I had a clearout in April. 50 C64 games, a dozen Atari ST games, around 100 PC games, some xbox and wii games, various bits of hardware including the c64, the ST, the xbox and the wii.
Sold the lot for £140 to a local shop.
The shop will have made a decent profit. Great - I want small local shops to stay in business. If I'd sold them individually on ebay I'd have made nearer £250, but it would've cost me 1-2 days effort.
More to the point.. fuck the money. Almost everything I sold is impossible to replace these days. I'd far rather it go to someone that wants it than to landfill.
Shit, I'm giving away something else from that clearout: An 80s Scalextric collection, including limited edition vehicles worth £380 in mint condition. Mine were toys; they've been played with. They're not mint. They're going to someone whose kids will play with them some more.
If you want something that'll appreciate in value, buy lego kits and never open them. Buy limited edition swiss watches. Just don't bank on selling off your Steam account for more than a fraction of how much it cost to populate it.
His statements seem to be very confused. He wants Google and others to do more to block material depicting child abuse. Well that's already blocked in the UK, and it's done at the ISP level with no need for Google to be involved.
He wants Google to use 'safe search' as their default search setting. I thought they already did?
He seems to think people will have to register to be able to search for porn. Register where? Search how? And register for what? This is where I'm utterly confused by what he's assuming, what he's proposing and how he thinks it will work.
The only certainty is that it wont.
Mark Bridger viewed non-pornographic images of April Jones from Facebook. So does Carr want Facebook banned? Does he want images of five year olds banned from Facebook? Does he want it to be impossible to search for images on Facebook?
Mark Bridger had a collection of images of child abuse. Those images are already illegal. Access to them is blocked when possible already within the UK. There's not a whole lot Google can do about that, not least because anybody finding any material via Google can already notify the Internet Watch Foundation and let them know about it.
The good news is that in another ten years or so the politicians will start to be replaced by people that grew up with the Internet, that understand it better and that will at least have a grasp of the pragmatic realities involved.
This is ironic, as I've been sick for years of the idiots incapable of using a keyboard that encourage fuckwit design decisions which fuck over people who can do things far quicker with mouse+keyboard rather than just a mouse.
I'm now blaming you personally for the atrocity that Microsoft called a 'ribbon'.
A proxy never works for HTTPS, you're always going to be doing MITM.
The web proxy server at my previous company, and my current one, both do MITM attacks against HTTPS traffic. If you're using the default desktop browser you don't see this as they've added their own certificate authority to the default browser install.
I use my own browser, and I get informed of invalid certificates on every HTTPS connection I make. Shrug, it's their network; if it's that sensitive I'll use my own network.
..and if you had a binary file that the police decided was encrypted even though it wasn't, you get two years for being in possession of arbitrary data.
The UK law is totally fucked up in several dimensions.
Sorry, you kind of got the flak from the accumulation of multiple "stop taunting Fox instead of attacking Obama" posts.
It probably doesn't help that I have no allegiance to Bush, Obama or any other American politician, and in my own country I call out politicians on what they say and do, not on which party they represent.
Sorry, but how does mocking a news organisation renowned for its quality gaps in any way relate to peoples views on the government that's doing bad stuff?
It's possible to hate Fox News and condemn the way they've been treated. It's possible to want to drown George W Bush in liquid shit and still hate Obama. It's possible to hold multiple conflicting views at once, let alone multiple views that aren't even fucking related like "fox sucks" and "reading journalists' emails is bad".
I am yet again fucking bewildered by the utter inability of so many Americans to be anything other than hopelessly slavishly partisan in their thinking.
You have a problem. You think everything is done as a partisan statement for or against.. well, maybe Obama, maybe republican/democrat split, maybe.. I don't know.
But maybe, just possibly, the original post to which you replied was merely stating a fact. Incorrectly, as it happens.
An administration spying on journalists is a bad thing. Nobody you replied to said otherwise, or linked it in any way to voting for anybody. So why did you?
On a motorway I can drive for a hundred miles without braking. I do this while driving faster than most of the people on the road.
It's possible because I'm not watching the car in front of me. I'm watching the cars a quarter of a mile down the road, the cars merging onto the road, the lorries on the slower lanes and the cars that might want to overtake them.
The car in front? It's almost fucking irrelevant. Pay attention only to that car and you'll have to brake every time he does, you'll have far worse fuel economy and you're far more likely to have an accident.
In city driving you do need to give more attention to the vehicle in front, but full awareness of your surroundings - including the cars in front - is really important.
..without then initiating a 36 month waterfall process in which you gather 17000 business requirements, identify 420 interfaces your new package must support with other systems and externals, design customisations to 94% of the screens and most of the the back-end processes and find out that at least three of the package components haven't actually been written yet, before abandoning the whole thing.
Biggest waste of £300m I've ever been involved with. If only they'd listened to you, and changed the fucking business.
. It must be serviceable and ready to defend my home on a moment's notice.
Oooh, I know that feeling. I have the same approach to my back door lock. Admittedly I forgot to use it yesterday and the cats came in and out all day while I was at work, but at least I have one, and it works.
Seriously, just where the fuck do you live? Aleppo?
Ad blocking is going to completely ruin the internet, and douchebags like you are causing it.
The internet was doing just fine before cunts starting flooding its bandwidth with adverts. But hey, thanks for subsidising the running costs of some of the services I use.
Given the millions of people that already wear corrective spectacles, the number of people that wear sunglasses and the number of people stupid enough to think that all of them are trying to record their cock in a bathroom, I think you're safe.
If not, use the existing laws on assault, or just shoot the person that punched you. Isn't that the American way?
People ALREADY have cameras on them all the time. They can ALREADY record live video with head mounted cameras, and youtube has a fuckload of content recorded in that manner.
Support a family in a house with no central heating, one TV, no computers, no internet access, a single small radio, possibly a record player, a hoover and a cooker but no microwave, no dishwasher. Dress the children in second-hand clothing. Eat out once a month. Have one car in the family, or none if you live outside of the US.
Tell me you still need two parents working? Or did you want to enjoy those productivity gains of technology?
Pogonophobia isn't predicated on a fear of crossing over. I know a girl that's so scared of beards she wont hug a man that hasn't had a shave that week.
Anyway, most women may not have full bushy beards but many do have mustaches.
You want to tell me, a car rental agency can make a contract to cover my traffic bills/tickets? Sorry, under european law this idea is not only rediculous but laughable
Really? Fascinating. Good luck renting a car in the UK where not only will the rental company inform you that you will be charged for all bills/tickets, but that in response to any speeding notices you will be named as the offending driver.
Think you're safe because you live in another part of Europe? Welcome to the (fucked up stupid illogical and abused) European Arrest Warrant.
Living in Europe does not excuse you from obeying traffic laws.
You can drink alcohol outside of a bar. You can drink alcohol in a bar without driving there or back. You can drink in a bar without consuming alcohol.
What you can't do legally is get drunk then cause a serious danger to yourself and other road users through use of a motorised vehicle.
We'd gain better observance of the law from people that think, "I can have one and I'll be fine" then end up having 2-3 and justify it with "Well, I started an hour ago so the first one's worn off now".
That may not be how you do it, but sadly other people do.
Slashdot Mirror
I had a clearout in April. 50 C64 games, a dozen Atari ST games, around 100 PC games, some xbox and wii games, various bits of hardware including the c64, the ST, the xbox and the wii.
Sold the lot for £140 to a local shop.
The shop will have made a decent profit. Great - I want small local shops to stay in business. If I'd sold them individually on ebay I'd have made nearer £250, but it would've cost me 1-2 days effort.
More to the point.. fuck the money. Almost everything I sold is impossible to replace these days. I'd far rather it go to someone that wants it than to landfill.
Shit, I'm giving away something else from that clearout: An 80s Scalextric collection, including limited edition vehicles worth £380 in mint condition. Mine were toys; they've been played with. They're not mint. They're going to someone whose kids will play with them some more.
If you want something that'll appreciate in value, buy lego kits and never open them. Buy limited edition swiss watches. Just don't bank on selling off your Steam account for more than a fraction of how much it cost to populate it.
*Some* ISPs have signed up to censor content the IWF(*) tells them to (notably Virgin and BT). The majority of ISPs haven't.
According to the list at https://www.iwf.org.uk/members/member-policies/url-list/iwf-list-recipients the ISPs servicing 98.6% of UK households are signed up.
Along with Google, as it happens. I didn't know that.
So whether the majority of ISPs use filter on that list or not, the majority of internet users in the UK definitely do.
Ah. Erm: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/oct/08/april-jones-teenager-jailed-facebook
His statements seem to be very confused. He wants Google and others to do more to block material depicting child abuse. Well that's already blocked in the UK, and it's done at the ISP level with no need for Google to be involved.
He wants Google to use 'safe search' as their default search setting. I thought they already did?
He seems to think people will have to register to be able to search for porn. Register where? Search how? And register for what? This is where I'm utterly confused by what he's assuming, what he's proposing and how he thinks it will work.
The only certainty is that it wont.
Mark Bridger viewed non-pornographic images of April Jones from Facebook. So does Carr want Facebook banned? Does he want images of five year olds banned from Facebook? Does he want it to be impossible to search for images on Facebook?
Mark Bridger had a collection of images of child abuse. Those images are already illegal. Access to them is blocked when possible already within the UK. There's not a whole lot Google can do about that, not least because anybody finding any material via Google can already notify the Internet Watch Foundation and let them know about it.
The good news is that in another ten years or so the politicians will start to be replaced by people that grew up with the Internet, that understand it better and that will at least have a grasp of the pragmatic realities involved.
This is ironic, as I've been sick for years of the idiots incapable of using a keyboard that encourage fuckwit design decisions which fuck over people who can do things far quicker with mouse+keyboard rather than just a mouse.
I'm now blaming you personally for the atrocity that Microsoft called a 'ribbon'.
A proxy never works for HTTPS, you're always going to be doing MITM.
The web proxy server at my previous company, and my current one, both do MITM attacks against HTTPS traffic. If you're using the default desktop browser you don't see this as they've added their own certificate authority to the default browser install.
I use my own browser, and I get informed of invalid certificates on every HTTPS connection I make. Shrug, it's their network; if it's that sensitive I'll use my own network.
The UK law is totally fucked up in several dimensions.
Mainly because PETA have been acting like cunts online since at least early 1996, when they stole the peta.org domain name from its rightful owner.
Sorry, you kind of got the flak from the accumulation of multiple "stop taunting Fox instead of attacking Obama" posts.
It probably doesn't help that I have no allegiance to Bush, Obama or any other American politician, and in my own country I call out politicians on what they say and do, not on which party they represent.
Sorry, but how does mocking a news organisation renowned for its quality gaps in any way relate to peoples views on the government that's doing bad stuff?
It's possible to hate Fox News and condemn the way they've been treated. It's possible to want to drown George W Bush in liquid shit and still hate Obama. It's possible to hold multiple conflicting views at once, let alone multiple views that aren't even fucking related like "fox sucks" and "reading journalists' emails is bad".
I am yet again fucking bewildered by the utter inability of so many Americans to be anything other than hopelessly slavishly partisan in their thinking.
You have a problem. You think everything is done as a partisan statement for or against.. well, maybe Obama, maybe republican/democrat split, maybe.. I don't know.
But maybe, just possibly, the original post to which you replied was merely stating a fact. Incorrectly, as it happens.
An administration spying on journalists is a bad thing. Nobody you replied to said otherwise, or linked it in any way to voting for anybody. So why did you?
On a motorway I can drive for a hundred miles without braking. I do this while driving faster than most of the people on the road.
It's possible because I'm not watching the car in front of me. I'm watching the cars a quarter of a mile down the road, the cars merging onto the road, the lorries on the slower lanes and the cars that might want to overtake them.
The car in front? It's almost fucking irrelevant. Pay attention only to that car and you'll have to brake every time he does, you'll have far worse fuel economy and you're far more likely to have an accident.
In city driving you do need to give more attention to the vehicle in front, but full awareness of your surroundings - including the cars in front - is really important.
Biggest waste of £300m I've ever been involved with. If only they'd listened to you, and changed the fucking business.
Police are trained to use guns.
..and still kill an awful lot of people by accident, or when lesser force would have been sufficient.
This does of course add weight to your argument.
. It must be serviceable and ready to defend my home on a moment's notice.
Oooh, I know that feeling. I have the same approach to my back door lock. Admittedly I forgot to use it yesterday and the cats came in and out all day while I was at work, but at least I have one, and it works.
Seriously, just where the fuck do you live? Aleppo?
"defend my home". Sure. Grow some fucking balls.
Ad blocking is going to completely ruin the internet, and douchebags like you are causing it.
The internet was doing just fine before cunts starting flooding its bandwidth with adverts. But hey, thanks for subsidising the running costs of some of the services I use.
Given the millions of people that already wear corrective spectacles, the number of people that wear sunglasses and the number of people stupid enough to think that all of them are trying to record their cock in a bathroom, I think you're safe.
If not, use the existing laws on assault, or just shoot the person that punched you. Isn't that the American way?
People ALREADY have cameras on them all the time. They can ALREADY record live video with head mounted cameras, and youtube has a fuckload of content recorded in that manner.
Stop being a paranoid cock.
Neither does a country that's so great to live in, it has rampant immigration.
The irony of course being the danger that the immigrants retain too much of their own culture and destroy the one they seek.
Which is clearly just shit.
Support a family in a house with no central heating, one TV, no computers, no internet access, a single small radio, possibly a record player, a hoover and a cooker but no microwave, no dishwasher. Dress the children in second-hand clothing. Eat out once a month. Have one car in the family, or none if you live outside of the US.
Tell me you still need two parents working? Or did you want to enjoy those productivity gains of technology?
Pogonophobia isn't predicated on a fear of crossing over. I know a girl that's so scared of beards she wont hug a man that hasn't had a shave that week.
Anyway, most women may not have full bushy beards but many do have mustaches.
You want to tell me, a car rental agency can make a contract to cover my traffic bills/tickets? Sorry, under european law this idea is not only rediculous but laughable
Really? Fascinating. Good luck renting a car in the UK where not only will the rental company inform you that you will be charged for all bills/tickets, but that in response to any speeding notices you will be named as the offending driver.
Think you're safe because you live in another part of Europe? Welcome to the (fucked up stupid illogical and abused) European Arrest Warrant.
Living in Europe does not excuse you from obeying traffic laws.
Wtf does drink-driving have to do with bars?
You can drink alcohol outside of a bar.
You can drink alcohol in a bar without driving there or back.
You can drink in a bar without consuming alcohol.
What you can't do legally is get drunk then cause a serious danger to yourself and other road users through use of a motorised vehicle.
Is that a problem for you?
We'd gain better observance of the law from people that think, "I can have one and I'll be fine" then end up having 2-3 and justify it with "Well, I started an hour ago so the first one's worn off now".
That may not be how you do it, but sadly other people do.
Not the way I make sherry trifle.
Killing kids is sport now?
Actually, I could see how it might get serious TV ratings. See also: Battle Royale.