1135 posts • joined 22 May 2007
Just seen on Tw@tter
"Vulture 1 recovered intact. Completely intact. Playmonaut safe and sound."
Where are they going?
They seem to have got lost in San Martin de Whateveritis, turned round, then decided to go for a joy ride, completely forgetting where they are aiming for. By my reckoning they should have turned left about 3 miles ago.
They been at the celebratory vino a little early? Or just as good at navigating as my mother (who often mixes up left and right, and has thrown the map out of the car window on the motorway before)?
Looks like she's down
RE: Stealth: Intent to Avoid Being Detected
Actually, AFAIK "intent" in this case is "They intended to do something", and that something was against the law.
This does not mean they "intended to break the law".
Ignorance of the law is no defence. It can be used in mitigation at sentencing, to reduce the sentence if they were unaware something was illegal.
The facts of the case: They DID break the law. They did not think they were breaking the law (having received home office guidance saying it was OK), but that doesn't change the fact that they broke it.
DISCLAIMER: IANAL, so I may be wrong, but I believe what I have said is correct.
Religious intolerance and misinterpretation.
'Is this the same chap who actually wrote ... to "Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them"'
I am not a Muslim (nor a follower of any religion), but it is taking passages such as this in ALL religious texts out of context which has cause so much war and death throughout the world. I do not have time to research this fully, but I hope someone who actually knows the Qu'ran comes on here to explain the context.
Take a passage from the King James version of the Bible, for instance.
"Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."
This appears to be advocating killing women and male children, and raping little girls. Does the bible really say this is OK? No, when taken as a whole, the Bible, and most other religious texts prohibit murder and rape.
Yes, there are some in EVERY religion who use it as an excuse to be dicks to each other, but that does not make the religion bad. It makes people bad, and we know this already.
So sod off with your intolerant, ill-informed view of the Islamic faith! It is people like you who take things to extremes and perpetuate wars, hatred, persecution and misery throughout the centuries!
"Tax avoidance is just tax evasion that hasn't been found out yet."
Tax avoidance is using legal loopholes to pay less tax. Most of these loopholes are known by the govt. Therefore they have already been found out, but what they are doing is perfectly legal.
Tax evasion is, basically, just not paying the taxes you owe. This is NOT legal.
I am not saying it is right, moral or just. I am saying there is a distinct difference. If the govt wants to, they can introduce legislation to close the loophole. They (effectively) endorse tax avoidance (glad I proof read this, I initially wrote 'evasion' here) by not closing the loopholes.
Many people avoid tax by legal means, for example setting up a limited company, taking minimum wage for them and their spouse, and then taking the rest in dividends avoiding national insurance and higher rate income tax. If you found a way to pay less tax on your wage, would you not do so?
The DS110j is a single bay device, the myDitto dual.
I know that different users have different requirements, but to do a comparison you would need to choose the DS210j, which puts it much closer (you could buy the 500gb of the myDitto and whack a 2TB drive in for about the same price as a DS210j and a 2TB drive)
The 2TB version looks rather over priced to me. £150 extra over the 500GB! Your 'avin' a giraffe inchya? Even if you are putting 2x1TB in, £100 easily covers it, even at retail prices.
"why is it so damn expensive?"
I have to agree, though. £35bn seems a lot.
The title is required, and must contain letters and/or digits.
I like it down here at the "random-USE-of-CAPITALS end of tabloid journalism".
The articles make more sense than anything I ever read in the Guardian, and generally contain a more balanced view... as well as putting a smile on my face
Great game. The main bugs mentioned haven't bothered me yet.
It looks spectacular, even on a mid-range gaming PC like mine (Athlon X3 @ 3GHz, Radeon 5750 @ c.1600x1050 full detail no problems).
One thing I think is missing is telemetry, at least in practise sessions. All you have to go on is your lap times. I haven't even found a way to see sector times (although I've only played for a few hours). This makes deciding on your setup rather challenging, a matter of trying a few and seeing which 'feels' best.
Apart from that, this is my favourite racing game since NFS Underground, where you had so much control over your cars setup you could spend a few hours tuning it for a particular race. I do like this game very much, and can see myself not doing much other than playing it once I get a wheel for the PC (playing w the keyboard is marginally better than a game controller, but still not great). And it should look awesome on the projector in the living room :D
If an airline sells more seats than it has available, then tells someone they can't get on the flight, they must wait for the next one, there would be uproar.
If I get (as I do) a 24Mbit/s unlimited internet connection, I expect to be able to use it whenever I want. If my use involves me saturating that constantly for a year, that should be my prerogative.
If the connection is NOT unlimited, it should not be sold as such. If a fair use policy is in effect, with a bandwidth cap, the product is NOT unlimited, and should not be sold as such.
Luckily I am with Be and I have, in the past, used my 24Mbit/s download and 2.5MBit/s (I think) upload constantly for weeks on end. There is an FUP, I have never had it affect me, nor has anyone else. There is no 'cap' (I think the wording is to do with affecting other users, not a specific amount).
'the word "Wookiee" has been changed to "hair challenged animal" and that the entire cast has been digitally replaced by Ewoks'
Also, The China Probrem:
'They're just taking Indiana Jones and they're... they're raping him!'
'Why would Spielberg and Lucas do this?!'
While I will admit that the re-master of the original trilogy had some good developments, it was completely unnecessary and spoiled the feel of the film. The move to 3D will likely be similar, a few good bits (I'm thinking Luke bombing the death star will look pretty cool) but overall spoiling the film.
And starting with Phantom Menace? I don't know many people (unfortunately my mother is one) who enjoyed that film. It should be removed from the history books. Ep 2 wasn't much better. And, although Ep 3 wasn't bad, I was really dissapointed. It could have been so much darker, instead they pandered to the majority again and produced a mediocre film. I won't bother going to see any of that trillogy, and doubt I will go to see the "original" trillogy in 3D either.
"Privacy International said on Monday that it plans to sue ACS:Law for violating the privacy of internet users over the security breach"
A fantastic twist to the tail (yes, deliberately used the "wrong" spelling).
RE: Renewable energy
Yes, battery powered vehicles can run on renewables, if there is capacity.
Currently there is not.
I am not arguing that EVs are the future, but based on current technology and infrastructure, the most green car tech currently practical is a light, efficient, ICE powered vehicle.
To take over, EVs need:
a) better energy storage technology (e.g. batteries)
b) more "renewables" (e.g. renewable electricity generation)
I do not say this to discourage the development of these techs, in fact quite the opposite. But at this point in time the technology is not ready to replace the trusty ICE.
"When they could have used none by going w other techs in the spirit of the competition"
Yeah, because the battery-'powered' vehicles would not use any fossil fuels, would they?
Coz they just charge the batteries from an electrical outlet... Oh, wait... That's mostly generated by burning fossil fuels.
They looked at the competition, and the rules of it, and did what real engineers do: Find the best solution to the problem posed. Currently, their solution was the best available. In future, when the majority of the world's power no longer comes from burning fosil fuels, there will be greener technologies available, but until then they are right on the money. Well done for thinking outside the box!
A metric tonne is 1000kg.
A ton, or more correctly a short ton, is 2000 lbs = 907kg.
A long ton is 2240 lbs = 1016 kg
Scaling and latency
Surely this will also affect the memory latency too on a core-by-core basis. If I have understood correctly, it is a unidirectional ring. So take a 2-core simplified example:
Assuming a clockwise direction here, latency to core 2 will always be 1 clock more than to core 1. This difference will increase by number of 'stops' on the ring, so you would end up needing to design programs to use a particular core if they were memory latency constrained.
"I guess one problem is that sometimes, in any vehicle, the best preemptive action is actually to speed up rather than slow down"
It is one technique I use fairly frequently, on motorways especially. If I am using the outside lane to overtake, but the vehicle in front is only moving a tiny amount faster than the car being overtaken, The best option I have found is to hang back where the driver of the vehical being overtaken can see me, then accelerate past him once there is space. The last place you want to be is in a drivers blind spot for an extended period of time, as you cannot count on them to check.
But to the driver of the vehicle I am overtaking, all he often sees is a bike fly past him, then decelerate. They may see it as a dangerous maneouver, thinking I was just doing that speed all the way, then decelerating at the "last minute".
The same goes for moving around in the lane, something my instructor told me to do as it increases the likelihood of being seen. But to some, it is seen as a biker weaving around dangerously.
And another one!
"Don't bitch at drivers, it's your choice.
"Bitch at your local representative that the police aren't interested in nabbing people for driving without due care and attention."
So you are saying that we shouldn't complain about people driving about due care and attention?! We shouldn't complain about people who drive too close to the vehicle in front, use their mobile phone while driving, don't look where they are going and generally assume that they own the roads?!?!
Yes, the police should nab drivers (and motorcyclists, cyclists, etc for that matter) who put other road users in danger, but I saw one of my mates doing so, I would complain to him too. If a driver pulls out on me, nearly causing me to crash trying to avoid him, and I see him stopped at the next traffic lights or pull into a car park, I will follow him and give him a piece of my mind. Everyone has a right to complain about someone putting their life in danger. When I am on a bike, I take a calculated risk, true. But it is when people, through idiocy, complacency or whatever, put me in direct danger that I get angry.
"Bascally, STFU unless you're going to do something about it."
Or you can STFU for being a selfish prick, obviously not caring about the safety of anyone who's recreational or transport choices you disagree with!
"( I've lost count of reports in the local paper, or seeing the road closed again, because of 40 something riders killing themselves on the roads round here, grow up you wankers)"
And I've lost track of the number of car accidents which have closed the M62, making me late for work (often a 40-something business exec who is driving like a dick because he thinks 5 minutes of his time is worth more than other peoples safety). Time for YOU to grow up, I think, and realise that there are bad examples of any group.
RE: shoddy excuses
"I believe it's typical biker behaviour because every single one, without exception, does this"
"Ive [sic] never seen anything but motorbikes treat chevrons as a special lane in all the years Ive [sic] been driving."
Seems you have:
a) Seen very few bad drivers and a lot of bad motorcyclists,
b) Have a coloured opinion of motorcyclists, or for some other reason only remember bad examples of motorcyclists, or
c) are not as observant as you would like to think, and therefore have not noticed good examples of motorcyclists.
Before you start, I would like to point out that I have no opinion either way, those are the options I can see.
But I know that, for myself, I saw several examples of good, bad, and "apparently bad" motorcyclists before I started riding ("apparently bad" is not good wording, I just mean things which looked bad to me, but which I have since discovered are perfectly acceptable). I know that most bikers are observant and respectful of other road users (until the prat in the car puts your life in danger of course!)
"Actually the Highway Code says "Take care and keep your speed low". Which is odd, because apparently bikers read this sentance as "Do it at 30mph regardless of oncoming traffic"."
Personally I limit filtering to 20mph, and merge back into traffic if it exceeds this. However, there are some conditions where 30mph is perfectly safe. Once again, you appear to only have seen the bad.
Might I ask how long you have been driving, and also where you are from? If things are as bad as you think there, it's not somewhere I would like to go. I would also expect there is a higher rate of motorcycle accidents there if they are riding as badly as you suggest.
I would prefer my surgeon was good at making split-second decisions. After all, if they hit a problem (not everything goes smooothly, no matter how skilled the surgeon or how well planned the operation), I would prefer they immediately fixed it rather than I die on the operating table...
"Admitting you drive a motorbike automatically excludes you from complaining about other peoples driving, pal."
Actually most studies done have indicated that Motorcyclists make much better drivers, cause fewer accidents, and that most accidents involving motorcyclists are actually caused by another vehicle. Let us break this down:
"follows the car in front at a distance of no more than 6 inches from the nearside rear bumper"
Stopping distance for a bike is generally shorter than a car. Add to this a motorcyclist is generally higher than their car driving counterpart, giving a better view of traffic ahead. Hence they do not need to leave as great a stopping distance between them and the car in front.
Even ignoring that, there are plenty of motorcyclists, like myself, who actually leave more room in front than the average car driver due to the consequences if they are in an accident. Also, I seen plenty of cars driving right up the vehicle in front's exhaust pipe. You get bad road users in all classes of vehicle.
"the belief that its ok for you to overtake stationary traffic at a junction"
Actually this IS OK. It is mentioned in the highway code, and is known as filtering. So long as it is done at a sensible speed, with the awareness that other road users may not expect you to be there, there is no problem. See http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_069854 (88)
I have of course seen motorcyclists filtering at what I would consider unsafe speeds on the motorway, but then again I have seen cars weaving in and out of traffic on the motorway at unsafe speeds, so once again it cuts both ways.
"the belief that ... the dividing chevrons on a dual carriageway are in fact an overtaking lane for motorcycles"
I agree that this is not a good idea, and is actually illegal if the lines surrounding it are solid, but once again I have seen cars do the same when circumstances allow, so you can not use it as a specific argument against the driving skills of motorcyclists.
Bottom line, Adam: Do not make sweeping generalisations about a group of people without having the facts. There are many good motorcyclists, and a few bad ones who give the rest of us a bad name. Many car drivers also see typical motorcyclist behaviour as dangerous purely because they do not know, having never ridden themselves. Of course there are many dickhead bikers out there, but there are also dickhead car/bus/lorry drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians.
But then again so are most integrated graphics. But it is likely that (eventually at least) the graphics core will ba able to be used to boost performance alongside a 'proper' graphics card.
Add to that the fact that most mainstream users will be more than happy with the performance of the Sandy Bridge GPU, as all they will be doing is a bit of surfing, watching mindless funny clips on YouTube and such. They don't need the latest greatest nVidia/ATI multi-card setup for that.
The simple answer
is to not hold any data on your laptop. Keep it all in a remote file store of some description, and access it when needed. Ensure you don't store passwords/keys to it on the laptop itself.
Then if they want, they can copy everything from the laptop. There is no 'data' there, nothing personal or private, just the apps needed to access it.
It's Not About the Music (tm)
I have seen this many times. Most of the time I back off a bit and am more careful as soon as I see someone with headphones on.
It is not as much about the fact that they are listening to music. It is more that they end up in a trance, playing with their phone and listening to music, not even thinking about the world outside.
I have done similar in the past, nearly walking out into the road on the way home from school, because I was thinking about some school work.
I don't think education will work. Everyone sometimes drifts off, and kids will just take the opinion "why the hell shouldn't I listen to my music, you mean grownup!"
In general, things like this are going to happen, no matter what we do to try to prevent them, especially as more and more portable gadgets become available (businessmen speaking on their handsfree while looking at the pretty powerpoint slides are just as likely to step out into the road without looking, in my experience).
Live with it, or ban everything, lock people up in padded cells and let robots do all the work.
Loving the P.A.R.I.S. project
Not the issue
It doesn't really matter that the code is probably less efficient. It is realtime sensitive, so what matters is getting it done quickly, not efficiently.
Skip to the end...
To many comments to be arsed reading but...
As many have already said, the easiest method is put it all on fuel.
They could always sset this up so haulage firms can claim some back, similar to VAT, to stop them going out of business. Savings will be made in administration costs (e.g. DVLA). Motorists don't need the extra hassle of tax discs, nor is all that paper wasted.
I am not the first to say it, nor the first to think it. The idea, though, is a good one, simple and effective. Therefore it will be ruled out, and will never happen...
Yep Yep Yep
"The other useful feature they could add to any kitchen is a self cleaning one, some kind of roomba that cleans cookers, floors, worktops, fridges & everywhere else."
Cooking=Fun. Cleaning up after cooking, not so much. Looking at the cooker a week after it was last cleaned, covered in oil, bits of foor etc, rather unpleasant.
"Ah, there's a green spin to this story"
Don't know why anyone expected any different.
New politicians, new promises broken.
They were not compliant because they modified the code, distributed it, but did not make the modified source code available (to those they distributed it to).
The GPLv2 is very simple. Anyone can use the stuff, or modify it. But as soon as you distribute the modified code you MUST make the source code available to those you distribute it to, under the terms of the GPL (so they can then distibute the code freely or modify it).
It's not an unreasonable requirement. People are doing a lot of work and letting you use it for free. All they ask in return is that you follow the spirit of FOSS development. If you don't want to do that, use something else (same argument as with any software license really)
I share your pain
I feel exactly the same way.
Stories like this, and any other about those we elected to power being less than truthful, should be outrageous. The should whip up anger in the population that those who "represent" us would not be truthful with us. They should be the exception...
But they are not. We regularly hear stories of politicians having distorted the truth to fit their own agenda. The most common comment I hear about them is "What do you expect? They are politicians."
But that's the point. We *DO* expect it. But we *SHOULDN'T* expect it.
And occasionally, as with the expenses scandal, we do stand against it. But not very often. Mostly we just put it down to "the way things are" and get on with our lives.
Sad times indeed...
The ISP's quote the specifications of the service they will provide. In the case of ASL2+, the specs (at least as they are used in this country) allow up to 24MBits down, but this will vary dependant on line conditions. They advertise what their service does, hence are doing nothing wrong.
What OFCOM & ASA **SHOULD** be looking at is the "Unlimited" claims, which are blatantly false. If I have an unlimitted service, and am synced at 24MBit Downstream, I expect to be able to download 7.7TB of data each month, if I so choose. Putting a cap, hidden in an (un)Fair Usage Policy means the service is NOT unlimited, and should not be sold as such.
"It's more expensive to ship food into the big cities yet you don't pay more."
We pay the distribution costs in our shopping bills. The farmers don't pay it, we pay it in the mark-ups the supermarkets charge. The only reason a farmer *would* pay is if it cost less to buy from a supermaket than their local shop. In that case, blame economies of scale, don't blurt out ridiculous "we subsidise your food" garbage!
The fact is they CAN get high-speed broadband already. The problem is that it COSTS them a hell of a lot.
There was a recent article on here where a rural council paid towards the cost of getting FTTC installed to a village. This shows it can be done, the question is funding.
I do not see why I should pay for it, it's them who want it, let 'em pay! The councils could pay the initial costs, then whack it on their council tax bills, or else a group of them could get together and chip in for it. If they want it they can get it themselves. If they aren't prepared to pay for it, they don't get it.
I was one of the lucky ones. I went to university when fees were still reasonable (I think about £1000/yr max, less based on parents income).
There were 2 points I heard on the news this morning: First was this "Graduate tax". This is not a fair idea. We already pay income tax, which is linked to how much you earn. If graduates earn more, they pay more tax already.
Add to this the student load system, which "taxes" (IIRC) you at 9% on earnings above a threshold (16k ish?) until the loan is repaid, and you already have a fair system. This tax would, if what I hear is true, be paid for life, not until the "loan" is repaid.
I do not think it is a good or fair idea.
The second point was bringing in 2-year degrees. I think this is a mistake too. There are only 2 options with this: Teach less or teach quicker. Teach less and you devalue, even further, the degree. Teaching quicker is, IMHO, nigh on impossible.
Those setting up the groups have every right to do so. Anyone even saying they agree with Moat killing cops has a right to do so. Cameron has a right to say he disagrees with what they are saying. Cameron, as a person, has a right to complain to Facebook about it. Cameron AS PRIME MINISTER does NOT have a right to put that weight behind the complaint, as this amounts to government-sanctioned censorship.
I am also disgusted that this point has not been raised by Clegg. Although I have slowly lost my support for the LibDems since the formation of the coalition, due to them doing what all politicians have done and put aside personal and party values in order to maintain power, he should at least show some Cojones and challenge Dave on the fundamental right to free speech.
Come on Nick, show the country you are not just a lap dog and stand up for your parties supposed principals AT LEAST ONCE!
Sounds like a cultural misunderstanding. It doesn't suggest anything of the sort to me.
Shome mishtake, shurely
Surely you mean European and US governments, not firms/businesses?
I'm sure the US government would *never* pass this information on to their bosses^H^H^H^H^H^Hbusinesses so they could gain an advantage over their European rivals...
So how long
before El Reg get a "cease and disist" letter from 'em?
Brand new Symbian devices, you heard it here first!!
"affects Series 3 and % Symbian devices"
If I had to guess, I would say you mean "affects Series 3 and 5 Symbian devices", unless I have missed an anouncement about the new "Series %" devices :)
that is all
Playmobil reconstruction or it didn't happen!
Don't buy a brand new, over priced fashion accessory if you want a working, stable tool.
Don't get me wrong, the phones should not be doing this, and Apple should admit it, but you did buy a fashion accessory, not a phone...
I have always thought so
I always called 1024x768 1024 res, 800x600 800 res, 640x480 640 res etc (as did my friends)
When I first saw 1080p I assumed it would be ITRO 1080x800, but no, "they" count the lines as more important. Therefore this 2Kx4K is probably right for "them", and will likely become known as something like "2Ki"
"Requires Android OS 1.6 or greater"
Bummer! On 1.5 on my Moto Dext :(
OK I didn't see that
At least not until you pointed it out. You owe me a keyboard Thorsten!
- 'Windows 9' LEAK: Microsoft's playing catchup with Linux
- Review A SCORCHIO fatboy SSD: Samsung SSD850 PRO 3D V-NAND
- Was Earth once covered in HELLFIRE? No – more like a wet Sunday night in Iceland
- Breaking Fad 4K-ing excellent TV is on its way ... in its own sweet time, natch
- Every billionaire needs a PANZER TANK, right? STOP THERE, Paul Allen