Not sure it constitutes news or should even be on El Reg in the first place.
269 publicly visible posts • joined 15 Nov 2007
I stick with Firefox for a few reasons, but I don't like any of them. They are reactive reasons.
* The add-on population. But you really gotta take note of how many of them I and others have installed to FIX FUNCTIONALITY THAT MOZILLA BROKE.
* Chrome sucks, ergonomically, and I don't like some of the decisions it 'makes for you'. Up until recently Firefox was reasonably free of that rubbish ... yeah, recently.
* I hate Google. I really f******* hate them.
* There are no other browsers. No, just shut up, there aren't. Opera died, good efforts like Flock and Pale Moon rock but you know they're just going to end up in a cave like everything good, Safari remains a joke. Ironically, Edge actually isn't bad - but it's MS and therefore a security hazard and not something you want to code for.
But Firefox, now?
As of 45 it wouldn't accept unsigned add-ons (NO, this is NOT a f****** ADVANTAGE! It is a HUGE, TROUBLESOME, INCONVENIENCE!), not unless you use the 'Developer' edition. Oh oh, here we go into MS arbitrary forks. "No, no, it's perfectly reasonable that there be a development line with those things deactivated. And some other things. And oh yeah we keep changing the name. And yeah you have to keep track of what version you are on. And ..."
As of 52 the Linux version won't work with GTK2. "JUST UPGRADE YOUR OS!"
JUST UPGRADE YOUR ANUS, MOZILLA, WITH THIS REFRIGERATOR! PLUGGED IN!
Mozilla's attitude to backwards compatibility is just shocking. Which also brings me to ...
Mozilla are a bunch of amateurs, pretending to be professionals. No, they really are, they ignore basic use-cases and even basic computer-science, and it's becoming a real problem.
That's the W3C also described, in general, really. But Mozilla? Your stuff used to be smart and fault-tolerant, and NOT DO STUPID SH**. Now it is none of those things.
I think 52/53 may be their Waterloo. Their Apple OS X Server. Their Netscape 6. Their Windows 8. I think this may be the one that forces them to make peace with their gods and decide where they want to go.
I'm finding myself using Pale Moon more and more, despite the hideous interface font-rendering (who cares).
And Chrome is starting to look more attractive ...
It's still amazing me.
People think that Intelligence agencies TELL the public what they're doing.
NO. They DON'T. Not even if there is a REASON to.
Their business is secrecy. That never changes. It is their currency, their leverage, their life-blood, and their protection.
They don't tell you anything they don't want you to know. That 'you' is us.
For somebody to stand up and do this rubbish ... the agenda will become clearer down the track. But it's a stunt. It is a reasoned and calculated (or emergency) measure. It is not what it seems.
And on a related topic - I *was* gratified to see some posters on El Reg were of the same opinion as myself: The Wikileaks CIA 'leaks' are just a load of old, disused crap and they've long since moved on to more sophisticated hacks. This was just a golden opportunity to use the White Haired One's ego to publish a giant wad of FUD. Now anybody who isn't in on the joke is running to patch stuff ... that no longer matters. Not to Intelligence agencies like the CIA, NSA, SVR, GRU and the other handful that actually have some clout in the world.
What will the Coalition do
if they ever run out of poor people to demonise?
It's frankly an embarrassment that we have enough easily-fooled idiots in this country to have voted these bastards back in.
Yup, you've summed it up. We are a nation of extreme tardation.
How far, really, is it going to get?
Ok Windows doesn't stand a chance, it blows away like chaff in the wind against any serious security hack. But major servers don't run on Windows.
OSX fares a little better with its BSD heritage, but it too isn't tooo hard to smash into. But major servers don't run on OSX.
They run on Linux.
They run on open-source software that has an entire world's worth of security experts and security theorists probing into its every chess-move.
There will always be holes.
It's just... there might not be all that many of them, in the end.
Technology is two-edged, always. But here, I'm talking about the edge faced by the intelligence agencies, and corporate-owned "governments". It can fight back.
There are now strains of Android (let's just quietly ignore the hipster with the head shaped like a fruit trying to get our attention in the corner, and let's laugh at the random collection of ones and zeroes holding the four-colours flag as it gets kicked mewing and drooling out the door, shall we) that have Google's caring-sharing life-sucking tentacles removed, and have been hardened in other ways.
Ubuntu is becoming a popular handheld device OS.
There are homegrown efforts coming up that use other software, and indeed other hardware than the (cough cough) "major" brands do.
And online, the problems with TOR are being analysed out of the way (the entire paradigm sucks, because...), i2p2 grows and grows (...really, both endpoints need to be encapsulated within a network in order to be safe) and "illegal" - let's use the correct term: alegal - radio networks just keep popping up and refusing to be mole-whacked.
It's very annoying (for the surveillance sycoph... community), but some things are, albeit slowly, getting harder to find out, not easier. Bit like the MAFIAA discovering the public don't like being ripped off and neither do musicians.
Of course your standard thickhead won't care (and will continue using their real name on Facesucker, etc), until somebody dies or something big happens. But after that, suddenly they'll be on their car roofs beating their chests. FORTUNATELY, there will actually be tech there waiting for them with open arms.
<quote>"It seems like all this is based on the assumption that he's still there and hasn't been sneaked out in a diplomatic package (which the plod wouldn't be able to open - and they can be any size http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomatic_bag)"
If they tried that could cause a bit of a ruckus. For example, from that Wikipedia article:
"It may only contain articles intended for official use"
If there's a suspiciously human-sized diplomatic bag come out of the embassy, the UK government would have reasonable suspicion that Ecuador were violating the Vienna Convention by using diplomatic cover to break UK law, not a good thing to do. The government just says "no problem, we'll just seal this bag shut, nice and airtight, and wait a few days, then you can have it back. Unless you'd like to tell us that there's someone inside?"</quote>
Ego shipped separately.
I've often wondered. For a member of the Liberal party he seems to be quite remarkably with-brain, a very rare thing in that group indeed. But mainly, I have just been waiting for him to emerge from the wings and stab the other clowns in The Rich Peoples' Party in the back and take its throne. Stay chooned...
Disgusting behaviour by the airport security apparatchik. An enquiry should happen, whether it reports or not - this should be high news.
But yes - don't let some little turd in a uniform compromise your data. Encrypt it on a hidden volume behind a guest account. OR, store your data client-side encrypted online somewhere, and grab it after you've got where you're going - this is what govfuckwiterments have reduced us to.
Fortunately while they are busy slamming each others' dicks in the door and snorting cocaine, they physically can't legislate the laws of mathematics.
Yes! I liked that bit too - where the ORIGINAL Roy Batty turns up, and he's a complete special-ops nutcase. And he HATES the replicant version of himself that spared Deckard, regarding it as a cheap copy. The scene in the book where he breaks Holden out of hospital really does deserve to be filmed, though it would probably be the only good bit of the film.
As a general rule, K W Jetter sucks pus in hell. He's regarded as a contemporary/disciple of Philip K Dick but I can never work out why - Dick's stuff is genius, Jetter's is utter shit.
After I got out from under the spell of Prometheus, and realised it was a total piece of excrement, I wanted to leave some of my own excrement in a suitable vessel - so that the director would get to appreciate it, up close and personal, you understand. They NEED to think of these audience facilities!
Regardless of their relationships, both their browsers continue to s*** me.
Chrome is so utterly bereft of features that it reminds me of Apple's garbage ("Let us think for you... even though we're hipster idiots.") But gee its flash bindings work nice!
And Firefox, with all its configurability and plugin ecology is a PIECE OF BLOATED PIGWARE that uses up nearly a gig of RAM when it's doing *nothing*. And its flash crashes if you breathe.
Would that the two clouds of nerds (or... herd of clowns?) could get together and produce the One True Browser, instead of urinating over their respective audiences.
Glad to see this inspired the inevitable usual dickh... intelligent commentary.
Whilst this approach is a GoodThing[tm] - the bastards should pay their fair tax share - anything that starts to look like World Government stirrings makes my blood chill. A Gordon Brown or Tony Abbot at the head of a world parliament.... kinda makes the nuclear exchange threat of the 60s pale into insignificance.
Apple never really came up with anything. You can get any gear you want - if you are prepared to pay for it. You always could.
The iPod was a perfect example of Jobbie's marketing insan... genius. Take an mp3 player, moronise the interface (and call it 'funky'), then add an 80G surface-mount spinner. Isn't this wonderful? And it only costs you $800! Just don't drop it.
The MacBook Air - we'll make it so thin that nobody can make a DVD-ROM drive for it... cos, you know, those things are like so dead, man. And they did die, true. About 5 years later. But then there's a little thing called heat-dissipation, but thats ok nobody cares about that. In the meantime, we are so sorry about your scorched testicles, Sir, but they were scorched by Steve so you really should be grateful. Give us $4500 for the new one with less Ball-Scorch....
Decades ago, in the luggable era, Hewlett Packard (I *think*, it may have been somebody else) made a luggable that you could throw over a wall onto concrete. They built it for the military, and it was one of the first devices with 'drop-sensing' that would park the spinner, and all the internals were gel-packed. It cost $30k.
Anything you want. Gimme yo dolla.
I am not unique in this - I am an old, very experienced, still perfectly functioning software developer. My dreams are written in Python (it's more efficient than the old way).
And, I hate old computer hardware, ok? I can't stand it. It bores the living piss out of me. People who get enthusiastic about it generate a boredom field that ages concrete by millenia - they are dangerous, don't let them near bridges.
If it's seriously old - like valves-and-mercury era - then that's a different story. That stuff was space-lab frankenstein-lab evilgenius-lab glorious blinkenlicht power to the oversploog! But mainly because it looked really cool, quite apart from any boundaries it pushed.
Old, clunky and stupid plastic boxes, full of step-wise evolutions of green, crappy circuit boards, are your anus, frankly. Pants. Duff. Boring and spew.
And if it's APPLE, ooooooowwwwrrr, then it can REALLY get stuffed (down the curbside drain, with a roight goid kickun....)
" whizz-whir desktop 3D printers that produce a range of useless, multi-coloured, thermo-plastic turds."
spot on. really sums up the whole thing.
apart from some level of initial prototyping , possibly.
You guys are ignorant fuckheads. I know that makes me sound like a yank but... you've driven me to it. Keep reading and researching. You are espousing the 3D-printing view from about 1995. It's not 1995 anymore. No, really, look out the window.
They'll have a committee of 20. And a budget of several million, most of which will go up noses, into the deserving hands of ladies of the night, and to the building of some damn fine patios.
Any idea that Big Brother could be organised enough to be a long-lasting threat is rapidly dissolving in kafka-sillywalks juice these days.
Nevertheless, when this goes belly-up can I sue them and take ownership of their lives? C'monnnn.....
"Over the weekend, The Independent carried three articles about online bullying (and 'grooming'), within which a former Government spokesman said that the internet was becoming too dangerous for children and that the Government needed to get tough on 'the industry'.
This feels like an initial massaging of public opinion to enable acceptance of restrictions.
One idea mentioned was to use Australian legislation about online bullying as a reference model. So, look to Australia as inspiration for future UK government attitudes and legislation of the internet."
Oh god, please don't! We are a nation of 90% dickheads down here, we can't help you! In fact, we have been fearing idiocies like The Ring Of Steel making its way down here.
Right, so it's just more guesswork bollox and in the meantime there is nothing actually wrong with TrueCrypt.
Nobody has addressed the elephant in the room - has AES256 been compromised? (Correct answer: no, it hasn't). TC is just a file-system handler built around AES256's one-way functions.
So, carry on people, nothing to see here (yet).
Oh and read this:
Don't believe any of the old bollocks and hype about Australians being stand-up, defy-at-all-odds, revolutionaries - none of it was ever true, it was all propaganda, smoke, hot-air and bullshit, always.
As a nation we LOVE to bend over and take it right up the colon from the lowest, highest, or in fact any bidder.