Or keep the name, but reduce the font: <small>Microsoft</small> to indicate its relative importance these days.
69 posts • joined 5 Nov 2011
Normal practice in the USA for a case like this is for the law firm to absorb most or all of the costs against their expected share (typically 30%) of the eventual payout. This is known as a contingency fee basis. If his law firm is insisting on a pay as you go basis, that's a good indication they don't believe there is a reasonable chance of a large verdict or settlement.
Speaking of settlements, usually once pre-trial maneuvers like the one reported on here have failed, the defendant company will seek to settle. All the lawyers want to settle, the plaintiff's for the certainty of a payout and the defendant to avoid a major business risk. Sometimes the sides will let it go to a trial if they feel they have a potentially decisive argument. But if this actually goes all the way to a jury or judge's final decision, it means one of the parties has decided to overrule their lawyers to prove a point.
Any excuse to link to https://typesetinthefuture.com/2016/06/19/bladerunner/
If you are a fan of Blade Runner, Ridley Scott, typography, design, or just humour in general, please visit.
Details of the ESPER sequence are about midway. Beginning with
After his ineffectual piano playing, Deckard decides that it’s time to study Leon’s photographs in more detail. In doing so, Blade Runner gives us perhaps the Ur Example of popular crime trope the Enhance Button, via the suspiciously amazing ESPER Machine:
This chunky-looking gadget is a voice-controlled photographic enhancer with an almost supernatural ability to follow its controller’s verbal instructions. When Deckard inserts Leon’s photo into the ESPER and asks it to enhance 224 to 176, it diligently enhances 197 to 334 as requested:
When Gene Wilder died in 2016, they did a short re-release of Blazing Saddles in major US cities. I took my then 7-year-old son to see it after a lengthy explanation of satire and the history of US race relations. The latter of which, having grown up in Chicago, he was not fully unaware.
After all that, he still liked it. Especially Mongo and the fart jokes.
The US theatrical release, the VHS, DVD, and streaming releases all include the farting scene. It was only the broadcast TV version (i.e., the US version of the "before the watershed") that was bowdlerized.
However, and oddly from today's point of view, they left all the racist language in the original TV edit. You might think this showed that the TV execs actually understood the point that Mel Brooks was trying to make, but the reality is the FCC had never found the words to be indecent and so they weren't on the broadcasters' censored lists. I remember that they removed Lily Von Shtupp's surname, apparently in an attempt to render the broadcast safe for impressionable young Yiddish speakers.
Of course it won't help if the whole grid is out of capacity. But it should work for the much more common scenario of local shortfalls that require voltage regulation or very short term bridge capacity while power is shunted from another part of the grid. So more of a using your fire extinguishers to put out the fire in your neighbour’s garage kind of thing.
It could even help the whole grid situation if the shortfall is small and it's enough to keep things going for a few minutes until peaker plants can be brought up.
The cost does seem silly high though, at that price it would be more economical to build dedicated grid backup batteries.
Excessive Angle of Attack results in an aerodynamic stall, not an engine stall. An aerodynamic stall means there is not enough airflow over the wings to support flight, so down you go. This normally occurs when the nose of the plane is held too high for the engines to maintain airspeed. A stall is normally a recoverable event as long as you have enough altitude. If the plane is level and center of gravity is where it should be, it's actually a non-issue. The nose will drop and once you speed up a bit from falling, there will be enough airflow over the wing for it to start flying again. The Airbus crash over the south Atlantic a few years ago was caused by the computers putting the plane into an aerodynamic stall (due to faulty incoming data from iced over air pressure ports) which the co-pilot (who had command of the controls once the autopilot shut off) exacerbated by holding the stick back until it was too late to recover.
But this isn't what caused the Max crashes, it was actually an attempt to avoid the above scenario in the first place that did it. The issue on the 737 Max is the engines are mounted further forward than normal. At high power levels (for example during takeoff), this tends to pitch the nose up more than pilots are used to which could eventually result in a stall if allowed to continue. MCAS was designed to counter this by automagically trimming the tail to lower the nose when it detected the nose was too high. In both flights, it appears that a faulty AoA sensor resulted in MCAS repeatedly applying the trim when it wasn't needed. Poor software choices and inadequate training resulted in 2 planes diving into the ground while the crews tried to figure out what was going on.
Note: depending on how many other engines you have, an engine stall means you are either flying a glider or have reduced power. But the plane is still under aerodynamic control. Sully's "Miracle on the Hudson" along with millions of other successful glider and engine out landings tell us that an engine stall is not a death sentence, just an issue to be handled.
Indeed. They gave up on Mr. Stevens and the giant butterfly net though. Instead they made it saltwater corrosion-resistant and pluck them from the sea. Each fairing half has avionics so it knows and can report where it is, thrusters for (presumably) attitude correction and perhaps some guidance and parachutes that allow it to land it fairly gently in the ocean.
Musk tweeted that they are going to reuse them on a Starlink flight this year. Starlink is SpaceX's own planned constellation of mini-sats that will provide global internet access. It's a nice way to demonstrate reusability of the fairings without having to deal with an external customer.
If only that were the case where I live. In the US at least "literally" has the following meaning in descending order of usage:
- adjective to express emphasis, e.g. "literally bonkers"
- indicates exact meaning, usually followed by some version of "I mean this actual thing happened" because people can no longer tell what is meant by the word literal. As in this El Reg headline from a few years back "Apple iOS 7 makes some users literally SICK. As in puking, not upset".
This "feature" of English can result in a confusion over what is really meant. "Jury rigged" and "jerry built" have two precise and different meanings. Jerry built means (meant) shoddily built from the start. Jury rigged means something repaired not with the proper materials and procedures, but with whatever is at hand. Jury rigged does not require that the fix was poorly done. As the original poster notes, some jury rigs last longer than a "proper" repair would.
I assume people who misuse these at least get the "built" versus "rigged" part correct. But what does "jerry rigged" mean? Are they using it to state it was a shoddy fix?
Along the same lines, the transformation of "literally" into an emphasis word with random meaning has meant that English has lost a word for which there is no true synonym.
In case anyone missed the link above, you can check if your passwords appear on any of the lists at https://haveibeenpwned.com/Passwords
As expected, the passwords I use for forum sites (including this one) and other throwaway accounts all have "been seen nn times". Happily the ones I use for sites that hold data that actually matter are fine.
Or maybe they aren't now that the site has linked all my passwords to my IP address. WHAT HAVE I DONE?
Since sometime in the second week of December 2014, the order confirmation has been particularly unhelpful if you have ordered more than 1 item on a personal account. That's when they quit giving a breakdown of the individual items and prices. Now it's just a total, "Thank you for shopping with us. You ordered ____ ..." and __ other items.", and a link that requires a sign-in.
I notice they still give you a complete list on the confirmation e-mail when using an Amazon for Business account.
You are missing a critical point.
There were three pilots (one was the original captain who had been recalled from his rest period when the trouble started). Two of the pilots realized what was going on. And one of those pilots did realize what was happening and made the correct (forward) movement with his joystick to lower the nose. But the other pilot's stick was actually controlling. The Airbus controls are fully fly by wire and give no feedback, including no indication that the pilots are making conflicting inputs. The only way to tell there is a conflict is to actually look over at what the other pilot is doing and everyone was too distracted by the aural warnings and odd data coming from the displays. This was the last link in the chain that doomed the flight.
Here's the last words from the CVR:
02:13:40 (Bonin) “But I’ve had the stick back the whole time!”
02:13:42 (Dubois) “No, no, no… Don’t climb… no, no.”
02:13:43 (Robert) “Descend… Give me the controls… Give me the controls!”
They can still make their megabucks advertising. It's only the "personalised" advertising that would be curtailed. They get premium rates for such ads, but I'm sure they can figure out how to charge enough to keep the electrons flowing for ads based on currently deprecated data like the actual search phrase entered into google or maps.
Let's not make too much of his late interest in philanthropy. The reason he had given $2 billion and had only $20 billion left to give - instead of the $50 billion Mr. Gates has already donated and the $90 billion he has left - is that Mr. Allen spent the decades of his retirement buying the biggest toys and coolest stuff available. This includes multiple megayachts culminating in the 18th largest yacht in the world, complete with 2 submarines, a glass-bottom pool, and a recording studio; private planes including a G650 and the 757 he later re-sold to Donald Trump; the above-mentioned sports teams, plus the Seattle soccer club, which are perhaps the ultimate toy for US billionaires; the usual 10 figure homes in Seattle, Beverly Hills, Mailbu, Manhattan, Hawaii, London, Côte d'Azur, etc. and a private island or 2. He also like to collect things including a billion dollar art collection, enough planes (even a MiG-29) to open one museum, enough guitars and music memorabilia to open another, and enough old computer gear to open a third. He even collected his childhood movie theatre, buying it when it was slated to be torn down and refurbishing it just for the hell of it.
He also dumped a lot of cash over the years into dozens of business projects, but nothing much came out of it. He certainly would have been better off leaving it in Microsoft stock or something passive like an S&P 500 fund.
I'm not blaming him, when I was a kid and read about what he was doing, I thought it was the coolest thing imaginable, except for the lack of supercars. But the appropriate summary bio would be Coder, Microsoft Co-founder, Billionaire Hedonist.
Looks like they've already addressed that:
Google returned to the fray. There will be three options on the consent dialog, a rep explained: 1) Personalised ads 2) Non-personalised ads or 3) Ad free.
"The first two constitute consent to show ads to the user (personalized or non-personalized as the case may be)," explained Google's "Sam".
"The third option is up to you. As previously mentioned, a common use case will be to send the user to the store listing for the premium version of your app."
This makes perfect sense to me. Instead of having to dig through settings menus to turn off ad tracking, you get the option at first run. And, depending on what the app maker decides to offer, you may have a further ad-free paid version. They should, however, list the price of the ad-free version on the consent dialog so the choice is clear.
I do have a cheap Amazon Fire tablet. We bought it for my son when he was 5 and have handed it down to his sister. It does work well if all you need a tablet for is to temporarily distract the little ones. We give it out where their patience runs out in the car or at restaurants. It's especially useful if you have Amazon Prime because they give you versions of some kids' games that have in-app purchasing stripped out and you can download several videos at a time for offline viewing. But it falls apart if you need to go outside Amazon's walled garden. Even after sideloading Google Play, I was unable to get certain apps he needed for school to work. And it suffers from the same lack of granularity in its parental controls that everything else does. For example, you can set a total time limit for all apps, but not individual apps nor can you distinguish between school and entertainment apps.
Any of the commenters above have young children? I have a 3-year-old and an 8-year-old. It's hardly as easy the comments above suggest. When I'm minding the young one, how am I supposed to constantly monitor her older brother? I can't cut off net access, his school requires much of his homework be done through websites or apps, including Google Docs.
I can't tell you how many hours I have spent fiddling with privacy and parental control settings and applications between a chromebook, a tablet and the Xbox One his maternal uncle (and thus my wife) insisted on. And he still constantly finds loopholes. For example, I've cut off his YouTube access on all the devices. So imagine my surprise when I get copied on his e-mail that he has comments on his new video. He was making videos of himself and his sister with the tablet and, thanks to Google's integration of everything, sharing them to YouTube via the camera app.
And, BTW, this isn't about porn that I can just filter away. It's about the complete jerks that populate every corner of the web, from commenters on newspaper websites to popular YouTube stars to how gamers talk to each other. Starting around age 5, kids eat that stuff up. They think it's cool and it clearly affects how they act.
Frankly I would welcome some regulation here. Not of internet content, but requiring that devices offer useful and usable parental controls. For example, the parental controls on standard chromebooks are very limited. Such as you can either allow all apps or none. So if I want him to do school work on a chromebook, I have to allow alll. What is most annoying about this is that the chromebooks that google sells to schools can be tightly configured even down to per app time limits. Why can't they make that software available to parents? And why can't I easily configure an XBox to do something like only play games, allow anyone to play anything E10 and below, while disallowing chat and purchases? And Google needs kids' accounts - ones that let parents whitelist allowable activities. They let me do this with my staff at work so I know they have the capability.
[C]ritically, the plaintiff's own lawyer argued that if the restraining order was not granted, then legally there was unlikely to be a case for a retroactive decision.
Brunn Roysden, acting for the states, described the transition of the IANA contract as "just like the case of a bulldozer about to demolish a historic, unique, important building." The harm, he said, was "imminent and irreparable."
The attorney had to argue "imminent and irreparable harm" as it's a requirement for the granting of an injunction like this. But he is free to now argue the exact opposite - i.e., that the court can order a retroactive invalidation - and these statements can't be used against him. It may seem odd but it's a function of how the US legal system works. Attorneys are advocates, they are expected to provide every remotely reasonable argument on behalf of their clients, even if the arguments are contradictory or mutually exclusive. It is the job of the judge (and jury to the extent applicable) to review each argument in isolation and determine which, if any, have merit.
In Google’s ideal world the curation and content management of the “appified” DSTAC are absent, giving Google users the ability to take what content they want and present it all on YouTube, without having to enter the kind of negotiations for content that everyone else needs to do. Google users can stick the latest hit HBO show into another YouTube channel, and there’s nothing about the show’s creators or HBO can do about it.
This may be what Google wants and even what was in the initial proposal, but these rules have been through the comment period and have been extensively revised.. The rules currently being voted on require bundlers (e.g. cable companies) to give their customers the option of replacing or augmenting the current rented hardware box with apps so they can watch the shows they have paid for on whatever device they own and avoid paying the box rental fee. The crucial point is that the apps would be provided by the bundler. The bundler would still be in control of billing, DRM and providing the content. This rule does not require the cable companies to offer channels a la carte, not does it require them to stream it through any other platform.
If you don't believe me, here's how Forbes describes it:
The cable industry responded with a proposal that, instead of opening up their signals to all comers through APIs, would require operators to implement their own apps on a wide range of device platforms... Functionality of these apps would be limited compared to the functionality available on operators’ own STBs: for example, apps would not support digital video recording (DVR)...
The proposed rule that goes up for a vote on Thursday resembles the cable industry’s proposal, but it includes stricter requirements for app functionality, including DVR. It requires operators to provide subscribers with free apps on “widely deployed platforms, such as Roku, Apple iOS, Windows and Android,”...
Let’s look at the effects that this proposed ruling would have. It would help make up for the appalling lack of competition for video and broadband internet services in the United States by forcing operators to compete with third parties on reception devices. They’d have to offer STBs that are cheaper and easier to use, and they’d have to get creative in thinking of new ways to add value to their devices compared to the Rokus, Apple TVs and Amazon Fire TVs of the world, not to mention Smart TVs, iPads, Google Chromecasts, etc. (High quality end-to-end tech support would be a good starting point.)
Note, the FCC decided to postpone the vote. The sticking point is on technical licensing and oversight issues, not the basic premise of giving an app option to the rental box.
Internetainerpreneur or Representative of the Amalgamated Union of Philosophers, Sages, Luminaries, and other professional thinking persons?
MAJIKTHISE: We’ll go on strike!
VROOMFONDEL: That’s right. You’ll have a national philosopher’s strike on your hands.
DEEP THOUGHT: Who will that inconvenience?
I was working in Minneapolis for a MLS (real estate listings) vendor in the mid-90s while my wife went to graduate school there. Upon her graduation, she got a job in Chicago. Our largest client was in Chicago and we had a 6-person office there to service them, so I asked around and got assigned there for what was supposed to be 90 days to oversee the beta test of our very first client-server application. I was planning on using that time to look for a new job and resigning once the test was done.
But here's the fun part. While I was given an office in Chicago, I still nominally reported to my existing boss for HR purposes, and actually reported to the lead software developer (also in Minnesota) for the duration of the test. While the test was underway, the head of the Chicago office left. The new Chicago lead was told I was reporting to Minneapolis and, since I wasn't on his budget, I became effectively invisible to him. Then my nominal supervisor quit and since there was a temporary hiring freeze, they didn't immediately replace her and HR apparently forgot to assign me to anyone else. So once I wrapped things up on the beta test, I had an office in Chicago and a paycheck, but no job duties and no one to report to.
Meanwhile, I had decided to go to graduate school that autumn which was 6 months away. There wasn't much point in looking for a new job for that short of a time period, so I decided to keep my mouth shut and see how long it would take them to sack me.
They never did. For 6 months, the only actual work I did was helping out the local support desk guy a couple of times a week with questions he couldn't answer. Other than that it was drive in, surf the internet for a few hours, have a long lunch, surf some more and go home. I did a lot of posting on usenet and listservs so I at least sounded busy. To be honest, it got a bit tedious. But I was afraid that if I volunteered to help out the local staff, someone would start asking why I had so much free time.
They already had access to that toolkit. Did you miss the link to the existing contract?
Aug 28, 2013 5:15 pm
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) intends to award, on a sole-source basis, a fixed price purchase order to Cellebrite USA, Inc. 266 Harristown Rd. Ste 105 Glen Rock, NJ 07452.
Cellebrite will provide two Cellebrite USA UFED Touch Ultimate Kits (Logical and Physical Mobile Forensic Solution) for use in Forensic casework.
Market research efforts have indicated that the Cellebrite UFED System is the only hand-held, cellular exploitation device worldwide that requires no PC or associated phone drivers. The system will quickly extract phonebook, pictures, videos, SMS messages, call histories, ESN/IMEI information, and deleted SMS/call histories off the SIM for rapid analysis. Cellebrite supports all major technologies (DMA, CDMA,GSM, IDEN) including, Smartphone operating systems and PDAs (Apple iPhone, Blackberry, Google Android, Microsoft Mobile, Palm and Symbian) for over 95% of all handset models worldwide....
Given this, it certainly does appear that the FBI was using this as a pretext to gain new powers. I'm no Apple fan, but I'm glad they stood up to the pressure.
FWIW, I actually do feel better that law enforcement can unlock encrypted devices in cases like this, where a judge on a non-secret court has reviewed the specific request and determined there is a lawful reason for doing so.
Time Zones and offsets occasionally need to be forgotten. Thanks to a 12-year-old GnuCash bug, if I allow my work computer to use a time zone that has daylight savings time, my transaction dates all shift twice a year. If anyone would like to fix this, here's the bug report: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=137017
"Some $240m from the private sector will be spent on boosting science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) programs in America, President Obama said on Monday."
See the words "private sector"? The title implies, and several of the commenters above state, that this is about US taxpayer money. It's not.
What we have here is a typical White House (not just this administration, all administrations do this) bit of PR fluff that's not actually news. But El Reg recognized the clickbait potential and the "I hate Obama/Government/H-1B"-tards did their usual job of rising blindly to the bait.
Bollocks. "Illegal Immigrant" is not an official status. And there is no such thing as an "official US ID" other than a US passport.
I imagine what he was talking about was that it is possible (and even required) for non-citizens and permanent residents to get a SSN or Taxpayer ID number for various tax purposes. These will include a statement like "Not valid for employment" or "Valid for work only with DHS authorization" (the exact wording changes occasionally).
This is not to say that employers will never hire someone without the proper papers, but it's become much less likely, especially for white collar work and any corp large enough to have an HR department as the DHS has been steadily upping the pressure through workplace audits over the last decade.
These rules are a huge positive for consumers. Consumers require an ISP in order to gain access to internet content. By defining the role of the ISP as a neutral provider of this content, customers have at least a fighting chance to base their decision on an apples to apples comparison of prices, speeds and usage caps.
Naturally, the ISPs hate this. No one wants to be in a commodity industry, where you can only compete on price and service. They would much prefer to play the games that cell phone and cable and satellite TV providers play (in the USA), locking in all but the most determined with proprietary products, bundled products, and lengthy contracts.
The fact that the rules do not disfavor whatever content provider Orlowski currently dislikes is no reason at all to see these rules as anything other than a total win for those of us who both produce and consume internet content. Speaking of producers, and contrary to Orlowski's claims, it's the smaller producers - El Reg included - that had the most to lose if paid prioritization and selective throttling were to become standard. In addition to pushing their proprietary sites, ISPs would be falling all over themselves to provide fast access to the few household names on the web such as Google, Facebook, Netflix and Amazon since no one would sign up for their service if these were lacking. You can bet that every comparison of ISP services would include a table of response times for those sites. It's everything else that would get shifted down the priority list. BTW, I suspect in the long run, the ISPs would actually end up paying the big content providers for fast access rather than the reverse, much the way cable TV providers have to pay up to offer ESPN.
The Model T was far from the first automobile, what made it important (in the USA) was that it was the first that was cheap enough and usable enough to be purchased in large quantities by average families, which set off the massive restructuring of our physical spaces around the automobile.
The Model T of computers were the IBM PC clones. Again, these were the first computers that were cheap enough and usable enough to be purchased in large quantities by average families, which set off the massive restructuring of our informational spaces around the computer.
If I had to choose one particular clone as a best match for the Model T, it would be the Dell (then PC's Limited) Turbo PC. Even better, if you can find one, it'll only set you back a few hundred bucks.
As far as cars go, the Apple 1 is much more like the thousand or so handbuilt cars built by the Ford Motor Company before Mr. Ford developed the Model T.
Hardly surprising when consider those own sites include stuff like Google Search, YouTube, Gmail, Google News, Picasa and Google Maps. It adds up to something like 40% of global page views if the stats from last August's outage were correct - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/08/17/google_outage/
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020