also, e-mail sent to Assange informing him of the parcel:
> There are over 9000 identical parcels! So, if the first parcel fails to reach you, we will undertake a second and third attempt.
Surely they haven't made 9000 camera parcels?
I only say this in case it's just one server behind this IP address, and the camera / phone is posting it's images to it as well. Viral traffic could potentially ruin the entire experiment.
Perhaps my tinfoil hat needs adjusting.
At least now we all know who gave this crazy idea to some secret agent agencies if this indeed happens.
Parcels sent locally don't go through nearly the level of security as customs puts foreign packages through.
For example, British Petroleum has significant interests in South America.
Yes, it's obvious the real reason they want to get to him, but come on.
"Thatcher—who was kept apprised of the situation by Whitelaw—determined that British law would be applied to the embassy, despite the Vienna Convention, under which the embassy is considered Iranian soil."
"Three further shots were fired during the course of the imam's conversation with Oan. Oan announced that a hostage had been killed, and the rest would die in 30 minutes unless his demands were met. A few minutes later, Lavasani's body was dumped out of the front door."
Considering they were at the time holding 52 American hostages in the US embassy in Tehran, the Iranians couldn't credibly complain about the British rescue operation representing a violation of their rights under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.
I guess I don't think that precedent is going to generalize to many other situations.
Maybe that's understating it a bit.
The United Kingdom itself has embassies all over the world, filled with important British people and often in places where they might not be uniformly liked. The British have far more to lose by a breakdown of diplomatic protections than the Ecuadorians do.
It is up to Sweden, not the UK, to decide whether it wants to negotiate or not.
Isn't this an act of espionage? While cool, this seems like a bad idea to me.
I'm no spook, but I'd be surprised if the usual protocol for such situations is to advertise the presence of a camera on a high-traffic website.
Any chance of providing a time series of the parcel's location?
Let's do that /after/ it arrives.
You've only got to look at the xray image on the bottom of this site to see why - http://archive.is/lIwe8
Edit: Seems a bit overloaded and only slowed down.
"!Mediengruppe Bitnik @bitnk
moving again. but: USER IS over daily photo limit: bitnik!"
edit: Nvm, seems it was only a photo limit on the pic.twitter.com service.
The filename s in the form YYYYMMDDHHMMSS.jpg - you could probably guess the path to past images if you wanted to, or even knock up a script that would download them all.
That doesn't seem to end well for people lately.
Your browser normally uses a DNS server to resolve the domain name portion of a URL to the hosting server's IP address — news.ycombinator.com resolves to 22.214.171.124, for example — but it skips that step if it sees something that looks like an IP address itself.
(In either case, it tells the server what the original hostname was, so that it's possible to host more than one website at a single IP address.)
(One of my coworkers does this, Australian if it helps.)
So using "an" would be yet another mistake.