Re: Christ on a fucking BIKE!
I'm in total agreement. The comments on here are precisely what's wrong with the IT industry. The people making them are an embarrassment to our industry and, as you say, to our gender.
674 posts • joined 25 Jul 2011
I'm in total agreement. The comments on here are precisely what's wrong with the IT industry. The people making them are an embarrassment to our industry and, as you say, to our gender.
I have supported his quest for proper treatment, but this has no basis or need.
Why does he need access to these files before someone comes and talks to him? They wouldn't under our law in the UK either - you get access to the documents at the "you've been charged" stage before court dates.
This isn't a good move and he has lost my support with it.
As far as I can tell, there isn't a "free" subscription available at all. So, I would be assuming that they're all paid for subs.
You are trying to create a distinction as to what a "real doctor" is. I am trying to point out that your grounds for doing so are flawed - the term Doctor pre-dates its use in the medical profession.
If you wish to diminish the use of the term Doctor for PhDs, then you should more rightly do so for its use in the medical profession, based on its historic use. Before medical doctors were referred to as doctors, they were referred to as physicians. It is MD's who have appropriated the term.
However, both ways of using the term are used consistently world wide. A doctor can be an MD or a PhD. So, the idea that one or the other is a "real" doctor is nonsensical to say the least.
Also, my use of colloquialism wasn't itself colloquial. You seem to be struggling with the English language a bit.
@david 12 - you might want to look into the history of the term "Doctor", as it is from the Latin "to teach", in relation to teaching in a university. It had no relation to medicine at all.
The use of "Doctor" for medical professionals is closer to a colloquialism than any other definition, as medical doctors already have possible titles available, per their profession: Physician and Surgeon.
You seem to think its about specific laws. It isn't, its about legislative creep. This stuff is in addition to all the other attacks on civil liberties. It all piles up, and suddenly you realise you're living in a police state. Just look through all the laws of the last 10 years and you'll find an alarming number which take away tiny bits of freedom here and there, but overall it adds up to a much larger issue.
Safeguards *could* be put in place, but they very rarely are, and when they are they are so weak or are ignored so as to make them pointless. Just look at the spying stuff. We had a court rule what GCHQ had been doing was illegal, but since people now knew about it, it no longer was. We have laws all over the place with "safeguards" but the safeguards are never as strong as the laws they are there to control. It barely takes any effort to change them.
Quite simply put - corruption. Sure, those technologies aren't an issue on their own, but when they're used in a blanket way, it doesn't take much effort to screw someone over with them. I've been on the receiving end of police lying about me, and of a concerted political campaign to clamp down on a peaceful protest. It resulted in my having to drop out of university, and my life taking a massively different direction - and that was relatively minor stuff they lied about.
On top of that, our movement saw the government make laws specifically to make what we were doing illegal. That being protesting. Injunctions were issued, new laws brought in. Its now illegal to contact 2 people in a business to complain about their business practices if the first one tells you not to call again - ie. you are harassing a business.
I don't know about you, but if a company did that to me I wouldn't want to work for them anyway!!
Indeed. Down here, 3G signal is a luxury. On most of the roads around here, any signal is a luxury!
So, something needs to change in the UK to deal with this sort of system!
Precisely. Its a good looking, sturdy phone. I've had my M7 for 2 years and have dropped it numerous times, onto concrete too, and its only signs of wear are a small scratch on the glass, and a few tiny scratches on the back. Why spend all that time changing everything if what they've got is already pretty darn good?
That'll do me nicely, as my contract is up! Running the M7 at the moment and the M9 seems like a good replacement! :D
Top broadcasters have thousands of subscribers on Twitch. Smaller ones can have dozens or hundreds. I voluntarily sub to 4 channels each month, as they provide hours of entertainment so why shouldn't they get some reward for it?
Youtube has had tremendous growth over the last few years. That growth costs a fortune in equipment and bandwidth. But growth can't go on forever.
So, with them introducing things like subscription services and the like, I can see it becoming profitable very soon.
I'm quite surprised that they haven't created a system like Twitch TV's subscriptions - ie. people can voluntarily pay a monthly sub, part of which goes to Twitch and part goes to the broadcaster. Offer silly perks, like special emotes and access to "sub only" pages and people do pay up. The content still remains free, but there's a nice steady stream of income.
@benched42 - really? Got Word 2013 open here and Word 97-2003 .doc is a save option? And our old office 97-2003 documents all work fine still...
Oh no, 680 MB. How terrible. It'll never fit on my 4TB hard disk.
Sorry for the sarcasm, but in the modern world of computing, 680MB is not something to worry about. I install productivity software here, specific to education, that hits about 15GB in total. Yes, its huge for what it does, but our users want/need it, therefore we install it and live with that.
I'd love to see a breakdown of those costs to be honest! Costs here are closer to £250 per laptop per year, and we're a full Microsoft house.
I don't actually get that attitude to be honest. Mac OS has many of its own problems which can and will slow you down.
My workflow simply has very little interaction with TIFKAM, and it is still possible to install a third party start menu if you *really* need it. Maybe its down to my never actively looking for and clicking icons - I always just press the Windows key and start typing the name of what I want - same as I did in Windows 7.
To me though, faster IO drives a real increase in productivity due to reduced processing times for various tasks that swap to disk etc...
Windows 8/8.1, quite simply, is much faster than Windows 7. Disk IO is a good chunk quicker on its own.
So, as much as Windows 8's TIFKAM interface is infuriating, the core of the OS is pretty good.
If you really want to check things like that, you have to check it yourself. The old adage "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't force it to drink" comes to mind.
What part of "unless you set up a policy to bin them" is causing you trouble?
Not sure you understand the system. You can restore emails in Office 365 at the click of a few buttons. The system is already there, and people use it daily. All Microsoft have done is change from 90 days to infinite for the ability to go and find and restore those emails.
Why did it require everyone to move to one monolithic system?
Why instead didn't it simply involve a new "style" framework being created, dictating page layouts, language choices, design ideals etc... which other departments then would've had to implement around their existing content?
Doing it the way they did might work for a small business which merges with another small business, but doing it with a government, with hundreds of different departments and functions, with global reach, stakeholders in every sector of the population both internal to the country and external? That, quite frankly, is ridiculous.
I simply can't see what the advantage ever would've been?
Battery storage for homes is a great idea. Where I live, we use very little electricity, making a monthly bill about £25. With a battery like this, and a move to economy 7 or installing some solar panels, we could drop that bill down to £10 or less.
Imagine it this way - every house in the country has a home battery capable of storing enough power for a day's usage - blips in the power grid would be less of a worry. Load balancing and capacity on the grid would be simpler and the cost of power in general could drop.
The EU hasn't been silent. They are currently engaged in a thorough analysis of the problem, and whether the US SafeHarbor agreement is worth the paper its written on.
The main issue is that the EU bureaucracy works so incredibly slowly.
As new systems come into existence, those systems will need managing, configuring, debugging, etc...
Automation is all well and good, but it won't be perfect. No technology is perfect - it was invented by humans, and we certainly aren't perfect. So, those "non-perfect" times will require people with knowledge and experience to fix the stuff.
That said, just like any other industry, the number of people needed may well change over time. Where it'd take a team of 10 to manage a company's IT before, it might only take 5 in the future. That's progress for you. Lots of people lost jobs from the farming industry when tractors appeared...
That kinda renders pointless having something as inviolable as the Constitution. What's the point in it if a bunch of judges, who are appointed by politicians, get to overrule it?
I thought the US constitution was the highest law in the land? Does it not "trump" other laws?
What? How does this have any relation to the article here?
Who gave those random employees the right to make decisions about what content could be seen by the population of France? Were they elected? Is there a sensible way to appeal such a block? Is there a process to ensure the sites being blocked are only those which are illegal? Lots of problems with it.
Saying "not so bad" is kinda dumb.
We already pay yearly for Windows, Office, SQL Server and SCCM here, under the OVS-ES education subscription scheme.
So, "Windows as a Service" is pretty much what I've got already, and have had for a decade.
Only difference that I can see is that the upgrade stages (ie. going from one version to another) will be less a major headache to do the deployment!
Proper management of updates by you as a user is important. Updates don't get deployed to my work network until I've tested them. There's no mechanism for them to be deployed by end users either, so the idea of a machine randomly updating seems a little odd - as it just sounds like a lack of management to me.
Thing is, the whole point of providing cheap, fast internet is to allow small businesses to start up and grow. I know in some areas you can get 100Mbps symmetric leased lines for, what, £4k pa, but those costs are very variable. Where I am, those prices jump up to £12.7k pa, and 12 months ago they would've been £19k pa.
Saying to a startup "pay ££££" is not exactly encouraging them is it? Saying "move to somewhere cheaper" is also not very encouraging - they might be based where the talent is. They might be based where their partners are etc...
No, what they actually need is access to cheap, fast, internet connectivity. Subsidies may be necessary to kick-start the availability in the area, but the outcome will be greater tax income for the government and improvements in the local and national economies.
Fair enough. 24Mhz of frequency is a fair old chunk to need for wireless mics!
It does mean that your equipment will be about 10 or so years old by the time the changes happen in the UK then. Not a bad lifetime for wireless gear to be honest! I wish our Sennheiser mics would last that long.
Why did you buy 700Mhz mics 2 years ago? The industry has been going on about it since at least 2010.
Also, Sennheiser will usually change the frequency bands for you for a fee.
@Big John - ah, so you ask for evidence and when it is presented (along with how to get more), you're not happy due to it coming from left leaning sites. What evidence would be good for you?
If they want their patented technology to become part of an IEEE standard then they, of course, will have to comply with IEEE rules. If they don't want to comply with those rules, then they are free to not include their technology in the standard.
Why should they be able to be a part of a standard and still act like dicks to anyone who then has the audacity to want to use the standard?
Those companies are free to try and create their own competing standard, and free to manufacture their own equipment that uses it. But then, that wouldn't work with their trolling business model would it? They don't actually want to do any work with their patents.
Really? In 2015, you are shocked that Windows Server is popular? When you run a Windows network, the most efficient way of managing them is via, shock horror, a Windows Server.
A micro-iron dome is needed I think. Combine it with radar sensitive enough to pick out birds from the air, and a deep learning network for target analysis and you might be able to stop drones. Either that or just get some farmers with shotguns on the lawn.
As you can program drones to fly paths, so they don't need someone remotely controlling them, jamming would potentially be useless.
People complain about Linus and his personality, but seem to forget how successful he is and his management has been. As far as I can tell, the Linux kernel hasn't been forked by upset contributors to a different project, and gained the same level of use as the original... Why? The whole point of open source is that if you don't like something, you're free to grab the code and do it your way instead.
The reason is simple - he might be rude, but he gets the job done.
Consumers don't generally buy PCs because a new OS is out. They buy a new computer because they want or need one.
It isn't like the introduction of a new technology (eg. when iPads appeared). It isn't an additional device.
Businesses have a fixed rollout time usually, so new OS vs old OS isn't a discussion that's made for existing kit usually. They usually just replace PCs at the end of their planned lives, and prior to that the new OS is tested etc... The problem they have faced though, is compatibility - existing programs ceasing to work in the new version, so that caused them to hold back on the entire project.
If Windows 10 can run everything that Windows 7 and Windows 8/8.1 can, then there is less of a hurdle to overcome to encourage an upgrade.
We won't be upgrading to Windows 10 in our school until the next replacement cycle anyway, as there's simply no need to disturb our stable network!
Indeed. If I went around doing this sort of thing here, I'd be up in front of a disciplinary panel pretty darn quick and out the door shortly afterwards.
I technically, have access to the entire organisation's documents and work etc... But if I go accessing them, I'd be abusing my position of trust.
That's what the CIA did here - they abused a position of trust.
Somewhat odd analysis, considering Google Apps being used by millions of people worldwide, with its various different apps. Google Maps is pretty popular too...
Are Google somehow alone in their acquisitions methodology for development? Apple have bought 62 companies since 1988. Microsoft have bought 169 companies since 1987.
Sure, Google buy a lot of companies - 174 since 2001, but does the number actually matter? Just look at the products that come from them for each company - a lot of the "big" releases of the last decade were started by little companies, bought up by big corporations and then polished and marketed by them.
Indeed. The BBC is presenting it in an "its dead Jim" manner also. I don't really read it as that though.
Google's X labs are for pure out of the box thinking. Google Glass is no longer a "new" idea and is mature enough that it can happily be its own department - that doesn't seem like being axed to me. If it were being axed, surely they would've reduced staffing or moved the head to something else instead?
Go read some NTSB reports. You'll see pretty quickly that pilots don't get the blame for everything. You seem dead set on saying that a pilot is legally responsible for all and every crash and fault that affects fly by wire planes. That is what is nonsense, and you know it.
How about this site, which lays it out quite clearly about legal liability - http://injury.findlaw.com/torts-and-personal-injuries/aviation-accidents-overview.html (that being a US site).
Or look at some crashes. China Airlines Flight 611 - crash was due to failure of maintenance (therefore, the pilot isn't responsible). American Airlines Flight 96 - faulty design (therefore, the pilot and the maintenance team aren't responsible). In neither case was the pilot legally responsible.
Those same concepts apply to *all* systems on-board a plane.
You just yourself said that the 787 doesn't have a direct link between the peddles and the flight control surface. That means that when you press something, or use a pedal, or use any of the flight controls, those actions are being translated into the movements that the plane actually performs - via computer. It isn't a little bloke in there going "oh, he wants to go right, lets move the rudder" and then pumping hydraulic fuel into the system... Its a computer. It might be many different individual computers, with redundancies, but they're still computers.
If the wires that fly your plane break - meaning the systems that run those hydraulics are not working, that means YOU as a pilot are not legally responsible. There is absolutely nothing you can do. You can't go climbing on the wing to jump on the ailerons. Imagine it this way - you're flying along happily and your wings fall off. Is that the pilot's fault? No!
You can do your damned best to control the plane, of course, but if the plane crashes and it all ends up in court, the fault won't be "the pilot didn't do the impossible! He didn't fly the unflyable plane!". The blame will be placed, legally, on the engineers (ie. the company) or the manufacturer.
I did not mention "autopilot" at all.
Not all the time, no. If the on-board computer simply dies, severing all fly by wire controls, the pilot is pretty much useless. Its not like there are hydrolics from the pedals in a Dreamliner cockpit to the rudder or ailerons.
If the pilot does something wrong then they are held responsible. If the plane's systems do something wrong, it is either the fault of the manufacturer, or the ground crew who were maintaining it.
Its a question that we already have answered. If you have your car repaired by, say, a mechanic and he fails to tighten the lug nuts and a wheel later flies off - the mechanic is responsible.
If a person doesn't have their car regularly maintained and it a bit falls off on the road, it is that person's responsibility.
If a car develops a fault with its ECU and locks the throttle on, causing a crash, it is the manufacturer's responsibility.
There's a pile of case law that already exists on it. An automated car isn't so much removed from the "fly by wire" type vehicles we already have.
The tens of thousands of deaths on the roads of the world due to human error would seem to show that you aren't really on the right side of the, err, road here.
Automation of cars will reduce road deaths. I trust a well trained computer more than a human who might be tired, inebriated, distracted etc...
@Marketing Hack - That's kinda the point of a learning computer - over time it will learn more and more things that it will recognise.
I don't know what that weird object on the road is until I'm either standing over top of it or have picked it up and looked at it. A computer is no different.
The human eye is notoriously easy to trick.