2914 posts • joined Tuesday 25th March 2008 12:38 GMT
Inquiring minds want to know
Will the new audio drivers mean PulseAudio finally works?
Re: mothers day
Modern mother's day started in the USA, it has no real connection to Mothering Sunday. Mothering Sunday was to do with visiting one's "mother" church. Although Mothering Sunday has, overtime, acquired the trappings of the USA's Mother's Day (but keeps it's original date).
Just like Father's Day, Mother's Day (and Grandparent's Day and Secretary's Day and...) is just an attempt to get people to buy more cards and tat. Seriously, if it takes Hallmark to advertise a day in the calendar for you to remember to say to your mother/father you love them (or your secretary that are doing a good job or whatever); then you are a cock of the highest order.
Does the smart meter benefit me as the consumer?
Feck orf then.
So long as you have verified the contact (by some means) and they have need to see the data (for whatever reason) you can send it (or let them retrieve it). That communication should, however be secured and the recipient required to keep their copy secure until they are done with it (whereupon it should be destroyed).
I wouldn't reply to a random email though. I'd call the company and then ask them for an FTPS site, GPG key or something similar.
Yeah, the whole "orphan works" thing has never really sat well with me. Just because one doesn't know who made it (and under what license it was released) should not give one the right to use it; unless one knows for a fact it's so old as to be out of copyright.
Imagine if the argument were (sort of) flipped:
"Why did you Torrent that film?"
"Well, m'lud, there were no opening or closing credits and my best efforts could not identify the owner."
"Fair enough. Case dismissed. NEXT!"
"Apple told me they carry out spot checks for security reasons. But I don't think any private company should have the right to ask you to send over such personal documents by email."
They have the right to ask, you have the right to tell to go and fiddle with themselves.
Also, never, ever send such data in the clear via email. It's why we have encryption and other security measures.
Re: The problems it causes.
"free software can and indeed does in many cases implement DRM, there is a world of difference between free software which can be closed source, and open source software"
You clearly have no idea what free software is.
Once a bastion of freedom...
...and the free exchange of ideas, the Internet is not to have a Digital Repression Mechanism installed into its core.
The W3C are fundamentally wrong on this one.
E&Y you say
One of the largest advisors to the government on tax issues, you mean.
All the big accountants control government tax policy, it's in their interest to do so in order to allow them to sell "solutions" to their clients.
Does PAC no realise they are interviewing the very people who wrote the law?
If the government doesn't want tax loop-holes, stop asking the people who profit from tax loop-holes to write the friggin' law!
And IF Google has evaded tax, why is the PAC running the shown and not HRMC?
You know, HMRC. The people who sold their buildings to a company in a tax haven.
I would have thought this would have been covered by the resident "IP" zealot Orlowski.
Or did he pass because it doesn't reinforce his prejudice?
Re: Somebody PLEASE!!!!
GIMP is not 100% PS compatible as it does not render 100% of PS's layers/objects/filters with 100% accuracy, 100% of the time; which would be a mandatory requirement to act as a PS replacement in a professional shop.
Oh, and GIMP doesn't have CMYK support (bug 123598), so it's a non-starter as a PS replacement.
This is simply a case of PS being the de facto standard, and that means you have to support it and its features (which will be hard due to patents).
That all said, GIMP is fine if that's all you use and all you need. Nothing wrong with GIMP. It's just not PS.
Re: Wave hands madly and-
"I'm sorry hplasm, this media is protected by DRM and I am unable to print. Please contact www.hotnsweaty.com for a license"
Re: I really don't like the idea of gesture TV
You put gaffer tape over the lens. Beyond a power button, the TV itself has few/no controls.
Congrats, you just bout a £1,000 paperweight.
I really don't like the idea of gesture TV
How does the TV know the gesture was mean for it and you're not simply swatting away a fly?
Facial recognition? Does it know you are focused on it?
OK, so how do I know it isn't doing anything else with that data? Where are the safeguards for my privacy?
Will TV start reporting when I look at the screen, what I look at etc so ads can be targeted at me even further?
Where are the safeguards against me being further gouged by Big Media?
"5 pairs of eyes are detected, this film is only licensed for 4 pairs of eyes at once. Please upgrade your license at www.bastards.com"
There are none. The TV is becoming even more the agent of Big Media rather than the owner's device.
Easily solved in on fell swoop though; mandate that the TV's OS, applications and drivers have to be GPL and user serviceable. Done.
"Oh, but innovation blah-de-blah-de-blah..." Bullshit. Innovation explodes when there is freedom. I give you "The Internet" as one example. Imagine the uses that could be used if hackers had freedom, here is but there:
1) TV that doesn't report back to mother (or doesn't without your express and informed consent).
2) TV that modifies the picture and then puts it into a person's field of view (for those with certain vision issues)
3) TV that will access any Internet service you see fit, not the OEM's walled garden.
The privacy and security of users trumps any industry desires. Always.
Another thought on distance. If the likes out AutoTrader and give me a radius of a postcode, why can't recruitment sites filter on same? Actually I know the answer to that, because I asked someone when they wanted me as a DBA in Southampton.
"Oh" they said "I didn't look at the regions, I just did a keyword search."
So even if the sites did offer it, the recruitards wouldn't use it!
Fucking morons. End of.
Err...no. How about they switch on their brains.
Areas considered: Edinburgh.
Is London in Edinburgh? Is Edinburgh in London?
And that's before we get to the skillset.
As for travel distance...a satnav map would seem to help here. Long/Lat of target post code. Long/lat of start postcode. Distance between? Fudge that by adding, what, 10%? Assume an average travel speed of...40mph? Bingo, bango, bongo; there's yer time. (Note: you will need to gather some better data on distance fudge-factor and average speed).
Is it accurate? No, but it's a damned sight better than annoying me for about jobs I don't want to do in places I don't want to live.
When Joe Miggins of Boggins Recruitment calls me up about some wholly unsavoury job, I simply assume that they (and their company) are a bunch of buzz-word bingo bottom feeders. I don't think I've been wrong yet.
And anonymity is given another stabbing
Without anonymity, there is no privacy. Discuss.
I do not have, nor do I want, a Farcebook account due to things like this. But all it takes is a friend who does to tag me and BAM....my name is there and I can no longer escape the machine.
Maybe it's time to start a new trend and wear dazzle.
This. In spades. And not just homoeopaths - all pedallers of quackery and pseudo-science. Unless, of course, they can prove it works under proper (verified, repeatable, fully-blinded) trials. Which they can't.
What about everyone else?
Will the civil servants etc who purchased these face censure? (My guess is no)
Did any person from the UK aid their sale (e.g. ECGD, MP, civil servant)? Will they face censure? (My guess is no).
Now that he has been prosecuted, can we now move on to homoeopathy, chiropractors, mediums etc etc?
Re: As I predicted
I like the look of the Surface hardware. That's a semi-decent concept.
The OS is a pile of vomit, as is the lock-in
I have little issue with kids and guns (no, I don't own any or shoot).
Kids killing kids with guns, that's an issue.
But so is kids killing kids with anything really.
I've got some Borax downstairs. Maybe you should provide a link to that as well.
And cooking oil. That's dangerous too, when hot. Can you give me a link please?
Knives! My goodness, I forgot about the knives! Best give us a link so we can all be safe!
Water! ARG! You can drown in that! Link please! Help me! I'm scared to go in the kitchen!
You are beyond ridiculous, Badvok.
You have to consider intent.
Kids hurt (and kill themselves) climbing tree. What do you want to do? Expel kids for doing what kids will do?
She needs a bollocking, sure, but not expulsion.
When I say I want a permanent job doing Java-type stuff in Edinburgh; why do I constantly get calls for contract work doing C# in London?
Oh wait, I remember why; they are morons!
A waste of my time, their time and the client's money.
Re: Another PR stunt by MPs
Yeah, because Eire's economy it's a doing sooooooooo well.
Re: @The BigYin: Another PR stunt by MPs
MPs cannot accuse Google of immoral acts whilst they themselves do similar things.
Changing the law to get money from Google and protect themselves is also immoral.
They have one clear choice and they are not taking it. Too busy with this circus which achieves nothing.
I would be better of if the UK had proper tax enforcement. The purported £2billion from Vodafone would have been a good start. But no; one handshake and all gone. The culprit in all this faced no censure!
Actual banking regulation would be good too.
Our MPs are long on words but very, very short on action.
Re: Another PR stunt by MPs
> UK MPs can't change global laws
Well they can via treaties etc, but not immediately. What they can do is alter UK laws.
> they can't do anything that makes global businesses look at the UK and go "we're not going to set up a base there".
Then they should shut-up about "morals", tax and stop wasting everyone's time.
> This is for Google to be moral and stop being so mean
Google is obeying the law AFAIK. Right or wrong, that's the deal. Don't like it, change the law.
Re: Another PR stunt by MPs
"If the MPs and their pals avoid tax using these methods, cite some sources,"
I know for a fact it has been repeatedly reported in the "Private Eye", but I can't find any on-line sources right this second (and I don't want to mention names without being sure).
It's not illegal, they've not committed any crime. They're just being hypocritical - which is par for the course with an MP.
The last tax settlement HMRC got was a cosy dinner and a handshake (thanks Hartnett).
Another PR stunt by MPs
It makes them look good, but it achieves nothing. If they want to stop Google's antics there is a simple answer: change the law.
They won't do that because too many MPs (and their pals) also avoid tax by using the similar tricks.
ParcelForce also blocks certain browsers and OSs for no real reason I can fathom.
Spoof your agent and it works fine.
So....is this a legacy site then? Does it matter that it doesn't support modern stuff then?
Re: Whilst I can see the value.....
"But surely this means that something that saves a utility company money (such as not needing to employ meter readers) saves me money too?"
Not really. Costs go to you, savings go to shareholders. The only thing that keeps prices in check even vaguely is competition.
Re: Oh Noes!!!!111
Think about it, just for a second. All smart meters are the same. A hack is found.
You are a terrorist.
Wait until winter.
Switch off the gas and power to homes nationwide, screw the network drivers at the same time. You only really need to do the leccy, that'll take out gas central heating too (boilers do use leccy).
*UNLESS* there is a hard-reset switch that can re-flash the meter on-site (and this can be done by the consumer) then there is a very serious risk to life. And even if so, you (as the terrorist) and periodically re-bugger them.
The risk may be low, but the impact high. It bears thinking about.
It'll never happen? Bullshit. Look up the SCADA attacks.
Re: Whilst I can see the value.....
"We aren't paying for them, the electricity companies are paying for them."
And where do they get money from? The pixies? Any cost a company bears is ultimately borne by the consumer.
I would have less of an issue with smart meters if they were dedicated to the customer first and the utility company second. I could see them being very useful to consumers in figuring out where they waste energy etc. But they are not aimed at the consumer, so they are an epic fail. Again.
Re: Excuse me
Bit late now. Those images will be sat in a cache now, ripe for the plucking.
Time to die
Screw Flash and their locked-in, freedom hating crap. Forward the new, HTML5 DRM freedom hating!
Re: You don't
"in the case of Google they sell rights to patent licenses AND trademarks. "
So that's patents and trademarks, not "IP".
"There wasn't any specific reference to the third bit of "IP", copyright"
There is no such thing as "IP". There are patents, trademarks and copyright. Different tools for different jobs. Lumping them together under the misnomer "IP" clouds very serious issues.
Wasn't part of the whole Pi idea to stimulate this kinda thing? Now I have the choice of two nano-PC-board-things to choose from. Cool!
Both are good as learning tools, one has more juice than the other, but one draws less power than the other. Which one is "best" really depends on the problem you are trying to solve.
Re: The view from afar
Labour don't. They are left-wing; "Give the state all your money, the state will provide."
The Tories don't either. They are right-wing; "You are a peasant and deserve no money. You should be honoured to slave for us."
The Lib Dems are still trying to decide what colour the Internet should be.
Re: So, when do YOU start the posters and the street signs ?
It's not restricted to IT geeks. Any person who cares about their privacy can do it.
In fact, any person who does care should contact their MP and say how bad this bill is.
Open and under my control
So long as the security is an open standard, I can intercept and decrypt any message, every manufacturer publishes details on their messages and everything is ultimately under my control; I'm easy.
Put what ever other checks and balances you see for, but the one goal had to be that the owner/user MUST BE in control. Not the OEM, Google or Facebook.
Re: You don't
Oh, and please don't use the phrase "IP". It's meaningless and conflates three areas of law. You are referring to trademark licensing I believe?
- On the matter of shooting down Amazon delivery drones with shotguns
- Review Bring Your Own Disks: The Synology DS214 network storage box
- OHM MY GOD! Move over graphene, here comes '100% PERFECT' stanene
- IT MELTDOWN ruins Cyber Monday for RBS, Natwest customers
- Google's new cloud CRUSHES Amazon in RAM battle