Probably stored in 'the cloud' to save money.
2115 posts • joined 15 Jun 2007
Re: Can someone please enlighen me @AC
I don't doubt that you think that you can tell, especially if you use a magnifying glass. After all, the marketing people say it is better!
Done any direct comparisons without being told which is res is which? I would use the term 'blind' comparisons', but I don't think it is appropriate. I would suspect that you would flag a 1680x1050 with a shiny screen as being clearer than a 1920x1080 with a matt screen.
You must face the fact that at some point there is a cut-off where more does not really mean better. I just think we have already passed that point. And if having such high resolutions drives up the price or power consumption, then I would dispute that it does no harm.
Re: Can someone please enlighen me @David
Umm. Text DPI? everything non-textual?
I'm assuming that you mean that you are shrinking the page down, keeping the relationship between the text and graphic sizes the same. Yes. But at the point it will really makes a difference, the text will be too small to read. 13.3" diagonal is really not that big.
Also 'lovely and sharp' is subjective. I seriously doubt that you can really tell much of a difference between what this ultrabook can do, and what full HD provides on the same sized screen.
I would also seriously doubt that a graphic designer (like my daughter!) would use this sized screen for their primary workstation. They really use large 26"+ screens running at HD+ resolutions. I say again that 13.3" is too small for that type of work. It might be what they visit customers with, but I bet they plug it in to a bigger screen whenever they can.
BTW. I do command line on laptops all the time. I'm a UNIX sysadmin. I had an IBM T60 with a 1440x1050 resolution 15.1" laptop, and I could quite easily shrink down the text such that it was clear but too small to use without a magnifying glass.
Re: Can someone please enlighen me @James 51
With smaller text fonts (like I said)? The only way to get more information on a fixed sized screen is to make the words smaller.
Whilst I admit that you can do this with higher resolution, you end up trying to read characters that are 2mm or less in height. It just doesn't work beyond a certain point.
Example. HD on 13.3" at 16x9 equates to approx. 165 vertical pixels per inch. Nowhere near a Retina display, but assuming text at 10 pixels in vertical height, that would make each line of text about 1/16th of an inch in height (about 1.5mm). Now I'm not sure I really want to be reading characters that small on a screen at just less than arms length. It's just too small.
So it is not the resolution that determines how much you can fit on a screen and still use it, it is the size of the characters. I don't dispute that at smaller character sizes, higher resolution means clearer text, but again, it is a matter of degree.
I also dispute image quality for video. You're being sold a lemon. I really don't believe that you can see pixels that small on a moving image, and even if you can, it's a mobile device, not your primary entertainment device.
Can someone please enlighen me
What do you use full-HD resolution in a laptop with a 13.3" diagonal screen for?
Do you run your text with ludicrously small fonts? Is the text so much clearer. Does colour saturation matter so much for a device that, unlike a TV or large monitor, is likely to be used in non-optimum light conditions?
I know I am a bit of a Luddite, but it does strike me that it is merely 'my number is bigger than your number', because honestly, I cannot really believe that it makes a huge difference. But then I started using terminals with fixed 7x9 pixel character cell where you could still see gaps between the scan lines, so I may not be qualified to judge!
Re: A free €100bn @Thomas 6
Except that you (probably) buy your apples at Tesco or ASDA, who funnel the profit out of your local area. OK, you have some minimum-wage jobs in your locality, but the major benefits do not stick.
I would much rather have locally owned and run shops, but unfortunately, I also need to keep my expenditure under control, and big businesses make it hard for them to compete on price.
My journey was V6->V7->SVR2->SVR3 and onwards, so I was mostly isolated from BSD (I did have a BSD 2.3 or 2.6 distribution for my non-I&D PDP11 running V7, for Ingres, and it did have vi on it, but it would not compile in 56K, even using the experimental overlay loader that was also on the tape (this used one segment register in the PDP11 to switch different 8K pages into the process text address space to allow you to have more than 56K of memory in an executable, and it required a new system call to be added to the kernel to allow the dispatcher routine to request that the correct page was mapped in to the process before actually calling the code).
I only really came across vi when I moved on to SVR2 (I had used an Ultrix machine before, but not too much). Up until that point, I had been using ed almost exclusively (although I did also use an extended ed editor called em, tagged as Editor for Mortals which I believe came from Queen Mary College in the UK [hint - watch you don't mistype the "e" as an "r", very annoying])
For some time, I worked for what is now part of Alcatel-Lucent (then AT&T and Philips Telecommunications), and became the terminal 'expert' in their UK system support team, so was intimately acquainted with terminfo (it was SVR2&3 after all), and to a lesser extent termcap (some of the AT&T exptools packages used termcap, even though terminfo was available on almost all systems), and I looked after many different terminal types including AT&T 4425, 5620 and 630, HP2932, adm3 and adm5, Wyse 30 and 50s, almost all DEC terminals from 52s to 420s and compatibles, and even on ibm 3151 (yeugh). I missed out on the days when you had to encode time delays in the various commands, however.
While there, I also had a source-code license for Gosling Emacs, which had it's own (buggy) termcap.
The youngsters of today really don't know what it used to be like. I still get really annoyed when I see people hard-coding ANSI escape sequences into programs rather than using termcap or terminfo, or even Curses. It's just wrong!
Re: joe vs. vi
It does not show your age, as vi preceeded wordstar by at least half-a-decade.
What it does is to indicate that you learned computing on some piddling little micrcomputer, rather than a mini or a mainframe running UNIX.
Re: VIM @FrankAlphaXII
If you want to get the best out of Emacs without learning all of the meta key combinations, you need to learn the Electric modes. Once you get the hang of them, Emacs can be a doddle.
The reason why vi (pronounced vee eye, not vie or six according to the yellow book) is a little hard to use is because it dates back to a time when the only keys that you could guarantee were on a terminal keyboard were the alphabet and number keys, a limited amount of punctualtion, as well as an ESC key and a control function. As long as the terminal had a program addressable cursor, and a small number of other features (and really not too many of those), and a termcap definition (yes, termcap in the original BSD, not terminfo), vi would work.
There were some terminals that were too broken, however. I remember comments in the original BSD termcap about some beehive terminals, and a Ann Arbour Ambassidor that were deemed just too brain-dead to be able to write a meaningful termcap entry.
Come on Jake.
Hardcore UNIX users use ed!
Re: Right. @Peter Gathercole
"Alternatively just maybe knowing what internet sites these two had visited which had caused them to be radicalised could provide a list of possible other fanatics in the UK"
I will concede that this could be useful information, but it is likely that this will be obtained after the fact, as I'm sure that all their possessions are now evidence. I would be very surprised if the sites they were reading weren't already known. What you consider subversive information may be perfectly acceptable to other people in the world. As you said, what the security services would like to be able to do is identify everybody who is reading those sites, not necessarily the sites themselves. But this may still finger people who are just curious about such rhetoric.
"If they had posted their intentions prior to just maybe they could have been tracked down via IP information?"
Well. Did they? There is an "if" in your statement. I think that you would probably be surprised by how many people post such statements without any intention to actually carry anything like that out. I have said many times that I would like to drop a bomb on a certain campus in Redmond (there, I've done it again), but I will never really carry that out. If the police reacted to every casual threat that was tweeted, mailed or blogged, they would be very busy indeed.
My comment about porn was to try to show how little people understand our laws. I Am Not A Lawyer, and I certainly don't think I know everything that is illegal (like photocopying the Queens Currency, selling Creosote to individuals who are not in the fencing trade, or allowing ragwort to grow in your garden - all of these are against the law).
My list was intended to be wide but not so wide it would not cover everybody.
You've still missed the point that if they are allowed to do this without proper supervision, at some point they will in a way that is likely to be objectionable to everybody.
Re: Other soldiers @MJI
I out to point out that I was referring to UK military bases in the UK.
Re: Other soldiers @MJI
Most military bases have unarmed civilian security (I kid you not). There will be military armed guards somewhere on the base at any time, but every soldier checks their weapon in to the armoury when they are off duty.
I believe that there have to be specific orders in order to allow weapons and ammunition to be issued for use off-base, and that would not have happened (in the British Army) for an incident like this. Even if it were protecting a fellow soldier, off base it is the Police's responsibility. British soldiers are in every way professionals.
I deliberately made the list as wide as possible so that most of the readers would fall into at least one category.
I know I have latent consistency theory tendencies, so may be slightly paranoid about these things. The point I am trying to make is that if they use something like the list I presented as the initial trigger for monitoring, they may well end up seeing other things that you do that are less acceptable. I am pretty clean (in fact I only fall into one of my own list categories - I'll let you guess which), but will definitely be on their known list (for good reasons only, I hope).
I do nothing that *I* feel is worthy of their attention for bad reasons, but that does not mean I am happy for them to monitor my Internet traffic. I think that if you take the defence that "I do nothing wrong so I have nothing to fear" ignores the fact that you don't know what *they* think is wrong, and there is nobody to challenge their view.
(BTW. If one of the three that you do is porn, then I suggest that you restrict yourself to sites that certify that all their models/actors/actresses/participants are over 18, because if you have images - photographs or other types - of people engaged in sexual acts who are or appear to be (in the eyes of the investigator) under 18 cached on your computer, even as a thumbnail in your browsers image cache, you almost certainly are guilty of infringing the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, sections 62-68).
Chances are that if you have an IP6 address, then you are probably much more identifiable than if you stick with IP4. This is because it is less likely that an IP6 address will be re-allocated. You will either have it forever,, or at least for a good long time.
But even if you are using a temporary IP4 address with NAT, your ISP will probably be able to identify the account holder and probably the physical location of the point where it touches their infrastructure, just as long as they take account of timezones and DST correctly!
Although I don't agree with it, the presumption is that they could profile a person who was becoming a risk by reading their blogs, forum posts, browsing history, email, IM and SMS messages and even purchasing history (how did you buy your machete), and once identified, single them out for even greater surveillance. Once under surveillance, they can be caught before doing any damage.
But this effectively means that they will need to watch all people who match certain criteria, including many who aren't, and never will be, a threat to society. It's a really difficult problem which will always upset some people on one or other side of the argument.
My view is that as soon as government agencies have the ability to look at what people are doing without sufficient safeguards, they then will eventually abuse that ability, and look for things that have not been sanctioned by this legislation. Anything. Being a member of a particular political party or religious group. Or an anonymous blogger about personal freedoms. Or an infrequent copyright infringer. Or harbouring anti-AGW thoughts. Or being upset with your local MP. Or a consumer of legal on-line porn. Or an objector to HS2. Anything.
Is everybody who supports this charter sure they are squeaky-clean?
Someone being 'known' to the security services does not mean that they are a risk.
The security services will know something about everyone who has ever held security clearance or who has physically visited one of their location. They know something about people who have visited countries in the Middle-East, Asia, or the Ex Soviet Union countries. They know about anybody who has held public office, especially if that office manages sensitive data. There are probably any number of demonstrations or events where they will identify the people who attended, and keep a record of the people, so know about them too. Any of you reading this could be known to them in one way or another.
Just because you are known to the security services does not mean that you are automatically a terror suspect. Sometimes people are known for good reasons. Sometimes they are known but not judged to be a risk worth pursuing. Sometimes they get it wrong. Sometimes they have not got the correct resources.
@Titus. If you were to say that one in a hundred of the people who fit a particular profile that they know about may be a risk (and I emphasise that this is a number plucked out of thin air), then that means that 99 completely innocent people may end up being monitored.
So if you (for example), were next to a group protesting about Margaret Thatcher, took part in a Student protest about fees at the Houses of Parliament, were a member of CND, went on holiday to a former Soviet country, the Middle East, East Africa or Pakistan, and regularly use TOR or encrypted Bit Torrent, you may be on their list. How does that make you feel. Good? Still want to give them the power to look at what you are doing online?
Re: illegal download sites @Ed_UK
This happens with a lot of car insurance policies. I paid for my daughters car insurance one year because her money was in hard cash, and she needed to renew over the phone. She asked for them to not auto-renew the next year, but they did, from my card again. This is despite the insurance being in my daughters name, and the card being in mine.
This was despite my daughter previously phoning them and saying that she didn't want to renew with them. They would not cancel the policy nor refund the money until she could prove that there was another policy that covered the car (presumably because of insurance fraud).
Re: illegal download sites
Termination of payment does not equal termination of contract.
You have to let Love Film or whoever know that you are doing this, and you have to abide by the termination clauses of the contract that you entered into (for example, Sky want a month's notice).
If you do not do this, expect threatening letters from a debt collection agency for the notice period that you did not give them, or, in extreme circumstances, ever increasing amounts of debt if they attempt to continue to charge you because you've not gone through the correct process. It all depends on what you agreed to (or not) by 'signing' the contract (clauses like "...using this service implies acceptance of these terms and conditions..." come to mind).
Re: "watch a Russian Bear bomber go overhead"
I was on the deck of the Audacious class Ark Royal in the '70s at Navy Days when an F4K came over and did the climb with after-burners on. Flat metal surfaces and the flight deck reflecting the sound, it was deafening.
I think it was the same visit that we took one of the Drakes Island boat trips, and saw Eagle (the Ark's sister ship) mothballed and anchored just off the Island. There's something strangely disturbing about such a large warship with nothing happening on it, although it was not as bad as watching the follow-on episode to the BBC first series of "Sailor", where they took the Fleet-Master-At-Arms who had served on the Ark for 20 years on-and-off to the graving dock where they were pulling her to pieces. Seeing such a 'hard' man crying was terrible to see.
Re: Office... @dogged
When WinME was around, the product was called IBM Lotus SmartSuite, and (IMHO) WordPro was better that Word, Lotus123 was missing some of the charting features of Excel, but was still pretty good, and Approach was streets ahead of Access. I also preferred Freelance to Powerpoint, although they were pretty comparable.
Re: We need fewer registers not more!
The days of significant difference between RISC and CISC processors is long past.
What you might call RISC are gaining more and more instructions (see the ISA for both Power and later ARM versions), and what you might think of as CISC are often built using microprogrammed RISCy cores (intel since 486's and even IBM zSeries).
Almost all architectures have many, many registers, and often use techniques like register renaming to allow fast context switches.
Re: Scientific Theory @AC 08:01
Your two camps of scientist are wrong.
In general, all scientists from most related disciplines agree that climate change is happening. What is in debate is whether this change is caused by man, or whether it is natural, and how far/fast it will happen.
I'm not a climate change sceptic. Climate change is happening, because it's always happened since the Earth formed. But how much change is caused by human impact, I'm not qualified to judge. It is probable that some is caused by us, but some is certainly natural.
It's the people who think that the just pre-industrial age climate should be taken as a benchmark for the rest of time that get me annoyed, because they just don't understand anything. And the people who think that a statement like "well, the weather wasn't like this when I was young" means anything in regard to climate change need educating, preferably with a large learning-bat!
I just wish that this debate was purely a scientific one. Once politicians got involved, it was always going to get messy and uncertain.
Re: COBOL ain't going nowhere soon.
Fortran is still alive and well in the scientific and engineering worlds.
Where I work, most of the HPC workload is coded in a hybrid of Fortran77, 95 and a smattering of 2003 (with small bits of C glue code to do some of the things that are difficult in Fortran).
Because of the relative simplicity of Fortran, it generates very predictable code that the clock-cycle counters trying to get the maximum from their extremely expensive systems still like quite a lot. It's also pretty portable across architectures.
I wish you would stop trying to suggest that lower cost Linux on Power is anything new. IBM has been selling Linux only Power systems at a discount for close on a decade, and Linux has been supported by IBM on Power for a few years more than that (but you had to buy the hardware at the same cost as an AIX or OS/400 system).
It's true that they did refresh the offerings and maybe tweak the prices of Linux-only systems in the last 18 months, but it was not completely new. See the IBM OpenPower 710 and 720 systems announced in 2004.
Re: Leaks? @Me
I MUST MUST MUST proofread my posts better. I meant to say "You leave your fingerprints everywhere...."
You leave your password everywhere, unless you are like Michael Jackson, and wear gloves all the time.
As soon as someone finds a way of lifting your fingerprints off the glass you drank your last pint from, and sorts out a method for creating a facsimile/feeding the correct hash from that into an authentication system, it will be busted wide open. And if there is a single hashing method, that will not take very long. Sounds soooooo secure to me!
If you are going to use biometrics, use something that is not generally available! But as soon as you do, the data from that biometric will leak (your iris or retina data is only safe now because you have never had a reason to have it scanned. As soon as you do, it will become generally available).
I'm also a little unhappy about putting my eye up to an optical device in a public place, because it would be possible for such a device to be hacked (like bank ATMs are now for card skimming) to do irreparable damage to my eyes (scenario, use a pulsed solid state laser to burn some small random patch of the eye. No immediate symptoms, so device may not be spotted immediately, but repeated use would degrade sight).
So, possession of a physical token, plus a changeable secret, with additional further authentication to resolve conflicts, which may include biometrics used at some trusted local identity broker (physical presence required) would be my preferred solution.
Re: Unix phone @Ken
Not necessarily. It would be perfectly possible to write the command line phone interface to take the last group of numbers on the command line a single phone number. Not normally the way you would write a UNIX-like command, but possible.
What I would say about the OP is that I would not want my phone book installed in /etc. That is for non-personal, system configuration files owned by root. Maybe something like ~/.phonebook instead.
Re: Winners? @Don
It's not HP that is being sued. It's the named parties, "HP's current CEO Meg Whitman, her predecessor Leo Apotheker, former HP chairman Ray Lane and Autonomy founder Mike Lynch, along with other senior execs and HP's banking aides, Barclays Capital and Perella Weinberg Partners."
If the defendants lose, they will personally (in the case of the individuals), or the companies named, have to find whatever the court deems suitable recompense. It should not cost HP anything, so the only damage will be reputational. That's the problem of being a senior officer in a US company. You have a fiduciary duty to the shareholders, which puts you on the spot if they are not happy.
I don't know about the US, but I believe that it is pretty difficult to make anything stick to the auditors, because they are acting as agents, and unless negligence or deliberate fraud is proved, can absolve themselves of blame.
Sod all these gestures.
Give me a voice activated TV! Say what you want done.
Probably cheaper to implement as well (microphone, noise discrimination circuit to avoid feedback from the TV sound, Google voice recognition, job done).
Scotty: "Computer.... Computer"
Re: Rip-off UK pricing @An0n C0w4rd
But the cloud service will probably be paid direct to Adobe US, and bypass the UK company completely. Remember, the Internet is international!
Re: What I'd Like.
Soduim. My chemistry teacher did this in a large pyrex bowl. Said he had done it many time before. This time, the sodium ball stuck to the edge of the bowl, and caused the bowl to 'explode'.
Fortunately, nobody was hurt, but it did shake everybody up, including the teacher.
Re: Too many moving parts...
If you look at the 'front', there appear to be a ring of what look like LEDs, possibly multi-colour, which may work like those in a Solsuno watch, replacing the main hands of the watch. That would be pretty cool.
Re: Not radioactive
Damn. Beaten to the punch!
As caesium atomic clocks use the stable isotope caesium-133, it is not radioactive, and there is no danger of being accused of moving nuclear material while travelling.
Re: Whilst I can see the value.....@Phil
It says 1KW.
Re: Whilst I can see the value.....@Tom Walsh
When I installed an electricity monitor about four years ago, I was appalled by the base load of the house. It prompted me to go through all the devices and thinking what was being left on or on standby which should have been powered off (seriously, CRT tellies in standby can draw 60-100W).
It also encouraged me to identify all of the lights that are on for large parts of the day and making sure that I used the lowest power bulbs that did the job (my house has people in it 24x7 at the moment because my wife does not work and all the kids have moved back in! - seen the sitcom "My Family"? It's like that).
Since then, I have also had nearly all the old CRT tellies replaced by LCD ones (well, it was as good an excuse as any, and an easy Christmas present for the kids with benefits to me), moved my firewall onto a laptop, rationalised the number of devices needed to drive the home network, and made sure that the freezer is kept defrosted (it really makes a difference), and also used smart-power strips to remove the power from several devices when one is put into standby.
I just wish that more devices had physical power switches (and I can't use the switch on the socket because in most places, I have more than one device plugged into the socket, and I want to, for example, power the telly down while leaving the Sky box plugged running)
My base load is still around 500W, and I'm struggling to identify where that is going. Probably not something that a smart meter would help with unless they also supplied per-plug metering devices.
It does make you wonder when you can tell that one of the kids has left their gaming rig on overnight to download some game patches, and you can see 3-400W of additional drain. And also when the gas central heating kicks in, and the electric pump starts drawing 7-800W of power itself.
If only I could persuade my wife that the tumble-drier really is one of the biggest expenses. She will not understand that 2 hours of 2.5KW easily uses more power than 24 hours of 30W for the firewall.
Telnet and FTP. Seriously.
Network Security 101.
Thou shalt under pain of ridicule by your peers, turn off all services that pass data, especially authentication information, across the 'net unencrypted.
Re: Less is more @AC
At the time, if you wanted a serious calculator that would work for years, HP was your best bet. Their calculators were the Rolls-Royce of calculators.
Also at the time, HP were a major computer manufacturer as well as a medical and test equipment manufacturer (which is where they started). Printers were a bit of a late addition to their product set.
I agree about the EeePC 701, and mine is still working and in use running Ubuntu.
Re: I have a search box @AC
the '-r' switch in ls? As in reverse the order of the listing?
I use it multiple times a day. It reverses the order of the search, and is incredibly useful when used with the '-t' flag to find the most recently changed file, as in 'ls -ltr | pg' (or less, if you like).
You could just let it run to the bottom, but that's not what I want to do.
One thing which has hone wrong IMHO, is the fact that the order that files are sorted has changed with the advent of multi-byte character sets, such that the sort order is affected by the collating sequence of the NLS code page you are using. Add to this the stupid (again IMHO) default of the GNU ls to ignore non-alphabetic characters (like '.') into the equation, and the order that shown becomes almost complete nonsense for any practical purpose.
Life used to be so much more simple.
Re: What does LTS mean, anyway?
No. He's right.
If a problem in an LTS release is not fixed in the first year of the life, it almost certainly won't ever be.
One of the problems in 10.04 that gathered a huge number of sufferers was the interface to musicbrainz, which is used to identify the CD you're playing or ripping. The fact that it would not work in the library implementation that shipped with Lucid meant that you could not us it to rip CDs, without you keying in the album and track info in manually, regardless of the ripper you used (they all relied on the library implementation in Ubuntu).
After a year of relative inactivity, the responders on the Ubuntu bug tracker suggested people upgrade to a newer release of Ubuntu. After 2 years (still in the support window for Desktop), they closed down all of the reports as "will not fix". And the stupid thing is that the problem was well known, and could have been worked into the repository with comparatively little effort. People even offered to do it, but the updates were not put back into the source tree.
None of the Canonical responders were prepared to put the effort into what they saw as an old version. So I have to ask, what value is there to LTS releases. I'm not asking them to back-port the features from newer releases, but I would expect them to fix known bugs, even if they are not security related.
To fix the problem, I had to update to Precise, with all the collateral pain that caused. Now using Cinnamon on Precise relatively happily. I try Unity every now and then (it's still installed), but inevitably go back.
Re: sob. sob.
I'm fast becoming convinced that Canonical do not want Ubuntu to be seen as a Linux distribution, but as an operating environment that happens to run on top of Linux, in the same way that OSX is an operating environment running on top of Mach and BSD.
They want it to be distinct and different, and that appears to extend to being prepared to piss off long term UNIX/Linux users.
This may be a clever strategy. If they can get the wider population to adopt Ubuntu and accept it for all it's strengths as an environment in it's own right, rather than a Linux distribution, then it may be able to ditch the (undeserved IMHO) stigma that appears to blight Linux in the eyes of the community of non-Linux computer users.
But it sure does make me cross.
I'm just waiting for comments like "Oh. Ubuntu. That used to be base on Linux at one time, didn't it?". As soon as that perceived distance has been achieved, then maybe, just maybe Mark Shuttleworth will be content.
Or maybe I'm just an old fart, too out of touch to be relevant any more.
Re: Cost reduction @Big_Boomer
Cheques in the UK remain a valid payment method for transactions with businesses that choose to accept them. What has been phased out is the 'cheque guarantee' function of your card.
What has happened is that most major retailers have chosen to not accept cheques (it is their choice), although they did it on the back of the presumption that cheques would be phased out. In the end, they weren't because of the lack of a non-cash, disconnected payment method that many older people and particularly charities complained was missing. The Payments Council concluded that there was still a role for cheques (http://www.paymentscouncil.org.uk/media_centre/press_releases/-/page/1575/)
After making such an inaccurate about cheques being withdrawn, I wonder whether the icon you've chosen is actually justified.
Re: Facebook / Instagram etc.
If you were to assume that being present on a website shows ownership, then what prevents someone taking your image, forging some metadata that 'proves' that it was taken earlier than you posted it, and the accusing you of stealing the image yourself! Being posted to a web site is just not enough, especially if you are dealing with Instagram or Google
When it comes to identifying photos, diligent will mean either a quick check for the presence of metadata, or an incredibly huge and impractical manual search of millions and millions of images.
As far as I know, automatic comparison of pictures is still an inexact science, which means that it will be very difficult to automate the process of working out whether a picture is the same as another picture that someone claims ownership. It's probably easier with scanned film than digital images, because you can look for grain pattern and defects, but even that can be altered with digital filters.
Considering what is done routinely to crop, rotate, change the colour pallet, touch-up and resize images, you would have to have some means of automatically and reliably hashing a picture using the major distinctive features and be able to discriminate between different pictures of the same subject.
I'm sure there must be some major research going on, but I would think that any research will mainly be working on identification of the subject, not proving that two images are the same. Whether one can come from the other is a moot point, but without this technology, I would be much happier without this legislation unless you make it a major crime with appropriate punishments to strip or forge metadata.
Re: It's in the ears of the beholder
Mr Dabbs was just a bit too late.
As a studentin the late 70s and early 80's, I had some of the earlier Amstrad HiFi, including an IC2000 amp. and an IC3000 tuner (and a JVC KD720 tape desk, and a turntable from Strathern, a failed Northern Irish employment project). I also had a set of Comet speakers which were the weakest components, but were the same as Amstrad speakers of the time, and definitely had two drivers, although they were replaced by a set of Keesonic Kubs, which I still have today (great little bookshelf speakers).
Now I know it was not up to the grade of my friends who had Rega, Quad, Tangerine, A&R and Mordaunt-Short kit, but it was definitely better than the so-called 'Music Centres' or pseudo stacks that many of my friends had. Was a good compromise between cost and quality.
The follow up Amstrad kit that was in hardboard boxes with tin-foil glued on to make it look like metal were crap, however. The switch was when the switch from from discrete power transistors to integrated circuits for the power amplification was the point where it went downhill. (BTW, the IC in the IC2000 amp referred to a single IC in the pre-amp stage, not the rest of the amp).
It's not all that clear cut here in the UK. Considering how small the British Isles are, there is a huge variation in regional dialect, from Scots to Welsh to Cornish, with the industrial regions of the Midlands, Liverpool and the North East all having broad and very distinct accents, some of which are as difficult to understand as your brand.
What Americans often think of as British English is an artefact of everybody wanting to talk like the Royal Family (often called the Queens English) that is mainly promoted by the BBC since Radio and TV came along. This is a real effect, but even around London, we have Cockney and Estuary English. Accents and dialects are slowly dying, but they're not dead in England yet!
Re: Quite @Don Jefe
Don't jump to too many conclusions. In many cases, it is British English that has changed, and American English that has stayed the same (I'm not talking here about unbearable brashness, street talk or Spanglish here - they're American!).
Many words used in America are hangovers from older forms of English, and some of the spellings that we think of as American are just archaic use of English.
Indeed, I've heard it said that if you want to find out how people spoke in 17th Century England, you should visit the southern Outer Banks in North Carolina, where people have lived with few outside influences for several hundred years. Just be quick about it, because they've got satellite television now!
@Paul Crawford - server/desktop releases.
I know that the LTS periods for desktop and server do not match, but I fail to see the difference when it comes to the repositories. I have a 10.04 desktop build (although it is used more like a server, but I do directly log in to it relatively regularly) in my environment, and it is still getting many updates from the repository.
I know that there is a good chance that some packages will not be updated (in particular, Chrome and Firefox updates do not happen, or happen infrequently), but the kernel and the basic OS appear to be receiving patches.
So I have taken the attitude that my 10.04 system will remain at that level for the foreseeable future. I believe that I will get basic OS security patches as long as the server LTS release is maintained, and most of the user-access stuff is sufficiently stable that I'm not overly worried that I may not get updates. Same goes for my Asus EeePC 701, which is really too small (4GB internal SSD - not upgradeable) for anything later than 10.04.
For the record, I'm using 12.04 with cinnamon on my laptop, and I am getting by, although I really would like to re-instate the pre-unity elevator boxes on my terminal sessions. The pop-up up/down/drag slider button thingy just annoys me when it disappears.
Should have used the Joke icon. Plus, I think you mean "netbook" rather than "notebook". Maybe spell-checker error.