
Re: Reported to the FBI?
There is a not small, some would say large, difference is knowing it happening and commuting the crime yourself.
344 publicly visible posts • joined 20 Sep 2011
Surely they won't care, after all they did take over a CSAM site, AND THEN RAN IT THEMSELVES FOR A YEAR!
Of course it was for reasons of catching more people, but that doesn't change the fact that they ran the site distributing and accepting new CSAM for that year... Real standup guys, very trustworthy.
1.6billion over 5 years breaks down to 320million a year
considering, oh just pick one at this stage, the state of government finances and reckless spending on myriad other "projects" and "plans" that cost many many millions just to think about and put on paper, not even implementation if they even get that far, I am sure the finger could be readily pointed back at the governemtn for their own "Benefit frauds" upon their own people.
For sure, actual benefit fraud should be tracked and tackeled as a mattoer of course too.
I would imagine a lot of it came down the the old adage: "You will never be fired for buying X"
X here being Intel. They were, were but not currently, seen as the safe bet. They would do what they say they will and not need attention and if they did it was a painless swap.
In the building world it would similar to paying way over the odds for DeWalt or Hilti. Sure there's cheaper just as capable stuff available, but its the support network and assumed ease of warranty that you pay for. You *could* save a lot buying a pile of Aldi grinders or drills, but when they break the support won't be there the same as it would if you just spent more on the big name.
The problem being, if they can't trust it for crew flights its not a backup at all.
And at best its a 6 time thing, more likely 5 or 4 by the time Boeing are done testing live.
They are already on borrowed time, so realistically, its not much of a backup if you have less than a handful of chances at it and currently none of them look very safe or promising.
Sure they didn't kill anyone.
They just burned through billions, for a defective product that is too dangerous to use.
Considering investors want a return on their investment, it would seem odd to reward them for a near complete, multi year, multi billion dollar failure that is likely to result in a scrapped project now, with nothing to gain from it ultimately.
Some asset stripping might be good for them at the moment.
They way over stretched themselves and kept it all under the one name and finances. They even noted this themselves, Optate a perfect example. Intel have no business being in Storage, but it was a growing market... Shame intel got into it after everyone else had optimised their production and they just beat intel over the head for trying to get in on their game.
Intel are a CPU designer and maker, that's what they are good at... Were the best at, but now its falling behind and making mistakes as it takes the focus off CPUs and onto all sorts of misguided side projects just because they had money to burn.
Then the 10nm nation attacked.
They have been in a spin since then. They didn't focus on their core and it hit them hard. Since then its just been Band-Aids on their CPUs to keep them competitive. Pushing clocks with power. But that's very clearly not working anymore. And they noticed, they have been shedding various side companies that they blew cash on while they were riding high rather than investing it in the next generation of CPU production.
Skylake 14nm+++++++ for years. While others were actually advancing.
Should have stuck with the "Tick-Tock" plan and pace.
Because there are UI Devs and art majors that need jobs. Can't just get it right the first time and put yourself out of the lucrative job.
Make a functional but annoying UI and you will have a job forever fixing it. Drag in your art friends to make concepts and you can spin a good sliver of gold for yourself.
"the CP wont go anywhere untill Micro$haft have fully working alterntives and atm, that isnt happening anytime soon."
I would not be so sure about that.
Remember the start menu win8 brought. That was not a fully functional alternaticlve to what we had and they did it any way.
Had to release a whole new is to fix that one, but try to cover it up by calling it 8.1 like it was not a complete overhaul.
I would not for one second put it past them to try removing it at least, before having a month or two of outrage and eventually having to walk it back but not in an easy fashion.
At this stage, what ever Microsoft decide to do, I will reverse with a ddofferent piece of software.
Screw the start menu, screw you, I'll get a program to bring it back.
This is no different. As with all MS OSs, the old version is still in there if you dig deep enough. I remember there still being 3.11 dialogue boxes in 10 if you went far enough. So the options will just be gathered up an repackaged into a control panel again by someone else.
Nuts to the and their ideas about how I should work.
Maybe you lost your imagination, but Lego is still everything you have said.
Just because you have instructions does not mean you have to follow them. And indeed the sets you use as example have set instructions
https://letsbuilditagain.com/instructions/0744/
So it was still a thing you could build and leave as is then, just as it is now.
But just as you could take them apart then, you can now.
And for all the talk of custom pieces, those are still fully compatible with all others sets. You can still use any piece you want to make whatever you want.
So none of your rant made any sense. Unless its self referential that *you* no longer play with Lego. But plenty still do. So this is a you problem.
All that's changed is we have far more choice and can make far more things in far more styles. Nothing has been lost.
Thanks for that, and interesting read, and a very sad end to the entire project. The only flying example was shot at and used to asses shrapnel damage on modern aircraft... Shame.
The only 2 surviving ones are museum pieces that never fully functioned.
Apparently there were around 100 in various states of building planning and ordering, many of which were in assembly and then all destroyed along with the tooling just months after the project was canceled.
I understand why, the company that was the French side of it was absorbed into Airbus, but it is a little galling not to feature both companies names considering it was a joint venture.
Its funny they mention that it does not come with Air France and British Airways stickers though. I saw this set built about a week before this article and asked that exact question to the person showing it too, if it did come with them. Sad it didn't as they were the look.
And further, if they are going to go with the prototype livery, then it really should have the era appropriate company names on the prominent side of the box (Sud Aviation / British Aircraft Corporation), sure put the modern owners in the fine print on the back (Airbus / BAE)
I understand what you are saying but it is a dangerous line to walk.
"Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."
Sure its a simple line but with just a little thought behind it, it becomes a very scary potential reality, one history has proven many times over.
Yup, been having a good chuckle at the people doing a rain dance around the fire and chanting about how bad China could be while ignoring the very real and proven snooping and delving into every corner your your life and data that is happening for sure from the US and less talked about but also happening in Europe, FOR DECADES!
"I'd certainly be far more concerned about what the NSA and all the other TLAs *are 100% confirmed to be doing* do to me *AND* with my data"
Fixed that for you.
For all the jumping up and down, stomping around and pearl clutching about what China *could* be doing, the facts are we have hard evidence that the NSA and many other state sanctioned administrations are absolutely doing right now and have been for a VERY long time.
Always makes me laugh. No it does not absolve China completely, but this madness over them and inherent trust of the USA/Europe is just mind boggling.
Yes it is the buying new things that do the same job and also that the new this have a built in shelf life with batteries that may not be replaceable that I really don't like.
There are headphones from the 40s that can still be used just fine today.
I have both kinds and far more often its easier to use wired ones most of the time.
This should be higher in the article than it is. Its is still a pretty iomportant feature to me and probaly a good few others.
It would have been nice to see something in this price range and reparability to have one, doubly so if there is less focus on dirt and water getting in, no real excuse not to have one.
"MS doesn't even test the file, they couldn't - it's not their code, not even their own hardware being updated."
While it is very evident MS dont test anything before pushing it to users, their software or otherwise, it is not at all hard to catch these things.
In this case it would have taken exactly 1 PC with Linux and Windows installed, get the updates on windows, reboot and oh look a problem that stops the entire PC from booting.
So I do not accept that statement at all, and will go on so far as to say that suggesting they push any software that is passed to them by a "trusted third party" is idiotic to even suggest.
"MS is only doing what they are told: Intel or AMD or Lenovo or ASUS or any other hardware manufacturer is coming to MS and saying, "We want this distributed automatically to our users", and MS is only saying "Fine, will do""
As that would literally open the doors to an email hack, on any given hardware vendor, that then sends malware to the windows update system that then gets auto pushed to every windows PC and compromises both the windows and any other partition on the system as it can start as an officially signed and pushed MS bootkit.
Edit: "The only thing MS did was give access to their Update channel to outside sources...and, I'm sure, if they didn't some government agency, somewhere, would have a fit of 'monopolistic practices'."
But MS having the ability to fully cripple another OS without warning could in no way be construed as 'monopolistic practices'...
I think the main thing that makes people avoid and then give out about these security audits is that it makes them feel and in some cases look.stupid for either getting caught out by what is obvious or being seen forgetting new passwords and having to ask for a reset again. Usually compounded by a general disdain for IT staff even though they keep the place together.
Isaacman said Starship "could very well be the 737 for human spaceflight someday, but it'll certainly be the vehicle that will return humans to the Moon."
Yeah... Maybe don't mention the 737, even if intending to mean the old one that changed passenger air travel, it has unfortunate connections with wanting to land itself aggressively, parts coming off, and poor build quality.
I get the idea, but yeah.