hawker9000

On ‎10‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 1:02 AM, BuaBS said:

Provoking China , NK , ... it never stops.

How is a transit in international waters "provoking China"?   Yeah, the Ameriphobes never stop.

"Provoking, China , NK , .... "  Uh-huh.  Right.  Sure.  ROFLMAO   No end to such lunacy.

"Sonia Sotomayor, noted that she would not have wiped out the appeals court ruling"

Yeah, what a shocker.   If the dems want so badly to impeach somebody, she's the perfect candidate, though she could probably be ruled unfit to stand trial...

3 hours ago, Grouse said:

Always been madness. Better to stay and force change from within.

Having surrendered so much of its sovereignty, how exactly do you "force change from within"?  I'm surprised Brexit took as long as it did.

2 minutes ago, bazza73 said:

The only thing I need Windows for is the printer driver for a Brother laser printer. Linux doesn't have one that I can install correctly.

My needs are simple - email and a browser. Changed over to Linux a few years ago at the urging of my son, have never regretted it.

Have had Windows XP, Vista and 7. Vista was the greatest abortion ever visited on an unsuspecting customer base, and I'm sure it drove many people into the arms of competitors. IMHO it was only Microsoft's huge reserves that got it through Vista, it would have broken most companies.

Possibly Windows suits people with high-end gaming and graphics needs, I wouldn't know. I do know I was constantly fighting off viruses and malware in the various versions I used. I haven't seen a single virus in Linux.

"The only thing I need ..."

Why do Linux users insist it's always about THEM and what THEY need?  Either that or a similarly bombastic sermon about Windows and its problems, which is undeniable, but not the question.   And preach to Windows users without the slightest idea of what THEIR needs might be.  No.  Linux is great, but it's not the solution for everybody.  OK, so we're all endlessly impressed with what a wise and wonderful non-Windows user you are.  Awesome.  Now please put a sock in it.

53 minutes ago, jgarbo said:

Depends on the OS. Windows is of course doomed from birth. It was designed with an NSA back door. Apple OS is good but "closed" (you don't know what's inside). I run Linux, which won't allow any installation of anything without  "root" (god) permission. All Linux code is open source, ie thousands of very smart, very angry folk check it constantly for bugs. Bugs are fixed in hours. Updates are automatic, according to importance. Keyloggers don't work because they need to be installed. Viruses don't work, unless you're on your fourth martini and go #.

At "blackhat" conventions, a yearly prize is given to hackers who can "break" a machine. Windows is a joke - 5 minutes. Mac - 20 minutes. Linux - not yet.  

However, the computer and OS may be smart but the operator is the problem. Three yr olds, no matter how cute,  should not drive Ferraris. Clicktards, who click on anything shiny, are the gateway for "pwning" a machine. Do you open your door to a stranger? Pick up cute hitchhikers? Accept drinks in a bar from anyone? Then stay away from computers.  

PS I install Linux on friends' machines after they tire of Windows' stupid bloated system & useless help. No complaints so far. You can make Linux look exactly like Windows (ugh) or run it far better. And Linux & all its apps are free.

And how do they run their bought & paid-for Windows apps on their new Linux machines?  Do you fix them up with Windows emulation software; how well does that work for them?   I'm guessing you don't number many gamers OR custom-software business users among your friends.   But if all a person does is send & receive email and browse, Linux should fill the bill.  You're certainly correct in touting Linux's relative security, but blithely advising everyone to use it and being dismissive of those who don't is to be guilty of the same simple-mindedness you're accusing them of. 

On ‎10‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 8:12 AM, Dumbastheycome said:

That  statement is a  contradiction  in  and of  itself.  The   use  of  "If"  is  the  marker  of  some  panic  by the  conventional  currency  manipulators  etc. Why  can it  not  be  both? As  a tradeable  currency  it  is  capable  of  quintupling  in  tradeable   value  and  can be  also traded where  is  there  any  disadvantage  except  to   the  plasticized   paper  equivelant  that   comes  well under  the  control  of   too  many  who  have  no real  relationship  to  the  trade. How  much  emphasis  is there  on the  trade  in   non existent  gold?Digital  metal versus  digitable  digits?  lol

Looks  like  it  will  be   Bitcoin  or  no  coins  in  not too  long.

Chipped inplants  for  credit/debit transactions.

Every  newborn  mandatorily  gifted   100 credit  points for  initial existence  and  mortgaged   ever  after?  !   lol

 

'Don't know whether to disagree or not.  Do merchants who accept bitcoin price their goods & services in the local currency first, and then let their PC readjust the bitcoin price at the time of sale?  The bitcoin value seems far more volatile than most currencies, and I don't see how you can quote a static price for your product in bitcoin. 

On ‎10‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 6:17 AM, bontang said:

Many Tourist here in Thailand on Tourist Visa renting Condo's, However by Law the Landlord must report the Tenant within 24 Hrs of the Person renting the Condo/Studio/House,

The Tourist must submit Copy of their Passport, TM6 Arrival document, & it that person has Tourist Visa stamp in their Passports for up to 3 Months must submit copy  Copy also,

Jomtien, and perhaps some other Immigration offices (I'm not sure which ones) will require you to have a TM30, which must be done within 24 hours of arrival.   Most will logically say that should be an owner responsibility, but Jomtien will hold you responsible even as just a tenant (i.e., a "possessor") if the owner doesn't do it (and many owners will deny even any knowledge of the matter, let alone assume responsibility for it).

If you arrive using a Tourist Visa and aren't planning to apply for an extension but instead just leave at the end of your 60days, then you probably won't have any dealings with Immigration and this might not be anything to be too concerned about (tho', technically, you would be on the wrong side of the law if you don't do the TM30 reporting). 

It's remotely possible I guess, but not likely in most places, that the consulate from which you're requesting a single-entry Tourist Visa might want to see your rental contract or hotel reservation.  I've never heard of it.  There's a place on the application form (as well as the TM6 arrival card later on) where you simply list your first place of stay in Thailand, and that's generally - as in almost always - all there is to it.  (The requirements are more demanding if you apply for the Multi-Entry Tourist Visa.)

"The state's newly legalized marijuana industry was also hit hard, with at least 20 pot farms in Sonoma, Mendocino and Napa counties ravaged, a growers' association said. "

Well I guess even the darkest cloud can have a silver lining...

18 hours ago, canopus1969 said:

thinks he’s savvy about travel scams   

 

Welcome to Thailand, what a Muppet  

'Gotta' agree.  Oldest trick in the book, and can't believe some version of it isn't running in other tourist destinations around the world.   'Hope his flight planning is more meticulous.

There's some serious fear-mongering going on in this thread.   You're really asking two different questions, each of which needs to be addressed on its own.  WRT the possibility of having been "taken over", I'd echo the suggestion of the on-demand scanners.  Their major advantage is that they don't run from your possibly-infected system but remotely from the scan source (even though they may install some files on your PC before running).  Some malware can compromise your system to the point that your installed security software is essentially compromised as well giving rise to the possibility of false negatives; remote scanning overcomes this and is going to be fully up-to-date as well.  Run more than one different one for extra assurance (but perhaps check some online reviews for ratings on which ones are currently considered the most effective).  And "free" does NOT mean "useless" or ineffective in this context.  Note however that these remote scanners generally will NOT generally remove infections that they find; they just inform you.  You then need to go find out what to do to remove the infection using the information the scanner will have provided (name of the malware, etc.) Sometimes you can find a removal tool that'll do the job; sometimes there's a manual removal process you can follow.  BTW, Microsoft offers a "Safety Scanner" that's entirely different from Defender; it works for only 10days following download and offers no realtime protection.  (When you want to use it again, you download it again.)   There's also the "Malicious Software Removal Tool" that downloads monthly as one of the regular OS updates.

There are some specialized scanners available to look for things like rootkits.

OK - so THEN you have a problem with Win10 not being upgradeable.  As others have suggested, your predicament may be due to your having a pirated/invalid version, or it may be due to a glitch in the OS install, possibly following some past upgrade or patch which didn't get properly applied, or it may be due to a malware infection (though if there are no other indications/symptoms, I wouldn't jump to this conclusion first).  You might take the time to inform yourself about the various "recovery" methods, and start working your way through them.  You really don't want to allow that condition to continue on your system.

• Windows repair disk (if you made one)
• System restore
• Recovery drive
• Restore using Windows installation media
• Reinstallation using your Windows installation media (probably your last choice)

If you've not being doing backups, the first thing you might want to do is backup your data files (not the whole PC!) to a fully independent, fresh (not previously used and definitely NOT ever previously connected to the PC in question), external hard drive, USB stick, or memory chip.  Make the backup, and then disconnect that media and put it aside and proceed with your other work.  BEFORE restoring those files should you need to, be sure and run a security scan on that media FROM ANOTHER PC YOU TRUST, to ensure you haven't just backed up the infection along with the files!  Don't backup system or application files, only your data files.

Oh, and to answer the originally posed question...  I know of no simple, one-size-fits-all, reliable way to tell if your computer has been "taken over", unless it starts displaying some pop-up window telling you so.  You need to scan.

This is why, for many, the new no-smoking rules for the beach will make no difference.  Cigarette smoke is one of the "lesser pollutants" compared to the deplorable condition of the water.

It's the near-apocalypse of the day I guess.  Tomorrow's is the super-volcano getting ready to erupt under Yellowstone that's going to wipe out all life on earth.

Very bad up there.  And not totally unexpected.  Risk of wildfire is high by this time of year whenever the previous winter was a rainy one.   Winelovers aren't going to like what this does to California wine prices (and availability).  More "red flag" warnings out for this weekend; it's not over yet.

16 hours ago, toolpush said:

I can guarantee you that I will tell all my friends, visitors and acquaintances to avoid going to any beach that has this ban in place. Can you imagine the extortion attempts that will happen now by the BIB? They will make those guys on Sukhumvit near Terminal 21 look like pikers......

LOL.  Have fun with your "guarantees".   5555555    The non-smokers will smile and head straight there.  The smokers will commiserate with you and stay away.   'Works for me.   Another stick in smokers' eyes.   The trend continues.

Except that the Pattaya beaches are so nasty, a great many stay away nowadays regardless.   When they figure out a way to clean up the water so you can safely swim in it, call me...

12 hours ago, Jip99 said:

 

No photos required, they take your picture.

 

It is now $37 per day,

$37 per day - wow.   Is that really per day or for that 3- or 4-day temple pass/ticket?   ('Been awhile since I was there, and haven't been since the Chinese hordes descended on the place.)

7 hours ago, Lannig said:

That's what I was assuming too until that guy I've already mentioned told me that he distinctively saw a flash going off twice at the location of one of the known speedtrap cams along HW#32. So they may not have deployed this flash-equipped model along HW#7 (that's the BKK-Chonburi motorway number isn't it ?) but I hope that you're not up for a suprise soon.

Does the fact that there's a flash necessarily mean it's working correctly?   And if not, I'm guessing it would take months before anybody even realized it.

4 hours ago, Ruffian Dick said:

Gosh, then laws do no good...?

Well let's just say in some countries more than others...

Armed local criminals need the comfort and reassurance of knowing that if they should decide to invade your home or assault you personally they won't need to chance your being able to confront them or defend yourself or your family or your property.

And actually, the same criminal-favoring rationale is quite popular in the west as well.

14 hours ago, FritsSikkink said:

When the ship is in Thai waters you are in Thailand. They only have your word that you won't leave the ship, I wouldn't be so sure nothing would happen and ask a lawyer.

I'm not so sure about this.  Unless the ship is Thai-flagged, as long as you remain on it, you have not I don't believe technically "entered Thailand" regardless of the fact that the ship itself is in Thai waters.  Do all passengers' passports automatically receive entry stamps when the ship in which they're embarked enter different national waters, or when that ship docks or drops anchor in a foreign port?  I really don't know - do they?

And I guess another caveat would be the fine print in the terms of carriage that accompany your cruise ticketing.  You probably "agree" to lots of stuff you're not aware of, including something that might well cover and obligate you in situations like this.  

All that notwithstanding, I personally wouldn't take the cruise to begin with, but if I found myself in the situation, I would refuse to go ashore with Thai immigration or at the request of ship's authority and specifically and repeatedly and loudly state "I do not wish to enter Thailand", and make them physically force me ashore, with as many people recording the process on their cellphones as possible.  (I would also have filed a written statement with the purser that I had no intention of going ashore in Thailand for any reason whatsoever).  I guess you could try refusing to allow your passport to be handed over to Thai authorities - at which point the cruise line itself might refuse to board you unless already underway.  Anyway, under those circumstances, and assuming you're not actually wanted in Thailand for anything, I would think that the Thai immigration party would decide to leave well enough alone, blow some smoke to save face, and in the end leave you unmolested.  But I doubt doing this would exactly ingratiate you with the cruise line, which probably has procedural agreements and memoranda of understanding with the Thai authorities that your actions would infringe upon.

But I'm NOT an international lawyer and would definitely NOT recommend your reliance on the above.  See a real lawyer or don't go on the cruise is my on-the-record advice.

14 minutes ago, mstevens said:

There are as many arguments for sin sot as there are against it and the whole concept is polarising.  I'd simply say that if you're getting married in Thailand and are genuinely happy to pay sin sot then pay it.  And if you're totally against it, then don't pay it (or don't marry that particular lady as the case may be).  We all accept different things in relationships and I think sin sot is one of those many things in a relationship that some people are ok with while others are not.

Well said.  For me, if there were going to be no marriage unless I paid the sin sot, unless it were a matter of an insignificant token, I'd lose interest in the lady then & there.  There'd be absolutely no need for argument.  But it's strictly an up-to-you thing.  There are so many cultural issues & differences to be aware of, deal with, and plan for; this is just one.  So if it IS a problem for you, you probably haven't been digging as deeply as you need to into what marriage to a Thai actually holds in store...

Many owners feel that fulfilling their obligation to do the TM30 "puts them on the radar" as taxable income recipients and therefore resist doing it (and will usually plead total ignorance if approached).  It's also difficult to complete a TM30 without the involvement of the owner.  As mentioned above, in Jomtien, this translates to passing the buck to the renter.  (So, if I need a 30d extension for example, I just plan on a couple of days stay in a hotel up in Bangkok; Chaengwattana is easier to deal with...)

BUT, legally, if a TM30 is required, it's not only required, but required within 24hrs of arrival.   I doubt if many renters who just make their reservations online before they leave home know anything about it or have the first clue. And trust me, checking in they will NOT be told.

9 hours ago, DogNo1 said:

Global Guy: I was an ambulance driver in San Diego in 1968-69.  I clearly remember my frustration when I pulled into Mercy Hospital with a patient who needed immediate attention only to be stopped at the door of the emergency entrance by a nurse with a clipboard who had to get all of the payment information before we were allowed the enter the hospital.  It's not only Thailand that requires payment guarantees up-front.  I never took in an unconscious patient but I feel sure that they would be looking for ID and insurance cards ASAP.  As I remember, County would let us take the patients straight in but the private hospitals wouldn't.  This may be shocking to people who assume that American hospitals provide treatment first and arrange for payment later.  Mercy Hospital would actually turn patients away if they didn't have the ability to pay and then it would be off to County.  The patients' condition was very worrisome when you couldn't get them the care that they needed promptly.  So far as I know, the ambulance company was never sued over this.

Lol.  Laws have changed a bit since 1969, and your information is not accurate. Hasn't been since 1986 matter-of-fact.  Emergency rooms in the U.S., public or private, can't legally turn away anybody anymore for emergency care.  (Private hospitals can turn away non-emergency patients.)   Either find an illegal and ask them or Google 'EMTLA '.

Anywho.....    this topic was started back in early June.  Has there actually been anything further on this?

32 minutes ago, jaiyen said:

No problem, my wife can still legally buy a gun. Foreigners can still easily buy a stolen gun, so the new rule will change nothing, except on paper.

Yeah, something will change.  The "stakes" will be higher for the foreigner who subsequent to the prohibition finds a reason to use his weapon or is found with one, however that comes about.  The "purchase price" will also ratchet up a bit.  I'm not disagreeing with the idea that there'll be little or no proactive enforcement per se, or that foreigners will remain able to get their hands on them, just that the brown envelope will now have to be a bit fatter, unless you're willing to settle for a knife at your gun fights.

Abolish it?

Yeah, right.  That's gonna' happen...

@Russia, @ China ...

If you really want to restrain something, you can start with your own whackjob psycho client.

On ‎10‎/‎9‎/‎2017 at 2:21 PM, wakeupplease said:

Some fools just repeat what they are told to say and Dumbo's do not realise every time they do, they look even more stupid in the worlds eyes and make it so much more easier to get asylum.

I really doubt the govt cares much about the Shinawatras' asylum requests and almost certainly doesn't want or need them back.  They have to voice their disapproval of granting sanctuary internationally on an "official" level, but the message really being sent is:  "OK, you're out.  Now stay out."

There's a very large faction that'll agree, and an also-large opposition faction which is fast forgetting...  Yingluck may be back one distant day, but I doubt Thaksin will live long enough.