Re: I thought was part of Office365...
>Oh, Wait, we use Excel to manage our project times where I work...
Isn't that what MS Project is? Excel with some cut & paste macros?
4970 posts • joined 4 Dec 2007
>Oh, Wait, we use Excel to manage our project times where I work...
Isn't that what MS Project is? Excel with some cut & paste macros?
I've seen businesses not purchase cheaper CPU's because they don't want to be running "unsupported" hardware.
I was going to rubbish it, then I saw vmware bork my vmplayer install with an update which decided that, after many years of running happily, my laptop wasn't good enough, despite adding no detectable beneficial features.
That isn't a business risk I would take, though I did *cough*howmuchiswindowsactuallycostingyou*cough*
>When one cloud "attacks" another cloud it's called a thunderstorm
And both sides are trying to tell you that, for some unknowable reason, their cloud is better than the other one, and therefore worthy of your cash.
Personally, I recommend not throwing things into a cloud. Its just fog which prevents you from seeing properly and has been put so far away that it looks pretty rather than grey and wet.
If you actually keep track of what you are doing with your data rather than sticking it all in a foggy place and hoping for magic unicorns to defend you, you'll do better.
I think the key bit is owning your own authentication rather than deferring to a provider.
This is the scary bit about MS' Azure, "sign in with facebook," "sign in with google" etc. These major platforms are attempting to own the authentication, which gives them control over the interaction. Obviously not the details, but if the application only uses "sign in with google" and you don't implement anything else, google are the gatekeepers and can collect data on your interactions.
I set up MS SASL with an external provider and it was... non-trivial. We need something which is easier. And we need a mechanism where corporate firewalls and proxy interception don't void the security.
Best explanation of the cloud ever: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFdZWgiAj8I
Audio is NSFW.
>A substantial part of the funding for Leave in the Brexit vote has been declared illegal and the person who gave the cash has been fined but those who received it have not and the referendum decision stands.
And do all the anti-Leave articles from the BBC count as "election contributions"?
Foreign kleptocrats - would that include Juncker? Are we concerned with the foreign powers who might possibly somehow, in some ill-defined manner, benefit from the Brexit, or the foreign powers currently actually receiving our net contribution to the EU?
>something a bit more serious that "be excellent to each other" seems like a good idea.
Actually, no it isn't. It is far more inclusive and all-encompassing than the limited categories in the CoC.
The problem with the CoC is not so much with the words but with the spirit. It betrays an obsession with feelz and a demand for ideological purity which many people find revolting. You don't need a CoC to deal with what is illegal. The CoC is a indicative of a desire to turn things which are not the law, into effective law. If you can be kicked out because you called someone "fat" despite making valuable code contributions, it indicates that that code contributions are valued less than all those listed things in the CoC: age, body size, disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, level of experience, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
So you can't say, "oh, typical Yank!" or you can be thrown out.
There's a lot of typical SJW stuff in there. It's mostly obsessed with sex, race and gender. Since this won't be showing up in code, it betrays a desire to control people outside of the code contributions. To punish people for wrong-think and the expression of bad thoughts. Can you express thoughts regarding illegal immigration without falling foul of this?
Again, it isn't the really the contents that are the problem, everyone should be complying with this. The problem is its enforcement and the threat of exclusion for non-compliance. There is a reason we don't put this stuff into law - it is impossible to objectively and sensibly enforce it. Where it is put into law, it leads to ridiculous oppression and partisan behaviour.
>Short of imposing authentication and magically abolishing crap passwords, can the bots be stopped?
The problem is that it turns out that strong mobile authentication invades privacy and we have fewer and fewer reasons to trust the large providers. Until we sort out the privacy issue, we will have a problem.
It might be simple, such as a vpn back to a home router or a remote control mozilla instance, or it could be something a little more advanced, such as a new email client which provides a facebook-like interface to an imap server. Posts are emailed, which increases traffic volumes. but adverts disappear.
Because Intel does high-power systems well and DC's keep their CPUs busy. They do not race to idle.
3 years - 5% of life, car crushed-may be 50% of annual income.
That's too much.
This case is not, oh no we wiz hacked, it's just more profitable not to be careful than implement good practices.
That won't change until there is a credible deterrent.
>Though if AC was black I imagine he could pretty easily find a lawyer willing to take the case, and the business would be willing to settle to avoid the publicity of the accusation even if that had nothing to do with the firing
I wonder if this leads to employers not hiring black people, in order to avoid the lawsuits which may result if they ever have to let them go? What if anti-bigotry legislation creates a valid business case for not hiring female, black transexuals? That would be ironic.
>No matter how you put it, it is the consumers that end up paying anyway. If they pay Netflix more since they have to pay the ISP or they simply pay the ISP directly does not matter.
The problem is not so much the payments as the market distortion. The payment may be the same, but the benefit goes to Netflix alone. The problem is that it makes the large content providers the ISPs' customers and they own the bandwidth instead of the internet users. That means new content providers will be locked out of bandwidth availability. Internet users will have no choice but to pick the streaming providers which have agreements with their ISP because no-one else (or at least new providers) will not be able to compete. It locks in the big incumbants.
That is unacceptable and it gets even worse when there is a lack of competition in the ISP market.
I understand Trump's desire for deregulation, but that really needs to be predicated on the availability of competitive markets, not just making markets "free."
>let the next generation follow wherever their hearts lead them.
Wait, what? Do they not have the choice now?
It seems to me they have the choice, and they don't like programming. I've never met a parent who freaked out over their child's choice of toys. The only people who seem to freak out are those who see girls playing with Barbies and boys playing with cars in a way which undermines their ideologies.
If you think men and women should be equally represented in a field because they are the same, what's the point of diversity? They are all the same so there is nothing to be gained.
Hmmm, at least half-life had 3d textures...
>Sadly, I think it's more serious than just silly; it's neurotic
Not only neurotic, its plain wrong.
I absolutely do want a master/slave relationship in my code. If my slave code develops a penchant for doing its own thing and runs off to Canada, I'm in big trouble and the code will be... erased.
>Having a hard time seeing the logic in that, is it because 'Max' is (usually) a male name?
Maybe Max doesn't self identify with the gender binary.
Please report to your nearest
gulag reprogramming centre.
>That is nuts
I see you didn't reference the Washington Post article itself anywhere, so let me help:
The actual headline is: "Another hurricane is about to batter our coast. Trump is complicit."
Given the meaning of the word "complicit," I would suggest that the above headline does indeed imply Trump is responsible for the hurricane. Unless of course, they are talking about two completely different things and have then put them side by side to create an illusion. Surely they wouldn't be that disingenuous, would they?
Regardless of what the article might say, it is pretty difficult to suggest they aren't trying to assign some responsibility for hurricanes to Trump. Even if you agree that "He plays down humans’ role in increasing the risks, and he continues to dismantle efforts to address those risks" and you totally agree with the most alarming AGW predictions, I'm not sure that the last two years over-rides everything that has happened since the industrial revolution began. But maybe it does, maybe he is the evil god of hurricanes.
When your newspaper headlines make concerns about chemicals turning the frogs gay look sane, I think it is safe to say it isn't the president who is shredding the reputation of the mainstream media.
>Who would have imagined that if you leave a club then you have to give up all the benefits of being a member?
I doubt many people care about it. What I find interesting is tagging on the "European values" element. This isn't about geography or jurisdiction, this is just the latest in ideological enforcement. Even if you are in France or Germany, if you don't exhibit "European values" it looks as though you can lose your domain.
Toe the ideological line or lose your internet presence no matter which email or web host you use. This goes far further an a twitter or facebook ban, this links political compliance and ideology with DNS. I wouldn't touch it with a Dutch barge-pole.
They've made .eu utterly toxic. I'd recommend ditching them as fast possible regardless of what country you're in.
Don't forget the increased incidence of Bubonic Plague!
I was going to tag on additional global warming / climate change / hurricanes, but it appears that's Trump's fault.
>That's not egg...
It's hair gel.
It isn't difficult to see another attempt to create an all-seeing eye. This is not about pron. This is about control of the internet.
Perhaps rather than bicker of tech, we should be asking why we regulated the telecommunications services and then ask if the reasoning still applies in the new scenario.
If you want to talk about quality guarantees, yes, the internet opens you up to (D)DOS over which the VoIP provider has no control, but if we are talking, "critical communications service pricing" then that is different.
As per usual, Cloud also fouls things up. What we really want is to be able to configure packet filters, preferably at the ISP-end, so I can block volumetric attacks if I so choose. If all my controls have shifted to the API layer, that is going to be computationally expensive to do and will require expensive colo/IaaS.
>One problem is that a huge number of US citizens do not understand that THEY (and US manufacturing, etc.) are the ones paying the tariffs.
"THEY" are the only ones who pay tax in any scenario.
As someone said, "The government doesn't have money of its own, it only has your money."
The real question is, "Who is affected and how?"
My personal thought is that being large enough to become a multinational should not allow you to gain either short or long-term tax benefits relative to domestic companies.
"They then ran the sentences through Google Translate, via API, to see how Google's language model assigned gendered pronouns"
You'd think the university undergrads would be more tolerant of colour-diverse companies. Then I saw how these bigots only considered male, female and neuter options. Gender-fluids didn't get on a seat at the table and there was not a single two-spirit to be seen.
No need to call the new ghost-busters. The beams are already crossed.
>Not our fault. Your fault.
Correct. And that's not a lesson that's likely to be forgotten or which will engender gratitude from the learners.
Open source. No Cloud.
One man's troll is another man's satirist.
Are WWE performers trolling?
The cannon approach what they did to infowars last week, but unlike the real world, digital things can be infinitely cloned. Not only does it not really work (which is why I assume video-carrying social media acted as a cartel) but it brings the spotlight onto the problems of having morality police. I think that was probably a strategic mistake for both social media and the governments who push for viewpoint policing.
I have no love or interest in infowars, but I take a great interest in what government and corporations think they should be able to do and this is not it.
They know quite well what the decisions imply. They just choose to ignore it.
Hence skype is no longer p2p, Large corporates will always try to make money and they will comply with the law. Combine legal requirements with financial self interest and you have a winner.
The "you will not tell your tell anyone" provisions is for the corporate's benefit, not Australians.
There are still problems. Obviously on-prem kit has to go. We can't have that messing up our surveilance. Cloud it is, then.
>The isn't accusing anyone nor convicting them.
Not effectively quite true.
Parole is part of it so it is effectively judging the likelihood of a future transgression and altering the sentence based on that.
A longer non-parole period based on reoffending rates could be seen as effectively an extra conviction.
Moreover, a judge may be questioned over his reasoning. Not only is the software unquestioned, but the fewer humans making the decisions, the less training data is available which isn't creating a feedback loop.
This needs to stop.
I set up postfix, dovecote on a core2 duo. Let's encrypt deals with the certificate issue.
Surprisingly little spam too, even without any clever spam filtering.
Mostly I see smtp auth attempted on port 25, but no one seems to bother with 587.
I too got the blocked access message from google for another account. They wanted my telephone number. That behaviour just speeds my migration.
The aim is market segmentation, not customer satisfaction.
When the question is, "what can we produce which will be cheap but not destroy our more expensive products' market share" your corporate culture is going to kill your business.
Actually, I don't think MS could win here anyway. They have built such a strong Windows-PC-for-Business-and-Gaming brand that anything which doesn't meet that expectation of performance will cause the product to fail.
If I were them, I'd leverage the xbox brand for consumers. "Xbox-Tablet" and hide all the Windows branding and styling. Windows is toxic for a home brand. That's a "work" system with associated with 9-5 work, corporate control (no screensaver changes for you and you will have the corporate logo on the desktop - in case you don't know who you work for), A/V software run amok and arcane system controls.
>Why not treat it a such?
Shock horror! People on the internet don't always tell the truth!
From what I can tell it is basically FB's self-promotion. "Look at us, we can fix elections. Sorry about the last one, we'll try to make sure the other party wins next time."
El Reg's own look at the "Russian meddling" showed it to be quite inconsequential.
The looks more like a power-grap by politicians rather than anything which could ever hope to be either desirable or workable.
I also went the BSD/Opnsense route (r), ditching the telstra thingy.
The thing is, for most of these rubbish things, they aren't modified once installed, so why not put a separate admin port in which doesn't forward traffic? Then the attack surface and bad press is vastly reduced.
I have to agree with you here.
The US military hegemony is so large, expecting a 19th century meeting on a battlefield is ridiculous. The only way to win is to make the cost of war unacceptable to your opponents. In the case of the US, that means ensuring that the true (or exaggerated) civilian cost is publicised to the US voters.
The US strategy is to minimise the loss of US life with overwhelming firepower. Their opponents strategy is to make every US strike an expensive one. I'm sure Sun Tzu would have something to say about using your enemy's strength against them.
Perhaps, rather than debating military strategy, we should be examining the civilian political decisions which lead to fighting.
What makes you think compromise is possible?
I don't see how the eu could compromise. If they did, everyone would vote to leave to get a better deal.
The EU doesn't want to be an association of nations, it wants to be one nation. It's in the eu charter - "ever closer union." A successful brexit will be a political disaster for them - something along the lines of Texas seceding from the US, except that the eu is far shakier. Most of the countries have fought each other for many hundreds of years. No one thinks of themselves as European first and Greek or Spanish second and they have no real interest in helping each other.
I don't think either side should expect a deal that goes beyond an agreed transition to WTO rules.
And "Brexit means Nothing" May needs to go if we aren't going to spend tmore ime messing around.
>"Software and subscription access."
>Not for me.
Indeed. A Netflix sub might have something new in the future that I want. I have no interest in a new version of MSOffice. If Netflix just keeps churning out Oceans remakes, no-one will keep paying. And quite right too.
The whole reason for these subs is that people saw no value in upgrades - at least, not enough value to spend the cash.
New stuff used to be better stuff for the user. Not anymore. Now its just, "keep ms in business" stuff.
Actually if you use proper 2fa like securid with physical tokens and you run a proper vpn, then most of these problems evaporate.
Ah, you don't want to spend on security? It's slightly inconvenient? Well now we know how much your company values the services it exposes.
IMAP is legacy? Ok you should run it over tls but that would seem to be a disingenuous distinction.
I have noticed recently that start menu searching for "update" gets you nothing, but searching for "windows update" finds the "are we up to date" control. They seem to be progressively hiding more stuff.
I know people who love onedrive but I hate it. Isn't it supposed to be a local cache? Why is it always so much slower than a normal file system for reading even when fully synced?
Linux services for windows? Who will that please? Someone with an irrational fear of vmplayer?
Win10 may be used for work, but at home I fire it up every few months to run windows update and the odd game of defense grid awakening which was sadly never ported.
Then you should be banned from the internet. We should be able to trust all things which have "news" in the name!
I'm sure that will fix everything.
>"Try The Sermon on the Mount next. It will be *correctly identified* as communist propaganda by nearly any ML system trained to identify one."
I visited Moscow in 1981 and went to a Christian church there. The whole service was recorded by the State for monitoring. (Oh, hello Facebook, Siri, Google...) because there were restrictions on free speech and what could be said in the sermon. Afterwards, church leaders suddenly surrounded us and wouldn't let anyone near us. The "secret" police (they were pretty obvious in following us around while we were there) had arrived and anyone seen talking to us would be visited that evening. The leaders were used to it, but they didn't want random congregation members to have to go through that process.
I'm generally not a fan of argument by "lived experience" so I'll also recommend people who think Christianity is close to socialism, national socialism, or nationalism read some history and literature.
I noted the story above because one of the problems with centralised systems is that they prove irresistible to those wishing to to play with the levers of power. I have to disagree with El Reg. The problem is not that Facebook has some way to go in fine-tuning its hate-speech take-down algorithms. The problem is much bigger and illustrates fundamental flaws at many levels:
Hate-speech is subjective and ill-defined. How could you imagine that you could code an algorithm for a task when you have no idea what the data looks like or quantify the results if the results are feelings?
Even if we could define hate-speech, we would need algorithms which could understand human language (or in a multi-national context, multiple languages). Star Trek isn't real, so that isn't a thing we have the technical capability of doing. Pretending we can do it, like all lies, will have a bad outcome.
Why do we allow Facebook (and the other tech giants) to have the ability to take down business? There seems to be far too much willingness to allow this to continue. If the content is so bad, why doesn't FB just automatically remove it, rather than putting the onus back on the content owner, and then taking down all of their content if they don't comply? This seems like FB trying to manipulate content producers rather than FB's professed motives of "protecting the targets of hate-speech."
I'm somewhat disappointed that El Reg has joined the ranks of think stuff on a computer screen causes riots in India, Sri Lanka or anywhere else. It does not. We should not be complicit in pressuring social media to accept responsibility for this stuff. After I read something on a computer screen, no matter what it is, I have a choice about whether or not I go out and burn a random car, or loot a shop. No-one forces me to go out and do that, in fact force is applied in the opposite direction. What makes me choose a path of action is my value system. That is what needs examination.
That brings me to my final point: We need to talk about values. This also applies to "religion." At its basic functional level, religion is what you hold to be the highest good which drives your behaviour. It could be the Bible, Koran, Das Kapital, Mein Kampf, or the writings of Voltaire, Germaine Greer, Plato, Hitchens or Dawkins. The ideas contained in these writings are mutually exclusive and trying to pretend they are all the same is ignorance of the data. The books are just the recorded speech communicating ideas. We need to stop saying "religion" (someone-else's belief) is bad in order to shut down the debate. We need to be precise and identify the (religious/driving) belief which is causing the bad behaviour. If you think Christianity is bad, identify the value it promotes which you disagree with. Which one of Jesus' assertions on the sermon on the mount do you think is evil and why? What Islamic or Buddhist ideas do you disagree with? If we are to be able to co-exist with people we disagree with, we need to ensure that our understanding of them is correct and we need to be able to identify concrete issues about which we can argue merits. Assertions that "you value system is rubbish" cannot convince the holder of that value system of where they might be wrong because it is so vague there is no logic which can be applied and both sides are likely to try to fall back on coercion as the behaviour modifier. That is not a good outcome. As the world shrinks, culture and beliefs need to be up for debate. If we are unable or unwilling to identify good things and bad things, how can we improve the world?
Then I name the next version of linux, "hedgehog".
Oh wait, there's that init replacement thingy...
I name the next version of BSD, "hedgehog".
I think Range headers can have multiple parameters - you can ask for Range P1-P2, P3-P4, P5-P6 parts of a document.
I seem to think this caused security problems some time ago when bounds checking was poor and a single request could be used to amplify the reply by requesting the same thing multiple times, use negative ranges (give me a range backwards) etc.
We can have nice things. Just not from MS. They are too busy working on locking in all authentication - internal and SaaS/business-to-business with AzureAD - browser issues are nothing compared to that horrific idea.
"And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name." - Rev 13:17
>you plug it into the USB port ...and the laptop runs forever
You bought one of those silly new MacBooks?
>The demand for 100Mbps has been falling since day 1 and since 2014 hasn't been above 15%.
Speed != bandwidth
Selling speed tiers is stupid. Get the bits off the nbn network and onto the users’ networks as fast as possible. Even streaming video doesn’t take that much. Sell the data cap instead. That provides the cash for total capacity.
I think Huawei is talking about carrier class kit, not phones.
In which case, yes, the allegations don’t appear substantiated.
All android phones snitch - that is their purpose. Carrier kit, not so much. Even so, if you aren’t securing your data from your carrier, you aren’t doing it right.
It’s just protectionism. It breeds inefficiency and increased costs for the protected side. You’re welcome to your Cisco sfp and ram prices.
>Morrow doesn't understand gamers don't use the bandwidth, video streaming does.
Unless the Steam sale is on...
Did they build much, or did they just buy and try to integrate?
They should have gone with gigabit fibre and sold data volumes.
Trump Derangement Syndrome?
Maybe there are lots of other people worth snooping on in the Whitehouse vicinity.
Most of the honey is close to the queen bee. Only bee-keepers are interested in the queen herself.
1. Why would a national security agency be dealing with child abuse? That seems like using the army for police work. Shouldn't they just provide training, rather than change the law?
2. Why would they be dealing with child abuse in someone else's jurisdiction? Shouldn't they pass the data to the relevant authorities rather than going all vigilante?
3. What is the limiting principle? Child abuse? Spouse abuse? 50 Shades re-enactments? Bullying? Kids calling each other mean names?
4. Is the course of action in using the ASD proportional to the stated problem? How many incidents of child abuse where the asd helped using a cyber-attack, occurred last year?
5. Can they explain how taking out a media server mitigates the stated problem of child abuse? Even if it was a live event, even if the ddos was successful, how is the child rescued from harm?
Preliminary analysis: Liars.
And when we are talking about the State, dangerous liars.
>Hello? Hardware? Built into the chip??
It would have been prudent to put the code out there in an emulator format before they baked it in.
But regardless, put your $%^#^ VM on-prem, not under someone-else's kit.
It is far cheaper and far safer than everything you need to do to mitigate the stupid cloud decision.
I think the commenter meant "editor" rather than "publisher."
If they curate content beyond what is required by law, safe-harbour should not apply and they should be liable for the content under their curator-ship.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018