Posts by Jeremy 2

So then...

...Let's just hope that the private key protecting the credit card data table is better protected than the game disk code signing key, huh?

<title/>

"It seems The Sun really has Nintendo in its sights over this one, though. There is only one way to settle this…"

Yes, with a Playmobil re-enactment of a FIGHT! Come on El Reg, it's been too long...

Wow

I thought a 2 day outage by my bank was annoying.

Presumably they're too poor to buy a few development servers?

Good old Think Geek...

...they never let us down. The video for the Lightsabre lollypops was great.

What twaddle

That kind of survey is only ever done to get the name of the company who commissioned it into the news.

Here's a press release about a health concern. On a scale of 1 to 5, how much does this press release about a health concern, concern you?

1) Not at all concerned.

2)

3) Somewhat concerned

4)

5) Very concerned

Most people will of course, pick a response somewhere in the middle and all responses >1 can be used to describe the person as "concerned"

Then of course, there's the relevance of who they surveyed ("3000 adults" isn't exactly clear).... If it's 3000 parents of young kids (the target of Nintendo's advisory) then the result is going to be skewed more in the direction of 'concerned' than if they asked 3000 parents of teenagers.

Crappy question, crappy survey, cheap publicity... Simples!

32x32

And of course, being that the 32x32 pixel icon gets scaled down to 16x16 for display, it looks crap.

Didn't seem to affect reception...

I left the GPS out in the back garden near Atlanta from an hour or two before the test supposedly started until just now, 30 minutes or so before the scheduled end. The tracklog never wandered more than little bit from it's actual location (within 10m ish throughout, and 43m off for a split second) which is perfectly normal.

I'm sure they were just covering their arses issuing the notice - just in case something unexpected and they got fingered for it. If they were going to do something that they knew would _actually_ hit GPS accuracy to any significant degree, there would have been a bit more warning, I suspect, given the potential safety implications of loss of civilian GPS these days (the emergency services use it for starters).

Address feature removed...

...in other words, the company that paid $$$$$$$$ for access to that data has got all they want now (how many unique users access the most popular apps daily?) so the feature can now be turned off and quietly forgotten.

Just how many addresses and phone numbers have been slurped in the past 72 hours?

More to the point, why is that despite there being a story like this about Facebook every other week, people still ask me why I don't have (and won't make) an account there? Isn't it bloody obvious!?

Don't worry, it'll never happen...

...The Aussies started all this at a time of economic plenty when all the streets were paved with gold (or printouts of internet porn, one or the other).

The tories are trying to start the same thing when everything's gone to hell, with budget cuts and the smell of mothballs lingering in every corner of Whitehall.

This begs the obvious question. Leaving aside the technical and philosophical flaws with the idea, examining all the worlds websites to decide which are naughty and which are nice is going to be an astronomically expensive and never ending process. So who's gonna pay for it?

Assuming government don't want to have to pay for it (that's normally what "we don't want to legislate" means) then it would come down to the ISPs who would obviously pass the cost to their customers, which would be commercial suicide.

So even if they then push on (which they won't), you'll be able to have your clean-feed internet if you want but if you take the filthy-dirty-middle-england-offending-wont-somebody-please-think-of-the-children-feed instead, it'll cost you a tenner a month less because it's so much cheaper to administer. Which will people choose?

Noble perhaps...

...but unfortunately, it'll still fail.

The vast, *vast* majority of Facebook users are sheep. They just don't care about privacy or security, they just want what they're used to and they'll be loathed to switch. They think that the problems they read about on the rare occasion it makes the mainstream press are things that happen to other people. Hell, even if this new site is better than Facebook and offers more with less exposure of data, people will still stick with Facebook because it's what Aunty Nora and that guy they had a crush on at school 20 years ago use.

That and refusing to even serve the site's homepage to IE users just makes them look like a load of spotty computer nerds in their mother's basement. "You need to use a real browser"? Seriously?! A bit of testing suggests they slam the door on users of IE6, 7 and 8. What kind of a moron decided snobbishness was a good policy direction for a site that intends to try and break into a tightly monopolised market?

And don't get me started on the name...

Aliens!

You noticed, of course, which organisation is linked to several times on that website, no?

Presumably they started it because our alien overlords want to see more boobs...

Outstanding job, chaps.

Brilliant stuff. That last picture makes it all worthwhile, I hope?

<title/>

"We hold no brief for Google Street View but the Mail has really gone out on a limb on this one"

And you're surprised about this because..........? This is the Daily Make-it-up we're talking about here.

Anyway, they've missed the bigger picture, like how does Google (not) revealing the locations of refuges affect middle-class taxation and house prices? Daily Mail readers have to know these things!