Posts by Ian Yates
767 posts • joined Tuesday 12th June 2007 08:17 GMT
Re: Is there anybody there?
Had it been able to do spaces, however, they would have known that it was actually a guy called Sam Sung that had pissed Jobs off once.
Re: Security issues
"Note that windows desktop share and windows server share are both falling, so this isn't just anecdotal."
That wasn't my point at all; you stated that it's because MS' systems are more insecure, but I don't believe that is much of a factor at all.
The only factors I've ever seen in non-public-facing infrastructure is (a) cost, (b) existing licences, (c) existing knowledge. And pretty much in that order.
Presumably built from the remains of the probes that first "penetrated the Martian surface"... by high speed impact
Re: Security issues
"Industry is moving away from MS because MS systems are more insecure"
I don't know what industry you work in, but I've never seen such a move on desktops or servers.
Companies in general use whatever they want based on what the person spec'ing it (a) knew and (b) was told was available. If a company can buy Windows boxes/licences cheap and they have tools/people to manage, they will; if they can't, they'll look at whatever else their preferred suppliers have that fits the bill.
Most reasonably sized companies don't build their own servers with Linux on; they pay a supplier (IBM, Red Hat, Oracle, etc.) for a fully supported system, regardless of how good their local sysad is, which cost (initially; not discussing TCO) very similar figures to the Windows based options.
In my experience of working for a company with 250k+ employees, only the security of the public-facing servers were really a consideration, and those numbers were such a small amount compared to the internal-only ones. Internally, all employee access was logged and they relied on standard ACL to limit access. If someone was found to have hacked in to something they shouldn't, they'd be out on their ass.
Re: Wait one minute...
"talking to Shatner"
And how... would they deal... with the a-pparent... pauses... in the feed?
Re: FFS
Except that 666 isn't the only possible "Number of the Beast", and no one can even agree as to what (a) the Beast is, or (b) what is represents...
Posted in Paper computers: Not mere pulp fiction
Re: Paper wins
Paper disproves Spock.
Dead trees win!
Re: If they have improved the interface - that's definately a good thing
There's some here: http://www.libreoffice.org/download/4-0-new-features-and-fixes/
Re: Company behind the video looks unlikely to actually be working with Google
Shame. I watched it on G+ earlier and thought that it was the first time that a Chromebook had seemed interesting.
Re: It's about time they made this sort of 'research' illegal
Would you rather just ignore the possibility of security issues?
Re: It's very simple RIM.
I thought it was irrelevant.
With IMAP over SSL to the company mail server, we effectively have secure push mail, and we don't have to pay per handset like we did with BBES.
Re: Pipping android to the post
"e.g. if apps have per-user storage"
They do. Users can't even see what other users have installed, but when a second user "installs" an app from the market, in reality it just permissions them to be able to see the already installed copy (but with a whole new data store).
Re: Remove all links to Facebook from all engines please
"Who gives a fuck about the Oxford Comma?"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_comma
(Disclaimed: I'm a fan of it)
Glass platter
How brittle is the substrate compared to the more typical metal ones? Since this is aimed a laptops, I wondered what the likelihood of smashing one was.
Obviously, the damage to the heads would be fatal in either model, but recovery would be even harder if you've got to rebuild four platters from shards first.
Re: Maybe, maybe not
... so... iPhone users should just fan heat every room they go in to?
Re: Port
Isn't Wine an emulator?
And VOD is not a problem solved by broadcast... Whether they can afford to scale it, though, is a different issue.
Re: Gentle voice of reason?
Not if you're dyslexic
"Being responsible for aids being spread [...]"
I'm reasonably anti-Ratzinger, but I'm not sure I'd word it *quite* like that... I mean, he's not going out there and actively spreading it. Although, he (and his administration) are responsible for not helping prevent the spread.
Still, semantics, since he actively did cover up the paedophile stuff.
That aside, I wonder what the conversion rate really is... My experience tends to be that the religious people I know are vehemently religious and won't discuss the alternative, the atheist/humanists are vehemently areligious (unreligious?), and the agnostics would rather everyone just shut up about it so that they can get on with their lives.
Re: @ Nobody presents climate models as gospel
To paraphrase Hanlon: Never attribute to conspiracy that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
@Flatpackhamster I agree, but what if *now* is the time to act? The problem* was built over the course of a couple of centuries, what if it takes at least that long to reverse?
It's right that there is research done in to both sides of the argument, the problem is how emotive it all gets. People like Lewis writing articles that effectively boil down to "ner ner de ner ner, someone with a PhD has disagreed with someone else with a PhD, so my point is proved" is just idiotic. Unfortunately, too many people have an economic position with proving things one way or the other.
The simplest argument is: If it doesn't happen, we've lost very little by trying to prevent it; if it does, we're potentially screwed (although we probably will adapt). However, the first part is only true if there is a global agreement to act, which I would put serious money on won't happen.
Ah, well; there goes my hope that the El Reg commentards were going to solve the whole thing.
* If there is one
Re: Oh Joy
I'm more concerned that who ever is in charge is called Mantrid and has plans to consume the whole Universe...
Re: Competition is good.
"unable to innovate without Google's help, and as a result none of whom seem to differentiate their products significantly"
I'm not sure I agree with this. There is a lot of innovation going on in the hardware, it's just that the market (read: "consumers") have all decided that they like the candy-bar style with few physical buttons; a design that Apple helped to convince the majority is best.
You can't say that the Note and Note II weren't an innovation from what was around at the time. And the concept hardware that flies around every year is interesting, it's just that the manufacturers don't see enough interest to complete the R&D to market.
If anything, the complaint should be that none of them are willing to take a risk.
Re: Blockbusters closing all stores?!?
For now
Re: They have arrived!
You missed:
2a. Name it after a much-loved cult Sci-Fi series, in order to pull in the geek crowd
Now, where do I send my cheque?
"32-bit and 64-bit Intel processors"
Poor AMD, getting completely fogotten. Especially since "x64" was originally their work...
Re: In aircraft combat how useful is this?
They would be the fastest, loudest birds ever witnessed.
Surely there must be a video of him outbidding the Penguin for it?
Re: Bumping up the stats...
Pah! It was better before the newfags turned up.
The Reg is dying.
etc.
etc.
Re: An NRA spokespersons said...
"I see you have to "break" the conditions"
What are you on about?
You created the conditions with your skewed analogy, I merely adjusted them to more accurately fit the actual problem. The "kit" you picked up on was (in your version) infallible, but in real life psychology/psychiatry are far from that.
If you actually read my post you'd see that I agree that the nutter was the cause of the incident, but to argue that guns aren't a catalyst in exacerbating the total damage done is an "ingrained prejudice" of its own.
If you argue that everyone should be allowed to own semi-automatic assault rifles, why not fully automatic? Why not grenades, rocket launchers, tanks? It's an argument of reductio ad absurdum, but where is the line?
As someone who has enjoyed firing rifles and consider myself good at it, I still don't understand why any person needs more than one firearm, nor why limiting it to a pistol, shotgun, or manually cocked rifle is a problem. Also, ammunition limiting. Why are questions not asked when someone buys 12,000 rounds of ammunition?
Re: An NRA spokespersons said...
"You are locked in a room with ten people, at least one of whom potentially has a particulalry nasty venereal disease, and you have a kit that is the only way of detecting that disease before it reaches the final stages of infection. The final stages of the diseases is irreversible brain damage, causing violent paranoia and aggression, and there is a chance the diseased will stab someone with the cutlery you have in the room. In essence, you are suggesting not using the kit so as not to cause offence, but instead throwing the cutlery away. And - no - I am not advocating stabbing (or shooting) everyone else in the room first, or that giving everyone their own cutlery to defend themselves would remove the chances of someone eventually being stabbed, I am advocating identifying the diseased and keeping them away from the cutlery so as to reduce the chances someone gets stabbed, without leaving everyone else to eat with their fingers."
This is such a poor analogy. To make it more accurate:
* The cutlery should be, say swords: not essential, designed to cause damage
* The "kit" should have a high chance of false-positive and false-negatives: psychiatry is not infallible and requires the practitioner to use their subjective experiences to diagnose many cases
* Not everyone with the disease need reach the "final stage": far more people with mental illness do not react violently
So, in this analogy, why would you say that also locking the cutlery/sword away and only lending enough out as needed is more preferable to only relying on an unreliable test but letting everyone do what they want with the cutlery/sword?
Replace either the "you" or the "tube" in the popular phrase "youtube" with any sexual noun or verb and you're likely to find something.
Cheers
Re: An NRA spokespersons said...
"In which case screening would seem just as if not more effective, and have the benefit of identifying and helping those with mental issues that might not turn them into killers"
Haven't read all of the replies, but I actually don't think many people would disagree that such people do need to be identified and treated before they become a danger to anyone.
But just taking in to account the cost and logistics of such an endeavour, which would be easier: limiting the number and type of guns people can own, or screening everyone in the country for potential mental health issues (which would require regular rescreening)?
Lets say (for argument) both reduce the chance of massacre equally, which would be cheapest to implement and maintain?
In an ideal world, I'd say that both would be great, but I just can't see a universal government mental health screening process being feasible.
Isn't doing something better than nothing? Are there any real legitimate arguments against preventing ownership of assault rifles, or limiting the number of guns to 1 per licensee?
Re: An NRA spokespersons said...
"Guns don't kill people."
Okay, so I've always understood that this was their idiotic rhetoric that a gun isn't capable of killing someone by itself; hence the normal follow on: "People kill people". The (stupid) argument that the person wielding the (semi-automatic) "gun" is solely responsible for massacre A and they would still have done it if only armed with an egg whisk.
But!
"Video games ... kill people." Makes no sense! They've completely screwed their own argument as a video game isn't really even a physical thing... are they now saying that a virtual piece of entertainment can randomly commit homicide, but a device designed to cause physical damage is incapable of it?
Bizarre. Unsurprisingly.
Re: if you want to lose weight
"Whenever people ask for advice on how to lose weight", then I say "lop off a limb!". That's the fastest way.
If they actually mean "get fit/toned", then that's a different thing.
Re: May have a point
Has anyone found any detail on what he was doing?
I can't find anything on whether he has played with the shipped ROM and found an error that shouldn't be displayed (so, hidden code) or whether he's shifted a ROM from a different product across, where the error would make sense.
Re: Buses, huh?
My God... it's full of buses!
Posted in Boffins develop microwave weed-zapper
Re: "Far happier are those who worry about the prevalence of pesticides"
Dear $DEITY! Save us from this microwave RADIATION! (etc., etc., etc.)
Re: Mens watches are jewelery
Agreed. Potentially, once epaper (or similar non-backlit display) has a high enough resolution, colour range, and refresh rate, it could have the appearance of a normal (albeit completely flat) watch, but respond to gestures to occasionally perform smart functions...
Whoops
Wasn't aware of this exploit and told my cousin to change her password when I got some spam from her account. She did, but 12 hours later it happened again so I told her to change it to a completely different and more complicated one.
Feeling a bit mean now...
Re: Open console is needed
"The Xbox - from a business perspective, is disastrous." You're confusing 'business' and 'commercial'. From a business perspective (Microsoft's) the XBox is one of their most important products; just look how many living rooms and bedrooms they are in. Plugged directly in to most people's preferred form of entertainment: their TV.
That aside, I'd take a lot of the profit announcements with a pinch of salt. MS certainly is an odd one in that the hardware has always been sold mostly at loss, but the licensing for the various parts of the system is the real money-maker, and I've never seen anything that has been able to confirm it falls within the "XBox division's" profit centre (i.e., the profits are reported somewhere else).
If it was really losing them money on all fronts, why would they not have made some changes to it? They still plough huge amounts of R&D in to the annual dashboard refresh.
And EA deserve what they get. Their games have focused on pointless sequels for years and Origin is an abomination
Re: I wanted a Nexus 7
All I got was a pesky replicant that kept trying to tell me it was human :(
Re: Great idea!
"a full desktop OS onto a phone and released Windows RT on a mobile."
Windows RT is far from a full desktop OS [citation]
Or, in more detail: "Windows RT can't run third-party desktop applications. At all."
Matt's diatribes are generally divisive, but this one is just downright bonkers.
As a long-time user of Android, I'll agree that it may still lack some of the polish of iOS, but it would be insane to argue that it isn't catching up. Is Matt really suggesting that Google dropping Android would have left Apple any incentive to continue work on iOS? I saw someone use the "new" notifications system on their iPhone the other day, which clearly draws inspirations from Google's efforts (which isn't a bad thing, despite what software patent trolls think).
Competition breeds innovation and consumers starve the garbage out of the market by not buying/using it.
Re: Herbertsmithite (named after its discoverer)
Shame it couldn't be used as a popular food ingredient, with appropriate advertising campaign.
<sings> I feel like *cough*
Re: Whatever. It's SOLSTICE! Celebrate!
I truly hope that nothing happens "today" (which, let's face it, means something different depending on where you are on the Earth) that could be taken to be the "cataclysm"... it would make all the usual believers of such prophecies even more insufferable.
Anyway; last orders gentlemen.
Re: Does this scale?
Nah. There'll be enfored MITM certificate substitution soon. If UKGov were considering it (idiots), there's no reason to think China won't go ahead with it.
Except that software patents are stupid. Small devs do not have enough time or money to check if something they're working on is patented; I'd argue that "no patents = more innovation" in software (just look at FOSS).
Sure, trademark your look-and-feel if that's what consumers use to associate something to you, but don't pretend that dragging something across a screen with your finger is a patentable invention.
Your comparing developers of software (something that is completely intangible) with manufacturers of physical things.
