135 posts • joined Thursday 30th August 2012 10:30 GMT
Re: I want to play with VMs
To quote the old saying "how long is a piece of string".
You can run a number of VMs on a $300 laptop or require a server with 4 processors running 12 cores and 32Gb RAM and anything in between.
It depends what you want to run and achieve with it?
However in basic terms, everything will be shared between all the VMs. So make sure you have enough total cores that can be presented to each VM as a (a quantity of) virtual core(s) and enough RAM to share amongst each VM.
As for Hypervisors, if you are using a machine especially for testing VMs then I would recommend using the free Bare Metal VMware. Load it on via DVD, connect using the VSphere Client and away you go, very easy to set up. Use the VMware converter to convert a physical machine to a virtual for a quick start.
Your issue will be licensing the OS though. Unless you are running Linux as the Guest OS, every two VMs will need a WIndows Server Licence. Now Technet is not available, test licences are restricted to trials.
Re: A shining example of how Microsoft got it wrong
It's a while since I did it but I'm pretty sure you have to restart the server to do that?
A shining example of how Microsoft got it wrong
For the perfect example of Microsoft having a screwed up strategy is Server 2012.
When you get a model right everything you throw at it just seems to fit perfectly - however when you have to make massive compromises and do things that just seem wrong just so you can continue that strategy then you should take a step back.
Microsoft should concentrate on Consumer v Business. Work PCs - Business, Servers = Business, Company phones = Business. Home PCs, social networking phones, etc = Consumer.
They don't then need to shoehorn business users into a consumer OS and Windows Server 2012 should never have happened.
You can, of course, run 2012 core, however it is a bit of a gamble that the utility or app that you need to troubleshoot something runs as a powershell or remote management interface. There is no easy way to add on the GUI afterwards if need be. If, you opt for the safety of the GUI to start with you have the Modern UI ... on a server!
So every entry to the server remotely involves logging on going to desktop, doing your business and then going back to Modern UI to log out...sorry Sign Out. They've had to add additional commands into the control box of the Remote Desktop just to handle this easily. Having to go to the bottom left and attempting to get the start box to appear and then having to go to the opposite corner to log out is just maddening enough with a mouse when you first start with it.
Seriously Microsoft, understand your paradigm, don't alienate users and stop chasing the consumer dollar by annoying every business user (the ones who are going to be keeping you afloat in the years to follow).
So domain squatters who hold onto domain.co.uk get given another one for free that they can readily sell on as well, holding a company to double ransom?
Re: Damage and distress
Thanks, for that!
Maybe over in the USA but in the UK if you take someone to Small Claims court you only have a limited subset of claims you can make and nearly all have to be directly related to a loss or cost you have personally suffered. So you could go to court and sue for £5 maybe for the time it took to download an digest the e-mail. However you are never going to be able to claim £500 etc via the small claims system.
In the UK they courts, even if you go to full civil court don't hand out massive punitive damages - apart from a limited few cases such as libel - these have to come as forms of fines which is why it needs to be done through legislation.
Damage and distress
I would add that rather than having to show damage and distress they should be fined per recipient if the company sending the communication did not take adequate measures to try to ensure that they were genuinely entitled to market to that individual.
So if the fine ranged from 10p to £10 per recipient based upon how neglectful the company was, this should help to stem the problem dramatically.
Therefore, unlike a fixed fine, it cannot be thought of as a "business cost" which can be negated by sending even higher numbers of communications.
Re: What happened...
How many companies, let alone NHS trusts do you know that have the budget and resources to employ an AV update bork-checker?
Updates come out for AV at least once a day and sometimes more often. To load this into a test network and try out every bit of software to see if it still works okay for that once in 5 year time that it doesn't is unrealistic.
In an ideal world, yes it would be great but you expect your AV vendor to have the resources to do testing for at least major software (like the WIndows OS) to make sure it is not affected.
Re: @Lloyd cheap and nasty
Are you sure you don't have HDR/HDR+ turned on?
Minimal State Interference
I'm not sure you could class intercepting the traffic of two of the largest Cloud service providers, demanding backdoors in to software, forcing companies to hand over encryption keys in secret courts, intercepting laptops at borders and making copies of the entire hard disk with no reason and no oversight, etc minimal state interference.
I would think it is quite a lot of state interference.
So, if this is true, company A starts to negotiate a deal with company B.
Seems like a good deal for company B so they start looking into it and realise they can make a lot of money out of it if it goes ahead.
No contract is signed (however Company B may have told it's board that they are in for a bumper Christmas).
Company A re-evaluates and decides that they are not going to go ahead.
Company B then feels, without any form of contract, that it is entitled to claim all the money (at the top end of their estimates) all the money they might have got from the deal as well as a high percentage of the same again on top for damages?
If this was to succeed then you could just tender for a contract and then claim all the money anyway if you weren't awarded it.
Re: DAB struggles to play
2Not necessarily stronger. Within one multiples the broadcaster can choose the error resilience (ruggedness) of individual streams."
Can..but do they? No they all use PL3 on that Multiplex.
Re: DAB struggles to play
"R2 is the only one that is strong enough to play without distortion"
How do you manage to get a single station to have a stronger signal than others on the multiplex?
Re: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
"One thing to bear in mind is that almost anything the NSA can do, it would seem likely the Russians and Chinese can and are doing."
That is not actually true. A foreign power cannot go to a US company and demand that a backdoor is placed in their software or that their private keys are handed over. The foreign power can also not go to a US court and demand a secret court to agree that they have sweeping powers and that companies must comply and not talk about.
Although other spy agencies are obviously utilising 'hacking' and social engineering to get into computer systems they are also being searched for and malware and systems access being blocked. You would not end up in court for actively trying to block a foreign power from getting access to your system, whereas you might if it is a local agency.
If they could ask people to pay £1.50 extra each a month now, they would - or £2, £5, whatever the market could bear.
Luckily with 4 major National networks and lots of sub networks there is plenty of competition and they may well have to suck this price up. It was strange how when the 3% extra price was announced for existing customer and their bill went up to £37.54 per month or whatever, new customers could still get the nice (rounded number) £36 per month deal.
If ofcomm had been suckered into accepting the "insurance policy" option then the networks could still advertise the cheap price, have the "insurance against increases" as an optional extra and the network would win on all fronts (and the consumer would lose out).
Expect more "hidden" costs and optional extras (like the current 1p per text message delivery notification that was always once free, pay a premium price for freephone and 0845 calls, etc) rather than a baseline price increase.
RE: Victim Surcharge
Not quite true, the surcharge doesn't go to a victim in that particular case it goes into a fund which compensates victims of crime.
For instance it pays compensation if someone attacks you in the street. There might be a criminal prosecution against the perpetrator but that would not result in a monetary award for the victim. For that you would need to mount a second civil case but you might often find that any award is a small amount per week due to no assets of the victim.
The compensation fund will pay out a set amount based upon a compensation chart.
Just make a good responsive website - if you store the css for the media query in a separate CSS file it is easy to also show the full grid version if selected.
It caters for any screen size then, desktop, tablet, mobile or even iPhone.
There is no definitive mobile detection that works well with all mobiles, phablets (cough), tablets etc.
Re: Regardless of the merits of the Apple patent
Maybe because as a great money spinner you could create something, demonstrate it to the world without a patent. Wait for everyone to also use it (you've published it to the world of course) and then when there is significant uptake patent it and sue.
Re: Big consequences?
"But of course it doesn't work in reverse, because there might actually be content in the mail that the recipient doesn't want Google to know about."
That is just anthropomorphism. You are personifying a computer system.
Do you know how a mail server works? If you don't want someone other than a recipient to know the contents of an e-mail you have to use reliable encryption that isn't broken or backdoored. There is no other way.
Re: Big consequences?
"The problem is when the actual content of the email is not just scanned for virus or spam, but is also stored, compared against marketing data, keywords saved to the google account for ads on other services. The sender email being stored as an active email, something for the broader system to know about."
Where do you get this from?
As far as what is explained, and evidence shown, no "extra" e-mail is stored elsewhere. The ads appear based upon the content of the current e-mail. If you interact with those adverts then your interaction and profile is very likely to be updated to reflect that. It would be absurd to think that Google take a copy of every e-mail remove extraneous words and store it elsewhere on the system as part of your profile. This would add 50% to the storage size for absolutely no reason whatsoever.
It would be prudent to assume that the ads work just like any other system such as spell checker or website underlines that find keywords. i.e. it uses an algorithm to find paid for search terms and displays a relevant ad next to it. The advertisers doesn't know who you are, who the sender is, what your e-mail contained unless you interact with the advert and that would be similar to the search referrer from a search engine.
Re: Big consequences?
the ads only affect the G-mail user not the Sender who already knows about the service and has accepted the Ts&Cs
the ads only affect the G-mail user, not the Sender, who already knows about the service and has accepted the Ts&Cs
"And yes, the complaint is also that Google *are* opening each email to read it, so that they can display ads that might be relevant to the content."
In this case
Google == a big computer system
Opening == passing through their system and the bits (1s and 0s) being analysed for a pattern
From your PC, your router "opens your e-mail", so does your ISP, and any switches and routers in between including any system, software or hardware (of which there'll be a few).
What exactly is the privacy impact (above and beyond the privacy impact of any other normal SMTP e-mail system) - I really don't understand?
People don't complain that when they send a Word Document to someone Microsoft Word (The computer program) opens the document and reads it, analyses words and compares them and then shows spelling and grammar errors?
If they were to win this lawsuit that would surely put paid to any e-mail anti-spam and anti-virus scanning at the server level?
This also involves a system "reading" the contents of an e-mail to determine if it is legitimate or not.
There would also be issues with corporate systems and accessing another user's mailbox or checking against company policy.
In reality I don't see the complaint - the ads only affect the G-mail user not the Sender who already knows about the service and has accepted the Ts&Cs. It's not as if Google are personally opening each e-mail to read it. They could open any e-mail at will for sure, but then so can any company that hosts a standard SMTP server and there is even a requirement to hold these plain-text message by some goverments for analysis.
If you leave your office computer unlocked when you walk away from it then someone could also play a hilarious prank like deleting the departmental folder, or sending an e-mail to the boss to tell him he is an idiot ... etc.
That's why a normal corporate IT policy will include not locking your PC or using someone else's PC under their account as a disciplinary offence.
Rather than having to crank up the exposure, can you not touch an area of the live preview to auto set exposure and focus on?
Also wouldn't an HDR mode like most other cameras and smartphones have be better rather than having to choose which part of the image is over or underexposed?
I never realised there was such a big scandal with Yubico? I hadn't even heard of them until now.
"...ephemeral technology du jour"
Still in denial
"The judge said that the monitor was necessary since the fruity firm had shown that it had failed to learn its lesson with "blatant" violations of antitrust law."
"Apple maintains that it has broken no laws and is planning to appeal against the verdict."
Obviously still hasn't learnt it's lesson and the watchdog will do no good if they don't even think they have done anything wrong.
Re: adverts already
Apparently Ads have been around in Waze for quite a while before Google got involved but the Nissan ads have only been seen in the UK for a few weeks. I'm guessing it was part of the strategy to sell the company and prove a revenue stream.
Seem a bit pointless to me as I'm not going to suddenly drive to Nissan because of a pop-up but as 0.001% of people respond to spam you never know.
Re: Powernumpty Media are unfair on old Stevie.
"The company has more than tripled revenues and doubled profits under Mr Ballmer's leadership."
But a more insightful quote would've been..
"The company has more than tripled revenues and doubled profits despite Mr Ballmer's leadership."
Re: At the risk of...
"... approximately 1100 disaster-related (premature) deaths among the evacuees, due to psychosomatic effects (67%) ... "
I don't think you can take any article seriously that states there were 737 deaths due to psychosomatic effects. Unless of course they all had a suicide pact because they believed they were suffering from advanced radiation poisoning when they weren't.
In fact it would seem worrying that it would be reported as such as that would sound like they were trying to cover up 737 deaths by bluffing.
No "Reply" button
In Lewis Page's Fukishima article I can't see any "reply" buttons next to posts.
People have been replying to others, there is a section to post my own comment, and I see reply buttons in other comments sections.
Seems a bit pointless
Apart from the obvious disadvantage that you have to use a snap on case (which I presume you won't keep on, you'll leave in the car) having the charging mat in a fixed location means you can't use the phone as a visual sat nav or trap alerter etc. A wireless dock in the dashboard with universal fittings would make more sense.
As you are driving using the phone may be outlawed so quick access to pick it up and use it is redundant.
Unlike a charging mat on you desk where the phone can be grabbed, used and put back which has some use cases, this just seems to be using wireless for the sake of it and seems like it creates more problems than it solves.
More to it than what was stated?
Groklaw is/was a truly brilliant site. The dedication shown by PJ is astonishing with time and attention to detail.
It was one of the few places that was able to counteract the shills like FossPatents spreading their FUD.
However shutting it down just allows a win for the companies that would love an dhave tried to have it shut down for years.
However, I just can't help feeling that this was an excuse rather than a reason to shut it down. PJ has been trying for a while to remove herself from Groklaw (and I really don't blame her, the work load must be tremendous). She 'resigned' a while ago but after protests it was taken over by Mark, but I'm guessing the demands of the site meant he couldn't continue with it, so PJ starting writing more and more articles for it again.
This is probably why the comments have been closed so there is no more "outcry". It's a shame for sure, and SCO isn't even finished yet, but it was way too much for one person.
Re: To misquote Harrison Ford...
"We used to be rightly proud of the things we made in Britain - true they were generally uglier than a hutts left butt cheek and had all the market appeal of a three week old kebab but they were built to last by skilled people and were home made from the ore & coal upwards."
Are you looking through rose tinted glasses or do you remember British Leyland?
"You and your significant other want a trip to Vietnam this summer? Better not talk about it before hand or view ads, or the trip will be much more expensive when ordering time comes around."
This would not make any sense. If you have a customer who a hot lead the last thing you'd want to do it turn them away by upping the price as another supplier will just step in with a more reasonable price, Or they'll just visit Cambodia instead. You'd be better off doing a limited time special offer so that they impulse buy and don't seek out a new supplier.
If you are talking about a monopoly with a single supplier then the risk of fines for this would be so big that it could put them out of business. But then this supplier would already knows the percentage of the population that needs this product and it will be profiteered accordingly.
"...and it wont benefit the consumer in the least!" For most things, outside of essential services or monopolies the consumer is king. They ultimately set the price through supply and demand. The more competition the better - hence why the Android/iPhone/WMobile etc battle is so good for consumers (especially with multiple manufacturers).
Re: I really like it, but
"I was thinking of having a spare bit of surface. it could be..."
So from that report we can conclude that:
"... the unit’s “Quality/file size” factory default and highest modes don’t completely alleviate the problem"
"The default and highest modes ... a software bug character substitution is not completely eliminated"
however we then revert to the original stement that
"... on low-resolution scans of documents ... then it may reoccur"
Also it doesn't affect normal office documents unless you consider a large spreadsheet which has small numbers (quite a few) a normal office document?
"We apologize for any confusion that came from our prior communications." ... and from this one.
Google already allow you to buy individual music or upload 20,000 tracks free of charge, you don't need this service to do it.
"So sliding your fingers around that means you have one hand on the wheel and are distracted."
So ban in car stereos, gear sticks, window and sunroof openers, cigarette smoking, hazard warning buttons, heater and air-con controls or deactivate them all when moving ... etc etc
There's a big difference between doing research and working out if there is a problem, giving guidance, using existing powers ... and just jumping to a knee-jerk reaction and banning something "just in case".
Do we really want to live in a world where everything is outright banned and we have to be nannied by the government who make every decision about what is good for us and what isn't?
Look at cycle helmets. It was looked at to decide whether it should be law in Britain to wear them. The evidence showed that they undoubtedly saved lives, however the amount of lives they saved were not high enough to justify the invasion of liberty that forcing people to do something would cause. However, nearly every cyclist you see on the road wears one anyway.
Re: @DaLo - incompatible
"So you argument does not wash with me."
So you would be happy for Sat Navs to be banned in the UK, just because some people look at them while driving (even if you do not).
If you don't agree then the argument that HUD technology should be banned just in case someone does something stupid, like watch a movie is even weaker.
You also must do some pretty easy routes, I've been to places where it would be total luck if the voice guidance would keep you correct. The voice hasn't had a chance to finish the one direction when the next has to interrupt it and then the next.
I use my phone as my sat nav. It sits next to my speedo behind my steering wheel, perfectly legally.
It can have pop-ups, sms, video, games etc. Not only that to just view it (even as a sat nav) I have to look down away from the road and change my focus from 50 metres to 50 cm and back.
Many dedicated sat navs will also bluetooth to your phone and can pop up alerts such as incoming call or text messages. Truckers have been known to have laptops open while driving, these aren't banned in themselves. Before in car tech people would sometimes try to read a map while driving.
Surely a HUD would be much more preferable to any of these?
Yes it could be abused, but the cops should just look out for driving without due care and attention (car swerving, braking late etc). If someone has a crash wearing Glass then the cops can just have a look at logcat and see what the driver was doing.
It seems short sighted to jump on a bandwagon of "let's ban it" before doing real research into whether it is more dangerous than the alternatives. The research might just show that they actually improve safety with the right apps?
I can see the author has it plugged into an MHL compatible port. Would be interested to know if he tried to not power via USB (with MHL set on) to see if it would self power. MHL has this feature, unlike regular HDMI which is limited to 50mA.
Personally after RSA got hacked: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/18/rsa_breach_leaks_securid_data/ and their appalling handling of the aftermath, I wouldn't go near them or trust them ever again.
Re: @ Phil O'Sophical
It says it was a Java flaw in the linked article.
However it says it was a recently discovered flaw, it doesn't state whether it had been patched yet.
As for the OS, there is a good chance they are running Linux - they appear to be running Apache web server.
- Facebook offshores HUGE WAD OF CASH to Caymans - via Ireland
- Justin Bieber BEGGED for a $200k RIM JOB – and got REJECTED
- Microsoft teams up with Feds, Europol in ZeroAccess botnet zombie hunt
- Review Bigger on the inside: WD’s Tardis-like Black² Dual Drive laptop disk
- Mexican Cobalt-60 robbers are DEAD MEN, say authorities