VM seems fine to me
There again, I'm usually only playing Sauerbraten.
3068 posts • joined 25 Mar 2008
There again, I'm usually only playing Sauerbraten.
There is a long history in publishing of authors for the same house giving each other glowing reviews. Will that now be stamped on?
...ionising enough to damage the cells? I wouldn't have thought so (being below light), but what do I know.
WTF is that?
...is in one location, then one really isn't getting the point.
...use butterflies. http://xkcd.com/378/
On the one hand you have the public. You know, the whining sods who cause problems.
On the other hand you have the BPI, MPAA, RIAA etc. You know, the very nice people who bought that sumptuous dinner, tickets for football games and promised you that nice job if the public boot you out on your ear.
Who do you think they are voting in favour of?
Is it just me or is the "Mini" now actually a "Maxi"?
Has anyone told Austin?
It was "Context Information Security" who published the big report, MS who did some light-weight review.
But the question remains - Did they report it to Khronos/Mozilla/Google and give them time to fix before they went public?
Assuming Linux suffers from this issue, by the sounds of it it would.
Just checked FF and the options are the same on a Linux.
MS found a vulnerability, jolly good. Did they report it to Khronos/Mozilla/Google and give them time to fix before they went public? Or did they just publish? (And only a short while after IE9 was spunked out - curious).
The story does not say, and it's an important question. Or should zero-days on MS products now be made public as a matter of course?
Yay! Can we get laptops with a matt display too, please? PUH-LEEZE!!!!!!
...on how the picture were taken, who took them and who they get sent to. We don't want to reduce the ability to apply the law to paedos (yes, I know this is getting very close to the "think of the children" argument). I guess one could provide advice to the courts (can they do that in the USA?) that says something like "If the sending party was between 14-18 and the act of sending/receipt was consensual, then send them away with a flea in their ear."
Actually, give that advice to the cops. Much better that the teens get some education on privacy; before they find their bits plastered all over Facebook or something.
You are quite right about the puritanical furore that grips the USA at times. Look at the "Hot Coffee" hack. It's OK for a 14 year old to play a game where they can machine-gun down passers-by ("Hell yeah! Ah gots ah raht to mah guns, commie!") but simulated sex? Oh dear.
...the Daily Mail. "Fixing" these laws is political suicide *until* enough people have been crushed by them. That's happened in the USA, so the law can be sorted. Not sure if the same problems have happened here yet.
...the browser reads-ahead on the results links to give you that "instant page"? That's Old Skool that is.
Watch your bandwidth caps and fair-usage clauses, people.
That bloke fell over in a public place.
The inside of a shop is not public.
Did I just defend The Sun? I feel dirty.
A couple of devout scientists, I quickly formed the conclusion that it is not possible to be a scientist and to follow a faith. Well....maybe Bhuddism or something similar, but certainly not any Abrahamic faith or anything remotely like it.
Why? Well, a scientist must (crudely) have a theory, make a prediction, test that prediction and then publish results. Other scientists will then confirm/refute and we take a small step forward. Wall the time their is evidence, proof, invalidation, refinement etc. It all follows logical thought and it all must be supported by evidence an everything constantly questioned.
Faith? It's in a book. You must accept the book in totality. You may not question the book. The book is a translation of a translation of a translation of a.....but it is still the WORD and must be OBEYED UTTERLY WITHOUT QUESTION!
These two are, I put it to you, opposed and mutually exclusive. if you are a theistic scientist, then you are either a very bad scientist or a very bad theist. You cannot have it both way.
It's in the UK too. At least they have separation of church and state. Meanwhile our government continues to throw public money at faith schools.
"its image isn't helped by the fanbase of people who don't think they should have to pay any taxes, ever"
WHAT? It's backed by football players, music & movie stars, banks, supermarkets and mobile phone companies? Wow. That's some serious backing!
...it is stabilising around the USA$19. For now.
...to call Mr. taxman about my new income, and I can't get through. ARGH!
I want to pay you Mr. HRMC. I have this misguided idea it might make a difference and I accept that I am too small to get cushy deals like Vodafone. I want to pay you - pick up the goddamned phone already!
No, no, no, no!
Going to let a private corporation own our legal identity? Feck that for a game of soldiers.
My on-line identities do not equate to my legal identity nor should they IMHO. Sure, my bank can match my login to my legal-self, but I trust my bank slightly more than I trust FB. Why would somewhere that I may post picture of kittens doing somersaults have any need to equate to my legal self?
...where they are.
And buckets of it. After decades of using patents as a weapon to crush opposition and stifle innovation, MS have just got bitten on the ass by their own tactic. I can't say I am sorry.
The fact that they are trying to spin this into them being the wounded party and now a fighter for patent reform is laughable. These are the very same people who are blowing a gasket about the attempt to reverse-engineer the Skype protocol (to pick one example) and continue to use patent threats (Android, Linux, MPEG....).
Bend over and take your medicine, MS. You were part of making this problem, you are still part of this problem and you can never be part of the solution unless you walk the walk and much as you talk the talk.
...I think you mean "Taxpayers punished for civil servants' ineptitude", after all it's us who pay these fines to...err...ourselves in cases like this. Those who failed (if anyone) need to face the music, not our collective wallet.
Oh, wait, this is the civil service. I forgot.
No system is 100% secure. None. So a system will always starts out with, say W problems. Over time X more are found for any given time period t. So the total number of faults is W + Xt. This number grows with t.
Fixes, Y, for those problems are released. So the total number of faults is now W + t(X - Y).
Ah, but wait, those fixes may introduce some other issues, Z, so the total number of faults is W + t(X -Y +Z) where Z is some fraction of Y...say f, so Y is fY
W + t(X -Y + fY) which si W + t(X -Y(1-f))
So long as Y(1-f) > Z then a patched system actually gets more secure as time goes on rather than an un-patched one, because more are holes are getting plugged than are being discovered/created.
Just because Windows makes keeping a system up to date a raging pile of ball-ache does not make a highly patched system a bad thing. So long as those patches fix more problems than they cause.
Regular updates mean a secure system. The more the better.
Just let your package manager handle the updates for your OS and installed apps, authenticate once, all done. You don't even need to reboot unless the kernel changes.
The rules change depending on where one is. I think the rules in the article are for the USA and don't apply to the EU. Anyone know what the EU rules are? Can the article be updated with the EU rules?
If he did all this legally, I hope MS do respond and I hope they get told where to shove their complaint.
...Project Embrace is proceeding well.
We all know which two projects follow.
Aye, I am well aware that some herbs do have pharmaceutical properties. To quote Dara O'Brien:
"The good bits of herbal medicine became....MEDICINE!"
Although if the herb is potent enough for what ails you...may as well use that I guess.
Now where did I put those ginger pills.....?
...with seemingly intelligent people buying into happy-clappy, unproven BS these days? Homeopathy, chiropracty, cults of all shapes and sizes, crystal healing, reiki, etc.
Depressing. I best take some St. John's Wort.....
Tesco is all over the press, on the front page of the Beeb. A cheap way to get your name plastered all over.
...divided is an enemy defeated. Hopefully Apache can heal the rift between OpenOffice and LibreOffice. We need two competing versions like we need a hole in the head just now.
Yes, choice is good, freedom is great; but division of labour won't do anything to help O/L-Office take on MS.
"There is no viable competitor, we have the lock-in, we can charge what we want".
That about right? Intel - the MS of the chip world.
Just look at how our MPs/MEPs treat their benefits....
...are human too. Who'd a thunk it?
Give up the dogma, recant the hypocrisy and start enjoying life.
Are handset makers starting to see sense?
..."The Cuckoo's Egg" by Clifford Stoll.
They haven't learnt a thing!
Because I have never had satellite or cable, I needed fast broadband, I got a very good deal, I thought I'd give it a go. It's not worth it.
No, you cannot (and I did state you won't have certain channels). As I don't watch Sky Sports etc, they're of no interest to me.
I will be implementing pretty much what I stated when my contract ends.
Can it be networked? Can I stream any media (flac, ogg, mp4, whatever) from any location on my network to that box? If the answer is "No" then this is an epic fail. I did scan the article but didn't spot it.
For that money I'd go get a small-ish, quite PC (something like a Fit-PC2, but maybe with more oomph) drop XBMC/Myth on it and stream from a common source (e.g. a desktop with a Freesat card). No ties-in, no limitations, no continuing charges.
OK, so I won't have FX, Discovery etc, but I have those now and really (apart from Mythbusters) there isn't much worth watching. Take the savings and throw some at the broadband connections, yer still quids in.
When will these companies realise that they are now just another utility?
...you can create as many straw men as you like, but my worry was that we suck at major contracts (which is why I said "any major UK contract"). Almost without exception, every major contract any modern UK government has tried has gone massively over-budget and been a total shambles.
Individual components are all well and good, but when they are put together by monkeys you get garbage like our two new carriers (one to be moth-balled, one to barely carry and planes, budget through the roof and they're not even nuclear!). Or Failtrack. Or the Metro Line. Or....
To give you straw-man some actual body; at a consumer level, the last semi-decent UK product I can think of was the Dyson Vacuum cleaner - but that's now made in China.
Hovercraft was invented here - but not pursued. Taken up by the USA and other nations. Killed by the suits (who I am railing against)
EuroFighter - an Europe-wide project, over-priced and crap. We are spending billions on something that can't even do ground-attack without significant modifications (many will sit mothballed an unused). We would have been better off with a clutch of F16s and keeping Harrier going.
Jet Engine - yup, 60 odd years ago. But then that was one team, so a small project not a big contract managed by suits. And when the suits saw it, they wanted to cancel it.
Concord - glory of the 70s.
The UK does do some good engineering, but we are run buy morons. Nimrod, the new carriers, our trains, EuroFighter, Snatch Landrovers, various NHS projects. And thus we suck balls at big contracts.
...is that the UK reactors were built to UK specs and maintained in the UK by a (I guess) mostly UK workforce. That does not fill me with confidence. You only have to look at any major UK contract (aircraft carriers that can't really carry aircraft, anyone?) to know what a total pigs ear our supposed betters make of things like this.
That being said...it's probably still less bad than coal.
"Liberté, égalité, fraternité"? Really?
"Control, Restriction, Slavery"
I thought the Maquis Seal Team got that guy?
Wasn't it all over Fox news? About Obama being killed.
Oh, such a confusing world.
Have the supposed "electrosensitives" been tested in double-blind trials? Surely that must be done first. If they fail the test (and I expect they will), send them off for counselling.
1) 3D costs more
2) The glasses are uncomfortable and slide off
3) The colours seem muted (might just be my imagination)
4) 3D gives some people headaches
5) It adds nothing !!!NOTHING!!! to the movie.
I thought (and I may be wrong) that publishing in UK terms of the web was interpreted as the act of seeing it in one's browser (the bits get jiggered around and "published" to the screen).
If that is true, does it mean that the mere act of viewing a foreign site that says "X bunga-bunga avec Y" when in the UK is a breach of the super-injunction?
Of course, there is an easier option to all this; keep yer snake in yer pants.
Why don't we ask Andrew Marr?
...an HDTV that is as dumb as a dumb thing with maybe just a couple of HDMI/component connectors. That's all I need. I'll plug low-power PC into that and it can do all the network/fancy stuff. This also means I can control what content gets shown, how it gets shown and what codecs will work; not have to suffer some broken, OEM-only content restricted bull-crap. The orther connectors would just be for consoles.
Hmm...I could probably route them through the PC...