the main message of which is "trust no one but us to tell you the truth".
You might want to check how truthful your favourite media is by looking at https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/
2403 publicly visible posts • joined 29 May 2007
Don't mean to sound like an ad for Car-X, I just used it as an example because I'm happy with this one particular shop near where I live.
I do even better, I use a man who arrives, takes my car from my house to his lockup/... and brings it back when he is done. He knows what he is doing and is not expensive. He does not need to advertise - word of mouth and he is busy.
They might not be able to show me advertising, targetted or not, but knowing who I know helps them build their graph of personal interests and so must help them earn. How much I do not know, but not £0.
I am pissed off at my bank, Nat West, they keep on sending me spam. The latest "Alain fancy winning £10,000 this holiday season? T&Cs apply".
They need to have my email address. I never, as far as I am aware, agreed to receive this stuff, I have replied asking them to stop sending it.
I wonder if the ICO would do anything about this ?
Worries of a dystopian society apart it seems to me that in the not very distant future an AI could not be worse than the current shower in power.
Eg: read the comments from the Covid inquiry "Mr Johnson was "clearly bamboozled" by some of the science." It is worrying quite how unsuited many politicians are in today's scientific age.
Yes: I would not want an AI in No 10, but please can we have some with some real understanding of the world. (I am not going to even start on characteristics such as honesty and working for the common good rather than themselves.)
"reduce the risk of the most serious offences such as child sexual exploitation and abuse or terrorism"
They may catch a few low level reprobates but those who they really want to catch, the big cheeses, will use good encryption, etc, with all the latest security features. If you are doing something that, if caught, will have you eating porridge for years do you really care if you break another law ?
Government must either realise this or they are stupid.
It is all too seductive for me, as a developer, to write tests that check that certain inputs yield the expected outputs.
What is much harder to think about and thus write are tests where the s/ware should fail (eg invalid input, conflicting records, ...). What is wanted is that the system should detect these unwanted situations, complain suitably and then proceed normally to deal with more input. If this is not done you can get disasters like earlier this year when UK air traffic control went TITSUP over a bad flight plan.
The benefits in terms of cost savings to households from knowing the amount of energy they are consuming was pegged at £19.5 billion ($23.6 billion).
So does that mean that energy suppliers make £19.5 B less profit ? ... over what time period - I cannot find a range.
If consumers switch off a device or few - will they chalk up the lekky saved as entirely due to a smart meter ? If a household does not have such a meter - who/what gets the credit ?
Then these devices will draw power, 24 x 7 - how much will that cost the consumer? Is this factored in ?
I have the impression that there is something that we are not being told.
the Tories can have the grid upgrades done by their favourite party donors if that is what it takes to get it done quickly.
Better that they trouser lots of our dosh than we be dead or suffering greatly due to climate change.
Having looked at Sunak's limp wristed approach to dealing with climate change massive corruption might be the only way to get him to do something.
Far better of course would be that he has an epiphany and does the right thing in the right way, but I am losing hope that that might happen.
It is well established that encryption algorithms should be published so that people can try to break them. This is a form of peer review - to a larger set of experts than the ones that you employ. If what you encrypt is valuable to someone the algorithm will be obtained anyway by opponents with deep enough pockets to bribe or blackmail the right people.
Keep the keys/passwords secret of course.
Strength in an encryption system must not rely on secret algorithms.
is the RFC process. It is open, lightweight and fast. This means that new or updated protocols could become known quickly and used quickly.
Contrast this to, eg, the ISO process: large committees, meetings in nice parts of the world and several years before it gets out.
the growing habit of web sites checking the browser and refusing to play if it isn't one of their favoured ones
Simple: if they do that then I go elsewhere. If I spend money elsewhere, their loss.
There are very few places that would cause me problems if they did that, eg my bank.
Would not behaviour like this fall foul of disability legislation, eg refusing to work with a text-to-speech browser ? (Assuming that gov't can be arsed to enforce its own laws).
One also needs to wonder about their technical competence if they are apparently unable to make their web site work cross browser, it is not very hard.
What I have is 10 years old and lasts a week on a charge. From what I see newer ones do not last very long.
This also means that I will have no reception at all when I visit a friend in rural Wales, 3G is bad enough there & 4G is a fantasy!
What is the current best replacement for vanilla privacy sucking android ?