2559 posts • joined 20 Jul 2010
Re: Make it look and act like (al)pine.
*shudder* All of a sudden, I'm back in 1995.
Re: Stagnant is good, dead is better
Given that email has been around for quite a while (along with things like SMTP, POP and IMAP), I would agree that major change is unnecessary. It's not a bad thing if the software 'stagnates'; this implies it has reached maturity and does everything it should do. Anything now should just be maintenance programming, or adding support for any new weird and wacky ways of storing / transmitting email that happen to come along.
What we don't need is flashy UI changes for their own sake. This just aggravates users who have got the software looking and working how the like, and have learned where all the buttons and options are. By all means, allow means of customising the layout, but don't force a new one on us. We still remember the dreaded office ribbon bar, where we had to re-learn where the hundreds of different buttons and options now lived.
would that cost more than £0.00? Now you know why it wasn't done.
And here is the entire point of data protection legislation. It changes the equation from, "will it cost any money to secure the customer's data," to "will it cost more than the potential fine and lost reputation from failing to secure the customer's data."
Companies like Just Eat make money by acting as a broker, I would imagine it is typically a small percentage of the order total, but scales to be very profitable with volume. It certainly is more than enough to pay for flashy TV advertising. They can certainly afford some technical solutions to help protect customer data, even if it the rather low-tech response of putting things right after they have gone wrong (which they failed to do in this instance). If their business model cannot sustain the cost of protecting their customers, then they do not have a viable business model. The fact that they appear to have a cash tap from their current business model suggests that this is not the case.
Re: I'm failing to see how this is Just Eat's fault
@AC, very well put, and saved me the bother of writing all that detail!
As it happens, like many in the software industry, I am currently involved in producing software to deal with GDPR when it comes into force. A lot of organisations will be woefully unprepared for it, especially those (like Google, allegedly) who think that they can slurp your data with impunity. The regulations in the EU (and UK after the brexaster if we ever want to deal with EU data in any way) are already a far cry from the vary laissez-faire attitude in the US, and GDPR tightens them up considerably.
Re: A single case of a creepy...
I think the issue here is JE's response to the complaint.
They should have a data collection policy that includes what to do in the event of such a breach; for example, they should immediately inform the restaurant, and the restaurant should ensure the driver removes the number from his phone, then fires him. They should then not offer deliveries from that restaurant until the restaurant can assure them that it will not happen again.
Instead, their policy was, "oh dear, have a £5 discount."
I don't think anyone is suggesting that we can ever entirely prevent this sort of thing from happening, but taking it seriously when it does is a clear responsibility.
IMHO, the whole chain of people are responsible for the breach:
The driver, for using the number for an unauthorised purpose, and retaining it for longer than required to make the delivery.
The restaurant, for failing to have an effective policy in place to prevent this.
Just Eat, for failing to have a policy in place to ensure data protection compliance by the restaurant.
Re: I'm failing to see how this is Just Eat's fault
Surely, JE are the 'data controller' in this instance. It is therefore their legal duty to ensure the data they have received from you (your phone number in this case) is used only for the purpose you have consented to, and deleted afterwards. That this may be a difficult task once it has been passed onto the restaurant is their problem, not the consumer's.
Things will only get worse for them once GDPR comes into force. They will have to report, on request, exactly who has that data, for what purpose, and for how long it will be retained, and also delete all of it on request.
What this does highlight is that JE clearly have no procedures in place to control that information once it has been passed onto the restaurant. They should at the very least, be able to ensure that the restaurant deletes it once they have finished with it (i.e. once the delivery has been made), this includes use, and retention, by employees of the restaurant, such as the delivery driver.
Re: But the good old days!
...You could probably do worse than spending a few minutes of your time reading up on things you probably don't agree with (debunking of several tabloid myths), as published by your sworn enemies (the European Parliament), to better inform your own arguments...
Re: But the good old days!
The EU has done a fantastic campaign for extremist political parties left and right. Their support throughout Europe has increased thanks to offering an alternative to slavishly being in the EU.
Extremist (aka nationalist) politics is on the rise globally, it is not a phenomenon unique to the EU. EU countries managed to reject the likes of Marine Le Pen and Geert Wilders. The US got Trump, and we still have Nigel wandering around acting like he never failed to get elected as an MP 7 times.
Economics- 2008 global financial crash. US and UK bounce out of recession, the EU do nothing.
There's pretty good evidence to suggest that our government's policy of ideological austerity extended the recession in this country, at a time when other European countries were already recovering. Do your research.
Immigration- [...] You say we can control our borders but only within the confines of the EU's dictation (as they are trying to dictate in negotiations now) which means by definition we cannot control our borders.
Part of living in a world that has other countries means making deals with those countries. Very few (if any) countries have completely closed borders. Free movement of people is part of the three freedoms of movement of the EU (people/goods/services). You won't get one or two of them without the third. The fact remains that we could have greater control of our borders if we wished, but we chose not to. It wasn't inflicted on us by the EU. It was a choice made by our own duplicitous politicians.
Trade- We leave and instantly we are able to drop tariffs we must impose due to the EU.
This neatly side-steps the issue that if we leave, we need to renegotiate trade terms with every other country in the world, or fall back on WTO rules, with much more severe tariffs imposed on us whether we choose to reciprocate or not. Of course not reciprocating would result in a flood of imports, and a collapse in our export market and the pound becoming about as valuable as a Zimbabwean Dollar. An optimistic timescale for a bilateral trade deal with most countries is in the 5-10 years range,by the way, and we will need an veritable army of negotiators to make those deals, a skillset that doesn't currently exist in this country due to there not being a need for it, since our trade deals are currently negotiated on behalf of the entire trading bloc (which carries a lot more clout than one nation).
Sovereignty- Erm read above. If we dont have control of our borders, law nor trade then by definition we have lost it.
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." -Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride.
This is pretty lazy of you. I proved its existence only 4 hrs ago and yesterday to 2 separate...
Tim Worstall saying it is so, doesn't make it such. Have a slightly more authoritative source on whether the EU has rules on 'bendy bananas', the EU itself (unless you are going to claim that they are lying about their own regulations?):
The full picture here, is that if fruit are abnormally mis-shapen they can't be sold as free from defects. Given that this is usually an indicator of disease, I think that is fairly sensible. If you want to go out and buy some diseased fruit to eat, I'm sure you can still find it in British shops in any case.
Again, doing your research is about more than just finding someone who agrees with you and stopping there.
Not a single forecasted growth figure has been correct since the referendum (They keep getting revised up), but remainers keep throwing all their faith into them.
Except for that last revised forecast we got in the last quarter of last year, when it was revised significantly down. Selective memory perhaps?
There was a big vote, and everything...
I refer you to 1930's Germany, and how having "a big vote and everything" worked out on that occasion.
The UK punches well above its weight on the global stage (and within the EU) in science and technology. That you are unaware of this doesn't make it untrue, it just demonstrates your own ignorance. it is an important and growing part of our economy, which will be properly screwed over by petty-minded nationalism.
Re: But the good old days!
Ok, I'll bite...
Pick a topic- politics, economics, immigration, trade, sovereignty
Let's go down the list, shall we?
- Politics - We'll be going from a position where we are represented in the EU (via MEPs), with some degree of oversight via the ECJ over the worst excesses of our own authoritarian government, to one where 'we' take back power, for values of 'we' which roughly equates to those who have gone to Eton College and then read PPE at Oxford. The main 'political' aspect of the whole brexit fiasco was an attempt by the Tory party to shore up its own membership against the looming threat of UKIP which was splitting their vote and threatened to lose them power. If you think the Tories represent your interests, you are either a Tory politician yourself, or misguided.
- Economics - The pound fell in value by about 20% on the day the referendum result was announced and has stayed pretty much at the same place. It's good news for companies which make their profits in another currency, which is why the FTSE is up, and bad news for everyone else. We will have to pay tens of billions of pounds to sever the obligations we have to the EU, and then we will have to find the money to replicate the bodies and organisations that we will be losing membership of, such as the EU medicines regulator, nuclear regulator, etc. We'll lose the economies of scale on those costs too (i.e. have to bear the whole cost, not split it 28 ways)
- Immigration - The idea that we cannot control immigration whilst in the EU is laughable. Our own government has chosen not to implement the rules that are already allowed about how long EU citizens can stay in a member country that is not their country of origin. Not to mention that immigration is mostly a good thing, despite what the racist right-wing press likes to shout at you. Many of the doctors and nurses working in the NHS are EU immigrants, as are all those low-paid workers who pick the fruit and veg which are now rotting in the fields because they have 'gone home'. People may have voted for brexit because they don't like immigration, but when it comes down to it, any argument along those lines eventually comes down to 'we are better than them', i.e. xenophobia. If you lost your job to someone from another country who doesn't speak English as their first language, guess what? It's because they were able to do the job better or for less money, so (simplified argument...) either you were shit at your job, or greedy.
- Trade - we will be giving up barrier-free and tariff-free trade with our largest trading partner, on our own doorstep, for the possibility of a deal with nations on the other side of the world, who we can already trade with via EU trade rules (which we will be losing). If you think we will do better with trade after brexit, you need to do your homework.
- Sovereignty - we never lost it.
- Bonus point - the bendy banana thing? That was a load of bullshit made up by BJ in a newspaper column a couple of decades ago which has been so thoroughly debunked that if you believe it it proves that you lack even the basic ability to do your research.
Now it's your turn. Give me cogent arguments for each of those points that stands up to scrutiny. I can guarantee you won't be able to, because in all the time since the whole sorry affair started, nobody has.
Re: So one remainiac commissions a report from load of other remainiacs...
You do know that we haven't actually left yet?
I am aware of this, yes. These are the effects of the vote to leave, before we have even left. They aren't going to get better once we have left.
If someone tells me that it is a bad idea to cut my arm off with a machete, despite it being patently obvious, I'm not about to go and cut it off just to find out.
If you are confident that things will improve after we leave the EU, assuming this insanity cannot be avoided, I suggest you put your money where your mouth is. I am willing to bet you any amount of money that the NHS will NOT get £350M a week additional funding after we leave the EU. At least then I may be in the position to get some sort of compensation from one of the fuckwits that voted to screw over the country. I'll take it in Euros please.
Re: Remoaner commissions report from remoaner Corbynista...
Nicely refuted by referring to the ramblings of a batshit-crazy right-wing blogger. That's me convinced.
near-socialist view of regulation
I think the OP is probably referring to 'neoliberalism' and conflating the rather right-wing 'liberal' economics with left-wing liberal politics, whilst probably not understanding either.
As it happens, the economic policy in the EU that people used to rail about is considerably less 'neoliberal' than folk feared back in the '70s. At the same time, the economic policy in the UK has become much more neoliberal, characterised by things such as ideological austerity, and contraction of state funding of public infrastructure.
In terms of political liberalism, this is characterised by the 'evil' left wing philosophy of 'be nice to people', rather than the 'good' right wing philosophy of 'greed is good, screw everyone else'. This probably accounts in large part for why, when travelling to other European countries, everything seems much more pleasant and better run that it is in this country, from economical public transport, to clean public spaces and parks, to a marked lack of drunken street violence on a Friday/Saturday night (not counting the British tourists).
Re: So one remainiac commissions a report from load of other remainiacs...
From the same guys who predicted a recession and the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs immediately should the Referendum have gone to Leave
Well, I don't know about you, but my salary went up by less than inflation last year, and the NHS is doing so well with that extra £350M a week it isn't getting. Magical brexit rainbow unicorns for all!
Re: So one remainiac commissions a report from load of other remainiacs...
Wow, your argument is so strong that you immediately resort to insulting those whose opinion differs to yours.
This is totally going to convert me to your point of view.
Meanwhile, in the real world, leaving the EU remains an idiotic idea, the proponents of which almost universally stand to gain from it in various ways, for example, by not having their tax dealings come under the scrutiny that the EU wishes to impose...
Re: Say what?
I can't believe no mention of 2001 or Alien.
Those films weren't from the 1980s
2001: A Space Odyssey was released in 1968, and Alien in 1979.
Re: Not just technology...
Whilst PV has made some excellent films, it is still hard to forget some of the lemons he has put out. Like Showgirls.
Re: So much Education still needs to be done
"Do it today .. send $100 of BTC to someone .. out the other end spits $25 ..days or weeks later !"
A slight misrepresentation perhaps?
The nature of the blockchain means the hashing difficulty is tuned so that the time between blocks is approximately 10 minutes. In practice, as more mining hardware is added, the actual block time is usually a little under ten minutes.
To confirm a transaction, the number of blocks required is usually six (which makes a cryptographic attack against the blockchain, for instance to double-spend, impractical). In other words, if you send someone BTC, they will usually see it in less than ten minutes, and be able to spend it in less than an hour. Not days, and certainly not weeks.
Yes, the value is volatile, but it doesn't crash by 75% in an hour. You might find that $100 is $85 when it gets to the recipient. On the other hand, it is equally likely to be $125.
On the other hand, if I do a bank transfer, it can take several hours or days. If I give someone a cheque, they have to pay it into their bank, and then it will take around a week before the funds are cleared.
The advantage of the blockchain that I can see, is sending funds overseas. I don't know about you, but if I want to transfer £10 to someone in Ireland, my bank will charge me an addition £9.50 for the privilege.
The transaction fee for bitcoin may currently be 'around $20', but it is also worth remembering that the transaction fee is actually optional, and can be set at any amount (it goes to the person who mines the next block, and that person doesn't have to include any transactions, so if your fee is low, it may not get included until several blocks later).
I think the problem is that the official government 'remain' campaign didn't do their job very effectively (partly because it was organised by an incompetent government in the first place), coupled with the fact that using targeted social media campaigning is a little less that scrupulously honest, so more likely to have been used by self-serving hard-right individuals such as certain frog-faced failed stockbrokers.
Maybe because, like everyone else, they are legally bound to comply with the regulations surrounding the collection and processing of personal data, which include responding to the ICO with the appropriate information when they ask you to.
It's not unreasonable for the regulator to expect the information to be forthcoming without having to take the subject to court to comply.
Re: Meh, the risk to planes from drone strikes is overblown. El Reg already told us so.
If a commercial aircraft hits one of these things, it may or may not cause damage. What it WILL cause is a need for the aircraft to make an unscheduled landing, most likely back at the airport it took off from (given that most planes will be well above the ceiling of drones not long after take-off).
The knock-on effects of this are the delay and rescheduling of other flights, as well as the cancellation of the flight that has just had to land. The plane will need to be fully checked over before it can go anywhere. The passengers won't be happy.
The possibility of loss of life is not the main concern here. It is all the associated costs with dealing with a mid-air incident.
Re: It's all black
I did exactly this with an android phone a while back. Once changed from Simplified Chinese to Simplified English (US), it required a USB cable and adb on my desktop to install a package that then allowed the change of the language settings to something sensible, such as Traditional English (UK).
Re: Are we surprised?
I remember when that serial killer was on the loose in Ipswich, the police said they'd collected 80,000 hours of video material in a week. For one, small city. So the logistics of that are still too hard.
It is also worth noting that the killer in question (Steve Wright, the 'Suffolk strangler') was caught not because of CCTV evidence, but because his DNA was found on one of the bodies, and was already on file because of a previous crime he had been convicted for. Up until this point, the plod in Ipswich had actually been pursuing and had arrested another man, whose identity had been leaked to the press. Which all goes to show exactly how useless our ubiquitous CCTV is.
Re: Funny really...
The principle reason, as far as I am aware, is so that drivers can rate passengers, in the same way that passengers can rate drivers, so that drivers can avoid picking up people who are likely to be abusive, or violently ill in their car.
The amount of data required for this presumably would be pretty small (an identifier, and a set of ratings), and I wonder what other associated account data Uber actually hold (such as identifying information and billing info), as well as how much of this data they need to hold, and whether it was leaked.
The whole thing does indeed look pretty dodgy - from the fact that Uber didn't 'fess up to the breach at the time, and haven't revealed the nature of the stolen data, to the pretty amazing admission that they paid the criminals to delete the data that was stolen. I can see no way that they could verify that the crims actually did this, rather than taking the money and holding onto / selling the data.
Makes a change...
...from all the drunken Brits on stag dos in the Czech Republic.
Re: The world owes me a living ... wage.
You get what you pay for. Paying people not to work seems an odd thing to do.
Looking at this form the other angle, is the fact that a rich economy like ours can easily afford to make sure that nobody is without a roof over their head and a meal in their stomach; even the most feckless in society shouldn't be left to starve or freeze to death. At the moment, these safeguards are being provided by charities that struggle to achieve this, which is why we have seen a massive increase in rough sleepers and food bank usage over the last few years. Where I live, there is barely a doorway that doesn't have cardboard and a sleeping bag in it.
Anything above and beyond supplying those basic needs, sure; work for it. Nobody is advocating a situation where work doesn't pay. Not even Karl Marx.
if everyone gets X amount, it'll cause costs of stuff (food, fuel, gas, electric, telecoms, transport, loans, mortgages etc) to increase as people will have more money to pay.
That belies a basic misunderstanding of economics. In short, you have assumed monopolies (or price-fixing cartels) on all those things, and no competition. Unless, for instance, all food producers decide to increase their prices in unison, the producer that puts their prices up by 10% loses business to all those who do not.
Re: Welcome back Stalin
You are confusing the evolved innate tendency for humans to believe in agency, with the necessity of that agency existing. You then throw in a mix of the misguided idea that belief in some agency is a prerequisite for moral behaviour (which is neatly disproved by the observation that atheists give more to charity than people ho identify themselves as religious).
Basically, you start from the position that the universe is inherently meaningful, then argue for that position by claiming that anything else is a sign of sociopathy.
You should probably take a look Here, tick off the pitfalls you have fallen into, re-examine your arguments, and start again.
Hey, aren't you the same guy who was busy being offended on behalf of other people yesterday? Good to see you're not wasting your time.
So which is it?
100% chance in 10 years, or "longer than the current age of the universe"?
Re: Assuming the OP is a Christian...
You assume wrong then don't you.
Well, if they're not, then they are just being offended on behalf of someone else, presumably without their consent, in which case they can just fuck off.
Assuming the OP is a Christian...
Better forgive whoever hurt your feelings then.
Amazon makes recommendations
...it doesn't predict what you are going to buy, it tries to make you buy stuff.
By this logic, does Rudd think that FB et al should be recommending terrorism to potential terrorists? Or does she just need to learn about cause-and-effect?
Re: Time to start deporting the problem fast before it gets much worse!
Wow AC. Just wow. I'm amazed that you managed to actually form two correctly punctuated sentences there. How did you avoid the urge to eat your keyboard and then defecate on the desk?
Re: the vast majority of terrorist incidents world wide are linked to Islam
How many western countries currently have the death penalty for apostasy or homosexuality or adultery?
Unless those countries you are thinking of are specifically theocracies, they will have a separation of state and religion, and thus their laws are a cultural, not a religious artefact. Don't conflate what are societal norms in a culture with religion. Very few countries have the death penalty for apostasy (although there is no excuse for those that do), and several sub-saharan african countries that are nominally Christian have the death penalty for homosexuality or adultery.
The fact is that Islam encompasses a vast number of people from different cultural backgrounds, and you are insinuating that they all behave like the lowest common denominator. It's the exact same faulty thinking that equates all Christians with racist bible-belt gun nuts.
Re: Who would pay for BBC access?
Um non of those are produced my amazon. Mr robot is USA show which has commercials.
I never said they were. They are, however, available as part of the Amazon subscription.
Labour claim the BBC is biased towards the Conservatives.
The Conservatives claim the BBC is biased towards Labour.
The problem is that, in trying to appear 'unbiased', the BBC tries to put forward every viewpoint, no matter how out-of-whack with reality, hence the promotion of idiocy on the same footing as rational thought. For instance, with climate science, where 99% of scientists in the field hold the same opinion, but they will always wheel out a 'contrary opinion' from a fossil-fuel lobbyist and treat them as if they each carry equal weight.
Re: Who would pay for BBC access?
To be fair to Auntie, there are a few things worth watching - for example the excellent work of the wildlife unit. I'm not sure this justifies the frankly steep license fee - the best part of £150 doesn't compare well with, for example Amazon Prime at around half the price, especially when you consider that Amazon give you several products for this price (such as free postage, Twitch prime, etc.) and a few programs you'd actually want to watch, even if their catalogue is sparse.
It is a shame that so much of its other output is populist drivel, but then the commercial channels aren't exactly better in this regard, but Amazon do manage to give a few high quality offerings, such as American Gods, Mr Robot and Ash vs the Evil Dead. I can't remember the last time the beeb gave us any programming of that quality, although I'm holding out for Good Omens...
The public service broadcasting, such as the news should arguably be paid for out of general taxation anyway - it's not like they're exactly independent of government.
Re: My car doesn't decide where it should go... I do...
I don't check my texts when driving (you know, because it's dangerous and illegal), except for the rare occasion when I am already stopped in stationary traffic with the handbrake on and I need to let someone know I am delayed. How would this almost certainly apocryphal traffic management system help me?
Re: Walking directions?
If your taxi driver starts off by blindfolding you, you should be worried.
Security by Obscurity
It is mildly ironic that security by obscurity is a concept so thoroughly debunked that all you have to do is google™ the phrase to find out why.
To quote the first result (Wikipedia):
Security experts have rejected this view as far back as 1851, and advise that obscurity should never be the only security mechanism.
Re: Playing devils advocat for a moment ...
Is that some sort of horrible yellow alcoholic beverage?
Re: Black box
More importantly, with a car or microwave, it is perfectly possible to take it apart into its constituent pieces to determine how it works (whether this is advisable is another matter). For instance, if I were to disassemble a microwave, I would find things such as:
- A metal enclosure
- A door with a faraday grille to prevent radiation leakage
- a power transformer
- Control circuitry
- A magnetron
- Control dials
- A hinge switch
With each of these parts, I would have a decent chance of identifying it and its purpose. If Google's software was open-source, and well designed (which I'm sure it is), I would also be able to go through the exact same process, class by class. If it's properly documented, then it would be even easier. None of this would prevent Google from holding copyrights (and 'software patents') on their code, in the same way that the manufacturer of my microwave no doubt holds design patents, and copyrights on it.
If there is no definitive evidence that any data had left [their] systems, how do they know it was the work of a hacker, and not a leaker? Presumably all they can prove is that they were hacked, not that the hackers stole the data, so if they cannot show otherwise, it is entirely plausible that a mole used this as a cover to leak the data.
To be fair, I can tell decent gin from cheap crap in a G&T. But we did a "tasting" at a friend's leaving do and went through a nice bar's gin selection. Yummy! From Gordon's up to the £40 a bottle boutique stuff, and the only one I could taste any real difference with was Gin Mare. £35 from Waitrose, and very nice indeed. Not sure I'd pay that for it as a mixer though. For martinis I might.
If you are tasting gin, you really should do it neat. Take a small amount and swill it around your mouth until it stops burning, then swallow that and take a swig to taste it. Gin Mare is one of the few that is nice neat at room temperature, as the olive and Mediterranean herbs soften it a little. If you are looking for a G&T, you may as well go for something cheap and full of juniper, or something with a strong flavour that isn't damaged by the tonic, like a rhubarb gin.
...and if you like Gin Mare, it's cheaper closer to the source, around €30 a litre in Barcelona.
Re: Lies, damn lies and BT excuses
It's "whomever", not "whoever".