Yeah. Civil engineers only. The rest are just pretenders. Or did you have something else in mind? ;)
870 posts • joined 13 Dec 2008
Yeah. Civil engineers only. The rest are just pretenders. Or did you have something else in mind? ;)
They should have a .med domain instead, to include the medical professions. Then a .hoax domain, for the homeopaths and others.
Shouldn't that be "time to celebrate American Pi"? Seeing as the date convention required for this to work is one that's used by the USA and, I believe, Belize. That's it. It's only seen in Canada because it's so dominated by American corporations, but it's not actually a standard in Canada at all. So yeah, "American Pi". Enjoy.
So yet again the people who are bowing to blackmail: Netflix, are being blamed for bowing to the blackmail rather than seeing their business destroyed?
Netflix is told "pay us or your content won't get through". WHAT THE FUCK ARE THEY SUPPOSED TO DO? They can either pay and hope they make enough profit to cover the blackmail, or they can say "no, that's not within the net neutrality guidelines" and see their business get butt-fucked by non-net-neutral ISPs.
Why are so many people blaming what seems to me to be the victim?
I got rid of my wrist-based, easily banged up watch when cell phones came out. If I had to carry something that had the time on it, I didn't need two of the things. Happy times.
So now we have a device that lets me know if my phone is ringing (hey, I can HEAR the damn thing already, OK?), lets me know if my phone is sending out an alarm (ibid.), lets me know if my phone calendar needs attention (ibid.), and generally only tells me that I need to take my phone out to get any detailed info?
I smell... hype. Lots and lots of hype.
That or I've missed something. But looking at it more closely - I don't think I have.
Far be it for me to disagree with NATS claiming they have skimped on IT, but this kind of failure seems to be exactly the kind of thing you'd expect when proper design and testing isn't scheduled or funded. If the description of the problem is even vaguely accurate (which is a big "if", admittedly) then given the severity of the results I'd expect any attempts to set the wrong values should have been caught by a correctly designed and tested system. That it wasn't makes me wonder what other shortcuts they've taken?
I fail to see the problem. Top secret leaks in top secret buildings obviously need to be plugged with top secret documents. Nothing else would do!
They got bought by an investment firm?
Another person here glad to be using AdBlock Latitude, although I was a little annoyed that PaleMoon unilaterally switched me. At the time. Now I'm not so annoyed. But I'm also using Ghostery, NoScript, Privacy Badger, and a few other tools that block things I don't want.
About ads in general though:
Technically, I have no problem with ads. Some are even useful for informing me of products I might not have known to look for. What I have a problem with are the page of ads that over-write my screen, the flashy jittery ads that give me headaches, the misleading ads that pretend to be the "next page" of an article, ads with autoplay sound, ads that beat the fuck out of my weaksauce Canadian bandwidth, and the shitloads of utter fucking crap served up by those who feel that since I'm on their website, then I should bloody well take what I'm given, even if it's a rusty chainsaw dildo.
So I'll use whatever methods work to get rid of the damn things. I occasionally turn off the blockers for specific sites, because they made what I see as promises that the ads they do run would be properly curated. The second they lie to me, I turn the blocks back on and they can go to hell. Currently, The Register is one such site. So far, they haven't lied as far as I've been able to see. In fact, I'm not seeing any ads? Is something wrong?
Tim Cook manages a company that makes money and wins, gets 9 million.
Gregg Steinhafel of Target Canada oversees one of the biggest retail failures anywhere, leaving behind a bankrupt company that owes $5 billion to creditors, and gets $61 million for his efforts.
Either Tim Cook has some other remuneration that they aren't talking about, or Steinhafel just demonstrated why some directors and shareholders are complete idiots.
First thing I thought of as well. I can see destruction after confirmed duplication, but doing it piecemeal before that confirmation is just asking for a lot of trouble.
This isn't "innovation", this is just attempting to enforce unworkable laws with unworkable technology.
There's no fucking excuse for that kind of code. If you're going to do rm -rf, then you'd bloody well better check the arguments. Yes, I've made that kind of mistake. When I was a newbie and not allowed anywhere near production code.
Phenomenal Cosmic Powers!
Itty Bitty Living Space.
I'm a klutz. If there's a way for me to drop something into the bath, I'll find it. Wrapping my reader in a waterproof cover (a.k.a. freezer bag with seal) is useful. To me.
What I wouldn't mind is a touch-screen that I could turn on and off, so that I could use it only when I wanted to use it. I can think of a few uses, such as making annotations, where a touch-screen might be useful. But so far I've not seen one with a touch-screen that can be turned off.
Worst thing to ever happen to e-readers was the touch-screen. Sounds great, until you try to actually use it, at which point just moving your hand around to a more comfortable position jumps the page on you. Or you put it down (or pick it up) without first having carefully turned it off, and boom, lose your page. Or you want to read in the bath so you put it in a waterproof bag? Oh look, it doesn't bloody work at all. My wife has the Sony touch-screen. Soon as anything passes near the screen boom, lost page. Pile of shite.
I like my bog-basic Kindle (no fucking touch screen. I hope the newer ones don't force the issue) with calibre book software. Buy books from where I like (rarely Amazon actually), read them how I like, and I can treat my e-reader like a book, but lighter and more convenient.
Don't be silly. By leaving it ticked, they can claim that they got consent. Besides, the websites are probably outside of Canada, and therefore beyond Canadian jurisdiction. Canada isn't the USA, and doesn't claim jurisdiction over the entire world. Yet.
Maybe security journalists, or even those working in security, don't watch frivolous films like James Bond movies? Which is a pity, because there's a lot of great ideas in there that used to be science fiction and are now just potentially silly toys.
Authentication is normally based on 'something you know', and not just 'something you have' such as a fingerprint or any other biometric.
Technically incorrect, unless you add "insecure" to the beginning of that quote. Also, I've always been told fingerprints don't count as "something you have", they're only "something you are", which is lousy security because it can't be changed. Slightly more secure authentication is based on both something you know, AND something you have. Also not just "something you are", such as the horribly insecure fingerprint, which as noted can be duplicated. The duplication can be in any of several ways, either pre (the print itself) or post (the digital "signature" of that print) processing. Just one of the above is, today, not really considered "secure". Or at least, not "secure enough".
I guess if you're comfortable working in a country whose infrastructure depends on slavery, then it's probably an OK country to work in. So long as you don't fall afoul of the corrupt officials, the medieval "justice" system, and don't get into a disagreement with a national, in which case I hope you have a solid exit plan. A very solid exit plan.
Yes, I've worked in the Middle East (various places). It was very profitable, and I probably could have stayed. But I eventually I found it morally indefensible for someone who didn't want to be a complete hypocrite, and I never could agree that slavery was a good thing, no matter what the Qu'ran (or the Bible for that matter) might have to say about it.
So if money is all you care about, by all means work in the Middle East. So long as you're feeling lucky of course. Get into an argument with the local authorities (or worse, with a well connected national. Watch out for those low-numbered plates in the UAE for instance) and you're going to discover just how inhumane the system becomes. And most often definitely not in your favour.
It's probably in the "extended" contract that the 95 page contract you actually agree to is only a part of. In the fine print, paragraph 323, line 3563, section 432. Written in Swahili then translated using some fly-by-night automatic translation software.
The self-admitted troll I rented a room to, who spent hours counting score on how many people he'd gotten angry, was a scrawny little shit who was bullied a lot. This was his way of "getting back" without getting physically abused. The fact that many of the people he was targeting where the bullied rather than the bullies escaped him completely.
quote: "If someone pays for a support ticket from MS, the problem is usually a significant one, and takes a bunch of time to fix."
Which means that before you can even start to pay Microsoft, you have to already have paid someone to determine if the problem "is significant". Probably someone who paid into Microsoft's protection racket with an MCSE or whatever it's called today.
They really do get people coming AND going. I guess it's why they're so profitable - they're the epitome of cashing in on the whole "there's a sucker born every minute", and they sold it a copy of Windows.
The big ISPs are ALREADY implementing a "pay to play" model. Perhaps Netflix HAD to pay if it wanted to be able to continue in business.
I smell a rat in the FCC revolving door here. They're basically claiming that Netflix bowed to blackmail, therefore it must be guilty of wanting the situation where the blackmail was possible?
My solution is "don't use Facebook". So far that's worked for me. The original solution was "just give them fake info". Which also worked, but I was spending too much time on it, so I went with the new solution.
You have to admit, they're consistent:
we went from "you're holding it wrong" when the reception sucked,
to "you're storing it wrong" when it bent while in people's pockets,
and now "your security expectations are wrong" from people who actually expect a minimum of security.
I can only wonder what their next attempt to blame everyone but themselves will be.
Colour me very, very sceptical. Microsoft does not have a history of being honest about anything, from secret APIs to dishonest dealings with "partners". I can only wonder what hidden traps they'll have in their definition of "open source", or their implementation of the "open source" version.
Are you sure he was doing for a laugh, and not because those were the only directions he could remember but he didn't want to admit it?
Personally, I've found beans to be explosive WMD (weapons of mass disgust) only AFTER I've eaten them. Maybe their mileage varies?
Links to original source for such claims are always welcome in my books.
So http://www.maravedis-bwa.com/en/ or http://www.ipass.com/Wi-Fi-growth-map/
Hmm. User rated? So "Web of Trust" or dozens of others? Another example of USPTO incompetence, methinks. Sounds like the Wizard's Apprentice got a job there and never left.
Subheading says "...already wining approval"? What, no beers?
Only goes to show how low governments have fallen in my "trust" dept when the first thing that comes to mind is "yeah, his computer probably was pwned. By some government organization who wanted to shift blame to an easy target.". Meh, hardly matters any more. Governments lie to us. Corporations lie to us. Even the bloody cops lie to us these days. Good luck figuring the "good guys" from the "bad guys" in cases like this.
These guys (and one woman) keep calling me claiming that they're solving a technical problem.
The only thing they've done is let me practice my invective and insults in a creative fashion without worrying that I'm doing it to anyone whose opinion I care about. It's quite refreshing really, kind of cathartic. I always feel a little better after one of their calls. I hope they call again, there's a few more insults I want to try out on a receptive audience. It's not the sort of thing I'd want to try out on another person, but the fact that they're active scammers makes them, to me, not "people" in the sense of me caring one whit about hurting their "feelings", assuming they have any.
I left, so the national average weight went down. Apparently my local pub also had serious financial difficulties after I left. I'm apparently a one-person economic bonanza to pubs and restaurants. Works for me.
He really said this? "It's not really about asking for a raise, but knowing and having faith that the system will give you the right raise,"
What is he, so divorced from reality that he actually believes this drivel? Or so misogynist that he thinks just women should believe that drivel? Either way, he's a fucking idiot.
Yeah, not allowed to do that unless you pay AT&T money, then it's all good.
Maybe they're only kicking up a stink to make it LOOK like the encryption will actually stop them from snooping? Wonder how much the marketing dept of these companies had to pay for these resounding votes of confidence?
In other news, Google has announced a homework completion service, Google Homework. By data mining the information provided by all these students, Google Homework can finish your homework for you by copying the most likely answers from others at your and other schools.
Ah yes, the Ostrich Security System deployed to airports everywhere. If you can't see security, they can't see you. Also known as "Head In The Sand" security or "Security Theatre". Idiots.
HA! I knew it! They've responded in their typical Apple fashion: it's not the phone, it's how you sit. Just like they did with the reception issue: it's not the phone, it's how you hold it.
Apple isn't so much at excellent design as they are about decent but sometimes flawed design with absolutely cracking good marketing and spin doctors.
Sadly, you'd also be arming the gabby bastards who want to shout down the phone. So they'd get to fire back. What we really need is a "trade your phone for a firearm" policy at the boarding gate. THEN we might see some politeness. Even if the "firearm" was just a paintball thrower.
Sadly, we won't be allowed to forcibly defenestrate (de-plane? de-avion? what might the correct term be?) the gabby bastard next to us who thinks that yelling into their phone makes up for the poor connection. I have a problem with this.
Sure. How about... wonder how long before they start forcing their poor to emigrate to Mars? Your typical Indian farmer could probably terraform that sucker in a generation.
ZEE Ex? Fucking ZEE Ex? Fuck him with a rusty chainsaw! I will not compete for a "ZEE Ex".
So the answer would seem to be that if the content "producers" (really the middle-men who don't produce anything but are more in the business of legally ripping off the actual artists) were to create sites that make it easier to access the music, films and books people actually want, they would profit more? Alternatively, impose a levy on the advertisers on those other sites?
Because closing their fists tighter and tighter on a broken business model seems to not be working very well, especially for the artists themselves. With a few exceptions of course - just like the lottery, if they can keep the hope alive, there's always fools who will flock in to get fleeced.
Good point, well made. I didn't realize Salesforce didn't allow local servers. Learn something new... etc.
Amazing what some businesses will trust. And as an American company, they answer to the US State Dept (in a roundabout way), an organization with a documented history of helping American companies no matter what the cost to non-American interests. Wonder how many Russian organizations are using Salesforce these days?
Go ahead, business people. Give all your business data and financial information to IBM. I'm sure nobody else will look at it or use it against you. Not that Google doesn't already have big chunks of it already, of course.
They're just pissed off because Apple got caught. Shareholders like that are always on about how a corporation must put profits ahead of everything else. They elect boards of directors whose views are to put profits ahead of anything else. Then they get all pissy when the laws and ethics they trample on their way to bigger profits rise up and say "no, you can't do that".
Now if only there was a way to put the shareholders on trial for getting what they asked for.
So these are the people who think Snowden and Assange are "traitors" and should be executed. Yet when their own services are caught being actual criminals, all they require is a mealy mouthed apology whose only accuracy is that they're sorry they got caught. No charges, no criminal investigation, no jail time, no firing, no repercussions at all.
Then they wonder why so many people think the USA is run by little more than a bunch of murderous hypocrites.
Starting running a "store and forward" BBS node in about 1983? 84? About then. Memory failure. Eventually ran one of the first versions of FidoNet, whenever that came out. 300 then 1200 baud modem connecting to the "next" node that was a far away as possible without incurring long distance charges. Eventually upgraded to 14.4.
But was "connected" to ARPANet prior to that through work, starting with teletype "display" on 110 baud connection, graduating to green-screen VT100 terminal in the early 1980's.
How are we going to define "internet"? I define it as "single connection point to access required information" (as opposed to having to dial in to a specific system). That was probably late 1980's for me, through a work-provided modem dialup.