3050 posts • joined 25 Mar 2008
And what is the size of Canonical (yet to turn a profit I believe) vs Red Hat (raking it in)? Is Canonical's 1/16 or Red Hat's really so far out of whack?
And even if you don't think it is, Canonical's 1/16 is still better than 0/16 and leagues ahead of the likes of MS.
I agree totally
Rights to free speech, movement, freedom from torture etc are basic human rights. The inalienable rights. Those we'd still have if we returned to the trees.
Everything else is merely a benefit of our technological age.
Not just in N.I.
Before they got booted out for being inept (allowing in a coalition of ineptitude) Labour policy was total observation. This is why they began rolling out ANPR all over the south of England. So recording the movement of mostly innocent people in N.I. is just brining them into line with the British values.
Labour may be out of power for now, but you must still obey the machine they put in place.
If I had kids old enough...
...I'd give them a restricted account, only sites/services on white-lists allowed. As they get older and smarter, they will work out how to by-pass the security. By they time they can get all the pr0n they want, I'd expect them to be old enough to cope with it.
(I only ask to be in the room when they stumble across 2-girls-1-cup for the first time. Evil? Me?)
Must. Control. Fist. Of. Death.
"Labor, they claimed, had comprehensively failed to deliver on cybersafety policies for children"
That pisses me right off, it really does and I'm not even Australian. We see the same thing here. "The Government MUST protect the children!" blah-de-blah-de-blah.
Last time I checked it was the responsibility of the *PARENT* to protect their children! Do they let their children play with guns? On the motorway? Drink bleach? No! So why when it comes to the 'net to they want to divest responsibility to the government?
And what will happen to children on the net?
A few will be predated on and that's not a good thing to have happening, but it happens all the time (relatives/family-friends are the worst - ease of access). Do parents expect the state to mind-scan Uncle Joe when he pops round for tea? So why demand the near-equivalent when their kids go on-line? We are talking about people savvy enough to realise that there is some level of threat on the net. If they are smart enough to work that out, they are smart enough to apply their own content filtering (plus firewalls etc). And if they are not smart enough to do that, they should not let their sodding kids on-line!
But for most, by and large nothing untoward will happen. Apart from the fact they will realise 99.99% of decent, 99.99% are honest. 99.99% of people want the same things they do. Oh, and 99.99% of people are seriously pissed of with the increasingly dictatorial nature of supposed democratic governments.
Whether or not Android makes it in to the main kernel really doesn't matter. Once Windows Phone Mobile Handy A-hoy-hoy Zeiben hits the streets, the whole world will realise the error of their ways and return to the loving embrace of Redmond.
So if a local admin account is logged in and walks away without locking the PC, then any moron can just click "OK" and do what they want? FFS. It's still crap!
*ALWAYS* challenge. Or store a time-limited permission or something. But *DO NOT* assume that just because the logged in account is "AdminBill" that the primate bashing the keys is also "AdminBill".
I do wish people would think through basic security before commenting.
Yeah, and what a piece of crap that is. No password required! So any moron can escalate without needing to know the password for root access. It's bloody stupid.
...running an OS that is less likely to get royally shafted by malware? Y'know, because the user doesn't run as Administrator? Y'know, because the other OS actually has proper user security?
(Cue the down-votes)
In it? Probably.
Someone on average wage and with various outgoings would probably not have £800+ in their account for very long.
I think this is pertinent information.
...this would the only time a groom would be happy to be firing blanks?
You do know you are using a Unix OS on your Mac, yeah? And be thankful to sweet zombie jeebus that you are!
As for flint axes...they (well, bladed weapons in general) score over more modern equivalents in many ways. 1. They are cheap. 2. They are silent. 3. They don't need reloading. 4. One can draw a knife and complete an attack faster than one can use a gun (just ask the Thai army...).
Unix may be old, but that does not make unfit for purpose. In fact, one could take the view that Unix (and Unix-a-likes to an extent) have most of their mistakes in the past.
Just a guess...
...but maybe IE9 vs FF3.6 isn't considered "fair" and they're waiting for FF4? I really don't know though.
I did the tests last nigh on FF 3.6 running on MS's end-user OS (Windows XP) and some worked (slowly) others didn't (e.g. "Space Invader"). Here's the thing, you can get FF for FREE! You could test and publish your own results! You'd need to test IE9, Safari and Opera on the same hardware for a fair comparison though.
As for "it can [optimise] everything for Windows", I really don't care. Windows is becoming increasingly irrelevant by the day.
It does not get 95% The 95/100 isn't the "score". I realise that "The Register" is not pitching itself to be the IT equivalent of "Nature" but really... ...there are something simple things that the authors should *know* and to be able to explain correctly to readers.
When writing a price of browsers, the author should actually have a clue what ACID3 is and how it is measured.
How many times?
Even 100/100 on ACID3 is *NOT* a pass! Jesus wept. It must also match (to the pixel) the reference rendering. Then there is how smooth the animation is and how long it takes.
So is 95 "impressive"? I dunno, we have no information on the other critical factors of the test.
...is to computing as cooking is to chemistry. They are both vital skills, but it is important not to confuse the two.
"Hard" subjects (mathematics, all sciences etc) have been in decline in Britain for years, while or competitor nations (India et al) invest heavily in such subjects. We are already paying for that failure with lower investment and a lack of innovation.
I did the GCSE back when a Master 128 was a shit-hot beast. We never did mail-merge or anything (I have no idea how to do it today, but I have a fair idea of how computers work and how to read the chuffin' manual!), we had to write our own applications in BBC BASIC (I did a very small amount of assembler). Then again, we weren't allowed calculators in maths classes either.
And we were told back than that the GCSEs were too easy!
"There was five exabytes of information created between the dawn of civilization through 2003,"
Probably. And most of that data was unique and precious. Today we get 4.99 exabytes of regurgitated, manipulated, distorted and duplicated vacuous bullcrap (this post adding to that total) every two days!
There is probably more value in one essay from Aristotle than there is in the sum total of most blogs that are spewed forth every day.
It was interesting...
...it just didn't solve comms problem any better than anything else. And some of the features just sucked donkey ball (showing people what you type, as you type? Pun-leeze).
It was newsgroups for Web 2.0 and it managed to not be as good as newsgroups.
Oh, and not havig stand-along apps was a fail. I don't want my comms in a browser, I want them integrated to my device/desktop.
I am sure that we'll see components/ideas in other offerings despite it's problems.
Want to solve my comms problems? Give me voice, video, instant messaging and email; all integrated. Encrypted, based on Open Standards and working seamlessly with MS Office (no matter how good OpenOffice is (and it is pretty good, i use it at home) it does not format/render documents etc *identically* to MS Office and some of us have to use it....grr...).
What part of "it does not work" do you not understand?
If placebos are so powerful, why do doctors bother giving drugs at all? Perhaps what they should do at the first appointment is shake the "magic tambourine" and declare you cured. See if the placebo effect can cut admissions and drug prescriptions?
Who is to say that homeopathy is any cheaper anyway? Many drugs for day-to-day problems are either produced on a mass scale or can be purchased as generics; this makes them cheap.
When you start to get to the expensive drugs/treatments, you are getting towards serious heart problems, cancers and a whole slew of nasties. But not to worry, a sugar pill is cheaper. Jesus!
They only "alternative" medication that can claim any real credence is herbalism - and that's hardly surprising as we still get lots of drugs and compounds from plants. But this does not mean I expect the doctor to treat my skin rash (say) with lavender tea. Unless lavender tea has been proven to work in a double-bind study that has been published in a peer reviewed journal.
The very fact that homeopathy is even given elbow room in the NHS is a clear indication of governments ruling by populism rather than evidence and fact; and the populations growing inability to critically assess data and reach logical conclusions (not being helped by the disaster that is the British education system)..
Sky do not want Ofcom to interfere, but as soon as the BBC et al try to enter Sky DEMANDS that Ofcom interfere.
You can't have it both ways.
...Embrace has begun. Extend and Extinguish to follow shortly.
MS have, at every possible turn, tried to attack/destroy open standards and interoperability. They should not be trusted one iota in this arena. C'mon, they can't even write a browser that follows the HTML standards FFS!
"I'm sure if we all switched to Linux based machines, it'd only be a matter of time before we were back to our usual routine of patching holes every other day."
Very true. At least the repository system employed by many Linux distros would make that task much, much easier and there'd be no need to reboot the machine (well...rarely a need, kernel updates).
What prices I have seen reported for Apple's OS X upgrades list it as cheaper than the comparable upgrades for Windows 7. I do not believe you can buy OS X stand-alone, I could be wrong.
Apple hardware may not be suited for games, but it is more suited for other applications (e.g. graphic design). You pick the tool for the job based on evidence, not ideology.
Actually, any modern windowing system is about as easy to use as another other one. Familiarity, of course, will make one *appear* easier than another to any given individual. I use Windows (XP, 7, and Server), Ubuntu and OS X; they're all pretty much the same although the do have their individual strengths.
If old hardware works, then it works. Why should it be retired if it can still fulfil its function? If it works, or can be re-purposed, then use it. I certainly can't afford a new PC every couple of years and I am gainfully employed! I suspect you are not working and have your needs met by Mummy and Daddy, your attitude will change when you have to provide for yourself.
I am pleased to hear that your mother got such a good system, does she play games? Or did you spec it for her? For day-to-day use you can get a perfectly good system for about half the price you quote (less if you opt to re-use hardware or a different form-factor).
MS is a dead-duck in the Smart-whatever market. That it ruled by Symbian, iOS, and a legion of Linux distros. So if the world does shift from the desktop to that kind of arena, then we could see the landscape change. Which would be good. Competition is good. Struggle is good. For too many years IT has been stagnating in a monoculture. It needs to diversify, if only to save itself.
"one last thing if you cant understand me then stfu i dont give a beep"
Well, you should. ifyouexPressyOurop1n1oninaw-ayth-at1shardtounder5t4nd then people will struggle to follow your opinion. Any valid points you may make will be ignored and simply add to the noise.
You already have two of those
Eye-ball mark one. Simply slow down and the the prat go past (assuming it's safe to slow down of course).
It's almost here
If you have a fairly new license plate, it will have an RFID chip. EVSC/ISA is mooted and Galileo is up there to do the tracking. You pretty much get this with charge-as-you-drive anyway (which is almost certainly on the way - making drivers pay at least 4 times for the roads).
Traffic light cameras get a big thumbs up from me. I'd also like to see yellow-box cameras.
Both connect to frickin' lasers! >;-(
How long before Apple uses them?
...this reads like a manifesto for having all government systems based on open-source; don't you?
"Dear User, You are using too much bandwidth and we are shaping you traffic. Please purchase and increased allowance. Toodles! A.N.Isp."
So a letter along those lines is now collusion/conspiracy to assist piracy?
I have zero sympathy for pirates, but the action of the MAFIAA and their bull-boys is just beyond the pale.
HP (plus a few others) etc tried it, had some good ideas, but it didn't really get legs.
Apple stripped it down, locked it down and made it look good and it just works (so I'm told).
Then Linux started appearing on more an more units from the more "fringe" OEMs (some iPad rip-offs, some not) and started breeding tablet/tocuh specific distors (Android, MeeGo, Unity etc)
Now HP et al have started to weigh back in with non-MS units.
So MS are not basically playing "Whack-a-mole", the problem for MS is that it's the moles who are holding the mallets in this game. Some of these mole may even be holding nothing more than a sharpened stick, but then know where to jab them.
MS has lost (actually, they never had) the mobile market. It's too fragmented, too varied. Only the ecosystem that Linux fosters can possibly cope with the variations that abound. If MS want to retain any chance, they need to start building cross-platform technologies, applications and services.
This, of course, goes against everything MS stand for. They cannot tolerate (cannot survive) competition on an equal footing.
Like the law would stop them
It's not breaking the lock that is the crime (well...it's not robbery, that's criminal damage), it's not entering your property that's the crime (not everywhere has laws on trespass), it taking your stuff (or causing fear etc) that's the crime! You can have as many laws as you like, but people will still do it. They have chosen to ignore (break) the law.
Why not leave your door open and just have a sign out front that says "Dinnae take my stuff, it's illegal!", see how far that gets you.
It is beholden on these companies (they have a duty of care to their customers, and those customers [banks] have a duty of care to me) to ensure their stuff is as secure as is reasonable practical. Seems like they have been sitting on their laurels.
The usual response in cases like this is to attack the person demonstrating the flaw rather than fixing the bloody flaw. This would akin to you suing the person who point out that you have no locks and only a flimsy sign to guard your valuables...
"The CEO of any organisation that is found to be responsible, or partially responsible, for any environmental incident (e.g. oil spill) will be held personally and infinitely liable. Should the CEO be bankrupted, such financial responsibility will be spread amongst other members of the board (COO etc)."
Or something similar. The only way to get people to take responsibility is to MAKE them responsible. This is true for banks and any other industry. At the moment those with the power (CEOs etc) bear no liability or responsibility and when things do go tits up, they can expect to leave with a massive golden-goodbye.
If you are I messed up in a similar manner, we'd be facing summary dismissal.
Speaking as a Brit, "fluff" means s light, downy material. Possibly something like lint or, gosh, a cloud. Or even something of little significance.
Where you get the notion that "fluff" is euphemism for coitus in British English eludes me, I have never heard it used in that context at all.
The morons in the RIAA, MPAA, BPI etc won't agree to it. They want to keep trade restricted and obstruct the free market so they can profiteer. This is why they try to carve up the world into regions; despite the fact that the 'net is global and has little concept of borders (e.g. I could get a USA VPN account and watch Hulu).
C'mon, Sony thought that attacking people's equipment with a rootkit was justifiable. That is the mentality we are dealing with here!
You need a bigger box...
...IIRC it must run from internal power in order to be exempt.
Petrol is cheap
Very cheap. It costs about the same as water which, when you consider what has to be done to actually create petrol, is simply phenomenal; so be thankful for small mercies.
No, no and thrice no!
One of the best things about the Beeb is the lack of adverts. I am more than happy to pay £12 to not have to watch adverts. In fact, one reason I don't have Sky is because I don't see why I should pay for a channel AND still have to watch adverts*.
The Beeb has problems, no doubt about that (juniors having to work as producers for no extra pay whilst big-wigs cream off vast salaries for no apparent benefit; for example), the Beeb also suffers from Leftie-bias and has failed to produce a meaningful (hard) documentary on any subjest for about ten years; but compared to the likes of ABC, NBC, CBS etc... ...it just leaves them in the dust.
One must be very careful when reading "anti"-BBC stories too. Sky would like nothing more than to see the Beeb neutered, then there would be no competition for the dross it outputs.
*If I ever get around to installing MythTV, that won't be an issue.
If they do bring in...
...some kind of 'net license, I expect the BBC to lift all restrictions on what players can play back their content. I will have paid for it, so I expect to play it on any device of my choice (PC, Mac, iPod, hacked xBox, whatever; on any OS of my choice [not just Windows]).
I am also interested in the pricing. At the moment I pay £12 for "all you can eat" and rarely need to use iPlayer as the PC records more than enough stuff for me (only when it has a glitch do I use iPlayer). So if there is a 'net license, will I end up paying more? I strongly suspect the answer is "yes".
And how does the costing work? Who pays? The owner of the 'net connection or the viewer? If three people share the same net connection, is the fee levied once or three times? What if one person watches three shows at once? Is that now 3 charges?
With some kind of 'net fee, will they (and by "they" I primarily mean the parasitic distributors) finally get out of the dark ages and agree a global license. If I pay the fee to the BBC (or whomever) why the hell can't I play their content from anywhere in the world?
Perhaps such a model is the beginning of the end for traditional broadcasters. Perhaps we'll move to a system where you pick a "agency" that has agree license terms and just get what content you want, when you want (e.g. Jamendo, Magnatune) without restriciton. Paying the appropriate fee, of course.
This will, undoubtedly, lead to the demise of some major player which IMHO would be a good thing. The majors have ruined many promising series in the chase for the current bottom line and jerked content creators around more than enough. I have no doubt the some content creators could "go direct" (e.g. Seth McFarlane, Trey Parker & Matt Stone) and allow their fans access to their content, to major label required.
Can you smell the fear from the MAFIAA yet? Perhaps this is what ACTA is intended to stop - free trade and an open market.
"I'd like to see them spend some money on actually painting useful arrows on roads approaching roundabouts"
Indeed! Nothing is more annoying that approaching in what one thinks is the correct lane, only to spot the arrow just before the dotted line and note that one is now in the wrong lane for this particular roundabout (e.g. two lanes in, left is mandatory first exit or something).
One arrow about 200m further down the road (or even some singage!) would be a big help.
I don't like the GATSO style safety cameras, they only check the speed at one specific point and if the limit has been set wrong (yes, it is quite possible to set a limit that is too low) then you get a concertina effect when the traffic gets to the camera zone. Average speed cameras are much better.
Cameras I support 100% are red-light cameras. Although they are far too lenient (amber means stop, idiots) and I have yet to see any attached to automated Gattling guns to remove the red-light jumping, pond scum from existence.
The thing that puzzles me is that the cameras are revenue generators. At a time of cost cuts, one would expect their use to increase. Although, with the money first going to the Treasury, the local council who has to bear the cost probably doesn't get to see much of it.
Anyway; even if you believe that speeding (as in, being over the limit) is a causal factor in around 33% of accident (the true figure is probably nearer 7%, according to unmassaged governmental figures), those light-up smiley faces are actually more effective. As is better road design, surface repair, signage etc. So if Brake really, *REALLY* support road safety; then throwing it all behind the safety camera is counter-productive.
The one big thing that really helps road safety is traffic police, but I doubt we'll be seeing any of those on or roads any time soon. Coppers cost money and despite traffic cops making roads safer (also catching miscreants of various types) they simply cost too much.
There is simply no need for this invasion of privacy (and I am a TalkTalk customer). Had I known, I would have opted out as I do not require this level of nannying from my ISP. I want my ISP to be an efficient, yet dumb, data pipe. That is all.
And how do they determine what is a threat. Many "threats" only target some systems, so an attack on XP may not work on Win7 and almost certainly will not work against a real OS.
It also leads to end-user complacency. "I do not need any firewall or AV as my ISP protects me." Cue TalkTalk customers getting data-raped by a zero-day that basic measures could have prevented.
Up to know I have been happy with TalkTalk and was pleased at their stance on Phorm. This action gives me serious misgivings and I will watch it with interest.
I wonder if this is serious enough to complain to the ICO about....not that they'll do anything of course.
I agree he did it
And I agree with why the USA want him. Thing is; that's not justice, that's revenge.
Invalid comparison. As far as we know, nothing was stolen (no burglary), not thing was broken (no criminal damage) and so no crime may have been committed (clue: not all countries have laws on tresspass in meatspace let alone cyberspace).
Until the USA presents evidence and satisfies a UK court that a crime has actually been committed, they should be told to haud their wheest. Although I realise the treaty pretty much allows the USA to demand any UK citizen be handed over at any time for any reason and they are not required to provide evidence.
I don't worry about my collection being stolen just now
I have this thing called "insurance".
If they held is, I would seriously worry about their records getting screwed and losing me my "collection". "Computer says 'No'" attitude.
It'll be DRM'd to death and, as it is backed by Sony-BMG, can you really trust it? Can you be 100% sure they will not root your PC (again) just to "protect" their "rights"?
I'll stick to buying the physical media and ripping to the format of my choice (perfectly legal fair use, normally blocked by DRM).
Equipment maker "Krug" is now called "Kriega" after fizzy-pop maker "Krug" had a moan. I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I do know that fizzy-pop and backpacks are not the same thing.
Perhaps "iPood" should have been renamed "iJobbied"?
You said "beta testing", the presumes 2 things
1) There was alpha testing;
2) MS actually do any testing.
You have 7 seconds to tell me why Apple advertising is mind-numbing.
"Earl had clearly breached the rules on use of Westminster facilities but he had apologised and promised not to do it again."
"[Huntley] had clearly breached the [law of the land] but he had apologised and promised not to do it again."
Either the rules (law) are enforced for all, or they are enforced for none. You cannot have a two tier system.
Our leads must not only obey the rules, they must been seen to obey the rules and lead by example; or pay the consequence. If I had a say (and I don't under our current 'democracy') I would strip the Earl of his title and eject him from the house.
- Hi-torque tank engines: EXTREME car hacking with The Register
- Review What's MISSING on Amazon Fire Phone... and why it WON'T set the world alight
- Product round-up Ten excellent FREE PC apps to brighten your Windows
- Product round-up Trousers down for six of the best affordable Androids
- Why did it take antivirus giants YEARS to drill into super-scary Regin? Symantec responds...