Posts by diodesign

Furious Stephen Fry blasts 'evil' Reg and 'TW*T' Orlowski

Re: Re: Ah, bless

Rampant Spaniel wins the thread.

C.

Security damn well IS a dirty word, actually

Re: TLS 1.2

The paragraph has been tweaked.

C.

The UK Energy Crisis in 3 simple awareness-raising pictures

Re: Lee D

"and every EU and other country cut off our gas supply, we'd only have a fortnight of gas rather than a couple of months. Which, on the face of it, seems incredibly unlikely"

The country risks running out of stored gas by April 8 based on the fall in its reserves seen since the cold hit at the beginning of March, Reuters calculations show.

Nvidia unveils Minority Report-style face-bot tech

Re: Hmm...

It's just a simple mistake. It was fixed ages ago.

C.

ARM head legs it from core body: CEO Warren East retires

Re: Five Hats

Keyword: mainstream. That's not tech-world mainstream, that's the wider-world mainstream.

C.

Moderation gone mad?

Re: Re: Not allowed to criticize a Reg author?

"Fair enough. Thanks for your time."

Stop posting the same comment over and over in the TV tax thread.

C.

Re: Re: Not allowed to criticize a Reg author?

"Shouldn't you wonder why he attracts them?"

We do know why: it's because he writes things that people disagree with. Shock!

C.

Re: Re: Not allowed to criticize a Reg author?

"Why is it that commentards are allowed to be fairly nasty and impolite to each other, but professional journalists, whom one can reasonably expect to be a bit more thick-skinned than the average person, are beyond politely phrased criticism?"

You guys can do what you like to each other, within the rules. We try to keep discussions civil but that's not always possible when comments are auto-moderated an d thousands are flooding every month. The report button is there if things get out of hand.

As for criticising staff, again: attack the points raised, not the person. There is no point in allowing a thread to descend into baseless personal attacks. That applies to everyone. There's some leeway, I admit; for instance, if a writer has a pop at someone's dress sense then I don't mind a bit of backchat in the comments. It's only fair.

But mouthing off about bias with nothing to back it up just because the writer wrote something you don't like is pointless. Calling for a writer to stop writing about a topic is tantamount to supporting censorship. It won't happen.

In the example of Andrew, you cannot, for instance, accuse him of bias against the BBC when he's heaped praise on its output, investigated how the BBC news website was built into a success story, worked as a producer for the broadcaster, and so on. Criticising certain parts of the gigantic public-funded organisation isn't bias, it's journalism.

I can't enter into any more correspondance about this because a) I'm just repeating myself, b) moderating comments is perhaps 10% of job as a sub-editor, and these headlines won't write themselves.

So to sum up, once again: play the ball - not the man. If you can't grasp that, mate, then I'm not surprised you're getting rejected.

C.

Re: Re: Not allowed to criticize a Reg author?

"I'd be allowed to post about suspicion of bias here?"

As long as you can back it up, fine.

I just don't like meta-discussions getting in the way of on-topic discussions. You may argue that bringing up accusations of bias is on-topic, but these accusations are so wrong the vast majority of the time that I just bin them.

C.

Re: Re: Not allowed to criticize a Reg author?

"Are all posts on his articles delayed because we're not allowed to criticise him?"

No, it's because he attracts the more, er, vigorous of our comment-posting readers who seem to be bent on hijacking threads.

C.

Re: Re: Not allowed to criticize a Reg author?

"aren't we allowed to ask for some balance?"

Drop us an email or post here. Don't ruin threads by tossing in baseless accusations of bias (or worse). I wouldn't turn up at your place of work and wildly accuse you of incompetence to your boss; try not to do it at ours. Please.

C.

Re: Not allowed to criticize a Reg author?

"I've had about 5 posts, generally polite & civil ones, rejected merely for saying things like 'Could El Reg please find someone without an anti-$X bias to cover $X?' Are we not allowed to criticize the authors, even politely?"

I'm sure you were polite and civil, and that's appreciated, but I'm minded to reject comments that, to be blunt, just don't add anything to the conversation. It's not policy to take a writer off a beat just because they upset a few readers; thus, your post is as effective as hanging around outside our office shouting at the tourists.

Please, challenge our articles all you like. Just play the ball, not the man. I don't see the point in turning the comments section into a boring complain-a-thon about certain writers.

C.

Paying a TV tax makes you happy - BBC

Re: Re: Best value?

"El Reg should get someone without an anti-BBC bias"

Writing critically about an organisation isn't bias. Good grief.

C.

Is UK web speech regulated? No.10: Er. We’ll get back to you

Re: Rikkeh

[ this post won't have my Reg badge for various boring reasons ]

"My understanding is that defamation..."

Yes, brilliant. But I'm not talking about defamation. We already have a law for that. It may be harsh but at least it's more or less stable. I'm talking about non-defamatory, non-prejudicial reporting that is suddenly being controlled outside of a court room.

"A vexatious person could bring to Court under the present system"

Yes, indeed. It's a risk we take whenever we publish. But at least courts know when to throw things out for being frivolous; a CFA lawyer will know that too. But this, again, is not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about a regulator that's wildly emerged with the powers to really cock things up as I've previously described.

And, as you say and as Andrew touched upon in the story, the watchdog can grant its own powers. There are many things wrong with all of this, all for the sake of putting Murdoch in a bad mood for a couple of hours.

C.

(PS: you're right about CoCA, although it doesn't negate my point)

Re: Re: Pile of c**p being disseminated by the media

"The form of the regulator is entirely up to the press"

We'll see how that works out. As I understand it, members of the press are excluded right from the start in organising the regulator.

"The regulator is entirely voluntary"

And if you don't sign up, it's pay all costs if you successfully defend a libel case, and face huge damages if you lose. Now that's making an offer you can't refuse.

"the entire middle section of this article has changed"

No, that's overstating the mark somewhat. The first pull-out par in bold quoted the charter when it should have quoted the law; this was fixed up very soon after publication. The point being made wasn't derailed by this accident, but it's obviously a good idea to refer to the correct document.

C.

Re: @diodesign

"The place is known as a court and the person who mades the decision is usually referred to as a judge"

No, you're confusing defamation with non-defamatory reporting. There's no law* that enforces accuracy in articles beyond defamatory statements precisely because outside of defamation, deciding what is true and what isn't is a nightmare. Show me the act of Parliament that makes saying something incorrect but not defamatory unlawful.

Let's say we describe a company's decision as a U-turn. That's not a serious libel. But the company's PR doesn't want it described that way. It's a strategic stroke of genius, they'll say. We'll quote them in the story to that effect. But they want the headline and the copy changed. We refuse. They can't go to court. There's nothing to sue for.

So they go to the regulator. The regulator then decides the truth, the narrative and what can and can't be said. Isn't that chilling? Or will you wait until your free speech is taken away?

(All IMVHO)

C.

* Actually, Contempt of Court Act slaps down inaccurate reporting of an ongoing case if there's a chance of prejudicing a jury. I'll grant you that.

Re: The press have brought this on themselves.

"Given a choice between the government and the press I'd trust the government's honesty and integrity more than the press."

There are no words.

C.

Re: Re: Pile of c**p being disseminated by the media

"How's it going to cock things up?"

Because it will be down to a state-crafted regulator to decide what is true and what isn't. This isn't hyperbole. Putting aside defamation for a second, if you assert a fact or opinion that a PR or politician disagrees with, they'll take it to the regulator. That regulator will then decide what the truth is. Good luck doing that if the fact is based on protected but trusted sources who cannot be disclosed, or if the opinion is contrary to the panel's sensibilities.

We like to call the Dept of Culture, Media and Sport the "Ministry of Fun", and scientists "boffins". I can imagine the corrections on that. And this is the TRIVIAL stuff, let alone proper reporting. Every day we get PRs asking for headlines to be changed, and we resist because it's freedom of speech.

Yet now, the regulator decides what is truth and what is allowable opinion; it's state-licensed publishing by the backdoor. The watchdog will order you to run a correction and an apology if it deems so, and fine you up to £1m or 1% of your revenue.

Now, imagine struggling regional papers being bombarded with complaints from sniping PRs and pushy councillors who want the news told in their way. Imagine online outlets coming under fire from corporations who are already pissed off that you didn't just run the press release as written.

Ironically, the big boys - the media moguls this law was supposed to slap down - can easily afford this and may stick to soft celeb stuff more than they do now just in case. If you hate the press now for being lazy and ineffectual, you're really going to see some serious shit.

It's not automatically the end of the world; I don't think the publishing sector will collapse overnight. The regulator may roll over like the PCC. Everyone may boycott it and take up the ridiculous libel penalties to the ECHR. Paying all court costs even if you win doesn't sound like a fair trial to me.

But even so, yes, it will cock everything up. It will cock up complaints, apologies, legal bills, revenue, revenge, truth, facts, opinion, the works. Because this law is so vague and there are plenty of people with an axe to grind.

All IMHO. Views do not necessarily represent my employers'.

C.

Re: Pile of c**p being disseminated by the media

"Parliament fudged a way to try and stop big newspapers from excercising uncontrolled power"

And completely cocking everything up for the hundreds of national, regional and online outlets that haven't done anything wrong and were well aware of existing laws, which have been used to prosecute tabloid wrongdoing. IMHO.

C.

Re: What about forums on news related web sites?

According to the amendments, comments on articles are not "subject to editorial control" and thus not covered by the regulator. But I could be wrong, or a lawyer could argue it past a judge and make it so anyway. A huge number of comments are not moderated an go live straight away, but some are, ironically, for legal reasons.

This is going to end up as an expensive exercise for some, IMHO. It's a minefield.

C.

Freeview telly channels face £240m-A-YEAR shakedown by Ofcom

Re: There is no incentive if the technology is mandated

"Firstly, there are six national multiplexes, not five. There are five SD multiplexes and one HD. At the moment. "

Yes, you're right. God dammit, I hate it when this sort of thing happens. Can I make another plea for people to drop us an email via the corrections button; if you post in the comments, we may not get time to see it and it'll never get fixed.

C.

Heavily armed dolphins on rampage in Black Sea

Re: FanniM

Please see the update at the end of this article :-)

C.

Best Street View Oopsie EVAR! - May be NSFW, but blurred in the right places...

Re: Classic!

Ha! And not very far from Vulture Central, too.

C.

En Garde! Villagers FIGHT OFF FRENCH INVASION MENACE

Re: Ancient news.

Yes, indeed. I used to live in the area (and visit quite a lot) and switching off roaming is just the obvious thing to do. You can also pick up French radio, zut alors, so I guess this is a multi-spectrum invasion of culture, communications and charges.

I was surprised to see it flare up in the headlines this morning. This article is a story about a story, and sometimes there's nothing wrong with that. Particularly if you can poke a bit of fun.

C.

Submitting posts failing

Re: Re: Submitting posts failing

Thanks a lot - I've passed this thread and other info I've gathered to our tech team.

C.

Re: Re: Submitting posts failing

OK I'm gonna need URLs from anyone affected by this bug.

1. What's the exact URL of the article you wanted to comment on?

2. What's the exact URL of the comment form page you tried to comment on?

Otherwise it's going to be hell triangulating this.

C.

Re: Submitting posts failing

Damn. I've heard from one other user about this, and I hoped it was just their proxy config. Humour me: what browser and proxy server (if any) are you using?

C.

There's cling-ons on the starboard bow! Trekkies' wallets under attack

Re: Why no mention of the DeathStar project

It's been done! http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/02/05/open_source_death_star_on_kickstarter/

C.

BTYahoo email accounts being hacked

Re: BTYahoo email accounts being hacked

Thanks for the comment - we've followed it up with some coverage.

C.

Congratulations, copyright infringers: You are the five per cent

Re: Re: Numbers?

"there are a lot of reasons why a typical freetard might not publicly admit to pirating on a survey"

Indeed - see Kantar's and Ofcom's handwringing over it. But at least they've written up their methods and the reasons why.

C.

Re: Numbers?

"The important details about the data gathered remain unseen"

It's a survey: why would someone downloading Linux ISOs say they were pirating? The report and links to the methods are here:

http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/telecoms-research/online-copyright/w2/report-wave2.pdf

C.

'Seriously Kelly? I may as well call YOU the unelected networks tsar'

Re: No Money?

We'll try to find out exactly where it's going other than being possibly poured straight into the EC soup bowl of cash.

C.

Is there really no such thing as off-topic?

Re: Is there really no such thing as off-topic?

Calm down. You posted an overly snippy comment for a Friday morning. It's not the end of the world.

C.

Android 'splits' into the Good and the lovechild of Bad and Ugly

Re: Code bases...

"I'd be willing to bet I could pull the same trick for iPhone too"

Yeah, let us know how that works out. Andrew is talking about Android and iOS, whereas you're talking about Android and Windows Phone 7.

C.

SimCity 3000

Re: Rush Hour?

"Rush Hour is the SimCity 4 addon"

Thanks for spotting that; the article has been amended.

C.

Banged-up Brit hacker hacks into his OWN PRISON'S 'MAINFRAME'

Re: Hmm...

"Is there any more information available? because I just can't see what's being reported as being accurate."

That's not very nice. The story is accurate TTBOOK. The word mainframe came from Fox during his tribunal hearing.

C.

Getting with the 21st Century

Re: Getting with the 21st Century

"your authors seem to be using their own email accounts to respond to comments"

FWIW staff and selected freelancers use @thereg email addresses. The Ozemail.com.au domain you mentioned does work and is that particular writer's preferred address.

C.

So much noise on WinMob, but Microsoft's silent on lovely WinPhone

Re: Embarassingly naive

"Andrew, I'm shocked that you are only now waking up to the clusterfuck of the Windows 8 release"

Ahem, ahem. I guess you've not seen one of Andrew's previous articles about Windows 8 - in which he described the new OS as "a rather an elaborate kind of torture".

C.

McAfee dumps signatures and proclaims an (almost) end to botnets

"I do wish the moderators here would stop all this personalised bashing of individual posters"

The trouble with deleting comments that bash individuals is that it spirals into a "he started it!" nightmare. The general rule I like to see people follow is "play the ball, not the man". So if people stick to that then things work out.

C.

That Firefox OS mobe: The sorta phone left behind after a mugging

Re: Can I have Andrew's MWC ticket?

I thought it was pretty hilarious.

C.

Nexus 1 put in orbit to prove 'in space, no one can hear you scream'

Re: Re: Scream

"It's not entirely clear from the wording this article"

Apologies - the meaning was slightly lost in the edit: the phone will try to record the screams from its own microphone. I've made that clear in the piece.

C.

Re: Mobile Twitter?

All right, calm down. Worst things have happened at sea. I've fixed the link.

C.

Absent without leave

BOFH returns

He's back! First episode of 2013.

C.

That iPhone 5 review

Re: iOS 6xx Audio Issues

"Why, aside from random posts on forums worldwide, have none of the big tech-geek sites mentioned the issue?"

It's news to me. Anyone else experienced this problem?

C.

Space station 'naut supplies Reg with overhead snap of Vulture Central

Re: AMERICAN perspective

Welcome to the site.

"Vulture Central"

Our logo and mascot is a vulture (see the masthead) and thus Vulture Central is our HQ. A nod to readers who have been us for the past decade or so.

PS: We really do have a stuffed vulture in the office to greet visitors.

C.

Top tools for junior Linux admins

Top tools and tips for junior Linux admins

Our sysadmin blogger Trevor Pott wants your suggestions for utilities, tools, tips, tricks, IRC channels, resources and anything else to ease new Linux administrators into the job of keeping servers running smoothly. Fire away, please!

C.

Apple FINALLY fills gaping Java hole that pwned its own devs

Re: Can someone explain to me ....

"How a hole in the Java software ... is Apples fault???"

It's more than that people accuse Apple of being slow to roll out security patches, such as this one from Oracle. Ultimately, Apple was stung by its own schedule.

C.

Apple and world HACKED by Facebook plunderers

Re: Wouldn't have happened with Windows 8

Great to see someone sticking up for Windows 8. Except in this case, it was a Java 0-day. Or are you saying Win8 can block JVM holes?

C.

Mobe networks bag UK 4G for a steal - £1bn shy of Osborne's £3.5bn

Re: Freudian slip?

No, just an early draft. Everything should be spick-and-span now.

C.