"The recent ElReg article on the state of IT security in Michigan highlights what a challenge it is."
Especially when the overall conclusion of that assessment was on the lines of "could be worse".
16426 posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
"His lobbyists will write the regulations, the cheaply whored-out congresscritters will pass them, and then all of the stuff people are squirming about today will suddenly be just fine because it's Officially The Law now."
Ah. The view from the US. The laws Congress pass apply to the whole world.
Digital advertising was already in trouble – failing to offer brands a great advantage over traditional, "wasteful" advertising
That's because they don't appreciate digital advertising's greatest benefit: adblockers. Remember "Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted and I don't know which half"? Adblockers should give advertisers a big hint.
No, it's the letter of the law that matters. You and I may have different ideas about what the spirit might be but what the Act actually says is beyond dispute - it's the text that emerges from the Westminster Gas Works and that's what the courts have to work with, even if they're not happy with it, as here. All the court can do is drop a big hint.
"I bet the MD of the company is already putting plans in motion for another company to be setup."
I'm sure there are be criminal charges available in relation to endangering rail safety. They might keep him from setting up any more companies for a good while. I'd like to think the ICO will be liaising with British Transport Police on this one.
"You get charged for the processing required for those 100 requests."
Give that servicing each of those requests now seems to have the overhead of spinning up the service that allegedly doesn't exist and closing it down afterwards it seems likely that the charge ought to be more.
"It's serverless because you don't spin up a compute resource...Each function you call launches in its own container"
The second sounds extremely like spinning up a compute resource except in different words. Do you really think the assembled el Reg commentards can't see that?
Do you also think we don't know that with servers you don't need the time to spin up a compute resource/launch a function because the server was spun up at boot time and is already waiting to do the job?
Given that you seem to be new here maybe you really do think that.
"We had life before cars and electricity, too."
We had life before horse and cart. We had life before steam locomotion. We had life before gas lighting. All those things were indispensable in their time but we discovered alternatives. The end of history is a fallacy; every age has thought it had achieved the pinnacle of human achievement.
"And no, various family values preclude ignoring people for whom Facebook is the exclusive contact point."
How about telephones or are you post-telephone? How about letters or are you post-letters? Email? MySpace? If you can dispose of those to communicate only by FB, something you (plural) must have let happen by mutual consent because nobody actually forced it on you, then you can also dispose of FB.
You may not have any contingency plans in place but you'll struggle on somehow.
Don't think FB is too big to fail. There's no such thing. Banks weren't allowed to fail because they were too big, they were allowed to fail because they were too embedded in the workings of the economy. That took a few centuries to happen, not a few years.
"My twitter feed is replete with promoted messages that are very much in favour of the EU, mass migration and Clintonite / Blairite politics."
It may, of course, be those opposed to such things who have had them promoted in order to wind you up. I suspect Unwarranted triumphalism of having a similar purpose.
"For several years we ( me and the SO) have taken part in a longitudinal social survey organised by a UK university. Once a year a reseacher pops round with a laptop and questionnaire."
Does a Heisenberg principle apply to this sort of thing? Does being surveyed regularly influence the way you form views? And how would a researcher test that?
"Basically, volunteers get a list of people to call"
Either things work differently in the US or the best use of this would be to pretend to be the other side and call their supporters. From my PoV it would be "I was thinking of voting for you but as you've called a TPS-registered number I won't".
"The fact he was doing stuff that was so easy to trace is mind boggling."
We keep seeing this. Those who are doing intelligence acquisition seem to be not very good at maintaining their own security at both an individual and corporate level. We should remember this when evaluating their notions of how to go about their business, especially their calls for back doors.
"They don't mean that much to most of us."
They do if we have to replace an entire aspect of EU activity, say medicine approvals out of our own resources. Just because someone isn't directly involved in something EU funded it doesn't mean that they aren't the beneficiary of that activity.
The way it works out, some things, e.g. aviation licensing are done on an EU wide basis so from the EU's point of view, when the UK drops out of that their contribution has to be picked up by the rest of the EU - it won't really cost less to do if the UK isn't involved. So it costs them money. But the UK then has to take on the responsibility for itself and bear all the costs of that itself. It's one of the things that's caused some consternation (exaggerated along the lines of come Brexit all planes will be grounded in the UK) in that it's going to cost the UK tax payer more than it does at present.
Then there are situations such as the ESA which isn't strictly an EU organisation but when it was put together membership of the EU seems to have been assumed - what happens there? If the UK isn't a member they'll miss our financial contribution but if we're not part of it what happens to our space industry if it doesn't participate in ESA projects? Can it flourish to the same extent?
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019