* Posts by h4rm0ny

4539 posts • joined 26 Jul 2008

Temperature of Hell drops a few degrees – Microsoft emits SSH-for-Windows source code

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: POSIX

>>"These are far more complicated, whether they are 'easier' or 'harder' to work with depends entirely on what you are used to and whether you know how to use the facilities correctly"

No it doesn't "depend entirely" in what you are used to. A pretty massive component of hiw easy or hard it is to work with them depends on what you use them FOR.

UNIX permissions are simple and adequate for basic scenarios. They can be made to work for more complex scenarios with a lot of expertise and a tolerance for people emailing you every other day to say such and such needs to be added to this group or the other for some obscure reason. A proper system if ACLs is what you want for any moderately complex environment however. Easy management of nested groups and hierarchical, trickle down permissions is a basic requirement for a capable permissions system. Amongst others.

These are not things that "depend entirely" on which you are most familiar with. I don't see your part about inodes having any bearing on this, either.

0
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge
WTF?

Re: POSIX

>>"I smell someone that can't convert Octal in their head..."

I smell someone who hasn't noticed that computers moved on to 16, 32 and 64-bits since the days of ancient IBM mainframes (hint: octal doesn't make sense except when you have a word length that is a multiple if three, e.g. 12, 24, 36-bit machines and you don't seem to have been told we don't use those any more). As it happens I can convert to octal in my head seeing as it's just counting in binary, but I figured as my aim was to explain something rather than score Internet Points, I'd use the friendly notation that GNU/Linux systems themselves actually display it as. Or are Brian Fox and Richard Stallman similarly people who "can't convert Octal in their head" seeing as they chose to use the same notation I did in my post when they put together Bash back in the day?

I don't know which is sadder - your godawful attempts to score points or the implication that a knowledge of octal being an aide to using a permissions says anything positive about the permissions system in question.

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: POSIX

>>"LOL. If you think Powershell is more powerfull than BASH, you need to have another think. Although I will concede that I am inferring BASH is on a mostly-proper *nix system like Linux or the BSDs with all the attendant utilities. I would imagine BASH on a Windows box would be about as useless as Powershell on a Linux box."

This has been debated before on El. Reg. Yes, Powershell is not a good fit for GNU/Linux and Bash is not a good fit for Windows. This is because Windows is an OO environment and GNU/Linux is not. But your comment about Powershell not being more powerful than Bash is woefully misinformed. It is not only better designed and more self-consistent, but it has vastly more capabilities. MS looked at Bash, Python, et al. and created a scripting language that really took advantage of the last thirty years of progress in a way Bash never could (because it's very old). The below is a good starting list for advantages of Powershell over Bash and that's before I get into the far greater standardization of it. The below list was posted by TheVogon. I claim no credit for its excellent summation:

1) Object oriented pipes so that I don't have to format and reparse and be concerned about language settings.

2) Command metadata. PowerShell commands, functions and even *script files* expose metadata about the names, positions, types and validation rules for parameters, allowing the *shell* to perform type coercion, allowing the *shell* to explain the parameters/syntax, allowing the *shell* to support both tab completion and auto-suggestions with no need for external and cumbersome completion definitions.

3) Robust risk management. Look up common parameters -WhatIf, -Confirm, -Force and consider how they are supported by ambient values in scripts you author yourself.

4) Multiple location types and -providers. Even a SQL Server appears as a navigable file system. Want to work with a certain database? Just switch to the sqlserver: drive and navigate to the server/database and start selecting, creating tables etc.

5) Fan-out remoting. Execute the same script transparently and *robustly* on multiple servers and consolidate the results back on the controlling console. Try icm host1,host2,host3 {ps} and watch how you get consolidated, object-oriented process descriptions from multiple servers.

6) Workflow scripting. PowerShell scripts can (since v3) be defined as workflows which are suspendable, resumable and which can pick up and continue even across system restarts.

7) Parallel scripting. No, not just starting multiple processes, but having the actual *script* branch out and run massively parallel.

8) True remote sessions where you don't step into and out of remote sessions but actually controls any number of remote sessions from the outside.

9) PowerShell web access. You can now set up a IIS with PWA as a gateway. This gives you a firewall-friendly remote command line in any standards compliant browser.

10) Superior security features, e.g. script signing, memory encryption, proper multi-mode credentials allowing script to be agnostic about authentication schemes which may go way beyond stupid username+password and use smart cards, tokens, OTPs etc.

11) Transaction support right in the shell. Script actions can join any resource manager such as SQL server, registry, message queues in a single atomic transaction. Do that in bash?

12) Strongly typed stripting, extensive data types, e.g first class xml support and regex support right in the shell. Optional static/explicit typing. Real lambdas (script blocks) instead of stupidly relying on dangerous and error prone "eval" functions.

13) Real *structured* exception handling as an alternative to outdated traps (which PowerShell also has). try-catch-finally blocks.

14) Instrumentation, extensive tracing, transcript and *source level* debugging of scripts.

15) Consistent naming conventions covering verb-noun command names, common verbs, common parameter names.

3
1
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: POSIX

>>"But the most widely used Linux distribution, Android, uses something even better than Posix ACL, namely SELinux. That makes SELinux very widely used in the *nix world. SELinux is way more powerful than ACLs, be it the Posix or MS variant."

I have worked with SELinux. It's a patch over the UNIX security model that is constantly tripping people up and not well integrated into GNU/Linux itself. SELinux on Android I have no experience with. However, in either case it's basically a layer over the top of the UNIX permissions system to try and wrap it up in something more usable. It's odd how all I initially wrote was that Windows permissions were much more capable and maintainable than the default UNIX permissions systems and the first two replies I got were people immediately responding with alternatives to the default UNIX permissions system. You and they are both really reinforcing my point that the default (and most commonly used on GNU/Linux) permissions system is limited and hard to work with.

As to SELinux being "way more powerful" than Windows ACLs, I find that not to be the case at all. What is it you think makes SELinux superior to Windows ACLs?

3
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: POSIX

>>"No it is for older versions at least, fully POSIX compliant. There is no "not really". POSIX is a standard and Windows has previously implemented all required aspects. However support for it is now deprecated: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-gb/library/cc754351.aspx"

At the very least since Vista, Windows is not POSIX compliant. I'm not really interested in arguments that say Windows is POSIX compliant because ten years ago it was. Because, whilst not wishing to sound like Bill Clinton, that's a rather funny definition of "is".

4
1
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Good.

>>"But they're all just "Linux". I don't see the point in saying that they ported to this distro and that one when they're all essentially the same target assuming they use standard tools like autoconf."

Actually, this is a bit of a red herring. What Microsoft did was create an Open Source service and provide it as package for these distributions and the package is designed to allow people to manage those OSs using Powershell from a remote machine. They haven't ported Powershell itself to GNU/Linux and that wouldn't really make sense as Powershell is OO-based and GNU/Linux exposes little to none of itself as objects. The package is more like a proxy way of configuring things, monitoring, etc. It's designed to facilitate management of your GNU/Linux boxes in Azure. The source is available if you want to compile it on something else.

5
1
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: POSIX

>>"Windows has been POSIX compliant for many years already."

Ehhhhh, in a sense, but not really (imo). It can offer a mostly POSIX-compliant environment. You can install Cygwin and have a POSIX world in which to play. But the functionality of Windows is a super-set of that. It would be a little like saying that C++ is C compliant. Not a fan of analogies, but I think that one works. So I concede you're sort of right, but would say that in practical terms it is not, nor tries to be.

1
2
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: POSIX

>>"Get a clue. Posix means Posix ACLs which give fine-grained access control not unlike Windows ACLs. You can argue that Windows ACLs are better if you wish, but displaying your ignorance of Posix is not a good start."

I wrote "default UNIX -rwx/rwx/rwx approach". You seem to have disregarded that in favour of what you would prefer I had said. Sure, you can add ACLs to GNU/Linux or UNIX and some people do. But they are not the default and they see minority usage. They are also a great deal harder to work with and less capable than Windows where they are the default approach. I don't think you could shoe-horn the more capable Windows ACLs into POSIX-compliance. Feel free to show me how you could, if you want to try though. ;)

As to the other poster, yes, I perhaps should not have written "fully" OO as there are some non-OO APIs in Windows. My background is UNIX so I'm prone to the occasional misspeak on Windows. But they key word in my post was "environment". You can manage the entirety of Windows via Powershell in an OO fashion and whilst if you're programming on Windows you might use a non-OO API, what I'm getting at is that working within the environment, pretty much everything exposes itself with an OO interface. And I do not see why or how people want Windows to suddenly be "POSIX compliant" as they sometimes post on El Reg. I don't think they actually know what they're asking for or what they think it would gain. A little like a builder of row-boats looking at a car and demanding it have hooks added for the oars to go in. Perhaps Nigel 11 here would like to explain what advantage there is to Windows in tying itself down to being "POSIX compliant". How and why would you even want to handle files or processes in the way POSIX lays out when there are better approaches?

7
1
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Ugh!

>>"I just had a look at it. I picked a file at random - auth-passwd.c and looked at the Microsoft version versus the equivalent from the portable OpenSSH project. The Microsoft version is nearly twice as long (378 lines versus 216), with the addition of huge #ifdef hacks, converting back and forth between UTF8 and UTF16, and all sorts of other horrors."

I don't consider "nearly twice as long" as a file in OpenSSH to be a criticism. Maintainable code is often longer than hard to maintain code just because it's better structured. Your comment reminds me of ancient C programmers decrying Open Source with, well as it happens, exactly the same criticism - "but look, it's twice as many lines of code". No-one who is objective and knows about code should be making a criticism like the one above. As to converting between UTF-8 and UTF-16, well if one peer is using the former and the other the latter, what exactly would you suggest?

Anyway, you are surely not holding up the labyrinth that is the OpenSSH project as an example of clean, well-structured coding. Are you? :/

14
1
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: POSIX

You say "POSIX compatible" as if it's a good thing. The Windows OS is a fully OO environment. Pretty much every part of it including its permissions system (which is a Hell of a lot more powerful and manageable than the default UNIX -rwx/rwx/rwx approach). So why the Hell would tying it down to the ancient POSIX standard which was developed for UNIX make sense or be considered an advantage for Windows?

9
18

Terror, terror everywhere: Call the filter police, there's a madman (or two) in town

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Filtering and removing

Informed people are difficult to manage. Uninformed people are much easier to manage. But you have to make sure they are uninformed in the right way so that it's you they are managed by. That is essentially the principle.

9
1

CIA boss uses AOL email – and I hacked it, claims stoner teen

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

I'm not sure which is funnier...

That they may have got into the director of the CIA's AOL account(!) or that they think US foreign-policy is too pro-Palestine!

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Typical teenager..

If teenagers didn't do stupid things we'd all go from childhood to being 45 and how depressing would that be?

9
0

GCHQ to pore over blueprints of Chinese built Brit nuke plants

h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Joke

Well if there wasn't spyware in the computer systems before, there will be after!

30
1

Connected kettles boil over, spill Wi-Fi passwords over London

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: wow

Maybe it enables him to find when people are home and bored so he can pop round. Did you think of that?

Or anything, in fact?

0
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Which has more stupidity?

For an example, look at televisions. All I want from it is a good quality display and reliability. If I want to watch YouTube on it or Skype, I will connect one of my devices that does those things. UNIX philosophy - do one thing and do it well.

Except that I can't find any modern TVs that are like that. Everyone of them comes loaded with an OS and a pile of software that I don't trust to be patched and kept up to date now, let alone two or three years from now. The manufacturers have all decided that Skype / YouTube / FireFox v.27 is the vital market differentiator without which their product will sink like a stone.

As a consequence, if I want to get a 4K display right now, I have to buy something that three years from now is going to be a complete liability. And to the poster that says "just don't connect it", that gets harder every year as the manufacturers WANT to make it harder to not connect by tying as much functionality into connectivity as possible. That way they can "add value" and get your data.

5
0

Amazon Echo: We put Jeff Bezos' always-on microphone-speaker in a Reg family home

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: More customization desired in these voice powered assistants

Or the Avon version: "That's an interesting question. Can a vacuum be said to have a temperature at all, or do we just consider it to be de facto absolute zero. Tell you what, why don't you float around outside for a while and see if you can tell the difference. I would suggest a spacesuit, but of course that would interfere with the experiment, wouldn't it?"

2
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Monopoly

>>"I for one would love to get into the oil tanker business. Isn't going to happen soon though!"

That's not a great analogy though. If you've been buying oil tankers from BigShips.com it doesn't give you any special reason not to buy your next one from OilForYou.com if they enter the market and sell you the same for less.

But with something like this or Cortana that's not true. They collect your data which you can't export to another provider creating a barrier to switching; and they also forge deals with their partners which others are prevented from doing. If you think Amazon / MS / Google / Apple wouldn't say to StubHub or whoever "we're a really big company and we'll pay a tiny bit extra per user if you don't also licence it to this new market entrant," then I suspect that's misplaced trust in big business. (N.b. for 'don't licence it' you can probably read 'price it too high for them' which is easier to get away with legally).

0
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

whilst you drive to the cantina.

7
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: What always seems to get missed...

What I've always wanted, is simply the ability to pay for this stuff with money. But I seldom get that choice. For example, there are features of Cortana that I would very much like to use. Being able to speak to it and quickly add things to my calendar would be very valuable. However, I can't pay for the service, I have to sign over consent to read through all my txt messages and emails (amongst other things).

Or best of all with Windows 10 where Microsoft seems to want me to pay with money AND privacy.

Put some controls in place on this technology, ask me for money for it, and I'll be happy to do so. Unfortunately I think the sheer number of people out there who want / expect such services for free, seem to make me a minority market not worth serving.

Btw, I did read the article not just skip down here to the comments to rant about privacy like the author suggests, and to prove it, did anyone else read the following bit:

...distrust turned to uncertainty; uncertainty to excitement; excitement to disappointment; disappointment to acceptance; acceptance to affection.

and expect it to end with "I had finally learned to love Big Brother".

21
1

GCHQ can and will spy on politicos, rules tribunal

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Yet, have you ever met a politician......

Yes, actually I have. Though they tend to be the ones marginalized away from the centres of power in the party, excluded by the Blair or Cameron cabals in control of their parties. They're the reason Parliamentary Whips exist.

0
0

Fixing Windows 10: New build tweaks Edge, sucks in Skype

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: preview on mouseover in Edge?

Metro IE does it even better - the tabs are neatly tucked out of the way until a right-click or a swipe brings them up into view as a little carousel of preview images. Extremely quick to use. Very intuitive.

Edge is a significant step backwards in several ways. I particularly loathe the way when I open a new tab (which I have set to be blank by default) it moves the cursor into a near invisible search box in the middle of the page which I then have to grab the mouse, move it up to the top and click in the address bar before I can start typing my URL. Compounded by the fact that the address bar is white on a white background with almost no visible outline. I am unimpressed.

2
0

Google's .bro file format changed to .br after gender bother

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: this really is nothing compared to what's coming. @H4rm0ny

>>"Due to "feelgood" legislation perpetrated in the name of "protecting" women, the ability of a judge to determine the sentence in these circumstances has been taken away from him in New York State."

You are confused mandatory sentencing guidelines are not the same thing as "automatically guilty". There are mandatory sentencing guidelines for murder as well but that doesn't mean that someone accused of it doesn't get a trial. Also, there's more to your post which goes on to condemn the idea that adults having sex with minors is wrong and blames feminism for the fact that the law is written that way. If you think that then you have a pretty low view of males as well as women.

Your rant about plea-bargaining and sex-offenders registers is not germane to anything I have said. It's really just attempting to shift ground into other areas easier to contest. Me: "laws against adults having sex with minors is not some feminist evil". You: "Get put on sex offenders register and your life is ruined". Me: "Huh?"

>>"The fact is that feminism is a leftist farce perpetrated upon men for the sole reason of revenge against men for the perceived wrongs that exist only in the minds of feminazi "wymyn".

Feminism is about equal rights and treatment in society for women. The above is paranoid delusion. Wanting, for example, to be treated the same in job interviews is not motivated by a need for revenge against men.

>>"Stop blaming men for all your own personal shortcomings. If you don't like men, then stop trying to hurt them and ruin their lives. Find something else to complain about."

The usual nonsense about feminists hating men or feminism being compensating for shortcomings.

>>"The only time I get PO'd at or think less of women is when they play the gender card, expecting men to fawn over them in order to get an unfair advantage."

Well this is demonstrably not true from your posts alone. You sound desperately bitter, to be honest.

>>"You wanted equality baby, suck it up you can have all the equality you want, you just have to live with the consequences. No one owes you a damn thing now. You made your own bed and woke up with fleas. I don't care if you don't like it, TFB. You deserve to be treated the same way a man is"

And yet all too often, we're not. Are you saying there is no sexism in the world? If so, you're delusional (you may be anyway). If not, then why are you spewing all this bile at people who oppose sexism?

>>"If you had bothered to read my comment before your hindbrain reaction to my "male oriented" statement kicked in, you would have seen that the statement about a lawsuit was hypothetical. Here it is again."

It is hypothetical because there is little to no demand for a male-only gym, which is what I wrote. You can't rant about how feminists are stopping you from having a male-only gym if that has never been the case. And if there were such a case, why would that make sexism against women okay?

>>"That's called REVERSE DISCRIMINATION, in all caps because you still don't grasp the concept!"

Discrimination is not Momentum. You can't add two opposite vectors and say there is no discrimination any more. Your issue is that you see this as two sides battling: Men vs. Women. Plenty of men are feminists. Most I would say, in the modern Western world given that feminism is essentially a belief that women should have equal opportunities to men. The real sides are Sexists (against men and women) vs. Non-Sexists. You are currently strongly in the former camp and I believe increasingly marginalized.

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: this really is nothing compared to what's coming.

>>"The "automatic guilt" is already in place in any case in New York state that involves a minor girl and an "adult male" even if she actually initiated the sexual relationship, and said so in court and there is only 4 years difference in age. That's your "zero tolerance" in action."

What are you saying here? That if someone is accused of sex with a minor they are automatically found guilty without trial? Because that is what is meant by "automatic guilt". And if this is the case, I'm going to have to see a citation that trials are suspended in New York State. Or is your argument that feminism has led to adults having sex with minors being a crime? I didn't realize you had to be part of the Feminist New World Order to believe that.

As to a "men only gym" being shut down by lawsuits, any evidence of that? Or indeed evidence that there is demand for a men only gym in the first place? I think you get a few men only saunas - they're gay hangouts and I've never heard of women suing to shut those down because they're not allowed in. You're contriving examples. On the other hand, you do occasionally get women-only gyms. Or more normally you very occasionally get a women only time in a gym or swimming bath, tends to be a small period of time, because there's actual demand for that and usually because it's the only time some Islamic women can actually use the facilities. Now I don't like Islam much, but I'm not against women in Bradford being able to enjoy swimming or using a treadmill for a couple of hours a week.

I honestly do not know what the world must look like from inside your head with the way you see feminism as such an extraordinary threat to you.

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Paris Hilton

Re: To others...

I opened the comments section to say that as a woman I found it insulting that people thought a file extension would upset me. Having just read through the comments, especially yours, I feel pretty alienated, actually. You call it "a feminist myth" that co-workers are rude or unhelpful to women entering the field. You attribute objection to sexism to "fat humorless women" because apparently objection to sexism comes from not being successful as a sex object... That's the same charge, btw, that has been levelled at feminists ever since we actually started to achieve change. 'Oh, they're angry because men don't want them.' Not, the more accurate, 'we're angry because we face prejudice and double standards'.

It's not a myth that women in the tech sector face prejudice, it exists. You're not likely to encounter it much in Germany .You might encounter it in the UK from time to time. You're almost certainly going to have run into it in the USA if you have worked in the tech sector there for any length of time. Most men I work with are fine, but there are enough people like yourself who share your attitudes, that you encounter this hostile sub-culture from time to time. Up to and including interviewers who are plainly more interested in the possibility of getting laid than in my technical skills. All things that can happen to men, but are far, far from commonly challenges women face in the tech sector.

Personally, I wouldn't give a damn about a file extension being .bro. It should be as much of a non-issue if it happened to be .fem. Except I come here to say that and find all this story has really done, is provide an entrance point for angry people to spew grievances about how "feminists should leave the tech sector alone". As if feminism isn't something that should be normal across all sections of society. Tech is not some refuge for males to defend. It's (or should be) a meritocracy based solely on skill and passion for the subject. Unfortunately it's not. For the most part, people are fine and non-sexist. But only the deeply naïve could think it doesn't have problems (especially in the USA). Or the deeply biased. And someone who throws around nonsense like feminists are motivated by men not wanting them is in the latter camp. Your post is its own counter-argument and a sterling example of the culture that I occasionally encounter. Deeply unpleasant.

39
7

Hillary's sysadmin left VNC, RDP exposed to the internet - report

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: There is no need to read her email for it to be a disaster

>>"Anyone know what a FAT check is?"

Checks length of the diplomat's name is under 255 characters, I think.

7
0

Hurrah! Doctor Who brings us a bootstrap paradox treat in Before the Flood

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

A bootstrap paradox may be acceptable so long as there is a way into the paradox. To take the Doctor's own example, suppose Beethoven did exist, you go back in time and accidentally kill him, and now must impersonate him and "compose" his symphonies yourself. That's okay - you have a route onto the M25 loop of eternity, it doesn't matter that you can't get off. Maybe, anyway - it's as decent a theory of fictional "Time Travel" as anything else.

What I disliked about the episode from small to large, is firstly the Doctor finding the bootstrap paradox a mystery. I would have thought the Time Lords had a pretty solid grasp of the mechanics of all this. Seems a backtracking to learn that they're just dabblers who find such things every bit as mysterious and head-scratching as everyone else. But more significantly, I really disliked the direct talking to us the audience. The show did it a couple of weeks ago again when the Doctor asked us pointedly "where did I get the tea? I'm the Doctor, just accept it". There was at least a thin conceit that he might have been talking to the Daleks at that point though it seemed more like a direct order to the audience. This week's completely abandoned the pretence and made the Doctor our own narrator and presenter of stories.

I do not like that. I like fiction to not acknowledge that it is fiction.

5
1

Playmobil cops broadside for 'racist' pirate slave

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Interesting complaint

Then you may be over-simplifying what you are teaching your children. They weren't random scum who suddenly decided to steal for a living, for the most part. Press-ganging was common for much of what we consider the pirate era in the popular mindset. Pirates could be and often were, people who had been abducted from the streets and forced into a country's navy against their will. On a successful mutiny, they may well turn pirate with some legitimacy - they now had a death sentence on their head anyway. And many pirate crews were actually fairly egalitarian and run as collectives. They could even, occasionally be quite progressive in terms of sexual equality (occasionally). Look up Anne Bonny who was a female pirate captain. They were certainly on the whole more racially tolerant. The times that pirates lived in (if we're talking Johnny Depp stuff) were not equitable times where they acted out of casual desire to steal for a living instead of working.

21
0

Whoever hacked Uber's driver database wasn't our CTO, says rival Lyft

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: "Lyft denies any wrongdoing by its employees."

I don't know about that... I could see myself doing what the CTO did: "They published their own private key? They didn't... *looks at source They did! Muppets!"

6
0

Silicon Valley now 'illegal' in Europe: Why Schrems vs Facebook is such a biggie

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Mainly a public sector issue

It's not necessarily goodbye to those tools. Google might have a bit more of a problem technically (educated guess, not fact), but MS could very easily spin up a distinct European Azure and I'm certain that Amazon wouldn't find it any harder. Indeed, both already have the infrastructure in place and putting the necessary data segregation in place would be fairly straight-forward (at least for the architects of such epic projects as AWS and Azure it would be).

And if the question is a legal one, well MS could certainly licence the Azure technologies to some European countries. They essentially already do this as MS Server and many of their own commercially available tools are the same as in Azure. In business terms, licencing "AWS" might be a little harder but again, hardly insurmountable. In both cases, find a large European company as a front, and away you go.

1
0

Microsoft's HoloLens: Here by 2016, mere three THOUSAND dollar price

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: and then there is the Microsoft Surface book

>>"Looks are subjective; I think they're about as ugly as each other. The Surface Book presents a minor problem for me though: it grabs my leg hair if I use it on my lap when I'm wearing shorts... rather like those stretchy watch bands that grab my arm hair. You may not have that problem, h4rm0ny"

Well not to get too personal, but no, I don't have that problem. However, posting mainly to clear up that when I wrote "looks better than..." I was referring to specifications and design considerations, rather than aesthetics. I find both a little drab visually as I have never much liked brushed aluminium finishes.

0
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Not going to happen

>>"Seriously, it's not all about the guy sat in his room developing on his own. In time it might not be, but to start with, leave it to the pros with the bankroll."

Hopefully $3,000 is cheap enough that small players and even independent developers can get involved if they want to, though. If you have the skills to develop independently for HoloLens then $3,000 probably equates to a working month for you at least. (If not, the job market is looking for you - get out there!). Your costs to develop something for HoloLens are going to be way more than $3k just because of the market value of your development time alone.

2
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Price @DrXym

You seem wedded to your initial post despite all the flaws in it. In response to your points:

>>Even if we were to say the hololens is more complex, that still doesn't justify the honking disparity in the price of the kit or that its a barrier of entry

Firstly lets dispense with the weasel words. There's no "even if..." The HoloLens IS more complex than Oculus Rift. The Oculus is a display that you connect a GPU up to. The HoloLens is far more than a display. It has high end processor, GPU, a custom-designed chip for integrating the input from its camera with sound signals (which it has tiny speakers for rather than normal headphones as it's designed to augment ambient sounds) and movement, et al. It uses Kinect technology to handle gesture recognition and the software handles interaction of the AR objects with real-world physical objects. Just attempting to equate the two betrays a wilful bias. As to "barrier to entry", honestly $3000 is peanuts to all but the amateur developer. Even a small development house will eat that easily.

>>And if this disparity carries over into production then woe betide them. VR will be a hard enough sell (which IMO will fail). Something costing more again isn't going to do any better.

Again, this wilful ignorance in conflating VR with AR. Different technologies and different purposes. I don't think VR will fail, btw. For games it is amazing. But that's an aside. The point is that being able to casually share what you're seeing with an expert or colleague somewhere remote and also have them drawing arrows or highlighting things in your vision as one small example of how AR will be used, is not the same category as playing Elite Dangerous in VR for example. There is no basis to say "well if it costs £300 to play a game in VR, a doctor certainly wouldn't pay twice that to be able to conference with the hospital consultant when examining a patient". It's an utterly nonsensical argument that makes me question just how stupid you can be.

>>Oh you mean like a phone? It doesn't justify the cost. Furthermore, if it is more like a super-light computer it bodes ill for the retail price of this thing if/when it finally sells

Yes, like a phone. Many people buy subsidised phones on contract and don't look at the actual full price. An iPhone 6 unlocked costs around £550. Now imagine that instead of being a mature product in mass production by the million, it was a limited run thing not even pre-release and they'd only made 20,000 of the things. How much do you think it would cost then? Again, your analogies are dreadful and contrived only to try and damn the fact that the HoloLens development kit costs $3,000 which really isn't that much. It's even in the reach of home developers if they really want it, let alone actual companies. You have no idea how this sector works at all. Either that or you're hopelessly biased and think everyone else here is an idiot.

And it it wasn't when DK 1 and DK 2 were released. It's not a valid point.

Okay, you think you can make statements about final costs of HoloLens from an early beta and you're justifying that by comparisons to a different product in a different category which, despite what you say actually didn't start off at the same price as it happens. Oculus began with a $2.5m kickstarter to front-load it with cash. Those who contributed less than $300 subsidised those that paid more. But that's minor details which I shouldn't even bother correcting because it takes away from the point that your fundamental approach is wrong.

>>"Denigrating the Oculus doesn't remove the point that their dev kit is and has been 1/10th of this thing."

Okay, I am NOT denigrating the Oculus in any way or form. It's great. I think it will be a big success. I also think it will be a huge boost to the GPU industry (especially AMD who sorely need it). Do NOT put words into my mouth. Pointing out that they are very different products with different technologies and goals is NOT denigrating anything. Do NOT pretend that you are somehow defending Oculus against HoloLens. All you are doing is making silly comparisons that harm both.

>>Microsoft is trying to pitch this thing at games - witness various demos they've made of it for that purpose, e.g. minecraft video. In fact they're on record as justifying buying Minecraft for hololens. And their plans include XBox One front and centre and it's hard to imagine that the device would possibly succeed or achieve mass market sales otherwise.

Hard to imagine for you, maybe. I can think of dozens of non-game uses for HoloLens and MS have been demonstrating such uses. Yes, that includes games. It is not limited to games. And again, you're hopelessly muddled in your thinking and floundering around for ways to make Oculus and HoloLens sound like they're attempting the same thing. Games for HoloLens wont be the same as games for Oculus. AR is not VR and I don't see a lot of overlap in terms of how games will make use of them. Imagine doing a space simulator or first person shooter in AR. It's a nonsense idea - you'd be watching semi-transparent people running around overlaid on your walls and desk which would be swinging around you with no connection to the world you were playing in. But no, because MS want to have Minecraft playable on your carpet, or have several friends sitting around the dining room table playing a real time strategy game on it, your limited brain goes "but these and FPS and Simulators are all games - therefore Oculus and HoloLens are similar. MUST POST ON REGISTER!"!

There are few people on this forum as stupid as you.

5
1
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Price

>>"Perhaps a better price comparison is with Google Glass. That was $1500, rather more than Occulus, half the price of Hololens."

That's a much more sensible comparison than Occulus as Google Glass is in the same category of HoloLens. HoloLens is a lot more sophisticated though. Google glass was essentially a small projector extension that provided a 2D overlay onto one of the eyepieces. HoloLens is a great deal more sophisticated both in terms of display and in terms of processing power and software. Have you seen that demo where HoloLens is projecting a Minecraft game ONTO a table. I don't mean as a flat image, I mean that you can turn or tilt your head and walk around the table and see the 3D blocks piled up on that table shift in perspective as if they were there? HoloLens is much more than putting 2D txt messages on a lens. But this isn't me arguing a point with you - you simply stated facts. I'm just adding why I think the two should not lightly be compared. In fact, I'd go further - with HoloLens being so much more than Google Glass, I think double the price for a developer kit works pretty well.

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: and then there is the Microsoft Surface book

Actually, the Surface Book looks better than the MacBook Air, imo. Touch screen and an OS that takes advantage of that, almost certainly a much more powerful GPU, detachable screen (it's a hybrid). It looks seriously impressive.

(But sadly horribly expensive).

6
2
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Price

>>"True but the Oculus dev kit is $350."

* The Oculus is a couple of months from launch. This is an early beta.

* The Oculus is small screens in front of your eyes connected to a GPU in your computer. This is essentially a super-light computer that you wear.

* The Oculus is a VR device. This is an AR device. These things are not the same thing. They serve different purposes and work in different ways and have different demands.

* Approx. £2,500 is not that much for something focused on professional development houses which is what this is. The Oculus is being used for games right now and home hackers - it's essentially a pre-release product at this point.

But mainly and most of all, AR is not the same as VR. Different goals and different challenges.

6
0

Safe Harbour ruled INVALID: Facebook 'n' pals' data slurp at risk

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Am I the only one ...

Indeed. And I've just read that Twitter began segregating data in expectation of increasing problems like this. And Twitter aren't small. So, yes, I expect some changes resulting from this. And given how easy it is becoming to purchase a set-up from AWS or Azure and replicate your services in a different region, I can see this being a viable approach. A hassle, certainly, but hardly a show-stopper.

5
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Am I the only one ...

No, but it's going to have repercussions. I was recently involved in a deal that the Safe Harbour provisions were an explicit condition of. That contract is already sealed and I don't expect it to come back across my desk because of this... However, I wouldn't bet money on it. We (well my client - I sell my services as a consultant) will still abide by the provisions and we treat customers' data protection extremely seriously. But we've just lost some assurance under law, I think. This WILL affect business deals. I know of a couple first-hand which have been lost not because of this specifically, but because of concerns about sharing data with US companies generally. And if I know of a couple first hand, there are more out there. It's definitely an issue. Though speaking as a European, I approve of this being taken seriously by our courts.

29
1

Doctor Who's Under the Lake splits Reg scribes: This Alien homage thing – good or bad?

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: well....

He can say 'fuck' all he likes for all I care. Depending on the incarnation. Nine it would fit fine. Ten or Five, it really wouldn't. The wording that bothered me this episode was when he said "Oh god!" seemed pretty out of character for him. I mean he's met a few and they'd hardly inspire devotion in him. Usually he kills them or banishes them to some outer dimension.

0
0

Dangerous resurgent banking malware hits UK

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

>>"However if a manufacturer does put something into a product that inherently weakens it's security for the sake of convenience then it must take some portion of culpability"

Well possibly, but VBA was introduced to Office in 1993, about twenty-two years ago. Email was something I accessed by Pine back then and if I wanted to surf the web I did it with Mosaic or maybe Netscape. The world in which it was introduced was a very different one from today.

And like the other poster said, you have to click through two message boxes that all but tell you "Go Back! This is Dangerous!". The ultimate secure system is one that does nothing and can't be accessed. At which point do you say the user is an idiot / technically illiterate? Or do we say that you can't build code that interacts with Office documents?

0
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

I'd guess they're being downvoted because Microsoft would be damned by the business world if they removed them and calling for a class action suit for something MS are themselves trying to get businesses to move away from. MS have provided a replacement for VBA and it's been in Office for a little while now. You can use Office Webapps to do most of what you'd legitimately want to do in Office and security controls are built into them from the ground-up. You create a manifest XML file which can lock down everything from whitelisting external servers it can connect to (if any), whether it can access contacts list, access controls, you name it. And by scanning the manifest file you can both know exactly what a webapp can and can't do and this is also enforced by the system, it's not just a label. If a webapp tries to do something it's declared that it can't, it's blocked from doing so. The tools are all actually there. Getting a large body of legacy users to ditch everything and move forwards - now that's the difficult part and MS would kill their customer base by trying to force the issue. You link yourself to guidance on not using Macros. The OP isn't being downvoted for advocating not using VBA, they're being downvoted for placing the blame on Microsoft / Office.

MS have actually done pretty much everything that could have reasonably done without removing VBA support from Office. By default, VBA macros wont run, you get pretty clear warnings if you try. And it actually tracks the source of VBA macros and treats them differently so it knows if one is, say, just from some document you downloaded from online / got from an email. Indeed, this latter is a step beyond what LibreOffice does where you could equally insert macros into documents.

Basically, place blame where it should be and use modern tools, not old legacy ones. Nobody should be churning out VB macros in an enterprise environment anymore and those who have them should be migrating away from them. But then how long did it take to get enterprise to move away from XP with its vastly inferior security model to Windows 7? Or to move from IE6/7/8 to the much more secure and standards compliant 9/10/11 ? In both cases, MS had to practically hold a knife to their customer's throats to actually get them to shift. Calling for a class action suit against MS because of this is just silly and the OP is rightly downvoted for doing so.

1
0

Has somebody shared your 'anonymised' health data? Bad news

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Ask any IT professional in this field or related...

...Whether they think it's probable that this level of detailed data can be de-anonymised, and they will tell you "yes." Unless they work for one of the companies providing it.

8
0

Boffins: We know what KILLED the DINOS – and it wasn't just an asteroid

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Carl Sagan.

I'm just going to quote him: "The reason the dinosaurs are no longer here, is that they didn't have a Space program".

10
0

AMD to axe a few more staff as it struggles to get back to black

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: To the sick, while there is life there is hope

Well that and those occasions where Intel actually paid people to buy its chips over AMDs. I've never fully understood why AMD settled the way it did but I suppose they just couldn't afford the massive legal battle it would have taken to get more.

AMD are making some gains, though. HP are now putting their new chips in professional grade laptops. That's a real achievement because AMD have always suffered through their chips only being available in low-end products. There are plenty of people who have said they would buy an AMD laptop if it didn't also mean a crappy screen / case / keyboard. Both AMD and Intel processors have entered "good enough" territory some time ago. Now that you can actually get AMD chips in a decent device, we'll see how that plays out for them. Zen is also taped out and getting ready for production. Not saying the remaining stages are easy or risk-free, but it is nearly the final strait and barring disaster, Zen is now finalized and moving steadily towards us. Graphics cards were also hit by the failure to reduce node size - which was a foundry problem, not AMDs. It affected AMD and NVIDIA both, but the latter had more money to handle the loss. The current Radeons are not what was intended originally. Now that such issues are resolved, the next generation of cards, with HBM and an architecture that properly takes advantage of that, as well as HSA becoming relevant, mean AMD could really turn things around in a very impressive fashion.

IF they can hold on long-enough. I see it as a waiting game. If AMD can cling on, they're turning in the right direction. They just need to survive long enough for all their work to start bringing in the rewards. Don't know if they will but much of what I've seen indicates to me that if they can, they can rise again.

3
0

Are Samsung TVs doing a Volkswagen in energy tests? Koreans hit back

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

I don't think anyone is disputing that prosecutions follow the law as written, they're disputing the "Boo hoo!" part. It's little different to any other complex system such as my computer OS. If someone finds an exploit, well that needs patching, but I don't suddenly express contempt for the victim of a hack and exalt the hacker for finding a way to get access without valid credentials.

Samsung may have found a loophole way around the intent of the law, that is worthy of criticism.

1
1
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: Unsurprising. This *is* Samsung after all

I was coming here to post something similar about Samsung. This is the company that has literally tried to hand judges a briefcase full of cash, movie-style. This is kind of a re-post but last time I shared this story it was over a year ago, so here's an anecdote about Samsung.

In 2006 Samsung was sued by Pioneer for infringing their patents on Plasma TV technology. A memo from a Samsung engineer used as evidence showed that they knowingly infringed on the patents. Rather than agree a licencing fee however, Samsung counter-sued and buried Pioneer under suits and appeals. Pioneer was awarded $59million in damages, but got buried in punitive legal actions from Samsung and a few years later shut down the television division, in large part because of this. Ten-thousand people who worked in that division directly or indirectly, lost their jobs

They're a fun company.

6
4

Met at 'huge risk' of botching its Sopra Steria outsourcing contract

h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Well yes, but it's not about saving money. It's about two very important things. Funnelling money to mates in the private sector (I have no evidence of this but I don't see why it would be any different to the NHS - please correct me if they really are lilly-white in this instance as, unlike the Met, I'll actually backtrack if it turns out I've nicked the wrong suspect). Secondly, and this could be even more important, it will give all the people in charge a bit of paper that says when it all goes tits up, it's the fault of that terrible private sector company, not theirs anymore.

19
2

MACAQUE ATTACK: Monkey plunders Florida resident's box, gobbles contents

h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Paris Hilton

Monkey rights...?

So are PETA campaigning to have the monkey tried for theft? Enquiring minds want to know.

16
0

'We can handle politicos, OUR ISSUE IS JUDGES', shout GCHQ docs

h4rm0ny
Silver badge
Mushroom

Re: QUESTION: If you were in charge of the country,

You know the best way to generate a large EMP?

1
0
h4rm0ny
Silver badge

Re: @TwoWolves Safety vs Security

>>"I'm more than willing to give up preventing every attack if the government would get out of the business of mass data collection, especially considering that we've known every terrorist before the event yet the services seemingly have their attention somewhere else (like up their ass apparently)."

In a nutshell, the Intelligence Agencies' goal is to protect the state, not the people. For the time being, preventing terrorist attacks is part of that because terrorist attacks make people unsettled and demanding change, but it's not their only goal and it doesn't have to coincide. If the people become the threat to the government, then the people are the enemy. And to an extent, the people are always a threat to the government.

6
0

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018