Feeds

* Posts by h4rm0ny

2620 posts • joined 26 Jul 2008

Boffins attempt to prove the UNIVERSE IS JUST A HOLOGRAM

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Interesting times

>>"You can prove a theory to be true by showing that it being false would lead to a contradiction."

But you have to prove that the thing it would contradict is true first. It's theorems all the way down. ;)

1
0

IT blokes: would you say that LEWD comment to a man? Then don't say it to a woman

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: After 30 years in computing

>>"My sister is a Chartered Chemical Engineer and she deals with her peers as would a man, why does the work environment have to change for a sex that from my experience are not as dedicated to the subject as their opposite number"

I suggest you show your sister this article and your comment and see if she agrees with you.

0
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: You'll Get The Respect You Deserve

Don Jefe: I nearly always agree with your posts. This is the first time I recall outright rejecting what you say. I am very confident. Hassle still happens. Some people see "woman" and that is enough for them - confidence of the woman makes no difference to them. Believe me, most women have PLENTY of practice at what you describe. Doesn't stop this happening. Quite honestly, your lack of experience of being in this situation has led you to error - what you have deduced to be the case is not matched by reality.

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: What about a man in a female dominated environment

>>" some percentage of the members of that group will act without due consideration for the feelings of those in the less-powerful group, which can manifest as a lack of respect for them as well as other, less subtle, behaviours."

Primarily, in my experience, it is the low-status members of the group that are behind such behaviour as well. They're near the bottom of their feeding order and the only ones they can pick on are the outsiders. Pretty pathetic.

Of course you get lecherous senior people too, but that's a different motivation I think. A lot of the bottom feeders are just out to be mean because they lack respect from others.

0
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Turn it around

>>"You ever two buds go, "Where've you been, you pot-belied pervert?!" in terms of pure friendship?"

Quite honestly, no.

1
5
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Booth babes

>>"Exactly. Employing "Eye Candy" of either gender is an admission your product lacks punch. And probably does little to demonstrate you understand the modern market place."

I can see why marketing people do it at car shows. They're trying to sell this lifestyle image with their latest super-expensive sportscar. They want to tell you that if you buy this Ferrari you will find sexy women draping themselves across it.

But what sort of idiot thinks "if I buy this VoIP solution, I'm going to look so hot" ?

5
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Out the b*****ds

There's often no need for public shaming, and sometimes you can overreact such as Adria Richards astonishing overreaction at that Python Conference and that backfires horribly, not just on the individual but by causing many men to adopt the mindset of it being women's fault for 'not being able to

take a joke'. So sticking it on Facebook may be a bad idea (except in extreme circumstances).

But telling other people around you at the conference so they know how badly behaved someone is, is probably a good idea. Particularly as it will reflect on their company then and there. Also, and this I think really is a good idea, is to report them to their company. It's very easy when something like this happens, to feel like everyone is against you, that it's a conspiracy of men. (The other reason it's good to have male friends standing up for you - not just to dissuade the behaviour but to stop you feeling isolated). But that's not actually true. You might think reporting them wont do any good, that their boss is probably just like them and they'll laugh over it. However, that very often isn't true. Their boss is probably a better human being than they are and it might get them the lesson they need to learn.

1
1
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Surprised..

>>" and a good chunk had abandoned such juvenile topics even in the locker room by the time they were 18. That's more what I'd expect from a 12 or 13 year old."

IT / Software, is a field where someone can work effectively limited contact with other human beings / general populace. Not will, but sometimes can. Combine that with the fact that a lot of the people they do work with are also males who might tolerate anti-female behaviour (again, might, not will), the sector can become a bit of a haven for the minority of males who didn't learn their lessons at 12 or 13 years old. That's one of the reasons I think IT is slightly more prone to it than some other fields.

So if you're a guy and you work with someone who comes out with such shit or behaves in such a way, please don't smile and laugh just to be polite. Let them know it's not actually pleasant, because I'm certain that many guys don't find such behaviour any more stimulating then women do.

4
0

Cracking copyright law: How a simian selfie stunt could make a monkey out of Wikipedia

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: It really doesn't matter

"Wikipaedia is going in to bat for the public domain, that's you and me!"

Firstly, not everyone is about self-interest. I believe Dlater should be compensated for his efforts if we want the product of them. Secondly, I genuinely believe I (as a non-producer member of the public) benefit more from living in a world where people ARE compensated rather than expect their work to be taken from them and thus may simply not bother anymore.

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Recent news on Page 2

>>"If I take a picture of you with your camera after you asked me"

As others have said earlier, in this case you have intent to take a picture. An animal that merely triggers the shutter does not.

On a separate note, Wikipedia's page on this dispute is tremendously smug about the whole thing and explaining in a faux-objective way why they're in the right. Extremely obnoxious.

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Recent news on Page 2

>>"If the man with the monkeys had randomly tripped over a root, spun around and accidentally captured an airplane on fire passing overhead, he would still have a copyright claim."

In this case, the photographer gets the copyright because there is no other responsible party and the effort to produce it such as it was, is still his. In the case of the monkey photo, there is still no other responsible party and the effort such as it was, is still his. He bought the equipment, he set it up, he spent the time getting the monkeys used to his presence, he travelled around the world to photograph them. There's no contradiction between the aeroplane and monkey cases. The monkey has no intent or creative contribution anymore than if he had set up a system where the wind in the trees moved a branch to take the photograph. Plane or monkey, the creative effort is the photographers and there is no other responsible party.

3
1
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: It really doesn't matter

>>"You aren't important, you make a few minor edits and haven't donated money, so how can you speak for those who do?"

I've donated money to Wikipedia in the past as I stated last time El Reg reported on this. I think about £200 in total. I'm fine with the position of the person you're replying to. They wont see any money from me for a long time, after this.

4
1
h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: Recent news on Page 2

>>"Me thinks photographers get too much copyright for what is often 1/60s work."

I'll re-post my response from last time someone made this idiotic comment on here: I was once paid £200 for an hours work. That's quite a good rate for an hour. But then of course I was paid that because I had years of familiarity with the software, extensive programming experience, understanding of what they wanted to achieve. All things that actually enabled me to do that hours work. But no, by this reasoning it doesn't matter - only the length of time it took me on that specific instance.

1/60th of a second? There's no way photographers should be paid anything at all! Even paying them £1 for that photo would equate to over £200,000 per hour rate! Preposterous - they're having a laugh.

If they want to get paid more, they should invent a slower shutter, work-shy little shysters!

18
2
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Recent news on Page 2

Oh and fallacious though your reasoning is anyway, your facts are also wrong. That's not 1/60th of a seconds work. As well as setting up the camera and settings, once the photo is taken, there's the post-work done on the photographs. Even the selection process of which photo to use. I guarantee you that the photo we have seen is the product of a fair bit of skilled work post taking. Things that also contribute to its copyrightable nature.

12
1

AMD unveils 'single purpose' graphics card for PC gamers and NO ONE else

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: "a single purpose: to play demanding PC games"

>>"I guess you've been under a rock for a decade"

Ever since Tony Blair was elected, actually. And no election result since has persuaded me to come out yet.

I feel safer down here.

3
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: "a single purpose: to play demanding PC games"

Or they have a living room where they like to game, possibly shared with a partner or family and they don't want a great clunking PC sat next to their television. As opposed to someone who games on a monitor in their bedroom for example.

Consoles do have some advantages, you know.

2
4

'I'll dance on their graves at 1 MILLION operations per second'

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

>>"He's gone??"

Completely. But he's still posting if that's what you mean. ;)

6
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

I'm safe from inclusion. None of my comments are less than eight paragraphs long. ;)

(Except for this one!)

2
0

Your move, sucker! Microsoft tests cloud gaming system that cuts through network lag

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Presumably if the algorithm fails and you do something different, it doesn't display the now incorrect frame and you revert to having slightly greater latency for a brief moment. It's not playing the game for you, it's just planning ahead. A little like the pre-fetch of pages a browser will do where a human takes valuable time moving the mouse around and thinking so the browser pre-fetches the pages that various links on the current page point to. Only in this case it's significantly more sophisticated.

2
1

Munich considers dumping Linux for ... GULP ... Windows!

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: @h4rmony and your comparison rules

>>"You always seem to be 100% sure about things until get pointed to contradictions as in the case of 40K vs 50K patents fact."

As this is something like the third time you've made attacks on me based on another thread rather than keeping things in that thread, I'll respond just the once here. There's no contradiction in what I wrote. I said that Google were historically weak on patents. They were. That's why they went on a massive patent purchasing spree. And interestingly, now that they have lots of patents, they have started charging other people for use of them. Now stop attacking me over things in a different thread as a means to bolster a different argument here.

0
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: @h4rmony and your comparison rules

>>This is a lot of writing and looks pretty ugly. I'd prefer a much simpler syntax like this one:

I probably shouldn't indulge this. Your initial attack was to demand whether Outlook could be used by scripting. Having been told that it can and much more (it has a full OO API) you shift goal posts and say there's too much "writing" for your tastes. However, I can see where this road leads and it's not to a good place for your argument, so I'll allow you to shift the goal posts a little closer to the cliff if you wish.

Basically, you don't understand what is happening here. I'll illustrate the difference. Here's a short sample of a script that works with Outlook. It's creating and sending an email.

$ol = New-Object -comObject Outlook.Application

gm -InputObject $ol

$mail = $ol.Session.OpenSharedItem("C:\Test Email Subject.msg")

$mail.Forward()

$Mail.Recipients.Add("someone@example.com")

$Mail.Subject = "Test Mail"

$Mail.Body = " Here is some text"

$Mail.Send()

Here's what you prefer because you think it's shorter and simpler:

echo "Hello

Here's my message.... " | mutt -F ~/.mutt/one_of_myprofyles -s "Hi from me" someone@somewhere.something -a ~/Documents/attached.pdf

Firstly, the former isn't long - it's eight lines, one statement on each and anyone remotely competent should be able to handle that. ;)

The reason yours is short is because all you're doing is piping text to the Mutt program and using command line flags. The Outlook example is Object Oriented code that lets you instantiate an instance of Outlook, an instance of a mail object, perform operations on those instances and do pretty much anything you want with them, clone them, copy them, feed them as objects to other programs... It's vastly more powerful than piping text to Mutt on the command line. If you don't understand that, then you are not a programmer.

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: @h4rmony and your comparison rules

>>"My position was that "a user can do it within mutt", are you supposed to count all the "external" shared libs too that mutt uses as a dependency? "

No, but it's pretty fair to say that having to launch an external program such as Firefox to see a formatted email or included images does not count as being able to "do it within Mutt". Perhaps my car counts as a movie theatre because it can take me to the cinema, too? :D

You linked to a Google image search of Mutt interfaces as an objection the screenshot I posted. I am more than happy for people to compare any of those with Outlook 2013's interface. It shows the absurdity of arguing Mutt has a simplicity advantage. Yes, I can use it fine, but then I've been using Vi for over a decade. The majority of users do not want to have to learn such things to use their email client.

>>"Who uses an email client on a headerless server environment?" is concerned, I and many other people very happily do"

Then that is terrible and archaic practice. You should not be running an email client on computers running your services. It's an obsolete practice and it's not something anyone in the Windows world wants to do on Server Core and therefore not a feature needed or desirable in Outlook. Seriously - criticizing Outlook - an email client - for not having terminal text-only interface again shows how staggeringly far removed you are from normal users.

>>As fiddly as limiting/searching for mail containing wildcard constructs like

~d 21/3/2012*3y*5m*2w*3d =f fromsomeone =b "some text in the body "

#-- show me all the emails in this mailbox dated within 3 years 5months, 2 weeks and 3 days since March 21 2012 sent from fromsomeone containing "some text" in their bodies

This one is really funny because you should have quit whilst you were ahead. You demanded whether Outlook could let you search using regular expressions and I freely volunteered that it could not, conceding an advantage to Mutt. However that wasn't enough for you and you had to go on to show off an example of regular expressions. The unfortunate thing is (for your argument at least) that it's very easy to do your example in Outlook and you don't even have to understand "d 21/3/2012*3y*5m*2w*3d " - anyone can do it. You just click on Find and then if none of the common tools meet your needs just click on "Advanced Find" and you can add as many criteria as you wish. This includes things such as "received on or after X". Throw in a "received on or before Y" and you have your date range. Throw in "Body contains" and you're done. And it's all quickly and easily assembled through a GUI that guides you in the process.

Not that needing a regular expression to find emails between two dates is quite as vital on a client that actually has a GUI unlike Mutt, of course. You just click sort by date and scroll down through your search results in the range you're interested in. Anyone can do it, even those with little technical expertise. Really, you scored one point for Mutt by pointing out that it can handle regular expressions, and then you torpedoed it by showing off what you could do with regular expressions in Mutt and ended up with something that can be done just as well in Outlook without using them!

Another poster commented that you are what is wrong with Open Source. I am inclined to agree. You would rather argue that tortuous approaches such as yours are better rather than look at the actual reasons why something like Mutt isn't used outside of a very niche group of expert users.

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: @h4rmony and your comparison rules

>>"Outlook runs only on Windows, so no chance for me, mam (which is not a shortcoming for you according to the tone of the corresponding reply).

You could just say "no" when asked if you've actually used the product you're criticizing. And yes, lack of familiarity with something you're attacking is a "shortcoming". One should know before one criticizes. It might avoid posts like your earlier one where you say things like "can you use it in a script" and "can it handle IMAP". (Yes to both).

>>"Let me also assume you haven't used latest mutt-patched as well."

I've used Mutt. I think I can get my head around the addition of a side-bar to it. But regardless, I'm not that one that launched into a random attack on another product. I don't believe I've made one factually incorrect statement about Mutt (correct me if I'm wrong - well, you would have), whereas you have made multiple flawed attacks on Outlook. I'd suggest your lack of familiarity is the greater problem here.

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: @h4rmony and your comparison rules

You shift the goalposts again. You argued that Mutt had more features than Outlook. I pointed it lacked such basics as displaying formatting or images. You responded with questions such as "does outlook support scripting". I responded that it did - in fact a full API. You then argue that you think Mutt's "scripting" (which is actually just command line flags unlike Outlooks Object Oriented actual API) looks nicer. You're just seeking reasons to dismiss that actually Outlook does have these features you thought you'd scored points on. Another case in point - your stripping all context from the GPG comment.

After finding out that contrary to your attempt to find ways to show Mutt is more feature-rich you actually can use GPG with Outlook, you (a) try to find a way to dismiss it by seizing on my comment that it's not available for 64-bit Outlook 2013, yet, saying this is the normal case. In fact, it's not - Office 2013 still makes up a very small proportion of the Office userbase that is out there. Most people, let alone corporations, do not roll out software immediately on release. And more than that - the default install type for MS Office 2013 is - wait for it - 32bit! So not only are you wrong in suggesting that the standard version is Office 2013 (it's probably less than 5% worldwide), but of those a large proportion are going to be the 32 bit version. Possibly you don't understand that 64-bit OS does not mean there's no 32-bit software.

So GPG is available for the overwhelming majority of Outlook users and the only thing you have shown is you are determined to seize on anything you can in your attempt to salvage your attack on Outlook. Actually, it gets worse - you strip away entirely my pointing out that there are other more enterprise-friendly ways of achieving the same thing with Outlook without GPG - which is to say you are putting your own personal rules on how something can be achieved for the sake of your argument. Not that there's anything wrong with GPG - it's great. I use it. But your using it as an attempt to show Mutt is more capable is flawed.

All of your charges were answered with the exception of using regular expressions in searches which you'd need to script something for. You could easily have looked these things up yourself but you would rather accuse first and hope that something sticks.

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: On Mutt vs Outlook comparison, @h4rmony

>>>>Ability to display formatting or embedded images are two capabilities missing from Mutt compared to Outlook that spring immediately to mind.

>>Mutt got an ability to use external software (w3m, firefox, image viewers) of a user's choice that have this capabilities

For people not familiar with Mutt, here is the interface: screenshot. This is what you're comparing to Outlook.

You claimed that Mutt was "probably" more capable than Outlook. (I assume the 'probably' is because as with our previous discussions you haven't actually used the current version of Outlook in any significant way). I gave two common and popular capabilities that Outlook has and Mutt lacks. Saying that you can open an email from Mutt in Firefox if you want to see does not change that it doesn't have the features. You've now shifted your position to "Mutt plus other software used alongside it can do some of the same things as Outlook more or less". The "more or less" is because I don't think opening an email in a separate program just so you can see the formatting counts as the same. That's quite a goal post shift from "Mutt is probably more capable".

>>1) How many Operating Systems besides MS Windows can it run on?

It's Windows only, as I'm sure you know. I very much doubt many Outlook users care.

>>2) how well does it handle IMAP?

Fine. Exchange is recommended so you can use the calendaring and other features, but here is how to set it up with IMAP. Link. You know, 5 seconds with a search engine and you might have been able to actually check rather than asking questions with an agenda on here.

>>3) can you use pgp/gpg for signatures and mail encryption?

Yes. It's unusual because Outlook is aimed toward Enterprise environments and there are other tools to achieve the same thing as GPG managed centrally by an IT department. Really for something like this you want a company-wide approach with enterprise management solutions. However, you can use GPG with Outlook. Again, five seconds with a search engine would have told you this: Link. The GPG4Win Outlook plugin doesn't work for Office 2013 64-bit version yet (that's still quite new) but does for the 32-bit version and others. There may be another way to do it, I don't know. I have GPG4Win installed here but I use it with Thunderbird and the Enigmail plugin.

>>4) can it be run without GUI (like in the Core Server environment)?

No. Who uses an email client on a headerless server environment? If you're trying to sell Mutt as more capable than Outlook (sorry - "probably" more capable) by holding up its lack of GUI as a feature you're far removed from normal use cases.

>>5) can you use it in a script or out of the command line?

Yes. More so than Mutt, actually as Outlook exposes a full and rich object-orientated API that you can access from another program or Powershell. All exposed elements in Outlook are objects. Here is a really small taste of what you can do just to give you a feel for how simple it is.

$ol = New-Object -comObject Outlook.Application

gm -InputObject $ol

$mail = $ol.Session.OpenSharedItem("C:\Test Email Subject.msg")

$mail.Forward()

$Mail.Recipients.Add("someone@example.com")

$Mail.Subject = "Test Mail"

$Mail.Body = " Here is some text"

$Mail.Send()

>>6) does the search/filtering in Outlook support regular expression (and virtual mailboxes for that matter)?

Wildcards only in the default interface. You could, if you wished, create a short script which used regular expressions and attach it as a filter / search. Bit fiddly.

>>7) can you pipe any email message (any part from a message) onto a command from the shell or an application?

Again, this is far, far removed from normal use case. You could do it with a script if you wished. Or, you know, hit Ctrl+C / Ctrl+V.

>>Can you tag any number of messages using regex option as in search/filtering and do the same, or apply mailbox operation such as moving to a different (remote) box, saving, deleting etc?

Already answered the regex. Yes, you could do this but you'd have to know a small amount about using regex's in scripts.

>>8) can you use external editor of your choice (like vim/Emacs) for message composition?

Obviously. Write in whatever you want and then put it into an email.

>>9) is it as simple, fast and with as low foot print as Mutt (around 28MB of RAM for me currently for 10K email messages on gmail IMAP)?

It is actually simpler given that it is GUI based. It's footprint is not as low but it runs fine on any modern hardware. Once you meet the condition of "running fine", you've met user needs. Besides, that's not really a "capability". More goal post shifting.

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: @sisk

>>" am fine with mutt and GNUS (using IMAP and postfix as a sendmail frontend). I bet, those are much more capable than Outlook."

Ability to display formatting or embedded images are two capabilities missing from Mutt compared to Outlook that spring immediately to mind. Features rather expected in the 21st century.

1
1

Wall Street's internet darlings require an endless supply of idiots

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Ho-hum - Brillian!

>>>>It's the best argument in favor of slavery I've ever heard

>>Say what? I think you may have the wrong end of the stick.

No, you don't quite get what they're saying. Labour done without compensation is slavery or exploitation. Only exception to that would be failed labour (nothing to do with Milliband).

Your example of you not getting paid for washing the dishes at home falls down in that you are receiving the fruits of that labour. Were you to be doing it for someone else then it would be a parallel to the situations we're talking about in this article.

3
3
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: We need more cooperative enterprises.

Any business in which the workers are rewarded with part-ownership of the business is a cooperative enterprise to greater or lesser degree. Such businesses exist and all else being equal they tend to do pretty well.

3
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Marxism my ass

>>"It's pure capitalism, and it's not new"

Agenda, much? Taking without compensation is not part of capitalism. Selfishness, yes. Capitalism no. Capitalism is about trade and the market. Because you dislike both X and Y, does not mean X is Y. Learn your definitions rather than just shoe-horn any bad thing into an attack on capitalism.

5
4
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Ho-hum

>>"Err... No! First, I didn't know that medieval times had any particular view on “copyright”. Must have been difficult, not having a printing press and all that"

That's the point - the views are "medieval" because they're for a time before mass reproduction was possible. In medieval times there they didn't have copyright because the acts of creation and reproduction were both labour intensive whereas afterwards, only the act of creation was. The Wikimedia Foundation has been espousing a viewpoint that aligns with medieval views on this.

The only points on which I diverge from the author are concerning Amanda Palmer. I don't believe there was any intent to defraud or cut costs. I'm very sure that she genuinely didn't think of it in terms of money and just saw it as a chance for lesser known musicians to participate with a more famous one on tour and drive community interest. She's a fascinating person and having seen a number of interviews, I'm certain there was no ill-intent there.

The other point I diverge, if only slightly, is that I think more caveats are needed. Kickstarters can be great. There are high-profile cases such as in this article where people give money only to see others make a fortune, but there are many good kickstarters and that needs highlighting else the article seems wholly against it when really it's the exploitation which is a problem.

2
4

Cheapo Firefox OS mobes to debut in India – definitely not one for selfie-conscious users

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Dual SIM

Nokia do a dual-sim Lumia: http://www.nokia.com/in-en/phones/phone/lumia630-dual-sim/. Not sure if they do any others in the range like that. WP8.1 does have nice support for dual SIM, though - http://www.windowsphone.com/en-gb/how-to/wp8/connectivity/use-a-dual-sim-phone. Doubles up the signal bars and runs dual messaging apps, etc. adjacent to each other. Not sure if that's helpful to you or not.

0
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Pint

Good.

We need proper Libre phones out there. So long as there's viable Libre software that can do this, there's choice and we can avoid lock-in and stagnancy. Also, there's a lot to be said for a phone that can be modern whilst still being simple.

They should put a lot of focus on battery life. Firefox OS on a device with really long battery life would be outstanding for many parts of the Indian market.

Pint for the Mozilla crew - launching a new mobile OS is a lot of work!

10
0

Microsoft exits climate denier lobby group

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: ...that word. I do not think it means what you think it means

>>"Subjects of the bills range from "kill the gays" to "

Can I get a citation on that? I find it unlikely that any remotely well-funded group in the USA has drafted actual bills that gay people be executed and passed them to senators to propose and be voted on.

1
1
h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: Taxpayers were funding deniers?

>>"Is it possible that Microsoft are still sending them money under an NDA?"

Yes. Because the one thing Microsoft are all about is giving away money.

0
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: ...that word. I do not think it means what you think it means

>>"Rather appropriate considering the overwhelming evidence for global warming these days"

Thus indicating you don't actually understand the criticism. AGW skeptics are generally unconvinced by the degree to which human activity is a driver of global warming, not that it exists. No matter how many times actual arguments are made, people still trot out this argument as if it solves everything.

0
1

Hello, police, El Reg here. Are we a bunch of terrorists now?

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Religion is like a penis @Omgwtfbbqtime

>>"Your original comment in support of agnosticism was that no one knows if deities exist. If you apply your same logic to Russell's celestial teapot you have to agree that it might exist, right up to the point that you can definitively prove that it does not."

Yes. That is logically correct. The point is that until it becomes relevant to me to make a decision on whether or not there's a teapot in Space, I really don't care. If someone challenges me as to whether there is a teapot in Space I'll shrug and say I don't think there is. But I wont be intellectually dishonest and say that because I have seen no evidence of a teapot that is evidence there isn't. Anyway, it doesn't matter. I wasn't saying the case is or isn't anything. I was just pointing out that the correct term for saying you don't know is agnosticism, the correct term for saying there is no god is atheist and that the two are not the same even though some people would like to present atheism differently. No-one has successfully proved there isn't a god as yet. Ergo, agnosticism is the only fully supportable position that doesn't rely on preference.

0
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Collective Delusion.

>>"One problem might be that English does not really have a word for the absence of religion ("irreligious" is somewhat ambiguous), "

You're looking for "agnostic / agnosticism". This is taking a position of saying we don't know.

2
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Collective Delusion.

Atheism and most religions both make authoritative statements about what is without being able to prove it. Religion argues that something is despite lack of evidence. Atheism argues that absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Agnosticism - stating we don't know either way, is the only logically thorough position.

2
2
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Did he preface it with "I'm a journalist" ? I'm just wondering if those of us with less press credentials would have received a different answer.

0
0

Intel's Haswell-E brain to emerge from the lab at end of August – reports

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: SATA 3.2 ????

Fair point. It's faster random access time I could really do with. I was just trying to justify my love of new technology. That said, I still think it's a shame that SSDs are being held back by having hit a ceiling on the current SATA. This is still a selling point to me.

0
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: SATA 3.2 ????

I've got two and I still want more speed. I work with databases - I'll take everything I can get and more if I could.

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Thumb Up

SATA 3.2 ????

If this is so as El Reg implies, I think they've just sold one. We need this bump to take the ceiling off the current SSD market. I'm not sure you can ever have a fast enough hard drive!

1
0

Microsoft ropes in Opera Mini as default Nokia dumbphone browser

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Fanboyism for trolls.

0
1
h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Pint

Opera was the best browser there was for a while. It used to be my default choice. I was quite sad to see it become a Chrome wrapper - like the World needs fewer choices. :(

Good to see it live on a little longer! I'm pretty sure Opera Mini is still its own thing.

10
4

Is it an iPad? Is it a MacBook Air? No, it's a Surface Pro 3

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: @H4rm0ny - "It's the same price as a MacBook Air with equivalent screen size"

>> "@H4rm0ny - "It's the same price as a MacBook Air with equivalent screen size"

It's interesting that you edited my words in the title above to say something that I never did. I think you perhaps don't understand the principles of quoting.

I never wrote they were the same price. I wrote they're in the same price range. And they are fairly close. People complaining about the Surface Pro 3 being too expensive appear to be willing to give MacBook Airs (which are all over the place) a pass. Does the small percentage price difference between the two account for how one can be hugely popular but the other is far too expensive? Is it the extra couple of tenths of a GHz speed bump you hone in on that makes one cheap enough to be everywhere but the other too expensive?

As to your list, you pick all the negatives and try to write off the positives, and select the lowest specced version in the range to do so, too.

0
2
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

>>"The pen issue is what makes the Surface/Win8 a non-starter for me. In my opinion using a pen on a screen just isn't a very pleasant experience for a number of reasons; I'm yet to come across a pen tip that feels 'right' on glass, and it's awkward to not be able to let the remainder of your hand rest on a touchscreen, like it would on a peice of paper, as you constantly end up inputting involuntary clicks and movements."

You don't have to avoid putting your hand on the glass when using the pen! It has palm rejection. I think you must be thinking of capacitive styluses. This is an active digitizer as you would find in a Wacom graphics tablet. Slightly lower degrees of pressure sensitivity (and who's hand distinguishes more than 256 anyway?) but otherwise the same.

8
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: @Arnaut the less RE"......... but for the mass market it just costs far too much....."

It's in the same price range as a MacBook Air with equivalent screen size. Plus you get good quality pen, potentially more storage, dual-purposes as a reasonable tablet. It certainly is expensive. But I see MacBook Airs all over the place so clearly it's not too expensive. I think some reviewers *cough cough* are having trouble getting their head around what to compare this to (or even if they should).

Criticising the use case makes little sense to me. It can meet most of the uses of a laptop perfectly well and no-one argues laptops aren't useful. So then the angry demand comes back why not just get a laptop. To which the reply is: this is really convenient, serves as a passable tablet and why not?

I have a laptop. I use it far less than I used to since I bought a Surface RT. Much of my work these days is Office-based work and web-based work and I can do both on the RT. And it's so much lighter that I take it with me on many occasions I wouldn't take a laptop. That's the other reason I don't get this repetitive attack on it for "lack of apps". Apps were a work around for phones that didn't have proper browsers or much power. Modern tablets have both. There are apps for anything I really need and I just use websites for the rest. Unless you want to play games (which this can run actual PC games anyway), I just don't see the complaint.

I often ask what people can't conveniently do due to lack of apps on Windows 8 (even RT). I never get a very convincing reply that isn't only true for a small handful of people.

11
3

Class war! Wikipedia's workers revolt again

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Pulling out the PR

Has anyone read the Media Viewer page in Wikipedia? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Media_Viewer

It's full of PR about how users have liked it, etc. Now THAT is a page where one might question the neutrality!

0
0