Posts by Destroy All Monsters

Ok. But now...

...did they really use CouchDB?

It's a MAD WORLD.

videos of people drenching themselves in ice water to avoid donating to charity

Yes... this.

CAN ANYBODY explain to me WHY EVERYBODY is BEHAVING LIKE TEENAGERS that have NOT A CHANCE IN HELL to even get their A-LEVEL EXAMS.

Except the Russians, the Chinese and, well, ISIS.

Next you will be wearing bell-bottom jeans.

A better choice was to use add-ons that kept everything within the same server and for users to maintain up to date with software security patches.

A site that does not look like a JavaScript spaghetti monster with lots of little "buttons" that hint at an advanced stage of some weird disease? In 2014. How retro.

Meh.

But one hacker using the alias Famed (@famedgod) claimed responsibility for the PlayStation Network DDoS and accused LizardSquad of stealing credit.

They added Sony should take lesson from Redmond's Xbox architecture and run the gaming and enterprise networks from different data centres.

Really. From doser to security consultant in 10 seconds? No skills were harmed in this display of lamerosity.

Time for cool-off period in the chokey, I would think.

It was a bit like a lesser issue of a Flying Circus skit

Except for the underhanded "IMMA LOSING MUH COPYRIGHT". That was really uncalled for.

Next: Ukraine and the neocon pipeline control project? Where it's all about Location, Location, Location. And Grauniad reporters trying to start WWIII wih random tweets from #Russia.

Ok, so....

Welcome to The Register's new Comments of the Week feature.

Oh, FUUUUU....

Competition is ON NOW!

It would have been interesting if the parallels between 21st century dark matter and 19th century luminiferous ether had been made.

Of which there are none. The latter was meant to transmit light at speed "c" in a preferential reference frame - we don't want this as we found out that "c" is the same in every reference frame. The former is meant to explain the experimental fact that there is far too much mass for the visible matter to account for all of it (about 5 times more). More interesting would be parallels 19th century luminiferous ether and the current idea of the "vacuum" which is a complex material with some attributes of a superconductor for color charges if I understand correctly.

Ho-hum

Not sure whether this goes beyond a very valid criticism of the party trick of raising money for capitalistic ventures with no counterpart given, cunningly commingled with the cry of the starving artists and panhandling writers that THEY are the ones who REALLY DESERVE to be remunerated instead of THAT GUY. Welcome to the world of content, and it's not one with weakend “IP”.

“I don’t share the furious ideological objection (sharing economy = neoliberalism) that writers like Tom Slee and Evgeny Morozov advance.”

Do I need to repeat that “neoliberals” are actually the third-way socialists? Apparently so. I really detest this scaremongering about free exchange. Oh no, there is people doing deals and I'm not in on it. Won't somebody think of the regulation!!

“Now you can begin to see why Jimmy Wales espouses his medieval views on copyright”

Err... No! First, I didn't know that medieval times had any particular view on “copyright”. Must have been difficult, not having a printing press and all that. Did I hear someone say that property rights should only apply to the paper on which the words are printed? Nah. Must be neoliberals.

“And you could rely on the Left for "fairness" and the fair compensation of labour.”

You can rely on the left for selling you unicorn steaks and equality fries every single day (AAH, no Mistress Warren, I will behave now, stop the spanking!!).

Not every labour is compensable or even worth compensating. If Jimmy Wales has found the magic trick to ride on the riches created by a swell of interest in Wikipedia ... hell, why not? Should Wikipedia editors be compensated for this joyous happenstance? Possibly, possibly not. Apparently the care-o-meter on this is pretty low on the Internets, there is no “Occupy Wikipedia” movement to be seen, people are not pulling away to other servers. Or at least I haven't heard of it. So is there a problem?

Of course, quality of quite a few articles is low, Wikipedia warrens are often clueless. You get what you pay for. You may want to choose to pay for “quality”, real or perceived.

I’ve used AirBnB for ages, but when it comes to taxis, however, I stick to my favoured private firms and licensed Black Cabs – confident they’ll adapt to the technology.

Yep, choice. See how that works!

I suppose good articles come from scholars who are working on their course materials ... these also hold interesting blogs, post their course etc. No problems are being had. Where does the vague impression that someone is being fleeced coming from? The economy is not a zero-sum game, it never has been.

“weakening property rights means everyone profits from the work except the person who creates it”

Begging the question here. We have had NOTHING but extensions of the so-called “property rights”. It's getting frankly ludicrous, and no-one except Big Content profited.

“Note that when The Guardian newspaper writes about Kim Dotcom it glosses over the manner in which he makes his money, and fails to mention his ownership of a signed copy of Mein Kampf.”

So Dotcom has a non-downloaded copy. Which is nice. Where is the problem? More to the point, why bring “Nazis” in?

“Far from being one of the most exciting decades in modern times, this has really been one of the shittiest.”

But not because of Internet “sharing”. Because of wars, rampant money printing and endless fleecing schemes from inflation, “that one last tax increase, promised” and “economic bubbles” that hoover up the money you would hope the government were keeping safe instead of blowing it on bailouts and F-35s. Well, it's gonna get worse and intellectual property rights of online content will be the least of the problems. Oh, we were talking “IP”?

“Getting an "internet economy" that benefits the people who do the work, take the risk, or provide the resources – and gives us a modicum of self-respect - should be a start.“

More demand for unicorn steaks? It's all about contracts and positioning. An “Internet Economy” does not exist, and one that provides results as if they were coming from the left's Sheet Of Fairness cannot be gotten. If you want well-remunterated work, look for it. If you want to provide charity, do so. If you have problems with self-respect, work on it. If you want a guaranteed income stream, sadly, we cannot have that kind of nice thing.