Is anybody really surprised by this given that their partners have previously included the likes of Vodafone? (or should that be Gerontic?)
758 posts • joined 3 Dec 2012
Re: Problem with this sites CSS?
It seems to happen mostly with comments on articles in 'the channel' section of this site. Not sure if this helps.
It also happens in both Chrome and Metro IE.
Problem with this sites CSS?
On a number of occasions over the last few days the font used is Times New Roman (or something that looks very much like it). It seems to happen sporadically too. I don't think it's my connection as this has happened now on my work PC, my home PC and even my phone.
Microsoft has rolled out data encryption with "bring your own keys" HSM encryption based on military grade Thales HSM systems to store certificates without Microsoft or anyone you don't want having access to them
I just hope that the MoD aren't relying on this 'HSM in the cloud' that Microsoft seem to provide. Otherwise they're still relying on hardware provided by and run by a 3rd party.
I know that there is plenty of cooperation with the US. That said shouldn't the government here be more careful than to use a US based service when the US response to the concern of non-US citizens/organisations being spied upon is little more than 'screw you'?
I wonder: is having an ex-employee from Google working for HMG the quid-quo-pro for employing an ex-ICO staffer at Google?
There are previous patterns that also suggest that this revolving door exists: just ask Patricia Hewitt, Norman Lamont, Ian Livingston and BT.
Re: Open internet
And Google certainly does a lot of lobbying.
I wonder how much they'd be prepared to spend over here?
Re: From a network's point of view...
I can easily imagine this extending to online services like Netflix, especially since they've already been seen to capitulate to the likes of Verizon.
(in my case probably not a lot!)
But then that's the advantage of giving the option of paying but not forcing it: those that don't want to pay for access could continue to view the version with the adverts. People willing to pay would get the opportunity to get rid of them without any possibility of feeling guilty about it. In both cases the website remains accessible to everybody.
I'd pay the content provider but paying the advertiser to not advertise? Bollocks.
That's not what I was suggesting. It would be the website not the advertiser that gets the money.
Re: Operators blocking ads
...and then offering the option to remove those additional ads as an extra paid for service...
"I don't like ads and I demand free content!"
How about 'I don't like ads and am willing to pay'?
The argument that it will either be free or won't survive isn't really that realistic IMO. Services like Spotify prove that, with people willing to go beyond the freemium model and pay for the service. Netflix and Amazon Instant take this even further since they have no free option and yet they are still a success.
Lack of advertising does not necessarily equate to lack of success, and advertising is not the sole form of funding available.
I've suggested this before for this site. There shouldn't be a pay wall but why not at least offer the choice to users to pay to remove all advertising and any scripts related to that? Unfortunately nothing seems to have happened with that idea. Which is a pity since I probably spend more time here than on the newspaper websites. If I'm willing to pay for those then why should come as such a surprise I'd be willing to pay for this too?
Re: to advertisers...
What I don't get is why people think the death of advertising will automatically be a bad thing. It may or may not be, but what people tend to forget is that we end up paying one way or the other.
Do you think that the CEO of Microsoft is personally paying for all that advertising or is he handing the cost on to his customers? We end up paying for 'free' services one way or another, just in ways that tend to be more opaque and more difficult to measure.
You're assuming I'm using the DNS server provided by my ISP. I'm not.
For that matter just because they use the information for a legitimate purpose does not automatically give them the right to extend that usage to cover whatever they deem fit.
URLs *ARE* part of the content.
Don't believe me? Take something like acme.com?userid=99&fn=Joe&ln=Bloggs. Are you honestly going to tell me that contains no personal information or content of the communication?
URLs can often include PII (and for that matter even the domains in question can reveal to some extent what you're doing online, since they would all need to be checked to see if they fall within a set of listed domains).
Presumably this would involve both the interception and examination of personal communications.
This is a value added service, and as such would presumably require the explicit and informed consent of the users concerned.
Come to think of it, wouldn't that sort of interception require permission from both sender and recipient? Too often the sender is ignored in this equation, and their rights forgotten for the sake of expediency.
In addition when it comes to filtering, more often than not the interception occurs even when the filtering is turned off. Bluecoat based filtering would be a good example of this. Can we be certain that the interception that forms the basis of the blocking will also be off when the blocking is switched off?
That'll teach me to make those sorts of comments then. That seems to work. You learn something every day.
Although it does strike me as being a little counter-intuitive.
The new tab icon IMO relates to tabs within the same window, and there is no reason offhand why people would be looking there if their intention is to create a separate window. If I have the list of apps open to select an app for the other area of the desktop, then why go back to the same copy of IE already open rather than open a separate IE window when the IE icon is tapped a second time?
Re: How does it compare
You mean the one with only one port, forcing people to buy yet another adapter for functionality that should have been there from the start?
And the battery life? How did it perform? And the overheating that seems to plague the larger Surface Pro 3? Does this have the same issue?
And the weight? (no idea about this one, but with the SP3 the weight made it uncomfortable to use as a tablet for any real length of time)
I have yet to try a surface 3, but if the surface pro 3 is anything to go by I found myself making more typos using the keyboard cover than with a 'proper' keyboard. I would imagine that the same would happen here (no mention either that an SP3 keyboard cover can be used here, albeit it with the size difference making it awkward to use as a cover, nor of the pen not coming as standard as with the SP3 - so that's ~£50 more if you want that too). Incidentally one other quirk I found with the SP3 and I imagine exists with the S3 too is that the F keys often relate to windows shortcuts rather than the functionality they're supposed to represent. Just try pressing F5 when in a browser for an example of this. It would be nice to have F keys that actually work as F keys.
As for style, the covering on my SP3 is unscratched after 6 months. I couldn't say the same of my ipad mini 3 within a few days, or my ipad 4. The metal covering on those looks gorgeous, but is far too easy to damage.
With regards to web browsing, the TIFKAM version of IE might be more finger friendly, but just try docking it to one side and opening another window to dock on the other. It can't be done. At least with the desktop variant you can have more than one window open (another niggle with TIFKAM in my opinion is the way the desktop fills the entire window when you've docked a window to one side and tap the empty area to open something to fill it - this interrupts what's going in within the frame that's already docked, so why not just fill up the empty area?)
Unless things have changed in the surface 3 then are you sure about establishing wifi connections? I set mine up on the SP3 using the charm bar on the right. One such explanation was found here:
Surface 3 pro != Surface 3.
The Surface 3 is essentially a cheaper version of the SP3. A sort of netbook equivalent to the laptop that that SP3 is supposed to be.
Any chance of a Surface 3 review?
Is there any chance of somebody on your end reviewing this any time soon?
As a Surface 3 Pro owner I'd be particularly interested to hear how well it deals with cooling. The Surface Pro 3 certainly hasn't scored well in that area. My own unit - an i5 rather than i7 device - tends to get very toasty just from playing solitaire.
Forget any chance of playing World of Warcraft too (something that my 8 year old netbook could do, albeit only on the lowest settings).
From what I understand the i7 variant performed even worse than that, going as far as shutting down when overheating sometimes, and throttling the CPU on many others, meaning that it ended up being slower than it's cheaper i3 variant.
But I digress: is there any chance of reviewing the surface 3?
They have been able to do so to some degree for quite some time. Google the term 'statuatory instrument' if you don't believe me.
Re: Well, what a surprise!
Grayling as justice secretary was a great fan of this. He even managed the trick of getting his changes thrown out in court because they conflicted with changes he himself had previously put in place.
'It's not illegal when the government does it'.
Sounds like something Nixon would say.
It's difficult to see this happen without the HRA repeal (DRIPA was an 'emergency' response after the EU's DRD was ruled illegal if you recall).
I would suggest that anybody interested in the prospect of the HRA read this:
Re: Define 'extremist'.
Teresa May: "we are one nation"
Is it just me or would that sound better in its native German?
Perhaps we can at least get our own back on MPs the next time they break the spirit rather than the letter of the law (expenses specifically come to mind, as does the likes of Adam Werritty).
That's something we've certainly one area where we've been far too passively tolerant.
Repealing the HRA look likely to be doomed at best and questionable at worst thanks to devolution (and here I was never thinking I'd be thankful for the SNP).
Given that rather large bump in the road that the government has yet to find a way around, how do they plan to put this into action and make it legal with regards to human rights that we have at present?
Teresa May can't. And that should tell you all you need to know.
Re: What good will it do?
They COULD hand it over, but just because the US government tells them to, wont mean that they aren't breaking laws in Europe to transfer that data over.
Most such demands come with gagging orders. Breaking the law is easy when nobody knows it's happening.
As for data being stored in Ireland, has any assurance been given that employees in the US won't be able to access it remotely? Without that assurance the location of the server or who it's being managed by is irrelevant.
As things stand US company = US law. If safe harbour isn't acceptable then neither is using a US company for services.
We can't tell you how many PCs run XP because 'national security'
Re: While the salary is attractive
I hear things aren't so good at GCHQ (where black hats are white hats only because the government say so)
Re: Non-Americans can sort themselves out. Sorry.
Part of the problem though is that it's not just the location that needs to be considered. If it was the case then the whole issue surrounding Microsoft and servers in Ireland would never have arisen.
Re: If the board of BT plc won't invest in a demerged Openreach....
The successful private ownership under regulation, of water and sewerage networks, gas and electricity grids shows that the required results can be delivered
Are they really such desirable results though?
<Glances at the bills that always seem to go up, even when the prices of gas and electricity go down>
That's not to say that this isn't the right thing to do, I'm just not so sure using the gas and electricity providers as an example is really such a good idea.
Google the name 'Charles Farr' for one such example.
Present in both Labour and Conservative governments and generally supportive it seems of what has ended up in the 'Snoopers Charter'.
Re: Jackboots and Jodhpurs anyone?
The question remains therefore why the conservatives are so keen to allow it again?
Re: Jackboots and Jodhpurs anyone?
@Yugguy Yes, after it was blocked by un-elected peers despite overwhelming support from elected MPs after free votes on the subject.
Seems like an appropriate use of the Parliament Act to me. Out of curiosity what part of that did you object to?
Re: Jackboots and Jodhpurs anyone?
Funny you should mention jodhpurs - one of the first things they started talking about was making fox hunting legal again.
There's nothing like getting your priorities straight is there?
Re: The Bedroom Tax Man cometh
David Davis seems to be concentrating on the EU referendum at the moment. Funny how the EU manages to distract so many MPs...
Re: It's hard to believe he has any real respect for the rule of law.
...But at least we now haven't got Grayling in charge of the "Ignore all the experts in the legal system" department.
Didn't Gove adopt a similar attitude when at the Dept. for Education?
Re: WooHoo! @big_ted
As justice secretary though wouldn't he be involved in discussions surrounding the legal ramifications of any change?
This is the same Michael 'Mrs Blurt' Gove that put so much effort into avoiding the Freedom of Information act. Now he's in charge of it.
It's hard to believe he has any real respect for the rule of law.
Maybe I should just install an ad-blocker and be done with it...
A new advertising low on this site
Providing adverts before even showing me the headlines? Seriously?
Re: @AC (the fucking idiot) @fruitoftheloon @Rich 11
I never claimed Labour came up with the idea - it was however their idea to abuse it to the extent that they did.
Re: @AC (the fucking idiot) @fruitoftheloon
At some point, IT HAS TO BE PAID BACK
I'm surprised no mention of Labour's bright idea of using PFI hasn't been made yet. We'll be paying off the millions of debt created by that for generations to come, even within the NHS (I wonder how many are now experiencing issues because of it?)
My favourite Guardian bit is from here:
To be fair that was in the opinion section, which is rather different to the front page of any newspaper.
Re: So this article is basically saying the traditional print media in this country is crap?
Isn't the independent owned by a Russian oligarch? Cameron isn't relying on non-doms for support surely?
...or the parties themselves are crap.
One side likes to spend too much and doesn't know when to stop (but tries to pretend it does whilst ignoring the bills pouring through the letterbox) whilst the other prefers to hack away at the public finances with all the appearance of glee and a maniacal laugh (until voters realise what a mistake they made and that side have to be dragged kicking and screaming away from the bloody corpse of what used to be the public sector).
Oh, and of course there's a 3rd side too, but they don't really count as they'll just end up supporting one of the two others.
And they all want to sacrifice our freedoms (even the lib dems - just look at how they voted on DRIPA).
They're all as bad as each other - just in different ways.
I know that to expect this not to happen is naive, but nevertheless I can't shake the impression that any journalist that does more than report the news is getting ideas above their station - regardless of who it is they're trying to support.