Re: I can't wait....
"Hi! I'm Johnnycab! Where can I take you tonight?"
1773 posts • joined 10 May 2011
"Hi! I'm Johnnycab! Where can I take you tonight?"
"I can imagine the situation in which a fraudster meets someone in a bar..."
... and says "Hi, didn't we meet at blahblah last year," buys them a drink, and gets their fingerprints off the glass. And then uses it not just for accessing bank accounts, but for identity theft in general, since more and more organisations are relying on biometrics like fingerprints these days.
The problem then becomes obvious: biometrics can't be changed like stolen cards and tax file numbers. So once someone has your fingerprints, retina scans, voiceprint, whatever, and is using them to commit criminal acts, you're fucked for the rest of your life.
Never mind a sex change, these vermin incense me to the point where I want to advocate bringing back hanging, drawing and quartering.
" that botnet takedowns could only deliver a coup de grâce if bot masters were PUBLICLY executed."
There, fixed that for you again!
There's a reason why compromised hardware is a much bigger concern than TLAs sneaking agents into your executive structure.
Agents are expensive, and take a lot of effort to insert and maintain. The old adage about "for every sword raised at the front ten backs must bend in the field" applies equally in this case as well - for every agent in place, a support staff back at HQ has to be maintained to receive the agent's information, process it, and provide the agent with intel and orders.
So this would only be a concern for big players. I'd be surprised if there weren't various TLA agents at or near the top of corporations like Microsoft, Amazon, Google and even Cisco. But the chances of ASIO going to the trouble of inserting an agent into our little back-street SMB are vanishingly small.
Not so with hardware. Automated information processing is a far more serious threat to privacy, confidentiality and even liberty than any amount of manned spying, because it is far cheaper than manpower and a lot more global in scope.
Consider a parallel: face-recognition software vs. a room full of security bods at a CCTV control centre. Security bods can't watch everyone all the time; they have a list of photos of wanted criminals and scan the camera feeds for them, ignoring everyone else. But face-recognition software tracks everyone, everywhere, all the time. And all it has to store is the metadata: Citizen 17548923 identified via Camera 6485 at Lat 34°55'22.7" S Lon 138°35'58.9" E on 2015-03-07 06:33:45 UTC. So it isn't about having to keep years of AV footage - such metadata can easily be retained on everyone for many years simply because it reveals a lot without taking up much storage.
In the same way, hardware backdoors allowing remote software to regularly collect data means it doesn't matter if a human is looking at or using your information. Software analysis is a much greater threat than human observation, simply because it is orders of magnitude cheaper, more thorough, ubiquitous and far-reaching.
I thought Mars didn't have a magnetic field, which is essential to the formation of aurorae. Although if it does, I can see how the aurora would reach much deeper into the atmosphere than on Earth, since the aurorae can only occur in low-pressure, rarefied gases - and the Martian atmosphere is rarefied enough that an aurora could get much closer to the surface. That would be a sight to see for an astronaut on the ground! How interesting.
"That's 55 percent: a high figure, and could well point to the fact that the value of dot-coms is falling."
Not at all surprised that the value of dotcoms is still falling, and that's even since the dotcom bubble of the 90s. The
cybersquatters domain investors have only themselves to blame: people learned many years ago that searching for stuff on the internet by typing "<subject I'm interested in>.com" into the browser address bar was the worst possible way to do it, simply because such efforts invariably led to a parking page devoid of anything useful, offering the domain for sale - or more likely, some spammer's malware-ridden link farm.
These days, few people remember what or where the address bar even is; most people now simply type what they want into Google* and click the result links - or they follow links posted by their friends on Facebook. Consequently, the domain name is no longer as relevant as it used to be, and these days it doesn't matter if your company has to use something like thisisaverylongdomainnametotypeintoyourbrowseraddressbar.com, since the major driver of traffic now is search engine rank and social media referrals, not so much "accidental drive-by" traffic.
These days, you don't tell people to "point their browser" to your domain, you just tell them to "find us on Facebook" and link them to your site from there.
*How many times have you given someone a domain name only to see them type it into the search box instead of the address bar and then click the search result from there?
Until you move to a different company, or your employer changes policy and starts expecting employees to pay their own subs, or Adobe decides to jack up the pricing once it has everyone's work to ransom, and then one day you'll find that all your work for the past however-many-years is no longer accessible or editable. You might not find it such value for money then.
Enjoy. You'll learn. Most likely the hard way. But I, and I'm sure many others, would prefer it if you'd kindly not take the rest of us, who prefer to retain control of our own software assets and data, down with you by funding this execrable rentism business model.
Getting a site translated professionally is time-consuming and expensive. Getting some underpaid subaltern to whack your Asian-language website through Google Translate is much quicker and cheaper. And with the level of grammatical idiocy displayed by the majority of the English-speaking population, I doubt they lose much business due to the appalling grammar. Most of their customers are probably so used to badly-translated Asian sites that they no longer even notice.
"It's a sign of the times that commenters on a tech site should be concerned about how bugs in an experiment feel."
For me it's not so much about how the bugs might feel, but more about the dangerous slippery slope* that this kind of research and experimentation entails. Inevitably, research that starts with doing things to bugs, soon moves on to frogs, then rodents, then monkeys, and eventually human beings. And of course there are all kinds of justifications for it; in this case "search and rescue," a nice populist application to soothe the uneasiness that people feel about the idea of developing technology that allows people to directly control the actions of other living things. After all, if it's a case of a bug being used to save a life then what's wrong with it being a frog? Or a mouse? Or a monkey? Where does the justification stop?
Even if you say, well it would stop short of human beings, there is still the fact that if it can be done to a monkey, someone somewhere in the world will apply it to human beings, legally or illegally, regardless of legislative frameworks. What matters is not whether it will be done, what matters is simply that it can.
Furthermore, coupled with the advent of indetectable and invasive nanotechnology, this sort of thing has the potential to become something truly horrific. If you look at issues such as contemporary slavery, which is unfortunately prevalent even in supposedly free nations, you can begin to imagine some of the absolute horrors this kind of research could unleash.
For every worthwhile justification for such research, there are a dozen ways it can be misused. The question is, do the benefits it could confer outweigh the dangers represented by such research? This is the sort of thing that, like nuclear research, needs to be subject to strict controls imposed by an international regulatory body similar to the IAEA, and forcibly stopped the moment it advances to any creature more advanced than, say, a frog or a mouse - to ensure it can never be done to people.
*I find it interesting these days that the "slippery slope" argument is increasingly being dismissed as a logical fallacy alongside such expressions as "ad hominem" and "appeal to authority". I suspect this is a particularly nasty piece of social engineering being employed by certain elements of society to dismiss concerns about not only the misuse of technology, but such things as invasive surveillance and far-reaching police powers, etc. etc.
If my bank insisted on my using a particular browser to access its site, I'd be switching banks in a big hurry. Designing a site only for a particular browser implies non-standard design practices that would inevitably result in serious security vulnerabilities, even leaving aside the element of lack of choice.
I can say that we'll probably be running much the same tech as we are running now, and have been for the last 10 years.
Our main office server box is 2006 vintage, and had a motherboard and CPU upgrade in 2010. The office machines date from 2004 - 2009, the art room roughly the same period, albeit they had motherboard/CPU upgrades in 2012, and only one new art/design machine (an AMD 8-core) was purchased last year.
On the mobile front, we're using Toshiba laptops and Samsung Slates with Windows 7 circa 2012ish, and Galaxy S4s with Android circa 2013. (And we have one Apple iPad I'm ashamed to say, but that's solely used for testing to make sure our websites and ebooks work on iThings. We do have an elaborate office cleansing ritual for those forced to use it! ;) )
All of it does everything we need it to reliably, and everything is a known quantity that everyone knows how to use effectively.
With the flattening of Moore's law over the last several years (CPU power and storage sizes have stopped increasing exponentially), unless some earth-shattering new technology like holodecks or transhuman consciousness-uploading tech appears in the next 5 years, I can't see us using anything vastly different to what we're using today. Probably there'll be a few more minor hardware upgrades but that's abut it.
If it ain't broke, why fix it?
Let's hope the story does turn out to be an Arthur C. Clarke novel and not a George Orwell one.
"I don't like this expression 'First World Problems.' It is false and it is condescending. Yes, Nigerians struggle with floods or infant mortality. But these same Nigerians also deal with mundane and seemingly luxurious hassles. Connectivity issues on your BlackBerry, cost of car repair, how to sync your iPad, what brand of noodles to buy: Third World Problems.
All the silly stuff of life doesn't disappear just because you're black and live in a poorer country. People in the richer nations need a more robust sense of the lives being lived in the darker nations.
Here's a First World problem: the inability to see that others are as fully complex and as keen on technology and pleasure as you are."
So you see, Hans, that while you might think you're being all sensitive and politically-correct by arguing to defer all other solutions in favour of eradicating poverty and starvation, in fact you are showing your ignorance and bigotry by assuming that people in Africa are only concerned with basic survival, rather than communication and wanting to be a part of the larger world.
The reason why that is in there is presumably because there is an assumption that one cannot imagine an internet without "google search".
Actually I made that qualification not because I can't imagine an internet without it, but because it's the one service they can't pull - it's their bread and butter. I personally use DuckDuckGo most of the time, but DDG's lack of tracking and search history is both a benefit and a pitfall. Sometimes I want localised results based on my search history and for that I go to Google. But yes, for everything else it's DDG.
My advice would be never to start using any Google service other than basic search for anything important in the first place. I learned years ago the perils of coming to rely on a Google service only to have it yanked out from under you a couple of years later. I'll never rely on them again.
Incidentally, I wonder how long it will be before they yank Google Analytics and a billion webmasters cry out in terror before being suddenly silenced. Notwithstanding that GA is already blocked by a host of privacy tools, that and Google's notorious unreliability, are why our websites use only our own in-house analytics code.
it's China. They have far too many people to be let loose on the roads as they are. If you've ever seen pictures of that new massive freeway they built, that at 250 km long, has since become the world's largest car park, you can understand why.
I think the main reasons businesses aren't upgrading are twofold:
1. Our systems work, they satisfy all our present and foreseeable needs, our staff know how to use everything and we can provide our customers with the level of service they've come to expect form us. If we upgrade, we have to retrain all our staff to use the new interfaces Microsoft have foisted on us and we have to iron all the bugs out of the new systems. Ours ain't broke, so we ain't gonna fix 'em.
2. RENTISM IS NOT A BUSINESS MODEL WE WILL EVER ACCEPT. We are not, under any circumstances whatsoever, going to be put in a position where we have to continuously pay every month to continue to use software we've already paid for once. Microsoft can stick their Office 365 rentism scheme sideways into the most painful orifice they can find on their worthless, greedy arseholes, because we are not going to be put in a position where they can hold all our work and data to ransom unless we pay whatever they demand every month to keep using it.
does this mean we're bigger than the Andromeda Galaxy now?
I've long considered Queensland to be Australia's answer to North Korea, ever since the Bjelke-Petersen days. What with his gerrymandering, their barely-shy-of-death-penalty marijuana laws, then their draconian if-you-know-a-bikie-you're-also-guilty laws, and now this, I have a sackful of very good reasons why I would never cross South Australia's northeastern border!
It will have to get a LOT worse than this before people rebel. North Korea stands as a stark example of the extent of oppressive conditions people are willing to tolerate without rebellion or revolution.
Remember the boiling frog analogy. I'm absolutely certain that if half the laws and legal practices we tolerate today, had been suddenly imposed all at once back in the 1970s, people would have stormed Parliament House the same way they did the Bastille in 1789. But because these laws have crept in one by one over many years, using safety/fear as justification, they've been able to impose conditions that would have been considered absolutely intolerable 40 years ago.
So I doubt very much there will ever be a revolution now, because the powers that be have the boiling frog technique worked out pat. What the future holds in my mind doesn't bear thinking about. I just live one day at a time hoping it doesn't get too bad before I shuffle off this mortal coil. At least with no children I don't have to be concerned about where civilisation goes after I'm gone.
I've never been asked this, but then I haven't been in the job market for a long time. But if I were, and I was asked to provide access to my private accounts at an interview, my response would be something along the lines of:
"Obviously I cannot give out that information. And in all honesty, what does it say of your company's attitude to IT security that you would even ask for such information and expect an answer? If I tell you, how could you trust that I wouldn't give out my login details to your company's systems in future if someone required it for whatever reason?"
If you want a vision of the horror that would be extended life under Google, have a gander at this Youtube video.
Although it deals with uploading your consciousness to a computer system rather than preserving your organic body, I have no doubt that the "terms and conditions" imposed by our corporate overlords in exchange for longevity would certainly follow similar patterns.
This is the modern equivalent of burning in hell for all eternity. The oblivion of death is paradise compared.
Yes, that would be why the Chinese government loves the idea of "cloud" so much - it makes the Ministry of Truth's job so much easier. Instead of having to recall and reissue thousands of copies of newspapers (or hard drives) revising BB's dayorder to show that Eastasia has always been at war with Oceania and not Eurasia, they only need to update the one cloud server and presto! it's automagically updated for everyone, and nobody can prove otherwise.
Actually, there is a good reason for posting AC.
The police may or may not read El Reg, but you can bet a lot of IT bosses do - and most of us here work in IT. Given that you can easily lose your job for stepping even an inch out of line these days, you have to confront the very real possibility that one of your workmates or bosses might be reading your comments here. Especially since said workmate or boss only has to click your name above your comment and they can read everything you've ever posted. Even if you're using a pseudonym, there's a good chance someone at your workplace can figure it out or might recognise it from somewhere.
So if you want to post something controversial without risking your job, you'd do it as AC, not to evade the police, but to evade your pointy-haired boss from telling you that "those opinions don't reflect the attitude of our company" and using it as an excuse to give you your marching orders.
Of course in my case I'm a partner in the company I work for, and I promote free and honest expression in our workplace, so this doesn't affect me or our people so much, but for many here it would be a very real danger.
In New Zealand we had FTTN completed in about 2010
That's because New Zealand doesn't consist of 8 million square kilometres of the kind of terrain one normally only encounters in Frank Herbert novels. Australia has a lot of peculiar issues when it comes to infrastructure, and I'm not at all surprised that the whole NBN project has gone awry; I knew it would the moment Labor first mooted it, simply because I know what this country is and what its environment does to man-made objects. I'd wager few, if any, of the high-living politicians mooting it from the comfort of their air-conditioned Sydney and Canberra offices, have ever actually ventured out into the Great Red Nothing that most of this continent consists of; if they've seen anything of it at all, it is most likely through the little window of an aircraft flying just under Mach 1 10 kilometres above it, and so it was inevitable that they'd grossly underestimate the problems and costs involved.
Even if we discounted connecting all the rural centres and gave each city its own satellite uplink instead of running cables all over countryside comparable to that of Arrakis, Australian cities are not like most others in the developed world. They sprawl out over a huge area, making it an expensive proposition to connect up each separate house. My own home city of Adelaide, for example, is geographically bigger than London, but has only 1/8 of the population. From this you can work out that the per-capita cost of hooking up a city the size of Adelaide would be more than 8 times that of London; since Adelaide's median income is definitely not 8 times that of the average Londoner, it's not at all surprising that we've had these difficulties, and in fact I find it amazing that we've achieved as much as we have!
All this law is doing is essentially extending existing harassment and abuse laws into the social media space. It's pretty specific that the material to be removed must be directly targeted at a particular Australian child before it can be the subject of a complaint - that is, it has to refer to or address an actual person, and consist of an attack on, or harassment of, said person.
I don't see any way in which, say, advocates of political correctness could use this law to take down anti-feminist or anti-progressive commentary, for example, since such commentary is generally not targeted at specific individuals. In fact, laws like this could well be used against such individuals, since the standard MO of PC advocates is to harass and attempt to smear and ruin the lives of those who disagree with them.
Facebook lynch-mobbing and the media-induced hounding of individuals for the sake of sensationalism has become a serious problem that needs to be addressed, and this law is a step in the right direction. Preventing targeted and directed harassment and abuse of individuals is not censorship. It's straightforward civilised behaviour.
"You appear to be attempting to equate paedophilia with homosexuality."
I was hoping you would be intelligent enough not to attempt to use that particular strawman to try to bolster your position. I guess I overestimated you. I should have known better, given the mindlessly Orwellian mentality you've been exhibiting.
No, I have not equated homosexuality with paedophilia at all. What I did was to examine the psychological mechanism behind fanaticism and denial. At no point did I draw any comparison between homosexuality and paedophilia, the only comparison I drew was in certain peoples' negative reactions to them and the reasons for said reactions.
I could just as easily have used a comparison with a fanatical Islamist wanting to ban bacon being a secret bacon-lover, or a rabid anti-smoker covering for her craving for a cancer stick, or a fanatical temperance-movement crusader trying to cope with his alcohol addiction, but in my ignorance of your sheer stupidity I chose to use the homosexual analogy instead. Silly me.
I believe that those who are most fanatical in their opposition to something are often secretly enamoured of it themselves, and so they speak out to hide the fact from others as well as reinforce their own denial.
This principle has already been demonstrated in the case of anti-gay fanatics: many of them are secretly gay, or have homophilic desires, which their culture and upbringing causes them to deny, and this denial is what drives their anti-gay fanaticism.
That's not to say that everyone who dislikes gays is secretly gay. There are certainly many who are simply uncomfortable with the idea, but they don't go on banner-waving crusades about it. There is discomfort and avoidance, and then there is fanatical zealotry.
If this is true of homosexuals and anti-gay fanatics, it is likely also true of vocal anti-paedophile crusaders like yourself. Yes, most people are rightly protective of kids. But when they start frothing at the mouth and demanding that the most basic freedoms be flushed down the toilet to further their cause, as you have clearly been doing in this thread, that's the kind of fanaticism which is usually covering for denial.
Which is why I'd be more concerned about somebody like you being left alone with kids I care about, than someone like the fictional Sims. At least he knows what he is. How well do you know what you are?
Yep. You can bet that Game of Thrones, the show that made Australia famous for piracy, won't be in Netflix's lineup because that greedy bastard Murdoch wants you to pay $120 a month for premium Foxtel to watch that one show. I can see a massive uptake in VPN subscriptions from Australia as soon as the new copyright enforcement regime comes in and people start getting nasty letters from their ISPs!
Given that the "ball in a tube" mechanism presumably has a fixed mass for the ball, its momentum - and therefore the energy recovered - would be a function of frequency of motion, not torque. So a power wanker who pulls his pudding at a rate of 80 strokes a minute with a force of 80 newtons per stroke, would only generate about half as much electricity for a given ball mass, as a rapid-fire chicken choker at 160 strokes a minute with a force of 40 newtons per stroke, despite consuming the same number of joules in the process.
It seems to me that a better mechanism for converting oscillatory motion into electricity could be devised, perhaps one that would produce low volts / high amps for the power wanker, and high volts / low amps for the chicken choker, which can then be transformed as required, so as to maximise power conversion efficiency regardless of the stroking style of the power source.
Given the difficulty of varying the ball's mass, a good solution would be to provide different models with different sized metal balls, which buyers can choose to suit their wanking technique: big, heavy balls and tubes for the power wankers and small, light balls and tubes for the chicken chokers.
VyprVPN apparently do keep logs and will hand them over upon request, according to TorrentFreak. I've been using Private Internet Access for over 6 months so far and I've no complaints.
I've long maintained that Tony Abbott and his cronies should be charged with high treason if they sign this TPP as it stands. The provision that foreign corporations are allowed to sue a democratically elected government for passing laws they don't like, is nothing less than blatantly selling our nation's sovereignty to foreign powers. Which is an act that, throughout recorded history, has been globally regarded as treason.
When I was in tech college, the meaning of "broadband" I was given to understand meant that the data was transmitted over a broad band of frequencies or channels, as opposed to "narrowband" which meant the data was sent using a single carrier frequency or channel.
But, just as the media have misappropriated the term "hacker" to mean "cyber-criminal", it seems the term "broadband" has now been misappropriated to simply mean, "internet access that is faster than yours!"
Of course. Better exterminate all those evil overprivileged white male cishet shitlord scum who are the sole cause of all that that is wrong with the world, right?
Sanctimonious PC hatemongers like you are what is wrong with the world.
Apparently not. Fairfax reports this:
Yes, but Fairfax is a big corporation that the laws of the land don't apply to. The ten-years-in-prison clause is only for the little guys like you and me. If one of us had published this bungle on our little Wordpress blogs, WE'D be looking at 10 years' chokey, but Fairfax and Murdoch's minions have effective carte blanche.
Always remember the Prime Directive of 21st century lawmaking: one law for us, and another for them.
Hell, why not just go the whole hog and bring back the guillotine, the gallows and the garrotte. We even could bring back public burnings of the worst ones, just to set the example for others who dare to speak out of line! Or hanging, drawing and quartering for extra spectacle!
That reminds me, while our governments are busy using Orwell's political diatribes as instruction manuals, there's a scene in the Radford movie our parliamentary do-gooders might like. When Winston and Julia meet in Victory Square to arrange their first excursion, truckloads of prisoners are being brought in and tied up to stakes around the square. One guard goes along machine-gunning them in the legs and letting them hang there in agony for a few minutes until the next guard comes along popping caps in their skulls. I'm sure our modern Moral Guardians and Easily Offended Purveyors Of Political Correctness would revel in this kind of rally, cheering on the public executions of the outspoken and other doubleplusungood crimethinking ownlifers.
So, is this comet now going to swing around the Sun and give us a sky-spanning lightshow later on, or is it going to pass too far out to form a large tail?
The biggest problem with Australia's voting system is not just that it's mandatory, it also uses what are called "preferences". Now, remember you HAVE to vote, and if you don't want to vote for Labor or Liberal, you could vote for a minority party like the Greens, the Sex Party, the Pirate Party, Hemp Party, One Nation and so on. But all of those parties are forced to stipulate "preferences" to other parties.
What this means is that if the candidate (and their party) you voted for doesn't get voted in, that party's votes are forwarded to the "preferred" party of their choice. So, say you vote for the Greens, and they preference Labor, but they don't get in. Then your vote for the Greens gets counted as a vote for Labor, whether you wanted Labor in power or not. You can't choose for your vote not to count at all if your desired party doesn't get in. Ultimately, because Labor and Liberal between then have an absolute oligarchy in this country, everyone is forced, through this system of preferences, to vote for one or the other, regardless of what you actually want.
Even an informal vote (e.g. a blank ballot paper, or one with a penis drawn all over it, or simply turning up and signing your name off and not putting a ballot in at all) is counted as a vote for the incumbent party, so you can't escape voting that way either.
The upshot is, if you live in Australia, you either vote Liberal or Labor, regardless of how much you hate either - or both.
The ghastly things wake me up every morning at 5:30 am with their discussion of "news of the day" on their way out to farmer fields.
Be grateful you don't live in Australia. Rooks have voices like Maria Callas compared to the Australian Sulphur-Crested Cockatoo, a large and exceedingly early-rising flock of which have taken up residence in the roadside trees right outside my house. If you haven't heard the raucous, ear-shredding shrieks of these avian abominations you have never experienced true aural agony. Trust me, these damnable creatures constitute the world's most sadistic alarm clock.
If you're feeling particularly masochistic and want to experience for yourself a sample of what I get hauled out of my sweet dreams by every morning, then give this YouTube video a listen. If you can keep that video open for more than 30 seconds, you're either deaf or an ornithological saint!
The record (that we're aware of) is over half an hour!
That's an achievement to be proud of, even more so given that you kept them holding that long with nothing but hold music.
I have a specially crafted MP3 file that I've carefully honed over the years to try and match, as closely as possible, the scripts these droids use when pitching something. I came up with it because I found that simply saying I'd get the person and leaving the phone on hold never kept them on the line for more than a minute or so, and I wanted some method for maximising their time wastage while minimising my own. So the MP3 I created goes something like this:
"Good day, [My company name], Steve speaking...[5 second pause]...Okay...[8 second pause]...Uh huh...[6 second pause]...Probably not, but if you could explain it to me I might be able to refer you to someone... etc, etc.
The MP3 file is about 30-odd minutes long. The longest I've been able to hold a telemarketer on the line with it before they realise they're talking to an answering machine and hang up, is 17 minutes 36 seconds. The average is around 8-10 minutes.
So respect to you being able to tie them up for half an hour with nothing but hold music. Well done!
since our fucking government has just passed laws making it perfectly legal for ASIO to do to innocent Australian citizens what the DEA has done to this woman.
If my systems are fair game for you to attack because I'm not in the USA then you're fair game for my systems to whack you with a trojan when you break into them.
Well considering that cloud storage by its very nature is all three of those; namely insecure, expensive and can't do the job, I'd say our government agencies shouldn't be adopting this toxic technological trend any time soon.
if Google simply stopped linking to his sites altogether. I'm sick of Googling some current event and finding half the first page links to articles hidden behind Murdoch's paywalls. Especially considering that if I set my user-agent string to simulate the googlebot I can often access the articles without restriction. This means he's showing one thing to the googlebot and another to regular browsers - which I was under the impression was a huge no-no in Google's books, guaranteed to get you ranked off their index. Not to mention the sheer ironic hypocrisy in his doing this, and then complaining about Google scanning his articles and reprinting them in their news searches!
So it'd be great if Google could just wake up to this and give his shit-sites the go-by and link me to actual news sites, instead of that evil bastard's pay-per-view propaganda rags.
"Whenever he's browsing his playlists for stuff for us to listen to there are gaps where music that he used to be able to stream is no longer available."
And here we have another reason why I abominate this emphasis on "cloud." This is the Ministry of Truth in all its ugly glory. When all movies and songs and books are stored in the cloud and "hoarding" (I see the pejoratives for those who prefer to keep their own data are already being circulated) is a thing of the past, how easy is it to simply delete undesirable parts of history, or to edit songs and movies to suit modern PC sensibilities? All you have to do is alter or remove one file from the cloud server, and it instantly affects everybody. Looks like Winston Smith and his ilk will soon be out of a job.
I give it 10 years before our government starts making it illegal to keep your own copies of media files and mandates exclusive use of the cloud for exactly this reason. Once that happens, our journey to Orwell's nightmare will be complete. What will the penalty for keeping a diary be then? 30 years in a joycamp?
I believe the solution to that would be for ALL persons appearing in court to have their legal counsel appointed by the court - no matter who, or how rich, you are. If your income is below a certain threshold, then you should be eligible for a subsidy from the government to cover the cost of legal counsel and court fees, which would be reclaimable from you in the event you are convicted in a criminal case. This would put a dead stop to rich people and corporations using highly-paid mouthpiece lawyers to sway and manipulate the judicial process. If all lawyers were appointed based on equivalent competence for both sides, a much fairer trial and more accessible justice would be assured.
But since the rich and powerful and their mouthpieces are the ones that own the government and run the legal system, the chances of seeing such a remedy are about on par with those of the Curiosity rover discovering Martian crested three-winged pigs.
I'm just... gobsmacked... that system designers aren't limiting login attempts by default without even thinking about it.
Way back in the early 80s, when banks first started introducing ATMs, it was made very clear that if you got your PIN wrong 3 times the machine keeps your card. And in high school in 1983 on the old BBC Micro network (remember the old *I AM NAME and *PASSLOOK anyone?) 3 failed login attempts locked your account and you had to go and see the teacher to reset it.
Ever since then, I've always designed systems to lock an account after 3 failed login attempts, believing this to be industry standard practice. That it clearly now is not is utterly unbelievable, not to mention stupendously irresponsible. I say that any systems engineer designing a system without a failed-login lockout condition should be charged with criminal negligence.
This is exactly the kind of scandal that is needed to wake people up to the hazards and dangers of relying on cloud storage. It is NOT secure and never will be, no matter how much buzzword fluff the marketing droids and three-letter-spooks throw around. As to all those who brush off their reliance on cloud with "I have nothing to hide, so nothing to fear" - you fucking well have plenty to fear now!