Posts by localzuk 1098 posts • joined 25 Jul 2011
So, Eskom bought into Oracle's services - a company renowned for its litigious behaviour and sharp licensing, then proceeded to play fast and loose with the licensing?
And now, they're trying to force Oracle to support them for services they haven't properly paid for? Do they realise that Oracle could take them to the cleaners for the blatant license breaches?
The problem being described seems to be that people might hold someone to ransom for their email conduct, but the question should be "what email conduct is ransom-able?"
If someone stole my emails, they wouldn't really have anything to blackmail me for - I don't go around emailing things that are dodgy. There may be some stupid content that others have sent to me in there somewhere, but that's on them for not behaving properly in the first place.
Live by the motto that anything you send is permanent, and you'll be much safer.
Surely, as the UK and USA have equivalent crimes on their lawbooks - the UK Computer Misuse Act and the US's Computer Fraud and Abuse Act have similar punishments - why would the USA want to waste their time with this? The UK govt can prosecute and punish the guy to pretty much the same level as the USA would.
Migrating everyone to new releases takes time. Realistically, for many organisations, they would only have the capability to do this once a year. I know where I work, we don't have time to dedicate to testing a new release every 6 months.
Its why when I look at our stats, most of our clients are on 1803 or 1903. We've only just started rolling out 2004 - but rolling it out to all the old machines will take time, as we prefer to do fresh installs rather than upgrades too.
So, Uber say they manually check the firings, but the question that would show how well the humans doing it understand the reasoning and outputs of the system is - how many of the decisions by the system are rejected by the human part? If every decision is basically rubber stamped by them then that is not really a manual check. Its a box ticking exercise.
@Tom 38 - But that isn't the point of it. It isn't a "get a test because you've been near someone" app. It is a "you've been near someone so you should isolate" app.
People should only be getting a test if they have symptoms. The government have been saying that repeatedly.
Yes, this concept will lead to more people isolating, but in the greater scheme of things it is the right way forward. Isolate for 2 weeks, if no symptoms, you're good to go.
So, yes, you're still being selfish.
How Microsoft seem to be the only cloud provider struggling. Not heard of AWS or Google struggling to scale.
Even down to their productivity suite, I've seen no end of issues with people on Office 365 - Teams being a big issue. Those people using G Suite don't seem to have faced any of those sorts of issues.
A consequence of Microsoft leveraging legacy systems (Exchange, Sharepoint etc...) with fancy modern skins, vs from the ground up built solutions at Google?
I think you may not understand how scientific and medical improvements are made... It is nerds that do that. Mostly in labs, yes, but there's a lot of computing that goes into it all these days. So, yes, the "nerds of the world" are going to rush in and save everyone. That's their job.
Spending your life tiptoeing on eggshells because a phrase *may* offend one group or another is not realistic, nor sensible. Lots of things offend lots of people. The reality is, context and intent always matter - and this wasn't intended to be offensive in either of the ways you or the IP office took it to mean.
Legally, you are correct. Sadly, legality and reality don't always match. What actually would happen is you would stop, as not stopping might cause them to try and detain you by force by making something up. Your only recourse is after the fact. If you have been detained without due cause, you can complain/sue. It is always inadvisable to ignore a police officer telling you to stop.
"When not in use, the Galaxy Z Flip folds in half, with the screen protected from the usual sources of scratches and nicks that are the inevitable byproduct of encounters with keys and coins."
This isn't really true either, courtesy of the rather large gap between the 2 sides when its closed. Could easily have coins or keys slide their way in there.
Why do companies behave like this? What is this gonna cost them, as a percentage of their yearly profit? It'll barely be more than a rounding error realistically. Yet, the goodwill they destroy by behaving like this is worth far more. Why not treat your employees well, and get them working loyally for you?
The issue isn't the authority itself, its the checks and balances, the oversight that is the issue. All such authority should be subject to review and be able to be overruled by other elected officials. So, in the US Congress and the Courts should be able to review it.
"The report argues that competition in the charging connector space has created €14bn of estimated consumer value between 2012 and 2018. Any top-down attempt to enforce a standard, it reckons, would create €1.5bn in estimated consumer harm."
What a mess of a claim this is. What is "consumer value"? Consumers haven't earned €14bn from charging connectors in 6 years. No, what they mean is the consumer has been charged €14bn in this time, and a standardised approach would save €1.5bn.
What does the law say about it? Is there a law in the US requiring Apple to put a backdoor in their phones? No? Then the government should be working with Congress to put such a law in place.
If Congress disagrees? The govt is out of luck, and should move on. Dragging Apple's name through the mud over it doesn't change the law. All it'd actually do is end up with Apple taking the govt to court due to them being lied about by the AG.
"The majority of bank employees are call centre, branch front of house, or HR/other support. None of those people need or want a desktop, just that’s been the legacy heap of junk given to them."
Hang on, what should those people have then? Call center staff? Why would they have anything other than a desktop? It isn't legacy to give them a desktop - its what the job needs.
HR? In my experience, most HR people sit in an office all day. Why would they need something different to a desktop?
Front of house? Most bank branches I've seen have service desks, with security glass over the front. Why would they have anything other than desktops? Not so easy to use an OMR or coin scales if you're hovering about with an iPad...
You are doing the opposite I think - making out that real work is only done on mobile devices and not desktops. The reality is that in the majority of businesses, desktop PCs still rule supreme for working on. Laptops and tablets are often "extra" items as well, and some more modern businesses have swapped desktops for laptops with docks etc... but overall, go into ANY office building and you'll find desktop PCs. Go into your local mechanic workshop, and they'll have a desktop PC at the front for invoicing. Go into your local doctor's surgery, and every office will have a desktop.
We've long known this - whilst the law may apply to the rich, powerful, ministers, prime ministers, spies etc... What actually matters is the consequences.
The reality is that the organisation that would bring any prosecution is controlled by the government - the CPS. They have absolute control over this agency, as part of the executive. If something is determined to be covered by "national security", at the sole view of the Attorney General, who is appointed by the government of the time, then it is entirely up to them whether it goes ahead.
Well, unless someone pays for a private prosecution that is... Ha.
With a majority like the one Boris Johnson has now also, it would be very difficult for anything to stop a change in the law also. So, the Supreme Court's powers are still limited by the government.
I don't get that. Company has a problem with thinking they're crap, so they launch a new business with the same name. Why!? Everyone will just think "eugh, more of the same".
Just like Natwest launching their app only bank "Bó". Great. Nice fresh name (even with the hilarious connotations of BO from the name). But, no, they advertise it as "Bó by Natwest".
Why do they think Natwest, the brand linked to the bank that has major IT outages constantly, would be a great way to advertise this new service? Come, use our new IT only bank...
A potential scenario. You're a vet, out on a farm on a welsh hillside. You vaccinate a bunch of cows. You've done half the herd and head back to the office for the end of the day. Once you get back, your phone connects to wifi and Android goes "ooh, updates" and downloads Chrome 79. You then open the app up, ready to do its sync, but your data is gone.
Beef burgers, pork sausages and dairy milk are animal products.
Last I checked, having a veggie burger doesn't change beef burgers from being beef burgers. Pork sausages still exist and having Linda McCartney Veggie Sausages doesn't change that.
It doesn't damage the "meat" market having those names.
People don't get confused between meat and non-meat burgers/sausages. Saying it is "passing them off" is nonsense. Glamorgan sausages, which don't contain meat, have existed since the 1800s, and people don't confuse them for meat products.
The Register - Independent news and views for the tech community. Part of Situation Publishing
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021
