Posts by Kiwi 4368 publicly visible posts • joined 26 Sep 2011
Isn't a primary objective of attending School commonly to make you employable in a better job than if you didn't?
I thought the primary objective of attending public school was to make sure you're so uneducated that you can't get a better job (or at least can't challenge TPTB)...
"That's why opening a text file (document) still gets the machine infected. In 2017."That sounds like complete bullshit.
Jake bet me to it, with a link from MS themselves no less. Guess that means it's not bullshit then?
And why 2017?
Because I'm pretty sure that last month, October 2017, was in 2017!
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/10/10/october_2017_microsoft_windows_patch_tuesday/
But hey, how about this month, is November 2017 in 2017? Or do you think it isn't? Not knowing what year it is considered to be a sign of some significant cognitive impairment. Maybe it's you who's on drugs?
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/11/15/november_patch_tuesday/ - and yes the article refers to Word documents.
The Windows security model is more advanced in pretty much every regard.
Right. That's why opening a text file (document) still gets the machine infected. In 2017.
Bugger. Another hole in the floor... They don't make these bullshit detectors like they used to, or maybe there's just too much crap in your posts even for the most robust system?
"1. Exchange calendaring is dire, apparently unable to cope even with switching to or from summertime."I have yet to see anything better
Go and find a 2yo to give some crayons to. A minute later you'll have something much better than exchange.
The appointment is always in the meeting creator's time zone - and will be automatically adjusted to appear correctly in calendars in any other time zone.
So does everything else I've every played with. Probably because at a guess the appointments are saved in GMT or somesuch and the clients adjust to the time zone they're set to. Like with everything else in decent OS's (not so much on windows though, I've known lots of people to have issues with lack of decent time zone support there...)
and of course the problems and support costs of an OSS based desktop trying to run a full business application suite are of course much higher than under Windows.
Bugger! That's the second bullshit detector burned out this week! And now my landlord's gonna be pissed because that one burned so hot it melted through the floor!
You see youve failed with your first point as it is obviously bollocks, I mean the comment that I was responding to was aparently about "fictional products"
But the post I was responding to was where someone had made it about Windows vs Linux. Wonder who that was?
but going back to the article which is about windows and linux you will see one of the reasons that they are ditching it is user unfamiliarity... after SEVERAL YEARS the users are still struggling with linux.
I guess you missed my point, where I was talking about people who'd been using Windows for years and were still struggling with it, and loved Linux when I switched them because they just found it so much easier to use. And stable. Doesn't break over silly little things, takes seconds to shut down or start up, takes minutes (at most) to update with no forced reboots, and updates when they want. The user interface is stable. They can trust programs they installed yesterday are still installed today, settings are in the same place yesterday, today and tomorrow, with the same interface.
I use Linux as my main system because it's easier. I don't come home from a long day wanting to relax, or get to the office to work (not these days but I've spent most of my life working) only to have to wait for 40+ minutes while Windows does it's sill "please wait while installing updates" (and sometimes "please wait while installing... install failed reverting ... installing agtain... failed again... installing again.. failed[clicked[ you turned it off in desperation after 48 HOURS of this, now the filesystem is stuffed, REINSTALL EVERYTHING MU WHA WHA HA HA HA HA HA HA! - tell me please how is granny supposed to fix or recover from that?)
Older people find Linux easier to use. They find it simple, reliable, and to them it has and maintains an intuitive interface. Icons don't wander around the desktop (at least not IME), stuff does what it says on the tin, it works - and they love that it works and they don't have to be scared of turnign their computer in in case it breaks and they have an expensive repair bill (for some pensioners an extra cup of tea can almost break the bank let alone paying for a tech to make a house call since they're unable to take the machine in to the shop themselves)
Oh, and don't forget most of the world seems to do their stuff on Linux quite happily. Those same users who were alledgedly having problems with Linux on the machine? Most of them use it every day in several devices without giving it a second thought. They press a button and their TV or radio or whatever comes on. Their car starts on cue. They ring their spouse and check movie listings or book a restaurant or whatever, constantly using apps running on Linux to enhance their lives. MS may have the desktop, but Linux has everything else.
I cannot help calling uttermost BS on "We also REPROGRAMMED ALL OF LINUX ..." This baseless claim shows relatively total cluelessness about the structure of operating systems in general and Gnu/Linux in particular.
He's rather consistent, but I'd suggest some weird form of troll.
Or heavy drug user.
Or both maybe.
Clearly the "sudo installer" gave us all a good laugh but he does have a point, Windows is easier to use.
I know a string of older people who will tell you otherwise. None yet over 85, but several over 70, not one of which came from a computing background.
The real problem is fighting perception that there are no real alternatives. Perhaps they should have considered a mixed environment with Linuxes and Windows on a need to use basis...
I've built a few small setups like that - left the secretarial/managers machines with Windows and set up the factory/servers/engineers/whatever with Linux, as needed. If I'd come across a CAD use I would've looked at what they needed and gone with the best choice I could find, yes biased towards Linux but if a Windows solution was more appropriate (interoperability, functionality, whatever) that's what they would've got.
You don't give the secretaries a full CAD suite. You don't give a server a full desktop. You give each machine/user what they need to do their job.
I personally have a problem trying to understand why should I have to choose between going full Windows or full Linux...
I haven't yet - there are a couple of games i sometimes play that I haven't yet got running under Linux (and haven't tried). But I now start Windows less than once per fortnight on average, maybe less than once per month. When I first started with Linux I had it on servers (not sure why I chose it over BSD, probably whichever ISO finished downloading first) and windows as the desktop machine. Eventually I actually put a distro with a full desktop on a machine and started using it, and fell in love with it pdq. My windows use has gradually dropped off and now W7 only exists (outside VM) as a plaything.
Now, when I visit it's for tea, not tech help. Which is a much nicer state of affairs, don't you think?
[waves hand in the air] Oh oh oh teacher! Me me me me! The one where you spend your time locked away from family as their computer gives one stupid fault after another!
I know exactly what you refer to here Mr Jake, as I have the same with my family. I see more of them, and see them more often. I used stress about passing the area and found lots of excuses to drive straight through, rather than spend hours bogged down with a stupid error on a stupid OS.
Instead I visit, we chat, have a coffee, I might do a little bit of tech stuff but it's stuff like showing how to organise bookmarks into folders or setting a new email filter (and as they'd be using the same browser/mail program regardless of OS it's all the same) - 2 minute stuff. Or maybe start the update ball rolling for one oldie who's still afraid to do it despite over a year of no issues (wonder where he learned to fear updates.. was the same OS that taught him to fear computers and the online world, name starts with W...)
I love seeing that little bit of light come back into their eyes as, after installing Linux, these people just find their computers so easy and enjoyable to use. Sadly, I am largely out of oldies to convert. Must find some more...
I'm so sick of reading the stock answers on Windows forums.
You missed the "My computer doesn't boot, doesn't even power on when I push the button" "Oh, just do a system restore"...
(or a number of variants... You know the ones I mean!)
FYI, I support Windows machines all day long for my day job.
Wish I had something stronger than a virtual beer and an offer of a shoulder to cry on...
provides enterprise grade fault tolerance?
Thankfully none. I mean, tolerating faults like fuck-all security that lets malware run rampant on your systems might be fine for some people/orgs, but I'd rather NOT have MS garbage near anything important. You're just asking to have your systems compromised with spyware before you're finished installing their garbage!
2 : Linux as good as it is, is not intuitive for the average user who has worked with windows their entire life.
Well that's clearly rubbish. Anyone who's ever given a computer user (NOT tech, but someone for whom the computer is a utensil) will find that, even if they'd been using the best version of Windows for 90 years they'd still find Linux makes their computer "amazing, I never thought it could be so easy to use". Try giving your older relatives/friends some joy in their life, dump windows from their machines and give them Linux.
3 : The existing support team will not be more familiar with linux over windows.
If you're able to keep your head long enough to support windows, with all it's stupidities and incompatibilities and moving stuff from one version to the next and so on, the only problem you'll have with Linux is trying to work out why you wasted so much of your life supporting that MS stuff. I struggle to find anythign on 10 (thankfully have had very little to do with it),but I can jump into a new version of Linux with a DTE I've never even heard of before and know exactly what is what. (Ok, Q4OS did have one thing that threw me for half a minute or so the other day..Make that 40 seconds...)
4 : As has been discussed over and over again, the TCO inst that different between the two products.
?? En Anglais sil te plait.
Why isn't my favourite Canon photo processing software readily available on Linux whereas both Microsoft and Apple are supported?
TBH, as a lover of Cannon cameras (and have exclusively used them for work and play since I first tried one many years ago), I've never actually installed their processing software. Am I missing much?
That said, I am a strict "via the lens" shooter, I don't edit photos (unless I need a panorama or need something (eg a number plate) to disappear).
Image recognition software has nowhere need reached the levels of the free Picasa.
Which is freely available on Linux (but like with all things google, have a very good and very close look at the licensing terms, in case there's a "by using our software you grant us a perpetual license to use/modify/sell/make derivatives of any photo you let this touch" (IIRC Flickr, the now dead(?) g+, lockedin etc have clauses like that - if you're a business and on LI they now own the rights to your logo (if you put it on there).
Scanning software is a poor imitation of what comes with my printer.
That's odd, what comes with the printer is normally a poor imitation of software.... </troll>
I've never had any problems with the basic software that comes built into Linux. It's able to manage the scanner up to the full resolution of the scanner, and has some nice features for the average home user. If you're buying a much more expensive scanner than a home user earns in a year you might want to spend a bit on software as well, but for most people basic scanning software is easy to use. I'm just talking an elderly friend through sending some insurance documents through to someone else using xsane, an "ancient" Mustek 1200dpi USB1 scanner, and Thunderbird. Because it's easy to use with default settings, this person has found it easy to use, and has for the first time in his life scanned documents (if you don't count faxing), attached them to an email (also a first) and sent them to someone else - stress free (especially for phone support!) and successfully on the first try.
Anyway, hope that helps and maybe one day I should see what software Cannon provides and see if it's useful or not.
[Edit : Didn't know picasa was going the way of the dodo - RE Google's replacemnt : BLOODY CAREFULLY READ THE EULA!!!!!!!!!!!]
When it would have been easiest for me to switch fully to 'nux, a while back ( I was already dual booting) the Outlook issue was the one that kept me back.
I can't recall trying beyond office 2010, but I've never known anyone to have any issues installing Office under Linux. A double-click of the installer, like in Windows, and moments later it's done. I don't know if 365 or other versions since are the same or not. If you have time and inclination to play and don't wish to risk damaging a Linux installation, put it into a VM and give it a whirl.
I had my Outlook calendar synchronised across devices, beautifully and integrated with my email so that it was always visible.
I don't need/want my calendar always visible, but aside from that - I have it in my tablet and on my computers (Linux only though, I don't let W7 touch the net after MS made the updates unsafe), and also share calendars with a friend. Ok, in one respect Thunderbird kinda sucks where it may not always deal with dismissing or snoozing a reminder, but aside from that works fine. He can put in an appt and a moment later it's on my desktop and my tablet.
Filters along the lines of Put emails from x into the management folder, unless the subject was tea money etc. is beyond TB's filters
Better not tell my system that. It has all sorts of filters on subject, sender, recipient(s) and so on. I use a number of them myself. It's quite flexible and easy to set up in that regard (my only outlook filtering experience was with outlook express, and, well, 'nuff said...)
There are email servers, and web-based email clients, but the integrated email/address book/calendering systems are web-based only, and usually not free.
Seems to work well over here. My own server gives me all that and the security of knowing it's immune to >99% of the malware ever written, patches and updates are painless and seamless (and more than once a month), and the speed - even on the slow machine it sits on - is still pretty good (not that I ever get it near CPU max).
Best of all, aside from the couple of hours it took to build, and the leccy, and the few minutes every month to log in and run updates (once or twice a week I log in, run a simple command, let that run in the background and log out - with Linux you can trust that your updates won't break anything and you don't have to reboot just because solitaire got an extra byte added).
For free, I'm pretty sure google et al have all this stuff sorted as well.
They asked Accenture, co-founded by Microsoft, what is better, Microsoft Windows or Linux.Bzzt. Accenture was around more than 20 years before Microsoft existed. Try again.
Funny, I'm sure MS was around earlier than 2009.
"In 1989, Arthur Andersen and Andersen Consulting became separate units of Andersen Worldwide Société Coopérative (AWSC)...."
"On 1 January 2001, Andersen Consulting adopted its current name, "Accenture"."
(from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accenture#Formation_and_early_years)
Oh bugger. Just quoted Wikipedia. Guess my place in hell is now set :(
[Icon for El Reg - please get that bloody captcha fixed! Or rather get rid of clodfool. You're supposed to be a tech site!]
@SG7
I thought you built all your own hardware and wrote all your own software from the ground up?
But despite the stuff in your posts that turn bullshit detectors to overloaded slag, perhaps if you want to claim that you've coded in various Unixes esp Linux you might want to learn a few things about the language you claim, eg that there is NOT an program for installing software named "SUDO"? Even just tried it in my Linux Mint's terminal : "SUDO: command not found"..
Perhaps, if you want us to believe you... Try learnign of what you speak?
Oh, btw, you owe me a new bullshit detector. Please send one to my address forthwith...
... of 30,000 users ...
And
"As everything needed to be developed by ourselves, the city's IT was 10 to 15 years behind market standard. The City of Munich is not an IT developer, but has other major concerns to deal with."
You mean they couldn't find ONE software house willing to take on such a job? They couldn't go to any of the software houses writing their '800 necessary programs' and say "Hey, can you port this to Linux? We have 30,000 users".
Not one?
Hmm.. Something is very rotten in the state of DenmarkGermany.
-->Icon : El Reg, we need something closer to a rotting fish. Or that smells like a rotting fish.. (Picture of Amber Rudd? Some say she's a rotten c......)
Because, of course, it's natual to open an email from a company you have:a) never heard of
b) have never dealt with
c) have no intentions of dealing with
d) that you aren't expecting
I'm guessing your policy is to basically open anything and everything, regardless of if it contains a virus or not - as that's what you have just implied.
Yeah. I know it's weird but sometimes, in some businesess, you have these funny things called customers, and sometimes customers contact you out of the blue because you've not yet dealt with them before.
And sometimes these customers who you've never heard of before send you quotes from other firms to invite you to compete.
A lot of businesses, quite strangely, rely on customers to remain in business. And if you cannot meet your customers needs, they go elsewhere and you go under.
I guess your business never grows eh?
How do you hire staff without checking their CV? Those are usually some form of document.
And then there's the firms and government depts where staff handle hundreds of documents every day. Companies sending in spreadsheets to tax firms/accountants/IRD etc, clients sending in CVs/quotes (car repairs, medical, stuff for clothing for job interviews etc) to welfare agencies, invoices for work done (verify that the work has been done of course) - the person who opens the incoming invoice may never had heard of the firm claiming the payment - some businesses are a bit larger than mom and pop who only deal with the corner grocery store y'know.
Some firms need to be able to open documents that come from people they've not heard of, otherwise they don't get new customers and without new customers they quickly go broke. So, what is needed instead of a (sometimes) silly "don't open all these documents under these myriad conditions which won't catch everything (see Wannacry for a start, plus Iloveyou etc etc etc - all from people they knew and trusted) is a robust system for receiving said files safely.
That means a well-cared for system with decent AV scanning the incoming emails at the server level, so nothing can get through. If LO etc are incompatible with MS's "infect on open" macro, then use them at least to preview a copy of the document (if they have the same or similar flaws you're going to have to rely on incoming scanning), stripping macros (if it can still be done automatically without opening in Word etc), and of course having the receiving machine get lots of backups and able to be killed and restored in a moments notice (like a VM).
Of course we had it easy. We could safely open any document we wanted to without fear of malware, because we did run email scanning at our end as well as decent spam protection, and any documents we opened were opened by the secretary in Libre Office on her Linux machine. On the off chance that any one tried to send malware it would've simply been unable to work at that stage.
Now you've done it! I forsee a future filled with random CAPS in bold italic
What, you mean like Ascot cap, Coif, Do-rag, Bearskin, Academic, Beret, Busby, Ochipok, Cricket, Papakhi, Deerstalker, Toque, Dutch cap, Fez, Karakul, Kepi, Zucchetto, Mao, Beanie, Sailor cap, Caubeen, Tubeteika, Caul, Ushanka, Snapback - to name a few?
I know I know, outta here...
A more accurate headling would be:"It's 2017, and people are STILL opening dodgy attachments despite being explicitly told not to. and why."
I know right? I can't even imagine why people still have word processing software in their businesses. I mean, it's not like staff have to use them to open documents sent by other firms from time to time now is it?
Dunno where you got that idea from.
I'm only skimming some stuff looking for this, but over at "https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2015/05/11/microsoft-edge-building-a-safer-browser/ Microsoft themselves say "But Microsoft Edge has done more than just re-write the rendering engine. " and "Microsoft Edge is a brand new browser..."
Those two alone imply that the browser was re-written (you don't buy a new car by overhauling your old one!), but there's more out there that's said that from what I recall.
I believe that this is one of the reasons why we seem to live in a time where software gets an ever lasting stream of updates and patches. Sometimes it's not because of the programmer, but because of the tools and externals they chose to use.
While that is true, I'd suggest also a couple of other factors - we're more connected and send more stuff to each other for one. 20 years ago only a small % of people were connected, so even if I got you to run a malicious document there's a very good chance your computer had never had a connection outside.
Then you have more of our lives online. Internet banking, paypal accounts etc etc. 20 years ago financial data on a computer was hard to extract, and on the average home computer that was nothing more than the housewife's budgeting spreadsheets. Nowadays there's a potential to find banking or credit card info that can be abused.
Also we have an increasing programming skillset including among blackhats. When everyone thought that Word documents were just data with no way to cause them to run executable code elsewhere in the system, no one bothered to look. Then someone looked, and buffer overruns or other exploits were discovered. Now that the concept is known, anyone can go hunting, and the concept inspires people to come up with new concepts for new vulnerabilities, which when discovered inspire other people to look somewhere else...
And finally the "fuzzing" tools (etc) that can help find bugs are much better than they were just a small few years ago.
TL;DR: many of the bugs were there already, but with our more-connected world there's more chance of remote-execution, and with our vastly improved bug hunting tools they're getting easier to find.
Separate your control systems networks (and they shouldn't be on Wireless - if they are I may not be able to hack in but I could jam) from your nav systems networks, and keep them separate from the public wireless and entertainment stuff.
It may take time and cost to test and start to implement, but what is the cost of paying out compensation to a few hundred families because you didn't do this, and a plane crashed as a result of your failure to fix a suspected-if-not-known security flaw? Hell, next time a plane comes down and someone suggests to a family that maybe someone hacked the plane and caused the crash, what sort of problems will that cause for the specific airline or manufacturer?
And keep the entertainment systems separate from any wifi or internet-connected networks!. Someone might want to do a murder-suicide on a plane load of republicans, which they could achieve by having all the screens show a picture of a couple of Arab men holding hands (a common practice in many mid-eastern countries which has nothing to do with sex,I am told). This would cause at least one of the passengers to go into such a violent rage that they explode, and failing that the rest would go mad rushing around trying to smash everything electronic to make the pictures go away.
Ah, now I see the problem. There's something wrong with your installation of Pale Moon, not UB. This is how it's supposed to look (Firefox 52 ESR)I'll re-install both PM and UB later, once I export/save all my tabs. The one downside I've found to tabbed browsing, you can wind up with a lot of stuff open you wish to keep open!
Purged, reinstalled, fixed. There's a whole row of icons there! Still got the double-tooltip but clicking on the icon makes it's purpose pretty obvious. In fact I had set up a rule which was done largely manually, involving digging a little deeper into the page code using the developer tools (Pale Moon still has that cool 3D mode I've always loved!) to find the correct element (not something a few layers above which changed ID constantly) which looks like it would've been 2 of 3 mouse clicks had I seen the Picker icon there and tried it out!
(Sorry AB+, you've been a great help and opened my eyes to a world of annoyance-free browsing (cept some commentards anyway)
Actually El Reg, a way you could give us an option to "hide" certain commentards - set a div style/ID by the commentards name; we could then use Ublock or other toys to change their specific style or even hide them completely! (and if you've done it, thanks and slap me for not looking deeper into El Reg's page code! :) I'll chuck a request in the forum wishlist.
Ah, now I see the problem. There's something wrong with your installation of Pale Moon, not UB. This is how it's supposed to look (Firefox 52 ESR)
I'll re-install both PM and UB later, once I export/save all my tabs. The one downside I've found to tabbed browsing, you can wind up with a lot of stuff open you wish to keep open!
Just had a look at UB on WF and yeah, looks much the same as in your pictures which makes things a tab more obvious.
Thanks and sorry for the grumbling. Must be my time of the month.. (which these days seems to be 24/7....)
Yes yes, not everybody can drive cars so we need someone walking in front of them waving a red flag yadda yadda yadda yadda.
So give us the choice. Oh wait, those of us who want to use our browsers our way have left FF behind (actually in my case thanks to you personally - thanks again for pointing out waterfox I am finding it much better than FF!).
BTW, the validity of your argument is put in doubt by the sheer fact that IE/Edge have had such a huge portion of the malware yet such a small portion of usership. Also, given some of the stuff like No Script that are there to protect privacy won't initially be there for FF57, well that kinda at least partly kills arguments about security/privacy. Given what NS can protect people from, FF57 will be less secure than FF56 until suitable script blockers are in place.
Seriously? Just change the 3rd party cookie settings if you like. Even better, use an addon like Cookie Autodelete to be better protected then any default setting.
For what % of users is that a reasonable option? How many users have a "fear" of any settings/options menus? How many have been taught, probably thanks to the IE toolbars issues, to avoid addons like the plague unless someone they know installs them for them?
More importantly, Firefox (along with the Tor team) is the *only* browser improving fingerprint resistance.
Odd behaviour though don't you think? More importantly, why does Mozilla think that having such a bad-for-privacy (and even worse for "fingerprint resistance") setting turned on by default is helpful to their goal of stopping browsers being fingerprinted? They could block every mechanism by which Facebook can see my browser details, screen resolution, installed plugins etc - and yet all this is defeated by letting FB set/access their own cookies on my machine when I visit El Reg, or Tentmaker, or the motorbike restoration sites etc.
It's like putting in a 60' high walls, a wide moat with not just man but boat-eating sharks (with frikkin lasers on their heads), a $billion anti-aircraft system, $million/hr armed bouncers on the front door; and having a well-signposted 6-lane tunnel under the moat that leads straight into the main vault.
I appreciate Moz's work towards privacy, but this one setting makes their efforts rather wasted. Easy for you and me to change, but lets see you tell your grandmother to "just change the setting" eh?
Google Chrome is popular because users are pushed into it by every time they visit a Google site.
Don't forget the number of programs that have hidden (under "advanced options") "install google chrome" and "make chrome my default browser" pre-ticked checkboxes.
Some users won't notice. Some will think it's better. Many won't want to go through the perceived effort of ringing someone and asking for help of changing it back (and a lot of us don't exactly help their perception when we do the #rolleyes and "wtf have you broken now" comments with exasperation and sarcasm flooding from our voices).
You're still just arguing that a tool designed for advanced users doesn't accommodate novices. Your original argument was that UB doesn't do a thing that it does. When I point that out your argument is that it's not the right colour? Fine, you don't like the UX, but you're still arguing form over function and to suggest that someone shouldn't use a better product simply because its buttons aren't clear enough for you (the rest of us manage) is completely irrational, which you then compound with your immature attitude.
Right. Because an invisible button is such an obvious thing.
ABP makes settings obvious. It doesn't hide the buttons with the foreground and background colours being the same. You don't have to hunt this stuff with ABP.
Maybe UB is better maybe not. If they'd made the button a different colour to the background, it'd be something I'd have spotted and looked deeper at. But since the button is not visibly there...
If you can't figure out how a button works, then stick to ABP, but you should be aware of its functional limitations.
Not being able to change the settings of a program is a functional limitation. It doesn't matter if the settings menu simply does not exist, or if it's hidden behind an invisible button (which, btw, has 2 tooltips show up when you hover over it - 1 is "ublcok origin" and the other is, well actually I don't know because the ublock tooltip covers it
Now, if this is as logical and easy as you try to claim... I've uploaded a couple of screenshots to https://postimg.org/gallery/lujjyt8c/. Take them, modify them, and show me how the hell anyone is supposed to be able to see that there are icons there and what those icons are for. Browser is Pale Moon 27.6.0 and uBlock is 1.13.8 (I think, not easy to read -slightly lighter grey text on slightly darker grey background). One picture shows the normal extensions page (cf No Script, Ad Block and other extensions that have a preferences or settings button there), the other is a group showing the normal UB icons, the blocked tooltips, and the wonderfully helpful standard (NOT!) right-click options.
If UB can't make a visible icon, I can't be expected to be able to see it. Only though your posts did I even discover that there was anything extra there.
Should I hold my breath while I wait for you to explain how this is reasonable? Thought not.
I have been "figureing out to use buttons" for a long time. Even someone with your level of intelligence should be able to work out the simple logic that if I can post to El Reg, I can probably see and use their buttons. But knowing an invisible button is there for settings then the program has no other visible settings option - how is it that you think it's reasonable for people to know that?
And you clearly didn't read the OP.
You should learn to read what others write before you criticise them. Do you have to work at arguing like you do, or does it come natural to you? Paris, coz, well....
And cycling groups wonder why drivers are resistant to the idea of "automatically assign fault to the driver in a collision" policies.
Interesting. Maritime law basically says "smaller (and thus more maneuverable) gives way to bigger". This, and law of survival, should say "cyclist has most to lose so cyclist must take action to save themselves, and if they don't there's a good chance it was their fault".
When I was a kid a cager knocked me off my bike (she actually lost her license a short while later when putting another kid in hospital). Had I been taking more care of my safety, I would've dismounted before going through that particular intersection, and waited for a safe time to go through, not when I had the right-of-way but when I could get through unharmed. She was wrong, but I could've died.
Cagers, as a group, are idiots. Much like computer users. They do stupid and unpredictable things. Hell, they define stupid! So if you're on 2 wheels, keep an eye out for them and protect your safety. Don't worry about right, worry about life.
Oh. And remember. A large part of your cycling brethren are also computer users, and also rather stupid at times!
You've forgotten to divide by the number of passenger miles. Cars kill 2000/year, roughly, bikes 2/year, roughly. So if there are more than 1000 times as many passenger miles by car than bike, then cars are safer for pedestrians.
Think you missed a trick. Dead person is dead person, doesn't really matter if the vehicle that did it has done 1mile or 100 billion miles.
Someone hit by a bike also likely has a far higher chance of surviving than not.
And ooi how reliable are the stats on bike distances traveled? Not like they have a device on them that measures distances as a normal fitting.
First, some thanks. A while back I asked for a couple of things - stopping the reloading for up/down votes and highlighting the arrow if you have voted a post up or down. Both of these have been implemented and make my time on el Reg a bit more enjoyable and easier to use - if I go from reading a long thread in thread mode to "newest" mode, I can see which posts I've read a bit more quickly (since I vote most posts I read). I'd still love to be able to "remove" a vote, eg I read a post I don't want to vote on but accidentally click the arrow, or I vote in haste and change my mind - would be nice to be able to click on the opposite arrow ONCE to remove the vote and twice to change the vote. But thanks for the changes, they really are very much appreciated.
Now, over at https://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/containing/3347222 I was talking Ublock and a tool it has that lets you easily select various page elements to hide. I understand there's also style manipulating addons for some browsers that would let you set a specific style for certain pages and the elements within (eg (speculating) you could change the red of El Reg's banner to cowshit green or babyspew yellow).
The idea I came up with would be for El Reg to set a div class around each user's posts, based on their names, eg for me you could have :
[div class="post first reply edited kiwi>
[div class="dateline"> [a class="permalink" [.......stuff snipped.......]
[input class="reg_btn" value="Reply" type="submit">
[/form> [/div> [/div>
Or maybe a separate [div class="kiwi"> if could help, even if a wrapper a little deeper in, eg before the "dateline".
By giving a [div>[/div> wrapper around a user's posts, it would then be possible for us to come up with our own way to hide or highlight certain users posts (we're mostly supposed to be techie types after all), through the use of plugins and the like. With Ublock someone could select that "div..kiwi" block and make Ublock forevermore hide my posts, and with some of the style editing plugins they could make my posts stand out in shocking pink, or fade the text a bit so they're less visible.
Enjoy.. I mean, you site coders weren't going to do anything else this weekend but bow to our whims, right? :) (while you're fixing the code - that captcha thing - KILL IT please, I shouldn't be having to go through it every edit, often with it losing the text of the post!)
(an icon that consists of a lightlbulb floating over a steaming pile of bullcrap could be appropriate for this post...)
"who knew the secret codes of the A wash C wash 1 wash all on the rotary mechanical dial."Usually printed on the underside of the washer lid.
Right where you couldn't read it and operate the dial at the same time? Sounds about right.
I know. So bloody hard to remember the setting for the time needed to drop the lid enough to reach the dial, and so much hard work lifting the lid again to re-check if you forget! :)
(OTOH, #1 RealMen(TM) don't read the instructions and #2 most of the time the label has faded to nothing 5 minutes after the 2nd use (well, actually the ink faded in light levels the male eye can detect, while being perfectly visible to the female eye even 30 years later!))
I have yet to see any rational argument that explains *why* having all jobs done by an equally proportionate number of males, females, blacks, whites, eskimos etc. is in principle beneficial.
The issue wasn't having "appropriate proportions", but that people had difficulties getting into jobs for various reasons NOT related to their skills. For a long time well qualified and well-able women could not advance much past the "typing pool" and breaking into senior roles could not be done. This of course led to various pay-parity issues, eg a woman who worked hard, learned her industry etc would never be more than a typist at $20k/yr whereas a much less capable man could become her boss on $150k/a. Women who actually wanted to get into other roles (construction. mechanics, physics and so forth) would find they often got laughed out of the interview room. Same goes for blacks, jews, gays etc etc etc (not equating these btw, before anyone takes offence) - black people were often treated as being a lower class of human, sometimes even more like a despised animal.
The idea behind the quotas was to force companies to bring in people from other sexes/races/sexualities/beliefs etc. Unfortunately while some things have improved, there's still a lot of odd issues (eg still often pay rate gaps between people of comparable skill and length of service, largely based on gender), and this tokenism won't help much any more.
Hire those who want to work for you, pay them what they earn, and if you can make your work more interesting to those who normally wouldn't be then do so, else forget about it. Pay more for more work, less for less work, more for more skill, less for less skill, same for same work and same skill. Don't pay me less because you think I'm gay and somehow feel threatened, pay me less if I skive off more often, get sick more often etc, pay me more if I spend more time at work and am more productive.
I have also not seen any huge outcry about the fact that AFAICS there are far more men filling the roles of dustbin collector and street sweeper than there are women.
Oh yeah, demands for "more X in Y" only come about for the "glamorous" jobs. But Shhhh! You're not supposed to talk about that!
Seriously, your first point "Most women don't want to work in tech" may be correct, although I'd prefer to see some stats before stating it categorically, but your second "They largely go for hairdressing and beauty, reception and book keeping work, nursing, teaching, etc." is just a stereotype based on your limited experience.
There's an easy way to deal with that. Go to the ladies you know, and (politely) ask them what sort of work they'd prefer to do and why.
If you know women enough, you'll find a lot want to go into part-time work to increase "work/home/life balances", you'll find some who go for "traditional female roles" because they don't wish to put up with perceived1 issues in male-dominated roles.
You'll find there's a number of reasons, but mostly they fall into "women just don't want to do those roles", and much of that is not because of issues around "male dominance" but simply that the type of work does not interest them.
Sometimes stereotypes exist for a good reason. A large number of beneficiaries are lazy and don't want to work, a large number of homeless people are alcoholics and/or have mental health issues, a large number of women don't want to work in construction, a large number of men don't want to become princesses (despite the number we have in world politics and social media forums these days!)
Oh, and until you actually do something like this, your experience (in this area at least) is more limited than Tigra 07's..
1 Not all of these issues are as bad as some think, and not all are as good as some think, and sometimes the issues they expect (eg physically hard work than they can do)2 aren't realistic, but other issues they never considered (sexual harassment, stupid office politics) might be worse than they imagined.
2 See a lady when she makes the move from city folk to farmer('s wife) - see in her first weeks how she fears even some of the smaller animals, how even a week-old calf can scare her. See her a few years later when she puts an aggressive bull in its place without giving a thought to the size/strength disparity, and simply how the bull knows it'd better hurry up and damned well do what it's been told!
From the headline, it sounded like iPhone X would be completely inoperable in slightly cold weather. But the admission half-way down:"After several seconds the screen will become fully responsive again."
Right. Because after spending nearly $3k on a phone it's perfectly acceptable for the bloody thing not to work after a change of environment. Another area my $20 dumbphone outperforms the crapple (when they stop making crap products, they stop getting called "crapple" - don't like the name "crapple" then get them to make non-crap products!)
Before that though, the inclusion of your typical cliche "idiot-tax". Oh, all those other profit-making companies like Samsung are so noble - as if!
When people defend behaviour like this, well, they deserve to at least be called idiots.
And at least the Samsung phones work, and generally have far more features for far less cost.
Technically, it's for 50% of the world, but the Tropics and a fair bit north won't be too affected by temperature drops. The southern hemisphere will see the temperature rise as they're heading into summer.
#1 "Much of" does not mean "all of" or necessarily even "most of". "What did you do at work today hon?" "Well, much of the time I spent waiting for IT to get the damned network back up" - could mean "hon" had a 10 minute or 7hr outage.
#2 Much of the world's population is in the Northern Hemisphere, which is heading into Winter. Much of the Southern Hemisphere is ocean, as has been pointed out here.
#3 If you were to visit where I live, you'd be a little worried that we're not going to see summer this year - couple of weeks out and we've got a cold snap that has people using heaters, lighting fires inside etc when we should be out enjoying the weather. There is a significant risk of brass monkeys losing their marbles.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
