Posts by Pete Spicer107 posts • joined Friday 28th March 2008 01:14 GMT
An article from Anna that doesn't include variations on the phrase 'Foxconn-rebrander', quality is slipping. After all, anything that comes out of China is Apple's fault, right?
(Troll, because someone had to say it. Tongue firmly in cheek, of course.)
Quite frankly I believe she could run the country infinitely better than any of the bunches of clowns we've 'elected' into power over the last decade or two.
That's half the problem, like most other outfits, El Reg doesn't really know what needs to be done to be compliant.
Mind you, I'm still not 100% sure that the ICO's own site is compliant yet...
Haven't played, but I'm given to understand the always-online aspect is not merely because of the item marketplace, but also because your friends can jump in and out of games virtually at will which does sort of require always-online.
First up, who buys milk in pints? I do, all the time. All the supermarkets around here do it in 1/2/4/6 pint containers.
The thing, I find metric much less meaningful than imperial. I'm a fairly big bloke, and for me an inch is just slightly thicker than my thumb, a foot is about the length of my foot and so on, plus 'pounds' make more sense to me than kilograms do for weighing anything.
To me, metric makes more sense when you're doing engineering or anything of any precision but for anything else, where approximate judgement is acceptable, I can make much more sense of it via imperial... because it was inspired by us and how we interact with the world. I have no idea how the hell metric came to be, none of the measurements relate to anything tangible that I can see.
And here was me hoping it was taken down due to the cookie law stuff...
Failing that you can get the entire series from GoG.com for a few quid, probably more than you'd pay for this though.
The interesting thing is that the sale was partly in shares. That means some of that 1bn figure is based on Facebook's own insane valuation, and that it's not really as ridiculous as it sounds.
1bn cash is not the same as 1bn worth of shares in Facebook, and I don't know how the split between cash and shares, but I'd bet that the bulk of the 1bn is shares in Facebook - and after FB goes public, that 1bn may not be worth nearly as much.
Except that IE9's 'IE8' mode renders the same page differently to how a real IE8 renders it, meaning that it's a guide at best and unreliable at worst.
This technology might not have been asked for, but there's a reason why it's being deployed: because it helps the banks, it was never for our benefit as customers.
Remember: if your card is skimmed, the onus is on you to prove the card was used fraudulently, rather than on them to protect you. It's an increasing of the shift in liability from the banks to you.
Also, is it *any* Visa branded card or *any WIRELESS* Visa branded card? I don't see how they could skim the details off non-wireless cards.
Maybe I'm misreading it here but this seems like a meaningful appearance of common sense to me.
On the one hand, site operators that allow uploading of content must be pro-active about looking for infringing material.
On the other, ISPs themselves (not individual sites) can't be made to filter content, of the kind that BT and TalkTalk (IIRC) were fighting.
Where's the problem here? Any site owner is responsible for ensuring that what's on the site is legit, and the ISPs aren't responsible for what their users do. Same as ever, except this time we have some legal precedent for it.
It'll be as successful as the 18 cert is here, i.e. just mean that parents will actually have to go into the store to purchase things rather than handing their children the money to do so.
I've lost count of the times I've been in Game or similar stores, where a child who is clearly not even 15, let alone 18, is asking about purchasing something like CoD, and the parents don't seem to register the fact that there's a 15 or an 18 cert on the box.
You must have hated The Dark Knight then, Maggie Gyllenhaal was quite important in that one.
If they're not dead already, they soon will be: the next XBox is rumoured to not have an optical drive in it at all.
While the merits and flaws of that have been (and will continue to be) debated elsewhere, the fact is that it will kill any second hand games market for that platform, much as the PC second hand games market is already virtually non-existent.
Without that market to cater for, there's simply going to be less and less for Game to sell, and far less reason for them to exist.
Meh, I'll pass on this one just like I did Sim City 4. Not because I don't like the game style, but the increasingly complex evolution.
Sim City was, for me personally, quite a nice challenge to balance everything out. Sim City 2000 got more complicated, certainly, but it was still possible to build a nice city without *too* much trouble, but when I tried SC 3000 I found there were just too many things to try and balance. While it's evidently possible, it stopped being fun to try and do that, so I didn't dig deep enough in to the mechanics.
I don't see any let-up in that aspect of it, so I'd expect this to be little more than pretty'd up Sim City 4 with vague multiplayer aspects (who can build the biggest city, really, with some vague nods to helping or hindering your neighbours)
So, if it covers protocols, it's likely going to have to be FRAND, right?
(puts tin helmet on and waits for the invasion of downvoters)
Am I the only one seeing parallels with Ubuntu's increasingly inane naming system?
Oh, and for those wondering... we've had Froyo (2.2 or so?), Gingerbread (2.3 or so), Honeycomb (3.0/3.1 as I understand it) and Ice Cream Sandwich (4.0) so not surprising that the next one would be J...
If a user has an application deployed on a Linode that is insecure and has vulnerabilities that can be exploited, it will be eventually.
As a former support rep for certain online software packages, you'd be surprised how often "My <insert software> install got hacked" turns up, when it's not the fault of the software itself but something else on the server that has been compromised - which makes it entirely possible to modify what's on the server and inject backdoors into it.
Of course, it happens a lot more on shared servers, but VPSes aren't immune to it either - as ever the chain is only as strong as the weakest link, which is often the user running the VPS if they don't keep everything up to date.
as any fule kno...
It's done in the style of the Molesworth books, somewhat hinted at by the title. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigel_Molesworth
Interesting take on the question... the underlying point is about why the education curriculum is about to include teaching computer programming at some level to all students - that for most it will be as useful as Latin is, hence "it's the new Latin".
Waiting for the downvotes again... ;)
Here's a thought... did anyone look at what Apple did? They managed to rearchitect their systems away from PPC to Intel based, and while I wasn't an Apple owner during those times, those I've spoken to who were, didn't seem too confused about whether software they acquired would work or not - presumably because Apple managed to make the process relatively painless.
Microsoft, for all the bashing it gets, does have a lot of developer resources, not to mention the fact that NT was multi-architecture, so it's not like they don't have the technical skill to pull it off - but if they can learn something from Apple about how to manage and communicate it to users, maybe it won't be a total mess?
Here's the thing, I read your post and everywhere I see 'Node', I can substitute in 'PHP' because it's precisely the same argument, just held a few years back, and with all the same connotations.
Bad coders make bad code no matter the language. Even skilled developers still make mistakes in any language, but at least the higher level language environments do insulate against certain classes of vulnerability - leaving a smaller potential surface of attack.
PHP or Node may not be perfect but I think you'll find it's a touch harder to execute raw machine instructions via them than it might be if the front-side apps are in C++...
Yes, educating the coders is important. There's just not enough people understanding authorisation, authentication, configuration management, DR, monitoring, or for that matter even processes like prevention of SQL injection, and dealing with XSS and CSRF matters are still not entirely understood by an awful lot of coders out there. And educating them is undoubtedly going to help.
Unfortunately, the more you try and remove protective layers, the more coder stupidity is going to cause problems, and it's not like the current generation of coders is that great at doing what they do. Nor the users for that matter.
Bottom line: Node isn't fully understood yet, sure. Doesn't mean it's not a suitable tool for certain cases, and I would love to see a tool that has security, robustness, performance, scalability and maintainability - and still allows me to work in a reasonably safe environment (i.e. not C++ because it's far too easy to have buffer overflows) while being able to handle the sorts of matters that PHP can't (which means if I don't use Node, I'm basically looking at Python/Twisted or Ruby/EventMachine for that use case... are you telling me that these meet all your criteria that Node does not?)
I suspect this will also further delay the Mac Pro from being refreshed for a while too, and for the same reason it's already been 18 months since the last refresh... (Mind you, Apple may also be waiting on nVidia to do something in that department too...)
Downvote away, you know you're going to want to.
Two things.
1. Why the **** are you giving Ted Dzuiba any more credence as a tech writer than he deserves (which is none)?
(Yes, he doesn't like Node.js and he doesn't have to use it. For the rest of us, it's a tool to be used, should you wish to do so, and it carries up and down sides like everything else. For anything that's intended to service long-life connections, it's not really a bad solution. At least you can actually achieve such things in Node.js rather than trying to do it based on Apache/PHP if you have *any* plans about scalability)
2. There is a very, very good reason why we put abstraction layers like PHP or JavaScript between the raw web and the general developers. Yes, it's slower, but damn is it safer. All software has bugs, all software has points where vulnerabilities can creep in. If you sit and code at the C++ level, you're more likely to trigger them.
I'm not arguing that PHP (and JavaScript) has produced a lot of very bad code. But imagine, for a moment, that the bad PHP coders then go off and try and write C++ apps on their little servers. That, assuredly, is a disaster waiting to happen. At least there is a modicum of insulation without them having to worry about buffer overflow injections as well as all the normal gamut of vulnerability classes.
How do they define 'social network operators'? Does that include discussion forums that allow attachments?
Does that also mean if YouTube were to set up a server farm in Europe, they would be similarly exempt?
(Just curious. The definition seems very vague, and the ruling seems open to abuse.)
Yes, but phones do a lot more these days - including access to a vast repository of applications, not to mention the wider web. Which makes it far more vulnerable to malware than the phones of yesteryear.
It may not transform your life but it might just prevent your phone being compromised, with expensive calls made on it to profit others (that you're paying for), not to mention the likes of Google Wallet and NFC payment systems being added to phones. They're less and less about communication and more and more about your digital - and financial - life.
"So here’s the real story, you still have choice and control."
Yes, you still have a choice and control, the choice is increasingly becoming "Do I trust Google not to abuse the crap out of what I do online?" and the control mechanism is to avoid using Google. You don't *have* to use Google search, nor GMail, nor YouTube etc. but it seems clear that if you do you will be monitored.
Well, it's probably not helped by the way they pulled the store mergers in places; I know up in Crossley Park in Kidderminster, there used to be separate PC World and Currys stores, they merged them into a single store unit and I suspect that actually put a lot of people off - people who'd go into one but not the other for whatever reason, now just avoid it entirely.
And the fact that they still pay peanuts, getting monkeys in as their staff.
I must relate though... not long after the aforementioned store reopened, I happened to pop in there to see an old couple looking at a 20-something" iMac. And there was a Mac guy there (looked like official Apple staff) explaining to this couple how to use a Mac, since judging by their attitude and comments, I suspect this was their first computer.*
That part in itself wasn't particularly surprising. What was surprising, however, was the PC World staffer standing by, looking attentive, and more than once mumbled... "I didn't know they could do that." The first time he said it, what was the Apple guy doing? He was loading Safari. Yes, the PC World staffer apparently didn't know iMacs had internet. I actually saw something I'd never seen before: a PC World staffer looking more gormless than usual, I didn't think it was possible.
And they wonder why no-one wants to buy anything from them.
* Now, please, don't give me that age old ********s about how Macs are so easy to use, don't need a manual, blah blah blah. If it was, as I suspect, this old couple's first computer, it's going to be a leap for them no matter what OS it has on it. But when you have someone who is more than happy to explain it to you and prepared to be patient in so doing, you probably won't be surprised to learn that Apple made a sale that day.
Once, just once, I'd love someone like this to be promoting sanity in the legal arena not because their paymasters dictate it (as I think the case is here) but simply because it's what he/she actually believe.
If only it were possible to get elected without having to have vast paymasters in the first place. The internet proves it's possible for ordinary people to be propelled to previously-unheard of fame or infamy. Maybe it's time we really started using these tools in a way to make another change for the better.
I'm more likely to overestimate their intelligence than underestimate it...
Either turn on incognito mode or go into Options > Under the Bonnet and uncheck 'Predict network actions to improve page load performance'
Don't read it, it's really that simple.
And notice how mysteriously, the argument of DRM fails to coerce people towards legal content - given adequate options, they'll happily pay rather than be cajoled into it.
Don't take this at face value. They've said that they're making a U-turn, but there's no *action* to back up the statement.
AFAIK, they're still listed as a corporate signatory of the bill itself (i.e. indicating support) and have neither removed their name, or added their name to the list of opposition. To me, this indicates it's PR rather than actual activity. Wait until they actually put their money where their (oversized) mouth is.
While the $1 a year, rest in bonuses is probably a tax dodge, there is one side benefit to it - probably the one that the rest of the board is trying to leverage, badly. (I seem to recall Steve Jobs only taking the $1 so he was actually on the books and thus got healthcare, prior to that I believe he wasn't actually directly paid by Apple as an employee even after he returned, but I could be wrong)
If you're only guaranteed a very small amount and the rest is bonuses, it does encourage you to do a better job of things. Same way that sales team members usually only get a really low salary with potential for much better things if they sell well.
Just here I'm not sure how well it'll work...
So are they monitoring the conversations/Twitter feeds to validate that things are being used for that purpose?
I presume the logic behind this is that it's publicly visible rather than private communication, as that's the one difference Twitter has vs email, texting etc.
Does this include satnav type devices?
Because if they think Google + Motorola will stifle competition here in the EU, they'll stop it. The whole point is so that everyone else has a viable chance at making products here and so that consumers have more choice and aren't at quite so much risk of having huge corporations that rule everything.
Imagine if Google + Motorola is anti-competitive here, you'll find that the cheapest phones are Google + Motorola and if you want anything else, it'll be *much* more expensive because they will be able to push others out the market.
I'd point out that whether the UK stays in the EU or leaves it wouldn't make any difference, and however many years ago when it was the EEC, it would be EXACTLY THE SAME.
Do you really think it's a good idea to allow big American corporations to run riot over the top of local firms? Because that's what you're encouraging.
If it's old enough to have DOS on it, it's likely old enough that these tools won't help that much anyway, being probably too old to support USB properly.
Actually, if you care to examine the GPL, while it's not imposed - it's actually fairly heavily implied.
People all around the world write FOSS code. I do it too, sometimes, though of recent times I've deliberately put a non FOSS, but custom freeware licence on my work to prevent certain ne'er-do-wells using my work.
Here's the thing. I'm in the position I can produce stuff for free and give it away. Many others cannot. If I were working as a paid developer, I don't see how I'd be able to use the GPL, and this is the problem with it.
The GPL only works in the ideal world, where people can create code without financial recompense from their work. Because you can't charge for GPL stuff, you just can't. The licence explicitly demands that anyone who makes use of your work and then distributes it themselves (be it as a library or something else), has to release the work under the same terms and freedoms.
The best example I have of this is MySQL, actually. MySQL's a GPL product. You want to build something based on MySQL and sell it? Well... you can use the GPL version and sell support, or you can pay the licence fee to get a non GPL version. That's the part most people seem to conveniently omit.
Now, you're mentioning that fact but you're glossing over the fact that it's inherently a *dual licensed* piece of work at that point. It's not GPL at that point, by definition, or least the use the company gets out of it isn't GPL'd at that point.
Anyway, I think you're still missing the point. The reason why GPL is noticeably absent from the store is the requirement that it would actually make the store hard to enforce (and I note that Apple has similar restrictions actually)
There is, noted, an exception in the GPL for system software, in that you can link to system software that is not GPL in GPL software and that's allowed. But you can't use it to link to non-GPL components without the combined work as a result being GPL. Which does put a dampener on anyone using various paid frameworks to release GPL software.
It's actually easier for them to simply deny GPL software and avoid the inevitable fallout that will go with it because as distributor, if a piece of software is found to have GPL code that isn't being used correctly, they're the ones who will ultimately be immediately (if not finally) liable.
So, you think that every developer should always work for free and never charge for their work?
That's essentially the alternative. The only way to make any money out of GPL software (i.e. to pay the bills) is to charge for support. The number of companies who've successfully done so for a while is actually surprisingly small.
And for anyone who doesn't realise the problem, you can charge for GPL software quite happily. Except you cannot prevent anyone distributing it once they've obtained it. Thus it only really requires one person to purchase it and it's then out there for free.
The biggest disappointment for me in this game was the fact that when I finally got round to picking up the Taito Legends PC CD which had this, Bubble Bobble and 20-odd other games from the golden era of Taito... they changed the music, presumably because Somewhere Over the Rainbow is copyrighted and they didn't want to pay to renew the licence.
It doesn't work like that, and as such it's an invalid comparison.
If you steal food, you are depriving someone else of a physical good.
If you copy something, you are not depriving anyone else of a physical good. Therein lies the problem for the media companies: it's not like theft of a physical object has taken place, and a copy in no way diminishes the ability to share either...
What are the odds someone on high actually used Google Chrome or Firefox to test it worked? Since those browsers send a request to Google to verify that the site isn't malware laden, it's no great stretch to assume that it also covers discoverability and silently adding it to the index...
The only reason they want to keep it running is spin doctoring. They want to make it look like they're listening to the needs and desires of the people, and for that, the amount of money they're spending is cheap.
Oh, yes we do. It's just that the names that are different, now we have 'Android is rubbish, Apple rules', 'Apples are toys, PCs are proper computers'. Or vice versa if that's your thing. (Me personally, I own various devices, each has their strengths and weaknesses, much like the Spectrum and BBC themselves.)
The difference between this and Convergence is that this seems like it can be rolled out incrementally across browsers and systems, as opposed to something that pretty much demands everything be upgraded at once, something that I didn't seem to get out of reading about Convergence.
The one problem I see with this is ultimately who has control over the log(s). It seems like we're creating another entity that must implicitly be trusted, but second-signing is going to be better than the current approach, I guess.
I think there's a bigger problem here.
We've seen recently where people were signing a petition on the government-instituted site, expecting the contents to be taken at least modestly seriously and debated in Parliament, only for it to be shrugged off with 'we don't have time'.
Now we have a politician complaining that people are sending him emails about something they're not happy about.
While the method itself may be less than desirable, surely there is a bigger point at play here that MPs are simply not listening to the people that voted them in originally...
I do sympathise with your problem, but whereas with Twilight Princess you can muddle through with the remote, it's a very different story in Skyward Sword.
TP was designed to work at least modestly well on both GC and Wii, but Skyward Sword was designed ground-up to work with the Wii controller, with MotionPlus and specifically for the style of gameplay that it encompasses: putting the player closer to the action by having the Wii remote and nunchuk act much more closely to the sword/shield than can be managed with any other style of controller.
Essentially, you'd have been asking for TP with new graphics, sounds and storyline, rather than the rather different beast that SS actually is to play. Like I said, I sympathise, but essentially you're asking them to simultaneously downplay the one thing that Wii has going for it and rehash an earlier game, as opposed to doing the one thing the Wii is truly good at, for its swan song. It sucks, but I don't think you can expect every system to be adapted to your (seemingly rather specific) needs.
It might be 3.75 times OUR limit but it happened in Poland, where THEIR limit is 0.02, not 0.08, so you get 15x the limit as originally claimed.
