Re: Constant change is here to stay
Thank you. One of my favourites! (Although it was brown cattle in Scotland when I heard it last)
1665 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
There used to be a crime something like "going equipped for burglary". If Plod caught someone out after dark with a crowbar, some lock picks and a burglar mask then that someone was up before the beak. Having a GameBoy that doesn't play games in your backpack, and it turns out that it's an Open Sesame device for car locks should fall into that category, I think.
<<One pre-submit fact check later>>
Yep, still there. Theft Act 1968 S.25 Going equipped for stealing, etc. Attracts 3 years in chokey, but no statutory fine. Oh, and crim has to be caught with the device outside his/her home.
> Official documents like cabinet papers - often 40, 50 and 75 years.
Yes, and for those the secrecy is typically NOT guarded by digital cryptography. The clue is in the word 'papers', a very few copies of which are physically secured (with multiple layers of protection, starting with chaps carrying guns and descending to mechanical security locks on big steel doors).
Do you mean Strowgers, as in Strowger switches?
> Nobody's fault-tree analysis includes "building hit by military drone."
That depends on your line of business. The Pentagon will surely recognize that risk, having had a plane flown into it once, and the resilience being shown by Iranian C&C at the moment suggests that it occurred to them, too.
Yeah, no. There's no such thing as a metric cup. Measurements are either (a) part of the Système Internationale (SI), or (b) promulgated by the Vulture Central Weights and Measures Soviet [1]. In the latter case, the base unit of volume is the EU Standard Grapefruit. It's impossible to have meaningful scientific discourse if you blighters are talking about measuring in cups. Leave that to the lingerie manufacturers.
[1] See the foundational document, by the late and much-missed Lester Haines: So, what's the velocity of a sheep in a vacuum? (2007)
The original purpose of giving operations code names is exactly that of any code: to obscure the planning and objectives from being observed by the enemy. Once someone has told you which military operation has which code name, that purpose is lost, so in this instance they seem to have gone straight for something that Hegseth thought would play well with Fox News bulletins.
Operation Market Garden comes to mind, being the effort to capture the Rhine bridges at Arnhem (1944). Glory naming was not the fashion back then.
> Some people feel that AI writing ... lacks genuine understanding
There's a perfectly good reason for that feeling - because the 'AI' does NOT have a scintilla of understanding. It's like Marvin, who didn't have an enthusiasm for anyone to engage, only in this instance every single one of the LLMs does not have a mechanism even vaguely like understanding.
Someone is not involved, it seems. The line of which you can only see the tops of the letters reads "Not asking for VNC because of an automated install". Maybe it's running off a live USB and has rebooted after a power cut, and defaults to automatic install, 'cos that feels resilient...
I think this is the Anaconda installer, used by RedHat et al. Fedora 42 (Apr 2025) dropped support for VNC, switching to RDP for remote install, because: X11 dependency removal.
But... it's a server, with GUIs to manage the services. The desktop choice seems a very secondary consideration. Plus, (provided that their FreedomBox hardware can cope) anyone with the technical chops to install and use FreedomBox will be able to install KDE from the sources, should they have a wish and need to do so.
As someone retired from the front line of hardware, software and information management using computers, it's fascinating to watch the tectonic forces grinding against one another. On one hand there are the Big Tech companies that have sunk unimaginable amounts of investors' money into developing LLMs, and on the other are the largely un-organized but myriad people who formerly made a good living from wrangling information technology (in its widest sense) into solutions for civilization's progress and benefit. [1]
At this time, it seems as if efforts such as OpenSlop, which is after all only an exercise in free speech, are shouted down because Big Tech and its investors are terrified of someone blundering into the film of the market bubble, and bursting it. To me it looks as if "A.I." is in the position of Wiley Coyote at the cliff edge - it has accelerated over into clear space, and its legs are still making running motions, but shortly there will be the moment where Cartoon Gravity takes over, followed by a splat-shape on the floor of the canyon.
[1] There's also the people who generated adequate solutions for problems we don't have [talking toasters], and bad solutions to problems we do have [see El Reg, passim], but they're just noise.
Just ordering one of these might bring you to the attention of The Authorities, I would have thought. A bit like that oh-so-secure messaging platform that crims were relying on.
Surely it wouldn't be hard to devise a discreet and discrete USB killer, involving a fat capacitor and a usb socket?
To knobble is to place knobbly protuberances upon something. To nobble, on the other hand, is partially to disable something, typically a racehorse or greyhound, so I suspect that's what the indie devs are experiencing. Oh, unless there's a thousand of them and this is a kilo-nobble?
> Isn't that what empires and aristocracies have been doing for centuries?
In other reports it is stated that Qian was planning (as in, making diary entries for her strategy) to become the Queen of a microstate somewhere in Central Europe. This one? I haven't checked back with that other report, sorry.
Multiple upvotes required for parent comment. ^^
This insight is really most valuable. The full and correct answer to "What do you want the program to achieve?" is linguistically EQUIVALENT to the program code. Of course there are always the situations where the problem, completely and unambiguously stated, is impossible or intractable, but they don't crop up too often.
This is at least one of many ways to a copilot-less future.
Downvote away, you knew someone was going to say it!
I'm intrigued and faintly apalled by this statement:
> We are forced to use Copilot at work
In what way, and how is that enforced? I mean, do you get into trouble for writing your own report | recommendation | memo | Post-It Note? I can think of so many dystopian scenarios that I'm not going to query each one explicitly, but I would be interest to know some more detail, either from Mk10 or anyone else being force-fed on AI output.