Posts by bombastic bob 10282 publicly visible posts • joined 1 May 2015
Emojis are like a cancer. They started with those stupid sideways smiley things and grew into a hideous mass of toxic waste. It makes me want to *vomit* (and there's no emoji for vomit, and if there were, I wouldn't use it anyway because it's funnier if I just type out *vomit*)
icon, because, I'm facepalming. And it's not an emoji.
"Belfiore wrote that "if a customer does want to switch out of S mode, they will be able to do so at no charge, regardless of edition."
What the *HELL* was Belfiore *SMOKING* before coming up with THAT?
(You REALLY shouldn't implement new business ideas that you thought up when you were stoned)
does 'SH!+' mode turn OFF the ability to run "legacy" applications (i.e. Win32 API) or any kind of "backward" compatibility? Because, rumor has it, THAT is the TRUE goal here. That's right, ONE! BIG! HAPPY! UWP! FAMILY! (via "the store") !!! All *DUMBED* *DOWN* to the *LOWEST* common denominator, running 'SH!+' mode "CRapps" from "The Store!!!" Because, it's *MODERN* !!!
ugh, now I need more 'pink liquid' so I don't vomit.
the problem isn't fear of tits, but rather, the implication that showing tits have: (alleged) bad male behavior. Too many men have been castrated by radical feminism and are afraid to be themselves.
As for me: left paren, dot, Y, dot, right paren
Think about it: It's fun to follow the women's movement while watching from behind. And when normal male behavior is classified as "toxic masculinity", you KNOW there's gonna be a BACKLASH!
But, apparently, they're not amused by the prank over at the Utah bar association. Getting all self-righteous over it is actually what the prankster would WANT to happen. So it was a successful prank.
"that wouldn't help with the apps on the phones"
Someone like me would invent a new "not back door" encryption 'app' that would a) act like a file system, storing your data encrypted within it as if it were an SD card or other removable storage; b) use a very strong encryption method that's well known and well published and has NO! BACK! DOOR!!! [with a HUGE key that's hashed from an arbitrarily long pass phrase plus a salt that's stored as part of the device itself]
So to decrypt the file you wouldn't just be able to take the SD card out and put it into another device; you'd have to at LEAST analyze the device and know what "salt" data needs to be used when generating the hash from the password. That's one possibility, anyway [others also exist].
This way, the app ITSELF does the encrypting, and it deliberately has NO back door. Although, I suppose storing the SALT within a 'back door-able' encrypted file isn't that bad. Sure, yeah, why not! Throw 'em that bone!
That way, ONLY those who used this (illegal?) app would have STRONG encryption, and you KNOW that anybody getting ahold of that APK would be able to install/run it, and even if you PUBLISH THE SOURCE, it wouldn't matter much, would it? [then anybody with an SDK could build the thing and install it as 'a developer' or on a jailbroken phone]
And THIS just proves how POINTLESS the argument is to have a "not a backdoor, seriously, not!" encryption method. With a back door. Shhhh...
"And of course, the key escrow will never be breached..."
nor will the WRONG person ever be in power to abuse it.
When you consider all of the outright illegal shenanigans that took place within the top levels of the FBI, regarding Mrs. Clinton, the Steele dossier, and (alleged) lying to the FISA courts to get a warrant on a member of a rival candidate's campaign, yeah, sure, we can "trust" that the keys would be kept safe/secret.
Riiiight. Am I on 'Candid Camera' ?
Fact: Human nature is what it is. Those who wield power often ABUSE it. Period. That's why we must NEVER allow *them* to have TOO MUCH.
As for those who want back doors or "not back doors" in encryption algorithms, I say this: Do you want someone you don't know to have a master key to all of your locks, in case you're a criminal or a terrorist? Do you think it will be kept safe?
The 4th ammendment to the U.S. Constitution was written in part to deal with this specific thing. I believe they had locks on doors back then. This is NOT a new concept. The cops can do REAL police work instead of being FORNICATING LAZY.
And, if every HONEST LAW ABIDING CITIZEN used this "back door" encryption, then EVERYBODY WHO ENGAGES IN ILLEGAL ACTIVITY will simply use one of a BOZILLIAN EXISTING METHODS that do NOT have back doors, with super-strong keys, and THAT genii has been OUT OF THE BOTTLE for so damn long it's pathetic.
Icon in response to the idea that the FBI guy was 'right' in asking for the "not a back door, really, honest!" encryption method, because, he thought of it, and therefore it's *POSSIBLE* !!!
When certain keys (or key 'signatures') had known vulnerability problems, such as multiple keys could resolve the decryption, I think every key generator had its list of "poor crypto" key signatures to avoid. Or something like that. I remember seeing an update to Debian and/or FreeBSD for something similar, probably more than 10 years ago. It might have even been done to OpenSSL [I just don't remember the details, that's all].
Faece-book can monetize anything that's "free" as long as it ONLY works with Faecebook. It becomes a 'feature". Like the 'Edge' browser, which ONLY works on Win-10-nic. If you want to run the Edge browser, you need to have Win-10-nic.
It used to be (back in the day) that the applications you ran determined the platform you used. That's the kind of thinking _I_ am thinking of. It's how Faece-book "monetizes" something that's "free".
And, there's also the data slurping mentioned earlier)
""It is notable how almost every OTT messaging app out there apes (in one way or other) BlackBerry Messager."
I think AOL's messenger, MSN's messenger, and ICQ preceded even blackberry...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant_messaging
thread and sub-thread blocking have been implemented in some news readers for, like, EVAR.
(thunderbird has 'ignore thread' and 'ignore sub-thread' in its menu, for example)
To say they were cloned from Blackberry might be a bit much. Perhaps they (including Blackberry) simply grew out of a large set of features implemented by MANY "old school UNIX" applications back in the day, maybe even as early as the old '$TALK' system on the California State University CDC Cyber timesharing computer. From the 70's.
"So a bit like turning the device off? Are they going to sue for power buttons as well?"
I think HP and Apple have patents over the use of buttons, with respect to selecting from a menu and "hold time" having a different function... but they're specific to their own devices. HP's patents have to do with printers that have LCD displays, for example. Apple's patents are for things like the iPod. if you did a different type of device, you could [in theory] circumvent THEIR patents, and even get your own patents granted.
but any patent is SUPPOSED to be specific to a device or narrow class of devices. So if you're not making an iPod clone, or a printer with an LCD-based menu system, you should be fine. With THOSE patents, anyway.
Software patents MUST, at the very least, be specific to a device, and not "generic computing devices". Didn't anyone learn anything from Micro-shaft vs Apple back in the 90's ? Oh wait, they did... and they're forming PATENT TROLL portfolios now! [wrong lesson]
"Can we just have an end to software patents?"
I'd be happy to end patents on TRIVIAL and OVERLY-BROAD software patents, like THOSE appear to be.
But, on occasion, a patent MAY be deserved, such as specific software patents related to a specific device, with the provision that the patents are NECESSARY for the device. I think a Blackberry works just fine without "those things", as do Android and iPhone.
A valid software patent MIGHT include a method for error correction or data compression that's specific to a particular device, like a hardware decoder or demodulator that has microcode. But if someone were to implement the same algorithm in SOFTWARE, for a generic system, it shouldn't be covered by the patent. however, if someone else made another hardware decoder or demodulator, the patent MIGHT apply. And, THAT would be fair.
An alternative might be to reduce the time period for any "generic device" software patent to something considerably shorter than 20 years. Or, just deny them outright.
ideally you could "subscribe" to a service where you can get a car within a few minutes, better than a taxi and on call for semi-emergencies, with a regular taxi service as a backup for unexpected demand.
Electric car fans would probably appreciate this kind of service the most. They could _ALL_ be electric, and would re-charge themselves at the "base" where they're all kept.
Ideally the service would include some 'long distance' vehicles that are gasoline powered, but otherwise your average trip to the mall or picking up groceries would be covered by your subscription.
If it's properly managed, cars will "re-arrange" themselves between storage lots as economically as possible, maybe driving you to the store, and parking at a different lot, then getting you at the store, and parking at the original lot [maybe not even the same car, but so what]. That kind of thing.
Best usage would be for people who have a hard time driving or can't get a license for some reason. TOTAL mobility. It's a good thing.
I doubt they'll replace privately owned vehicles, or human-driven vehicles, especially for long trips or "out in the boondocks" excursions. Still, I'm looking forward to seeing these things.
But I doubt they'll replace cabs. Sometimes you just need to have a driver, to handle luggage, for the extra customer service, to get local info from, yotta yotta.
And then public transportation is most likely going to remain cheaper than a "driverless car subscription". But the 'driverless car subscription' should be cheaper than a car payment + insurance + fuel + maintenance (and that would be the selling feature).
A friend of mine used to subscribe to a service where he could get a car to drive with an hours' notice or something like that. It worked pretty well for him until he started driving EVERY day and then he bought one for himself. Up until that point he'd take the train to work. When that became too inconvenient, he started driving. But if it had been available at BOTH ends of the trip, to the station, then from station to work, then back to the station, etc. he might've continued taking the train.
I played with Lego back in the mid 60's. It was pretty simple then, a nice compliment to Tinker Toy, Lincoln Logs, and the Erector Set. A box of Lego could be played with for HOURS. With all 4 of those things, plus a model train set and road racing set, you could build an entire model city. More or less.
I guess the Legoland parks have already done that with just Lego, though.
Back in the 60's, when Lego was still "a box of bricks", the Erector Set went the "specialty" route.
I had a box o' generic parts that I had tons of fun with and plans to build a whole BUNCH of stuff [which I did, for several years in fact]. Only a few items needed 'specialty' parts. But I remember seeing the specialty kits in the toy isles. My parents wouldn't buy them, saying "you've already got a HUGE Erector Set". (they were smart)
Apparently the Erector sets nowadays are actually 'Meccano' sets.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erector_Set
So they repeated the same mistake.
At least they're still made of Steel. You gotta give a young kid something he could actually hurt himself with, then supervise how he uses the tools until he's safe with them. Getting the occasional cut from a semi-sharp steel edge is a good training tool on why you use safety precautions, learned at a young enough age where you can't really hurt yourself THAT bad, and it tends to stick in your mind better.
"My kids still play with the large brick sets to create Minecraft-like buildings or vehicles, but the modern sets tend to be played with once"
exactly. After a while, parents catch on and buy the kids the thing that lasts for a while, rather than paying for the overpriced "new, shiny" that only gets used one time.
Also Lego seems to be having a classic 'inventory control' problem. The solution to an inventory control problem is EXACTLY what their CEO appears to be doing. You have to eliminate the excess inventory, using the method that creates the least amount of pain, and then fix your forecasting methods and get the production schedule RIGHT this time, so you don't end up with another warehouse full of crap that won't sell.
"after that long it's probably turned into coprolite"
oh, so you're suggesting that maybe he held it for SO long that now it's IMPOSSIBLE for him to crap it out?
Well, then, that's a *bit* different! [in saving his life, they'll collect the evidence - w00t!]
He _still_ deserves a Darwin award, in my bombastic opinion.
The jailers should've let him explode. Instead, he gets to (allegedly) BURDEN SOCIETY for the rest of his [much longer] life.
I have no compassion for criminals, as THEY have NO COMPASSION for ME (or anyone but themselves). Innocent until proven guilty, and you get your day in court and your standard "rights". Beyond that, too bad.
And the jailers aren't responsible for self-inflicted punishments. If the ACCUSED wants to inflict punishment upon himself, such that he can't be forced into compliance, that's not the jailers' fault. They've "washed their hands" of it.
at least when you let a toddler hold his breath until you buy him "that toy", the toddler knows to give up after a couple of minutes. THAT guy ought to have received a DARWIN AWARD for his BLATANT STUPIDITY.
"the engine is slowing it down"
OK - I do a mini-simulation in my head, and I see air going into some kind of 'scoop' device, like what you might see on a ramjet [only a "space" version], and I consider a few things that aerodynamics might cause some trouble with:
a) when the air enters the scoop, how does it get collected exactly? [you need some kind of compressor pump I'd think]
b) while air is collecting for a compressor pump intake cycle, wouldn't it build up enough pressure to exert an impulse on the satellite, causing it to slow down just a bit more?
c) is the electrostatic acceleration going to be ENOUGH more than the (effective) drag caused by the intake scoop going to be enough to overcome the additional drag of the satellite itself against the atmosphere? [this includes the solar panels, too, which just might not be all that streamlined]
I imagine the rocket scientists have thought all this out. Hopefully I didn't just poop their party.
"the prospect of having to pay legal costs is enough intimidation for the other party to drop the case?"
Exactly. Think of it as a "burden of proof" hurdle that you have to overcome in order to have a successful lawsuit. This as opposed to "always side with the [insert 'identity' here]". That way, only the REAL cases will win [and no more 'just settle and make it go away'].
Let's face it: every time you hire a [insert 'identity' here] you run the risk that this employee, if ever fired, will turn it around and sue you, costing you time and legal fees at the very least.
I applaud Intel for NOT "just caving" and "just paying her off".
So, *FINALLY* it looks like there's a penalty for playing the 'identity' card like that, in this case the 'sexist' card, "*FEELING*" as if everyone else out there is a bleeding-heart SJW just waiting to PUNISH "the man" [in this case, literally so] for all of those past grievances that SOooo many others [read: straw men] *SUFFERED* due to discrimination in one form or another, and therefore concluding YOUR case now has "merit" because, emotional manipulation, excessive jury damage awards, yotta yotta.
I hope this has a 'chilling effect' against frivolous discrimination lawsuits.
the only 'winners' in these kinds of things are the l[aw]yers.
"14 year old girl: [trollface]"
because, as we all know, when someone online claims to be a 14 year old girl, it's really a 45 year old male living in his mom's basement.
Asking for underage pr0n: creepy
Sending the underage pr0n (of herself): criminal
who's really taking the risk, here?
with the hippy overtones, they should've just camped out at Haigh/Ashbury (assuming there's a vacant lot there 50 years after the infamous 'love-ins' of the 60's).
I wonder why _I_ was not invited to this love-fest? I've got open source stuff, on github... so what's the big deal here? I contribute patches and testing for open source projects. So why was _I_ not invited?
I guess it's only for the 'hippy' side of open source.
Article didn't mention if Linus was there. I bet he wasn't. Linus was probably busy working on Linux, as usual.
"Actually if you want to do this is also the old school "Saturatable reactor" tech."
yeah, about mag-amps... they're notoriously inefficient, so they'll heat up really fast. Additionally, you COULD make a mag-amp rectifier, but regardless you still need to feed them with AC, and not DC, which means that charging a bank of super-capacitors and then RAPIDLY discharging them into the railgun system to fire it would be out...
nice try, though. Sorry to pee on your parade, to wet your blanket, to hose you down in your moment of passion, to poop your party, to ...
compare to much smaller (and lower dissipated power) IGBTs and/or MOSFETS. Hell, with optoisolators you could get away with using standard bipolar, or even (if you're really tricky) use SCRs. A few decades back I saw some static inverters that actually used a bank of SCRs in the output stage, big bolty-looking things, several inches in diameter. I think these inverters were designed in the 1970's, long before IGBTs and vertical MOSFETS came around. And they had massive cooling fans, too.
Anyway, there are LOTS of ways to skin cats, remove one's clothing, etc..
"They own most of the US National Debt."
Maybe not MOST of it, but certainly a whole lot of it, and the previous U.S. president made SURE of that [having doubled the national debt in his 8 years in office]. [ok Congrab didn't help either, being all too willing to pass 'continuing resolutions' indefinitely, but still]
so yeah, now a foreign entity owns a big chunk of our national debt. But that COULD be weaponized: "We go bankrupt".
Not sure WHAT would happen, then...
agreed, IGBT's aren't that new. however the process and specs of VERY high current IGBT's may be the kind of intellectual property they have acquired...
just like integrated circuits have been around since the late 1950's or very early 1960's, but the ability to make the latest/greatest Intel CPU is the 'secret sauce' that only their chip foundries have. Similar for the RAM and SSD storage, yotta yotta yotta.
"IGBTs are used to power every modern electric train, from any number of different countries."
I doubt it's the concept of an IGBT that's of concern here. It would be the various processes and physical dimensions involved in making the wafers and getting a decent yield. That kind of 'secret sauce' means that this particular manufacturer can mass produce the necessary "stuff". It's also theoretically possible that China _COULD_ deny "that stuff" to everyone but themselves, now.
Keep in mind who the Chinese government people REALLY are...
a) they employ millions of people in what can only be described as "sweat shops" but with more modern tech.
b) they pollute the CRAP out of their own cities, because other nations basically pay THEM to do the "polluty" things.
c) a small number of people have the vast majority of the wealth. Most people earn only a fraction of a typical 'minimum wage' in any 1st world country. It is likely that most of the people making iPhone could not afford to buy one, EVAR.
d) they are WELL KNOWN to do "internal use only" knock-offs of western tech, because they have the schematics, board layouts, components, and willing 'minions' to make it happen. "4th shift" it's sometimes called, "off the books" manufacturing of copyright and patent violating stuff.
Given this, and a pile of cash they're _NOT_ sharing with "the people", what do you expect? It's like the royal coffers of the "communist" nation are full to the brim now, and they want to flex their muscles and ensure it *STAYS* that way, indefinitely.
Understanding them means understanding human nature. That government has too much wealth power in too few hands. _ONLY_ corruption can result from this.
And we, in the west, have ENABLED them.
I'd say that 'strategy' does not mean what they must think it means, if "strategy" means you hire a CHIEF! _DIVERSITY_! OFFICER! to mange your hiring policies and recruiting efforts.
Now, if they'd hired a "Chief Best Qualified Candidate Officer" or a "Chief Hire The Genius Officer" it would make a LOT more sense.
But that's _NOT_ what they did, now is it?
The purpopse of a corporation is to earn profit for its investors. "Diversity" is counterproductive to profit, because it focuses on "identity', and _NOT_ something that is "the best employee" nor "maximum value to the company". This means _LOWER_ profits, which is counterproductive and not in the company's best interest.
But hey, if a pair of BULLSHIT artists want to duke it out over BULLSHIT like "Chief Diversity Officer", let them. The rest of us can sit back and LAUGH! AT! THEIR! FOLLY!!!
ISPs could mitigate this, if they filtered all UDP traffic originating at their address space by filtering out anything that does not match the actual IP address of the source computer at the gateway
A simple filter rule on the gateway. There's nothing in the RFCs (that I'm aware of) where you need to allow the originating IP address of a UDP packet to differ from the computer that originated it. It's just that it CAN, that's all.
there was this one scene where 'Zero Cool' was having a turf war on a TV network control computer against "some other hacker". It turned out to be his future girlfriend. How cute, they met while duking it out on someone else's "puter". Heh.
The future realm of online dating - two potential lovers, trying to take over some innocent victim's computer for bitcoin mining. Awwww... [and they were all filled with 'awe'],
but yesterday's world was better - for desktop users, anyway.
I'd welcome an XP-like environment for Android, especially if it's 3D Skeuomorphic and *NOT* 2D FLATSO. so much of 'droid is already 2D FLATSO, but it doesn't HAVE to be... starting with non-flat icon design [which I see a lot of] but would need customized controls in lieu of 'flat-looking boxes' that pretend to be buttons [and so on]. but a reasonably clever programmer can make a 3D looking one, using a bitmap (as one example; other methods exist).
now, if native 'droid would just support that better...
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
