1492 posts • joined Monday 22nd June 2009 16:11 GMT
Re: @ Stacy @...Pierre
ha, it appears that "full cycle" may have different definitions. Also, you make a lot of asumption on my battery use...
In fact, appart from your quite wild and ungrounded assumptions, it appears that I am ideed 100% correct, and that you may not be completely wrong yourself (appart from the 65%-80% thing. that's just stupid, and you just invented these, obviously; depending on the gizmo that kind of percentage is 1/2h to 6 h autonomy, nothing tthat anyone would be willing to advertise these days).
Re: gignormous wheel spninning very slowly
You want it to spin as slow as possible because the energy loss scales exponentially with the speed (unless in a vacuum, which makes it financially impossible).
The energy stored is proportional to the mass of the spinning thing, with a helpful bonus for an increased radius.
Get your physics straight!
I would think bigger is better.
Multiplying the wheels also multiplies the point of failure, the loss in wiring, and the overall complexity.
If it had to be done my money would be on one single gignormous wheel spninning very slowly, let's say, horizontally underground (under the whole windfarm that would use it for example).
But as others have said it's still going to be a very expensive and hard-to-maintain gizmo when compared to off-the-shelf batteries.
Re: It shouldn't be patentable....
> I've had it on my toilet door for a lot longer...
And a door clearly is a "mobile device" (otherwise it would be called a wall), so even that particular infamous defence won't stand!
about pr0n: Unwise comment perhaps?
"Folks who want porn can buy an Android phone"
As Mr Betamax said,"Folks who want porn can buy a VHS"...
"And it certainly didn't negatively impact DVD sales."
And that is the crux of the matter. "piracy" does not negatively impact sales, and never had. Quite the contrary in fact, as Microsoft could tell you...
People download illegally, or get passed "pirated" copies, and then if they like it they go buy the DVD with the good-quality images and all the nice bonuses. The thing is, ordinary people only have so much money to spare on entertainment if they want to be able to eat and pay the bills. They won't spend more, and they usually don't spend less. "piracy" in this context ensures that your product is widely known and appreciated, and thus that people will spend their disposable cash on it rather than on the competition's.
The real reason why Big Media _has_ to be seen as being "tough on piracy" is that piracy is the argument they use to hide the beancounting dirty tricks that allow them to hide profits and thus not pay taxes. "Pirates ate my profits, honest".
As LINC would have it,
"Competitors are nipping at the heels of the once unassailable Apple"
You mean "Competitors massively outsell Apple and have been for quite a bit of time", surely?
69 % of the market for Android vs 19 % for iOS is hardly "nipping at the heels" of Apple.
Oh, and of course, if you want a single manufacturer:
Hard to see, huh?
> “It sounds like a flock of blowflies and at twenty metres you can't see it,” Pearson said, explaining it will be hard to hear or see when in use.
Yeah well, if a tenth of what I heard about the people in the outback is to be believed, flocks of blowflies will get a lot of attention from scope-equipped rifles in the next few month...
Re: I am going to take an unpopular side here (pengwin)
>the problem with digital files is you can copy them over and over and over
Which you can't do with a CD, surely?
BTW a CD is just digital data egraved on a physical medium, so there's no fundamental difference between a CD and what you call "digital files".
There are very few things that bother me more...
... than a hipster who thinks shit pictures as art just because they are shit.
And one of these things is an article, on a tech den, defending that very same "if it's a very bad photo, then it must be art" stance.
This photo shows very bad border effects, incompatible with even the very old setup used by Cartier-Bresson. Even beaten up as it was after years of use in harsh conditions.
It is also pretty bland in the composition dept.
One more point, the bokeh is extremely half-arsed, but still there, meaning that it was never likely to be a photo by HCB (who worked mostly under the rule that everything visible on the photo had to be sharply in focus, as much as technically possible) and is not likely to be taken as a good photo by modern standards (the bokeh is not sufficiently marked to avoid distracting the viewer's eye away from the subject).
I don't care if someone managed to google-bomb that photo into internet fame: it can't possibly fool anyone with even basic notions of photography or photo history, and the lady's trainers ain't the cause.
I have a joke for y'all: how do you know that Andrew Orlowski doesn't know much on a given topic?
He writes about it on El Reg.
Well done, mister O, well done. With the long WE looming, that's a good let's-troll-the-commentards-while-we-relax-on-a-tropical-beach (1) article.
Respect. Andy represent (or something to that effect, whatev's)
(1) or is it "tropical-bitch"? as a French MoFo, I have always seem to get those mixed up.
> Go out and take a better picture
I actually do... I currently have 3 (real, not phone) cameras within arm's reach, and I'm at work (a work that does not involve cameras; well, not that kind of cameras).
I must admit that I also take worst pics. A lot!
And toy cameras are fun to use actually, I did not say that I disliked the present pic immensely, just pointed out that it was most likely taken with a bad camera, possibly -probably?- a bad-on-purpose camera like a Lomo. That's Andrew's assertion that I disagree with, I have nothing against the photograph (well, the compo IS a bit bland I suppose, but that's no mortal sin).
I think I'll just leave for a beer now, probably snap a few pics on the way too ;-)
Have a nice long WE.
PS @ El Presidente
It is a common misconception that HCB's Leica was an excellent setup. It is actually not quite true. It was compact, reliable and sturdy, something new at the time (dominated by bulky and fickle setups), which made it ideal for photo-reporters like HCB. Leica's lenses were quite good at the time, especially regarding undesirable edge and corner effects (which pretty much disqualifies the present pic right away).
But it was certainly not anything remarkable by today's standards. Any current middle-range reflex with a middle range lens is several bazillion times better in any possible aspect, despite selling for an order of magnitude less on eBay (thank you, hipsters).
@murph RE: receivind end
> [China] shouldn't complain now they are on the receiving end.
The receiving end of what? Of being sent back to the stone age as suddently gov agencies need to communicate via smoke signals, store data on engraved stone tablets and perform rocket launch calculations on an abbacus (although... that's been invented by the Chinese, wonder if they put a backdoor in that)?
Or on the receiving end of having to have all tech purchases approved by the FBI as it turns out that litterally EVERYTHING has parts made by a firm that doesn't pass the purity test?
To me the US state agencies concerned, not China, appear firmly anchored on the receiving end of this nonsense.
> it's just a good camera, and a lot of skill.
No, it's actually technically pretty crap, and the composition is not so great either. So I wopuld guess a rather bad camera, perhaps even a toy camera à la Lomo, and not so much skill.
Honestly I don't think Google was expecting anything else than a frank "fuck off". They have to ask for the definition to be amended to preserve their trademark in the US, but that's just that. Once they asked, their duty was done and I reckon the Swedes could have had merrily ignored the request. A language body like that is descriptive, not prescriptive. It describes how words are used, it doesn't make them. There was no reason for the Swedes to step back, nor for Google to try and make them (appart from asking nicely and taking no for an answer). :w
"US democracy activists"
I'm puzzled. Does"activist" in this context mean "activist investor" as in Carl 'I buy your stuff and sell it for scrap' Icahn? Does this mean "weapons of mass destruction for petrol"? Or perhaps "pacificating Palestine, one bombed village at a time"? "US democracy activists" is such a double-edged swear-word...
When I was but a lad...
I used to find condoms useful, for the very "drawback" mentionned by Mr Gates.
Now I find them to be a fire hazard.
They might become a MrFreeze's wrap soon.
It's hard to be a man -and to stay so.
Re: better get a mobe, then.
> Since the iPad and iPod touch I specifically mentioned cannot receive SMS, sending one wouldn't be applicable anyway would it? Duh! Therefore SMS is not even an option for many iOS users (the very people most likely to have an AppleID in the first place).
Since you mentionned them out of the blue to couter an argument that had nothing to do with them, and yet you managed to be wrong, du'h you're a luser. Confirmed.
>What? You need to change your network provider if SMSs take "several minutes -sometimes hours" to reach you, unless New Years Eve is celebrated daily on the planet you're from. Several seconds - at most - on any of the 5 networks I've ever used.
Several seconds is the very very very best from send to "bip bip". A few minutes is the window for an attack, because who read their SMS right away? Often, a few hours is the attack window, because, yes the networks DO jam, and if you're gonna stage an attack, why wouldn't you choose new year's eve?
>Trivial? LOL. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about do you? Finding and exploiting a vulnerability in Apple's systems,
YOU have absolutely no clue, my "friend". The hole is intercepting SMS messages and it IS trivial.
> the mobile network providers systems, or the handset OS allowing you to run that "~10 lines of code" would not be trivial. Nor would setting up some 'man-in-the-middle' attack.
"Man in the middle"? you're really stupid. It has nothing to do with anything like that. SMS is roughly as secure as email. A bit less for targetted attacks, actually.
And yes, it IS a matter or running 10 lines of code, to detect a "password recovery" message and forward it to a server of the hacker's choice.
I understand that you are in sweet, sweet love with Apple Inc., but that is hardly an excuse for being completely clueless.
That said, cheers, have a beer, if you are of age.
Re: better get a mobe, then.
> Spoken messages would be useless for people with an iPad or iPod touch (as they don't have cellular voice capability) or for people without a mobile phone (such as iPod owning kids).
As opposed to SMS, which are extremely useful for people without a mobe, then? Kids without a mobe may get a phone cal on daddy's home line.
SMS is an incredibly stupid choice. You specifically need a mobe, it spends several minutes -sometimes hours- wandering around the network before it reaches the end user, it is extremely easy to intercept at any step, including on the final handset before the legit user gets to read it, and it is machine readable, which means that it would be trivial to mount an automated hacking procedure just by running ~10 lines of code at any step of the transmission (including, but not limited to, the recipient's handset). Push messages on the very device from which you are trying to recover your password, erm, sure, what could possibly go wrong?
An automated phone call, on the other hand, is only delivered when you pick the call, the info spends very little time in the open before the end user gets it, and is significantly harder for a machine to automatically extract the relevant info.
better get a mobe, then.
SMS? Seriously? Even eBay uses proper "spoken" messages. Besides being very unpractical, and not very safe, SMS would have looked cool in the nineties. Now? It sounds like "please provide your AOL ID and we'll message you your forgotten password": unsafe, inconvenient, and stale.
> Doesn't make Java bad.
It very much does make Java an internal-use only, hack-prone, quick-and-dirty piece of (somewhat useful) shit.
In the case of Java there was too much emphasis put on the "whatever you type will work" angle and not enough on the "whatever you type won't cause an exploit" angle. In my book, that makes it a useful in-house dirty-hack-that just works language, but verily makes it a VERY bad language to be included as a browser plugin on a machine allowed to reach (and be reached) by the Wild Wild Net.
Re: From what I hear...
> What sort of internet connectivity does your washing machine have?
I reckon it's only a matter of years (few of them, too) before your washing machine has its own IPv6 adress. A better question would be "what kind of java-enabled web browser does your washing macine have?". Appart from designer prototype I can't imagine anyone browsing the web from their washing machine in the foreseeable future. Laundry rooms have a distinct tendency of being a tad less cosy than bedrooms, living rooms, or even offices (the last one my be debatable...). Maybe that will change and laundry-room-web-browsing will be all the rage, but every time I ask my crystal ball about laundry-room web-browsing I feel like the abyss is gazing into me. Brrrrr
Re: What's this "until it is patched" rubbish?
Yes, more useless cruft encumbering the screen is exactly what we need, because obvously 2 clicks to access the list of enabled plugins is FAR too much effort. I mean, you need it almost once a month, come on, we seriously can't be expected to add these 2 clicks a month to our all-too-busy schedule of refreshing El Reg's comment pages!
Re: baseless suspicion
"I have a completely baseless suspicion that Judge Lucy Koh was selected for this whole Samsung / Apple thing since she is a Northern Californian (thus supposedly pro Apple) of Korean descent (thus supposedly pro Samsung)."
Honestly that seems unlikely. Choosing a judge because she is equally biased towards both sides sounds like a very risky bet, as if one party was able to convincingly suggest that the bias is even slightly imbalanced that would be a very good basis to have her repelled. Replacing a judge in a trial (especially towards the end, as surely both party would keep that as a last-chance card) is a very, very costly and very, very lengthy process. Time and money that would almost certainly be better spent. Then again we are talking patent wars, so perhaps here "better spent" has a signification that I am too un-patent-lawyery to grasp.
Re: Shut up you incorrect pedants!
> I even have a proper job - which I'm supposed to be doing now.
Of course, that's what El Reg is for. If you weren't supposed to work I hope you would be doing more contructive things than reading stories like that!
That's the very definition of cool
or damn close to it at least.
Information wants to be free
So now, the Chinese will now immediately what Al Qaeda is up to and vice versa...
Re: Lesson learned?
> That's what the "call to send examples" is about - ensuring that Verber cannot be granted the mark by proving its already in common use in that sphere.
My point exactly
Re: Lesson learned?
> The world is not that applified yet.
That would be why LibreOffice is still named OpenOffice, and Jenkins is still named Hudson, yes?
Lindows, ifone, etc...
Re: Lesson learned?
> "I find it extremely doubtful that python the language can remain python the language." No you are wrong there. The world is not that applified yet.
Well, you think they would keep a name that would put anyone using it at risk of being taken off the web? How do you advertise computer software that bears a name that is trademarked by someone else?
Today has been the best Friday in a loooong time.
Xenu cake thumbnail
Just dropped by to tell you that I had to tineye your delicious cake thumbnail, and after very detailed inspection I am sorry to report that the original picture appears to be a tad blurry. I dont really like cake, but I'll have a bit of that, thank you very much.
Re: Lesson learned?
> python the language will remain python the language
If Veber manages to get their "Section 9: computer software" trademark approved, I find it extremely doubtful that python the language can remain python the language.
Re: Why is this important?
Google "powered by python", for a start. Presto, about 84 900 webpages that need rewriting. Of course the language will need to change name also, as surely distributing "computer software" that has a name in violation of a trademark is a no-no.
"Imagine if people who use C were to get steamed up in the same way. They'd be spamming disk drive manufacturers and digging up the former head of the Secret Service."
Ridiculous claim. I didn't see Seagate trademarking the name "C" for computer programs. Does the former head of the Secret service hold such a trademark? I didn't think so.
"I use several programming languages, and frankly I couldn't give a stuff who trademarks any of their names."
That's because you do not understand the implications.
"These people should get a life."
You should get a clue
As a rather well-deserved strike back, it seems that a few Python developpers took to themselves to take out www.veber.co.uk.
Rather efficiently, it seems. More efficiently than what Veber is able to cope with, at least. They must not be very familiar with Python.
I can't seem to find a hint of sympathy for Veber.
I am not part of the attack of course, but I may ping from time to time just for the sake of reporting.
Rather amusing result?
It would be rather more amusing if your traceroute presented the results in a more civilized manner.
For the poor souls unable to get their hands on a real machine:
10 Episode.IV (18.104.22.168) 94.504 ms 89.281 ms 88.483 ms
11 A.NEW.HOPE (22.214.171.124) 88.696 ms 97.793 ms 96.447 ms
12 It.is.a.period.of.civil.war (126.96.36.199) 81.160 ms 80.384 ms 84.499 ms
13 Rebel.spaceships (188.8.131.52) 73.969 ms 77.264 ms 83.163 ms
14 striking.from.a.hidden.base (184.108.40.206) 86.083 ms 79.081 ms 81.519 ms
15 have.won.their.first.victory (220.127.116.11) 84.520 ms 79.735 ms 85.686 ms
16 against.the.evil.Galactic.Empire (18.104.22.168) 86.103 ms 87.797 ms 85.189 ms
17 During.the.battle (22.214.171.124) 92.026 ms 94.525 ms 95.315 ms
18 Rebel.spies.managed (126.96.36.199) 86.278 ms 90.951 ms 80.816 ms
19 to.steal.secret.plans (188.8.131.52) 89.398 ms 87.976 ms 77.482 ms
20 to.the.Empires.ultimate.weapon (184.108.40.206) 85.232 ms 83.784 ms 81.638 ms
21 the.DEATH.STAR (220.127.116.11) 82.016 ms 79.823 ms 88.794 ms
22 an.armored.space.station (18.104.22.168) 88.333 ms 89.604 ms 85.701 ms
23 with.enough.power.to (22.214.171.124) 91.673 ms 91.219 ms 86.865 ms
24 destroy.an.entire.planet (126.96.36.199) 74.739 ms 83.246 ms 82.971 ms
25 Pursued.by.the.Empires (188.8.131.52) 75.581 ms 82.458 ms 85.756 ms
26 sinister.agents (184.108.40.206) 83.561 ms 81.955 ms 86.489 ms
27 Princess.Leia.races.home (220.127.116.11) 87.341 ms 91.137 ms 94.531 ms
28 aboard.her.starship (18.104.22.168) 93.274 ms 95.313 ms 97.448 ms
29 custodian.of.the.stolen.plans (22.214.171.124) 97.823 ms 80.401 ms 86.990 ms
30 that.can.save.her (126.96.36.199) 86.710 ms 82.553 ms 89.645 ms
31 people.and.restore (188.8.131.52) 93.327 ms 91.365 ms 85.288 ms
32 freedom.to.the.galaxy (184.108.40.206) 86.546 ms 95.534 ms 92.901 ms
33 0-------------------0 (220.127.116.11) 93.657 ms 96.636 ms 95.635 ms
34 0------------------0 (18.104.22.168) 95.998 ms 98.693 ms 75.227 ms
35 0-----------------0 (22.214.171.124) 84.989 ms 85.909 ms 79.472 ms
36 0----------------0 (126.96.36.199) 84.533 ms 82.324 ms 86.147 ms
37 0---------------0 (188.8.131.52) 85.247 ms 94.674 ms 97.176 ms
38 0--------------0 (184.108.40.206) 93.953 ms 88.564 ms 91.396 ms
39 0-------------0 (220.127.116.11) 94.096 ms 91.079 ms 96.546 ms
40 0------------0 (18.104.22.168) 77.409 ms 83.731 ms 82.427 ms
41 0-----------0 (22.214.171.124) 80.867 ms 87.531 ms 90.112 ms
42 0----------0 (126.96.36.199) 91.591 ms 85.747 ms 88.709 ms
43 0---------0 (188.8.131.52) 93.784 ms 95.922 ms 92.855 ms
44 0--------0 (184.108.40.206) 90.986 ms 94.511 ms 88.741 ms
45 0-------0 (220.127.116.11) 90.158 ms 73.978 ms 80.759 ms
46 0------0 (18.104.22.168) 79.025 ms 77.294 ms 83.660 ms
47 0-----0 (22.214.171.124) 86.608 ms 91.295 ms 88.665 ms
48 0----0 (126.96.36.199) 88.185 ms 86.044 ms 90.736 ms
49 0---0 (188.8.131.52) 94.240 ms 97.500 ms 96.600 ms
50 0--0 (184.108.40.206) 93.564 ms 91.398 ms 79.103 ms
51 0-0 (220.127.116.11) 84.263 ms 84.652 ms 79.042 ms
52 00 (18.104.22.168) 87.126 ms 84.519 ms 85.306 ms
53 I (22.214.171.124) 97.280 ms 95.550 ms 92.924 ms
54 By.Ryan.Werber (126.96.36.199) 91.650 ms 93.334 ms 96.675 ms
55 When.CCIEs.Get.Bored (188.8.131.52) 97.928 ms 99.182 ms 95.551 ms
56 read.more.at.beaglenetworks.net (184.108.40.206) 80.004 ms 85.447 ms 85.823 ms
57 FIN (220.127.116.11) 82.474 ms * *
@ AC 20:56
"I'm pretty sure these are the sorts of OEMs who would rather not receive loads of support issues from Linux newbies complaining about XYZ not working."
Yes, because everytime your copy of VirtuaGirl has a glitch you call Dell customer support to complain about it, do you? Kids these days...
"PCs that shipped with Windows installed"
That presumably excludes "servers that are managed remotely", so far so good for the Foundation's approach then.
If you buy a windows-loaded, UEFI-Secure-Boot-locked PC to use it as a distantly managed Linux server, you're just looking for trouble. All the people I know who remotely administrate Linux servers either bought them with Linux pre-installed or bought them barebone and built them to their needs. I must admit that I don't know _everyone_ though, so that's remains anecdotic, but strongly supported by common sense.
Re: sign your own software
Oh, you can sign your own software allright. The thing is, it needs to be signed _by Microsoft_ to work with Secure Boot UEFI. That's not a GPL issue.
Re: An NRA spokespersons said...
Get a Desert Eagle and pop heads like melons.
OK, I'm already out, don't shove.