Heh - that's some seriously dense gas.
Neptune, Uranus and Saturn are all thought to have solid cores, so not an implausible concept.
589 posts • joined 2 Mar 2011
Alastair Reynolds adaptations when?
This x9000, plus Iain M Banks and Peter F Hamilton.
Was at a reading with Banks and Hamilton around the time The Hydrogen Sonata and Great North Road had just been released. During the Q&A, Banks in particular was very hopeful about adaptation doors having been opened by GoT.
I would absolutely *love* to see a talented production team take on the challenge of portraying Hamilton's Prime aliens from Pandora's Star.
science fiction TV history is littered with good stuff (or stuff that showed a lot of potential) that didn't last
Amen to that. 'The 4400' and 'Being Human' are the two that spring immediately to mind whose cancellation saddened me. It's almost not worth mentioning Firefly which is practically a byword for the whole phenomenon.
"Macros and VBA in Office documents are a different class of problem."
Seen some really rather cleverly obfuscated VBA code which spunked a small executable binary to disk byte by byte. Allowed to run on an air-gapped machine, the resultant exe created a small and very tenacious startup entry intended to grab and execute the real payload.
"Interesting, considering for me the killer feature (on other channels like SMS or email) is absolutely nobody being able to tell whether I saw a message or not - disabling "message was opened" replies even if requested is the first thing I do in any email client. Plausible deniability, people. YES, I INSIST."
As always, Mr. Munroe has a strip for that...
So just exactly why is getting a health app to run on a current OS so f**king difficult?
There are other reasons, but in my org the main reason is managed software providers being dicks, and bamboozling the beancounters and execs into forcing IT to "just do what you need to do to make it work".
The IT managers are, as usual, little more than willing messengers.
Take a bow, Atos.
"The Lion and the Unicorn are symbols of the United Kingdom. They are, properly speaking, heraldic supporters appearing in the full Royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom. The lion stands for England and the unicorn for Scotland."
Also worth noting that the unicorn is chained. I'm no student of heraldry, but I think the statement intended there is fairly clear!
Swings and roundabouts...
Catalonia is probably a better comparison for Scotland
Debatable. UK is a union of unitary nations, of which Scotland is one. Catalonia is a technically "autonomous" region of a long-unified Spain. Both have significant independence movements, but politically and legally their situations differ enough that I don't think Catalonia is any better* an example than Martinique.
* Or worse, for that matter.
as a Scotsman this is the first I have heard of us having a "unicorn" as our national beastie
Look on your passport.
Technically it's Scotland's heraldic animal, not the "national" animal, but since we don't really have one of the latter (if you discount the odd wild haggis sighting in cartoons) I think folk have settled on the unicorn. I think it's a brilliant idea.
Also Blade Runner.
Will this include desktop use? My partner has been getting the Play Store autodivert when attempting to use messaging on the mobile site for a couple of days now, but it seems messaging on the desktop site is unaffected (so far at least). I tried to advise her against installing FB bloatware but as with most people she has taken the path of least resistance.
Of course the article may be short on details because FB itself is keeping characteristically mute. A quick Google search tells me they've tried to force mass migration to their Messenger client at least once before, and people didn't like it then either.
I see your point, but unequivocal statements like "the UK's first..." are either true or they're false, so I can't in good geek conscience agree that an argument could be made either way. Nor would I admit to splitting hairs, because the article doesn't say the Clydesdale notes aren't in general circulation (clearly they are - I've bought beer with them ;o) only that the BofE ones would be in future.
If you're not paying for a product you're not a customer, just another product. Did you pay for Windows 10? Nope. You paid for Windows 7/8.
Presumably those paying for new machines with OEM pre-install, or buying the retail version for their own build are somehow magically excluded from your spurious logic?
if the fans are speed managed, it can easily become annoyingly distracting
Most temperature controlled fan headers are so badly implemented and aimed at performance over silence, with little or no hysterisis built in to the controlling logic. The only retail board I ever saw do fan control well was Abit's IP35 Pro. It was outstandingly good. Then they pulled out of the motherboard market.
Anything that requires more than a tiny amount of power should never be fanless. Not because of the heat, but because there is no such thing as a silent coil. Been there and done it umpteen times. A powerful system with a single slow-running fan (lovely broadband noise) beats a fanless system of the same power every damn time.
...but what I have seen makes me feel (a lot) less embarrassed about my own.
Worst was some consultant who'd taken what should've been a simple string padding operation in VBA to get a valid 8-character payroll number and turned it into a multi-line conditional...
If Len(strPayNo) = 1 Then
strPayNo = "E000000" & strPayNo
ElseIf Len(strPayNo) = 2 Then
strPayNo = "E00000" & strPayNo
ElseIf Len(strPayNo) = 3 Then
strPayNo = "E0000" & strPayNo
ElseIf Len(strPayNo) = 4 Then
strPayNo = "E000" & strPayNo
ElseIf Len(strPayNo) = 5 Then
strPayNo = "E00" & strPayNo
ElseIf Len(strPayNo) = 6 Then
strPayNo = "E0" & strPayNo
ElseIf Len(strPayNo) = 7 Then
strPayNo = "E" & strPayNo
Not only had he done this, but he had replicated it EVERYWHERE. That code block appeared something like 140 times. At first I thought he'd cut and pasted it, but then one of the users told me the guy had been charging £1k+ per day for his services (working on site) and I got the sinking certainty that he had just sat there for days on end and typed every single line out by hand.
This was a public sector (NHS) organisation he'd fleeced, and it was just a one-man project for a few weeks. I shudder to think what else is out there in public sector land.
DRM on Streaming? Well, a decent HD camera and 42" HD monitor defeats it.
And what you get is a crap copy with saturated colours, bloom and excessive motion blur, assuming you don't get crazy flicker. Far better (not to mention cheaper and less hassle) capturing video directly from a VM.
No argument with any of that; I'm just making the observation. Plus, given the choice between:
A) Being unable to use an app because it refuses to work with a given set of restricted permissions, then seeking to spend time "reviewing" the app to gripe about said refusal to operate.
B) Finding something else
C) Simply granting the permissions.
...I highly doubt even a small minority of people would choose option A.
Like I say, I'm with you on what apps should and shouldn't be asking for/getting, however the trouble is the (apparent) quid pro quo of having some new shiny game/app/whatever is seemingly enough for them to just hand over control. Devs know this and exploit it, and until more people start to care about their privacy, that state of affairs ain't going to change.
I seem to remember reading also that part of the Google good-developer-guide-thing (probably not an official name) states that you have to intelligently handle lack of permissions come Android 6, not just bomb out totally.
"We're sorry, but you agreed to the EULA, which states this software requires the following permissions, which you have not granted. Please grant the permissions listed in order to continue."
To you and me, that's definitely bombing out, but at the same time it's a perfectly intelligent way to handle it. And more to the point, nobody can force your user to grant permissions, just like nobody can force you to provide a function/service without getting what you want in return for it.
Which is why the move to more granular permission with Android 6.0 is welcome
It's a great idea, but I fear the practice will simply become that any app, when so denied any given permission, will either refuse to operate, or operate in some kind of useless limp mode, until the permission is granted/restored.
Seems unlikely that Google would have any reason to force app devs to give up their user data addiction, especially when it comes to behemoths like Faceache.
This can already be seen happening with Facebook platform apps. FB now permits users some granularity of choice on permission requests, however when you deny one or more requested permissions many apps in return refuse to operate.
Absolutely. Tonight, after months of fighting with XBMC on Windows, I finally ditched MS on the HTPC and installed Kodibuntu. Everything now works as it should. The only pissing about I had to do was temorarily disconnecting the HTPC from the telly and plugging it into a monitor because the TELLY is crap at low res i.e. changing BIOS settings.
The desktop OTOH might take a bit more effort to make the switch!
Just checked after reading this, and there it was, KB3035583, in the optional updates, ticked again. I had previously uninstalled and hidden that update. Will now be keeping an eye on this daily, and watching out for the Upgrade to Windows 10 "optional" update, cheers Reg.
Somewhat annoyingly, I have just sent a freshly-minted W7 laptop out into the wilds of the in-laws' house, taking care to hide 3035583 first. No doubt the next time I see it, it'll be infested with W10.
so they can retain the ability to send Facebook messages on their phone
I investigated this. It turns out there's this thing called the "World Wide Web", and Facebook has a "website" on it, which can be used to send Facebook messages from any browser-enabled mobile, without having to go anywhere near either the main FB app or the FB Messenger app.
the Reg doesn't take over people's lives the way Facebook does
Dunno, for a while there back in 2002-9 (ish) when LP was on top form as a contributor, the Reg did take up a considerable portion of my day*. Defence procurement being one of those things you don't know you're angry about until someone like Lewis comes along, lays it all out for you and goes: "SEE?!"
* Work day, of course.
Salmond was pro-business, backing both Murdoch and Trump (two noted socialists), and the SNP's policies have broadly favoured the middle class rather than the poor.
It was McConnell who sucked up to Trump. Salmond got rid of that bampot in short order after Labour got booted out of Holyrood, and noised him up into the bargain with an offshore windfarm within sight of his precious golf course.
Pure speculation here, but I'm minded to think Murdoch was the one sucking up to Salmond, not the other way round. Salmond probably rues the day he stupidly let the dirty digger get within a hundred feet of him.
They're basically Blairite.
That might've been worthy of consideration as valid criticism if the SNP had ever invaded Iraq. To the best of my knowledge they have never done this.
The FBI has no business pursuing silly crap like someone exposing Emma Watson's personal photos, when somewhere a child is working forced prostitution on American streets.
Ah, the fallacy of relative privation. Sorry, doesn't wash. The mere fact of the high profile nature of this case means it is equally if not more important to deal with than the examples you mention, pour encourager les autres.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020