The BBC news site will play HTML 5 video *if* your user agent looks like something mobile. Otherwise it just says "You need flash to play this content" (or something like that), Which is a bit crap really.
114 posts • joined 12 Apr 2008
The BBC news site will play HTML 5 video *if* your user agent looks like something mobile. Otherwise it just says "You need flash to play this content" (or something like that), Which is a bit crap really.
Are there really that many new homes every single week? (honestly, I have no idea... but that sounds considerably higher than I might've guessed)
That'll be why they didn't zoom in enough to see the green blobs!!
When these projects fail, where do the incomplete deliverables go? Surely if they (the gov.) don't intend to use them, they should be available to the public?
It's been noted here previously, how frequently this turn of phrase appears particularly with not-particularly-clueful-vendors. TalkTalk springs immediately to mind!
Given that these "customers" are likely to be leaving anyway, I think they should have some fun with it... say something like "only customers with very small proportions are affected" or something. It'd be funny!! :D
On a related note, it's *all* their customers then, yes?
I can see it now... said moron arrives at (say) Brussels airport for his flight home... moments after he enters the building, gun fire can be heard and shortly after, a bomb is detonated.
Luckily, our moron is sufficiently far away to be uninjured by the blast.
There's smoke all around. People are in shock. The shock turns to panic. Mobile phones can be heard ringing as friends and family check on loved ones.
Inexplicably at this point, Steve Jobs is also in the same airport (back story: he never really died and just wanted to live a more normal life... or something. Whatever, I need him for the punch line later on...). Steve calmly surveys the scene trying, liking everyone, to understand wtf just happened.
He see's a young man (our moron), in oddly ill fitting clothes, maladjusted baseball cap, but still with impeccable hair. More mobile phones are ringing. The moron pulls what looks to Steve like a gun from his bag; "perhaps he's an undercover cop", thinks Steve momentarily? But... hang on, why has he grabbed it by the barrel? And he's poking it with his other hand!
At this point, the moron is shot by _actual_ undercover cops... the last words to float through his vacuous skull being those of Steve: "You're holding it wrong!".
To be fair, I think an RTG does increase the costs quite a bit which is a shame because they are perfect for this kind of thing.
^ re Gnome's bloatyness, has this not improved at all?
I'm still running Ubuntu 14.04 on my main machine (2.6GHz quad-core i5), but I've recently been trying to use a Raspberry Pi 3 as my main machine! Yes, the Pi is much slower with many things, especially the browser (albeit Chromium on the Pi 3 is just about tolerable), but the thing that really amazes me is that the file manager (PCManFM) is *considerably* snappier on the Pi than Nautilus is on my i5.
I do appreciate that the i5/Ubuntu setup is running compiz and therefore has a little more work to do... but even so, I'm kind of of the opinion that a file manager really shouldn't be perceptibly slow.
Can people stuck on a TT contract use this as a reason for escape?
"That Win 1 0 is getting a (small) boost in market share is understandable, the deadline for "not free" is fast approaching."
If that is the case, and I'm not sure it is, but if it is.... would MS not be better just dropping the price of Windows to ~$20. Maybe different pricing for enterprise, but otherwise, just have a single version of Windows equivalent to Pro for use by home and small business users for basically a minimal price to cover media distribution?
That would effectively mean giving it free to OEMs, but at least they might then increase the user base a bit more than now; cheaper PCs, slightly more upgrades... maybe?
In other news, Microsoft might in effect be allowing upgrades to Win 10 after the cut off date, providing you
pretend to be are a user who requires assistive technologies!
So (1). they think that security by obscurity is a useful primary defence layer *AND* (2). they've then given away the very same information that they consider to be their primary defence layer.
Even if they could convince anyone that point 1 is valid, then surely they are guilty of aiding terrorists because of point 2?
They deserve to be absolutely destroyed in court over this level of f*k-wittery.
His _own_ toothbrush!
If you were in the sorry situation of having no backups of your own, then way-back-machine or google-cache might be your best option. EXCEPT way-back-machine won't show anything if the robots.txt file is no longer being served (or indeed, if it's set to block bots).
Anyone know what 123-reg have been serving for sites that have been nuked? It would be interesting to see if they do serve a robots.txt file.
The article says "114,933 servers out of 115,000".... so am I correct in thinking that that's considerably more than "a minority of customers" or whatever 123-reg's original assessment of impact was?
I thought it was Orion?
Word-for-word, that's exactly what their admin said. Probably! :D
Totally guessing, but maybe Mossack Fonseca is just one of a number of companies operating in this [ahem] area of expertise [/ahem]. I'm going to guess there's a *lot* of people suddenly needing to double check their own arrangements, maybe proxy through more than one of such companies, and make sure things are really really air-tight.
However, there will still be a lot of impedance mismatch between the Windows and Linux universes. Anyone who does not want to fight with strange compatibility quirks at every turn will still use a real Linux distribution to get work done.
It's an interesting one that... because initially when I heard about this, I thought that this is the "embrace" phase, and next things will be written to target the Microsoft version of Linux. But it is perhaps more likely that open-source projects that currently target Windows and Linux, can now just focus on Linux and thus be more reliable and easier to maintain?
I certainly think that's what cross-platform open-source projects should be looking to do!
Have MS made their extension documentation public yet? I'm just wondering if it's the same as Chrome or if they've [ahem] extended it in some way.
If he didn't mention porn or cats then he was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off the mark!
Even if it is just an early preview, it does represent (to me anyway) the most interesting this Mozilla has done in years. I'm particularly interested in seeing how it performs on low-end hardware such as a Raspberry Pi.
They really need to change the name "browser.html" though because, to be blunt, its fucking stupid. Seriously.
Also, they might want to think twice about calling anything Graphene, because that's just a name used for things that show promise but don't actually exist.
If only you'd waited... you'd have waited (IIRC) about 3 _extra_ months, and when it arrived you would've also got a letter offering money off a roll of thermal paper for a ZX Printer. I never took them up on that offer!
The Spectrum was great though... so maybe I can start to begin to consider thinking about maybe letting that incident from 30+ years ago... go. Maybe! :D
I seem to recall some games were terrible because they used "turbo loaders" (increased baud rate) and entirely didn't bother with error correction, so even the original cassette was hard to load.
Using a Multiface One to deal with - (ahem) - creating backup copies, worked much more reliably because it just dumped the RAM image out.
The name Toni Baker rings a bell. Was the cover of that book mostly dark green / black and I think the text was gold/yellow? If so, then that was the book where I *finally* after a very long time, managed to grasp Z80 assembler.
UPDATE - I used "Google" (whatever that is) to find it: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Mastering-Machine-Code-Your-Spectrum/dp/0907563236
That was totally my bible when I were a kid - so thanks Toni Baker!
"Some of these reports can be somewhat humorous. For example: 'Customer answered door wearing an adult nappy'."
Doesn't sound like this private data is needed for the bisness purpose that TT is supposed to be providing.
If the customer concerned had these details leaked* and this particular bit of information, I'd say [IANAL] they'd be sue the crap** out of TT.
* No. Just no.
** Still no.
"Johnny, what have I told you about not talking to toys?"
Honestly, when you step back from it and look at it... it's sooo stupid putting internet connectivity in these things not least because local data-storage and raw CPU power aren't particularly expensive these days.
It probably won't change, at least not whilst it's mere childrens privacy being violated. Once we have a high-ranking GCHQ/NSA operative's super-secrets stolen by their own childs toy bear*, *then* maybe they'll start to take it seriously!
* (note to self... contact Charlie Brooker about a possible Black Books script entitled "Rupert-Gate: the tale of an entire government brought down by actions of a rogue soft-toy")
...is titled "Crucified Hope".
Or "The Crucified Hope of Gerry Pennell" these days I'd imagine.
His Wikipedia page says he's an IT Executive and he studied maths, but I can't see anything else - presumably he did something else to qualify him for these jobs?
I appreciate that was probably very old code... but you do realise that changing case in ASCII is just a bitwise operation? You could probably speed up your old code ten-fold! :D
That said, I just did a Google and discovered people on stack exchange marvelling at such wonders. Makes me feel old!
"We are also reviewing our relationship with Wipro."
I think this piece of management-speak actually means they're negotiating terminating the contract due to supplier (Wipro) breach... but it depends how much they're prepared to drop versus their utility as a scape-goat for PR purposes.
Once Donald Trump is president, this will be normal everyday life.
Also, if I enter a bot called "The Clarkson", do you think they'll just ban me outright? 'cos I think that's a really good name!
Still giggling at that one!
So I think I'm right in saying that in the previous series, the robots were just remote controlled things? Will that be the case in the new series, or will they be completely autonomous? Or a bit of both?
Don't the fly-wheel-bots always win?
Is Tickle available for, you know... 'droids?
That said... he could've saved himself a billion or so years if he'd just punched a smaller hold in the crystal wall. Pretty sure he only needed a hole he could wriggle through rather than a whole archway to walk through! :D
I was seeing Pertwee too. I think it was the velvety jacket and permed grey/white hair!
What with TalkTalks down playing the impact, have they actually got a case any more?
I thought the official story was that only a handful of customer details were lifted, and in any case, there were no bank details... so it almost seems like the police are wasting money investigating this surely?
Exactly this. It's the same as when the service providers were complaining about BBC iPlayer and this like using too much bandwidth, basically trying to frame it so they can charge people on both ends of the wire*.
It should be illegal to tamper with content over the wire*.
* you know what I mean! :D
He's one of them there fair weather CEOs.
I think that El Reg is being too nice to BAE. An *Evil* reporter would point out to BAE how they really fk'ed it up with TalkTalk given the fact that they not only got hacked, but apparently with vulnerabilities so easy to hack a child could do it. Because that *is* the reality of it. Kind of makes BAE look like the last company you'd want to use to secure anything. Perhaps BAE would like to comment on that?
Also, given that we don't know the details of how the hack occurred, and given how BAE had been contracted only months before, is it not possible that BAE itself was in some way responsible? I.e. bad advice left TalkTalk *more* vulnerable than it was before, or even worse, maybe a BAE employee, privy to inside information, leaked something?
Just a ThoughtThought! (me Walk[walk]s away whistling)
Oh... whilst I'm posting, don't know if anyone saw that BBC Panorama about hackers that was on recently, but the guy who the US is trying to get extradited for hacking (you know, he looked like Rodney's mate, Micky from Only Fools and Horses), well he seemed to think that TalkTalks site was still vulnerable. Whilst that isn't exactly concrete evidence of incompetence at TalkTalk, he (Micky) does still have slightly more credibility than TalkTalk do!
In todays BBC article* on the subject, apparently the business community is pleased with TalkTalk's performance... and apparent retention of most of their customers.
Dido/TalkTalk PR machine is/are now trying to defuse the lack of encryption with:
"I can confirm that we're compliant with all encryption requirements for the industry, but actually it's not just about encryption," she said.
"So one of the reasons why none of our customers' credit card details were stolen in a way that means they can be used is because they were more than encrypted.
"They were what's called obfuscated - obscured. So that nowhere in the system did we actually hold all of their credit card number.
So yeah, it's all about obfuscation. It's better than encryption. Riiiiight!
Not wishing to detract from beating up TalkTalk, but since people here might have an answer, I have a question...
Q. Why don't credit-card companies tell providers NOT to store card details ever, and instead, issue them a token on receipt of a valid card number? E.g.
Customer (unwisely) decides to sign up with TalkTalk. Enters their contact details and card number on the TT website and agree to (say) a sign up fee of £X and recurring debits of ~£Y based on call-usage etc.
For £X, since it's a one-off, TT don't need to store a card number. For ~£Y they do currently because they need to debit the customer (usually) once a month. So instead the card company supplies a token (like a disposable card number) but this one is constrained such that ONLY TT can use it... so even if it leaks, it's useless. And it could be further constrained by number of debits per month, or limited value ranges.
I've wondered this for years... basically whenever a leak ends up in the news. It's an obvious solution, so I'm guessing there's a good reason it's not implemented?
Is your 1st gen. Moto G a 3G or 4G model? I've got the 3G one and I've still not seen any updates to 5.0.2, which given the number of security issues Android has had this year, is a bit of a concern.
At the end of part one the major question left unanswered was why the one person who hadn't been inside the ship was spared by the ghosts. And in part 2 this was used to dramatic effect to... go and find a phone?!? What a waste of a good plot point.
I believe Clara said something about him not having "the signal" in him because he hadn't seen the message, so presumably that meant he wasn't worth turning into a ghost because he couldn't be used to transmit the signal. They did kind of blast through that point rather quickly though!
In fairness, Steve was correct in that a stylus was a crap *primary* input method for a small handheld device such as a phone. But for tablets, particularly for people artistically/design inclined (like many Apple customers), a Wacom-like, full-bells-and-whistles pressure/angle sensitive, isn't a bad *optional extra*.
So whilst *every single* report has mentioned the stylus, and "oh Steve said they were wrong"... blah blah... I do think it's a useful addition.
A keyboard on the other hand is crap idea for a tablet... acceptable as a third-party add-on for a small sub-set of users who do find a use, but for the majority, if you really need a keyboard, get a laptop, and then it'll sit better on your lap when you're using it.
I've not heard if Apple got a place to store the "Pencil" in the device? Because where the Surface Pro 3 seems to be largely well designed, the thing that always made me laugh was how the storage place for it's stylus was... on the keyboard... which always struck me as being a typically MS-not-quite-as-well-thought-out-as-it-should-be solution!
Feel strange urge to "pupulate variables"
I just got the update to 44.0.2403.107
Okay, so most of the bits about the hack I get. But I'm struggling with *why* the brakes are entirely electronic. Anyone know why?
I appreciate that shutting down systems might prevent ABS from working, and if the engine is shutdown, then I guess the brake servo won't work. But I can't understand brakes not working at all. Seems like a huge design issue, and potential liability to the manufacturer... and that alone, I would have hoped, would have prevented them from using such a system.
My mum's computer (yeah, I'm tech-support) runs Ubuntu and she has a wireless HP inkjet and that randomly decides it won't print... can't remember the error message, but it implies it can't see the printer, which therefore implies a networking problem... but you can *always* get to the printers own web interface thus proving that isn't the issue. When I try to investigate it will either start working, or CUPS will crash and I'll restart and then it'll probably work. Bloody thing.
Driving a long one day, notice a yellow "EPC" light on the dash board. But it's yellow, so it can't be super serious can it? I get home, check the manual and it just says the engine management system has spotted a problem and you should take the car to a dealer. Doesn't say you can't drive or anything though. So that same night I had to go somewhere, so I drove. The car drove completely fine, but the EPC light is still on. Later that evening, I return to the car, switch on... and there's another light on. Didn't know what it was until I got home, but it was the emissions light. Still a yellow light though... not red... so not serious.
Anyway, at this point I'm concerned I'll damage the cat if I drive it any more so I make enquires with "people who know"... and they ask me "do the drake lights work?". Which struck me as a surprising question. Surely this was engine related? Anyway, the brake lights were not working because the little switch under the brake peddle that tells the engine management that the car is braking had broken which in turn led to it just flagging up a bunch of other non-related issues.
It's just all crap to make up for the fact that for the most part, modern kit is electronically and mechanically, far more reliable than ever before. So obscure software issues is the new growth area in annoying people!
Next, they need to deal with referral spam on Google Analytics.
I agree that MS do seem to be making much better decisions under Nadella. However, whilst I know a few people with Windows phones and they all seem to like using them, I suspect the business case for MS to continue developing the platform is.... difficult!
Given the market share of both Android and iOS, MS absolutely must have convincing Office apps running on them in order to ensure the Office revenue stream continues. All OS revenues however are likely to get a lot thinner - I doubt they've ever really made any money on WinPho, and the days of being able to charge much for a desktop OS appear to be ending.
So unless they can dramatically increase the market share for WinPho, it seems to me that it's simply a massive cost for MSFT. Obviously, in the past, under Ballmer, they'd have simply thrown money at it for years on end (like they haven't already) until eventually, at version 3+, it's not too crap (..and to be fair...!) and all the competition has been killed off (ah... this!) and then they'd have a winner.
Does anyone else think there's a good _business_ case for keeping WinPho?
Or looking at it another way, imagine you're a share holder, Nadella's saying WinPho is costing X per-annum to develop/maintain, developing apps (Skype/Office) for WinPho costs Y per-annum, and you will *never* actually make any money off it directly... then what are you left with? Just a bit of leverage over a very small percentage of the market?
On the other hand, I guess if Nadella _did_ announce WinPho was to be discontinued, then that might upset a lot of partners/customers who have bought into it.
Only 12 days ago I said they should do exactly this:
Can't be a coincidence! :D