Cool
I was wondering what McCain was working on these days.
744 publicly visible posts • joined 7 Jul 2007
If the government think they need this campaign, then they absolutely must not spend the money of the people they hope to convince on it. I mean, for Christ's sake, if support is so weak you need a campaign from Saatchi to try to convince us, isn't it a bit rich forcing us, under duress, to bankroll it?
UKGov: Reach into your own private bank accounts, you arseholes.
That's funny, I was in England a few months ago and they wouldn't take my Clydesdale Bank notes. I sense a curious asymmetry.
Seriously, I don't think the large numbers of 'fake IT people' are really the problem. The UK's got an exit wound where industry used to be. All we manufacture is fresh food and bullshit. Both great industries, don't get me wrong, but they can only provide so many worthwhile jobs.
"The prosecution is considering a request for retrial in respect of the plot to blow up airliners against all seven men upon which the jury could not agree."
If at first you don't succeed... And even the Guardian runs this story under the headline "Liquid bomb plot: three guilty of murder conspiracy" and refers to Abdulla Ahmed Ali as "the ringleader." Curious.
I also like this bit: "Disposable cameras would have been used to help set off the devices which would also contain regular batteries, hollowed out to contain chemicals." Very crafty, though you have to wonder what they'd have done with the chemicals they hollowed out of the batteries to make room for the chemicals, and what use the cameras would have been as detonators without further batteries. And indeed why we're still allowed to carry batteries and disposable cameras onto planes.
Don't make me make the obvious joke.
And Acorns *are* scalable. Check out the Master 512! Awesome. And that Tube r and the 1MHz bus; even the Model B can run CP/M with with 8086 secondary processor.
Damn, I need 'get me coat', 'joke alert' *and* 'boffin/geek' I think. Mine's the one with the Mode 7 Teletext display, for Prestel.
I think this article has drawn as much hatred from the baying crowds as IE has had piled on it in a lifetime.
And that's saying something.
Got to say, I love the way the IE crowd get their toes stuck in. On the basis of lack of innovation no less.
In a slightly different tone of voice people, it's just a fucking web browser, calm the fuck down.
"their aim is not to prove their clients' innocence as that is largley[sic] impossible for the majority of cases"
No, the reason is that justice traditionally works the other way around.
But hey, you're right, we shouldn't let the trifling issue of torture get in the way of convicting people on the basis of their own confessions. With all this wailing about human rights it's amazing these unelected agencies have time to fill their dragnets with people based on their ticket stubs to keep us all safe.
The same thought has often crossed my mind, but obviously MS can't go that way. Admittedly XP to Vista seems to have been quite a jump in terms of new code, but NT4 to NT5 to NT6? Radically different chrome but essentially the same engine. Releasing the source of NT4 would probably still constitute releasing a fair chunk of XP (and indeed a reasonably large subset of Vista, I reckon).
Essentially it seems to me that Microsoft's income depends on being able to release a product, support it for a short while, then slow down the updates for a while to build up a head of steam, respray the old crate and fire it out as a new release - basically, they support essentially the same product for 10 years and call it a different one every 2 or 3 so that they can charge for it again.
So getting them to release the source for the 'old, obsolete' version is probably a no-no, simply because it actually *is* the shiny new one. Also, if the excerpts from the Win2K code I've seen are real and are anything to go by it's a little heavy on the expletives and "We are morons" in-jokes so there'd be a bit of an embarrassment factor there.
There must be some kind of half-way house, though - they could keep supporting old versions but cease to promote them. After all marketing must be a bigger expense than R&D for a company that warms over left-overs for a living.
I've been running Ubuntu about a year now (switched over from Fedora because I liked the lazy, no-effort, just-works experience Ubuntu offered). I'm a developer and run four Ubuntu servers (on creaking legacy hardware) and two Ubuntu Desktop machines (one creaking, one pretty quick).
In the past 12 months my grottiest machine has had about 2 hrs downtime while I replaced its dust-clogged, worn out fans, and the fast one was down for 15 minutes for an internal clean and the addition of an extra hard drive. A couple of applications have occasionally flaked out on me, including OOo and Eclipse, but I've not lost any data as a result or been forced to reboot the OS. My workhorses (Postgres, MySQL, PHP, Tcl, Squid, Tor and Apache) have been flawless. I've had no hardware compatibility issues (and I do use a wireless network and a ton of USB devices - mostly storage, plus a digital camera, a few of which were officially badged as Windows only).
Most of my machines are tucked in behind a firewall but I do have one trusty world-facing webserver that also runs Tor. I get a few 'knocks on the door' a day but have never had a successful break-in (touches wood and tails logs).
Just as buggy, my arse.
I've been one of their more loyal customers. Although I haven't sold much lately, I had a few items lined up and I was still planning to use eBay, but this is clearly going from bad to worse so I'm out of there. I'm sure they're going to succeed in what they're doing - I don't think they're being stupid, just realigning what their site is all about. This is a systematic attack on small sellers - they really do want rid of us. They want a few big sellers and a horde of small buyers - you can see why they think that'll work, and it probably will. I don't see why they didn't start a separate side-project for this though, there was no need to kill eBay in the process.
To avoid giving them the satisfaction I'm going to stop buying through them as well. Craigslist doesn't seem to have really taken hold around here yet but Gumtree is going strong. I'm giving that a try. It's a little bit of a shame to lose the convenience of Paypal but it's a price worth paying now that the price of Paypal itself isn't. I guess the eBay of old was too good to last.
"We all know how the UAC played out in Vista" - with all due respect, don't include me in your 'we all knows' like this. UAC is actually hopeless in terms of improving security; it's a buck passing tool.
Even if I'm wrong, the fact that I hold this opinion clearly shows that we don't, in fact, all know.
"To prevent performance bottlenecks, the filter only acts on web pages that can result in the execution of scripts, so objects such as images that don't include scripts are ignored"
Wow. I mean, WOW! How awesome is that, a script filter than only checks scripts. Ingenious.
"The filter also gives a green light to code that's found to originate from the site the user is visiting."
Elegantly defeating the purpose then - XSS is effective largely because the scripts, from the browser's point of view, do originate at the site the user is visiting. Or is it me being stupid here? (No trace of sarcasm, I wouldn't rule that out).
"The filter can also be disabled for specific zones, based on an administrator's preferences."
Hello again, ActiveX and trusted sites.
"a heuristics engine is started that inspects the URL and POST data of the requested page and uses regular expressions to identify possible XSS vulnerabilities"
Brilliant - what an impressive sounding way of saying it checks a bunch of regexps against the source and tries to spot the bad guys. This is so trivial to work around it's actually slightly offensive. Anyone remember how IE used to treat things like this?
<img src="j%65vascript:"
Couldn't someone working on those have had a crack at sorting the underlying issues though? Also, I have to say:
"Microsoft Live Labs developed the technology in tandem with researchers at the University of Washington over the past two years" - i.e. MS bankrolled University of Washington research.
"The viewer uses technology from Seadragon, a company bought by Microsoft in February 2006." - i.e. The viewer *is* technology from Seadragon.
"If the patents are granted, IE could join Safari in allowing a feature affectionately known as "porn mode"."
Er ... so they'll only do this if they can arrange that nobody else can? And what they're trying to patent is Safari's behaviour? Something very odd and Microsofty about that.
Software patents suck.
Also, as a PlusNet customer I get unmetered bandwidth between midnight and 8am (used to be midnight to 4pm until the sneaky scum suckered me into an 'upgrade' but that's another story) and I can spare another 10Gb peak bandwidth a month. I'll be chewing through that with a web spider from now on, polluting the database with random pap and restricting my real traffic to Tor and I2P.
They're taking this too far now. Time to push it a little further from our side methinks.
With reference to your comment about it being like asking Intel to still supply older CPUs... the difference is that if you need a 486, you can still buy one (new), even now. They have certain advantages if you really don't need much performance. Admittedly last time I saw a new DX33 (with 8Mb of EDO and a suitable motherboard) the price wasn't particularly tempting - over £100 if I remember correctly.
But still, if you want one, you can have one. If MS don't want the support burden of their older systems, they could release them open source (or, more realistically, public domain, since a lot of the source is probably too embarrassing to release) without support, rather than cutting off supply entirely. That would still leave people with a choice. Perhaps support could be handed over to another company under license.
Linux isn't a terrible option for this, depending on what you're after. Ubuntu is pretty usable out of the box without much setup effort (installation is easier than Windows XP). I'm drifting away from Ubuntu at the moment because it's not so great for software development (in my experience; might just be me, but I'm switching to full-caffeine Debian instead). Mind you, if you're developing on Linux you probably don't mind a bit of tinkering to get things going.
Windows does get to cheat a bit on the 'just works' front by being installed before people even get their hands on the machine. If people had to install XP themselves I think they'd realise that the average home user can't do a decent job without some head scratching and web searching.
The way I see it the real problem is that on Unix-like systems there's a long tradition of system adminstrators not being ordinary users; life is very easy for the ordinary user, but the traditional administrative tools are more 'techie oriented'. This obstacle is gradually being overcome by most of the more popular distributions with friendlier admin tools.
Windows has a much more serious corresponding problem, in that it has a long history of being used by ordinary people and administered by nobody, just degenerating into an unusuable state over time and then being reinstalled (usually by the next owner of the PC). Looks like MS are combating this by trying to be everybody's system administrator now, which is progressively removing the option of being your own. Bye bye choice and privacy in other words.
... to surveys of confidence. Is this really such a good way to measure the underlying performance of a sector, or of the economy as a whole? Strikes me, if anything's going to kick off a self-perpetuating rise or fall in confidence, it's surveying peoples' confidence and publishing the results.
To be pedantic, technically they're uploading (which is the fundamental reason why terms like 'sideloading' annoy me ... just because an MP3 player is small doesn't mean you can't upload to it).
Also, the word 'vulnerable' is a bit redundant in the context of Windows PCs. :)
I've considered both of these (I'm slightly embarassed to admit!). Gambas is clearly quite nice but not enough like VB for my VB skills to be that much use (and enough like it that I won't tolerate a learning curve - BASIC is fundamentally distasteful and I'd rather learn C# if I'm picking up something new).
RealBASIC is a commercial product - I'm still feeling my way around it a little but as soon as software costs actual money I get very reluctant to put any of my time into it. I don't like the sound of "One year of software updates" for $400 and more cash for any support thereafter. In truth the only reason I think of VB as convenient and handy is that my employer handles licensing for me (and indeed pays for it) - at home neither applies and suddenly I find myself imprisoned in closed source hell again, which serves to remind me that while some of the development tools are nice'n'shiny (sharp toothed and bright eyed?) over on the other side, life in general is far more awkward.
I was only observing that MS can put together some nice development tools - not seriously contemplating infecting my poor machines with their bloatware. :)
... this Linux fanboy has to admit Mike has a point. Visual C++ 6.0 has a really solid compiler and even VB6's IDE (once you install a third-party scroll wheel fix and MZ Tools to bring it into the late 90s!) it actually very comfortable (though the language is undeniably an ugly, mutant dog of a thing).
Still - development tools clearly a strong suit at MS.
See, I don't just slag 'em off. :)
You know, from time to time I actually wish I could use VB6 at home when I want to throw together something truly temporary. I just won't shell out for an XP license (let alone a Vista license, ye gods) to do it.
Funny, that's not my experience. Also, on the occasions when my Linux boxes do update the kernel or glibc I generally wait a few days (up to a couple of weeks) for an opportune time to bounce them, which takes 22 seconds on my slowest machine.
It's nice to have the option isn't it? More than once, mid-patching, I've had Windows ripped out under me without so much as a 30s window to save my work. I've had it install patches after I asked it not to, I've had it brick itself with patches, and I've had patches chew up applications. I've never had that with Linux (not saying it's not possible, but I've not seen it).
Linux also promotes world peace and leaves a minty fresh taste in your mouth, with zero (yes ZERO) calories. Mmmmmm, Linux!
MS are crap. If an incompetent administrator changes a server's IP address, Linux pops over to the data centre and has a quick read of the sticky label on the front of the server, updates its resolver, allows you to use your mail, and composes a polite email to the administrator advising them to update their DNS servers (enclosing a concise bash script which will handle it, for their convenience). Then it looks up El Reg, searches for a vaguely MS-related story, roots through the comments for a desperate MS fanboy and posts a clever, original rebuttal of his last assertion.
In the meantime, a daemon (fantasticd) corrects for user error, restores from backups you never made and steals from the rich to give to the poor, resolves conflicts in Georgia, Iraq, Afghanistan (amongst others) to the satisfaction of all parties and deletes the records of innocent people from the national DNA database.
After bringing down oil and gas prices, patching the ozone layer and re-freezing the poles, a small script called from cron (/usr/bin/awesome) generates blueprints for practical flying cars.