Posts by Matt Bryant

RE: whahahaha

".....engage in activities with the enemy?...." Oh, you really need to loosen up the tinfoil hat and double up on your meds.

RE: @Matt Bryant: lay off the 'Big Society' FlavorAid and try THINKING for yourself

Oh, I do lots of reading, plenty of thinking for myself, and I even know a bit about history. A damn more than you, by the looks of it.

"The State kept right out of the voluntary sector when there was full employment...." When was there full employment? If you mean in the years immediately before Thatcher, then I suggest you go read up on the Winter of Discontent. I think you'll also find there were plenty of charitable organsiations long before Margaret Thatcher was even born.

"......why keep people out of work?" You say it like there was some grand plan to keep a certain number of "the poor" unemployed. The fact is there are plenty of unemployed that simply choose not to work because they think menial jobs are below them. For example, the BBC has an article on its website about squatters (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-14030336), and talks to one called Biz, an art graduate, who chooses to squat and stay unemployed as she wants to find a job "she enjoys". Personally, I think she needs a good kick in the pants. As a graduate, she must be smart enough to do any number of office jobs, she just seems to assume they are too "mundane" for her.

RE: hmmm

There was a cake? Sorry, I didn't see past the baps.

RE: Re: Anonymous are God's until they break into *your* server

Boy, you really do know nothing about the law, do you!

"....could be compared to a bunch of people protesting outside a building causing enough of a crowd normal employees/customers/etc. can't get in...."

There are strict laws about such protests. In the US, it is a crime for a protest to block access, which is why you see those news clips of protesters walking in circuits outside their target buildings, so the Police can't charge them. In the UK, picketting has very strict laws which were designed to stop union intimidation of non-union workers. If a protester or picket stops anyone physically crossing the picket line then they would be arrested and charged with assault. And you need to follow health and safety guidelines and apply for a licence to make a legal street-protest. I suggest you do a bit more research before mounting your next crusade to "free us all from the tyranny of whatever".

And then how do you propose that websites accommodate "pickets"? DDOS is a crime, fullstop. You can create a protest website if you like, but you had better make sure your "facts" presented there are proveable otherwise you'll be up for slander/libel/defamation charges. Oh, but the work of checking your facts, creating a proetst website and dealing with challenges is just too much like hard work, no? Much easier to just download some SQL injection toolz and fire away from your Mum's basement!

RE: Yet another reason to hate Oracle

Aw, c'mon, Alli! Quit being lazy and do your own trolling, girl!

http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/ondemand/migrate/db.html

;)

RE: If you don't have an iPhone,

You just have more choice and more cash in your pocket.

RE: It's just like an iPhone 4

But the improvement is now you just need your tongue stuck to a railing rather than a flagpole.

RE: Re: Android with QWERTY keyboard

And for gamers, the Sony Ericcson Xperia Play, with slide-out PlaySation-style controller.

RE: Re: RE: Why wait?

".....you can't see why people would be waiting to buy an iphone?....." Well, I did my market research, compared prices and features, thought about what I was actually going to do with a phone, and came to the conclusion that the iPhone4 offered zero over what the HTCs offered, and Android seemed a lot more flexible in choice of what I can actually do with the phone. So, for me, it seemd daft to pay more to buy an iPhone that would actually give me less than the HTC. Looking at the details released so far on the iPhone, I still see nothing of greater value than the HTC Sensation gives already. If the iPhone4 had given me something extra over the HTC then I would have paid the extra. Instead of you fanbois just doing the shouty-shouty, please explain what features you think the iPhone5 will have that will make it better than the current dual-core Android phones?

RE: Why wait?

I have three phones I use daily, most used being my work Blackberry. Second up I've just upgraded to a nice new HTC Senstation with Gingerbread and it's truly a great personal phone. And still getting useage after many years (it's an app thing) is my old iPaq running WinMob 2k3 2nd Ed (no, I'm not joking). The Sensation is brilliant, and - having tried friends iPhones - I just didn't see the need to wait for an iPhone5

RE: @ Matt: Matt, matt matt...

".....That would usually hold. If you assume that Onkyo Corp and Velocity Micro have more cash than Google...." No, what you need to see is which companies MAKE MONEY FROM ANDROID as they are the targets M$ is hitting. Regardless of how much money Google has from other activities, Google gives Android away free, it is effectively a loss-leader for them. Even the Nexus was an HTC jobbie in Google drag. Google make a sum total of zero dollars from Android. In fact, probably a loss, but a minus sign would just confuse you so let's stay with zero dollars. The handset vendors are the ones that make money selling handsets with Android installed. You got that? Zero dollars, versus lots of dollars. Concentrate, see which is the bigger figure? And that figure is getting bigger as Android has the fastest growing share of the market. So M$ will target the handset vendors.

Now, I suggest you stop reading here as the remainder of this post is speculation about business stuff and likely well over your head. Each company M$ signs up to their patent licencing scheme sends M$ money for every Android phone they sell, so that rapidly growing Android market share is a rapidly growing revenue stream to M$ for very little outlay. Each vendor signed up sets a stronger and stronger precedent to go clout more handset vendors with. It also increases the cost of making each Android phone, therefore allowing M$ to compete better with their own phone OS (in fact, you could say the patents revenue allows M$ to offset some of the cost of their own phone OS development and marketting, making them even more competitive). After all, M$ is not obliged to sell a licence to any handset vendor, so taking away say their FAT licence would kill their ability to use many external devices. Not nice, but then this is business.

Now, would an adult please take Pierre back to the ballpit?

RE: Two more go on to the list.

If M$'s arguments were so weak it is highly likley that Google would have stepped in to support their customers. After all, Google wants Android to succeed. I'm pretty sure the "free-till-I-die" people like the OSF would be all over this if M$ didn't have at least some grounds. Unless we get some leaks from those lecensees already bitten, it seems we are unlikely to uncover exactly patents M$ clubbed them with, but that might change when they get round to a bigger opponent (such as Motorola).

RE: Great, more FUD

"......When someone has a problem with Android they go after Google, not after the hardware vendors...." Follow the money, dummy! If M$ sues Google all they get is a big bill from the lawyers and no doubt plenty of attention from monopolies commissions, and all Google have to do is point out they give Android away for free to stop a request for money. If M$ pushes Google too hard then Google may rewrite whatever bits are impacted by M$'s patents, and then release that code for free to other people that could use it to get round M$'s patents. If M$ get licence deals with Android handset vendors then they get a revenue stream, their patents saty valuable, and they don't run up massive legal bills either. Seeing as Android is growing so fast, it looks like a nice revenue stream to have!

Linux is different, I think you'll find the biggest anit-Linux swingers were actually SCO and Sun. Although M$ made lots of noise, their dominance in the desktop, netbook and server markets meant they didn't really need to be too aggressive and eventually they didn't need more attention from monopolies commissions. Phones are different, M$ can afford to throw their weight around without getting too much attention from the authorities as they are not leading the phone OS segment.

The fact that - so far - just about every vendor has coughed up quickly implies M$ has a good case, even if they are "bogus" patents. I suspect it is to do with FAT storage of one type or another, which M$ seem to have zeroed in on as a solid case for licence deals. What we need is for someone like Motorola to take it to court so the World+dog can examine the patents, then maybe someone clever can write something free to get round the patents.

RE: Selective reading - to a selective conclusion

You are making the unsubstantiated conclusion that any IBM gains were due to competitive take-outs, whereas IBM's gains int eh quarter were more likley to have been old Power upgrades to newer Power6 (which was reduced to clear) and Power7. And probably also because IBM's Power sales took such a beating during the dip in the economy, so they had a bigger hole to climb out of to get back to normal. The point I was making was that IBM's competitive takeouts were not impacting hp's sales, and that Itanium was still growing in sales.

As regards the growth in Snoreacle sales, growing 34.4% of next to nothing is till not much at all.

RE: Decimal point

Whoops! Sorry, yes that should have been 0.82% and 3.3%. I can only blame the laughter induced by another TPM "IBM, ra-ra-ra!" article. I suppose we might see a small dent by the time we're all in flying cars. But TPM also didn't go back and read his own article on the IDC figures for the quarter (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/05/26/gartner_q1_2011_server_numbers/), which showed that hp grew their UNIX figure by 6.7%. So, if IBM is taking a few accounts, hp seems to be taking a lot of more IBM or Oracle ones!

RE: "...about 391 of those deals came out of Oracle/Sun accounts..."

At that rate of replacement, I don't think either Leo or Larry will be exactly breaking into a sweat! Take a look at the figures hidden in between TPM's Big Blue pompom waving and it doesn't exactly paint a picture of great success. The hp competitive conversions don't exactly sound like a tsunami of Power:

"....IBM says that it has identified over 10,000 HP Integrity server accounts.... " So that's the overall target. I'm sure it's no coincidence it's the same as the number of shared Oracle-Integrity accounts hp mentions in its court case against Oracle.

"....the first quarter of this year was pretty good, with 845 competitive replacements...." So this quarter just gone was extra good for IBM? So how many Integrity implementations could they have replaced with Power, assuming all those were Integrity and not old Compaq Alpha?

".....40 per cent came from HP accounts...." So, a grand total of 82. Ignoring the fact that IBM marketting probably counted individual servers rather than customers, and that some of those were probably very old hp kit rather than Superdomes, 82 is still nothing more than market churn. It's 0.0082% of the target accounts, or 0.033% if they maintain that over the year. At that rate, we'll all be flying Jetson-style aircars before IBM even makes a noticeable dent!

".....the kind of thing Big Blue has been doing for years and presumably HP and Oracle/Sun are doing, too, but they don't talk about it (which is idiotic if they are doing lots of competitive takeouts)....." I'd suggest even Larry would draw the line at pointing out such a Grand Replacement Plan was achieving so little!

RE: @ Matt

".....'political-self-destruct' button..." Twitter shows there's an app for that!

Given that the Terriblefudgeup seems to have the aerodynamics of a brick, you will probably need to carry spare undies for every time it hits a crosswind!

RE: it can't get airborne carrying two normal American men

"But, what if they're republicans?" I hear some Democrats Congressmen like to be seen just in their undies, that would save some weight.

RE: With that sort of arrogant attitude

Sorry, but even the repmobile drivers are nothing compared to the average owner of a Toyota Pr*ck-to-ar$e. I won't call them "drivers" as they seem to be barely capable of steering in a straight line. Only the other day I followed one along the M4 and he went 40+ miles without leaving the middle-lane, regardless of whether the inside lane was empty, and totally blind when other drivers indicated that they wanted to pull out of the inside lane and the outside lane was empty. True, the latter is just common courtesy, but then I always maintain a good driver is also a courteous one.

RE: elitists? bleeding hearts? wtf?!!

"....So if you want government protecting your workplaces your best bet would be to campaign & vote democrat...." Erm, love to burst your bubble, but investigations of the Dummicrat Stimulus showed that it was sending massive amounts of both US taxpayers' cash and jobs abroad, especially to China. The windfarms that Lewis bangs on about in his UK energy articles were a particular source of criticism in the US, with 80+% of the first round of Stimulus funding of renewables going to overseas companies. I would suggest a more practical approach would be a little research rather than just blindly following the Dummicrat line.

RE: RE: RE: @ Matt Bryant 26th June 2011 15:19 GMT

"....No assumption....." Erm, yes, you just admitted it was!

"....The Internets is full of forums filled to the gunwales with descriptions of this racial profiling..." Ah, a more unbiassed and truly verifiable source of data would be hard to find than Internet forums - NOT! Please, if the best argument you can give is "an AC on some forum said so" then I really think you need to go back to kindergarten.

"....Everybody can predict the future, up to a degree..." So you're admitting you can't predict the future accurately. You're also avoiding the issue that you assume all Arizona police officers will only operate the checks out of some form of racist vindictiveness, rather than becuase they should already be doing so.

"....This is a very weak sophism..." Actually, no. You cannot get a driving licence in the US without proof you are a resident, i.e., not an illegal alien. Possession of a valid driving licence is accepted as proof of legal immigrant status. You are bound by federal law to carry your driving licence whenever driving, so if an officer asks you for your licence he is also effectively checking your immigration status. I know this as when I was stopped for speeding in Florida I was asked for my driving licence, produced my UK licence, and was then asked for my passport so they could check my tourist visa.

"....OR some cop not liking your looks..." So we're back to your childish presumption that all cops are racists. Did you ever stop to think that if all the cops were racist then the Arizona Senate wouldn't have needed to pass SB1070 to make the police enforce the federal law? If they were all racist there wouldn't be a problem, they'd be stopping every car with a brown person in it. I can only suggest your inbred ignorance is the result of a tiny and equally-self-deluded pool of aquaintances, and that maybe you should try getting out and seeing the real World rather than just taking their word for "how it is".

"....usually the cops ask only for the driving licence...." Which is also a test of legal immigrant status. You're just piling up the fail here.

".....Except if you are in AZ and are dark skinned...." Because you were at every traffic stop ever in Arizona, right? I mean, how else would you be able to make a blanket statement like that? Unless you were talking out of your prejudiced rectum, that is. Oh, and yes, automatically assuming all cops are racist is just another form of the prejudism you are frothing about. Truly you are a master of fail.

"....And yes, they can remove legal immigrant status from people who commits crimes...." And yet you fail to provide a single case where this has happened, or even the proof that there is a legal mechanism to do so, or to account for the appeals system that would make any such attempt to remove legal status for a misdemeanour very unlikely to succeed even if it were to be attempted. In short, if you stretch it any further it's going to look so silly that even five-year-olds will laugh at your "arguments".

"....And please consider the implications for the citizens of Latino origin...." What, they should get special consideration just because they are Latino? Are you suggesting only white illegal immigrants from wealthy countries should be subject to the law? That's positive discrimination, which is also illegal. Seeing as Mexico is also the home to Carlos Slim Helu, the World's richest man, your reverse racism also seems a bit insulting to Mexicans.

"....You verbal kung fu is weak..." Given that you come across as such an unaccomplished debater, totally reliant on easily debunked waffle, I can't say I hold much value to your opinion.

RE: @Matt Bryant - Posted Sunday 26th June 2011 15:19 GMT

You're just making the point that the kneejerk reaction to SB1070 is born out of ignorance. To summarise Title 8 of the United States Code (i.e., federal law), Chapter 12, Subchapter 2, Part 8, Section 1302 and Section 1308 ((commonly referred to as just "Title 8, Section 1302-and-8" by visa agencies), U.S. federal law requires all aliens over the age of fourteen who remain in the United States for longer than 30 days to register with the U.S. government, and to have those registration documents in their possession at all times. As part of that registration you are finger-printed. Seeing as I'm British and have worked in the US for periods of over 30 days, wanna guess which laws I had to be aware of and abide by? I suggest you try just the insy-winsyiest bit of background reading before your next leap of blind political faith, otherwise people might assume you are a guillible moron.