Jump to content


  • Post count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Beechey last won the day on 16 May 2018

Beechey had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,300 Excellent

About Beechey

  • Rank
    Cyber security guy
  • Birthday 09/09/1994

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Fan Since
    Since birth

Recent Profile Visitors

6,212 profile views
  1. Oh my, it's so extra I don't even know what to do "The ultimate act of betrayal"
  2. I disagree completely. The Royal Navy did not come to being from a thirst for colonisation. It came to fruition from the defence of (what was then) England from the Spanish Empire. The words "never shall be slaves" almost certainly refers to these conflicts. "Exerting" is not a word used in the poem - I brought it into the discussion, it refers to "ruling the waves", meaning simply to have a more powerful fleet than your competitors. It is an undisputed historical fact that the Royal Navy's strength kept major invasions away from British shores throughout history. At the time of writing, the Royal Navy was not the all-conquering force it became in the 19th and 20th centuries, meaning the command of "Rule, Britannia!" meant literally a call for the Navy to be invested into such that it becomes the pre-eminent force on the world's oceans. We need to add historical context here: the Kingdom of Great Britain was not the large empire the British Empire came to be in the 20th century. The Seven Years' War hadn't happened yet, France was the world's global superpower - Great Britain was probably considered a second-rate power at the time compared to the empires of Spain and France. Let me add context by showing you a graph which plots the spend as. a percentage of the economy with the size of the navy - and I'l last you to try and pinpoint 1740. The year 1740 is just about where the military spend as a percentage of the economy as a whole starts to shoot up - coincidentally, also around the start of the Seven Years' War (1756) - the war which would shape the globe to this day. I can absolutely, 100% assure you, this song at the time was not a celebration of Britain's power, but a call for a fleet which could adequately defend the islands against France, Spain and Portugal. There are precisely no connotations to enslaving others, taking other's land or forcing your will on others, but merely the defence of the country. People need to actually read the lyrics and consider the history instead of projecting their vision of Great Britain in the colonial era on it. You seem to be placing the poem about 100 years in the future from when it actually came to being. Of all the songs to be annoyed about, this frankly is not one of them.
  3. I think that's a pretty big stretch. That is the poem's only mention of slavery, and it's absolutely nothing to do with inflicting slavery on other people. You could made such reaches for basically any sentence in history. Read the following verse. It's clearly about Britain being strong enough to not fall to foreign powers. The nations, not so blest as thee,Must, in their turns, to tyrants fall;While thou shalt flourish great and free,The dread and envy of them all."Rule, Britannia! rule the waves:"Britons never will be slaves."
  4. The song has nothing to do with enslavement of other people. The lyrics: "Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!" are a command from God for Britain to exert itself through naval power. The lyrics: "Britons never, never, never shall be slaves" simply refers to the fact that such naval power ensures that no foreign nation could overcome Britain's defences at sea.
  5. No way so we sell any major player in January bar something extraordinary like the Xhaka incident.
  6. It wasn't tens of millions of attacking hosts, it was tens of millions of "attacks", almost certainly meaning "tens of millions of packets". Seemed to be repelled easily by CloudFlare, meaning it was probably just a few hosts generating a few hundred thousand packets each. Any competent network administrator should have absolutely no problem mitigating attacks like that - there are so many tools to do so. Labour, like most sane organisations seem to deploy CloudFlare, which is great at DDoS protection. DDoS attacks only get dangerous, as you say, when there are tens or hundreds of thousands of attacking hosts available to use. These are quite rare.
  7. Nothing is ever completely secure, but some people's stuff is more secure than others. Most threats are easy to spot and avoid, such as email phishing scams. Just make sure you keep your software up to date and ensure you don't click any stupid links. As cyber attack complexity increases, so does the defensive mechanisms available. This attack though was crude, short and completely ineffective, like most script-kiddy DDoS attacks. Amazingly, yes - and it's because they operate using CloudFlare rather than them actually doing anything.
  8. Interested to know what exactly they detected Ah such a lazy attack: The Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack floods a computer server with traffic to try to take it offline. A Labour source told the BBC "tens of millions of attacks - mostly originating from Russia and Brazil" had been detected.
  9. Still find it astounding that so many were eager to sell him after a few games of bad form. Reap what you sow. We'd probably end up with the world's most defensive left back for the next 10 years and all moan about it.
  10. Never rated him. He's too scared to splash out £40m on Ziyech. Complete waster!
  11. Next season will be big for him if we manage to get a EL/CL place.
  12. No, he cites his own age when joining Man City.
  13. Well obviously. People care about what you say as well as what you do...
  • Create New...