Posts by VinceH 3483 publicly visible posts • joined 26 Nov 2009
Microsoft notes that “Based on customer feedback,in the most recent version of the Get Windows 10 (GWX) app, we confirm the time of your scheduled upgrade and provide you an additional opportunity for cancelling or rescheduling the upgradewe observed too many people misunderstanding, believing that saying 'No' was an option, so we've taken steps to prevent them saying it.”
Fixed.
"No means no. We've all said that thousands of times before, but you still don't get it."
Indeed so.
I was at a client's office a few days ago speaking to one of their subbies, and he was telling me about his laptop. He originally installed Win10 to try it out, and after a little while using it decided he didn't like it, so rolled it back to Win7 - which is supposedly an option for a month(?) after installing Win10.
More recently, it was unexpectedly installed again. Now, personally, I'd say installing it, trying it and then uninstalling it should be registered as a definite "No!" - a word Microsoft clearly doesn't understand.
As to how it happened, I wondered if it was a case of the nagware popping up and stealing the focus as he was typing (which I've speculated was the case for other users I know), but his close icon issue may also have been the problem.
And now it's on his system again, he says he can't find the option to roll it back. My initial speculation on this was that perhaps it (stupidly) based the roll-back option on the date it was first installed - that was much more than a month ago. On the other hand, with this close icon revelation, maybe they've just taken that option away as well.
I was speaking to him on Monday. Since then, I've become aware of two and a half more unexpected updates - which I suspect might by now be three. Again, before I knew about this close icon twattishness my guess was the stolen input focus problem - but now I realise probably this.
The 'half' was a case of the person saying he managed to deliberately crash the update when he saw it was going to happen - though I suspect he's probably only successfully delayed it until his next reboot or something.
"At almost 50 I'd like to weigh in here: biometrics may be easy, but as long as I haven't got the ability to grow back fingers or eyeballs or whatever at will, biometrics are right out."
At not-quite-almost-50-but-not-far-off I know the difference between identification and authentication. Biometrics are no good for authentication - and can be a bit iffy sometimes for identification.
Quite. I was going comment thusly:
"Labour's Keir Starmer previously said the party would refuse to the let the bill progress through Parliament untilthe government conducted an independent review into the new powers and definitions included within itthe next time they're in power, at which point they'll be all for it or something similar."Fixed it!
And I now have commented as such.
More worryingly, would it be possible to read the clipboard rather than write/alter it? I'm thinking long passwords stored in a password manager, which users copy and paste into password fields; if reading is possible (and the ability to write/change it suggests it would be), then a dodgy bit of Javascript brought in with a dodgy advert could be a way to nab such passwords.
[Hugs NoScript, just in case]
Is it an internal power supply, though - or just a power supply?
The El Reg article says it's internal, but if you read the linked Citrix blog post you'll see it simply says it comes with a power supply - no mention of it being internal. Plus, if you look at the pictures, the case isn't much bigger than the Pi itself, and one of the visible ports is the micro-USB used for the normal power supply.
"And does having a flat battery count as "failure to produce valid documents" ?"
Look beyond such pitfalls, and remember that for the end user there will be "increased convenience". They will achieve this by coupling the digital licence "with the increased use of biometric, multi-factor and secondary authentication techniques".
So when you show your digital licence (or fail to do so because of a flat battery) you may also need to supply a secondary form of identity, or do something else to help authenticate your identity.
"The problem is that many things steal the focus from the form on the page, and the user may hit backspace editing a comment (like I am doing now) and have the web page go back,"
What would steal the focus from the form, but keep it on the page?
The only time I've encountered the focus being stolen is when it ends up in another window - usually another application. In which case, backspace will affect that window or application, rather than the page with the form being edited.
The only thing I can think of might be something stupid in any scripts on such a page. (Perhaps this is another benefit of NoScript?)
"They couldn't have just made it an option or something?"
Or better still, when responding to backspace, look at the cursor:
Is it in a form field? Do a backspace, otherwise use it for page navigation.
Since I have a form open (this reply) in Firefox, I've just hit backspace. It performed a backspace. Opening another tab and visiting a couple of pages without forms and then hitting backspace, it performs navigation.
This should not be rocket science.
Before getting all ranty about it and calling people names, consider the way the story is told. Just isolate the one-sided conversation from the rest of it.
“Hi. You ok? I got a notification that you’re at 60."
...
“Yeah, I got notified your blood sugar is dropping - yeah I know you’re in Florida, but that device sent me a message. It’s great."
...
“So you didn’t even know? You didn’t feel anything? Well, you would have."
...
“No, it’s ok. Just go have a Starburst or three."
So the son's having a hypo that is so bad, the dad can take the time to hold a short conversation with the son (including being complimentary about the service that notified him) before suggesting that the son has a Starburst or three.
And the son apparently didn't even know. So if 60 mg/dL is so dangerously low in his particular case that it needs third party intervention, why the monitoring device not set to warn the son himself before it gets that low?
It should have levels set that are appropriate for the person it is monitoring.
"I really am not getting the cloud part of this. What benefit does "Cloud" give to this situation?"
None whatsoever.
As someone pointed out further up the comments on this article, the device the son had (er... should I have used a spoiler warning if you didn't read to the end for that amazing revelation?) could have notified the son directly, rather than going through to his dad.
Even the dad being notified didn't really need the cloud. The monitoring device could have either cellular connectivity of its own or be paired to the son's mobile phone, and send an alert message directly to the dad (and other configured numbers).
(None of which would work if the boy was somewhere with no connectivity).
The cloud is completely irrelevant. The whole story was just a MacGuffin to sell us all on the supposed benefits of its use - and like most MacGuffins it doesn't stand up terribly well to scrutiny.
"feature request to el Reg : please attach author's name to articles in RSS feed."
It does - but whether you see it depends what you are using. Looking at the source feed, for this article it contains <name>Darren Pauli</name>. If I render the feed in my browser, that isn't shown, whereas my normal reader (FeedDemon Pro) does show it.
"As someone who once left their wallet at work and then found myself almost out of fuel and having to hunt for coins around the car to pay for just enough to get home, having a card on my phone would have been really useful (as long as it was secure!)"
I've never done that - but if I did leave my wallet at the office it wouldn't be a major inconvenience; I always keep a small amount of cash in my pocket in case I did just that. I also don't keep all of my cards in my wallet - some are kept locked away at home, in case I was to ever leave my wallet at the office at the start of a weekend.
The moral of this story: Don't keep all your eggs cash/cards in one basket your wallet.
I've done that for years, but I go one step further now. Starting towards the end of last year, that unique domain now has a number of subdomains on it, and the unique email addresses I give out on it are spread between them. If any such email address is leaked, I now only have to update a subset of them - which saves some effort on my part.
Additionally, one of those subdomains is more disposable than the rest: I use that for things I'm even less bothered about needing to remember - where next time I visit the site/shop/whatever, it doesn't matter if I have to use a fresh address.
I've yet to migrate everything from the domain to the subdomains - but once I've reached a tipping point in terms of what addresses have been migrated, I'll disable email for the domain itself.
Wrong picture. I think Ugotta B. Kiddingme was asking about this one. The filename is "shutterstock_shiny_new_woman.jpg" which may be a clue. (i.e. if the meaning of the question was "Is it from a SF film, and if so which one?" the answer is "probably not - it's probably a set up photo.")
It brings new insight into this old, short documentary from a while back about a chap returning a recently purchased pet to the shop.
"As for saving data, Android N will allow users to cap the amount of data that individual apps use. This is good news for someone on a tight data plan, and should help rein in talkative apps."
So for anything that doesn't actually use the internet for functionality, set it to zero to avoid adverts?
"Fiction or not,"
Others have pointed out that they offer nothing to back up their assertions. However, there are people out there who do store simple password files in cloud services. I know of one, for example, who uses a Google Docs spreadsheet.
"just don't use the word password in the file name. I doubt I would be using the password as the file name..."
And the person I speak of did just that. Until I expressed alarm at the very idea of storing an unencrypted password file in the cloud - at which point, he changed the file name. That'll make it perfectly safe, I'm sure. :/
Quite. From the same paragraph with the 70:30 split mentioned:
Rob Leathern calls its a “shared subscription” service offering “ethical ad blocking”. Leathern is optimistic that users might be guilt-tripped into paying.
It sounds to me that Javascript is going to be needed so that the site covered is able to determine whether or not to feed you ads.
My use of NoScript isn't primarily to block adverts. It's really about better security and privacy, and has an added benefit of making most websites quicker (though advertising has a bearing on all three - security, privacy and speed). As such, enabling scripts so that yet another third party site can be contacted to fetch a sodding script to run on my computer is not an option.
Just keep them unscripted and static to get them on my screen, rather than trying to find alternatives.
"It's also not uncommon for companies to outsource e-mail marketing to third parties,who may turn out to be spammers, or who outsource to spammers themselves."
Indeed. I raised a complaint with Sage (and the ICO - with a typically useless outcome) several years ago when I received crap from them (through a third party) even though I had explicitly opted not to receive marketing stuff etc.
Although I've not made any further comment on that blog (though IIRC I did comment on Twitter), a couple of years later a couple of spam emails and a virus have hit the unique-to-Sage address in question.
"The patches (HT206568) also address a low-risk vulnerability that allowed attackers to bypass lock screens"
The update is working, then. The lock screen can't be bypassed if the device is bricked*.
* Trollnote: I'm conveniently ignoring that according to the article the vulnerability is on iPhone 6 devices, but it's iPads that are being bricked.)
There's a huge difference between the way these muppets went about it and the way Derren Brown does it.
With Brown (and any professional TV production) permissions are sought from relevant authorities and any organisations involved, everyone who needs to be notified is, and almost everyone is not only aware but involved. Usually, even the "victim" - while they don't specifically know they're being set up - is someone who has applied to take part in some other, fictional Derren Brown item.
With these muppets, the only people who knew were the twits themselves. Note their logo at the start of the video, which includes the words "full" and "retard".
(Though one thing does stick out as odd: with those gallery pranks, they must have taken in those pictures that they pretended to steal. The pictures look too big to fit in their backpacks, so why did nobody think "wtf?" and question what they were up to on the way in?)
I had a little video editing to do last night - so with exporting the result likely to take most of the night, I decided I may as well watch them both then.
I didn't think the original was as good as I remembered it. Mind you, I was probably barely even a teen when I originally saw it. Possibly younger. Terrible upbringing, I know. I blame the parents. :) 7/10 (It would have been 8 if it wasn't a bit too musical - I didn't remember that at all)
As for the Nicolas Cage version, that wasn't as bad as I expected it to be - but still crap. 3/10.
Yes, it's amazing where you can get an internet connection from these days. :p
What I meant, of course, was that I thought The Flumps might have been on children's TV after I stopped being a proper child and turned into the full grown child that I have been for the last however many years. (Because like everyone else, that's the point I stopped watching new children's TV stuff, and carried on watching children's TV stuff that was on when I was a proper child.
Or something like that.
And I was sort of right: Having now checked, it appears that The Flumps was a documentary (about a family of Tribbles by the looks of it) on children's TV from 1976. Strictly speaking, I was still a child at that point, but I'd say it was aimed at a slightly younger viewer than me.
And while typing the above, I've realised why they make me think of Marshmallows.
"Radiohead should have sought our consent as we consider this a tarnishing of the brand. It is not something we would have authorised. We consider that there is a breach of copyright and we are deciding what to do next."
Can you really claim copyright on a very general look and feel? Because that's what this is, really, isn't it? Unless any of the actual puppets and backdrops are direct lifts from the originals.
"Very frustrated. Need to produce 3 months of statements in the next hour and website is down. Ridiculous and unnaceptable."
Well that's your own stupid fault, then. If you've opted not to receive paper bank statements, then at the very least you should log-in and download your bank statement each month so that you have a copy stored locally (and included in your back-ups). If you did that, then at worst you might have not been able to get *one* month's statements if the statements were due amid the outage.
" I think most elReg readers understand the difference between a battery and a capacitor, and many will argue the toss about which is more valid in this case."
I don't. That's hardware. I use hardware, but I don't pretend to understand it - or necessarily know the right term for it.
I'll get my wind protection skin.
"The Mrs has got a Windows 10 laptop (spit) and I noticed it did an update to Flash the other day but it isn't even listed anywhere as being installed, so the phuckers don't even let you remove it!"
See if you have Wild Tangent Games installed - I found Flash on my Win8 computer, and IIRC it was pre-installed with that.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
