"The ZenBook UX305 is a machine you buy as much for style"
OK, now I understand the title.
16426 posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
"Give everyone a robot that they can contract out to companies?"
Maybe not quite this but...
Family history research shows that most of my male forbears were independent tradesmen, mostly clothiers. Until about the turn of the C19th it would have been unthinkable that cloth manufacture would be carried out in massive mills. Is the ever growing concentration of manufacturing in larger units the only way to organise manufacturing?
I'm sure Tim will be ready to tell us about Adam Smith and pin making to argue that this concentration in factories was inevitable because having workers concentrate on a single task in a process was more efficient. However Adam Smith's pin makers weren't using robots. There's no reason to think that a form of organisation which suits manual methods is necessarily one which suits robotic methods. What seems unthinkable as a way of organising work now need not be so in the future.
So might it be reasonable for individuals or small groups of individuals to buy their own robot installations and sub-contract work from larger corporations?
"So, someone simply builds an ad-blocker that mimics the behaviour the web site is expecting to see"etc
Actually there should be zero incentive to the ad-spewing industry to escalate this. They'd be sending what the advertiser wants them to send so they'd be getting paid for it. The content provider would get paid in turn. The advertiser would actually gain over the situation that would exist if the ads were shown because he wouldn't piss off potential customers. If the industry were to make a big song and dance over it the advertisers might realise that they're getting ripped off by paying to piss off those potential customers so the industry would be the eventual losers.
But yes, a farce indeed.
Actually the industry ought to shut up about the present situation. The more noise they make the more the chance that the message might get back to their customers that advertising can carry negative value.
"I pay for unwanted advertising almost every time I buy something."
Alternative view. If advertising gets pushed in my face I won't be paying for it. Because the only effect it will have will be to ensure I avoid whatever it's advertising.
"Tree rings tell you about the growing season, which most definitely does not include winter."
Long winter = short growing season. By implication they do tell you about winters.
Also consider the possibility that water supply is melt of the previous winter's snow. If water supply is a limiting factor for growth then again there will be some information about the winter.
"How is it possible to not know that there is only one backup tape, and not be aware of what that means ?"
The story is a bit vague but as a new backup tape was bought every month it was used to replace the previous tape in the drive. The only way to know that there hadn't actually been a backup would be to check and it seems that until "Stuart" came along there'd been nobody near the machine with the knowledge to do that.
As to location of kit when the lab I worked in first acquired a server back in the early '80s (anybody remember the Onyx?) it was put in a cubbyhole next to the lift. Transients from the lift mechanism meant it reset at frequent intervals until we persuaded TPTB that this wasn't a good arrangement it got it moved.
"nowhere in the nervous system are the objective value of consumable rewards encoded"
Clearly the man has never been sent out by a SWMBO with a shopping list. In connection with which, and to pick up the point of Aldi & Lidl having fewer SKUs my interpretation of "Lidl surprises" is going there & finding what was on the list.
One of the weaknesses of human mentality is to believe everyone is in the same situation as themselves. It comes in many forms.
One is that people who find foreign languages/maths/games/IT/music/whatever easy and interesting imagine everyone else must be the same and that those who don't are being wilfully obtuse. (My misfortune as a youngster was the number of such folk in the teaching profession.)
Another is to assume that the facilities available to them in their situation - geographical, financial or whatever - are available to all.
You, A/C seem to fall into the second categor - maybe the first as well but you haven't given us any evidence on that point.
"least privilege is something *I* impose upon my user base"
There's a difference between you doing that & $vendor doing it. In your case the computers are owned by and operated on behalf of your company who's paying you to do this. It's like Dave123's PC situation writ large - the owner is making the decisions according to their needs and remaining, via you, in control. The problem with vendor-made decisions is the vendor taking control of kit they don't own.
"My biggest problem so far has been getting my copy of $application to run in it under WINE."
Assuming $application doesn't need you to go online then one solution is to set up a VM running an older version than W7 and run it under that. Alternatively a VM with W7 with updates off. Just keep it in its own little world.
"Microsoft EU is a wholly owned subsidiary of Microsoft (mumble), based outside the USA, but with Microsoft USA being the only shareholder."
That's not the same as having a wholly separately owned franchise operation. If they really want a clear legal air-gap then they need a company with wholly non-US shareholders running a franchise under Irish law (or whatever the country of residence is) with the terms of the contract excluding any ability of any part of US to demand customer information.
" this is an attempted end run around existing agreements coz some entitled bureaucrats think they shouldn't apply to Uncle Sam"
It could indeed be ignorance, arrogance or indolence that caused them not to choose the proper procedure. However, having thought about it some more I wonder if it's a fishing expedition and they don't have an adequate a priori case to present to the Irish. Or maybe they're a lot of secretive sods who can't bring themselves to present the case that they do have because somebody else.
"from a legal perspective, MS cannot be allowed to win as it creates a dangerous precedent,"
The precedent it would set would be that law enforcement would have to follow the due process which exists for this very purpose. There is an existing method for requesting this information & the authorities chose to ignore it.
Exactly what is wrong with a precedent that obliges the authorities to follow due process? This year we celebrated the 800th anniversary of the introduction of that concept into English and hence into US law. The US claims that Magna Carta is a valued part of its heritage. The prosecution in this case should be ashamed of themselves.
"US law governs companies in US jurisdiction, If Microsoft et al do not want to be subject to US law, they should move out of the US"
Sigh. I've said this here a couple of times. Looks like I'll have to say it again.
All they have to do is arrange for a franchisee to operate the business outside the US. They can then go to the US court & truthfully say they have no access, it has to be done through the franchisee which operates under the law of the country where the franchisee is located.
It's not like US business don't have lawyers capable of setting up franchises( for tax purposes).
You're also missing the point that it's not Microsoft et al who want to be not subject to US law. It's their non-US customers. Why should we be so subject?
If IT is just another supplier someone, somewhere is doing it wrong. And it might be IT.
If you're working in IT within a business you should be taking advantage of that to learn about how the business works and what it needs. You should have better knowledge of those needs which should let you meet them better and even be proactive in suggesting better uses of IT to the rest of the business. These are advantages which no external supplier should have. You are part of the business and the rest of the business should be aware that you have common interests with them.
"Ashworth pointed out that according to 2012 research by the EU, only 3.5 per cent of consumers wanted to access AV material across borders and only one per cent want to buy it across national borders."
If the demand is so low why go to the trouble of geoblocking? It must cost money to put in place. Is that a rat I can smell?
"All staff with access need to attend privacy training and be aware it's a sackable offense to breach data protection."
There are a couple of prerequisites for this. One is that it has to be a sackable offence and the other is that the employers need the balls to do the sacking.
"last time I was looking for something I could pick up *that day* and was checking the stores in reasonable travel distance they had really obfuscated whether they were actually carrying what I needed or not."
Same problem the other day with Screwfix - surely they can't all be on collect next day for a Dremel disk.
" We want to get to a point where we are adding to that range of products and making it more specific to customers.”
And we know what that means. Buy a camera, for instance, and every time you visit the site the muppets offer you more and more cameras ignoring the fact that that's the item you're least likely to be looking for this time.
The strong encryption genie has been out of the bottle this last couple of decades.
Assuming we can be confident of at least some of the cipher schemes in the libraries (and there are a good many non-government eyeballs looking at them nowadays) it's not beyond the capabilities of any organised group whom TPTB consider bad actors to roll their own applications. It would have no effect making that illegal: you don't stop people who are already breaking laws by furnishing them with more laws to break. The only effect would be to piss off those people who wish to use encryption for legitimate purposes - the name for those people is spelled V O T E R S.
"Clearly, the simple reason for this operation is to show other half-wits with British passports that going to that dusty shithole and making a video about yourself killing infidels will eventually get you killed too."
It tends not to work that way. They see that fate as glorious martyrdom, as glamorous. Yes, we may view that attitude as irrational but that doesn't stop people thinking irrationally.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019