Re: An unknown person accessed a list of email addresses in a log file
Maybe the Government should come up with a scheme to help people with protecting their digital resources?
157 posts • joined 21 Nov 2011
Maybe the Government should come up with a scheme to help people with protecting their digital resources?
To be fair, if Microsoft hadn't taken the actually pretty good WP7 and then decided to start from scratch with a new incompatible version not once, but twice, they might actually have got some people to buy them.
I'm fearing the day my Lumia 930 dies. There's nothing new out there today that's as good*.
(* Disagree? Give me suggestions - I'm looking for a replacement and can't find any I like)
> He's all for democracy until it doesn't go the way he likes.....
What's undemocratic about saying "I'm not going to organise a meeting in a location which is restricting who can go"?
> TMay needs to look at the people agitating about this and say "grow up".
Looks like the Government saw this and agreed, but they're reaction seems to have been "stop it! you're going to ruin everything!", and then stamp off in a huff.
If a million people saying Trump shouldn't be invited for tea & cakes with the Queen is going to "ruin everything" then that really doesn't say much for the special relationship. Just how desperate was Theresa during her meeting with Trump?!
If only this was about accuracy. Put simply, you will be able to sue El Reg because you say it is incorrect, take them to court, get it thrown out because you've just made up your complaint, and El Reg still has to pay for the whole debacle. Even if El Reg was 100% correct in what they write, they still get lumbered with the bill.
Robust press regulation to ensure accuracy is a good thing. Allowing anyone to create frivolous lawsuits which then cost the publisher is not the same thing.
> To be fair he didn't say it was cheaper he said it was better value for money.
He said would have "some change left over" after buying both with the money he could have spent on the licence.
Although, now I've found Amazon's alternative plans (yes, yearly is £79), you could get their TV only package for £5.99/month, which would make the combination of Netflix + Amazon and entire £1.74/year cheaper, so it is actually possible to get that small change.
*Goes to downvote self*
Basic Netflix (no HD) £5.99/month = £71.88/year
Amazon Prime £7.99/month = £95.88/year
Netflix + Amazon = £167.67/year
UK Colour TV Licence = £145.50/year
> For the same price I get a Netflix and Amazon Prime subscription with some change left over.
I think you need a new calculator.
> I'm no Linux hater, but is Linux on the desktop really much of a competition to Windows?
Well we do seem to start each year with an announcement of this being the year of Linux on the desktop...
> There were people debunking the myths and lies spouted by both sides of the campaign; Radio 4's More or Less did a good job in the months running up to the vote, and the BBC News Website's Reality Check section did stirling work too (as did others), but many people chose to ignore these voices and vote with their hearts not their heads.
Yeah, but the BBC's funded by the EU so they're obviously going to make everything Leave said look like it's lies. And they're full of lefties. And do-gooders. And, worst of all, they acknowledge, eugh, experts.
Better to stick to Youtube. Everything on there is 110% accurate. Especially the home made stuff which the mainstream media refuses to show.
> Sadly, this won't help - the Daily Mail and similar shit-filled gutter-dwelling hate rags will still count as "News" and be allowed through.
Look at the difference between the printed Daily Mail and Mail Online - the latter will happily publish complete nonsense, safe in the knowledge that they can just delete it a few hours later after they've raked in the views and the truth decides to make an appearance. The printed edition on the other hand has to tread a safer line, as it's harder to deny you wrote something when there's printed copies strew around the place.
Hence each year they can write a piece about "Winterval" on the website full of the lies and blustering that their readers want to see, and just remove it when the complaints come in. Do that in the paper and they'll have to tuck an apology in somewhere when Birmingham City Council points out the lies (again). The readers don't care, and the deletion just adds to their suspicions that the only reason we don't hear more about these stories is because of some lefty cover-up.
You might want to read the article a bit more carefully...
"And in January last year, Google refused to budge on the 90-day deadline it gave Microsoft to fix a reported security bug before it went public with details of the flaw.
That time, Microsoft's senior director for trustworthy computing Chris Betz called out Google: "We asked Google to work with us to protect customers by withholding details until Tuesday, January 13, when we will be releasing a fix,""
Not to mention January 13th 2017 is a Friday.
...and there's 366 days this year.
> Personally I'm delighted that it's one of the few major sporting events that's still available FTA in this country, rather than being sucked into the paywalled extortion machine that's Sky Sports like all the rest.
Would now be a bad time to tell you the Olympics are going to Eurosport?
There's still some argument about exactly how much has to be made available FTA under the current rules in the UK, with around 200 hours being suggested. This is after the IOC bypassed all the national broadcasters and sold the European rights en-masse to Eurosport without even giving the likes of the BBC a chance to bid on them.
Did you fail your audition by presenting a soggy bottom to Mary?
> Fun fact - the 450 presenters, engineers, bag carriers, emotional support therapists etc the BBC sent to cover the Brazil Olympics, all with first class flights/accommodation, cost more than the UK government spent funding sports in its entirety in the 4 years since the last Olympics.
Top tip - If you're going to make stuff up, try and make it at least slightly believable.
> My sympathies end when you realise that Southern are one of the last remaining train operators with guards/conductors.
Along with at least (possibly more):
Abellio Greater Anglia
East Midlands Trains
Virgin East Coast
Virgin West Coast
South West Trains
Actually there's still a few companies with guards on them, not just Southern.
> The less obvious one is the Victoria line. The driver opens & closes the doors, and presses "Go". That's it!
Same with the Central, Northern and Jubile lines
> If the trains are crowded there need to be more trains
This works in parts of the world where there are three trains a day. In the commuter belt of London, the only way of getting more trains in is to build more tracks. And that involves demolishing expensive bits of real estate. Then, once you've got the trains into London, you need to build bigger stations to handle them, more really expensive bits of land needed. And then, all these people need to get around, so that means more busses or more tube lines, which means more roads and/or tunnels, and that'll be even more expensive.
Double decker trains won't work (the Victorians didn't think of them, so they'll be convertibles after the first bridge they go under). Longer trains won't work, they're already as long as the platforms.
Want more capacity? It's going to be eye-watering sums of money, which is really difficult to justify when the rest of the country is still bouncing along in two carriage freight wagons with bus doors added.
> The spineless government
> Should sort this shit out ASAP.
The thing is, that's actually what's happening. The DfT wants rid of the guards, knew they were going to have a fight with the unions and has specifically awarded the current GTR franchise (Southern, Thameslink, Great Northern and Gatwick Express are all the same company) to have that fight once and for all. Getting rid of the guards means it's cheaper to run the services, and they're less likely to be disrupted by striking / ill / not-willing-to-work-their-days-off staff. Next step is the driver (who won't be driving the new trains through the centre of London anyway, there's a computer for that).
This isn't a fight between Southern and the unions, it's a fight between the Government and the unions.
It'd be interesting to find out whether the Kindle uses a MS generic driver or one provided by Amazon. And if it's a generic one, whether the problem occurs with other devices that use that driver.
Looks to me like the problem with interstitals is that they're becoming more popular because of people using the likes of ad-block, and they're more likely to be sold in house than through the likes of Adsense, depriving Google not only of their revenue, but their data-gathering too.
> Like swearing that tearing newspapers up keeps elephants out of your living room and pointing to the lack of elephants as proof.
I find it easier just not to acknowledge them
"Shall we get down to this dull / difficult / repetative work, or shall we nip down the Dog & Flag for a quick half?"... Two hours later... "Er, they've asked for a progress update, hic, what shall we say?", "Nothing, if they ask again we'll just say we sent the email and it must have disappeared on the way. Another pint?"
File under "the dog ate my homework".
I bet there's a brand new virus, branded the worst ever by Microsoft / FBI / Met Police / Crimestoppers / BBC (delete as appropriate), called the Olympic Flame which will literally torch your hard drive. And you can only prevent it from infecting your computer by telling everybody you know about it.
> Personally, I doubt my desktop at home will ever, not use hardwired network and monitors (latency etc). But for my TV, satellite box etc. I welcome the day I can get rid of the huge rats next of network, power, HDMI, displayport and optical audio cables, I have crammed behind the TV cabinet!
Personally, I'd rather see something like the USB-C being used to connect everything together. One power lead to your TV, then USB-C to the satellite box, games console, thingyme-widget and so on.
You can already get PoE powered large screens (using HDbaseT at the moment), so the efficiencies are getting there, such that you could just need to run a single cat5 from your router to the TV, and then the USB-C's and everything is all connected, powered, and talking to the internet.Seems much more user friendly and less complicated than trying to configure / pair / restrain a random bunch of devices over wireless.
It might work OK for the first guy in the office to get it. However, once you've got a cluster of 4 desks each with a couple of monitors, a bit less so!
> there is using wired just for wired sake, there are plenty of scenarios where there just isnt any point in using wires over wireless
We can only get a finite amount of data over wireless. Wired can effectively carry infinite data. And as more and more people try to push larger & faster amounts of data over wireless, it's going to stop being a viable option sooner-or-later. Maybe we should concentrate more on making the things that are helpful working wirelessly (mobile internet / mice / headphones) better, and keep the things that don't (desktop monitors / printers / desk phones) cabled down so we can take advantage of the better wireless?
How many years Chrome and even IE have been doing this. The entire article makes it sound like this is a new revolutionary idea, while even MS have been doing it for yonks.
> Since throughout the article, including the tables, it's made clear that the numbers are for smartphone sales, I'd say you're completely missing the point.
From the article:
"Not all is lost for Microsoft's, because we know that PCs still ship at a rate of 230m units a quarter and the majority of those run Windows"
The author *is* trying to compare Android sales to Windows desktop sales.
To be fair, I've bought 3 android devices in the last year (all "too cheap to be true" experiments). Two of them have gone in the bin, the other will be soon since I replaced it with a Tesco W10 cheapo tablet which so far seems far nicer for basically the same price. I'd be surprised if there's anywhere near that disposal rate with Windows devices.
The BBC is increasingly being prevented not only from looking outwards from the UK though, but also to reign in it's ambitions within the UK.
This week we've seen the closure of the travel, local news, youth news and food websites, all well used (and defended) services*. This is a direct result of too much government meddling - firstly by specifiying in too much detail where the BBC budget should be spent, secondly by demanding the BBC stops trying to compete with their commercial opposition. Unless the BBC is freed up to do as it, and it's audience, want, there's no chance of it growing it's balls back. Instead the pieces are being placed for a breakup and sale when it's decreed that it no longer justifies any Licence Fee because it's not making what the audience want and use.
* Strange there was nothing mentioned about these closures on this site, even if it was another Orlowski Licence Fee bashing...
> It does not want to risk that $5.7bn by inflating the $1.2bn.
I think they're far more worried about the licence fee being reduced if the commercial income goes up, and then being told to stop doing the commercial stuff because that should be left to the commercial sector, leaving yet another gaping hole in the budget.
You've missed my point. Without knowing exactly how many machines were actually eligible for the upgrade (and how many upgrades have actually happened), it's impossible for us to actually *know* whether this is a good result. Instead, MS can spin it as being the most successful campaign ever ("look 300 million installs!"), or the anti-10 brigade can spin it the as the least successful ("how many billion machines exist, you've not even got it on 1%!").
It all seems a bit petty and childish to be screaming about how badly they're doing when we don't know any of the actual figures involved (and everything MS says can be automatically discounted as it's coming from the mouths of professional liars - a marketing department).
<insert quote about lies and statistics here>
I suppose to make a fair judgement, we really need to know what percentage of pre-existing OS's were eligible for the free upgrade. There's a fair percentage that don't run Windows 7/8 to start with, then there's the Enterprise editions which also don't get the upgrade.
If only 45% of the total numbers were eligible, and they've got almost half of them to upgrade, that'd be a fairly good outcome for any marketing department.
>They weren't "Apps", they were "Applications". Altogether more sensible and substantial :-)
Remind me, what icon did you click on the icon bar to open the list of "Applications"? "Apps" wasn't it?
And what was the text displayed in the title bar of the window that opened? "Resources:$.Apps"?
I also disagree that the likes of Edit and Calc were more substantial than their mobile app counterparts we have today.
I've called them Apps ever since using Risc OS in the early 90s.
> Though quite how that works, I'm not sure. Surely the taskbar is explorer.exe too? And file windows?
explorer.exe is basically two different programs run from the same file. On start up it detects if its 1) the currently assigned shell program, and 2) if any other copies are running. If yes to both, it runs the shell launcher version. If no to either, it runs the folder browser version.
Main reason for running the two programs from the same executable is for early versions of windows where the overhead of launching a separate process just to look in a folder was undesirable. Doing it this way meant the folders could be opened by the same loaded process as the shell UI, requiring minimal additional resources.
Personally, I've always ticked the "Open folders in separate process" box, as it makes the whole thing more stable, but I can understand why they did it the way they did in the days of 12MHz CPU and 4MB RAM machines.
> they print a lovely message on the screen saying "YOU ARE USING AN ADBLOCKER PLEASE TURN IT OFF"
And, pray tell, *how* does that affect anyone's privacy?
> they print a lovely message on the screen saying "YOU ARE USING AN ADBLOCKER PLEASE TURN IT OFF"
And, pray tell, how does that differ to it printing a lovely message on the screen saying "BUY DAVE'S CANDLES, THEY'RE REALLY BRIGHT" or "Something went wrong, click here to try again"?
Right, firstly, give up with the industry shill nonsense. Look through my previous posts, you'll see I'm a developer. I have with nothing to do with the advertising industry. I'm interested in this topic, the technical details of such, and your interpretations, and it'd be nice to get a sensible discussion out of that.
At no point did I say you were completely wrong - in fact I clearly said some behaviour - notably tracking and registering the presence of an adblocker would be covered by the directive. What I'm doing is questioning your assertions that all anti-adblock scripts are illegal. Now, if you'd like to explain to me why I'm wrong, that's fine, I'll happily admit you've spent a lot longer looking into this than me. But please give me a little more than "the big man told me I was right", and "everyone's opinions are worthless, but mine's right".
> Nothing is certain in law (that is why these are "test cases")
Well quite. Not that you would have gotten that impression from the rest of your post...
> Held in memory = stored in memory.
From Article 5.3:
"This shall not prevent any technical storage or access for the sole purpose of carrying out or facilitating the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network"
So the temporary storage of a script locally in order to enable that to be executed is not covered by the article.
Now, if the script was storing a cookie to say you've got an adblocker, or transmitting back to the server information about your computer and it's adblocking, there's plenty in the directive to use to complain about, but if it's happening locally, and nothing is being stored, I just can't see how it falls foul of the article.
For reference - full [English] text of article 5.3:
"3. Member States shall ensure that the use of electronic communications networks to store information or to gain access to information stored in the terminal equipment of a subscriber or user is only allowed on condition that the subscriber or user concerned is provided with clear and comprehensive information in accordance with Directive 95/46/EC, inter alia about the purposes of the processing, and is offered the right to refuse such processing by the data controller. This shall not prevent any technical storage or access for the sole purpose of carrying out or facilitating the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network, or as strictly necessary in order to provide an information society service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user."
Two things surprise me about this incident:
1) They're not using a dedicated SDI output from the machine, relying on Windows to properly manage it's monitors, and probably using an HDMI output and HDMI-SDI converter...
2) They're using the primary screen to output their weather maps. This is madness, as all wonders of messages can and do appear on the primary screen, not just this nag screen. Add a second monitor, using a usb-vga if needed, and set that as the primary screen, then run your critical software on the secondary output - voila - no more nag screen, volume popups, notifications, "java wants to update" balloons, taskbar if someone nudges the windows key, etc.
Is it me, or is the paralympics one a couple of rectangles short of Batman's logo? Will he also be complaining about plagiarism?
If being an EU member or part of continental Europe was a pre-requisite for EBU membership you may have a point. But they're not.
Pretty much everyone except for the UK.
It's a shame so few people understand the differences between Eurovision, the EBU, the EU and the Eurovision Song Contest. On the other hand, it's bizarre how much hatred a singing competition gets. It's not like it goes on for months or people are forced to watch it.
3. The linked malware will affect the device scanning the QR code, not the PC showing the QR code.
But yeah, the biggy is, as Raymond Chen would put it, if you're on the other side of the airtight hatchway, your malware doesn't need to trick the user into downloading more malware, it can just do it itself.
@Graham - there are thousands of residential customers in Sheffield city centre, none of which can get anything above 10Mbps ADSL connections unless they're lucky enough to have cable access.
Homes further away from the same exchange do have FttC, or plans to upgrade to at the least. The economics of running fibre to a handful of people simply don't apply in this case. After all, they've already had to run the fibre past these homes to get to the ones outside of the ring road.
Sadly there's been no such increase for me, or plans to increase the speeds, living in the desolate rural location of Sheffield city centre.
This isn't because the exchange isn't enabled, it is, or because there isn't an upgrade plan happening in the city, it is. It's just because BT don't want to fit it inside the city centre, presumably because it will affect the number of businesses they can sell leased lines to.
And living in an apartment block, we can't get cable either (please stop sending me adverts Richard).
I keep hoping Ofcom will force their hand, but I'm not holding my breath.
I prefer Detoblet
>but how often do you use the I player app
Every time I want to check what time / channel something is on BBC TV, because their mobile website blocks IE mobile and just displays a full screen advert extolling the virtues of the iPlayer app instead.
It's a brilliant example of terrible UX only there because marketing.
> The issue with Windows Phone 7 & 8 never was UI or performance as I understand it, but the incompatibility with Windows Mobile apps coupled with the lock in to the store.
The main issue, as MS seem to see it, is that it's not got the same UX as Android. So instead of iterating what was a great UX, with unique features (e.g. unified messenger hub for sms / email / facebook / twitter), good performance on "lesser" hardware and at a reasonable price, they've opted to bloat out the platform, try and rip off the obvious bits of the Android UX, force people to make worse UI's for their apps, and remove the features that the existing users liked.
I just wish they'd stop this whack-a-mole style development path, with new ideas coming and going quicker than they can actually get them to work, and instead focus on making an OS that is different enough from the opposition to make it worthwhile, and that people actually want to use (i.e. like they had with WP7 - just updated).
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017