And right there, you have fallen for the problem with biased media.
You have been led to believe that Palestinians bombing Israelis is similar to Israelis bombing Palestinians. There is however a big difference - The Palestinian (and indeed all Islamic) terror aims to cause as much civilian death as possible. Women, children, the elderly are all fair game.
The same CANNOT be said of Israeli military actions, which whilst potentially resulting in collateral damage do not SPECIFICALLY and STRATEGICALLY aim to kill innocent non-combatants. Israelis don't dance in the streets when a Palestinian child is killed. Can the same be said of Palestinians? No.
Equally, if you believe that Israelis are randomly dropping bombs on poor stone throwing children, you are not aware of how these children are deliberately used as human shields by terrorists holding rifles and rocket launchers (see: here for a textbook example of this disgusting abuse of children by Palestinian terrorists. Now tell me how Israel is supposed to stop the guy shooting at them?
Of course, if the media weren't implicitly biased you'd know all of this wouldn't you?
Still, I'm glad you are debating me. Someone else decided to mod me down as a troll instead. Hardly an intelligent response!
I think that the reason the reporters might be biased against Israel...
And right there you proved the point.
There is a difference between op-ed reporting and news reporting. There can be no excuse for journalistic bias that is not stated and up front. In other words, journalists passing off as news their own opinions and bias.
Everyone is welcome to their own opinion but journalists have a responsibility to not let them cloud reporting of facts rather letting the reader/viewer form their own conclusions properly armed with all sides of a story, not merely the reporters' preference.
this is a disgusting insult to decades of dedicated investigative journalists which have risked life and reputation to bring the truth to the people
Like this guy?
I take your point however and exclude the quality journalists from my smear. I cannot but help feel they are becoming a smaller group...
Basically, if correspondents say they don't have press freedom, they don't
But when have reporters ever looked deeper than a quote which they liked and which served their bias?
See: An Open Letter to Reporters Without Borders which includes the comment: "Given that Reporters Without Borders receives 44 percent of its income from the European Commission, you are in no position to criticize any government for using speech".
Given this, and other comments in this thread, I would apply a healthy dose of skepticism...
Depends how you look at it (or define "responsible").
n fiscates-indy-media-servers-in.html
See: http://indymediawatch.blogspot.com/2004/10/fbi-co
It's interesting to note the results and see why it's difficult to trust ANY news coming from Iraq.
How are we expected to know what's really going on when reporters feel threatened and ordinary Iraqis still don't trust the media after years of it being state controlled?
There are other documented examples or Arab gangs intimidating the press to sing their own tune and it pretty well rights off any ability for readers to discern between news versus propaganda.
in reality most people don't sleep naked atop a big pile of cash as you do.
They wear pajamas...