Re: Your PC is not a typewriter
Just to stir things up even more, I believe the original title was "The Mac is not a typewriter".
196 posts • joined 20 May 2009
"just remember who created plod Scotland and their "overseers" (still stripped of their powers IIRC) Scottish Police Authority (and lost their powers due to failing to do any oversight and just giving Plod Scotland EVERYTHING they wanted and then some.......oh yes...it was.....the SNP....."
I recall there were only about six votes against the bill to create Police Scotland. I think all parties played a part. It was only after the police started raiding strip clubs in Edinburgh that we woke up to the consequences.
It's a bit of a giveaway if your malware opens with the question. "ALLOW SPI TO CONTROL YOUR NETWORK?"
I thought the same initially. But those dialogs appear in the context of another installation, so I guess there is the temptation to just follow the flow. (There's something about those dialogs that implies that if you say "no", the software won't work. And we're sometimes just too tired to think about what we're doing. There should be some info about the consequences of saying "no". )
I generally use a Mac without anti-virus software these days just to annoy Reg journalists.
It seems he's not using a passcode check function but a keyboard input function, i.e. simulating typing from the keyboard. While that function is running, apparently the counter/data-erase behaviour won't run. The video shows it behaving as if data is being manually entered. It's very slow - a few seconds per attempt.
Why can't it 'fail to scan properly', or 'fail properly to scan'?"
You're second example changes the meaning by having 'properly' modify the verb 'fail'.
In this case there are two infinitive verbs (scan and redirect) sharing the same 'to' and the same object. I'm assuming the author's intention was for 'properly' to modify both of those verbs. So something like ' fails to scan properly and fails to redirect properly...' But that would separate the object from the verbs making it difficult to follow. As we all know that parentheses can get us out of all kinds of problems, maybe the following is better:
"Because the camera fails to properly (scan and redirect) URLs from QR codes,..."
"Because the camera fails to (scan and redirect) URLs properly from QR codes,..."
(I don't really care about grammar rules, as long as things can be understood without too much effort.)
"Anyone extradited on a EAW cannot be further extradited without the permission of the original country."
Well that's nice to know. But I don't remember that bit of info being brought up when I asked a similar question when this fiasco started. Forgive me if I have doubts about the accuracy of your statement. Can you point me to the relevant law?
Assange may be a tosser, but he seems to get more flippant coverage here than other tossers. Why do I get the impression Assange has shagged one of the El Reg staff's girlfriends?
"he's far more likely to get extradited from the UK to the US than if he had gone to Sweden"
Do you have any good reason to suppose that? I think both the UK and Sweden have handled this badly. The UK for not requiring assurances from Sweden that he wouldn't be extradited to the USA. Sweden for not providing such assurances.
When they come for the tossers, maybe we should all speak out.
I'm guessing architects get such requests all the time. They're perhaps a little luckier in that they can whip up a quick sketch to show some ideas, and hopefully they can produce an agreed design that forms the basis of their contract. And all this before a brick is laid. In my experience, we don't have that luxury with software development. We need to build some software first before we can test it out on some real data. And if you work in education like me, you can be pretty sure that the first real data you run it against looks nothing like the sample data you were provided with three months earlier.
"It tends to prove the earlier comment that there are more Nazis here than in Germany nowadays"
Not just nowadays perhaps? I've often thought that the revulsion we Brits express at the Nazi atrocities is really a kind of relief. We know it could just as easily have happened here.
I have a German friend of my own age who likes to be updated weekly on whether Kraut or Hun is the current term of reference.
Taisei is a large construction company. I'm guessing this is either a division or subsidiary.
I have one fond memory of teaching English to structural engineers at this company in the early 80s. Their head office is one of the large skyscrapers in the Shinjuku district of Tokyo. When it was built in the 70s, there was much fanfare about how it was made earthquake proof. But these guy told me that one of the engineers had redone the calculations, and although they thought the main structure was still safe, there were doubts whether the cladding (window panels) would stay attached during a severe earthquake. So they very kindly offered the very nice window-side office space to the HR staff and other suited types. Meanwhile, they moved as far from the windows as they could.
Instead of firing staff, they might think of piping in fibre, and giving the staff a headset so they could do the same job as those in the call centre 1000 miles away and still be around to help everyone's gran, and 'other stuff'. Why drive to a far-away call centre for work when you could pop down the local branch, which probably has a pub next door.
If we have anti-matter, is the notion of anti-space (or anti-spacetime) feasible? I.e. the space that anti-matter had a preference for when it was created. A bit like men's and women's toilets perhaps - there is general preference for one or the other, but occasionally someone is in the wrong place.
"I can can tell you that Agile / Scrum / DevOps *can* work"
I was reminded of a couple of stories. (I'm past my fifties, but only entered software development seriously after I was 40.)
One story concerns the idea that "anything can work". It was prompted by a senior engineer at a Japanese steel company in the early 80s. At the time, Total Quality Control was the thing (Deming Prize, etc.). He frequently had to entertain visiting groups from the United States who wanted to pin down the the proper way to conduct TQC. He was badgered with questions about which method of TQC was best. He told me that it didn't matter which method you chose, just so long as you had a method, generally stuck to it, but had some notion of your objectives so you could break the rules when necessary.
Another story concerns the teaching profession, again in the 80s, when the notion of "Student Centered Learning" was introduced at a conference I attended. It seemed to many attendees that various "youngsters" were trying to formalize something that was taken as normal good practice among experienced teachers. And there was that dread feeling that by giving it capital letters , it was already doomed. (Another poster hinted at a difference between agile and Agile.)
I've enjoyed reading the comments here. I do wonder sometimes whether the different opinions are based around the different tasks we do and also our various backgrounds. Creating reporting applications for educational achievement and creating controllers for industrial machinery seem worlds apart to me.
This article isn't written for people who have avoided the bug. It's written for people hit by the bug who want to know WTF is going on. And check the link - Apple admits there is a problem.
But not so helpful for people like me who are wondering whether to advise others to update or not.
Also, ppl saying their gear works - are you using the Outlook app? That app is crippled
That wasn't made clear in the article, which seemed to focus on server compatibility. And now I'm left wondering if the problem only occurs when using the Outlook app.
Apple kicked off the trash in the corner trend in 1983, with an easily accessible icon for storing junk on its Lisa computer.
I didn't have a Lisa. But my failing memory is that the trash can on my first mac (an SE in 1987, System 6.0.x) didn't store anything. It either trashed files or ejected disks. Am I wrong about that?
In the late 80s, an English language newspaper in Japan published an obituary for the Emperor Hirohito, who was ill at the time. I remember reading it on my morning break and wondering what the folk in the news office would be doing right then.
Sorry, but I don't think twattery has anything to do with the law. I'm not breaking any law if I refuse to answer my wife's questions, but something tells me I ought to.
The article says Mitchell refused to answer an unsworn constable's questions. I've no idea about the circumstances or the questions. Perhaps the constable was a twat or perhaps he or she was new and nervous and/or Mitchell was behaving like an idiot and/or whatever. Not answering questions might seem a bit childish if the questions were reasonable and answering them would have made the police officer's life easier. (Then we wouldn't have to have this discussion.)
I accept that perhaps he was treated wrongly. But as the article seems to be judging the police, doesn't the innocent until proven guilty argument lie with them?
Fourteen other military passengers aboard the Voyager – a militarised version of the A330 airliner, fitted with air-to-air refuelling equipment – were so badly injured or shaken up by the incident that they were unable to continue to Afghanistan, where they were due to deploy on military operations.
At school, we used to go to some lengths to get off things such as cross country running. But this is taking things to a different level.
"If you have single points of failure you deserve everything you get."
Are you suggesting that multiple points of failure are better? Maybe I'm being pedantic, but I've never quite understood the expression. I've had to deal with people who wanted to put part of our system on AWS and another part on Azure to avoid "a single point of failure". That the two parts are required for the system to operate and thus the chances of the system being down would increase didn't seem to cross people's minds.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020