Re: The only thing I'd really like to see is.....
Hey thanks! It would be even better without the photos tying up width so more summaries would fit in the screen.
523 posts • joined 13 Sep 2011
Hey thanks! It would be even better without the photos tying up width so more summaries would fit in the screen.
Perhaps they shouldn't appear on every article until we've either got a dedicated picture desk or they should be made smaller, or both.
Make them a lot smaller and put them to one side so they don't reduce the amount of text on the screen.
I don't make these decisions.
Sorry to see you've been stuck out here taking the flak.
There were worries that the previous design was looking like Ceefax.
I liked the old design!
The aim is to have a strong image per story.
Maybe the pic should be optional, but it's not supposed to be a "space wasting picture that has fuck all to do" with the article.
I wouldn't agree with the last bit of that description, but the pictures are definitely space-wasting.
The following filter rules seem to block most of them, but not all:
Can anyone improve on that?
Please get rid of the enormous images at the top of the front page and every article. They clog up most of my browser window so I can't read anything until I scroll past them.
Farming, building, and manufacturing equipment is far cheaper than cruise missiles and jet fuel.
Yeah but M&M Industries sell missiles and fuel.
So that's what "POS" means!
You don't see many posts that have been deleted by a moderator.
Unfortunately we don't see how many posts are rejected before they appear. Shouldn't the rejection stub appear for those too, so we can see what the pre-rejection rate for a particular article is?
Anti-Andrew viewpoint- whatever
I don't think that's true. Could you find out why my post in response to "Whistling Google: PLEASE! Brussels can only hurt Europe, not us", marked "Rejected Thursday 27th November 2014 12:53 GMT", was accepted and then later rejected? It's a fair criticism of the article itself. (I accept that my previous one "Rejected Tuesday 25th November 2014 14:50 GMT" was different and I have no gripe about that rejection.)
They "require" pre-mod? I don't think that's the right word.
Is it really appropriate that one writer is consistently shielded from criticism unlike every other one on El Reg?
Will it insert ads and snoop on you?
"Should the description of certain journalistic practices result in a resemblance to the practices of the Bild-Zeitung, such resemblance is neither intentional nor fortuitous, but unavoidable." ---Böll
Yes, but for good or for evil?
"informing consumers of the implications of copyright infringement and legitimate alternatives that provide affordable and timely content"
Over there, next to the unicorns.
Right. Here's a good piece by Cory Doctorow about the quality of legitimate and illegitimate movies.
Buy this because paying money will deliver high quality
Some bootlegs are unreliable or of poor quality. I once had a well meaning friend give me a pirate Rolling Stones cassette for my ninth birthday; the bootlegger saved money, squeezing the 45-minute album onto a 30-minute tape by fading out each song two-thirds of the way through. In some instances, this matters – you want what you acquire to be a faithful copy of the work you're after. But inferior packaging and labels are unlikely to bother most purchasers, who are likely to stick the media on a shelf and forget it, possibly ripping it first if it's especially good.
But this pitch only works to the extent that the paid-for item is indeed of high quality. When anti-copying restrictions are added to media, it actually lowers their quality relative to the illegitimate item. I often hear from parents who download unauthorised cartoons for their kids because the DVDs come with long, unskippable (or difficult-to-skip) adverts, the worst of which deploy "pester power" tactics intended to get kids to nag their parents to buy something. As far as these parents are concerned, spending money gets them a product that much worse than the free version.
Personally I believe that I have the right to see what I want
Yes. Going off topic a bit, I wish our councils had the power -- and the political will -- to ban outdoor advertising like São Paulo. If you choose to open a magazine or a newspaper, fine, but we should have the right to go about our business without having visual pollution forced on us.
If it's a) then warning people of the presence of a camera and thus to slow down is surely helping enforce the law
No, that makes people obey the law only where they think they are likely to get caught. The best way to enforce the law would be to hide the cameras and move them around so people have to drive legally everywhere.
It's noticeable that even in this evil country we call home they now make speed cameras very visible and yellow, having decided that a) is the reason for having them. Round here they publish the list of next week's locations for the mobils traps in the paper!
It's completely stupid. See above.
Could you not just obey the law?
"Well obviously it's sizist. Fat Controller etc."
I disagree --- the Fat Controller shows that you can be large and successful.
Everyone involved in education should read Clifford Stoll's _Silicon Snake Oil_.
"One day, while showing my toddlers Thomas The Tank Engine on YouTube,"
Wait a minute, did you check that it wasn't a copyright violation?
I have told my card issuers that I do not want contactless payment on my cards. Do they give me a choice? No. Consumers should have the right to a card without this bug^W feature.
It depends on the whisk(e)y. Bourbon and other American whiskeys are nice with a little ice. Scotch, no. Maybe it's the inverse of the production climate?
"Hi. Your phone tells me you've just wallked past shop X. Wouldn't now be a perfect time to go in and take advantage of a great deal on our product? We checked with your fridge and it says you don't have any. In fact, it says you don't have any of our products at all! What are you, some kinda communist?"
"What's good for M&M Industries is good for America!"
"Please, leave me a few things that have actual knobs to turn, pull, or at least fondle, okay? I'm old."
Please, leave me a few things that I don't have to worry about exploits for. I'm not stupid.
"But that's just it - we need to be able to identify you to see if you are logged in or not. This is exactly what cookies were designed for."
And that's the ONLY legitimate reason for identifying us.
I'm happy to see this kind of tracking banned, but it will be extremely difficult to enforce, even without the "adapting the user interface to the device" loophole.
"Ironically, an ad-supported Wikipedia was Wales' original model over a decade ago"
Just out of curiosity, why did he abandon that idea?
"Search engines are very good for this kind of thing, although far too many people play fast and loose with copyright on those doodles. So Microsoft's answer is to encourage its customers to use Bing to find images and illustrations instead."
Nice in theory, but once you start using a search engine to find stuff to "liven up" your slides, you'll soon cave in to using what you like rather than what is CC-licensed.
Also, most CC-licensed material requires attribution, so to do it right you'll have to add a couple of slides of "bibliography" at the end of your presentation.
Abuse by for-profit health "care" companies.
"It's equally as obvious that you have no idea what you're talking about. The side of the shooting sport that targets birds (and other animal life) is comparitively small. Mostly, shooters in these here blighted isles target paper or clay, not fleshy things."
In some countries hunting is done by ordinary people to feed their families. That's not the case here, whether you're talking about posh shooting or paper or clay targets.
"I stopped driving several year ago because it is stupid expensive for short distances and cycling keeps me fitter, but I renew driving license for those times when I do need to drive, so would object to a retest every 10 years."
Retesting drivers would make the roads much safer for cyclists (and pedestrians). Even better, though, would be a requirement to log some road cycling miles as a condition of obtaining or renewing a drivince licence (with an exception for the disabled who can't cycle).
"letting the powerful pick and choose what we can read"
The somewhat democratically accountable EU government, or a totally unaccountable for-profit business?
Surely they can be sued for DACRON?
In fact there’s a whole subculture emerging of patients who are doing this at home as a way of alleviating a wide variety of medical conditions.
Without a lab to test the bacterial profile of the donor's output, how do you know what you're getting?
"Facebook-owned WhatsApp" doesn't sound trustworthy.
"The open-source TextSecure software allows two devices to exchange encryption and decryption keys in a way that an eavesdropper and the TextSecure servers cannot crack" --- that sounds good.
"Assuming WhatsApp uses the same system, and hasn't compromised it for the feds," --- those are some big assumptions, especially since it's owned by Facebook.
This is advertising, which is not fit to be protected free speech. Free speech is about the exchange of ideas, not selling stuff.
Oh sure, dump more "friends & family" free tech support work on people.
Good idea, as long as we also curb spying by business.
"You can't get there from here." ---R.E.M.
Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard
Zuck: Just ask.
Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS
[Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How’d you manage that one?
Zuck: People just submitted it.
Zuck: I don’t know why.
Zuck: They “trust me”
Zuck: Dumb fucks.
IMO the two problems with vinyl are that normal use wears it out (unlike CDs --- I know they won't last forever, but each play doesn't wear it down) and that you have to be very careful with the needle.
Trivia I can't seem to forget: In the US, perhaps in Europe as well, the laws generally refer to "citizens".
The Bill of Rights mainly refers to persons or people; all the important bits there are not restricted to citizens:
the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Thar she blows!
Contention is a fact of life for consumer internet and that's not what's being argued here.
Fair enough, provided the ISPs are required to tell you when you sign up what contention you will get, and scale your bill proportionally if they change it later.
whilst other providers will lease the last mile and connect to you to their network at the exchange.
These are not phony choices
Do you not still have to pay for a BT land line to use them?
"At the moment, the only safe public WiFi that I can use is in McDonalds (here in France)."
I hope you don't eat that filth, though.
Copyright is supposed to be a privilege granted to promote the public good. So it should not be possible to copyright executables without lodging the source code with a public authority, who will release it to the public when the company stops supporting the software, so that others can continue to maintain it.