Branded lunchbox biz didn't answer for 5 days, alleges infosec firm
I guess they were trying to keep a lid on it.
296 posts • joined 5 Sep 2015
Woke tech giants sued...
Seems to me that if anyone is going to be called "woke", it should be the ones doing the suing.
They seem to be deliberately ignoring the fact that the oil industry is a far bigger user of cobalt than the battery industry, and oddly enough, they also get their cobalt from the same sources.
Not only that, but of the companies actually listed, most of them buy their batteries from established battery manufacturers; the only one that actually manufacturers their own batteries is Tesla... and they're on record as saying that they're making efforts to cut their cobalt content to zero.
So basically a stupid lawsuit that is aimed at making publicity from attacking high-profile tech companies rather than targeting the companies that are actually getting their hands dirty.
Yes, the original code is ugly, but there will be be better ways to tidy up it up than using this operator.
Fundamentally, the problem with assignment within an expression is that it is a one-line violation of CQS (command / query separation), which frankly is one of the most important rules you can learn for writing reliable, good quality code.
Good on them. This has been overdue for at least a decade.
I'd be willing to bet that the project would have actually been a better piece of software today without that name as well, because I'm fairly certain there are devs, and testers who have backed away from it due to the name, and even funding, just as there have been users.
If they're worried about what happens when a project changes name, they could look at projects that have been forked, such as Jenkins, MariaDB, LibreOffice and others which have done just fine after what was effectively a name change (yes the original projects carried on, but just about the entire user base and all the developers jumped over to the new one).
Neurolink differs from most of Musk's other big ideas in on important way. Let me demonstrate what I mean:
When we see electric and self-driving cars in sci-fi movies, it's often depicted as part of a utopian future.
When we see sci-fi movies with space pioneers pushing the boundaries to help expand humanity from Earth, it's also often depicted as a good thing.
But when we see sci-fi where everyone has brain implants with the kinds of features Neurolink is aiming for, it is very often shown as part of a dystopian vision of the future.
Quite what the real future holds for all of these technologies, I honestly don't know. I've got an uneasy feeling about this one which I don't have about anything else Musk is doing.
Also, I note that this is just about the only thing Musk is doing that Jeff Bezos hasn't decided to copy. Given that Bezos comes across as a much more level-headed supervillain than Musk, this may be significant.
The announcement, if that's what it is, came in a tweeted reply from Elon Musk that the upgrade will come: "End of Q4, most likely."
This was promised quite a long time ago. Yes, it was re-iterated by Musk on twitter over the weekend, but the original promise was made ages ago. In fact Musk's tweet that is quoted here was in reply to someone who knew that and was asking when it would happen.
So basically no story here; just repeating stuff that was already known anyway by anyone paying attention.
Boeing is also building the Starliner spacecraft in competition with SpaceX's Crew Dragon.
At least one of the major abort tests is being done for real by SpaceX but as a simulation by Boeing. I have no idea how they managed to convince Nasa to go along with that, but whether it's sufficient for it to be a simulated test or not, it certainly speaks of the same attitude at work as described in this article.
Let me clarify, because people seem to think I'm wrong.
It is indeed never too soon to discuss correct design and criticise failures.
But right now is too soon to be making flippant jokes about an aircraft crash that claimed hundreds of lives only a month ago.
There is an obvious comparison to be drawn between the two events, and I'm right with you in making it, but pleae just be a bit more careful about making your point by turning it into a snarky joke, because a month after the Ethiopian crash, that comes across as being in poor taste.
A comparison from an entirely different industry may be helpful here.
When Coca Cola reached peak coke, they didn't keep trying to get us to drink even more of the stuff. Well, they did, but that wasn't what allowed the company to keep growing. They diversified.
Coca Cola as a product isn't going to get any bigger; it's basically saturated the market. But Coca Cola the company has acquired or created dozens of other brands, some of them not even remotely related to soft drinks. Doing that has kept the company growing, and kept the shareholders happy.
The core soft drinks business carries on of course because it's a cash cow, but shareholders want growth as well as dividends, so that's what the company has to give them.
News about Tesla is a Rorschach test for the media.
If you read all the different media reports about this incident, its very easy to see that each reporter has seen what they wanted to see in the story.
Some are praising Tesla's Autopilot for saving lives. Others are critising it for allowing the situation to occur.
The reality is that it's not much of a story really, and it isn't really about Tesla. It's a story about a stupid guy who thought he could get away with drink driving, and about some cops who saved lives with smart thinking. An interesting story, to be sure, but not worth the vast number of column inches it's earned because journalists want to push their Tesla agenda.
For all Facebook's faults, however, this isn't a new phenomenon. Employers have always targeted advertisements - knowingly or unknowingly - by the choice of publication in which those advertisements were placed.
You're right, there is a comparison to be made with placing a job advert in a magazine with a known strong demographic. You may advertise for a builder in a DIY magazine, knowing full well that most of the people reading it are going to be men.
The difference is that a woman who is looking for a job as a builder does have the option to buy the magazine. She may be in a minority, but she can still access the job advert if that's what she wants. On Facebook, the adverts were explicitly only sent to men, and the woman looking for that job would never have had the opportunity to see it.
That's why this is being claimed as sexist where other forms of demographic targetting are not.
They are doing it to maximize their advertising dollar. If you are advertising for an oil field worker, you are getting far less of your money's worth by advertising to women, or to men over say 50 years old...
What you just wrote is basically a pure capitalist justification for racism / sexism / ageism / whatever-ism.
It doesn't stop it being sexist just because you're doing it for financial reasons.
This suggestion has been deleted by a moderator
I just want to point out here that I very rarely go to the homepage of The Register, because I have the RSS feed configured in my firefox bookmarks toolbar, and I keep track of the news here and on a whole bunch of other sites by checking what's new in the feeds rather than by visiting any of the sites directly.
Maybe I'm in the minority in doing it that way these days, but it works for me and makes it really easy to keep track of new content across a few dozen sources of news and other info relevant to me.
Since we're on the subject of making tweaks to the site design on El Rg, there is one change I beg you to make:
Many pages have a "You may also like" section, listing articles that are related in some way to the one I'm reading.
That's great, but please *please* **please** can you include the date that the linked article was published, because sometimes it pulls out articles that are really old or out of date, but doesn't give me any context that that's the case.
But even if Kepler fails it does have a successor. NASA launched its TESS spacecraft in April. Science operations were kickstarted in July and it also uses the transit method to scope out other worlds.
Does anyone know when we're going to start seeing results from TESS? Looking forward to seeing what it can do.
I really should read headlines more carefully. I had hoped that NASA were about to trial an infinite improbability drive as used on the Heart of Gold.
I'm beginning to wonder re the Trump presidency, Brexit, and various other recent world events, whether they have been caused by someone, somewhere firing up an unshielded infinite improbability drive.
Can anyone point me in the direction of a product line similar to Nest that:
* does not require internet connectivity
* does not fail if the vendor's online systems fail
* cannot be bricked by the vendor if they decide to stop supporting it
* is secure
Because basically all of the gadgets I'm seeing on the market fail most, if not all of those criteria.
I can just about swallow it if I'm buying a device that won't cause any knock-on problems if it fails. But there's no way I can justifying spending money on a critical part of my home infrastructure if it fails any of those criteria.
The problem for Uber is that 99% of their competitive edge comes from their willingness to bend / ignore / flout regulations. If they start playing straight, they completely lose their edge and will find it much harder to compete against established players.
The one area that will still help them succeed is their ease of use; ie the app makes it easy to access their service. But this would not be a difficult thing for others to replicate.
I thought they merged it with their French neighbour's favourite colour to form EE, then sold it to BT.
That was just the UK instance of T-Mobile. The brand continues to exist in many other countries, and is still owned by DT. Likewise with Orange.
Indeed, one of the main reasons they changed the name to EE when Orange and T-Mobile merged rather than maintaining one or both existing brands was so that they could sell the combined entity off without having to sell the trademarks.
Hmm. Gas giant sized but with no clouds.....
And therefor with the potential for maximal learning.
Lots of learning, yes. But this object is clearly different (heh, pun intended) from others we know, so while it might give us a lot of data, that information may not be relevant to other gas giants.
That problem with stable distros providing a fixed version of everything is the biggest bugbear I have with using Linux as a platform over Windows.
I like that most of the software on my box is stable well maintained, but there are some applications for which I absolutely need the features in a newer version. Most of the time it's possible to install the newer version if you need it, but it almost always involves a lot more effort, and relying on third party repos that you may or may not want to trust.
This Modules feature sounds like it fixes that problem for me. I will be very very happy when this feature rolls out to Centos (and Debian too...? we can hope, can't we?).
Take-off crash 'n' burn didn't kill the Concorde, it was just too bloody expensive to maintain
Well yes of course it was.
Even the newest one was built in the 1970s. They retired in 2003. Most commercial aircraft would be considered old and would be getting expensive to maintain by the time they get to that kind of age.
The low production volume multiplies that, as do the unique capabilities and features of the aircraft.
Concorde was always going to need to be retired within that kind of time frame. The accident may have moved the retirement forward by a bit, but even without the accident, it couldn't have carried on indefinitely. For comparison, the Boeing 707 ended production the same year as Concorde. How many of those were still flying in 2003?
No they don't. They've been plain ignoring the requirement for GDPR compliance, wishing it away by pretending it wouldn't apply to them
Yes you're right, they have. But so have many *many* others. And many others just don't even realise it applies to them. And many more think they're okay but aren't.
It's going to be a mess, and there really does need to be some kind of grace period where companies can get caught and told to sort things out, but not necessarily get stung for the fine, because those fines could cause some serious damage if they're doled out to every offender from day one.
Lots of ranting here about ICANN and Europe, but relatively little about the GDPR itself. Interesting.
It is true that ICANN are looking pretty bad here; they've basically set themselves up as a big target for mockery (and potentially worse once GDPR kicks in) because they've had plenty of time to resolve the problem but have ignored it until it's too late to fix it in time.
The thing is, they're not alone. They're the ones getting the press (at least here on El Reg), but there are thousands of organisations big and small that are going to fail at GDPR. Even many of the ones who are sitting smugly thinking they've got it sorted are going to fail.
If the lack of preparation that I've seen is representative, then the world is going to be in for a massive wake-up call when the first fines start getting levied. With the level of fines available and the number of organisations out there that are completely ignorant of GDPR, I reckon the EU could probably cover it's entire annual budget just through fines if it wanted to.
That's obviously not going to happen (not least because it would have a massive economic impact), but what I would say is that there is a clear need for a moratorium on fines, at least to begin with. ICANN might be making themselves look foolish, but looking at the broader picture, they do actually have a point.
They didn't attempt it on this launch. Don't know why.
The main reason is that Mr Steven is based in California, and can only realistically be deployed for Vandenberg launches.
Apparently though, they did still do the whole parachute thing to recover the fairing, albeit with a wet landing. I don't believe that they can reuse a fairing once it's got wet, so presumably they did this in order to get more data about how the parachutes perform, in order to help with the catching next time.
As far as I know, they haven't released any information about how it all went so far this time. But there's a reasonable chance that someone will photograph the boat coming home over the next few days with the fairings on board.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020