Re: 256GB for a sign!
Given how often those things blew up, I'd leave it in the bin...
940 posts • joined 18 Aug 2009
Yep. If you've ever bought anything in Duty Free, you've been engaged in tax avoidance, perfectly legal.
If you've brought more than your personal allowance of (say) spirits into the country without declaring it and paying duty then you've engaged in evasion, most definitely not legal.
>Side note: Would any third party even be allowed to sell their own cola-flavoured soft drinks, if Coca-Cola was a new invention under today's IP régime?
Yes, for the same reason that multiple companies can offer cherry flavour drinks - they didn't create the kola nut/tree or the cola genus.
It /is/ highly likely that there would be a lot of litigation along the way driven by greedy idiots in inexplicably high positions in the company, so the legal people would make out like bandits as usual.
Nah, it's ease of use. The stupid people always had a voice, but as long as access to a platform involved employment of double-digit brain cells they either couldn't get in or got distracted by a different shiny.
I would say that the biggest disservice is the "Login using Facebook" button - or equivalent.
I beg to differ with you on one point:
>It's simply not appropriate for a company to pay someone a board-level salary for doing a mid-level-management job.
It's perfectly appropriate to pay skilled staff more than board members in the right situation. Management is a skill set in exactly the same way that IT is, there are zero logical reasons why a very skilled IT person should not be paid more than an unskilled or semi-skilled manager.
The idea that managers have to be paid more than their staff is a completely artificial construct perpetuated by the fact that those making the salary decisions are often incapable of putting their own ego aside.
Many years ago I worked for one of the large consultancies and had to put together a team of SAN engineers (just as SAN usage started to take off) and I was paid ~£20k less than several of the people i my team because that was the going rate. It didn't bother me and fortunately the company understood what they needed to pay to get the staff they wanted.
Not long after that, while working for another large company who took your view, we were unable to even get an applicant for a senior DBA role in two years because they were offering £25-30k under the market rate. I wish this was an isolated incident, but I know from talking to others that it's not and it's *always* someone higher up the food chain saying "I'm not paying someone who works for me more than I'm on".
Overnight is exactly how plugging something into a socket can work today. Most EV/plug in hybrids can be set to only charge at set times *and* in some cases that can be combined with GPS location - so, for example, you can make sure the vehicle only charges overnight when at home, but can charge any time it's plugged in when away from home.
My washing machine and dishwasher have timers, I set them to run overnight on cheap electricity so they finish about the time I get up.
You could even offer people especially cheap power at staggered times to encourage them to set stuff up properly, rather than your solution of overcharging them to behave.
Some problems are not impossible to solve, including the one that figuring out that the 350kW charging system in the article is not likely to be a domestic system - in the same way that the Tesla 120kW chargers aren't.
Don't see why not, a guy near me as a 2003 Jaguar XJ with touch screen in the dashboard that still works and LED tail lights that still work.
Do touch screens and LED lights fail sometimes? Yep, but I don't see how that's significantly different from incandescent lights or mechanical switches to be honest.
In fact, if they don't fail in the first five years (suggesting a build defect), then I'd expect them to be more reliable.
>Interesting question. What can you say to the ICO if you really don't know what data you have collected?
You must know your data sources so you have to make searches of any that could hold data on the subject even if you do not know whether there was any data collected through that source.
It's quite legitimate to say that you didn't search you HR systems for example because if the subject is not an employee then they won't be in there.
It's not legitimate to say that you didn't search the data you got from Facebook because you didn't know if they were in there or not,
>Meanwhile, in the real world, the massive tech investment continues with corporations saying "no we don't give a shit about brexit actually, in fact, it's why we're investing here"
Meanwhile, in the real world, at the time of the vote I was working for a massive tech firm who decided to massively scale back their UK infrastructure and workforce and are considering exiting the UK completely as a direct result of Brexit. I was one of the 10% made redundant last year and I know of former colleagues who are in this year's 10%.
I returned to contracting and right now I'm working for a different massive tech firm who have been - and are doing - exactly the same thing.
I know there are a handful of specific examples about investment in the UK tech industry, but those seem to be split between companies taking a punt on the weak pound and those trying to pick up the business being abandoned by the companies scaling back their UK operations.
In all honesty I'm not seeing a trend towards investment in the UK *at this time* and certainly not massive amounts of investment.
In the end I don't know that the ultimate outcome will make too much difference to me in the short term anyway.
If Brexit goes ahead then there will be a lot of work in the IT sector building new systems that will be required for functions that are currently carried out by the EU, but will have to return to the UK.
If Brexit collapses, then many projects that are currently on-hold pending the outcome will come back to life.
>Despite the fact that, during the referendum campaign, multiple Leavers were at pains to suggest this wouldn't happen?
Because there was no concrete plan for Leave, so the Leave campaign was free to promise everything to everyone and hope to hoover up all of the voters from the hard exit end of the spectrum through to the people who thought that we should have an arrangement like (say) the Swiss.
Clearly it's not possible to please *all* of those people, which is why we are in the place we are now - we had to choose between what we already had and a utopia made up almost entirely in everyone's heads (for the Leave voters).
You can see the faulty reasoning all of the time, if your answer to the question "Has membership of the EU been good for the UK?" is "Yes" or "No", then you're not reasoning properly. You're literally comparing what actually happened to a scenario that only exists in your head, which is a ridiculous thing to do. We don't have access to an alternate reality where the UK didn't join the EU for comparison purposes.
Personally - and I know this isn't a popular idea - I'd like to see a second vote when we know what the deal is, at least that way we're choosing between two defined paths.
>I could go on for days listing reasons but suffice it to say there's a huge list of upsides and absolutely no downsides.
The company I was working for a year ago decided to significantly scale back its UK presence as a direct result of Brexit and over the last year has made 10,000 people redundant (including myself).
If you think there are absolutely no downsides then you aren't paying attention.
Here's a tip: If you can't think of a compelling argument *for* an opposing viewpoint then you don't understand your own position.
The biggest problem with Brexit is that the arguments for it still rely on a made up future that assumes we'll be able to get all of the deals we want with no downsides. Personally, I don't have that level of confidence in the people in charge, I don't know about you.
Here's an idea: Instead of a Netflix subscription, why don't you negotiate with all the studios individually then come back and tell us how much better the new arrangement is in both convenience and value.
Dublin airport is weird, it has no links to rail, light rail or the tram system so you are basically stuck with bus or taxi to get into the city.
Pretty well all of the buses stop around 23.30, so if your flight lands after 23.00 you miss the last of them - and flights come in until around one in the morning.
I've been working there this year, I had to wait over an hour after landing and get an overnight coach that actually goes to Waterford, but happens to stop in Dublin every time I flew in.
They do, however, have loads of parking, so they clearly worked out that people based in Ireland might be using the place to travel overseas, but don't seem to have worked out that overseas visitors will arrive /without/ their cars.
Is that the same "smart money" that's been predicting that for the last ten years?
Markets have *never* worked like that and likely never will. Yes, the bulk of the market will be at the cheaper end, but there's always room for other price points.
If it were even slightly true that people just bought the cheapest thing that is "good enough" then every single new car sold this year would be a Dacia Sandero.
Your "smart money" people sound like they're not very smart at all and they probably don't have any money. Did you meet them down the pub on a Friday night?
Oh, and by all means go and buy a OnePlus any enjoy owning it if that's what *you* want., there's nothing wrong with that choice any more than someone opting to buy at the other end of the spectrum.
(Actually, if you're looking for something good enough that's cheap checkout the Archos range, they start at about £50 - new - on Amazon.)
The UK, Italy, Greece and Spain all voted against it because they have large tourist industries that meant significant drops in profit for their local telecoms providers.
This was all timetabled to come in during 2015, but held up because of these four. I remember being quite surprised and annoyed that my own government were doing it, but at the time all of the operators were busy building out their 4G capability so I did have some sympathy.
That said, I can't say if it was UK government policy because I don't know who had the majority of MEPs at the time. Roger Helmer MEP tabled an amendment to reject the agreement on behalf of UKIP, so that was one party definitely opposed to it; you can do your own research about the others.
>Are these care not all capable of 'ludicrous mode" as well?
No, the performance models have different hardware of some kind to take the additional power flow that's needed and IIRC the lower capacity batteries also can't deliver the current either.
They introduced improvements a few years ago that allowed "Insane mode" and an option to have the parts swapped in older performance cars to enable it.
I guess it's the same as being able to change an ECU map to produce more power from a normal ICU engine or being able to fit a bigger turbo, but to make a 2 litre engine into a 3 litre one is a much bigger job.
Unfortunately, the lack of gender equality in IT isn't something that the unions can easily address.
Last time we hired in my area (a long time ago), we had exactly zero female applicants for two positions, so it's not like we could have even looked at trying to address the mostly male bias in the unit.
By contrast, the last place I worked at had about 35% women and often did have a bit of a mix for job applications. Both are large IT firms.
>The real problem was lazy writers.
Star Trek was quite bad for lazy writing, but to be fair they're far from alone.
Actually, the one that always winds me up the most that seems to have originated in Star Trek, but is now all over Sci-Fi, is solving problems by "just reversing the polarity of X".
Since reversing the polarity translates as "put the batteries in the wrong way" you can at least have some fun by mentally swapping the two phrases to turn the script into a comedy.
"Of course! We can use the tractor beam to push the asteroid away by putting the batteries in the wrong way."
>Anybody in the UK buying a Tesla S from 2 April 2017 and will be paying £310 road tax each year for the first five years
Actually that's not 100% clear. From the VED website: "Cars with a list price in excess of £40,000 will incur a supplement of £310 on their SR for the first 5 years in which a SR is paid.".
The Tesla doesn't pay SR because it's a zero emissions vehicle. Or, strictly speaking, it has an SR of £0. So does that count as paying or not paying?
The attached document looks like it might be a bit clearer and does seem to imply that you would pay the £310, but it's hardly cut and dried.
Also a bit woolly on how things like optional extras are handled. If you buy a car that's £39,995 list, but the opt for an extra that adds £500 to the price, does that tip you over into the supplement? Seems a bit draconian, especially as you're likely to negotiate a discount of a few thousand anyway.
If optional extras aren't considered, then I can see a lot of manufacturers offering engine upgrades and the like as "optional extras".
Start with a BMW 318, optionally upgrade the body, engine and equipment, take delivery of a 750 with an original list price of around £25k and £40k of extras.
>Ask Sir James Dyson if justice can be seen to be done
Can I ask him why he expected the testing to be changed when he couldn't prove that he had a test that gave consistent reproducible results to replace it with instead?
I've just read the ruling, it basically says: "Yes, bag-less cleaners are objectively different and the Commission should consider treating them differently, but your test didn't provide repeatable results from different laboratories".
I'd say that was quite reasonable, TBH.
Oh and the UK leaving the EU wouldn't change things for Dyson's sales in Europe, so you've picked a terrible example there Andrew.
1. I don't fully understand how the European Parliament works either, that's *my* fault, not the fault of the EU. I did, however, vote in the European Elections - unlike 65% of the UK. You're right that it's an open and shut argument, but you're wrong that it's undemocratic. Sometimes when people vote you get results that you /personally/ don't like. Tony Blair, David Cameron, take your pick. The results don't suddenly become undemocratic just because you don't like them or if you didn't bother to vote in the first place.
2. When the choice is between something that people know (but may not like 100%) and an unknown alternative, they do tend towards sticking with the existing situation - exactly like they did with the Scottish referendum. But you're right, we shouldn't boil the frog slowly, we should straight into the mincer.
3. I you really think that's what's going to happen, then don't bother voting at all as it won't make any difference.
>The majority of British people had a better quality of life before we joined the EU.
Absolutely nothing else could have caused a change in quality of life since then?
In 40 years?
I would like to see any facts that support your supposition that the *majority* of British people had a better quality of life 40+ years ago and it was *because* of EU membership that things got worse (if they have).
You do realise that we don't have access to a parallel universe where the UK didn't join the EU so we can compare outcomes, don't you? You're comparing what did happen to a scenario that exists entirely in your imagination, which is clearly complete nonsense.
Because if interest rates go up, people can't afford to borrow as much so they can't afford to pay as much.
Depends where you are in the market, but some segments will see a reduction in demand as result meaning anyone who *needs* to sell may have to accept less, which leads to the perception that equivalent properties are worth less.
You can set the price you want, but if the market doesn't agree with you then you ain't selling. You only have control within market limits, you're deluding yourself if you think you can set whatever price you want. Why do you think that areas with lower demand (like the north of England) have lower prices?
Personally I'd love to be able to sell my place for £100m and then retire to the Bahamas, but I doubt I'd get any takers.
Unfortunately watchOS 2.2 came out in March, so calling it 2.1 might lead to confusion.
They're calling it 3.0 because they've made cosmetic changes to the user interface, performance changes to the main OS and introduced a bunch of new APIs for developers to use. I'd say it was fair to call it a new major release rather than 2.3, because a point release doesn't usually have anything more than half a dozen new features and some bug fixes.
"This imaginary future that I want you to agree with is better than this other imaginary future that I don't want you to agree with."
Could we get a breakdown of the author's previous predictions and accuracy so we can properly gauge the author's ability for any future articles like this, please El Reg?
>No mention of a licence.
You'd better check.
I used to think, but if you dig out your microscope and read the tiny print (can be on the label, booklet or cover) you'll usually find that you have been granted a license for personal use of whatever is on the medium and normally excluding public performance (so a radio station can't just pay £10 for a CD to play on the air as many times as they want, for example).
I must admit, I was quite surprised when I looked into this stuff a few years ago.
Deeper joy. I imagine Samsung are doing this because Apple are rumoured to be working on the same thing and they want to get something out first.
When is Apple's car rumoured to launch? 2020? Expect Samsung's in 2019 and for it to include something technically quite impressive that makes you go "wow", but which is completely useless in the real world - like being able to unlock it by break-dancing or being able to slide your 52" living room TV into the seats to provide rear screen entertainment.
Don't forget that while China is the largest manufacturer of electronics it isn't the only one by a long way. If they suddenly decided to stop supplying the rest of the world there would be shortages and price rises in the short term but long term new plants would be built to take up the demand.
Chip manufacture goes on around the world, before China the big players were in Japan and Taiwan, now you have South Korea to add to that mix. Those are only the biggest players. There's a chip fab plant around five miles from where I live in the UK, for example.
Ramping up capacity is what takes time, these days the clean room environment that's needed takes around four to five years to establish once a plant is built meaning that you're looking at around a six year lead.
"Consumers don't make their decisions based on broadband speed or network coverage or service reliability or customer service - just price - and so the only winning business strategy is to cut costs and prices"
No, they don't, that's quite patently obvious with just a cursory glance at what is available on the market and the number of customers with each supplier. Only some people decide purely on price.
It is true that there are an unhealthy number of business people who believe this rubbish and end up destroying perfectly healthy businesses in the pursuit of the lowest prices.
>For a long time there seemed to be a media consensus that Peter Davison's portrayal was a >disappointing, lightweight followup to Tom Baker that started the show's slow decline in the 80s. It's >interesting that this seems to have changed in the past few years, with far more people taking a >positive view.
I think that is because Tom Baker has such a huge presence, anyone following him (apart from perhaps Brian Blessed) was always going to look really flat in comparisson.
Like many here, I think McCoy was probably one of the better doctors, but had both the worst scripts and production values so was always going to be in trouble.
I think they're pretty good examples that price is not the only factor that matters to people if you're not on an especialy constrained budget.
Why people make the decision to purchase certain products or from certain companies may not be immediately clear, or may not even make much sense if you don't share those views/values/whatever.
> how do you know if they have collected your biometric information?
When the TwatSpanners(TM) in advertising attach cameras to those colourful LED/LCD/Plasma/whatever advertising boards in shopping centres and then match the camera data to the FB data in order to personalise the adverts to you as you walk by.
I guarantee there are people working in that industry right now who have literally no clue why anyone would be against such a thing.
I think we should lobby our respective parliamentary representatives to have "working in advertising" correctly classified as the mental disorder that it is, then we can help these people with their debilatating social problems instead of villifying them.
I've been running Windows 10 under El Capitan with Parallels 10 without any apparent problems, so I'd hope it doesn't magically "break" when the full version of El Capitan ships.
With previous OSX releases I usually found that Parallels wouldn't work, once because of an API change that fundementally broke it, but mostly because something moved or permissions changed - in which case there were often work-arounds.
To be fair that wasn't the only problem they had or daft decision they made, for me the biggest standouts were:
- Launching with minimum memory requirements of 4Mb (yes, Mb!), but really needing 6Mb just after an earthquake took on of the world's larged memory fabrication plants offline causing memory prices to more than quadruple. That's not IBM's fault, just unfortunate.
- Launching without a TCP/IP stack just as the internet was beginning to get traction.
- Trying to charge £95 for the TCP/IP stack when they made it available about a year later.
So just as the home PC market kicked into high gear with machines available around the £600 mark, you needed to spend around £2,000 on a machine that could run OS/2.
They did eventually realise their errors and around late 1996 you could finally get a decent OS/2 setup for around that £600, but by that time Windows 95 was too well established.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020