£15bn in advertising revenue was lost
I think that the correct wording must have been lost in translation from German, surely it should have been ''£15bn was saved by companies in useless advertising costs''
2646 publicly visible posts • joined 29 May 2007
This was talked about a couple of times in El-Reg in 2014, one here. The Ministry of Justice is sending 65,000 jobs to India. This is simply stupid:
a) Data protection. A lot of very sensitive information going overseas - what could possibly go wrong ?
b) Loss of skills in the UK, helping another country get skills.
c) Look at the numbers: save "£100m over the next few years" - that means 10 years. So, £10m a year.
The cost - 65,000 jobs[**].
£10m/65k = £154.
So, MoJ is saving £154/year for every job lost to the UK economy. It might save MoJ, but UK Plc loses big time.
An analogy would be: a plumber getting in another plumber to fix his bathroom tap as the other plumber has a B&Q discount card & so can buy the washer more cheaply - the job still ends up costing the householder plumber more.
[**] That is jobs paid for by MoJ - there will be other jobs lost in: infrastructure suppliers, office cleaners, ...
when the IRA set off dozens of bombs. We got on with life without the current brouhaha. Yes: it was occasionally inconvenient and a few people got killed, including an MP (Airey Neave).
We were not terrorised because we did not let it dominate or significantly change our lives.
Today: the recent governments are reacting badly, causing/attempting changes (no liquids on air-planes, snooping, ID cards, ...) It is them who are doing the terrorist's work for them.
I looked up how many incidents in London, remarkable that the IRA was responsible for far, far more in the 70's to 90's than ''Islamic terrorists'' in the last few years.
So: why is the government trying to get us to cower under the kitchen table ?
Sometimes a bit fiddly when I have to give temporary permissions to sites/domains in order to make something specific work.
Easy: I run a different browser with no controls at all. I will use it to see something if tweaking settings seems as if it will take more than a few seconds. After viewing I clear all private data (cookies, etc) and view something else. Not perfect, but easy.
It is the need that I want explained... and please don't bring out the tired rubbish about: paedophiles, terrorists, drug barons and master criminals - we have heard that all before and it does not hold water; yes: they may catch a few low hanging fruit (the simpletons); but the big boys are not going to stop using good encryption just because it becomes illegal - that is even assuming that we are really at real risk from these people or that open-to-government encryption will let them be stopped.
So: why does she want it? She is either stupid or has some other, hidden, purpose.
Yesterday I was teaching Javascript, delegates ran a mix of Apple and MS Windows machines. Someone's PC (running MS Windows) decided to update and was unusable for 1.5 hours. The lady just accepted it - 'it happens'.
How on earth are you supposed to run a business when some of the kit randomly goes on strike ?
They have succeeded in making Assange the story and not what he revealed through Wikileaks.
We seem to have forgotten that this was started when evidence of USA government wrongdoings was published; so standard procedure was activated: discredit the messenger, something that they have done many times before - Bradley Manning for one.
but is often cheaper than screwing up and having to pay the cost of the f**k up.
The problem comes when a bean counter wants to know if a few £k can be shaved off some budget or a marketing manager wants something delivered a couple of weeks earlier - so security is not done properly. After all: you can have a system that appears to work well even if the security is paper thin.
By the time the short cuts come to light: those guilty of forcing the change are forgotten, but just in case the universal 'hacker' bogey man is invoked/blamed.
This is not just a Talk Talk problem. I recently saw some email from https://references.clearviewtr.co.uk/ to someone wanting to rent a house. Login details all in clear text, one email: URL, username, password - this is somewhere where a lot of financial data is entered (bank a/c details, home + work address, ...) just what you would want if you wanted to spoof someone. Management at clearview should be shot.
is what Microsoft says when trying to tell people that Linux is pants. That doesn't seem to have worked here does it ?
So: will Microsoft do the honourable thing and pay consumers for their excess data charges ?
While at it: also pay for people who's broadband limits were blown by them shoving MS Windows 10 at them without asking.
You also need the ability to replace the compiled code that comes on your device with code that you have inspected and compiled. The point is that how can you be sure that the code running in the device corresponds to the source code that you have been given ? - Especially if the likes of NSA/GCHQ are around with laws that can compel vendors to silently subvert their own products.
The ability to extract the installed code and check that you can build something bit wise identical would also be good.
OK: it will not be for everyone (recompiling) but being able to reinstall firmware should not be too hard.
Also: knowing that someone has verified the manufacturer's binaries will reassure the many for who reinstalling is too hard/much-effort.
If this were to ever happen, then NSA/GCHQ will set up organisations to do the recompiling/checking but lie about the results and so give a false sense of security; so it is not as easy as you might imagine.
AFAICR Microsoft, as one of the settlements of one their regulatory run-ins, have to share details of the SMB protocols so unless this settlement expires your scenario seems unlikely.
That is true. But when will they release the spec ? "Sorry guys, we forgot to put this on our web site. This is why Samba has not been working for 4 months." They won't need to do this very often to give the Linux desktop a bad reputation. Do they care if the EU fines them a few hundred million ?
Also have you looked at some of these things ? Not examples of clarity.
If anything was ever going to usher in the Year of the Linux Desktop, having Microsoft basically act like the Mafia demanding protection money to maintain access to one's files would be just that.
And once the use of Linux desktops gets to the magic 15% all sorts of nice things happen:
* hardware vendors need to release specs so that Linux support becomes a no brainer
* software vendors will start to feel the pressure for that Linux port
However: I dread what MS will be able to do once it has all MS Windows machines being updated within a few weeks to their latest release. Consider the following:
* MS quietly release protocol update to SMB (file sharing), all machines are capable of the protocol, but none use it; use older protocols.
* 3 months later: new update, that protocol is now mandatory (excuse is a security flaw in the old protocol); will no longer work with old protocol.
At a stroke any machine using Samba (ie Linux, BSD, ...) cannot do file sharing with MS Windows machines. MS announces that "Linux is broken, come back to Microsoft, it just works"
... would put this kind of kit on a network available to the general public?
It has been known for a long time that SCADA systems tend to have poor security controls; many are ancient having been built in an era before today's world where everything is connected. Plenty of time to address the issues but this has not happened.
So: regard this as a boot up the backside, not just to the vendors but also the users who have been reluctant to invest in upgrades. Granted that upgrading a rail system is not an overnight job.
Hopefully the result will be more secure infrastructure in a few years time.
About 30 years ago at a LUUG (London Unix User Group) meeting in a pub DT asked how an if/else should be formatted. There were 14 of us and 13 different answers; we were all prepared to defend our own style as being the best - all their arguments were wrong since it was obvious that my own style was the only good one.
Many preferences seem to depend on which languages you cut your programming teeth on, how they were laid out.
As regards your examples:
* the opening '{' should be on the line with the 'if', the '}' ends the 'if' the '{' is less important and just makes the if body multi statement.
* there should not be a space after the 'if' - why, in my case, because snobol did not allow it.
For a run of the mill office server, encrypting the important file systems should not really slow it down too much. A quick search finds: Ubuntu extra overhead of 5%, others should not be vastly different. Thus acceptable on a modern server that has more CPUs/cores that you know what to do with.
If you are smart: do not encrypt the file systems needed to get it up & running, then on a reboot you can ssh in and get the encrypted file systems mounted.
In other words the corporates expect to be able to take GPL products for free, make a few changes or incorporate it as part of their own software and sell it on.
Parasites.
If you get something for free don't insist that others have to pay for your tweaked version.
He was arguing about how European governments poke into data. We all agree that that is bad; however the NSA is just as bad.
He ignored limits on corporate use of private data. Here Europe is streets ahead of the USA. In the USA personal data is fair game, a commodity with which to make money. In Europe companies are (in theory at least) restricted as to what they can do with it.
When doing a compare and contrast: do not ignore the bits that do not bolster your point of view.
I went to https://cloudup.com/ with my standard browser set up and all that I saw was 5 links to JavaScript that the NoScript plugin had blocked. Come on guys, at least show a basic page without me having to enable JavaScript - if you do not then I will probably just go elsewhere rather than try to work out what I should enable, indeed what I want to enable.
There are plenty of stories of corrupt government and of the rich being prepared to do anything to stay rich. There seems to be a lot of evidence, I am not a historian or journalist so it is hard for me to verify things like: JFK - 9/11 except to say that much of it I have heard before.
Something worth reading is this: Shock Doctrine and also Shock Doctrine.
It is easy to label as conspiracy theory, but there are plenty of unanswered questions.
Derogatory & belittling attacks on your enemy is silly, the result is that you tend to dismiss them as fools and so not take them seriously. You may not agree with what they are doing (as I do not) but we must understand that they have intelligent people and are thus able confound the best that we can use against them. To assume any less is to leave us wide open.
We must also assume that their top commanders get better advice on secret communications than those lower down.
It also will have zero effect on any criminal with 1/4 ounce of IT knowledge.
Exactly: so it could help to catch small time crims/paedos/terrists - but not the clever, well organised ones - ie this is designed to not catch the people who it is supposedly aimed at.