Posts by Jamie Jones

Re: I think it would be rather splendid

US governent and military could just make rhemselves exempt from the law, and then roll their own.

I don't know if sigjal is open-source, but even if not, the encryption is.

Re: A deal

I assumed you meant ten past eight yesterday evening!

Re: Once again, the question is choice

6 million times YES.

The worst thing about dumbing down of interfaces is the actual loss of functionality for those that want it.

Remember when the paypal site looked and operated like a proper banking site?

Re: It doesn't matter anyway

You praise Trump, whilst in the same post criticise China for innacracies.

Let's see:

After the disease was in Washington state and the World Health Organization reported a high global risk, Trump said there were no worries of a pandemic.

The day the stock market plummeted, Trump said the virus was very much under control in the U.S., and the stock market was looking pretty good to him.

A few days after declaring a national emergency, Trump said he had “always known” this was a pandemic.

More: https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/mar/20/how-donald-trump-responded-coronavirus-pandemic/

Even more: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/timeline-trump-covid19-responses/

Re: I hate cookies

I can't be the only one who's hacked up a small cronjob script that automatically converts all cookies (apart from those whitelisted) to session cookies, in all installed browsers?

Re: At last - the X-ray specs

Aye, and they refused to give me a refund!

Re: FreeBSD port

Ah, that's a shame. It doesn't seem to depend on anything other than the linux base and emulation, so I'm guessing it needs a more recent linux emulation than 11.3 has, in which case you're probably stuck unless you upgrade....

12.1 is a production release too :-)

Re: Colour me disappointed...

It's disabled because of the forums and logging / posting IP etc.

You can access the main site over www if you add the IP manually. See my post about it, and the official response here:

https://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/all/2019/11/25/ipv4_addresses_gone/#c_3923843

Re: But I don't have a so-called "smart" phone.

Thank-you. I was beginning to think I was the only one without a phone surgically attached.

I never take my phone when I'm shopping. What's the point? I have this nifty service that not only lets me know of missed calls, it allows the caller to leave a message!

If only other people got such a thing, they wouldn't have too answer the phone with "I'm shopping right now, call me back later"!

And yeah, some people may be on call, or needed immediately for a critical emergency, but really, that's a small percentage. How on earth did we cope pre-mobile?

Re: Does that mean that hosted servers are not going to use FTP anymore ?

It's already being done - FTPS already exists.

However, if you are using an upload/download "file-manager" type FTP client, I'd suggest switching to an SFTP client instead of FTPS. The front ends are basically the same, but use sftp underneath. (If your servers ssh doesn't have sftp-server then most clients can emulate it to some extend using scp under the hood, but you shouldn't have that issue)

EDIT: Nick got in there before me!

Re: Also matter to energy and entanglement

God? Is that you?

Re: Buying extra bog roll understandable

I was in a cafe this afternoon with my sister and nieces. One of them said something, and I glibly replied that "I probably have coronavirus".

You know those times when you say something louder than you meant to?? Using the "outside voice" instead of the "inside one"?

One woman in particular looked shocked...... I was a bit embaressed, and took a sip of my coffee... and it went down the wrong way, and I needed to cough.... I tried desperately to contain it, and stammered quietly, "oh shit, now I need to cough" ("oh ha ha, stop messing about" came the responses), snd then it happened, a big series of loud involuntary deep chokie coughs swiftly followed. The poor old woman looked mortified, even though she was at least 20 foot away...

Re: He obviously misunderstood his position

"thoughts and prayers"!

Re: Oh My!

And when interviewed about the virus at the CDC, all he could do was brag about his poll numbers. That's all he cares about (oh, and on top of this, his brag was a lie..)

https://apnews.com/7c07f069fdbcfd256703ce7bdf6363fb

Re: RE: thinks she has me on a diet

I went on this 2 week diet...

All I lost was a fortnight!

Re: Insult the electorate, cause that really works.

How on earth could you think the Tories were the best of of the three?

You don't even have to think the others would have done any good to realise they'd still have been better than this totally useless and evil lot who will do countless damage.

Re: Good

Exactly! All the fault of the EU, of course.

Once we are finally free from their demonic shackles, we'll be the world leaders with our British-made exports! Briannia rules the waves, after all (All said in an "Al Murray's 'Pub landlord'" accent)

</sarc>

Re: So GCHQ...

Yeah, Brain fart moment! 1984... Big brother the 1984 character, not the trashy TV show!

Re: @Jamie Jones

We dont know if they would be so dominant. The regulations didnt exist then and a large part of FB and googles expansion has been through big data. If we pour tar on them now they must adapt (in the EU) but if they were already covered in tar would they have got as far as they have? The EU may not intend to slow development but that is the effect of regulations. The 5 year ban on AI being a good example, who else is going to do that?

Fair enough. But why should we be grateful they are so big? Especially when their growth is down to shady data dealings?

The vacuum would have been filled one way or another, the only possible consequence is that some billionaires might not be quite as rich from profitting off others data.

From what I have read it does seem to be 2 different ways of looking at the same problem. From what I have seen the US people seem to view the public vs the private and the public imposes on the private. Over here we seem to have a different view that the gov is somehow on the side of the citizen against the businesses. Although that gets complicated when people complain about the gov being in cahoots with business. *I know its actually more complicated and a mix on both sides of the pond but roughly.

I agree. Though I'd phrase it differently. Over here, people *expect* the governments to work for them, and whilst there are still some voters who expect that, some politicians will be like minded.

In America, (and becoming more so with the UK govenment) people are resigned to that fact that the politicians work for the corporations, and the lobbying has been able to take over.

Though, I do see America showing signs of getting better. Here, we seem to need things to get even shittier before we have our "let them eat cake" reaction.

I dont think this is a move to penalise America and yes its an own goal. I actually think its a control freak mentality which should scare people that the EU wants a centrally planned economy.

An 'own goal" from a purely captilist profiteering point of view, but to some people, it's a cautionary step (although admittedly it's pretty useless if the rest of the world doesn't agree to the same plans)

Still, if people are that concerned about that or any other EU actions, they can always vote them out, seeing it's a democratic institution after all!

Of course. This is the good governance vs bad where one considers the problem and the other reads the latest horror story and reacts. The expectation then growing that the gov will react to the latest overreaction and never do anything useful. Its an easy trap to fall into for any gov and ours has been guilty of it too.

So your issue with the AI restictions isn't that they decided to place them, but that in this case, the restrictions don't tally with any supposed issue?

Yeah, all governments tend to over-react to certain issues. Once an angry mob gets mobilised, governments will be seen to make some stupid unworkable laws that won't help anyway.. Politicians knowing this, you also get the situation where they purposely incite the mob so they can "appease" them by passing laws they wanted to pass in the first place. The number of times "think of the children" and "to catch terrorists" has been used as a smokescreen is witness to that.

However, the other side of the coin is that I don't want governments to *not* investigate/restrict something just because doing so will affect the profits of some mega-corp. That's where America is, and we are heading.

You are right with a, b and c but even without that yes. The data (1) requires ISPs to secure ‘opt-in’ consent from their customers before using information that is not sensitive in nature or even personally identifying; and it is a targeted restriction-

Well, assuming they are completely above board there, I'll admit it's not as bad as has been reported, but still, it's an automatic assumption of theirs that they own this data. You'd not expect the phone or postal companies to do similar.

And how can they truely guarantee information will be anonymised?

What about a URL http://www.somesite.com/search/does/jamie/jones/from/swansea/have/a/big/xxxx ?

All of this results in an “excessive burden” on ISPs, they claim, especially because not everyone else had to do the same. The new statute includes “no restrictions at all on the use, disclosure, or sale of customer personal information, whether sensitive or not, by the many other entities in the Internet ecosystem or traditional brick-and-mortar retailers,” the lawsuit complains.

Well, that's just silly of them. There is absolutely no burden on them to leave peoples data alone. In fact, the burden would be the one they claim to have put on themselves : anonymising the data they are collecting.

And if they were campaigning for the same rules to apply to all, then I'd be agreeing with them, though I think their comparisons are invaild - Let them set up a shop on their portal, and then let people know that "1,000 people ordered a barbeque set last month" - it's not the same thing as snooping on peoples data, whh is no different to having peoples phone conversations listened to and "anonymised".

The main difference is the selling of information that a customer has provided you, versus selling information between 2 separate parties that has nothing to do with you. That's a big diiffence!