Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Recruiting? (Score 4, Informative) 132

errr - that's not a tardis (hope this isn't a "swoosh" moment, it's a regular old-style public phone box (booth). You don't see them about much, although a while back an enterprising sculptor put a dozen together like this and flogged it to my local council for several tens of thousands of quid.

The tardis is supposed to be a police telephone box, which has a different design and colour like this. These boxes also contained equipment other than a phone - such as a first aid kit and an incident book.

On a last pedantic note, there were red police boxes in Glasgow, Scotland, for a time.

Comment Re:He didn't rape them (Score 2, Informative) 530

The definition of rape in Sweden is a lot more liberal than in the UK (or US, for that matter). I think the charge is something along the lines of "having sex without a barrier protection method on the assumption that the parties involved do not sleep around and then subsequently finding out that at least one does sleep around, thus increasing the risk of STDs to the injured party".

Oddly, I wasn't aware that you could be extradited from the UK to face a charge for something that isn't illegal in the UK - I think they're trying (and succeeding, so far) to peg it onto a "sexual assault" charge

Comment Re:£149? (Score 1) 286

In the UK it actually is the same (although mostly without the technical terms such as "ADSL2+" which would confuse the poor ignorant masses), although you will also be shaped depending on traffic class during "peak" hours (that typically last for much of the day) with a lot of the major ISPs - check out your Fair Usage and Traffic Management policies that are required to be easily findable on your ISPs website. If you are fortunate enough to live near an unbundled exchange, then you have a better choice of ISPs and so may be able to find one that offers an unshaped, unlimited (without the *) contract. These contracts are either not very cheap or not very common. Buy cheap broadband and expect to be heavily throttled and have caps put in place

Comment Re:My Face (Score 1) 344

There's also that key phrase "subject to your privacy and application settings". In there, you've got:

Your status, photos and posts
Photos and videos you're tagged in

How hard is it to modify those settings to one that is not "all and sundry in the world"?

Comment Re:I would be very concerned (Score 1) 532

The ban is almost entirely a matter of regulatory inertia and risk of lawsuits. Since the bans are universal, no airline wants to risk paying higher damages in a lawsuit if there's a crash and someone is able to convince a jury that their policy of allowing electronic devices theoretically increased their liability by even .000001%. On the other hand, if airlines could install picocells that made it impossible to connect to a carrier's towers, but enabled them to collect $1/minute roaming charges, you'd see any hint of a ban eliminated within a matter of days.


Comment Re:I would be very concerned (Score 2) 532

Unlikely to be a very good Faraday cage - the amount of times I've seen folks making calls on landing (before doors open) throws that out the window. The main reason for not getting a signal is that the antennas on the base stations aren't pointing up. But it's still conceivable to get a signal to a tower under those circumstances, and it can play havoc with the network as it's not designed to cope with those speeds (even when not making a call). Making a call would probably be problematic as, in GSM, you'd use up several timeslots just with the timing advance over that distance.

Comment Re:Expensive legal defense (Score 1) 95

One interesting thing is that, AFAIK, under British law you have to prove the person not just the address for an alleged crime. For instance, more than a few people have defended a speeding ticket by stating something along the lines of "I own the vehicle, four of my family members are insured to drive it, I wasn't driving it that day and wasn't at home, and I cannot tell who was the driver". Unless the photos clearly show the driver's face or other distinguishing feature, you can't prosecute.

That loophole is now closed for speeding tickets - if the registered keeper can't say who was driving, then they still get slapped with at least the fine and, in this case, all 6 points. I've seen other articles where the fine and points were divided between potential drivers (in the case where they said "it was a long journey and we alternated, but can't say who was at the wheel at the time"). There's been quite a few cases of this nature getting thrown out.

Comment Re:Any UK legal folk around? (Score 1) 347

I think the premise is that English Heritage own the site and issue tickets to folks to visit it, so they control the rights you gain on entering their property. As part of the T&C's (although these aren't visible on their website) it will no doubt state that you may not take pictures of the monument for commercial gain. I've not been, so don't have a copy of a ticket to verify this, though.

This is a widespread practice in museums and art galleries as it protects their cottage industry of selling prints.

I wonder whether they might exert the same claims on someone who took a picture from off their property with a long lens?

Slashdot Top Deals

Never call a man a fool. Borrow from him.