"We envision a future where high-performance single-cable docks, stunning photos and 4K video, lifelike VR, and faster-than-ever storage are commonplace,"
In other words bigger and better selfies and kitten videos. Oh to be living in such times.
40413 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
If any Conservative candidate comes calling for your vote ask them if they've published all their banking, ecommerce, farcebook, twatter and other log-in credentials. When they ask why explain to them that this will be the net effect of removing encryption and you don't see why you should be asked to vote for someone who hasn't tested such a stupid policy on themselves.
Or simply explain that forcing HMG to abandon the centuries-long presumption of innocence is a major win for terrorists who wish to destroy British values. (Make that English values dependent on your assessment of the candidate's degree of rabidness.)
"That's why there are proxies for further back in the record"
And what are the error bars on such proxies?
The trouble with all this argument is that the period for which we have good global measurements (give or take arguments about integrating them) is very short so we're really arguing about noise which includes such things as the effects of volcanic veils - and do we know yet what caused the cold & wet period in Western Europe starting in 1315? In any case anyone who thinks that constant climate and constant sea-levels are the norm is living in a fools paradise. They have changed and they will change whatever we do.
OTOH we should really be concerned about conserving scarce resources. It's wantonly using up those that our descendants will be cursing us for.
"137 years of measurements"
This is what concerns me about climate change discussions. Set against the period of the post-glacial it's about 1% and yet all the arguments hang on this.
There are very good arguments against unnecessary consumption of fossil fuels: they have multiple alternative uses as raw materials and when they're gone they're gone. There have been no good arguments against shoving them up power-station chimneys for the last half-century or more. It's largely down to the self-styled green movement that we're continuing to do this.
"And I very much doubt the marketing / ad business would be able to lie about those figures on such a massive, world scale to fool those that pay dearly to have their products / services adertised year, after year after year."
There's an excellent book, How to lie with statistics. It ought to be part of everyone's education. In a few years I'll buy the grandkids copies. (If I live so long boxed sets of Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister fill follow.)
As I've pointed out in another post here they don't measure the sales lost because of advertising pissing off potential customers. By only quoting conversion rates to their customers the advertising industry is lying to them with statistics.
"It is depressingly enlightening."
Actually I've found comparatively few who do leak email addresses. This may be because I just give out a series of short-lived email addresses so leaked addresses just bounce.
The exceptions are Ebay and PayPal who pass on the address to vendors. Even this is rarely abused.
I very seldom leave feedback at Ebay now simply because if I do it's impossible to then add negative feedback in the event that they do spam. I have left negative feedback in such circumstances. It's against Ebay's T&Cs to spam so I hope they do follow up on such feedback.
PayPal is a different proposition. The email address is also the login ID. They send a customer's login ID to the merchants! That is downright stupid beyond belief. I've been spammed a couple of times by PayPal merchants. They've been left in no doubt as to what I feel about them and that they've forfeited any chance of further business. It's also been pointed out that the email address makes it quite clear that it was only for PayPal's use and that they have inconvenienced me by forcing me to change it.
"the problem with directing your anger at the people setting the policy is that it's extremely hard (and, in fact, impossible)"
Giving a valid address at your country's data regulator is possible and may well be very effective at directing your anger there. Of course if you live in a country that doesn't have such a concept - well, the rest of us feel sorry for you.
Assuming for a moment that this scheme does exactly what Google claim it still won't measure the actual effect of advertising. In order to do that they'd also need to measure the negative effects - who bought what instead of a product that had been advertised at them because the advertising pissed them off.
Nobody in advertising or marketing will risk doing that. As long as they don't know they can plausibly deny that such an effect exists. The advertising industry can keep on selling to marketing and marketing can keep drawing their pay. Knowledge would seriously disrupt this cozy arrangement.
Remember folks, the only thing the advertising industry sells is adverts.
"I remember when my manager bought a brand new Volvo. Six months later he told us that the dealer had got in touch to try and sell him a brand new Volvo."
Six whole months pester-free? I'd scarcely got my new car home before the dealer started spam texts. It only stopped when I managed to find the MD's email and told him bluntly that the spams had ensured that I never buy from his company again.
"Remember, corporate policy isn't the fault of the kid running the POS."
No, that's why directing them to the ICO would be a good move in the UK. Corporate policy might be in for a well-deserved nasty shock if they start spamming that.
"I do my best to make HOLD a pleasant or neutral experience."
Hold is not an experience anyone wants. They want someone to answer the phone. If there aren't enough people to answer the phone quickly the hold queue will grow until it equilibrates; as it grows longer more people will abandon their calls and eventually the rate of drop out plus the rate of answer equals the number of new calls. And every dropped call means a customer or potential customer that your precious company has pissed off.
Your company might want short messages on your hold track, your callers don't, they just want their calls answered.
" along with a queue announcement indicating how many people ahead of you"
A decent call centre will NEVER, do that. It is pointless.
It isn't pointless. The point is that the message should be repeated and you can hear how fast it's going down. Your 1000 calls answered a minute will have a total going down by about 50 as fast as they can announce itt and you'll know you'll get to the front of the queue pretty soon.
"This is the idea that should be killed with fire, shot, killed with fire again, shot again, stamped on, dipped in quicklime, buried in a lonely forest glade wrapped in an old carpet, and then nuked from orbit."
Sorry, you failed your BOFH. You forgot the electrocution and the fall from the 20th storey window into a skip in the car park.
@Cynic_999
Dammit. I meant to write "service" and somehow "job" got in there instead. You're right, of course, where there's specialist investment in equipment required the job can usefully be outsourced. But the sort of labour-intensive service provision jobs that are being outsourced in situations such as the article describes don't easily gain from capital investments in the same way.
Another example would be health care provision. Locally,district nurses and various other services have been shifted to some not for profit organisation. The management gets paid more but the nurses are reportedly breaking down from overwork.
Is it so difficult to work out? If providing some part of the job well requires X people being paid £Y to do it then handing it over to someone else who will be expecting to make a profit is going to either cost more to cover a profit or is going to be done less well by employing less than X people. If there are genuinely savings to be made in the operation why not make them yourself and cut your costs rather than let someone else make them and keep the savings?
Reading through the pleading two things emerge.
The administrators don't have a copy of the agreement and are complaining that MS won't let them see their copy. Apart from MS's admitting that there was an agreement it seems difficult for them to prove that there's an account at all!
The administrators are wanting to have their cake and eat it. They want the data to be handed over but they don't know how to use it if it were handed over so they don't want the data to be handed over until it's convenient for them.
"If so, should cloud agreements not have a 'data escrow' clause?"
From the customer's PoV, yes. But it would be up to them to insist on it when the contract's set up. It's too late to start thinking about that when things go wrong. Despite everything that's said about lawyers this is why you need them - to see such problems in advance.
"Because what you're suggesting is probably illegal and akin to a ransomware."
No. Basically it does what a landlord is entitled to do in the circumstances - distrain the debtor's property, in this case the data - but in a way that makes the administrators responsible for the storage avoiding accruing further debts. The payment being sought is what MS claim to be entitled to anyway, clearly different from a ransom for which there is no legal basis. If a court decides that the debt wasn't valid then the key can be handed over.
"It would also establish US trade watchdog the FTC as the governing body for internet privacy rules."
The US should give some thought to having a separate body concentrating solely on privacy rights, internet or otherwise. Given some teeth, say the ability to issue fines at levels comparable to the GDPR, we might even begin to believe the Privacy Shield actually meant something.
"many (most?) clearly cannot be bothered with password changing, and mandating stuff will not change that."
It will if the mandate is that the device will not become operational until the user's own credentials are entered. And any variation on "password" will be spat back at the user after a second, 2 seconds at the next attempt etc.