263 posts • joined Sunday 7th February 2010 12:01 GMT
Some would say, if you were worried about your privacy, you would not have installed Origin in the first place..... Surprising news, EA's distribution / spyware platform allows you to be spied on.
And before you say it, the EULA did not change from them having the right to gather whatever info they want from your machine, when you decide to use it. And this is not the same as Facebook as you decide what you want to share with the world and as a by product Facebook. Origin, unlike Steam where the surveys are optional, gives you no choice in what is uploaded to EA....
This is how EA has gotten around not being able to sell the info they gather to 3rd parties as in the original EULA. Now they just give 3rd parties a conduit to get the info directly.....
Android Firefox then?
Adblock plugin works with out changes under Firefox's android version. Chrome is always going to have a problem with plugins like adblock and noscripts on the windows and android, as google don't want them to get in the way of their ad's.
Only stats for vendor built PC's
I know it may not be much, but I would like to see stats on the amount of components being shipped / sold as well as just whole vendor build PC's (HP, DELL) sold. I would like to see how much of the PC market is people building them, themselves or purchasing components to upgrade existing PC's. Excluding these details is rather short sighted and does not give the full measure of the 'PC Market'....
Yet Another Anonymous coward
So your argument is to have more of the content available without a warrant so that the innocent will not be caught up with the guilty because in the current climate, people are considered guilty by association. Rather than arguing for more invasive warrantless survalence because innocent until proven guilty as a principle has fallen by the wayside. How about re-affirming that principle instead.
No Content of communication - Not accurate
"Nothing in these proposals will authorize the interception of the content of a communication."
This has been the line though out the lead up to the proposed bill today. It is a statement that stretches things a far amount to say the least. The gov believes that internet surfing history is analogous to phone call history. This is completely untrue.
When you have a record of the number someone has called, you can see the address and company or person it belongs to. You may see that it is a sex chat line and assume the caller discussed things of a sexual nature, but that is it.
With a fully qualified internet address you can see the exact content that user saw. So the web page address is all you need to see the 'content' of the communication. The two are in no way analogous. At most the only thing that should be available without a warrant is numerical IP address of the site visited and that's it.
So no, the idea that these proposals will not expose the content of communications without a warrant is pretty false. Unfortunately since most journalists don't have much technical knowledge, they are unable to challenge MP's on this, when they repeatedly, make these in-accurate assertions.
Report of the blindingly obvious.
Good the report is out there, but it is hardly news. It is the argument most have been making about bring this kind of filtering to ISP's, since the idea was first touted.
I always ask for the filters on all my connections to be removed, not because I want to look at dirty pictures, but because I just want to be able to access the internet, like wiki pages on standard biology etc. Or the web sites of cities like Scunthorpe.....
If any children use my connections, I make sure they have filters in place locally that actually work. It's not rocket science. I wonder if parents will be able to get the government to take over other parts of their parental responsibilities, because doing it themselves is 'a bit tricky'. Maybe David Cameron can come round to peoples houses and make their children go to bed at a decent time.....
Buying an iPhone = Defying the herd????
Has world has been flipped on it's head? Now purchasing an iPhone is considered as 'defying the herd?'.
And 'should you wish to avoid' a 'juggernaut.' Going for an iPhone not going to do that as they are the archetype of 'juggernaut' launches. The fact that Samsung are being able to compete is a good thing....
The TalkTalk system - too high a price....
"ISP TalkTalk has been the one lonely voice in the pro-net-filtering debate, having become the only major telco in Blighty to have implemented network-level anti-malware blockers on its service in May 2011."
Doesn't talktalk's system work by recording all their customers browsing history (even the ones who are not using the filters), so TalkTalk's 'bad content' detector can search through the web pages later and add them to talktalk's filter list, if needed?
That's hardly a good model. Network filters for some customers at the cost of the privacy of all customers. That does not sound like a good bargain to me.
Wait a minute, doesn't the government want to start monitoring browsing history. And the only system that does filtering at the moment, collects that as part of building their filters. That's convenient. Strange both these pieces of legislation are happening close together.....
"I agree completely that Android would do well to review it's security (which it is beginning to do, to a small degree, and rather badly alas)..."
Android needs to go through the same security boot camp that Windows XP did with SP1 (or SP2 can't remember now). Where Microsoft delayed development of their next OS in order to get their OS's security house in order.
Ahead of his time....
Come on, it's only going to be another few years before we all have to strip down to be able to board a plane. This guy was just conforming to a future screening regimen.....
Yes, but that has not been the message from analysis's who have been predicting that Microsoft releasing Windows for tablet means the death of desktops.
Microsoft have believed this, as they have focused on the Metro GUI even on the desktop OS at the expense of the Desktop experience. Since tablets are the future. No tablets are another new useful form factor, not a replacement....
When I say locked down I mean how much of a walled garden it is. On desktop, Windows is known for allowing users a fair amount of leeway in it's use as opposed to OSX by comparison. But on ARM you won't have the same leeway with Windows RT, since it will follow the Windows Phone model which sits in between IOS and android for leeway in use.
For example with Android you can install applications outside the of their app store and install new versions of the OS on your old hardware even if not officially supported. This is not the case for IOS and Windows RT.
Of course leeway in use should not be the same as unsecure, which Android may well by guilty of at the moment. If they can follow how Windows has made efforts to secure it's self which still allowing a lot of openness, that would be good.
But bottom line if you want the same openess you enjoy with windows on desktop, on your tablet then windows RT is not the way to go.
You mean free Metro office....
"yes you can get Office on ARM but not on x86/64, but legacy apps run on x86/64 and not on ARM."
Well you get Metro Office on RT, not the full office we are used to. Not sure how much fun doing spreadsheets will be.
And for x86/64 you get more than just legacy apps. You get all the future applications that will not have metro versions. So any power apps or AAA games are unlikely to come to metro and therefore Windows RT.
Essentially with Windows RT, Microsoft are creating a different OS which will not have the guaranteed support it would if it had an x86 emulator. Sure it comes with a cut down version of Office, but that's it. It is even more locked down than android.
So again this is all fine for people who want to use touch while on the go, but still is not a replacement for the desktop and desktop apps.
Relativity happy customer here.
As an 'L' customer, my connection doubles in speed and more than doubles in STM limits, all for free, with the P2P policy staying the same. I am pretty happy.
I completely understand that those on higher tiers will be legitimately pissed. But it's not bad news all around. Just saying....
Though I wish there was BT infinity in my area, as for the same price I am paying, my father just got a 40 down and 10 up connection (actual speed) vs my 20 down, 2 up. As far as I can tell BT only shapes P2P traffic. They do seem like a better proposition if only they were available in my area.
Re: Still has not got the memo
No one said you couldn't. I have an ASUS transformer with a mouse and keyboard. It is not as productive as my PC with the full desktop apps. That's the point. Since Nvidia tablets will be limited to Metro they will not have access to the full desktop and will not be as productive. You canlt even have more that two windows on screen at the same time with metro.
Re: Right then...
Pointless as those are defeated by a RIPA request. That is unless you don't mind a 3 year stay at her majesties pleasure...
Re: April Fools
So because corporations are trying to look at our data, our government instead of thinking 'how can we stop this invasion of privacy for our citizens', thinks 'how can we get a piece of this.'
Also because Google have my email (don't use them myself), that means the government should have a record of all my on-line activity? Talk about a false equivalency...
Still has not got the memo
There is no Windows 8 for ARM. There is Windows On ARM (WOA) which is a separate product and launches at the same time as Windows 8. WOA will only have metro and metro apps. It won't have any access to deskop applications as those are x86 only. So if you need a PC to run desktop apps, you will still need one after WOA and Windows 8 launches. Someone please explain this to Nvidia's CEO.
The most interesting tablet / phone for this would be one with an Intel CPU as they could run native x86 code and therefore Windows 8 desktop apps. Intel already have an x86 CPU smart phone coming to market just running Android, at the moment.
Moved the problem on....
"Hadopi's stats say that 6 per cent of internet subscribers have received a warning – and 95 per cent of those who received only one warning stopped infringing, and received no second warning. Of those receiving a second warning, 92 per cent stopped infringing. Ninety-eight per cent of those who received a third also stopped."
Translation: People receiving a warning installed a software firewall to stop detection (being vague on purpose here as I don't want to suggest methods to stop detection via P2P, but there are ways) or moved to another sharing method. People receiving a second warning finally woke up and did the above. And so on with the higher warnings.
I am very cynical about the claimed successes here. Due to the concentration on P2P, it can look like a success while everyone has moved to other methods or sharing / piracy. Has it stop some piracy, sure. As much as claimed, that is a lot less likely....
The only positive evidence is an uptick in legal music buying, HIGHER than increases in countries that don't have this law.
Becuase UK freedom of speech < US freedom of speech
The UK does not have as much freedom of speech as the US. Those in power may try to say we have full freedom of speech, but in practice, we don't. In the UK we would not have Supreme Court protection for the West Bough Baptist Church holding up their awful signs at soldier funerals.
Some will say this is a good thing and the UK approach is more pragmatic. Myself, I believe that as soon as you start chipping away at freedom of speech, even with your heart in the right place, it gets easier to chip away at it for bad reasons. Or to mis-use the existing laws against speech they were not designed to censure. I envy the US treatment of free speech being sacrosanct even if it causes offence and hurt, like the West bough baptist church. It is a double edged sword and as far as I am concerned, as soon as you started limiting it, you place limits on good speech as well as bad. Any limit does that...
What can you do with it.
As an end user, and not a developer, is there anything out there that currently uses PC Kinect. As in if I brought one what would I use it for? This is going to be the biggest problem at the moment for this, I don't know anything that really supports it.
Also another version so soon after the first was released. That gives you confidence to buy. Why not hold off and see if there is another version in a few months.
Good for consumer spending!?
I am happy the economy is so good, that the Chancellor can do things that might harm consumer spending...
Re: Where would HMRC and Government be best focusing attention?
It was a one off, targeting one type of transaction, just one bank was doing. Everything solved with corporate avoidance then. No wonder they are now targeting joe blogs.....
Re: Lots of freetards about then...
No, some just have this old fashioned idea that you should be tried and convicted in the country where the alleged crime happened. Rather than having the US policing the world and taking people from around the world to stand trial there. As a precedent it is rather worrying.
This has noting to do with the specific crime, but is due to the precedent setting circumstances of it, i.e there was no crime on US soil, so it is none of their business.
I am sure every day, I do something that is against the law somewhere in the world. Should I be extradited to stand trial in a country where my actions are illegal.
Or if I do break the law in my own country but the CPS does not want to press the case, should I then be extradited to another country, where they have more of an interest in prosecuting.
Why not just out source the whole of our justice system to countries like the US, by extraditing any alleged criminal there. It will save a lot of money in these debt ridden times. Call me old fashioned, but I don't like that idea....
If the BBC wanted to do this with a view of reducing the license tax with these extra proceeds, I would support it. My fear is that the license tax will remain and go up and while you have to pay to watch programs you already contributed to the making of through the tax.
As someone who would not miss the loss of access to 'BBC' services I would be happy to pay for just the BBC services I wanted to watch / listen to. Not a fan of 'Sherlock', 'Dr Who' or any other of the amazing programs the BBC make. My problem is I do consume commercial services that are also mean having to pay the BBC tax.
To me you either have one method of funding or the other (tax or pay as you or), not both. Both just means that they get to charge multiple times for the same thing and the first time you had not choice in the matter. You get doubly screwed....
Does not make sense
"For much of its history, the BBC attracted the best talent, groomed it, and focussed it. Sherlock is a rare example of the BBC making TV that's popular and stunning - it concentrates some CERN-like talent on a show. "
If the BBC "attracted the best talent, groomed it, and focussed it.", then examples "of the BBC making TV that's popular and stunning" would not be "rare", but common surely?
The point of one sentence gets contradicted by point of the following one.....
Wrong one to start off with.
Of course in these times of government debt, it is good tax loopholes get closed. My problem with this is the Chancellor is straight away not going for one that Vodafone or any of the big avoiders use, but one 'joe public' are using to get cheaper DVD's, etc. That about says it all.
Should it be closed? Probably. Should it be closed before anything is done about the billions of pounds being lost to the big avoiders elsewhere? I would say no.
Also the idea these big companies shipping from the channel islands are avoiding tax is a fallacy. It is the consumer avoiding the tax. The corporation does not care either way whether their consumers are paying tax or not. The only advantage it gives them is being a bit cheaper than high street stores. They themselves are not avoid tax, we the consumer are.
And of course our mug of a Chancellor, goes straight away before any other loop hole to one that directly encourages consumers to spend. It's good that our economy is doing so well that it can afford to have consumers dis-incentivized to spend as much.
How about closing the loopholes that the likes of Vodafone, etc use first, before this one. Then I will start to believe the 'we are in it together' language. Otherwise it smells of 'we are in to together' for the people least able to contribute more, but if you are a large avoider like Vodafone etc, then continue as you are.....
You are right, for the impatient with no will power/ self control, there is a major difference.
For those who have 2 - 3 months patience there isn't.
As I said in my original post, kudos for Apple for getting this out before competitors.
Love the comment-bombing
Love Apple fan comment -bombing / down vote bombing going on for any comment slightly negative to this new device.
The new IPad is a worthy upgrade with the HD screen, if you are already part of the Apple ecosystem or just want an Apple device. If not there are Android alternatives with HD screens waiting in the wings. As simple as that.
One thing I have to give Apple kudos for is getting to market with a high res screen first. When you consider that they don't make the screen, but buy them from competitors that have their own android tablets. It is impressive that they can buy them from competitors before those competitors can put them in their own tablets.....
Impressed... Open to comment
Well not with the article, but more I am more impressed that Mr Orlowski has opened one of his controversial opinion pieces to comment. Good on you...
Isn't this one heck of a U-turn. Haven't Microsoft for many years, been extolling the virtues of not needing applications to be full screen, but in 'windows' who's size you can control and stack to look at multiple things at once. Wasn't one of the touted features of Win 7 the ability to stack windows quick on either side of the screen just by dragging them there. If it was so bad for productivity why did they bother.
This is like Apple coming out and saying that having things that 'just work', is actually bad. Or stylish design is bad.
I am gob-smacked by this, gob-smacked I tell you. What's next keyboards are actually bad of typing.....
The complains about the Windows 8 preview maybe put down by some, as resistance to change. Certainly for myself this is not the case. I like change, or more accurately progress. I am happy for Microsoft to shake up the GUI in Windows in new releases. It's why I brought Vista early on, as despite the bugs the Aero interface with task bar thumbnail previews was progress. It made the experience to me more streamlined. That is what progress means to me.
After playing with the Windows 8 preview I have come to the conclusion that the changes are not progress. In fact for mouse and keyboard users the new setup is a step backwards. I now have to make extra clicks or wait longer to be able to do the things I normally do in Windows 7. This to me is not progress and therefore it is legitimate to be critical.
Don't get me wrong Metro seems like an interface with lots of potential, but on touch devices (as others have already said). With a mouse and keyboard, what's the opposite of streamlined?
It is a shame they cannot find a GUI that works in a streamlined way with both touch, mouse and keyboard.
The final issue for this version is that apart from Metro if you have a touch device, I see no killer reason to upgrade. At least Vista had Aero and DirectX 10 for gamers. What has Win 8 got apart from an interface most of the current install base are not interested in because they use mouse and keyboard.
Also you may say, 'well Microsoft are being clever becuase they know mouse and keyboard is on the way out and touch will be the prefered input method'. I have to disagree. I have used touch devices and always find the exprience better with mouse and keyboard. Touch is great for mobile while you are on the go, but as soon as you are not on the go, nothing beats the mouse and keyboard for input accuracy and speed. This control method is going nowhere and Microsoft devalue it, at their peril.
Re: Need Start Menu back. Not much reason to upgrade
Yes, I fear most will not bother. There will be people saying that we are only complaining becuase we don't like change. For me they could not be more wrong. I love change, or more accurately progress. I have no problem with the Start Menu going, if it is being replaced with something better. The Metro Start screen and Charms area is not progress. If anything to get to various things it now takes more clickes than before. I am disapointed that even if you are going to spend all your time in 'desktop' mode, Microsoft still tries to force Metro down your throat.
I have been looking around at articles that give 10 reasons you should upgrade. They have really had to scrape the barrel to give reasons why you should upgrade. I love upgrades. I was one of the few to buy Vista when it came out because I liked the Aero gui and things like the thumbnails previews, etc. For all the bugs it was progress. Windows 8 does not feel like progress....
link to your post in a thread
Can we have back the link, used to be a little arrow next to the post tittle (->), that would take you to your post in a thread. Rather than having to go to the thread and search for your post. This was the most useful (to me) upgrade these forums have had recently....
Does not have to be an arrow again, just want the functionality back....
Need Start Menu back. Not much reason to upgrade
Once some enterprising person / company brings out a Start Menu replacement for Windows 8, so you don't have to go near the charms, or the Metro start menu, things will be fine. Just not much of an upgrade over Win 7 unless you want the Metro interface, which most mouse and keyboard users won't.
I know a lot are predicting problems with this release due to the dislike of the Metro interface, but that is a side issue. The main problem is for most users not interested in touch there is no killer features that will make them want to upgrade (as far as I am aware). This is what Microsoft should be most worried about. They are going to have the same problem getting people off Windows 7 as they did with getting them off XP.
*Written from the Metro version of I.E....
Re: No one is losing their civil rights
"This will get confirmed by a contitutional decision."
If being forced to hand over a combination to a lock / safe has already been ruled out by the Supremes, it's anyone's guess how they will rule on this scenario. Certainly not the forgone conclusion you think it is....
Re: No breach of constitutional rights
"Count on it."
Or not, in the case of the guy facing the same issue in Florida. The courts are conflicted on this issue. But of course you, with your arm chair law degree, know better? Please.....
The only place your 'Count on it works', is the UK, where the innocent do not have as many rights.
Well this just goes to prove that their are alternatives in gathering the evidence you need, rather than stepping on peoples civil liberties.
- FLABBER-JASTED: It's 'jif', NOT '.gif', says man who should know
- Analysis Spam and the Byzantine Empire: How Bitcoin tech REALLY works
- VIDEO Herschel Space Observatory spots galaxies merging
- Apple cored: Samsung sells 10 million Galaxy S4 in a month
- More than half of Windows 8 users just treat it like Windows 7