Posts by Richard Plinston

Re: Oh dear...

> That would be Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Russia (which contains Chechnya, which supplied the Boston bombers), to name a few. But these countries have not been blocked.

That is because Trump has business in those countries.

Re: Any other country???

> If Trump had tried to block all Christians from South America (but letting in the atheists from those countries), it would still be wrong and would still be opposed.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/trump-nobody-except-me-gets-to-question-someone-elses-religion/

Re: Ahh, guys, any of you ever hear of the Constitution?

> The President has the right under the Cinstitution and immigration laws to refuse entry to anyone,

And yet you can't even spell it.

But, exactly, he can refuse entry to any_one_. He can do so by naming that person.

Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

> The only way to make America great again is to elect Trump a second time. And then a third! And a fourth! Never elect someone who is not Trump!

One of the commentators on the inauguration said that it was great to see that 4 past presidents had attended, and also that the next 4 presidents were there (as his children walked in).

Re: I.T. comes full circle, from timeshare to PC to... TIMESHARE!

> Parents want their children to learn stuff they will actually use in a future job...

The only people who say that are those that have never had a job and have a weird idea of what 'business' is. The vast majority of workers in industry and business that interact with computers do so with specific business applications such as SAP, BPCS, or the many in-house systems that handle all the business transactions.

Teaching children to use MSOffice is like teaching 'domestic science' students how to order at Macdonalds. If you want to teach them about jobs then they should learn the difference between an invoice and a forward order, about how a warehouse works, about supply chains, because they won't be leaving school and be given a job as a financial analyst.

> But then if they give the OS away for free (they did it with 10). - They gave Windows 10 away to consumers,

They only gave W10 'for free' to those who had already paid for Windows 7 or 8. They did not give it for free to OEMs for new machines (purchasers of new machines paid for it), nor to XP or Vista users.

Re: Windows RT

> "Windows" means to its customers that it runs "Windows" apps.

While this "only runs UWPs", it seems that existing x86 Win32 'Windows programs' can be bundled into a UWP container that can be sold through the Store. Of course this will require the developers being bothered to do that for, initially at least, a tiny market where Microsoft grabs 30% of the revenue. OTOH the 30% is probably much less than is grabbed by the distributors and retailers. It also requires that Microsoft is prepared to accept the product into their Store (competitors and GPL software need not apply).

Microsoft will claim that Store UWPs are safer than software from random download sites, and thus Windows CR is the safest operating system _ever_.

I don't think that this will be tied into Ofice360. They will create Office Home and Student and full Office as UWP containers for sale through the Store, and possibly the individual programs. LibreOffice, Firefox, Chrome won't be there.

Microsoft needs to increase its revenue each year. In a declining PC sales market where prices are also falling it needs to take revenue from other sources. In this case it wants to increase revenue from its Store and it will do that by taking software revenue from retail shops, OEMs, and other software sites.

The Store will probably also offer a 'full Windows upgrade' for $199.99 so that a user can buy a CR(ap) PC that is locked down from an OEM or retail and then send money to Microsoft to unlock it when they discover its limitations.

Re: Windows RT

> and they are supremely likely to lose as Google already has a head start

It is not about competing with Chromebook, it is about _killing_ Chromebooks made by the OEMs.

Just as WoA/RT was used to kill WebOS and Dell's Android tablets by waving 'loyalty discounts', and XP was resurrected to kill Linux netbooks, and ultimately all netbooks, this will be used against Acer, Dell, ASUS, Lenovo, etc to stop them making Chromebooks, or pay retail price for all copies of Windows that they want.

Re: Excellent news! At least for --

> hates overtime regulations, hates sick leave, thinks the minimum wage is baloney

Yes, but think of the advantages: US companies won't need to go overseas to get cheap labour!

(if anyone wants such a job).

> Trump is just signing a piece of paper with fairly meaningless words on it that will nevertheless stop other bits of government from doing its job.

No way. It will _tripple_ the number of legislators, lawyers, interns and others so that they can get the job done. Many more jobs for Americans! Yay!.

Of course _real_ Republicans want less government, Trump requires more.

Re: Alternative Facts

> but I can't agree with your later demonisation of "Deniers"

I am not sure where I did that at all, perhaps you could point that out.

OTOH some "Deniers" seem to demonise climate scientists and others that see climate change actually happening, such as 'Big John', who flat out denies anything bad is happening or will ever happen, and says it is all fake and for the money. He also is confused because 'global warming' makes it colder in the south in winter (which is actually because there is more energy to take the cold artic air further south).

> some "deniers" are just "sceptics" as in scientific scepticism.

That is certainly true. But sceptics are able to voice their concerns without resorting to personal attacks (such as calling them fools) and can provide the evidence they used to produce alternate explanations for the global record high temperatures and increasingly more active weather patterns.

> In other words they are taking each others models as rote - as fact.

As someone related the other day: "How can weather scientists get it right when some weather forecasts for tomorrow say it will be cloudy and others say it will rain". It may be true that there may be some minor disagreement over the forecast for tomorrow, but we can all agree on the weather that happened yesterday. That was record highs, record number of stronger weather systems, Arctic ice is less, Antarctic sea ice is thinner, glaciers are retreating, sea levels are higher than 30 years ago.

> in order to remove ALL the questions that people still have.

There is no doubt that CO2 levels are higher than at any time in the last 100,000 years (and certainly since records were kept), that warming of the seas and atmosphere (more energy) is happening. The "deniers" are the ones that are denying the actual objective measurements. In some cases they are doing it because they don't want anyone telling them they can't buy petrol anymore, or can't pump oil out of the ground, or can't burn down a forest.

> Putting ALL scepticism down as some sort of low intelligence, conspiracist movement is a bad thing

I can't recall ever doing that. It may well be that some are as you describe, but did I actually describe anyone like that? and I certainly can't recall writing hyperbolically.

Re: #alternativefacts

> I'm trying to discuss actual climate and its current status, so you bring up the same old scare stories that have not happened, and don't look like they'll be happening any time soon.

Seal level rising is a direct result of global warming. Granted the Antarctic ice hasn't all melted yet, but:

"""Sea level has been rising over the past century, and the rate has increased in recent decades. In 2014, global sea level was 2.6 inches (67 mm) above the 1993 average—the highest annual average in the satellite record (1993-present). Sea level continues to rise at a rate of about one-eighth of an inch (3.2 mm) per year, due to a combination of melting glaciers and ice sheets, and thermal expansion of seawater as it warms."""

"""Most predictions say the warming of the planet will continue and is likely to accelerate. Oceans will likely continue to rise as well, but predicting the degree to which they will rise is an inexact science. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says we can expect the oceans to rise between 11 and 38 inches (28 to 98 centimeters) by 2100, enough to swamp many of the cities along the U.S. East Coast. More dire estimates, including a complete meltdown of the Greenland ice sheet, place sea level rise to 23 feet (7 meters), enough to submerge London."""

Re: #alternativefacts

> and which are harmful?

It is easy to see which ones are harmful. The ones that will cause the sea level to rise a few feet, or eventually 200 feet. The ones that will make the 'corn belt' into desert. The ones that increase tornadoes and cyclones in both ferocity and number. The ones that bring winter snows deeper into the south and more intense in the north*.

> where did you get the idea we know enough about the climate to make rational moves toward controlling it?

It is not about controlling the climate, that cannot be done. It is about controlling human activity so that the situation gets no worse, and potentially can be made better. It has been working for the Ozone Hole, which is healing since CFCs were banned. Now we need to ban fossil fuels so that there is no more carbon dragged out of the ground and poured into the atmosphere. We need to ban deforestation, which also puts 'locked up' carbon into the atmosphere.

Once the increase in carbon is stopped then we can work on how to remove the excess carbon and hope that brings the climate back to as it was a few decades ago.

* 'global warming' is putting more energy into the weather. This not only give record high temperatures, as is obvious, but it also gives more energetic weather patterns, pulling winter weather further south, such as has happened in Louisiana a couple of weeks ago.

Re: Hail Trump!

> Your side is still losing and the rest of us are smiling to see it happen in our lifetimes.

I don't have a side, I watch from the very distant sidelines.

It will be both sides that lose. The smile will be wiped off your face when you realise that Trump is doing it all for the Trumps and only the very rich will get any 'trickle down'.

Re: Alternative Facts

> People criticize Trump's claims of 3-5 million fraudulent voters, and I have to agree, there's no apparent basis for him to make that claim. But there's an investigation going on, and if they find 1 million, I'll still be JUST as appalled... [and just as NOT surprised].

The apparent basis of his claim is his narcissistic ego that requires him to have won the popular vote. Just as he can't stand the idea that his inauguration audience in the mall wasn't the biglyest ever and that the protests the next day were several times larger.

He clings to the estimates that there are indeed several million duplicate registrations* or dead people on the register (who have died between registering and the election. There is zero evidence that there are any fraudulent votes cast. On previous elections fraud was calculated at between 0.00004% and 0.0009%. While Trump has claimed that NONE had fraudulently voted for him and 3-5 million voted for Clinton it is interesting to note that several of the new White House inmates were registered in two states, including Tiffany Trump.

The whole point of finding voter fraud is to add new rules to registration to deny votes to anyone would vote against him in the next election. If the investigation finds (or invents) fraudulent voting then the rules would be tightened to require, say, photo id such as a driver's licence. Inner city poor and non-whites tend not to own cars and to not have licences. Thus they would be excluded from registering or voting. This could be enough for the republicans to hold onto power in 2020, and thus shall be done.

* When someone moves from one state to another and registers in the new state, or when someone dies, the old registration isn't removed until the register is reviewed later.

Re: Alternative Facts

> I see the alleged "fact bombs" saying things like "97% of scientists" and my first reaction is always "_WHICH_ scientists"?

But it is only the deniers that say "97% of scientists" as a way of making it look meaningless. The actual quote is:

"""Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities."""

A simple Google search is all that was required to answer your question of "_WHICH_".

The issue is not whether climate change is happening, that is unarguable. The issue is: what is the cause of the change. The relationship between CO2 levels and 'greenhouse effect' has been established. The cause of the rise in CO2 is clear. The only argument left is what will happen over the next few years: the fundamentalist conservatives (which Trump has aligned himself with) say that "God will fix it because He is on Our side". The oil companies (which Trump has investments in) simply deny it is happening (cf Tobacco companies and lung cancer). Deniers say it is just an environmentalist conspiracy plot to boost their funding (which Trump will cancel when he dismantles the EPA which interferes with his oil stocks).

Re: Hail Trump!

> compare Trump or any other sitting politician to Hitler,

I completely agree with you. Trump is much more like Mussolini.

Originally he supported the left then he changed to nationalism. I am just waiting for Donald to get the uniforms made so that he can be saluted by the military parades that he wants, they will be bigger than Putin's, even if the lying press show photographs with fewer tanks and missiles.

Re: Hail Trump!

> Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, or Lennon need to go back to school

John Lennon? I think your school should recall you.

Re: "will only let apps be installed via their App store and devs are expected to pay lots of £££"

> As an ISV, I don't really like the walled store model - and strongly believe it is anti-competitive, regardless if it is Apple, Google or Microsoft.

I am not sure why you continue to include Google in that group. Is it just dogma because you want them to be seen to be as bad as Microsoft?

For Android there are dozens of alternate app stores that compete with Google's Play Store, and you can find them by Googling, or even Binging if you prefer.

https://code.tutsplus.com/articles/10-alternative-android-app-stores--cms-20999

> but useless and extremely expensive when you already have the infrastructure yourself,

There is nothing stopping you from having your own Android app store, the software for this can be downloaded and used for free.

Re: Change in mindset is needed IMO

> It's a chain of trust - you trust that the CA has verified that the publisher is who they say they are,

You are quite correct that, for large scale distribution to unknown users, you need to centralise that trust back to a CA that is trusted by the receiver.

However, for limited distribution to known users (eg customers or clients), you can establish your own chain of trust directly. If arbitrary unknowns stumble upon the site then we don't care that they don't trust us, and that we don't trust them, and in fact prefer that.

"best practices"

When a consultant has told a client of mine that some way is "best practices" it has always been that they have not actually evaluated the real needs and just want to do what they have done elsewhere and it wasn't a complete disaster (ie the consultant made a profit).

In one case the client was a jobbing shop using CAM where the machines were paired with design stations. I installed hubs for each pair and set fixed IPs so that as long as there was power the workshop could keep working. A consultant recommended using DHCP as "best practice" even though that could mean the workshop would be inoperable if the power failed and then returned but the servers were still down (which actually did happen, though only once).

Re: OK, let me get this straight..

> and now I'm going to install a product ... That's about as useful as ...

Well, no, it seems that you not going to install it, because it is not useful to you. It is optional and some will because they do find it useful.

It is called 'choice', do you think it shouldn't occur?

Re: Just stupid

> a) It makes it very difficult if not impossible to set up a rival store which (for example) might have lower fees for selling apps

Which is why there are only a few hundred of them. You can even search Google to find them or reviews of them, such as:

http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/android-app-stores/

You can even easily set one up yourself - for free (except for hardware and bandwidth of course).

> b) The stores filter the applications available - you have to pay to put your app on these stores and jump several hurdles reducing the applications available to use.

Yes, it does reduce the number of apps available to only a few million!

Just think: if supermarkets gave the suppliers the full price that the customers paid, and the suppliers could demand as much shelf space as they wanted, then there would be so much more variety of products, so much more competition.

> All in all it is perhaps mildly easier for a lazy punter but is not actually good for competition. It is in many ways what the supermarkets would like... for example if you want milk you could only go to Tesco

I am not sure why you think that the "supermarkets" (plural) would want that, ASDA certainly wouldn't. But I am not sure why you think that fake argument is relevant, because it is nothing like the situation with Android apps (though it is like Microsoft's WinPhone and UWP store).

Re: Just stupid

> So if you app is successful enough, Google earns a lot without really offering more.

And the app writer earns much more. And if the app is not successful they pay only a small, proportional, amount. A percentage markup, or a percentage fee, is very common in most commercial transactions. Try getting your product on a shop shelf (or a website like Amazon) while demanding they give you the full price they collect from the customer.

Are you advocating that every app writer should pay a fixed monthly fee per app, or do you think that all services should be free? (which they are if your app is free).

> Sure, you can do some "hacking"

In what way is it 'hacking'? Install the F-Droid software, set up your apps. There is a single checkbox in 'Settings' on Android to cater for loading from other app stores. It is no more difficult, and probably much easier, than setting up a web site to cater for Windows software downloads.

> Even MS didn't force anybody to use IE

They forced it to be installed, they ensured that it couldn't be removed, they paid OEMs (via additional 'loyalty discount') to not install competitors. They created non-standard features and had FrontPage use those to make competitors display 'incorrectly', they made it compulsory for some websites.

> "Google applies much less control". You're living in Google alternative reality.

Google applies much less control than Microsoft does on its app store. Try using an alternate app store for WinPhones or UWPs, try creating your own UWP app store without having corporate licensing for several hundred copies of Windows. Try getting a competing app into Microsoft's store - such as an office app or a browser.

Re: Just stupid

> The issue is saying to a manufacturer, If you want Google Play you MUST also include a crap load of other Google apps that most people have little interest in. They cannot be uninstalled. End Of, take it or leave it.

The manufacturers are perfectly free to install other operating systems, such as Windows 10 Mobile where they can pick and choose which services they install or not, and can put their own GUI on. Oh, wait, no they can't.

Re: It had potential ...

> Chromebooks have stripped down BIOS which makes it easier to install regular Linux on a Windows laptop.

Windows laptops have UEFI firmware and Secure Boot which, potentially*, makes it impossible to install regular Linux.

* With Windows 10, OEMs need not cater for turning off Secure Boot. http://www.pcworld.com/article/2901262/microsoft-tightens-windows-10s-secure-boot-screws-where-does-that-leave-linux.html

Re: Actually

> I'd be happier to dump the need for a gmail account. They are a spam magnet.

I almost never get spam in my gmail account, maybe 3 or 4 a month.

Re: Just stupid

> The issue is saying to a manufacturer, If you want Google Play you MUST also include a crap load of other Google apps that most people have little interest in.

They are perfectly free to not install Google services (granted it is on an all or nothing basis). They can set up their own services (as Amazon did and Nokia/Microsofft did for Nokia-X, and anyone else can do). Not installing Google services by default does not prevent the _user_ accessing those Google services if they wish, or anyone else's services.

Re: Just stupid

> Ehm , no Google doesn't distribute it "for free" as long as it asks you a percentage of your revenues.

Google pays for the servers, for the storage, for the data centre, for the electricity, for the bandwidth and you want them to collect your revenue and _not_ take a cut ?

> As long as you are forced to go through someone else to sell your products, there's an evident competition issue.

You are not forced by Google to go through someone else. You can do it all yourself:

https://guardianproject.info/2013/11/05/setting-up-your-own-app-store-with-f-droid/

> but have no issue if MS, Google or Apple want to control their devices app markets..

Many have taken issue with MS control, some with Apple, but Google applies much less control, it is just your misrepresentation (alternate facts) that you are arguing against.

Re: Just stupid

> Can you publish *any* app of yours (which is not a malware, of course) in any of those stores? Can you avoid to pay the "protection money" fee?

> No, you can't. And that's the issue, because actually it *limits* competition.

Free apps can be hosted on the F-Droid store for free and any Android device can access them.

Or you can use the free F-Droid software to set up your own app store that can be accessed by any Android. There is no competition limit imposed by Google.

https://guardianproject.info/2013/11/05/setting-up-your-own-app-store-with-f-droid/

But, I suppose, you will claim that without Google giving you a free computer to run your own app store on that they are *limiting* competition.

> It's attempting it now with Windows 10, UWP and the store, after Apple and Google has been so successful in achieving it, while almost nobody complained.

Google does not block Android users from using other stores, for example F-Droid. Nor does it block Android based device makers from implementing alternate services and stores, for example Amazon and Nokia/Microsoft (Nokia-X).

Nor does Google block its competitors, Microsoft has many products in the Android store.

Re: Military-industrial 101

> (the unibody design common to almost every car since the late 90s came from this)

'Unibody' design has nothing to do with the military, it originated in the 1920s and the first mass produced car using it was a Citroen.

> was pioneered by us during WWII when we cracked the German enigma cipher.

I don't know who you think 'we' is. The enigma code was originally worked on by the Polish academics and then this was moved to Britain.

> Things like WiFi and spread-spectrum signalling came out of rapid-frequency shifting systems put on our stealth bombers

"""Frequency-hopping may date back to radio pioneer Jonathan Zenneck's 1908 German book Wireless Telegraphy although he states that Telefunken was using it previously. """

Re: HOLY CRAP!

> backtracks on other high-profile topics, such as getting Mexico to pay for a wall along the US border

While Trump has asked the Congress to pay up 8billion to start the wall he has assured everyone that Mexicans will pay it back.

He noticed that Mexicans working in the USA send 2billion a year back to their families in Mexico. He plans to take that. Over 4 years that will be 8billion, enough to pay back what he has asked Congress for.

I can see how well that will work - for the first week.

Re: The last mercantilist president

> just in time to start rearming prior to WWII I might add.

Or, in America, 'just in time to start rearming while WWII went on for a couple of years, ...'.