90 posts • joined 28 May 2012
Re: Very sad indeed...
I too am very unsure of those statistics, but in an effort to remedy the situation, I've found some HSE stats on their website: http://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/theory/r2p2.pdf
For the entire UK population:
Annual risk of death due to road accident: 1 in 16,800 in the UK in 1999
Annualised risk of death due to aircraft accident per passenger journey 1 in 142,000,000 (1991-2000)
So even if you take this to the ridiculous extreme of flying twice a day, every single day of the year, your chances of being an aircraft accident fatality are 1 in 195,000, or, to put it another way, you're still over 11 times more likely to die on your way to the airport.
Not that statistics are any comfort to the families of the souls onboard MH-370 - our thoughts are with them at this terrible time.
Re: Microsoft misread the market
The original RT was a joke that only the retired Windows ME development team found funny. However, everyone I've spoken to about the Pro would have them, if only they didn't cost as much as a second hand car.
For microsoft to misread the market would have required them to actually look at their market, which they don't, because they already "know" what the market wants better than the market does. Hence their booming success, Windows 8 on every desktop, and the baying hordes outside redmond calling for Ballmer's return... Oh wait
The incident in question
The ATSB also had the following to say to passengers in this very same report:"Turbulence is a weather phenomenon responsible for the abrupt sideways and vertical jolts that passengers often experience during flights, and is the leading cause of in-flight injuries to passengers and cabin crew."
I feel SO much more knowledgable now.
Re: They almost laughed him out of the boardroom...
Well, at least in the Marine industry, the EU is heavily funding research into ways of emitting less CO2 (regardless of your beliefs as to whether that's a good thing), and one of the ideas seriously being considered is the use of sails - the downside is that they're efficient at 12kts, not the 18kts cargo carriers current go. But, there is a glut of cargo carriers, and you can get the same throughput with more ships on the ocean going slower. It of course means that you'll be waiting for your big-TV shipment from Hong Kong for around 33% longer, but presumably if you're shipping by sea rather than air, it's because you want it cheap and are willing to sacrifice time for that.
So a slow (it's still ~4+ times quicker than shipping by sea), heavy lifter market may work - it has drawbacks- indeed the weather restrictions for a dirigible presumably are more strict than a helicopter, but just because it's slow doesn't mean it could be useful. I can think of lots of companies who wouldn't mind the capability to lift 50 tonnes out on short notice - oil companies spring to mind. Whether they'd let 50 tonnes of swinging cargo next to an offshore rig is questionable, but in terms of getting say, heavy machinery from a manufacturer in Germany to a site in Africa somewhere in a reasonable time frame for less money than hiring a C-17 Globemaster- I can see that there might be a market for that.
Re: Borrowed technology from the Dreamliner batteries??
No indeed, in fact my Samsung iPhone* can have its battery replaced in under 10 seconds by popping off the back.
* according to the ruling of Judge Koh. USA supreme authoritaaaah!
Re: Oh fsck. Not Lewis Page again.
You'll note he also made the same problem with the density of lead. so whilst he was wearing his 1000x binoculars, his comparison was valid. The volume of 270,000 tonnes of lead (via wolfram alpha) comes with the helpful volume comparison of 1/8th of a hindenburg airship or 1/44th of an empire state building. The same applied to 1.2m tonnes of carbon-graphite (which I've assumed to be similar density to ash) is 3 hindenburgs, or 1/2 an empire state building.
Was it a howler, really? yes, he was out by 3 orders of magnitude, on a subject which very few people can actually visualise. What does the UK national debt (~£1.3tr) look like in terms of volume of pound coins? how about £50 notes? is it the size of a warehouse? canary wharf? or of heathrow?
Coal stations burn a lot of coal. We definitely dig square kilometers of the stuff out the ground every year. The point still stands, that the entirety of all man made nuclear waste to date is pathetically small compared to a single years worth of ash from 1 single coal station. Fair play on you for calling the units, but at least from my point of view, it doesn't invalidate their argument as they applied the same error to both sides.
Re: What do you want from the NHS
I don't think many people will have a problem with medical data being used for life-saving medical research. What I have a major problem is the selling of this data to the private sector for commercial gain. Those two areas have been lumped together for care.data, which is why it's a farce to begin with.
Secondly, the rhetoric coming from those in charge of the project just shows they haven't a clue - this project, in order to work, needs complete transparency, and for the rules on how data is used to be clear. On the first point, they've already bungled, by refusing to explain decisions that led medical data be sold to insurance companies due to companies "re-branding" (whether that particualr act is actually damaging to peoples interests is debateable, but the refusal to explain IS definitely damaging) and on the second, nothing exists.
And it's going to be implemented by ATOS. Now I know that you're going to have to use a big provider for this, but jeez, anyone but ATOS...
You seem to misunderstand what Care.data is about. It's not about sharing your medical records inside the NHS, it's about sharing medical records with 3rd parties outside the NHS. Your data is already available to the professionals within the healthcare service. Staying opted-in will not change the fact that you're asked to repeat your medical history every time you see a doctor or healthcare professional.
This is all well and good
But if Dodd/Frank is already law, then surely this (vastly more sensible option) doesn't fulfil the necessary requirements for it? Surely the bureaucrats haven't shuffled enough papers, and NGOs haven't leeched enough blood?
I'd like to think the EU might have a modicum of sense when it comes to this, but then I remember that EU bureaucracy makes American bureaucracy look positively amateur.
This is now a political issue, which, like all political issues, requires nonsensical actions coupled with taxpayer signed blank cheques to "solve". Do we really think that this sensible approach has any hope at succeeding?
Irrational? not really
A laser deliberately targeted at an aircraft cockpit is most definitely a hazard and it does blind you temporarily (or for longer, depending on the power output and distance).
Your arguments about laser shows are mostly irrelevant, I too have seen the HK one and the Singapore one, they are scheduled, limited with short exposure to the sky, and it's obvious to any pilot flying in the area that it's happening. It's not the same as having a pointer targeted at you for a sustained amount of time by any stretch of the imagination.
A pilot has absolutely no way of knowing the strength of the beam, it may be a fairly harmless 1mW one which will dazzle you for a couple of seconds, or it might be a class IV blu-ray cut from a player and modified for sustained use (freely available on ebay) which will burn your retinas and do irreversible damage. The range on even the smallest of pointers can be several miles, and it does spread out light a torch, so it is perfectly possible to illuminate the entire cockpit from a mile away. Cockpits don't have curtains or blinds - you can't prevent the light entering, and it is very distracting usually at the point where you require most concentration - i.e. low level take off or landing, where the very last thing you need is a distraction that you can't mentally block.
If you want an example you might relate to, imagine you're on a dark A road at night, approaching an unlit roundabout or intersection at 50mph, when all of a sudden you are lit up by something akin to football stadium lights directly in your path, or hit by the full beams of some other motorist who keeps them on you for more than 10 seconds. That is the kind of distraction and danger that it presents, only in the plane situation you can't slam on the brakes. If you're telling me that is only a nuisance when you're piloting 300 people, and not endangerment, then I'm going to strongly disagree.
People really don't understand just how dangerous it is, and their huge availibility leads to a blasé attitude to laser use - if it were down to me I'd have them as restricted as say, lab chemicals.
Re: utter crap
Oh do shut up AC.
In my local town centre, parking charges have doubled every 2 years since they introduced them. In addition, all (charged) parking is capped at 2 hours, which when you have a 2 mile long central high street, means that you cannot ever do all those chores in one go. The post office is at one end, and the pharmacy is at the other, which might not be a problem had the coffee shop not been right in the middle of the two, and you all know we're caffeine addicts here.
Shop owners are livid at the council, because people can't leisurely shop, as they're always having to go back to their cars. I don't particularly see why I should have to race around on my weekends due to greedy councils wanting to tax the motorist some more on addition to the VAT they pay on the car, vehicle excise duty, fuel duty, VAT on fuel duty, with parking charges, which in themselves include VAT!!?! At what point does it end?
And yes, we have plenty of boarded up shops in our high street, directly due the greed of the council in business rates and parking restrictions. In addition, once they became responsible for parking (i.e. once the meters were installed) there was a 1400% increase in traffic wardens. If it really wasn't due to the money, why would they be so keen to invest so much in that particular area at the same time they're being asked to cut all public services? It's not about bad parking, it's about ripping us off.
Looking at the BPT Board members...
It would seem that none of the trustees have any engineering or computer experience between them, save one woman who did "computer programming" for a couple of years before climbing the corporate ladder, and a telecoms exec. That said, there are Lawyers, Civil Servants, Historians and investment bankers aplenty.
No wonder Collosus, Tunny or any of the exhibits that made Bletchley park what it was have no support - it's too busy being run by executives who have no appreciation for what happened there from the technical and mathematical point of view. A woefully unqualified Board to run Bletchley, if you ask me, even if they can run large organisations.
And yeah, the Gullivers Kingdom guy is still on the board too - tells you all you need to know.
Re: An amazing experience will be lost
Agreed. I first visited Bletchley whilst I was still of school age, and the experiences with the volunteers there were one of the key reasons I went on to study, graduate, and become employed in electronics engineering. The machines to a schoolboy were just machines - but the volunteers made them come alive, and showed the extent of the genius of the people that created them.
The Lottery funding was badly needed to restore the buildings and exhibits, but they count for precisely nothing when you remove the people who know about them. I'm 25, we're suffering a monumental shortage of engineers, and yet the BPT seem to be doing their hardest to remove the one single most effective tool in their arsenal to inspire the young people to learn about what happened here, and realise that there is still so much to do in this amazing field of science and engineering. I'll give them a clue - it isn't the tangible assets.
I'm extremely dissapointed in what I have read and seen here, doubly so by the apparent flippancy of the BPT responses, both official and leaked. Sacking one of those people who gave ME so much, who inspired ME, and who is partly directly responsible for my current career in an area which helps keeps UK PLC afloat (as opposed to say, errr, banking or sueing people), for something as pathetic as "not following the tour to the letter" is nothing short of disgusting.
A national treasure is under threat, once again, for seemingly petty and childish reasons. I will be voicing my displeasure to the Heritage Lottery Funding, and if anyone has details of the Bletchley Park Trustees, I'd like to understand exactly what they think they're doing, because their responses thus far, in my opinion, have been entirely inadequate.
Nah - it's obviously just GCHQ redirecting all British traffic through NSA servers making it look like we're all American so that they can spy on us.
I mean - we're looking up things about computers and security on the internet - we MUST be a threat.
Right - I think you need a lesson in cat psychology, as it's obvious the local cats absolutely can't get enough of you.
Rule 1: You can't train cats, cats train you. You cannot contain them, you cannot control their behaviour, and you have no influence over what they do. They are categorically the polar opposite of dogs. Your neighbours cat controls him, not the other way around. He can no more take responsibility of it than you can take responsibility of what the NSA looks at on your computer.
Drive is gravel - well that's your second problem, cats are trained to do their business in kitty litter. Replace with lawn or tarmac.
Car has soft top - oh yeah, cats are going to love clawing at them. Remedy is either to get a hard top (which I can't imagine you'd seriously entertain) or get something better than a fabric car roof for them to sharpen their claws on - scratching posts around your driveway, for instance.
As for presents of mice and birds on your doorstep- well, that's just them saying "you're a really crap hunter, but I like your house and the awesome themepark outside it (your drive and car) so I don't want you to starve" (If you haven't noticed, cats are incredibily condescending and dismissive of your pathetic existance and actions.)
You clearly don't like them, and they can tell, the smug little blighters, and they'll hang around just to annoy you - this is classic cat behaviour - ignore you if you pay them attention, and crave your attention if you show signs of not wanting anything to do with them. You firmly fall in the latter camp, and hence you'll be getting loads of attention.
The easiest, and cheapest way of getting rid of your cat problem, would be to get yourself your own cat to guard your territory for you and chase the others off. Might have to be one of those hairless ones if allergies are your thing.
Re: Missing the point.
He doesn't say that this won't prevent rape/death/murder/beatings - what he is doing is calling on this organisation, who got their sums catastrophically wrong by several orders of magnitude, to explain themselves for making such a monumentally stupid decision which appears to have been based on ignorance.
This happens too often - emotive subjects are used by people to rip us off, strip us of our freedoms, and generally act in ways that DO NOT get their actual agendas acted up on (which might well be of good intention) Porn, surveillance, paedophiles, child-abuse - need I go on?
It ISN'T acceptable - problems such as this need to be solved in efficient manners, not stupid, unworkable, time-wasting pseudo-activities where the KPI is pissing money away. If someone told me I could end the suffering of a human being for £1000, I'd do it. If he came back a year later and said it'll actually cost £1,000,000 and take 120 years - then what is the point? I can't afford it and the person I was going to save will be long dead. Worse, in this situation, they have other industries already using the £1000 model, and have still chosen the £1,000,000 and 120 year option just because we said we'd do it and then they moved the goalposts.
This isn't about "spending a small amount of money to solve a well intentioned problem so we should do it regardless," it's about solving the problem properly, in the most effiicent and quick time possible. The old adage "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" is one which should act as a warning from history in this regard, because often acting in a wasteful, unstructured manner is often worse than inaction.
That said - I agree that in this case, inaction is unnacceptable, but when the answer is actually so simple, and the problems are just politically difficult in nature, then I categorically disagree with putting all efforts into the politically correct solution of unnecessary bureaucracy proposed - because it's madness, and worse for ALL involved. Even IF it works, it's still a Pyrrhic victory.
Re: These figures are fairly irrelevant
Yeah - hit the nail on the head, though having been around town on Sunday in Birmingham, there were still consoles to be had if you didn't mind paying inflated prices for them - cheapest deals I saw were circa £550 for the console (either one) and a game (and a few extras like films I didn't want/need).
Both companies know how this game plays out - you just have to have sufficient demand that you sell out and stay sold out throughout the Christmas season (while the launch games are few and far between - dealing with headlines about people agonising over when they're going to get your products drives sales far more than loads of frustrated gamers with consoles who have completed both launch games within a week.)
It also hides glaring manufacturing faults long enough that they can be fixed for future batches, while the number of affected customers remain those who were your most loyal followers anyway. Keep the demand sky-high and release just enough supply to prevent a backlash, whilst constantly running campaigns telling everyone how high demand is.
The engineers have had their fun now - time to hand over to the dark arts of sales and psychology
Re: Lies, damn lies, and....
Starbucks also operates hundreds of franchise stores in the UK which are like any other small business and pay all local associated business taxes on their profits. Just because "Starbucks" the holding company uses tax efficiency to not pay tax in the UK (usually by means which the government INCENTIVISED - creating local businesses for one) does not mean that the exchequer doesn't take a healthy percentage of your £3 latte. They pay tax. Department B of Subsiduary C of Holding-company A might not (though it might be their UK head office), but that doesn't mean that the entire company isn't paying their lawful dues, does it?
I too am young though, perhaps you could educate me?
The only thing the panorama broadcast showed me is how seemingly workshy and ignorant young BBC reporters actually are. Zero hour contracts? they're great - I've been on them. It means you get to choose your work-life balance - and provided there is work available (which there inevitably is) then you can put in extra hours and earn extra cash. When you want to go on holiday, you don't have to turn up at work, because you aren't contractually obliged to. You behave like a full time employee, you'll keep your job. And if there isn't work, you go and find somewhere else to work - who the hell owes you a living, anyway?
As for the whole "picker" role - yeah, that's what these warehouse distributors have to do to get their stuff out on time. You're walking 11 miles a day - so what? so does everyone who stands up for a living. They buy comfortable shoes and don't spend so much money on unused gym membership. Treated like a machine? yeah, course you are, just like everything else on a production line, distribution network, whatever. You do your time, then you hang up your apron and leave your problems at work. It's mindless, but it pays the bills. Get over it. I worked in a supermarket - it's no different, except I had to get cold every 5 minutes in the walk-in freezers to get stock to fufil demand.
And as for tax, rather than MPs whine about how immoral it is, why don't they change the law - surely that's WHAT THEY DO, isn't it? Personally I'm of the opinion that corporation taxes are rather silly, and amount to double taxation. What money they make is either passed to consumers, who pay VAT, their employees, who pay income tax, or their shareholders, who pay income tax on dividends and capital gains tax on share price increases. It's a business - there is no further place for it to go, and as all routes are taxed, why do we need to tax their profits too? Maybe I'm missing something here, but even if a company just hoardes cash in an offshore subsiduary, it's not doing anything good there and sooner or later it'll become part of the tax-a-go-round again anyway as shareholders demand it to be used to gain them further value.
Globalisation is here to stay. The sooner our government accept this the better. As a result, my shopping will be done almost exclusively at amazon and other online stores this Christmas, and if that pisses off some MPs, all the better.
Re: Why are the names of the two female accomplices being kept secret?
Because once they were known it would provide an easy link to the young victims, who are entitled to lifelong anonymity under UK law.
What is a realistic expectation then? I'm two years out of university, with an electronic engineering degree and I worked alongside many a computer scientist who put in as many hours as I did over the 4 years I was at university. I demanded (and got) £28k starting - is that ridiculous in your view? I suspect it might be. 2 years in and I'm comfortably in the £30-40k bracket. Is that ridiculous? over-inflated? unrealistic? I had a few months work experience and a 2:1 at a Russell group uni, but it's not really groundbreaking stuff. I'm not in oil, financial services or banking, just a run-of-the-mill corporation at the junior level.
Have you thought about considering them but offering a salary more in line with your expectations? You might be surprised that they'd likely settle for £10k less than they're asking. I appreciate CV filtering often involves chucking everything that is remotely aside from the narrow parameters you've set (split the pile, chuck the left one away - you wouldn't want to employ anyone who is unlucky, would you), but in my experience, our expected salaries on a CV were just the ones we'd seen from the 20 or so companies at the uni careers fairs, who are usually at the upper-end of the multinational corporations with large, well funded graduate schemes - after all, you'r not going to lower your potential earnings by putting down an artificially low expectation, are you? Equally, having no experience in the world of work, you don't have a yardstick to draw on to test whether what you read on WhatSortOfSalaryShouldIGet.com is remotely plausible.
Personally I think the whole reason so many people are underpaid in this industry is because we keep our salaries so private - the most common salary quoted to me during my job search was "competitive" which is a meaningless phrase which allows HR to get away with quoting you an offer 40% below that which they're willing to pay and you'll probably just accept it because the only yardstick you have at the end of uni is the daily mail unemployment figure.
If you want to be well paid, then start shouting your earnings from the rafters like those in finance do - they're doing it as much to tell if they're being ripped off as they are to boast. Directors publish their salaries in the annual reports. Why is there such a stigma over how much society values your time when you're a professional, other than the fact that it keeps people timid?
To get back to topic - the other reason people don't employ computer scientists is because they think it sounds like a pseudo-science, like environmental science, or social science, or watersports science. A couple of those are respectable disciplines, and a couple are a bit of a joke. But if you ask 100 people if any of them are proper academic subjects, 90 of them will tell you they're not.
There was also a glut of people studying around the dotcom boom and bust, meaning that you don't have a chronic shortage of qualified people at the moment, unlike most STEM disciplines.
It's yet another url addition which no one (except nominet who will make money out of the fiasco) cares about.
What problem does it solve? none, yet it's introduction allows for a whole raft of hell to break loose as everybody gets confused over who should be .org, .co.uk and .uk
I'm kind of amazed that no one had the foresight to stop all of this, when the previous system wasn't broken. Nominet must be laughing all the way to the bank!
Re: A bit harsh
Go on then, downvoters, prove me, and my electronics degree modules in computer architecture wrong. Last time I checked this was a tech site.
Why does 64 bit mean faster? It doesn't. It allows you to address more memory (last time I checked no tablets had 4GB RAM.) And unless you're doing CFD, CAD, HPC-grade analyses like weather prediction, stress analysis, or things like desktop-level gaming then you're not going to see the benefits in terms of the added double-precision calculation capacity that 64 bit offers over 32 bit.
Yes yes, those articles quoted are about the 5S. The A7 chip in that is the same architecture as the iPad Air.
Re: A bit harsh
Repeat after me: "64-bit architectures have NOTHING to do with speed"
If anything, they're slower than their 32-bit counterparts, due to having to process more bits for a given calculation. Unless you're doing lots of double-precision floating point analyses, their use is somewhat limited in a tablet.
As if I needed yet another reason...
... for why I don't buy apple.
What astonishes me is that fanbois still put up with this behaviour. They let apple drag them around on a leash like this and still sing their praises?!
It's this aspect of draconian control that apple place on their products which is the real reason for why I hold the company and their users in such contempt. It's laughable, especially when some of my "iPhone till I die" friends have bought something other than an apple phone and they exclaim "Wait, you can do that?!" for things as simple as bluetoothing a photo or music track.
I can only conclude that people like to be controlled.
Re: For everyone saying 'good'..
I use my phone as a satnav, and so do thousands of other motorists - afterall, with a 5" screen they're pretty much indistinguishable from a tom-tom unless you're in the actual car, and there isn't anything (apart from good old fashioned common sense) stopping me from streaming Tom and Jerry videos from youtube. Police have never commented on it, and I know no-one who has been told off for using the satnav capability of their smartphone.
As for wearing google glasses when they're switched off - that's kind of the point. They're glasses - handsfree, instantly available and you don't have to fish them out of your pocket when you want to use them - these would be the reasons I would buy one. Having to take them off and put them in a case every time I wasn't using them would be really annoying, whereas augmented reality at the tap of a button/voice command would be exactly as I would expect to use them - and I wouldn't want the HUD on all the time, just like I don't want my phone screen on all the time.
As with most things - used sensibly, there is no threat - It might be a bit cliche, but fighter pilots use HUDs to allow them to process the information they need far quicker than the disruptive procedure weekend pilots have to do of checking outside, looking at an instrument, checking outside, looking at another instrument, checking outside. Yes, they're highly trained, but technology can be used to enhance rather than distract human concentration and mental processing. A knee-jerk ban isn't really doing anyone any favours.
Bottom line: the attitude of society towards these new devices is one of inherent suspicion and immediate jumping to conclusions, rather than reasoned, logical debate and actually thinking through the topic. Entirely predictable human response, but not necessarily right. Do I think they're dangerous? No. Do I think society is ready to accept them yet? No.
Drives down in price? Blu Ray drives were around in 2006 let's not forget, yet still, the cheapest OEM version online for a BDRW is around £45. 7 years of manufacture - they should be approaching the cost of the old DVDRW drives (~£15-£20) you'd have thought - yes they have an additional laser and have to pay a few pence to Sony to licence patents, but this still screams of price fixing. HP have had enough, and they're one of the few goliaths in the industry that can actually force the point.
Trouble is, we've seen this before - by the time anything meaningful happens the technology is completely and utterly obselete. If they're suing about blu-rays now, then I reckon the courts will slap a fine on them in, hmmm, around 2020. It's like CRT price fixing all over again.
Re: Why have PCs failed to have useful hardware improvements over the past 3 years?
I'll tell you what I think happened - consoles.
The biggest driver for PC development prior to Xbox 360 and PS3 was gaming, faster drives, higher performance graphics cards, faster RAM, more memory. Then, after PCs had caught up and surpassed the consoles, no one cared any more, because EA and Ubisoft had bought everyone, and believed that PC piracy would destroy gaming, so didn't bother developing for PC any more. Made commercial sense for them, and they've been successful, so fair play.
However, as a result, the market for PC gaming came to a grinding halt, and with it, so did development. Now everyone just wants free throwaway gaming apps where they can buy smurfberries, and they're happy - the drive for better machines dwindled, and what is most appaling, is that the PS4 and XBone have barely raised the bar by an inch, and will probably be the last of the old-style gaming consoles.
It's a pity, because whilst gaming is seen by some as a frivolity, the arms race it spawned in the silicon development stakes has benefitted us immensely - for HPC, parallelisation, simulations, speed - everything. These advances haven't gone, but they're slowing (though in their place mobile computing is driving down power consumption and increasing performance, but it will be a while before it gets to where the mighty desktop once roamed.) Desktops are part of the old "multiple consumers, limited markets" world. Mobile is part of the new "limited consumers, multiple markets" world. The King is dead. Long live the King.
They may be shareholders but having been in a position of a shareholder where the board lied to you, it's not so much about recovering the money you lost as attempting to send a message that if you lie about your company to those people who own it, then you'll pay the consequences as damn well you should.
Risk is part and parcel of company ownership, and you accept that as a shareholder, but in order to manage that risk and your exposure, the shareholders elect the board to inform them of the companies doings. When they lie, they should be strung up for it - as they are guilty of negligence, and it pretty much amounts to saying "everything is fine, keep paying me." Considering just how much these board members are paid to do their job, which is to act in the interests of shareholders, not against them, when they don't do it then they should be expected to be defending themselves in court with pretty hefty sanctions being applied if they lose.
So no, it's not about reviving the companies fortunes, it's about removing freeloading parasites who will say anything to keep being paid for another month even though they know that the company is finished. (PS, I'm not a BB shareholder so I don't really care in this instance, but just giving you my views of why somebody might take this sort of action|)
Re: Automated till hell ...
Did you know THERE IS A MUTE BUTTON for the checkouts. Just before you hit the start button, look at the bottom centre of the screen. HIT THE VOLUME ICON and it SHUTS IT UP!
It doesn't prevent the rest of the pain of using it, but you don't have to hear it moan at you EVER AGAIN.
Consider yourselves educated. You're welcome.
Re: At first
Of course it lowers the risk - you hand the sensitive data to a company whose only vested interest is to protect it - it's their job, and if they have a breach then they're going to be finished. As it's their vested interest, they'll spend far more time and money making things secure, and economies of scale mean you'll get a vastly superior offering to doing it yourself.
Otherwise what we'll end up with is every Tom, Dick and Muhammad Retail Ltd kludging together a badly implemented payment system which they don't understand and have no interest in keeping secure - they sell you their wares, not payment security. So long as it works and does the bare minimum, they're not going to improve it - they have their vested interests elsewhere.
Re: Did they ask about...
Simple solution - Leave cables lying around in your house and trip over them in your rush to call them, then explain that it is their fault you broke your leg in 3 places whilst rushing to the phone after following their simple instruction to "call now, don't delay" and tell them you'd like to sue them.
Back to the article - just trawling facebook for "likes" ain't going to work unless facebook put the long awaited "dislike" button in there as standard.Otherwise these TV types with their overinflated egos are not going to realise just how rubbish their programmes really are. Not to mention that anyone trawling private conversations to see what was said for profit is just completely unnacceptable... oh, they've been doing it for years? Why do people still use facebook again? And more to the point, who still watches advert riddled TV when ad-free on demand exists?
When I'm world president...
...copyright, patents and rights for creative work will be given to the creator amounting to a term valid for 3x the time of the human effort that went into the creation, for example:
if you spend 20 years developing a fusion reactor then you assert rights over it for 60 years. (and serial, not parallel. Having 100 people work on it for 20 years does not give you 6000 years)
If you spend 3 years writing a novel, then you get to protect that work for 9 years.
If you spend 2 minutes creating a song playlist and then 1 day mixing them together, you can have 3 days and 6 minutes worth of protection.
They damn well need another cable - their broadband prices are about 4 times the cost of ours in the UKs for a limit comparable to most smartphones - 1-3GB a month.
Great if you want to slow down and enjoy life and retire in Lord of the Rings country, but if you yearn for an acceptable 21st century standard of living - able to watch moving video on a PC rather than an advert stuffed box for instance, NZ would drive you crazy before too long.
Burn baby burn
Personally I think that the chip companies should leverage the extremely useful heat producing capabilities of their multi-billion transistors switching.
I mean, who wouldn't want a house centrally heated by their computer? Picture it - SWMBO puts the thermostat up, AGAIN, and you get the option to model the microclimate in your back garden and sell the data to the MET office or perform a simulated nuclear test on the neighbour's cat. I might actually consider spending £2500 on a boiler if it came with an intel inside sticker and a HDMI port and could run Crysis at 42fps.
Re: You didn't already know?
To be honest, I'm just here to get some free votes
Oh for goodness sake
Prior to coming to work for a corporation, I was able to get away with probably around 5 core passwords (with plenty of merging and munging between them) around the internet, each of varying security, and very few being uniquely used, except for things like forum logins where I couldn't care less if I was compromised.
Cue the god-awful password requirements for the tens of systems I now use, that all have different requirements, all change at random intervals (some 30 says, some 1 month, some 3 months, some 6 months) and of varying degrees of forced control. Is it any wonder that I now actually store some of my passwords on my desktop in plaintext, simply because it is completely unnecessary to have to have a password with a complexity requirement more stringent that the release mechanism for a trident nuclear missle for a flippin "corporate HS&E e-learning tool." I mean, the only thing an attacker could do there is complete the annual "how to sit at your desk without becoming a paraplegic" refresher for me, which I would actually welcome.
I will use necessary security where it is needed, I studied cryptography at university, and people who think that security is enhanced by having the most draconian requirements really ought to learn about human psychology when it comes to security - as there comes a point where you end up compromising security very easily if you make things difficult for the end user. This is exactly why I store my password in plaintext on my desktop for aforementioned HS&E program.
I don't have a business mobile phone, but really - do the majority of users really have anything worth stealing on there? I mean usually it's just emails with the circular about the new cover sheet on the TPS reports... a 4 digit pin ought to keep someone out long enough for the user to realise they've lost it and security to remote wipe the device. Anything more is quite simply unnecessary, and more hassle (and cost) than the security is worth.
New Fangled Television
This might have been useful back in the 90s, where Ceefax existed and you had to wait 20 minutes to see what was on channel 44, but now? Seriously? I barely use the television, preferring on demand and my fondleslab/smartphone/ultrawhotsit And if I need to see listings, it's quicker to get my mobile out of my pocket and ask siri than to try and find the flippin remote and work out how the thing wants to work today...
Lots of money for an utterly pointless and meaningless investigation for a system which belongs squarely in the last century - of course the government are falling over themselves to pay for it - it's an IT project that cannot possibly fail (there, I've jinxed it for them)
As with the others, Automatic noise generation from somewhere in the browser gives me, normally a perfectly rational individual, an apoplectic fit. I start foaming at the mouth and turn extremely violent, and feel like defenestrating any device, non-screwed down object or co-worker, whether directly related to the noise or not.
I term this as the sort of rudeness as some guy ringing you up at 3am to sell you double glazing, or a waiter telling you to directly fuck off after they've just served you a starter because they double booked your table, or perhaps a customer service agent slamming the phone down after telling you to turn it off and on again without hearing the problem. Hell yes I'll vote with my wallet, and tell everyone I meet of my diabolical experience.
So Dabbsy, unless you are redesigning the website of the RNIB, or have a poor-taste Stephen Hawking style text to speech website which you want to go viral, if you're going to put audio in it, for gawds-sake make sure it doesn't fire automatically. Or if it does, it better be telling me how I can sue you no win no fee for the damage I caused by putting my fist through my monitor.
Re: 'Whiff of octogenarian media lord sends 1 in 5 running'
I think 100,000 people leaving from an estimated subscriber base of circa 500,000 shows the effect pretty clearly. Let's not forget that Be subscribers were there because Be broadband was actually good, and when you had a problem they weren't afraid to speak tech with you if you wanted. I was with O2 for a while at university because it was very cheap if you had a phone contract with them.
Both O2 and Be had something to differentiate them from the market, and hence their subscribers have already shown themselves to be a far more savvy bunch than the usual crowd- and losing 20% of your userbase even when you're offering a fair few sweetners just shows that Sky didn't do their homework properly. That's a disaster. Sky is seen to be run of the mill, poor customer service offering a mediocre product - definitely a step down from Telefonica's offerings.
If I had a MAC right now I'd be looking at someone like Andrews&Arnold (recently quoted in the Cameron Censorship fiasco article as they'll give you active choice - you can have uncensored internet, or you can go to hell) - they must be rubbing their hands with glee at all the potential customers.
Re: Are you Ignorant or just Stupid?
I'm gonna bite. The city of Detroit DID go bankrupt because of American cars. Detroit was completely and utterly reliant on that industry to fund their economy - it was therefore the root-cause. Back in the 90s, the cars Detroit was putting out were nothing short of uncompetitive - the South Korean manufacturers absolutely rinsed the floor, on cost, build quality, fuel economy - the only thing they didn't quite match up to was size (which to some Americans == luxury). Detroit continued, as you said, being bent over by the unions, building up huge debt obligations without the means to get a return on investment (due to the uncompetitiveness of the auto-industry) and as people lost their jobs and quality of life deminished, crime went nuts and everyone left. Cue bankruptcy, it's as simple as that, and it could have happened anywhere that rests on their laurels about how awesome they were in the past, not just limited to American cities - UK shipbuilding and mining towns went that way not that long ago either - again, due to reliance on an uncompetitive industry.
I have driven about 20 hire cars in North America over the last 6 months, all 2013 models, and I can safely report that all the American models still suffer all the stereotypical problems that Europeans think they suffer - build quality is pretty poor, there is loads of shiny chrome, computers that control everything (which WILL break and be extortionate to fix,) and cheap plastic all over the dash. Fuel economy is still dire - an average 2.4L car (which is about as common as the 1.4L/1.6L car in the UK from my observations) will just about get 30MPG (imperial), which is still considered "good." They accelerate quickly though handling is still rubbish, but their ride is comfortable, and there is lots of space inside. I remember seeing an advert for the Chevy Cruze which can do 56MPG as being the lowest highway fuel consumption in class (it's the size of a mondeo). Euro cars were doing that 5 years ago. The Hyundais and Kias and Toyotas I've driven are worse than in Europe, (they've obviously cut costs in their US models and it shows) but are pretty much superior over US built vehicles, in everything other than space and comfort (which is highly valued in the States but not elsewhere in the world) They're also all sold far cheaper than anything in Europe, and encourage you to go out of your way to pick them up on finance.
Americans still suffer the delusion that the bigger the vehicle is, the safer you are inside. They have never seen a Euro NCAP style crash test which proves otherwise - I'd take your bet that one of our 2013 "Minis" would be safer for occupants than one of your 2013 Chargers or something in a 40mph collision. I think you'd be surpirsed. Sure, in a question of energy transfer in a collision, a lorry hitting a car is only going one way, and there are a lot of oversize SUVs on the road in the US, but there is an awful lot that can be engineered to mitigate that. I don't accuse the US of standing still though - safety is getting better, same with fuel economy, but they fell a decade behind and are still playing catch up. You're not going to see American models taking the world by storm any time soon, with the possible exception of Ford - their Focus and Fusion (Mondeo in Europe, not that stupid box thing we call the Fusion) are actually reasonable. Chevrolet, Chrysler, Dodge and GMC (Vauxhall, Opel in Europe) are still woefully outclassed by the Europeans, Japanese and South Koreans.
But yes, it's an enormous country, it was built around the Internal Combustion Engine and not the horse (as Europe was), and therefore to do anything there you need a car. Sidewalks, more properly known as pavements, are for cities only, as everywhere else is just too far to walk. But when petrol is still sub $1/L, it's not painful to fill up like it is in the UK (doesn't stop them complaining though, hehehehe)
Re: Sense at last
You're hopelessly naive if you think that an 11 year old hasn't seen things in the playground that would make your hair curl. Kids have the ways and means to distribute files, via phones, memory sticks, whatsapp, you name it - they'll have seen stuff of the most extreme hardcore nature (and most likely illegal) by age 12, I guarantee it. You're kidding yourself if you think otherwise.
ISP filters DO NOT WORK, all they do is add pointless inconvenience to the average user. I can imagine it now - trying to access instagram or flikr in starbucks - sorry, our free wifi is family friendly, and uses government approved ISP filter lists. Public libraries wifi - "sorry, that research material is classified as adult material and unsuitable for our family library." The internet is most useful when it is available widely - and government guidelines coupled with opt-out mean that you will only get government sanctioned internet in the future. That's not on.
It is censorship. It's not a great idea, and people with views like you are actually harming children by destroying responsibility toward them - and that is far greater than the harm done to them by viewing "naughty things" on the 'net. It is NOT societies responsibility to parent properly, FULL STOP.
Re: Bring them on....
do a search then- El Reg is a good place to start - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/16/vm_fraud/
Re: "a £265 piece of kit"
Its an industrial grade product and has to last 10 years. It is not a consumer-grade item, therefore you won't get a consumer-grade price. Besides, the government has "mandated" them, and that means that the company that makes them will suck as much blood out of that government mandate as they can possibly get away with. It's a bit like anything "military spec" - build it for market price, then move the decimal point to the right.
It would also appear
that ReKey is having problems and causing some devices to enter a boot-loop. They say it's fixed in the latest version, but "non-destructive"? a boot-loop you can't get out of is a major implementation flaw, and almost as good as bricking your device.
I'll be waiting for a few more positive reviews before I take the plunge, personally.
Re: You mean like this web site does....
But I, like 95% of the internet, use the same password everywhere - your argument is invalid.
Re: I love the idea and desperately want one but what about professional drivers
You missed the point made, as punishment you can read it again. ALL the way through.
It's simple - by removing the humans and their cost, the money which would otherwise have been spent on them doing something that they no longer need to do is available for them to do something else. Yes, they're instantaneously unemployed, but their wages are availabe to them on kickstarter (put there by evil capitalist looking for a quick buck from the profit he made by laying them off), if you want a 21st Century example. They do something else and society benefits from the auto-captioning of cats software they create, or somethng.
Capitalism is the same game it was in the 18th Century. The rules haven't changed, just the quality of life.
ARTICLES without comment boxes - Climate, CO2, Anything authored by L. Page...
Seeing as I have no where to agree with/ vent against Messr L. Page, I've created a topic as he suggested.
CO2 CAUSES GREENING: Having long been sceptical of CO2 rising = death and Earth turning into Venus, I tend to be interested in how biological systems manage to avoid runaway feedback mechanisms, and am not suprised when things like this come up. Hurray, we're saved! (maybe)
SCOTLAND and TIDAL POWER:
Whilst the firth itself may have lower estimates of capacity, the UK has a whole has something in the region of 15-25% of the worlds easiest available tidal resource. I've worked on tidal turbines in the past, and as with any brand new tech, there are teething problems. Once again the UK has a huge advantage - we had the sea protecting us against Europe for millenia, copper and tin mines making us a world leader during the bronze age, we had loads of coal (still do) to power the industrial revolution and to develop the railways, and now, in the 21st Century, we realise that we're on one of the strongest tidal stream resources in the world.
It is never going to replace fossil fuel, but unlike wind or solar it is very predictable, and hence many times more useful for electrical utilities. As usual the biggest problems with anything that makes sense seem to be the green brigade, who are scared that whales can't avoid things which are very large and rotating, or that rising waters in estuaries will destroy bird habitats. Whilst I am not hung up at all about CO2, reducing pollution in general is a fair plan, and tidal is a clean resource, and there is much to be gained from harnessing it. If the Firth can produce a mere GW, that's half a very large power station that doesn't need to be built on land. But the government will have to underwrite the risks, as no private corporation will take a gamble of this magnitude. Green energy doesn't look like it's going anywhere soon, I'd say it would be a wise investment of my taxes to make the UK a world leader in tidal technologies.
Why should strict privacy be the exception? - it's none of anybody elses business what I say to other people behind closed doors. That I have "nothing to hide" doesn't mean you can invade my privacy to check. You will take me at my word until my actions prove otherwise - it's a basic right of respect, and fundamental right of innocent until proven guilty.
Just because I use tools that protect my privacy != my activities are illegal, no matter what the do-gooders say.
In a healthy society, privacy ought to be the norm, not the exception.
Project - sham. IDS - half a modicum of sense
It's obvious that this is a textbook government IT project. And as such, baby steps are needed to limit the damage and give the firefighters the 3 years they need to get this thing fit for purpose, which sounds like what is proposed by IDS - Get the basics right FIRST, then start adding complexity after you've fixed the initial (inevitable) problems.
Yes, it's a proposal that is due a lot of flack for not getting it right earlier, proves that the project was poorly planned and executed and isn't going to deliver on time, but compared to the alternative, it's far better than just rolling it out regardless and bringing the entire system to a standstill, specially when it affects the lives of so many of societies vulnerable people.
Don't get me wrong - it's an omnishambles, but in terms of dealing with said shambles and damage control, (and I can hardly believe I'm saying this) I think IDS is probably doing the right thing.
- Fee fie Firefox: Mozilla's lawyers probe Dell over browser install charge
- Did Apple's iOS make you physically SICK? Try swallowing version 7.1
- Pics Indestructible Death Stars blow up planets using glowing KILL RAY
- Neil Young touts MP3 player that's no Piece of Crap
- Review Distro diaspora: Four flavours of Ubuntu unpacked