Re: It's coming Tories/Labour/Lib Dems...............................
> 2) Dive into the EU head first so they can protect us...
Because swapping one bunch of corrupt bastards for a bigger bunch of corrupt bastards always works.
4414 posts • joined 16 Nov 2009
> 2) Dive into the EU head first so they can protect us...
Because swapping one bunch of corrupt bastards for a bigger bunch of corrupt bastards always works.
Here's an interesting one from Private Eye -
Percentage of Buy-To-Let property owners in the UK - 2%
Percentage of Buy-To-Let property owners in the House of Commons - 25%
And look at all the tax-breaks that particular wheeze keeps getting! Remarkable.
We already know the answer to that one is "no". The first step is a removal of all benefits while the case is "reviewed".
Assuming the perpetrator does not die from starvation and/or hypothermia in the meantime, a criminal trial will follow with mandatory jail time for a guilty verdict.
> the iFaithful aren't *that* faithful.
Yeah, they are.
> The poor dont have to buy cars
You live in a big city with public transport, then. That's nice for you.
My best mate is a farm worker. He earns £8.68 per hour and has two small children to support. In order to afford the rent, he has to live in a small town 8 miles from his job. Rich people from cities bought up all the farm workers' cottages for holiday homes. Are you suggesting he get on his bike?
Easy to rant when it's not you, isn't it Mr Anonymous Fuckwad? Or shall we just call you Norman Tebbit?
> Only that last one would hit the poor who can't afford efficient hybrids.
And who tend to drive cheap old cars inefficient cars which cost more money, all of which is liable for VAT.
If you buy a brand new car, you don't even need an MOT for three years. Your fuel bills could reasonably be expected to be lower.
If you buy a car for £2K, you can expect to spend at least £200 every year on getting the bloody thing through an MOT (plus forty quid for the certificate itself) and the emissions are likely to be higher meaning they'll hit you for more road tax.
Basically, rich people spend less.
“The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money.
Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles.
But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.
This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness.” - Terry Pratchett
> But the point of VAT is the selling company is collecting it on behalf of the government, and then passes the VAT collected on
Correct. The point of VAT is to turn business into unpaid tax farmers.
> It'll just be easier for all the countries to have the same VAT rules.
21%, according to the EU agreement.
Because there's a limit on how much you can (physically) spend.
Let's take an example, just to see how this works.
I need to buy a new towel. I buy a new towel. For the sake of argument, it costs me £10.
Assume I am on minimum wage, that towel just cost me nearly two hours work. (And half an hour of that went to the government who graciously allow me the freedom to dry myself provided I do not offend them while doing so).
Now let's say Alan Sugar needs a new towel. He buys a new towel. It might be a bit more expensive than my towel but not much because a towel is a fucking towel.
The odds on it costing him more than seconds of his time are so small that I can't even begin to calculate them.
Being rich doesn't mean you buy more. Somebody on a comfortable income might buy £100 worth of ebooks per month. Somebody on an obscene income is unlikely to read more than that or to watch more films (regardless of how expensive their telly is) or even drink more beer.
As a proportion of income, the poor pay many times in VAT what the rich do, which is exactly how the rich like it.
They're still hammering everyone with VAT though. You read it - 15% is the lowest national VAT rate permitted by the EU. 21% is the agreed target rate.
Well, because VAT is regressive and hits poor people higher than rich people, obviously. EU commissioners make way too much money to be bothered by VAT but they'd notice if progressive income-based taxation were more prevalent.
It'd be okay if there was anywhere in the developed world where the 1% weren't making all the rules to suit themselves and fuck everyone else over but alas, there is no such place.
If MS sell a Nokia X phone, they don't need to license it. They own their own patents and you can bet your balls that any patented drivers/codeblocks will not be GPL.
I miss Singapore.
Amazing food, nice people, sticky climate but who cares, tall buildings, crazy jungle and work 14 hours days six days per week.
Better than being in the UK, having childcare to do after work, a commute via First Great Western Fuck You We Already Got Your Money, Bitch and this shitty weather.
Switch to linux
It's remarkable how often we see all this stuff advocating that (according to stats) 90.75 of all desktops are just plain wrong and should be immediately and irrevocably switched to reflect the preferences of users of The Register's comment boards with their clearly far superior 1.49% of all desktop installs worldwide.
I mean, that just makes absolute sense.
Everyone knows that the majority system is always wrong, except in phones where it is always right (except if it's one you don't like, such as Symbian).
I would very much like to see a breakdown of user-agents published by the Register of all browsers and devices used to read this site.
Because it strikes me that given the stats above and the probabilities involved, most of these loyal partisan forum warriors are lying like marketing.
Thanks, dude. I don't know how we could have survived without that vital information.
> it's just that he will have to pay to upload the software to the App Store and then buy it from the App Store before being able to run it.
Well, no. You can side-load your own code. You can also make your app free (in which case MS get 30% of jack shit). But yeah, I think a dev license currently costs something like $19 for a year, or as I like to think of it "one medium sized pizza".
u mad bro?
The rebels because Assad's in Putin's pocket.
Which, to be fair, is a pretty safe place to be.
Or any old telly with an XBone and Kinect, if you wanted to dump the iPhone/iPad requirement.
But that's silly - what self-respecting buyer of an iTelly wouldn't already own an iPhone and iPad?
> Sony DRM
How do you work that out? It's not available on Sony platforms and not made by Sony....
Yeah, and the NHS is not being privatized.
Emulating x86 windows code on ARM is always going to be so slow as to be practically unusable anyway.
1. How bullshitable are they? That is, how strong is their validation that your identity is real and unique?
Given a disposable email address, you could get far enough to log in and you only need to be logged in to use this vulnerability. So, pretty bullshittable.
2. What's the difference between when another member should and shouldn't be able to see this information on the page anyway? (Or are you specifying that the registration email address can differ from that listed for limited publication in one's profile, and that if so it's the former that's being spaffed? That would indeed be extremely bad.)
A "connection" - somebody you've given access to your details - could just send you an on-site message which LinkedIn would spam you with anyway but they couldn't see your email address. They actually sell the addresses to employment agencies as a paid service, which I find ironic.
And yes, it's the registration address that's in the source.
3. Anecdotally, do you reckon there are many source-botherers on there? Clearly you are, but it always struck me more as a managers' playground. Just wondering if it has that many denizens who'd even consider viewing the source (not that this would mitigate the vuln really but...)
Put it this way - unless there's somebody you specifically wanted to connect with (I did) then if you're the kind to wrangle source code at the 'raw bits' level, you have no real reason to be on LinkedIn because it's only useful for getting you a job or finding somebody you used to work with. However, there an awful lot of developers of the type who struggle to find work on there, if you understand me.
Probably some of those get bored. Me, I just wanted to know what the plugin did so I installed it and looked at what it was really up to.
> You are not the only one to be Clueless though, the oft quoted Clueley concluded that "I really don’t feel as if [linked in] have handled this situation badly at all"...
I really don't feel that Graham Clueley has any fucking idea how insecure LinkedIn actually are.
This kind of comment on the basis of no analysis whatsoever is exactly what's wrong with current journalism and what the grauniad still insists on calling the "blogosphere".
I'm not trolling. Did you log in?
This is pretty much what the plugin does.
View a profile page in LinkedIn whether or not you are a "connection".
Search the source for "@"
And there you find that user's registered email address.
In my opinion, this is unforgivably bad practice. Don't give LinkedIn a genuine email address. I think the only reason most people don't notice the spam-vuln is because LinkedIn send so much fucking spam themselves.
But he's not wrong.
I'm not hostile. I'm... obstructive, I suppose. Personality politics annoy me, mostly because I used to live with a very strident feminist.
I don't like what's implied by Brendan Eich's donation but we have to remember that it is only an implication. He hasn't changed any policies or made any rules discriminating against gay people or anyone else.
Put it this way - I wouldn't much like the idea of a rabidly fundie Christian taking over the company I work for but... provided we didn't have to say grace in the canteen and nothing else changed and he did a good job, it would be both uncharitable and - yes, let's go there - bigoted of me to reject him based on nothing more than a single assumption.
Am I making sense?
You could fork Firefox and call it "FayFox" or something?
> As a gay man I have to admit that I find his promotion and the comments here disheartening.
Really? You suspect then, that only those who wholeheartedly support gay rights - or perhaps, only homosexuals? - can do a decent job as CEO of Mozilla?
You have some evidence that legal historic donation to a political campaign (which lost) somehow renders one incompetent in entirely unrelated fields?
I should be interested in reviewing the studies which led you to this conclusion.
Suppose you support legalization of cocaine and you work for Mozilla.
Cocaine is illegal.
You do not use it but you donate to a "legalize" campaign.
SHOULD YOU BE SHOT IN THE FACE?
Beautiful. Well spotted.
So, short version -
A ping of less 100ms doesn't make much of a difference simply due to the fact that most humans take longer to react (fully, rather than simply "notice there is something to react to) than that. Even if you could see bullets coming at you, it wouldn't help you dodge them.
(And you can't anyway; I can move my hands faster than you can see and so can any street magician).
Therefore, Trevor sucks at Titanfall but he can always blame it on Microsoft (via Azure) to maintain the ongoing theme of this site. Everyone happy?
> "Our raters were able to estimate intelligence with an accuracy higher then chance from static facial photographs of men but not from photos of women,"
So can I, based on the presence or otherwise of a baseball cap.
Earning your pay on this one, Bob?
I absolutely agree with you.
The problem is, this is owned by the Accounts department who see that a) what they have now works b) replacing it would cost money in developer time and analysis and c) they (as the Accounts department) would be paying.
The odds on sneaking any improvement past the beancounters are infinitesimal.
> Dogged makes the point that the 28Mb spreadhseet with VBA macros aint gonna run on Linux. Well, I have news for you - it can and does run under OpenOffice, and it was 3,000 MB. However, it was developed under Office 2003 using WinXP.
That's interesting. The (actually real) spreadsheet I was referring to has any number of MSGraph COM objects in it and crashes explosively under WINE and the VBA doesn't work at all under OpenOffice.
So, some will, some won't. But most of the homebrew line-of-business Windows applications absolutely won't run so my point stands.
> And I'm a .NET developer (glad to be shot of Visual Studio!).
What are you using instead?
(Personally, I quite like VS, post VS2010 which was crashy and irritating).
Except for IE; no linux browser will currently run ActiveX components (and quite rightly so). Although idiots who wrote in-house applications using ActiveX and IE are sadly not rare and those applications are now causing everyone a whole lot of grief.
And not everything runs in a browser. That hideous spreadsheet your accounts department uses for reporting with the 28MB of VBA macros in it.... not gonna run, even with WINE.
You know and I know it should never have been created but it was and it is and it's mission-critical now...
Or the untold billions of in-house developments using VB or .NET Winforms or WPF that mono will simply never support.
Migration can be a great a policy but it can also be a terrifyingly expensive and time-consuming policy.
That is not an acronym. You can pronounce an acronym. RADAR is an acronym. LGBTQIA (whatever the hell that stands for) is (presumably) an abbreviation because good luck pronouncing it.
All we know is that he supported a group which wanted to keep gay marriage illegal in California.
Maybe he also supports groups try to ban all marriage. Maybe he sponsors every year's Pride to the tune of half a million dollars. Do you know?
I don't know either. So I can't call him a bigoted hater because I have insufficient evidence.
But I can call you a judgmental wankstain because you've helpfully proved it.
> who died and made you Queen?
Careful, I think that may technically count as "hate speech".
They never say which direction the costs are spiralling in, do they?
Personally I solved all this nonsense by moving in with a doctor. The only trouble is that every tiny inconvenience that I'd ignore gets treated like a symptom of something more major.
They're only headaches....
4chan. Send everyone to 4chan and we will soon know that all symptoms can only indicate AIDS and ebola.
Professionally, I code for MS platforms which gives me an interest in them. They pay my bills and clothe my child.
If you have a problem with that, I suggest you kill yourself.
Privately I code for the debian project because it's valuable to me and I like to be able to put something back. If you have a problem with that, I suggest you kill yourself.
Neither of these makes me blind to the realities of probability or gives me any religious obligation to "support" any side or company. Working with their products every day tells me that those products are no worse than any other software from any other company or project. Even debian, which I vastly prefer, has some glaring flaws in it.
Whereas you post as if you think that MS are some kind of dark evil vastly powerful (and yet simultaneously utterly incompetent) Sauron equivalent that wants to rape your mum. Which is a completely retarded (not to mention contradictory and hypocritical) opinion to express.
And you started throwing the word "rape" around, you fucking child.
@eulampios - I do not work for Microsoft and am not paid by them.
You just shat all over the House Rules just because you're the electronic equivalent of a Jehovah's Witness.
All this is true. The problem was the off-by-default Windows Firewall.
Does Thief has a third-person mode?
I suffer from simulation motion sickness and first-person mode literally makes me puke.
Reviews never mention it but I find it's worth asking. Skyrim was pretty playable in 3P, after all.