Re: The key question is ..
I shall probably regret this, but what is it you think is broken in current Windows that would be fixed by more money?
4539 posts • joined 26 Jul 2008
I shall probably regret this, but what is it you think is broken in current Windows that would be fixed by more money?
Not really. Firstly, it's massive, massive overkill as such people are likely to have a very small user base and a single location for files. It's not much good trying to detect anomalous patterns of behaviour amongst your users and network if that's basically two people and a couple of laptops.
Secondly, even though this flags up data for review, you still need to be competent to make use of that. The average family are not going to know what to do with if some software flags up an alert that user account X suddenly has a new pattern of scanning and copying files from Y. A competent sysadmin would, but not your typical home users.
Though really the first one makes the second academic, anyway.
>>"Why didn't Linus just call up someone at google or perhaps even send an email, I am sure he knows *someone that could allow him to bypass the lack of customer service."
Possibly because Linus Torvalds, creator of Linux, has a community spirit and wants to raise things publicly and for the benefit of all, rather than some invisible and perhaps partial fix.
Though equally plausible, when dealing with a corporation the size of Google, even Linus realises that public opinion is a useful weapon to wield.
Good point. And these MacBooks sell well unlike their low-end corner-cutting counterparts. Whilst I got a factual detail wrong, you've actually proved the point I wanted to.
Some of AMD's debt isn't due until 2017 and the rest isn't due until 2020. So no, receivers aren't going to come bursting in the door tomorrow. AMD have time for Carrizo to be selling before then and they will have a very new architecture (Zen) released and in distribution as well. We should also see HBM bedded down as a standard by then in which AMD have the lead.
So whilst the plane has been nose-diving, the ground is still legally five years away and they have measures that could turn things around in that time.
A lot of the time the customer doesn't even bet as far as buying it in the first place. Vendors always pair the AMD chips with shoddy hardware. So whilst the processor might be adequate to their needs the poor screen and shoddy plastic wont. So AMD get disqualified by association.
A high-end laptop or workstation isn't going to use AMD because the high-end Intel chips are more powerful and more efficient than AMD's best chips. But there's certainly room for AMD's offerings in better products than they get.
And I wonder what would have happened if Intel hadn't engaged in blatant anti-trust behaviour to sabotage AMD so badly back in the day. Intel were found guilty and forced to settle, but the settlement was a bargain for keeping their competitor from gaining ground. Even after that verdict they continue to engage in such practices, such as paying vendors to buy their chips over AMD's. (True - look it up).
It's an x86 device so yes, it should run GNU/Linux.
>>Exactly. Fitting a curve in the past is not guarantee of future.
Modded you up in the belief that this is subtle and cheeky satire. :)
>>"My problem lies in being sentenced to the British gulag known as North Wales for three years :)"
My problem lies in wading through 15+ posts dealing with your personal misery as the only English child in the village. Move on!
>>"However, is it still the case that there have been no deaths due to Fukushima? I can't clearly recall where, but I do remember reading about 1300 deaths, though did not at the time ascertain the source."
There have been no deaths attributable to radiation or other direct effects of Fukushima. There have, however, been a number of deaths due to the hysterical ways of responding to it. That's hysteria in the clinical sense, not the humorous one. For example, many aged people have become ill or passed away from stresses and emotional trauma brought on by being moved away from their homes, from loved ones, kept in evacuation centres, loss of livelihood and financial devastation from losing homes. There have been many cases of severe depression and trauma amongst people who have basically seen their entire community and life taken away from them as villages are emptied and the inhabitants scattered to the wind. I'm not sure about your figure, but statistically many people have suffered adverse health effects and mortality has increased amongst affected demographics. The great tragedy being that it's avoidable. Nearly all of the evacuated areas are fine to live in and even the areas really close are essentially just a "you have a very slightly increased risk of cancer, statistically speaking".
However, the Japanese government was and is terrified of being accused of not doing enough. You're familiar with the way someone will always show up to tear down a government with claims of how they could have done X and why didn't they do Y. They even upgraded the rating of the nuclear disaster to its highest level (despite not meeting the criteria at all) because someone accused them of not taking the disaster seriously enough by putting it lower than the maximum. Disastrous evacuations and traumatic break up of communities and families followed.
I'm not exactly sure of your numbers, but that is likely what you have seen referred to as "deaths due to Fukushima". The media loves its disaster porn.
>>"Genius. It's not even compromise. Superb"
It's not some clever method of tricking AGW-skeptics into supporting anti-climate change measures. I AM a skeptic. And for example, I get very unhappy when I see extras tacked onto my electricity bill and am forced to subsidise wind farms which are hugely inefficient. (Solar and nuclear I'm in favour of, wind power is downright destructive).
I just happen to be an AGW-skeptic who would like to head off staggering rises in energy costs (which increasingly expensive to extract fossil fuels inevitably lead to), who detests regimes that stone women and would like to see London's vehicles emit water vapour rather than black filth.
>>"Have you seen where a lot of the uranium comes from?"
Kazakhstan may mine Uranium, but there are also plenty of other sources globally where it can be mined very economically. For example, whilst Australians are frequent complainers about their government, I doubt even they would refer to their government as a despotic regime (mostly). And that's just Uranium. When you get onto Thorium reactors, fuel is so globally plentiful it's absurd.
You can get oil from places other than Qatar, Saudi, et al. But with oil, Western support of despotic regimes seems to have been intractable. Nuclear power, the fuel is so easily sourced that if we decide we don't like Kazakhstan's human rights, shifting to another provider is perfectly doable with only a modest financial impact. Maybe even none.
AGW-skeptic right here, and you might be surprised to find that many of us are actually in favour of moving away from fossil fuels. Just not out of some (imo) terror of AGW. They are polluting and cause adverse health effects. They are finite, meaning we must start changing away from them. They are heavily produced in regions ruled by despotic regimes we should not be supporting.
All of these are good reasons to be moving away from fossil fuels. Though not to wind power which is a dreadful ideal, but to nuclear which is cleaner, has plentiful fuel and doesn't result in us protecting the Saudi royal family from those they oppress.
AGW doesn't come into it, as far as I'm concerned
I'm very puzzled as to why something like this would only be measured now rather than a long time ago.
Is there a reason why it's not been properly investigated earlier?
>>"The minimum wage is about to become £6.70 per hour. Coming out at £27,872, will leave very nearly £26k after taxes are applied. Multiply the gross by 3 for mortgage purposes and you get about £83k maximum safe borrowing limit.
If I'm reading you correctly you're basing your ideas on two people both working forty-hours a week every week of the year (2x40x52x £6.70 = £27,872). That unrealistic calculation alone should tell us what we need to know about your argument. It shows a very stunted understanding of both the current state of the jobs market and, indeed, how humans can tolerably live.
Furthermore, it takes no account whatsoever of living costs - firstly ignoring what repayments will be like and secondly the necessity to save for a deposit in the first place. Two people living off £26,000p/a and saving for a deposit? I'd enjoy seeing you try to live off £13k a year.
>>"That alone woul allow the purchase of a whole raft of protery types and locations throughout the land, except for central London."
Well you can get a small terraced house in Hartlepool for around £80,000, I'll grant you. So yes, if everyone is willing to move away from friends and family to whatever depressed area of the UK happens to have the lowest house prices, you might get on the ladder with something small. But we're still not at the point where someone on minimum wage can actually get here, as you're claiming. This is still above their level.
>>"Which is now taxed at a significantly higher rate than any and all previous goivernments desired to. How do you not see that as a good thing?"
Sure, it's a good thing, and I would not expect the government to ignore a pathway to get money out of anyone be they middle-class landlords or otherwise. But I don't see how it remotely addresses the fact that people wishing to buy face massive competition from wealthier people buying those same properties so that the former are forced to rent, instead.
>>"Only, it isn't. I've already shown you how any minimum wage couple can afford to buy a home almost anywhere in the UK"
You really haven't. You've completely assumed cost of living is low enough that your hypothetical couple who have managed to find consistent full time employment and work fifty-two weeks of the year can somehow save enough.
>>"Unrealistic expectations i what is at play here. Having rented nice fully specced homes in nicer areas, they simply don't want to start out at the bottom of the ladder liek the rest of us had to."
A couple don't live in a five-person house share, shacking up in a single bedroom because they're too snooty to settle for a modest house. You really have no idea and IF you started out at the bottom like the rest of us, you should have a better feel for how hard it is to get out in the modern day. But I suspect you did not.
I don't understand this one. Presumably it pushes employers to hire under 25's as much as possible for unskilled / low-skilled jobs? This is ostensibly a positive for 25 year olds but as far as I can see what it actually does is put increased pressure on them by making it even harder to escape the unemployment trap. Have I misread this?
>>"they are most probably still living with mum and dad"
That would be because house prices today are beyond most people's reach and consequently any available properties are snapped up by well-off people who buy them to let out. Frequently borrowing to fund their buy-to-let which further exacerbates the problem. Thus you get buying a house unattainable for most under the age of thirty-five and if rent it takes up half or more of what you actually earn each month.
So there are lots of people "still living with mum and dad" through little choice, even when they work.
Can you explain, please? I missed this one.
I've never had any trouble understanding amanfrommars1. Indeed, I have always liked the way they talk in accurate and informationally complete terms rather than through the layer of underlying social assumptions one must accept in order to understand most people's posts here.
They can end up being used in the national press when you are investigated / wanted for a crime.
I don't think a Service Pack will fix this. The issues I have with it are fundamental design choices. Search bar integrated into the taskbar, hybrid and very cluttered Start Menu, Cortana intended to be a core part of the experience yet unusable unless you grant Microsoft permission to rifle through your emails and txt messages for supplementary information, the hideous inconsistency of settings between programs and OS, the unnecessary windowing of the formerly clean Metro interface.
I am for the first time in a while seriously considering switching back to GNU/Linux for my primary desktop needs.
Will be very keen to see what they have for us.
>>"It seems that at least four of you don't know sarcasm when it hits you in the face"
Actually, I just figured you were trolling.
No. A major version increase would be based on new functionality / interface changes. Simple improvements to the codebase (or complex ones!) don't merit that.
Once some people get their Righteous Cause on, nothing but absolute submission will appease. And often not even then. A great many people get their superiority from being able to point out the faults of others.
Or who remember your last post on this. ;)
2 minutes 21, there is false information. Jimmy Wales states that people aren't worried about strangers looking them up and finding old and regrettable things about them, they're worried about friends and family finding it out, and that these people will already know it.
Both parts of this are incorrect. As a person, what would concern me IS that something I did over a decade ago is going to come up every time I meet a stranger, whether that is a job interview, a new acquaintance, a date, whatever. Secondly, we make new friends all the time (at least most of us do) so again, they may not know what we were arrested for twelve years ago or whatever.
The issue, in a nutshell, is that up until now, the damage to how people see you of something diminished over time. It was possible to move on, rebuild your life or get past that.
With the popular indexing of search engines, that changes. You go for a job interview, start dating someone, try to make a friend and suddenly, just through typing in your name, they know that you were raped six years ago, or were arrested for assault, or that your partner died in an accident, or you programmed in Visual Basic or anything. And these things never go away - no matter how long ago, they are the first thing anyone knows about you defining the impression before you even arrive for your interview or whatever.
Regardless of one's position on this, what Jimmy Wales claimed in that interview is untrue. People ARE concerned about strangers knowing all these details about them and it is NOT the case that everyone in your social circle will already know something.
And anyone claiming that knowledge of this kind doesn't impact your life through how people treat you, plainly is familiar with a different type of human being than the species I live amongst.
>>"Perhaps it's time that the NHS and the civil service in general employed their own IT consultants direct."
In my experience with this area, in-house actual work is the last thing that they will do. There will be plenty of in-house people producing paperwork and looking busy, but it will all be just liaising with the third party company(ies) and waffle.
There are two reason they wont touch actual work in-house. The first is that there is a fair bit of corruption at the upper levels and the aim of a lot of this is to funnel money to outside parties. Oh they will tell people, even themselves, that they're actually spending it for good, but they will still ultimately be funnelling money to their friends. A lot of the SPINE and Connecting for Health was done under Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt, formerly board member of Accenture. Who got tonnes of money for these contracts? Accenture.
There are a lot of rules and regulations about spending in government. But once you get it out into the third party, accountability goes down the drain, it's essentially a firewall against investigation.
Which leads to the second big reason which is one of accountability. No-one in upper reaches of the NHS or Department of Health ever risks having the blame for something land on their desk. They ALL have bits of paper that show it's actually not their fault. Doing work in-house, runs directly counter to that. And yes, that even includes specification which you thought was harmless but no - if there's a clear specification done in-house and it turns out to have been flawed and can be blamed for the ensuing disaster by the outside company, then whoever was head of the department or team writing that specification is going to be hung out to dry by the government as an easy scapegoat. So even writing the specification is outsourced where possible. They'll hire an expert consulting company to help draft and develop the specs.
The one thing you have to understand, if you really want to know why things like this happen, is that the ONE overriding concern of everyone involved on the government side of this, is THEY MUST NOT BE ABLE TO HOLD ME RESPONSIBLE.
And so, no-one is.
The people in charge of this debacle should be prosecuted under the law. I used to work in the NHS. I left because of the sheer degree of corruption at the top. The NHS is filled with people who pointed out flaws with this program and others right from the start and said exactly where it was going wrong. Unfortunately they are all at the middle to bottom of the power structure and never listened to.
I and my project team could deliver better versions of the software components of Careall this for a twelfth the cost. But what would be our chances of even getting to the tendering stage? I will tell you for a fact it is zero.
This is sadly not new. Some years ago, they were shown to have infiltrated that bastion of terrorism, the Green Party. Now I think wind turbines are as stupid just like most other people who have heard of nuclear power, but spying on our political parties on behalf of the New Labour (this happened under Blair, iirc), is not democratic behaviour.
They should have used AWS which as we all know has solved the problem of users typing in the wrong information
Microsoft have been trying to emulate Apple for a while now, seems they're just carrying on that tradition.
Stay good, Microsoft!
ASP.Net is Open Source and released under an Apache licence, just so you know.
>>Are they particulary "unwashed" in the nether regions, or are they just "overly friendly" with each other..
I don't know. Perhaps it's that like you seem to, they are under the bizarre belief that washing the genital area is an effected means of preventing chlamydia transmission.
>>So with the AR version you could use scanned images of your favourite celeb, co-worker, etc. and then overlay onto your partner (who presumably is doing something similar) or "real feel doll".
Until you change position and the software isn't smart enough to realize this, and a male suddenly finds their partner doing some Exorcist style head rotation staring at them up at them whilst bent over.
I can't see that being freaky at all.
I think the use cases of Hololens vs. Occulus are almost inversions of each other. I think the Occulus is likely to be a success for gaming, but have few uses outside of it. Perhaps minor adoption for specialist training purposes. Whilst Hololens will be massively useful for all sorts of purposes outside of gaming, but only suitable for niche games such as those which involve interaction with the real world.
I would imagine Occulus is the death of Mouse and Keyboard gaming. If you can't see your hands, it's pretty much simple game controller only.
>>"I'll spare you the details, but sometimes, one may be wanting to work with accessories. You could, I suppose, arrange them all neatly beside you on the bed before you get started, but even so..."
This is not my area of expertise so I should probably stick to programming articles, but presumably you could occasionally lift the VR set from your head for a few seconds if necessary.
I would think the greater concern for some would be whilst wearing the VR headset, you have no idea if someone else is standing there in the room watching you.
Ah but the real Argentine argument is "a foreign company discovered oil reserves on the Eastern side of the islands and we want them."
It's just phrased differently.
>>"It is politically impossible for any British government to give away that territory now that British blood has soaked its sands"
Why should it be given away, anyway? People live there, these people don't want to be part of Argentina, they want to be part of the UK (which they are). So what trumps their right to self-determination?
The two usual things that people use to try and trump the Falklander's right to self-determination are either claiming that the land is Argentina's by right of geographical proximity, or that it was taken from Argentina unfairly. Neither stands up.
To those who tout Argentinian ownership based on geographical proximity, I simply point out that the islands are about 300 miles away. You can't even see them from Argentina due to curvature of the Earth! If being in that range is sufficient to make some land yours, then I own France, Spain and Belgium. (Anyone want to buy 4,000,000 very rude waiters?).
To those who tout Argentinian ownership based on precedent, I ask people when Argentinians ever settled there? I think there was briefly an Argentinian base there, which post-dates British settlement and that's about it. The people who settled the Falkland islands turned up on an empty, uninhabited island which Argentina had never occupied. There was a very ancient canoe found there by archaeologists, iirc. A canoe which predates the formation of Argentina and probably was some unfortunate souls who drifted out too far into the ocean and starved to death.
The ONLY legal basis for Argentina to own the Falkland islands is that King Philip of Spain once drew a line on a map and said they could have that area. A person whose opinion and legal weight has about as much worth as my own. Less, imho, given that I base my opinion on what the people who actually live there want.
>>"I do remember reading elsewhere that ASLR on 32 bit systems was a dubious concept to begin with, and that on 64 bit systems people were predicting that ways around it would be found sooner or later"
It's not my area but I understand that with the much smaller address space in 32-bit systems, ASLR's benefit is of much less value because the randomization is of necessity far smaller and therefore less of an obstacle. The thing about ASLR is that it is not a fix, it is a mitigation, that offers some value in conjunction with other techniques. For 32-bit systems MS are essentially saying that the value is not significant. HP are saying that it is.
I do not know enough about this area to say who is correct. I do think that HP are correct to disclose this now that MS have confirmed they wont fix it.
>>"What can be patched is the underlying security hole in Windows or IE (whatever it is, if it exists)"
There isn't a specific underlying security hole in this instance. HP have simply reported a flaw with the mitigation measure itself. MS haven't refused to fix any underlying flaw so far as I am aware.
Whilst I feel for the Greek people, many of whom are suffering because of the recklessness of their neighbours and government, I find it hard to entirely place the blame on Germany and France for maliciously lending them money. Indeed, both Germany and France are at risk of major losses out of all this and can hardly be accused of some villainous masterplan about it.
In either case, it still doesn't make jokes about invading Poland any fresher. Please, get some new material for all our sakes.
(this message sent from a British person)
>>"I've read quite a few reviews for this game and virtually all of them are on the PS4 version. I wonder what that's about."
Rocksteady refused to release PC codes prior to the launch so nobody was able to review a PC version. It is now available and complaints are starting to come in. For example. the PC version is capped at 30fps. (You can change it by editing config files, but it's illustrative of much if the developers are making this the default). Number of other complaints as well, so it's looking like the withholding of the PC version from reviewers may have been deliberate attempt to head off news of the problems.
Note, I haven't played it. Probably be next year before I actually find time to get it if I do, so just reporting what I have read. The game may well end up fine with a couple of patches. But hiding the game from reviewers and only letting people play PS4 versions is not a good thing, imo.
>>"However, I do notice that you debated a point and THEN wanted to end the debate."
Touché. I had not even noticed I had done that - most unfair. Instead, I am content to end on your counterpoint and amusing note on national economies.
Beer on me! :)
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018