On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 15:26:52 +0000, Richard wrote:

On 26/12/2018 15:19, Johann Klammer wrote:
On 12/26/2018 09:41 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

???? try shockwave flash plugin




It is installed.

The `enable flash` bar doesn't even show up(Iceweasel) anymore. They
(youtube/google) seem to have switched completely to broken HTML5 now.



Try a different browser.
Works here ihn Firefox, Opera & Chrome.

Here also.

wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 25 December 2018 21:06:08 UTC, 87213 wrote:
"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 25/12/2018 18:05, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 04:47:24 +1100, 87213 wrote:

The reason is that it isnt possible to do that with an iphone.

I think you're kidding yourself.


Just someone that has fallen for the marketing.

Nope, someone who knows how the phone is done
and knows that it isn't possible to monitor me 24/7
unless I give the app permission to do that.

lol, the spooks have now been told.
From the start there were requirements for mobile
phones to permit government access to data.

There is no data for the govt to access with iphones
and apple keeps making it impossible for the govt
to access what is on the phone whenever a loophole
is revealed. Thats why the FBI had to try and use the
court system to try to force apple to provide access
to what data there as on the phone like the call
history. And the exploit that allowed the FBI to get
that data via a 3rd party when apple kept telling
them and the courts that they couldnt provide
that access, was only possible on an obsolete
iphone and has now been closed too.

It has nothing to do with any visible apps or user permissions.

Thats wrong too with monitoring the owner of the phone 24/7.
Plenty of apps allow you to keep track of where you have been
so you can keep track of what exercise you have done and only
the apps you have given permission to do that can do that.

On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 05:19:59 -0800, tabbypurr wrote:

lol, the spooks have now been told.
From the start there were requirements for mobile phones to permit
government access to data. It has nothing to do with any visible apps or
user permissions.

Yup, it's all done in the hardware, folks.



--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 05:19:59 -0800, tabbypurr wrote:

From the start there were requirements for mobile phones to permit
government access to data. It has nothing to do with any visible apps or
user permissions.

Do you remember, I think it was quite recently (less than 18 months I'd
guess) there was a massive hoo-ha in the mainstream media about Apple
refusing to give the FBI access to some guy's Iphone. He was refusing to
hand over his password and there was "nothing the FBI could do about it
without Apple's assistance" ROTFLMFAO! Talk about contrived! :-D




--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 08:50:51 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 25/12/2018 16:02, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Cursitor Doom
writes
On Tue, 25 Dec 2018 11:51:19 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:

The RF possibly CAN give you cancer

Is there some *particular* region of the EM spectrum to which you
refer?
Because I can tell you without a doubt that to say "RF CAN give you
cancer" is a bit like saying "all Eastern Europeans are thieving
****s."
It's just way too much of a generalisation.

No. It's a bit like saying "Some Eastern Europeans are thieving ****s."
or "All Eastern Europeans may be thieving ****s."

As I'm sure you know perfectly well, it's at the higher frequencies
where the body is capable of absorbing more RF power. That's why we
have 'microwave' ovens and not 'longwave' ovens. The most likely effect
is that you get cooked from within - and continual, repetitious,
subliminal internal parboiling is not likely to do your cell structure
much good, Such damage can increase the likelihood of the repair
process starting to fail to work correctly.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/y97xlaf3


Howver cooking does not casue cancer and the power of most RF devices is
very very small indeed

You should be far morw worried about a smart phone slung down near your
genitals with a head set.

Or eating bananas.

Indeed. Or luminous watches and CRT TV sets; two big health scares from
the 50s and 60s. Funny how there is *always* *something* to be afraid of,
isn't it? Mad Cow Disease, mercury in seafish, lead in paint, the Flesh
Eating Bug, HIV/AIDS, 'bad' cholesterol, the false widow spider,
carcinogenic coffee, the 'hole in the sky', cigarette tar, particulates
in diesel, global warming, etc., etc., etc. It just goes on and on and on
and on........
I still think the old adage covers it perfectly: everything in moderation!




--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 05:19:59 -0800, tabbypurr wrote:

lol, the spooks have now been told.
From the start there were requirements for mobile phones to permit
government access to data. It has nothing to do with any visible apps or
user permissions.

Yup, it's all done in the hardware, folks.

Not in an iphone it isnt. Thats why the FBI made
such spectacular fools of themselves with Apple.

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 05:19:59 -0800, tabbypurr wrote:

From the start there were requirements for mobile phones to permit
government access to data. It has nothing to do with any visible apps or
user permissions.

Do you remember, I think it was quite recently (less than 18 months I'd
guess) there was a massive hoo-ha in the mainstream media about Apple
refusing to give the FBI access to some guy's Iphone.

Apple said that they couldnt do that.

He was refusing to
hand over his password and there was "nothing the FBI could do about it
without Apple's assistance"

Nothing Apple could do to bypass the lack of a passcode either.

ROTFLMFAO! Talk about contrived! :-D

Easy to claim.

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 08:50:51 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 25/12/2018 16:02, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Cursitor Doom
writes
On Tue, 25 Dec 2018 11:51:19 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:

The RF possibly CAN give you cancer

Is there some *particular* region of the EM spectrum to which you
refer?
Because I can tell you without a doubt that to say "RF CAN give you
cancer" is a bit like saying "all Eastern Europeans are thieving
****s."
It's just way too much of a generalisation.

No. It's a bit like saying "Some Eastern Europeans are thieving ****s."
or "All Eastern Europeans may be thieving ****s."

As I'm sure you know perfectly well, it's at the higher frequencies
where the body is capable of absorbing more RF power. That's why we
have 'microwave' ovens and not 'longwave' ovens. The most likely effect
is that you get cooked from within - and continual, repetitious,
subliminal internal parboiling is not likely to do your cell structure
much good, Such damage can increase the likelihood of the repair
process starting to fail to work correctly.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/y97xlaf3


Howver cooking does not casue cancer and the power of most RF devices is
very very small indeed

You should be far morw worried about a smart phone slung down near your
genitals with a head set.

Or eating bananas.

Indeed. Or luminous watches and CRT TV sets; two big health scares from
the 50s and 60s. Funny how there is *always* *something* to be afraid of,
isn't it? Mad Cow Disease, mercury in seafish, lead in paint, the Flesh
Eating Bug, HIV/AIDS, 'bad' cholesterol, the false widow spider,
carcinogenic coffee, the 'hole in the sky', cigarette tar, particulates
in diesel, global warming, etc., etc., etc. It just goes on and on and on
and on........
I still think the old adage covers it perfectly: everything in moderation!

Doesnt work with smoking.

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 11:16:07 +1100, Tim J wrote:

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message:

Apple said that they couldnt do that.

I know. Some great free publicity there. Get all those paranoid crooks
trusting in Iphones.

Nothing Apple could do to bypass the lack of a passcode either.

So they wanted everyone to believe.

ROTFLMFAO! Talk about contrived! :-D

Easy to claim.

Likewise.





--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 11:25:32 +1100, 87213 wrote:

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message
...

I still think the old adage covers it perfectly: everything in
moderation!

Doesnt work with smoking.

Unless you're genetically predisposed to cancer, smoking a handful of
ciggies a day (say =5) isn't going to do anyone any harm. In fact I
personally found it very *beneficial* to my chest as it was de-sensing
all the phlegm apparatus which is very much over-active in my case. Since
giving up I have to take pills to keep on top of it.
There's an old adage among chemists: "the *dose* is the poison" - and
it's very true.



--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 11:16:07 +1100, Tim J wrote:

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message:

Apple said that they couldnt do that.

I know. Some great free publicity there. Get all those paranoid crooks
trusting in Iphones.

Nothing Apple could do to bypass the lack of a passcode either.

So they wanted everyone to believe.

So they .know is the fact. They wouldnt be lying
to the court when they know that if it was possible
for apple to do that, the court would know that
and **** apple over big time for lying to the court.

ROTFLMFAO! Talk about contrived! :-D

Easy to claim.

Likewise.

That wasnt a claim by anyone other than apple.

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 11:25:32 +1100, 87213 wrote:

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message
...

I still think the old adage covers it perfectly: everything in
moderation!

Doesnt work with smoking.

Unless you're genetically predisposed to cancer, smoking a handful
of ciggies a day (say =5) isn't going to do anyone any harm.

Thats bull**** and isnt 'in moderation' anyway.

In fact I
personally found it very *beneficial* to my chest as it was de-sensing
all the phlegm apparatus which is very much over-active in my case.

Even sillier than you usually manage, and thats saying something.

Since
giving up I have to take pills to keep on top of it.
There's an old adage among chemists: "the *dose* is the poison"

That is referring to something else entirely.

- and
it's very true.

On Wednesday, 26 December 2018 18:55:35 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
tabbypurr wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 25 December 2018 21:06:08 UTC, 87213 wrote:
"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 25/12/2018 18:05, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 04:47:24 +1100, 87213 wrote:


The reason is that it isnt possible to do that with an iphone.

I think you're kidding yourself.


Just someone that has fallen for the marketing.

Nope, someone who knows how the phone is done
and knows that it isn't possible to monitor me 24/7
unless I give the app permission to do that.

lol, the spooks have now been told.
From the start there were requirements for mobile
phones to permit government access to data.

There is no data for the govt to access with iphones
and apple keeps making it impossible for the govt
to access what is on the phone whenever a loophole
is revealed. Thats why the FBI had to try and use the
court system to try to force apple to provide access
to what data there as on the phone like the call
history. And the exploit that allowed the FBI to get
that data via a 3rd party when apple kept telling
them and the courts that they couldnt provide
that access, was only possible on an obsolete
iphone and has now been closed too.

Heh. I reckon that was just a public soap-opera

It has nothing to do with any visible apps or user permissions.

Thats wrong too with monitoring the owner of the phone 24/7.
Plenty of apps allow you to keep track of where you have been
so you can keep track of what exercise you have done and only
the apps you have given permission to do that can do that.

whoosh

wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 26 December 2018 18:55:35 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
tabbypurr wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 25 December 2018 21:06:08 UTC, 87213 wrote:
"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 25/12/2018 18:05, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 04:47:24 +1100, 87213 wrote:


The reason is that it isnt possible to do that with an iphone.

I think you're kidding yourself.


Just someone that has fallen for the marketing.

Nope, someone who knows how the phone is done
and knows that it isn't possible to monitor me 24/7
unless I give the app permission to do that.

lol, the spooks have now been told.
From the start there were requirements for mobile
phones to permit government access to data.

There is no data for the govt to access with iphones
and apple keeps making it impossible for the govt
to access what is on the phone whenever a loophole
is revealed. Thats why the FBI had to try and use the
court system to try to force apple to provide access
to what data there as on the phone like the call
history. And the exploit that allowed the FBI to get
that data via a 3rd party when apple kept telling
them and the courts that they couldnt provide
that access, was only possible on an obsolete
iphone and has now been closed too.

Heh. I reckon that was just a public soap-opera

More fool you. There is no reason for the FBI to make
such spectacular fools of themselves and only a mindless
conspiracy theorist would be stupid enough to believe
that Apple would have staged the whole thing, paid
someone to be a terrorist so they could pose as having
a very secure system, particularly when that fiasco
showed that the was a vulnerability in an obsolete
phone that has since been fixed.

It has nothing to do with any visible apps or user permissions.

Thats wrong too with monitoring the owner of the phone 24/7.
Plenty of apps allow you to keep track of where you have been
so you can keep track of what exercise you have done and only
the apps you have given permission to do that can do that.

whoosh

You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag.

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 15:21:58 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rot Speed,
the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

whoosh

You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag.

I see you KEEP bull****ting your way into your grave, senile cretin!

--
Sqwertz to Rot Speed:
"This is just a hunch, but I'm betting you're kinda an argumentative
asshole.
MID:

On 27/12/2018 03:04, 87213 wrote:

3825-633-763

On 26/12/2018 13:38, Richard wrote:
On 26/12/2018 13:18, dennis@home wrote:
On 25/12/2018 01:31, Michael Chare wrote:

Smart meters clearly cost more to make and they have quite high
operating costs because of their use of mobile networks.

Do you want to produce figures that show the difference in cost for
smart meters and sending a meter reader around.


Those that have them should pay for the extra cost.


You want to pay more for having a meter reader come around then?

You want to put meter readers out of work then?

There will be plenty of work for them going around multiple times to get
one reading from those that won't have smart meters.
They just need to charge them for all the extra work and not pass it
onto people with smart meters.
..

On 27/12/2018 12:16, dennis@home wrote:
On 26/12/2018 13:38, Richard wrote:
On 26/12/2018 13:18, dennis@home wrote:
On 25/12/2018 01:31, Michael Chare wrote:

Smart meters clearly cost more to make and they have quite high
operating costs because of their use of mobile networks.

Do you want to produce figures that show the difference in cost for
smart meters and sending a meter reader around.


Those that have them should pay for the extra cost.


You want to pay more for having a meter reader come around then?

You want to put meter readers out of work then?

There will be plenty of work for them going around multiple times to get
one reading from those that won't have smart meters.
They just need to charge them for all the extra work and not pass it
onto people with smart meters.
..

But everyone is already paying for the smart meters.
You are harry AICMFP

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 01:17:49 +0000, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 11:16:07 +1100, Tim J wrote:

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message:

Apple said that they couldn¢t do that.

I know. Some great free publicity there. Get all those paranoid crooks
trusting in Iphones.

Nothing Apple could do to bypass the lack of a passcode either.

So they wanted everyone to believe.

Feb 26 2018 - Forbes: The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone
Model In Existence. Cellebrite (owned by the Japanese Sun Corporation)
claims it can unlock all iOS versions up to 11.2.6, the most recent
iteration of Apple's operating system.


ROTFLMFAO! Talk about contrived! :-D

Easy to claim.

Likewise.

On Thursday, 27 December 2018 04:22:11 UTC, Rod Tard wrote:
tabbypurr wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 26 December 2018 18:55:35 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
tabbypurr wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 25 December 2018 21:06:08 UTC, 87213 wrote:
"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 25/12/2018 18:05, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 04:47:24 +1100, 87213 wrote:


The reason is that it isnt possible to do that with an iphone.

I think you're kidding yourself.


Just someone that has fallen for the marketing.

Nope, someone who knows how the phone is done
and knows that it isn't possible to monitor me 24/7
unless I give the app permission to do that.

lol, the spooks have now been told.
From the start there were requirements for mobile
phones to permit government access to data.

There is no data for the govt to access with iphones
and apple keeps making it impossible for the govt
to access what is on the phone whenever a loophole
is revealed. Thats why the FBI had to try and use the
court system to try to force apple to provide access
to what data there as on the phone like the call
history. And the exploit that allowed the FBI to get
that data via a 3rd party when apple kept telling
them and the courts that they couldnt provide
that access, was only possible on an obsolete
iphone and has now been closed too.

Heh. I reckon that was just a public soap-opera

More fool you. There is no reason for the FBI to make
such spectacular fools of themselves and only a mindless
conspiracy theorist would be stupid enough to believe
that Apple would have staged the whole thing, paid
someone to be a terrorist so they could pose as having
a very secure system, particularly when that fiasco
showed that the was a vulnerability in an obsolete
phone that has since been fixed.

It has nothing to do with any visible apps or user permissions.

Thats wrong too with monitoring the owner of the phone 24/7.
Plenty of apps allow you to keep track of where you have been
so you can keep track of what exercise you have done and only
the apps you have given permission to do that can do that.

whoosh

You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag.

What better for the spooks than a phone that crims think they're safe with, but the spooks can read. What better for Apple than a product buyers think is more secure than all the others.


NT

On 27/12/2018 12:53, Richard wrote:
On 27/12/2018 12:16, dennis@home wrote:
On 26/12/2018 13:38, Richard wrote:
On 26/12/2018 13:18, dennis@home wrote:
On 25/12/2018 01:31, Michael Chare wrote:

Smart meters clearly cost more to make and they have quite high
operating costs because of their use of mobile networks.

Do you want to produce figures that show the difference in cost for
smart meters and sending a meter reader around.


Those that have them should pay for the extra cost.


You want to pay more for having a meter reader come around then?

You want to put meter readers out of work then?

There will be plenty of work for them going around multiple times to
get one reading from those that won't have smart meters.
They just need to charge them for all the extra work and not pass it
onto people with smart meters.
..

But everyone is already paying for the smart meters.
You are harry AICMFP


Not if their running costs are less than the old ones.

On 27/12/2018 14:53, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/12/2018 12:53, Richard wrote:
On 27/12/2018 12:16, dennis@home wrote:
On 26/12/2018 13:38, Richard wrote:
On 26/12/2018 13:18, dennis@home wrote:
On 25/12/2018 01:31, Michael Chare wrote:

Smart meters clearly cost more to make and they have quite high
operating costs because of their use of mobile networks.

Do you want to produce figures that show the difference in cost for
smart meters and sending a meter reader around.


Those that have them should pay for the extra cost.


You want to pay more for having a meter reader come around then?

You want to put meter readers out of work then?

There will be plenty of work for them going around multiple times to
get one reading from those that won't have smart meters.
They just need to charge them for all the extra work and not pass it
onto people with smart meters.
..

But everyone is already paying for the smart meters.
You are harry AICMFP


Not if their running costs are less than the old ones.

Oh, they're so much cheaper for everyone:
https://www.ft.com/content/10a148ae-...e-41e0209208ec

https://www.researchgate.net/publica..._Ownership.pdf
Short url:
https://preview.tinyurl.com/y84tdblb

"Martyn Barclay" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 01:17:49 +0000, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 11:16:07 +1100, Tim J wrote:

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message:

Apple said that they couldn¢t do that.

I know. Some great free publicity there. Get all those paranoid crooks
trusting in Iphones.

Nothing Apple could do to bypass the lack of a passcode either.

So they wanted everyone to believe.

Feb 26 2018 - Forbes: The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone
Model In Existence. Cellebrite (owned by the Japanese Sun Corporation)
claims it can unlock all iOS versions up to 11.2.6, the most recent
iteration of Apple's operating system.

No it can not.

ROTFLMFAO! Talk about contrived! :-D

Easy to claim.

Likewise.

wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 27 December 2018 04:22:11 UTC, Rod Tard wrote:
tabbypurr wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 26 December 2018 18:55:35 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
tabbypurr wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 25 December 2018 21:06:08 UTC, 87213 wrote:
"alan_m" wrote in message
...
On 25/12/2018 18:05, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Wed, 26 Dec 2018 04:47:24 +1100, 87213 wrote:


The reason is that it isnt possible to do that with an iphone.

I think you're kidding yourself.


Just someone that has fallen for the marketing.

Nope, someone who knows how the phone is done
and knows that it isn't possible to monitor me 24/7
unless I give the app permission to do that.

lol, the spooks have now been told.
From the start there were requirements for mobile
phones to permit government access to data.

There is no data for the govt to access with iphones
and apple keeps making it impossible for the govt
to access what is on the phone whenever a loophole
is revealed. Thats why the FBI had to try and use the
court system to try to force apple to provide access
to what data there as on the phone like the call
history. And the exploit that allowed the FBI to get
that data via a 3rd party when apple kept telling
them and the courts that they couldnt provide
that access, was only possible on an obsolete
iphone and has now been closed too.

Heh. I reckon that was just a public soap-opera

More fool you. There is no reason for the FBI to make
such spectacular fools of themselves and only a mindless
conspiracy theorist would be stupid enough to believe
that Apple would have staged the whole thing, paid
someone to be a terrorist so they could pose as having
a very secure system, particularly when that fiasco
showed that the was a vulnerability in an obsolete
phone that has since been fixed.

It has nothing to do with any visible apps or user permissions.

Thats wrong too with monitoring the owner of the phone 24/7.
Plenty of apps allow you to keep track of where you have been
so you can keep track of what exercise you have done and only
the apps you have given permission to do that can do that.

whoosh

You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag.

What better for the spooks than a phone that crims
think they're safe with, but the spooks can read.
What better for Apple than a product buyers
think is more secure than all the others.

Sure, but its just a tad unlikely that the spooks would
organise for a terrorist to kill 25 people and then kill
themselves just to produce a media frenzy like we
saw with that court action which actually showed
that they could actually get into that particular
obsolete iphone and found nothing useful in it.

On Thursday, 27 December 2018 18:06:23 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
tabbypurr wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 27 December 2018 04:22:11 UTC, Rod Tard wrote:
tabbypurr wrote in message

Heh. I reckon that was just a public soap-opera

More fool you. There is no reason for the FBI to make
such spectacular fools of themselves and only a mindless
conspiracy theorist would be stupid enough to believe
that Apple would have staged the whole thing, paid
someone to be a terrorist so they could pose as having
a very secure system, particularly when that fiasco
showed that the was a vulnerability in an obsolete
phone that has since been fixed.

It has nothing to do with any visible apps or user permissions.

Thats wrong too with monitoring the owner of the phone 24/7.
Plenty of apps allow you to keep track of where you have been
so you can keep track of what exercise you have done and only
the apps you have given permission to do that can do that.

whoosh

You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag.

What better for the spooks than a phone that crims
think they're safe with, but the spooks can read.
What better for Apple than a product buyers
think is more secure than all the others.

Sure, but its just a tad unlikely that the spooks would
organise for a terrorist to kill 25 people and then kill
themselves just to produce a media frenzy like we

are you a lunatic or an idiot? Oh, for a moment I forgot, you're both.

saw with that court action which actually showed
that they could actually get into that particular
obsolete iphone and found nothing useful in it.

the court thing was likely to convince everyone the phones were secure. Both sides win. We'll never know.

"Richard" wrote in message
...
On 27/12/2018 14:53, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/12/2018 12:53, Richard wrote:
On 27/12/2018 12:16, dennis@home wrote:
On 26/12/2018 13:38, Richard wrote:
On 26/12/2018 13:18, dennis@home wrote:
On 25/12/2018 01:31, Michael Chare wrote:

Smart meters clearly cost more to make and they have quite high
operating costs because of their use of mobile networks.

Do you want to produce figures that show the difference in cost for
smart meters and sending a meter reader around.


Those that have them should pay for the extra cost.


You want to pay more for having a meter reader come around then?

You want to put meter readers out of work then?

There will be plenty of work for them going around multiple times to
get one reading from those that won't have smart meters.
They just need to charge them for all the extra work and not pass it
onto people with smart meters.
..

But everyone is already paying for the smart meters.
You are harry AICMFP


Not if their running costs are less than the old ones.

Oh, they're so much cheaper for everyone:
https://www.ft.com/content/10a148ae-...e-41e0209208ec

paywalled

https://www.researchgate.net/publica..._Ownership.pdf
Short url:
https://preview.tinyurl.com/y84tdblb

Thats not talking about the reading cost, just the repair cost.

wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 27 December 2018 18:06:23 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
tabbypurr wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 27 December 2018 04:22:11 UTC, Rod Tard wrote:
tabbypurr wrote in message

Heh. I reckon that was just a public soap-opera

More fool you. There is no reason for the FBI to make
such spectacular fools of themselves and only a mindless
conspiracy theorist would be stupid enough to believe
that Apple would have staged the whole thing, paid
someone to be a terrorist so they could pose as having
a very secure system, particularly when that fiasco
showed that the was a vulnerability in an obsolete
phone that has since been fixed.

It has nothing to do with any visible apps or user permissions.

Thats wrong too with monitoring the owner of the phone 24/7.
Plenty of apps allow you to keep track of where you have been
so you can keep track of what exercise you have done and only
the apps you have given permission to do that can do that.

whoosh

You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag.

What better for the spooks than a phone that crims
think they're safe with, but the spooks can read.
What better for Apple than a product buyers
think is more secure than all the others.

Sure, but its just a tad unlikely that the spooks would
organise for a terrorist to kill 25 people and then kill
themselves just to produce a media frenzy like we

are you a lunatic or an idiot? Oh, for a moment I forgot, you're both.

You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag.

Thats the event that saw the FBI want to look at the contents of that
iphone.

saw with that court action which actually showed
that they could actually get into that particular
obsolete iphone and found nothing useful in it.

the court thing was likely to convince
everyone the phones were secure.

Its just a tad unlikely that the spooks would
organise for a terrorist to kill 25 people and then kill
themselves just to produce a media frenzy like we saw.

Both sides win.

The FBI didnt, they looked completely stupid trying
to get the court to force apple to let them see what
was on that iphone and even sillier with the 3rd
party allowed them to do that and there was
nothing useful on it after that mega**** fight.

? We'll never know.

We do in fact know that the current iphones are so
secure that even apple can't perve at the data on them.

On 27/12/2018 18:42, Rod Speed wrote:


"Richard" wrote in message
...
On 27/12/2018 14:53, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/12/2018 12:53, Richard wrote:
On 27/12/2018 12:16, dennis@home wrote:
On 26/12/2018 13:38, Richard wrote:
On 26/12/2018 13:18, dennis@home wrote:
On 25/12/2018 01:31, Michael Chare wrote:

Smart meters clearly cost more to make and they have quite high
operating costs because of their use of mobile networks.

Do you want to produce figures that show the difference in cost
for smart meters and sending a meter reader around.


Those that have them should pay for the extra cost.


You want to pay more for having a meter reader come around then?

You want to put meter readers out of work then?

There will be plenty of work for them going around multiple times
to get one reading from those that won't have smart meters.
They just need to charge them for all the extra work and not pass
it onto people with smart meters.
..

But everyone is already paying for the smart meters.
You are harry AICMFP


Not if their running costs are less than the old ones.

Oh, they're so much cheaper for everyone:
https://www.ft.com/content/10a148ae-...e-41e0209208ec

paywalled

Try this:
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...CyGjwPsttrCOyl


https://www.researchgate.net/publica..._Ownership.pdf

Short url:
https://preview.tinyurl.com/y84tdblb

Thats not talking about the reading cost, just the repair cost.

I know. But the overall cost of implementation needs to be taken into
account.

On 27/12/2018 17:57, Tim J wrote:


"Martyn Barclay" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 01:17:49 +0000, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 11:16:07 +1100, Tim J wrote:

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message:

Apple said that they couldn¢t do that.

I know. Some great free publicity there. Get all those paranoid crooks
trusting in Iphones.

Nothing Apple could do to bypass the lack of a passcode either.

So they wanted everyone to believe.

Feb 26 2018 - Forbes: The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone
Model In Existence. Cellebrite (owned by the Japanese Sun Corporation)
claims it can unlock all iOS versions up to 11.2.6, the most recent
iteration of Apple's operating system.

No it can not.

How would you know, Rod?

"Richard" wrote in message
...
On 27/12/2018 17:57, Tim J wrote:


"Martyn Barclay" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 01:17:49 +0000, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 11:16:07 +1100, Tim J wrote:

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message:

Apple said that they couldn¢t do that.

I know. Some great free publicity there. Get all those paranoid crooks
trusting in Iphones.

Nothing Apple could do to bypass the lack of a passcode either.

So they wanted everyone to believe.

Feb 26 2018 - Forbes: The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone
Model In Existence. Cellebrite (owned by the Japanese Sun Corporation)
claims it can unlock all iOS versions up to 11.2.6, the most recent
iteration of Apple's operating system.

No it can not.

How would you know

Mate of mine is a spook.

On 27/12/2018 19:43, Tim J wrote:


"Richard" wrote in message
...
On 27/12/2018 17:57, Tim J wrote:


"Martyn Barclay" wrote in message
news On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 01:17:49 +0000, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 11:16:07 +1100, Tim J wrote:

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message:

Apple said that they couldn¢t do that.

I know. Some great free publicity there. Get all those paranoid crooks
trusting in Iphones.

Nothing Apple could do to bypass the lack of a passcode either.

So they wanted everyone to believe.

Feb 26 2018 - Forbes: The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone
Model In Existence. Cellebrite (owned by the Japanese Sun Corporation)
claims it can unlock all iOS versions up to 11.2.6, the most recent
iteration of Apple's operating system.

No it can not.

How would you know

Mate of mine is a spook.

Time you had an enema, Rod.

On Thursday, 27 December 2018 18:58:43 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
tabbypurr wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 27 December 2018 18:06:23 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
tabbypurr wrote in message
...

What better for the spooks than a phone that crims
think they're safe with, but the spooks can read.
What better for Apple than a product buyers
think is more secure than all the others.

Sure, but its just a tad unlikely that the spooks would
organise for a terrorist to kill 25 people and then kill
themselves just to produce a media frenzy like we

are you a lunatic or an idiot? Oh, for a moment I forgot, you're both.

You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag.

Thats the event that saw the FBI want to look at the contents of that
iphone.

saw with that court action which actually showed
that they could actually get into that particular
obsolete iphone and found nothing useful in it.

the court thing was likely to convince
everyone the phones were secure.

Its just a tad unlikely that the spooks would
organise for a terrorist to kill 25 people and then kill
themselves just to produce a media frenzy like we saw.

Both sides win.

The FBI didnt, they looked completely stupid trying
to get the court to force apple to let them see what
was on that iphone and even sillier with the 3rd
party allowed them to do that and there was
nothing useful on it after that mega**** fight.

? We'll never know.

We do in fact know that the current iphones are so
secure that even apple can't perve at the data on them.

let us know when you're sober and can take stuff in.

In article , Tim J
writes


"Richard" wrote in message
...
On 27/12/2018 17:57, Tim J wrote:


"Martyn Barclay" wrote in message
news On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 01:17:49 +0000, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 11:16:07 +1100, Tim J wrote:

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message:

Apple said that they couldn€št do that.

I know. Some great free publicity there. Get all those paranoid crooks
trusting in Iphones.

Nothing Apple could do to bypass the lack of a passcode either.

So they wanted everyone to believe.

Feb 26 2018 - Forbes: The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone
Model In Existence. Cellebrite (owned by the Japanese Sun Corporation)
claims it can unlock all iOS versions up to 11.2.6, the most recent
iteration of Apple's operating system.

No it can not.

How would you know

Mate of mine is a spook.
Well not a very good one if he discusses such things with any non-spook.
And you are bound by the Official Secrets Act (even though you may not
even have heard of let alone signed) to report him as a security risk.
--
bert

In article , "dennis@home"
writes
On 26/12/2018 13:38, Richard wrote:
On 26/12/2018 13:18, dennis@home wrote:
On 25/12/2018 01:31, Michael Chare wrote:

Smart meters clearly cost more to make and they have quite high
operating costs because of their use of mobile networks.

Do you want to produce figures that show the difference in cost for
smart meters and sending a meter reader around.


Those that have them should pay for the extra cost.


You want to pay more for having a meter reader come around then?
You want to put meter readers out of work then?

There will be plenty of work for them going around multiple times to
get one reading from those that won't have smart meters.
They just need to charge them for all the extra work and not pass it
onto people with smart meters.
.

Less a deduction for the cost of the smart meters given to other people.
--
bert

wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 27 December 2018 18:58:43 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
tabbypurr wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 27 December 2018 18:06:23 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
tabbypurr wrote in message
...

What better for the spooks than a phone that crims
think they're safe with, but the spooks can read.
What better for Apple than a product buyers
think is more secure than all the others.

Sure, but its just a tad unlikely that the spooks would
organise for a terrorist to kill 25 people and then kill
themselves just to produce a media frenzy like we

are you a lunatic or an idiot? Oh, for a moment I forgot, you're both.

You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag.

Thats the event that saw the FBI want to look at the contents of that
iphone.

saw with that court action which actually showed
that they could actually get into that particular
obsolete iphone and found nothing useful in it.

the court thing was likely to convince
everyone the phones were secure.

Its just a tad unlikely that the spooks would
organise for a terrorist to kill 25 people and then kill
themselves just to produce a media frenzy like we saw.

Both sides win.

The FBI didnt, they looked completely stupid trying
to get the court to force apple to let them see what
was on that iphone and even sillier with the 3rd
party allowed them to do that and there was
nothing useful on it after that mega**** fight.

? We'll never know.

We do in fact know that the current iphones are so
secure that even apple can't perve at the data on them.

let us know when you're sober and can take stuff in.

You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag.

"bert" wrote in message
...
In article , Tim J
writes


"Richard" wrote in message
...
On 27/12/2018 17:57, Tim J wrote:


"Martyn Barclay" wrote in message
news On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 01:17:49 +0000, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 11:16:07 +1100, Tim J wrote:

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message:

Apple said that they couldn€št do that.

I know. Some great free publicity there. Get all those paranoid
crooks
trusting in Iphones.

Nothing Apple could do to bypass the lack of a passcode either.

So they wanted everyone to believe.

Feb 26 2018 - Forbes: The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone
Model In Existence. Cellebrite (owned by the Japanese Sun Corporation)
claims it can unlock all iOS versions up to 11.2.6, the most recent
iteration of Apple's operating system.

No it can not.

How would you know

Mate of mine is a spook.

Well not a very good one if he discusses such things with any non-spook.

Not just any non spook, someone who has known him since he was a little kid.

And you are bound by the Official Secrets Act

No I am not.

(even though you may not
even have heard of let alone signed) to report him as a security risk.

Wrong again.

On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 09:10:21 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rot Speed,
the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


let us know when you're sober and can take stuff in.

You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag.

You certainly keep bull****ting your way into your grave, senile idiot!

--
Sqwertz to Rot Speed:
"This is just a hunch, but I'm betting you're kinda an argumentative
asshole.
MID:

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 20:51:16 +0000, bert wrote:

In article , Tim J
writes


"Richard" wrote in message
...
On 27/12/2018 17:57, Tim J wrote:


"Martyn Barclay" wrote in message
news On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 01:17:49 +0000, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 11:16:07 +1100, Tim J wrote:

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message:

Apple said that they couldn‚t do that.

I know. Some great free publicity there. Get all those paranoid
crooks trusting in Iphones.

Nothing Apple could do to bypass the lack of a passcode either.

So they wanted everyone to believe.

Feb 26 2018 - Forbes: The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone
Model In Existence. Cellebrite (owned by the Japanese Sun
Corporation) claims it can unlock all iOS versions up to 11.2.6, the
most recent iteration of Apple's operating system.

No it can not.

How would you know

Mate of mine is a spook.

Bull****.

Well not a very good one if he discusses such things with any non-spook.
And you are bound by the Official Secrets Act (even though you may not
even have heard of let alone signed) to report him as a security risk.

Exactly. And who's word are you going to trust, a respected online
website like Forbes, or some nymshifing half-arsed troll.

"Martyn Barclay" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 20:51:16 +0000, bert wrote:

In article , Tim J
writes


"Richard" wrote in message
...
On 27/12/2018 17:57, Tim J wrote:


"Martyn Barclay" wrote in message
news On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 01:17:49 +0000, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 11:16:07 +1100, Tim J wrote:

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message:

Apple said that they couldn‚t do that.

I know. Some great free publicity there. Get all those paranoid
crooks trusting in Iphones.

Nothing Apple could do to bypass the lack of a passcode either.

So they wanted everyone to believe.

Feb 26 2018 - Forbes: The Feds Can Now (Probably) Unlock Every iPhone
Model In Existence. Cellebrite (owned by the Japanese Sun
Corporation) claims it can unlock all iOS versions up to 11.2.6, the
most recent iteration of Apple's operating system.

No it can not.

How would you know

Mate of mine is a spook.

Bull****.

Fact, actually.

Well not a very good one if he discusses such things with any non-spook.
And you are bound by the Official Secrets Act (even though you may not
even have heard of let alone signed) to report him as a security risk.

Exactly.

Fraid not.

And who's word are you going to trust,
a respected online website like Forbes,

Only fools trust Forbes. And even that Forbes
journo doesn’t say that with any certainty.

or some nymshifing half-arsed troll.

What a stunning line in rational argument you have there.