760 posts • joined Tuesday 10th April 2007 06:11 GMT
Maybe, just maybe...
Maybe, just maybe... Prince/Squiggle/Former (or whatever) is actually working *for* the freedom of media.
Why? Because by running around acting like a musical Napoleon and ridiculously suing people left, right and centre in a manner that would almost make the R.I.Ass. of A proud this kind of idiocy will be canned and real fair use laws will be passed and adhered to.
On the other hand, he could just be a pint-sized-prick.
"With the cable merger integration expected to be complete by year end, we can focus on continuing to improve the fundamentals, enhancing our products, reducing our churn, and delivering on our competitive strengths."
That would be customer support that, erm, supports customers rather than lying through their teeth to them. That and never calling back, which is quite an impressive deal for a *communication* company...
Still, it's not all bad - after a mere 17 hours of calls I finally managed to find somebody competent who resolved my issues. As a bonus they appear to have dropped their Indian call centre - recently I've managed to speak to staff who's first language is actually English, which is a vast improvement on the previous situation.
It'd be less annoying if cable/network delivered services didn't have the potential to be much better than satellite / terrestial broadcast can ever be.
Forecourt advertising... it's been done before and failed.
Anybody remember seeing the adverts on the pump nozzles? These days they just advertise the vendor's own products as there isn't enough profit in it to bother changing the adverts regularly.
Moving on from this - anybody remember the electronic displays on the nozzles? Once all the electrical certification and installation had been taken care of - guess what? Yep, no profit in that either.
In a similar vein, there was a company dedicated to audio/visual advertising channels in forecourts - great apart from a few problems... punters couldn't hear the content because of the noise of the nearby road / fuel pump itself (solution was to make the thing so damn loud it pissed everybody off). Also, the video screens couldn't be seen because they were cheap non-daylight screens and therefore couldn't be read and due to their environment, they got dirty very, very quickly. Can't see why these failed either...
Ah yes, the wonderful windows "Hibernate" option where it'll typically either just crash and BSOD on resuming. If it does happen to resume, when the desktop bothers to reappear, will be so unusably slow (and remains that way for about 20 minutes), that the only sane recourse is a hard reset and wait for the OS to restart from scratch.
Yep, can see that relying on that's a great idea.
Lock in, bloat and a spare heater all in one!
Excellent... Buy one of these to be locked into MS's proprietry closed formats, run an obnoxiously powerful device just to, erm, store files and, to top it all off, you can warm the planet as well by running a 200W device 24/7 that'll warm your front room rather than a 20W NAS. Want to turn the damn thing off? Wait five minutes. Want to turn it on, wait a similar period of time.
OK, the MHS system does provide a *little* more than just file sharing, but once again, unless you're stupid enough to use MS Windows Live Messenger Hotmail (or whatever it's been branded today) then you'll have no use for it at all.
This is no different to Acer doing their usual lie-through-their-teeth-specification where they claim to sell you a laptop with an 80GB HDD. First, the hard disk is never 80GB, usually around 70-74GB, then they take 4GB for their "recovery" (ie, wipe everything back to the original, bloated, crap-infested and often unusable configuration), then partition the remaining space into two partitions and, to add final insult to injury, format them with FAT32 rather than NTFS, The end result, a supposed "80GB" HDD system with only about 30GB in each partition. Most users will never use the second partition and all software will be installed, by default onto the first parition (C:), along with data ("My Documents", etc). As a result, with the normal windows bloat, swap file and shovel-ware, most users start off life with around 25GB of free disk space on an "80GB" HDD system.
Still, at least Seagate bother to put the capacity of their drives on the disks themselves these days.
Re: Did QVC try to bill her?
In the UK if a company (i.e. mail order) sends you good that you didn't request, if you keep the items for 6 months then legally they are yours (I believe that you must not attempt to sell, use or damage the items during this time). Alternatively if you inform the company of the mistake then they have a much reduced time (1 month, I think) during which they must arrange for the return of the items (at their expense) or the items become your property.
That's as I remember it, of course our beloved dictators have heaped so many laws and changes to existing law in the last 12 years that nobody really knows for sure any longer. Jobs for the boys (lawyers) anyone?
Of course copyright "theft" is *much* more important than tracking and prosecuting murderers, kiddie fiddlers, gang crime and (these days) "unimportant" stuff like muggings and burglaries. None of these people pay much to get results, whereas the industry cartels have lots of cash and are therefore much more important. It's simple economics.
Ruining one man's livelihood is much easier than actually doing any police work and there's less paperwork to fill out as well.
BT (@ Anonymous Coward)
Ah... This would be the BT that have purposedly dragged its heals on every new technology that may dent some previous (already existing) cash cow? For example: leased lines, ISDN and dialups - all were, and still are to a large extent, serious cash cows for BT. For example, there's no way that BT is going to rush (S)DSL into place because it would remove the "justification" in charging utterly extortionate rates for leased lines.
They're not investing in any new infrastructure because they don't want to dent, in any way, their existing cash-cows and therefore effect their shareprice and dividends.
If it weren't for competition from the likes of cable companies, if BT had their way we'd all still have 512MB broadband (if we're lucky)
"but the Europeans made Africa the way it is today"
Yep, like most of the planet, we screwed it over, suppressed the natives and left the area in a considerably worse state than they were in before.
Europe (well, the great sea-faring nations of years gone by - France, Spain, Portugal, England and the Netherlands)... managed, through dint of superior technology, wealth and fire power to take over most of the planet. We then proceeded to replace the current rulers of the areas we subjugated, pillaged the wealth and divided the countries up in ways that split the natives (divide and conquer). As a result, we can quite easily claim responsibilty for much of the current mess that is Asia, the Middle East and Africa. So yes, the quote is quite true - "but the Europeans made Africa the way it is today"
As for genetic differences between people with different colour skins... of course there damn well are - we'd be clones (and would have been wiped out by a disease millions of years ago) if we weren't so different. Of course I'm genetically different from somebody with lighter (is it possible?) or darker skin to me, or those with darker hair or those who can't grow beards or those whose eyes that slant slightly differently to mine. There are bound to be other differences as well, namely athletic prowess, intelligence, height, shape of nose, etc. It's just important to keep the differences in perspective - while height, strength and pigmentation are easy to measure, a more esotorical value such as "intelligence" is almost impossible to measure with any form of accuracy.
I get lower scores on such "tests" because I don't celebrity watch and therefore know who's who in some pointless TV soap. Likewise I don't read a dictionary every night or practice mental arithmatic over breakfast. Does this make me any less intelligent than somebody who does? Most such tests only test specific areas of knowledge and, frankly, if you're a farmer in the middle of some desert - trigonometry, algebra and soap operas are likely to be the last things on your mind. As a result, the most intelligent man on the planet may actually be a goat prodder in the sahara, but with no opportunities or training who can tell? Watson may have some quaint "Empire" views on life, but some of his points are very valid - the lack of opportunity is a big problem.
Oh, and using "Nigger" to describe the residents of "Nigeria" really shouldn't really be too much of an issue. However, like many words, their implied meanings, values and usage change over time. Now excuse me when, in the words of "The Flintstones", I'm going to now have a "gay old time"... :p
Leprechaun Escalation... I think they're already on the (IT) case...
* Switching the mouse buttons round
* Causing windows to attempt, and fail, to install the same "update" every day (XML4 update, for those that care)
* DirectX 10.
See - there are IT related issues here :p
Salt is required...
Salt is required in some foods, not just as a preservative and (natural) flavour enhancer but, for example, bread does not rise properly if there is no salt added to the dough.
This doesn't justify ladelling it in the food like it's going out of fashion though...
Oh good, a new king of bloat arrives...
Oh good, a new king of bloat arrives... all this from a company that somebody managed to make a *document viewer* (nothing more) go from a small install to a bloated behemoth that now weighs in in excess of 22MB and takes about 3 minutes to bother to load up (you can either have this pain at login time or document opening time, your "choice"). On top of the bloat, they added all manner of security holes (features) and as a direct result it's just as likely that PDFs will take over your system as using ActiveX / Internet Explorer / Word Documents, etc.
@Adam Williamson / NNTP
"let's face it, if NNTP had been intended as a file transfer protocol, it would've handled 8-bit encodings"
Better stop using POP3 and SMTP then. No more e-mail attachments for you.
One further point...
Apparently (I've been told this by somebody I know who is both wheel-chair ridden and a champion of accessibility), customers in the disabled market are *much* more loyal to a brand/company that provides a good service compared to non-disabled customers. i.e. If you give them a good service they'll keep on coming back to it and, importantly, will spread the word around about the good service.
Maisie Donaldson makes a good point that I missed - the aim is to include ALL the potential customers, not to exclude them because you're too lazy/thoughtless to take them into account.
For example, in real bricks and mortar terms, it takes very little additional effort to ensure that a new building is full accessible by wheelchair users. Retro-fitting an existing building, on the other hand, is what is known as a "bugger" (and often an expensive one at that). However if you consider that a fully wheelchair accessible building will also help other users, for example deliverymen or internal staff who need to shift heavy items, it's a positive point there as well. From an IT perspective, it's a LOT easier to shift heavy kit in modern, accessible buildings than older or just poorly designed ones. You can, of course, go overboard and one site that I visited all the non-wheelchair using staff must have had bad backs from having to continually stoop down to reach light switches, door openers and so on.
Hopefully you get the point - accessibility can help everyone, not just those that absolutely require it. If you consider it to start with, it costs very little time or money to implement and brings many advantages. If you attempt to retro-fit it then you're in for an "interesting" time...
Some of the comments here are endemic to the blinkered stupidity that, unfortunately, many website "developers" (broadest possible use of the word "developer") suffer from.
1) Accessible websites help ALL users (which should be a goal of ALL website designers)
2) Accessible websites, should greatly improve Search Engine Optimisation (another holy grail of website designers)
Now, if you're still too dumb to realise that doing the following is bad, you should do all us all a favour and crawl into a cave somewhere and become a hermit:
* rendering heading/body *text* as images
* rendering navigation solely as images, with no alt-text or structure to the layout (or alternative navigation)
* using technology such as flash as the navigation - for example, flash is a good ADDITION to a website, it must never be used AS the websute
* believing that putting the word "accessibility" on a link to a page that lists keyboard shortcuts is "accessibility". Likewise being dumb and putting links to change the font size and/or colour scheme - all decent browsers can do this for your website anyway (ever heard of CSS?)
* designing pages with no clue as to the STRUCTURE of a document - the idea isn't just to make it look vaguely pretty on a fixed width, screen running one browser. Remove all the images and your document should still be meaningful.
* mingling layout with content - content in one file, layout in another. Granted, (X)HTML and CSS doesn't always make this easy but the closer you get to it the better all round.
* Using table elements as layout - they're for tabular data, not for layout. 10 years ago, when browsers are even worse than today, it may have been the only working solution to actually getting a website page to look vaguely like you want it to, however times have changed and CSS is now (mostly) supported in browsers.
Oddly enough, avoiding the above stupidities (and a few others), tends to make your website more usable all round. Hell, your website may even work on a mobile phone or TV connected system!
"Think you got a muslim problem now?"
Muslim problem? How's that for an flame inducing blinkered statement? Most Muslims, like Christians (and others), are fairly moderate, peaceful types. Heck, the holy books of each preach peace, forgiveness and the spreading of the faith.
It's the irritational, bigotted nutters that are the problem. Those that "read" poorly translated and re-written texts, remove them from all context and attempt to apply their words as, erm, "bible".
Thankfully the number of such nutters are quite low. Unfortunately a great way to increase the numbers of nutters is to invade other countries. One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist.
Windows 2000 + LitePC
This is exactly why we use Windows 2000 configured with the great XPLite (LitePC) tools. Once you remove all the superflous junk that comes with every windows install (solitaire on a server?), you have what is actually quite a lean, fast and stable operating system.
Once you've uninstalled windows updates, Internet Bugsplorer, Telnet server, remote admin, file&print sharing and the other assorted junk, windows becomes quite a secure operating system...
@ Exchange 2007? / Mark
Couldn't have put it better myself, although you missed the part that it's now a delivery point for foisting Sharepoint on all users... (for example, the depracation of the _almost_ working shared folder system in deference to a not-working at all and almost useless sharepoint based "shared folder" system).
As for mail systems other than Exchange (which is an utter pig to attempt to manage), there are a few quite good ones, including ones that work in windows - for example MDaemon to name just one. Yes, it has it's problems, but it's immeasurably easier to manage than Exchange.
He might be wonely...
He might be wonely... and somewhat deluded, but he does seem to have a better grasp of the Internet than our own beloved dicatators.
...if in true modern UK policing style, they'll arrest the chef and prosecute him for wasting police time?
So, in order to have the pleasure of using MS's applications, you have to have the full fat version bloating your hard disk.
And the point of this is...??? The whole point of having *web-based* apps is, erm, that they're web based, not some arse-about face ActiveX security hole plugin that requires the full application itself.
For extra fun and joy, MS will doubtless require that you use "The World Most Insecure Browser" (TM) as well.
It's obvious what MS are doing here though - they'll build this junk into sharepoint to further muddy the waters and ensure that users user their products and their products alone.
Anyone care to explain £1m worth of heating?
From the description, this was meant to be a data storage unit, therefore in a *sane* world it wouldn't require multi-gigahertz-multi-core CPUs just to get the damn "operating" system booted. The required time to retrieve an x-ray image isn't likely to be measured in milliseconds, so stupidly fast (and therefore hot) HDDs wouldn't be needed either.
Tape backup units, of course, now they would up the price considerably... wouldn't want to deal with the shopping trolley of backup tapes that would be required for a full backup of such a system.
It really depresses me that we're paying for this kind of dumb-ass improperly specced, badly implemented (doubtless late) "solution" with our taxes.
Can you say "monopoly"
OK, so it's improved - which, admittedly, shouldn't have been too difficult a task really considering just how poor it currently is. However the only reason that it's as "popular" as it currently is is that it's the default search engine for all new PCs and Installs of IE7 (along with *American* as the default damn language, rather that using the system language).
Clearly MS aren't abusing a monopoly position here either then. Yes, they have an option to add alternative (and usually far better) search engines, however your average computer numpty won't know how to do this.
Just wait... in a few months all American tourists that go to Antigua will be considered Communist Unpatriotic Terrorist Extremists (TM) and sentenced to interrogation, torture and hard labour and then given a fair trial. Oh, and the change in policy will be retrospective so anybody having had a holidy there since 2003 will also be considered the same. Along with their families.
Dang! That explains why we're now only allowed to take 100ml of the stuff onto planes... I'd forgotten just how much of a terrorist threat that evil stuff was!
Now... back to making some liquid bombs. Don't worry, I'll flush before getting my coat!
Not going to get into the rather blinkered slanging matches thare are going on in these comments, as amusing as some of them are...
But to remove the bloatware:
There's a handy application that you can remove quite a lot of the crap that comes on a system, it's called the "Decrapifier". Download it from this site: www.pcdecrapifier.com
Norton AV and other supposed "security" products are pretty much worse than Viruses, which are usually easier to remove and cheaper as well. I'd love to see an end to the "free" Anti-Virus pre-installs that clearly neglect to state that they're time limited (often just 3 months), "accidently" don't come with any way to remove them and/or if you do remove them they don't actually bother to uninstall fully and just continue to silently bloat and crash your system. HOWEVER, it's not all bad - these nefarious manufacturers do actually provide complete removal tools... Google for "Norton Removal Tool" and you'll find the link (it changes regularly, is hard to find in the Norton site search, so it's easiest to find this way) - just click whatever "product" you've been lumbered with (or just click anything, it doesn't really matter) and you'll get to the download page. Download and run the application and it'll remove all the cretinous junk that they lumbered your system with. After a restart, look forward to a glorious 50% quicker startup time, less crashes and a few GB of recovered hard disk space! Similar tools are available for McAfee however they're much, much clunkier to use.
"I am an apple owner and fan for life."
This is the kind of dumb, blind comment that marketing departments and politicians LOVE to read. Congratulations Sir, your full frontal lobotomy was a resounding success!
Me? I'll use whatever tool is most appropriate for the job. I'll use whatever XYZ branded (or unbranded) product fits the requirements - if an Apple product happens to be the best tool for the job, I'll use it. I really can't be bothered these days to start dick waving and screaming that "my tech is better than your tech because it has this brand name/logo on it" - I grew out of that when I was a teenager.
For a perfect example of form over function, look at the "Prada" phones - the most important point on these is that the word "Prada" is clearly visible both on the faux-leather case and is visible on the phone when the phone is in the case. As a phone, camera and SMS tool, it's utterly awful almost to the point of being useless. However folk still buy it because it has the *name *on it.
Re: Open Document Format
If *nothing* supported "Open" (hahahaha) Document Format then it'd be an even better situation. MS are once again purely intent on producing more and more obfuscated formats to extend the lock in of their products.
The better solution, is to just enforce "compatibility" mode in Office 2007. Unfortunately this doesn't appear to be a simple thing to do, you have to set all kinds of GP settings in various places.
@ @Noisy Adverts
Alternatively just edit your hosts file and point the most common ad servers to nowhere, or just localhost :)
Works a treat and saves wasting money on paid-for ad-blockers (daft), free ones that attempt to own your entire system (browser toolbars - especially from search engines) or the utterly ineffective ones that come with IE.
@Ned Fowden / why Microsoft?
You have missed the point by so many miles it's almost amusing...
It's not that there are bundled applications with the "Operating System", that's the issue, it's that Microsoft are using their monopoly to ensure that only their technology, i.e., their particular versions of these bundled applications are used in most cases.
How does this work? Because Joe User loads up Windows and, for example, is confronted with one Web Browser (the most insecure one in existence), one Media Player (probably the most inefficient and bloated one there is). Both of these poor quality applications use custom, closed protocols and before the Joe User knows it, half of their websites, files and media are in a closed standard that only Microsoft or their licensees can access. In short, the user has been forced down one path and is left later footing the bill in one way or another.
Now, if when windows started up there were a variety of applications available and the user could pick the one they wanted to use, this would be a much better solution. For example - a user being given a choice of Web Browser, Media Player or whatever, will be able to make their own mistakes, however they *should* also remember that there are alternatives available and that they can switch if necessary. If these applications also used Internationally agreed standards, then this process of switching between applications becomes much easier and we get to a state where COMPETITION on QUALITY and FEATURES will become the norm, rather than a monopoly based on locked in, closed non-interoperable file formats.
Now for the, oh so obligatory, analogy involving the car industry... It's like a large car manufacturer, for example Ford, deciding to fit triangular holes for their petrol (gas for US) tanks and having their Engine Management Unit test for the presence of a custom chemical combination in the petrol. This custom chemical combination is, of course, a secret and attempting the figure out what it is involves declaring that you are unpatriotric (because Ford is an American car company) and also breaking a wide sweeping law regarding petrol additives that Ford lobbied very hard to have implemented. Instead you're forced to buy petrol at double the price of everyone else and only from specific "Ford Approved" petrol stations. Oh, and the miles per gallon performance of your petrol is also less than normal cars. Needless to say, the average car driver will not be told that there are alternative petrol systems available and instead lied to by the car dealers about it being "better" (in some intransient way) than the unpatriotic, communist alternatives.
Yep, I think that analogy is about right. I'll get my coat now.
@ FFS! / Matt
You sound rather too like one of the muppet web "developers" who is under the delusion that just because their website happens to work "OK" on their local computer/operating system, using their browser, with their particular screen resolution that everything is perfectly acceptable.
The standards are there for a reason - to ensure interoperability. They're NOT their to ensure no innovation or advances (that's the role of monopolies).
Any user agent that claims to be able to be a "web browser" must follow the rules, any user agent that doesn't follow them is not a truly valid web browser. It's a shame that none of the current browsers fully and properly support the standards.
For example, modern networking and, in particular, the Internet is ONLY possible because of standards and the adherence to them. To do otherwise is akin to something monumentally dumb like deciding that because your developers are too incompetent to implement a working TCP/IP stack, they should only bother to develop a few bits of it and introduce all kinds of custom constructs and shortcuts to fudge the required functionality in place.
Finally... solid state "HDD" storage is _beginning_ the process of being mainstream and, eventually, should become somewhat better value for money.
Recording data on a rapidly spinning disk where a motor controlled arm moves over it and attempts to keep a *very* small distance between the head and the platter surface is an antiquated storage system and is asking for problems, especially in portable systems but also in others.
Not that modern HDDs aren't marvels of engineering precision with great bouts of clever design, and solid state disks have their own issues, but removing one of the more common moving part problems in computers is something that I've been waiting for for a long time.
Now to fix the other one - overheating due to fan failure...
Stuff the IT angle...
More important, is exactly how many sheep did this guy expect to purchase with his ill gotten gains and how many finches did he manage to get into the establishment before being "dealt with".
Re: On hippie based fuels
You missed the category that should be number one on the "providing worth to society by acting as human fuel list"... politicians/lawyers (same thing these days, which explains all the additional laws being passed).
Re: Wow. / Clay Garland
"I reall thought that AMD were going to put up a fight. Instead they release a part that's about 70% as fast as the one I got in my Mac 6 months ago."
Looks like you're still stuck in the MHz is king mentality that got the industry into the mess it's currently in.
These systems are much more than just the MHz, it's the interconnectivity and numeric processing capability that sets them apart from desktop processors. As good as Core 2 Duo chips are, these are faster for the tasks that are common for server applications.
A little honesty for once!
I just found a little honesty for once - in the page that Dell has regarding Vista - http://www1.euro.dell.com/content/topics/topic.aspx/emea/topics/solutions/winvista?c=uk&cs=ukdhs1&l=en&s=dhs&~ck=anavml
Read the section about the "Windows Vista Capable" PCs... it lists these specced systems as "Great for... Booting the Operating System, without running applications or games". This is amusing, until you read the specification and realise that MS has redefined bloat once again... :(
Re: Try finding the same Vista PC
Erm... the systems you're comparing are vastly different - this is why there is a difference in price, not a conspiracy by Dell (in this instance). They might happen to both have "Inspiron 530" in the name, but that's pretty much where the similarity ends... For example:
Linux - Core Duo processor, Vista - Pentium D (The Pentium D is a cheaper, naster processor by far)
Linux - 19" Silver Wide Flat Panel, Vista - 19" Value Flat Panel (Notice the value and non-widescreen nature of the Vista system monitor)
Linux - 128MB nVidia GeForce 8300GS, Vista - Integrated Intel Graphic Media Accelerator 3100 (Decent nVidia graphics card compared to cheap and slow Intel on-board output).
Missed another point as well...
Why, oh why would anybody SANE want the a Matrix Trilogy boxet? There is only one Matrix film -"The Matrix", so why have 3 copies of it - or does the boxset come with a DVD, HD-DVD and Blu-Ray version all in one box?
As far as anybody sane goes, there is only one Matrix film and those films that are touted as "sequels" either do not exist or have nothing to do with the first film. The reasoning is simple: "The Matrix" was such a good film yet the films that are the supposed "sequels" are such absolute and utter shite that the only possibility is that world class morons wrote and directed the sequels and really talented people wrote and directed "The Matrix". While this is a very fair conclusion, it's thrown into disarray by the observation that, allegedly, the Writers and Directors of the "sequels" are the same as that of the first film... This kind of blip in reality is difficult to explain so it's easier all round to assume that the "sequels" do not, in fact, exist. We'll just put them down to some glitch in the program and look around nervously for men called "Smith"
Delaying the release is sensible at least... because unlike the abortion that is Vista (herein known as Windows ME 2007), MS won't be able to force users to use their bloated, unstable junk by leveraging their monopoly on the supply chain and therefore might actually have to get it (mostly) working prior to release. Corporates are the only ones going to buy server 2007, oops 2008, and we're reeling enough with the thought that we're shortly going to either have to pay more microsoft taxes for the rip off that is the various licensing schemes (allowing us to *upgrade* Vista installs to XP) or be forced to use Vista. Forcing us to have to use another untested piece of bloat isn't going to sit well at all.
Now please excuse me while I load another Linux distro...
@mike "I will not"
Perhaps when you get to the stage of EMPLOYING staff and being responsible for the costs involved, you might change your self-centred stance on time wasting.
At a place of employment you are using:
1) COMPANY EQUIPMENT - i.e., it is NOT yours to do as you wish with, to install whatever virus ridden / trojan laden software you feel like and then come to the IT helpdesk demanding immediate fixes and help.
2) COMPANY NETWORK - a company network, i.e. it's Internet network connection is NOT an unlimited, free-for-all-to-use resource. There's set bandwidth limits and, especially these days, much more important uses for it than personal access. Most reasonable employers will pay a subsidy for home Internet access if it is used regularly for business purposes, so would you like to pay to use the office network when you use it for personal purposes?
3) COMPANY TIME - while it is possible to limit access to certain parts of the Internet to set time periods during the day, this is not a flexible technology - take your lunch late because you were working on a important deal and you'll miss the slot for access. This is not acceptable or fair. However in reality (and as already pointed out), a huge majority of staff, if given the opportunity, will access such time wasting sites during work hours and not breaks. Of course, you could whinge that it's the management's fault for not checking on every single employee every second of every day, but then management typically have better things to do than that.
Or would you advocate a "policy" where it's perfectly acceptable for employees to use the company phone system when they feel like to make personal calls for as long as they want? This is what you're effectively saying is OK.
...as for Mobile Phones, well this is another issue - if a lot of staff are abusing mobiles (note, there is no "right" to use a mobile phone during office hours), then the only solution is to attempt to ban them. This said, more reasonable employers either allow them as long as they're not interruptive to work or just on silent.
Don't forget, that windows will, by default, automatically search for available wireless networks. When it finds one that it can connect to, it will automatically connect to it.
So, before you know it, a "standard user" has just "hijacked" somebody else's wireless access, usually without knowing it.
Where does the original offence happen? When windows starts the communication with other devices, when it automatically establishes a connection on your behalf or when you attempt to access your e-mail a website not realising that you're using some other network other than the one you expected (which might be switched off, or down for some other reason).
While you could take the ridiculous standpoint that users must know what their system is doing, with the abstract mess that is windows (in particular its "security") and the general fear of "knowing anything", this is akin to expecting all drivers to know the operation of their car, from basic combustion engine principles to the actions of the EMU (engine management unit).
You can, of course, take the analogies too far - so am I "stealing light or electricity" if I stand in front of a house at night and read a book by the light of the house's security light (that, like many of these annoying lights, turns on when I walk on the *public* footpath past the front of their house)?
Now, intentionally accessing an open (i.e., unsecured for *whatever* reason) wireless access point and port scanning the computers that are also associated with it, attempting to access them or to use the connection to send or access illegal content, now that's an entirely different matter.
How does she know it's a womens DNA???
... I think you need to go back to and re-study *basic* genetics - it's all in the chromosones (XX, XY, YY)
"due in part to the rapidly evolving political uncertainties"
Nah, this means one or more of the following:
* the machines are crap
* the machines are crap and insecure
* the machines are crap and insecure and we're sorry
* the machines are crap and insecure and we're sorry we got caught peddling this junk
* the machines are crap and insecure and we're sorry we got caught peddling this junk and not sure if we'll be sued
Re: Never found out why...
There are standards for the storage of track (and disc) meta data information and there have been for a long time.
The problem with this technology is that it required:
a) much more expensive decoding equipment to read, convert and display the data (compared to the comparitively cheap audio read circuitry)
b) the standard does not handle multiple languages / character sets. The recording industry is lazy - they'd rather have the same master but not have the track names than have to produce a different master for every language, and while the end CDs are cheap, the masters aren't (or weren't at any rate). In fact, the industry is so bad with this kind of data that they can't even manage to keep the disc ID (that is encoded) consistent or unique between CDs...
If MS really were deeply involved, the iPlayer project would *only* work on Vista. OK, so "work" is perhaps too strong a word for anything in relation to Vista, but you get the idea...
It would "require" Vista because of a "requirement" for, erm, DirectX 10, which "requires" Vista because, erm, ah, the drivers are "different" (which is odd as DX was meant to be driver agnostic) and, erm, ooooh, that's it, because it wouldn't have been possible to write DX10 "drivers" for anything other than Vista. Or something like that.
As for DRM systems, I can fully understand why content owners might not want their shows to be freely available in a half decent format (of which by all reports, the BBC iPlayer shows are very badly encoded), otherwise they won't be able to sell (rip off) the public for the same dross but in DVD form at £15 each 6 months later. Cynicism aside, a lot of a show's value comes from the sale of DVDs after the run of the show and it's this that the show producers want to protect. What they, of course, fail to understand that any idiot with a VHS recorder has been able to copy their shows for the last 20+ years. VHS may be lousy quality but it's still as good as most P2P shared files are recorded at, and HD recorders record the shows at much better than VHS quality... so there is no way to protect the shows anyway.