... the UK is shown up on this issue - however transparently a fop to privacy advocates it may be - by the US.
258 posts • joined 4 Aug 2010
... the UK is shown up on this issue - however transparently a fop to privacy advocates it may be - by the US.
I mean, sure - it seems quite technically clever and impressive and such-like, but I struggle to see the point.
In this day and age, with the amount of computing power available in even the most bog-standard of basic office-desktop-boxen, is spinning up a VM to run proper Linux really that tricky? I have VirtualBox on every machine that runs the x86 Android build, and a flavour of Linux, just to play around with. Hell, MS themselves released Windows 7 with XP-Mode, and that made getting a VM up as easy as you like.
So proper-techy-people (one of whom I am not) - is there in fact a genuine use-case for this?
"very little need" =/= "no need"
But I see your point.
I had to bloody well look it up!!
Grammar Nazi - because.
I'm a bit off-topic on this one too, for the same "not being an American" reasons as you, but I understood it as a 14th Amendment defence because there is such a concept as Corporate Citizenship - meaning that corporations as a whole are extended the same rights as an individual citizen with regard to certain things.
There's an awful lot of computer inside a Wear watch, and it isn't doing much for you, except running down its battery.
I've been saying this for *AGES!!*
This is why the Pebble and such are so good. Just a shame they're a bit on the unattractive side. The Pebble Round Time isn't bad, but they've made the same mistake regarding "thinness" as all the other tech manufacturers seem to do and have taken it too far. Also, no Qi charging, which in something like a smartwatch is unforgivable in my view.
Andy Burnham is a thick, clueless, lifetime politico-twat.
He understands nothing, but thinks an Oxbridge PPE gives him the background to legislate on everything.
Much like pretty much every other MP in the Commons sadly.
Last time the Lords pushed back on something the Government really wanted to get through - the benefit changes i think it was - they were told there would be "consequences".
(Although that was more because they interfered in a financial, budgetary matter which by custom they previously had not.)
I would suspect that if they interfere again, they will get slapped down and their power reduced. In this case, because it will be pointed out that the Bill passed with a huge majority and thus must represent the will of the people as filtered through their elected representatives....
Absolute weasel words here from Labour. They think the Bill isn't worthy of support in it's current form, but they won't vote against it. Instead, they simply abstain and allow the vote to pass with less than an absolute majority on the number of votes, instead only needing a majority of the number of people who turn up.
Andy Burnham (Shadow Home Secretary):
"I disagree entirely. As I said, we will not oppose the Bill because we will be responsible. I have recognised that the country needs a new law. I have also said, as I will come on to explain, that the Bill is not yet worthy of support. There are significant weaknesses in the Bill. I am sorry, but I am not prepared to go through the Lobby tonight and give the hon. Gentleman and his Government a blank cheque. I want to hold the Government to account. I want to see changes in the Bill to strengthen the Bill. When they listen, they will earn our support. That is entirely appropriate and responsible for an Opposition party to do."
I could accept abstaining if the threshold for passing a Bill or vote in the Commons remained 326, not a simple majority of the people in the chamber at the time. When a vote can pass on 281 votes because of mass abstentions, then abstaining isn't simply abstaining - it's effectively voting yes.
Why 'abstaining' on issues like this is an option is beyond me. We, the citizenry, pay through our taxes a substantial sum of money to keep the parasites gainfully (Hah!) employed by voting on our behalf on important issues.
They don't turn up for some votes. They abstain on others. Meaning a Bill gets passed through a Parliament of 650 MPs with 281 votes - 43% by my sums. And that doesn't even account for the fact that the 328 or so Conservative MPs are running the country based on a little over 35% of the total vote, which in itself is only representative of the 60% or so of the population that voted in the first place!
That means this Bill has been through the Commons with (possibly) as little as 9% of the vote - if one chooses to interpret the numbers in a specific way, admittedly.
The SNP are hypocrites.
Labour are absolutely spineless.
The Lib Dems, at least, haven't flip-flopped on this particular position as they did on so many for the promise of a referendum on alternate voting systems.
I happened across the hated VB Date format bug myself. Took me an age to work out what was causing the issue in the first place, primarily because I foolishly assumed no-one would be so stupid as to allow random conversions in the first place.
I then discovered that - in the version of VB i was then using at least - that the system Locale settings make absolutely no difference whatsoever to VBs interpretation of the dates. It carries on doing it's own thing regardless.
I ended up fixing the issue by wrapping every single date input command in the ConvertDate() (at least i think that's what it's called - the memory is now hazy) to *FORCE* everything into a consistent, known format, and carefully hand-scouring the code, which was thankfully not too long, to ensure it wasn't doing anything odd with strings or anything.
Worked in the end, but had me pulling my hair out and screaming for a good few days.
I love the random 8 character .origin issue though. That's just brilliant.
What's that? Yet *MORE* evidence that the police and other such bodies can't be trusted with personal information that is - apparently - only accessed when necessary and in pursuit of the prosecution of criminals and terrorists?
I hope people are going to make a point of emailing this story to their various MPs pointing this fact out, especially if said MP happens to be in favour of the Snooper's Charter (Mk 2), or is in fact the FIrst Lady of Darkness herself?
(I would, but as my MP has recently passed away, there isn't a lot of point!)
You don't need to commit a crime to be discharged from employment for gross misconduct. You can be dismissed under the terms of most contracts for turning up to work over the drink-drive limit (or some other specified amount), which is perfectly legal...
... or were you commenting on the fact that the copper in question has somehow gotten away with *ONLY* being discharged from his employment, rather than being *ADDITIONALLY* charged with a crime?
Surely it can't be difficult to update the OS kernel and the programs that run atop it without changing the HAL model and invalidating the existing drivers?
The court order is extremely specific to the device (serial and imei). And iirc doesn't require the software to be handed over. I was actually quite impressed with the wording and can sympathise with the intent.
You and I both. Some of the judges have obviously been paying attention to the growing furore over security, unwarranted snooping and the like.
However, the idea that any individual's protected information can be accessed by the state by way of a court order is troubling to me. Personally, I've nothing to hide, but that doesn't mean I'm comfortable with a government agency rifling through my stuff.
I don't agree here though. If the authorities, be it the local police of some arm of the government security apparatus, has actually been to a court and got a court order, then isn't this exactly what most people have been asking for? Clear, accountable judicial process and a valid warrant for the information?
Admittedly in this case, it's all a bit post hoc and arguably pointless - which is why I tend to agree with people suggesting it's being used as a precedent-setting test-case - but I'd be perfectly happy with this. Especially given the controls the judge has tried to put on it.
Of course, if Apple were to comply, all they've done is shown everyone and their dog that there *IS* in fact a way to break into their system and "bypass" the security...
Proper sex and relationship education = good thing.
Thinking that will stop kids growing into young adults and getting their rocks off watching online porn = clearly as delusional as the Government and the Great Web Filter of Westminster.
all it means is that when they finally watch the porn, they'll just enjoy it for the 'spectacle' rather than thinking it represents reality. Like watching American "wrestling".
"Not when there is a Constitution that guarantees individual privacy and freedom from unwarranted search, and bulk surveillance is - by definition - unwarranted search."
That's the problem.
There isn't a UK constitution. We have a hodge-podge collection of statutes and other legal, political and sovereign documents and ides, all interacting and interfering with the other. We don't have a 4th Amendment - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution - and more's the pity.
Note in that link - HMGov have been pretty lax about behaving with the rights of citizens/subjects for quite some time:
Got to remember when my little girl starts school to give nothing but false names and addresses then.
Done that to the interminable bank phone calls once or twice:
Bank monkey: "Can you confirm your name and address please, to prove who you are?"
Me: "You're my bank - you've called me on the number i've given you. I want to know *YOU'RE* who you say you are before I give out any personal information! Can *you* confirm *my* address?"
Bank monkey: *silence*
And yes, Data Protection is the new Health and Safety. No-one really understands it. I fell foul of it trying to cancel my granddad's phone contract after he passed!
Everyone else here has summed up my feeling on the discovery - and the preliminary thinking that went into this pre-discovery - far more eloquently than I'm capable of on a Friday morning. However, I've got to say my favourite part of the article was this:
As part of their jobs, four members of the team have to try and introduce faults into the signal, and all four said they weren't responsible for the signal.
That must either be the most fun job in the world, or the most annoying...
Scientist 1: "I've done it! I've found a gravitational wave to a 5-sigma certainty! Now, just to check to make sure it was the 'Red Team' interference..."
'Red Team': "Ah, no, sorry. That was us again. Sorry about that."
Scientist 1: "Well just fuck you guys."
Jesus - you at least need to warn us with a NSFW tag when you put such a filthy and disgusting image up as the banner at the top of the article! I nearly spat out my tea in horror!
None of which sounds like a Windows issue to my (admittedly unenlightened) eyes.
Every single issue listed sounds like shitty vendor software or drivers.
Perhaps the reason Apple stuff "just works" is because only proper software gets developed for it - you know, stuff like Photoshop and the like. All the stuff that is used by hundreds upon hundreds of millions of people across the globe.
Some CNC software / bespoke plotter drivers / whatever - that is possibly only used by a number in the low thousands of people - not a lot of call or scope to maintain / update / patch / whatever the application code.
And no - I'm not an Apple product owner. Never bought anything from them, and probably never will.
Upvoted just for "And all this for the price of a couple of community catalyst catapults for a Shoreditch web design imagineering exercise."
"Many times in my career I have given up on a problem and left the office. Then 100 metres down the road had to turn back as the answer had just occurred to me."
This happens to me ALL THE TIME - although normally when I'm about 200 metres from home rather than 100 metres from the office.
It is intensely annoying, as I then have to try to *remember* the solution for the next day!
All fair points. And I think me missing the <sarcasm> tags might not have helped...
But the fact is that most of the concerns people have (or so it seems to me, and other than the obvious technical problems ofc) aren't about security services / police having access to this kind of data - it's about security services / police having *UNFETTERED* access to the data.
Whack some accountability by the judicial system in there and job's a good 'un!
... exactly why it is it's so difficult to simply go to a judge an ask for a warrant to snoop on someone's phonecalls, text messages and internet access. get said warrant, go to various companies, and those companies can - by way of a "software update" - push appropriate snooping software onto a specific device, rather than the deep-sea trawl approach they seem to be going for.
As an added bonus, accountability and the ability to use whatever data they snoop in a court!
Also, in that second picture, the 'cabin' appears to have parachuted to a rest in the Windows XP default backdrop...
I think the theory - much like the large Highways Maintenance PFI deals which I have direct working knowledge of - is that while the services cost the same amount of money to provide, there is a saving to be made by outsourcing to the likes of Capita et al because some of the overhead costs, such as HR, (internal) IT support, pensions etc. etc. are shared across all the Capita outsourced jobs, rather than being duplicated by each Council (or whatever.)
There is also the fact that - from the POV of the Council - it's a fixed annual fee. They know exactly how much they're paying out year-on-year as it's in the contract, and if the contract has been written and vetted correctly, it should never cost any more or any less than that, no matter what changes to the services Capita (or whoever) are asked to undertake. That then makes it easier to see how much money the Council has left for other things, rather than the cost of service provision being a moving feast.
At least that's the theory as I understand it.
In practice, of course, it hardly ever works.
To be fair, I think Samsung is one of the worst of the bunch. It seems to all be tied in to the amount of deep code-level twatting about the manufacturer does with the build.
Samsungs have always been poor, because of all the additional Samsung bloatware clones and replicas of functionality they whack on (read SMail, SCalendar etc.).
HTC suffered from the same issue, primarily because of SenseUI.
The manufacturers that don't mess with Android too much do a much better job of getting updates out. Sony were pretty decent with my previous Z1. My Lenovo Yoga 2 updates fairly frequently, and this is after they've had to transcode the updates from ARM to x86. My Moto X updates regularly too.
the nacelles are surprisingly large! The engines when viewed as part of the larger plane look a bit weedy, but that's just the size of the airframe tricking the eye.
Oil would have to stay very low for a very long time in order for the economics to be viable of the life of the airframe if fuel is - in fact - the reason orders have dried up.
No point ordering a load of 747s now because the oil is cheap, only for the oil price to bounce before the first one is delivered and then o be stuck with them for 25+ years.
Never said they were innocent or not partially culpable. Plenty of blame to go around.
But I notice both Halliburton and the valve manufacturer (whose name i have since forgotten) didn't end up paying any fines. Fact is, a large chunk of the damage was caused by failure of the well-head concrete, meaning that a top-kill wasn't a feasible solution. It was subsequently discovered that the concrete had been out of spec in both material and placement, and entirely the responsibility of the sub-contractor.
All three firms should have been punished. But BP took the reaming - because even though they're mostly owned by Americans, the name suggests they aren't an American firm, and our multi-national conglomerates have *NEVER* been involved in anything suspect with the government in order to dodge regulations or win a fat juicy contract (ref. Halliburton and Irag War 2: The Enbombening)...
What? You mean like the Deepwater Horizon FUBAR where BP got absolutely nailed to the wall, despite the fact that the cut-off valve that failed was manfactured by an American company, and the concrete surround well-cap was specified, placed and monitored by an American company?
Are we sure it's not just some bits of grit on the scanner?
For the kind of messing about I do on my desktop and laptop at home, I really don't think Windows 10 is bad as an OS. The "spying" concerns me a little, but considering my usage consists of time on eBay, time browsing the net generally, the occasional YouTube trip, and occasional gaming, I don't think I'm going to worry myself unduly about the entire affair.
What worries me a little more is time spent on an unsupported OS. My Win 7 machines might have to be imaged, then upgraded, so that I qualify for the "free" upgrade and can immediately revert back. Saying that, I've had Win10 on my desktop for a while now and I've had no problems with it.
I'm really not sure how these devices will "enable consumers to reduce their energy consumption and save money"?
Presumably all that will actually happen is the smart meter will flag up that your fridge, or your oven or whatever is using a lot of electricity / gas and that to save money you should consider turning the heating down or switching it off or replacing it with a more efficient device. To which the majority of people will go "Yeah, and I'm paying for that with...?" and carry on with the older inefficient fridge because they like to have food without mould on it, or carry on with the heating because it's cold outside and they don't want to freeze.
I just don't see how they're advantageous for anything except more accurate billing than the comedic "estimates" energy companies usually make. And even then I'd expect some creative accounting to make sure you're paying over the odds.
Think I'll just be constantly "not in" for the installation.
No wonder the USA police refer to the general public as "civilians", especially now that police is the USA are basically a series of paramilitary forces.
I've said the same myself. When you have a police force referring to the general public as 'civilians', it just emphasizes that they have totally forgotten that they are, themselves, also citizens, and have no special rights under the law.
In America - as in the UK and other major democracies - policing is by consent of the populous. It seems the American Rozzers just forget this a bit more frequently than they do elsewhere.
How I miss thee.
Apparently, getting rid of Worstall and Page are part of the "improvements" - which doesn't promise anything good for anything else that the Reg is also going to label an "improvement".
Is that like when you see 'new and improved recipe' on a sticker on your favourite thing from the supermarket, which guarantees that 'new' = 'cheaper' and 'improved' = 'worse than before'?
While true, not the case.
The headline says "sue", but this will actually be a criminal suit for violating of a federal statute.
If I was VAG, this is exactly what i'd be doing myself.
All proper like - no fiddling of any results, but I'd be buying some EU and US models of popular cars, and running the appropriate EU and US emissions tests on them both to compare results.
And if - *IF* - i found anything fishy, there'd be a few "anonymous" emails to the various environmental protection bodies and political persons in the respective governments...
Sony's problem is that they aren't giving me a convincing reason to replace with a newer model.
I had a Z1. Loved it. Couldn't upgrade to the Z2 or the Z3 due to contract lock, but didn't feel the need as beyond minor battery life improvements and a slightly bigger screen, there was nothing worth upgrading for. Waited and waited and waited and waited for the Z5 hoping for a 5.4" screen, 2k, 3Gb of RAM and a 15-20MP OIS camera. Figured that wasn't far off the specs of every other flagship going so there was a decent chance.
What did i get? Three models that are *IDENTICAL* except for screen size and, in the case of the hellishly expensive Z5 Premium, a 4k screen that slurps so much power it isn't even used all the time. No OIS on any of the camera modules - instead a lot of noise about the speed of focus which doesn't really matter most of the time. If you're trying to take pictures of something that is moving so quick and happening so fast that you need focus times in the microseconds, then you shouldn't really be using a cameraphone to do it.
I'm all for incremental improvements - Apple have been doing it for years with the iPhone - but you have to at least make the increments big enough so that 2 generations down the line there is a noticeable difference!
I refer you to the Sputnik program, Tsar Bomba, and other Earth-bound vulgar displays of power.
Ah right. I kinda get it. I suspect not intentional at all, given how tenuous it is tbh.
I love SpaceBalls (the film, the colouring book, the lunchbox, the flamethower and - my personal favourite - the doll. Isn't he adorable?) but I hadn't thought of that possible back-link in any way.
--++ SPOILERS ++--
Personally, I think that JJ was trying to avoid as much nerd-rage as possible by showing a potential power source of being able to generate the energy required to overcome the binding energy of not just 1 but 5No. Earth-a-like planets in one go. I was sat with the kind of squirming in my seat usually reserved for when i see IP addresses with values in the 7 and 8 hundred ranges when the first shots were fired, thinking "How on earth is that laser beam travelling interstellar distances to destroy planets in remote star systems? Surely the people looking at the sky would just see practically static beams?" when the explanation tipped up that The First Order had managed to construct a hyper-lightspeed weapon system. At that point, the nerd rage subsided. They haven't explained how it worked, but they'd clearly given it sufficient thought to realise the problems and handwaviumed it away.
Good enough for me, given we're talking about a universe with hyperspeed, all-powerful space wizards, laser-plasma swords, moon-sized artificial space stations and technological ability to hollow out a planet at turn it into a star-slurping supergun.
Missed that reference entirely. In what way do you mean exactly, and how more so than the original Death Star = MegaMaid reference?
I have been reliably informed that, in order for hospitals to put in the exorbitantly expensive Pay TV services where you get a shitty lo-res TN TFT panel in a crappy shiny white plastic case on a broken arm dangling over your bed for only £35 quid for 5 days of non-premium free-to-air channels, they have to sign a contract stating they won't implement free patient wifi or other services. That's one of the reasons why the ward TV rooms have gone (also so the hospital isn't responsible for upkeep, servicing, etc. and to free up the space admittedly.)
The deal being that the hospital gets all the kit installed for free for a lengthy period at no cost to the NHS, so the company involved can gouge patients silly should they want to watch a BBC show they've already paid for while they're unfortunate enough to be stuck in hospital. In return, the company ask the hospital doesn't provide any amenities or luxuries that a patient might want, such as TV or internet. This worked brilliantly when world+dog didn't have a smartphone and a 4G connection... and even better when mobile phones were still uncommon so you could charge though the nose for phonecalls too.
Hospital Pay TV companies are the worst kind of scummy filth.
The irony of this deadline is that many who moved from Windows XP and running IE6 moved their browser at least to IE8, because it offered the path of least resistance in terms of re-writing applications and software portability.
Now, those who upgraded to IE8 must be shot of the browser no more than two years later.
This isn't irony. It's a punishment for those who are so short-sighted that they haven't correctly fixed their problems.
Not content with running a 13 year old OS, they were given plenty of notice that it was going EOL and did nothing. They then got a reprieve and an EOL extension, and so sat back on their hands and forgot about it until the next deadline 'whooshed' past them. And on. And on. And then MS offered them a lifeline with CSAs at (deliberately) exorbitant pricing, to try to train them re: the costs of this kind of short-sightedness.
And now they're having to do it all over again less than 2 years later. It isn't irony (unless you mean in an Alanis Morrisette kind of way) - it's karma.
Personally, i think it'd serve them all right if one time MS stuck to their guns instead of offering get-out after get-out through extensions and CSAs. To give a few years notice of EOL, and then stick to it. Rigidly. Make 'em squirm in the wind.
BUT as mentioned in the review, I need decent, front-facing, stereo speakers.
I didn't use to. I never thought about speakers. Then I got an HTC.
You *WANT* decent, front-facing, stereo speakers.
You don't *need* them. You won't die, or get fired, or lose your wife/GF/husband/BF/children/dog/whatever if you don't have them. They aren't central to your continuing existence. You won't vanish in a puff of logic like God when confronted with the idea that proof begets faith.
While I don't deny the benefits of such speakers - my Moto X Style has them and it makes the device far more media-consumption friendly than the bottom / side mounted single speaker on my previous Z1 - the whole "want / need" conflation is starting to get right on my bloody nerves.
I get your point. But it also mentions the tear as being adjacent to one of the cargo doors, hence the breach would have been into the baggage hold. At ground level there would be no air loss as the pressures would be equalised, and at altitude the baggage holds aren't (to my understanding at least) pressurised anyway.
So it may well have breached the pressure vessel, but in a location where it "Didn't Actually Matter" (TM)
You mean differences in actual behaviour between Christians and Muslims like this:
Or perhaps these groups of people:
Just for a few examples. Your comparison is absolutely inane. Tarring an entire group - be it racial, theological, by country of origin, hair colour, whatever - because of the actions of a few is one of the highest forms of idiocy, beaten only by attempts to justify whatever bigoted nonsense has just spewed forth from your face-hole.