@AC
A pint for you!
4156 publicly visible posts • joined 6 Aug 2011
I was listening to the "Unexplained with Howard Hughes" podcast yesterday, and he was speaking to a chap called Mike Godfrey from a company called Insinia about hacking and cyber threats. And he mentioned, briefly, how everyone thinks the Met work closely with GCHQ on certain threats when in actual fact GCHQ can't trust the Met with any information in fear of them losing it. Aparently there's a track record with the Met and such things.
This chimed with something an uncle of mine (since departed) said to my Dad some years ago. My uncle worked building devices that could detect whether or not a room was bugged and where abouts in the room it was located. He had offers from America for the device, but nothing from the UK. And he said that the British police are always several steps behind everyone else (especially the Americans) in terms of technology to help solve crimes etc. He said that about 15 years ago, and nothing since has proven him wrong.
You know, after reading the headline I was absolutely shocked. Shocked to the point where I thought death was to be placed upon me shortly.
Now though I realise that 1.5cm a year isn't anything special, and I'm not going to die, so I've decided to go on YouPorn.
If it's good enough for Hawians after a missile scare, it's good enough for me.
Paris icon because, well, I might be a fan.
"Is that Varoufakis' book? Might be an interesting read, but isn't he talking about the Euro and the EU - and the problems with them? Rather than Bitcoin. And I don't see how Bitcoin is the dollar even makes sense.
Also, there's an IT angle. Varoufakis used to be chief economist for Valve."
The very same.
For the most part it is generally about the EU. But it's the formation of the EU and economic impacts behind the formation which are interesting, and enforce what I was getting at before.
The "bitcoin is the next dollar" is in reference to the Nixon Shock which occured in the 70's. In very simplistic terms, the dollar isn't backed by anything. Just good will and faith of other countries. After WW2, the Bretton Woods system pegged the dollar against gold, but once gold values started to rise the USA were still forced to sell it at $35. Nixon pulled the dollar away from gold. Since then the dollar, really, hasn't been backed by anything tangible, the same as every other currency in the world. So when people bemoan bitcoin for being worthless or a bubble, they don't understand how their own currencies work. Every currency in the world is a fiat currency, faith based.
If someone in the UK decided that America wasn't strong economically as they thought they should be, they'd "sell" their dollars. This devalues the dollar, as everyone else see's that and thinks "crikey, the dollar must be on it's arse. Best sell what I have". The dollar slumps due to this contagion of the weakening of the faith in the currency.
At the very core of the matter, all currency is worthless. If both you and I decided that a bottlecap is worth a bottle of beer, I could pay you a bottlecap and get a beer back. People outside of our agreement would see that and think the bottlecap is worthless and you're stupid for selling it. But to us its a currency. That's what has happened all over history. From the swapping of hides for food through to brass coins instead of hides.
To finish, the book is very, very good. Hard to understand sometimes so may need another read. But I must say, as someone who voted to remain in the EU, I'm half glad the UK is leaving now. That'll make sense when you read the book.
"It's only until you see and understand how financial markets have worked since the Nixon Shock in the 70's, will you then begin to realise that all finance is corrupt and shady."
I like how you neglected this part.
The book "And The Weak Suffer What They Must" is a fantastic description, from a European point of view, on the creation of the EU we have today. Those who disagree with what I said would do well to read this and then read my comment again.
I'll wait.
Indeed.
If the volunteers threw in £200 each, they could've wined and dined the heads of the NHS and pushed this through. Alas, their mistake was to believe that those who manage the NHS are doing it for the good of the organisation, and not for the good of 3rd party contractors who want to make a few quid off the back of a publically funded body.
Roll on the next general election, and get these shower of bastards away from the NHS.
2FA is a royal pain in the arse when you don't have your phone. In August my WIleyFox Spark X had decided to stop working reliably (wouldn't answer phone calls, wouldn't ring when calls were placed, restarts etc). In a bid to show the phone who's boss, after it died one too many times, I threw it in the River Moy - forgetting I was throwing my SIM card away with it.
Didn't need the phone, really, for 2 weeks after that (as I was on holiday). But when I got back to work I forgot my work email account had 2FA on it, and there was I waiting for a replacement SIM card to arrive.
The only thing they need to sort out, if I'm to nitpick anything, is the speed of the search. I have a mailbox that, really, is too big to prune and too important to discard, and it's a pain in the arse to search on it. Takes absolutely forever to do.
If they could do something to improve the speed and accuracy of the searches then that'd be great. But I'm so bloody happy they left Mozilla. If that's the only thing they do all year, it'll be the best thing they'd have done in 10 years.
"But I haven’t wasted a second of MY time. Only the time my employer is paying for anyway. If they want to send me off on a wild goose chase, that’s up to them, it’s their money."
That all depends on the way you look at it.
If you're a 20 year old developer, fresh out of school, that is the sort of mindset they have. It's all about the money.
When you get older, your priorities change. Would you rather work longer effectively repeating your work for the sake of an extra few quid, or would you rather it was done properly and agreed so you could go home at a respectable time and put your child to bed?
There's no right answer to it, and I'd agree with both statements. However, right now, I would only agree with the latter. My 20 year old self though would've agreed with you.
Life is far too short to treat any gobshite boss's demands as wasting their money. It's wasting your time, and you only have a finite amount of it.
Lovely idea, something I've done myself. However, you don't take in to consideration the following issue:
The stakeholder - in my instances the guy who pays my wages - see's it as your job to do what he says. If he changes his mind, then it's up to you to do it again. The fact you've agreed to something is irrelevant to the fact that you're employed to do what they ask for, and if you've wasted your time that's not their concern.
To be a developer today is to be a navvy on the railways 100 years ago. Do what you're told, doesn't matter how tough the job is, if you don't like it then there'll always be someone else to replace you. Don't ever kid yourself in to thinking you're the Alpha and Omega of a project and can't be replaced.
It's the thin end of the wedge. We can already see how anti terror laws in the UK (as an example) are being used for petty non-terror related incidents. Now we're entering a phase where "hate speech" should be banned. But what is hate speech? Where is the list stating those crimes?
In my opinion free speech works both ways. There is a freedom to make statements to what you hold true to yourself and statements you feel are fact, but there should also be the freedom to argue against that. Freedom of speech allows the freedom to insult and be insulted, it allows the freedom of expression of a point and the anhialation of a point. If we're suddenly going to stop and prevent nasty things from being said we are losing our freedom of speech no matter what it is for. In this case, we lose the freedom of speech to educate and inform others why such a point is wrong.
If someone says something hateful, we lose the freedom to take them to task over it, to show others who might be inclined to such a belief or way of thinking that this isn't the right way to think and these are the reasons why. Banning completely is akin to smaking a child for pointing at someone fat in the street without the explanation as to why it was wrong.
"Since the dawn of time humanity has always had a strange curiosity with orifices, from early caveman and their flint dildos (who said they were for creating fire?) to the current craze of fidget spinners. If it fits it goes."
Fun fact: The electric vibrator (motorised dildo) was invented 100 years before the electric toothbrush.
"@bitbucket is really making our lives hell today. And before you bitch, yes, we pay for it."
That's your own fault for giving a 3rd party the responsibility for handling something you really should keep in house, and it's your own fault for not having a back up plan in place for such an event.
The phrase "I've nothing to hide" is a pacifier to those who willingly allow their data to be used by people they can't see. They don't value it because they, themselves, haven't paid for it and they don't personally see a monetary value to it. They don't understand how the data is used, where its used, what it's used for. If they did they'd be more selective with what they share.
Case in point: I was buying something from Cath Kidston for my sister over Christmas. The lady behind the counter asked me for a postcode, I gave her the first 3 letters of it, she then asked for an email address. I then asked why, and she said it was for market research and to see if I was a returning customer. I declined to give her anything more than the first 3 letters. She said OK. But it wasn't until I asked was I told what my information was being collected for. I told this story to my wife, and she said "Oh I don't care I just give them the information. You're too paranoid".
"OK, I'm confused. I thought it was generally accepted now that Wikileaks had selectively leaked information to damage the Democrat campaign and and held onto stuff that might have damaged the Trump/Republican campaign. In which case wouldn't they be rather pleased with him?"
Do you think Trump is the type of guy to remember these things with people who helped him to the top?
There is that. But there is a caveat with that.
Those who have the degree, yes they will end up with a £60k debt but it opens the door to higher paying jobs than those on apprenticeships. Right now I've no degree, I've a HND which I haven't topped up, and I'm at my salary ceiling. If I had a degree I could move up the ladder again. But time, money, life, all things that get in the way of doing that.
If the current GCSE course is anything like the one I did in 2003/2004 then it's going to be a useless qualification anyway.
If you're in Year 9 or a parent of a child in that year and wondering what to do, don't do the ICT qualification. Do something creative like music. Go to college and learn IT properly, but use your last years of secondary school for something fun, not for something useless.
Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse with the introduction of that shitty chiclet keyboard, they decide to weld the battery in to the laptop.
My T500 will just have to keep on keeping on. There's no alternative to the T500 (circa 2010/2011 edition) in terms of robustness, reliability, and typing pleasure.
EDIT: Just checked and my T500 was built in 2008, and was already second hand when I bought it in 2012.
You're not alone. I think the same thing.
The reality is, like I've said before, parents don't know what their kids are up to but they don't want to know either. If something then happens then it's someone else's fault, not the parent's fault. We have already seen this in cases where parents are moaning about their child racking up £2,000 on the household credit card "without their knowledge" and it's the game maker's/Apple/Googles fault. It isn't the fault of the parent that they let their child play with something they don't understand nor supervise.