Re: Not sure
Reminds me of the scene from Veep where the hapless President arranges a public "diversity debate" and the 5 attendees are all white middle aged men ....
3225 publicly visible posts • joined 5 Mar 2010
So Britain makes itself even *more* of an international laughing stock by whinging that British scientists are being treated differently to EU scientists ?
Is that the gist of this ?
But if only someone, somewhere had warned of the consequences of leaving the EU.
What's that ? They did ?
If you need to ask that question you don't understand blockchain.
(Don't worry, few do).
blockchain is not just distributed database. Well, it can be, but even emerging platforms such as Ethereum aren['t.
Blockchain is a state machine, capable of processing transactions - data *and* instructions autonomously.
When you realise that, you realise why the lawyers and governments are sniffing around. A properly created blockchain SmartContract is effectively a program which can transfer, unlock and lock "money".
In the example in the article, you could send a claimant their benefits as a SmartContract which can *only* be honoured by a certain retailer, in exchange for certain goods.
Any competently instantiated blockchain should be cryptographically secure. Personal details on the blockchain wouldn't worry me.
Far more sinister is the emergence of a parallel currency - BenefitCoin - and an infrastructure like blockchain which enforces Smart Contracts.
Could this be the final destination for Project Tory. A real two-tier society ?
Not doubting the article, but it has just triggered a vague memory of some sort of scare ?? marketing ploy ?? to do with kids toys.
1980s ???
Wasn't there a kids toy robot thingy which "reacted" to audio codes in the (cunningly linked) TV cartoon ?
Or have I just given some startup an idea ?
Only read the first page, but I thought the US courts had long delineated the 1st amendment as not being a license to shout "FIRE !!!" in a crowded theater - the point being that the ensuing - possibly fatal - stampede was a foreseeable result, and the responsibility of the shouter. Free speech or not.
In other words, nothing to see. Move on. There shouldn't be any new law here.
Maybe I'm getting [too] old, but it seems to me the current hipster response when called out on your POC product/app is to whinge that people aren't seeing "the bigger picture" and to imply (or sometimes explicitly state) that it's all other peoples fault for "not getting it".
Then again, I have vague memories that he kaftan-joss-stick scamsters in the 60s would blame the market failure of their schemes on "bread heads, man". So maybe it's nothing new ?
Really ?
I think, if nothing else, the brief fad for referenda we have enjoyed is well and truly dead.
We won't see another one for at least 60 years. When all the people who can remember this one are dead.
Of all the referenda we could have had, this is probably the most ill conceived, debated and executed as you could get. Certainly the most divisive. We need a "I weep for my country" icon.
There will be so much post-Brexit shit to deal with, this is probably not even bottom of the list of lists of things that need to be done.
Generally the UK government seems to struggle doing it's day job. Gawd knows how it's going to cope unpicking the tangle of UK-EU connections.
Just long enough since 1973 for everyone to recall the 50s and 60s with rose-tinted glasses. As survivors generally do.
The general thrust to the Brexiters seems to be that you'll also be able to leave your front door unlocked, bread will be delivered by boys on (Boris) bikes, and the postman will wear a peaked cap and whistle a jaunty tune as he delivers your dole cheque. Basically, a past which never existed.
all big companies that ran "data centers" flogged time on their systems to smaller companies who couldn't afford a whole [IBM] computer.
What's that thing just about to hit the back of your head ? Oh yes. It's a full circle turning.
Of course all the skills and expertise that developed in those crazy days (not just technical, but administrative and contractual) has disappeared. Either carried off by death, or kicked out the door as redundant.
Anyone who wants to study that era may find they have a jump on the next breed of sharks selling snake oil.
Free market, perhaps ?
A lot depends on how you view a ticket. If it's property, then letting the state dictate what you may or may not buy or sell, and what you buy/sell it for is a really bad idea. Price controls generally are a magnet for even more crookery.
If it's not property, but a unique placeholder for an event, then maybe the ticket industry could take a break from counting their profits, and devise a system the end punter can have faith in.
In fact, anyone who has been to a Robert Plant show will know they have. Never seen a tout at a Percy gig because his management link the ticket to the card that bought it. No card. No ticket. Simples. Hardly a new idea either - it was trialled in 2007 when "Led Zeppelin" played the 02
Given that, one has to wonder why it's not in more general use. Clearly the ticket agencies aren't in a rush to help.
(FSVO "currency")
Having been tasked by my employer to deep dive blockchain in general, it seems most people - *especially* "experts" have been a little bit starstruck by BitCoin, and can't separate the concept of virtual currency from blockchain. As even the tone of this article demonstrates.
Like it or not, there is a slow development of blockchain for all sorts of uses. Just one example is a distributed ledger for the provenance of gemstones - an attempt to address blood diamonds.
Blockchain is like paper - yes, you can print banknotes on it. However you can also do a lot more with it (including burning it :) )
Not being funny, but what are you doing The Register ?
Are you *ever* going to get a phone ?
I can understand Joe Public holding out from having a (I presume you mean) smartphone.
But a nominal techie ? Surely you should be - to a certain degree - leading your customers. Not following them.
I would have thought Apple execs - whatever their characters - were not in the same league of morons as my in-laws.
Clearly wrong.
If anyone owns any Apple stock, they may wish to diversify, if this is the level of intelligence at the top.
They may as well have suggested it'll be little-people-powered ....