Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Sounds like a campus speech code (Score 3, Informative) 432

by stewwy (#42031605) Attached to: You Can't Say That On the Internet
not a student of anatomy then :-)

first point :

Both sexes have 'boobs' Its just that natal females have more developed breast tissue, all oestrogen does is to cause that tissue to develop ( to simplify )

FYI lactation and breastfeeding is even possible in men look (up the Aka tribe)

The second is just an opinion, which I feel free to ignore. although I have to admit to a slight agreement with you on 'fatass's ' but it's my body so I'll do what the f*ck I want with it :-)

Comment: Re:Sounds like a campus speech code (Score 4, Interesting) 432

by stewwy (#42027629) Attached to: You Can't Say That On the Internet
It's funny! :-) Blurs and challenges peoples assumptions.

I'm in the UK and for what it's worth I'm a transsexual currently growing her own boobs, (not bad, a bit more than a B cup at the moment :-) )

The situation is interesting though, if I'm in male mode and strip my top off from there in a situation where male bare-chestedness is appropriate (say a normal beach) then that is OK as far as the cops are concerned.

But it's not OK if I strip off from a Skirt and Bra.

I actually find this quite an enlightened attitude. In the rare case that I'm presenting as male I'm treated as one

When I'm presenting as female then I'm treated as one

Which is how it should be. I do find this whole thing about nipples (in the USA ) a bit ridiculous, and to be honest a bit childish, it smacks a bit of giggling in the playground

It is however an insidious way of introducing censorship.

In the UK we treat sexuality ( and nipples ) a bit more seriously, strangely thanks to the murdoch press and the Sun (a low brow, very popular newspaper ) girls on page 3

But we fall down considerably on freedom of speech at the moment ( witness the guy being arrested for a burning poppy on his FB page along with calling squaddies c*nts, as if they would care )

Comment: TR-069 (Score 4, Interesting) 193

by stewwy (#40033313) Attached to: Paul Vixie: 100,000 DSL Modems May Lose Their DNS On July 9
Some modems implement this , TR-069 (remote config) protocol. At least some of the clueless should have this active, I'm surprised it's not used more widely by ISP's Of course anyone with half a brain will have it disabled,( do you want your ISP to control your router? ) and if you have it disabled at least you know your modem/router HAS a config page but still, it's for exactly this reason it's there.

Comment: Re:Why? (Score 1) 403

by stewwy (#39754727) Attached to: Europe Agrees To Send Airline Passenger Data To US

You're quite correct I could in certain circumstances become bound under that 'law' if I said the wrong thing, in the wrong place. I wouldn't do that because every person is in my opinion entitled to their own illusions/delusions. i.e. freedom of belief

On the other hand as I am probably a 'criminal' in the eyes of at least one set of laws, why should I bother to obey any law I didn't agree with?

Comment: Re:Why? (Score 2) 403

by stewwy (#39747365) Attached to: Europe Agrees To Send Airline Passenger Data To US

As a UK citizen I am now subject to three or possibly four sets of laws

UK law(and it's variant if I travel to Scotland or do business there, Scots law) EU law and now US law.

UK law is all well and good, I was born and brought up here so I have a pretty good idea of what I can and cannot do. (Scotland has roughly the same criminal law but a different civil law system I think)

EU laws, which generally have something to do with commerce, are not too bad as to have any effect on me they have to be translated into English law, usually with all sorts of unnecessary add-ons and gold plating. Just occasionally the prats in Whitehall will get slapped for some fundamental human rights violation which is OK by me.:-)

Just as an aside, a lawer friend once explained to me that in its simplest form UK law generally says 'What isn't forbidden is allowed'. But that Continental (EU) law says 'Everything is forbidden except for what is allowed'. He followed on from this to say that 2 things stemmed from this, in the UK what is forbidden rises over time, but in Continental (EU) Law what is allowed rises.

and now to US law, which seems fundamentally different from most other jurisdictions and seems to apply, regardless of UK law, whenever I travel, do business, or go online. If I break that I can now be shipped off to the US for trial as a non-person/terrorist/someone whose annoyed a US business.

I like to think that if the last ever applied I'd behave like any true US citizen " You can ship me off to your godforsaken country over Your dead body!'

Good luck on keeping track of what laws you break!

Comment: Re:Encryption (Score 1) 191

by stewwy (#24872283) Attached to: Criminals Remote-Wiping Cell Phones

Except that a Vermont judge recently ruled that password(s) contained in one's head are protected under the 5th Amendment to the United States Constitution. just like any other information in your head. It was discussed right here on Slashdot.

As for threatening law enforcement officers: say nothing, know your rights, and keep your cool. The law enforcement officer is NOT your friend and you shouldn't speak to them or answer their questions. You have a right to remain silent and you should use it. BTW every attorney that I have ever heard opine on the subject has said that it is better to say nothing than to answer some of the questions but not others. Don't let them scare you into giving up your rights with their Gestapo crap. Remember, if they are questioning you, especially if they are threatening, then there is NO way that you are NOT going to be held (i.e. arrested) for a while anyway until the matter either goes before a judge or they have to let you go (48 hours max w/out cause before any attorney can force them to let you out), so don't be dumb and tip your hand right at the start. Also, remember that if you ever get your equipment back then you can never use it or those passwords again (who knows what bugs they may have planted before releasing it back to you). You basically have to wipe and start over on new hardware.

Disclaimer: IANAL so if you find yourself in a situation like the one above find yourself one that you can trust and let them do the talking, but remember that the police are NOT your friends.

yeah right but its not 48hours in the uk anymore.....you try keeping quiet for 42DAYS

It's funny.  Laugh.

+ - 10 Great Snake-Oil Gadgets-> 5

Submitted by
The Byelorussian Strikes Again
The Byelorussian Strikes Again writes "Wired offers up 10 of the most awesome snake oil gadgets, from industrial cables sold as $200 ionized pain-relieving bracelets to a plastic chip that cures anything, improves gas mileage and cleans swimming pools. One truly sad development: the infamous $500 wooden volume knob is no longer on sale."
Link to Original Source
Media

+ - Brazilian site contains great anti-DRM guides

Submitted by
drmbreaker
drmbreaker writes "In Brazil, far from the claws of the DMCA, a webpage has been written in English with straightforward instructions on how to break the DRM in iTunes, DVDs, and other sources, as well as on how to use BitTorrent, and how to download videos from YouTube and other video sites. The instructions are simple and step-by-step, down to each click of the mouse. Anyone can follow them, not just techies. Most people do not realize that DVDs can be ripped, copied, and mixed almost as easily as CDs. Everyone deserves to know how this can be done, especially given how many tools today make this very easy indeed. The site stresses that it does not support piracy, and that these techniques should be used only to back-up or transcode media that is already legitimately owned. Remember, making back-up copies and transcoding media content to enjoy it on different platforms is a legal right we all should protect and practice. Please spread this site's address around to as to weaken the grip of DRM even further."
User Journal

SPAM: 'NYT' Reporter Who Got Iraqi WMDs Wrong Now Highlights Iran 3

Journal by Jeremiah Cornelius

Saturday's New York Times features an article, posted at the top of its Web site late Friday, that suggests very strongly that Iran is supplying the "deadliest weapon aimed at American troops" in Iraq. The author notes, "Any assertion of an Iranian contribution to attacks on Americans in Iraq is both politically and diplomatically volatile."

What is the source of this volatile information? Nothing less than "civilian and military officials from a broad range of government agencies."

"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices." -- William James

Working...