"How anyone can cite Microsoft as a company to emulate where security is concerned, who isn't a Microsoft shill, is beyond me."
Perhaps they've been paying attention. Compared to Adobe, Microsoft are golden.
8168 publicly visible posts • joined 14 Jun 2007
"Google does pretty much the same thing"
Not really. Their search engine runs an algorithm whereas our friend had compiled a list of links by hand, which is more like YouTube, except that the latter actually hosts the material.
There's an obvious similarity in both being funded by advertising, at least if you can put aside the scale of Google's operation.
"Linux is a full blown UNIX, thats why its going through the final phases of taking over the world now."
That would depend on which world you were taking over. In the consumer world, Linux has a market share of about 1% and is losing it to closed unices from Apple and Google. Over on cloud-cuckoo planet, however, I'm sure 2012 is the year Linux arrives on the ultra-net-phone-desk-book-top.
And as for "Where does Windows come in?". Well, if you take a huge step backwards and widen your field of vision, that absolutely massive sun-obscuring mountain that you thought was just part of the landscape is in fact Windows market share.
Sad, but true. (Could we have an unhappy Penguin icon?)
Erm, if I were targetting Linux boxes, that file would be copied from a USB stick formatted for a Linux-friendly file-system and it would have the executable bit already set. I might be copying *to* a file-system mounted so as to prohibit execution, but equally my Windows setup might be configured to stop files being executed from directories writable by end-users.
Technically, there's bugger all difference in how secure these two platforms can be made. Culturally, there is a gulf. Unless the US military are willing to embrace the secure-by-default culture (and the quote about commonplace viruses on networks suggests they are going in the opposite direction) merely switching to Linux won't help.
"The malware in question is [...] found routinely on computer networks and is considered more of a nuisance than an operational threat."
Is anyone else worried by that remark? I'd say that the routine presence of malware on military networks was something to worry about. I'd be looking to replace any net-admins who thought otherwise.
Really? I think you'll find if you stop random people in the street that most of them haven't a clue that MS have criminal convictions for anything. Also, I think you'll find that Windows' market share is still so large that most of those same people don't think there is an alternative. Apple? They only make phones and tablets for Stephen Fry, don't they?
How about *.sucks, a TLD devoted to customer complaints against big brands.
The rules of the registry are that trademark owners *cannot* buy their own brand names, which in turn means that anyone going to (for example) www.theregister.sucks can be in no doubt that it isn't affiliated in any way with the well-known brand. Thus, the usual "passing off" argument that brands use to silence their internet critics is whisked out from underneath them.
Actually, if I go to reasonably large shop, I *assume* that there is an employee of the shop whose job it is to track me whilst I'm in the shop and record the footage on CCTV. I think this has been standard practice in retailing for several decades and society seems to reckon it is OK.
If they follow me home, that's different. But then again, I said as much in my earlier post. Collecting data isn't an invasion of privacy. Trawling the resulting dataset and making certain kinds of connections might be. Computers don't change the principles here. I see no scenario where something that is legal on a small scale becomes illegal just because you've automated it. If it is wrong on a large scale, it was wrong in the individual case, and vice versa.
“However, if that company is able to combine that information with other information about that individual [...] this could constitute personal data. The company would then need to notify customers about the way in which and the purposes for which their personal data is being processed,"
There's a big difference between "is able to" and "does". If you insist on the "is able to" test, then you'll simply have a lot of organisations forced to tell punters "We collect X but do not combine it with any other data afterwards so it doesn't matter." (or words to that effect). The end result would be a general public that routinely ignores "data protection" notices.
If you are wandering about in public, people can see you. If they want to track you, they can. We've come several thousand years without society reckoning this is a problem. If it is just a shopping mall trying to improve its floor plan, only the irredeemably anal will care. Obviously if they then hand over the data to the local anti-terror spooks we might have a problem with that, but let's keep our "public outrage powder" dry for that moment when it comes.
Learning to code isn't generally useful, but learning how to control a cursed, wretched, bastard machine that does ONLY and EXACTLY what you tell it to do may well prove to be an essential skill for the general population in the 21st century. A computer is a reasonable platform to practice this skill.
Because by the time you've persuaded an actual language to produce interesting output, your 11-year old has fallen asleep. Learning doesn't have to be boring.
As it happens, I was looking for a gentle introduction to programming at the weekend and found Scratch. My 10 and 7 year olds have been playing with it since, by choice. I doubt that would have happened if I'd started them on a "proper" language, but scratch is powerful enough for them to learn from experience about spaghetti code and badly named variables.
In fact, I'm stunned that Mr Gove has stumbled upon such a good idea.
"Tying in directly with a mobile carrier could be a smart play for Groupon, as it will potentially get a lot more random traffic if it doesn't have to persuade people to sign up for information on its deals."
Am I to infer from this that DT will be spamming its customers with Groupon ads, presumably defending the act on the grounds that they already have a commercial relationship with their customers so its OK to send unsolicited (and unrelated) crap?
I hope this doesn't set any precendents. I find SMS spam rather more intrusive than email flavour.
Since the probe is several million miles away from any physical influence, the only way a foreign power could sabotage it is by sending commands. Are we to infer that the world's space agencies spend squillions of bucks on expensive launch systems for even more expensive payloads and don't bother to secure the comms to and from ground control?
Now *that's* embarrassing! Remind me again, what century is this?
What sort of typing position are we talking about here?
I've just tried to type with my palm low enough to touch a touchpad. It's bloody uncomfortable and I've no intention of keeping it up. (I'm typing this now with my hands above the keyboard like any sane person.)
I was briefly tempted to patent the pain in my joints, but then I remembered the prior art: "Doctor, it hurts when I do this..."
That would be "ultra book" as in "way beyond the size of your average book".
Seriously, the whole point of a notebook, as distinct from a laptop, was that the former was smaller and therefore more portable. They'll be selling "kindles" with screens that aren't eInk next, or "personal computers" that are so encumbered with DRM that you have no say in their configuration, or "open" systems that are locked down so hard you can't even wipe them and start again with your own OS.
Icon: grumpy old man.
Even better, googling just "Lyonnaise de Garantie" and the top entry is the corporate site and the second is a news article about this case.
Legal query: if Google remove the auto-complete facility from www.google.fr (that being, in my view, a gesture of good faith towards the French legal system in not wanting to inadvertently fall foul of their fine laws again) is their French operation still liable for the behaviour of www.google.com?
I can't be bothered to check wikipedia, but I think you'll find that Italian, Spanish and French were mutually intelligible (and basically medieval Latin) until at least the tenth century, and educated folks all over Europe used Latin as a lingua franca until a handful of centuries ago.
So 1900 years is very probably off by a factor of two and arguably off by a whole order of magnitude.
Of course, the previous version is still there for *you* to find precisely because the end-user didn't know about the feature and therefore hadn't either switched it off or recently purged all previous versions. Making the feature *more* visible to typical end-users might actually make it *more* likely that they lose data.
VMS had a similar feature and a sub-population of end-users who relied on the fact that a document had multiple personalities and so you could store important data in different versions. It was great until they exceed their disc quotas and their sysadmins "fixed" the problem for them by purging all older versions of all their documents.
There's no substitute for a decent backup regime. I know it's boring, but if you can't calm down enough to put one in place then I'm afraid you are just too disorganised to use a computer.
...this is, at least, a genuine OS-level feature rather than yet another bouncy graphic for the vacuously inclined. It is, in fact, the first I've heard that Win8 will be different (at an OS level) from Win7 and therefore conceivably (*) worth shelling out money for.
(* Probably not, in practice, since I'm quite happy with my existing backup strategy and don't require five-nines uptime, but I dare say it will appeal to some.)
"The report also noted that on the day measured 1 per cent of "extreme" users were responsible for 50 per cent of mobile data downloads. Considering that the results included dongle users, it's likely that these will be torrent downloaders on laptops with no-limit internet SIM cards watching films."
I vaguely remember a network technology that was so advanced that all the vendors started offering unlimited packages and were then "disappointed" to find that customers who had paid for unlimited downloads were downloading a lot.
But it was a long time ago and I'm sure their experiences have nothing to teach modern mobile network operators.
"The registry is the number one place MS screwed the pooch"
Crap. Certain other OSes store this information under /etc or in dotted directories under ~/ in a host of tiny files all in different formats. Windows uses several instances (hives) of a strongly typed custom file system, allowing uniform access to the same data and fine-grain security. Both design choices have plus and minus points.
Registry corruption only happens if you let crapware or clueless users run amok on the data. The same would happen under any other design and the problem is letting crapware or clueless users run amok.
I speak as someone who has made typing errors in small files in the /etc hierarchy. :)
Where would that come from? We already have a list of *well-behaved* installed applications that the user can remove if they wish. It's in whatever Control Panel calls itself these days. Presumably then, you want a list of installed malware, and if you could solve *that* problem you'd have a working antivirus system.
I think OEMs will ensure that it is after. As a result, this feature will remove all your data and put back a pile of (now rather old and therefore unpatched) crapware.
As described, I can't think of any circumstances whatsoever in which pushing this button wouldn't be a cause of deep regret. It is quite stunning that MS are putting development time into it. Presumably Windows is now regarded by its developers as *so* feature complete and bug free that they are actually bored and looking for daft ideas to pass the time.
I think "iPod" went the way of hoover and biro some time ago, particularly in playgrounds.
Kindle might follow, but only if Amazon stop diluting the brand with things like the Fire.
I don't know if "owning the brand" is commercially useful to Amazon. It makes them the first place people go if they are interested in buying an e-reader, at least for a few years. (I don't suppose anyone buys hoovers or biros from the original manufacturer anymore.) It is certainly deserved. Amazon made a product cheap enough and good enough for book lovers rather than gadget lovers.
Perhaps. Of course, it isn't actually the job of a DNS server to decide whether the answer to your query is safe to use. If there is a problem with the certificates on the target site, it is the client's job to decide how to handle that. But if you've punted that responsibility to OpenDNS, then they are indeed doing what you ask.
Either way, if people are now migrating to the MS alternative, it looks like Google have paid the penalty regardless of whose fault it is.
My vote definitely goes with the latter. In the time-frame of interest, just about every third-party software vendor in the known universe managed to write apps that also ran on 2K, even if they used XP-only features for a few things. It wasn't hard then and the equivalent trick isn't hard now.
"IE9 is, imo, where they build on the base of IE8 to make something pretty good."
IE9 may be many things, but it builds on a base that is sufficiently unrelated to IE8 that it will never run on Windows XP.
Speaking of which, are Microsoft planning to launch a "Kill XP" campaign? I hear that its market share remains defiantly above 1%.
That's "everything except display a picture more than three inches wide and/or let you type anything in". I know the CPU power and RAM are there, but *unless* you are a mindless consumer of low quality versions of someone else's content, you'll need a PC as well as a smartphone.
Furthermore, if you can only afford one, you'll go for the PC if you have anything at all between your ears.
...is that all the legitimate foreign sites, like Windows Update, will withdraw leaving the field open exclusively to purveyors of malware.
(At least, that's the net-related outcome. I imagine the political outcome is less easy to predict.)
One question though. Wouldn't it be easier just to cut the wires at the border? Their chosen method of censorship sounds like they've deliberately left things so that it is possible to fall foul of the new law and incur that fine. Almost as though the whole thing is a rather desparate money-grabbing venture on the part of the authorities rather than a security clamp-down.
What *ought* to happen, unless the Berne convention has been completely consigned to the history books, is that as soon as the idea is *published*, no-one (not even you) can obtain a patent. In practice, it seems to be possible to patent a version of the idea that differs in some utterly trivial idea. The USPTO will cash your cheque (or check!) and the rest of the world has to go through a US court in order to overturn your immoral, fraudulent, crooked and intellectually insulting behaviour.
And faced with such institutionalised theft, the response of the rest of the world's politicians appears to be "absolutely incomprehension and inactivity for a decade or so, followed by a dawning realisation that they could perhaps get their snouts in the trough, too, if only they were crooked enough".