Do they even *have* a full-time security staff in there online division?
Where can you download Sun (Oracle) Java for Mac OS X ?
Imagine if folded responses suppressed quoted text.
No you don't! You only think you do...
Click. Click. Click. Click.
The two big GSM providers in the US use different 3G frequencies. (AT&T 850/1900, T-Mobile 1700/2100).
You can get voice and GPRS/EDGE, so long as your handset has been SIM unlocked (this is different to rooting or jailbreaking).
This is not an Android limitation, the same restrictions apply to iPhone/N900 etc.
I am not aware of any phone that has a flashable radio chipset allowing reconfiguration of the wireless bands, there may be a requirement for a physically different antenna.
The magic words used to be "quad-band", but nowadays you would want a radio that supported upwards of six bands for 3G capability across AT&T, T-Mobile, and rest of world.
Thread past this point can be filed under "arguing on the internet".
I often discuss this with friends - what if Tony Blair had come to the British public and said:
"The US wants to go to war in Iraq.
"We don't really have any grounds to do so, and operations in Afghanistan have hardly begun, but it looks like they're committed to removing Saddam Hussein, and soon.
"It will take heavy public borrowing, soldiers' lives, and likely make us even more of a terrorist target, returning to conduct military operations in the ex-Empire.
"By our standards, we can't agree to it, but they will be "sexing-up" what little facts there are to get the support of the US media and public, and it seems they will be going ahead even if the whole world is opposed to it.
"It's not the right thing to do, but right now, I believe it's the right thing for the UK to back the US unconditionally in what they want to do."
It would never have happened, of course, much as I might wish for a world in which it did.
Not one politician has ever truly believed in "transparent governance", especially Tony Blair.
Also, it would not be the behaviour of an ally to publicly undermine the US gambit in this way.
So, I can see how the UK might have wanted to say one thing publicly, and another thing privately to the US.
The whole world knew exactly what was going on anyway.
The predominant reaction I am seeing to the WikiLeaks releases has simply been that people's suspicions are confirmed, albeit tinged with surprise that government actually seems to be such an amateurish business.
I wholly support WikiLeaks activities, but I understand the need for confidential communications.
The diplomatic system is better than nothing at all.
The whole affair is just fallout from a badly designed and implemented IT solution.
Memory fault -- brain fried