"even just one day's delay is not worth the risk"
How about an article on the chilling effect of self-censorship?
2911 publicly visible posts • joined 8 Mar 2008
I'd just like less videos on the BBC news site and more actual bloody articles.
I haven't visited the BBC news site for a couple of years but do find their News App for hones suits me. That seems to have a good mix of articles which appear to get cached when using WiFi at home and are therefore available when I am out without a data connection.
I don't mind paying the licence fee which is only 40p a day. Others may be half the price of that but don't, for me, deliver half as much. I am however aggrieved at their withdrawing their free Radio Times XMLTV listings service and having to resort to web page scraping.
Don't like the process that allowed we the people to elect him? Move to another country snowflake, this is how democracy works.
I thought, in a democracy, people were entitled to mould that democracy into the democracy they would like, not eternally stuck with what they had.
Isn't what you saying more akin to fascism?
Unfortunately, people pirating software, having registered user names, registration codes and accompanying licence files pushed to what used to be called warez sites was one of the reasons companies started using on-line licence verification so they could revoke licences abused that way.
As is often the case; a small group of people can spoil things for everyone else.
There is light-touch DRM and then there is the kind of heavy handed abuse which HRD appears to engage in. With great power comes great responsibility.
If there are people in this country who don't particularly like us I don't think that giving them even further cause to not like us is the best approach. Especially if this drives them further underground.
I would much rather have 'illegal kids' in school getting to recognise we are far from perfect but we aren't all bad than further isolated and more exposed to radicalising influences.
I would prefer any 'illegal neighbours' to consider me more a friend than an enemy. The government however seems hell-bent on pursuit of punishment rather than reform, sees it better to prove we are a nasty lot who don't care for them at all, regardless of the consequences. It seems they would rather create and let enmity towards us continue than try and break that chain.
I don't feel that being 'illegal' is a particular problem of itself. If they are here then, unless they do present a specific threat to our security, it would in my opinion be better to turn them into legal and contributing members of society. That can include some sort of punishment for their having been here illegally, but community service and similar may be appropriate.
A company operating under EU law has committed a crime, but the EU are fining the population of the member countries
No. VW are being punished because they committed a crime. The member countries are being fined for pretty much turning a blind eye to that. Each are being punished for their respective failings.
Microsoft has reiterated to Azure customers that prices will go up by 22 per cent
The value of the British pound has weakened more dramatically against the US dollar, dropping by 18.9 per cent since 24 Jun
A drop of 18.9% requires an increase of 22% of the new value take it back to the same level.
I take your point, but what happens when you change ISP?
Perhaps people are confusing using an ISP's email service with using only email addresses on the ISP's domain?
Doing that is a separate issue as to whether an ISP's email service is any good.
Businesses explicitly using email addresses containing their ISP's domain name may well end up with problems, but they aren't forced to do that. I use my own domain name in my email addresses which are routed via my ISP, so I can route those to a new ISP or my own servers if need be.
People still use the email services of their ISP?
There is no reason an ISP's email service should not be as good as anyone else's and they usually have far more resources to handle the job than individuals and smaller providers do.
Virgin Media has, on the whole, done a pretty good job of handling emails. They have had their hiccups and even a few dire moments but it seems they have not been any worse than any other provider.
will force internet service providers to impose blocks on porn sites that do not include mandatory age checks.
I haven't read the bill itself but that suggests if the porn provider doesn't do age checks they will be blocked by ISPs.
So how do I prove my age to porn providers without exposing more personal information than I wish to expose?
From the article it appears that the device can only be updated over the Internet. No facility to update locally over the LAN or to use USB
My full-fat Chromecast updates firmware from the net but it can be instructed from the LAN - It has to be that way for the Chrome browser or a mobile to be able to tell it what to cast.
But it likely will be that it doesn't have any capability to get firmware from the LAN simply to stop people loading their own firmware on it.
There are ways to hijack the Chromecast using MITM techniques but if the problem is in establishing a connection between the Chromecast and router there won't be anything there to hijack.
The best solution would be to take the Chromecast round to a friend's house who doesn't have a BT modem, let it update the firmware, then take it home again.
Apple probably have a special channel for when they suspect not responding would see them stitched up by some journalist poised to accuse them of supporting terrorism for want of a click-bait article.
It probably hasn't done anything to improve the relationship on any other channels.
Hasn't this TVR project, now commercialised as RADBOT, been in the pipeline for a good number of years?
So far it seems a sorry tale of going nowhere fast, and it's not a particularly interesting story being told along the way.
The only thing I am getting from all this is it's a fine example of how to badly run a project.
Perhaps someone who does use banking apps can explain why they need one. Maybe it is a generational thing or that I have a reasonable balance in my account so am not forever in fear of going into the red, but I find I rarely interact with my bank or account and it was the same before I had a smart phone.
I understand one can use them to check balances, set up direct debits, cancel them, make transfers but they just aren't things I do day to day, often not year to year.
Perhaps I am missing a 'killer feature' or just don't need that.
It might be fun, seeing Carly as FCC chair...
This is the problem with the 'tear it up, burn it down, drain the swamp', populist charge for change; people believe that because it will be different it will be better, that disruption has benefit, or they simply don't care what happens so long as it is different, there is change.
Some even jump on the bandwagon of change because they think it will be funny to fuck up the system just for shits and giggles; often arguing it can't be any more fucked than it already is.
I understand the desire for revolution - I think we do need that (and not only in America) - but it's not just about change; it is what comes from that change. Change without purpose is not much more than riot and destruction.
“The lame-duck president can hardly complain. If you rule by executive fiat, then you should not be surprised if the next executive undoes your fiats,” Thiessen wrote, barely containing his glee.
Indeed; the problem with Executive Orders and the like is that they can be undone with a change of administration. But what was Obama meant to do if he couldn't get anything done other than doing it that way?
He could have done more to convince Republicans but that wasn't practical; it was always going to be 'you repeal Obamacare, climb down on gun control, and we may consider it'. I think anyone saying he could otherwise have done more through being flexible is not acknowledging Republican resistance and their inflexibility. Republicans were determined to shut Obama down, limit what he could achieve. The glee now shows they would never have entertained what Obama wanted in the first place.
He really had no choice, do it and hope it would stick, hope the next administration would fare better and be able to cement it as law rather leave it as EO, forego important achievements to get less important things through, or do nothing.
He did what he could.
Could happen and I doubt it would be such a constitutional crisis as feared. If Her Maj stood up and insisted we must not accept the 'Big Brother police state' parliament has decided upon I am sure there would be a hasty change of mind before her subjects arrived with pitchforks, burning torches and a few lengths of rope.
In a Regina versus Those Tossers in Parliament death match I know which side I would bet on.
Unfortunately Her Maj is not going to stand up for her subjects.
That seems quite likely to me given just how much bandwidth would be required if every street light had a live video feed.
I would also imagine cameras are pointing downwards to detect cars passing on the section of road they illuminate, average speed being calculated from the length time it takes for a vehicle to pass underneath; it doesn't have to be that accurate.
The idea that Suffolk Police will be tapping in to the lights to add speeding ticket printers seems fanciful to me. That appears to me to be more scaremongering than credible fear. Had there been more of a technical review of the hardware used and its capabilities we could all have perhaps been better placed to assess it.
On the other hand, it might mean that people lose weight, get fitter and healthier. That alone may justify a huge expenditure even if the energy generated is near zero or simply thrown away.
Just having a pavement slab flash once it has accumulated enough energy could bring about a health revolution if we could encourage people to buy into that.
People believe that walking under ladders brings bad luck so maybe we could convince them that making a slab flash has saved a life somewhere, made Jesus happy, or given an Angel some wings.
We try him here, the judge instructs the jury to find him guilty, sentence him to 99 years and fine him millions of dollars which we will FedEx to the US. Justice done, America can be happy, case settled.
Then we can deal with his appeal and actually have justice done.
Of course, America doesn't want justice, it wants revenge.
It can't be the cost, judging by the F35
The amount we, and everyone else, should be paying would be considerably less than what it would cost to design and build the same ourselves. Our political masters know that and also chose to believe the US when they said it would be the bestest thing ever and be in service years ago. It also keeps us in good standing as loyal lackies.
If it can't be done, will be over budget, late, with numerous problems, it makes more sense to let someone else fail than fail one's self. Though it does rather screw up having a defence force and planning for that, I doubt it would have worked out any better if we'd done it ourselves.
I am a peacenik at heart but not a pacifist, so I do understand the need for defence and it does seem ridiculous to not have sovereign control over one's own military. If it ever does kick off we really don't want Trump or anyone being able to stand-down our military because America wants to protect one of their best buddies.
This is what Trump, Farage and Co leveraged so effectively.
According to exit polls, over 80% of those voting for Trump said it was a vote for "change" and that's understandable. It's even understandable that they don't really care who is leading them, or what their politics are, so long as they get change, and particularly when they don't believe they will be any worse off through that.
The peasants are usually thrown just enough scraps to keep them from rebelling but it seems 'the elite' had forgotten to do that in recent years.
There is little "shocking" about Trump's victory; it was entirely predictable. It is what that victory means which is the bigger worry.
And how many times a day will they be contractually required to mention DevOps?
Three things I hope this doesn't encourage; more click-bait articles, articles which are mostly echoing or quoting what people have said on social media, social media users descending on the forums and turning the comment sections into another echo chamber of hate.
Isn't it sufficient to turn off the Wi-Fi? Who needs it if she's not actually surfing?
Leaving WiFi on is convenient as it auto-disconnects when one leaves home and reconnects when one gets back. That is handy for getting email, alerts, news, weather and app updates without having to remember to switch WiFi back on.
My phone has an expired SIM, is only used as an internet device, so it's convenient for me to have it auto-connect to all the freebie hotspots it can when out shopping. I get almost unlimited free WiFi and that suits me fine.
But it was a useful learning experience & certainly worth people giving that a go at least once.
Indeed. Difficult installs and having to understand things which an install program could figure out better than me confirmed that, for the average person, auto-install is the best approach. Providing it works.
I had used Slackware and other distros when they used to come on a single floppy and was always willing to try a more modern Linux but no install ever worked flawlessly for me until Ubuntu 8 came along. There was always some problem with partitioning, network, video or sound cards. These days things have got a lot better.
As others have noted; for most people there aren't enough hours in the day to be pissing about getting things installed and making things work. But I accept Arch Linux isn't targeted at those people.
I don't know why organisers of events and those launching products always go for the 'mad rush' approach which inevitably fails, leaves lingering resentment, leads to criticism and many people complaining of unfairness. It always brings out the worse in people and sullies the whole affair.
It would be far better to let people apply for tickets over a longer period of time then select the lucky winners later. At least people will only be upset at not being lucky enough to get a ticket, not riled and infuriated at the unfairness of the process and incompetence of the organisers.
But if you have a public-facing website, anyone can POST a JSON document at your endpoints and potentially crash your server.
To me that's the fault of the JSON parser or whatever causes the crash; not a problem with JSON itself.
It's the same as creating a GIF which blows open some image viewer; it's the viewer at fault, not GIF itself.
Language like that, the unwillingness to acknowledge that there is more to IoT beyond pointless connected toasters and fridges, the baying anti-IoT mob and down-voting of anyone who may dare suggest otherwise, is having a chilling effect on rational discussion of IoT.
Much of what is being railed against isn't even IoT but simply remote control and browser-based access.
Out in the real world there are many devices which have only a Bluetooth connection, and one needs to use Bluetooth to interact with them. Users want a simple means to do that and a browser-based mechanism which is platform and architecture independent suits them and manufacturers.
Google Chrome already supports a Bluetooth API and it is proving popular, Mozilla are having to play catch-up to stop users moving to Chrome to use that. There are issues which need to be debated and resolved but 'it's a steaming pile of shit' and 'burn it down' is not the right approach.
Don't like it, can't see the point; fair enough, but there are plenty of people who not only like it but want it. They aren't going to listen to those who simply appear to be luddites or a pitchfork and torch carrying mob.
It's an interesting thought. In theory, yes.
The hijacker has to get their timing right and send a command just before the real owner sends theirs; this causes the receiver to take the hijacker's commands and ignore the owner's. So a command sent just before the hijacker's should likewise get theirs ignored.
How far one could go would depend on how long subsequent commands were locked out for.
"not bothering to offer firmware upgrade capabilities"
That wasn't what was said at all; it is "a feat not possible on most devices". That is because code is often burned into microcontrollers which are then soldered to circuit boards without any means of reprogramming them.
Something needs to be done because there will be some event which has the usual media suspects and their all-caps commentards calling for something to be done and we probably won't like the kind of knee-jerk reaction that provokes from governments and authorities ... "if only every bit of kit had a backdoor so it could be disabled when it was being a nuisance".
There are ways to get existing and incoming exploitable kit off the net and nuked out of existence in countries which desire to do that. That would only leave those reluctant to do so. Reducing the risk is at least a start to removing it.
There isn't any single and simple solution, it will require a multi-faceted approach. But if we don't do something it will only get worse.
It makes sense to me. One can sell-on the original, one can sell-on a downloaded replacement for a lost or damaged original, providing that software is then removed from the sellers system.
The backup only exists with rights allowing it to be restored, thus it cannot be sold-on without obtaining additional rights to sell it.
What the situation is with software restored from backup then being sold-on is not made clear in the article but I imagine the ruling covered that.
It looks like this is a technical ruling relating to those having multiple backups and then trying to sell each and everyone of those on, claiming the defence of being legally able to do that. If the ruling were any different to how it is it would have perhaps legalised doing that. It therefore has to be how the ruling is to make it an offence.
I can't see why spending time in a 3 * 4m cell in the US or the UK would reduce the risk of suicide, I can't imagine that either would be very happy situations.
There are two aspects to this; where he is held prior to trial (and for how long) and how he will be held if he is found guilty of the charges. It does not have to be a 3x4 cell and does not even have to be a prison.
While it would be nice to think he'll be no worse off in America than in the UK, I think most would recognise that as a very naive outlook and there is plenty of evidence that life is harsher in US prisons than the UK.
That reflects differences with regard to what the the primary purpose of justice is intended for; 'reforming', 'protection of others', and 'punishment'.
I don't believe anyone is saying Love should simply be let off, but we do need to consider what is the most appropriate way to proceed and deal with any crime he may have committed.
Britain would have to re-apply for membership of the EU, once Article 50 has been invoked
That's not my reading of it - "If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49".
Invoking Article 50 only signals our intent to withdraw, we won't have withdrawn at that point. We will spend (up to) two years negotiating the terms of withdrawal.
http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-European-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html
Really it's no different to any other insurance.
I have long suspected that insurance tends to work like carrying an umbrella around; if you have it you won't need it and it will look like an unnecessary inconvenience but, if you don't have it, you will find you will need it and are buggered without it.
I have unfortunately had to 'make a claim' and I am thankful for the service we have, the nurses, doctors, surgeons and everyone else who makes it work, and everyone paying for it.
Looking at how much my treatment would have cost elsewhere the NHS is a bargain. I can understand why people who don't have that end up selling their houses, being plunged into debt or having no option but to book the undertaker.
I suspect most people will use the NHS at some time in their life and probably will get back a fair share of what they put in even if they don't realise it. Even if people are fortunate enough not to have to call upon NHS services themselves they will likely have family, relatives or friends who do.