Re: arguably the most aspirational Chrome OS device
...and shiny.
40471 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
"It is 2020, what was the customer data and critical systems doing on Windows boxes, rather than Linux with a snapshotted file system underpinning the storage?"
In a lot of cases I'd agree with you. That would be the consequence of running a monoculture and getting phished.
However it looks as if this was the consequence of a failure to protect their VPN against intrusion and the intruders have been able to take their time. By now they'd probably have acquired admin credentials on the Linux boxes. I doubt there's anything beyond a dumb printer in there that could be trusted by now.
"It proposes to allow OpenReach to tack on these costs before a single road is dug up"
Tack them onto what? I have a nasty feeling that those of us who live in rural areas with perfectly good FTTC services are going to get stiffed in order to subsidise FTTP for other customers whilst having an unwanted and disruptive "upgrade" forced on ourselves.
True, but if it's the latter they're burning money to do it and even if they're buying them up to replace the innovation they can't do themselves they'll smother the companies with their procedures and policies and end up still burning money but more slowly.
Is it a sign of a moribund system or simply of a moribund corporation? I'd expect the latter. At some point its products, including the IP it tries to collect rent on, become obsolete and businesses which can innovate will displace it. Behaviour like this should be a warning to shareholders to look to their exit strategy.
AIUI the actual technical contributions to RISC V come from all over the world, just as in this case. Putting it outside the US means that (a) the US doesn't actually have its hands on the |RISC V throat to choke it and (b) everybody outside the US can still contribute assuming their govts. don't try the same trick. The worst case for the foundation is that contributions stop coming from the US. The worst case for the US is the same. The worst case for non-US competitors is "meh".
Repeat that for anything else the US wants to choke.
Apropos this particular case, does it supposedly cover QGIS? The registrant for qgis.org is in SA.
If the users don't patch when they're informed then such a term would be essential. After all those users are responsible. Even the one in the twitter thread, assuming they're still with the same MSP.
The Pulse Secure response can be summarised as "You can lead a horse to whater but some of them are mules." That's the problem.
"I do wonder how much of a part the agency plays in this."
I remember seeing a contract ad that specified someone with experience of the client's in-house bespoke system. The system which I started writing about 20 years earlier. The system I spent the next 10 years on and off - but mostly on - managing, migrating and enhancing. I suspect they were actually looking for me. Never heard anything more about it.
in most companies chieftains only care about how many people they lead, because "more people = more important".
This is an artefact of promotion policies. The policies are laid down by management types and that, by and large, is a criterion for managers. Obviously managers don't want a criterion such as "able to do the job well".
"Young workers are just willing to completely exploit themselves"
They also haven't had their manglement bull-shit filters trained so they're not going to laugh or worse at intelligence-insulting motivational* seminars.
* Motivation as in "I'm motivated to get out of this place for good".
"they may not be able to find a postdoc position that's suited to them"
From the University's PoV they may not want to risk taking on someone who might promptly quit because the right post-doc job came along. The real problem, of course, is that research offers too many short-term jobs as opposed to permanent ones.
" if all parties concerned ... crashed and burned."
I'd guess that one of those parties - most likely the banks that are coming up with $24bn - put themselves in front of the queue and ensure they get the cash from selling off the remnants. And likely nist that when the remnants are sold off they get first option at financing the sell-off.
"There are already too many large companies with too much power trying to gain even more power."
That's only part of the problem. If you have the two boards get together and do a straight merger - so many shares in the new entity pro-rata the shares in the old ones you have the problem you state. When you have something like this you have the additional situation that the new entity is saddled with stupid amounts of debt and likely going down the tubes as a consequence so the competition is reduced by two instead of one.
" if all parties concerned ... crashed and burned."
I'd guess that one of those parties - most likely the banks that are coming up with $33bn - put themselves in front of the queue and ensure they get the cash from selling off the remnants. And likely nist that when the remnants are sold off they get first option at financing the sell-off.
"Alexa/Google Home integration - probably doesn't need explanation."
No. Just needs justification.
From your explanation getting the merest squeak out of your speakers requires internet connectivity to work, which is fine until it doesn't, and Sonos' service to remain in place, which s fine until they go bust or someone like Icahn't buys them and shuts them down or a software update bricks them.
"use this software any way you like"
Remember that statute law will always override contract law. "Any way you like" will still get you into trouble if what you like happens to be a transgression of the law of the land. It ought to be the latter that provides protection for customers, at least in a consumer environment.
In a B2B transaction where there is less protection afforded by statute the customers should check the T&Cs, if necessary, run them past their lawyers, and then make a risk assessment before going ahead.
Trying to extend licence law into areas where there are (or should be) existing protections, at least for consumers is scope creep for an organisation such as OSI. Admittedly I'm looking at this from a European PoV; things may be fuzzier in the US and maybe also in the UK in the future.