> You know you've got trouble when the kid is texting while on the interview.
Precisely. I was wondering whether the employer form the story would agree with the candidate's retelling...
Vic.
Posts by Vic
5860 publicly visible posts • joined 7 Dec 2007
Page:
- ← Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 72
- 73
- 74
- 75
- 76
- 77
- 78
- 79
- 80
- 81
- 82
- 83
- 84
- 85
- 86
- 87
- 88
- 89
- 90
- 91
- 92
- 93
- 94
- 95
- 96
- 97
- 98
- 99
- 100
- 101
- 102
- 103
- 104
- 105
- 106
- 107
- 108
- 109
- 110
- 111
- 112
- 113
- 114
- 115
- 116
- 117
- 118
- Next →
Chinese student fails job interview because of iPhone
Internet shut-down easier, in more countries, than you think
Children increasingly named after Apple products
Home Sec: Let us have Snoop Charter or PEOPLE WILL DIE
Monday 3rd December 2012 18:00 GMT
Re: Who watches...
> I propose 24/7/365.25 (ish) monitoring of MPs and senior civil servants
No way!
By skewing the sample under observation like that, you'll end up skewing the results. We'll end up with "proof" that mass surveillance is essential because of all the crimes detected up by the pilot...
Vic.
Tech titans lose our loyalty: Are fanbois a dying breed?
Monday 3rd December 2012 16:57 GMT
Re: Added value : more than downloadable apps.
> Congrats
Thanks!
> a European Fiesta is what I believe you call a sub-compact in the US
I'm not in the US - I'm in sunny Hamsphire :-)
> My Fiesta is an old one, and does 0-60....... eventually
I drive a knackered Peugeot Expert...
> momentum does not help
Seriously - buy that book. It's a tenner. It will save you from at least one crash. And it will make underpowered vehicles much easier to drive...
Vic.
Monday 3rd December 2012 14:23 GMT
Re: Added value : more than downloadable apps.
> falls behind other traffic, mainly due to a lack of acceleration
Go and buy yourself a copy of "Roadcraft".
You don't need much acceleration to keep up with traffic, you need to maintain momentum. This basically comes down to plannig and observation.
I first did the Roadcraft course when I bought a big bike. It did indeed reduce my top speed, as I expected it to - but what I didn't expect was that it made me faster...
Vic.
Monday 3rd December 2012 14:06 GMT
> "this is the corporate way, and it is how you will do it"
The SysAds often have no real choice in this; policy gets laid down by The Management, and the admins simply don't have to authority to tell them to bog off.
Even if that's not the case, they're frequently busy people, and time is expensive. Spending a couple of hours getting some strange piece of kit working might be loads of fun, but that cost has to be paid by a budget somewhere. If the budget controller won't pay for the work, it ain't gonna happen...
Vic.
Ready for ANOTHER patent war? Apple 'invents' wireless charging
New laws to shackle and fine the Press? We've got PLENTY already
Sunday 2nd December 2012 11:12 GMT
Re: Guilty until PROVEN innocent???
> THERE HAVE BEEN TOO MANY MISTAKES
There have been very few mistakes. But there have been many instances where a paper has published some salacious bullshit because it creates sales, but there is little or no downside to trashing the life of an innocent party.
IMO, there is really only one rule that needs to be made and enforced: in the event that a paper publishes an untruth about someone, they must publish a retraction on the same page of the paper, with the same fonts and sizes and the same amount of space allocated . So one days' "Paedo TERROR!" screamer becomes the next day's "This paper talks SHIT!"[1].
Vic.
[1] Yes, I know they're not allowed to say that. But you get my drift...
Hearts, minds and balls: Microsoft's Windows 8 Surface gamble
Sunday 2nd December 2012 09:24 GMT
> You clearly knew what I meant
Everyone knew what you meant.
Unfortunately, what you meant is total bobbins. You have no understanding of the subjects you're speaking about. Richard pointed that out to you; you seem to have missed that.
> The ARM CPU would not be able to handle the larger distributions running KDE or GNOME
Yes it would. I have done so, and so have many others. You can see an example at the Raspbian site. There are many others.
> most people would not consider Android as Linux distro
Ah. "Most people", heh? Got any stats to back that up?
> each able to run applications written for the other because they all can install the GTK or QT tool-kits.
Yeah, you've really not understood this open-SOURCE thing, have you?
I run Linux on x86 (and similar, like Vortex), PPC, SPARC and ARM architectures. The reason it works is not because of GTK+, it's because of GCC...
Vic.
NASA: THE TRUTH about the END OF THE WORLD on 21 Dec
Microsoft braces for Surface RT feedback storm
Dell launches Sputnik Linux Ultrabook
Friday 30th November 2012 23:48 GMT
Re: @AC 16:25GMT - Quit your whining
> Dell had to do work themselves that they normally would not have to bother with
No they didn't.
There's an open offer from the kernel developers to generate a proper driver for any piece of hardware for which the vendor will supply specs. Dell didn't need to write a thing (not that they did).
> Las time I checked, programmers capable of working on drivers weren't cheap
You should check again. Linux driver development is as cheap as you want it to be, without sacrificing quality.
Vic.
Monty on broken MySQL promises: Oracle's going to fork it up
Friday 30th November 2012 23:06 GMT
Re: Poor Monty
> but why this envy
It's not envy.
Monty was the guy behind MySQL, sure. But he sold his interest.
Since then, he seems to have spent all his time bemoaning the fact that he no longer gets to decide what happens to MySQL. But that's kinda what happens when you sell something - the new owner tends to get to decide where it's going...
Vic.
Ten badass brainy computers from science fiction
Friday 30th November 2012 22:24 GMT
Re: Prior Art
> Anyway the point is that only real things that actually work can be prior art
That's not true. Fictional devices can be prior art.
> which is pretty sensible when you think about it.
No, it's not.
If you're trying to claim that you invented the idea of a device, then it being known if fiction pretty much precludes that claim.
If, on the other hand, you're patenting the *way* you got it working, then the fictional device is unlikely to be prior art as it is unlikely to have specified its methods.
Vic.
Beware the malware-tipped SPEAR TRAP in your inbox
Friday 30th November 2012 18:43 GMT
Re: simple yet effective
> I'm still getting spam to an address I blacklisted over a decade ago
I'm still getting daily delivery attempts to an address that was accidentally generated by a misfiring spambot a decade ago.
The address has never been mine. It's easy to see how it was put together (stupid script). No email has ever been delivered to that address. Yet every single day, some spambot tries...
Vic.
America planned to NUKE THE MOON
Ye Bug List
Thursday 29th November 2012 18:02 GMT
Re: Gotcha or policy re. deleted comments?
> To me, that topic shouldn't show up in the "my topics" list
I actually prefer that it does.
I might have deleted my only contribution - usually because it's attracting downvotes from people who emote rather than think - but it's still a topic that has attracted my attention enough to want ot post to it, so I still like to see what's going on.
Vic.
Apple sticks finger in dyke, cuts off Dutch flood of Galaxy S, SII, Ace
TVShack O’Dwyer strikes deal to avoid US extradition
Amazon makes BEELLIONS from British customers, pays pennies in tax
Thursday 29th November 2012 18:48 GMT
Re: They aren't breaking the law, it's all legal etc etc
> Laws can be changed
Indeed they can.
The issue here is that, for new tax laws to be effective, we'd need other countries to do the same thing. And some of those countries have a vested interest in *not* doing that same thing.
To do this unilaterally is to spark off a goodly number of trade wars. It's unlikely we'd win.
Vic.
Thursday 29th November 2012 18:31 GMT
Re: jobs
> BUT THEY DON'T PAY THEIR FUCKING TAX!!!
The thing is - they *do* pay their fucking tax.
They just don't pay as much tax as most of us want them to. Now we have to work out a way to increase their taxataion without doing something monumentally stupid to the tax system. And that's not an easy task...
Vic.
Iran's Photoshop FAIL: 'New drone' actually Japanese university bird
Android seven-inchers swipe rug from under Apple
Bradley Manning to speak in public for first time in two years
Bash Street bytes: Do UK schools really need the Raspberry Pi?
Man facing rare refusal-to-unlock-encryption charge: Court date set
Tuesday 27th November 2012 17:46 GMT
Re: Worth remembering
> for RIPA to be valid, the police have to go to a judge first.
No they don't.
Schedule 2 shows who can issue a Section 49 notice. In many cases, this needs to be someone to whom a Judge has granted the right to issue notices - but most importantly, once such powers are granted, there is no further judicial oversight. People issuing notices by way of this route (Section 1 of Schedule 2) do not need to be Police Officers or any other authority figure (although in practice they probably will be).
Section 2 opens things up considerably for the Police - authorisation for a Section 49 notice can come from the Police Act 1997. No judicial oversight is required.
There's loads more in there - it explicitly allows for anyone authorised under Section 94 of the Police Act[1], for example. Have a read at your leisure. It's scary stuff.
Vic.
[1] This pretty much equates to "anyone"...
Tuesday 27th November 2012 13:36 GMT
Re: You have the right to remain guilty...
> Its an EU human right o remain silent under police questioning
Yes, but the law in England and Wales permits a court to infer bad things about you should you choose to exercise that right. Hence the newer version of the caution :-
"You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court."
So it's all very well having a right to silence, but you stand a good chance of getting yourself locked up for it. Not really much of a right...
Vic.
Tuesday 27th November 2012 12:47 GMT
Re: Making a stand.... or just thick ?
> shouldn't they first be required to produce evidence that there is, in fact, something there to decrypt?
They should be. They aren't.
A Section 49 notice only requires belief "on reasonable grounds" that there is an encrypted data block. And it doesn't need to be Plod issuing the notice - it can be anyone in Schedule 2.
Note that 49(3) gives the grounds on which a Section 49 notice can be issued. The first is the one I find least troubling. The grounds are :-
(a)in the interests of national security;
(b)for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime; or
(c)in the interests of the economic well-being of the United Kingdom.
(c) above should worry any foreign nationals storing commercially-sensitive data in the UK...
Vic.
Tool time with Trevor: 'Organic' sysadmins' spice mush still pretty edible
BBC Newsnightmare: Opera chief brought in as new DG
Sailboat cracks 100 km/h for first time
Pirate cops bust LITTLE GIRL, take her Winnie-the-Pooh laptop
Saturday 24th November 2012 20:55 GMT
Re: Civil Law / Criminal Law
> Small claims court is there for such matters and its expensive for them (in time and fees) to get you there.
It's not *that* expensive. You can fill out the claim online in a maatter of moments. There is a fee to be paid, but that is added to the judgement should the plaintiff prevail.
There is some expense in actually going to court - as always, it is better not to if possible.
> Once there, they have to show your are liable for some tort or other (which is tricky).
I disagree. If there is any case whatsoever, it's easy enough to show that a debt is owing. Small Claims Court Judges are sharp cookies, and they are predominantly interested in settling the issue - they expect those appearing in front of them to be untrained in the Law, and IME are especially accomodating. They don't get sidetracked, they just get on with working out who owes what to whom, and issuing a judgement accordingly.
> You will not have to pay their costs. Just yours
That's not true. In the event of a loss, the defendant is liable for the debt claimed (or part of it, should the judge award a partial), and for the court fees that the plaintiff has already paid. Additionally, the winning side can ask for - and might be awarded[1] - costs for appearing in court. These latter costs are currently capped at the princely sum of £50 per day.
> Nobody who knows their rights falls for it.
That depends on whether or not the plaintiff is just trying it on. Every time I have started Small Claims proceedings, the defendant has assumed exactly that. Each of them has later been surprised. I've only actually had to apply for a judgement on one occasion - most people settle once they realise you're serious. A CCJ against a trading company can really make a mess of things...
Vic.
[1] I was awarded costs the last time I went to court. And I'd only gone in as a witness for the defendant. He and I got £100 each for the two days we'd spent in court. Not exactly a great rate of earnings, but we did put an end to the efforts of the lying cheating git that filed the case. Which was nice.
BOFH: The Great Patch Mismatch
Evildoers can now turn all sites on a Linux server into silent hell-pits
Saturday 24th November 2012 10:13 GMT
Re: Or it could do like VMware Workstation/Player does
> It would only require dkms if you do it as part of the OS.
If it's not a part of the OS, it's not an infection...
> The rootkit could have a userspace component hidden away that runs on boot to make sure
> the rootkit module is loaded
That's exactly what dkms does. You can rewrite it with a different name if you really want to split hairs, but what you're talking about is exactly what dkms does.
> If it finds it is not, it would then download what it needs
So you've now got a malicious userland process running on a non-rootkitted kernel. *That* gets noticed.
> It could do the download and build slowly over the course of a few hours
For all that time, it has to do the sort of thing that will trip the intrusion detectors without the protection of a rootkit hiding its tracks. It then needs to install software without root privileges - requiring another privilege escalation vulnerability on the newly-installed kernel - and then load the module. This is not a viable infection route.
Vic.
Page:
- ← Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 72
- 73
- 74
- 75
- 76
- 77
- 78
- 79
- 80
- 81
- 82
- 83
- 84
- 85
- 86
- 87
- 88
- 89
- 90
- 91
- 92
- 93
- 94
- 95
- 96
- 97
- 98
- 99
- 100
- 101
- 102
- 103
- 104
- 105
- 106
- 107
- 108
- 109
- 110
- 111
- 112
- 113
- 114
- 115
- 116
- 117
- 118
- Next →
Biting the hand that feeds IT
