Posts by elsergiovolador 4287 publicly visible posts • joined 27 Apr 2020
Over 10 MX Master 2s. They last between a year and two. It's outer coating simply disintegrates and becomes sticky and unpleasant to touch.
I had a couple of MX Master 3s, but these are even worse - in the sense that build quality is worse than 2s and they don't work as well.
I also had a few keyboards (from the top of the line, don't remember models) - same issue - very cheap and poor quality materials.
> Logitech builds some great hardware.
Plastic Chinese cheaply made carp with planned obsolescence built in and charged premium for.
Only reason people still buy from this company, because they managed to patent their "inventions", so other companies can't make e.g. a mice with a flywheel.
Apple margin shouldn't be higher than 1-2% on online sales.
Otherwise this is bad for the economy. They are sucking the money out of SMEs preventing it from trickling down.
Good chunk is probably spend on our adversaries in China.
For any sensible country it would be a no brainer to shake Apple tree off people's money, they take without reason other than greed.
Really you want to have a worker do the job on mission critical system very much straight off the plane, without a chance to recharge and relax properly?
This is a recipe for disaster.
Take into account that such trip probably wastes worker's Saturday (having to bring forward Sunday shopping and whatnot) and Sunday would then be wholly trip orientated. So after week's of hardwork, worker effectively lost their time to relax and in such state would be pushed to work on Monday.
Whereas if they fly Friday evening, sure - they have to postpone their weekend plans wholly, but they get two full days to get their energy back.
If the posting was successful (in the sense that worker did everything they could), I would have given them Tuesday off to take the edge off.
Beancounters often forget that behind the spreadsheet, there is a living and breathing person.
to live the rest of their lives in the totalitarian People's Republic of China.
Most countries are totalitarian, some just are better at keeping the façade pretending they aren't.
If you travelled more, you would probably learn that everywhere in the world is very much the same, because people are the same.
Sure there are exceptions, where certain regions are still enslaved in sort of medieval style and have not figured the way out of it yet. But China is not the one, at least not whole.
ASML is definitely paying very good wages
Are they?
It's simply suffering from a lack of available European talent to begin with.
Well, this happens if you don't pay very good wages.
People have no incentive to get to the field and those who are experts, tend to also be experts in other fields that pay them more.
Specifically, the claimed inventions provide a process by which a client can send a data request to a location server, and if that location server does not contain location information for the requested data, it responds with a redirect message that specifies which location server contains the relevant location information
This is some bollocks. I know because I have developed such system well before 2000 as we were grappling with various limitations of network and computers then.
I am sure many others did as well, because that's what you were doing.
I wouldn't even think of patenting such process, because that's just common sense.
This is quite ridiculous.
These things should have never been allowed to be patented.
Then they don't contain any inventions.
This is often driven by investors requiring company to patent anything that moves, so in case the company folds they can have patents to troll with and recoup some of their investment.
This is so lame, I don't know why Enquiry is falling for it.
It's like a child saying dog ate their homework.
PA is just being used as an excuse.
Competent Enquiry should see through that.
execs often don't send their own emails but get their PAs to do it.
That doesn't matter. Exec should have access to emails and should hand them over. PA is irrelevant.
that's been the business environment for hundreds of years with very little security threats until recent years.
Really? What about having to pay protection money to the local gangs or competitors getting corrupt government to close you down or let your business experience mysterious fire.
Today is even worse, as common crimes against business are pretty much legal. Anyone can go to your company, take whatever they want and leave. If you are SME, all you can do is get crime ref number (and if officer has a bad day you will probably have to explain to him why you think any crime happened at all and that you have not imagined it) and frame it.
Then you have cyber crime on top of all that.
SMEs can barely keep their head above water, having yet another thing to add to the pile of things would likely have sunaked them.
So most just predictably decide to wing it and hope it will all somehow work itself out.
In the meantime policymaker just ticked another box.
Happy clappy Britain.
Almost anything that requires recurrent payment should be run by government.
Design and manufacture their own servers?
This is one off. No need unless there is a national security concern.
- Create their own hypervisors, integrated into custom silicon?
No need. There are open-source and free hypervisors. Current commercial offerings of silicon are adequate.
- Run their own global fibre networks?
This is an exception. But surely government could build a backbone network to connect data centres in different countries and could rent out surplus capacity.
- Design custom electrical substations?
Energy supply should be run by the government. We should have a national supplier.
- Design their own CPUs?- Design their own AI accelerator chips?
- Create their own distributed databases and analytics tools, heavily integrated into the infrastructure stack?
No need, though of course software development should be in-house as hiring big consultancies is expensive and delivers poor quality. Though this would need a reform of finances, as currently public sector by design cannot employ specialists as they are unable to pay market rates.
Being a cloud is an awful lot more than building out a datacentre, even a clutch of gov-wide datacentres. Clouds long ago moved beyond providing a bunch of servers and storage in a datacentre - AWS now has over 200 customer facing services, all orchestratable by API, all integrated into IAM / billing / SDN / monitoring etc. etc., all very effectively capacity managed so you can almost always provision within minutes, seconds or less. These are big building blocks that enable you to e.g. build a highly scalable transactional app with mobile and web identity management, event driven feeds to a data warehouse, a data lake, a contact centre, maybe some media transcoding services with redundancy across three availability zones and if data protection regs allow to another region. Provisioned in large part with a few lines of Terraform and without so much as speaking to procurement.
Nothing that cannot be built and tailored for government use and bring massive savings long term. Not to mention local jobs.
Anyone who views this through the lens of "who's running the datacentres" has thoroughly missed the point. Teams creating business services don't consume datacentres: they increasingly consume complex, integrated technology stacks that require engineering effort and operational investment way higher than a single mid-sized government can afford.
That's nonsense. It can only fall apart by corruption.
Absolutely no normal person says "please build a data centre."
and we have a first ad hominem.
So the alternative is to have a (massively underfunded, underskilled, underpaid) public sector workforce build infrastructure that is an exact duplicate of something that already works? Or do you propose nationalising Azure/GCP/AWS/the Internet?
How to unpick this rubbish. Pay bands in public sector are set low so that organisations are forced to hire interim staff from agencies that make massive profit on top of already high rates. Public sector workforce can be paid adequately, but the current corrupt system needs to be changed.
Yes, "building exact duplicate" is essential as it will be cheaper in the long run, because you don't have to pay a massive mark up each billing cycle. Data centres are not a temporary need, but permanent.
Cloud infrastructure is almost nothing like real estate. You rent a house, your landlord has no incentive to improve your conditions because there's always another clown who will rent your awful, mouldy flat. Cloud providers are always chasing growth. Even a fat slug like the public sector will accrue benefits demanded by the private sector.
Cloud providers are chasing profit just like landlords. The situation with landlords you are describing is a side effect of artificially limited supply. You seem to have trouble understanding basic economic concepts.
This "Cloud first policy" is such a non-sense it sounds like it was written by one of the cloud providers.
Hopefully the new government not only has more imagination, but also can run an inquiry why this even happened and whether it was just stupidity or something more sinister.
If you ask yourself: "what is the business of government?" how high up the list would "being a data centre provider" be?
Very high on the list, probably at the top. You are framing the question wrong though. It's like asking how high up the list would "being a landlord" be? One of the worst mistakes management can do is to sell off the buildings corporation owns and then rent them back from the buyer. That's how many businesses run themselves to extinction.
Computing and data processing is essential today. There is no case for government to buy these services from a private entity and let them make a massive profit.
Government cannot opt out of computing and data processing. It's not something temporary.
If it was a one of thing, an experiment, then it could be cost effective, but if something is permanent then lease is simply not sustainable.
That's why there's a "Cloud First" policy for government, and why their service manual says: "You must never build your own data centre."
That's simply an idiocy or invitation for bungs.
But you have to ask: what's the benefit of moving from one to the other?
If organisation is renting, then benefit of switching provider is to find one who will offer some savings while retaining quality of service or exceeding the previous provider or if what you are renting is no longer fit for purpose.
That question would be irrelevant if government ran its own datacentres.
Yes the problem is that there is no one to pay bungs to get them up and running.
That problem doesn't exist if data centres are corporate owned. Few dinners, directorship for the nephew, maybe some nice holiday at private island and promise of a good donation at the speaker circuit, when politician is out of the woods so to speak, do wonders.
That's why we need government to store all the data about us they possibly can. This way when the foxy data thieves enter the hen house they will be overwhelmed by sheer amount of data, they won't be able to download anything meaningful before the coppers read a headline in a local newspaper that there is an ongoing data thievery, try to ignore it and then under pressure from the public reluctantly come assess the situation. At which point thieves realise they ran out of space and only managed to download 20 years worth of heartbeat rate at 0.001s resolution of one citizen.
It's not how you do it.
You create a company that specialises in processing data, especially medical records.
Build some reputation over the years.
Start lobbying politicians and people responsible for tenders.
Get a contract from department of health or something for processing medical records.
Make sure your lawyers sneak in terms that will allow you to choose subcontractors to process data virtually unrestricted.
Now you got the medical records, they pay you for having them and nobody calls you a thief.
Then instead of advertising on darknet, advertise that you look for subcontractors on the pedestrian web.
Hire them to do processing they want to do while they pay you to your completely unconnected offshore vehicle.
Seems like people don't get which events can trigger receipt of a bung.
Competitor asks to scrap the project. Kerching!
Competitor asks to win the tender for a new improved project. Kerching!
The event that does not trigger a bung:
Carry over previous party project like nothing happened.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
