Re: Agents of SHIELD link
"Computers Located Overseas? Usurp Data!"
3213 posts • joined 26 Nov 2009
"Computers Located Overseas? Usurp Data!"
"This is possibly the funniest thread ever written on flatulence:"
Icon says it all. And I haven't finished yet - the rest is saved for later!
"It takes a special person not to re-read your out of office before you set it. To be fair I think I've made that mistake once, which is something you learn from."
Ditto. The solution I've settled on is to change the out of office when I turn it off so that it reads as something more generic. Next time I turn it on, if I'm in a hurry and forget to edit it to add a date, it's still fine.
"Chrome sends everything you type even local network hosts off to the chocolate factory. No way that is secure. They don't care about security or privacy unless its _also_ an earner for them."
Just for fun, why not have your site browser sniff - and if it detects Chrome, display some appropriate text about the slurp-tastic nature of Google.
" if only a few see the funny side then it's worth it"
Sometimes, if only a few see the funny side, that makes it funnier.
If the Earth did not rotate, I don't want to live on the dark side, but could we please make sure I'm located somewhere that it's permanently dusk? That would mean it's always evening, and that tomorrow would never come - which is when I would next have to go to work.
"Riiiiiight... you mean you put it to one side in the hope people believe you thought about it for a few days and then assigned it to the BBFC 'because it's easier'.
"Is there a pop up book on how the internet works they can read?"
If there is, I don't know - pop ups are blocked here.
That made me do a double take, too, until I followed the link in the article, and found:
"The mobile apps used to control those devices are not just an ordinary remote. The apps offer multiple features for communication and socializing like search for other users, maintaining a friends list, a video chat, a message board and also a feature to create and share image galleries, where images can be stored and shared with friends in the Vibratissimo social network."
Ta - that line does appear to have done the trick. Wine 1.6.2 is no more.
The instructions on that page are what I was going to follow to install the new wine - but I didn't get beyond uninstalling the old one. Now I have:
vinceh@Deimos wine --version
If we ever meet, I owe you a pint.
WINE is currently on my most hated list of Linux software. I have version 1.6.2 installed on Mint, and wanted to upgrade the shiny new version, in the hope that I could get some more software I use on Windows running on Linux.
According to the WINE home page, I had to uninstall the old version first. Fair enough... except the bastard won't uninstall.
I first tried it using the Software Manager, and it seemed to work. Until I then came to install the new version, following the instructions on its home page. I forget the exact error, but the upshot is that it won't install because, apparently, I still have 1.6.2 installed.
Except I haven't if I try to use it - nothing that ran under WINE now runs under WINE.
Except I have if I try to install a new version.
Except I haven't if I try to uninstall it again.
Except I have if I type wine --version
Except I haven't if I try to use it... etc.
Head -> Desk.
All the improvements in the world would just take a calamity and turn it into a disaster.
I don't like pizza much, so I'm inclined to suggest the best thing to do with this monstrosity is add it to the cargo in a sun targeted rocket.
I am quite partial to one of those giant yorkshire puds filled with stew, though.
"So 2 distinct visits to different car parks were falsely recorded by them as car being in same car park at 2 different times"
I suspect that's more down to incompetence / stupidity than anything else. They simply hadn't considered the possibility of someone using one shop/car park, going away, then coming back and using the other shop/car park.
(Icon for them, not you.)
I wish they hadn't cut that scene from the final movie.
"Unfortunately, we will inherit it only briefly, before keeling over with a Gregg's bag in our chubby hands.."
So we'll at least go out happy*, then?
* Subject to liking stuff from Greggs. Other vendors are available. Your statutory rights are not affected by this footnote.
"And Google's, obviously."
Sure. Unless you take steps to limit it - there are ways and means. They probably still get some data from me, but it's nowhere near as much as they could get if I just shrugged my shoulders and accepted what they do.
"it's now 2018 and the time and date is available everywhere."
Remind me where I can see the time in the middle of Dartmoor, the Brecon Beacons, or places like that.
TBH, I generally don't need to when I'm in such places, and don't really care what the time is - and I haven't worn a watch since the strap broke on mine - but you said it's available everywhere, when it quite patently isn't.
Well its "core strength" certainly isn't security!
"More likely anything large and interesting will be hunted to extinction, if it is sentient, then they will govern it to extinction."
Quite. If we were a race capable of interstellar travel (in useful time frames), the only chance life on other worlds would probably have is if it was much more advanced than us.
Obvious joke is obvious - so obvious that I didn't see it! ;)
Actually, though, I wouldn't have Marketing Bob say it at the end; I reckon Programmer Bob should have said it when he finished his explanation.
Thinking about this while in the shower, I've imagined a scenario that may have played out at their premises.
* cue wavy special effect to change the location from El Reg's comments page to Programmer Bob's desk...
Programmer Bob is sat at his desk, working away - or at least using his computer for something, which may or may not be work - when he decides he needs a coffee, so he gets up to head for the canteen. His route takes him past Supervisor Bob's office, where he can see Supervisor Bob deep in conversation with Marketing Bob.
He gives them a nod as he walks past, and Supervisor Bob waves at him to come in.
"Hey Programmer Bob," says Supervisor Bob, "I'm glad I caught you. I just wanted to check something. I was looking over some of your code earlier, and I noticed something, and wanted to clarify. You've defined a constant - frick - as seven hundred and five million, six hundred thousand, and used it in various places. What is it?"
"Uh, hey, yeah, we work to a precision of one one thousandth of a frame - that's a frame tick - and various frame rates. That number is the lowest common multiple; we can use it for the math* in any frame rate without resorting to complicated fractions."
"Ah, thought it was something like that."
Noticing the blank expression on Marketing Bob's face, Supervisor Bob starts to explain.
"You know that there are various different frame rates used in video?" he asks.
"Yeah," says Marketing Bob.
"And you know we work to a precision of one one thousandth of a frame?"
"Yeah," says Marketing Bob, showing early signs of not knowing at all.
Supervisor Bob nods to Programmer Bob to continue.
"Well, the math* surrounding this can be quite complicated," he explains, "and representing frames - or fractions of frames - in a number of nanoseconds can be messy and imprecise."
"Okaaaay," says Marketing Bob, nodding, while his face looks increasingly blank.
"So I figured, let's work out the lowest common multiple of all the frame rates multiplied by a thousand. That's seven hundred and five million, six hundred thousand. Define that as a constant, which I've called frick - it's short for frame tick - and we can use that throughout our code. One thousandth of each frame rate - the precision we work to - can be represented by a certain number of fricks."
"I see," says Marketing Bob, looking at Supervisor Bob in the hope he might offer a clue about what Programmer Bob just explained.
"Basically," says Supervisor Bob, trying to make things clearer and summarising what Programmer Bob said, "Programmer Bob has worked out a number that's really useful for the math* in our code. Seconds and nanoseconds aren't accurate enough, but the constant frick is a good way to represent each amount of time we need to work to."
"Aha!" says Marketing Bob, "So Programmer Bob has invented a new unit of time?"
"Well..." starts both Programmer Bob and Supervisor Bob, hesitatingly.
"That's genius!" exclaims Marketing Bob, getting up out of his chair, "I think we can do something with that. I'm off to write a press release. Can you email me an explanation - in simple terms if possible, I don't want to confuse the people we send it to."
He goes to walk out of the door, then hesitates.
"One thing, though. Can you change its name - frick sounds a bit sweary. How about a flick? That's got huge potential!"
* 'math' rather than 'maths' because all three Bobs are probably Overpuddlians.
flicks functions written to perform accurate conversions, the losses accumulating through timing mismatches would result in a loss of precision and could throw off the execution of the simulation."
I'd say FTFY - but in fact they probably have written those functions, specifically to handle 'flicks'.
All that's happened is that someone has discovered maths, worked out the lowest common multiple of the frame rates (x 1000), given it a name, and shouted about it as though it's some kind of miracle.
"One wonders who they actually interviewed for this survey, or what "enterprises" they "worked" for."
Or how loaded the questions were.
I followed the link to see if they were available, but I'd have to create an account with them so sod that.
"YES! The first acceptable use for the damned things!"
Well, I wasn't thinking of it as a "use" as such, but in hindsight, it is: The Sun is gradually losing mass (and we're getting further away from it) - so feeding it sprouts (and other things we don't like) makes sense.
The best way to cook sprouts is to fire them into the Sun. All of them. Let no sprout remain!
"There is a 20% tax on turnover on EVERYTHING Apple sells in the UK. It's called VAT."
VAT is not a "20% tax on turnover".
It is a tax added to the price of the goods or services and is ultimately paid by the consumer. The company is merely collecting it from the end customer, and hands it over minus any VAT they themselves have paid on allowable goods or services they have purchased along the way.
"so they employ lots of staff in the UK, all subject to national insurance and so on."
They pay employers' national insurance contributions, yes - but that isn't a tax on the company, as such. However: "and so on"? You originally claimed they paid "tax and NI on local employees." The tax is deducted FROM the employees wages and salaries (along with the employees' own NI contributions). Apple isn't paying anything here (other than the ers' contribution as I said) - just like with the VAT, they are merely collecting it, this time from the employees, and then handing it over to the tax man.
"The recipients and their families when they use the income to buy stuff."
They use their net income to buy stuff - net after the tax has been deducted by the employer (in this case Apple) and passed on to the tax office. That was the point I was making - tax on income is a tax paid by the employee, not the employer.
The person I was replying to seemed to suggest it was a tax paid by Apple. It isn't - they're just collecting it from the employee and handing it over.
"They pay local sales and other taxes (VAT, business rates on their shops, salaries, tax and NI on local employees, and so on)"
Wait, what? Who pays VAT? Who pays tax on wages and salaries?
"You think that's bad? Try a channel with only 44 subscribers and less than 300 views a month. Up until this point I have nothing interesting to offer tho."
Ahem. Fewer than.
But that aside, during 2017 I'm sure I saw something from YouTube saying a channel's videos could no longer be monetised until the channel had reached 10,000 views. (Logging in to check, mine currently stands at 6,739 on the main channel).
Prior to the change, though, I had built up a small balance - it currently stands at a whopping 92p, though I think half that probably dates back to long before I put anything on YouTube and is from when I was young and foolish and actually had Google advertising on a website.
Oh, those heady days.
"as I start to put some elbow grease and started producing videos, Youtube waltzes up and move the goalpost farther away."
Yup. And because I logged in to check those numbers above, I can also point out that it's worse than El Reg says. The article says "until their channels hit 1,000 subscribers and a total of 4,000 viewing hours" but looking at the monetisation page, it actually says (my emphasis):
"You can apply for monetisation at any time. To be approved, all channels need at least 4,000 watch hours in the previous 12 months and 1,000 subscribers. This requirement allows us to properly evaluate new channels, and helps protect the creator community."
"I really don't care what the paint job looks like as long as it works."
I looked at the blog post, at the image, and filled in the survey with comments to the effect that they're talking about "Improving its Interface" - but the image looks like the same interface with some icky paint job on it.
Also, the questions are so stupid. For example: Does it look "trustworthy" - WTF?
I can't "trust" something where form is given more import than function. So that comment got added as well.
And those who have lost irretrievable data, but it was a long time ago and therefore couldn't possibly happen again.
"I think you fail to realise that Google search results are "personalised" based on browsing history. (Same applies to the original complainant)."
So what does it do for someone who doesn't, by default (or directly), use Google for search? I use Startpage. If I happen to log-in to a Google service, I tend to log-out when I've finished, and cookies are wiped at the end of my browsing session - and I don't keep the browser open longer than I'm using it.
So let's go to Google now, and see what it suggests for me. These are the ten suggestions, in order:
is my car taxed
is santa real
is water wet
is my car insured
is my car mot
is it down
is 1 a prime number
is it going to snow
is the earth flat
is the iphone 7 waterproof
If there's no browsing or search history to draw on, it must be using some other algorithm to make suggestions - and popular search terms certainly seems a likely possibility.
Meanwhile, if you throw the word into Google Translate and it tells you that in Spanish it means "chopped up" and in Portuguese it means "cut".
There's been a lot of confusion and misinformation* over the whole Making Tax Digital farce - including some from HMRC themselves, where some people in the organisation have a different understanding of what it is or is not to others.
I did notice in the report this article is about, though, that where it makes reference to Making Tax DIgital for Businesses, it suggests it will be for those businesses that have a turnover over the VAT threshold.
* Although I think the worst misinformation came from cloudy crud companies, some of whom kept pushing the notion that MTD meant companies had to use cloudy accounts rubbish.
"It is particularly concerning that a number of the inadequacies related to basic, commonplace measures needed for any such system."
26 (2) in the report (page 13).
Amusingly, I received a Word doc by email a couple of weeks before Christmas, which I needed to forward to someone else. He printed it using Word and the result ended up back with me. It printed incorrectly, so I want back to the original email I'd received and printed it from there, using Libre Office.
It was wasn't quite right, but the result was much closer to how it should have looked than the version that spewed forth from Word.
(Most likely, the source used a different version of Word than the person I forwarded it to - but still!)
No, they don't remove your data - at least, not everything. It might be that they delete all your posts/photos etc, and just retain your connections - I can't be sure.
I deleted my old account a few years ago, and a couple of years (ish) created a new one with a different email address (which has remained unused until the start of this year*). Some time after doing that, I tried doing the same with the original email address as an experiment, and it offered to restore my old account. This was a while back now, so I can't remember the exact wording - it might have just been the connections. I didn't proceed in order to find out - that was as far as I wanted to take the experiment.
"Of course, they could just be hoping you decide to cancel your deletion and remain connected to the collective"
Yes, ^ this.
* A few family members have commented about me not using Facebook (and have given the impression they think I'm weird, like the poster further up). At least one thinks I'm a liar when I've said I don't use Facebook because he's seen the name crop up and doesn't understand "not having" and "not using" are two different things. So over Christmas I said that I will start using it again from this year, albeit very lightly (log-in occasionally, post something unimportant). And now that I have, all I can say is that I think it's even more awful now than it was a few years ago.
"Somewhere for the birds and the bees to do
When I was a child and was told about the birds and the bees, I didn't believe a word of it. After all, wouldn't the bees sting the birds?
Of course, some of the birds could be masochistic, but I didn't know about that possibility back then.
"Rendezvous with Rama Arthur C Clarke. (There be sequels.)"
A thousand times yes!
Also: Lucifer's Hammer (Niven & Pournelle) - it's a big old book IIRC, so would probably work as a mini series.
Another I'd like to throw into the list of possibilities is a trilogy, of which I've only read books 1 and 3: The Trigon Disunity (Michael P Kube McDowell).
Yes - on a usenet group I inhabit*, we made that observation a long time ago - and whenever something good appeared, we'd therefore anticipate early cancellation.
There are, of course, exceptions that somehow last the distance, but science fiction TV history is littered with good stuff (or stuff that showed a lot of potential) that didn't last.
I hereby raise a glass to some of that stuff.
* I nearly said "used to inhabit" - but I am still subscribed. It's just there are almost never any posts these days.
One recent gem from SyFy was Dark Matter - which I've only just watched - but the feckers have cancelled it.
Although the article was heading in a distinctly different direction, one sentence in particular jumped out at me and I felt needed fixing:
"And the more data there is, the greater the attractive force pulling
applications and services marketeers to associate with find ways to monetise that data."
"There is generally nothing between a touch screen and the fingers, that's kinda the point of a touch screen, yo."
My thoughts also when I read that bit.
I'd go with "Problem Extends from Fingers and Beyond" - PEFFAB.
"Will we all start to covet this new security system?
Well, having tested the system now for two months, we can answer authoritatively: yes and no. And which side you will end up on will depend on two things: the size and shape of your home; and how much money you have and are willing to spend on a security system."
You appear to have missed a reason for someone falling into the 'no' category - which is because they aren't stupid enough to buy things with teh 'smarts'.
And now that he has been sacked, has David Davis quit like he promised he would? If not, does he have a suitable excuse?
Don't forget "It's a small exhaust port, right below the main port" and (right after it) "The shaft leads directly to the reactor system."
And didn't Obi Wan tell Luke that he'd have to "learn to use the force if you want to come"?*
* There may have been a reference to Alderaan at the end of that sentence, which I'm ignoring.
Am I the only one disappointed that the headline didn't end after the second word?
Firefox 57 - and the NoScript UI on it - is what finally kicked me into installing Palemoon on my Linux box. (I've been using it on this Windows laptop since buying it, but I left Firefox on the Linux desktop at home.)
"I've not heard of them before, so found there's an opt out thing if you visit https://www.viglink.com/opt-out/"
I would imagine that works using a cookie. If so it's not much use if cookies are wiped automatically when you quit the browsing session.
Nah, eroding workers rights should be easier, so they're going to do that first. Then they can loosen up rules on electrical stuff, because as well as stopping it interfering with other things, they can also take away any safety regulations at the same time.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018