alan_cx

56 ms·

571.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Problem is, you have to sell the idea of accepting a perceived risk. We have to ask the public if it is OK that every now and again really bad stuff may happen, and NOT to blame the politicians for it. Because, in the end, that is why polit
572.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Im actually in the process of considering exactly that. Well, I like painting, but, you know.
573.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Im not sure anything can or will. IMHO, the plus for this is that if more and more people move to encrypted communication across the board, it will a) increase the work load of the likes of the NSA and GCHQ, and b) send a message to governm
574.
by alan_cx 13y ago
The ONLY thing I would say to all that is that the IRA actually existed, and civilians were constantly attacked by them, for over 30 years. The IRA even managed to blow up the UK government. The threat was real. IMHO, the AQ threat is 99% b
575.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Yeah right, we British might well need the skills of such immigrants to survive freely. Shame we dont have much of a tradition of immigrants from France... Hmmmm.... The British (Or US) Resistance, any one? Really annoy our right wings by
576.
by alan_cx 13y ago
I hope those who treated me with scorn for suggesting the politicians and business people are effectively blackmailed by the mere existence of NSA type spying can now see it for real. No direct threat, not conversation, no deals. Just the f
577.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Blimey, what did we do before email?
578.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Really? And blow the monarchy's neutrality? Defy the voted for will of the people? Given the tone of your post, can I assume you would want her to do this in order to undermine the monarchy?
579.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Indeed, I thought was a pretty good movie. Even Bruce Willis was awake.
580.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Hopefully this will be enough to convey it, hopefully there shouldn't be any permanent damage... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTf17cmPl0I
581.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Yep, hands up, took me a while too. I wonder if the media and/or government(s) were bending over backwards to make damn sure no one could be accused of homophobia. Dunno about the US, but in the UK, if there were the slightest smell of
582.
by alan_cx 13y ago
As a Brit, I find it shameful. Indeed, I find it hard to accept how blatant it all is, but with seemingly little public out rage. The abuse of anti terror laws to harass people who merely embarrass a so called democratic government is truly
583.
by alan_cx 13y ago
There is both a British and US amusement/irony there.
584.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Where there is space available, people will spread in to it. Once they get used to it, they are reluctant to give it up and will formulate any excuse under the sun to keep it that way. Screens, houses, land... same thing.
585.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Has the Guardian reported that Snowden docs were taken?
586.
by alan_cx 13y ago
It says encrypted thumb drives.
587.
by alan_cx 13y ago
So, on a shared internet connection, where many people might well use that one IP address, does this mean banning one person bans all?
588.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Well, it depends what you use them for.
589.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Cheers, best laugh I've had all day!!!!!! Edit: Sorry, should explain. The Lib Dems are the minority junior partner in a coalition government. The idea they would move to kill of their only ever hope at power is a dream at best.
590.
by alan_cx 13y ago
So, we seem to have yet again redefined "terrorist". It now means: causes embarrassment to government. Heh, well.. related to some one who causes embarrassment to government. Mind you, just read another article(1) about an underco
591.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Um, call me ignorant of the facts, but don't US courts tend to award higher damages than UK courts?
592.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Obviously, but in my experience, at least, normal non geek home users want a computer that just turns on, they don't want to be logging on to different accounts, let alone managing them. Even I gave that lark up. With 6 kids it almost
593.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Useful test for Greenwald and the Guardian too, no? Useful to run this partner through an airport with some clean electronics to see what the reaction would be and to perhaps see how far the British are prepared to go to please our Us maste
594.
by alan_cx 13y ago
As a Brit, I agree. But, the scope is different. The US threatens literally every country on earth..... the UK? Ah, bless. Its almost funny, isn't it? All we can do is harass our own, in order to suck up to Uncle Sam. TBH, I find UK be
595.
by alan_cx 13y ago
From a British point of view, that is the most scary thing ever.
596.
by alan_cx 13y ago
And not Cameron? Blair had a plan, he managed to execute a fair amount of it, then fell apart. Exactly like Thatcher. Cameron has none. Oh yeah, "austerity", which I think the US has now shown to be not the way to go. Heh, Cameron
597.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Serious answer? Both. Which pains me greatly, I used to quite like and respect both.
598.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Yeah, I suppose you do have a point there... Nasty way to run things, no?
599.
by alan_cx 13y ago
Actually, I think there is something about the cold logical mind that deals with logical computers that is more likely to come down on the legalization side. If we say that legalization is rational and its irrational emotional concerns that
600.
by alan_cx 13y ago
What I want to know is why governments support all illegal drug dealing, and dont get a cut of the action themselves. The illegality is pretty much what makes it profitable. All the "war" on drugs does is keep the prices up. Mean

More ›