Posts by Mike Shepherd 643 publicly visible posts • joined 23 Aug 2008
My (virtual) mobile provider uses EE. I've noticed this week that DNS failures (e.g. from typing in the wrong web site name) now lead to a BT page instead. I thought I'd paid for straight internet access, but no...I must live with BT's view of the internet, so anything beyond browsing the web may not work as I expect.
I left BT internet years ago when they decided that improved security meant they must block pings. (This screwed up our remote backup system). Will no-one rid us of this turbulent company?
(2) would be quite an achievement. In our history society, we've managed to convert all our diskettes, VHS tapes and audio cassettes to digital storage. But who can say that the (hardware) means to read the new formats will be around even one decade later? So far, we've achieved a single digital medium (to simplify copying the archive to new media as each becomes obsolete). But it still needs constant oversight to avoid that obsolescence.
I'm not an expert, but (as I understand it), NAT (particularly for mobile connections) places numerous devices on a single public (routeable) address. So insisting that each user have a different IP address would block many legitimate users.
Why do companies like Microsoft, Google feel they must prove that they're "real kool"? I don't want to meet you socially. In fact, I don't much care if you live or die. I just use your stuff. I don't want an email service that corrupts messages when you feel like it, because "Hey, it's fun!". I don't want you to entertain me by changing the login screen image every time I turn on the PC. I don't need a new set of images, conventions and sounds on every issue of your OS. I have work to do.
What's next? Might a Google car say "Hey, I know you wanted to go to Seattle, but we thought the Everglades are so nice this time of year. Hehe!". It's not cool: it's just stupid.
DABS was particularly convenient for us as the warehouse was within driving distance. Then they shut the counter service and sold to BT, so we never dealt with them again.
Want a business telephone number? Which would you do, Google it or wade through BT's directory enquiry service? (Try it. Try even finding it from the bt.com page). If they can't do directory enquiries right after 100 years' practice, you can only imagine what their eCommerce is like.
People often find it fun to work in a small company, fun that can evaporate when sold (like they're the livestock that came with the farm) to a larger organisation.
The talented people "bought" in this way are the ones who can easily move elsewhere. The buyer may call them into the new fold, but
"Why, so can I, or so can any man; But will they come when you do call for them?"
It's simple. Russians don't have the habit of forcing a smile for politeness (and sometimes consider it bizarre). But some cultures are so accustomed to fake smiles (e.g. on greeting) that they consider them "natural", to the extent that you can read articles about why Russians "don't" smile.
It's not as complex as made out. We know what the terrorists are about, so we trust them more than GCHQ and the rest, the people who labelled Harold Wilson a Soviet agent, who think Vanessa Redgrave is a "subversive" and who work, at our expense, to ensure that society heads in the direction they think best for us.
Are we supposed to care? It's just storage: we don't need to know how it works. If one type is cheaper next year, we'll buy that. If not, we'll go on buying the old stuff. We don't lie awake at night wondering exactly when that will happen.
The new people won't hand out fivers to celebrate their win, nor will we shed tears as the others go out of business (or not).
Someone seems to have forgotten the point of these vehicles. If the passenger must watch constantly in case he needs to intervene, that's harder work than driving the car yourself. So it's entirely a failure of machine thinking.
As I understood it, accounting arrangements can be set aside where the main purpose is to avoid tax e.g. where a foreign subsidiary bills a UK subsidiary a large sum for goods or services which are clearly worth much less. I don't know why this doesn't apply in this case, but I'd be happy to have Page and Brin dealt with by the Henry I method.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
