Re: Easy good passwords, here I go again...
"What we've got here is failure to communicate"
Or was it "a failure"? or did I expand "we've" to "we have"? So many things to remember...
16449 posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
"This is the org that let 80% of the UKs banks blow up."
By following a definition of inflation laid down by the then PM, former Chancellor. A definition that said increasing house prices didn't count as inflation when setting interest rates because low interst rate buy votes as well as keeping the cost of govt. borrowing down. That definitely wasn't a housing bubble you were betting the bank on. Definitely not, right up to the time it burst.
"Why isn't the question the other way round, e.g. any reason why your project should not be spoken about openly?"
Because it doesn't work the other way round. If you speak about it openly and then discover you shouldn't have it's too late and you might find yourself having to dob yourself into the ICO for having led to half a million people's PII turning up on haveibeenpwned.
"I identified it seems to be the way the negotiations are being conducted. And as I point out it is unproductive."
If you recognised the reality that negotiations would be unproductive why did you support Leave?
"The UK doesnt want a border. So its the EU's problem if they do."
The UK's position is that it doesn't want to be in the EU. That means that there will be a border between the UK and the EU because that's what borders are: demarcations between one political entity and another. The RoI is part of the EU. So inevitably there will be a border between the RoI and the UK. NI is in the UK so that means that the border is between the RoI and NI. But the UK has commitments arising out of the Good Friday Agreement. Resolving the nature of the border that must necessarily exist between the UK and EU arising from Brexit and those commitments is inescapably a problem for the UK; it may be a problem for others but it isn't one that the UK can duck.
"That is a very 'zero sum' view of negotiating. It is also a very unproductive way of looking at negotiation which is pretty harmful. Unfortunately it does seem the negotiations may be being carried out that way."
In other words, it's the reality. We've always said that. You didn't believe it. You can see it happening. You still don't believe it. Why?
"freedom to do as we please regarding borders (think Ireland)"
Indeed, think Ireland. Think also of a separate but associated matter: the Good Friday Agreement. And if you wish to wind back to pre-Common Market/EU days you then need to reconstruct the previous arrangement which allowed free movement of citizens between Ireland and the UK.
"Allowing another partner to join a project at a later date, then change the terms to exclude an an existing partner is NOT ACCEPTABLE."
I'm not sure who this other partner joining at a later date and changing the terms is but it's quite clear who's responsible for excluding the UK. It's the UK. We (by a small percentage of those who voted) decided to leave.
"We paid our share for the development etc., - if we don't get that back then we should be allowed to decode the PRS signal."
You may thing we should but that's just your personal view. The reality is that unless the contracts were written that way that can't happen.
"Did you know that according to the EU (suggested by the French, could it have been anybody else) snails are classed as fish! Hows that for thinking out of the box!"
I'm sure scallops, shrimp, crabs and prawns are also classified as fish. Zoologically they're not. In culinary terms they're shellfish, of course. I believe that in some English restaurants snails are referred to as "wallfish" - and why not, we couldn't use some foreign word like "escargot" could we?
"As we have recently had confirmed the EU are a far more reliable political entity than the US."
And thanks to these nuppits we in the UK have proved we aren't which is going to serve Fox & co really, really well when they try to negotiate all these wonderful trade deals.
The only pity is the spineless and incompetent tossers we have "negotiating" on our side.
These incompetent tossers are some of those who advocated leaving in the first place. If you think they're incompetent why did you take their advice when you voted? If you think you or anyone else could do better remember beggars can't be choosers and we (or at least you) are the supplicants in this.
"where people rather want become journalist than engineer I don't think paying more will help alleviate a skills shortage."
If being an engineer doesn't pay well, partly because of off-shore competition, then paying more would help.
Going slightly OT could the numbers of media studies/arts students reflect the numbers of places available and could that in turn reflect the relative cost of providing such places? There's an argument that the media studies students are subsidising the provision of STEM courses.
"People stayed with the older Office versions for many years (because of their superior usability)"
Or simply because they didn't see why they should pay MS money to upgrade something with which they were content. That would be a valid reason even if the interface hadn't changed at all.
"For professionals who actually want to work with the products, it was quite frustrating and painful."
Don't you realise those are bad, bad people? They haven't got with the programme. They were supposed to buy upgrades for all their old products. Not doing so means they've deprived MS of their rightful extra income. Next thing, you'll be telling us some of them even use LibreOffice as well.
"... a change merely because of the change?"
Not merely because of the change.
It's because they backed themselves into a corner years ago by getting their file formats made into an ISO standard (add your own comments on the whys & hows of that). That prevented them from forcing upgrades every time a new format was introduced and users of old versions found themselves unable to open files from newer versions. It also meant that compatibility stopped being a moving target for other S/W, particularly open source. So how to lock users into MS products and upgrades?
Enter the ribbon. New users get forced to learn the ribbon interface (all those educational deals) so wouldn't be able to use either old versions of Office or the competition. But now LibreOffice have started introducing a ribbon interface into their products so ribbon-habituated MS users can feel at home.
Is it surprising that we get another interface change?
"You need your Tier 1 developers on it or even better a sysadmin with a developer background (if you can find one), not the Tier F ones."
In fact, forget the Tier 1 developer. It's strictly sysadmin territory. Get it wrong and it'll be sysadmins pointing and laughing.
"Any plan to pull it back would be met with international fury."
I've often said that IT's ultimate revenge is to give the users exactly what they asked for. Perhaps it's time to do that to Cruz and watch the wider, non-US, internet community just sideline IANA and all its works by simply redesignating one of the root mirrors as definitive.
"OpenBSD and DragonflyBSD projects published their patches to mitigate this issue – thus forcing the situation onto the world stage. The BSD teams went ahead after Intel declined to work with them under embargo, and instead stuck to larger operating system vendors and makers."
I'd like to think that'll prompt Intel to be bit more cooperative in future but I doubt it will.
"You sign up on a US server, read the EULA (several dozen pages wherein the jurisdiction of US law and playing fast and loose with personal data are mentioned)."
EULAs have a habit of not being enforcible due to clashes with consumer law. Now they have GDPR to contend with as well. Conditions of service based on playing fast and loose with personal data will be hit hard with this.
"demand from all US companies to only store private data in EU-owned datacenters."
The CLOUD act makes it necessary to go a step further. There needs to be something like an EU-owned trustee such as the Microsoft/Deutsche Telekom arrangement or a franchise arrangement so the data, as opposed to the datacentre, is out of US control.
"Does this have any bearing on the shysters who try and go after people based on IP addresses caught torrenting ?"
Not as far as I can make out but if I read the judgement correctly the cases cited suggest that they'd have to pay the costs of finding those IP addresses and matching them to the particular premises to which those IP addresses were assigned at a given time.
"Microsoft accepts no responsibility for... By using this software You agree to indemnify Microsoft against all claims..." etc. etc... In other words, you're entering in a contract.
If such a set of contract terms attempts to overrule statutory obligations it'll get chucked out of court.
"For good or for bad, there is no constitutional protection for one's honor in USA constitution....The first court will terminate it with extreme prejudice on first amendment grounds."
Perhaps, rather than dealing with this as an act they should make it a constitutional amendment instead. It's time the US constitution was brought into line with those of civilised* countries.
* AFAICS some of the constitutional amendments are based on a romantic notion of the US as a pioneering country, pluckily advancing beyond the known limits of civilisation. If they want to be treated by the rest of us as civilised they need to start acting that way and the first step would be to get rid of that notion.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019