
Signature
Unlock Your Phone's Potential
www.UselessInfo.org.uk
www.ThePhoneLocker.co.uk
www.GSM-Solutions.co.uk
> "Adrian C" <email@here.invalid> wrote in message
>> He doesn't sound that smart and has gone quiet.
>
> You deduced that from one written post?
Yup. I live under a bridge, I can deduce anything (when drunk)....
>> Perhaps some wisdom on why this is NOT worth reporting?
>
> Perhaps because the purchasers have done nothing illegal?
So they wouldn't mind the intrusion to check :-)
>> The way that the public's assistance has been requested is 'if you suspect
>> it, report it' no matter how inconsequential it may be.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> better start increasing their workforce by a factor of 100 as soon as
> possible.
Ah, this ain't Plod. It's experts gathering inteligence, putting
multiple leads together to arrive at decisions - rather than relying on
the guesswork gained from a just a few. In my IT experience, quesswork
wastes more time then absorbing multiple streams of information and
making a faster trend analysis. They need our help.
What's next? Report anyone buying more than one bottle of Cola
> and a packet of mints - because as we all know, they could be combined to
> make a rocket that could be used as a delivery system for explosives?
Wel, yes - if something doesn't fit. Obviously Cola/Mints is a bit "out
there" as a weapon; these is no obvious evidence it is a threat - but if
you have doubt about the individual making the purchase, let the experts
worry about the threat assessment.
> Box breaking is NOT illegal. Most independent phone shops (and many more
> individuals) do it to some extent simply because it's often a cheaper way to
> procure handsets than buying them piecemeal at the distributors.
This is nothing to do with the legality of box breaking.
This is to do with terrorists having access to untraceable
communications and means of raising money - there is strong evidence
"pay as you go" is a danger as indeed Theo has written.
People not living under a rock and being aware of government advisories
would have heard or thought about that - and hopefully would do the
right thing.
Now, who's walked of with my coat, and where's my <fx:hic> whiskey?

Signature
Adrian C
Ivor Jones - 10 Apr 2008 12:41 GMT
>> "Adrian C" <email@here.invalid> wrote in message
>>> He doesn't sound that smart and has gone quiet.
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> So they wouldn't mind the intrusion to check :-)
I've never (knowingly anyway) committed a crime, but that doesn't mean I'd
welcome plod searching my house on a weekly basis.
Ivor
Richard Colton - 10 Apr 2008 14:15 GMT
>> "Adrian C" <email@here.invalid> wrote in message
>>> He doesn't sound that smart and has gone quiet.
>>
>> You deduced that from one written post?
>
> Yup. I live under a bridge, I can deduce anything (when drunk)....
Pass the bottle.
>>> Perhaps some wisdom on why this is NOT worth reporting?
>>
>> Perhaps because the purchasers have done nothing illegal?
>
> So they wouldn't mind the intrusion to check :-)
Most people would very much (and quite rightly) mind the intrusion.
>>> The way that the public's assistance has been requested is 'if you
>>> suspect it, report it' no matter how inconsequential it may be.
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Ah, this ain't Plod.
Strange that, because the link you gave was to the Metropolitan Police.
> It's experts gathering inteligence, putting multiple leads together to
> arrive at decisions - rather than relying on the guesswork gained from a
> just a few.
It's to be hoped they can get it right for a change then. If HM Gubbermint
Ltd get their way, anyone suspected (i.e. they don't need to prove a thing)
of having anything to do with terrorism will be detained indefinately.
Looks suspiciously to me like the terrorists have already won.
> In my IT experience, quesswork wastes more time then absorbing multiple
> streams of information and making a faster trend analysis. They need our
> help.
And perhaps if they hadn't made quite so many mistakes in the past, and had
been a little more sensible in their demands, then they might deserve the
help.
> What's next? Report anyone buying more than one bottle of Cola
>> and a packet of mints - because as we all know, they could be combined to
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> you have doubt about the individual making the purchase, let the experts
> worry about the threat assessment.
No thanks, I'd rather abide by the law of the land in this case.
>> Box breaking is NOT illegal. Most independent phone shops (and many more
>> individuals) do it to some extent simply because it's often a cheaper way
>> to procure handsets than buying them piecemeal at the distributors.
>
> This is nothing to do with the legality of box breaking.
It very much is to do with exactly that.
> This is to do with terrorists having access to untraceable communications
> and means of raising money - there is strong evidence "pay as you go" is a
> danger as indeed Theo has written.
Then perhaps Plod etc., should approach the networks and ask them to not
subsidise the cost of handsets to such an extent that they're practically
giving them away to support a business model that only works if the handset
is used for some considerable time on the supplying network. They might
also consider asking O2 (in particular, but they are all at it) not to hand
SIM cards out as often and freely as condoms at an orgy.

Signature
Unlock Your Phone's Potential
www.UselessInfo.org.uk
www.ThePhoneLocker.co.uk
www.GSM-Solutions.co.uk
[snip]
> Box breaking is NOT illegal. Most independent phone shops (and many
> more individuals) do it to some extent simply because it's often a
> cheaper way to procure handsets than buying them piecemeal at the
> distributors.
The whole thing hinges on the networks' insistence on handset subsidy. If
phones were sold at realistic prices then it wouldn't happen and people
wouldn't see the need to 'upgrade' their phones every 5 minutes.
Wait, though - that would mean people not spending all that money in phone
shops, oh no, we can't have that.........!
Ivor