Been like that for ages. The Twitter storm was just cos someone noticed and thought it was funny.
329 publicly visible posts • joined 25 Jul 2007
Actually I want 3G on a tablet
which is why I said it. I use my phone for calls and texts, and have it on a cheap tariff for them from Orange. I use my tablet for internet stuff and have it on a cheap tariff for that from 3. I save money and have two devices which can function independently. And my phone's battery doesn't get hit with constant wireless comms.
I understand the argument but for me, the killer tablet feature is 3G.
1. BoS calls a significant part of their range of savings accounts "investment accounts", so it IS ordinary savings accounts that are being cut off for a year.
2. While not covered in the story, this same migration is affecting ALL accounts including current accounts, with features like historical statements being removed.
So all BoS customers are affected, in fact, not just some perceived elite.
You keep missing my point. I'm not making a comparison between this incident and the earthquake and tsunami which caused it. You are, but I am not. My question over the term "minor incident" is not comparative between those two. Okay? So please stop telling me that the earthquake was a major incident and that that therefore somehow proves that the reactor problems were a minor one. It doesn't follow at all.
I'm not caught up in any melodrama. I'm saying that when I look at what happened at Fukushima, I don't call it a minor incident. I'm also saying that the reason that description was there is that El Reg got carried away with the narrative it has been pushing on this story since it happened. I'm all for rational, calm and expert views on this. Calling this a minor incident is not rational. It's gone far too far the other way. And I believe it was done for shock value to prove the size of Mr Page's journalistic cojones, because he loves being the Bringer Of Truth and the Slayer of Hysteria.
I think he got it wrong. So do a lot of other people. That's not an over-dramatisation, it's just my opinion.
I think it's well established that the extent of the media attention garnered was not warranted. I'm delighted to agree that many people understood the science and ignored the doom-mongers. And of course the assessment of whether anything is major or minor is subjective, so on one level this all just hot air.
I guess my feeling is this: over 100,000 people were evacuated; emergency action resulted in permanent shutdown of at least three reactors; estimates say it will cost at least $5 billion to recover; and the loss of generating capacity has caused blackouts in one of the most densely populated areas of the country. If that's a minor incident, what in the name of fuck is a major one?
Thanks for the clarity on the cooling systems; my shorthand wasn't intended to be misleading. And thanks for the further information/speculation on other incidents. I have one question: given your description would you seriously call this a "minor" incident? That is my sole point.
Here's the thing. I don't disagree that it took the media's attention away from the real tragedy. I'm perfectly capable of recognising that some of the reporting around this has been alarmist and unhelpful. I haven't made any claims about my expertise, nor based any of my stated view on what anyone told me in the pub. And I'm not James Delingpole.
None of that takes away from the fact that this was not a minor incident. These 6 reactors were hit by a 9.0 earthquake followed by a major tsunami, and three failover cooling systems failed in succession leading to helicopter drops of seawater, radiation leaks and sizeable explosions.
It may be an incident with far less significance than some have claimed; it certainly should not have been the biggest story emanating from Japan. But it's not a minor incident and calling it that was an exercise in journalistic willy-waving.
"We are also beginning to see significant applications that do not work on XP, like Microsoft’s forthcoming Internet Explorer 9. Support is another issue, with Microsoft set to end extended support in April 2014."
Surely this merely represents Microsoft deliberately forcing users to upgrade, as it always has? There are no reasonable reasons why IE9 shouldn't be engineered to work on XP, and Microsoft ending extended support is also a marketing decision.
I believe this is what they call
an accident. Regrettable, tragic for those involved, but not indicative of any need to further regulate, control or amend. As long as there are tall buildings, people will accidentally fall off them. It's sad, but it's not possible or sensible to try to legislate against it.
It is the people who produce the books who will have to add such metadata to their eBooks. And it is a royal pain in the arse to do. Sounds like Amazon is announcing a feature *enabling* congruent page numbering but deliberately not mentioning that it won't universally *deliver* congruent page numbering.
Thickness & weight
I use a Galaxy Tab day to day but recently had it and an iPad together for a few days on a trip, and while the unfamiliarity of the iPad meant I only used it for the presentations I had to do, so I can't honestly compare usability, your comment about the weight and thickness really surprised me. I would have sworn blind that the iPad was thinner and lighter than the Tab. Just goes to show how effective the design of the iPad is.
I've grown very fond of the Tab though, and wouldn't swap it. 7in is the right size for me.
has El Reg become an outlet for climate change denial? Did you just stop editing the fucking site, or are you just giving up all pretensions of passing on honest information in favour of whipping up clicks with garbage science?
Lewis should stick to writing stories on military toys, which he knows about, and stop indulging his anti-climate-change paranoia.
I think it's nothing more than a VC gobble
Intel has more than $25 billion in cash/equivalents on its balance sheet, most of it built up fairly recently. Perhaps it was just another investment in a company for which they see big profits in the future, and they took the opportunity to gobble the whole thing up and talk up the synergy. However shit the products might be, AV is going to continue to be big business.
This really is a pisspoor rant of an article
Ludicrous comparisons to enable bitter points-scoring and absurd generalisations.
Why the fuck does it matter that people don't know how much energy is saved by line drying in comparison to how much energy is saved by turning the temperature down on a washing machine? And how about giving us some DATA is that bald accusation? Because I can prove that line drying compared to tumble drying saves more energy than turning down the temperature on my washing machine by 1 degree.
Lazy, angry, self-indulgent journalism. If I wanted that I could go to the Daily Mail.
Good stuff thanks. That answers a lot of questions that the review didn't even ask and in my opinion should have done. It deals with all but two of my original misgivings, those that remain being:
1. Using the product requires placing implicit trust in your company, essentially an unknown third party. I guess this could be ameliorated by various verification schemes which you may already have in place. Something which embeds itself in the CSP obviously already has been verified by MS but many people wouldn't view that as enough reassurance.
2. The banner "You are now safe to shop online" is still presumptive - surely there are plenty of other dangers, not least at the merchant end. Even a product which offers good security should be wary of claiming it is offering more than it does.
Kudos for coming back and setting me and others straight.
But it should be down to you
to point out that such peace of mind would be entirely unjustified. This device will do nothing to improve online shopping security, potentially a great deal to undermine it, and so people who are intimidated by this internet malarkey would simply be taken for a ride with this SmartSwipe malarkey.
My irony meter has exploded
This is a joke review, right? I mean, even if the product is real, which I'm having difficulty believing, there's no way El Reg would run a review of it without pointing out the glaring ironies that:
. a product which claims to make shopping secure forces you to use the least secure browser on the least secure operating system to do so;
. the claim that "you are now safe to shop online" is based purely on the idea that all danger to online purchasing comes from potential keyloggers active during your first registration with a site, which is so woefully untrue as to be practically fraud in itself;
. to use the product you have to actively place your trust in an unknown company and a downloaded piece of software which connects to the internet for updates so could easily connect to log your card details too;
. literally all it does is input card numbers into a box, and uses a script to interfere with a secure website in order to "hide" the number on-screen, laying open the possibility that such a script could literally be doing anything else it wants with the data it has captured.
65%? Seriously? I'd give this 0% and a "stay away at all costs" rating.
Can't you already do this?
I'm pretty sure various network printer drivers have been supporting this sort of thing for yonks, though perhaps this is the first time it's been built into the printer itself. Nonetheless, I am unmoved. Unless there is a button which tells the printer to go to my shelf and load a single sheet of photo paper first.
"However, we've definitely identified some interesting opportunities to improve the way you share and connect with the people and things in your life."
How entirely selfless of you. I really am flattered that you continue to go to such trouble without any urging and without a thought for the expense and challenges you burden yourselves with. My only hope is that somehow, some day, you find a way to recoup the never-ending investment you are making into my wellbeing.