648 karma · joined September 3, 2014
So, a handy translation guide for those not so familiar with with the local lingo - http://www.glasgowvant.com/glaswegian-dictionary-terms-and-p...
I don't think people are distinguishing between 'domestic' or 'foreign' spying. For most people, it's way too complex to have an understanding of domestic US laws on agencies spying powers. Also remember, it's not just the US either. Remember the UK is probably the most prolific gatherer (they have a much more strategic point on internet routing than the US does).
People reduce a complex and difficult to understand story into something they think they understand. In this case, Snowden is 'about spies' and 'spies track[/kill] terrorists' combined with 'I'm not a terrorist, so they won't be interested in tracking me' hence the whole story is irrelevant and only conspiracy nuts think the Government spies on them.
Any attempt to counter this and say, actually it is important because in 5, 10, 20 or more years, an agency can take a dislike to you (or some relative/connection) and then start to revisit things you have long since forgotten, and target you for some throw away comment, just sounds so far fetched as to be lunacy.
But, as the submitted article shows, it's exactly what is happening in other countries and there is no reason why 'our country' [insert name of wherever you live - not just the US] won't do the same. For domestic US readers, imagine a future President Trump issuing an executive order to track down those who insulted him, even in private personal e-mail conversations - it may be a crazy scenario, but the NSA database allows such a thing to happen.
The mass collection and storage of data is a real risk to any democratic society, because of the threat of misuse. Don't fool yourself that some official will say no when asked to carry out some heinous act made possible by access to the stored communications.
Getting tied up in whether Snowden is a traitor or a hero is missing the point. It's also where the NSA has focused on steering the conversation at every opportunity.
Even when people read about Snowden, they just don't get it. This past weekend, he came up and the response was, yeah, but Snowden was saying the spying is only on terrorists, they don't collect any information on people who are not terrorists because that would be way more information than they want. Trying to explain that is the opposite of what Snowden was saying was pointless and futile because it just made me sound like the crazy one.
The NSA must be rolling around laughing as they listen in to peoples naive conversations about Snowden.
edit: oops, removed link added on the wrong posting. Sorry. And a typo. Sorry again.
If a Government (or TLA or whoever in power) wants some Evil Thing, a piece of paper from somewhere promising not to do Evil Things will not be a hindrance to either asking [or, depending on where, compelling] you to take part. If you have the option to decline, they will keep asking people (and increasing the financial reward) until someone agrees.
It is widely used by the Police (obviously) but also by the likes of insurance companies (e.g. unsubstantiated suspicious of "suspect" insurance claims) and high street shops (the major stores operate a facial recognition database of 'known' and 'suspected' shoplifters which they use to target people on entry to stores and either eject or detain them as they determine they want to do).
All you need to do is construct an argument about preventing and detecting crime and you're pretty much free to store and process whatever and however you want. The only case I've heard of this failing was in the building industry blacklist (which GCHQ helped create and was run by Sir Robert McAlpine, Balfour Beatty, Costain and Skanska Construction [1]).
Databases like that are part of the 'bulk collection' being used here. It has gone on since at least 1984 (the Telecommunications bill instigated the legal framework for it).
In the mid-80's, I worked in the UK with someone who was in the middle of some business dispute (normal business stuff, nothing unusual or noteworthy). A lot of the business involved dealing with military type customers who generally worked at the 'discreet' end of the business. In casual conversation with one customer, the dispute came up and frustration was expressed at the lack of ways to resolve it. A few days later a large envelope arrived with a complements slip from said customer, containing a huge ream of printouts of extremely personal and sensitive details on the business competitor, their businesses, their family and some choice friends. My colleague had the sense to burn the paperwork ASAP (but did look through it!) and was always way more careful about what and with who he discussed things afterwards.
From that incident, I know that any sort of record in the UK is fair game for GCHQ and it was normal for your doctor visits, bank records, credit records (purchase details), any store accounts etc. - everything - to be sucked up, even in the 80's. Any sort of political activism (of any type) moved you way up the interest & monitoring list, especially things like donations or driving your car near any sort of demo or sensitive site.
The irony was that 1984 was the year the UK made legislation for it. But it got way worse under Tony Blair, who is often chastised for treating Orwell's 1984 as an instruction manual rather than a warning.
[1] http://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/mar/03/blacklisted-...
There's some interesting things from a tech perspective - use of Postgres, Perl scripts etc. That was fun to find out.
Unfortunately the Guardian is in regular battle over their comments, particularly in respect to how they handle comment regarding Israel - they are frequently accused of suppressing anything 'pro' (by deleting entire commenter accounts as breaches of their rules) and retaining some quite alarming comments (on Israel and other subjects) by classifying as free speech and retaining despite complaints - see [1] for 68 'recommends' for killing Tony Blair being kept.
This looks like an attempt to bypass some serious issues by intentionally addressing something completely tangential. A classic diversionary tactic.
That's why I think you (or anyone else) is unlikely to get access to the data.
Which is a pity, because it could help clear up exactly these issues of claimed bias they are accused of, and help determine if it exists or not. - something useful.
[1] https://ukmediawatch.org/2011/12/31/cif-commenter-suggests-t...
UK bankers were arguably key to the creation and implosion of the worldwide banking system but are already back to obscene bonus levels and see the taxpayer bailouts as a just reward to ensure their opulent and obscene lifestyles.
I'd happily have my 'Sir' title removed and be left with the money and have police officers guarding me 24x7 to ensure I can enjoy my ill-gotten gains. And if the media tries to publish anything about me, then I can go get a super-injunction to make it illegal to even say I got an injunction ! (http://www.theguardian.com/business/2011/mar/10/fred-goodwin...)
2 years for non terrorism related cases. 5 years for anything "national security" related.
e.g. model plane enthusiast with mental health issues? http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/24/ripa_jfl/ worth reading the whole thing as it does a lot of analysis and gives lots of detail.
I always recall Frank McCourt in Angela's Ashes talking about "the English and the terrible things they did to us for eight hundred long years" as it summed up much of the logic and reasoning [I mean that ironically] that led to thousands of murders in Northern Ireland. (edit: For clarity, I think Frank McCourt understood that very well and that's why it wrote it as he did.)
Young and impressionable people are prone to learning about historic injustice and they trying to right the wrongs by perpetrating new injustices. That's not what learning history is supposed to do - an understanding of history is about learning how society ended up the way it is now and trying to use that to improve society without repeating terrible mistakes that lead to death and mayhem in the past.
It's vital to learn history, but it's vital to learn context and the bigger picture too. Without that, it becomes the source of hatred that undoes the evolution of society (sadly there are too many examples readily available of that happening).
http://www.bury.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=4013&p=0
Specifically discussing Moslem burials, offers :
Types of graves available
Timber, brick or concrete vaults
On request, graves will be lined with timber, brick or concrete breeze blocks to form an inner shell in the grave space. Please note that we require the following notice for these types of vault.
And in NY (http://www.isnf.org/Documents/GuideToMuslimFuneralsInWestern...) you are charged extra for not having a lining on the grave.
"A concrete or other permanent outer burial container is not required, but there is an additional charge for a burial without an outer burial container."
They've been rarely used until more recently, when it's been a favorite for prosecuting police officers and police employees for egregious behavior resulting in deaths and injuries (where traditional charges such as manslaughter have failed to convince juries who are always reluctant to convict). The other favorite use is to prosecute civil servants for speaking to the media (aka. leaking).
However, no sign of it being used to deal with mighty screwups on government IT. I do like your thinking on this.
The ones you hear about are the ones the government ministers foolishly chose to boast about in some answer in parliament or announce in some TV interview. Normally that's when consultants pounce on it and offer to help make it succeed [i.e. vampire all the money away in insane fees]. A minister announcing it is practically the death-knell of a project.
The ones which succeed generally keep publicity and announcements to an absolute minimum and keep tight control. That's way more difficult than you imagine on a government project as civil servants go hunting for projects to buddy up to in order to pad their promotion cv. If your project budget is more than the last one they screwed, they're all over it so they can boast about the incremental increase in projects they contributed to - a major promotion point (as no-one checks if the project succeeded, the promotion is hinged on how much public money it pissed away).
I was ecstatic to leave UK Gov projects behind.
Just look at most UK Government IT projects. They've got it down to a fine art, blowing billions and being left with nothing useful.
Several major international government consultancy firms got their break on supposed small UK Gov IT projects, and were able to keep billing $1,000's/hour for years (while delivering nothing useful) and became big IT consultancies in the process. The failure didn't harm them one little bit - it let them claim the have experience and that got them way more work.
IT project failure in large and complex organizations is practically guaranteed.
Now, if they did that small-ish team, paid well, it could well work. But your board is not going to approve some pizza munching, jolt cola drinking geeks as your wonder IT team. Don't worry what the team is really like, the consultants asked by the board to review them as part of the process will make sure they're described as the aforementioned pizza and cola weirdos. And recommend using the consultants team instead. Been there. Done that.
The low insulin sensitivity in type 2 means the pancreas produces large amounts of insulin in a futile attempt to reduce blood sugar. Initial treatments focus on insulin sensitizing agents to try and assist the natural insulin to be effective. Despite the amazing capabilities of the body, it eventually becomes too much and people have to start insulin replacement therapy at that point.
Type 1 diabetes is not associated with being overweight and weight loss does not help. Indeed, rapid weight loss is often an early indication of the condition. Treatment with insulin (the only method available) typically results in weight gain, as the body recovers due to the newly available injected insulin. Often these patients start at normal weight range (i.e. BMI < 25) and are often substantially below typical weights prior to development of diabetes.
Type 2 diabetes has strong genetic factors and substantial evidence shows these, combined with weight and some other factors of diet, lead to an expression as diabetes. In these cases, some people have had significant improvements in their conditions due to calorie restriction (leading to weight loss but often it also means they've switched to a healthier diet in the process and that also helps). The mechanisms here are believed to be due to improved sensitivity to insulin which is still being naturally produced.
Various ratios of diabetes are quoted, but generally 1 in 20 of the white european population has diabetes and 1 in 20 of those has type 1 (and the other 19 type 2). Figures for Indian/Pakistani origin people are dramatically different if they move to Europe or North America and research suggests this is due to very different foods consumed [the 'western' versions being significantly less healthy than those from origin countries]. Much higher numbers of type 2 diabetes are found in these populations (reinforcing the factors as both genetics and types of food are involved). Other population groups differ too.
Treatments for diabetes typically create weight control issues as increased insulin or sensitivity to insulin promotes body fat storage.
It's untrue (and frankly verging on offensive) to simply blame diabetics for their condition because they are obese or overweight. Addressing and treating the condition is significantly more complex and weight control may be one of the few elements the patient has any input to, while many other factors are entirely outwith their control and they bear no culpability for.
PI are highlighting that in the US, Apple were at least able to publicly disclose what they believe is an egregious over-reach by a law enforcement body. In the UK, Apple execs would currently be facing significant jail time for what they have done.
[1] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/12/police-ripa-pow...
[edit: grammar, sorry]
Super high property tax when I'm not there? Simple, employ a cleaner on some minimal wage and let them stay there when I'm not in town. When I'm in town, put them up in a hotel. I'll probably still save money on the property tax and I can claim to be a caring employer, helping with employment in town. The city council are evil job destroyers by sticking me with huge taxes.
Scotland implements a 'second home' variant of their 'council tax' [a weird name for property tax]. Depending on area, it's a locally chosen multiple of the standard tax. But that's based on whether people declare another property and there's a lot of overhead in policing it. I doubt if it actually raises any extra net income.
But what if your empty property is actually from a relative who recently died and the estate is being finalized? Does that get hit too?
It always sounds simple to just slap extra taxes on rich people (who always happen to be defined as someone other than yourself), but that often leads to unfairness to decidedly non-rich people.
Rich people always find a way round these things - they pay lawyers and accountants to make sure they can. No public policy will ever fix that.
3 FA is :
* Something you have (normally one OR MORE user IDs)
* Something you know (normally the associated password or passwords for the user ID(s))
* Something you are (normally biometric)
[edit: technically, it's multi-factor when using multiple user/passwords - here's a useful link https://pciguru.wordpress.com/2010/05/01/one-two-and-three-f...]
What should probably be of concern is that Assange is talking about leaving the Ecuadorean embassy in the UK AND the UK police have taken a much lower key approach recently, removing officers from outside etc.
Has Assange not considered the risk that, given how friendly the UK was to these flights [landing, refueling at Glasgow Airport for example], the flight is probably sitting waiting at Heathrow right now?
If he steps out, he's more likely to be confronted by US agents, possibly posing as UK police, who will detain him and whisk him off to the waiting plane ? The convenient absence of real UK officers will allow for a daylight snatch by the US and bypass the Sweden issue completely.
You'll still be rejected out of hand and forced to resort to legal action however. You're right that the UK has targeted non-EU spouses and is intentionally obstructive, arbitrary and perverse in their dealings, all for the political ends you describe.
Indeed, it's been a huge bonanza for the local residents as big corporations have rolled into town and spent millions on PR (often as close to the courthouse as they can get). Everyone in town is courted (forgive the pun) to try and see corporations in the best possible light, just in case they turn up on a jury in a case against $BIGCORP at a later date.
<humor>It's the American Way.</humor>
Opting out was practically encouraged last time I went via EWR - the woman doing the pat-downs seemed to be on training to do them, so they were funneling people to her rather than the scanners.
I see argument in some comments that the risk to a pregnant woman may not be so large (I have no idea), but there are many people with medical devices who could be seriously harmed by a mandatory policy.
If device manufacturers are so clear that the devices are not designed to be subjected to EMF from these scanners, will the TSA be replacing devices and compensating people ?
The security theater just got officially dangerous (ok, more dangerous than before).
There's all sorts of debate above about office 365 (some reads more like slick advertising astro-turf - people really shouldn't bite at that stuff) but this could be great for many web based business automation apps. I can think of a few things I've done in the past this would have been great for. I see it's already being built in to Zafara and Roundcube.
It's fantastic that many of these stories (and the source code) are starting to be told. I love them for both the memories and finding out how things came about and sometimes even seeing what they caused to evolve through till now.
Looks like this is one for the mods to check.
Looking at facebook and seeing people with hundreds of so-called friends will give the wrong impression. Of those hundreds, nearly all will have no interest in the ups or downs of life. A "like" to some bullshit picture of your dinner or of drunken vomiting on your SUV hood is not friendship, but for lots of people, they think it is.
I've been acquainted with hundreds of people, even being close and going out to bat for them. But, with literally 2 or 3 exceptions, not one person has ever stuck around and shown what I'd call true friendship. As soon as things got tough and I could have done with some support, they were gone - stopped answering phone calls or emails, type of gone. Talk about being kicked when down.
But, looking around, I saw that this was not me being singled out for shitty treatment. It was actually pretty common and even normal. And it makes it really difficult for people going through tough times; I've known people who were plunged into despair and depression at being abandoned and even shunned by people they trusted.
Despite it not being trendy (or, nowadays, politically correct), find out if there is a local church (or whatever equivalent matches your background) that seems sensible (shop around and avoid fringe extremes!) and has some social events. You may not find people who will become lifelong friends (almost certainly not) and you may even disagree with their views on many things, but if you shop around, you should find somewhere you at least feel welcomed and supported in a way that you appear to need just now.
I don't think you need fixed. A little bit more life experience and perspective that you're not so different after all will help.
Lots of online comment (and views of the video[1]) are supportive of the guy and are viewing to remove the threat of him being financially ruined (it's almost at the 200,000 as I type).
MS just come across as intentional bullies and thugs (I'm paraphrasing comments made elsewhere rather than stating an opinion) and that's probably way more damaging to them than any of their make believe financial damages ever could be.
The BSA have a long track record of trying to game search engines and cause reputational damage to those they sue but I expect, in the long run, the 'pirate' will have more harm caused by long forgotten facebook postings than by the BSA. The world has moved on and the BSA have failed to even notice they've been left behind.
I'm tucking this one away as an example for the times I need to give examples of brain-dead stupid stuff that people who don't understand the internet, do, thinking they're being super clever and showing their super skills/exacting revenge etc.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKjPutIlBCA
[edit:spelling]
The US Border is bizarre, I get asked for a card when I cross almost all the time - like it's some sort of equivalent of a passport that proves I'm really on business. They had a sense of humor failure when I offer to email them one, so I stopped doing that and just got some cards so I can give them, and whoever else asks, one.