Re: worth a farthing
For a more recent example, take a look at the Zimbabwe Dollar. Apparently you'll currently need 35 quadrillion Zimbabwean dollars to get you 1 US$.
1328 posts • joined 12 Apr 2007
The moment she realised people could see her hairy parahybana.
She should have used robots.txt, if she doesn't like webcrawlers.
> Apple doesn't push ads
Apple's new content blocking tech is a gun pointed directly at Google. Meanwhile, Google are busy shooting themselves in the foot by doing nothing to prevent malvertising pushed over their infrastructure.
> No, because like with the ISPs as long as they're not acting in any kind of gatekeeping capacity
And yet they (Apple) are acting as a gatekeeper for the apps, and are reaping the profits from having a more trusted platform. If they did the same for ads they would increase that trust and thereby increase their profits.
> But that will take, labor, and most importantly money. Try getting this plan past the accountants...
But the same argument can be made for vetting the apps. Having apps that can be trusted not to contain malware is a good sales argument for the platform. Same for the ads.
Developers pay Apple for vetting for entry to the App Store. Same for the ads. (Or it will be, if content blocking makes iAds the only show in town.)
Maybe that's what we'll get from Apple after their content blocking tech comes into play. Maybe the iAds that they (presumably) won't block will be better vetted than the malvertisiing that Google currently let through.
There's hope for this, since the iOS apps are certainly better vetted than Android ones.
Google et al certainly need to get their houses in order on this. They could get away with it while no-one else is doing it better, but that time is running out. Thankfully.
I mean, why hasn't the UK's National Health Service website ever spoken up against the three years of massacres that occur in Syria?
I don't recall seeing anything on the Marks and Spencers website about it either.
Or on the Chessington World of Adventures website.
They're obviously all complicit in the World's conspiracy of silence.
Hack 'em all, I say!
Is it not unreasonable for somebody to expect a "full delete" to be exactly that? Including from whatever contact list your telesales uses?
Maybe the telesales are using the telephone directory. Should they delete you from that too?
More likely they are buying a leads database from some other 3rd party. Practically speaking, if they are to avoid pestering you in the future, they are going to need to keep a record of you to remember to do so.
"affordable prosthetics for all”?
Hmm. Why does he think we will all need prosthetics? What's he planning?
I'd vote for anyone promising to keep all football off TV.
> Look up Zoela
You'll have more luck with "Zoella". But otherwise you're right. She's a UK-based vlogger with a big influence in the buying (or nagging) decisions of many teenies. We in the UK can only hope to keep UK-based vloggers honest. The Rest of the World must try and tame their own vloggers.
I suppose if Ms Sugg doesn't like being required to be honest and open about who she's shilling for, she can always relocate to somewhere where they care less. I'm sure she has enough dosh to allow her to do so.
> "With all the extra publicity, Ashley Madison is only going to be getting more users," Mikko Hypponen, CRO of F-Secure commented.
Sorry, but I must question Mr Hypponen's thinking skills.
The "publicity" includes revelations that:
1) 95% of their userbase are men;
2) They don't permanently delete user information that users have paid them $19 on the promise so to do;
3) They can't keep their user database private.
How could he possibly think that such publicity would encourage more users to enrole?
How are Lexus supposed to reach their core demographic if they can't advertise on dodgy websites?
Keeping the Bluetooth running for AirDrop is a horrible battery hog. Just keep it turned off. Turn it on only when needed.
I'm surprised they didn't go with World Drone Racing League. Maybe it's because this is a sport that the rest of the world might actually want to play too.
Yup. Came here to say the same. Doubtless this is the "unexpected consequence" that Big Tobacco is hoping for.
(The EE spokesman was not refuting any suggestion that safety concerns were ignored (since the suggestions were not proved false), neither was he rebutting the suggestions (since, as far as I am aware, no counter evidence was offered). He was merely denying the suggestions.)
To quote Chris Rock, "Women would rule the world – if only they’d stop bitchin’ about each other."
> Terrorism of all sorts must be stopped.
Any ideas on how to achieve this, beyond more of those tried already, which haven't worked, and are slowly tipping us towards being a police state?
Obligatory Ben Franklin quote. “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
From the article: Fang says the scam spread to users in a victim's contact list, and likely used automated scripts to spread over social media.
Maybe you should try adding this functionality to your lousy game. Unless you're a decent person.
So, a high cowboy poked a pig, causing severe depression in the pig, and the pig's owner blew off a load of hot air.
Sounds like everyday life in Utah.
> 4. Nadella is replaced by Cortana.
Now that actually would be a great idea. Imagine all company management replaced by AI. It's as wonderful a prospect as self-driving cars.
Imagine management making rational, fact-based decisions, rather than the mad, drunken, macho posteuring, self-interested, insider-trading, and random brain-fart-based management performed by our current meatsack masters-of-disasters.
Just give the AI management rules to find a sane balance between share-holder and public benefit: a fixed percentage of profit to R&D; no raiding of pension-funds; maybe efficient co-ordination with other companies rather than effort-duplicating competition; with clear goals to improve tech based on open-standards.
Sounds good to me.
I for one welcome our silicon-based managebot masters.
It'll be just a matter of time before we have a Patch Tuesday for Cars. Or Recall Tuesday, perhaps.
When the self-driving cars have taken over, we'll just notice that the roads are rather empty, because all the vehicles have taken themselves off to the workshops. And your car-ordering app will just sit there showing a spinning wheel for a few hours.
Use wget and less. Can't be too paranoid.
@Ben Tasker: Thanks for the info. That would certainly break filtering clients by MAC address. Sigh.
> If I pay for the whole book
In this case you are not paying for the book. As the article states: 'It will affect self-published authors on the Kindle Unlimited and Kindle Owners' Lending Library." So, only books you are lending or renting from Amazon, not those that you buy. Remember, Kindle Unlimited users are free to download as many books (on the list) as they want, for a fixed monthly fee.
> To me, this just looks like another money grab by Amazon on the backs of the authors.
Amazon are not reducing the size of the royalties pie, they are just changing the way it is distributed. Authors who write books that users read will receive more, whilst authors who write books that users don't read will receive less. Personally I can't see this as anything other than a Good Thing.
Of course, if you think Amazon is using some (other) trick of false accounting to screw the authors, then this is quite another (unrelated) matter.
Thanks for the explanation, Swarthy. In either case, I see some opportunities to game the system, but much more easily in the former case.
Previously, the "author" would need to hire a sweat-shop to repeatedly download his "book" to ensure an unfair slice of the Amazon pie. Now he (or she) will also need to get the sweat-shop to pretend-read the "book" too. Which will hopefully be enough to make such trickery economically unviable.
So, well done Amazon!
No downvotes from us, surely. We're all big Led Zep fans here on The Reg forums.
It was only 3 months ago that they announced the shutdown of their Google Code project hosting service and now they are opening another one. WTF?
> I have to continue this chain, not as good as amazon.amazon.amazon then.
My research suggests that we could keep this exchange going for another 289 to 294 iterations before we get to the very best possible amazon domain name.
Or we could stop here. :-)
> Well, obviously, if amazon.com is good, amazon.amazon is twice as good...
But would it really be any better than amazon.amazon.com ... ?
Since the Amazon River is actually called "Amazonas" in the Spanish and Portuguese-speaking countries of South America where the river flows, maybe they could have the .amazonas TLD, leaving .amazon for the so-named Seattle-based ecommerce company. (Although, why .amazon.com shouldn't suffice, I do not understand.)
Their flights were poleaxed.
I see your post has been ripped and digitally copied already. Damn those pirates.
> I've never found feminists to be particularly hot on logic.
But your criticism was of the AC's grammar rather than his or her logic, surely?
There are apps that facilitate access to a http proxy which then blocks the ads in Safari. There are also ad-blocking alternatives to Safari which are also webkit based and are functionally (almost) identical to Safari.
So, it's not quite true to say there is no ad-blocking business on iOS.
(I see you wanted a link.)
> Expect the ad agencies to come up with "ingenious" new ways to bypass ad blockers and the like some time soon.
What about product placements in articles, whilst listening to the your latest Audible book, and in user forums, while your PC completes its backup with Carbonite? With Carbonite, whether it's business or personal, your data is there to stay.
If Apple controls the mechanism for blocking adverts, then they can ensure that their adverts don't get blocked unless they allow it.
Then they can charge their advertisers premium rates for adverts that don't get blocked, or at least get blocked less often.
At least with Apple there is a hope that these expensive and exclusive adverts will be better controlled for taste and trojans than most of what we meet on the web nowadays. Or at least we would meet if we weren't already using NoScript, AdBlockPlus, etc.