2200 posts • joined Monday 31st May 2010 16:59 GMT
Is it useless though?
I thought the purpose of such entities was to make the hoi polloi believe something was being done about whatever subject was at hand while in truth protecting the quangos and individuals the folks in power liked. You make it seem like you believe that there exist government agencies (ourside of health care/social services and firefighting) that actually help people.
I can RAID drives. DIMMS, not so much.
As to redundancy...difficult to do on an SME budget, but I'd like to think we don't do too badly. I've learned the hard way some failure points, while others I was fortunate enough to see coming. The La Cie isn't something I would /ever/ use as a primary device. It was hoped however that the thing would serve as a temporary storage point during the move. Not so much, apparently.
As to fans issue; good fans will give me three years. The fans that don't give me a single year irk me greatly. We can't afford IT bodies in all sites, so we are reliant on yearly preventative maintenance. Fans that refuse to give me even that year...I'll not be buying from that company again.
Any decent sysadmin plans for redundancy within the budgetary parameters given them. There is that point however where you do have to trust hat some of your components will stay up some of the time; a minimum service life if you will. If only because the primaries have to be operational whilst you are upgrading the backups.
@Pavlov's obedient mutt
I can't speak to the "legal" part of the editing...but it definitely reads significantly different than written. My editor tries to compress my articles into as small a space as possible; I fear I have not yet learned the art of telling my tale in few enough words. ("Be ruthless, you know it makes sense!") Overall I think he's an excellent editor. I like to think that any improvement at all in my writing style is due to his hard work and the kind advice of several folks at El Reg.
I was hoping that this article would serve as an introduction to a short series of articles based on a particular hellacious network migration I recently underwent. Unfortunately, that introduction contained a lot of lead-in and ended up being about three hundred words over limit. I can’t really comment on the resultant article; it would be the ultimate height of arrogance to comment on one’s editor’s style. Frankly, I’m new enough not to have much experience in what “sells,” other than I write (and talk) way too much.
The ultimate measure though is whether the readers here like my articles or not. While for all other articles I’ve been merely posting links to them on my personal blog. I am allowed to post the full unedited articles there after a few weeks have passed since their publication on El Reg. It might be an interesting experiment to post the “Doomsday Weekend” articles in full and have some folk read the edited and non-edited versions.
That, and my editor has kindly offered to take me through editing one of my articles step by step. With luck, from both I will learn what people like and don’t like. Stylewise, my articles (when they reach my editor) read no different than my comments. I have a lot of learning to do before I can pare my writing down enough to produce articles that don’t need editing at all…but I’m learning!
This is what happens when you don't have a sysadmin on site. I think I had been to that site a year ago, and it was iffy...but not that bad. I spent something like six hours rewiring that mess. Unfortunately, the room provided for me to put two rack sin is barely larger than the two racks themselves. When I try to walk one of the sales staff through adding or removing a server (usually due to ten cent fan issues) they are far more concerned with getting the server back on the rack and online than with cleanliness. Heck, even some sysadmins...
I have three Model Ms. Every one of them gets a good dishwashering (NO SOAP!) followed by a three day air-dry. Take the caps off the keys first, or you'll spend the next few days picking them out of the dishwasher.
Works like a charm. There was a rumour about the nets that this was the recommended way of cleaning the things in their original manual. I though "what the hell, worth a try" and haven't looked back since. More than two decades of this with my first one, and well over a decade with the other two. No problems so far. Of course, the water in my city is very soft...I have no idea what a dishwasher with a lot of minerals in the water would do.
Google Wave is what you get when you IRC, SharePoint and PHPBB get drunk one night and decide to do something unspeakable in a needle-ridden back alley. The outcome is a lot like the Octoparrot from the Simpsons.
"Polly shouldn't be!"
Give it a few generations of revision by the open source community to discover a purpose for it, and it might be grand...but by that point, it won't be Wave anymore...
@Rex Alfie Lee
Which of the megacorporates in IT don't?
Google sells you to advertisers like you where a cheap ten cent whore. They then try the old “if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear” routine.
Apple has such little respect for it's customers it has to wall them into locked gardens whilst charging outrageous prices for faulty and sub-par equipment. Meanwhile, they are trying to sell you like a group of expensive but mindlessly devoted whores so it can cash in on this advertising thing and make themselves into the next Google.
Sony plays the "proprietary format" game even harder than Microsoft...going to far as to install rootkits on you machine via their audio CDs.
Dell sell known bad computers, then RMA them with known bad computers, then deny everything. All the while screwing /millions/ of people over during the Pentium 4 era by accepting bribe money from Intel.
HP sells sub-par equipment to consumers then disclaims any warrantee at the drop of a hat. They also must be selling the sanctified blood of virgins in their ink cartridges because it’s one of the (if not the) most expensive fluids on the planet. Then they spy on everyone, lie to all of their employees right before major cullings and provide such an unbelievably demoralised workforce that their support is beyond abysmal.
IBM has had their middle finger in the air to the entire world. They are famous for viciously using any and every anti-competitive tactic known to man to protect their mainframe monopoly. Right alongside they this have lead the charge to drive down the wages of IT professionals, howling consistently louder than anyone else for the right to export as many jobs as possible to low wage countries whilst importing as many low wage workers to western countries as they can.
This leaves Microsoft, Cisco and Oracle. These companies can rightly be accused of crimes against open source. They are run by soulless, amoral, egotistical greedmongers. They play proprietary games at every turn and have made no bones about the fact their long term business plan involves being “everything IT” and locking you into their homogenised ecosystem. They push out or buy up competition and drive the prices of their products through the roof.
So there we have it; the 800lb gorillas of IT. (Minus some of the Asian corporations like Samsung, etc. who aren’t IT companies per se, but chaebols of which IT is only a small part of their overall business.) Each and every one of these IT goliaths is unabashedly, unreservedly and unrepentantly evil. They would all sell your soul for a bent copper whilst robbing your mother and pillaging your hometown.
The issue at hand wasn’t who was “better” or “more noble” or in some other way “not a gigantic sack of fail.” The question was which corporation, based on past experiences and their business model would I (be most likely to) trust with my data. The answer to this is Microsoft.
The reasons are simple: Microsoft is trying to carve a niche out for themselves; “you own your data, you run your servers, but we can augment them with our cloud architecture if you want.” This is a direct reaction to outfits like Google. It is an attempt to capitalise on the desire for privacy, corporate and personal data ownership that individual and corporations have.
Understand this: I might /possibly/ consider trusting Microsoft with my data only because I fully understand that Microsoft believe they can make a profit securing my data and selling me my privacy. I don’t think that it’s “right,” and I certainly don’t think Microsoft is “good.” I do however think that for so long as they believe that there is money to be made selling privacy to the milled masses, they will be a safer place to store my data than the other contenders.
Which I why I will NEVER, EVER host my data in the cloud. If, of all companies, Microsoft is the best bet for security and privacy of consumer and SME data, then **** THAT NOISE BROTHER.
I’ll build my own servers and host my own data. I may trust Microsoft more than the others to protect my data, but it is still a question of “which scorpion to you believe will let you get farthest across the river before they sting you?”
I don’t trust cloud anything. Not from Google, Apple, HP, Dell, IBM, Sony, Cisco, Oracle, Microsoft or just about anyone else. I *might* be capable of trusting Amazon in the future…but I have to learn a lot more about them first. It’s my data. My location information. My usernames, passwords, files love letters, affairs, plots against Dick Cheney, plans for protests against my government, super-secret patent designs, ideas for a novel/movie, and my next article. It’s my privacy. My /right/ to conduct my affairs without having those affairs snooped on, data mined, sold, “borrowed” by a staff member that “the company disavows all knowledge of” and my further /right/ to conduct those affairs without my government or the rest of the world snooping on all or any of it.
No corporation, regardless of marketing pap, company motto, cult leadership, fancy logo or sales volume has the right to my trust. Trust, especially as regards privacy, must be EARNED. Microsoft have done a lot to lose people’s faith, it’s true. But unlike many, I haven’t ignored the past ten years where they have struggled hard to regain it. They aren’t there yet…but I suspect that one day they will be. They may yet become the beacon of corporate trust, privacy and security.
As I said before: that’d ****ing terrifying.
Good intel there. I can't dispute any of it, except to sya that my experience nad my instincts tell me not to trust HP, Dell, IBM or really anyone else to host my stuff in the cloud. You talk about the sprint phone cloning, or exceptional items occurring because of the actions of a few employees that are outside the extant contract. I realise that /most/ actions that might endanger your data are perpetrated by individuals rather than the corporation itself.
…and? Bubba Joe Bob steals my corporate data and sells it to my biggest competitor for two squids and a goat. If this becomes public, or HP/IBM/Dell looses a lawsuit over it then their reputation is on the line. I can sue, but they will ERASE ME FROM EXISTANCE long before that ever gets to court, or anywhere else. David has a contract with Goliath, and Goliath sits at the back of an army of bloodthirsty lawyers carrying shoulder-mounted missile launchers and laughs at the primitive with a sling. David is dead, and has no more lives left. Game over.
You mention the difference between VLANs and firewalls inside the cloud. I won’t debate you for a second that this is an important enterprise distinction. From an SMB standpoint however, it’s really not. I am not exactly worried about other tenants on the cloud hacking my data, since paying off an insider to get at my data is far easier. No matter the technology, the HUMANS involved are the weak links. I have been called paranoid for talking about it before, but in any scenario where the human being involved are essentially untouchable, I get really nervous about dealing with them. In the case of cloud computing, as an SME or consumer…the folks on the other side of the wall are completely inaccessible from either a “run down and taser the bastards” or “send a lawyer at them” standpoint.
This is why my personal domains all go through my personal webserver. It is also why I run my own website, host my own storage and download the media I consume rather than stream it. I am a luddite. I didn’t grow up as part fo the new generation that was raised to “trust in the Google.” I wasn’t raised to believe that corporations like Apple “know what’s best” and “genuinely want what’s best for their customers.” I grew up watching corporations rape and pillage the society I loved until nearly all of the things I held dear about the world were whittled away to the barest shell of their former selves.
In my opinion, people today are willing to sell their privacy, right to choose their elected representatives, and right to hold their various elected representatives accountable for their actions for a pat on the head and a new “limited edition” colour of plastic case for their MP3 player. Given the sheep-like bleating that emerges from individuals and SMEs, the concept of things like class-action suits ever being a threat to a megacorporate is laughable. Depending on the information you propose to put into “the cloud” (and thus in the hands of these untouchable megacorporates,) you are quite literally betting your future (via your personal information) or that of your business on the benevolence of said megacorporate entity.
I just can’t find it within myself to trust any megacorporate. There are those however that I trust significantly less than others.
The key is "without a reasonable amount of warning beforehand." BY this I mean "A few months." They are not going to change the formats behind their cloud overnight such that you walk into work the next day and nothing works. They WILL change the formats to prevent competition, and extort money from you. They WON'T do that in such a way that prevents their customers from adapting in time to extort said money.
As I said; Microsoft is expensive, but I can reasonably trust that they won’t take my data and walk off. I will always be able to get said data, though I will likely have to pay much for the privilege.
Actually...I have no idea as regards backup. My undertstanding is that Server 2008 R2's Windows Backup + Volume Shadow Copy + Exchange 2010 works /somehow/. Don't ask me how, I haven't the foggiest damned idea. I use Retrospect.
I hear Horsemen.
Even if there is an evil conspiracy, (something I deeply doubt,) I'm perfectly okay with Ass. being erased. I think he's an arrogant grandstanding twat who is perfectly willing to risk the lives of others for his own ego and fame. Maybe you should take some no-doz, and go look at other whistle blowing sites out there. Some have been around far longer than WIkileaks, and are run as less of a carnival. THOSE folks I have nothing but shitloads of respect for.
I’m sorry that my personal opinion of Ass. burns you so badly, but to me, the various giddy followers of this cult leader look no different than the zombie-like drones that hand on Jobs’ every word. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!
What completely astonishes me is the deification of this grandstanding little punk. I find it infinitely more plausible that he got a case of the dickileaks than that the “super-secret bad guys” decided to try to ruin his name. Understand that I don’t FOR A SECOND that they would try to run this guy into the ground. He is definitely a thorn in their side. I do however believe in their competence for more thoroughly than I believe in Ass. unassailable purity of spirit. He wouldn’t be the first dude who got a little famous, got a little full of himself, got a little gropey.
But hey, THUMBSDOWN ME BROTHER. I am a heathen unbeliever in both the cult of Jobs AND the cult of Ass. You must round up the others and vent your internet rage that I dare speak what I believe to be truth to the faithful. Blasphemer! Unbeliever! Heathen! WITCH!
The problem is that there is no middle ground. I don't doubt for a second that HP/Dell/IBM/whomever would provide the government, military or fortune 1000 companies with the best in anonymise, encrypted secure and reliable service.
As an individual and sysadmin for an SME, I also have zero double they would sell my soul out from under me. I am small, they are big. They don’t have any incentive to play fair with me: there are no laws to ensure it and in any case the regulators aren’t looking in their direction. If and when laws come about to protect the hoi polloi like myself, it is only AFTER a company has been brutally spanked in public for data loss/theft/selling that I will trust them. Only then will I know the leery eye of the regulator is watching, waiting for them to slip up again.
As for free services…screw ‘em. All of ‘em. I pay mu subscription to Ars Technica. I’d pay my subscription to El Reg as well…if they offered such a service. I would rather pay for the services I use and have my privacy than give Google my soul and have my literature for free. It’s a personal choice. I /like/ my privacy. I don’t think anyone needs to or should know where I am at any given time, what I am doing, thinking, clicking on, searching or what-have-you. Maybe that makes me a luddite, I don’t know.
The problem with the whole cloud thing is the imbalance of power. Even if you had a contract with a cloud service provider (because you pay them,) that contract is A) not going to be weighted in your favour and b) irrelevant anyways because the cloud provider has more lawyers than you have total staff members. The rights of the individual? HA!
Don’t get Government/Large Enterprise service provision mixed up with consumer/SME service provision, sir. They are different worlds. In the consumer/SME segment, corporations like DELL, IBM, HP and more cut every corner they can…and then a few corners they legally can’t.
So give me one good reason I would trust them? I don’t particularly trust Microsoft either, but I certainly trust them more than the alternatives available. The only reason for that is because they have been spanked a few times for anti-competitive and anti-consumer practices. When everyone is watching you…you behave.
Re: Is Reg supported by some anti (or pro) XYZ/ABC organization?
I know I'm the new guy around here, but I think that after four or five months I would have figured out if there's a super-secret shadow cabal pumping out hidden messages to the masses via The Register's editorial control. Quite the opposite. I think The Register gives its authors a remarkable amount of freedom. To date I've not been told once which product or company to write about. I've not been asked to go easy on an individual or corporation, nor have I been asked to really put the clamps on either.
Other than my editor’s valiant attempts to elevate my writing skill beyond the linguistic equivalent of banging two rocks together, I seem free to write what I wish. Now admittedly, this is anecdotal evidence. It’s possible that there is a huge conspiracy and I’m just not in on it. I prefer to take the Occam’s razor approach; the simplest explanation is likely the truth.
Rather than sponsor driven editorial dictates, I think it’s far more plausible that The Register does exactly what it says on the tin: bites the hand that feeds IT. The readers it attracts, as well as the folks that it employs are the kind of people who take the piss out of everything and everyone all the time.
For every pet topic, viewpoint or belief you might ascribe to a particular author here on The Register, you’ll find another one with a completely different viewpoint. From an institutional standpoint, I don’t think you can find a single corporation, individual or discussion item (beyond the obvious ones such as the importance of journalistic integrity) that would garner uncontested support from amidst The Register and her many regular readers.
Frankly, I think that’s the way it should be. Any news organisation/blog/magazine/what-have-you that allows its sponsors or the political leanings of it’s higher-ups to affect the content of works produced by its staff doesn’t deserve to exist. Any proper information outlet should always strive to report the truth as they know it at the time of publication. /Without/ knowingly omitting vital information that changes the overall result of the work. A purposeful lie by omission is still a lie.
Preferably, the organisation as a whole should have the chutzpah, resources and time to dig a little deeper than the surface impressions and do some real investigative snooping around from time to time. Sadly, as we move into the era of “citizen journalism” in which noone pays for the media they consume, outlets that have the resources for this are fewer and farther between. Personally, I think El Reg does remarkably well at looking past the fluffy PR pieces that are thrown in their direction and sniffing around for the larger picture.
Of course, no news organisation in the world has the capacity to employ only investigative journalists, so they also have a cadre of reporters. Even the investigative folks have to do a little basic reporting. Reporting is exactly what it sounds like: reporting the facts of an event and leaving it up to the reader to make any inferences they wish. Somewhere in the mix you get opinion pieces as well; these are usually reasonably well researched and written in order to spark thought and debate. Overall, The Register does a damned fine job of maintaining a balance between these.
Fanboys of any stripe will not find safe harbour here. Eventually, no matter what product or company you believe in, an article will come along and take the piss out of it. Though regrettable, every now and again an article will even come along that is outright wrong. This isn’t maliciousness but usually an honest mistake on the part of an author. For all the negativity that El Reg (and dozens of other rags just like her) get from commenters about being “bought and paid for,” I have come to trust the reporting here more than I have almost all of the mainstream information outlets in Canada. Certainly I trust El Reg by an order of magnitude more than any of the mainstream press in the US.
Everyone deserves a right to their opinion, but accusation of being bought and paid for venture into the territory of insulting. These are good people, sir; they all work honestly and hard to do a great job. The grousing of commenters can make writing feel thankless. The gods only know how the people who moderate things around here don’t go absolutely nuts.
I could go on. I’ve had such a terrible day at my day job today that I would like to. Retrospectively, I realise that a page-and-a-half nuclear diatribe is a completely disproportionate response to your comment. I apologise, but I really needed to vent some frustration and your comment struck a nerve.
I received my very first “you’re a paid corporate shill” comment to one my articles not too long ago. It still stings a little; I’d like to think that if I was a paid corporate shill I wouldn’t be so poor. I’d also like to think that the cost of my ethics is more than a little bit higher than anyone out there would be willing to pay. Somehow, I suspect that’s true of everyone here.
Will someone please explain this one to me...
I have to admit that this area of business if far outside my expertise. We are dealing with a world to which I was not born, so the answer to my question may seem obvious. Still, I would appreciate it if someone could clue me in.
Why would Dell continue to drive up the price? At 2.4 BILLION, can’t Dell simply let HP take the (now horrifically inflated) 3PAR and walk away a winner? In my mind, they should be able to take 1Billion and essentially BUY all the staff at 3PAR, regardless of if HP gets the company or not. They could then take the remaining 1.4 billion and give those staff their own skunkworks and a nearly unlimited amount of resources. As a bonus, because they are the folk behind the patents HP just bought, they would know how to engineer the stuff they are building for Dell in such a way as to not infringe on HP’s new and shiny patents.
Two years later Dell would have its own in-house 3PAR, and HP would have a 2.4 billion dollar shell, with a few patents and no talent to back it up.
What am I missing here?
Apple recognise, learn from past mistakes.
the only problem is that this can't be possible, as Apple don't make mistakes. I know because a fanboi told me so.
Given that climate change has erased most of the things that eat seals, SOMEONE Has to keep the seal population down. Elsewise the horny buggers would breed unchecked and devastate the marine ecosystem.
Besides, even if you care about seals “because they’re so damned cute,” there’s no human rights violation occurring there. The discussion was about human rights violations. I can remember a few incidents with our troops abroad, and some pepper spraying of protesters. The troops got into a WORLD of shit when they got home. That leaves pepper spraying protestors.
CANADA: We’ll violate your human rights! With PEPPER SPRAY.
(Ignore the whole Mohawk incident in the 80s. We’ve come a long way since then, and learned a great deal.)
This article is about Exchange 2010 vs Exchange 2003. For the purposes of this article, my sanity and sustaining the denial that keeps me running out and playing in traffic, Exchange 2007 NEVER HAPPENED. I am putting that trauma behind me. Yes, the cert reqs are the same, and many of the fundamental basics are similar between 2007 and 2010.
That however is like saying that many of Windows 7's features (or the new driver model) existed in Vista. That's not relevant. Vista never happened. The world went directly from XP to 7. It's called DENIAL. Denial makes me happy. (Thanks to denial, I’m immortal!)
Like Windows ME before it, the entire 2007 generation of Microsoft products NEVER HAPPENED. I realise there are people out there who like to pretend this horror was indeed visited on the world. I am taken to understand that like the demented souls who practice worship of Cthulhu, there are even those among you who like to believe they would have ENJOYED living through that nightmare. I pity you.
Instead, denial allows me to have lived the past few years in a happy fluffy world where I pet bunnies as I rode on horsies through a field of rainbows. Rainbows in a universe where the 2007 generation of Microsoft products NEVER HAPPENED. So even if the world has to hate me for it, the entire world went from 2003 to 2010. (Well, those using Microsoft MTAs.)
And from that perspective, Exchange 2010 was a huge leap forward from 2003. I’m quite happy with the upgrade, and it’s working well, thanks for asking.
(I apologise if I offended any followers of Cthulhu with this post. It was probably unfair to demean you by comparing you people who actually enjoyed MS2007. Unfortunately it was the only PG comparison I could think up. Honestly, you guys aren’t as far gone as MS2007 fans.)
The point of being able to deploy SSL-based Outlook connectivity in my environment was to allow users who were NOT using domain connected systems the ability to cache a copy of their e-mail locally.
Your solution, while valid in a completely domain-joined world, is invalid in this scenario.
You don't trust Microsoft? Why, may I ask? Microsoft like to extort money from people, but I can't actually think of any real privacy breaches or personal information landgrabs by them. They’re greedy and lazy, not stupid.
Who would you trust more? Google? The idea is so laughable my sides are hurting. Amazon? Maybe…in all honesty I don’t know much about their track record, but they seem good so far. Who else….Oracle/Sun? They would seem trustworthyish, but just as greedy and lazy as Microsoft.
IBM? HP? Dell? Apple? Sony? Not on my life, methinks. They are greedy AND lack any semblance of anything approaching ethics. If you don’t have ethics, you have a hard time understanding why others might want to keep their data safe.
Microsoft is an evil empire. It’s also the devil we know. Microsoft may try to take all my money…but I can not imagine them selling my data to someone else, nor can I imagine them changing the fundamental structure or formats of their cloud without giving a reasonable amount of warning beforehand. After all, they need to give warning so that their customers can cough up the money to pay for the format change.
With Microsoft I know I will always be able to get my data OFF of their cloud if I need it, and they are the least likely of the bunch to sell my data without telling me. I also suspect they won’t try to “own” my data either.
…but they’ll be bloody expensive.
NOW, will they be RELIABLE to use a cloud service…that’s a whole other ballgame. Personally, I’m not sold on the reliability of ANY cloud service. From a data security standpoint though…I’d trust MS before any of the other contenders.
It's not just the site, Microsoft...
Your whole damned volume licensing program is broken. Why not take it all back to the drawing board and come up with one that doesn't suck, doesn't penalise people who purchase legitimate software, takes into account things like the regular use of Ghost, Virtual Machines, spare hardware and other similar normal elements of a modern IT environment whilst not asking for the souls of virgins every year in exchange.
Oh, and if you made the whole VLK program less stupidly complicated, you wouldn't need a great big and complicated bloody website. Greedy gits…
I'll bid a grand.
But only if I get the brand name as well as the software business. After years of running the SCO name into the mud, it'd be nice to throw some poetic justice at it. I am thinking along the lines of attaching it to a Linux distro...perhaps making SCO to SUSE as CentOS is to RedHat. Who knows, a decade or so of doing right by folks could cause an ultimate karmic redemption.
SCO was cool once, back when it was the Santa Cruz Operation. It would be nice to rework the name into even the faintest shadow it’s former self.
"As a thought experiment, imagine what might be said and done if a foreign nation were to dump one of its old satellites through US airspace into, say, the Gulf of Mexico."
THe US would huff, and it would puff and it would...be completely ineffective at anything. I mean, really, what is the US going to do? Invade your country to steal your Oil? They seem to be remarkably ineffective at that. Lob a missile at you? Because countries that launch satellites don’t have the capability to make the US regret that one right quick.
What’s left? Economic sanctions? What economy? (BTW, those economic sanctions…they worked SO WELL against Cuba. My last vacation there was oh so burdened by the lack of ability to buy…actually, it was bloody awesome.) What /exactly/ is the US going to do to /anyone/ who has the economy or technological capability to launch spacecraft?
If they were REALLY DUMB they might shoot it down. Then they risk turning one dangerous falling object into many. I’m sorry, but if someone deorbited a satellite over US airspace into the ocean the US would be capable of doing exactly sweet **** all about it.
"One could also argue "Is there really nothing better to do on the internet than come to El Reg and write inane comments?""
Um...nope. Or at the very least, I haven't found anything better (on the internet) to do with my time. There's plenty of stuff IRL that's far grander but almost all of it involves, well...REAL PEOPLE. On the Internet though...where's better than here? This is my electronic home-away-from-home, sort of like a digital pub. I venture out to other pubs periodically, try for variety and such like...but I always keep returning here.
Where do you know of on the tubes that's a better place to be than here?
Pint for all my mates on this here internet pub.
"It will only be short hops to Europe then, what with the death penalty in US.
Actually aren't France banning the burqa (spelling...sorry!), scrap that.
And Italy turning back the Libyans.
So we will only be able to go to Germany (whose constitution was part made by us and US) and Switzerland...hang on they allow euthanasia."
So what's Canada, chopped liver?
I have mixed feelings.
WebOS kicks ass, and I would love some more WebOS devices. I just can't find it within myself to cheer on HP though. At least not until they pick a CEO that isn't a soulless shell of a human or a workforce devastating butcher.
Is anyone else terrified by this?
If this technology exists and at some point in the future Labour gets elected, the UK is humped. Soon there after I am sure Australia will fall. After that, Canada can't be far behind. THIS MUST BE STOPPED, FOR THE GOOD OF US ALL.
To hell with Motorola.
Milestone 1 hasn't received Froyo in Canada yet. Even if you could lay that at the feet of our arrogant monopolistic carriers (quite possibly true,) who in the name of sweet fnord releases an Android phone without a 1Ghz processor? Android 3 compatible or GTFO.
Mine's the one with a proper HTC Desire in the pocket. (Which Telus could get the Froyo update out for ANY TIME NOW….)
Speeds at "up to X..."
...but only if you're in a major Metro. Oh, and you have a bandwidth cap of 2MB, past which you're charged at 15$/100KB.
And it'll still be the best deal on the continent. *sob*
So let me get this straight...
Pornographers wanting a .xxx domain would have to have their business verified and would have to meet certain minimum standards of not being a jackass. In other words...it would be an entire TLD for legitimate and ONLY legitimate porn.
FANTASTIC idea. Basically, it gives me a great reason to install a porn blocker for every TLD that is not .xxx. .xxx pornographers would have to meet a certain level of "not being a society-ruining asshat" and most likely "not being a malware harbouring computer ruining asshat." I support this wholeheartedly.
I wish we could do this with other industries. Then one day we could reach a point where we just collectively ban ".com" as the horrifying wasteland of the internet.
Terrible idea. If a satellite designed to deorbit into the ocean gets hit by debris then you have one (or maybe a smallish number more than one) bits of uncontrollable junk in orbit. If a satellite designed to fragment into bits on contact with atmo gets hit by debris it will SHATTER, and you juve just created the orbital equivalent of a shotgun blast.
From a “how do we dispose of this satellite” standpoint, your idea is brilliant. From a “what happens if the unexpected occurs” standpoint, it’s a hazard.
The problem with all this "clear language" hullabaloo...
...is that if every business were forced to state clearly what they were charging you, when and why then consumers would have a easy way to shop around for the best deal. Businesses would be forced to compete, or (horror!) innovate in order to obtain and retain customers.
This goes against the spirit of modern capitalism, which thrives on ever bigger corporations with ever more reason to stifle innovation and competition. Providing lower levels of service by drastically cutting back the workforce is another cornerstone of modern capitalism. Also encouraged are enormous bonuses for executives, golden handshakes, golden parachutes, and buying off regulators.
It is then common and accepted to raise the flag of being “unpatriotic,” “anti-western/American/capitalist/democratic” (delete as appropriate) for anyone to commit the thoughtcrime of questioning this state of affairs. The idea that the customer should be able to put pressure on the megacorporate entities of our society by shopping their business around to a different megacorporate entity in the hopes of a better deal is “harmful to business.”
In addition, we must not tax the rich, or large companies. Similarly, we should increase the tax burden on those whose jobs we are all busy eliminating. Increasing taxes on small businesses and consultants (whom the megacorporates are doing their best to drive out of business in the interests of quelling competition and suppressing innovation) is also strongly recommended. Pair this with the cries to deport the poor/homeless/unemployed or at least drive them out of the city and dump them in the woods and you have the perfect society.
Or so I am told by the man on the telly. I have to believe it because to think otherwise makes me a bleeding heart leftist pinko commie liberal, and we can’t have those types cluttering up the world.
Speaking of the world…would someone please stop it briefly? I’d like to disembark.
Nobody believed him.
Good job that guy. Pint for you, mate.
What does this mean...
...for sites like El Reg? Given that not only are the comments one of the best features of the site but that they are actively moderated, can El Reg get a fist shaken at them for having commenttards run around and take the piss out of everything/everyone? What about websites whose only reason to exist is to be a giant forum?
So many questions about the implications of this…
- Geek's Guide to Britain INSIDE GCHQ: Welcome to Cheltenham's cottage industry
- 'Catastrophic failure' of 3D-printed gun in Oz Police test
- Game Theory Is the next-gen console war already One?
- BBC suspends CTO after it wastes £100m on doomed IT system
- Peak Facebook: British users lose their Liking for Zuck's ad empire