Re: a bloke in the pub told me that...
23 posts • joined 3 Aug 2011
How sad is it that we have to resort to a "yeah, but we're still better than them" argument. I might have failed maths but I didn't fail as bad as that guy!
It's a race to 2nd to bottom. And with North Korea behaving as it does, there's still a lot of scope for slippage.
Whilst Waleed's comments may not necessarily be absolutely technically correct, they're at least on the correct side of the argument. I'm a bit squirmy about having this opinion because I'd prefer the whole argument to be solid, but we in Oz are in serious need of arguments, or even rhetoric, that reaches the masses on a non-technical level to balance out the even-more-technically-incorrect statements coming out of the mouths of those who actually do know better.
And then there's all the political posturing:
We don't want the 2016 election result to be considered a 'mandate' to avoid FTTP, and getting the message out to the mass-market, rather than just the technologically literate crowd, is what's necessary for the government to have the vague possibility of getting the message.
Good on you Waleed Aly.
Who knows, had the current government continued rolling out FTTP without stopping to do six different reviews and re-negotiating contracts and re-purchasing infrastructure, then you may have had your Rolls Royce much sooner than 2020. We will never know.
Do you know what your suburb's rollout schedule was prior to the 2013 election?
You weren't asking for content, just data describing the intent of the content, ie. metadata. Ironically, even the metadata is obviously too sensitive to be appropriate to discuss whilst the consultation is on-going? (double-ironically, this sounds like law enforcement speak).
Go Team Australia...
Amen brother. How smart was it of the NSA to have such a massive trove of false trail documents just in case of such a leak? But I guess that's why their budget is so big, they think of these things that mere mortals like us can't even fathom. They also need to fund a heap of NGO contractors to work on these documents to maintain the pretense that it's all legitimate.
Bravo to the NSA, may they continue unencumbered.
Error: Irretrievable context failure, please reset completely and retry operation.
Not sure if my attempt at black humour fell flat or I missed your attempt at dry humour, but I can't see how the stating of obvious physical impossibilities could become the basis for any law enforcement investigation. If the situation does come to pass, however, is there a 'you didn't get the joke' clause that can be invoked to minimise the wastage of the public purse?
If not, I'm going to have to work out how to get one of those Roger Rabbit holes stuffed into my phone as well, or further protect the contents of the phone by relocating an Icelandic volcano into it.
They saw your message, enlisted the CIA to create an account, and we're now seeing 2 downvotes as standard.
It sounds as if what he's saying is that having a right to keeping conversations, images, home videos private is above the law. I thought a right to privacy was, precisely, "the law".
I'm getting a sense of "the lady doth protest too much, methinks" and this is part of the campaign to give users a false sense of security. As a number of commenters have already said, there are many other avenues to get metadata, or other evidence, physical or virtual, that can point towards what is likely contained on the encrypted device, or that make the contents of the encrypted device inconsequential to getting a warrant or conviction.
There's always a trail, unless you're dealing with someone at The Grugq's level of computery counter intelligence and at that level of discipline any arguments over default encryption by Apple and Google are rendered moot.
P.S. The guns, drugs, bags of fertilizer, little boys, sex workers, and my missus' bruises are all hidden in my phone, which is encrypted, so even if we're pulled over there's nothing 'the man' can do about it. Let's ride!
Th reality is that Labor didn't want to run a cost-benefit analysis because the reality that their NBNCo Corporate Plan predicted that 50% would be connecting at 12Mbps and in 2028 less than 5% connected at 1Gbps would have exposed the reality that HFC and/or FTTN could meet the requirements of the majority of fixed line customers.
That argument doesn't take into account the fact the state of the copper that would be used FttN may not be up to snuff, and that HFC is owned by private enterprise and would need to be leased or purchased. It already cost NBNCo $11 billion (with a b) and that didn't include owning the copper in the ground - which is what the Liberals are proposing. MT has said, however, that the agreement with Telstra will not need to be re-negotiated for NBNCo to end up owning the copper. Some find this hard to believe.
It's also my opinion that a CBA is too limited a study for such a large and lost-lasting infrastructure project, even more-so because it's government driven and therefore if it's deemed a long term benefit to the country, then a CBA doesn't do it justice.
I think the CBN or MTM should go ahead even if the CBA isn't necessarily flattering, but only because that's the first step towards a FttP NBN, and it seems to be the closest thing we're going to get to a broadband upgrade under the current government.
He submitted it TWICE following the rules. No dice. He went outside the rules ONCE and it got noticed. He should be paid for finding a flaw in their bug-reporting system if nothing else.
If following the rules doesn't work, most IT people I know wouldn't hesitate in bending / breaking the rules to get the desired effect if they believe it will get the right answer in the end. I know I would.
$500 is very cheap for good advertising. Withholding $500 is very expensive to look this bad.
That was a very long paragraph to explain why 1 billion 'people' should have read 1 billion 'accounts'. It was also so long that you lost your way and ended up at "Zuck behind bars". What axe are you trying to grind here?
Disclaimer: I don't have a Facebook account, but I liked the movie The Social Network and am entirely aware that it's writers took varying degrees of artistic license.
I thought one of the reasons that JA was accused of rape was that he didn't use a condom when requested. So, now, there IS a condom, but any DNA it contains doesn't match JA.
Maybe this is a slam dunk double negative proof of JA's guilt: the non-existent condom contains non-matching DNA therefore, should a condom have existed, it MUST, conversely, contain JA's DNA.
...may assist you in not going off half-cocked in future.
Please be doing us the favour of pointing out an example of any leaked government information that has affected the security of its populace. Pretty much all the leaks I've read about have only been classified as "secret" because they're embarassing to the government.
ie. Proof or STFU
Didn't the US recently add 'cyber' attacks to that which constitutes an act of war?
ie. Had any country sponsored a Stuxnet-style virus aimed at disabling nuclear facilities in the US, then the US would feel justified declaring war on said sponsor. And I would wager that declaring war on said sponsor would be, primarily, non-cyber attacks.
My bad, wasn't the author of HULK that wrote / reviewed THOR. That comparison blog is here:
Still, the above blog post is a couple of weeks old...
Having read the HULK author's blog a couple of weeks ago, he already stated that it was easy to recognise HULK's attacks because they come in a specific order. He also went on to say that he developed THOR which recognises and nullifies HULK. What research did Prolexic do more-so than just reading the blog about HULK and THOR? Did they even get down to the THOR part? Doesn't sound like it.
Sounds like "some website" agreed with your pre-existing opinion by doing a mathematical calculation on the english language. Just because they use wanky language doesn't mean they're wrong, and it also doesn't mean you're right. Argue against the wankiness of the wording and I'd happily agree, but you've used it to indicate that the NBN is fundamentally flawed. Sorry, no such logical jump to be found here..
As for the NBN, from what I've read, both sides of the argument agree that the infrastructure upgrade and associated potential bandwidth upgrades are necessary, and that fibre is the best solution. The argument gets stuck on the overall cost, not on bandwidth or latency. There's also the whole government controlled vs commercial argument, but the proof of the effectiveness of that stance is, well, precisely what we have now.
Also, I doubt that anyone using their ADSL2+ connection to it's potential is going to choose a lower end NBN connection, so your point is moot (it's also a bit stupid as it's a matter of consumer choice, not product limitation). There is already evidence of NBN prices being comparable (if not cheaper in some cases) to equivalent ADSL connections.
In regards to your 'quango monopoly' comment, and I'll warrant this is subjective, I'd prefer the devil-I-don't-know quango monopoly to the devil-we-know-all-too-well-and-for-well-too-long Telstra.
I honestly don't know why a reader of El Reg would be against the NBN as fervently as you obviously are, other than concern that maybe the money would be better spent on something else. If it's latency, then that's a case of "get over it" because you can't fight the laws of physics, laws of physics Jim.
If you don't like the NBN, what do you propose instead? Be part of the solution, not the problem.
Torrentfreak recently published an article about how RapidShare got themselves off the 'rogue sites' list: http://torrentfreak.com/rapidshare-from-notorious-market-to-proactive-piracy-eliminator-120208/
The posters above with negative comments towards Project Managers obviously haven't dealt with one that's worth their salt. If you've worked with a good PM this article will appear as gospel, if you've only worked with bad PM's then this article will appear to condone the red tape that causes projects to degenerate into failure or a nightmare of moving goal posts.
To massively oversimplify things, a successful project depends on a good team, a good PM, good management above the PM and a supportive / interested board. The team is probably the least important as a good PM can work a sub-standard team to produce satisfactory results.