But that message was sent 3 years ago! Surely it no longer applies in these modern times?
1773 posts • joined 10 May 2011
But that message was sent 3 years ago! Surely it no longer applies in these modern times?
closer to the pre-crime dystopia depicted in Minority Report....
" It will continue even if the economy runs on spice and water."
But spice and water are indeed what make the universe turn; without them, civilisation would cease to exist. After all, who controls the water controls Arrakis; who controls Arrakis controls the spice, and who controls the spice controls the universe.
Admittedly we now also know that it is not who controls the spice, but who can destroy the spice, that controls the universe.
And relevant to this discussion, one more little pearl of wisdom from the same source:
"Control the coinage and the courts. Let the rabble have the rest."
These are Australians you are talking about. The most apathetic, indifferent, uncaring, lazy mob of football-watching beer-swilling bogans on the planet.
The same thing happened back when we were organising protests against Conroy's internet censorship regime. In Adelaide, we had Nick Xenophon and the Premier present, and all of FIVE people showed up, because everyone else would rather get drunk and go to Womadelaide. It was an embarrassing farce for all of us, including Nick Xenophon, who put the time, money and effort into organising the protest, designing, printing and distributing flyers, doing the PR, organising the campaign, contacting public figures, setting up media coverage, and so on.
I gave up bothering that day. Our government could turn this country into fucking North Korea and as long as the fat lazy indolent bastards that comprise the majority population of this benighted country could have their football and their beer and their Australian Idol they wouldn't lift an arsehole to do shit about it.
isn't so much the energy use, the noise, or the physics of flight.
It's the idiocy of the general driving population.
An awful lot of people seem to have difficulty managing a vehicle on a flat surface in two dimensions. What makes anyone think that these mobile-using, non-indicating, lane-hogging, inconsiderate prats could ever handle three dimensions?
At the very least, I'm certain the aerial fatality rate to surface fatality rate would follow the square-cube law if we allowed the common idiot unfettered access to flying cars. The only way around it would be to have the vehicle under the control of an automated central guidance system at all times while off the ground. Which, given the increasing tendency of companies to want to take remote control of our computers, wouldn't be too much of a stretch for the public imagination.
These companies blame the GST when it's their own greed that causes people to shop elsewhere. They don't even have the bricks-and-mortar excuse, because Australian online retailers are just as big thieves as their bricks-and-mortar counterparts.
Example: I can buy a 16 MP digital camera with 24 x optical zoom for $260 from a Chinese drop-shipping site. The cheapest similar camera from an Australian online store is $430. That's a 165% markup. GST is 10%. If it was applied to me buying the camera from the drop-shipping site that would mean the camera costs me $260 + $26 = $286. Still a damn sight less than I'd be paying to an Australian retailer.
So even if the government bows to the retailers and makes us pay tax on online purchases it still isn't going to stop anyone from buying from overseas retailers.
Finally, these companies are the very same ones who were quite happy to outsource Australian jobs to cheap third-world labour. How dare they complain when we, the consumers, do exactly the same thing by outsourcing the purchasing of our products! Hypocrisy much?
At first I was strongly against this, but as I thought about it the more interesting it became. This kind of technology has the potential to be a great playing field leveller. After all, something this small can become ubiquitous; eventually it will be available to all and sundry.
I can imagine these things not only infiltrating our homes and workplaces, but police stations, secret parliamentary and G20 meetings, politicians' and judges' offices, everywhere. It will allow us to watch the watchers as narrowly as they watch us.
After all, if our leaders have nothing to hide, they have nothing to fear. Right? Right?
Marino, I've just taken the trouble to upvote all of your posts in this thread for successfully trolling the Reg commentard community to such an extent. Truly a trolling worthy of the best of 4chan. And that's even taking into account Poe's Law, because I'm certain nobody capable of entering a username and password would actually believe the new-age quasi-religious tripe you just posted!
to see Chrome pass Firefox, considering the malware-like fashion in which it is generally distributed. After all, there are probably a good many other botnets and spyware networks that have larger "userbases" than Firefox for much the same reason!
is, if Samsung phones being banned from sale in the US, the Koreans and Chinese reciprocate by banning the sale of iPhones in their own countries. I believe that would hurt Apple's overall sales figures a lot more than Samsung's.
Not to mention the loss of freedom of choice should such a ban go through: if I were forced to choose between having an Apple smartphone or no smartphone at all - well, you'll have to try and reach me at the office.
For me it's almost a deal clincher!
Not only do I get the benefit of not having to worry about US legal tentacles and Chinese spying for the reasons you describe, but given China's attitude towards intellectual property enforcement I'd be able to use it to store all my DRM-free music, movies and TV shows without worrying about being prosecuted for doing so - and give access to my family and friends besides!
I still wouldn't use it to replace my local storage though, more as an access-anywhere adjunct. Not to mention that with my ISP data usage plan at 150 GB per month it would take me over 2 months to upload that much...
Actually, I can see the copyright lobby giving birth to dinosaur-sized kittens over this, because inevitably the most popular use of such a generous storage space allocation will be pirate downloads on a scale to make even bittorrent pale into insignificance!
You think you have the right to complain?
It's summer here in Australia, and while it's cloudy today we've generally been getting clear skies. But of course it doesn't matter how clear our skies get since the damn thing will be at its best only as it passes right over the BLOODY NORTH POLE meaning we'll only get to see it low in our northern skies for a couple of days as it emerges from behind the Sun and starts to brighten up!
You complain about a few clouds? Bah! We've got thousands of miles of rock and magma blocking our bloody view!
Oh well. Back to swanking over our Magellanic Clouds I guess...
Does anyone here seriously believe that allowing private enterprise to replace or take over the functions of government will result in improvements?
These corporations have to be lashed by legislation every step of the way. And those who raise the reflexive cry of "Communism!" every time someone opposes corporate domination of any aspect of human endeavour must be exposed for the shills they are. No legal leeway whatsoever can be given to these psychopathic "entities" whose obsession with profit supersedes even their consideration of human life.
Administration of space should remain in the hands of publicly accountable and electable organisations.
If this guy gets what he wants, then the corporatisation of space for profit above all else will inevitably follow. And the inevitable outcome of that can be expressed in two words:
a few idiots ruin it for the rest of us. Just like those little fuckwits with laser pointers aiming them at aircraft caused the government to ban laser pointers above 1 mW for everybody.
Given that this is the Nanny State Republic of Ausfailia, expect to see legislation very soon banning all use of RC aircraft anywhere except by law enforcement and registered personnel, using this as an excuse to take away yet another small liberty. It's what our government does best.
Well, I'm male, and I find any phone/gadget use during meetings and presentations unacceptable.
To the point where, if I'm giving a presentation, and someone is using a phone or tablet, I will stop the presentation, explain to everyone present that when we are all ready to continue, I will do so at their earliest convenience; and I will wait until anyone messing about with their gadgets has returned their attention to the meeting.
I've interviewed job candidates who have actually pulled out their phones and started texting, right there in front of me. Needless to say, I've politely informed them at that point that they won't be considered for the position, and they would save their own time and mine by departing forthwith.
I also refuse to hold conversations with people who keep diverting their attention to their phone. I generally give them three warnings, after that I will simply leave, ignore them, or go about my own business, even if they try to pick it up again when they're done.
It's basic human courtesy that when someone is talking to you, you pay attention to them.
Not only that, but what's even more sinister is that this represents ads that you can't block with NoScript and Adblock. If you do, obviously you can't solve the captcha and you can't use the site.
is one of retrieval rather than storage.
If they build a storage medium that will last a million years they also need to build a writer/reader that will last a million years. Otherwise, like reel-to-reel tapes, 8" floppies, and Betamax cassettes, the information might still be there but a functioning device to read it non-existent, since companies see fit to change the media standards every couple of decades or so and planned obsolescence takes care of the rest.
Fat lot of good an archive of these things would be even in 50 years' time, let alone a million, when nobody makes the readers any more...
You clearly haven't encountered the delusional mentality of advertising twonks. I've actually worked with these people, I'm sorry to say, and I've been exposed to their peculiar brand of reality-rejection first-hand.
*THIS IS WHAT ADVERTISING PEOPLE ACTUALLY BELIEVE*
People love watching advertisements. They receive deep and fulfilling life satisfaction from the excitement of learning about our latest products. They find our art and design work stimulating and interesting, and will naturally tend to seek out more. People desire advertising as it fulfills their deep spiritual need to buy and consume. Our task, then, is to gratify this insatiable desire by creating deeper, richer, more spiritual advertising that will touch their hearts and win their souls to buy more widgets.
*THIS IS WHAT ADVERTISING PEOPLE ACTUALLY BELIEVE*
I know this is difficult to comprehend, but you'll find that the only possibility that exists for "these folk" is that you desire ever more intense and personal advertising and that they are the ones to fulfill your need.
It's sickening, I know, but that's the mindset you're dealing with. Not much short of a course of Haloperidol can fix that I'm afraid.
" I read comments suggesting MI5 kill the Guardian editor with Polonium, that he should be shot for treason and all kinds of threats."
I have to pull you up on that one matey. There is a distinct difference between saying someone should be shot and saying someone will be shot. The second one is a threat; the first one isn't, it's just an opinion. Any comment along the lines of "You should be..." is not a statement of action and therefore cannot be interpreted as a threat.
The day you start classifying "should" as "will" is the day you give up any pretence of freedom of expression.
Are you sure? Because detecting a white dwarf and an asteroidal body comparable to Ceres at the equivalent distance of a galaxy on the far side of the Virgo Cluster is no mean feat! What incredible instrument did they use to pull that off?
Or did you mean 150 light years and got a bit overenthusiastic about the distance?
Back in the 80s I was shopping around for a new stereo. In store after store, I'd see outrageous claims for the power of these cheap all-in-one systems - 600 W here, 1500 W there. Watts PMPO, that is. Meaning that the system could theoretically output that power level for a second or two here and there, with a load of distortion, before blowing its caps out of its arse, but nowhere near that on a continuous basis.
Try asking the salesmen how many watts RMS or the signal-to-noise ratio and I'd get blank looks at shop after shop. They'd try all sorts of weasel tricks to convince me that PMPO was a valid measure of a stereo system's quality and that'd be my cue to move on.
After that it was MHz for microprocessors, which we quickly established as PMPO-level bullshit even back in the Commodore 64 days. The Zilog Z-80 could be clocked at 4 MHz while the humble 6510 only did 1, but the overheads of the Z80 made it the inferior processor. Same with the 12 MHz 80286 of the IBM PC vs the 7 MHz 68000 of the Amiga - and the Amiga blew the PC away in terms of performance.
These days it's megapixels. I have an Olympus FE 240 pocket camera (nothing fancy, but at least it has an actual lens on it) and a Samsung Galaxy S2 phone. The Olympus is 7 megapixels, the phone is 8. Guess which one takes the better pictures?
Oh well, I suppose they've got to keep trying. But for me, every time I see these bullshit measurements touted as an informative factor of a product's quality, I am reminded of the PMPO days and my youthful trek around town to find the ideal stereo.
No. He won't. Neither will I. Neither will a host of others who refuse to hand over control of our machines to megalomaniac corporations who think they have the right to claim ownership of our lives.
There are always alternatives. Always have been, always will be.
So the kids will avoid being hit with kiddy porn charges and get nailed for sexual harassment instead. Well, it is a step up I suppose.
More specifically, like Reddit's /srs/ board.
I stopped reading the article the moment I encountered the word "misogyny" on the first page. That word, along with other political-correctness trigger words like "womyn" and "cisgender", act like an automatic off-switch beyond which I will not proceed.
So I'd take this review of GTA with a grain of salt. Obviously the reviewer has biases of his own which prohibit more open-minded people from establishing an informed judgement of the game based on this review.
Translation: "We want all of Rudd's mates gone so we can give the cushy sinecure positions to our mates."
Sometimes these politicians' motives are so transparent you could use them to measure Doppler shifts in distant galaxies.
You're not alone there mate. I'm right there with ya.
Last year I went with my brother to some "Symphony Under The Stars" event, with the Adelaide Symphony Orchestra performing in Elder Park.
And all I could see was a sea of arms waving smartphones high in the fucking air. I don't know why 20,000 people all wanted 20,000 identical videos of a mass of 20,000 wavering smartphone screens, because that's all any of them would have gotten. The only way you'd have been able to see (or film) the orchestra would be to have been pressed up against the stage.
Because of this sort of thing, I've come to detest the fucking things. In cinemas, in restaurants, at concerts, fireworks shows, sporting events, everywhere, everybody constantly waving these fucking smartphones around every bloody moment of every bloody day. An EMP cannon! an EMP cannon! my kingdom for an EMP cannon!
"As far as I know nuclear decay is the only easy genuine random source available but a bit tricky to include in a little chip at a suitably low cost."
What about Americium-241 based smoke detectors? We already have widespread, low-cost "nuclear" gear in our homes in this form - why couldn't we use this same technology as an RNG in our computers as well?
with the concept of the cloud per se. It has its uses and provides a lot of convenience; you can access your data from anywhere there's a computer and internet connection, you can share that data with colleagues in distant locations without the limitations imposed by email; you can offload much of your maintenance problems to a third party. The cloud certainly has its advantages.
What I object to, in the strongest terms, is this constant push, push push to force everybody to use cloud technologies exclusively. Increasingly, new versions of software are coming out as SaaS - pay every month, instead of pay once and keep forever. And if your cash flow is down one month, and you can't afford all the stacked monthly payments, you lose everything. Much of the software we use is now in two flavours - packaged and SaaS - but it's evident that "packaged" is being retained only as a transitional measure and the intent is to "wean" us all into the cloud as soon as possible.
Whenever something like this is pushed with such fervour and zeal, it inevitably means one thing: the big boys make more money which means you get less while paying more. Microsoft have found to their cost that selling a successful product can be a disaster once market saturation is reached, as the numbers of companies unwilling to migrate from the tried-and-true Windows XP shows. "Buy once and keep forever" is not as profitable as the "leech money off the poor bastards forever and a day" model. And this is one real reason why cloud is being pushed so hard.
The other reason is about power and control. Cloud storage means your data can be taken away if you don't toe the official line; it means your data can be monitored and analysed at will without your knowledge; it means your computer and your data are no longer your own, they now belong to the companies that own the OS and your data storage.
So in the end, my problem is not that cloud technology exists; it's that we are being forced into it to the exclusion of all other options. And until this hegemony is confronted and we are let to make our own choices about how and where we use what technologies, I and others like myself will continue to oppose this encroachment of our informational freedom to our last ounce of strength.
My thoughts exactly.
I've often maintained that until we start PUBLICLY EXECUTING these fucking bastards, and their families along with them if it can be shown that the family members knew of the criminal activity and did nothing about it, this sort of shit will run rampant.
Once we've had a few globally televised public hangings of these parasitic scum that are of no worth to the human race, once they made to realise the stakes are that they'll make money at less risk by enlisting for service in Afghanistan, we'll start seeing some results.
Who? Apple or the CIVC?
For my part, given Apple's legendary lust for petty intellectual property, I 'd love to see the Frenchies sue their arses off. It would be poetic justice.
@ Don Jefe: No advantage, in fact I've probably earned a place on a few watchlists for posting that opinion. I just felt I should point it out because the possibility existed that it was a motivating factor and that mentioning it as such was likely to invoke artificial social taboos designed to silence debate.
As to you others who felt it necessary to resort to abuse and insult, thank you for illustrating why it is necessary to oppose the proponents of political correctness, who are the very ones who use these tactics to silence discussion and dismiss opinions you don't like. What you fail to understand is that the more you abuse and deride those who don't share your worldview, the more people will oppose you, and the greater the eventual horror that will arise from that opposition. You seem to have forgotten, as so many have in the past, that carrot is more effective than stick.
It's extremely politically incorrect to say this, and I'll likely cop a pasting as an anti-Semite and a Nazi and all sorts from the more oversensitive and zealous commentards, but -
Zuckerberg is a Jew. Shreateh is a Palestinian. I'd wager heavily that this political condition has at least some measure of effect in the making of Facebook's decision to refuse payment. After all, that money might be used to support anti-Israeli terrorism, no?
There, I've got it off my chest. Let the downvotes roll in, fellas.
e'); DROP TABLE PLANETS;--
I see little Bobby Tables has grown up to become an astronomer!
Ooh, ooh, can I write Apple's next marketing campaign based on this?
"Samsung and Android. The choice of bogans, chavs and rednecks everywhere!"
Interesting that Safari and Opera have such high error rates while Chrome is so low, considering that all three use the Webkit engine as their foundation (ISTR Opera switched to Webkit a while back didn't they?)
Like others here, I have no problem with the modern incarnations of IE. Since Microsoft have been dragged screaming to the W3C table the job of web development has become a lot less hair-greying than in the days of IE6, when as I recall I became quite the Firefox evangelist on these very forums (and elsewhere) to try and drive standardisation. I'm very thankful that that battle, at least, is finally over!
The only problem with a telescope in Antarctica is that you can only ever see the Southern Hemisphere. Perhaps there's a similar location in Greenland where they could put a complementary telescope, then we could cover the entire sky.
" If an agent of the copyright holder made the files available for download and advertised it on pirate sites, then the people who downloaded them obtained them legally."
You've raised a very interesting legal issue here.
Yes they did download them legally, but it's not the downloading the copyright mafia nail you for - it's the seeding / uploading, which is integral to bittorrent, and which legally amounts to unauthorised distribution. That's what they charge you with on the court documents.
I'd be very interested to see the legal take on this - if I, as a copyright owner, distribute my own work via bittorrent, I'm implicitly authorising others to distribute my work as well by the very act of using the bittorrent mechanism as my distribution medium. So does this implicit consent stand as legal authorisation for anyone in the swarm to distribute? What if I stop seeding the torrent myself - does that withdraw the consent for others to distribute? What if someone else creates another torrent on another tracker and starts seeding it there as well?
Bittorrent seems to be a real Pandora's box as far as legitimate or authorised distribution of copyrighted material is concerned. Any commentards here in the legal profession got a take on this, or does anyone know of any court cases dealing with these issues?
Shit, that would have to be a bloody big squirrel!
I remember seeing parody ads for "Crackwhore Barbie" back in the 90s, in MAD magazine or some similar publication I think. I had no idea companies would ever start selling toys that promote criminal activity for real though!
I mean, in an age when kids are expelled for merely hugging each other in school, how the bloody hell is Lego getting away with this without a massive media/do-gooder shitstorm in the offing? It just shows the extent to which the media controls public reactions to these things, doesn't it?
This kind of greed and exploitation by the aristocracy is what eventually leads to revolutions and sends parasites like this bitch to the gallows and the guillotine.
Agreed, although the B Ark would be an acceptable alternative for those feeling a bit less murderous...
"Never heard of a county with several governments."
How about Somalia?
This is a brain cell. I have quite a few of them to sell you if you'd like a couple of your own. Real cheap too, just 5 cents each!
"The US Government isn't a totalitarian government by any stretch of the imagination."
Hitler was elected to power by voters in a democracy. Do not mistake the ability to vote for a guarantee of freedom.
I'm no Google fan any more than I am a Microsoft one, but it seems to me that Microsoft are throwing their toys out of the pram on this one.
As a web developer for many years, I still remember the horror days of IE6 and ActiveX, where I had to create two versions of the same website for every project - one for IE6, and one to the W3C specs. This blew out costs and dev times on every project and I came to loathe Microsoft for this.
But these days Microsoft aren't the big boys on the block any more, and so it seems to me they're now spitting their chips because they're not the ones shoving their bloated inconsistent standards down everyone's throats. Instead they're being forced to abide by the W3C specs as they should have been from day dot. And they're bitching about it because they're no longer the ones calling the shots.
So tough shit MS, your day is past and you have to suck it up and comply with the W3C standards like everyone else.
Mind you, I don't like Google's "We don't have to use HTML 5 but you do" approach either. Anyone who operates under "do as I say not as I do" is someone I never want to deal with, as I despise nothing more than a hypocrite.
Before clicking on any link, hover the mouse pointer over it. Then look at the status bar right at the very bottom of your browser window. It'll tell you where the link goes. Make it a habit to do this every time you follow a link.
The diary comparison is certainly a valid one, yes.
But most people don't routinely hand their diaries over to the management of their local shopping centre for perusal to establish what adverts to show you when you walk into the mall.
Use duckduckgo.com. Not only do they not track you and respect your privacy a lot better than Google, they also do AND based searches by default (you have to use the OR operator if you want OR-based search) And I've found their search results as relevant as anything Google provides.
It's not that big an Achilles heel, and I see this in a different light - the whole event shows that a terrorist attempting to jam the GPS at an airport would be unlikely to succeed. There's nothing "fortunate" about it, evidently the airport authorities were prepared and able to respond to an attack of this kind.
A problem was identified during the test: a jamming signal affecting the guidance systems. The source was triangulated and located, agents dispatched to the location, and the problem was solved in a timely fashion and in good order.
I was impressed to see that there was no overreaction by authorities on this one; no SWAT teams armed to the teeth stomping the guy's face into the pavement, no gung-ho cops tasering innocent bystanders, no besuited operatives ramming gloved hands into body cavities. Just a measured response to the threat and the sensible capitulation of the culprit. It was what could be called a textbook case.
So this doesn't seem to me to be a failure of security. To my mind, it looks like a resounding success.