3028 posts • joined 25 Mar 2008
In the UK ex-directory is free, there is no charge to pay. So either you are not in the UK or you are simply wrong.
THe one things that pisses me off about data is the likes of Experian. They collect data about ME that directly affects MY life, and then have the gall to charge ME for access to MY data. They should be forced by law to open it to the person who the data refers to.
Never happen though.
To be fair to @Fuzz, the Linux-a-likes installed on most netbooks/tablets are pretty socking. Each OEM stamps on their "brand identity" in order to "differentiate" and "provide added value".
Which translates to "mess it up", "slow it down" and "screw it up".
1) I did not realise that Sony had put their customer database up on teh torrentz. Can you give me teh upload codez?
2) Sony appear to have applied security to some aspects of their data, but not others. What is the ICO's position on encrypting personal data?
3) Unlike most government offices, I don't read anything in the story about Sony putting this data on an unencrypted USB stick.
4) Sony are a shower of anti-free-market asshats (rootkits, GeoHotz etc) and deserve everything they get, but I don't see how this suit helps. This is a *global* problem and needs to be addressed at a state level. The countries involved (i.e. just about everyone) should demand that Sony make good any loses and have ID theft teams.
5) *IF* one suffers a loss, *IF* one has evidence that Sony is responsible and *IF* Sony do not make good, then one should sue. *IF* this happens repeatedly, then the courts should consider punitive damages/prosecution.
Just IMHO of course.
Err....requiring people to have legal title (or at least, license) to sell stuff is an artificial restriction?
It's that kind of thinking that has caused the economic problems. Building markets on thin air.
...capitalism does work. What doesn't work are completely artificial trades like "shorting" where you don't even have what you sell. Or "collaterised debt" where you magic a negative into a positive and sell the risk to some poor sucker.
When one or two did it, probably tolerable. When everyone is doing it, it just builds a market on thin air (call it a "bubble") and as we know, all bubbles burst.
No one will complain whilst they trouser their fake cash. it's all milk and honey. Their milk and honey, not yours or mine. When it does go bang, then they come crying for hand-outs.
I am all for...
...more energy, cleaner energy and simply using less.
I think the big problem is trying to a find a "one size fits all" solution. Such a thing does not exist.
In some place wind makes sense. In others solar, others hydro, others...
Each needs to be seen in the local context (topography etc) and in the relationship to the global context ("If I put the solar cells there, how do I maintain/fix them?"). But governments do not like this as it makes it appear that people A get something different from people B and ass-hats in both camps kick up a stink. Despite the fact the peoples A and B actually have different needs.
This puts me in the curious position of quite liking the idea of wind turbines, but deploring they way they have the splatted all over the landscape.
Correct me if I am wrong
But I thought Google always opened the code after release?
That may not be "open source" in the GNU/EFF sense of things, but it is far ahead of anything MS or Apple ever do (both staunch freedom opponents).
And whilst it may be against the true spirit of "open", it does keep the forking down until after the code is stable and the hardware shipping. If the code was open, I would not put it past some corporations to begin forks just to try and poison the waters.
Will it be called...
...a "Wii wii"?
(Got an original, well worth the money).
I hope so
Then I can pick an old one up on eBay for little.
When Google (for example)...
...release a Google OS that comes with a Google Browser baked right in and uses undocumented Google-only APIs; then Google will be as bad as MS for lock-in and restriction of choice etc.
Google and FB have the *potential* to be as bad (maybe worse, considering the personal data they control) as MS; but so far they are not that bad. MS is still the anti-open, anti-standards, anti-freedom gorilla in the room.
Hell, IBM is more open than MS!
"Likewise Google has come in for attention because it deliberately sniffed wireless connections and geotagged them all over the planet."
I know there was a big hoo-hah in the press and I know the politicians saw it as a popularity contest in "Who can be more outraged?"....but is it a criminal offence to record data that is being blasted into the air unencrypted?
I do not excuse Google from the potential abuses this data could be put to, but are they really the causal party? It's not as if Google had to de-crypt anything. My opinion?
The users were idiots for not securing their networks adequately. "Ah, but not all users are techies." Then not all user should be setting up routers and networks, should they?
Google were (at best) very naive to think that Europeans would not get upset by this. Europeans are much more sensitive to privacy that the USAians. In the USA it seems that asking for privacy is almost an admission of guilt.
Not just China, but that's how things used to be. I thought Patents were to protect inventors (people or companies) who had made investments to perfect a product and (quite justifiably) required some protection to recoup loses. I don't think patents were ever meant to be used in the way they are today.
Survival of the fittest.
All add up (pretty much) to Capitalism. As the USA (and to a large extent the EU) no longer wish to follow those three principles, what kind of market are they running? IMHO the EU is protectionist and the USA nearly Communist.
Move datacenters out of the USA, run near-penniless shell companies in the USA (most probably do that now as part of their tax avoidance strategies), ask your employees to pick a country of choice and leave the East Texas court to vent its spleen all it wants.
One has to ask - Linux has been around for decades, these ideas have been around for decades too, so why wait until now before suing? Patents should have a clause similar to "adverse possession" for land. If you do not actively use/protect a patent for a period of time (say, 5 years) then you lose all rights and that patent goes to the Public Domain.
I thought the USA was all about freedom? To live the dream? Seems it's more about oligarchies and protectionist cartels these days.
"if you consider the level of sentience to be the reason for not causing paint to, or killing animals"
Personally, that does not enter my head. IMHO a sentient being should not cause harm for the simple fact that a sentient being can CHOOSE to not cause harm. Be that to animal, plant or even a rock.
Obviously we need to consume (food etc) and we have little choice in that, but everything else? That's a choice and in order to preserve our scarce resources and to reduce the impact on our own environment, we should choose to harm as little as possible.
Doesn't mean I (or anyone else) is perfect and being perfect isn't even the point. Trying is. Heck, I still eat meat (just not a lot of it).
This bar was just acting like a dick. Maybe they should have raced the owners, encouraging them it water cannon?
...guess I'll wait and see what happens when 4.0.1 comes out of beta.
Made for Internet Explorer?
Site does not work in FF4 on Ubuntu. That could be a fault in FF4, but considering past form it's probably proprietary and non-standards coding by Team MS.
Let me get this right
The Daily Fail etc get their panties in a bunch about some buttocks on the telly before 2100, yet many of these gutter rags will have some waif with her whoppers out on page 3 and are themselves owned by porn peddlers.
Allowing a child to watch "X Factor" is tantamount to child abuse, but for entirely different reasons.
The answer is simple.
OEM price for Windows exclusivity on hardware is X.
The price for non-exclusivity is Y.
Where Y >>> X.
Now, question, why do OEMs want (need?) to ship Windows? Well, the answer is easy. That's what non-techie Joe McPunter knows. Sven Chubbleson and his designer pals know about Macs, true. But Joe McPunter lives in a Windows world. He uses IE6, Word etc at work, plays MMOs with his friends etc. All these (like it or not) demand Windows and as far as he knows, Windows is it.
So if HP (or someone) sell him a PC that cannot run IE, Word, MegaKill 4000 Ultra-Violence Edition; then he will return it as "broken" rather than try to learn a new system.
Even if that system is superior in many ways.
You can argue until you are blue in the face about how "wrong" all this is and I will agree with many of your points, but that is the way the world is. Linux is at least a decade away from being on the desktop, there's still too much Windows-only entrenchment and momentum.
Here's the thing
"The TUC's general secretary Brendan Barber described it as "a major boost to people who work in the creative industries and whose livelihoods are put at risk because creative content is stolen on a daily basis."
By and large people WANT to support the creatives, but the current business model prevents that. People know that most of the money will vanish up the noses of execs and be squandered elsewhere, with the actual talent getting very little.
Now, you can call "Bullshit" if you want and I will agree that there are quite a few bad-eggs out there who need a punch in the face, but if one looks at the success of attempts to work WITH people rather than AGAINST them, then one can see a glimmer of hope.
Now, sure, these initiatives won't keep EMI or Sony afloat; but who gives two craps about them? So long as money gets to the creatives, that's the important thing.
One would have thought that empowering creatives to directly connect with their customers and taking the creatives out from under the yoke of the majors would have been something the TUC is in favour of!
"Theirs is actually capable of 100% duty, so $525,000 per MW at expected duty cycle - under a tenth the capital cost."
That's a fair point, but it ignores one thing; what's the planet cost? Dust-to-dust, which one costs the planet more per MW? That is the only measure of concern.
And as it happens, I think wind is an utter waste of space. Never mind the blight on the landscape and the threat to wildlife, wind cannot be relied on; is often there when you don't need it and gone when you do (30% capacity is pushing it).
Nuclear (even after recent events) is a better option.
Simply using less is an even better option.
...I grant you, but there are some nice features:
1) The doc on the left is very nice. Much better than other docs I have tried (and rejected)
2) The "expose" style overview of windows is good.
3) The lack of clutter on the screen is great.
Things I don't like:
1) The doc on the right for different desktops
2) It takes too many clicks to find an app and they are not grouped/categorised by function
3) The lack of clutter on the screen! One can't just go to an icon and do something any more.
All in all though, it's good to see some attempt an innovation. I just worry that (like Unity) it is too focused on the fondleslab and does not pay enough heed to the different work-function of the average desktop.
...no issue for me here (SuperHub on R25) but then I "only" have the 20mbps service.
Which I got days before the 30mbps came out. Not sure whether to be happy or sad that I missed out.
That kind of PR is bad and it was killing them, but they needed to control Hotz to protect their various licensing agreements.
Probably the thought that they could get themselves out of the spotlight for a while.
Almost certainly (at least the the geek and nerd market segment).
The donation did not form part of the settlement. Think. Why would a corporation like Sony (lover of rootkits) want to help the EFF? They wouldn't. It was Mr. Hotz who gave the money away as this is what he had promised.
I think Hotz had it pretty much right - free speech has been cut in the USA to appease corporate interests. And one more thing:
DO NOT BUY SONY!
Sony has lots of money, so Sony can buy the decision they want. (Technically it was BMG with the rootkits, but they are owned by Sony; so Sony can still be help accountable).
Probably not much - what kind of pillock puts a music disc (it's not a CD as it did not conform to the standard) into the drive of a server or anything else important? It would have been home machines that got attack by the rootkit. Although that does not make it any more acceptable.
Yup. If people were using the mod illegally they should have gone after those people. Next: everyone with a crowbar to be arrested as a burglar. Everyone with a knife to be arrested as a murderer. Everyone with a....and so on.
It's not the tool (be it physical or electronic), it's the use that tool is put to.
I MS win...
...they may have just pointed the RPG at their own feet.
If the burden of proof was lowered, wouldn't that mean that people would find it easier to go after MS's patents?
I understand it perfectly
"You can save 50% by going to the Cloud!"
"Oh, you still need to buy a full compliment of Office licenses. Sucker."
The world and its monkey...
...can offer this. Not just Google or MS. And for the "case", if it's the one I think it is then all hell is about to break loose. The MS cloud is not FISMA certified according to Groklaw. http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110413220154117
FISMA won't apply to everyone, and there's loads of offering that will do private clouds, cloudburst etc. And if they company has a web presence, odds are they are already running a flavour of the OS that is could aware and have most of the skills in-house already.
"The onanists are a bunch of wankers"
Haven't we been here before?
Didn't the WTC find against the US-of-A when they blocked some Antiguan gambling sites?
Any way, if bank fraud etc is to be investigated I hope the Yanks don't expect help from the imbeciles at HRMC or the FSA. Settle for fractions of a penny in the pound those idiots will.
".xxx" is live!
Next news headlines:
Australia blocks ".xxx" because porn is "bad" and degrading to women
America blocks ".xxx" to preserve moral and stop something-or-other
UK blocks ".xxx" because the Sun/Mirror/Mail says its disgusting and won't anyone think of the children?
Porn remains on .com/.net/.whatever because, when all is said and done, it's the biggest industry on the intertubes and is the global leader in new consumer technologies and markets. Get off your hypocritical, Abrahamic high-horse and just bloody deal with it. Mmm-kay?
Is it just me...
...or does anyone else chuckle when the hear "The Last Air*bender*".
Maybe I am just puerile and spend too much time on b3ta.
After looking at Gnome3...
...I think Canonical have shot themselves in the foot by not getting on board with that. I won't be going to 11.04.
I used to be an unpaid volunteer myself (did a variety of collections in uniform too) to I am probably being somewhat hypocritical, but I never stopped people and never called out/shook the tin. I just stood there looking needy.
I'd rather have more efficient governance than higher taxes (i.e. no more PFI/PPP crap). Tighten our belts, mend and make do. But then I am a dreamer.
If it was one or two...
...charities, then they would have a point and perhaps there is some better way they can cover these costs (make a 10% donation themselves and write if off against tax or something) but a company cannot be expected to support every possible charity at zero cost out of the goodness of its own heart. Because is doesn't have one.
You can be sure that Virgin et a have calculated to the nearest penny how much free PR this is giving them, and they probably account for that as covering their costs.
The sheer number of charities that are going around these days is ridiculous. So I can completely see why a company may wish to covers their costs. Personally I am sick to the back teeth with all the chuggers (you know, the people paid to mug you - where's the outcry about that?), charities cold-calling (engaging in emotional blackmail) and the various collection bags shoved through my door. I just bin their crap or close the door in their face.
Might make me seem like a cold, heartless bastard (maybe I am) but the constant pleading/begging is putting me off and I am giving less because I am so tired of it all.
Let the down-voting commence.
"It is in our company's DNA to give 110%"
1) Your company is not organic, it has no DNA
2) Over-unity is not possible.
Both should be hanging offences.
Enterprise is still using ie6! *sobs*
1) Can I root it to remove the crap?
2) Does the battery last a week?
Call me when the answer to both is "Yes", until then I shall stick to my ageing Nokia.
How about an adaptation of Kim Stanley Robinson's classics?
Silverlight works on Mac
So it is cross-platform.
Heck if it runs on XP and Win7, then one can spin that as "cross-platform".
What it isn't is a patent-free standard and neither you nor I can run out and implement it. We could (if we were mad enough) implement our own HTML rendering engine, and that really gives the answer/power/competition/freedom.
Even when MS does force a standard through, it contains patent bombs and one still can't implement it fully (e.g. docx). In such an instance one should demand ODF.
"I get a lot of questions: 'Should I use Silverlight or HTML5?',"
Well, there is only one answer. You use HTML5 because it is the closest thing to an industry-wide standard. This stops your company becoming dependent on MS and prevents your customers becoming more dependent, allowing them to re-tool as new technologies take hold.
If the standard/cross-platform tech of choice can't do what is required, look for another. Only in extremis should one be choosing a technology/implementation that is proprietary.
I realise that is a pipe dream, but dreaming is the only thing that keeps me sane sometimes.
Now if you will excuse me, I have to go back to shouting at the sacks of vomit that are IE7 and IE8.
Not too bothered...
...if some add-ons slow the start-up down (so long as it doesn't become ridiculous, i.e. minutes). AdBlock, Flashblock and NoScript are two I would still use regardless of how slow they were. Why? Because without them the Web would become almost unusable with pop-ups, pop-unders, floating ads hiding content, in-line ads messing up flow, content ad links and flashing adverts.
KDE is (generally) more demanding on graphics cards than Gnome.
But I really would have thought that the "Joke Alert" icon would have given the games away.
KDE users. Tch!
Yeah, but KDE needs a Cray for all it's graphics.
Let the GUI wars commence!
Oh, and which Window Manager do you prefer? Oh, then you're WRONG! HA HA HA!
(See the fun you Windows users miss out on? :) )
Why are people automatically granting unknown attachments execute rights?
Oh, wait. This is Windows. Having everything ready to run and wide open to be exploited is normal.
This may explain why the *nix are not affected.
Even on Windows one can drop the permits to just "Read". Why is this not the default state for all attachments (no macros, no Flash etc permitted to run). If the user wants something to run, they can explicitly grant execute rights in the very few cases where it should be required.
And 2 months to fix something that is actively being exploited? That, frankly, is pathetic and that is why people should not be using Flash or Adobe need to release the code to the community. You can bet that the legion of geeks with too much time on their hands would have a patch ready in a few days (or sooner).
Oh, and they might be able to get Flash to be slightly less shit.
Content has previously always been behind a paywall. One had to buy the book/magazine/paper to get at the content. Why does it make any difference if the paywall is electronic?
Not content with forcing libraries to re-buy e-books after a measily few loans, all publisher have to do is slip all their content behind a veneer of a paywall and they can strangle the supply to everyone. It's like DVD Region encoding, but worse.
Once again the government is pandering to the needs of business and ignoring the needs of the people. Can anyone actually tell the difference between the Tories and Labour?
I agree with your sentiments about freeloaders, but your logic is wrong.
Just because a thing/right can be used to steal/infringe is not a good enough reason to remove that thing/right. What one must do is target the transgressors and punish them, leave others alone.
It is that simple and just because this is an electronic device does not change that one whit.
I have a hacked xBox, I could use it for all sorts of shenanigans but I don't. There's more than enough legit stuff floating about to keep me happy, I really just wanted to stream (legal) media to it.
Sony have been raging ass-hats and I for one will not be buying Sony.
Yes, they are compulsory if:
---You want to use network play
---Play newer games (these demand more recent firmware)
So saying the updates are not compulsory is a total crock.
Sony sold the PS3 as advertised with the "Other OS" option and then arbitrarily removed it. Why consumer organisations the world over haven't spanked Sony to hell and back beats me.
There again, Sony were not adequately punished for the rootkits. (Yes, I know they were on BMG discs, but BMG is just a subsidiary of Sony, ergo Sony are responsible)
No, actually, it isn't an EU thing at all. It was an "EU interpretation" thing perpetrated by the last shower of raging incompetents as the EU did not explicitly demand the test be conducted the way the DSA decided to do it.
Love to cite a source, but of course I can't find it now.
...is just a Cybernetman ZPC-GX31. See?
Good luck finding a public outlet other than Commodore through.
- Crawling from the Wreckage Want a more fuel efficient car? Then redesign it – here's how
- Review Xperia Z3: Crikey, Sony – ANOTHER flagship phondleslab?
- Human spaceships dodge ALIEN BODY skimming Mars
- Pics Whisper tracks its users. So we tracked down its LA office. This is what happened next
- Ex-US Navy fighter pilot MIT prof: Drones beat humans - I should know