Re: BasicReality...
See my response to Throatwarbler Mangrove above.
40471 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
"Our priority is protecting the public."
One of the things the public should be protected from is misuse of policing. We have seen several well-publicised miscarriages of justice recently, especially if "policing" includes private powers of prosecution as wielded by the Post Office.
It raises the question of whether concealment of a flaw from the regulator constitutes misfeasance in public office.
Setting up a database (as opposed to a list) is understanding the structure of the data to go into it. Perhaps a simpler application would let the user start typing in what they though of as records, start storing them but also analysing them and reorganising them to recognise the structure and restructure the data store accordingly.
For instance if it were presented with a list of things sold, including or der details, it might work out quickly that that there were two entities, an order and an item and not much less quickly that the "item" wasn't a single structure but included a product and likewise the "order" included a customer. The restructuring hat involved mightn't be too onerous as it would quickly work that out with a one to many relationship between order and item, between product and item and between customer and order. It might take rather longer to discover customers could have multiple delivery addresses and that they might not correspond to billing address and even longer to discover that product priced could change and the restructuring of the data might freeze it for a while..
"If you look at today's AI, as much progress as we've made over the last couple of years, we're still not at the point where we're fully exploiting the potential of AI,"
At what point to you concede there's little potential to exploit and certainly nothing to justify the expense poured into it.
"It’s an American company, European law is irrelevant."
OK, let's turn that round. A European company sells in the US. US law is irrelevant. No tariffs. Is that how you see it? If not could you produce a reasoned argument as to how the two cases would be different?
"Just because" or something that reduces to it would not be a reasoned argument.
I was subbie to a subbie on a couple of Capita contracts that went well. But they outsourced their development to an Indian company with staff in the UK. From that experience I'd guess that most of those who worked on it will no longer have been in the UK. Every few months I found myself explaining to a new developer that there was a reason for the code they'd not understood and had just removed that gave special handling for names such as O'Neil and that it needed to be reinstated, otherwise their XML was not well-formed.
This, of course, assumes that there were some actual developers and it wasn't vibe coded from start to finish.
About 2000 Microsoft could have said to themselves "We've got it about right. It's stable, it has a nice, clear UI. We can just keep selling it to OEMs and rake in a steady income. Development costs can be trimmed right back, just keep it up-to-date with new hardware. Marketing can be trimmed back because it can sell on merit. Nice and easy to manage with a huge profit margin."
Why didn't they? Because nobody makes big money managing a nice simple business. They can get big pay packets by allegedly managing something huge and complex not matter how dire the product and how hated it is by their customers once they've got the lock-in they established back in W2K days.
There used to be such things as user groups who could exert some leverage. I suppose user businesses decided it was taking up too much staff time to attend meetings, even before COVID. Then there was the issue of who would represent the business - quite unacceptable to send some low level techie who understood what it was about it it was qay too detailed for a managerial chap.
"The bad news is that there is no immediate fix, and the workaround involves fiddling with the Windows registry for virtualized environments or a PowerShell script to prevent Explorer launching before the required packages are provisioned."
But it's so much easier than Linux, isn't it?
How does a user get in to fiddle with the registry or create and run a script without the task bar or panel? I don't suppose Ctrl Alt F1 woks on Windows.
Fowler (2000 edition), under "gibe, jibe" says "The American word jibe in the phr. to jibe with 'to agree, be in accord*
is an unrelated word of unknown origin (in the 19c)." It also says that the sailing term is spelled with "y". Spelled with "i" it means to mock or jeer and that meaning, goes back to at least 1761 in "An Universal Etymological English Dictionary; ....etc" 18th Ed.
"but I am surprised that the the artificial hardware requirements to deliberately force new hardware purchase haven't seen litigation"
It's the other way around.
1. Microsoft want you to buy a new Windows licence so that you pay them money. Everything else hangs on that.
2. They could simply have announced that W10 users need to buy an upgrade licence because it's going EOL. This certainly would bring litigation from users who just bought a new W10 PC.
3. In order to maximise 1 and avoid the fallout from 2 they could compromise on the amount they can sell and set some time limit so a W10 licence more then N years old has to be upgraded. This brings even more and even less defensible litigation from users who bought a new W10 PC just over N years ago.
4. In order to maximise 1 and avoid the fallout from 2 and 3 they introduce a H/W requirement based on something introduced about N years ago. You'd need to spend a lot of money on discovery to find a Halloween-type email saying that that was the plan in order to make a suit stick. Just pay up for the licence and tough shit if it comes with a new, expensive PC attached.