* Posts by Trevor_Pott

6180 posts • joined 31 May 2010

Windows 10: Forget Cloudobile, put Security and Privacy First

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: @ Trevor

"If you chose it, then it's not rape."

Actually, that's not true. The new standard is "enthusiastic participation", not mere acceptance, specifically because of situations where choosing to be violated is the least horrible of a bunch of very horrible offerings. Look to the new laws in California, specifically regarding coitus on campuses.

0
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: what's the point

Well, I, for one, am using it as my primary OS specifically so that Microsoft can get real world information back from my usage. Many of us are choosing to do this for just that reason. It is our chance to have a voice - however small - in how this all turns out.

0
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: rant-like journalism

"People with ADD have a much greater ability to identify and avoid pitfalls and come up with creative solutions to problems."

Some of us do. Not all.

"You speak of ADD as if it were a genetic defect that has no evolutionary advantage. If that were true, it would have been cleansed from the gene pool long ago."

You do not understand how evolution works.

2
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Many of us are forced to use MS Software

"Just the idea of trying to support and maintain a small product with two completely different, incompatible UIs brings me out in a cold sweat, let alone something the size of Office."

So Ubitmenu are significantly superior to Microsoft in skill? http://www.ubit.ch/ I don't understand how that could be.

4
2
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: @ Trevor

"If you had the choice of losing your job or being raped what would you choose?"

Honestly? I'd chose the rape, though only by the narrowest of margins and only if the job loss was "career loss" class as exemplified by the "a job without computers" portion of the comment. I don't remotely expect that everyone will feel the same, and I think the specific circumstances matter a hell of a lot in making that call.

To be honest, I feel that just by asking that question is such a blatantly black-and-white fashion you are trivializing both rape and career loss without giving any real consideration to the effects of either.

Both are traumatic events that are horrible, but I will heal from the rape. Lose my job and I might never be able to return to a position where you make a similar income, have the same opportunities for advancement, etc. I might lose your house, I might lose everything.

"Rape and losing your job are in two very different categories that cannot be compared to each other."

Oh no? Why not? Rape comes in two parts: violence - or the threat thereof - enacted against the individual is the first part, and the easiest to overcome.

The second part - the damning and damaging part - is a lifelong feeling of a loss of control. You feel like you don't have value. That you don't have worth. You feel that maybe you deserved it, that something about is fundamentally wrong. Some days are better than others, granted...but it never leaves you. It haunts you. It underpins your personality and serves as a subconscious, silent reminder that - underneath it all - you're just an object, a toy, a disposable thing.

There is nothing trivial about rape; not because of the violence of the event - and remember many rapes aren't violent in any way - but because of the legacy it leaves, imprinted on the mind of the victim...often for a lifetime.

Losing one's job comes in two parts. The initial loss of income and it's immediate fallout, and the long term effects, should this result in a major quantitative negative change in quality of life.

Loosing one's job - especially in cases where an individual cannot return to the level of income or possibility of career advancement they had previously - can lead to feelings of loss of control, powerlessness and hopelessness. The fewer your options for new employment, the more you feel like a worthless "thing". A toy, to be discarded. There can be massively negative social implications; humiliation, ostracisation, even the disintegration of that individual's family.

The loss of a job - especially one that is of such a dramatic change that one is "working without computers" - can be hugely traumatic. Going from $100,000+ a year to digging ditches has absolutely proven to make people suicidal, amongst other things.

Being perfectly honest, I fear the concept of that level of job loss - especially against my will and over something so trivial as expressing a preference for a given UI! - even more than I do rape. At least people understand rape. There are trauma centers and counseling and an entire constellation of support mechanisms to help people cope with the psychological trauma that comes form that.

But the long term psychological trauma of having one's life turned upside down due to career-ending-class job loss? As a society, we won't even touch it. We will cheerfully let people kill themselves off rather than face up to the fact that this is problem.

When I think about the sort of job loss discussed here - massive career change to the point of "not working with computers - I picture the issues of reintegration of soldiers, or the problems faced by an aging population who lose their jobs but can't get a new one. I've seen instances of that being every bit as horrible - and as frightening to me - as rape.

But there are pitifully few social institutions to help those who have lost their job. There is a massive amount of social animosity towards them - "get a job, ya bum!" - and fuck all in terms of sympathy if they've gotten a job, (or two, or three or four) but so far below what they were making previously that they sink into a massively long term clinical depression...or commit suicide.

We mock, disparage, disrespect and discourage those who lose their jobs, especially if the individuals "falls so low" as to go from a well paying job to "one without computers involved."

I can see in both cases a loss of power. I can see in both cases feeling like an object, a "disposable person". I can see in both cases feeling as though I had no value, and never could have value in the eyes of others.

But only in one case do I see that society would be ready and willing to try and help me fight my way back to feeling human again.

Before you fly off the handle of political correctness, I strongly encourage you to spend some time with people who have honestly tried to rebuild their lives after losing a good paying job, but failed. Those who have put years into it, who have worked the minimum wage jobs, lost their houses, or been told time and time again they're "too old".

Please try to take the time to understand that rape isn't alone in being a life-changing negative event. Trivializing job loss - especially career loss - is every bit as asinine as trivializing rape.

There are those who feel that in this thread I have trivialized rape. I honestly don't believe I have. I believe, instead, that the people who decry my comparison are trivializing the long term emotional damage that forced career loss can - and does - have on many people in our society.

I also believe that such comparisons must be made, if we are ever to force ourselves - and our society as a whole - to confront the problem and find solutions that preserve the dignity of those affected. Hate me if you want to; that is what - to me - this thread has been about.

1
5
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Many of us are forced to use MS Software

Man, I miss those little plastic "cheet sheets" we used to stick on the keyboard above the function keys that had all the commands for Word Perfect 5.1. Took a few days, but you got 99.9% of the commands you'd actually use memorized cold. Then, when you had to hunt for one, it was right there, on your keyboard.

I can't remember, did those come with word perfect, or were they made by a third party?

3
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: rant-like journalism

The thing is, ADHD isn't something that you "might have, but we can't prove". We absolutely can prove whether or not you have it. Putting someone on Dexedrine for a week will make a proper doctor 95% certain. If - for whatever reason - they were less than certain, 1/2 hr in an MRI would tell you beyond any reasonable doubt.

We've come a long way since the 1980s.

I submit, sir, that you may be laboring under prejudices about ADHD that are not valid in proper clinical practice. Your prejudice may be understandable - as it is a natural human impulse to link abuse of the drugs used in the treatment of a disease with the disease itself - but I honestly believe that sort of prejudice is as much a part of the problem as the past tendency towards overdiagnosis.

Neither mental illness nor pharmacology should not be taboo. Instead, education and open discussion should be the norm, so that we can all better understand the conditions, the treatments, the ramifications...and the abuses.

I'm sorry we're at odds on that belief, but I hope, in time, society catches up to the point that such debates are no longer necessary.

3
2
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Many of us are forced to use MS Software

"The rape analogy would get many people fired, most commentards on hand moderation and is plain ridiculous. The asshole remark surely would..."

I'm sorry you feel that way, and I genuinely apologize if I've offended. That said, I do feel that in this case the comparison is, in fact, valid.

This isn't like an employer setting a rule and the employee having to obey. It's so much bigger than that. The employer doesn't even have a choice here. It absolutely is an individual (well, a company) in an unapproachably powerful position simply forcing their will on others.

Now, in and of itself, there's no way that's like rape. There are a number of avenues available to the individual in any rational society to address this. Starting with "asking the developer to provide choice", through to "getting lots of others to raise their voices in unison" and so forth.

But that gets very different when we talk about "submit or find a different career". If those are the only two choices allowed then I very much so believe that has parallels with any number of traumatic events you could name.

To be clear: I am very specifically comparing the idea that an individual should have no choice but to choose between dramatic career change and accepting a UI they don't like as putting that individual in a massively negative place where they would feel helpless, hopeless, without power or recourse and for the stupidest and most unbelievably fucked up of trivial reasons. So fucked up that - to me at least - is absolutely is as crazy as saying depriving someone of their power via rape is okay "because they wore the wrong thing".

Any rational society would allow for an entire universe of possible alternative actions and outcomes. "A third party is going to impose a change you don't like. If you don't like it, quit and/or change careers" is completely disproportionate. Somewhere in there should be the ability to ask why this change is occurring. To seek alternatives to this change.

Nobody should have the right to tell you should be made to change careers because you don't like a UI.

I accept the possibility that this just means my outlook on life is horribly skewed and that I, in fact, am the bad person. Hell, I'd be barking mad not to believe that could be the case.

...but I see in both cases an overwhelming and unstoppable force saying that something massively negative should occur to an individual for the most trivial and outright insane of reasons. If you believe that makes me a bad person, I accept that. Maybe I am.

In the meantime, however, I will continue to believe that the guy who suggests changing careers is the appropriate response to an enforced UI change is the bad person.

0
3
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Many of us are forced to use MS Software

"people are quite able to ask Microsoft to give them the choice, and Microsoft are quite able to go "no, that will cost us too much to develop and make the software more complicated"."

And that's between the end user (or the business owner) and Microsoft. There's no call to tell someone "if you don't like what's there, go get a job that doesn't use computers." That's not okay at all.

"Besides, even if there was an implemented choice on whether to use the ribbon or not, the vast majority of users wouldn't get to make it - it'd be the IT hell desk deciding on their behalf, just like they do with a huge number of settings on corporate desktops."

And that's where it becomes between the business and the employee. I agree that some - but by no means all - businesses would remove choice from the end user. In most instances, I find that defaults are applied as part of policy, but with a level of customizability being allowed. (The level varying between organizations).

"It's not about choice - there's very good reasons for offering choice, and there's very good reasons for denying them - it's about people getting upset that things have changed."

Wrong. It's about choice. The choice I have as a business owner, for example. There are plenty of industry-specific applications for which no alternative exists that must run on Windows. Now the Ribbon Bar is part of the most fundamental parts of windows - such as Windows Explorer - and can't be avoided. Why shouldn't I be able to ask Microsoft to retain the option for traditional menus? Why shouldn't I encourage others who would like the same choice to also ask Microsoft for that choice?

Microsoft can say no - in which case my opinion of Microsoft as a supplier will diminish - but what business is it of yours (or anyone else's) that I ask Microsoft for that choice? What business is it of yours if I feel that Microsoft are less worthy as a supplier for not offering the choice, even as a paid option?

"If you don't like how things change in a job - be that equipment provided, management style or even staff room perks, sometimes it becomes necessary to move on, be that to a new company or career. It happens to people daily, with a lot less negative effects than being raped for "wearing the wrong clothes"."

But this isn't just about a decision made by management. Management never had a choice to make. That choice was removed from them; and from everyone. And the discussion wasn't left at "if you don't like change in a company, leave that company". Very specifically the suggestion was made to even go so far as to change careers to the point that one worked in a career without computers at all.

At this point, in 2014, that is recommending that someone make a change in career with massive qualitative - and income - implications.

I absolutely do not get how a potentially massive quality of life change is a rational or acceptable expected response to a desire for choice in a software UI?

We're not talking about a minor change like "how the tables are laid out in the break room". This is closer to the world's overwhelmingly dominant semi truck manufacturer changing all the displays on their semi trucks to Klingon, and embedding them in the roof instead of on the dash. In response to drivers wanting the option of buying semi trucks with the displays in English and on the dash you say "if a driver doesn't like the change he should quit, potentially seeking employment where driving isn't involved."

It is a preposterously disproportionate response.

4
2
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: rant-like journalism

You'll note I did advise looking into Dexedrine. Ritalin is far worse than the alternatives.

That said, Caffeine absolutely does have similar - albeit far less powerful - effects to both Ritalin an Dexedrine on individuals with ADHD. As a matter of fact, you are generally advised against combining them - especially during the initial dose-adjustment phase - for exactly that reason. It's hard to know what the right dose is for you if you are pounding back the caffeine as well.

Also: "having a low attention span" does not necessarily mean you have ADHD, though it is often a good indicator. ADHD is a very real - and serious - condition that has demonstrable physiological effects. You can place a person under an MRI and see differences in how their brain responds under certain conditions than a normal person.

ADHD is typically over-diagnosed in children. That said, it is often under-diagnosed in adults. Many doctors - to say nothing of lay practitioners - still labour under the belief that you can be "cured" of ADHD simply by wishing it away, or as a condition of "growing into adulthood. This is false.

As I stated in my comment above:everyone can - and does - suffer from decision fatigue. (Though "willpower fatigue" is a lot rarer.) ADHD people can vary from individuals with decision fatigue resistance and willpower close to that of a normal person - and thus an attention span close to that of a normal person - to those who are overwhelmed by choices before they even leave the front door for work.

If someone is honestly easily distractable then it absolutely is worth their while to investigate whether or not they have adult ADHD. From there, they can look at different treatment modalities.

The quickest way to tell if you have ADHD is honestly to take a mild dose of Dexidrine for a week. If you have ADHD, you'll know. It will change your life.

However, once you have been identified as having adult ADHD there is nothing that says you are restricted to pharmacological treatment modalities, and I would strongly encourage people to look at the alternatives.

Meditative techniques worked (mostly) for me. They get me to the point that I can deal with my ADHD using just caffiene, and I don't have to rely on Dexedrine except on my worst days. There is also neurofeedback. This is basically a means of gamifying the same sorts of neural patterns you learn through meditation. Neither of these work on everyone with ADHD.

Make no mistake: meditative or neurofeedback techniques for resolving ADHD will not cure it. They do not allow you to just "will yourself better". What they do is provide you a coping mechanism that allows you to become more functional than you would otherwise be, and they offer a tradeoff point between the capabilities provided by stimulants like Dexedrine and Ritalin and the fog of not treating ADHD at all.

In addition to the above:

Ritalin and Dexedrine are amphetamines. They absolutely will have massively deleterious side effects on individuals without ADHD. They should only ever be taken with the consent - and ongoing support and monitoring - of a qualified physician. They absolutely will affect individuals with ADHD completely differently than they will affect individuals without ADHD. (Just as Caffeine will, incidentally, but the effect of Caffeine is so much lower that it's hard to judge in many people.)

It is for this reason that these drugs are prescription, and why monitoring and support by a qualified physician is so important. They will - or should, if they are any good at their job - look for the signs that verify that individual indeed has ADHD (and thus can benefit from the drug in question) and will absolutely not allow a non-ADHD individual to continue use.

All of that said, don't dismiss ADHD as some myth. It's not...and identifying and treating it will make for a huge positive quality of life improvement in anyone unfortunate enough to have it. If I seem passionate about it, well...it's because I am.

I've known about my ADHD my whole life, but my wife was only diagnosed (and began treatment) about a year ago. It absolutely changed her life. Getting her ADHD under control allowed her the ability to start doing tasks she otherwise found overwhelming, and this massively changed her self confidence and self image. It ultimately led to notable change in the lows and the frequency what had been episodes of clinical depression.

So yeah...why not talk about these sorts of things? Why the social taboo around mental illness? It is the fact that we choose to laugh uncomfortably about these things and mock those who discuss them that makes them so much harder to deal with.

If there's evidence that attention span may be a problem, I say take the time and effort out to see if it might be indicative of something more serious. If so, it could be that some fairly small changes could lead to a happier, more productive you.

4
4
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Many of us are forced to use MS Software

"Anybody who has "massive and traumatic change" forced on them by the presence of the ribbon is not somebody I'd want to share an office with. How would they react when we run out of digestives in the staff room?"

Where did I say that the presence of the ribbon was "massive and traumatic change"? I very specifically</I. called out an anonymous coward's comment that said people who didn't want to deal with the ribbon should change jobs - or careers - even to the point of ones without computers involved.

"PS - loving the strawman you've erected - changing career isn't the alternative to offering a choice of UI. "

That is <i>exactly</i> the choice that that suggested be made by the anonymous coward to whom I was responding, you pompous, arrogant gasbag.

"Changing career is an option for those who are unable / unwilling to continue to use certain software."

So is "asking the developer to offer a choice of UIs." In fact, "asking the developer to offer a choice of UIs" is <i>far more rational than "changing careers". It's even an option that doesn't negatively affect others. Holy pants, batman, what a fucking concept.

"There are many other less extreme options available too, such as moving to another department, recommending against using the new version which contains the hated feature, or even developing a solution to patch the offensive software so that it becomes usable again."

All of which are still dramatically more extreme than "asking the developer to offer a choice of UIs". The developer could even charge for the functionality.

Yet in your world, asking the developer for choice is anathema. Those who do so are deserving of denigration and disrespect, but telling them to go work in a job without computers is a perfectly rational thing to do?

What the metric fnord is wrong with you?

7
4
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Many of us are forced to use MS Software

"I, too, get downvoted or flamed if I admit that I like some of the tricks that Access and One Note can do. But not as badly as the time I criticised St Snowden."

You folks do realise that the world isn't black and white, right? Liking something the Microsoft has to offer doesn't mean you like everything Microsoft does, or says, or sells. Similarly, liking something non-Microsoft - or even hating something Microsoft - doesn't mean a dislike for all things Microsoft.

What's even more shocking, is that you can like something Microsoft offers, but still believe that they should offer a choice of options to others.

I, for example, like most Microsoft technologies. I think Windows is a great operating system...and Windows 10, even in the technical preview stage, is easily the best yet.

I love Windows Server 2012 R2, but I'm less of a fan of Windows Server 10. I also love CentOS 6...but think that systemd - and thus CentOS 7 - can go straight to hell.

I think that how Microsoft treats customers, partners and end users is appalling, but I cannot deny the strength and capability of technologies like SQL server, Exchange or Microsoft Dynamics.

I think you'll find that it isn't a like or dislike something that sets the internet hate machine upon you. It is either A) stating that your anecdotal experience has been X and thus nobody else should have a problem or B) taking an extremist point of view that says other people shouldn't be allowed choice.

Which keeps coming back to the concept of "invalidating the preferences of others" as being that which attracts the internet hate machine. Believe whatever you want, in your own church. Just don't start demanding that the rights of others be curtailed because of your religion.

A group of people saying "Microsoft, please give us a choice of UIs" is a group of people asking that Microsoft respect the preferences of others, while at the same time respecting their preferences. It's is about living together in harmony.

A group of people saying "Microsoft, only have the UI I like and never allow choice for those others who have different preferences" is about a notable lack of respect for others. It is about forcing one's belief system on others; it is about arrogance and a sense of haughty superiority.

I've seen plenty of discussions on these forums about the positive aspects of Microsoft technologies, features and services where people in no way get viciously downvoted for talking openly about liking them. I thus submit that demonstrating respect for the preferences of others (or a lack thereof) is in most cases going to be the deciding factor in the number of downvotes you attract.

There absolutely are some real Microsoft haters here who loathe all Microsoft technologies and services...but they are emphatically in the minority. We all have to live with these technologies...and most of us respect them. Respecting the individuals, departments or even entire corporations who make asinine decisions that demonstrate huge disrespect for preferences - or requirements - of others can be and often is separate from respect for the technology produced by those people/departments/companies.

And for the record, OneNote is awesome. I really like the Android version; it's pretty much the only thing that makes the pen on my Note 2 worth a damn.

6
2
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Many of us are forced to use MS Software

Telling someone that should not have the right to ask a developer to include a choice of UIs, but should instead quit their job and change careers in order to change UIs is absolutely, 100% as arrogant and horrible as justifying rape by saying that the clothing someone worse justified the action.

Both cases are attempting to say that the desire of an individual to exercise a fairly minor amount of choice - asking a developer to offer a choice of UIs or choosing to wear $clothing_style - somehow justifies forcing massive and traumatic change on a person.

"Go find a job that doesn't use computers" is the equivalent of telling someone "give up your current upper middle class job and go get a job that is minimum wage" because....they want to ask the developer of an application to provide a choice of UIs?!?

Yeah, you know what? That's pretty goddamned fucked up. That is fucked right the hell up. That is easily as fucked up as saying anything justifies rape.

And the inevitable argument "well you wouldn't have to change careers if you'd just learn to like the new UI " is exactly as fucked up as saying to someone "well, you wouldn't have been raped if you'd just worn different clothes."

The loss of a job - let alone the requirement to change careers to something so dramatic as "does not use computers" if fucking traumatic. It absolutely can impart the very same feelings of loss of control, worthlessness and so forth as rape.

Now, admittedly, rape tends to have a higher instance of PTSD after the event, but the effects for people who have be forced from a job - especially in situations where they cannot hope to return to a job as lucrative as the one they were forced from - absolutely have been known to have massively long term effects on individuals, including PTSD. In many places - Japan, for example - job related stresses, mostly related to difficulties in retention, competitiveness and downwards wage pressures - have led to an epidemic of suicides.

So yeah, casually suggesting that people just go our an change careersbecause they shouldn't have the right to ask a developer to offer a choice of user interface options is just as fucked up as making fun of rape. That individual is completely trivializing the very real world - and very traumatic to a great many people - impacts of career loss.

Comparing that to rape is not trivializing rape at all, but hopefully will serve to help you understand the very real importance and seriousness of the implications in what that individual has suggested.

15
7
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Many of us are forced to use MS Software

"There are many many jobs out there that don't involve using Microsoft software, or even computers."

In essence, you are saying that individuals who find a given user interface onerous, unintuitive and detrimental to productivity should change careers instead of telling the developer "give us the choice of your old UI or the new one".

That level of arrogance is, in my mind, equal to:

:"Your honour, if you'd seen what she was wearing, you's know that she was asking for it".

...and I have for you the same level of contempt as I would the asshole who would use such an argument. You're a bad person.

21
7
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: rant-like journalism

That's why I recommended Dextroamphetamine. Honestly, as someone with some hardcore adult ADD - my wife has ADHD as well, as do several of our friends and family - it's worth considering. The two biggest symptoms of adult ADD/ADHD are "decreased willpower" and "decreased ability to focus."

Everyone has something called "decision exhaustion", where we find it harder to make decisions as the day goes on. Little decisions eat into our ability. Do we have toast, or a bagel? The blue pants, or the red?

But ADHD individuals have a dramatically increased susceptibility to decision fatigue, and this gets coupled with "willpower fatigue" to leave us unable to force ourself to focus. And we must - it is an exercise of will for us to focus - because our brains are structurally different from normal people.

Stimulants - Ritalin, Dexedrine, Caffeine, etc - basically chemically provide us with a boost to our willpower and decision-making capabilities. It varies based ont eh chemical and individual, but it's why it works for us. (I could go into a lot more scientific depth, bu you do have Google right there.)

If you have trouble reading through a three-page article then the chances are really good that you have adult ADHD. And it isn't an attempt at insult to suggest that trying standard therapies could lead to increased quality of life. From one person who struggles with ADHD: don't knock it until you've tried it. If you do have the same neural structural issues that the make ADHD people what we are, then you might be shocked at just how big a difference it can honestly make.

P.S. also Google "hyperfocus". It's a skill - and a curse - unique to people with true ADD/ADHD. It is worth some time and research into it's capabilities...and it's downsides.

11
10
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: About-face

I never had a problem with being tracked in the technical preview. I had - and have - problems with the inability to turn this stuff off, or even to know what is tracking me and why. And for all the reasons that were explained in the article...and in the subsequent posts to the very thread you linked.

I do, however, find it curious you left out the conversation that starts here, however, as it is closely related and relevant as a progression of the dialogue.

I strongly encourage anyone interested to read both threads in their totality. Good points were raised by a number of people.

5
4
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: rant-like journalism

Have you considered Dextroamphetamine? It tends to help with gnat-like attention spans.

13
16

Apple's new 'iPad Air 2' sliced open, revealing (possible) A8X core

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Minor bump

Honest curiosity: were you running up against the 1GB limit on your existing iPad? So far, I've been able to do everything I can think of on my Mini Retina. My Galaxy Note 2, OTOH, runs up against it's RAM limits every few months. (Probably have more background services on the Note 2).

Curious if that's just Apple's different design, or if my experience is uncommon.

1
1

Trolls have DARK TETRAD of personality defects, say trickcyclists

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

@Chemist pokerface.jpg

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

"There's the kind of people who are actively trying to get down-votes and negative responses as some sort of weird validation of their existence. I suppose you could argue that's low self-esteem, but I think in a lot of cases it is because they feel that they've successfully pushed people's buttons and got their sadistic pleasure out of pissing them off. It's not a notion I can really understand. I also get the imporession it makes some of them feel that they're showing their superior intelect, and the sheeple's failure to agree with them is yet more proof of their stupidity."

I don't know. I've been trying to get to 2500 global downvotes on El Reg for like 8 months. It's harder than you'd think. Currently, it's a race to see what milestone is fit first: 15K upvotes, or 2.5K downvotes. In total, your posts have been upvoted 14547 times and downvoted 2430 times.

But for me, "trolling" has little to do with sadism. Curiosity, yes. Understanding people. Seeing what makes them tick. Finding that sensitive nerve that says "investigate here".

There are trolls that troll in order to hurt. And there are trolls that troll because they're bored. There are even trolls that troll as a defense mechanism because their sense of self-esteem is so low that they need to lash out preemptively. I think I've been in one of those positions in at least one thread in my life, but I can't say that any of them really sum up my motivations, and I've been described by more than one person as "a professional troll".

Quite frankly, it's a label I'm okay with. Mostly because I view trolling as "shit disturbing". Motivations differ, but the results are always "saying the things you're not supposed to say" usually after "asking questions you're not supposed to ask".

But I think that the questions you're not supposed to ask produce the best answers. They are the questions that need to be asked. Thus, in truth, I think every good investigative journalist is - at heart - something of a troll. Not because we enjoy the pain or angst of others, but because we do throw shit against the wall to get a reaction...and the reactions we get give us clues on where to dig deeper.

Thus, I think you're very right: definitions and nomenclature matter. Like "hacker", the term "troll" has become diluted. Who is one? What are the qualifications? And what then do we call people who engage in troll-like behaviors, but without the motivations described in the research in the article?

5
5
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

I don't know about Machiavellianism. I also question narcissism. Most trolls don't seem particularly Machiavellian. I'd even go so far as to say there's a strong contingent of highly collectivist trolls out there. As for narcissism...seems to me a lot of the trolly folks are not so much "obsessed with self" as "possessed of a desperately bad self image".

Maybe they are talking about the creme-de-la-creme of trolls. Seems to me that most of those I've run across over the years wouldn't really fit at least two out of the five categories all that well...while others would fit all five to a tee.

Maybe there is a category of sub troll? Goblins, perhaps?

5
2

Jony Ive: Flattered by rivals' designs? Nah, its 'theft'

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge
Pint

Re: Those in glass houses, Sir Jony...getting all bent out of shape

I have a Mac Mini Retina, not an iPhone! Get it right, man! I'm sticking with my Note 2 until something compelling shows up to to convince me it's worth the hassle to switch.

Egads, kids these days, never reading...

5
2
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Those in glass houses, Sir Jony...

@SuccessCase I absolutely do take offense to a broad generalization whose very clear aim was to paint techies as "generally non creative" and to indicate that those with creative skills were rare. That's a bunch of bullshit and you know it.

The number of techies lacking creative capacity is miniscule. In my experience the non-creative techies could be easily outweighed by the number of arrogant twunts that inhabit the average forum. I seem to be able to find techies with creative capacity all around the world. Pretty much wherever I look, as a matter of fact. A very minor amount of training and they're able to do exercise that creative talent professionally.

Quite the opposite is something I find true. People who trained to be "creative" first seem really bloody hard to train to be techies. Not impossible - I've trained a few myself over the years - but a lot harder than helping a techie unleash their creative capability.

What saddens me is when the only creative capacity that some individuals have is rabid fanboyism tied to misplaced brand tribalism. Those people are just wastes of carbon.

20
3
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: "Flat" design

@Doug S

$deity I hope skeumorphism stays a dead fashion. What an 80s-class trainwreck that was. "Creativity" my chrome-plated ASCII!

5
5

This post has been deleted by a moderator

To Russia With Love: Snowden's pole-dancer girlfriend is living with him in Moscow

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Happy for them both. Nice to see good things still happen in this world.

26
1

US astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson: US is losing science race

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Craving Attention

Neil deGrasse Tyson > you

10
2

'A motivated, funded, skilled hacker will always get in' – Schneier

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: off topic, & i apologise in advance

No.

You're not access TOR services by IP. You're accessing them through TOR. Think of TOR more like a VPN, but made out of a different protocol. Your IP connects you to the TOR network. But thins occurring inside TOR don't occur with your ISP-provided external IP.

TOR is essentially a distributed message bus. You don't really do peer-to-peer anything, and even if you did, you wouldn't be talking "your external IP to their external IP". It would be more like "your temporary TOR GUID to their semi-permenant TOR GUID". Where the GUID of the service is periodically changed and re-announced to TOR's service directory (like a DNS server).

Remember, your access to TOR is always gated by your first-hop node into the service.

So you could track a TOR GUID, but converting a TOR GUID into an IPv4 or IPv6 globally reachable IP address? You have ot wait for them to fuck up and reveal it. (Or you control all access points to TOR and you do traffic pattern matching, but that's another story....)

2
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Everybody wants a free lunch

And with what resources do you propose we "take security seriously?"

Good security is expensive. In someone's time or in money to buy good products. Usually both. That's a business decision; techies don't get to make those.

Throw in the "security versus usability" arguments, and add a dash of the current data sovereignty mess and you have a huge question around "who's stuff do you buy, and can you really trust them?"

Even for those of us who know what's what, it always comes back to money. Nobody's willing to spend on it. Not even IT companies. All they want is for you to buy cloud solutions. American cloud solutions.

So the choices we face seem to be "caught in the bottom of a dark pit surrounded by strange noises without the money to buy a ladder" or "in a wide open feild covered in gasoline with yankee politicians playing with matches at the edge of the feild."

Well, shit.

4
0

Look ma, no hands! The machines are speaking our language

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Ah, Dragon. Some times, you get an idea. Dictate into the recorder on your smartphone, then feed the wav file into Dragon.

*poof* An article appears. Love it.

1
1

Sh** just got real: Amazon to open actual shop in New York City

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumers_Distributing for an example of the pre-internet version of this exact model.

2
0

I want to TRANSPLANT your storage BRAINS: WD desktop NAS refresh

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Beyond RAID

The issue isn't speed loss. the issue is "likelihood of experiencing an Unrecoverable Read Error (URE) during rebuild, thus causing a second disk to drop." Also Google "rebuild stress".

There are two schools of thought on this:

1) "Disk manufacturer failure statistics are so low that URE issues during rebuild are just a boogyman".

Pro: The statement is partially correct. Manufacturer stats do basically say disks don't die.

Con: Manufacturers lie. Whether the disk can be "reconditioned" or not is completely irrelevant. What matters is "did it drop out from the RAID". Here, statistics on UREs during rebuild are much higher.

2) "Disks in RAID arrays tend to be bought at the same time, from the same place. Since bad disks tend to occur in runs, if one disk fails, there's a good chance it's neighbor will fail soon thereafter!"

Pro: The beginning of the statement is true. Disks in any given array are probably from the same run of drives, and a "bad" run will have more disks than the mean fail.

Con: Your chances of this being an issue in a 4-disk array are statistically irrelevant. "Same run" deaths tend to be something you encounter when talking about 24-36 disks in a given array, and it is one of the reasons we've tended to limit arrays to 16 disks. Statistically speaking, your chances of getting a defective pair in an 8 disk array - even from a bad run - is vanishingly small. RAID 6 (tolerating 2 disk failures) seems to scale well up to 36 disks.

Of course, all of this was dun in the era of 2TB drives being "the new shiznizzle". The estimates then were that 4TB would be the end of RAID 5 (and that matches my experience, TBH), with 8TB being the end of RAID 6. (And guess what comes out this month...)

RAID is not totally dead, but it's on life support. It's object storage or nothing from here on out. Even triple parity is just delaying the inevitable. Server SANs do object storage for VMs. For everything file, look to companies like Caringo.

3
0

An EMC-HP Borg cube will totally ANNIHILATE its storage worlds

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Going to Pott

"Was your mother frightened by an EMC salesman while you were in the womb?"

Nope. I couldn't give a bee's bollocks about EMC. Not my job to care. It is, however, my job to investigate. To ask questions others don't want asked and to root and the answers people don't want told.

Interesting nerve I touched...

0
2
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Since when has EMC given fucks about the politics of the situation? The EMC federation is a terrifying morass of backstabbing and fifedom-guarding. VMware has been repeatedly described as being a political "thermonuclear wasteland" and EMC isn't heaps better.

I believe you underestimate the egos of the people involved. They honestly think they can just "win" because they're that much "better" than everyone else. All evidence to the contrary. The EMC federation is not where sanity or rationality rest for long.

3
2

Storage startups: Hey VCs, it's not just the size, it's the frequency

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

The storage wars are over. Server SANs won. Everything else is just jockeying for position. Arrays will begin their gradual decline. It'll take 25 years for them to fully evaporate down to their concentrated remainder, but they'll follow mainframes as a zombie tech.

In the meantime and between time, it's all about who can provide the best server SAN. After that comes rolling in other features to help migrate people to server SANs. (Datacore, anyone?) Then maybe arrays to deal with niches or as a temporary point solution.

*shrug*

Software defined network is the new battleground, and with it, the first real skirmishes that will mark the beginning of the software defined infrastructure wars.

0
3

Windows 10's 'built-in keylogger'? Ha ha, says Microsoft – no, it just monitors your typing

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: That means Trevor Pott was right

Aye, if I could get a macbook with a real keyboard, I'd be a devout Apple Fanboi. Sadly, I need both delete and backspace. I'm too old to rewire that one.

0
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: That means Trevor Pott was right

Eh? I use Windows 7 on my laptop. I use CentOS on my servers. I do have a laptop with Mint, but that's my security unit.

Honestly, the instant that Wayland is fully baked, I'm leaving Windows behind. FreeRDP server was incorporated into Weston and it provides a fully modern RDP experience for remote work. That's all that was ever really missing from Linux in order for it to be my primary environment. I prefer working via VDI for a large number of reasons.

As an endpoint OS, I prefer a heavily modified Windows 7 environment to pretty much everything else I've used. Though Windows 10 has some very serious potential to be every bit as usable.

The problem is Microsoft itself. I just don't trust them. They've screwed me over and over and I am absolutely, 100% convinced they'll do it again. They are emphatically not honorable, which means that no matter how good their technology is it simply does not matter.

Microsoft could have the best technology in the world - in some niches they do, in others they emphatically don't - but that's just not enough. I can't do business with, trust my business to and ultimately trust my privacy to a company I can't trust.

That's before we even get into the rank madness that is Microsoft's VDI and SPLA licensing, the #1 reason behind my philosophical (and monetary) support of various open source projects.

Linux doesn't have to be the best at all things to be usable. Microsoft sure as hell isn't the best at a great many things and it's used in all sorts of bizarre places. What Linux has to be is trustworthy. I am not talking here about "bug free". No software from any vendor will ever be that.

I am talking here about the ability to run the software without fear of jackbooted sociopaths and their hellspawn laywers showing up to annihilate your business because you did something that seems perfectly rational to ordinary people but violates some obscure clause of a licensing agreement.

Spending half a year's revenue on licensing only to find out that the specific implementation you wanted isn't covered in that particular scenario can end a business. Usually because the alternative licensing either simply isn't possible or costs 20x the company's yearly revenue.

Trust is the knowledge that if I don't like something - from a UI element to an API change - there is the option to simply not participate. Linux can be - and is - forked when someone does something asinine. Windows users just have to close their eyes and think of England.

For all your snarky sniping and your dedicated vitriolic fanboy bullshit, Mr Anonymous Shill, you never do address these issues. And at the end of the day, I'm just tired of fighting the battle. Against Microsoft, against you, against the legion of paid "evangelists" that make truly obscene money to "control the message".

I'm tired. Tired of Microsoft. Tired of their licensing bullshit. Tired of having to worry about being in compliance with some stipulation about how I can use software that I paid for.

Make your jokes, spread your lies and be damned. I'm absolutely going to put my time and my money into Linux for the simple reason that it has become the path of least resistance. It takes less effort. It takes less learning. It takes less fighting and it just costs less, in time and in money.

Technology isn't enough. I buy computers because I actually want to use them. Not because I want to spend my time managing them, or dealing with the legal logistics of licensing them. For a computer you can actually use, it sure looks to me like one of the only choices left is some variety of Linux.

Cheers.

13
1
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: That means Trevor Pott was right

I read the EULA start to finish. I encourage everyone to do so. It is, in point of fact, the best written, easiest to understand, most "plain English" EULA I've ever read. It is an example of how to do an EULA right.

It doesn't have all the detail about exactly what methods they will use to spy on you, but it's pretty explicit that they will, and they'll be cavalier about it.

My issues were "what was causing the data leak" and "why can't I turn the taps off".* Because knowing how it all works is my job. And by knowing how it works in the preview we know what to look for in the release version.

As it turns out, the stuff I couldn't find and kill in the OS itself was Windows Store apps phoning home, even when not open. And they sent a lot of data. Uninstall them, and I only saw the traffic I'd expect to see from a surveillance an instrumented OS.

Most importantly, I reported all my findings to Microsoft via their "Microsoft Feedback" tool. Which, just by the by, you need to convert your Windows into a cloud-attached Microsoft Login setup to do. And that means that you can't say no to Skydrive. And...

Anyways, short version: I have problems with choices made in how Microsoft has designed the privacy and security elements of the OS that have nothing at all to do with Microsoft instrumenting a technical preview. Most of my issues are with stuff I fully expect to be in the shipping OS.

What I want is an operating system that is "privacy first, security first". What Microsoft wants is an operating system that is "cloud first, mobile first". We are probably never going to see eye to eye on this; our interests are diametrically opposed.

But, it is my actual job to download, install and play with the technical preview, the beta, and every other version that happens along. I'm a technology journalist. It's what I get paid to do.

If folks are shocked and shaken that I do so, then actually talk about the issues I uncover...well, then I don't understand why they read technology magazines - or the forums on those technology magazines - at all. It seems to me that they are actually going out of their way to expose themselves to the sort of information, opinions and facts that they explicitly want to avoid. (Or want to avoid until the final version is out.)

If anyone wants to pillory me for doing my job of investigating new technology, go right ahead. Honestly, after a few years, you really do get used to it.

*There is also an issue of what the defaults are, and the fact that turning things off doesn't actually turn them off in the preview, as well as that controls don't seem to exist in the UI for half the data collection points. But, to be honest, I'm willing to overlook those in a technical preview, though I do comment on their existence and I have reported this all to Microsoft.

11
0

Microsoft: Yeah, about that 50% post-Christmas customer price hike...

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Fuck you, Microsoft

May your reign last hours, and your death years.

35
2

Verizon: We're throttling broadband. FCC: WTF? Verizon: Lol, jk!

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Yup

Thanks for confirming your biases, anonymous coward. You believe that anyone who actually wants what they pay for is "demanding a free lunch" because you believe that it is the duty of every "consumer" to simply pay whatever they're told; in your world consumers exist to serve the cartels and are otherwise without value or rights.

Netflix is allowed to create hugely asymmetrical traffic into an "access network". That's what access networks do; they provide access for the end user to content out on the internet. There's no other reason for Comcast to exist other than to provide it's users hugely asymmetrical access to content that resides on other networks.

We pay our ISPs to build that access network and to ensure they have enough interconnection with other networks that we get the data we request. We don't pay them to maintain some 1990s false economy concept of "peering is free only when network exchange roughly equal amounts of information".

That's long dead. We're not a bunch of text-based academic networks anymore. Content lives in a handful of big sources now. Without the ability to access that content, there's no reason to have an access network in the first place or for all those millions of customers to pay the ISP the monthly bill.

Comcast doesn't like this reality. They think that because they have the subscribers by the short and curlies that they can play dirty in order to get Netflix to agree to cough up all the revenue they're losing from cord cutters who are saying "no more cable TV". There is even quite a bit of evidence that Comcast was massively throttling Netflix before they finally capitulated and agreed to pay.

Note that Netflix agreeing to pay to peer directly with Comcast isn't evidence that Cogent wasn't up to the job. All it shows is that Netflix wasn't going to pay Cogent and then Comcast as well.

And that is the original source of the disagreement, just by the by. Comcast (and a couple others) getting butthurt by the fact that Netflix traffic grew so fast, so quickly that their existing agreements for peering with companies like Cogent started to look like something they weren't able to monetize to their liking. They started to demand that Netflix - and a couple of others - pay to push that traffic on top of the existing agreements, and refused to increase peering bandwidth with anyone carrying traffic from Netflix et al until they capitulated.

Netflix was perfectly happy having an intermediary do the transferring because it meant they built one point of interconnection and the rest was the intermediary's problem. Instead, they ended up with a series of messy peering arrangements directly with the access network providers each of which continually tries to shake down Netflix for more money.

That is exactly the position Netflix didn't want to be in. Now every time renegotiation comes around they get to play the same stupid games with these monopolistic cable cos as they play with the traditional content providers. Blacking out shows, threatening not to run season enders or other such pap.

I don't think anyone would have a problem with a transparent where Netflix is jacked directly into the access network. in that case it isn't so much "peering" as "that provider is now one of the ISPs for Netflix."

But the problem comes when companies like Comcast start shaking down companies using third party transit providers that already have agreements. Netflix pays their transit provider. Who pays whom to get bits and bytes on or off of Comcast's network at that point is 100% between the access provider and Comcast. At no point should the traffic origin matter.

No internet service provider should be allowed to charge anyone different amounts based on the origin or destination of the traffic*. Everyone connected to a network should pay for the total traffic load they put onto the network.

The end user pays for what they upload and what they download. Business users, colocation facilities, datacenters and so forth pay for what they upload and download. Peering with other networks is trickier, but generally can go up to a 5:1 access to transit ratio (sometimes higher) before money is requested, because the access networks know that without the "big content" on the transit networks, there's not much reason for them to be.

But you don't turn around to a peer and say "pay me more because you carry Netflix". You don't tell a peer "we won't increase interconnect with you or even negotiate with you becausse you carry Netflix". You don't blackmail individual content providers into directly interconnecting with your network, and you don't don't individual content providers "you pay more to put traffic on our network than peers or other datacenters/enterprise customers/etc because you're Netflix".

That's what network neutrality is all about. It isn't about getting "a free lunch". It's about treating traffic equally. Everyone pays. And everyone pays only once. And nobody gets to discriminate and nobody gets to blackmail.

It's about dealing fairly, and about preventing any one entity from using control of their piece of the pie to beat others into submission.

If Netflix turned around tomorrow and said "we're blocking Comcast customers" I'd be the first to say "not cool, Netflix." The problems are many, and only actually legislating net neutrality will help.

Right now, there is fuck all to prevent any given party from bullying the other, and the concept of "he who has the biggest stick wins" is completely unacceptable.

Right now, there is no means of arbitration for disputes except the courts, which take forever and don't have the understanding to make a rational decision here.

Right now, we have the same companies owning access networks, traditional content distribution networks and content creation networks. There are massive conflicts of interest.

At the core of it is this concept: no company should be able to use a dominant position in one market to create a dominant position in another market. This is exactly what Comcast is attempting to do, and it's absolutely unacceptable.

I am - to a limited extent, and only if used with care and for sound technical reasons - okay with prioritizing traffic under two scenarios:

1) traffic is prioritized based on content type, but explicitly not on source or destination. E.G. voice & video (which are latency sensitive) prioritized over other traffic. But it isn't okay to prioritize "VOIP from Comcast" while degrading Skype, or VOIP from another competitor. It also isn't okay to prioritize "video from Comcast" while throttling (or leaving prioritized) "video from Netflix". If you prioritize traffic from one class, you do it for all examples of that class to and from all sources. Period.

2) traffic that is classified as "emergency services" traffic. This could be - and I'd argue should be - hashed out in legislation. Traffic to/from police, fire, medical and rescue services should take priority over all other traffic. We are an increasingly internet dependent society, and in an emergency traffic to/from emergency services is all that matters.

I'm not saying Comcast - or any network provider - doesn't have the right to try to make a profit form their investment. By all means; they should do so. They take the risk, they invest in infrastructure, they should structure their business and price their wares such that they can stay in the black.

But they should not be allowed to build barriers to entry for competitors looking to enter the market. (See laws they've managed to push through that say "no other companies shall be allowed to lay fibre/build out last mile networks/etc." Especially ones that say municipalities or counties aren't allowed to do so.)

And what isn't okay - what never will be okay unless you're a fucking sociopath - is the idea that the economic interests of the company owning the access network should ever allow it to abuse it's role as gatekeeper to restrict or prioritize traffic based on origin or destination. Especially as a means of harming competitors.

Maybe if you give a bent fuck about your fellow man, weren't such a self-absorbed fuck and spent your time doing something other than obsessing about what other people do with their lives you'd be capable of understanding the above.

As it stands, I don't expect that any amount of reading, exposure to facts, or introduction to the real world results of giving ISPs free range to clamp down on competition will make you capable of being informed. You have your agenda - defend crony capitalism and the cartels that make it up - and you'll die before you admit that you're wrong.

Well you have fun with that. You're the digital equivalent of some sad old fuck who still rages about "niggers" being allowed in the same schools as white kids**. You are a representative of an old guard establishment. The rest of us are just waiting for you - and the rest of the aged bastard like you - to just die off and make the world a better place.

Cheers.

*With the possible exception of "on-net" versus "off-net" differentiation (a-la MPLS). This is because it simply costs far less to transit packets across your own network. As soon as it has to peer, then it makes sense to up the rates a little.

**And yes, in case you hadn't notice, network neutrality is a social issue, not one of "wanting to get a free lunch". It's about right of access and the right to be treated without discrimination. It's about customer rights and the role of the individual - and governments - in a society where mega corporations have unprecedented power over all aspects of our lives.

5
0

EU's super-commish for tech: Geo-blocks on cat vids, music – NOT FAIR

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

He says all the right things. So either he's lying, or he's about to get whacked. Nobody that good ever makes it to positions of power in government.

11
5

Desktop, schmesktop: Microsoft reveals next WINDOWS SERVER

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: hate for powershell?

"More mature? How about *old*?"

I have a Sanyo clock radio purchased in 1982 three months before I was born. It is still to this day my primary alarm clock and it still works like a hot damn.

I have an IBM model M purchased 8 months before I was born. It is still to this day my primary keyboard and it still works like a hot damn.

I have a set of stainless steel pots and pans purchased over a decade before I was born. They are still to this day my primary pots and pans and they still work like a hot damn.

I have a blender that was purchased 5 years before I was born. It is still my primary blender to this day and it still works like a hot damn.

Old?

Yes, please!

I can list hundreds of items that are in use in my house that are from before I was fucking born. That makes them well over 30 years old, and they are all still my primary items for those use cases. At various times I have bought "replacements" that were "newer" than each of them. Inevitably, each of those items broke beyond my ability to repair and I went back to the tried and true.

Newer isn't always better. If you cannot grasp that simple, fundamental truth then absolutely nothing else you write is worth listening to. Christ man, you live in a consumerist society, for fuck's sake. And you're peddling "old = bad"?

Read this and for the love of $deity get out and actually gain some worldly experience.

Next, you can go back and actually read what I wrote, and realize that my beef was with the fanboy asshats who propose PowerShell as the only - or at least the primary - means of administration on Windows server. More specifically, those who say stupid things like "GUIs aren't necessary because there's PowerShell", or who propose automating and orchestrating entire datacenters using nothing but PowerShell.

As for "why is Linux better", the poster above me got it dead to rights. Also: flat text > APIs any day of the week. APIs change and evolve, and not everyone is a programmer. Text files change too, but if you can't read you're useless for a systems administrator regardless of the interface.

If you honestly believe that APIs will always be backwards compatible you're naive and deserve what you get.

In all, you come off as someone horribly young. Naieve, easily led, and not having studied history so you can learn from it.

Pity, maybe if you had been born during an era of tools and devices that were generational you might appreciate the value of engineering for quality instead of designing for obsolescence.

1
1

iPAD-FONDLING fanboi sparks SECURITY ALERT at Sydney airport

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: i hate this man

A) Because headphones and/or earplugs don't work. Nothing actually blocks out the shrieking of those awful larva.

B) Because not one of you has yet explained to me why "failure to keep fly zipped/legs closed" somehow grants upon the individual in charge more rights than the entire rest of the plane?

Maybe you think your child is "special". Maybe you believe that parents deserve more rights than other people, or that children deserve special consideration. I don't. And not one of you has given me a reason why I should change my views.

As I see it, we're all equal. If you get bring smell, squealing larva onto the plane to irritate everyone else, why can't I have a boom box? Hmm? Or why can't I scream my head off like a child?

I call for a "children's section" in uber steerage. Walled off from everyone else and sound proofed. Where the larva can scream and shit and run around and affect only themselves. Oh, but that's "demeaning" to the parents somehow? Yet you also maintain it's not demeaning to everyone else to lower their quality of life in order to make the parent feel included.

I don't buy it. Call me whatever names you want. It's 2014. Being a parent is a choice. You chose to conceive and birth that abomination.

I don't see why I should be happy that you make my life miserable just because you make stupid choices. I'm not going to scream at you for doing so, but I sure as hell am not going to smile at you and tell you that everything's cool, and that I am totally chill with your decisions to inflict your poor choices on the rest of us.

1
2

Linux systemd dev says open source is 'SICK', kernel community 'awful'

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: This is the pot calling the kettle black.

Sievers isn't the only problem. Poettering is an ass who can never admit his baby is ugly, and will viciously go after anyone who suggests it is. The both of them are 10,000x worse than Torvalds will ever be. Worse; they're wrong, and Torvalds is right.

Butthurt bastards foisting their abomination on the world.

38
0

Meg Whitman: The lady IS for TURNING. HP to lob printers'n'PCs OVERBOARD

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

RIP, HP.

9
0

I'll show you the D next week – billionaire space baron Elon Musk

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: The Tesla Diesel?

Tesla Dirigible would be amazing. Imagine if he managed to get a fleet of solar-powered dirigibles with proper helium storage and recapture tech (to minimize losses), including the air compression and condenser tech for ballast control. Wrap it all up, automate it, bring it into the 21st century.

Done right, he could revolutionize shipping. Screw multirotor drones; dirigible delivery! (At least from pad to regional/local depot.)

0
0

JPMorgan Chase: 76 MILLION homes, 7 MILLION small biz thumped in cyber-heist

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Where do/did stuff like PCI rules and audits fit into this picture?

Understand that there is nothing in the PCI/DSS certification standards that would prevent a determined and well resourced (especially state resourced) attacker from penetrating a given site. It isn't what you think it is. It certainly isn't security standard of a class to keep out former KGB officers in the Russian mob.

I agree that a bank that big should have better security, but strict adherence to PCI/DSS wouldn't stop things. You need way better security than a few tickboxes and some checklists.

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Erosion of trust

I agree; when your enemy is better resources with better talent than you have, it absolutely is a security disaster waiting to fail. Even if you're using an excellent operating system like Linux, administered by administrators who know how to secure it properly.

At the end of the day, the bad guys have more resources to find holes than the good guys do. And they will exploit them immediately, whereas the good guys then have to turn an "identified hole" into a "patched vulnerability."

But at least they were using Linux. It's a start. If they were using Windows not only would we never have known there was a vulnerability - and thus people would still be actively exploited - but there's a good chance that by compromising such a large bank for so very long undetected they would have been able to do serious damage to the economy.

Western nations absolutely need to up their cyber-security game because it absolutely i sa security disaster waiting to happen.

But good on them for not using windows; it's the first step towards a more secure future.

1
0

Atlas snubbed! Ad blocker says it can kill Facebook's stalker tech

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Not with a bang, but with a whimper

@Psyx

Actually, I have adblock configured to allow advertisements from sites that are aware of adblock and do various things to signal it that it's okay to display ads. I also have adblock configured to allow advertisements when they are hosted from the site itself.

Adblocok does, however, block any of the major advertising platforms (and their trackers) as well as all the "twitter buttons" and "facebook buttons" and so forth.

I don't mind advertising so long as it isn't A) Moving and B) Tracking me.

Static images or text are fine, so long as they're not tied to trackers. Those are highly unlikely to contain exploits that could harm me. Animated things - particularly flash - absolutely can crawl through the internet and do me harm.

It's security - both of my privacy and my desktop - that drive my use of Adblock. Not some hatred of ads. So do bear in mind we don't all have the same motivations.

2
0

Forums