1135 posts • joined Friday 1st June 2012 10:28 GMT
Re: Apple don't have 5 years - @loan 09:52 GMT
"Because that money sitting in the bank will explode?"
Actually, it will. Investors allow Apple to sit on the cash whilst the share price rockets, or when investors believe you are using or will use that cash in a good way. At the moment Apple pay for R&D out of revenues and still add to the cash pile, so they don't really need it. Corporate investors aren't fanbois, and they'll be pushing the board to hand the money back before long, particularly now the share price has topped out.
As one of, or the world's most valuable company by market capitalisation, they can't continue the meteoric rise in share price. So investors will let them bide their time for a while. But Cook is no Jobs, and unless Apple start to show a use for the cash, then the investors will want it back. My guess is that Apple's management will eventually start splashing out buying companies because they've no better idea of what to do with the money (and they'll be in no hurry to give money to the shareholders, even if they do own the company). And ARM are currently the obvious number one target. The only reason that ARM haven't been hoovered up by a cash rich US firm yet is because of the fear that the first mover will trigger a nuclear bidding war, with Google, Apple and Microsoft slugging it out, possibly with some incoming from the likes of Samsung or Qualcomm. Intel would probably be barred by market share reasons, although if Apple owned ARM then suddenly Intel have the custom of every other phone and tablet maker.
Doesn't really bear thinking about, with Apple's twatty management, and their childish approach to patents and litigation.
Nope, I think that the current location is just outside the front door of a swanky London law firm in the More London office development. I vote for it to stay, just be turned round so that it's backside faces the door. Either that, or to face the neighbours, PwC.
Re: "More people have a mobile phone than a toilet"
"And, critically of course, a mobile (usually) fits in one's pocket."
So would the vast majority of turds. Icon for obvious reasons.
Re: Whilst I love the idea
"Reading books on the loo is mostly a first-world pastime,"...by blokes.
There, fixed it for ya.
Regarding the more serious point of this all, I think we all know that the third world has endemic problems of sanitation. And rather than spending (I guess) ten or twenty grand on a bizarre temporary statue, whoever paid for this would have achieved a whole lot more giving the money to WaterAid, the charity who actually do something about this type of problem.
Re: Must watch more news@Matt Bryant
"you might have actually learned something about the realities of the Mid East conflict."
Nope. Your one sided agressively parroted tripe doesn't inform anybody of anything, other than that you are an israeli fanbois, wilfully blind to the fact that all conflicts have two sides. In Palestine terrorism is practised by both sides, although you obviously believe that if a missile is fired from an American supplied and funded attack helicopter, and kills Palestinian civilians it has some special attribute that makes it permissible, whereas a crude Iranian made rocket fired by Hamas that kills Israeli civilians isn't.
"Best if you just live in ignorance and parrot whatever some clueless celebrity tells you to think, right?"
Actually I'm fairly well read on the Middle East - you could be as well, but it certainly doesn't shine through in your shouty contributions. In all your whiney accusations of liberalism against anybody who has the temerity to disagree with you, I wonder what you actually know of the situation on the ground, or of being at risk of terrorism. I've been in situations where, working for my country's defence services, I've had to check my car daily for explosive devices. I've separately worked in low income locations as a commercial consultant where lawlessness, murder and kidnap are common. I suspect when it comes to comfortable people spouting crap without any relevant experience, you are the one.
"After all, pretensions are so much easier for you than actually forming an opinion."
You really are weak on this logical argument business, aren't you? You've typed several thousand words in this thread, blustered and shouted, and mouthed off abusively precisely because I have an opinion of my own. In this respect your approach to polite discourse is a bit like israel's approach to anything - loud mouthed, agressive, and counter-productive.
"/I'd use the Paris icon "
You should have, because it shows your true colours - a complete lack of respect for others, and for views that differ from your own rigidly held belief system. I've chosen the unhappy icon, because I'm sad for you. If this is truly how you are, then you must be a really unpleasant person to be around - rude, agressive, and bigoted.
Re: Apple is certainly in a rut@Thad
"Microsoft, on the other hand, would have done much better to produce something that did look like a bit more of the same."
Well, to be fair, the bulk of Windows 8, 7 and Vista appears to me to be common code. Since the three household machines run this vile mix, I think I've done enough prowling around to know. There's some tuning to 7 to make it run more fluidly than Vista, otherwise they are near enough identical, and 8 looks like 7 with a sticking plaster application launcher (TIFKAM). Again, 8 has some performance tuning over 7, but start getting into the administrative bits and it all looks familiar (and ancient). At a guess most of the code is still Windows Server 1802, or something similar.
Same with Office. Other than performance tuning between editions, and the ribbon (Office's TIFKAM, but a year or two premature) there's stuff all to commend upgrading. Xbox - yadda yadda.
There's certainly a few bits they've tinkered with, but (as an Apple hater myself) I really can't see how anybody would believe that MS are doing more innovating than Apple. Admittedly Apple is beginning to look like the same old same old, and MS have temporarily gone into branded hardware (with a few problems now, dare I say, surfacing?).
So my take: MS are not innovative, they are a mature franchise milking the cash cow. Apple, unfortunately appear to be reaching the same stage, and what Woz is seeing is simply the corporate middle age spread.
Re: Must watch more news@Matt Bryant
"I'm betting you only consider a view "balanced" if it agrees exactly with your preconceptions, and the real problem is I would have to have a labotomy to reach that level of obtuseness"
There we go yet again - presuming what other people think, and resorting to weak ad hominems. Given that's the best you can offer I didn't read the rest of your rant any further. Hopefully, releasing the bile soaked invective that it doubtless contains will have made you feel better, and on that basis I've achieved something positive today for your unfortunate anger management problems.
Your difficulties with the Arab peoples would appear to be unfortunately beyond help.
Re: Must watch more news@Matt Bryant
"If you are going to watch/read the news then best get a balanced view, and not the blinkered twaddle this AC apologist has been watching."
Well we won't be getting a balanced view from you, Matt.
Whenever the the Middle East crops up on the Reg, you're there, spouting piffle about how the Israeli's have every right to continue their track record of US sponsored agression and war crimes, plus sabotage and assassinations in other countries, but what complete bastards the Palestinians, Iranians, Lebanese or whover are. But surely if both pre-emptive and reactive violence is justified for the Jews then it must be OK for the Arabs, wouldn't you agree?
And you know what? History is pretty clear that Israel's long term strategy isn't going to fix the problem, and it isn't very good at doing any more than containing it. In the UK we didn't beat the IRA into military submission, despite the overwhelming military balance in favour of the British government. The Yank led coalition in Afghanistan has dismally failed to suppress the insurgents to any significant degree. Pakistani government attempts to suppress the Swat Valley have had no lasting success. The Indonesian government failed to crush the Aceh insurgency through military means. History is clear that the answer is not military, and Israel refuses to understand that, and refuses to give sufficient ground when negotations have been attempted.
Obviously the Israeli people can continue to live waiting for the air raid sirens, and spending 6.5% of GDP on their military, but is that really the life you think they should lead, because it would be "wrong to negotiate with terrorists"?
Re: BYOD Policy
"Or, it might be that they have a shiny laptop with no warranty and a load of piratey software on it that they use for work purposes and then land the company in hot water with because.... "
These issues are easily fixed. I use my car for work, and the company check my licence directly with DVLA, ask to see MOT and insurance documents, and could (and should) extend that to seeing the service records. So in the unlikely event that I wanted to use my PC for work, I'd see them being within their rights asking me to prove that the software is under a valid licence, has suitable malware protection, allow monitoring what I do during working hours, and requiring that I use disk encryption and suitable password routines. Backup is something for the company to make work.
Personally I can't see many people wanting their personal hardware fouled with the repressive hand of corporate BOFHs, so the answer to BYOD isn't "no", but "yes of course, on our terms". Mind you, the BYOD problem arises largely because companies hand out such poor quality and restricted functionality kit in the first place. Fix that, and most of the pressure will go away.
Forum users use insecure passwords?
Well I'll go to the bottom of our stairs.
TIFKAM here we come!
Main issue for merging Office and Windows is that although the true "operating system" has been invisible to many non-expert users for years now (other than as an application programme launcher) there's still a fair degree of stuff that isn't "productvity" related. Where are you going to put all the odds and sods that people think is the OS? I'm thinking the network setup, printers folder, file explorer, computer properties and so forth. You certainly could access this stuff via a dialogue or menu in an Office programme, but a more obvious place remains a control panel, accessed from a simplified programme launch screen.....at which point I'm beginning to think that this tends to point to the widely reviled TIFKAM.
You could be radical and try and do away with even a launcher, booting straight into an Office programme, although in practice we'd probably see the launcher function still there, relegated to a taskbar. Could certainly work for the horrible, bolted down corporate machines running a handful of programs, since these users have ever decreasing control of settings anyway, and if that's where the money is then this might fly. But would corporate customers pay the current licence fees for Windows and Office for a machine that nominally only has Office? Mind you, isn't this where Windows RT is heading as well?
Re: the sphyncter as a whole
Or cropdusting HR, ..... and ..... every government building I can get my ass into"
No longer, young padawan, no longer.
Having 'fessed up on El Reg, the homeland security people will be on your case, and you are looking at a future every bit as gloomy (and every bit as undeserved) as Bradley Manning.
"My personal preference is to let one go in a full lift, pause and then look with an accusatory glance at a chosen victim :D"
You do know that perverting the course of justice can carry a sentence up to life imprisonment?
Re: Definately a Friday afternoon article
"Are there any adults who really haven't mastered the silent fart yet?"
Good Lord, man! Why would you want to throw away one of nature's gifts like this?
Re: I find this...doubtful@ Joseph Lord
I) Your obsolete point: Not really material - every piece of tech kit becomes obsolete quickly enough, but my home gaming machine is fast enough for graphically demanding first person shooters, and it is a 2007 Core 2 Duo. Stick in a decent processor and reasonable memory to a smart TV and it will last ten years, but the sort of ZX81 processors most smart TV's currently have are obsolete in computing terms before the actual set was designed.
2) Cost. Of course it will be cheaper to cobble a DIY solution of multiple components - usually is in any situation. But you miss the point - I'm being (almost) forcibly sold smart TV's right now that are quite simply crap at the "smart" side of things. Whilst I do value your contribution to this thread, in your former capacity I'd suggest that if the current generation of smart TV's was as good as could be delivered, then (and including the reasons you give) why bother at all? I mentioned an i3 processor, that's probably overkill, but look at how phones are coming along - taking the bill of materials for an iPhone 5, and the component cost for a proper smart TV should be $133, less what they're already wasting to deliver a rubbish user experience, say $33. Add the retail and maker markup and it would cost an incremental £120 to deliver a fully functioning smart TV based on (say) Android.
3) Using DLNA etc. Possible now, but very often clunky to use and set up, slow in practice, and beholden to the TV maker's ability to write software. They aren't famous for that and it shows. Now slap in the fundamentals of a decent phone (less screen, camera, battery and mechanicals), and you just use Android; Job done. Moreover, let the third party developers in, and see what they can achieve on top.
Re: Connect TV to internets?
For anything that merits a big screen, or a shared screen.
Don't forget that "smart TV" is a typical marketing term with no definition, but invariably these include more than just a web connection, and have local networking and wireless media transfer, so (in some parallel universe where smart TV's are actually easy to use and quick) I'd use it to browse or show off my photos, displays vids taken on my phone, drag media off the PC or server and route it to the hi fi. Or use it to stream broadcaster's on demand services.
There are of course lots of ways of doing all these things now - I'm hopeful that in some distant future I won't need so many bits of kit to achieve it.
Re: I find this...doubtful
I can't help thinking that the dismally slow processing power, poor input devices, and utterly crap software built into every smart TV I've yet seen are the problem. Until the TV and computer merge to create a competent unit then smart TV's are going nowhere. In the highly unlikely event that anybody from a TV maker were listening, here's my wish list:
1) Non maker-specific OS able to run proper programmes (Android, Windoze, Ubuntu...whatever)
2) Processing power equal to an i3
3) Integrated recording capabilities
3) Wireless keyboard and trackball (and a normal remote for run of the mill stuff)
4) Proper high speed device networking (plus Freeview/Freesat tuners, and arguably Sky-in-software for those that wish to pay)
5) Arguably graphics capability for gaming, although I recognise that most of the peasants prefer consoles to PC gaming.
Having said that, the merketeers will continue to claim that sales and demand are climbing astronomically because so many TV's now offer this faux functionality, even though most of us play with it once, think "that's crap" and never bother afterwards.
Re: Why do we need to @ JaitcH
"The USA and Europe don't always agree with each other and having Galileo gives Europe the ability to give the Americans the finger sign when the need arises."
Maybe. But I'd expect there's lots of US export controlled tech in Galileo, which is fully likely to enable the US to have its way - eg degraded public accuracy when intending to attack someone. Most likely by consent (ie the US phone up and say "turn down the volume"), but if you were cynical enough you'd presume there may be by backdoors in the technology, or that the US might develop active countermeasures (and not just for the EU system).
And if the dispute's serious then I've no doubt that the US, China, and Russia have the means to ensure that somebody else's satellite is "accidentally" lost. But I can be pretty sure that the EU, who can't agree on anything defence related, probably would have neither the means nor the will to reciprocate. Worse still, the EU system becomes the warning shot target, the one that somebody takes out to show the Americans that they could do it if they wanted to. I think that, along with the US control issues above rather dismisses the "we need control of our own" argument.
So Galileo is sadly an expensive EU vanity project, unless there is an incremental €20 billion of benefit in improving the accuracy of positioning from around 3m to perhaps 20cm. And even then, the current location accuracy of GPS on the move is (in practical terms) better than the theoretical value, so actually about 1m, which is why devices can offer lane guidance.
I'm open to offers, but since my existing phone could (if I allowed it) already tell a shop that I'm right outside it, where's the €20bn value of being able to tell the shop which pocket I keep my phone in? How often do emergency services go looking for a reported crash, but miss it because the reported location was inaccurate by twelve feet?
Re: Nokia maps are incredible...
Agree with your views on Nokia maps, but they haven't given the crown jewels away because they've only enabled foor navigation, I believe. Although that also means that IPhone users will still need to use Apple's maps for road navigation, and personally I can't see that working in Nokia's favour.
A far better strategy might have been to offer a two month free trial of the full function Nokia maps, and then offer an annual licence for say thirty quid a year. That way verybody can try for free, then choose to buy if they want without changing their phone, but when it comes to renewal time they start to think "Nokia maps is free when I buy a Nokia, not a sixty quid premium on top of the Apple tax".
Re: Fiesty Finns...@Andus McCoatover
"Nokia's fighting back"
Well, actually Nokia is just delivering Elop's master plan. Trying to use Maps as a lure for other phone users is a nice idea, although in my view unlikely to actually draw many users away from their shiney iPhones.
Nothing has changed since the burning platform memo, Nokia is entirely dependant upon MS producing the goods in a popular phone OS, and as a company is coasting, trying to avoid burning too much cash whilst hoping in future to capitalise on Nokia's huge legacy user base not using full fat smartphones. The lukewarm reception for Windows 8 is a real problem here for Nokia - it seriously tarnishes WP8, and all because some arrogant twerp in MS wouldn't listen to desktop PC users, and foisted TIFKAM on an unwilling world.
Unfortunately, I think Google have just torpedoed Nokia's strategy - not per se with Android, but with the latest Nexus, which has delivered a proper smartphone at a previously unheard of price. Assuming that reflects a lower manufacturing price, then Nokia are in deep trouble, because the Lumia 820 is way too pricey to compete - and by such a margin that I can't see a theoretical stripped down 720 being cost or functionally competitive with the Nexus. Whilst Nokia have piffled around with their corporate woes, and prepping high end hardware for MS, Google have worked with LG to get the costs down.
In emerging markets, the rich will continue to covet the iPhone, but the emerging middle income groups will seek a balance of value and quality, and Nokia's not going to be in the running.
Re: It's the best theory we have so far@Destroy All Monsters
"I can't send you a gravitational field either"
You're wrong: You send me a matchbox, I'll bet that there's gravity inside it that I can test by putting a marble in and turning it over.
As for gluon, you physicists are just making that one up. Taking the august scientific journal that is Wikipedia, I see that it has a mass of zero, an electric charge of zero, but that it has a colour charge of octet. Who writes that stuff? Terry Pratchett?
"Really, the doofosity of the Scepticalism of the Reg Readership is amazing".
Do they extract the sense of humour from physicists by surgical means, or is it simply ejected by the sub-atomic interactions brought on by thinking too hard?
Re: I'm sure it was his own idea....
"There is a group policy item, related to the Start Menu, which if set to enabled breaks "Metro" in such a way as to remove all apps and tiles from it, and prevents you adding any. This error is not documented "
Sounds like half of the capability that most desktop Win 8 users are crying out for (the ones who won't use Classic Shell, that is).
Re: Male Chicken Icon
A snout in a trough (for the sort of graft that the UK now does so well)
A bishop's mitre (for all sorts of religious and unscientific beliefs)
A justice statue with scales that don't balance (where there's one law for us, one law for them)
Some police line tape (for "nothing to see here, move along!")
And most importantly, what about the ability to combine up to four icons? So if discussing some spurious technical angle to Margaret Moran's expenses, we could have a snout in a trough, a thumbs down, an imbalanced justice, and some police tape.
Re: What the West should be doing...@h4rm0ny
"Re-read my post. Money will be "clawed back" relative to if the work had been off-shored. Not relative to if local humans were still doing it."
I have re-read it, but I'm not convinced that the state can make much money on what becomes a corporate profit tax on the assembly operation. Look at the current UK problems of getting tax dodging corporations to pay their fair share for physical activities in the UK. Product assembly work has already flowed to the cheapest locations in the world, and robotic assembly would likewise go where the costs were cheapest. If (say) Germany introduced an asset tax on robotic production, would that preserve German jobs, or German tax revenues? Nope, it'd just mean that the states that had lower taxes would be the recipients of inward investment to build the robotic production facilities. And their traditional standby of "German manufacturing quality is much better" becomes irrelevant if robots do the assembly. Germany could choose to raise its sales taxes to counter loss of employment taxes and and higher welfare demands, but their VAT is around 19% - how high will that need to go, and who will pay it? Given the economies of scale, we'd see fewer, larger assembly plants, so the work could be less evenly distributed than it is now, meaning that there would be fewer opportunities for states to levy "robot tax", meaning more losers than winners.
I can't help thinking that this is one of the most important issues of our times (far more so than the comedy climate change religion, or the impact of debt crises), and yet look at this tumbleweed infested thread, with a handful of contributors. And between us we're giving it fifty-trillion times more attention than governments are giving the issue.
Re: Isn't this ironic?
Not as ironic as you might think.
China has a particular problem of an ageing workforce with increasing life expectancy and a declining working age population (even more so than Europe), which will mean that the current ratio of working age people to old codgers will halve in the next twenty years. Their best route out is to increase the productivity of the economy from a declining labour pool, and using robots for assembly work is one way of doing that. It does open up the issue of how you get the money to flow back to the population, rather than to Foxxconn's or Apple's shareholders, but that's just another thing to fix.
Have a look at the interactive graphic and accompanying text here (assuming that Newnight didn't make this up):
Re: Boom or bust?
Maybe, but this still strikes me as poor deal for those of us in the northern hemisphere.
Live in Britain. Enjoy British weather. Suffer British prices. Have a British standard of living. Get paid a British salary. Be packed in to our over-crowded island. Be subject to our rubbish infrastructure and useles spublic services. Watch your savings being diluted and half your salary being frittered by the incompetents and criminals who govern Britain. But work to make Aussies rich.
I wish my great grandad had stolen a loaf of bread. Or more likely, I wish he'd been caught.
"Google maps on Android is great, but I really miss Nokia maps from my old 5800"
So in fact Google Maps isn't great. Like you I had a 5800, and really appreciated proper offline navigation, and all the bells and whistles, all available back in 2009, and working well on hardware that was fairly poor. Google Maps in 2012, by comparison, is a very mediocre application, of zero use in a reception black spot because you can't search the limited offline maps cache, you can't get directions if already driving, and even where there is reception it is lacking decent lane guidance, or any speed limit and camera reminders. And on any handset I've yet seen Google maps seems to take forever to locate the user, in large part because it is busy communicating with servers half way round the planet over an often slow and congested mobile data connection.
When Google Maps works it is OK, and I do use it. For free that can be considered good value, but it could be so much more if they'd actually try using it themselves, and work out what a smartphone navigation mapping device needs to accomplish. They've had plenty of time to sort this out, and the improvements over time have been fairly paltry - like improving the orginally dreadful digitised speech. That was a worthwhile change, but the app shouldn't have gone out with such poor speech in the first place.
Given that (fanbois not withstanding) there is not really much to choose between any modern phone OS, I think that the mediocrity of Google Maps might be enough to make me choose a Nokia (and hence Winpho) device next time round, although there's a year for me to think about it on my contract.
Incidentally, Nokia releasing HERE for foot navigation only is a bit pointless - nobody will see the quality that the service really has, and it won't drag iTards over to WinPho. Personally, given the poor quality of Google Maps, I'd buy the full functioning Nokia app for £50 outright on Android, or pay fifteen quid a year for it; Not sure how many peasants would actually put their hand in their pockets, though.
Re: The haters are out again...
Strange indeed that the findings of an FBI investigation were published so openly. So for CIA, everything has to be really really secret, and when some tiny details leak out the FBI bravely leap into action. Then when they find some largely irrelevant but damaging dirt on the boss of the CIA it immediately is shared with the press.
Yet I see no press discussion of the implied politicking between the two organisations, that there has been a deliberate attempt to discredit Petraeus, nor any suggestion that the powers that be will attempt to find out who leaked the FBI findings to the press.
Have I got the wrong end of this?
"Yes, they could opt to reduce their profit to keep the final price down, but do you believe for one single second that they would?"
Well as not all businesses are playing the same tax dodging game. So Starbucks would become more expensive than Costa; Amazon would lose some, maybe all their price edge. In some cases John Lewis would be cheaper than Amazon with a 10% uplift.
So it becomes the tax-dodger's call, and then the choice of their customers. If you love Starbucks, and want to pay the UK tax that they ought to pay, then you'd be free to do so.
Re: It's the best theory we have so far@Destroy All Monsters
"Dark Matter is pretty well established by observation "
Well I've not seen any, and I've turned all the cushions over, and put my hand into the sofa silt. You send me a matchbox of the stuff and I'll upvote you, can't say fairer than that.
Re: Sod the clock - @ I Am Spartacus
"WHAT - A public train service makes a profit?? COME ON NETWORK SOUTHEAST - Get your act together, and find out how!!!!"
I'll tell you how: On 2010-ish data, Swiss Railways income is 25% above the combined UK rail industry's income (that's gross revenues per passenger km). I've not adjusted for freight traffic because ICBA, but my fag packet calculations suggest that would actually increase the difference by a few per cent.
So if you want Swiss style railways, no problem, we do know how it is done, and it involves paying out 25% more than at present. With UK government rail support to the tune of about a third of the total, to raise 25% of gross revenues through fare and freight increases would require the rail user to see a circa 35% increase on tickets.
Go sell that one to Network Southeast's punters!
Re: what do you expect them to do@DanDanDan
"You can't tax sales, that's ridiculous"
Of course you can. Petrol, fags, booze have punitive sales taxes added, and most items are subject to VAT; property has stamp duty charged. In the case of VAT these costs are mostly reclaimable by all except the retail customer, but the other taxes usually aren't. Arguably personal income tax is simply a sales tax on the sale of your labour to an employer.
A sales tax where avoidance of corporation taxes is clear is a damn good idea, and could even be simplified by tweaking the rules on VAT to make it reclaimable except in those circumstances. Somebody will now say "you can't do that because" but there's already situations where companies can't reclaim VAT, usually of a fairly technical nature (for example certain retail loan administration costs).
What is lacking here is (as usual) the political will to take a problem, and fix it. Grandstanding on a palrliamentary committee is a nice bit of fun, but this shower aren't accountable for anything, and I can't see that flea-brain Osborne fixing this ever.
Re: Totally agree.
"So what do you expect them to do - just ignore it?"
No, what I expect them to do is copy the practice, and that's exactly what Margaret Hodge's family company Stemcor does. UK revenues of £2.1bn, and paid taxes equating to 0.01% of those revenues. Good socialist values Margaret! Not that the rest of the Westminster leeches of any political persuasion are any better.
Remember, fellow commentards, having the one job and paying your fair share of tax applies to us, not them.
Re: What the West should be doing...
"But local robots are cheaper still. In both the latter cases unemployment rises, but in the latter case, money is clawed back through local taxes and less money going abroad."
How will money be clawed back locally, given that there will be fewer and fewer people in employment to pay for the product, generating revenues and taxable profits for the makers?
In some utopian future we might need some means of sharing out machine generated wealth amongst a largely idle population (not that the "idle consumer" model has worked terribly well in the oil rich Gulf states), but in the transitional phase that we appear to be approaching there's going to be a lot of difficulty as some people have to work, and an increasing number do not. The UK is one of the most de-industrialised societies in the world, but even we've found that services don't make up the gap, nor do welfare payments make for a balanced society.
"The web is one vast photo orphaning machine."
I sympathise, but what should we do about it? Do you suggest that we turn the clock back, lock down the IP, and try and shut down the tens of thousands of illegal re-posters? Its an idea, but I just can't see it working, it would just be whack-a-mole requiring a lot of whacking resource, but not actually changing much (and being vastly unpopular).
Is there some credible compromise where work (even non-orphan) is free for private, non-profit making use, but where companies are specifically disallowed from using orphan works? There's a few loose ends, but I could see this being made broadly workable.
Almost the exact opposite of what's being proposed, but then we never believed they worked for us, did we?
Re: And the USA wonders why @Matt Bryant
I call Godwin.
The rest of your spittle frothed invective doesn't really merit a response, but can I ask why do you let yourself down like this? Sometimes you're capable of reasoned thought and make good contributions, but only the other week you made an ass of yourself in a discussion with h4rmony, in exactly the same manner as you have here, spiralling down to abuse when you don't seem to be getting the better of the argument. It's not the name calling that I mind - I can do that when I choose, and I'm not posting under my given name - but that you're cr@pping on your own lawn needlessly.
All of us are wrong sometimes, but I find it better to slink away quietly on those (hopefully) rare occasions that I mess up - you might want to try that.
Big country differences
Looking at the linked report, it's intriguing to see the big differences between the percentage of accessible systems by country. So the UK economy is very similar in size to Italy and France, yet the UK has 1.4% of the sample of accessible SCADA systems, Italy has 6.8%, France 3.9%. The US economy is about five times the size of the UK, yet they have over 20x more accessible systems. Bear in mind that we're talking about SCADA, which mostly isn't not rocket science, so you'd expect the volume of gear (and thus vulnerabilies) to broadly track the size of the economy.
China's looks to be doing very well, although from the vendor names it would appear that the authors focused on Western SCADA brands.
So, IT security types, do these country differences mean anything? Is the UK doing as well (or less badly) as the report suggests, or is the report talking tosh?
Re: I'm gonna get flamed for this
"The way I see it, the scroat is taunting a heck of a lot of people"
Scrote, not scroat. Think what it's shortened from, and then how you have to add a vowel on the end to avoid it being "scrot".
Scroat sounds like a small furry animal, a sort of Scottish version of a ferret.
Re: This is why
"I save personal opinions for more anonymous forums like 4chan, Listverse and the comments pages of El Reg, "
Maybe, but there's not complete freedom of speech round here, even if tolerance of implolite langugage is for the most part quite good. You only have to try moderately hard to have a comment withdrawn on El Reg (calling an AC a c*** seemed to do it the other day).
Re: Will it be available in the UK at a reasonable price
The unsubsidised version is around Rs 4999, say $90 or £70. But that's in India. Factor in delivery and import duties if a personal import, or if resold into the UK add commercial profit margin and UK service costs, plus VAT, and you could be looking at £120.
At that price you're starting to see (surprise, surprise) that's its not much more competitve than the lower end of the market, which given the likely component sources seems to be obvious. Note as well that the Datawind business model is not to allow access to the Android market, but to sell apps through a dedicated store - one of the ways of getting the price down being to make money on the apps. In this respect the Aakash isn't really like the Raspberry Pi at all. You could perhaps root the tablet, but given the extent of custom hardware you'd be taking a gamble.
There is talk of selling this into Western markets, but as they can't make enough for the Indian market at the moment then you might have to wait a long while.
"I also don't like sanctimonious Iran-bashing (if you note my first comment here), but US hypocrisy doesn't make Iran equivalent to US or Israel, logically or morally."
I don't believe anybody has suggested that it is. As I see it Iran is a fetid, corrupt third world dump, governed by an anti-democratic bunch of thugs, schemers and pseudo-clerics. But as we've seen in Iraq and Afghanistan, you can't impose modern western values and structures on these countries - it took the West around five hundred years to get to current (rather suspect) levels of democracy and freedom compared to where the Middle East is.
The big question is how to deal with Iran and its nuclear ambitions. Sanctions have done little in this or other countries. Military intervention has, and will have, no UN support, and is unlikely to have a desired outcome. Even if they sterilised the Iranian nuke programme, they have committed an act of war against a country that has focused on asymmetric warfare, thus opening up a series of follow on problems of regional stability. North Korea is even more of an unstable basket case than Iran, already have nuclear technologies, and nobody is suggesting pre-emptive bombings there.
On the subject of where Israel's nuclear tech came from, maybe it didn't come from the US - we aren't going to ever find out, and I'll choose to believe that the US did supply some of it. Having bankrolled the Israeli military to the tune of almost $100 billion, and supplied most of the aircraft for Israel's airforce, all of its attack helicopters, many of its missiles, I can't see why they wouldn't go the whole hog. And if the US didn't approve, then they wouldn't continue to bankroll Israel, would they, given the leverage they have? So the US actively offer economic and military support to the posession of nuclear weapons by a NPT non-signatory.
And why would France supply nuclear tech to Israel? At the time that Israel was developing these weapons, France had an embargo on weapons sales to Israel (and Israel developed the pre-embargo Mirages into the Kfir because they couldn't get more advanced French jets). Do you really think they were proposing not to sell a few guns and planes, but happy to sell critical nuke technology? Perhaps they were, I don't believe it, and I smell a cover story that is intended to distract attention from the obvious tech supplier.
Re: And the USA wonders why @Matt Bryant
".....I should point out that I'm no friend of Iran....." Nope, you'er just the usual frothing Libtard without a clue, hence your not knowing about Iran and the NPT."
Likewise, I could have accused you of being some bitter GOP neocon, still frothing over Medicare and the relection of Obama. But I haven't, and don't, because the process of debate is not helped by weak and unjustified ad hominems, and because unlike you I'm not jumping to any conclusions about who you are, where you're from, and what you believe - other than that which you put your name to.
If you want to take issue about treaties in such a pompous manner, then do feel free. So what if Iran signed the NPT? They are being menaced by a nuclear armed non-signatory of the NPT, who have conducted assassinations and sabotage within the borders of Iran, and in their place I'd be fully committed to achieving a better balance of arms. Try putting yourself in the place of the rulers of Iran - looking at recent history (Israeli sabotage and assassinations, Israel's one sided war on Lebanon etc, a US war of choice in Iraq, US & NATO intervention in Libya, "whenever we like" drone strikes from Somalia through to Pakistan). Now why would you trust the West for a nano-second?
And I do believe that the US will have signed treaties to safeguard people against torture, funnily enough they choose not to abide by those when it suits them. But that'll be different, won't it?
Re: And the USA wonders why it is so despised world-wide?
"So in other words, what you're saying is that you aren't able to address factual argument about NPT presented in point 1 and philosophical one in point 2."
Let me offer a view on the NPT aspect. Israel got most of its nuke tech from the US. You can claim otherwise, but that's about as likely as Belgium developing advanced nuclear technologies entirely on its own.
So both Iran and Israel are in receipt of bits of US developed nuclear technology. Neither are NPT signatories, but you're trying to claim that its OK for one to develop nuclear weapons (the one that goes round bombing neighbouring countries' infrastructure), but not the other one (which other than a modest bit of regional shit stirring hasn't attacked anybody for a long, long while).
I should point out that I'm no friend of Iran, but all this sanctimonious demonisation of the country doesn't convince anybody other than the neocons who write it, and actively impedes any prospect of stability.