Pigs in helicopters...
Surely we just need flaming ejector seats and we can shower the streets with bacon?
2065 posts • joined 19 May 2008
Pigs in helicopters...
Surely we just need flaming ejector seats and we can shower the streets with bacon?
It at least says which makes it easier to do the right thing.
I used to try to take backups of things I thought important before upgrades... It's easiest just to backup the whole machine now.
Rather glad I spent the couple of hours getting my docker AFP container to accept time machine connections as well as being available as a share...
TM just seem to 'just work' (TM) which is more than I can say for most backup solutions I've come across.
For my next trick I'll be getting the TM sparse bundle mounted read only on the server, so I can push copies to a remote location as well (they don't need the speed or connectivity of the local backup).
Finally getting all this stuff sorted properly.
Although with the ease of TimeMachine it hasn't actually caused me a problem at all...
I pulled the old 60GB SSD out of the ageing Mac mini, and put in a 500GB disk in it's place, leaving the 500GB original spinning rust in there as well...
On booting to the Mojave install stick and opening disk utility to decide what to do it took one look at the disks and made a brand new fusion drive out of them - wiping both - without asking me.
Time machine backup pulled into a newly excluded directory so no actual data loss, but it was a very odd moment.
Centrifugal force is quite correct - although often misunderstood...
It is what happens when you solve newtonian mechanics in a rotating frame of reference.
If you solve in a static frame the centrifugal force won't appear, but you will have a pile of other things to consider (like very high lateral velocity), and the diagram becomes much more complex.
An orbit can be easily viewed in a rotating frame of reference (just assume the earth is a perfect sphere, so you don't mind it slipping backwards).
That's a bit of a stretch...
The iPhone 6 is, so it's in the *body* of a four year old design (which means that cases etc still fit), but there is a *little* more to designing a phone than drawing a rectangle and rounding off a few corners.
15 Million victims, £500k fine
That's not £30 per victim - it's thruppence.
"What you choose to tell service providers is your mother's maiden name can be a secret. If you want it to be."
You know that, I know that, most people here know that...
But the general population doesn't.
And the insistence on using such data from 'trusted' institutions (like banks and the tech giants) means that people just answers...
Stop treating my mother’s maiden name like it’s some kind of secret.
Free it from the scopes of CALEA?
I like my hearing aids - they work very well as BT headphones...
I don't understand why you can't get something of the same design (RIC, open dome, behind the ear) which is a dedicated headset.
Never come across anything so comfortable for long term use - and so good at giving me audio information.
Now there is some leakage, but then most people's ear buds leak like crazy as well...
The ears are being hidden, not the notch.
Just needs a two step status bar... Clock, network and battery notification in the ears - the actual status bar beneath that is then able to display more of whatever you want on it...
HMRC doesn't - but they aren't all taxed done by declaration in the most part anyway?
Shouldn't be that hard to audit
It's all in the sales - some percentage of adverts that aren't geographically limited, and all the revenue from those which are limited to UK users/geographies
... at the point of display, not sale.
FB et. al. Know exactly where their ads are displayed, and how much each has cost an advertiser. So tax it at that end instead.
Agreed - but there are occasions when people manage to run code anyway.
This is a failure in the next layer of defence - someone who conned your software (via a buffer overflow, or whatever) into running software shouldn't be able to get more rights on the system than that software had initially...
I might want a week or so with the Galileo team...
And some tea and biscuits.
The answer will be - its stupidly impractical for a single small country.
It's the details of the report that need fleshing out...
Why does an infotainment system need a connection to the rear of the car...
If it has its own GPS chip then that covers basically everything it needs,
Why would they be related to the self driving at all...
They don't need any connection to the rest of the car.
You write a cheque out...
To the wrong payee, with different amounts in words and numbers, and signed by someone obscure.
Bonus points if you still have an old chequebook for an account long closed (even more if the bank has closed down).
When voting on a mobile phone there is no possibility that you be being forced to vote for someone against your will (actually that's a problem with postal votes as well, but hey)
And they will do right until they turn off the tap, and that's a big customer to lose...
Not only is it a big customer to lose, it's also one that has the capability to develop it's own solutions, and then to sell them to your other customers as well...
JeffyPooh - I'm not a Robinson, but hey...
The point was that I think that most people have landlines which are dependent on mains power already.
One of the arguments for the POTS lines has always been that they give you a phone line which 'just works' in the event of an emergency. And a fire is one thing that is likely to take out your electricity supply. SO it doesn't really matter what the overall reliability is, the reliability * frequency of needing to call the services is a terrible measure. I don't care if a device is 99.999% reliable if the 'other bit' is inevitable when there is a situation I need to call the emergency services.
One of the issues is 'power loss can stop me calling the emergency services', and power loss is frequently associated with a fire (which is something I want to make that call for)
If most people's landlines (as I suspect) are mains dependent - then the POTS vs Fibre discussion possibly doesn't need to consider the 'power loss emergency services' issue, because it's just covered by mobile phones now.
"Worst case, there are more than several mobile phones in the house. We don't really require 99.999% reliability on our landline these days. 99.99% is fine."
Yes, but it's what causes that 0.001%.
If that is caused by fire then you *really* need it at that exact moment.
Now the other question is... how many people have a telephone that isn't dependant on the mains now? Mine is...
Maybe, but ransomware is a one time hit. If you can keep under the radar on a box you can keep it mining for a long while.
" Microsoft really doesn't care if you buy one and put Linux on it; you still gave them money in the process"
And I don't mind paying a hardware manufacturer for their hardware.
The drivers are likely to be generated in fairly short order if the hardware is any good.
So you can go an 'trust' your car, or your headphone adaptor, or your hdmi adaptor or whatever...
Because otherwise it will be turned off more than it will be turned on.
"So in what way, then, was this car "autonomous", If the "safety driver" was supposed to be watching the road and liable to have to take over at any second."
In the same way that anything autonomous is when under development and test.
You don't do a first iteration (or a second, or a hundredth) and say 'that's autonomous' and just let it out. You watch it, test it, monitor it, evaluate it...
That's the stage they're at. They just didn't have processes in place to ensure that the monitoring actually happened...
"Chances are it still would have hit her, it just may not have been instantaneous death."
Aren't the stats something like an 80% fatality rate at 30mph, and 80% survival at 20mph?
Probably a fraction better than that given modern car frontal design for pedestrian impact mitigation (I refuse to call it safety).
40mph is always going to be in the instant fatality except in rare circumstances territory.
20mph is nowhere near that - and getting that much braking done is massively valuable.
"The firm has launched a number of reviews and is also in the process of migrating its European systems to a more resilient global processing system, VisaNet."
Great - now we can stop processing transactions all over the world instead of just over here...
It's the database.
If only there was some way we could store data on the card itself, and have the important data on there both encrypted (so only readable with a pin from the card owner) and signed (so the reader can verify that the data was confirmed correct by the relevant organisation).
No need for central anything other than key distribution - all the potential benefits, with many fewer drawbacks.
If you're really ambitious you could have a number of separated data regions on the card... so you could store a relevant slice of information from NI/NHS/DVLA/HMRC on your card (and not have to have them all linked in one place elsewhere).
- The risk can be mitigated by building and managing your own sh*t. Letting others manage your stuff just makes no sense.
Well that depends on how many bits of kit you would have to manage, and how many people you have available and competent to manage them.
The risks involved in hosting your own are that you end up coming in on Monday to find everything offline because even your monitoring system has gone down. Then you have to figure out what has gone wrong where and drive round the country fixing bits...
There are risks with cloud deployments, but those risks can be measured and compared with 'in house' risks... and the balance, for some/many may well be in favour of the cloud.
No team viewer...
That’s fine. They didn’t think about an IP KVM for remote support?
"More importantly: can it fold back on itself, and be used to play Battleships in two-player mode?"
According to Linus Tech Tips - yes it can... it got called 'tent' mode rather than battleships mode though...
And the 'book' dual screen option was shown as well...
Dual screen laptops in an office make sense, most people where I work dock their laptops most of the time - so that keyboard is a waste of space most of the time.
Occasionally useful when travelling (but I still tend to take an external keyboard to put the screen far enough away).
If the clamshell can sit up in dual portrait mode....
But in currency futures saw an accountant I know put an extra zero in an order for Yennfornthebyear for a large business. Ordering hundreds of millions of pounds worth instead of tens of millions.
By the time he spotted it (end of the day) and it could be corrected (start of the next day) the currency markets had moved.... fortunately they had moved in his favour.
"Distance Selling Regs are your friend here ... use for a day or two and then if you find something annoying do a factory reset and send it back."
A "couple of days' use" is probably not what the DSR was intending. Unless there were any physical marks or other signs of use, I doubt the retailer would be able to tell and levy depreciation charges, though...
Pretty sure it's exactly what it is designed for.
Maybe a couple of days is a little over the top, but you can certainly find things out in 12 hours that you couldn't know from seeing things online...
Meh - I'll let a provider charge me £20 over three years for a phone, but not £300...
Many companies are now doing the contract and phone on separate bills even, so you can actually see what you are paying for the device and what for the airtime. At the moment my airtime is more than my device - I'm just upgrading at the moment though, so that will reverse (a combination of getting a reasonably current generation phone, and a cheaper tariff with more data/calls included).
I'm nowhere near paying £60/month though...
Probably is rather useful for something like, say, a pacemaker...
Or anything where you value consistent long term power... You'll not be recharging this battery...
It is pretty reliable - but that's why you have multiple AZ's.
You don't get to complain about an outage caused by a hard disk failure if you aren't running RAID.
If you aren't running the fault tolerant options on a cloud service... you don't get to complain about an outage that those options are designed to deal with.
"Shouldn't it depend on why they specified age limits?
If they sent out some ads targeting 22-35 and talking about how they have flex work and locations near hip downtown locations, and another ads targeting 36-50 talking about how they have on-site child care and 12 weeks paternity leave, and ads targeting 51+ talking about how they have great health care plans and allow people to transition to part time work as they approach retirement..."
Absolutely - if you have covered the whole working age range with ads then that's fine. Pretty clear that this is unlikely to be what has been done though.
Advertising in a teen mag is still visible to other people if they choose to look.
"Then you must accept the answer"
When the answer is not clear, and the decision is so asymmetric then only a fool would run with it in the way the current leadership is.
"You can still believe we would be better off in and so vote a party to rejoin."
Except that's not what I think we should do - and parties have a variety of policies which need balancing when you consider who to vote for.
Particularly difficult when you consider that where I live there is virtually no chance of the incumbent MP getting voted out, and even less chance of them getting voted out in favour of a party I'd like to see in power. SO I actually cast my vote for my second choice party, because I'd rather they got an extra MP than the party who hold this seat.
It's not nearly as simple as you seem to think... Elections are not a single policy decision, and they're not even a fair representation of people's view.
"So will the remain crowd do that?"
Will the remain crowd do what?
If the vote had been 2/3rds in either direction then I don't think there would have been that much more debate afterwards... The point is that it wasn't, there was practically nothing in it.
And rejoin != stay.
The two are fundamentally different as a result of the various exceptions we already hold (but could not possibly negotiate in any attempt to rejoin).
That's why I think leaving at this point is a mistake - it's because the decision is asymmetric.
- If we stay now, we can leave in 5-10 years.
- If we leave now, we cannot reverse that decision in 5-10 years.
General elections with a FPTP local representation and tactical voting doesn't give a particularly accurate view of what the electorate feels about the parties as a whole, let alone what they think about one specific issue.
a) My memory might be poor, but my maths is correct.
b) If it actually means apathy then you can count them for either side, you can't suggest that apathy means they only agree with you.
c) The whole point of a referendum like this was that it wasn't binding. It could easily have been written to be binding - but it wasn't. It was a proper scale opinion poll.
d) No it's not. Cameron may have claimed discontent, he couldn't point to evidence of it.
e) Non founder, but still with significant special exceptions which we will never be able to get again.
"Counting the whole population of the UK, including infants, isn't realistic. 46.5m people were eligible to vote, so claiming 65.6, as your baseline is nonsense."
Why not. Does the decision only affect those who are registered to vote?
I said (wrongly) 1/6th of the country. Not of the registered voters.
I should have said <25%, rather than ~1/6th.
Farage himself said:
(Mirror interview published online 22:00, 16 MAY 2016)
"In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the Remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it."
Interesting that he didn't consider the option of the Leave campaign winning by enough margin to 'end it'
>> Not half the country. About 1/6th if it.
> 53% of 74% is not 1/6th. If that's an example of remainer maths then it doesn't bodw well for the quality of your other arguments.
UK Population: 65million
Votes to leave: 17million
Ok, it's much closer to a quarter than I had remembered - that's a memory issue, not a maths one.
but 51.9% is not 53%, and the actual turnout was 72.2%, not 74%.
I'll assume your memory isn't perfect either.
"If you express no preference, you are deemed to be happy with whatever is decided. So the total percentage happy to leave the EU is 63%, and those who do not want to, 35%."
a) Your maths leaves a little to be desired.
b) You could equally read that those happy to stay number 63%
The margin of victory was such that it is a realistic negotiating tool. Farage's desire for a second referendum if the result was 'close' was soon forgotten.
The non binding nature of such referendums was soon forgotten.
The one way nature of the operation is just ignored.
We could easily have said.
Referendum shows deep discontent, we need to make some changes - we'll see what changes we can make over the next 5-10 years and then come back and ask again. Because the option to leave would always have been open.
If we go through with this, then we can never reverse the decision - the best we could do would be to apply to join as a non founder full union member...
"Except learner drivers are usually accompanied by an experienced instructor with dual controls, * who is paying attention because he isn't expected to be doing paperwork while instructing *"
Pretty sure that the same rules should be applied here...
Interestingly of course in the UK the driving examiner is expected to make notes.
And that's clearly with someone not yet qualified...
"the driver was distracted by having to review/flag an Uber touchscreen, which logs significant trip contextual info. This is part of her job, _per Uber design_."
At that point the vehicular manslaughter charges against Uber's management should be upgraded to negligent, or even deliberate.
If you need someone reading a screen during a drive then that should be a different person from the safety driver...
Uber maybe - but there is no evidence that the various other manufacturers are doing anything so stupid as disabling the braking systems, failing to alert the driver that the car thinks braking is probably needed...
By your logic we shouldn't ever train learner drivers, because they aren't certified as safe, secure and reliable yet.
Actually, we shouldn't have anyone driving anything...
"You persist in trying to muddy the waters here, and I wonder why?
The supervising driver was at fault, because they were not concentrating on the road, and were not in a position to override the vehicle in time to prevent the accident, but the fact is that the vehicle should have been able to avoid the accident by itself, and didn't."
I'm not muddying the waters - the fact is that the human driver allowed the car to plough into a pedestrian. Saying that no human would ever do so is therefore clearly tripe.
You only have to look at global accident rates to realise that people drive vehicles into perfectly visible objects on a frighteningly regular basis - your assertion that they don't simply doesn't hold water.
Today's report reveals, as had been suggested from the start, that the car's braking system had been explicitly *disabled*. The car *wanted* to stop, but was not allowed to.
Moreover it didn't even have the option to shout at the human driver either.
Uber also expected the human driver to be manipulating a touchscreen device to flag up 'interesting' logs - which would certainly put that driver on the wrong side of the law on this side of the pond, and I expect it would be similar on that side as well (see my previous links).
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018