there are some morons around
2426 posts • joined 5 Mar 2010
there are some morons around
No. It sounds like something Fry & Laurie would have rejected when writing a skit involving a brash, in-yer-face, hornswaggling yank.
But sadly, morals, and evidence-based policy hardly (if ever) coincide.
Drugs and sex are two of the most legislated areas of human behaviour, despite being, in the main, activities which take place in private.
Bear in mind, the more hysterical and pitchfork-wielding society becomes, the harder we make it for people who might realise they need help to seek it. Thus increasing the risk to children.
Or could this whole castle of sand be skewed by changing at very least a byte or two of data in the source image ?
I appreciate this might have some - limited - effect. But it's hardly the dragon-slayer it's being touted as.
Icon says it all ->
1) Use t'internet. Aggregate a few thousand web pages from a dictionary of millions (say every odd result from a Google search for cat videos, plus every even result from yesterdays most popular search), then a running XOR of a selection of bits from said pages to give you a seed ?
2) Surely there is a market for a chip with an inbuilt radioactive source, detector and a clock ? (I've seen an old XT clock chip with an inbuilt battery). You'd only need picograms of material.
3) Use next weeks lottery numbers ?
it can't be taxed.
Sounds like a result.
Or will this become another irregular noun ?
and the users dumber ?
When you buy your [next] smart TV, insist that you receive one which won't do this. In writing if needs be. Then if (when ?) it misbehaves, you can return the TV to the retailer under the SoGA, and bypass the manufacturer.
If more people did this, it would happen less.
I first heard it used by Armando Ianucci, in a "Red Button Extra" for Stewart Lees comedy Vehicle, but it turns out to have a longer history (2004 according to UrbanDictionary).
But yes, it is a word you have to find an excuse to crowbar into a conversation (see previous post)
after millions of man*-hours testing, is this only news now.
A week after the launch date ?
* I may have just answered my own question ....
hysteresis, and learning that some buildings have a response time of days ....
he did. And much as someone who has paid to see the hugely talented and entertaining Mr. Brown twice, I have to say the teardowns of how he (probably) did it were very insightful.
There was one where a guy basically copied DB and posted a pic-in-pic video of him doing that.
I think my biggest disappointment with DB was having to use some pathetic excuse about the numbers being "copyright" to explain why he couldn't reveal them to us plebs *before* the draw.
The bottom line is it *was* camera fakery.
Why is there not an automatic fine for misuse of 999. Especially since we have 101 ?
I get the same rage with missed NHS appointments. Just fine the bastards.
Presumably the BBC wanted to ensure no competition from Clarkson, May and Hammond (he's not a real hamster), hence the "no UK networks for 3 years" clause.
Given that this move basically negates that clause, are we going to see the BBC sue it's legal advisers. Because given streaming services are hardly new (which, as the operator of one of the oldest and widely used on the internet - iPlayer - the BBC should be aware of) then surely the clause could have been drafted to preclude appearing on UK screens - no matter where the contract is signed.
Bet the shows get made in the UK.
I also upvoted Rich 11, however, feel obliged to point out that the next line is
"Just like witches at black masses"
which - 35 years after I first heard it - still sounds clunky and naff.
the lack of *any* RFC standard about web-based identity and password handling is telling.
You'd think they'd have fixed that before they moved on to video formats ?
It was also an important trade hub in the Bronze age, but was largely abandoned for unknown reasons during the Iron Age.
Probably climate change. There are a few sites in the UK where archaeologists (among others) have linked changes in habitat to changes in human activity. Long before the industrial revolution (although our ancestors way of clearing forests for crops by burning them might be a factor ?).
Face recognition - old hat
Face recognition as security - old hat (my Android tablet has done it for 2+ years)
Payment verification - old hat
Biometric payment verification - old hat.
Or is it a Friday grump ?
Having seen IBMs take on artificial vision (http://www-01.ibm.com/common/ssi/cgi-bin/ssialias?infotype=PM&subtype=SP&htmlfid=YTD03119USEN/ ) at Hursley, it seems Google are still in the 1960s when it comes to processing.
Most impressive things I saw, when they ran the network over a video of a park scene, were:
1) Although it had never been told what a skateboard was, it correctly labelled a skateboader in the same box as "cyclist". So it had worked out that "cyclist = human on wheels" and then re-applied that to the skateboarder.
2) Correctly following a cyclist dismounting, and changing the label from cyclist to pedestrian.
3) Correctly identifying a static shape (person sitting on wall) as human (technically very high probability of being a human).
Spoiler alert: some if not all of this project is funded by the DoD ...
There is a chronic funding gap in the UK for companies creating digital media content, as our venture capital funds do not typically invest in this sector.
UK Venture capitalists don't do investing - what a curious idea. They do do short term profits over any idea of long term growth.
As a result, while US companies such as Vice, Netflix, Hulu ...have attracted huge amounts of investment, comparable British digital content companies have not.
That's because they have a decent track record. Sopranos, Breaking Bad, True Detective, The Wire, Mad Men. All top-drawer stuff. I can't see UK TV - particularly the commercial players - investing in a 5-year drama that means you have to think. Not when shite like Dapper Laughs managed to get commissioned.
Me ? I just gave Richard Herring £30 via Kickstarter, to be able to enjoy his excellent series of podcasts on video. I think that's the way the market is moving.
Where reality and response are rarely seen together, as ideology gets in the way. The classic example of this, writ large, is the Alice-in-Wonderland approach to drugs, whereby the response is far out of proportion to the harm. Something experts (paid by the government) have repeatedly pointed out.
With regards to IT, it depends what the original (political) premise was.
It use to be held up as a paradigm of "government" IT gone wrong - the Nimrod fiasco. Rooted in the fact that the [Labour] government of the day had to posture about buying a "British" solution, even though (a) the RAF wanted AWACS and (b) AWACS was readily available, whereas Nimrod was vapourware. Cue a decade of bunfighting (3,000 + annual specification changes - or 10 a day), as the RAF insisted on benchmarking Nimrod against their requirements (which AWACs satisfied) and Nimrod kept failing. In the 1980s (when I studied it for a module in my degree) the £3billion wasted was unheard of. Nowadays £3billion won't buy half a non-working Universal Credit system.
Oh, and no government project has *ever* failed. Cancelled. Respecified. Replaced. Renewed. Yes. But if you look carefully, no government project has ever failed, or been classed as failed. even GDS will be written up as "unsatisfactory", "unable to meet expectations", "unable to deal with updated requirements", yes, yes, yes. But "failed" ? Never.
Who gives a shit.
Where there's a universal blockchain, and everyone uses it for everything.
(Obviously the story is because something goes wrong).
people object to paying for tracks they don't want on albums. But apply the same model to books ....
I await the inevitable downvotes from people without my sense of irony.
Why should I want to let Facebook know what other sites I use ?
I programmed a bit-slice CPU ...
And hand soldered my final year project.
And great to see some gender balance in engineering. Y'all deserve one of these ------------?
I had kinda wrongly assumed anodyne American "pop" "star" - sort of Justin Beiber without the testosterone (?) and consigned her to the appropriate part of my brain.
Seems I was wrong - certainly keep an ear out in future - her Wiki entry (usual caveats) has some remarkably high praise.
20+ years ago, our street was cabled by Videotron. It was quite a comical exercise ... the sales guys were running 2 days ahead of the engineers.
Anyway, at the same time, a friend moved into a new build house, a mile away. When I first saw him, there were no pavements, and temporary roads (apparently they do a single re-tarmac on exit).
I asked if they were laying cables while building the development. His face fell, and he said he'd spoken to Videotron, and they had it on their 1995-2000 list.
I asked if my friend had discussed with the housebuilder about liaising with cable companies to pre-cable new developments. He said he had, but decided to stop when the person they pointed him at said "cable TV - what's that then ?".
My brother claimed he emigrated to the US for the weather. I never believed him.
Obviously (I wonder if Mr. Worstall would agree) the cheapest part of providing cable is the actual digging up of the roads/pavements, since this is the part no-one has tried to minimise. I say this, because NONE of the 10 or so new build estates I looked at last year had fibre. Moreover, none of them had PLANS for fibre in the next 3 years.
to get a fluffy name ?
Surely all the elements of "slamming" add up to conspiracy to defraud, or gain pecuniary advantage by deception.
It reminds me of criminal assault being rebranded "happy slapping"
some people have already thought this
For such a bug story, things have gone quiet on this ...
I have a sneaking suspicion that whatever the cause, it's somehow related to the 2012 outage. In particular to the fact that the minute the regulator had turned their back, all the "promises" (i.e. "lessons learned") disappeared into thin air, and it was back to BAU ...
Which would lead to an interesting future for RBS ... if a £56,000,000 fine wasn't enough* to teach them a lesson first time, how much should it be this time ? And will it cause the FCA to contemplate stiffer fines a priori - on the justifiable grounds that otherwise they'll be ignored.
And what's all of this doing to Gorgeous Georges plans for flogging off RBS ? How much sweeter will he need to make the deal, if any prospective buyer thinks they're buying into a future of cock-ups ?
*sounds a stiff fine - unless the outrage saved a few hundred million, in which case it's the cost of doing business.
oh, and another thing ...
would it be fair to presume all these people twitterplaining (a new verb wot I have invented, hoping it will catch on) have only had accounts since 2012 ? Because what about the 2012 cock-up wasn't quite bad enough for you to have moved your accounts ?
In which case, the question has to be : you opened your account, after the last car-crash cock-up
they are an IT house which does banking.
This was the almost unanimous verdict of El Reg readers discussing the 2012 failure. With a clarion call that bean counters recognise that IT (and it associated infrastructure) are essential components of their operation, not an ancillary part which can be hived off, like the catering.
I really hope any journalist on the receiving end of a "Lessons have been learned" puff piece, just finish off by turning to camera saying "no they haven't".
We need a "FAIL" icon big enough to spread over 2 monitors.
Anatomically, there's no reason they couldn't
as I recall ...
The reason VHS won out was that while Sony was paying engineers to (successfully) improve Betamax, JVC/Philips et al were paying salesmen to negotiate "VHS only" deals for movie rentals with the studios.
The result was the consumer saw the VHS section of their local video rental store far outnumbered the Betamax, and bought (rented) their equipment accordingly.
Why do you think Sony when on a massive spending spree in the late 80s and 90s buying up - wait for it - content providers ?
"Apart from anything else, it is infantile."
You know the old lady who gets on the bus with a cake on her head, and smells of wee ?
That's your girlfriend that is.
If I were devising such a scheme, I'd probably limit it to long-term Amazon customers.
(1) they are more likely to be "up for it" (because they are long term Amazon customers)
(2) they are pretty well known to Amazon (see above).
Is it just me, or is the level of thought commentards are applying *before* posting dropping ?
part of the problem with passwords - internet passwords specifically - is the total lack of anything remotely resembling an RFC on the best practices to implement password-based authentication.
Is the password complexity sufficient ?
Is the password stored in plaintext ? (Because some are, so you can be emailed it if you forget)
If the password is encrypted, can it be decrypted ?
If so by who ?
Is a regular password change mandated ?
etc etc etc
I wonder, if I was to setup a site requiring a login to be created, and harvested all the email address/password combinations people used, how far I could get trying those credentials elsewhere.
However, before I did that, I'd also wonder if anyone else had done it before me ?
Quick question. What's the ISO reference for web-based authentication ?
(I will buy a virtual beer for anyone who can name the programme, and character for this next quote !)
"A patient died. And now you want to close the whole hospital !"
I use LastPass. It's cloudiness is an asset - it means I can use *any* machine to access secure sites.
I accept I am trading convenience for security. I've evaluated the risks, and decided they are worth it.
Current count is >300 unique passwords stored, none of which is less than 12 characters, and all of which are generated nonsense.
A trick also used by the Manson family. They called it "creepy crawling"
Seems a retread of the idea (20 years ago) to use photos instead of numbers with the customer knowing which 4 they had logged as their password.
Is anyone seriously looking at Arthur C. Clarkes space elevator ?
Total respect to all involved, by the way. It's why I did a BSc.
80% of the public will only remember the first story, regardless of whatever truth emerges subsequently.
Why do you think control of the media makes power ?
There are still people - the majority, by the way - who will tell you that Jean Charles de Menezes (RIP :( ) was
-wearing a heavy coat
-vaulted the barriers
-did not respond when challenged by armed police.
despite the court-verified FACTS:
-was wearing no jacket (just a T-shirt)
-passed through barriers normally
-police never issued a warning for him to ignore.
I've always had my doubts about the shouty cunt "interviewed" so quickly on the day. Has he ever been seen since ?
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017