980 posts • joined 19 Nov 2007
"Get ready: The top-bracket young coders of the 2020s will be mostly GIRLS"
Brush up on your maths, perhaps?
8.6% * 2568 = 221 A* girls.
6.0% * 14205 = 852 A* boys.
So (roughly) a 4:1 ratio of best-performing boys to girls.
Re: Quit news period!?
"And the IT angle for those is what, exactly?"
Since when has that stopped anyone on here?
I do rather hope they get hauled in front of a judge for contempt of court. News organizations typically want to ruin ordinary people's lives to sell newspapers, and this ruling might damage that ability.
Re: Reading the instructions = cheating??
"Tape to Tape copy from a wealthier friend = no instructions."
I had significant problems copying Spectrum games. You needed a good tape copier and good quality tapes to get all the tones right, I think. I never managed it consistently anyway...
Re: Rent Seekers
In what way does the regulation protect the public? How about this: all Uber drivers undergo the standard CRB background check (or local equivalent), the vehicles are inspected the same way as taxis, and then we are good. If I remember, Uber already does CRB checks on its drivers, and are taxi MOTs different to normal MOTs? If so, Uber requires their drivers to do that too. Any more public safety measures?
Re: The proper term is whistleblower
"Ask yourself one thing : if Snowden's name had been Snowdenskiya and he had fled from Moscow with such a collection of documents outlining Putin's secret organizations activities, would you still be throwing the book at him ? I don't think so."
No: Putin would be preparing the polonium sandwiches.
Re: In other news
"The only way you can have peace in the area is by kicking Israel in the nuts so hard it stops its constant humiliating attitude towards the gaza ghetto and west camps."
I presume this "area" is Gaza. Because I don't see much peace in the Middle East even when the countries aren't Israel. In fact, about half of the wars in the MIddle East seem to not involve Israel at all.
"You need to read more Feynman. If a theory / law / hypothesis doesn't fit correctly measured physical results then it doesn't matter how complete or satisfying that theory is, it's wrong."
I think you needed the emphasis on correctly measured, not on wrong. And the level of doubt increases as the law of physics that is violated becomes more fundamental. Conservation of momentum is a pretty fundamental law of physics, so the fact that some guy with a metal jar can violate it seems like it's a problem with the experiment, not with the law. Violate CoM a few more times, in verifiable and repeatable experiments (for example, this time they could pump out the air to see if it works without air currents, like the Crookes radiometer).
Read a more in-depth analysis of the experiment by John Baez here: https://plus.google.com/117663015413546257905/posts/C7vx2G85kr4
Re: ... in contrast to Amazon's approach
"Probably toasting their victory with steaming cups of Macdonalds coffee."
Just had to correct this urban myth, spread by McDonalds themselves because they gagged the victim as part of the settlement. Look around on the Internet for the particular details of this. McDonalds served *boiling* coffee that hospitalized a woman, and she only sued for medical expenses..
Re: The UK Whatsits?
"Exactly who cares in the rest of the world?"
So things that affect only one country shouldn't be talked about? And this is a UK website, by the way.
Re: This was always kind of obvious, no?
"Riiiight... tell me again why we should do that? Got a court order?"
Yes, there is a court order. That's the point!
Re: Well I *was*..
"as far as I know the app sold 84 times at 99 Cents."
Good thing they didn't charge 50 cents for it, or they'd have another trademark infringement suit...
"The people who sold quick or sold short did so because they thought they had asymmetrical information, and they were in such a hurry to act that they didn't stop to check. They were trying to get an edge by acting before anybody else noticed. So, I agree that he should have been convicted, but I do not agree that he should be sued by people who lost out because of their own trigger happy behaviour."
Sharp downturns like that cause automatic systems on pension funds and investment accounts to activate to mitigate potential losses. Ironically risk aversion would crystallize those losses, so speculators might get away scot free but low-risk funds would get stuck with the bill.
Re: What losses?
"People who are in the market but are also stupid enough to have silly procedures, should loose money."
What about people who are too stupid to be able to spell 'lose'? Should they loose money?
"The only people who lost will be those who sold while the price was depressed."
OK, so it probably wasn't $300m. Let's say $50m. Is that any better? Can the people who lost money sue him personally for it? They can, but they cannot get much. He should be in jail.
"If it was accepted that his motivation was not market manipulation then really this was not the right conviction. Libel perhaps, but not market manipulation. It is a dangerous precedent since it could be uaed to prosecute protesters who successfully impact a corporation through their legitimate protests."
As long as the legitimate protest doesn't involving mocking up fraudulent press releases with lies about the business's health on it, they should be fine.
Re: Headline wrong?
"Those investors and speculators were happy enough investing in a high-risk company, in a high-risk market sector, in a type of business that will be deservedly history before too many more years go past. The very fact that they were spooked by a trivially simple little trick shows just how close to the edge that business is. By all means feel sympathetic to them if you wish, but don't overdo it: they went into a high-risk investment of their own free will, and the fact that they were willing to invest in one of the most harmful industries of all demonstrates that they (the investors & speculators) had no concern or care for other people - so why should we care too much about them?"
Let's go line by line, and go through the bullshit.
"Those investors and speculators were happy enough investing in a high-risk company, in a high-risk market sector"
It's only high risk because someone fraudulently attempted to manipulate its stock price. In this case, every company is high risk: send a press release saying you are calling in a business's loans and see what happens. It's fraud, he deserves the book thrown at him.
" in a type of business that will be deservedly history before too many more years go past."
Better not buy another computer. Where do you think metal comes from?
"The very fact that they were spooked by a trivially simple little trick shows just how close to the edge that business is."
As I said above, mock up a press release saying the SEC is investigating the directors of company X for fraud or X's banks are calling in their loans and watch what happens.
"By all means feel sympathetic to them if you wish, but don't overdo it: they went into a high-risk investment of their own free will, and the fact that they were willing to invest in one of the most harmful industries of all demonstrates that they (the investors & speculators) had no concern or care for other people - so why should we care too much about them?"
I hope all your savings were in the investment fund that got hosed by this.
Re: Both Google and Amazon vulnerable
"The biggest growth market is China, and through US Govt ineptitude over a long period, these companies are mostly excluded from it."
It's probably more to do with the Chinese government than the US government, to be fair.
Re: @John Smith 19
"DavCrav, if you have programmers that would do that, you have bigger problems that bugs that an outsider might find."
My point was, if we think that security researchers are just one slap in the face -- "free! T-shirt! Yay!" -- from becoming criminals, why are all programmers going to be pearly white?
Re: @John Smith 19
"Okay, $100K might be pushing it indeed. But the other end is equally ludicrous - t-shirt? Really?"
I think the t-shirt might actually be worse than nothing at all.
@John Smith 19
"If they didn't the first you'd find out about it would be when exploits appeared and started hitting your (or your customers) bank accounts."
Pay us or we'll steal from you/your customers? What is the difference between that an extorsion?
Don't get me wrong, I think bug bounty programmes are better than no bug bounty programmes, but $100k/bug is serious money, and will encourage criminals. Coder puts an obscure bug in code, friend flags it up, $50k each? Easy money. If you think that's unlikely, why do you think it's likely that if security researchers don't get paid big money for bugs they'll sell them to cybercriminals?
Edit: added a subject because I was obviously too moron to hit the reply button.
Re: If the EU want to censor the world
"Incidentally, why is that they expect Google to censor but not other search engines? Are the idiots that run the EU that pig ignorant of the fact that if Google is forced to not show a search world wide then it just means that people will start using other search engines and get to the same data that way."
Cannot tell if stupid or just trolling. FIRST LINE of the article:
"Google, Yahoo! and Bing have been grilled by the EU’s top data protection tzars."
Seriously, get a clue.
Re: Would you like - messy - sauce with your steak?
"If the A29 group are seriously considering data accessed within the EU is in-scope of the Data Protection legislation being used to back all this up ... Well what we need is nationalised databases (and given who's recently proposed that, we can probably forget about it)"
Google is processing the data of European citizens. Whether it does that in York or New York is irrelevant, if Google has a presence in Europe. Google can always pull out of the EU, if they feel that strongly about it.
"To be fair, if I'd spent close on 7 years training, I'd expect a decent salary."
Glad to hear you'll be supporting a doubling of academic salaries then. Eight years training here, and six years experience, and I could just afford to send a child to Eton, if I forwent eating and accommodation. And I'm comparatively well paid.
Really, Qualcomm? Whom did you forget to bribe?
Re: I think...
"You can't put your name on the post.
Either post outside of office hours or don't post."
Riiiight, John Smith. I'm sure that's your real name.
"Some comments, with apologies if DavCrav's comment was intended to be ironic, and I missed the Joke.
The heart of the "social contract" is that freedom was always inalienably theirs by right. It was stolen from them, along with their liberty and the fruits of their labor. Their children were sold for the profit of their owners.
We find this abhorrent. But for the vast majority of the time humans have lived on the planet, slavery has been accepted, often endorsed as "God's will." The reality is that the truths that many of us hold to be self-evident and cherish are not universally accepted and perilously fragile."
I cannot think of a time in history where a gruop of people are given a new right, and then compensated for not having that right in the past. When homosexuality was legalized, gays were not given compensation, nor when gay marriage was brought in. When the disenfranchisement of women was ended they were not compensated for being excluded from democracy.
Whether slavery is good or bad (hint: bad) it's entirely standard for no compensation to be given for things that were legal. Anyone talking about slavery reparations should also be talking about reparations to women and homosexuals, to name but a few groups.
Whether we like it or not (hint: we don't) slavery was a standard part of life for most of human history. At the time, freeing the slaves was a momentous decision, and I bet that every freed slave was ecstatic, and the first thing on their mind was not clamouring for compensation, but living their lives.
"Aw, poor Anglosphere.
Its inability to study other foreign languages like German or French or Italian makes it so dependent on an English-speaking press run by people who are unable to study other foreign languages like German or French or Italian.
So, you'll have a situation where a newspaper like The Guardin or The Telegraph will quote the New York Times about information about sentiments within the EU, which Britain is a member or, instead of Der Spiegel or Handelsblatt or Le Figaro or La Stampa.
IF the anglospher weren't so incapable of learning foreign languages, it would have noticed that the political situation that stopped things like ACTA and which brought rulings like the one against Google have grown stronger, not weaker after Snowden.
So, when Angela Merkel or Francois Holland or Renzi comes with the TAFTA treaty to their parliaments, it's not going to pass. And while Guardian and Telegraph will cover Nigel Farage's involuntary flatulence in great detail to find out how Things Are Done in Europe, they'll miss that the EP is likely to vote against this."
I've rarely read a comment on this website made up of so much bollocks as this. How many German people speak French, do you think? 15% according to the WIkipedia entry "Languages of Germany". And how many in the UK? 23% according to the Wikipedia entry "Languages of the UK". How does it feel to have a central plank of your pathetic argument pulled out as you were walking along it?
What you fail to notice is that it's only English that other large EU countries speak; they tend not to speak each others' languages. Also, we have enough people in the UK who can speak foreign languages to do the translation for us, thanks.
Also, racist much? English people are unable to learn foreign languages? About the same as if I said that the French were unable to drive properly or Germans had no sense of humour. Stereotypes and fluff.
"Notably, the (former) slaves were not compensated at all."
Apart from being given their freedom. Surely that counts as a win on their part, no?
""The public is reminded that they should not get into a vehicle without a TLC license, because it has not undergone the rigorous safety and emissions inspections conducted by the agency to ensure its safety and fitness for transporting passengers..."
Just out of interest, as I've heard this a lot with these services, but what checks do taxis have over and above the standard vehicle fitness checks that all cars need? And if standard vehicle checks are not enough to "ensure its safety and fitness for transporting passengers" then isn't that cause for concern?
Re: A mild reaction
Well yes, except for, you know, diplomatic immunity.
"Is opinion some kind of legal term? I always thought that judges were supposed to be impartial."
Yes, it is a legal term. But also, just because you are unbiased doesn't mean you don't have an opinion. If someone is caught stabbing somebody on camera then even unbiased people would have an opinion over whether they are guilty.
When China spies, it's fine. When the West spies, it's awful. Just saying.
Re: If only...
"I know that i'm using them as a free service, but I'd like to see No-IP offer me some compensation for the down time (obviously Microsoft would be responsible)."
OK, you get double your money back.
I thought that: companies suing individuals because the company is losing money from the individuals' behaviour is something I really don't like. Unless said company is given a £500 budget for legal fees, or has to pay for both sides legal fees and also has to appoint someone to deal with the situation in the stead of the individual, so there is no mental harm caused.
My father was unlawfully dismissed from an organization (I am not allowed to name it due to a shameful gagging clause but it was one of the world's most famous charities) and they not only sacked him without any decent reason at all -- they fabricated evidence, barred union representation at his hearing, etc. -- they then drew out the unlawful dismissal case so long it started really affecting my dad's health, so when they offered a relatively miserly amount in settlement, he agreed.
Bastards the lot of them.
Re: Will never happen.
"Here's a simple, (definitely non trivial) example from recent history. Do you remember the winning bid for the 2012 Olympics HMG submitted ? Do you remember how suddenly it went 17.5% over budget because someone "forgot" to add VAT (no you couldn't make it up)."
But VAT goes back to the government, so isn't really a cost. It's an accountancy flick of the wrist. It didn't cost the taxpayer a penny.
Re: Bad Decision
This is the problem with writing laws based on examples, and even then, this is a law from 1973 or something, so obviously completely outdated.
Positive example: home DVRs should be legal.
Negative example: unlicensed Internet-based content distributors, like a Netflix without agreement from the creators, should not be legal.
Now think of a definition for a law that makes DVRs legal and unlicensed Netflix illegal.
OK, done that? Now let's see how your definition stands up to:
1) a DVR that you rent from a company other than the content provider.
2) a DVD that someone made of a show that you have legal access to but you asked them to make because it was broadcast when you were not at home, and that you will play and then destroy.
3) A DVR that is hosted outside of your house but that you program, either by phoning up someone in the place where it is or by commands over the Internet. You have legal access to the content (i.e., not a subscription channel, or you pay the subscription.) The content is then sent you by
a) streaming and
4) A virtual DVR on a server that is not a physical box, but a program that does the same thing as in 3).
5) A virtual DVR that pre-caches everything broadcast that you have legal access to as it is broadcast and if you tell it before broadcast you can then stream it back later.
6) As in 5) but you request it *after* the broadcast, not before.
How many does your definition thing should be illegal? And how many do you think should be illegal? The last one in particular sounds an awful lot like unlicensed Netflix to me.
Re: So coin mining is a losing game, then ?
"Mine today at a loss, and then speculate tomorrow for a gain. You just have to wait a bit longer each year for your profit."
Hello, Martingale. Easiest way to win at a casino: bet on red, if you lose, double your bet and play again. It's like wandering along a train track picking up pennies. It works fine for a while.
The only thing worse than not getting what you want.
Isn't this what the Bitcoin fanciers wanted? Now Canada is recognizing your made-up, number-based currency as real money. You get to pay tax and be regulated just like everyone else! Yippee! Oh, you didn't want Bitcoin to be money?
Re: Spanish selection
And that comment was made even before England's pathetic display against Uruguay...
"What do they have in common other than they both use this internet thingie?"
Well, as we know from patent applications this is the most important thing:
blah blah blah, stuff already known and often done, ON THE INTERNET/A MOBILE DEVICE = patent granted.
Re: Genuine question
Also, many algorithms that are probabilistic at the moment should be significantly sped up, and this is many things in experiments where you need to find an element in a set with certain properties. Much of computational mathematics would be significantly easier with that.
Re: Nut allergy
CLAIT (or apparently CLAiT) is a standard computer literacy qualification for people who think that "literate" means knowing how to write a letter in Word. That is, the equivalent of thinking "literate" is knowing all the letter sounds and which way books open.
"A company that professes a (comparatively) altruistic goal and then actually acts in accordance with said goal?"
Maybe his motto should be Do No Evil?
Re: It is not that <insert company> is not paying enough tax
"Sure this sucks royally. Don't bitch at these Companies, bitch at the Governments that entered into these agreements."
Actually, we generally bitch at people for being immoral, so why shouldn't we bitch at companies for being immoral. Remember all those dodgy, but legal MPs' expenses? We bitched at MPs for their expenses, not bitching at MPs for not making the law......hmm.
"They are not avopiding tax. They are paying their dues. Sadly these dues are far lower due to these agreements than they should be."
They are avoiding tax. They are not *evading* tax. Or maybe they are, if this investigation decides they are. Artifical corporate structures whose sole purpose is to lower tax rates are the definition of a tax avoidance scheme according to HMRC.
Re: So is this similar to what Starbucks do?
"Yes and it's totally legal for a monopoly.
What would be illegal, and what Apple are accused of doing, would be if Starbucks sold the coffee to supermarkets at 1.00 allowing the supermarket to make a profit but sold it to it's own stores for 2.00 so they didn't."
They would have difficulty justifying selling their magic coffee for ten times as much as you can buy similar coffee in supermarkets and coffee retailers though, so they might be next on the chopping block.
Re: Apple retail markups
"The story I heard from a middleman supplier of Apple kit a long while back was that they frowned on deep discounting or even shallow discounting by suppliers to consumers."
True. But this is how much third-party suppliers get the stuff for *from Apple*. If retailers buy the stock from Apple cheaper than Apple UK does, then it's transferring of profits. That's why we need inside people to get us this information. (Essentially, anonymously leak commerical deals...)
Re: Underpaying tax??!?!
"People who live on public hand outs (politicians) should be very careful when adopting the "moral high ground"."
I assume these people who work in the public sector who should be careful include teachers, nurses, doctors, firefighters, police, social workers, etc.?
Re: non story
"Female meshes abound. Add an extra mesh option with the same animation rigs, and job done. Near zero costs. In fact, the modelling for a single building probably would cost more."
I'm glad to know that you, John Bailey, knwo more about this guy's game than he does, and have decided that he is talking rubbish about the development of his own game.
"Other RPGs allow players to play which ever gender they like, AND which ever species they like, with individual animation styles for each species. Elves don't move like Dwarves, and mages don't lumber like big human barbarians."
If you have played Assassin's Creed you will have found that their characters do an awful lot more than the walking/running that RPG characters do. Indeed, lots of characters in the game are female, they are NPCs, and they can walk and run. What they cannot do is climb up buildings, run over taut ropes, etc., and these are *not* going to be in the standard "female meshes".
"So please.. cut the crap. A female option is not actually expensive. Hire some out of work actor to do the voice acting, and job done. Probably for less money than they pay forum stuffers."
Oh, you mean an expense. There's the first one. You conveniently ignore the fact that they need several voiceover actors for the various localizations, but anyway.
"Insecure male management?"
So please...cut the crap. Unless you work for Ubisoft or have an in-depth knowledge of how *this* game is programmed you can't decide to ignore his explanation and cast significant aspersions on his character, that he is so insecure that he cannot let women play as women in a computer game? Does your head actually think the thoughts you write, or are your fingers connected to some random thought generator?
Re: Took ages to convince my parents...
"Yes you can.
1. Uninstall everything from Symantec or McAfee. FInd replacements if necessary."
My girlfriend's new computer came with Windows 8 (I know) and some pre-installed anti-virus thing, McAfee I think, and it was a 30-day trial. After two days of trying I managed to get rid of the anti-virus but there's still some HP encryption thing which isn#' even switched on but still won't uninstall. I just gave up in the end and told her to install Linux, a clean copy of Windows 7, or live with it. So far she's living with it.
"However, none of this seems to have occurred to the man described as "the cleverest man in Britain"..."
Who, him? Is he cleverer than Stephen Hawking? Sir Michael Atiyah? etc. etc.
- Nokia: Read our Maps, Samsung – we're HERE for the Gear
- Ofcom will not probe lesbian lizard snog in new Dr Who series
- Kaspersky backpedals on 'done nothing wrong, nothing to fear' blather
- Episode 9 BOFH: The current value of our IT ASSets? Minus eleventy-seven...
- Too slow with that iPhone refresh, Apple: Android is GOBBLING up US mobile market