Posts by Adrian 4 2289 publicly visible posts • joined 18 Jul 2009
Can't really see the court's argument here.
If Morrisons had been negligent and let someone have access through poor security or policy then yes. But he was legitimately authorised : he just abused that permission. How was Morrisons supposed to stop that ?
If someone over 18 stole a kitchen knife from their store and stabbed someone with it, would the store be an accessory ?
But what does popular mean ?
Used by lots of people ? Loved by lots of people ? Has more fixes than anything else ? More bugs than anything else ?
One day I'll find some python that works. Mostly it just seems to be a mess of incompatible dependencies and roll-your-own package managers.
You can get USB outlets that are rated for the 500V test : 'Big Clive' recently featured one on his youtube channel.
However, I'm not at all convinced of the wisdom of installing low-cost switching power supplies in semi-permanent installations. This sort of electronics tends to have a short life with a fiery ending. I'd much rather have additional BS sockets with a replaceable converter plugged in.
"so the too conservative is the correct setting, "
For uncontrolled roads, yes. But in reality you can't test other strategies if low level collision avoidance is stopping you all the time.
The proper answer is to present the system with only the variables you can handle at present, and only when you believe that to be representative of reality can you unleash it on the streets.
To be fair to Uber, they were doing that by running at night in an area that was relatively quiet. But still had nowhere near enough control of the environment and should in any case have then used the more careful strategies (with the expectation that they wouldn't be invoked).
There's some marketing in this too : clearly such a low-function prototype is a very long way from being safe to run on the streets. But 39MPH on an urban road looks far more progressive to your investors than 5MPH stop and go, so you'd want to demonstrate progress on that earlier rather than later.
The same argument works for motorway service stations.
Have a large number of low-speed chargers in the car park, capable of putting 100km range in 30min. Used by people going to eat who just want a top-up.
Have a smaller number of high speed chargers in the redundant petrol filling area that can be used at higher cost. Note that petrol pumps, at least, tend to be underused - the actual filling time is only 30-50% of the total time, that includes positioning and paying. Allow for peak demands with a 'power wall' replacing the former underground tank.
" cost was staggering.. It was almost the cost of a full time employee."
If the assumption is that your salary is for an 8-hour day (I'm sure you work longer but that's what it's supposed to pay for) then you're asking for permanently-assigned cover for twice your hours.
If the ISP can, by intentionally overbooking their engineer, do that for the cost of only one salary and still presumably make a profit, then that would appear to be a half-price bargain.
"Machine AI, for all its failings, is probably better than the Mk1 Eyeball version. I don't really know why ID parade evidence is considered so valuable. It has been known for ages that it is pretty damn unreliable."
Because it can be used on a much larger scale, and produce a correspondingly large number of false positives as a result.
A manual id parade with 10 random members of the public generates a level of false positives that can be handled, and since the other 9 members are picked randomly the presumption tends to be that if one does get identified it's most likely an error (though I imagine will be investigated).
That's an entirely different proposition to doing a speculative match against the entire past and current driving population of the US. A large number of false positives are extremely likely, and if it's used to find a person rather than merely confirm a suspicion, the assumptions of innocence are not the same.
It's not a matter of automating an existing procedure. It's a completely different test - more akin to looking through a book of known criminals to find a match than a real ID parade, with the vast majority of the faces NOT being criminals at all, which weights the test to favour false positives.
Johnson and the Conservative Party are doing their best to do the same thing over here.
Do you remember when we used to criticise poorly-written laws on the bases that 'some future ill-willed government might intentionally misinterpret them' and abuse the electorate.
We now have those governments.
The best two are the girl with the encryption machine and the boy with the pocket terminal. Both feature 'normal' people instead of the dodgy mugger types or the soviet style graphics, though the girl loses by being a cartoon depiction too. A real photo would be much better and easy to stage.
I'm no photographer or graphic artist. But perhaps something along this theme would do well ? Maybe a hipster with a laptop .. and a table of account names and passwords on the screen ?
"Some of those incidents include a £185,000 penalty against Northern Ireland's Department of Justice for auctioning off a filing cabinet that contained personal information about victims of a terrorist attack in 2014. "
And the effect of fining government departments or hospitals is what, exactly ?
I guess the managers have to take a pay cut ?
The people involved lose their holiday pay ?
Expansion plans are shelved ?
Or perhaps they just stop cleaning the publicly-accessible toilets and take on less cases.
Beer was the problem with a desk calculator (in the 70s, when that was a meaty brute with Nixie tubes) returned from certain Wolverhampton brewery. Not sure if they were encouraged to sample the products in the office, but the calculator was never productive again.
What bureaucrats most want to do is to do _something_, so there existence appears to have a point. It doesn't really matter what, and it certainly isn't expected to be anything useful. It just should be annoying and inescapable, so that it can't be removed without endless debate about what it should be replaced with. This protects their position.
EU bureaucrats aren't any worse than any others. In fact they're often better than national government bureaucrats because they don't suffer from so many parochial concerns or biases to protect particular nationally-important commercial interests. But they still don't really perform any function except sustaining themselves.
The US system may be different, but in the UK we vote for people, not parties. The members we voted in then elect a PM.
The party affiliation is secondary yet asserts a huge pressure on how the members vote.
How is this even legal ?
In any reasonable arena they would seen as what they are : immoral pressure groups applying bribes.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
