116 posts • joined 26 Oct 2010
Re: I'm more impressed
You have a devious mind sir. Or is the voice of experience speaking?
Re: slippery slope or lawsuit magnet?
At no point did I suggest that Google was breaking the terms of its contract. And yes, ultimately, if you don't want Google to read your shit then don't sign up to it*. I was suggesting that this kind of data mining is not in the long term interests of society (although I am very persuaded by the postcard argument).
As to the slippery slope, what is fallacious about it? If you had a time machine, would you argue with those who opposed (picking a suitably blown out of proportion example) Naziism, Soviet-style-communism, Fascism, McCarthyism and so forth that they were just subscribing to the slippery slope fallacy? Surely it's just a matter of how much slip you're prepared to accept before shouting 'foul'.
*up to a point. I don't want Google to read my shit, but I send email to people who don't mind - so, ultimately, that's me fucked - and I didn't even sign their blasted contract.
Of course, because MD5 is always unique for a given file, and no two files can have the same MD5 - that would be unthinkable. In fact, it's the most efficient compression algorithm even - reducing petabytes of data down to a few handfuls of bytes.
Sorry. I'm bored of the MD5 argument now. MD5 doesn't come close to telling you what a file contains - its only purpose it to guarantee that something has gone wrong in a copy, in no way can it tell you if something has gone right. And it certainly can't be used to probe the content of a file.
Re: Because you gave Google permission.
Not me. I pay for my email. But that doesn't matter does it? Because a great many of my friends, family and customers don't - and so a lot of my words are going to end up on Google anyway whether I like it or not.
Re: slippery slope or lawsuit magnet?
@AndyS "the information from Google allowed law enforcement to gain a warrant"
I see what you've done there. You've put the cart in front of the horse - which won't work nearly so well.
It is the job of the law enforcement agencies to approach Google with a warrant, not for Google to approach law enforcement agencies and suggest that they might want to take a warrant out on one of their clients.
The Post Office isn't allowed to open mail and parcels without a warrant - why should email be treated any differently?
I concede that, in this case, the right outcome was achieved - but I worry that this will make it harder for the right outcome to be achieved in the future, and that it could result (in an unpleasant future that is merely a repetition of unpleasant events from the past) in innocent people being persecuted for lifestyles that are none of anyone else's damn business. Like being Jewish, or Muslim, or Homosexual, or Christian, or Transgender, or Atheist or any one of a number of things that have resulted in abhorrent behaviour from wider society in the past.
In the same way that the post office doesn't open letters and parcels unless a warrant has been received concerning the recipient or sender, I can't for the life of me see why online services should be treated any differently.
It is right and proper that these offenders are caught of course, but it strikes me as something of a short term victory since scanning for crime in this manner will just drive the criminals deeper underground as a matter of course, making it harder for legitimate law enforcement agencies to gather evidence. In the future, the criminals will hide themselves out of reach of Google (and other service providers), and law abiding citizens will be further inured to the idea of giving Google, Facebook and so forth (mostly freetard services, to be honest) an all they can eat buffet of no-questions-asked data.
And yes, they'll claim that its for our own good, and that they're not interested in our law-abiding private email. I'm pretty certain that other organisations in the last hundred years might have claimed something similar - organisations whose ends were definitely nefarious. And whilst our governments and corporations may be relatively benign* today who is to say that we won't slide towards Macarthyism, Facism, Communism or <insert evil government of your choice here> in the future, regimes which may be able to coerce Google et al into spilling the beans on each and every one of us.
*or, then again, might just be pretending
Comparisons with Raspberry Pi are irrelevant since the Raspberry Pi is cheap enough for it not to be the end of the world if it breaks, and this overweight shark doesn't even have Ethernet. So it comes with a Windows license? Big deal. The only advantage that Windows had in the embedded space, that there were plenty of developers who were familiar with it, has now been lost to lighter and more efficient OSs, thanks largely to the rise of Android.
For a desktop system, I can build cheaper. For an embedded development system I'd be looking at nix - in one of it's many forms. Linking this to Raspberry Pi is just link baiting.
Maker of inexplicably popular, but rather poor quality, audio gear sues manufacturer of inexplicably popular, but rather poor quality, audio gear. What a sad state of affairs it is that this should be news.
Define Power User
Please define 'Power User’. If running Office and Windows XP on a Celeron with 2GB of RAM qualifies as ‘Power User’ then I am a top gun fighter pilot*
*I fly rather elderly gliders.
Re: It's the beginning of the next Maunder Minimum.
Give Jake a break. He’s learned a new term and now he’s all excited so he wants to use it. He doesn’t know what it means of course, or how to interpret the data, but hey - learning is a process? Right?
Old Skool FTW
I think I'll stick with playing with my NADs, thank you.
Re: A bit dodgy use of pronouns
The problem, as I see it, is that we all have unrealistic expectations of how much our gadgets cost. If you think back to the 1980's, when our computers* were largely built in America or Great Britain, they cost a good deal more than we're prepared to pay nowadays.
Take the BBC B, without a monitor or disk drives, adjusted for inflation you'd be forking out £1,176. The Apple II (again, without disks or monitor) would set you back a cool £1,538. Go for an IBM PC (yup, even back in the eighties you could have an IBM PC if you wanted) and you'd need to find £5,242, with disk drives and monitor. A Mac would see you shelling out £4,211 of your hard earned pennies - and that would only get you a measly 128k of RAM and no hard drive.
Not fair to list 'high' end machines? Even a Spectrum (£515 adjusted for inflation), or a Commodore 64 (£922 adjusted for inflation) busts wide open what most people are prepared to pay these days. And you still didn't get disks or monitor at that price.
So next time you look at the cost of a top price personal computer, and wonder why anyone would spend £2,500, consider that even that price is historically excellent value for money - and if we want to do something about the abuse of workers everywhere, we need to be thinking in terms of at least £1k for a base spec machine.
No, I can't easily afford it either. But, on the other hand, I'd rather have to scrimp and save for my next computer than be complicit in the abuse of the people who built it.
*our computers being those used in the UK. I have no data for other countries.
Re: RE: "So now it's Samsung............... " Fe, fi, fo fum... I smell a iPhanboi.
"That is in fact a reasonably objective description of the situation that firms like Sammy and the Fruity Company find themselves in. If you object to this description of the situation then I am forced to conclude that you are yet another example (AC, naturally) of the low forehead knuckle-dragging tribalists (regardless of the sect to which you belong) that we have all too many of here at El Reg."
Hear Hear! I'd buy you a beer in real life for this example of eminent common sense - please accept a virtual one in the virtual world.
Re: Intractible problems
Hear hear! But drivers are increasingly reliant on technology and rather dopey about solving these kinds of problems themselves. I know someone who insists that she's a good driver because she can apply her make up, talk on the phone and do a million other things whilst driving - and her car remains straight and true and stable the whole time. Of course, it all went to a can of worms when I turned off the dynamic stability system (and, with it, traction control, lane departure and so forth). A salutary lesson (and yes, the road was empty in both directions when I pulled that stunt).
The more electronics get thrown at cars, the more incompetent the average driver will get.
I like technology as much as the next person - but I really don’t like the idea of self driving cars. I have no doubt that they’ll make the roads safer and so forth - but what happens in twenty years time or so when the majority of cars on the road have the required intelligence?
What happens is an orgy of scrapping as the old, dumb, cars that have served us faithfully until now are banned and forced from the roads. And what of those of us who have classic cars? Now as viable as a horse and cart for long distance travel, will exemption be made to keep a little character on our roads?
Yes, yes. I know. I’m being self interested again. But I really would prefer it if my fun wasn’t spoiled in the name of ‘elfen safety and the preferences of a bunch of politicos who don’t enjoy driving anyway.
@Malcolm Weir It sounds to me as if you have some very good reasons for not choosing Apple. Having very good reasons for not choosing Apple for yourself is not the same as having very good reasons for 'hating' Apple (I know you didn't use the word hate), or even for objecting to anyone else using an Apple product. For my part, I have very good reasons for using Apple products (and no reasons whatsoever for objecting to someone else's choice of platform).
Sure enough, I like Apple's hardware (and as you point out, that's just as well because I can't choose to run their software on anything else), but it's their software that really floats my boat - and so I'd have one foot in the Apple ecosystem even if their hardware was like Dell's or Samsung's. My other foot is in the Linux ecosystem and… shit. I've run out of feet. I also use Windows (actually, I develop software for Windows, Linux, iOS and Mac OS).
I don't hate any platform. They've all got their pros and cons. But I do find the continual waging of 'ner-ner-nyah-nyah-ner my OS is better than yours' and expressions of hatred very boring and childish. Especially since the insults are usually backed up with no experience or evidence - and when they are backed up by experience or evidence, the experience or evidence only applies to the use-case of the person lobbing the criticism.
My objection is to a product being purchased purely for reasons of fashion rather than for the merits of the technology itself. It annoys me that people buy an Apple (or HTC or Samsung or Sony…) device because it's fashionable rather than because it represents the best solution to their particular problems. Only education has a hope of solving that particular problem - but I fear that herd mentality and bloody minded tribalism will always win.
@Bullseyed Disagree. This is OS Wars plain and simple, and you can wrap a reason around it if you like - but just remember that religious zealots have been wrapping spurious justifications around their chosen beliefs for centuries too.
Microsoft is anything but open (do you hate them too?), and yet there are many people out their who love Microsoft and hate Apple with all their hearts. In the past the same was true of Amiga (TripOS) and ST (TOS), Commodore 64 and Spectrum - it was ever thus.
The thing is that there are closed elements to Android too (Google Play Services, I think, is one, Google Search, Google Calendar and so forth), and open elements to iOS (the whole underlying OS (Darwin) for a start - download at opensource.apple.com). Google is in just as much of a position to take their ball away except…
…Except that the formats used are open. Contacts are stored as vcard. Calendars are stored as ical. Email is stored as eml. So if you try one particular platform, and then decide you don't like it, you can take your toys away and get something else - with no loss of data. And that isn't just true of Android. It's true of iOS too.
And why should you care what's in my pocket (unless you're trying to chat me up?). It's really none of your business, and it doesn't affect you in the slightest. Equally, I couldn't give a shit what you use. Got Blackberry? More power to you. Got Android? Cool, it's a nice *nix OS. If you want a super connected Internet OS, great for sharing and social networking, then Android is probably the best in the business. If you're a little more private then maybe you'd like to consider iOS. It isn't for me to say what you should use, or what reasons you have for using it.
And, as I say to my son, hate is a very strong word. And life is far too short for it.
Yeah, I thought that was a bit unnecessary. It may be true, it may not be true. I don't really care. Seems to me that iOS has some advantages and that Android has some advantages too (not least HTCs sweet hardware - but I digress), Windows mobile looks pretty damn cool too.
Choose your OS. Be happy with it, I hope. Be happy for everyone who chose something different because it suited ther needs. But let's not get all religious about it. That's be as stupid as getting all religious!
Why can't we… work things out? Little people… why can't we all just get along?
@Charlie Clark 'I think they'd be stupid not to open source it (the core at least) and get academics paid by someone else to kick the tyres.'
I'm in total agreement with you. At the moment, I'd be surprised if they did open source it - but I seem to be in a little negative minority! If they do open source it then it'll be a great addition to my programming arsenal, and I look forward to learning it.
If, on the other hand, it's Apple system only, I'll probably still learn it (and I'll feel all bitter and twisted about it at the same time!)
Re: Don't drink the Koolaid
Did you notice that this was WWDC? It's not about hardware - it's about the nitty gritty of software - the most interesting part of any computer system.
Swift looks very interesting to me. Personally, I like Objective C (and plain old C too of course.). One of the things I like most about Objective C is that I can develop in Objective C on Linux - it's cross platform. If Swift is cross platform then I look forward to playing with it.
I hope I'm wrong, but Swift looks to be Apple only. I don't like the look of that at all. If the milk turns out to be sour, I ain't the kind of pussy to drink it.
Re: Controversy abounds…
Actually, deserts are going to expand if we don't resolve global warming now. There's a happy balance between too cold and too hot - and the balance was about right fifty years ago. The problem is that, as we tip past the tipping point, the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere will increase - out of control. Not good.
I wish I could be as sceptical as you, and that Global warming scepticism was well founded. But that's just wishful thinking. Right now we're fucked - but if we act now we might be able to avoid being buggered as well.
Eco-friendly flight - Why limit this to flight? Why not just have eco-friendly power? Promising areas of research might include Nuclear power that doesn't produce waste that is radioactive for millennia, and that can't be used for weapons production. It might also include, as a sideline, ways of reducing power consumption of devices that we already have - <tongue-in-cheek>imagine a power-efficient PlayStation or Xbox (might look light a Wii U) or a power-efficient PC (might look like a Raspberry Pi)</tongue-in-cheek>
Sustainable food - If we can reduce global warming and world population, this one should follow automatically. GMO probably has a part to play too - provided that the innovations aren't patented, and provided the innovations concentrate on hardiness and not on making the crop able to survive ever more toxic pesticides. True, global warming may increase crop yields per hectare of farmable land, but the amount of farmable land will be reduced, and the nutritional value of the food grown will be diminished.
Safe and clean water - Again, linked to global warming, world population and sustainable food. Reduce global warming, and world population and the reserves of safe and clean water increase. Improve food sustainability and less water will be polluted with pesticides in the production of food.
Reduction of non-resistant antibiotics - I hesitate to say this, particularly when everyone knows someone who has been saved by antibiotics (and therefore I apologise if this comment hurts anyones feelings), but in planetary terms this is the wrong thing to be doing. No antibiotics and a bloody nasty plague would do more for the long term viability of this planet than anything else. Imagine a planet where the population was slashed from 9bn to 0.5bn? That'd hurt - entire families wiped out. A global disaster - but one that would remove all doubts about long term sustainability, and one that would (probably) deal with global warming in one fell swoop too.
A cure for paralysis and independent living for those with dementia. In the grand scheme of things, are these really the biggest or most important problems that we should be concentrating on?
Re: Uh oh
It's not just you. But, on the other hand, there've been a whole string of problems with Linux, Android, Windows and <insert name of any OS here>. Even VMS hasn't been immune - although the problem there is mainly an inconveniently placed bullet in the head courtesy of HP.
If you expect Apple to be infallible and believe that they don't normally ever have any problems then yes, panic! Unusual number of problems and bad news. If you expect them to be human then they're no worse than most and a lot better than some.
So have you been at the koolaid again?
Just not trying hard enough
Only 57 swimming pools? What an amateur. Still, I'd better hope that the cops don't find me - I've polluted 544,243,827,160,494 olympic swimming pools. All I had to do was piss in the sea.
Re: Which is why…
No need for an apology - my initial comment was written at haste and argued, at best, incoherently. Thanks though!
Re: Which is why…
There's even a government website which lists all sorts of devices and their expected reasonable life.
Really? Sounds useful. What's the URL?
Re: Which is why…
Hmm. My apologies. Perhaps I didn't make my point very clearly. It isn't so much about trusting anyone to play nicely with my data, it's about trusting them to ensure that the operating system is patched up regularly so that it presents a reasonable level of security (or facsimile thereof, depending on how tinfoil your hat is)
It isn't that it's impossible to remotely hack a patched up Linux, Mac or Windows system, but it certainly isn't easy. The reason that its difficult is that these systems are regularly patched to ensure that an OS compromise is non-trivial.
Sony, Samsung, insert preferred vendor of soon-to-be-connected gizmo here, have little experience of writing a general purpose OS from scratch and ensuring that it remains patched for the lifetime of the device. And the lifetime of the device is likely to be long. Worse yet, these devices aren't going to be like a computer, where it's easy to reformat the hard drive and replace the OS with one that is more up to date or more suited to your tastes. These devices are going to be more like mobile phones or portable media players. It's not that total replacement of the OS can't be done, it's that it won't be easy - and, anyway, life is too short to be slapping Linux on the telly, fridge, toaster, lightbulbs etc., and then keeping them patched and up to date.
The real problem is that the average lifetime of a television or fridge is an order of magnitude greater than that of a phone. My fridge is fifteen years old, showing no signs of packing up, and therefore not due for replacement. The TV is nearly ten, and much the same applies. Given that Samsung and Sony can't be bothered to ensure that a one year old phone is running the latest version of Android, I can't really see them bothering to update the OS of a ten year old TV.
So what to do? Your TV is now three years old, and you were lucky. You bought a TV from a manufacturer who kept it patched for a year or two. But now its getting on a bit. It's a bit old, and the manufacturer would rather sell you a new device - so no more patches for you. Your options are to disconnect from the internet (rendering the utility of the device somewhat moot), or buy a new one (which isn't very environmentally friendly given the huge piles of toxic crap that we throw away each year). And even sandboxing isn't going to help much - for two reasons. Firstly, because even sandboxing has its limits - only Apple really takes it to its logical limit, and (IMO) its the only reason that older iOS devices aren't hotbeds of malware. Secondly, because geeks, the early adopters, don't like it - look at all the bitching on el Reg about sandboxing on iOS - and on a TV or other consumer device, sandboxing is going to be more essential than ever.
You'll note that I've left government security out of the parameters of my argument. This is because government security challenges are either intractable or blown out of all proportion, depending on how paranoid / realistic about the limits of government probity you are.
Which is why…
If I ever buy a smart TV (and I almost certainly won't because I don't seem to have enough time to watch the blasted thing), I'll be buying it from a company that understands about making its operating system secure and keeping it patched. Furthermore, it'll have to be from a company where the customer isn't the product being sold. As far as I can see, the only companies with that kind of clout and track record are Microsoft and Apple. Despite the rumours, I can't see either of them getting into the telly biz - so I'll stick with a dumb TV, thanks.
Hmm. Love of country versus getting my end away?
Well, make love not war they say - I'll vote for making the beast with two backs.
Re: Apples not wrong on this if you ask me...
Aww - you spoilsport. Come on - get with the game. It's called the fun knee-jerk reaction game - and the best thing is that you don't even need to be able to think. You just need to be able to spew ill-informed bile.
You Reg. You are a card. Apple is too lax on security - bad Apple, naughty Apple. Apple is too tough on security - bad Apple, naughty Apple. And yet you still manage to make a nasty mess of love custard in your pants whenever a new bit of fondleable hardware gets shovelled out of Cupertino.
It's an object lesson in having your cake and eating it. Or, at least, trying to.
I'm pretty sure that 'Beginners All-purpose Symbolic Instruction Code' is a backronym. Allegedly BASIC was originally styled Basic, and it didn't stand for anything other than what it was - a basic programming language. I can't remember where I read that, and I concede that it may be bollocks.
1000 GOSUB PutFlameProofPantsOn
1010 GOSUB BeAPedantOnTheReg
1020 IF YouAreWrong THEN END
Re: These buttons are infamour
Of course, if there's an acknowledged fault with the device then it will be serviced, free of charge, even when it is many years out of warranty.
Speaking personally, I've never known Apple to have a 'not bovvered' attitude. Service has always been excellent. Other companies who've given me superb service are Sharkoon (on my PC case), Asus, Volvo…
Greater Anglia is the one company I can think of who give service that is fairly consistently bad - but I suspect that the staff are probably very demoralised, poor dears.
Re: Preload the engagement...
When I was a support assistance, if some lousy hack had plonked his testes on the counter with a supercilious 'do you know who I am? I'm a bigshot journo and I'm gonna write bad things if you don't do what I want', I wouldn't have passed the buck. I'd have just mucked him (or her) about as much as I could (with a smile, of course). It's amazing how much you can muck a rude customer about without endangering your job.
Similarly, as stated previously, it's amazing how far above and beyond the requirements of your job you can help someone who is nice, and treats you nicely.
In my experience, and this applies to all retailers, good service can almost always be obtained if you flirt with the staff. Not in an over the top, camp, way - just a little light flirting. Works with British Gas. Works with Orange. Works with Apple. Works whether you're male or female - people like to be liked, and if they think that they're liked then they can be persuaded to help out even beyond the strict letter of their job description.
I know this to be true because I've worked in a support role, and I've had occasion to try out my tricks (especially when I had an iPhone 3G - not a very good phone, but the Geniuses always replaced it for free (5 times no less), even when it was out of guarantee). I found when I worked in a support role that most people, even the nicest, sweetest people you could ever hope to meet, came storming in in high dudgeon and initiated the conversation with a complaint. No hello even. I was seen as being an obstacle, a minion to be defeated, on the way to getting their problem resolved. Needless to say, this got my back up and ensured maximum obstreperousness. When I was seen as a friendly facilitator and, yes, when I was flirted with, I became very, very helpful indeed.
Of course, sometimes there is just plain bad service - the trick doesn't work all the time. But you'd be amazed how far please and thankyou can stretch.
Surely not? GPS is a free signal - its not related to the cellular network. So your device will still be able to respond correctly (it just won't be able to download the data necessary to display a map).
Personally, as I said earlier, I don't think that this should be patented at all. It should be freely available to all device makers, and mandatory.
Extending that thought, I'm not convinced that patents should be handed out like sweeties. It holds us back, and prevents us achieving all that we can - it requires people to reinvent the wheel in order to avoid spurious patent trolling.
Copyright on look and feel or source code, fine. I can handle that. Patents? Nope. I don't like that so much!
In fairness, most of these are edge cases - and a semi evolved eye is better than none. And, in the case of 'If I'm sitting (ftfy) behind the driver, it knows I'm in the second row of seats and (ftfy) not in a 2-seater?' - you didn't read the patent did you?
No. The reason is that a speedometer - especially a speedometer with a needle can be understood at a glance. The speedometer and rev counter are large so that they can be recognised in a fraction of a second. Ancillary dials, such as the clock, fuel gauge, temperature, boost pressure and so forth are small so that they can't be confused with the speedo or rev counter. You could make an argument for removing the rev counter however.
Warning lights are similarly easy to interpret - and that's the reason why they have a large friendly pictogram on them. It's so that you can understand the message at a glance. Some older cars had the warning lights labelled with text - making them harder to understand at a glance. I don't know of any studies that prove this, however I do have a rather elderly car - so I cite my experience.
Similarly, mirrors can be interpreted at a glance. Car or cyclist approaching in mirror, don't manoeuvre (simples) - although if you rely only on your mirrors and don't quickly glance over your shoulder before executing a manoeuvre then I recommend that you chat to a motorcyclist or two.
The problem with a moving map, or a gloriously animated touch user interface where the controls necessarily change depending on context, is that they rely on you to spend time interpreting the content - time that you should be spending looking at the road. So, for a moving map (your choice of example), you can easily see where you are on the map (big arrow or car icon - easy, innit), but you can't quickly see where the map is in the context of the wider world. Now you might argue that a quick button press will sort that out - placing you on the zoomed out view screen - but that just compounds the problem as you're now spending time interacting with the device.
Once you have set your route, all you really need is a distance to the next manoeuvre, a pictogram representing what that manoeuvre is and, for numbered roads (M1, A38, B456 etc) the road number. Anything else is a distraction.
Good idea - but not one that should be patented. This is an idea that should be mandatory on all devices. In fact, I'd go a stage further and mandate that all screens, regardless of purpose, must be locked out while driving. Sat nav mustn't display a map - the display should be limited to distance and a simple graphic (arrow or roundabout pictograms) that can be understood at a glance.
Common sense dictates that one should keep ones eyes on the road but, sadly, common sense would appear to be a rare and valuable commodity. So, if drivers can't be trusted to be responsible whilst in charge of a couple of tons of hurtling metal, they must be forced to behave. Draconian, yes, sad that it should have to be so, yes.
I've seen families torn apart by reckless driving with a gizmo. If you had too then you'd probably be in support of technological solutions like this.
Windows is regarded as a legacy OS where I work - which is good because it means that we're upgrading to Linux. It's also bad because, for older applications that haven't yet been ported to Linux, we're stuck with the version of Windows that they were developed on. And, in some cases, that means Windows 2003 - and the company has little to no stomach for an upgrade to what is, after all, just a newer version of a legacy OS.
I'll have to get my persuasive trousers on again.
Re: Mumsnet: "By parents for parents"
I dunno, cos I haven't joined, but I think that there are dads on MumsNet. My wife assures me that there are, anyway. Honestly, though, I'm the worst dad in the world and I'd rather leave all the messy, worrying, stuff with her - and I'll do the playing with lego and reading stories to the kids bit.
Wasn't there some story on there about spaffing in a cup by the bed though? Or did I make that up? Not a very effective way of getting your girl preggers, I'd have thought.
Re: As one of the few people on this forum
Yes, thats kind of what I thought too (well, maybe a bit more forcefully than I thought it since what I really thought is 'Meh - who cares?') Now though, I'm swinging in favour of thinking that this is a damned stupid law brought about by politicians who haven't thought the problem through and who may well have lost the plot.
Whilst I really don't care if chickswithbigdicks or sweatyhairymilfs is knocked off line for the majority of the UK population (especially since it'll be relatively trivial to regain access), I do very much care if sex education sites like Violet Blue's (google tinynibbles, but be warned - nsfw) are no longer conveniently accessible.
So, I'm broadly supportive of the legislation provided that it is implemented intelligently and with due concern for legitimate and educational filth. I doubt that it will be though, and I hope that I'm proved wrong.
Re: Jobs was a genius
Interesting. I don't watch much TV, so I haven't observed this on my 5 year old Sony flatscreen. I was going to chuck out the 15" trinny in the loft tomorrow, but (thanks to your entirely timely warning) I think I might keep it a little bit longer now!
Romeo and Juliet, actually. If Romeo got lucky, anyway.
In rocketry there is the "Characteristic length" L* which is chamber length over throat area.
Doesn't the same apply to fellatio?
Re: Macs ARE PCs.
I think this is an example of a typical newbie error - the conflation of 'PC' with 'Windows'.
Commodore 64s, Apple IIs and the like were (correctly) called PCs when they first came out. Then 'IBM PC Compatible' was contracted to 'PC' and noobs who wanted to seem au-fait with this new fangled technology stuff got all confused. Bless 'em. PCW magazine didn't help, in the nineties, when it pretty much dropped coverage of anything that didn't run Windows.
If it's a computer, and it's personal, then it's a PC - whether or not it runs Windows (and, of course, Macs are perfectly capable of running Windows these days). The Raspberry Pi is a PC. So, probably, is your phone. It's a bit of a meaningless term, really.
Re: Better than Android then?
Different to Android. You pays your money and you makes your choice. Getting all partisan about it is just silly.
Now that's what I call quality journalism - and backed up by a well thought out hypothesis too! Well done, Lester - that's good enough for me.
I plan to perform a practical experiment to prove this hypothesis this evening - a pub crawl followed by kebabs and a fry up, heavy on the bacon, tomorrow for breakfast. I'll do a full write up (if I remember) and, if your hypothesis turns out to be wrong and I end up a drooling imbecile or dead, at least I'll have had a bloody good time.
- Game Theory The agony and ecstasy of SteamOS: WHERE ARE MY GAMES?
- Review Is it an iPad? Is it a MacBook Air? No, it's a Surface Pro 3
- Hello, police, El Reg here. Are we a bunch of terrorists now?
- Intel's Raspberry Pi rival Galileo can now run Windows
- Microsoft and HTC are M8s again: New One mobe sports WinPhone