Posts by Antonymous Coward 344 publicly visible posts • joined 6 Jul 2013
Calm down chaps! Methinks you're both right!...
After all, Canadians are a subset of Americans. Just as Mexicans, Panamanians, Venezuelans, Cubans, Peruvians, the poor stateless Puerto Ricans, Guatemalans, Yanks, etc. are also "a subset of Americans". Perhaps OP is a supporter of one of the Canadian contributions to Americana like "American football" and therefore understands the term correctly.
> Care to qualify your statement?
Censorship is ON for all comments. There's conspicuous inaccuracy/bias apparent in the "review" (as you'd expect in an MS piece from AO) yet the usually sharp-eyed "moderated" commentards appear not to have picked up on any of them. The commentary is usually quick to redress any imbalance but there it seems every bit as lop-sided as the "review". The whole thing has a disturbing air of Stepford about it. I wrote an unsympathetic comment which *did* percolate through eventually - so I haven't lost all faith but it was only a response to a trivial thread by fellow commentards. I might have a suitably cynical crack at prodding some of the more glaring flaws in the actual "review" if I get some time mañana... If I'm disappeared, you'll know what happened! ;o)
At this scale a modern 5mp sensor would almost certainly be BETTER!!!!!one!! More megapixels is just a marketing scam for morons. Despite the (newly invented by Nokia - according to the ad!) on chip pixel binning. The reason being: Each subpixel requires on sensor logic and circuitry... for a given generation of sensor that ancillary silicon will be a set scale, so, the more pixels you've stuffed into you headline grabbing sensor, the more of it's area you've WASTED on non-photosensitive infrastructure... and the more sensitivity, DR and colour fidelity WILL SUFFER as a result. Furthermore, the aggressive binning and NR you'll have to apply to the pitiful signals from your tiny pixels will smear away any additional resolution your pixel density MAY have THEORETICALLY been able to capture. So your images won't even be sharper or more detailed!
There's a good objective illustration of this here: http://gizmodo.com/5990360/htc-one-ultrapixel-camera-how-does-it-stack-up
A Google Street View car [driver] managed to crash into three other vehicles whilst out snapping pictures on the streets of Jakarta last weekend.
The Google logo-emblazoned Subaru hatchback was [being driven] through the outskirts of Indonesia's capital when it hit one of the city’s ubiquitous public minibuses, according to AFP.
Please El Reg...
> LinkedIn has joined Yahoo! and Google in lobbying the US government to let it tell the public how many super-secret requests from spies it gets for user data.
Note, all this "lobbying" is for permission (which will, after a suitably convincing feigned tussle, be granted) and not for an obligation under law (which would necessitate accuracy - an idea as ridiculous as this whole charade)
> The career network said on Tuesday that it has filed a legal challenge with the US government to let it be *more* open about the number of spy requests...
There it is again... Just let us say *something* for PR purposes. The plebs are revolting.
> LinkedIn announced its attempt at broader disclosure alongside the publication of its semiannual Transparency Report.
PR newspeak.
> From January 1 to June 30 of this year, LinkedIn received 83 Government requests for user data, 70 of which came from the US and 4 from the UK. It provided data for 57 per cent of the US government requests, and none for those from the UK. This compares with 48 requests for user data in the second half of 2012, 67 in the first half, and 73 in the second half of 2011.
Perfect! To round it off, a propaganda splaff bearing uncanny resemblance to my prediction from July: http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/containing/1897818 ...could they be reading El Reg? ;o)
Here you are RICHTO, a few recent reminders to jog your memory. Astonishingly inane when viewed in succession... you almost sound like some sort of fuckwitted shill who's been paid to spew out exactly the same crap over and over again. There's a handy "My Posts" link over on the right ( that way -----> ) which, if you follow it, will allow you to view millions more iterations of the same crap. Should you need further reminding. Knock yourself out.
http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/containing/1937285
http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/containing/1825520
http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/containing/1951061
http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/containing/1907119
http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/containing/1726924
http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/containing/1710002
For a bizarre attosecond there I thought you were to lead the design of a v3 TPM for Intel/M$/NSA and friends and nearly fell off my chair! Some sort of post Snowden flurry of glasnost or something!!!!one!
Anyway... back to reality with a bump...
Thank you TPM, for the wisdom, wit, insight, humility, neuron searing "grammar", humour...
The place won't be the same without you. First pint's on me.
Godspeed.
Compose all the following terms into a sentence which encapsulates your vision for Microsoft, instils sensations of immense profundity and authority in the naïve but means absolutely nothing at all:
incompatible
interoperability
partners
opportunity integrated technologist platform
innovate
compute [but only as a ADJECTIVE]
leverage [but only as a VERB]
monetize
cancer
virus
upward global trajectory
sybsystems
ecosystem
technology evangelism
OEM
fragmentation
TCO
kenetic [sic]
relationship monetization platform
>"creepy google plus probably the creepy Chinese government"
Gosh, what a lot of creepy. Creepier than RICHTO (Vogon) posting creepy M$ creepy propaganda from behind the creepy mask of cowardice? Methinks not.
>"If you have any sense of personal dignity..."
Was that another sarcastic M$ in-joke? Like "trusted computing" and "windows defender" and "secure boot" and so on...
>Read the article below, we don't have any kind of free press or government accountability any more.
We have access to the WORLD WIDE Web... for now... that's free of governmental interference. Which is why they're so desperately clamouring to get censorship laws and mechanisms in place.
Oh, except that the censorship is ONLY to stop us harming ourselves with naughty pictures. Honest. ...and will, of course be subject to the strongest possible standards of independent oversight. So that's OK then. Just like the anti-terrorism laws are only used to protect us from TERRORISTS.
Thank God our dear government is protecting us so well.
@AC 5:42
171.70.168.183
171.69.2.133
128.107.241.185
64.102.255.44
Perhaps ironically under the circumstances I had to Google it too. I've settled on OpenDNS myself, not least because they were the only service I saw competently and promptly address that phishing/poisoning débâcle a few years ago. The redirection for unresolvable queries is a bit naff though. Still, gifthorses...
Found a pretty comprehensive list here: http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Alternative_DNS
Anyone any idea what might have prompted the downvote?
Excellent point about DNS... you "think" it was affected... did you experience any DNS disruption directly? Or have you seen any data supporting this?
Just out of curiosity, why choose Google for DNS rather than OpenDNS, Cisco or whatever? Doesn't the Googleplex know enough of your business?
Methinks more likely a failure of our heroic churnalism soviet. According to the attributed source: "Google.com was down for a few minutes between 23:52 and 23:57 BST on 16th August 2013." which fits perfectly with the lifted graph.
I suppose there's scope for some disparity as the fault propagated across Google's infrastructure but some reference to the obvious contradiction in the article is surely warranted.
In lieu of the Reg headstone icon which seems to have been removed for our protection -->
As there's no headstone icon any more -------------------------------------------------------------->
As far as I'm concerned the vivacious and unusually (in part at least) informed commentard community was the best thing about The Register. It's certainly not the quality:quantity ratio of the articles which seems to be spiralling out of control. Neither is it the increasing frequency of the offensive sponsored infoticles with our replies always carefully "moderated".
Those forum leaders were the secret sauce. Can't see this ending well for El Reg
To be fair, they have to be making enough money to be worth suing...
That's bollocks RICHTO as well you know. Microsoft has to defend these purported "patents" from everyone. In approaching Canonical, Microsoft demonstrated awareness of Canonical's various Linux interests and asserted that they infringe the secret patents. When Canonical replied "fuck off" Microsoft was left with only two options. 1. Litigate. 2. Default. Microsoft appears to have chosen 2.
In not actively defending its assertions Microsoft has itself invalidated them... and not just for Canonical... if they're not valid against Canonical, they're not valid against anyone not Samsung, not Apple, not Google. The law is very clear on this: Use it or lose it M$.
Microsoft seems unwilling to rise to any form of fight/test/disclosure whatsoever. Canonical told the fuckers exactly where to stick it. No lawsuit ensued. In fact, methinks the MS protection racket alone goes a very long way to explain the sudden Unity/HUD revolution. Could Microsoft's loudly publicised, yet simultaneously top secret, patent minefield portfolio be little more than a load of "design" crud related to the Win95 UI... all on the cusp of expiry anyway?
I'm inclined to think the coincidence is simply a matter of control. When it was IBM churning out backdoored(?) kit under the watchful eye of the US's NSA all was tickety-boo. However, as soon as the keys changed hands and Lenovo found itself churning out the same kit, right down to the same backdoors(?), but now under the watchful eye of China's PLA, there's suddenly a problem. Well, a quiet concern for the "five eyes" anyway. Not something they'd want to go making a fuss about... not then anyway... don't suppose it'd be much of a secret from anyone now though.
When was it that Intel introduced its vPro/AMT remote exploitation management orifice? "Mid-2000s" ish? I think I saw somewhere that it's illegal in Russia and China? Not that there could be any connection. Of course.
I don't think it's a matter of expecting "manufactures like Dell and HP; and retailers like PC World/Currys"... "to stand up to them" either.
We have laws and regulations, legislatures and regulators to protect the manufactures and ourselves from this sort of abuse. Microsoft's monopolism has been found illegal numerous times. I believe what we're talking about here is illegal: If I buy a computer and do not wish to run a Microsoft OS on it, my purchase should be reduced in price accordingly. That's a TOTAL COST reduction, of course, TCO; ie my unwanted "licence" at cost PLUS Windows compatibility testing & development costs, all certification fees and the like, etc. Microsoft Inc has no power to raise tax, to take my money for something I do not want and do not use, or to construct a cartel which makes it difficult for me to go about my business without paying "tribute" to Microsoft Inc. Our legislatures and regulators should be policing these antics and, if the law isn't clear or strong enough, tightening it. That is their job it is their only job it's the whole reason we put up with the tossers.
Instead of protecting the public and the market, our political lords and masters appear to have set about protecting the Microsoft Corporation Inc. Busily drafting Microsoft consumer protection rules carefully contrived to make it illegal to sell a computer which arrives in a "non-functional state", while carefully honing "non-functional state" to amount to "without Windows™". Drafting bizarre procurement rules so obviously designed to match ONLY the one product they've been bribed to procure. Then there are the demented "education" policies... IT "education"?... All for it... as long as it's painstakingly restricted to being nothing more than indoctrinating the next generation in using the GUI of "the OS and office applications most prevalent in industry at the moment" - I wonder what that might be. IT? Have they heard of it?
With the rot so endemic it's hardly reasonable to expect individual companies to "stick there necks out". They have businesses to run, shareholders to consider, etc. They have to operate within the political and legal environment which prevails. The failings of the IT industry are our (the voters') fault. Just as all the other imperfections of our lot. Such is the meaning of "democracy".
Erm... completely agree with the (rather brief) point about the politicos and energy policy... but not so sure about the badger rampage.
Straight off the top - why not just BCG cattle for example? We know where they all are, after all. Surely removing bovine TB from the bovines, or at least greatly reducing transmission & virulence, is a better solution than paying for death squads to scour the countryside on a mission to eradicate the wildlife. There must be better ways!
Just curious... not meaning to solicit a comprehensive derailment. The curious tangent would suggest that you have an altogether greater interest in the topic than I.
Dr (of what) Dan Holdsworth (from where), if you don't mind me asking?
Strange that our self professed but anonymous "scientist" selected those two projects. The science of the Maude project was conducted by a Britain under intense financial strain enduring a state of all out war. The other example, the V2 rocket programme was conducted by a Germany facing similar inconveniences.
Perhaps our anonymous "scientist" doesn't know the difference between science and large engineering projects.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
