345 posts • joined 4 Jan 2010
In spain recently I asked for "te negro con leche" which I understand to be the normal way to request the closest approximation they have to a proper cup of tea.
A couple of minutes later, a teapot appeared, accompanied by an empty cup but apparently no milk. I thought I'd give it a stir before asking for the milk but when I opened the lid, I found the contents of the teapot was a teabag and hot milk - no water at all
The presence model of Skype for business is more like rolling a dice. often i receive an email telling me I missed a conversation when i've been online the whole time, then when I log onto the outlook web app on my home laptop a week later, the conversation appears there instead. if you happen to have S4B open on both laptop and phone, you will only get notifications to none-or-one of those devices, and it's totally random which one.
etc. etc. etc. </rant>
"Apparently Windows 10 S has an app in their store which flicks the switch and changes it to normal Windows 10"
but this thing doesn't have an Intel (or Intel-emulating) CPU so presumably it won't be able to run x86 and x84 native windows apps. So this while thing really boils down to nothing more than a reinvention of windows RT. Can someone explain how I'm wrong?
in the olden days (and probably still today for 90% of car owners) you can make a copy of the key before you sell your car (or house for that matter, or anything with a key in it) and still get access even after the ownership has been transferred. is this really any worse than that?
I'm not sure I see it as so much of a problem.
The world is changing fast and your kids don't like the same music/movies/games as you and generally don't want to *own* digital content in the same way older generations are interested in owning things. In fact, apart from houses and the odd sentimental keepsake, I reckon people will be increasingly less interested in inheriting things from their parents at all.
Re: the TicWatch part of the story, what's sad is that the manufacturers have to switch to a different operating system to conserve power - surely any OS intended to be used primarily by battery powered devices (android, IOS etc) should be designed to use next-to-no power when inactive, and perform only the necessary functions at any point in time.
Current crypto is good enough. It's not perfect but it's sufficiently difficult to break that if the powers-that-be want to snoop on you they will resort to other measures (of which there are plenty).
Quantum crypto will always be so much more difficult to deploy that it will probably never find a real-world application.
The only people willing and able to pay for it will be high level politicians and military types who will have to rely on a massive hierarchy of underlings to actually implement it, and the attack points will be in that hierarchy of human fallibility not the crypto tech itself.
What is the point in analyzing dodgy domains and sites by the TLD they are in? do punters generally think a .com is more likely to be legit than others?
As far as I'm concerned the TLD is about as meaningful as the day-of-the-week it was registered as an indicator of whether the domain is likely to be dodgy or not.
"Back to a world of mailing lists, personal websites and tarball downloads"
Not really, just forward to one of a million github imitators that will spring up (assuming the current trend of cloud companies offering services for free with no sign of a business model continues unabated as it has for 20 years).
Switching between git suppliers is trivial thanks to the basic nature of git, so I don't think many devs will lose sleep over that.
However you call it, there's no doubt that a lot of people have made a lot of *real* money on crypto-currency speculation.
All that's required to make money is that we're not at the top of the hype curve yet. That's why people buy houses and twitter shares and lots of other things that are hopelessly overvalued, not because they think they are undervalued but because they believe that someone else in the future will be even more gullible and will take said asset off their hands for more than they paid.
Although like (presumably) Alistair, I haven't put my own money into crypto, I think a lot of the negativity that comes out of some commentators is because (like me) they're just pissed off they think they've missed the boat, and they want to justify it.
@nifty when a user logs in, their plain text password is symmetrically encrypted in transit (i.e. using HTTPS), then at the other end it is decrypted and then hashed to compare against the password database. any logging that takes place during this window after decryption and before hashing would have access to the plain text password.
It's all about a trade-off between the rights of non-white people to go about their lives, the rights of white-supremacists to air their views and the rights of go-daddy to choose who they want as a customer. All of these are enshrined in law.
Just as white-supremacists can't be forced to shut up unless they break the law by violating the rights of non-whites, go-daddy can't be forced to give white-supremacists a voice unless that breaks the law by violating their free-speech rights (which it clearly doesn't).
In the same way, Wal-Mart refuses to sell CDs with the "explicit lyrics" sticker on - that's their choice
Having a many-to-one mapping between email address and mailbox is not the problem; there are plenty of ways to do that even without this gmail feature.
The fault is entirely with Netflix - they should not allow someone to sign up for a site without validating the email address to ensure the person signing up owns that email address.
Even though it may seem that some companies are struggling with digital transformation (or any kind of business transformation for that matter) and maybe even questioning whether it's worthwhile bothering, don't forget that most of the time you are only comparing them with other companies that still exist.
Even if your stock price or market share has gone down while you were undergoing transformation, that doesn't mean it would be better if you hadn't done it; in today's world, companies have to run just to stay still.
I suspect what this means in reality is that although they'll be using the web version of gmail, they'll still be using word and excel but just storing their documents in google's cloud. Even if that's not their plan, I'd wager that's where they'll be in 5 years time.
There's 2 huge reasons a lot of non-technical people are prepared to buy apple kit regardless of the cost/performance: (a) the apple logo and (b) the simplicity of the interface. This can't touch either of those.
For sure there are reg readers (like me) who have bought apple for other reasons, and might be tempted by kit like this in the future, but we are in the tiny minority of mac users.
"...SSL certificates are free and take little effort to install, add virtually no load or problems for your website"
This is exactly the problem. Google are training naive users into thinking that just because the site is HTTPS, somehow it's bona fide. When any old idiot can get a cert for free, that's a very dangerous assumption.
TBH I don't really make a distinction between fake and real politician/celeb any more. They're all just bodies for hire to promote a product, and whether they're the "real thing", a human impersonator or a digital avatar doesn't make much difference.
it's not very clear but I would assume it's the number of land-lines + active sim cards (i.e. either on a contract or with credit balance). if you include business, most people in the UK probably have between 2-3
@Aaiieeee I believe a lot of people who don't have access to mains electricity live can charge mobile phones through solar panels or wind-up
Of course Wikipedia isn't perfect, nothing's perfect. Everywhere you look in the world there is injustice, and journalists make a living from being outraged by it, as if we (humanity) had a choice between doing things right and doing them wrong, and we chose to do them wrong.
But that's not the way the world works. We invent things at random all the time, some are good, some are bad, we usually don't know which is which when we invent them, and on the whole the ones that don't work fall into disuse. Could anyone really claim that the world as a whole would be a better place without Wikipedia in it?
Is it intended to revive the culture of a city which is ailing, or celebrate one which is thriving?
The name would imply the latter, but assuming it comes with a slab of cash to promote cultural events, giving that cash to the city with the worst culture would make more sense.
back in the 90's you used to have sockets on the back of the PC to piggy-back power to the monitor.
When a colleague was away I put a novell netware server under his desk, connected it to his keyboard and screen, and piggy-backed the power to the server off his PC. Then primed a colleague to mention that we'd had to install netware on his PC due to a customer emergency. At first he laughed it off but when he powered on the PC and saw netware booting up it definitely had him believing it.
GF has a habit of telling me about a dream she's had but without actually mentioning it was a dream, leaving me rather confused most of the time.
The other day she said "I had a weird dream last night" and then proceeded to tell me about something that had happened the previous day - apparently it was supposed to be two unrelated sentences.
I think the author is conflating object orientation with component reuse. Whilst neither has been a panacea for all software development problems (and I don't think anyone serious ever claimed they would be), both have been successful and improved developers lives.
Try going back to VB3 or plain K&R C and see how long it takes to build an application from scratch (like almost all apps were in the 80's and 90's) compared to what you can achieve with modern tools.
But it's a really interesting observation that a lot of people (e.g. Athenian cafe owners and presumably a significant proportion of their customers) aren't concerned about cyber security at all and just see the internet as somewhere to gawp at porn and pictures of other people's dinners.
Are they all ignorant/deluded about the dangers, or are they living a lifestyle that doesn't really depend on the internet in the way ours does?
It all depends whether you trust banks and the governments they're in league with. At the moment, most people do (at least in the west) but as the realization of the global finance racket becomes apparent, I think people will be increasingly likely to look for something that's doesn't require you to trust any institution.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019