...no political overtones here at all.
819 posts • joined 11 Jan 2008
...no political overtones here at all.
The self-destruction "feature" is familiar to poor sods using Lotus Notes for email; indeed screen grabs may be the only way to keep an email indefinitely, since no-copy also means no-print. In practice it becomes a bug when somebody sends a self-destroying email that contains information that is needed for future reference or subject to a legal retention requirement. I'm not sure that the "GMAIL ate my homework" argument is going to work in court.
I think that old email from Google about "don't be evil" has self-destructed.
"The only difference is that our details won’t be available for anyone to access."
Exactly. So the public isn't able to discover who registered dodgybusiness.com without expensive and cumbersome due process. That seriously reduces consumer protection. Privacy is a two-edged sword and GDPR doesn't seem to recognise it. Fraudsters are pleased.
"the stable operation of the Internet's unique identifier systems" has been possible for many years because it's possible to discover who is (ab)using any particular registration. And contact them if necessary for operational purposes.
Changing this will make illicit or ham-fisted operations much harder to stop. It will be ironic if EU privacy rules make criminal activities easier to get away with.
Don't they need to get all registrants to sign a waiver?
"Something like a coin flip may seem random, but its outcome could be predicted if one could see the exact path of the coin as it tumbles."
Sorry, but that's plain wrong. Everything is a quantum process; there are just a zillion zillion quanta in a coin toss, but ultimately the one quantum that determines whether the coin lands heads or tails is unpredictable. (Yes, that only applies to the small fraction of coin tosses that are too close to call from Netwonian mechanics, because of measurement error, but philosophically a coin toss is just as unpredictable as the health of Schroedinger's cat, and for the same reason.)
"he was not being serious?"
Maybe not, but there are hotels and the like that NAT 188.8.131.52/24 and whose gateways sit on 184.108.40.206, so they won't be able to use this new "service".
The probe, announced today by the Communications Committee, will ask how governments should deal with the problems thrown up by the internet and the services that run on it.Not a bad response time, only about 23 years since Internet content became an issue.
What's vindictive about it? Why did anyone register in .eu in the first place? Presumably, because they were starting an EU-wide activity. If they plan to continue that activity after Brexit, they will need an office in the EU anyway, and they can switch the registration to there.
Nothing to see here, please move along.
Compared to the multitude of real economic, social and personal disasters that Brexit will cause, this is trivial.
Like causing a criminal investigation to be abandoned...?
No. Like seriously annoying the Establishment (in all 5 Eyes countries).
"How does C-level executives being formerly of significant government agencies strike you?"
It strikes me as absolutely typical in every country, especially the US. Given how the Chinese economy works, it would be amazing if it wasn't also true of many large Chinese companies.
So, it's irrelevant. Pai is a Trumpista and following the Trump line. In terms of how industrial economies work, this whole business is just self-foot-shooting.
Dear El Reg,
Official April 1st RFCs come out on April 1st a.m. (in a US time zone). Their preliminary drafts are never published on March 23rd or any other date. It's the one part of the RFC Editor's process that is kept secret and obscure.
Sometimes people who don't understand this publish joke drafts - anybody can do that, since the IETF is open to all.
Occsionally, people publish joke drafts on April 1st itself, but those are still unofficial.
None of the above is a joke. There's no icon for 'not a joke'.
"could really do Zuckwit and his company serious harm"
Am I supposed to be sorry?
Yes. A secure dollar asserts "I am me and I'm worth a dollar, just as good as any other dollar." An identity assertion says "The person known uniquely as 'Yes Me' originated this data item or session." Those are very different assertions. The dollar is self-describing and self-contained. The identity assertion depends on some trusted third-party source of the ultimate truth about 'Yes Me'.
Informed by prejudice, I think. Plenty of scientists who have worked in EU projects will tell a different story.
This whole anti brexit thing is like a whole lot of government contractors whinghing about not getting porkbarrel projects because they're not cronies of the new administration.That comment shows that you have utterly misunderstood the problems caused by Brexit. It's true that some EU-funded R&D money will be lost, which is what academics and hi-tech industries are complaining about. But that is completely secondary to the drastic fall in general trade in goods and services that would be caused by leaving the single market and by losing all the EU's international free trade agreements. The first loss is hundreds of millions, the second one is billions per year and would condemn the country to recession and poverty for at least 20 years. Enjoy, or better, cancel Brexit.
> Is there anyone who never has?
Farage? David Davis? BoJo?
> 64 bytes from edge-star-mini-shv-01-dub4.facebook.com
See that? "edge-star..." Yes, their CDN offers IPv4. You have no idea from that what they operate internally.
Yes, the front end facing the Internet needs to provide both services. But the rest of the data centre, CDN or whatever it is can be 100% IPv6 - some operators have already found this to be significantly simpler and cheaper to operate for a whole lot of reasons.
"one stack for handling IPv4 and another for IPv6"
That's an abstraction; in real life the stacks are well integrated with common code and a largely common configuration interface.
"Dealt with by one team proficient in IPv4 another trying to be in IPv6."
That would be really short-sighted. Yes, your lead engineers might be the first to get IPv6 expertise, but the goal is to have your whole ops team just as familiar with v6 as v4. Apart from being the cheapest solution, it also prevents you ending up in a few years having to fire a whole team of legacy staff who are incompetent in IPv6.
...the first serious argument for Brexit. Marginally less risk to privacy. Not that it's enough to counteract all the Brexit lie and fantasies, of course.
"Cisco may argue that it never had monopoly power or a dangerous probability of attaining monopoly power..."
Well, they may argue that but it's ludicrous; they were very close to a monopoly for many years.
How do you explain the completely different UK and US positions on use of Huawei equipment in broadband networks?Because the UK has no significant networking vendors to protect, and because they and Huawei were willing to go the extra mile to demonstrate the absence of backdoors. And BTW Cisco has sold a lot of kit in China, with features required by the Chinese government. So the American position is unfair as well as anti-competitive. The Australian position is incomprehensible, so is presumably just a matter of sucking up to the Americans.
> Exactly why do ICANN exist? Should be replaced by ITU.
I have to disagree there. ICANN should never have been set up under US jurisdiction, but equally the DNS should never be handed over to the ITU. Have you any idea how little the ITU understood the Internet in 1998, when this was a serious option? And have you any idea how they would mishandle the DNS today, in an organisation where totalitarian governments have the same voting rights as democracies?
ICANN should become an NGO in a more neutral jurisdiction; Switzerland and the Netherlands are still the obvious choices, as they were in 1998.
> Exactly why do Registrars exist? Should be done by National Comms regulator.
If you're talking about country-code registrars, their oversight is indeed a national question, and the answer will be different in each country. But registrars for the non-country-code top level domains need to be under multi-stakeholder oversight. Unfortunately, today that means ICANN.
It's greed. It's Thatcherism (or Reaganism in the case of ICANN). Or if you prefer, it's Carillionism. A public good (the national namespace) handed over to private industry.
A very black day indeed.
Tannin is correct that this problem needs to be handled in the user interface. It's simply not possible to fix it in the DNS protocol, or to a large extent in DNS registration policies. Technically, the problem is pretty much indistinguishable from "Don't be evil."
Consider that human writing systems have evolved over thousands of years, and none of them was designed for the Internet. There isn't space in this box to write a technical essay, but here is a sequence of such essays if people want gory details:
It seems to me that with the money she has in the bank already, her most rational approach to the future of IBM is to not give a flying f**k. That's the basic trouble with the grotesque amounts of money these people are paid; if they're not internally driven, why bother about another year's bonus? They already have several lotteries' worth under the mattress.
Actually IPv6 is up to about 20% (https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html) but you're right, deployment of new stuff as basic as a transport protocol takes many years. As with the French Revolution, it's too soon to tell.
Yes. I somehow failed to stop my wife's box from updating to Firefox 57 and there's been nothing but trouble since. Waterfox is your friend, for now, however. Must make sure updates are thoroughly off in T'bird. Maybe somebody can fork off a Waterbird?
I think you'll find that Canada is part of Five Eyes, and a lot of Canadian traffic runs through fibres that are south of their border with the US. So while the post was carelessly phrased, it's basically accurate. Nortel was under the same pressures as any US manufacturer.
"Its difficult to see where the IBM board of directors expect any future business to come from."
They're not there for that. They're there to ensure that Ginni and her best friends continue to buy back enough stock that their holdings and options keep them in the excessive luxury to which they are entitled. I believe it's known as "shareholder value".
Of course, eventually somebody will turn off the money tap at the mains.
And that's the point. The Leave campaign's predictions were about the effects of Brexit, not the effects of the referendum. And so is this report.
We've already seen the effects of the referendum: a large drop in the £, which also means that the stock market hasn't gone up in real terms. And many companies preparing their exit from the UK. This report is about what will happen in 2019+.
They would have to (a) grant him citizenship and (b) give him a diplomatic passport. But then he could only go to Ecuador...
"it was morally binding, if not legally so"
No. If it had been based on an honest, factual, unemotional campaign by both sides, that might have been arguable, even for a 52% vote. But since one of the campaigns was based on emotional arguments, lies and fantasies, no. Also, since Corbyn's lips muttered Remain while his body language said Leave, a fair number of Labour voters were conned into supporting UKIP. Also, it is well known that many of the Leave votes were in fact simple protest votes against the Cameron regime.
The referendum was discredited by the time the votes were counted. (And if the vote had gone 52% Remain, that would still be true, but it wouldn't matter as much; we'd simply still be dealing with UKIP as a political force, instead of planning to uninstall our international trade.)
Thanks for making it clear that we should stay in the EU, in order to improve safety standards for everybody.
The good people of Kent are looking forward to the day when both the M2 and M20 southbound are fully parked up with lorries waiting to clear Customs. The northbound lanes will be delightfully clear. Somewhere, a junior programmer will be puzzling over a faulty program written in something called RPG II that can't calulate the duty to be paid on a lorry load of HP Sauce...
He was a sole trader so... Nothing can be done until probate is sorted outHe probably didn't care. Not his problem.
As for the main story, nobody does bureaucracy and compliance as well as the British. And for some reason we've always been the most zealous implementors of every EU rule. Why do I think it will get worse if Brexit proceeds?
How you got any up votes beats me:
1) Islam isn't a race, so how can she have been suspended for a racist tweet?That really is nit-picking; the law seems to be about hate speech in general, not racism.
2) There's no such thing as "hate speech", only free speech a Lefty wants to ban.Rubbish. As others have pointed out, the German government, and the parliament that passed this law some time ago, are hardly left wing. Hate speech can come from left or right; it's speech or writing that incites hatred or prejudice. Historically it's probably been used more by the left than the right in the last 100 years, when you include the Soviet Union and the Peoples' Republic of China; but basically it's used by all kinds of rabble-rousers.
Actually her question is a very valid question: Exactly WHY is an official German police site tweeting in Arabic?Perhaps because Germany has been good enough to host a large number of Arabic-speaking refugees from war zones and wants to make them feel welcome? It's well established that countries that make refugees feel welcome and respect their culture do better at integrating them into society.
the problem is the vagueness of any definitionI think Germany has some very clear experience in this area. Yes, like pornography, there is no indisputable line, which is why some kind of judicial review is need for disputed cases, but that doesn't mean that a civilised country should just allow everything.
There are nasty bigots in most religions, no need to single out X.That's the whole point, of course. And it doesn't need to be a religion; any type of human group you care to mention would fit - nationality, gender, skin colour, language, political party...
There are nasty bigots using most programming languages, no need to single out Pythonistas.
Nevertheless, it was the neo-liberal doctrine aided and abetted by the FCC that failed to ensure local-loop competition in the US, and failed to encourage local competition between ISPs. So the US, land of the free, actually ended up with predatory regional monopolies for Internet service provision. And that wasn't the Republicans' fault at all. It goes back to the Clinton administration.
Chiming in late to observe that technology may not be political, but the way we apply technology is often highly political. So I don't think El Reg can or should avoid politics. What it should do is clearly separate news from opinion. That sometimes doesn't happen (and I criticised several of Kieran's ICANN stories for that reason). But this article is so clearly tongue in cheek that I don't see it as problematic. Not as funny as John Oliver, but in that category.
Correct. Gerstner actually understood that he was running a technology company, and listened to technologists. This did not apply to Palmisano and does not apply to Rometty. Hence the current death spiral.
Gerstner was a bit fortunate in that some of the old-style cash cow products were still viable in his time. He did try to bring on new technology, but Palmisano went the "services" route and, as you say, seemed to believe that human resources could be cut off the roll by the metre, regardless of skills and experience. Rometty learnt from him.
"Under Sam P, they cut expenses to the bone..."
Sam it was who said something like this to a collection of senior technical staff:
You don't need a PhD in Computer Science to understand the business model, a liberal arts degree is fine. Execute to the plan and we'll make the numbers.The plan of course included cutting expense and making sales. Couldn't be easier, no messy technology knowledge needed at all.
Isn't it obvious why they worked very hard to keep the share price and dividends up by buying back oodles of shares? Just look at how the senior execs, including Ginny, are compensated. I won't spell it out, because that might be libellous.
And behind this, you have to realize that your precious ICQ, HTML or whatever, is sharing all those connections with a lot of content streaming that is overwhelming a network originally conceived for discrete, discontinuous communication.Well yes, which is why the existing network neutrality provisions don't disallow traffic management mechanisms, such that capacity can be shared appropriately between streaming services and interactive services. What they forbid is discriminatory or predatory traffic management that prevents fair competition. And as others have hinted, it seems that the alt-rights now in charge don't see unfair competition as a bad thing.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018