The cyclist saw the effect he had on the vehicle and decided to keep doing his balancing act when he could have simply stood on his feet for a second, allowing the car to pass normally (so your implication that the only alternative to what the cyclist did came with a risk of being run down is nonsense). But no, he decided to be a self-righteous prick, like most cyclists on the road seem to be, and just keep doing what he was doing and not give a toss.
157 posts • joined 28 Jan 2008
Re: Why also 15" models?
I work for a small IT consulting company where we're on the move a lot and use our laptops as our main work machines. Last time we changed laptops, we all went for 13" ultrabooks (and away from our old, larger and heavier ThinkPads, EliteBooks etc.). Well, it's been a while since than and half the guys are pretty sure they want something larger the next time around (in two cases, they reverted to carrying around their old 17" beasts). The 15" 1366x768 screens are pretty disgusting, though.
BTW, a roundup of mobile workstations that can take 32GB of RAM, but aren't gaming machines that would look out of place at work or at a meeting would be a nice idea.
In relation to this news, the lads on another forum were discussing channels with large number of subscribers ran by girls with absolutely no gaming skill, but deep cleavages (I can supply the profiles, if anyone cares), one of which was described as "hopping on the chair all the time to make her boobs jiggle". In my opinion, it's ok if Twitch doesn't want them. Twitch is supposed to be about gaming, whereas those members are satisfying the form by holding gamepads, but are offering content of a different character.
Re: Hang on, am I too old for this?
What goes around, comes around. You "fondled the machine code and thermionic valves", but locked your users out of the mainframes? Well, ain't karma a bi***? You're a user now, deal with it. Or prove that you've still got it and get down and dirty with it yourself. ;)
@Squander Two: Whatever formulation you choose, it boils down to one thing, you drew a parallel between being outvoted and being denied the power to vote. Those are two fundamentally different things and the analogy is an offense to everyone that has ever truly been oppressed and unrepresented.
Do I know how the proceedings went? At least in part, I do, and it's from the article. If the Reg's source claims that the UK input was ignored, despite the arguments, what follows is that the British delegation was able to present their view and the arguments behind it. Furthermore, had the British representatives been disallowed to participate in the work of the WP in the same way as everyone else, then THAT would have been the story, and a huge scandal. No scandal - then procedurally everything was fine.
I can follow the person's trail of thoughts not because I am psychic, but because it is laid down in the article. Also, of course that, in my post, I expressed certain conclusions and opinions of my own and of course that El Reg's source expressed his. If we are to turn to philosophy and the question of whether we can truly ever know something, arguably, expressing opinions is all that we can ever do, so that is not a sin in itself. I merely wanted to separate the bits in his account that could be considered facts, from those that were his subjective observations, impressions, deductions and speculations, so that I could assess which parts stand to logical scrutiny and which do not.
The Reg's source expressed the opinion that the British input was outright ignored, even when well supported by arguments and that it was due to everyone "knowing" that UK will be gone from the EU very soon. I ascribed to him no more than that, so, really, no psychic work was done by me. I do however find it illogical, for the reasons mentioned in my previous posts. In short, though, according to Reg's source, UK is about to leave the EU; despite that, UK is still diligently participating in EU activities, even though it practically has no interest in them, whereas, on the other hand, the rest of the Union is ignoring British efforts even when the Brits come and serve them good pan-European data protection policy on a silver platter. Yes, it makes perfect sense.
@Squander Two: Ah, sorry, I didn't quite understand how your analogy worked. So, you were comparing the situation where none of the rights of the UK delegation were removed with a hypothetical situation where Scottish MPs would have their voting rights removed? Well, in that comparison, the latter sounds really bad, the former not so much.
I'd like to make a distinction between the (objective) facts and an unnamed person's subjective opinions and impressions. The facts are that there was a Working Party, that the delegates from most of the EU came with certain ideas, that the delegates from the UK came with different ideas, that everyone was allowed to speak and no vote was left uncounted and that the ideas of the majority were adopted. Everything else are one unnamed person's personal (subjective) impressions, opinions and speculations.
Their trail of thoughts is, apparently, that the fact that the British input didn't make the final cut can only be explained by it being ignored, "irrespectively of the arguments" (which assumes, obviously, that those arguments were valid). Then, trying to explain such behaviour of the other delegations, another leap is made that it was because the UK's soon departure from the EU was a sure thing, and that that was already clear to everyone else in the EU.
I don't think that that makes too much sense. As no one denies, the British delegation participated in the Working Party and, regardless of whether their suggestions were later ignored or not, they were heard, just like everyone else's. If Britain had brought to that WP something that was good for Europe (and not maybe just the UK), do you really think that it would have been ignored simply for the "fact" that it was leaving? I think not. My opinion is that the rest would think "Hey, UK sometimes has good ideas. It's too bad it's leaving." To make an analogy myself, if you knew that your business partner was going to leave your venture, but he came to you with a proposal that was going to make your company money, and would continue to make you money even after he left, would you ignore what he told you simply because he was leaving? That doesn't make any sense. That's how angry couples might think, not the majority of people in charge of pan-European policies. Having already heard them, had the British ideas been good for Europe, Europe would have taken them. It's that simple.
My conclusion is that the entire story is a bit of Euro-sceptic propaganda, carrying two messages: first that EU is ostracizing, ignoring the UK (being bad to the UK) and second that the UK's departure from the EU is a sure thing and everyone already knows.
Except that no one is stripping UK of their voting rights. The British input during a Working Party on data protection did not make it into the final documents? Boo-hoo! Guess what, no single nation's opinion has enough weight to change EU policy when that one nation's opinion is contrary to everyone else's. That IS democracy. If it really was that, this time, nobody cared what UK had to say on data protection, perhaps one should look for the reasons no further than the "A slice of data protection history" passage from this very article, or the article titled "British Lords: Euro 'right to be forgotten' ruling 'unreasonable and unworkable'", currently on the front page. In short, if there is a nation that has historically been privileged in the EU, in terms that their opinion has often been accepted even when it was contrary to the majority and that a blind eye has been turned when it says "We don't like this global EU policy, so we decide that it applies to everyone except us.", that is the UK. Yet no other nation is so ready to cry "Foul!" and complain that "the tyrannical EU" (the adjective "fascist" is also often used) is trampling over their rights.
Hewlett Packard published a piece of software that guesses the size of one's penis by one's shoe size? The end is near.
A buddy told me that, ages ago, in Denmark, they had a guy who'd watch the people coming to work in the morning and if some of them looked to be in a bad mood or stressed, he'd send them home. The reasoning was that it was cheaper to send a dev that's feeling under the weather home (without any reduction to his pay) than to later fix whatever he messes up in such a state.
What is "an offline piece of software"? If it's on an on-line device, it's not really off-line in the security sense, even if it's not designed to access the web itself. Every on-line device is exposed and on such a device, encrypted, schmencrypted. The password text has to be decrypted to be used and at that point it's up for grabs. Also, you are creating a single point of failure, if that piece of software you've got gets beaten, all of your on-line identities and data are exposed. Lastly, I consider someone using hacked Reg accounts to disseminate illegal content unlikely, plus even ordinary message board admins do a pretty good job of spotting when a known user is logging in from a weird IP address.
Re: C - the leech theraphy of coding. It will never go away!
Ahh, the things thought at schools these days... Reminds me of a group of graduates from my university who, straight out of uni, got themselves a job of designing and implementing a real time system. 'A' students that they were, they wrote code that was absolutely beautiful to look at, pouring all of their fresh knowledge of software design into the work. The only problem? Their beautiful, readable, maintainable OO code was nowhere near as fast as it had to be. Cue a rewrite that saw them doing everything that you "shouldn't" be doing when programming in the 21st century, and it worked.
So horses for courses. ;)
I wouldn't consider covering the cancellation fee "bribe" because, unless you actually preferred the AT&T network, the scheme didn't offer you any incentive to switch (and even in that case, the only thing you actually ended up with was simply the service you thought was better, not any money or goodies).
Re: You lost me there
And I'd say that the supposition is almost certainly true. Otherwise, the price would be higher than 3bn, because just the remaining 5 years of tax deductions amount to 3.5bn.
I Love My Dad
Looking at this list and remembering my dad's Sharp Pocket Computer, which he used for work (and payed decent money, I now know), yet which he still put in my 4-5 year old hands back in the eighties, makes me feel warm and fuzzy like I haven't in a long time. Also, I still have his old Casio FX-502P programmable calculator in my desk. :)
This actually competes well with the no-name handsets. I should know, I got one, costing 105€, a couple of months ago. It compares well to the Moto G in most aspects except this particular MediaTek SoC has a shot GPS unit (which I thought was fixable at the time) and no GorillaGlass (but it's not too shabbily built either). The only thing that's missing on the Moto G is the storage expansion option (and being dual SIM, which my Chinese, naturally, is), which is such a simple thing that it really makes me think that it was deliberate. I'd still be pondering the 16GB version, though, for the build quality and not having to send it back to China if I needed it fixed under warranty.
Re: Smart or Featurephone
True to a point, but I'm not sure that we understand each other 100%. I'm not interested in what an enthusiast could do with the device, I have a normal buyer and intended use on my mind. So, despite the technological roots, just like I don't see LibreOffice on Play Store (despite the announcement that's now 2 years old), I don't recognize the Linux origins of Firefox OS as any indication on what I'll actually be able to run on it. In short, I'd like to know if an ordinary buyer gets provisions for more than running HTML5 apps within what's essentially a browser engine on these devices?
Smart or Featurephone
Isn't this thing more of a featurephone? A device with built software, including a browser which, being HTML5 capable, can interpret and run anything you can put together with HTML5 (pretty much like the mobes of old, capable of running Java apps, only with HTML5 instead of Java)?
Eco stuff aside, I find the "romance" of transforming what's supposed to be the woman of your dreams into a physical likeness of another woman, on your wedding day, disturbing.
Re: You takes your chances..........
Okay, that clarifies a lot. I still find it a little weird that this kind of a case ended up as a civil lawsuit, which effectively degrades the issue to the same level of triviality as a spilled pint or a damaged fence, but it is what it is. Her lawyer ought to have warned her about the financial outcome, though.
Re: You takes your chances..........
Symon, we're not talking about a pint here and that does make a difference. I'm not for people getting fired over a bad joke, but sexual harassment is a somewhat different issue than a couple $ of beer. Also, you're forgetting (not reading carefully?) what others (Mark) are writing. The settlement out of court means the company remains free of any guilt in the matter in the eye of the law. Again, that's okay for an accidentally spilled pint, not for sexual harassment.
And if you did something and you want to do right by the person you've wronged, then admit to the court straight-up and you'll keep the legal fees to a bare minimum. If, on the other hand, you're guilty and you abused your financial and legal resources to drag the person you've already wronged and the state into a prolonged and expensive court case, that should count against you, not the other person.
Re: It's own EULA?
I see a lawsuit in the making. I'm just not sure if it's Sony, MS or some other major company with prior art in the area of "malware that comes with an EULA" that holds the actual patent?
They aren't supposed to make his face invisible, their purpose is to fool automatic facial recognition software, which they probably do if a couple of Japanese boffins say so.
The mask because it also thwarts facial recognition.
So Full of It (and not IT)
“I don't think adding diversity at the end works. You have to start with it as one of your goals. Who wants to be the token female?”
So the difference between the two approaches would be what exactly? Diversity as an afterthought - you choose the speakers, then add a token female; diversity as one of the goals - you choose the token female first, then proceed with picking the rest of the speakers? I bet the token females feel much better in the latter case.
And the whole point of this particular statement is moot anyway, as there were obviously no token minority representatives on the speaker roster, which makes me think that Mr Susser, whose last name bears an uncanny resemblance to the famous disruptive worm, was merely trolling his British colleague. And quite successfully too.
Re: It's not just sheep
Surely all of the mentioned activities, apart from watching TV, are more than doable over connections of quite moderate speed (and even TV should be possible at least in SD at just a few mbps)?
Re: Fair usage policy applies.
If you're advertising as an "all you can eat" place, yet you deny service to customers who, quote, "eat more than their fair share", that's false advertising. The same applies to the owner's complaint about their not paying the "optional" service charge.
If their manners were a problem, he should have said so. If two guys, who pay £12 per meal, presumably made of nothing too expensive, can really eat him out of business, as he says, then his business has a serious problem. Either way, he's going about it the wrong way.
As it is, they should report the business for false advertising and sue the owner for calling them pigs in public.
Re: What is a smart phone?
It depends on whether a phone is also considered a computer. The general criterion for being a computer is being programmable, that is having an operating system and being able to load and execute other programs written for that operating system than what the device shipped with to give it new functionality. So, a phone that does that is a smartphone, a phone that doesn't is a "dumbphone" and a "dumbhone" that comes loaded with apps that allow you to do most of what people generally do on their smartphones is a "featurephone". (Truth be told dumbphones can often run small JavaME apps, but, probably because they aren't written for any particular OS its not enough to consider a device a computer.)
I'm sorry to make such a non-technical comment, but that's the word that went through my head as I saw the screenshots. All caps Arial captions and flattened white ribbon? It looks like something I (a person mostly devoid of design skills) would have made as the beta version to show off functionality, rather than a finished product. In other words, not so much of a new design as a lack of one, in my opinion.
That makes me think... Maybe Steve and Stephen simply fired all the designers? I think that that's the most logical answer to how the new products ended up so underdesigned and so poorly visually integrated with what still exists in their products (Word is Metro, and Word's own Open dialog isn't).
Re: Users and their backups...
Users will be users, but that sounds like a serious design, bundle and instructions flaw.
Try selling a smartphone that loses all the data whenever the battery runs out and see how well it does in the market (even with some magical automatic cloud backup/restore that never fails). And even if one can say that it was normal at the time, a company makes a device that loses all the data whenever the battery runs out and doesn't even bother to bundle a cable without which users can't do backups?! Also, did it have a huge warning on the packaging saying (in all caps, which I won't use for the sake of good manners): "All user data is lost each time the battery runs out!"? It out to have had.
This one sounded like it had potential, like in the old days, with a whiny (and dumb) luser and the explanation that sounded like something that came out of the Excuse Calendar. But then the conversation got too drawn-out and the ending was done in a very unspectacular "'I'll have the PFY mess you up' ... 'and in comes the PFY after messing the user up'" fashion. I guess Simon wanted to do this one right, but saw the time and said: "What, pub o'clock already?!" Which reminds me...
Once a Moth Is Often Enough!
If you had to build anything for a business user, you'd know that if they needed something once a month, then you'd need to deliver it. Omitting the optical drive from a flashy ultra-compact is one thing, omitting it from a business workhorse is quite another. It's still common enough and no other technology has replaced it completely.
But the manufacturers and vendors that deem themselves big enough allow themselves to dismiss such pedestrian reasons. Newer tech makes better marketing material and pushes margins up and omitting older stuff, making the new devices difficult to use with the 'old' ones, forces the users to replace kit more often - sometimes even that which for all intents and purposes still does the job more than adequately.
Re: Not a big deal
Customers hate differentiation and they also love differentiation.
Imagine a college kid trying to book a room. There's a 90% chance that all he wants is a place to "crash" and that it costs as little as possible, so you offer him a hostel or a two star hotel.
A 30 year old couple with no kids are in a totally different ballpark. Try not to differentiate and offer them the same room as to the previous guy and see the look they'll give you. They've got a lot more money that they are willing to spend and they also have much higher expectations. You'll want to offer them a 4 star all inclusive.
The search engine from the article follows the same logic. If an Apple user is more likely to want a four star hotel, that makes such results more relevant for those people, so it's a search engine's job to rank them higher.
"Google's fleet will have red Nevada license plates with a Greek infinity symbol, intended to alert other drivers that a computer has control of the vehicle."
So, the meaning of the plate is essentially "Warning! Incompetent driver!" (as otherwise there would be nothing to be alerted about)? Great idea! Now all they need to do is start giving them out to people and they can abolish driving schools and exams, think how much money that will save and from how much needless greenhouse gases emission we'll spare our planet. IMO, if it can't pass at least the same test humans do (as individual humans are expected to improve as they gain experience, and this car unless it has some serious supercomputer and AI on board, won't until it's replaced or specifically updated), it's not fit for road.
Re: These hackers got off lightly
If the handset is not freely available (and it's not) and they weren't supposed to get one (and they weren't), then I'm not sure that there was a legal way for them to obtain it. It's clear that the handset was supposed to be somewhere else and the law generally states that you shouldn't take what others shouldn't give you. In other words, whoever gave them the phone probably technically stole it, so they were technically in possession of stolen goods.
Now, HTC might otherwise be willing to let it slide, as early leaks often add to the hype, but when some site breaks NDA or publishes a leak, it screws the manufacturer's partners who are honoring the NDA and that's why they make it such a no-no.
Re: Bad Breath
I thought that only the initial American spacecraft used low low pressure, high oxygen level atmosphere, and that the atmosphere that astronauts currently breathe is very akin to the one on Earth?
Re: consol fanboys
I don't think that this was payed for advertising, but I agree, one PC title?! Ask yourselves, are your readers reading this on PS3s, Xbox 360s or on their PCs? And is The Register a general technology web site or a specialized console gaming "publication"? The answers should provide you with a clue if there might be a platform that's fairly relevant to your readership that you've seriously neglected in this article.
Imagine you're a supervillan and you want to steal this valuable data. Your plan would probably be as follows:
1. steal the laptop containing the data;
2. decrypt data:
3. wreak havoc!
With the drive not being encrypted, the supervillan can't get past step two! Genius!
Tell that to Globalstats
They say Linux: 0.83%. But like you said, don't let the actual numbers get in the way of feeling good and smart.
What are you trying to argue, that Linux is widely adopted? Assuming "tens of millions" estimate is correct, one hundred (or ninety nine, if you like) times tens of millions makes for... billions of people who don't give a rodent's behind about Linux. So cope with a number yourself, Anonymous Coward.
Linux has it's own niche on the PC, it's undoubtedly there, but it's been there for ages with very little growth. So crying that some future external factor might make it hard for the market to adopt you, when that same market has had two decades to adopt you and said "no" to you every time is just shifting the blame for one's own market failure to someone else.
Could be that they are not complaining, but you're still talking about people who are in that 1%. If all they are ever going to use are a select, small, closed (constant) set of applications, a browser a media player and OOO, Linux installs like a breeze and works just fine. Beyond that... it's not as rosy. Unnecessarily complicated, poorly documented...
As for the "MS Office argument", it might hold true to some extent for work environment, but my home PC sees a .doc file once every blue moon, and even when someone sends one to me, Gmail will display it's contents just fine.
And even in a business environment, yeah you use what the higher-ups give you, but I've actually seen way more Windows + OOO combinations in practice here than Linux machines, so the office suite is not really that much of an issue. Every civilized partner will send you a PDF and expect the same from you. (once in a while, someone does send you a file in an MS Office format, but it gets handled) And inside a company, it doesn't matter what you're using as long as everyone is using the same.
So 99% of people don't use Linux because 99% of people don't want Linux.
As for ARM on the desktop, it doesn't seem too far fetched at a glance, but then look at how well Atom CPUs have worked there. And they were cheap and used the same instruction set as "normal" PC CPUs and weren't more underpowered for the time than ARM CPUs will be and I even saw a few desktops with them in catalogs, but nobody wanted them.
It's Not MS and It's Not About Desktop
First an obligatory flame at the guys who always blame others for their own failure: Linux has existed for quite a while and still only holds 1% of the market, so what has been "dissuading people from bothering to install Linux" so far? Ah yes, Linux itself!
Other than that, for ages PC users have been expected to be smart enough to pop into BIOS and toggle a single on/off setting if necessary if they wanted to use certain more advanced features (which is exactly how you'll disable this feature, as made perfectly clear in the requirements); and since forever have Linux geeks been smug about being smarter than those who don't know of anything better than MS, so where's the problem?!
What MS is aiming at are handhelds. You can't disable the feature on them, making it harder to hack that sort of devices. Disagreeable in it's own way, but that's as far as this goes.
Now thank God that that was not at all biased.
Try again, when you type a title in the search box, it shows the lowest non 0 price you can get it for and since Portal can be bought in the Orange Box and in the Portal Bundle (Portal + Portal 2), it displays the price of one of those instead 0. But it's still free which you can make sure by opening the game page.
So it's just a really dumb bug in Steam Client which affects the very few games in the Steam Store which are both free and can be purchased as parts of bundles that aren't free.
What this Reminds Me of
The well known tactics for getting someone hooked on drugs, first few fixes are free and when the guy gets dependent on the stuff, it's pay time.
Google does have the legal right to do this, after all, all of their license agreements give them the right to do whatever they want. The thing is that they have been less than open about how things are going to work out.
Until fairly recently, there was a sense of Google's being a technologically brilliant "Do no evil" company that develops all that cool tech for their own needs and then also shares that technology with the rest of us (unlike the other corporations which like to jealously sit on the stuff their R&D departments make); at that, all of those products and services were in a "perpetual beta", which was often perceived more as a philosophical stance than a technical one, as they were often capable of rivaling other companies' fully developed products, and all of them were free.
That was obviously a myth, but rather than be fair and honest and openly say "This stuff is free for now, but once it comes out of beta, it will cost you, possibly in the ballpark of $x per month/developer/whatever.", Google decided to let that myth live as long as possible, and it doesn't take a huge leap of faith to conclude that that was because they benefited from it. So they purposefully waited until the last moment and then just said: "You've got two weeks to start paying or GTFO."
And the users suddenly found themselves locked into a service they have to pay for and which can arbitrarily change its terms and conditions and pricing. Google, on the other hand, first had an army of people who first conducted testing for them for free; Google then allowed them to keep using the polished up service free of charge for a while, right until the moment Google estimated the bulk of them was committed enough that they'd have hard time getting out, and that's when they said "Pay up!" One may say that the users turned out fairly naive, while Google turned out rather... cunning.
So, while Google may be legally covered, this is a warning shot to anyone using any of their "free" products and services. Though, speaking of legality, it remains a fact that Google has used its cache and the guise of "a beta" to offer a commercial grade service for free for some time in order to get people to chose their service over a competing one and that might well be anti competitive behaviour.
Rybka has been around for ages, has gone through a few versions over that time which, until this year's tournament, played with increasing success (not to mention beating those programs it was allegedly cloned from). Isn't that a proof of evolution of it's code?
Someone mentioned SCO and this is exactly what the whole thing sounds, like "Linus was able to see our code and he made something that functions in a similar way to our software.", just swap Linus with Vasik.
Re: Re: Engage brain
... (It's no different from buying stuff when you are on holiday. You are subject to the laws of the country where you bought it.)...
And when you try to import them you're very much subject to the laws of the country you're bringing it into, even those in which you're re just switching planes and won't be leaving the airport, so the stuff may well get confiscated. Also, notice one small thing. When you buy something on a holiday, the transaction is "coincidentally" subject to the laws of the country where you physically are at the moment you're making the transaction.
The matter is complex. A country can't fine a manufacturer that has a product that's clearly labeled to be up to specs that don't conform to the local standards, but it can ban importation of such a product. It makes sense to apply the same principle to importation of services.
Room for abuse? As with anything else. Yet which one would you rather have, a service that is obliged to work and take care of your data according to the laws and standards of your own country, or the one which makes your data subject to the laws and whims of some god forsaken place where they might have physical boxes because it has cheap electricity and "relaxed" standards on how user data is to be treated?
How About You Develop Better Apps?
"The consultant found 49 per cent of publishers earning less than they'd expected from the Android Market. Twenty seven per cent are making more and 24 per cent about what they'd expected."
In other words, 49% of publishers are unhappy with what their apps are making them, while 51% are. Sounds about right to me. If I see two apps that do what I want, that's probably one publisher happy with what I'll give him and one unhappy.
Re: Apple's right to say FU
"This is how a free market operates." No, telling people (who are not your employees) what they can and cannot not produce, or else they may take their business elsewhere, was how guilds used to operate in the dark ages before there was a free market.
Also: "This is pure BS and part of some larger agenda."? I didn't know Apple fanboys had a tinfoil-hat division?
@Pick your side now AC
No, it's a 0.00015% spontaneous combustion rate, the failure rate is several orders of magnitude higher and sits in the same ballpark with the corresponding statistics for other modern smartphones.
P.S. I'm not picking sides, only fanboys (and probably hateboys) tend to turn the matter of who owns a certain object into an "us and them" sort of situation.
I Really Doubt that This Is Relevant
Unless someone is dumb as well as blind enough (for sheer stupidity is not enough in this case) to believe that a device that apparently costs less than €10 to make is a real iPhone, I doubt that any potential subsequent spontaneous combustion of such a device would end up attributed to Apple hardware.
The Very Concept of Photo Forgery Is Epic Failure
And when it's done this badly...
I don't think that the actual intention was to kick out the black guy, but rather to introduce a white one. Assuming that there are more men then women in IT in Poland (which is a pretty safe bet anywhere in the world) and considering that Poland has neither native nor immigrated black or Asian population of any significant number, you'd be hard pressed to find an IT office without a single white male in that country. I assume that that made someone believe that this skewed demographics would make it less likely for an average Polish IT worker to relate oneself to the people in the picture, and then he realized what's just the right thing to do. One awful Photoshop job later and every IT portal in the world is talking about them, bravo! Of course, this could have been done without decapitating the poor black guy by simply snapping a photo of a few local people and thus get some local mugs on the local site (probably) without all this fuss, but where's the fun in that?!