3272 posts • joined 22 Apr 2007
Go to software centre, type "Gnome" and install it...
...watch as it b0rks your system completely because you didn't tweak things to include GDM instead of whatever godawful thing Unity has, and you didn't reconfigure Compiz. Canonical have not made it easy and straightforward for you to divert from their Chosen And Holy Path.
Oh and then you have to move the buttons to the right side.
Not exactly a no-intelligence solution. A minty nuke+reinstall would probably be easier.
If it's that worrying, don't register it!
Exactly what I thought when the Lords Fuckwit (sorry, I meant ICANN) decided to post everyone's personal information online via the WHOIS records after removing the ability to go "ex directory" for us ordinary plebs.
I now own no .com domain names. The search engine spammers can have them. Vote with your wallet and tell ICANN to piss off. Plenty of other registrars in the world and ".com" has less cachet now than it used to.
But they'll be dead soon anyway. Fucking kangaroos.
If you like the UI...
Launcher 7, from the Android Market. I have the donate version. It's okay to be different but I still find myself sticking with ADW Launcher EX.
Even lesd reason to get a Windows Phone!
So a night out clubbing in the future reads like...
I like you. I like you. I like you. I like you. I like you. I like you. I like you. I like you. I like you. I like you. I like you. I like you. I like you. I like you. I like you. I like you. I like you. I like you. I like you...
You would think...
....that like trying to sell refrigeration devices to the Inuit, that might be a tricky sell.
Analogy fail, you suck and all that. This is the Reg after all.
Tastes like shit washed down with bitrex. Hits you like a sledgehammer and leaves you drooling on the sofa trying not to vomit for a good quarter hour. Was more fun after that.
Legally obtained btw.
Along with Nyans as a temporal measurement, is a measurement of bandwidth along the lines of a "Youtube-Hour" (abbrev. yH) incoming?
I use this.
A friend with iOS introduced it to me. Thing is, it stopped working for a bit, then came up as a different name on iOS with a lot more features such as a TV guide and red button. Us Android owners have to stick with this version, which isn't entirely bug free. It's random as to whether I get annoying regular glitches in the video, and obtaining full screen is a pain. You're lucky on Gingerbread if you can go full screen at all without the notification bar obscuring the top of the image!
So yes, it does work, for varying definitions of "work". Guess it's not too moan-worthy for free though.
I think the problem here...
...is people reading me wrong.
No, Lucasfilm is not a tech firm. I never said it was.
However, Lucasfilm may have an interest in poaching people from "real" tech firms, because they can keep whatever IT they have running well or manage the IT department better. To use "we're not a tech firm" to say "well we'd never agree to wage fixing with a tech firm" is.. invalid, I think.
Lucasfilm is not a tech firm?
No argument there, but who keeps their monstrously powerful render servers working?
Also Pixar, set up by a certain now-dead fruity CEO. I guess all their animations are hand drawn? They don't hire any IT talent at all?
Kids shouldn't even be on the Internet.
I think the problem was when the Internet started hitting the big time late 90s/early 2000s and the government seemed determined to expose every kiddy to the Internet via the school systems, then telling parents that they all had to have a computer and the Internet. Schools should have always been set up on some kind of AOL-alike network with restrictions that make Apple's App Store policies look tame, with the real Internet being something you might start work on in high school once you're starting to learn what this thing called "trust" is, and you're likely already aware of the aforementioned computer game character fetishists.
Anyway, hindsight's a wonderful thing (even if some of us had the foresight to see this Daily Mail wailing happening a long while before it happened), and we've just got to deal with the aftermath of the idiots who made it so it's now almost a necessity to have kids on the Internet. Technologically, a whitelist is probably about the only way you're going to stop someone going on sites you don't want them on, and even that doesn't stop them seeing whatever some hacker decides to graffiti a website's home page with.
A friend has a lovely solution though, that I believe one or two people here already use: The computer is in the living room. Only the older kids have devices that can get on the Internet. If you're somehow a younger reader that's stumbled onto this dark corner of the Internet and think that's cruel or draconian, think about how cruel or draconian a world would be where nobody can have access to an unfettered Internet because of all the "think of the children" wailing? You'll grow up. The rest of us won't^Walready have.
(and please don't tell mum that the Reg has been telling you about Sonic pr0n, I like this site when half the editors haven't been arrested)
was what I was wondering.
Though what you describe is some kind of double glazed funkiness. This, I'm wondering how it will work at night since even a flashlight on in the car can turn a windscreen into a mirror. During daylight hours, how much light will those panels have to generate to counteract the sun?
Cool invention though.
While I'm here...
...back when water was supplied by public-owned companies, you would pay "rates" based on the size of your house. A fixed monthly cost, because the cost to purify water is negligible and, from what I'm aware, it was actually illegal to charge for water. You could charge for purifying it and delivering it to your house via pipes, but not for the water itself. This law also stung restaurants who could not charge for a glass of water (although they could charge a nominal fee for the rent of the glass, etc).
I'd like anybody to try and tell me that the modern state of affairs is any better. Paying per cubic metre? All new houses fitted with water meters by law? Yeah, that one was sneaked through on the back of a hot Summer with hosepipe bans. People were convinced that it would be good to be a masochist and vote for price gouging, because it would prevent hosepipe bans in the future!
Except it, err, hasn't. At all.
Your electricity company...
...pays a hell of a lot more to generate a kilowatt-hour than it does to send bits flying around a wire. If the costs were as negligible as sending a megabyte of data, I'd call their actions reprehensible too.
People don't seem to realise this, and some masochists seem to actually welcome the idea of paying per unit of an infinite resource.
I didn't say it costs nothing to build a network; quite the opposite in fact. However per-megabyte, the running costs of those carrier class routers and switches is so insignificant as to be nothing. The cost of the maintenance crew is far more, and doesn't go up when Joe Sixpack decides to download 10 gigabytes of high def pr0n.
Nobody is saying ISPs shouldn't make money, but I do think that charging per megabyte when ther is no magical reservoir of 1s and 0s to run out and no Peak Data catastrophe looming, is a rather crappy thing to do. And yes, that's directed at the ISPs' upstream providers, too.
I don't need to know the ins and outs of the money markets to know that pay day loan companies are largely sharks. I don't need to know the cost of a router to know the cost of a binary digit. Neither do you.
...goodbye Youtube. Goodbye lovefilm. Goodbye netflix. Goodbye photobucket, facebook, and a million other bandwidth-intensive sites if ISPs all shifted to charging people per unit of an infinite resource. Do you know how many megabytes a high-def youtube vid of a few minutes long is?
"the ones who think they've paid for a licence to max out the service 24x7."
Yes, yes they have. Virgin slow you down to a "paltry" 2mbit from 10mbit if you download several gigabytes worth over a couple of hours during peak times, and the throttle lasts for all of 24 hours, but you're still given truly unlimited access with no extra charges and no "sorry, you've exceeded your traffic allowance for the month". Still plenty of bandwidth to do most things outside of 1080p, high def video streaming. For some reason they seem to get more stick for this than the ISPs that just either cut you off or add extra to your bill for daring to download a few gigs over a connection that can do just that in minutes. If you're penalised for that, then that's the ISP massively oversubscribing the network to the point where they can't handle more than a few users doing what they've paid to do.
And while bandwidth as in the total amount of data per second that can be transmitted can cost money to upgrade, bandwidth itself costs nothing. Paying network engineers costs money, regardless of how many bits go through the cable. Laying fibre costs money, regardless of how many bits go through the cable. Once it's in, the costs are effectively zilch and your workers eat up far more money being paid to maintain it all. A nice steady cost, dealt with by a nice monthly fee, and bollocks to charging people per megabyte.
Net Neutrality means that packets from youtube.com are given the same priority as packets from yourprivateserver.yourdomain.com, not that you aren't penalised for raping the shit out of somebody's network or that some types of traffic aren't prioritised for QoS reasons. The idea is that you're paying for a pipe that you shove X amount of bits per second over and you shouldn't be double-charged for "premium access" to various sections of the Internet, or told by AT&T that you can pay them lots of money on top of your hosting bills and they'll make sure the packets from your server gets to their customers ahead of other servers.
Basically, proponents of net neutrality would like to pay for X amount of connectivity to the Internet and everything on it. Opponents of net neutrality would like to charge you separately for access to Skype, Youtube, Facebook, you get the idea.
Nowt to do with heavy users, but a good attempt to charge people multiple times for the same thing.
This study commissioned by...
...the Campaign to Charge More for an Infinite Resource?
Yes, yes, I know there's only so much of that resource available at once, but then ISPs shouldn't be oversubscribing their networks, should they?
Kodak inkjets are pretty damned good on ink.
I know a couple of people who have Kodak inkjets for precisely that reason. I guess their only worry now should be how long will they be able to get hold of refills for?
If they're being given away...
...I'll have one. I just won't pay for one. I already have a tablet, laptop, desktop computer AND two smartphones, I really don't need an iAnything. It'd be like a downgrade!
OMG, you're right!
This is the most awful phone and tablet OS I've ever seen. The way it reacts immediately, and the various launchers you can get if you don't like the stock look and feel. The unified marketplace across so many different devices, the cheap price, the battery life that gets longer instead of shorter with each release, the voice recognition and notifications area that Apple thought was so bad they had to copy it, the ability to do all of this without touching a rooting utility...
You're right. I have seen the light.
I shall replace my Arc S and Tab 7 with iProducts immediately!
Read Error BThis is why I <3 the old BBC. It loaded in regular-sized blocks and if one of them fouled up, the counter would stop and you'd just rewind the tape a bit and replay that block. Didn't stop it taking bloody ages just to load a 747 simulator that comprised of an instrument panel, a line for the horizon, and runways represented as very long quads. The first time I witnessed Acorn 1770 DFS in action I think it took me the rest of the day to scrape my jaw off the floor. Can we have an "old fart" icon please?
This reminds me...
...of when the games consoles started breaking into the 3D arena properly. Atop the display you'd see a console "plugged into" a television, demonstrating some kind of really impressive trickery.
...until someone lifts up the tablecloth and reveals the SGI workstation. Oops.
An iWotsit's battery performance isn't all that amazing if you're actually using the thing. A day or so if you're the type to play Angry Birds on the bus. My Arc S seems to last about the same length of time.
I've solved the problem myself with an external USB battery, one of the Energizer XPal things. £70, 8Ah and it'll charge the tablet once from empty or the phone about three or so times. Apparently the 16-20V output will power low-juice netbooks and laptops for "up to 3 hours" and Energizer promise "two free tips per year for life" for new products, but that's probably something for Reg Hardware to cover in more detail.
More on-topic though, I'm looking at this patent and scratching my head a bit. What measure could ensure that a stolen phone+PSU could not be used by the thief to recover a password, and how is this more convenient than putting the password recovery abilities in the phone itself? Especially considering what happens if you lose the charger?
Are the Russians making prototype turbolasers along the lines of the US missile killers, are they blue enough, and how bright would the beam be after a few hundred miles of atmosphere?
I think they're more used to pumping up the volume than inflating LOHAN's assets.
Thing about hobbyist rocket engines...
...is that many (but not all) of them tend to have an ejection charge. This would normally blow the top off the rocket and get the parachute out at the end of the ride, but there's nowt saying it can't blow the expended rocket engine out backwards instead.
Of course if we're going for very-much-not-off-the-shelf hybrid motor fun, this could change things. I'd suggest either my idea from a while ago, where the aircraft sits in a fairing atop the rocket like a satellite would, or riding piggy back for a slightly easier but very much less swanky option.
Would it be breaking any laws to fill a Soda Stream bottle with liquid oxygen?
The main surprise here...
...is finding Mr Shitpeas not giving a damn about a company removing the ability to run the toy Unix on their devices.
I guess it's okay if someone with a few billion in the bank does it then. What do you think lobby groups are for?
Anyway, it's his site and the editors are with him. If the wikimedia foundation decides on a strike, are you suggesting the govt should step in and stop them? Good luck trying that.
Whether a wiki blackout will do anything other than give a few officials a bit of a smirk as they put the stamp of approval on SOPA however, is another subject.
So google have found a malicious app and... deleted it? While the article doesn't make it clear, I assume this also means it's been remotely nuked by Google's equally notorious kill switch. The only difference I see here is that Google have brought the Mighty Foot down on some malware, whereas Apple are likely to ban you for far more petty means even if they don't outright kill all trace of your app.
People do need to stop requesting silly permissions to throw birds at pigs or unravel a loo roll though.
Yes it is.
And it's still horribly misguided crap that will never support the DRM component and serves to give Microsoft false "interoperability" bragging rights, even though they are the very antithesis of the word.
I believe the phrase here is...
"How deliciously meta."
"16:9 is just a fad on a device like this."
Good luck fitting a 4:3 device in your pocket at any viewable size.
Whereas this old Tab 7 with a case+built in bluetooth keyboard works quite nicely when using RDP on the bus (Remote RDP Free Edition, by the way). Granted the case makes the pocket size requirement more gargantuan than most, but it's still vastly more portable than anything Apple have come up with so far.
Now all I need is a stylus. Windows Server 2003 is really not finger-friendly.
Spot the potential winner of the "2012" list.
DNS gougers, and general snoopers
Get yourself a dictionary file, have a script start randomly stringing domain names together and looking them up at a rate that won't get you in trouble with your ISP. The gougers will soon be stuffed even if they are only paying pennies on a domain name, and casual snoopers won't know what's real and what's not.
Same approach as using TrackMeNot: Why go under the radar when you can obliterate it with chaff?
With a bit of luck...
...they'll screen the misfire and the resultant damage/mayhem and end it with "...and this is why!"
Fuck off. He either hacked her email or didn't. Going to the website to find the username and password pre-filled is not "hacking", and neither is knowing the password anyway.
How did this even get to anything other than a divorce court?
It used to be "pick the one with the best performance."
Now I guess the best answer would be "pick the one least likely to get you sued over patent violations."
If you throw all of your content out for free and then expect people to pay for it post-fact, you are a fool.
The BBC should put their entire site behind a paywall if they want consistency. Make it so when you buy a TV license, you can have a login name and password for everyone in your house. As above, I've suggested a compromise that would continue to pay for the BBC and yet allow people who don't want, or even like the BBC to do without it.
But like I've already said, every time someone suggests a tax-free BBC, the sound of air sucking through teeth threatens to deafen. Bloody morons.
I wouldn't say "privatise"...
...but having the thing publically owned and run by a private company to a mandate that enforces what types of programming can be shown - you know, like they have now - could be a lovely compromise that gets rid of the TV license and lets the traditionalists keep the channels they know and love. I've suggested going to a Freemium-type model for a while now, where the flagship BBC1 and maybe BBC2 are kept as-is, but the rest of the channels either go behind a paywall or (shock, horror) get advert breaks. The BBC has so much in their archives that could be online and available on-demand to anybody able to buy a household BBC license (as opposed to TV license) and tap their login details into a web page.
Again, the types of programming can be mandated. A regular review of the Beeb's performance against said mandate would stop whatever slide downmarket that the license-lovers seem to fear so much.
Chances of that happening though? Approximately zilch. Too many people who gasp so hard they cause the room they are in to implode any time you suggest getting rid of that bloody tax.
Uni age? Seriously?
There's a fine line between protecting children and wrapping them in a cotton wool coccoon. I'd say once the little sprogs are past 16 then they are legally old enough to marry (or join the Army if you like). Saying "thou shalt not play out past 9pm" without some logical reason like "I'm up early tomorrow and so are you" would be perhaps a little repressive and may even damage somebody that age. Or maybe some parents will find out the hard way that some 17 year olds have just enough hotheadedness to defy you to make a point, and just enough stupidity to not care about the consequences. Of course you could kick them out and make them live in a hostel, but.. yeah, good parenting, that.
Anyway, what's the betting that some kids are going to be swapping their "smart" phones for cheapy Nokias that don't act like nannies?
To quote Eminem
I find you offensive for finding me offensive.
Now go perform a sexual act on a Satan plushie please, there's a dear.
Doesn't ask it of me..
..though I do believe they'll want you to be logged in to view a video that has been flagged as containing potentially adult content. By "potentially adult" I mean "the moral minority hath spoken" rather than "phwoar", but still, that's possibly why you were asked for account details.
Now perhaps they can update the Android app so it doesn't keep asking me for my password, despite the fact that I can tell the password-request dialog to fuck off and it carries on working like I'm logged in anyway.
Funny this story comes out today.
Just this afternoon I was chatting with a few of the other students and mentioned Blackberry's Playbook. None of them knew what I was on about. The questions asked were something along the lines of "Blackberry makes a tablet?"
Was only when I mentioned the advert with the Flash Gordon music in that the penny dropped. Everyone had seen it, nobody realised that it was a Blackberry device. Maybe that's part of RIM's problem right there?
So how much of this is already covered by the MPEG4 facial animation standards?
Not to mention numerous other bits of software about that I'm pretty damned sure have done some mighty similar things.
This is the Internet.
You seem new here. Hi.
Didn't work in landscape mode, then it decided that a 7 inch screen is way too large and only occupied a portion of the top left. Oh, and then the blue "slide here" animation was all screwed up and in the wrong place.
It scrolled smoothly though. A good demonstration of the bog standard Android browser's capabilities, but not a great UI. Reminds me of when Windows XP came out and all people wanted to know was how to get rid of that awful Fisher Price scheme. Maybe I'll try the Metro-a-like that's in the Market just to show off to people with WP7, but I don't see me sticking with tiles for long. Not when I have widgets, anyway.
- Does Apple's iOS 7 make you physically SICK? Try swallowing version 7.1
- Pics Indestructible Death Stars blow up planets with glowing KILL RAY
- Hands on Satisfy my scroll: El Reg gets claws on Windows 8.1 spring update
- Video Snowden: You can't trust SPOOKS with your DATA
- 166 days later: Space Station astronauts return to Earth