Re: @M Gale
Don't you know it, sweetie.
3540 posts • joined 22 Apr 2007
Don't you know it, sweetie.
The fingerprint sensor that also works with nipples and knob-ends?
That fingerprint sensor?
Granted it doesn't have the user tracking, but it does have everything else.
Anybody old enough to have been in an arcade when these machines were doing the rounds will remember the weird eye-bending pop-up effect it achieves. Neat to look at, but your eyes will hate you if you try to put your hand through the apparent image.
Also the same effect as seen in a bunch of executive toys where you stick an object between two curved mirrors, and the object appears to float in the middle of an aperture at the top of the toy.
ERM yes you do.
And you don't need your real name. Call yourself "John Smith", and Google Minus has no fucking idea how to verify that. Yes, you do need a Minus account in order to leave Youtube comments, even on your own fucking videos in your own fucking channel, or to rate or review Android apps.
Are you seriously claiming the Google Minus bullshit on Youtube has stopped even one iota of one percent of the "lameness" in Youtube comments? Or that it has stopped any of the fake, idiotic or just downright wrong reviews on the Play Store? Open your eyes.
Let's hope whoever comes in next isn't so much of a dick about trying to shoe-horn everybody onto Google Fucking Minus just to rate an Android app or leave a comment on your own fucking Youtube video.
How's that integration going at getting rid of the Youtube trolls? Or the fake app ratings? Or any-fucking-thing?
Door. Don't let it smack you in the arse.
(now a happy Vimeo/DailyMotion user)
Or the other variation:
Don't shit on my cupcake and tell me it's frosting.
Must be extra thick.
...it's an internal "reserved" number for whatever odd prototypes the fruit merchant is playing with, and will never have anything to do with any finished product?
This of course, assumes the panels are not tracking the sun.
I think this deserves an equally cheeky response from Samsung, perhaps taking the shape of a fake apology?
I'm just being pedantic though.
Yes, yes you are. Goes with the territory I guess.
Have a +1 anyway, because you're not wrong.
9/10 -- Obvious, but you got plenty of bites, so congratulations!
After coming out with this spectacular fail, despite various screenshots of dynamic, interactive widgets that pre-date Microsoft's shitty flat, limited "tile" things by years:
why an app icon should be static?
...I'm inclined to believe you. Obvious troll is becoming very obvious.
never change children toys, they hate changes, they need to repeat the same thing over and over...
Exceedingly, unequivocally obvious.
Application icons are just a thing from the past, something good for old school OS like iOS, Android and Linux.
Because Android doesn't have widgets AT ALL.
Neither does KDE4. That's a Linux desktop environment just so you know. There are so-called "Screenlets" if you're more of a Gnome person.
Difference is, you can do entirely without them.
Think about a mail app icon showing you actual messages, instead of just a plain image of an envelope.
Sounds like the Gmail notifier widget. Though, showing the actual messages rather than a number does sound like the sort of horrendous privacy faux-pas that only Microsoft would be capable of. Yes, that is a little ironic.
from people who never assessed it objectively and just hate change.
Making a lot of assumptions there. Maybe some of us decided to try it, got a VM spun up, fiddled with it for a little while, and now the VM image sits there gathering dust except for the occasional run to see how much more the latest update has buggered things? Myself, I'll see what the new rumoured menu does if it arrives, and if it's shit, the disk image sits in a dark corner of the hard drive with a dunce cap on yet again.
Seriously, if a pipsqueak upstart like Canonical can manage to officially support at least three different desktop environments with their Linux distribution, I'm sure Microsoft could manage "Metro" and "Classic", or whatever they want to call it.
I hope this is a fake and MS stick to their guns like they did with the Ribbon.
Best thing Microsoft ever did... from the viewpoint of the LO.o and OO.o devs. There's a lot of people who wouldn't even be contemplating looking for alternatives if it wasn't for the Ribbon.
Oh well. I'm sure some enterprising 3rd parties will make a start screen replacement for you.
If that sounds snarky, that's because it is.
I think I need more drugs. Or maybe less. The Martian is beginning to make sense again. +1 and all that.
It isn't the script kiddies you need to worry about.
The important thing here though, is what are the ramifications for LOHAN? Are we going to see the vinyl-wrapped beast performing a Death From Above manoeuvre at the behest of some Guy Fawkes Mask-wearing Spanish trolltard?
THE PUBLIC MUST KNOW, and such.
More simply: GaussianFace normalises each pic into a 150x120 pixel image, and uses five landmarks – two eyes, the nose, and the corners of the mouth – as the basis for the image transform. It then creates 25 x 25 overlapping tiles in the image, and captures a vector of each patch.
This sounds very much like a tweaked version of Eigenfaces.
Hey, if it works, hats off to them. After doing the Computer Vision and AI option back in uni, I'd best describe the algorithms involved in facial recognition as "bloody complex".
Sticking it all into kernel space is certainly safer if you are running Windows. Unlike Linux's legacy monolithic kernel model,
Oooh, "legacy". Which sneakily implies "old". Okay.
Windows can maintain true isolation between the kernel itself and running processes / drivers.
You know that Windows is a hybrid kernel, right? Yes, that's right, it has "services" like a microkernel, which run shittily slow but have the separation you're on about. It also has shit glommed into the kernel, which run whizzily fast precisely because they are in Ring Zero, which is exactly where you don't want a web server.
The SUDO point is that on Windows you don't have to run anything as root / admin to give elevated rights - so you have to trust zero code running as admin / root - you can directly give JUST the rights that are actually required.
...and that's why UAC comes up every time a program needs elevated privileges. It's not elevating privileges, just pretending to?
When a program can arbitrarily put shit wherever it wants in the system, then whether it's technically running as the "admin" user or not is really a moot point. You might as well chmod 777 the whole hard drive and then say that it's safe because nothing is running as root.
The Playmonaut pilot just needs to hop out with a wooden pole and reattach the pantograph to the overhead wires. (You young'uns won't get this reference)
You would be surprised.
Mine's the one with the World Of The Children volumes in the pockets. They're bloody big pockets.
there must be someone in this world who just can't handle the iPhone now due to excessive depth
I tried to resist making a lewd joke here.
And that's why you never stick a phone in your back pocket. Ever.
Back pockets are for spare change, the occasional key and stuff that bends.
People with free will in using-their-free-will SHOCKER.
Or white if you got the six-months-later edition. Gotta keep it colour-coordinated.
Astonishing that the hysteria does not occur each month when Microsoft releases the usual slew of patches. Or when Adobe has yet more "interesting" vulnerabilities. Or when Java lis found to have terrible bugs.
"Dog bites man" is not news. "Man bites dog" is news.
And when you buy Android, all you buy is the right that your data will be stolen by Google and not someone else.
Which I suppose is better than paying through the nose to have your data "stolen" by Microsoft? You should be reading the news; their Scroogled campaign has now dropped from zero credibility down into negative integers.
Everybody does it. If anything I'd call Google the more honest out of the bunch because at least they are up-front about the whole "WE ARE GOING TO ADVERTISE TO YOU" thing. Still haven't found any scandals involving Google engineers manually poring over Gmail contents to find an alleged leak, and the Google Maps wardriving incident was.. really not an incident.
Probably compiler directives, looking at that one function. Ouch.
Funny how you have to go quite far out of your way to compromise the security and integrity of IOS, yet on desktops (especially windows) it's a breeze.
That's because desktop OSes, or as I prefer to call them, "real OSes", actually give you control of the device rather than locking root permissions away behind a manufacturer or vendor key, like iOS and Android both do.
Granted, Android's "walled garden" is more of a knee-high bit of trellis, but they're both basically locked down and locked up like some kind of games console. Oh yeah, and that Windows Phone thing, too.
Still waiting for an alternative Droid ROM that'll let people re-lock their device under a personal key. All the freedom of a proper OS (well, to an extent), with gazillions of apps that have no excuse to ask for root and a user base that is probably conditioned to be suspicious of anything that wants root. Yes, please.
Funny, that doesn't stop the tards in the peanut gallery coming out to attempt picking holes in a certain other phone OS that only seems to have malware problems when you break it.
And spreading through "Chinese iOS software sites"? Gasp, you mean unauthorised copies exist on Apple phones as well?
Well I'd have never thunk it.
Out of the people I know who've tried it, roughly 50% can't stand the thing, and the other 50% are "meh".
Most of these people are not computer scientists, but strangely have little difficulty in the "insert disk and keep clicking next" method of installing software that's been around since Windows 95 (at least in Windows land).
If "insert disk and keep clicking next" is taxing your intelligence, I have to wonder if you're inserting the disk into the disk drive, or into your mouth to examine the flavour?
Fortunately, "OEM" licenses are a load of bollocks. Especially Microsoft's insistence that if the motherboard dies, replacing it counts as replacing the computer, thus demanding a new purchase of Windows. One local computer shop has already been stung by a £4,000 demand after the guy reactivated Windows on a mystery shopper's PC after replacing a "broken" motherboard, and didn't charge for it.
He didn't pay.
He's still not been taken to court over it.
Fuck you, Microsoft. Fuck you.
If you try to strip the tax free status of one church you'll have to strip them all because the Catholic Church is FAR more politically active than the Church of Latter Day Saints.
Bloody good idea actually. I don't know how this would threaten your ability to believe in whatever fairies you like, though.
I think you'd make a better case if you didn't use loaded terms like "human rights soviet", and at least acknowledge that a lot of the more sympathetic coverage to this is coming from LGBT news sources. Yes, really.
You might also want to mention that at least one of the judges described the ruling as "sobering", or that the backlash this is likely going to cause is probably going to bring about a change in New Mexico's state law.
Though I do have to wonder what the reaction would have been if Ms Hugeunin had refused to photograph a wedding between two black people?
Ahem. Firefox doesn't have the "really awful" Thunderbird either.
The whole point of Firefox and Thunderbird, back when Firefox was called Firebird, before Pontiac went full retard on them, was to separate the various Mozilla components into more managable chunks.
"Christianity" is really a whole bunch of religions that all share a common root. You only need to go to certain bits of Ireland to see just how similar two particular sects of Christianity think they are to each other.
Go to the Westboro Baptist Church, and they'll soon tell you what they think of the evil tools of Satan.
On the other hand, the local C of E vicar around here is quite the effeminate chap, and so's his boyfriend.
Doesn't stop me from calling religion in general a bunch of hocus pocus, but I'm a lot less likely to want to stove the local vicar's face in than any of the WBC lot. Hey, the vicarage is all wifi'd up because of me. Bloody thick walls in that place. Utter nightmare without a repeater plugged into the network.
And if somebody next would like to marry his or her cat, dog or horse? Why not?
Come on, really? Do you know how recently it was that certain US states actually banned bestiality?
A clue: Not all of them have.
Seriously, stop channeling Santorum. It makes you look silly, as amusing as it is to watch.
I'd recommend finding the IP of your router, most commonly 192.168.1.1 or 192.168.1.100 or 192.168.1.101 or 192.168.2.200 or 192.168.1.201
Or open a command line (hit the Windows start button and type 'cmd' then the return key). Then type 'ipconfig' and hit return. Amongst all the blergh, you'll have your active network interface. This will have a "default gateway" address. That'll be your router. Tap that address into your web browser.
Wireless LAN adapter Wireless Network Connection 2:
Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . : fe80::1414:2f7d:2def:4e1d%18
IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.43.92
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.43.1
Something like that!
me being a non-techie person, not in the IT industry.
Came here for the BOFH, stayed for the LOHAN?
You can create certificates equal to, or better than, certificates issued by any global root CA. At nearly zero cost.
Butbutbut, you don't get the green address bar or the little padlock, and the browser will shout at you! That makes it insecure!
So you are admitting to performing a security probe without authorisation from the server owner? Congratulations on becoming a criminal.
Under what law? The special Internet law that doesn't exist?
Unless of course you know in which jurisdiction the OP resides, and can quote the relevant passages from the relevant acts verbatim.
it was open source that caused this problem in the first place.[Citation Needed]
You sure it wasn't someone making buggy code that caused this problem in the first place?
And the open source development model that made the bug more likely to be discovered and fixed?
...and the closed off, black box nature of shitty SoHo routers that prevents a lot of people from easily applying the fix?
Yes, yes and yes.
It's lovely. Not perfect, but lovely all the same.
And yet Ubuntu's OK because you can install something other than Unity
I guess you haven't seen the various comment-storms on that one then.
I guess you've also not heard of Kubuntu or Xubuntu, neither of which come with Unity and both of which are official Canonical products.
Or you could just put a red hat or a shiny fedora on and be done with it.
However, I bet there's quite a few developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers who might not like the idea of Microsoft doing a Microsoft on the means of buying (and selling) software.
Ballmer was right about one thing, even if wrong about everything else.
Unsure. If I remember right, the idea of this thing is to use the URL, some other information and a salt to construct a hash, so you get a unique password for every site, without having to even make up a password.
The person I'm on about is a commentard here, so if they see this message, I'm sure they'll elaborate.
Well, I already know someone who's putting together a devastatingly simple and deliciously geeky thing. It involves an Arduino, a keypad, a chopped up USB cable, and enough code to say "oh hello computer, I am a keyboard."
Tap a PIN on the keypad. The Arduino fires a password over the USB cable. Magic password storing box. Tada.
SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY.
Shush, you. Only Android has crapware. Oh, and viruses that can magically break out of the app sandbox on non-rooted devices. Somehow. I think. Maybe. Or not.
Apple is perfect. The iPhone is heavenly. Praise St Jobs. Amen.
Sent from my iPhone.