In the news

http://mashable.com/2012/06/29/drone-hacking/

imagine the fun

Swimming in the Thames in London is to be banned from Sunday.
A new bylaw makes it an offence to swim in the river between Crossness, near the Thames Barrier, and Putney Bridge without written permission of the Port of London Authority.

can they just decide stuff just like that? was there any debate?
didn't know it was ever legal or illegal, tbh.

I see the grand lizard master is about to kick off now his wife has filed for divorce. Should be interesting seeing how far reaching these freaks are. Poor Katie, must be like being in Rosemaries Baby.

She made it to the perimeter fence...?

Was Jim Morrison a scientologist?

He was always rattling on about being the lizard king.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-02/twitter-must-turn-over-information-about-protester-posts.html

Do you think that's right?

Microsoft takes a $6.2bn write-down on the value of online advertising agency aQuantive, bought five years ago for $6.3bn.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18684395

Sweet deal Mr Gates.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-02/twitter-must-turn-over-information-about-protester-posts.html

Do you think that's right?

I'm surprised that they need to subpoena it rather than just google it. Anything you post on the open internet is public information forever. Especially on Twitter which is as public a broadcast medium as you care to imagine.

So, yes the judgement that Twitter should hand that over is probably right.
Whether those tweets should be considered as sufficient evidence for conviction of an individual, however is the real matter for debate.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-02/twitter-must-turn-over-information-about-protester-posts.html

Do you think that's right?

It's an interesting one. The contents of the tweets (as long as they were not Direct Messages) were and are still public, despite what Twitter seem to be saying.

If you know the tweet numbers you can still find them. I think that the current cutoff for easily findable tweets (i.e. those that you can just click through on someone username to see) is about 2 weeks. After that, hunting them becomes a whole lot harder, you have to go back tweet by tweet to find them, but they are all there, and there is software avaliable for you to personally log and store the tweet numbers for any search at the time.

Twitter are making a program availiable so that if you pay them mucho dollero they will let you have access to the whole database in an easily searchable form, but I've not seen more on that for a little while, but I can't see it not going ahead. The costs I've seen would be too great for personal users, but not for large companies looking for marketing data, who don't want to have to store the firehose themselves, which could bring about data protection issues and stuff.

The other data that they want, the IP data and so on, well, that's not something that is publically avaliable, so thats a bit more tricky. I suspect that, like in so many other cases, the Judge may not quite understand the nauances in the data being requested.

Can't Twitter users also send private messages to one another? Presumably, the ruling doesn't cover those?

what a fucked up world we live in, thanks to c#nts like GSK

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/glaxosmithkline-pays-3bn-for-illegally-marketing-depression-drug-7904555.html

Two RAF Tornados have collided 25 miles south of Wick over the Moray Firth - 2 aircrew have been rescued, the remaining crew missing

^^ In the US the drug companies are allowed to market prescription drugs directly to consumers and some of their adverts are pretty astonishing.

Two RAF Tornados have collided 25 miles south of Wick over the Moray Firth - 2 aircrew have been rescued, the remaining crew missing

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-18692532

what a fucked up world we live in, thanks to c#nts like GSK

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/glaxosmithkline-pays-3bn-for-illegally-marketing-depression-drug-7904555.html

Seems The War on Drugs does have some winners even if the UK is plainly losing according to Ken Clarke. Does he include the drugs alcohol and nicotine in the battle or just the less harmful drugs classed as A, B and C?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18686314

I'll take a mixed bag.

Just say no

Why, do you get them cheaper?

Just say know.

Say yes, then say lots more inconsequential rubbish.

You're on a roll snottyotter

You're on a rolly snottyotter

ftfy

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jul/03/david-cameron-immigration-greece-uk

Το start with, the "immigration" of Greeks should probably include the thousands who invested millions in real estate in London. Then it continues with the tens of thousands who come as students in the UK for years. But please, let's not stop populist talk to hide the facts. Once upon a time there was the commercial with the Polish plumber. Let's make the Greek version of it if it is politically convenient. Overall the situation saddens me as I see the rising of a political convenient racism. Today it's the "lazy Greeks" day. Tomorrow?

So yeah, they found the god particle.