AgProv

I'm getting hacked off with not being able to access some media content, ie some music videos, TV shows, et c, because the content is "not available to me where I live" or "the copyright owner has placed restrictions..." or "sod off, you live in the wrong country". This is particularly galling with some music videos I used to be able to freely watch on You-Tube in Britain with no restrictions - until Sony Music Entertainment got their grubby fingers on them and imposed restrictions.

I've heard proxy servers allow you to get round this.

Do they work for this purpose, how reliable are they, and are there any drawbacks?

BTW, I do not like yahoo adding adverts to the bottom of questions based on question content. Anything that may be advertised when this question goes live was not chosen by me, is not endorsed by me, and is likely to be defective, dangerous, toxic, shoddy, poisonous or just downright crap. If any adverts for SME come up, then the above applies tenfold - SME are money-grubbing scumbags. Thank you.

Disorientated. I go away for five minutes and everything I've known for ten years or more, that worked perfectly well (give or take a few glitches) , has changed to something pretty much unrecognisable.

Currently there's a rash of part-work magazines being advertised on TV. One promises that you'll have your own working model railway layout after 120 copies. (at £8.99 a copy, that's just over £1,000 for your train-set, when Hornby will sell you a starter set for £150). If I were to start buying this magazine, is there any guarantee it will still be publishing after the first flush of advertising dies off? Will it die after twenty issues, leaving me three pieces of track, a couple of carriages, half a railway station kit and no locomotive? Is this the usual way with part-work magazines?

By the way, none of the "sponsored advertisements" that may appear beneath this question are endorsed by me, I don't want to see them here, they're an intrusive waste of space and the product is bound to be total crap. Thank you!

I keep seeing this sidebar advert proclaiming that a "mom from Manchester" (sic) has devised a home-made wrinkle cream which gives fabulous results. Depending on which advert you read, dermatologists are fureous and doctors are angry at her. Why so? Surely something so fabulous would get all doctors bang onside? In that case they'd be cheering and slapping her on the back and saying "well done"? Or is the reason for their anger that she's peddling an expensive and dangerous quack cure - iether it diesn't actually work or it causes outright harm. I think we should be told.

It suddenly appeared a week or two ago with no warning, fanfare or congratulations Now the bloody thing's gone again just as abruptly. Did I dream it up? Ah well, easy come, easy go... in a way I'm relieved as it seemed to suggest I was in some way being endorsed and sponsored by the Yahoo machine and I worried it was compromising my independent viewpoint.

Maybe I said something Yahoo didn't approve of?

A friend of mine posted this on Facebook:

That special moment when you weasel out of meeting with your ex like the chickenshit baby that you are...

and it feels so good."

The whole question intrigues me, the FB friend who posted this is fairly recently married, btw. If you are happily married or involved with someone else, have no intention of being unfaithful, and you encounter your ex, what is the best way of dealing with this social minefield? esp. if your current other half is with you when you meet the ex?

(Second attempt, leaving out the sense of indignation). I beleive unfairly. They are dragging their feet on sorting it out and have not given me a valid reason. I have suspicions as to why but have no proof. What can I do about it and how can I make the best of this? (It's either an automatic thing that I've trippped. Or it could be a false acusation of cyberbullying. But I do not know which for sure and this irritates.)

Just for personal interest and satisfaction, i've just used Google Earth to track down a location where the BBC did some outdoors filming in the middle 1970's. Comparing the original film to the same street today, it really does appear to have gone socially upscale - big detached houses, leafy suburbia, et c.

I found i interesting that Google Earth marks where you can go with a thick grey line down the road. I had no bother locating much of the street where the BBC filmed thirty-odd years ago. But following it back, I get to a point where #i can turn left down a side-street and there is no way at all I can go forwards - half this street has not, seemingly, been mapped by Google Earth in street-view. It looks upscale, as if seriously rich people live there (in the Cotham suburb of Bristol, BS6). But I cannot "travel" along it and look at the houses.

Is it therefore possible for affluent or influential people to prevent Google from sending Street View camera down their street and buy out of a service the rest of us saw no objections to? (And even if we could have opposed it or wanted to - how would we have done so...) It does seem strange that Google Earth promises a 100% c0mprehensive coverage of British towns and cities , but on examination fails to do so!

angelebertagna601640 would like to "add you to his or her Messenger List.

Hi! Please add me to your Yahoo! Messenger contact list so we can chat. Thanks!"

I have never heard of, seen or contacted this person before. I am paranoid enough to suspect a scam. How can I find out more about the person behind this Yahoo identity: -

angelebertagna601640.

If you are real and legitimate, I apologise. You might want to answer personally outside Messenger?

AcceptDecline

This is usually on the first couple of screens after switching on - gets caught in a vicious cycle loop of switching on, going so far, powering down, switching on again, getting so far, powering down... what is causing this and how to put it right?

When issue started, I was reporting a dubious poster to a systems admin on a site I frequent - I cut and pasted the offending email intending it as evidence. The offending email had a link in it, but I was not clicking on the link directly - is even copying and pasting an email containbing a dodgy link enough to activate a virus?

This is usually on the first couple of screens after switching on - gets caught in a vicious cycle loop of switching on, going so far, powering down, switching on again, getting so far, powering down... what is causing this and how to put it right?

When issue started, I was reporting a dubious poster to a systems admin on a site I frequent - I cut and pasted the offendinbg ewmail intending it as evidence. The offending email had a link in it, but I was not clicking on the link directly - is even copying and pasting enough to activate a virus?

I recently won 10 points for "Best answer" on a historical/political question. One respondent questioned the accuracy of my answer. I gave the information in good faith believing it to be true, but going back to check it, I now realise my information was innaccurate and did not correctly answer the question.

So in all honesty I didn't deserve those ten points. How can I fess up, lose ten off my score, and have the question honestly re-opened?

I know my "open" pages on FB, such as my wall and comments, are out there in public and can be tracked by *anyone* - that's what Facebook is for, after all, and I can't complain if I were to advocate illegal action, and then get the police tracing me. Or if I were to really criticise my employers, they decide to check on what I'm saying, don't like it, and then sack me. But can my employers or the police access my private messages to others? This is what PM's are meant to be - private. Even if I accept the police can access them as part of normal law-enforcement, do my employers have such a right?

I've just picked up my first violation in over 1,000 answers. As you can imagine - it was a straightforward matter-of-fact answer, but within a loaded topic where you have to tread carefully - I'm a little bit upset about that.

I believe:- that somebody who was upset at my answer and felt emotionally threatened by it hit the "Report Abuse" button, as this was easier on their brain than preparing a reasoned rational reply. How do I guard against this?

I suspect: looking at my "contacts", that something else is going on. No less than four people on my "contacts" list are unobtainable because their accounts may have been suspended for one reason or another. If an individual is suspended for bad behaviour, do the yahoo police take the point of view that their "contacts" are also suspect and they should then, therefore, take a close look at anything submitted by the criminal's associates to see if they're guilty by association?

Also, a strange thing has happened. I would have to make a personal decision as to whether to become a fan of somebody else, yes? In theory, nobody else can do this for me or co-opt me as a fan without me knowing about it? I don't become a fan of anyone. Yet in two cases, I discover I am listed as somebody else's "fan" without my having consciously agreed to do so. This is very suspicious.

Can "contacts" also offer a chance for somebody to monitor what I do and write on Answers, so as to make it easy for somebody who disagrees with me on religious or political grounds to "stalk" my posts and hit the "report abuse" button on anything I write that they disagree with? I'm beginning to suspect mischief here.

If so, what do I do about it? And how do I "un-fan" myself from people I have no recollection of "fanning"?

Thanks!

In March, I travelled from Manchester to Liverpool by National Express Coach. I noticed that while every seat was fitted with a seat belt, which was new in my experience, there was no compulsion to wear them and the driver/crew did not insist passengers wore them. Therefore I treated it as optional and left it unfastened.

On Easter weekend, on Thursday before Good Friday, I travelled to Liverpool again on the same 060 scheduled service. Again I did not bother with the seat belt. The coach driver, before setting out, broadcast an announcement that all passengers must now by law wear a seat belt throughout the journey, and said that if the police checked the coach, any passenger found not to be wearing a belt would be fined.

In Liverpool, I spoke to a relative who runs a private coach and taxi company, and this coach-owner of forty years' experience was greatly surprised and said he'd heard of no such law, and certainly not one being enacted in the last three weeks.

So who's right? Was that coach driver spinning a yarn to impose conformity?

Out of the blue, I received an email, apparently from a startlingly attractive woman, who I'd never met before even through others, who wanted to Connect with me on Yahoo.

The email was from somebody called "Dollie Walsh" who completely out of the blue wanted to Connect and be my friend, The picture with the email showed an impossibly attractive woman, like Katie Price with more style and a sense of restraint, and I suppose the sensible thing to do would have been to delete the wretched thing without comment or reply.

But no, I had to be clever, so I replied with

"OK, excuse my cynicism here, but people who look like that generally don't need to make friends via the Internet. My AV is the best I can get and I have no fears of being hyped or scammed, so I look forward to the next move - who knows, Dollie might turn out to be a living breathing human (but one who has adopted a very flattering avatar, as I'm sure we all have done in one sense or another? ) in which case I welcome sombody who appears to appreciate my poor efforts on YahooAnswers!"

Silly, as I'd just advertised the fact I had a live email address.

So far nothing horrible's happened - I half-expect my email address to be bunged up with all sorts of $hit - but "Dollie" has replied to tell me how much she likes my avatar, my profile, my sense of humour, et c, and just coincidentally she'll be in "Manchester, England" this weekend if we want to meet...

I sense one enormous scam here, esp. as her email contained links to a sex-dating site which I suspect might be a front for prostitution. So Muggins here turns up at the date, discovers the lady's clock has been running since six and I already owe her several hundred, I protest that was not part of the deal, then two large blokes loom up behind me to say "Oh yes it is!" ,and enforce payment...

I also note "Dolly" has made 106 online friends, mainly male, so I wonder if anyone else's experience is the same as mine? Anyone willing to come out?

BTW, I have Googled on the name "Dollie Walsh" and it appears, without exception, to belong to several ordinary ladies in their fifties and sixties living on the east coast USA, who live blameless, even exemplary, lives - as teachers, elderly care workers, social workers, et c - and I suspect it has been chosen/stolen because it projects that sort of "trust me" solidity and reliability. Nobody under seventy in Britain calls herself "Dolly", anyway. And both the genuine Dollty Walshes and the women on the prostitution site appear to be clustered in the North-Eastern USA, around Pensylvania and New England.

How do I report this to Yahoo, as it stinks a mile high - something not right or proper is happening here.

British tV and radio presenter and comedian Paul O'Grady has revealed that he was held by officials at a US airport because they thought he was a communist.

The Liverpool-born TV presenter said he was taken aside for questioning at Miami airport by staff who made the assumption because of his 'funny' accent. (actually exactly the same sort of Scouse accent all four Beatles speak with).

He was then held for two hours while an officer accused him of being an 'illegal alien' from Cuba.

He told listeners of his Radio 2 show: "How could I be accused of being an illegal Cuban alien? Do I look Cuban? Do I sound Cuban?"

He added: "I've been to hell, folks - it's called Miami airport."

The Channel 4 star was later released after the customs officials studied his passport and found no links with Cuba.

O'Grady went on to describe his experience on his nationally broadcast radio show, advising listeners "Never go to Miami." The story was then taken up by British national newspapers.

So what would Americans have to say about this? Any other people on Earth would realise that somebody wasn't entirely welcoming to a visitor to one of their biggest tourist atttractions, note that some airport jobsworth had made the biggest mistake of his life by badly treating somebody capable of bringing down an awfully large amount of bad publicity capable of somewhat denting that lucrative tourist trade, and might be inclined to issue an apology...

I mean, somebody who can inform an entire country "never go to Miami and this is why" via a national radio station, and have the story taken up by national newspapers, is not somebody you mistreat at the entry airport.

But then, security jobsworths exist at airports the world only - little people, taking a delight in misusing very real power knowing that if the person on the receiving end complains, there's nothing they can do about it and the situation can be made worse for them very, very, quickly. America seems to have the most virulent kind, though...

A bloody big own goal for Florida's lucrative tourist trade?

I mean - bloody hell, yet another question I've submitted an answer to ("Are UK Benefits just not enough to live on?") has been deleted - no explanation, no apology, just gone. I suspect the bloke posting it might have been a piss-taker, but it ANNOYS when I've considered the question and thought about the real issues involved and spent ten or fifteen minutes of my life trying to compose an informative and reasonable answer. And then it goes.

Incidentally, who at Yahoo is responsible for the filtering software that refuses to allow a three-letter slang word, in common use in English to denote "a cigarette" , to be posted in an answer, when it very clearly means "cigarette" from the context in which it's posted? I'm posting from Britain, my Yahoo address has "-co.uk" at the end, this site clearly distinguishes otherwise between British people and other English-speakers, so why the hell impose American language standards on us?

Should I be worried about this?

How do I find out what the mysterious "updates" are and what they do?

Are any "spyware"? And can I refuse to accept them if I don't want them?