Re: INFANT?
...and in Westeros and surrounding localities you are a (wo)man grown by sixteen and can even be an unsupervised Monarch! Hell, they frequently kill their first victim by age 10 there.
896 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
What do you mean, "harks back"? It is still going strong.
Anyway, reading this review gives me a measure of relief. On our visit to the US over the holidays, my wife was contemplating buying either the Chromecast or the AppleTV to play the media she has on her Mac.
Since the AppleTV was just $80, and she being sort of a fangirl, she bought the Apple thing. I don't like Apple much, but I have to say the thing works over our humble WiFi without any problems (apart from sometimes needing to restart iTunes, for some reason), streaming high-def video like it was connected through a cable, be it from her local collection or from YouTube, Netflix, whatever we have tested. Sure, the two devices have slightly different features (I'm pretty sure you can't cast website tabs on the stock AppleTV), but still. Seeing how difficult it is to play local media from a computer using the Chromecast is quite surprising to me.
Yup, caught my attention too: "a whopping 80 per cent of crashes that killed or seriously injured pedestrians involved male drivers"
You'd expect The Reg, being such a tech oriented place, to be better at this statistics business, instead of just parroting any old number without thinking about it first, providing context, etc. Oh, well, who am I kidding? Media is media.
This is a bit off topic, maybe, but the patent is supposed to be a mechanism to reward inventors, or so I understand it.
Then, I think patents should be allowed to be sold at most once: when the inventor wants to sell it to someone who will then use the process patented -- if they do not use the process, they should not be able to charge for royalties on it either. That way, inventors would make more money. And patent trolls would pretty much cease to exist. And let's face it, patent trolling is all that this article is about, deep down.
Who cares!? Microsoft always makes me cringe with this (sometimes misplaced) obsession on "productivity". People want to buy the cool thing, not the productive thing -- even if the typical Reg reader is not like that, most people still are, deal with it.
Sure, a tiny few will want to run Office or some specialized Windows-only software on a tablet, and will buy the specific machine to do that. But most everyone else buys these things as glorified toys, even if they later end up finding some interesting apps that are actually useful for something productive. Typical people want to play with a tablet, not work with (or on) it. Closest they will want to get to "work" here is usually email or conference calls. Otherwise, it's mostly web, social stuff, videos, reading, games. Playing. Stupid Microsoft does not get it, and will stay niche on this until they get tired of burning money and pull the plug. Except for the XBox (apparently, I don't know, not a gamer), MS is not good at fun.
Now, it's obvious that the iPad has by now got some cool apps and accessory ecosystem that make it be very useful in many areas (e.g. music). People buy it, but not due to that potential usefulness though. Same for other tablets -- small, works for web surfing, (sometimes) cheap.
"The reality is that if they land a desk job they will be using Microsoft Office."
The reality also is that when these kids are hitting the market in 5 to 10 years the software will be so different that whatever they were monkey-trained to do now will be irrelevant and they will need to learn the new ways anyway.
I mean, I had last seen MS Office in 2006 or so. When I saw the "new" interface recently, I had no keep digging to find the functions I had used in Office 2003 or so. LibreOffice is much more similar in operation to the MS Office I used to use 10 years ago than current Office is, it looks like to me.
Have they finally learned to properly (pseudo)randomize the list of songs in the "shuffle" feature of the music player? My iOS 6 running iPod Touch sure sucks in that respect. Always getting in what I call "song ruts", frequently starting from the same song, etc.. I wonder if they'll ever be bothered to get that working.
Yes, but the "more savvy than the average Linux installing person" will create a restricted account for mom to use, so she cannot install anything -- even if she knew what "install" means, which I'm pretty sure my mom doesn't.
I'm sure it's not 100% tight, but better than leaving administrator access open. Now, the question is: how many friendly Linux installing people are doing this, specially at the risk of being even more in support duty over the phone later? :-)
(notice the correction there, the little comma you missed... And by the laws of universal irony I'll probably commit an even worse mistake in this post)
I suspect that subtitle was meant as a joke, but... I sure think that the US would be in better shape if even only half of the elected Republicans were like Schwarzenegger, really, instead of trying to be like the extremist fanatics who took control of their party in the past 20-30 years. He is definitely far from great, but that just underscores the gravity of the situation.
Why would they? Well, obviously they wouldn't do it out of the goodness of their little black hearts. But that's what laws are for. If there was one that said that DRM that can't be validated (due to the provider disappearing, for example) becomes null and void, immediately freeing the file in question, you can be sure they would be implementing the "inheritance scheme" very quickly indeed.
The tech aspects of this (namely, how to determine if the DRM is now dead) are of course open for debate. A non-profit or gov server to check whether the DRM in question is dead (as a fall back when the provider's server disappears) would be a possibility, I think.
Real solution would be the end of this silliness called DRM, but I guess it is a tough one to get.
Not necessarily. The original Africans did not go to meet the Neanderthals (nor vice versa), but do you think no one else has come back to Africa bringing those genes? Do you think all Africans have been sealed off genetically from the rest of humanity since some of them went to Europe? They sure haven't, and it's not due to modern transportation...
I myself am for a much more radical solution, one that I will never see happen (will anyone? probably not). I mean the end of all borders. Damn things are just results of historical accidents that only exist in people's minds, and are just a mentality leftover from kingdoms. If money can go wherever it pleases nowadays, why shouldn't people be allowed to do the same? As a good side-effect, conditions should improve a bit everywhere, I believe. Because, let's be honest, people will only care about what affects them. If millions of Africans living in misery were able to go wherever they wanted, people in the "rich" world would try really hard to actually improve things in Africa for once, and corrupt Africans would try to be less parasitic of their neighbors.
Anyway, nothing I said has anything to do with H1Bs (I used to have one, in science, which is not restricted by the limits given to corporate use) but that was on purpose.
I know it's his money, yadda yadda... But that's just plain stupid. How boring must someone's life be to be interested in something like that, really? Don't take me wrong, I sure like the good things in life that money can buy. But a phone like that isn't it. It's kind of sad. Only thing sadder than that is that I don't have even 1% of the wealth he has, heh.
"Whitman, Californians and others might remember, supported the implementation of Proposition 8 when she ran for governor of that state in 2010 – but she has now changed her mind."
Ah, what a whipping at the polls does not do for one's conscience... First, Republicans for immigration reform, now this?
So, both companies that were mentioned had names beginning with Buster. Which isn't a world in Portuguese. So, the same guys creating the companies. It is very easy to start a "company" in Brazil, any person can do that. Just because it's registered with the government, it does not mean it is legit.
The latest version of Ubuntu, 12.10, has been a disaster for me. Crashes like there is no tomorrow -- and soon there won't be for Ubuntu in my machines if it goes on like this. The interface? I actually got to like Unity after I learned its workings. A few hours work and I got really efficient in it. A "traditional desktop" (like the CentOS running KDE at work) slows me down now. But they broke the stuff under the hood, apparently, and if I wanted pretty shiny things that are crappy I would have stayed with another OS (ahem....).
Now, I know the .10 releases are usually supposed to be more bleeding edge, experimental, prone to problems. But I've been using Ubuntu for many years (at least since 2007), and have never seen such an unstable Ubuntu -- and that in two completely different computers of mine which had never had problems before running previous versions of Ubuntu.
I agree he is right that what Canonical did was bad, etc., but as someone mentioned above, he does not need to be a condescending paternalistic douche about it.
"Even if the feature were disabled by default, he says, allowing users to opt in still puts them at risk, because most won't fully understand what they're getting themselves into."
Don't take me wrong, I'm a fan of RMS and his work, but even if he's right that most people are too stupid to be discerning about this, no one has appointed him or anyone else the guardian of the innocent of the world, last I looked. If grown ups are not allowed to take responsibility for their own choices, then the world RMS wants (and I do too) will never come.
And, anyway, I suspect that whomever is too thick to understand what opting in to the Amazon search means is also very unlikely to come across it to even start wondering if it's a good idea, so opting in would not be that much of a big deal. Too bad it's still opt out.
...and they keep using economic ideas from the 1700s, with ideal little villages where there are 10 cobblers and you (the customer or worker) can just as easily go to another one if your regular one is misbehaving. Kind of hard to believe that type of thinking is still applied to another planet. I'm sure much else has been added to it, but still.
Also, corporations and capital can move around freely and much more easily than physical people. Might seem counterintuitive, but think about it.
And finally, if the EU corporations are not burdened by the costs of the corporate tax described, I imagine their workers must be better off there and the corporations' products must have a lower price (before sales tax, VAT, whatever) than in the UK. I don't know if that is the case, but I seriously doubt so.
Yep, pretty much my conclusions in another comment.
I also tried generating pages (with the www.facebook.com/user1?and=user2 kind of link) of "relationships" between friends of mine who are not themselves "friended" on FB. It generates a mostly blank page. The most specific thing that appeared was "Living in city, state", since they live in the same city. So yes, generated on the fly, and visible by anyone, it seems.
That's what I was asking myself too. It's not like typing the /us will allow me to see other couple's pages. Silly, yes; stalker-enabling? Hardly. But then...
But then I tried something else, which I do not know whether it was available before this. I went to a married friend's page. I've never met his wife, and she's not a "friend" on FB either. The word married in "Married to ..." was a link. When I clicked on it, it created a page showing the relationship. A URL of the form www.facebook.com/user_name1?and=user_name2
Of course then I tried to replace user2 with my user tag or whatever it's called. Voi là, a page showing my FB relationship to my friend. It's the same as clicking on the "see friendship" link on a friend's page. So, it's not couple specific, and nothing new I assume. Just a new, teenage-ish URL, to do something that was already possible. Or did I miss something.
Funnily enough, this reminds me of a "talk" I saw in 2003 or 2004, which was supposed to be about life on Mars. It was at around a table at a restaurant during quiet hours, with this engineering (as he described himself, although I doubt) guy speaking and some 6 or 7 people there to watch, and discuss afterwards. The title, which I don't remember, was intriguing. So I went.
Getting there, I found out it was arranged by some ministry. OK, that does not mean it will be bad. The guy started, and it soon became clear it was a creationist propaganda event, and all kinds of (the same old and discredited) attacks on the feasibility of evolution. The Mars thing? Well, the speaker's conclusion was that there could not be life, specially intelligent life, on Mars (or elsewhere) because such life would have to be "saved" (in the Christian way). And to be saved, there would have to be sacrifice of Christ over and over again. And apparently god "can't afford" (I remember those were his words) to do that. How about that, this guy knows god personally! Who'd have thought.
Of course this happened in America. The capital of Virginia, to be precise.
Just because you don't know how to use it it does not mean it doesn't work. If you don't know/remember what the image editor is called, write "image editor", or even just "ima", and you get a list of image related programs with pretty obvious descriptions. But yeah, categories are gone, and that sure is not to everyone's taste. I say good riddance, because back then the struggle many times was to remember, or hunt down, in which category some more obscure program you needed would be. At least with Linux we have options for every taste -- which some will promptly say is Linux's limiting factor, but that's another can of penguins.
Apple didn't decide my desktop should be a sterile wasteland without shortcuts, and without files.
I don't believe people are still talking about that. I am running the latest Ubuntu with Unity, and I have a bunch of files on my desktop area. Have no clue whether Gnome 3 also allows it though.
I have no clue. I have the time to watch, since I don't need Windows or any other Microsoft software, for that matter.
But it sure is amusing to watch the cognitive dissonance kicking in amongst the MS shills... I mean, I remember them clearly saying that Linux (for instance) is different, and people won't ever use different (not contented, if a distro imitated Windows as closely as possible in interface, they'd then complain about lack of innovation, but that's a different can of penguins).
Now, MS creates something not just very different, but seemingly makes an interface mess of it, judging by the most common opinion out there. Will the shills now say "NO, MS, don't change the interface that much, people won't ever use different"? You'd wish, if they were consistently rational. But instead they say: "bunch of whiners, just force them to use it and after a few weeks/months [some shills are more optimistic than others] they will have always loved it".
Funny thing is that I think the second reaction is closer to reality in most cases (don't know if it will be in W8's case). Time will tell, fun times ahead, and lots of work for you IT guys, patching up W8 machines to look and behave like W7, support calls, paid for or not, ah the fun.