some-human

But surely if it was exposed they have to assume it was taken?

If you can view the data then you could have saved it locally, print it or screenshot it, even write it down with a notepad and pen.

For all intents and purposes if they've accessed it, they've taken it?

I don't understand either:

"It is understood investigations have not shown any data has been taken."

Versus

"The cyberattack was on a payroll system with current service personnel and some veterans. It is largely names and bank details that have been exposed."

Surely it's one or the other, they've either got hold of those details or not.

Londoner for 24 years. I don't know what to tell you, 'Bro'.

Yes beggars walk down tube trains trying to get money, but they don't tend to set up shop on the platform which is what we're talking about here. I'm also pretty sure most of the people that have asked me for a quid on the tube were not homeless people, just chancers and drug users.

Besides which, once you were past the barrier, sleeping on the tube train itself is likely to be a much more viable and comfortable option than the platform.

as for "unmanned stations"? All London Underground stations are rostered to be staffed during operating hours. Stations located underground have specific staffing requirements and minimum staff numbers, which vary depending on the size of the station. This is a fire regulation requirement arising from the King's Cross fire in 1987.

People without a home do not have access to the platforms that these seats are on. These seats are on the underground, past the ticket barriers, and they would quickly be removed for trespassing on private property, as all TFL stations are staffed.

Typically in London, People without a home would be found outside the station, or occasionally in the concourse.

Trying to get the billboard to pay for the ad it's displaying. How was that ever going to work?

I interpreted the comment as a comparison between torrenting and emulation, "but torrenting isn't illegal but is used for illegal things" and thought it was implying the opposite for emulation, i.e that emulation was illegal.

I was making fun of that comment to point out the same is true of emulation. However I obviously misinterpreted the initial comment since you're clearly aware emulation itself is legal. Sorry.

Emulation and virtualisation is a pretty standard, official, way of running software on other devices, where the software licence also doesn't stop anyone from doing so.

Emulating also isn't illegal by itself of a direct link to pirating, it is just a very common way of playing pirated games.

Yes, I see that. My retort was to "The United States government does not employ censors to remove portions of shows before allowing them to air (or stream, whatever)." which it effectively does.

The scale isn't black and white with China being terrible and USA being great here, it's a sliding scale of shitness, with one being a 4/10 and the other 9/10, but the 4/10 pretends to be a 0/10 and proports "free speech for all. Home of the Free world. The government can't tell you what you can say and do." and the other doesn't pretend it is.

Say the word "Bullshit" and then show a erect penis on Wheel of Fortune and see how that 'we don't censor things' goes for you.