cmdkeen

And when GDPR comes in that will change to make it even more in their economic interest to take these things seriously. The higher of 20 million Euro or 4% of global turnover is enough to start making company boards ask questions about preparedness and impacts.

Visit the Highlands of Scotland and you'll definitely find wilderness. The Cape Wrath trail is probably the best indicator. Also places like Beinn Eighe, where the remains of a crashed Lancaster bomber from 1951 are still scattered about as it is was too remote to retrieve them at the time. In 2008 a climber fell during an avalanche only to have his fall broken by a propeller.

Factor in the civil service pension scheme (worth an extra ~20% of salary) and level of holiday you get and it looks rather more attractive. Based on my contacts there DSTL is also a very good place to work, with plenty of interesting stuff to get involved in.

Usually because the Western submarine was tailing them at the time, a fundamentally risky business.

There was a collision between UK and French SSBNs on patrol a few years back, and indication as to how quiet they can be - and SSBNs warrant the absolutely best ASW technology and techniques. An SSK, like the one missing, that has lost power isn't going to be making any sound at all unless the crew are doing it. If it is on the bottom you're essentially going to have to do a sea bed survey. The UK's Holland 1 submarine was lost under tow in 1913 only 1.5 miles outside Plymouth breakwater and remained undetected until 1981.

That's how CSRF works - I get you to communicate to the device from your "trusted" smartphone or other device. There is nothing you can do at the routing level to protect against it. It is entirely up to the endpoint receiving the request to have implemented proper CSRF protection against attacks.

CSRF has been around since 2001 and is in the OWASP top 10. It would be absolutely valid for regulators to require reasonable steps to be taken to prevent its abuse, along with similar attacks.

"Assuming a competent user" is absolutely not what IoT is about, it shouldn't be what most of our decisions as engineers should be about. I don't want to have to be a "competent user" for my fridge, lightbulbs, sex toys - i.e. everything is potentially going IoT.

Separately, no - attacks like CSRF will quite happily be routed and compromise an incompetently designed IoT device.

My (limited) understanding, and quoting from the article is that is is around: "holiday pay, paid rest breaks and the minimum wage".

The first essentially boils down to extra money - if you work X days you get another days pay to simulate a paid holiday day. I'd imagine the second two would combine - if Uber accepts your app connecting and being "for hire" they guarantee you at least the minimum wage, and after a set period of working you get a paid break.

It may be on a US Navy warship, that absolutely isn't the case for other blue water navies. If anything I would suggest that having too many people involved adds confusion. The OOW has repeaters of the course and speed so that they can verify their orders are being followed, they are the check.

The Wolf Rock collision board of inquiry makes for interesting (and embarrassing) reading around what happens when assumptions are being made about who is doing what.

While we may like to think of the Western intelligence agencies as all knowing for large periods throughout the Cold War they were essentially blind as to the inner working / thinking of the USSR. The occasional defectors or agents who could bring understanding are significant because of their scarcity.

The West had many reasons to believe the USSR was stronger than it was, hawks on the right wanted to believe it, fellow travellers on the left wanted to believe it, the Russian political system wanted to believe it (and lied to itself repeatedly).

Constraint programming is a fascinating area that I loved at university. There have been a few times where I've thought it would be a useful way to solve a problem since, but brute force always won through. Is anyone out there using it in anger? If so, in what sort of spaces / companies?

China has historically tolerated NK because it doesn't want to share a border with a US ally. China intervened in the Korean War precisely because the UN forces came too far north, in spite of China warning them to stay clear.

In the military junior leader's get taught Adair's theory of Action Centred Leadership: that Task, Team and Individual are separate things to deal with and yet mutually dependent.

Which to make the primary focus can and should switch up. If you are firefighting on a submarine all that matters is the task - the team are all dead if you fail. The individual does not matter there and then.

Back in the land of computers we have less extreme but analogous problems. There are times when you do need to focus on the task, however if you're a good leader you've used the times when that isn't the case to focus on building a Team and developing each Individual so that they can, and are willing, to dig out to achieve the Task.

Chris Bryant is of course a Labour MP. Intriguingly he was also caught up in the expenses scandal. One does wonder whether his book (which is being serialised here) manages to wonder about how the occupants of "the other place" get and hold onto power.

It also manages to recycle many of the popular tropes about the aristocracy avoiding taxes, perfectly legally, while ignoring the concept of noblesse oblige which was for a long time the flip side of aristocratic privilege. We're starting to see a similar concept return in the form of billionaires being criticised if they fail to sign up to donate their money.

In the UK* it is an offence to be "drunk in charge of a vehicle" so you absolutely can be arrested and charged for being asleep whilst drunk in a vehicle. You'll be having to defend yourself in court as to whether it was likely that would could have driven it drunk.

In the same way reading communications can be perfectly legal and is often helpful in establishing conspiracy cases. Accepting that Governments can legally intercept communications with some form of due process shouldn't be viewed as going after "pre-crime". It has always been the case before now that legal interception powers also enable illegal Government (or indeed non-state) snooping, that should be dealt with by robust interventions by an independent judiciary.

* Road Traffic Law is one of the relatively few criminal areas that is UK wide

It's not excellent. Nothing about data security, encryption at rest, and a whole load of things that would be covered by GDPR (yes the service is registered in Canada, but GDPR standards should be the benchmark now for what is considered acceptable for anything).

This is an intriguing idea as a concept but feels like it isn't a sufficient focus. The privacy page hasn't been updated in 18 months either, yet the release notes mention encryption at rest (with very little detail) being added in October 16.

Here's the thing with pay scaled to cost of living, it means things like pension contributions, ability to save, any property you purchase, are also scaled. There's a reason so many people flock to expensive cities early in their careers.

Very early stage startups might be able to move around Europe for a short period for cheap rents, you're going to be much less able to recruit staff (i.e. non-founders) to move from the West to Slovakia (as mentioned) to work for Slovakian wages.

This is why the financial regulators in the UK have changed to consider the corporate culture when dealing with breaches. A company whose senior staff "live a compliance culture" will be penalised less for the same breach than one operating as described above.

Now you can argue efficacy, being able to pull the wool over the eyes of regulators etc but I think it is a good direction to head in.

All that is way beyond the industry described with institutionalised cheating in tests, it wounds more like the graphics card industry than one with regulators.

A systems administrator downloads a random zip file and a password cracker onto his work computer, when he works for the Department of Energy, gets caught and fired. The first part of the article is surprising only in that he found it so easy to get a good job in finance afterwards.

To be honest I'm not entirely sure what the point of the article is at all. He freely admits that the FBI had cause to be suspicious about his travel to Iceland, it coincided with a massive breach of information and he definitely fit the bill to warrant investigation. He and his associates all were afforded the right to counsel etc, in terms of US law enforcement stories this is more of an example of how things should be done within the context of the law as it stands.

Why? He had the opportunity to appeal all the way to the UK Supreme Court who ruled that the extradition request was valid. Those who pledged surety over his bail were ordered to pay £93,500 back in 2012. This absolutely should not be about politics but about the rule of law.

There is a serious point as well that bail needs to be enforced otherwise its effectiveness is reduced, which in turn makes it easier for the arguments limiting the right to bail to be made. Assange has made it more likely that future defendants will be denied bail.

Other legal commentators in the thread pointing out that he is still wanted for "failing to surrender" to his bail which can face up to 12 months in prison. This is what the arrest warrant will be for, not some secret US extradition request.

Prosecution guidance on the offence: http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/a_to_c/bail/#a32

This is historically where the Mafia came from, as a means to keep members of a price fixing cartel mutually honest. The old saying about "no honour amongst thieves" being solved by outsourcing to a body to provide a parallel system of contract enforcement.

Harder to achieve online but not impossible, though plenty of criminals make enough without essentially having to place themselves at risk of physical attack from organised crime.

There's a separate, fascinating, historical incident that shaped the Royal Navy and by extension world affairs for centuries. The execution of Admiral Byng for "failing to do his utmost" lead to a culture of aggression in the RN. This resulted over the years in many impressive, against the odds, victories such as Pellew's two frigates taking the 74 Droits de l'Homme. It also led to sacrifices such as HMS Glowworm's attack on the Hipper during the Norway campaign in 1940.

The Royal Navy differs from the British Army in taking a more holistic view of traditions and history. Trafalgar is celebrated by all every year, Taranto is celebrated by all aviators every year - rather than only those descended from units involved. This combined with the length of time to draw lessons from has led to the saying "The Navy has traditions, the Army history and the Air Force has habits. And nasty, dirty habits they are too".

Initiative is very different at sea, and was especially so before the era of effective radio communications. Nations trusted their admirals and captains to effectively be ambassadors as the effect they could have on foreign affairs during peacetime was enormous. From the USS Pueblo to the USS Vincennes the position naval captains are put is often significantly more isolated, complicated, and symbolically important than any other armed service.

Though just the other side of the bridges, up at Rosyth, there are two rather large aircraft carriers being built. Also several aging examples of what arguably replaced the battleship, nuclear attack submarines.

/me Quietly goes back to using Knockout and Typescript to happily pootle along building apps without worrying about routing, SPAs and other added complexity.

Simplicity brings its own rewards.

I doubt the author was using Redux if he was praising React and Typescript...

Their pricing page says: "The minimum charge is 1,000 transactions a month, so the transaction cost will be at least €100 a month."

Doesn't look startup friendly at all.

Because calling for the UN Security Council to do something is easy but often doesn't achieve anything, Russia, with its veto, is hardly going to allow its ally in Assad to be implicated is it?

The question for Trudeau is - when Russia says no, then what?

Political, not commercial. All politicians lie or are "economical with the truth". If you want to get the courts involved in judging political statements, especially in a country that has already politicised the courts to a greater extent than many other Western countries, then you're on a hiding to nothing.

Because the farmers get paid next to nothing so disrupting supply does nothing to raise costs (the usual measure of the effect a supply side policy has). Mexican weed production soared because the authorities were pulled into cities due to violence leaving the rural terrain uncovered.

Narconomics is a good read on the various measures that have been tried. Going after poor South American farmers these days means the cartels just means the cartels don't pay them as much.

Far too much policy making around narcotics is done by knee-jerk reactions, on both sides.