Yay for yet another browser engine. With Opera moving to Webkit, I thought we were headed towards three browser engines that worked relatively consistently but noooooooooo that's not enough for Google.

I personally am glad to see that he isn't afraid to call it how he sees it. If he thinks it's stupid, I'm glad he has the nerve to call it so, bluntly and plainly without weasel words.

I would speculate, though, that a lot of the rest he is as ranty as he is, is simply because he is passionate about what he does. People who are passionate about what they do, they live and breathe it, and it flows through them. Drama is the inevitable side effect of someone who is that passionate about it.

So, Nokia isn't there... um... Microsoft and Symbian are both represented, doesn't that cover Nokia any more?

To be honest, I have a Symbian-based Nokia PureView 808 and am very satisfied with it. Yes, it's a bit of a slab but to be honest it fits my hands very nicely, moreso than an iPhone does.

And judging by the crapfest that was Microsoft 'social crap' that came with my last update, WP Nokia can fuck right off.

Well, given that Flash can be configured to access webcams, I'm not really seeing why there is a sudden new risk of browsers accessing webcams just because it doesn't need Flash to do it any more... it's not like there is a sudden lack of Flash on the desktop.

Well, considering how inefficient WP is under the hood, any blog with any amount of traffic really does actually *need* this plugin, and it is so commonly installed that yes, it is newsworthy in a lot of ways.

Now only if I hadn't already heard this 3 days ago... ;)

Can someone send a copy of Star Trek: The Next Generation to the government, please? If nothing else, a copy of the episode The Drumhead.

I mean, I'm seeing Clegg trying to imitiate Picard (I was as shocked as you are), and Admiral Satie as the successive generations of Home Secretary. I don't know who's playing Worf, but any of the civil service pretty much sums it up.

Picard: You know, there are some words I've known since I was a schoolboy: "With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably." Those words were uttered by Judge Aaron Satie, as wisdom and warning. The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged.

Worf: Sir, the Federation *does* have enemies. We *must* seek them out!

Picard: Oh, yes. That's how it starts. But the road from legitimate suspicion to rampant paranoia is very much shorter than we think. Something is wrong here, Mister Worf. I don't like what we have become.

Picard: Mr. Worf, villains who twirl their moustaches are easy to spot. Those who clothe themselves in good deeds are well camouflaged.

Worf: I think... after yesterday, people will not be so ready to trust her.

Picard: Maybe. But she, or someone like her, will always be with us, waiting for the right climate in which to flourish, spreading fear in the name of righteousness. Vigilance, Mister Worf - that is the price we have to continually pay.

This episode was 21 years ago, but the lessons it teaches in its own way are just as relevant today as they were 21 years ago. I'm not sure whether that's a good thing or a bad thing.

Um... did we forget there was a DOS port then?

http://www.gog.com/gamecard/earthworm_jim_1_2

So it's not really that much like Spectrum BASIC then?

Obviously this is Apple's fault. Or not. How about all the other companies whose products are manufactured at Foxconn... going to boycott all of them too?

Last time I flew - last month - the in-flight attendants actually said that it wasn't for interference but for the fact that if there's an emergency, having everything off would mean it would be easier for the attendants to get your attention. I figure that it just isn't an issue any more.

Obligatory Oatmeal observation: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/game_of_thrones

What about all the people who pirate and then go and buy the full game?

Also, part of the problem is that Ubisoft predominantly pushes franchise-reaping games, though I have seen them invest in smaller studio titles of late, maybe they're learning not to concentrate solely on the big names year on year on year.

Would someone please explain to me why Opera has to be fixed because Outlook.com doesn't run?

Is it because Opera isn't following standards, or because Outlook.com doesn't follow standards and relies on non-standard behaviour?

Given even the disparity of games available for OS X vs Windows, I'd be surprised to see a major move to Linux.

Especially when you realise that a decent number of those 'Mac' games are already using a WINE derivative anyway.

Finally, Rory has said something vaguely meaningful for once, makes a change.

I find I really, really hate Github as a tool for software development. I'm not against version control, and I could probably grow to like Git over time but the way Github does stuff just irritates me (do we *really* need those animations between pages?)

And it'll end up failing just as current AV generally does: you'll see developers sneaking in multiple variations of the same software, just modified enough to get past the detection code.

I'm not convinced on the whole 'everyone in the DC universe' shtick. I mean... most of the villains are basically name-checks and included for the sake of inclusion and given stupid mechanics to 'justify it'.

Aquaman is there. Yes, really. But the only use for him is to use his ability to spray a jet of water much as Robin does with one of the suits, except just in the places where you don't have Robin + his suit or it would be really inconvenient to do so (like in parts of Gotham City)

The Flash is there too. His only reason for inclusion, other than a name check, is to 'reassemble' the things that Lex's deconstructor ray has disassembled.

I mean, just by the conclusion of the main storyline, you'll have Batman, Robin, Superman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, Cyborg, and The Flash to play with.

Don't even get me started on the number of villains they included, all of which are on roof-tops and need to be duelled, and serve little or no real other purpose in the game other than that.

As far as navigation goes, that was handled surprisingly poorly, I thought, but turn on all the remote Batcomputer terminals (look for the red beams of light, can't really miss those) and then you can be shown a map with everything on it, and after that it isn't really hard to find, especially since you have multiple characters who can fly and thus float and look down on things... and this follows through for the roof-top duels: if you can find them and get to them, you almost certainly have Superman who can fly - and is invulnerable.

Completion of the main story campaign and only getting 20% is absolutely par for the course. Though I too felt unsatisfied - I was kind of hoping for the same as Lego Batman, having the villains' story to play too or at least more than 15 levels.

I like the idea of the massive Gotham City area to explore; it's done even better than Hogwarts was in the first Lego Harry Potter game (years 5-7 was quite poor by comparison, IMHO), but doing it this way is way too linear, it's one overall storyline and one huge area to explore, though there is a lot to do there.

If you liked the series thus far you probably won't be too disappointed, but you probably will be a little disappointed.

Not sure this should have had 85%, I'd have given it about 75% myself, that's after 25 hours thus far - it's a lot of fun, of course, but I'm not sure it's as polished as has been stated.

Speaking as a forum software developer, where this situation is rife

CAPTCHAs are only effective all the time they're not actively targeted - as soon as they receive any unwelcome attention, you're stuffed.

The trick, really, is to make them unique to the content of the site, and this is why anti-spam Q&A are so much more effective, because you can target the Q&A to the site itself, about things that people going to the site would be likely to know, e.g. I know a user who runs a forum about a game called Elements, and naturally, the anti-spam question 'How many elements are there?' means a different number to an Elements player as it would do everyone else - but that's fine.

The multi-lingual problem isn't really a problem either, it's not actually that hard to set things up so there are different questions for users with different languages (assuming you've provided a method by which alternative languages can be selected for guests)

The problem with CAPTCHAs is that ever more intricate methods are being devised - including people wrapping entire simple games around the forms in order to add one-shot values to things for verification - but this is not actually that useful from a user's perspective.

I also recently had an interesting debate with someone who is running campaigns where simple CAPTCHAs are constructed that specifically promote companies. You can only imagine how effective that really is.

Haven't played, but I'm given to understand the always-online aspect is not merely because of the item marketplace, but also because your friends can jump in and out of games virtually at will which does sort of require always-online.

The interesting thing is that the sale was partly in shares. That means some of that 1bn figure is based on Facebook's own insane valuation, and that it's not really as ridiculous as it sounds.

1bn cash is not the same as 1bn worth of shares in Facebook, and I don't know how the split between cash and shares, but I'd bet that the bulk of the 1bn is shares in Facebook - and after FB goes public, that 1bn may not be worth nearly as much.

This technology might not have been asked for, but there's a reason why it's being deployed: because it helps the banks, it was never for our benefit as customers.

Remember: if your card is skimmed, the onus is on you to prove the card was used fraudulently, rather than on them to protect you. It's an increasing of the shift in liability from the banks to you.

Also, is it *any* Visa branded card or *any WIRELESS* Visa branded card? I don't see how they could skim the details off non-wireless cards.

Maybe I'm misreading it here but this seems like a meaningful appearance of common sense to me.

On the one hand, site operators that allow uploading of content must be pro-active about looking for infringing material.

On the other, ISPs themselves (not individual sites) can't be made to filter content, of the kind that BT and TalkTalk (IIRC) were fighting.

Where's the problem here? Any site owner is responsible for ensuring that what's on the site is legit, and the ISPs aren't responsible for what their users do. Same as ever, except this time we have some legal precedent for it.