Re: To some MSDOS was an major leap forward.
There's also the option of ARM programming on the Pi, since you boot it off an SD card and that can have ARM based code for it to execute on boot
676 posts • joined 13 May 2013
See, that seems like a much more reasonable approach, and if he was doing that when he moved to a more public forum as well I don't think anyone would have an issue with it. I think I'd agree he isn't actually a bully, but he does seem to have a temper which gives him a bad name and discourages people from contributing to the kernel in case they set him off
Yeah, or maybe you could have just held him to the deadlines you'd both agreed to without the yelling or letting things escalate? I mean, it sounds like he was pretty bad as a developer, but also seems you weren't any better as a manager
Overall looks pretty good, although there seem to be some weird bits in the layout where only 3 news items appear in a row that's supposed to have 4. Glad you still went with a traditional layout rather than one of thos daft shiny designs that push half the content off the page and mean more scrolling to see anything (actually it looks like this layout allows more tiles per screen than the old one)
As I understand it, the issue is specifically Military usage of Galileo. Specifically that they won't have the ability to make encrypted queries to the satellites (so could be tracked) and they won't have access to the more accurate data which is only opened up to the military (for things like drone strikes)
Sort of, except they don't delete the information afterwards. They just store *all* of it, including the user ID, against those categories, meaning searching by username is an incredibly slow and laborious process (which is entirely their fault, so can't really see it as a good excuse)
Depends on whether you need intent to violate copyright. Technically if you're visiting sites where they've used images without the permission of the copyright holder, your system is going to download them without the owner's permission to store it in cache and so potentially could be considered copyright infringement
I agree it's pretty bullshit, but it sounds like they agreed to unlimited data but limited speeds, including throttling when it went over a certain limit. Why the hell Verizon didn't have something in place to flag up this kind of thing when it's an emergency service (since they're probably a bit preoccupied with the whole massive wildfire thing to think about data throttling) I have no idea though
I could see this as plausable if they hadn't previously integrated the system search with Amazon, providing affiliate links which would make them money, as a default feature. Now I'm wondering if this really is just being helpful or if it's another way we'll find out they planned to profit
Not being at Microsoft I couldn't say for sure, but my guess would be the scale of the problem. They might just not have enough servers to migrate people en-mass that way and have found it's quicker and less risky to have a small amount of down time to just patch everything immediately
While there are problems with Spotify, the claim they knew Harry Fox didn't have the infrastructure to manage mechanical licences when they explicitly advertise themselves as being a specialist in that area is a bit questionable. It might well be that they knew this was the case, and they were trying to pull a fast one, but at the surface level it does at least seem plausable that they expected Harry Fox to be able to manage the licencing for them to ensure it was done properly, and it's Harry Fox who screwed up
There's an extradition treaty our country agreed to previously where both countries agreed to extradite to the other if a crime was committed there. It's only recently that it's come out the treaty is somewhat lopsided (due to the constitution, they require evidence of the crime before extradition) and without the internet getting charged for a crime in one country while present in another wasn't really possible.
Basically the treaty is out of date, but nobody wants to re-write it and have to deal with the US
If you quit your job you can't apply for unemployment, at the very least. I'm not saying I agree that it's a major issue, but if you do implement UBI you're going to see worker retention become more difficult. In the long run this could lead to better working conditions, but that'll take time
Surprisingly, given how often it's been mentioned, shouting fire in a theatre for fun has never been litigated before, so is still uncertain under the law whether it's actually a limitation. It was a comment by a judge in one of their rulings, but wasn't actually directly related to the ruling so was never actually investigated
"So if Trump blocks George Stephanopulos for being a weenie, that doesn't stop George Stephanopulos from creating another account to listen to Trump's tweets."
Pretty sure that's a breach of Twitters terms and conditions, so couldn't be used as part of a legal argument that he could still gain access.
The point this lawsuit is making is that it's no longer a private account, but rather one run as part of the official communications of the White House (which makes other White House officials having access significant). It's also not necessarily about them being able to tweet directly at Trump, but also about being blocked from the public discourse regarding what seems to be official government statements in the replies to the tweets that are made.
It might not be a completely clear cut case, but there's enough wiggle room there because of the way the account has been used that they might have a case, or at least will be able to get the law clarified on how government officials can use social media in their official capacity
Comey didn't tape anything, he typed up a written record of what he recalled from the meeting, according to him because what happened in that meeting had him concerned about whether the president was going to allow the Russian investigation to continue without interference.
Yes, Comey worked on behalf of the government, but he didn't work on behalf of Trump, and given he worked for *law enforcement*, I don't see why you wouldn't expect him to make notes if he had concerns about the legality of events, if for no other reason than so he could have an accurate record to run by legal to make sure it wasn't
The current ban is on any electronic device above a certain size. It's largely reported as a "laptop ban", but also covers things like tablets and phablets. The concern seems to be people swapping out the battery for explosives, so it's likely the ban would apply to both
This was a claim made by a Defcon presenter iirc, but it was discredited as he claimed to have gone through the airplane wifi but that runs on a separate network. Also, while he claimed to be able to access some of the plane's instrumentation, he wasn't able to access the actual controls
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019