Re: Bob
Perl is perfection. No need to improve it.
C.
3532 publicly visible posts • joined 21 Sep 2011
"Please stop being so clickbaity"
Ah, it was a joke; a sendup of stupid headlines that claim you can make $$$s with one weird trick. Can't you tell it was out of style? Every word was capped up, and it's like no other headline on the front page.
"Jokey headlines - great"
This must be what it feels like to tell a joke on stage and be met with silence.
C.
Actually, Roth contests what ProtonMail suggested - and said he emailed in the vulns.
https://twitter.com/StackSmashing/status/468221482150404096
C.
"It's bizarre that the author is trying to blame Google for this"
Reread the article - it's about Google's reaction to the ruling.
"You can bet that if Google could get away with waiting for a court order every time, they would"
Absolutely, so why isn't Google doing just that? Is it worried if it bats every request away the Euro authorities will get mad and fine it?
This is multibillion-dollar Google. It's not poor ickle Google in a Stanford garage being picked on by horrible nasty internet people, no matter how many cutesy doodles it comes up with.
C.
"Is that documented?"
I believe we tweeted about it - but yes, a friendly top-level chap from the DA-Notice committee (part of the MoD) came around for a chat in the wake of Duncan Campbell's GCHQ coverage. It was to share advice, rather than impose rules or guidelines.
C.
"Guysm can you please stop with the over the top Google hate?"
No, and it's not hate. It's healthy criticism and scrutiny.
Google is the biggest thing on the web; it has near-unlimited power over the day-to-day internet lives of countless millions. Yes, it does a lot of good, but that doesn't give it a free pass. Gigantic corporations need to be kept in check, and that's why we keep the screws turning.
C.
"Is there something missing from the story?"
No, but the whole thing is baffling. It's all there and in the linked-to court documents. Microsoft claimed some of the subdomains use MS protected marks, and that No-IP's service was being used to cause:
"the unlawful intrusion into, infection of, and further illegal conduct involving, the personal computers of innocent persons, thereby causing harm to those persons, Microsoft, and the public at large."
So a judge in Las Vegas thought applying the restraining order, and redirecting the nameservers to MS's DNS systems, was just.
C.
"Journalists reporting / reviewing the Android Wear watches are doing a terrible job so far"
Iain has used the watch for, literally, a day or two. We normally spend a week or longer when preparing a review. As the article says, it's a first look. A review will follow. I'll take your point about the price though and add it in.
C.
"Google are renegotiating contracts for ALL labels."
Yes, but not all labels are treated equally. That's why the indies are upset.
C.
"simply disappearing from this story?"
No comments have been rejected AFAICT ... and we reserve the right to pre-mod comments on certain articles, subjects, authors, etc. Meta-discussion can be safely done in the feedback forums, ta.
C.
"I wonder if Prof Cyborg will deign to publish his results in a peer-reviewed journal"
I hear the results from Saturday will be put into a paper of some sort. Waiting for the university to get back to me. I gather the uni denied the Telegraph access to the transcripts, so this could turn interesting.
C.
I'm hunting for transcripts. In the meantime, this is the sort of level of conversation you can have with the public online version (DDoSed under popularity)
C.
Anonymous router person, email me. cwilliams@theregister.co.uk - PGP public key.
C.
"The '12,000' figure is part of a PR campaign"
Absolutely, IMHO. Google is presumably filing these complaints in /dev/null. Right now, Google wants as much "poor little Google" coverage as it can get – as its brand (in the public's mind) turns from "don't be evil" to "don't unknowingly miss the opportunity to gobble information on everyone".
C.