4302 posts • joined 31 May 2010
Re: how "dirty" the tar sands are
BC Hydro's Site C still isn't enough to power the oilsands, and most of it's capacity is spoken for meeting the needs of the northern BC and north western Alberta communities. (Freeing up the more southern Hydro plants to sell more power to California.)
As for you "but they dig up the earth" bullshit, plug it. Yes, they dig up all sorts of muskeg - and damned little boreal forest, thank you - all of which can be restored. You are absolutely 100% right about the toxic ponds which I why I said that the majority of the power requirements are not for turning bitumen into usable oil, they are for refining and extracting the toxic minerals that go into the tailings ponds so we can deal with them in a far more ecologically friendly manner. Read my fucking post before gnawing on yet more of your leg.
Regarding your rampant anti-corporatism, there are a couple of issues with your logic. The first being that Alberta is nowhere near exploiting the tar sands "as fast as corporately possible." In fact, it has been estimated that we are using less than 10% of the possible extraction capacity given the supplies of equipment, manpower and the traffic density of hiway 53. Alberta makes companies looking to exploit tarsands go through an incredible amount of paperwork to get permission; a huge amount of which is "how will you restore the environment."
In addition to this, Alberta - and Canada more generally - is completely dependent on those tar sands. They are such a large part of our economy that if we were to simply stop tomorrow Canada could take something like a 20% hit to our GDP and our nation would collapse into a depression that would take us decades to recover from. It is not merely the cost of the oil, (and the resource taxes it generates,) it is the massive number of people it employs and the very high wages they get paid.
So you are simply flat out wrong and deeply misinformed. I don't believe for a second that we should be plowing ahead with pulling yet more oil out of the ground and burning it, but that is because I understand the science of climate change. I also understand economics and geopolitics and I am perfectly aware that nothing on this earth will stop that oil from being dug up.
So there are two choices before us: rail helplessly against the tar sands in general, waste our time and effort being completely fucking ineffective and worthless...or make sure that the fuckers to as little damage as possible.
If you want to make sure that they do as little damage as possible then you will do everything in your power to make sure that the nuke plant goes forwards. Because with that kind of electrical power we can not only cut the CO2 cost of refining bitumen into oil - a major factor - we can also make sure that we don't need toxic tailings ponds, because we can extract and refine the toxic metals from the waste products and deal with them in a far more ecologically friendly manner.
(I.E. react them with something that locks them up in a stable chemical compound that is non-toxic and then bury them in massive underground vaults designed for purpose. Because hey, with cheap electricity you can make cheap vaults out of non-toxic metals like iron or aluminium.)
But nope, we're right back to ranting-by-eco-pamphlet. Lots of angsty NIMBY talking points designed to get the normals all riled up...no actual understanding of the situation.
Re: how "dirty" the tar sands are
The problem with the BC Hydro approach - and it's been considered - is the transmission line length. The most promising BC Hydro projects for this would involve building dams on a couple of rivers right before they dump into the pacific. You want to truck that much power all the way to Ft Mac? Your line loss will be staggering.
Nah, I think sticking a GW of generating capacity in Athabasca is the best idea. Close enough to Edmonton to get reasonably cheap meat to build and operate it, far enough from the muskeg that it won't sink into the ground and close enough to Ft Mac that transmission loss won't be a big deal.
Re: Colbert wieghs in
Oooooh. Neat trick! I always just ended up using a VPN. Cheers!
Re: how "dirty" the tar sands are
The biggest issue with the tar sands is the CO2 load per barrel of oil. That far outweighs the other issues. We burn so much coal to get a barrel of heavy crude that it's abominable.
After that, the biggest issues are to do with reclamation of the land. We can do a great deal to reclaim old mine sites, but we choose not to because extracting and refining a lot of the dangerous metals that end up polluting the tailings ponds is unbelievably energy intensive. IF we had a cheap, clean source of electrical power - say, for example, from the proposed Bruce Power nuclear station - then we would be able to do a gigantic crapload more post-processing on the tailings than we do now.
There is nothing about tarsands extraction that is inherantly bad for the local ecosystem. The negative effects are entirely because we choose not to bring our technology to bear on reclaiming the land. That's abominable, but I don't think we're going to realistically be able to do anything about it until we get nuclear energy involved.
The chances that Alberta will voluntairily evaporate over half it's GDP are exactly zero. The chances that China and the USA are going to stop buying our oil are exactly zero. The ecological costs of doing proper reclamation on those sites using coal or natural-gas-fired power plants are honestly probably higher than a few poison tailings ponds amongst the muskeg wastes of the north.
Get cheap power up there, however, and suddenly the government has a viable option. They can put in place strict - even outright punitive - ecological regulation and the oil companies would reasonably be able to implement them whilst still raking in the kinds of profits required to keep them interested in the oilsands in the first place.
Now, I don't know about you, but I've been up there. I've toured Shell and Syncrude plants and flown over the entire region in helicopter. I've seen up close and personal the damage we do...and also what beauty a properly restored area can be.
It's easy to buy in to a bunch of propaganda focused on terrifying images of active work sites or abandoned sites from 30 years ago. It's much harder to take an intellectually honest and objective look at what's going on. There's good. There's bad. There's horribly ugly. What's most damning of all is that there are viable solutions...
...we simply (stupidly) choose not to employ them. For that, I blame NIMBYs and I hope each and every one of them learns the true cost of their actions. Their fear, paranoia and greed will have repercussions for generations.
Of course, it's far easier to simply demand a province - and frankly most of a nation - live in abject poverty simply because of some propaganda and an unwillingness to do some investigation.
"Canada as the good guy" is nothing but good PR. We have a bunch of asshole 1%ers (known as the Conservative party) trying to screw it for everyone. (Though the Liberal party did a good job of cronyism when in power, they didn't fundamentally screw us internally nor screw our foreign relations in the same way that the tories do.) We have some severe problems, however, that we are having a lot of trouble correcting and making good on.
The first and most damning is the continued misbehaviour of our troops abroad. Despite numerous very real efforts to reign in the excesses of our deployed forces, there have been some very unwelcome sexual assault scandals that I find unbecoming of a Canadian.
Second is a little something called "residential schools." Look it up; it is a truly shameful part of Canada's history and we will spend centuries trying to make it right. This is related to how the Native American populations are integrated (or aren't) within Canadian society. Native relations are among the most damning examples of how even Canadians don't get it all quite right.
We have several quite successful clans in Canada. various Squamish-descendant tribes to well on the west coast; a visit to the cities they own and run show they are more than capable of running their own affairs. Many of the Inuit tribes have done well; they've carved out the territory of Nunavut for themselves and another group have created an independent legislative assembly in Nunatsiavut; both examples of native peoples managing to do well economically, politically and intergovernmentally without losing their culture in the process.
Others aren't so lucky. Too many reserves are havens of drugs, alcohol and various forms of shocking abuse. Mental health issues can and do run rampant and unchecked as mental health professionals are not allowed to help victims of abuse or those with various chemical imbalances which lead to depression, bipolar disorders and so forth.
This is a massive quandry for Canada. I think you'll find an overwhleming percentage of Canadians believe it is important for Native clans to be able preserve their own way of life and to self-govern. We see it as their right. Yet some simply can't. We are caught in a national ethical dilemma about how to resolve this issue in the most fair way possible.
Should we intervene and impose our morals and/or governmental organisation upon communities? (This is where the residential schools thing went horribly wrong.) Do we let them sort it out themselves? How long do we wait before we decide that they lack the skills and tools to do so?
Is it right to keep throwing money at the problem? (Canada has various treaties that pay out a large sum to most reserve natives upon their 18th birthday.) Should we cut them off in the hopes that this forces them to get their act together?
There are no clean solutions here; no easy answers.
Then there's the hype about how "dirty" the tar sands are. And they are! the solution is actually simple: build a great big nuke plant to power the damned things and we won't have these sorts of problems, but my fellow Albertans (in their infinite wisdom) decided to scream and whinge and protest. (The majority of the protesting coming from several of the aformentionned native tribes who have treaty rights to veto such development and chose to do so because they weren't getting a large enough sack of cash to allow the nuke plant's development. At least they're honest about it)
Europeans don't like our seal hunt, mostly because seals are cute. They get all huffy when you explain to them that if we didn't cull the blighters they'd wipe out the arctic fishery practically overnight. That's not a part of the story people like to hear.
So Canada has our own problems. We are ashamed of them, we work our asses off to find solutions for them. We are aware of them and we even discuss them amongst ourselves and with our MPs. (I can remember at least 4 separate occasions where I sat around with several MPs, a few students and some native leaders to try to find innovative solutions to some of the issues facing the local tribes.)
Everyone is the bad guy to someone. We've done some bad things on the international stage...but our greatest shame is at home. It's one of the reasons we don't try shaping the world in our own image. What right do we have to do so when there's still so much we have yet to get right at home?
I don't see it as all that strange. I've always believed they'll try it within my lifetime. I still do believe it. I don't even hold illusions that we would "win". The only question regarding the eventual American invasion on most Canadians' minds is "are we prepared enough to make them pay dearly for it?"
Robots will help significantly with that, I should think. Fortunately for me, my local MP agrees voiceferously: Canada not only needs lots and lots of robots, we need the capability to build them here in Canada. They will come. When they do I hope to hell they pay tenfold in blood.
Colbert wieghs in
You know, it used to be that way, Mr ASDF. It really did. But a couple of things have changed in the past few years that mean that any US general or politician eyeing Canada covetously needs be significantly more wary than they would have had to have been in the past.
The first: the Canadian citizenry is rather well armed. There are significantly more guns per capita in Canada than in the US and they are spread out fairly evenly. The second is that "standing army" figures mean absolutely bupkus today. You can have tens of millions of people active in your military and - while that's impressive on paper - it doesn't mean much unless you are prepared to fight a nasty inch-by-iunch ground war. If you think you can win that kind of battle then fucking bring it, America. You can't win a ground war against a bunch of poorly equipped peasants in the desert, I'd love to see you succeed in inch-by-iunch combat with Canadians on in winter on their own soil.
No, what matters is how many robots you have. Everything from cruise missiles to drones. People are unbelievably expensive. You have to feed them, house them, train them, buy them jeeps to move them around, fly them in giant crates of supplies and keep them outfitted with armour, communications and all sorts of other stuff. The average soldier costs a hell of a lot more than the average cruise missile and does less damage.
Could America "take" Canada? Oh, probably. But even today that would be a long, miserable, bloody and costly battle. Will America be able to "take" Canada 10 years from now? I very much doubt it. We're buying (and building) lots and lots of robots. The arctic is melting, you see, and the oil up there is ours. We intend to be able to defend that claim.
Well America sure as hell needs Canada more than we need them. Canada can get by just fine selling our resources to Europe and Asia. America's only value is that we can ship them stuff by train instead of having to put in on a boat. Considering the crap we have to put up with from them, that's hardly a worthwhile reason to keep 'em around.
Cut 'em off, I say. The entire world should just cease trading with the US at all. Sure, we'd have some readjustment to be done, but I think that in the end we'd all be better for it. Well except the yanks...but oh well. If that's an egg that needs to be broken in order to make a nicer planetary omelette...
Re: Next step??
Where PCs = "Desktops, Notebooks, Netbooks and Ultrabooks"
Where Midclient = "client with locally installed apps which pulls productivity apps from browser or App-v"
273 Mint PCs (and counting!)
83 Android midclients.
1526 OSX PCs.
12 Windows XP midclients (But not for long!)
480 Windows 7 PCs.
18 Chromebook midclients.
Can tell if serious...
...or ready for an asswhuppin'
Re: Nothing new
You can't police a *chan. That's as impossible as attempting to ruin a *chan. (Pissing into an ocean of piss right there, sir.) Also, by definition, *chan sites simply don't make any attempt to take ownership of responsibility for anything on those sites. Every now and again Moot tries something stupid...and how well does that work out for him?
You can not make the hivemind do what you want. You cannot impose morals on the hivemind. The hivemind is not your Personal Army. Attempting to tell the hivemind what it can and can not do will ultimately end up in a pile of internet so fierce you'd look at the idiocy visited upon the poor dear in this article as a polite bit of summer conversation.
Re: Nothing new
Rules 1 and 2! RULES 1 AND 2!!!
Your father was a hamster and your mother smelt of elderberries!
Re: Secrecy is the keystone to all tyranny
Any idiot with a few kg of uranium 235 can build a nuke. You place a sub critical lump on the left side, you place a sub critical lump on the right side and you ram them together at high velocity. Boom. A few kilotons of explosive force and "salt the earth" radiation that sticks around for a few hundred thousand years.
Also, stealth bomber technology was used during the cold war. The fighter tech wasn't brought in until the very end. Frankly, by the time they had the B2 prototypes out it didn't matter anyways. Everyone had enough nukes on land and at sea to reduce everyone else to a sheet of glass anyways. MAD was far more important than any other technology. Stealthy fighters and bombers serve no purpose except when fighting some proxy war in some godforsaken jungle or hellscape of a desert.
You also forget that both the Germans and the Japanese had their own nuclear programs. (Actually, the Japanese had two separate programs, one of which may well have suceeded in detonating a test device.) The soviets also had a program at the time and the Japanese were convinced they already had the bomb. (Which, frankly, they may well have. There's some evidence to indicate they may have detonated the first device, but wiped the design team out in the process.)
So I will grant you the requirements of tactical secrecy. A short term use of secrecy to obtain or preserve a military advantage. Strategic secrecy, however - especially against your own people! - is insane. Security through obscurity is a terrible, terrible plan.
I ask you, sir, exactly how many civilians have visited Area 51 without clearance? We all know where Nellus is. What about White Sands? Los Alamos? You don't need secrecy to be secure. Indeed, secrecy just makes people even more curious!
Secrecy is something to be used sparingly, if at all. Certainly not with the paint gun of "classified" that the yanks of today use. If you need to keep something hidden, hide it in plain sight. Don't make eveyrone interested by keeping it hush hush.
Perhaps at least some of the distrust in modern times stems from the fact that your government is actively, unashamedly, contemptuously, proudly evil.
Other than that, they're a pip.
Re: Low activity
The short answer to your question? Timeframe. You have to realise that Ice Ages are not generally mass extinction events. Ice ages unfold over millenia; species have thousands of years to adapt. They evolve, they speciate...and their lineage survives in the descendant species that carry on.
The problem with the holocene extinction event AKA "humans fucking up the planet") is that we are demanding changes of species in the span of 150-200 years that under almost any other circumstance they would have thousands of years to adapt to.
I should also point out that homo sapiens sapiens has never before lived during an era where the climate had shifted so dramatically. 4 degrees C warmer on a global scale and we're deep into uncharted territory. We have no idea if we can survive that, or if we do, how many of us can. Water availability - if nothing else - will change so drastically in the next 150 years that I believe strongly that full-blown water wars will start within our lifetime.
I don't think anyone except the most bizarre and esoteric of eco-nutter believes that the rare and endangered spotted horny stripy frog native only to southern Florida's Swamp #891247 is going to survive for the next 10,000 years. What most are hoping, however, is that it will evolve, give birth to descendant species and the diversity of their genome will be preserved.
We have only begun the era of genetics. The possibilities of life - from pharmaceuticals of plant life to genes for gene therapy from animal life - are endless. I think that it is remarkably shortsighted to attempt to make mass extinction into a moral item and then wash your hands of it by saying "well, those species might have gone extinct anyways (several thousand years from now), so who cares?"
We care. Your children care. Their grandchildren will certainly care. Ever species we wipe out is potentially dozens of diseases cured or new transhuman augmentations we will never have. Even if a person lacks the ability to appreciate the diversity of life as an end unto itself, even if they are the most sociopathic, self-centered, small minded individual in our history...they should be capable of understanding that to callously destroy the bounty of nature is to limit what that same diversity can do for us.
Re: Low activity
Actually, you have a point. We are currently nearing a solar minimum; not just as part of the 11-year cycle, but as part of a larger cycle (41Kr). There is significant evidence pointing to a gradually decreasing amount of solar radiation received by earth over the past 50 years. This lines up well with the overall pre-1900s climactic trends which have shown Earth on the path towards a new ice age. Had humans not dramatically altered the climate, Earth would likely have well and truly begun the next ice age approximately 1000 years from now.
That isn't to say the amount of CO2 we've dumped into the atmosphere is magically a "good thing." The change is so sudden that most ecosystems wills struggle to cope, we're already seeing an unprecedented extinction rate and the slowly altering climate is driving more extreme weather events which cost billions to cope with. In addition to this the climate is slowly changing rainfall patterns over entire continents; this will lead to further issues for many species, including ours.
Earth is by no means doomed, but a significant number of her species are; we've triggered the most rapid extinction event since the Yucatan impactor/Siberian Traps double-whammy wiped out the non-avian dinosaurs and almost half the marine ecosphere. That will take millions of years to climb back from. Even if we dropped everything and put our backs into mitigation, we'll still see some pretty outrageous effects manifest over the course of the next 500 years.
Small variations in axial tilt can cause events like the little ice age (indeed, it's one theory for the event) as can longer solar cycles than the standard 11-year cycle. Which we may be currently in the midst of, as part of that measured 50-year decrease insolation. Indeed, this has to be combined with the fact that high amounts of particulates in the air - first by the west in the early-mid 1900s and now by China and India - have kept the surface temperatures artificially low for something like 75 years.
Right now we're largely insulated from the effects of the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere. As we climb out of the current solar cycle to see increased insolation of the Earth (again, a separate item from the 11-year cycle discussed int eh article) we'll really begin to feel it. In a much shorter time frame China and India's switch away from coal (in an attempt to make their air breathable once more) will see the particulate levels of our atmosphere drop precipitously; this will lead to dramatic increases in global average temperature (likely on the order of 2 degrees C) within our lifetimes.
So while the 11-year solar cycle is not responsible for a notable decrease in insolation, we are indeed at the lower end of a larger cycle, though not quite at the bottom of certain even larger cycles (such as the Milankovitch cycles which dictate changes in our orbit over time.) Clear as mud? Good.
Assuming Voyager's RTG holds out enough to power the sensors several months (or years?) from now when the particle storm hits...
Re: U.S. NATIONAL DEBT What is bad for the USA is bad for us in Canada.
What is bad for the US isn't bad for Canada. The US is merely a source of finished goods. We can get those from Europe, or make them ourselves. (We do have an aerospace industry, in case you hadn't noticed, along with many other high-tech industries.)
We can cheerily sell our natural resources to the EU or China. The US is our largest trading partner, but it doesn't have to be. It's only really worthwhile because they have shorter supply lines than our other potential trading partners. If they go titsup.com, we'll take a small blow...but nothing too serious. A minor readjustment of the economy as we pivot towards other markets.
We saw this quite directly the last time their economy collapsed. 2008 might have been a fairly short-ish economic recession, however, Canada didn't suffer overmuch from it. We recovered way faster than they did (actually, has the US even replaced the lost jobs yet?), our banking industry didn't collapse, manufacturing jobs moved to Canada when the US collapsed and we took steps to diversify our economy, selling more into Europe, Asia and Latin America.
So not only did we not have to go through the half-decade of pain that the US has been miserably slogging through, we wised up and made our economy more resilient to such a single point of failure in the future. In short: fuck 'em. Canada doesn't need the US. They're a nice close place to sell stuff for now, but we've got lots of other friends. If the US wants to drink itself into oblivion then I say let 'em. You cant' force 'em into rehab; they have to choose to climb up onto that wagon on their own.
Your/you're. Learn them!
Also: if you think for a moment that the UK - or any other major power - isn't "in the spotlight" then you are deluding yourself. Ask the British how they feel about Iraq, or Greece about about EU monetary policy. The difference is that the douchebaggery of most other major powers is a pale shadow when compared do the overall dickishness of the good ol' US of A.
American exceptionalism: present in the populace as much as the politicians.
While I know many Americans I like - and a good number of my friends are Americans, and right decent people, thank you - America as a country can go fuck itself. It has been a good long while that a nation ruled by something other than a single dictator-like figure has so desperately needed housecleaning.
Even monarchies eventually developed the aristocracy to reign in the power of their royalty. Commoners gained representation through parliaments. Yet America holds itself up as a beacon of all that's right and good whilst allowing "executive power" to reach levels that most of these restrained monarchs could only dream of.
Worse, through objectively terrible decisions like Citizens United America has further reduced that ability of not merely individuals, not merely communities or towns or entire states but the collective voice of the entire nation to a mere whisper when compared to the power of a large corporation.
Topics where your nation very nearly speaks with a single, unified voice (for example gun control) have become charlatanous mockeries of what democracy should be. The needs, wishes, desires and thunderous demands of "the overwhleming majority" matter nothing in the face of backroom politics and the massive machine of lobbying. State legislators are no different; an entire state can turn out to "stand with Wendy" only to see their efforts rent to ashes mere days later.
This is how you treat your own people. You lie to them professionally. You murder the innocent in the name of the law. You rain down suspicion and even death upon your own people and you dare expect us to look upon you as anything more than the haughty, pretentious, arrogant, murderous, xenophobic, savages you choose to elect to run your nation?
We haven't even gotten into the disdain, disrespect and outright lack of humanity, compassion or common decency which which your nation treats the other denizens of this world. The United States of America is a corrupt nation unfit to preach about morality or freedom to anyone. It is a nation in desperate need of a legal and overwhelming political change. New parties need to emerge and America as a nation needs to learn some fucking humility.
Wake me when the Unites States of America has ratified the International Criminal Court. At that point I will be wiling to consider that American might be ready to be given it's first responsibility and might one day be treated as an adult. Until then, suck up, America.
You bring the criticism on yourselves.
Good show to these guys. While the rest of the server market struggles, SuperMicro shows growth. Despite the prejudice shown by some against SuperMicro, they've provided some damn fine equipment for my clients and I so far and I fully expect them to keep outgrowing the market. They are shifting a lot of boxes into the HPC space, to cloud vendors and OEMing units for companies like Nutanix. It is, apparently, a good racket to be in.
The only legitimate complaint I've seen from anyone against SuperMicro is the lack of a 4-hour enterprise replacement program. I expect they'll look after this sometime over the next year or two, once their manufacturing capacity can meet the spike in demand that would bring.
At least SuperMicro isn't in the middle of some massive "restructuring" (involving axing how many staff every month) or in some asset-stripping Ichann-driven limbo. The real interesting competition begins when Lenovo buys IBM's server division. Then HP versus Dell becomes Lenovo versus SuperMicro...and that will be an interesting contest.
We have always been at war with Eastasia.
Perpetual war = perpetual carte blanche to funnel money back to your campaign donors.
"fully featured x86 PC in a tablet form"
Yes, the fully featured x86 PC in a tablet form. Something that 13 years have taught us repeatedly demand exists for only in a tiny niche, especially if you overprice the widget in question.
You're correct that it will never be "sold that cheaply", however, that isn't due to some innate value or demand for the device. It's simply because Microsoft herp derp market comprehension.
"It's Lamborghini, pay Lambo prices, bitch" works somewhat less well when you're fielding a 20-year-old rebuilt Lada powertrain crammed imperfectly into a Pontiac Firefly's body that happens to peel and crack when exposed to, well, air. It's doubly amusing when you realize the competition is selling a fuel-efficient Scion XB that does what people actually want, and does it cheaply even if it looks like a toaster.
In short: fuck x86 tablets. In the face. Sideways. With a giraffe. (Bet you thought I was going to say gorilla, eh?) The only reason why anyone uses x86 on the non-workstation endpoint any more is legacy software. Legacy software that requires a precision pointing device and an actual fucking keyboard. (No, the Surface keyboard doesn't count. It's somewhere between "Blackberry keyboard" and "netbook keyboard" and all the way towards "WTF useless.")
No matter how much flavour-aid that Microsoft pours into the local dihydrogen monoxide supply it won't change the fact that once technology reaches "good enough" people start buying on price...and we reached "good enough" a decade ago.
It's you're going to buy a smear-attracting fondle slab why in the name of sweet merciful monkey fuck would you shell out $800+ for it to get a device where 95% of the apps are either craptastic^n or designed for a precision pointer? Hell, why would you shell out $800+ for a device whose only real purpose is content consumption in the first place? What laboratory would they have to grow your ass in to think that was a grand vision?
If you're going to slap down more than pocket change on a computer then it had damned well better pay for itself. Which means being a productivity tool. Which means a precision pointing device and a keyboard that works better than rolling your face around into 80s voice rec software whilst making mewling noises and gasping.
The tablet is not a replacement for a PC! It is a replacement for the television and/or the newspaper. It is a new way to consume content, it is fucking worthless at producing it. If you pay $800+ for a single-viewer television or a newspaper you are exactly the kind of chump that companies like Microsoft hope we all are.
Which leads me to: there's no reason that x86 tablets shouldn't innately be priced at the same as ARM tablets excepting a complete misreading of the market by both Microsoft and Intel. They don't understand the purpose of the devices and they don't understand how to position themselves. If Microsoft and Intel can't start putting their x86 tablets in the $100-$300 range then x86 will simply lose out on the "personal content consumption device" market altogether.
Considering that historically we've had a lot more content consumers than producers I'd say that's a completely ridiculous business decision on their part.
Re: RE: TP - Liver
As it happens, I don't eat liver either. I think that's a British thing. The point is that we can survive - and quite healthily - entirely off of meat. That's part of being an omnivore. Whatever it is we eat we eat because we like it, not because we need one group or another.
Re: What happened to Eadon?? - 'Ignore Lists'
"Shameometer?" Hmm...that could go either way, but interesting concept!
Re: What happened to Eadon??
"By the way, there are more options at your disposal than a ban-hammer. You could, for example, rate limit posts, remove people's no-moderate tag, temporarily suspend accounts, use a badge of shame, default comments to invisible. . ."
Excellent ideas, some of which I had not considered before. Thank you!
As for my idea of what it would take to get to the "banhammer" state, yeah, I really do think that you'd need to go all out on the douchewagon to get there. I'm a pretty hard-core believer in freedom of speech. (As well ast he freedom to add people to your ignore list. The freedom to say something doesn't mean you have the freedom to force them to read your tripe.) I'd love to see the "ignore" button that gold badge holders get extended to all commenttards. I think it's a viable solution to a certain class of troll.
That said, your insights are exactly what i am trying to get feedback from "people who are not Trevor" before submitting my proposal. I realize that my views on freedom of speech are certainly far more extreme than would be generally acceptable in most places.
A part of me does believe you should be able to forum jack, be generally dickish, off topic and so forth. I think that it is up to individual users to push back against that, to ostracise or ignore. If I didn't then frankly I'd have agitated ages ago to have jake, Matt Bryant, RICHTO and others booted. I never have.
What I did instead was ask for an "ignore" button and put their asses on my ignore list. I do plan to agitate to have that extended to everyone. If the really offensive individuals and/or serial thread-jackers are simply "ignored" by 85%+ of the community they will either go away entirely or look like complete tools talking only to themselves while the discussion continues around them as though they weren't there.
Per-user ignore lists at least remove the ambiguity of "so who decides if someone deserves to be [insert disciplinary measure here]ed". Only the most egregious cases would thus need intervention. That said, this is a personal preference, and I'm interested to hear other viewpoints.
Re: What happened to Eadon??
It's a fine line, and I have to be honest when I say that I'm not entirely comfortable myself with the idea of outright bans for anyone. (Well, maybe jake or Bryant...)
The reality of it is that Eadon was an outlier that caused some problems, stepped over the line and has caused a rethink of commenter and forum policy within El Reg. Drew and I had a frank and open discussion about all of this and I am under the impression that dialogue internally at El Reg has been proceeding apace on the topic as well.
My position on this is thus: I agree with the decision to banhammer Eadon, despite the misgivings that it causes with my inner internet troll. The situation was unique. I similarly believe that we should unban Eadon and invite him back with the understanding that he refrain from ad homs against the authors or other El Reg staffs. Call it "time served."
He may or may not accept - $deity knows I'd be pissed if I got banhammered from somewhere - but I think that "undeading" him is ultimately the right path forward. There is, however, a catch.
I believe - and others have agreed - that the forum policies need an update for clarity and that the issue should probably be discussed in the open. We're a technology website, after all, and this is an issue that affects online communities the world over.
A large part of the reason why this hasn't happened is because I agreed to create the draft and I simply haven't held up my end. I'm a little on the OCD side about trying to find the right balance and so I'm neck-deep in research about how other online communities have solved the same problems, as well as researching how the active members of our community are responding to the fallout of the incident. I've started soliciting input from members of the community as well about how The Register should deal with moderation.
Part of the issue is that full bore moderation - as it occurred under the moderatrix - is time intensive and expensive. The bigger issue, however, is that it is soul crushingly disheartening. What a lot of readers don't appreciate is exactly how utterly vile some of the comments that get posted here are. This is part of the reason why there are post counts before a commenter is allowed the right to post without moderation.
I don't exactly moderate this stuff myself, but I do talk to the folks that do...and frankly they find some of what people post quite upsetting, sometimes even legally questionable. So any policy needs to not only take into account issues like "continued and ever-ratcheting ad homs against writers and staff" but outright "not okay" posts from new users and even a sustainable methodology for tagging, reporting and acting upon offensive posts from established community members.
As a nerd I'd love to find a nice clean set of rules that are absolute. Ultimately, I don't believe that's going to be possible. Make absolute rules and a true troll will simply find a loophole. Clearly, however, we should try to do better then we have.
Some people are going to be very upset that we don't allow everyone to say anything they want. They demand nothing less than a moot-free 4Chan and they'll get all huffy and "leave" unless they get it. Others will leave if we let the community degenerate into trollmageddon.
I am a troll at heart; hell, I write for the register and am essentially a professional shit disturber. I prefer a community that falls between the two extremes of "4Chan" and "fully moderated by 'think of the children' NIMBYs." I suspect that the majority of El Reg staffers and community members feel the same.
If you agree, or if you disagree, I think the next month or so is your chance to speak up. I don't have the final say on community anything, but I have been given the opportunity to put forth a few proposals. The people trying refine the community rules are decent people. I can say with absolute confidence that all ideas will be considered.
So speak up! The Register isn't a faceless megacorp bent on pushing its view of the universe upon you. (In fact, given the eclectic nature of the people who work and write for El Reg I'd go so far as to say "The Register" doesn't have a collective 'view' on most topics.) You have a voice in the discussion regarding the evolution of the forums and it will be heard. Even if we all ultimately disagree vehemently, your views will be weighed and considered.
Re: Why are we throwing this away?
I'd cheerfully pay MS another $130 to keep Windows XP in support for another 5 years, as long as I get to keep my "you don't have to count remote endpoints and license them at $100 ea PER YEAR" remote access rules. Fuck anything past XP until that rule changes. I'll just get really good at reloading my XP VM until a viable remote protocol turns up for Linux.
Re: The big question for SMB's is....
Amen. That's what they pay MSPs ("their IT guy") for, and, really, why would MSPs outsource their own jobs?
Re: Dale Vile speaketh the truth.
Agree entirely. Most SMEs that i know of that are using "cloud" are using the "cloud" of their local MSP. They aren't using Google, Microsoft, etc. That, and despite Dale's protestations about "hysteria," privacy concerns are beginning to filter down to SMEs...though I admit they are far more common amongst enterprises.
Where Dale and I disagree is in the roll of MSPs. I see a lot of SMEs that simply don't have sysadmins anymore. They are managed by an MSP that's running 15 or 20 companies at the same time. When and where "cloud" gets implemented is typically when the MSP decides it is advantageous. Most "cloud" stuff is actually the MSP's private virtual cloud (a rack in a local colo) or their private cloud in their own DC. They sync their client's stuff there, run e-mail, etc.
But the overwhelming majority of SMEs are - in my experience - simply moving to appliances, both physical and virtual. Synology is a great example. While some - if not most - SMEs use a cloud service for something - usually e-mail - they just don't see the advantage to anything else.
Office 365 breaks even compared to a local copy only if you refresh every three years. Most SME's don't. Azure for your servers just doesn't make financial sense, especially if you shift a lot of bits. Bit shifting is expensive.
The problem is exactly what Dale points out: Microsoft, VMware, et al are basing their info off of metrics derived from within their own echo chamber. When you actually start getting out onto the real coalface, all their promises and their "this is demanded by our customers!" fall to pieces.
I wonder how many of us have to say it in how many different ways before vendors start to care?
Norfolk is a big time military town. There's a decent chance that it legitimately was a weather balloon but may have been carrying a sensitive payload. (Weather balloons being used to lift all sorts of stuff into the air.) Alternately it could just be a crashed drone, which they would obviously be wanting to keep wraps on.
Re: @Matt Bryant Potty Don't forget the rest.
I believe there was a memorial to the French victory that gave the US their independence. It's a gigantic rusted hunk of copper on some island out on the east coast.
Most yanks think it's USian. Explains a lot...
Re: Don't forget the rest.
Putting this as bluntly as possible: I give zero fucks about what China and Russia knows about me because I don't have to interact with either nation. I can - and likely will - live the rest of my life without ever setting foot there or having to interact with their government in any way.
I do have to put up with the USA, loud, proud and in my face every bloody day. Even if I never planned to set foot there again, they are a demented giant with dreams of extraterritorial grandeur that lives directly south of me.
Dictators like those in China and Russia are evil men obsessed with holding on to the power that they have and ensuring their hold on that nations they rule is absolute. The USA is run by evil men obsessed with taking over the world through economic and cultural imperialism and have no compunction whatsoever about killing you and the entire wedding you're attending with a drone to see their aims fulfilled.
It's different when you live next to the bastards. It's impossible not to feel like a target, especially when so many of them in positions of power publicly demand that we be invaded. Even jokingly, I'm not okay with a country of nuclear-weapon-toting religious nutjobs making jokes like that.
Other nations get uppity and sometimes get rules by the truly deplorable, but they are not married to a combination of nationwide moral exceptionalism and pride in their international ignorance. I get sniffy about how the Brits treat us - as just one example - but at least the Brits understand us. We can built a bridge with that understanding.
The Americans don't understand us, don't want to understand us and in fact view us as nothing but resources that are "rightfully theirs."
So yeah, not nearly so angsty about China or Russia knowing my life's history. Pretty angsty about Uncle Sam's religious zealots knowing it though. That's just not okay.
JDX can't consider either wrong because U.S.A! U.S.A! U.S.A!
All that's required for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing. JDX demands you not only do nothing, but you don't even think about doing anything. Just let the evil men win.
Now wave your flag and kiss an eagle, boys!
And just so we're clear...the evil men are the ones running the USA. If you think otherwise then you're dafter than any "conspiracy nutjob".
Why would anyone post on an open forum why I don't want the NSA tracking us? Dafuq?
"It's true that the full blown Office isn't available for ios or Android tablets yet, but I thought they're working on them. For years MS have made their software available for OS X. I don't think this is really an Apple-style "let's make things only work with our own hardware"."
Bullshit. "You can use Office 365 on an Android phone but not a tablet." Fuck right the hell off with your "this isn't market protectionism." Yes it is. So blatantly it's got a 200 foot neon sign blinking at passing airplanes.
Microsoft is not in the business of providing it's software on popular non-Microsoft platforms unless it's back is against the wall. It is in the process of extracting maximum money from it's failing monopolies before it eventually abandons them (or relegates them to "severely reduced resource input" level.) Right now that means "preventing people with Android tablets, netbooks and desktops from using Office 365 downloadable" because that would obliterate their Windows 8 and Windows RT sales.
In fact, the instant I figured out how to get the web app working properly (both for Google Apps and Office 365) on Android I sold over 500 Android desktops and over 300 netbook/tablets which would otherwise have been Windows 8 and/or Windows RT.
The non-redmondian-buttsnorkling public does not want Windows 8. That covers most of the planet in case you missed the part where Microsoft actually spent more on marketing their tangible evidence of failure to obtain clue than they managed to get in revenue from their surface efforts...and surface is unquestionable the most palatable Windows 8/Windows RT offering on the market!
Microsoft do not give any fucks about ideas, opinions or even purchasing habits of those who live outside the Redmondian echo chamber. They get "metrics" and opinions from their closest buddies and pals and design to them. The more they work away furiously at their little isolated self-reinforcing circle jerk the less what they build is applicable to anyone outside their echo chamber.
That's okay in the short term because they are simply so massive that they can get away with screwing people over and over and over and over again. At least until the alternatives pick up some steam. Then you start seeing what I'm seeing way out here on the pointy end: people getting rid of their last Microsoft endpoint and throwing parties, exclaiming "free at last, free at last, free at last!".
For a company you hold in such high regard perhaps you should ask yourself why it is that the hoi polloi view them not as enablers but as manacles.
Maybe if you can wrap your mind around the answer to that you will begin to understand what Microsoft needs to do to win. "Keep telling people how they should use their computers and consistently removing choice over the loud and consistent objections of their user base" is not that path. Providing what people want, when people want it on the platforms they want it is.
Re: Deja vu, all over again!
Bullshit Mark. Windows 8 was ONLY Made for touch.
There is some legacy keyboard/mouse code left in, but Windows 8 was designed ENTIRELY for touch. It's more than just Metro. It's "search as the default interface" and the minimization of a hierarchical structure for application discovery, settings interaction and more. Everything about it assumes you are probing your slab with fat fingers instead of a precision pointing device and and honest-to-god keyboard.
Windows 8 is a swinging sack of rotting dicks presented to productivity (keyboard+mouse) users as though it were the greatest dessert dish of all time. It's terrible. It's insulting. It gets in the way of doing real work. Worst of all, Windows 8 is about telling the computer user how they are going to use the computer instead of recognizing that it's my fucking computer and it is going to do what I fucking tell it to.
Windows 8 - and the milled minions of Redmond - emphatically do not know better than I do about how I should use my computer to get work done. Removing choice and herding us towards a means that works for their thinking patterns and particular combinations of neuroses are a dangerous precedent to set.
Windows 8 has very obviously deprecated every single non-touch input method...and the market reacted clearly. Suck it up. Learn from it. And do better next time.
Re: Deja vu, all over again!
Actually, I use Office 365 on my Android tablet just fine already. It's all down to the browser you use...
Please buy our Windows 8 and Windows RT stuff. We'll restrict access to the devices you actually use until you do! If you were able to use Office on an Android tablet (which often have a proper keyboard and mouse) that would be a disaster. Just buy our tablets, eh? Please?
Re: time for some serious declassifying, Keith.....
Them too...but my theory is that if popular uprising can tame the NSA the GCHQ will crawl back under it's rock for the next 30 years or so before trying anything overt again.
if( (Secret Prisons == CIA) && (Secret Courts == FISA) ) then Secret Police = ?
In a nation where money is the goal of all (wo)men the secret police is the IRS.
Re: time for some serious declassifying, Keith.....
Forget Americans. Time to come clean on NSA activities that target citizens and legal residents of the USA's so-called "allies." A Canadian or Australian should no more be subject to warrantless (or rubber-stamped) scrutiny than an American.
Re: Latest NEWS NSA says Snowden is lying, therefor he cant be prosecuted.
Why would you believe either of them? What incentive does the NSA, the US government or any other entity exerting high-level power in the good ol' US of A have to tell the truth about anything, ever?
Their collective credibility is the square root of negative zero. As is demonstrably the standard they hold us to I believe it is only just that they be held guilty unless proven innocent. After all, I'm somewhat sick of "one ruleset for them and another ruleset for the rest of us."
Actually, I prefer "LightDrive." Light goes in to the PRISM and out comes rainbows!
Really, you guys, we're not spying on you. Honest. Please trust US-based cloud computing. Oh gods, please?
If Ichann wins he had better strip the assets fast because anyone not under contract with Dell at that point will cease being a Dell customer immediately.
- DINO-SLAYER asteroid strike was a stroke of bad luck, say boffins
- BEST BATTERY EVER: All lithium, all the time, plus a dash of carbon nano-stuff
- Stick a 4K in them: Super high-res TVs are DONE
- Review You didn't get the MeMO? Asus Pad 7 Android tab is ... not bad
- Russia: There is a SPACECRAFT full of LIZARDS in orbit above Earth and WE control it