It had better not be foil-backed plasterboard.
767 posts • joined 20 Mar 2012
It had better not be foil-backed plasterboard.
Perhaps the thumbdown didn't agree that later systems are vulnerable? But those are the affected systems reported at www.ccn-cert.cni.es
Except when you average the purchase cost over the life of the drive ...
Surely your consent would be a part of your record, which this non-local A&E would be able to see, but not change?
Don't you think regular steganography offers a simpler method applicable to a much wider range of data exchanges?
The MPAA figure assumes that the pirates' clients would otherwise have paid (and ignores those who download "unofficial content" but then buy the authentic Blu-Ray, vinyl etc.) and everyone else thinks that's silly. Are you proposing extending the sicko pervs' audience by introducing a class of casual paedos who watch but don't pay? I'm not sure that's the desired effect.
That sounds like powerful magic.
i686 is too recent for some of my hardware anyway. :-)
My Intel Android tablet was cheap because Intel was paying manufacturers to make them, to try to get a foot in the door of the tablet market. I don't know if they're still engaged in this folly.
There will probably be people back-porting stuff from newer GNU and Linux releases to keep 32-bit environments somewhat up-to-date, in a "security fixes but no new features" sort of way. In many embedded situations it may not matter that updates aren't available anyway - it it ain't broke don't fix it.
P4 was a nasty evolutionary cul-de-sac, does anyone actually choose to run these today when old Intel Core systems are cheap as chips? I have some earlier Pentium systems (and some even older) for which I might conceivably find a use, sitting in a corner quietly doing something low-powered or attached to a specific piece of hardware, but really Raspberry Pi has made most of those obsolete too.
Driving while using a cellphone.
Walking while texting.
ITYF precedent doesn't get set by the lower courts. And anyway I think you'll not easily replicate the circumstances that made up that particular case.
Seems like unnecessary hassle - if they were going to make Windows 10 a must-have "upgrade" wouldn't they have done something about it by now, rather than just trying to trick punters into installing it as a "security update"? Windows 7 is in extended support until January 2020 - won't you be buying a new machine by then, with the obligatory Windows installation, anyway?
There's some doubt that it was actually her bike, and I've not seen proof that she ever used it.
There's a minimum weight limit for competition bikes, so no point shaving off grammes.
The UCI is all about restricting new technology - their rulebook is an OCD control freak's dream. Were it not for the UCI's interference, cyclists would probably be riding aerodynamic missiles with regenerative braking, rather than the basically Edwardian things that they have now.
I've recently been fiddling with Arduino and Raspberry Pi, and as a side effect I've been doing more electronics stuff than I have in decades.
But there's a boom in things like Raspberry Pi and 3D printers - they should be able to surf that wave, if they could resist applying their usual ridiculous markup that makes them embarrassingly uncompetitive with UK online sellers, let alone Chinese suppliers.
"We" is first person plural.
The Sale of Goods Act 1979 was superseded by the Consumer Rights Act 2015.
But a beige Rover 600 should be given a wide berth.
I think that may not be long enough in a multiple pile up, and I'm not sure that airbag deployment is the best indicator of an event either.
How about turning up the ICE in a double-glazed car?
That's fine, because as soon as there's a whiff of prosecution they'll be calling in legal and technical experts on both sides to sort out what happened and what matters.
Why would they be reluctant? Their call will be recorded and logged by the emergency call centre, so unless people are in the habit of calling to say they’ve been in an accident before it happens ...
And when they find something illegal on it, who are they going to invite to assist with their enquiries?
So what happens once they're wearing trousers?
But how do you tell a rogue USB stick that mimics an HID from a genuine HID?
Did you try just setting permissions on the installed driver files to read-only? (I have no idea how WU would treat that - I don't use Windows any more.)
I tend to live in (proper, not "fashion") combat trousers, their pockets are many, capacious and robust.
Were the slurped files on the mail server, or did they use the compromised mail server to access a separate document management system?
Upgrade the PC hardware, run XP virtualised and have the host SW keep a very close eye on network behaviour?
Experience tends to suggest that people drive more carefully and considerately in this sort of setting with as few traffic signs and road markings as possible. It's only the extreme idiots like the one in the story who need lines to keep inside (although they tend not to manage even that - what is it with all these drivers who can't stop before the stop line at junctions, or keep inside the lane markings on bends?)
Architectural features, starting with Aspirational Architrave.
I used it a couple of times, then installed Synaptic. Apparently that's still available in 16.04, so no problem.
You don't carry a mouse with you? If I'm going to be using someone else's machine I put a trackball in my bag.
It sound as if it relies on people not disabling remote login. :-o
I think it's more likely the Falklands connection that was considered offensive.
I think "gotten" is archaic English, like some other Americanisms. The ugliness of "get"/"got"/"gotten" is best avoided by using an appropriate alternative in many cases, although it is acceptable in a few.
I wouldn't use that machine before it's been thoroughly sanitized with a stack of anti-malware apps, or freshly installed on a wiped hard drive.
I'm not talking about how a device looks to someone on the internet - most home users are behind NAT routers that make them appear to have a single public IP address. But we know that, they're on a LAN based on that router so they're technically "not supported" for internet banking purposes.
What would be the point of asking for a spoofed caller ID?
It doesn't have to be Wi-Fi - for a start anyone connecting through a device that has an address in one of the IPV4 private ranges (10.n.n.n 172.16-31.n.n 192.168.n.n) is clearly using a LAN. It would be interesting to know what First Direct thinks a LAN is. A journalist should ask them why they're excluding the majority of their users from support.
That's not true - you have six years from the date of purchase to make a claim against a seller, but items that might reasonably be expected to have a shorter lifetime don't have six years of cover. If the court decides that an iGadget has an expected lifetime of four years and yours fails after five years the six years is irrelevant. Even if it fails after three years you can only expect to be reimbursed a quarter of the purchase price.
They have if you look at it in terms of motivation to hack their product - with so little market share it's hardly worth anyone's time to try picking holes in it.
He "seemed to be unaware of who his team had booked" i.e he was unaware of which entertainment act his team had booked, not who it was from his team who made the choice of act.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018