Posts by James 36

blah

Personally I think the secondhand patent market should be killed, patents for inventor only, they should not be saleable items.

On driverless cars as a committed petrol head I like the idea of people who see cars simply as a means of transport having an option that gives them the convenience of a car without the hassles of ownership.

i want to own a car as I like cars but if I could have access to a driverless car for commuting or social trips, or even family hoildays (including family camping which might fall outside of the use case) then I could have a wet ware driven car for fun,

This would make me happy, though making me happy probably won't lead to global success.

“By combining demand, on behalf of Central Government departments and the wider public sector, Crown Commercial Service has demonstrated the benefits of government working as a single customer to achieve best value for the taxpayer, whilst continuing to build good working relationships with our technology suppliers.”

or in other words,

due to the inability of the civil service to make a decision we have had to deal a large deal with a big incumbent

da plan

so I see my retirement in 20 years being contracting as infra arch /sysadmin at exorbitant rates to fund my dreams of classic sportscar racing,

awesome

though on a more sensible note I have been experiencing more customers just thinking that infrastructure is easy because that complexity is hidden to an extent by cloud. They fail to grasp that setting up an ipad is different to building systems across geographically diverse data centers servicing 10s or 100s of thousands of users will multiple conflicting requirements. This lack of understanding may lead to a future full of opportunity or it may not.

biddy biddy

awesome use of school resources,

well done to the head for supporting this,

well done to the kid for putting it together and sourcing the gear from industry, that shows nouse and initiative

Optional

hate crime

noun

1.

a crime motivated by racial, sexual, or other prejudice, typically one involving violence.

"legislation to stiffen penalties for persons convicted of hate crimes"

not a hate crime, just a crime

Optional

I could be interested in one if

1) it costs less than £100

2) it works with any android phone

otherwise not bothered

Optional

all your eye belong to us

blah

"Abadie has said she wears her Glass headset all the time, even when not using it"

during sex ? in the shower ?

enquiring minds need to know

use this to ask your MP

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/

I have used it in the past and got a written reply from the MP in question so , it has worked at least once !

its author's belief that nations need to measure the impact of online crime if the author is to understand how to sell them security products

fixed that for you

so is Larry actually saying that they are crap but no reason not to make money out of them ?

or will it be "shared databases are crap except ours"

either way expect a labyrinthine licencing model that is open to interpretation that no-one has the minerals to test in court

"We are the Cisco. Lower your firewalls and surrender your wallets. We will add your software defined networking and commodity switches to our own. Your company will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile."

bleh

A war on terror is like trying to nail jelly to a wall, the only way to reduce terror is to improve the lives of the people from where the terrorists recruit.

kill someone's relative they become easy picking for terror groups (or governments or criminals or ...etc) for vengeful acts of violence , educate them and improve their lives they will be harder to convince of the justification for "righteous slaughter" and also , hopefully , more critical of the arguments presented to persuade.

Intelligence gathering is still needed, I do not think spying on everyone is a good thing or justified.

optional

I got my nook glo thing for £69 when they first reduced the price.

It allows me to read books in the dark

which is nice

blah

A person isn't stupid, people often are

risk

So there is a risk that a mobile phone or other device could interfere with the safe landing or take off of a plane.

Given that a percentage of the sample doesn't switch off their phone or other device and that there are very few instances of aircraft having incidents as a result of passengers electronic devices can the risk not be assessed ?

impact - high crashing plane kills people

probability - low based on my scanning of the comments so please feel free to disagree

mitigation - ask all passengers to switch of said electronic devices knowing that some will comply and some won't

the mitigation chosen seems a reasonable compromise , I don't understand why everyone is getting so upset, surely the fact that some people cannot do without their phone or the possibility of not being contactable is more more upsetting ? well it is to me anyway.

Oracle state "our sh*t runs better on our sh*t"

in other news

"Clock on chart for bigger image"

needs an edit I think as I could not see a clock

blah

anyone who has a simple answer should be ignored as they have failed to understand the question.

missing letter

"e"

please insert yourselves

stuff the gov already does

http://www.thinkuknow.co.uk/

http://ceop.police.uk/

just point parents and kids at that.