Posts by DZ-Jay 938 publicly visible posts • joined 23 Apr 2007
>> "What exactly can you run with that, paint and fucking textpad?"
Really? It's been a while since I last used a lower specc'ed machine (not since Win2K was a new thing), but up until recently I was using a MacMini with 1.3GHz processor an 512MB of RAM without much problem. I did my coding on it and even played World of Warcraft (albeit a bit slow on the framerate). Is Windows XP really that crap on the same hardware?
At work I use a dual-processor machine with 3GB of RAM and Windows XP and it runs like a cripple on syrup, but I always attributed that to the crap installed by the IT people; things such as AV software, network access managers, monitoring software, and a whole catalog of icons that lives in the System Tray.
-dZ.
I cannot imagine that sentence meaning what I think it does. However, after reading the entire press release, I cannot find any context which would offer a different meaning. I can only think that it was an unfortunate and very wrong choice of words.
That, or the U.S. government is being very candid in its approach towards immigration. Talk about "transparency in government." Wow.
-dZ.
But what you seem to forget (along with Google) is that the technology has been there already for a while, and what you say _has_ been tried before, though not necessarily on a web browser. These "solutions" ultimately are forgotten until some bright young mind re-discovers their theoretical potential at some future.
Three-dimensional file viewers and the like sound like a great idea on theory, and there seems to be plenty of scientific studies that show that humans seem keen to spatial relationships within objects in the environment. However, none of it seems to hold a candle to the flat, hierarchical tree display, which ultimately seems to be a more intuitive way to display, say, hierarchical trees. Hierarchies, after all, are a human construct to mentally visualize relationships. The problem is that to start, by their nature, they are already flat in your head.
This is probably the reason why, thoughout the history of civilizations, mankind has used flat surfaces to study and analize organization and taxonomy, as opposed to, say, using physical blocks spread throughout an open room. Apparently, there is a conciseness brought on by the flatness that aids in maintaining the scope of the entire structure on one's mind.
Sure, there are specific uses for spatial and three-dimensional representations, and those have been pioneered by previous civilizations too (such as for engineering and anatomy), But these are not strictly hierarchical structures. And although they are very useful in the design of physical things, it is rather disengenious (or naive) to think that, since we *see* in 3-D, it must be easier to *work* in 3-D on all aspects of our lives. After all, who says that we *think* abstract concepts in 3-D at all?
-dZ.
Hello:
Jeff, you seem to miss the fact that, along with the cheap crap, there are some very expensive high-end machines offered by PC manufacturers too, yet some of those boutiques didn't even make it to the top 5 on the list.
But I get it, when people complain about PCs or Microsoft crap products, it cannot possibly be a reflection on quality; it must be because they are such large companies that they are bound to have their minority detractors. And when the masses praise Apple, again, it cannot be a reflection on the quality of their products; it must be some strange statistical anomaly.
So, I ask you sincerely, what exactly would constitute an actual rating of the quality? What criteria is valid?
-dZ.
Here're a few hints:
- GNOME was originally developed by Miguel de Icaza
- Miguel de Icaza then turned into a Microsoft fanboi
- Miguel de Icaza started and spearheaded the MONO project
- The MONO project is sponsored in large part by Novell
And as a bonus:
- Miguel de Icaza worked (at least for a while) at Microsoft.
You put it together. The circle is complete.
-dZ.
Actually, it is a reference to the children's nursery story "Hansel and Gretel".
Regarding the phone surveillance and the presumption of innocense, well I'm fscked--my old phone stopped working last year; I closed my account a few months ago and haven't bothered buying a new phone.
-dZ.
>> It is this potential that Twitter Partners aims, somehow, to capitalise on.
So, a completely free and non-advertisement polluted service is very popular amongst the masses? How are they planning to capitalise on it? Has it ever occurred to them that perhaps the only reason it is so popular is *precisely* because it is free and contains no adverts?
-dZ.
No,
>> "...could also be driving the relationship between reproductive success and good hunting skills."
What they are really saying is: the more sex you have, the better you hunt. Practice makes perfect.
I wonder if this is translated to modern vocations, say, software development.
-dZ.
These policies seem sensible to me. The only one that, in my opinion, should be updated is the presidential records law, which does not really fit the electronic nature of the Internet or modern data acquiring mechanisms. It may need to be upgraded to include the long term storage of electronic information in non-paper media. But other than that, all seem fit for a governmental organization which needs to serve the people and account for all its spending and service incursions.
Regarding the so-called "free" Web 2.0 services, Mr. McLaughlin's arguments are idiotic. These services are most definitely *not* free; they are supported by advertisements. And since the government cannot and must not participate in such schemes, it means it will have to pay for the services in other ways if they want to use them.
This is no different than, say, ad-supported television or ad-supported radio: a government agency cannot just take "free" air time and let advertisers pay for it--they must budget and purchase access to the medium.
If the government is going to have to set up a special for-pay arrangement with YouTube or FaceBook or any other Web 2.0 company to use their services, then it needs to research the cost and benefits and compare them against building their own infrastructure. And, yes, this takes time and effort, especially if such organizations do not provide the services in a usable way to the goverment, and which they may not be inclined to modify at a reasonable cost.
In view of this expense in effort, time and treasure, the administration should then decide if Web 2.0 "goodies" are really all that necessary. Perhaps they can reach more people in a more efficient manner using other more traditional ways. After all, event counting all the benefits that the Internet offers nowadays, lets not forget that the United States survived without it for a long time.
However, so far at least, the Obama administration seems to be preocupied not necessarily in efficiency of communication, but in being the cool and trendy administration that "gets" what the kids are doing.
-dZ.
@AC:
Did you not read the article? The point is not whether he should pay for his crimes or not, but that he is been forced to pay to the RIAA whatever *they* deem is proper punishment. The defendant's position is that he should be processed duly, tried for his crime, and served an appropriate punishment by the courts--as the constitution demands.
The way things worked on this case, the RIAA served as police, judge and jury, and made all decisions regarding guilt and punishment by its own devices. The RIAA clearly is overstepping its position by acting as a de facto government agency. But even if this were allowed and warranted, it is still a single organization taking the roles of various branch of government at once.
-dZ.
It's not the crime that is notable, it's what it represents. It represents a lapse in judgement, faulty integrity, and an intention to avoid responsibility (running away from authority when caught). This is not an indiscretion committed by a thirteen year old, up-to-no-good, unsupervised kid with too much time on his hands; this was an act perpretated by a 21 year-old adult, who you would expect is mature enough to make his own decisions and understand the rules of society.
Sure, it is a very petty crime, but it still shows a flawed character. So, the question is, do I want a person who just little over a decade ago showed irresponsibility and lapse of judgement, in charge of policies or decisions that affect our entire country?
The answer may very well be, yes: he is very talented and has grown from that experience, proving himself since a worthy and honorable man. However, I do not know enough of the man at this point to make that judgement. Still I believe the question is valid. The outrage may be misplaced and exaggerated, but the question is valid.
-dZ.
>> "Mainframe survivor IBM absorbing Sun is an apt confirmation of its status as the survivor of the IT age."
Seems fitting, considering that IBM was around before them, for it to remain standing after they're gone. It also says something about the "small and agile" strategy and "new" business schools of thought.
Unfortunately, it also means that the same can be applied to the Microsoft behemoth, within its limited industry: that it is large enough and stable enough for it to adapt to changing market pressures and still dominate, if at least by pure endurance.
-dZ.
>> >> "Support for images was introduced until version 2."
>> "So, no more pictures after version 1?"
No, it means that after version 2, images were not supported any more. This is why the web went text-only until pictures were invented by the Microsoft in the mid-nineties.
P.S. Wicked, Ms. Stob. Fantastically funny!
-dZ.
Actually, it's much worse than that: He did not *write* to them, he sued! From the response letter, at least, it seems that Royal Mail was contacted by Mr. Moore's lawyers, and at the end they advise that the claim--pressumably a lawsuit--be withdrawn.
Outrageous indeed!
-dZ.
Also, it would have helped if his "adventurous" antics would have, you know, worked. As it stands, he didn't manage to stop the vehicle. It was later on that it was finally halted with the help of others, proving that his stunt was dangerous and not only unnecessary, but useless; which is why none of the other participants were injured.
-dZ.
>> "Haven't downgrade rights always existed, and haven't they always only been available with "business" editions of Windows?"
Perhaps. But the point of the lawsuit is that Microsoft is using it's dominant market position to force people to purchase Vista, whether they want or plan to use it, or not. If you are looking to buy a new computer, you cannot purchase it with Windows XP installed -- Microsoft won't allow it because of "licensing policies"; you can only purchase it with Windows Vista.
However, nobody seems to want Vista; and Microsoft, instead of bowing down to market and consumer pressure and demand for Windows XP (which is what an organization without monopoly-ish powers would have to do), is making those who want Windows XP pay a so-called "downgrade" license for it--on top of the price of the pre-installed Vista. In essence purchasing both.
The fact that the user has only the choice of either swallowing an unwanted Windows Vista, or paying an additional fee for getting the product they want--while still paying for Vista--is the crux of the suit. I'm sure that many people would be happier if they could abdicate their pre-installed copy of Vista, subtract its price from the cost of the computer and use this as a credit towards a Windows XP license. After, those who are asking for XP do not want Vista at all, much less rammed down their throats.
Of course, offering the choice of Vista or XP is not an option for Microsoft, because that would mean revealing the emperor's new clothes: that there is no demand for the newer operating system, even when compared against a previous version from almost eight years ago.
-dZ.
Actually, if there are few takers on the service, and little interest in it, then just announcing it on the service's home page would qualify as "quietly"--regardless of how prominent or emphatic the text is.
The point of that comment in the story was that Google did not announce it publicly, on a press release or the like, along with other services they were closing. Instead, typically, they announced a much smaller set of services which were discontinued, to avoid the obvious implications that a larger list would have created (and the rumours that that would spark) in the public eye.
-dZ.
This malware still needs someone to download it, from a site of dubious reputation, then install it manually (and pressumably give it the admin password when installing to gain access), so what's the threat?
That idiots are installing stuff without knowing where it really comes from? So what else is new?
-dZ.
If the drug was able to mutate the mice into losing aural sensitivity, how does this provide a net gain? Pressumably, if your aural sensitivity is affected, you won't hear well at normal levels. So what is the benefit of a drug that reduces sensitivity preemptively in order to prevent damage?
Might as well just go to the club. At least you may get lucky there, even if you can't hear sh*t the next morning.
-dZ.
So, let's get this clear:
a- If there is currently a vulnerability in an application, and
b- if your system is unpatched, and
c- if you executed a program with a malicious payload, and
d- if this malicious payload took advantage of the new stealth technique
THEN you'll get infected, and it will very hard to trace it using common forensic techniques.
That's a tall order right there. The current situation is at "c", and malicious programs and infections are not that common. The new factor of stealth will not necessarily influence the availability of malicious attacks, only their detection.
You still need that proverbial virus that we've been promised.
-dZ.
I think the LOLcat tzar idea should be considered. Perhaps it should be called "Ceiling Cat Seckertry", or "Deparmen uhf Cheezburgrz".
LOLcats posters and banners should decorate all guvment offices, and yes, the Emergency Broadcasting System should show shots from icanhascheezburger to keep us calm during an emergency.
-dZ.
@boltar:
You're forgetting something: to the latest generation of code monkeys, "applications" and "software programs" mean exactly point-and-clicky interactive client programs or web applications.
Operating systems, device drivers, and even sophisticated video games with fancy graphic effects are not part of this pool--they are just stuff that you download or buy on a disc. Of course, from that perspective, C and C++ are useless and dangerous, and distract you away from the automagic code generators, garbage collectors, and shiny components.
As for the stuff they downloaded or bought on a disc, it must have been written in PHP, C#, VB.NET or Java. Unless it's buggy, then it definitely was written C, and the programmer should have known better.
-dZ.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
