@Ross K That's what I love about religion, from the Iranian viewpoint it's the USA who are the godless.
The world would be such a better place without the sky-fairies.
3058 posts • joined 25 Mar 2008
@Ross K That's what I love about religion, from the Iranian viewpoint it's the USA who are the godless.
The world would be such a better place without the sky-fairies.
Of course it does, how else can the rich nations (and primarily the rich within said nations) gouge the poor and vulnerable?
By placing the country under the heel of one of the most anti-freedom companies on Earth.
Of course, the Iraq war was never about freedom or protecting the populace from the USA's old ally Saddam. It was about the oil and the chance to make billions in rebuilding the country. Just ask Dick Cheney.
@Mark 121 Thanks for that, have an upvote.
I now consider myself slightly more edified in the matter.
So they just web searched for an image an used it, eh?
Did they check that they had rights to that image?
Did they contact the owner to get permission?
Well if you or I did something like that, we'd be up for a DMCA take down at best or before the beak as a pirate. Yarr!
I look forward to the reporting on where the BBC are sued for breach of copyright and loss of reputation due to the gaff.
"If the thing is configured incorrectly by the person installing it, that is hardly the fault of the software."
When the software's default position is "Rape me! Have at my datas you randy hounds!" then I'd say that's a problem.
"It is of course, fantastic that Linux is always perfect and is never misconfigured."
A few points:
1) Linux is a kernel, not a web server;
2) No one claimed it was perfect;
3) No one even mentioned it.
If you had cited Apache (or Tomcat or WebLogic or...) then you might have had a point. Too busy following the old rhetoric of "If they say anything anti MS, they must be a pro GNU/Linux, freedom-lving, fanboi. Engage maximum frothing!"
"you didn't come up with the idea and Monroe did."
I actually don't think Monroe did, but I could be imagining things. Can't find a reference just now.
Mostly because systems that demand "w1bbl€!" as a password, rather than what I would consider a "proper" one do my freakin' head in and don't even start me on the ones that have a upper limit of about 16*.
I was already using a system similar to the one discussed on XKCD (using poetry, if you must know) and was aware of the idea of non-symbolic but long "passphrases" from using the likes of GPG (clue is in the name "passphrase"). The XKCD just happens to be the most well known example AFAIK.
It is length that is a better measure of password strength, not necessarily complexity. Don't take that up with XKCD, take it up with grc.com and the method espoused by XKCD does lead to easy to remember, long password that don't need to be written down.
If your users have short, complex ones and have to change them frequently; I guarantee they write them down or use some kind of basic system for generation passwords "blah1", "blah2" etc. Both of which negate your security (of course, coercion can always be used to get a password; no matter how secure it is).
But most of all, I think you need to relax and breathe a little. I'm not the one slinging the insults around.
*Pretty soon I will start ranting about the cretins who can't validate an email address**.
**Anyone who thinks they can by definition doesn't know how to validate an email address.
Cripes. I thought people would take this suggestion light-heartedly, not get a bee up their collective arse.
I would say that a system which considers "pa5$word!" more secure than "HighTreeGiraffeeIcecreamParlour" is fundamentally broken. One might be shorter, but it is a bugger to remember (meaning it will often be written down - security lost) the other is a bit harder to type (meaning is may be entered wrongly once to often leading to lock-out - PITA but security remains).
And there are other measures too; key-fobs, one-time tables, blah-de-blah.
Me - I prefer the more complex, long keys as all I have to do is memorise a picture. Heck, I can probably even write them down in ideograms for myself and they would still be secure (I don't do this, however, as pictures fit nicely into the old noggin).
That is my opinion. It's not wrong, it's opinion and in point of fact it happens to be right because it is my opinion and it applies to me.
Hate to tell you this...but I use a similar idea for my ma-hoos-ive WiFi password. I don't seem to have any trouble.
And for SSH pasphrases.
Security is generally a trade off between convenience and, well, security.
That is all.
I am quite aware what DRM is, which is why I avoid it at all costs.
But you are right about one thing, I got Blizzard and EA backwards. it was Blizzard that was demanding real names. They don't demand that any more, they have no need to. Your game DRM key uniquely identifies you.
Apologies for the confusion.
...do not criticise this game in their forums. You will be banned and lose access to the game.
Pray their DRM servers don't go down, or you won't be able to play.
Hope your Internet connection doesn't go down, or you won't be able to play either!
Seriously - why do people fall for this DRM infected crap all the time?
£50k is not enough for having to suffer London.
Ha ha ha ha ha! Now that is funny.
Where do these people get these fictional numbers from?
We are talking about an organisation who's standard browser is IE6 FFS.
Not that I particularly like the idea of deeply personal information being on a public network.
Maybe a system for checking appointments or something (yes, I know that has privacy issues) but not much more than that really.
Bingo. This is the big problem with "IP". It brings three totally separate idea, sticks them in a pot and mixes them up. It then tries to blind the public with legalese. We should never discuss "IP". We can talk about copyright, trademarks and patents if people want.
But never, ever, ever "IP" as that is just some made-up bullcrap that muddies the waters and confuses matters.
Copyright - the current terms are too long. The measures currently in place (region locks etc) are too restrictive and IMHO lead to infringement.
Format shifting (part of copyright) - for personal use this should be allowed. No levy on blank media. Making mix-discs for a friend? Strict infringement? Sure. Should anything be done about it? No. It's part of human nature to share and so long as it really only is the odd copy or two floating around amongst friends....that's just life. Suck it up.
Patents - never on software. First to file (in the USA) is a joke, it should be possible to appeal a patent after it is granted should prior art be found or obviousness be questioned.
1) As a parent suck up the fact that YOU take responsibility for YOUR child. Period.
2) Install/configure a web filter/net-nanny server
3) Install/configure a net-nanny software on each client
4) Configure the security to prevent it being diabled
5) If you do not know how to do the above LEARN!
There, that wasn't hard was it?
This dovetails with the idea that it can be acceptable to commit one crime in order to prevent a greater one. For example, exposing "private" information that shows a public servant is on the take, or committing an act of trespass to save a life. You can invent your own examples and, of course, it's up to a court to decide if the defence applies.
What it does not cover, however, is raking through people's details for purely personal/devious reason (e.g. you want to date them).
Your example could actually apply, but you'd need a lot more evidence to satisfy a court that you had just cause to go prying.
"Staff at the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) were disciplined a total of 992 times for unlawfully"
It was unlawful...why weren't they prosecuted? Oh wait, civil service; above the law and don't care about data privacy (as numerous news stories inform us).
At the moment almost every time I try to do an update in Windows 7 I lose all networking.
I am now w-a-y behind in updates as I install them one at a time to try and finger the culprit whilst do the day job.
Not good at all.
You joke, but this is in fact no joke. Ever wondered why those "print your own cake decoration" things have either gone to the wall or only allow to to choose from select designs?
If your bairn draw a little Mickey Mouse or W&G for their own birthday cake, it can't be printed out as they do not have a license. Now I ask you; whilst in might be in technical breach, does this in fact breach the spirit? Sure, if the picture is a near-perfect rendition and you want 1,000 done eyebrows should be raised.
But on drawing for a kid's party? FFS. Get a grip corporates. This will add to your bottom line.
Every time I am stuck on those (which isn't that often...snigger*) I always think "I have just spent my hard-earned and bought original media. Why the hell do I have to suffer this? And it isn't theft, it's a breach of license mumble...grumble..."
Could be worse, we could live in the USA where such cobblers has become law.
*Nothing dodgy, I just happen to have one DVD player that jumps to the menu. Means missing out on trailers for other movies (which is a shame as I rather like watching those).
"Hey kids! Have you heard of 'culture'? Yeah, that's right. It's what you get when you buy a DVD or a CD.
What's that? You think human culture should be free from corporate profiteering? Nothing could be further from the truth! Without corporations to make money from you, there's be no jobs. And your mummy and daddy would die from a lack of food. You love mummy and daddy, don't you? You don't want to see them die of starvation on the streets, do you?
And without a corporation to control what you can see and talk about, why...you could see or think just about anything! And that would be bad kids, because then you might think that corporations are all bad and you wouldn't give them any money and then your mummy and daddy would lose their jobs and we all know what happens when mummy and daddy lose their jobs!
So love mummy and daddy, and never ever EVER try to engage in freedom of expression or have an original thought.
Thank, have a nice day."
It means, if you are doing something in IE Metro and switch to a real UI to get some actual work done; everything you we doing in IE Metro is stuck in Metro and you either have to start again or switch back to the Duplo(tm) interface.
Win 8 licenses sold - 500 million.
Licenses "optimised for corporate continuity and compliance" (downgrade) - 400 million
Infringing installs of previous versions - 50 million
Installs of alternative operating systems (intended) - 1 million
Installs of alternative operating systems (unintended, but the sheer horror of Metro was too much) - 68 million
Actual instances of Win8 world-wide? 1 million; all in store fronts.
Actual instance of Win8 used in anger? 1,000 (MS marketing drones)
But none of this matters because the sold 500 million! Woo! Win8 is big baby! Yeah! Woo! Developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers!
Get the children used to the concept of total observation, all of the time. It'll make them much more compliant to state spying when they are adults.
All in the name of PROTECTING THE CHILDRENS!
Countries can't pay the debts! I have zero sympathy for the likes of Vodafone.
Pay your dues and then we'll talk.
AIUI Cyprus, Ireland, Malta and the United Kingdom all lack a "blank media levy".
In the USA personal copies are allowed and this is where the confusion arises. In the UK, however, copying for personal use is illegal (although the various media companies have said they will not pursue anyone). The Digital Economy Act may make it legal in the future, but until such times if you want to obey the strict letter of the law, you must get express permission from the copyright holder to make the copy (or but it again on the different media).
Citations: Mostly Wikipedia, but even the most basic of web searches will get you some answers.
Everyone knows that the only way to stop actors and musicians staving to death through poverty is to pay full-price each time you want to listen to a song/watch a movie on different digital media. It's only fair, each time you hear/watch the media you are uplifted/comforted/entertained; so why should you not reward those involved.
Allowing consumers to copy media from one device to another will destroy businesses and send millions of people on to the streets. Imagine the streets thronging with malnourished thespians. This is the future you seek dare you copy anything!
And what of the musos children? Oh dear god! Won't someone think of the children?
And all the industries that rely on music and film. And all the industries that relies on those. And so one.
By god, copying would destroy Western civilisation as we know it!
So do not copy. Be a patriot. Support you country! Stand proud! Say "Nay! I shall not give into temptation and steal from my fellow man!" Pay full-price for each item and rejoice in the knowledge that you are saving us all from 'pirates' who are probably no more than trainee kiddy-fiddlers anyway.
ALWAYS THINK OF THE CHILDREN!
Not at all. Basic ergonomics relating to the prevention of eye-strain gives a rather amusing rule-of-thumb; have the monitor beyond arm's reach.
How the heck does one use a fangly-dangly touch interface on a fangly-dangly touch monitor in that case?
So FB has dropped around 3% from an over-hyped opener. This is news? Really?
Are we going to get El Reg stories every time the FB share fluctuates?
Give me a call when some massive pump&dump/naked short bends Zucker over a barrel and has its wicked way with him.
Am I the only one who does not understand how Facebook could possibly be worth USD105bn? Seriously, I just don't get it.
...but they should not be using iPads. That's as bad as locking the kids into MS by teaching them how to use Word and calling it "ICT".
Basic Android tablets would be 1) Cheaper and 2) Not locked-in.
Of course, I'd much rather they spent the money on books and lab equipment, rather than trendy-Wendy bullcrap.
I don't think it leaks as such, but causes an acid to be formed. This was on "Monsters Inside Me" a few episodes ago. Afraid I can't recall the acid.
@AC - What's the point? because it stifles innovation, prevents new products coming to market and can stop a whole industry moving forward. That's why. The whole Internet was found on technology that was patent-free. Do you think it would have gone as far as it did if was riddled with patent caner?
Patents have a place, so long as the are good patents about something truly new/non-obvious. The patents the USPTO a granting willy-nilly for tech ideas are just such cobblers. Thankgoodness (for now) the the EU doesn't allow software patents.
Never mind a phone, bloody XBMC has had this for sodding ages. Probably other applications designed for only mouse/controller/IR input too.
Just because this "modifiable on-screen keyboard thingy" is now implemented on a phone rather than a desktop/TV is not a good enough reason to make it patentable.
And on top of that, having a button to switch "layouts" to keep the screen organised is w-a-y too bloody obvious and is used time-and-again in a whole host of areas for managing features/options.
Seriously, the USPTO need a kick in the knackers.
There was a reason I quoted what I did; less religion is always good - regardless of the faith or country.
People are, of course, free to decide whatever they want. But just because they decide to believe a thing does not make it true. Or are you one of these people who believes in belief?
"Why no, I don't think there is a teapot orbiting between Earth and Mars; but I respect your right to believe it."
And next time - kindly keep the insults to yourself.
Oh, and of course the F/OSS software has to be written, and there is always a cost in that; either monetary in the form of sponsorship/salary or in volunteers' time. Then there is the hosting of the binaries and source, that has a monetary cost.
Again Free != Zero cost. Donate to your projects, people.
I don't know why you keep getting downvoted. The "free" refers to "freedom", not cost.
Yes, one can download F/OSS software for no charge and use it without charge and this is generally fine for home/enthusiast use. But in the workplace you need all the same stuff as you need for proprietary code. You need to hire (or contract) support, hire (or contract) customisation, hire (or contract)....
That's nothing against F/OSS at all - it's just a fact of life and people can argue until their blue in the face about which is "better" in terms to TCO. And often do!
"This could be one of the biggest blows to religion in the country yet."
Perhpas Greece should check Groupon for some hot EU deals?
The Bravia can read from multiple formats. It seems that when connect to a special "output" port the drive will get formatted and the TV will drop encrypted recordings on there. There are comments that the drive can only work with the exact same TV, and the Sony manual have precious little information. So my guess is Sony are using some proprietary crap-ola.
One more reason to never buy Sony (as if they hadn't given us enough reasons already).
I was about to post the same thing. I would imagine that Google would respect "robots.txt" and if the Google bot can get at the images, it kinda implies that anyone else could by simply walking the site using wget or similar.
So either they didn't define "robots.txt" properly, didn't correctly check sessions, didn't have proper security or some combination of all three.
And what did Perfect10 want? Google (and Yahoo, Bing, AltaVista etc) to not index them?
Yes, yes I think they have. Get Andrew Orlowski on the case, he's big on copyright and will surely see that just action is taken.
Nice post, although I do take issue with the use of the word "piracy" but that's just semantics.
I see Avengers 2012 on that list - can you please tell me how much that affected the box-office take? Because if I remember, it just broke lots of records.
Obviously that does not excuse copyright infringement one little bit, but it does bring into question just how much damage (if any) is actually being done.
I don't necessarily agree with TPB (although as a distribution service it is genius) but neither to I agree with the draconian legislation being mooted and forced through.
Infringement has almost certainly always existed once it became technologically possible (and no, that does not make it right) but what harm has actually been caused? Companies have survived and grown from gramaphones thru LPs to tapes, videos, CDs etc and not a lot seems to have gone wrong. Heck, maybe the infringement was even a boon to some. So despite it having been around for so long and companies/people still raking it in, why should we let them make such an audacious grab for culture with ever increasing terms, region-locks (WTF did those ever do other than force people to infringe?), DRM (as before), and new laws?
I often wonder what history has to say about all this - what happened when the printing press landed and all the scribes' jobs were in danger; did they demand legislation/special treatment to protect their business? It's the closest equivalent I can think of.
Copyright (and to a very large extents, patents) were about giving the original creator a window of a opportunity to make money off their creation/invetion (either by direct sales or some kind of licensing). The copyright/patents were all geared around the idea of a creator.
Now big business is trying to re-gear it all around a corporation. Corporations don't die and are inhuman. Thus they demand ever increasing terms and ever more restrictive laws to "protect their investment".
What about protecting human culture?
TPB gets it's panties in a bundle over being copied. Yes, that is hypocritical.
Andrew gets hit panties in a bundle over TPB allegedly attacking sites and deleting content, but isn't that what the authorities do to the likes of MegaUpload? Actions that Andrew supports. Isn't that also hypocritical?
The copyright laws are way, way out of control. The stranglehold corporations wish to get on human culture is simply beyond the pale. Sites like TPB are not really an answer (although the tech they use is certainly a boon), but neither are increasingly draconian laws which restrict culture.
@AC - Nothing, but a consistent handle is a step-up from a coward and the best yer going to get around here. Yes, I could have multiple handles, use throwaway account etc etc.
But I don't.
ElReg, good as it is, just isn't worth that level of effort.
Heck - how does another reader know that you are not me.
Are you me? Does that explain the blackouts and the voices?