My Photo

Ham Radio

Security Related

  • Symantec Says...

09 July 2009

The perfect cup of tea

You can learn from the Royal Society of Chemistry, how to make a perfect cup/pot of tea.

The perfect temperature to drink tea is between 60°C and 65°C, which should be obtained within a minute if the above guide is used. Higher temperatures than this require the drinker to engage in excessive air-cooling of the tea whilst drinking - or "slurping" in everyday parlance. Leaving a teaspoon in the tea for a few seconds is a very effective cooling alternative.


Or, if you have more money than brains and really want proof that the International Standards Organization has far, far too much time on its hands: ISO 3103:1980 Tea -- Preparation of liquor for use in sensory tests for only 44 Swiss Francs (about $47 CDN at the time this blog post was made).

04 July 2009

An example of TV in the 70's being so much better than TV now

I found this, and I could not resist...



Enjoy!

03 July 2009

What would it be like if "alternative medicine" ruled health care?

Something like this, I'd imagine:



Thanks Pharyngula

29 June 2009

Michael Jackson is dead. Finally.

I'm sure this will torque up the frothing-at-the-mouth Jackson fans, but I have to say it.  The world is a better place now that Michael Jackson has shuffled off his mortal coil.

Why?

Because he abused his celebrity to groom and molest children, and then to get away it.  No regular, run-of-the-mill buggerer of boys could get away with what he did.  And with one less pedophile in the world, the world is a better place.  Sure, some people will say "well look at his contribution to music, you can't focus on his eccentricities!"  To that I say "yes I can, should, and will." 

I admit, I liked his music in the 70's and 80's.  Musically the man had talent.  He did, for the most part, deserve his initial fame and fortune.  Unfortunately, he used that fame and fortune to abuse and hurt people.  That is inexcusable.

Lots of celebrities use their status to further political or other goals that are important to them.  Bridget Bardot uses her name to oppose all sorts of animal use.  I think she's nuts, but what she's doing doesn't really hurt anyone, so fine.

Jenny McCarthy uses her celebrity status to spread misinformation and lies about vaccinations.  That hurts people - specifically, it hurts children, but it hurts people in general.  Her conduct is reprehensible, but even then what she does is one-step removed: she lies, other people act on those lies to hurt people.

But Michael Jackson used his fame and fortune to support and feed his unhealthy addiction to little boys.  That's reprehensible, and its unforgivable.  We don't look at Hitler and say "Well, in the end, Germany ended up with a strong economy and its people are better off, so we can forget about the bad stuff he did" do we? (oops, Godwin's Law).

25 June 2009

How can I tell it's Field Day?

Field Day followed by a week of camping, that is?  Well, here's the current weather report for Field Day weekend:

FDforecast

And here's the current weather prognostication for where I'm headed after Field Day:

BBforecast

Awesome...

Bill C-47 is bad legislation

Much talk is in the media right now about the bastard lawyer's child, Bill C-47, otherwise known as the Technical Assistance for Law Enforcement in the 21st Century Act.  It is an unnecessary, and indeed terrible piece of legislation for a number of reasons.  As citizens of a free and democratic society we should not permit this kind of legislation to be passed by our elected representatives.

What is wrong with it?

It is an anti-democratic expansion of powers for law enforcement.  If this bill should pass, law enforcement representatives would be able, without warrant, request subscriber and traffic information from internet service providers.  Worse, ISPs would be required not only to turn over this information but to install in advance, the necessary tools and equipment to make this kind of warrantless snooping possible.  This also includes, where possible, the decryption of encrypted traffic (such as HTTPS).

Even the authors of this bill are aware that it is anti-democratic.  It is not once, but twice stated within the text of the bill:

Nothing in this Act derogates from any other authority under law to obtain the information referred to in subsection 16(1) from a telecommunications service provider.


That's right - the authors of this bill know damn well that they already have the powers to get this information by getting a warrant.  That want to skip that little bit of oversight... an oversight that prevents arbitrary tapping of telephones and such.

There is a reason we have laws that require our law enforcement to run their little intrusions past a judge before implementing them: so they aren't abused.  And even then, a certain amount of abuse gets through.  I feel somewhat comfortable knowing that a random cop can't just wake up one day and ask for my ISP for my personal information and internet traffic - like he can if this bill passes:

17. (1) A police officer may request a telecommunications service provider to provide the officer with the information referred to in subsection 16(1) in the following circumstances:
  • (a) the officer believes on reasonable grounds that the urgency of the situation is such that the request cannot, with reasonable diligence, be made under that subsection;
  • (b) the officer believes on reasonable grounds that the information requested is immediately necessary to prevent an unlawful act that would cause serious harm to any person or to property; and
  • (c) the information directly concerns either the person who would perform the act that is likely to cause the harm or is the victim, or intended victim, of the harm.
The police officer shall inform the telecommunications service provider of his or her name, rank, badge number and the agency in which he or she is employed and state that the request is being made in exceptional circumstances and under the authority of this subsection.


On the surface, that may seem OK, but there's very little to prevent malicious claims from, shall we say exhuberant, law enforcement officials.  All someone needs to do is call up, say "Hi, I'm Officer Soandso from the police, badge number 12345, and I want all the dirt, er information on Squid."  That's frightening when you think about it... it's not like we can actually trust these people not to abuse such powers.  Let's face the facts here: within 5 years, should this bill pass, there is going to be an abuse scandal.  Anyone who has lived in Canada long enough and who has read the bill can see that coming like lights in the tunnel.

In fact, lest we forget, it was abuse of power by the RCMP that led to the formation of CSIS in the first place.  Now it is proposed to give both of those organizations expanded powers of search without warrant.  This bill is a slap in the face to all Canadians.

The best part of this bill is Section 21, which requires that ISPs be paid for providing the information.  Perhaps the fee will be 30 silver dollars?

Please note here that I'm not droning on about "internet freedom" or any of that New Age bollocks that so many people erroneously consider to be rights or properties of the internet.  I don't believe there is such a thing as internet freedom and I consider people who do to be more than a little deluded - certainly they are unknowledgeable about the origins and purpose of the internet.  The problem with this bill is that is goes contrary to what Canadians have historically considered appropriate powers of law enforcement.  It's bad because it puts an onus for enforcing that abuse of power on internet service providers.  It's bad because it grants law enforcement the ability to act abusively with little or no immediate oversight.  We do not need to be giving our law enforcement more warrantless powers.

I want to make this absolutely clear to the Conservative Party of Canada, the Liberal Party of Canada, the New Democratic Party of Canada, and the Bloc Québecois:  If you vote for this legislation, you are insulting Canadians.  You will be demonstrating your contempt for the people of Canada.  In short, you will be showing that you are UNWORTHY of representing Canadians at the federal government level.  The Conservative Party has already lost my financial support for even tabling this ill-conceived bill.  Any party that supports this bill will gain my opposition in word, deed, and financially... even if, dare I say it, that means supporting Green or NDP because I'd rather live in a bankrupted country than a police state.

18 June 2009

How to nose and taste Scotch whisky

In writing the immigration article, I came across this interesting document.  If you like Scotch, it's probably worth the short read.  Enjoy!   

(you can get the document directly from Highland Park if you prefer).

Blog Local Time

  • Eastern Daylight Time (EDT)

Rationality

  • image
    Imagine there's no Heaven. It's easy if you try. No Hell below us. Above us only sky. (John Lennon)
  • Mojoey's Atheist Blogroll
    Join the best atheist themed blogroll!

July 2009

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

Counter

Search the blog

Blog powered by TypePad
Member since 09/2005