Why a Basset Hound?
Not sure what the picture of a Basset Hound on this story has to do with anything; still cute though!
63 posts • joined 18 Nov 2016
Offering up a sacrifice of cars to save the planet is going to make no more difference than offering up a goat to please some sort of deity. Co2 cannot possibly drive climate as; if you extracted every last bit of it from a bottle of ordinary air the mean global warming potential of what remained would go up (remove the lowest value from any range and the mean goes up; and co2 has the lowest GWP of any greenhouse gas).
Your public transport dream is over and has been so for more than 20 years. In 1997 John Prescott said that if he had not increased the number of people using public transport in 5 years then he will have failed; suffice it to say he failed.
Governments have consistently tried to beat driver out of their cars by frustrating driving to the point that it drives people to distraction and yet even at these levels of frustration driving is still preferable to public transport.
There is more than one reason why pubic transport is a bad idea, but the main one is that it simply doesn't take you from A to B at a time that is convenient for you.
The oxymoron for public transport is that were it ever to become successful then it would be a victim of its own success as the vehicles would have to stop more and it would take longer to alight.
Cue autonomous vehicles stage left: Driverless cars will remove all those bitter twisted fines and rules and the necessity for driving licenses and maybe even insurance. People who cannot afford one of their own will be able to hail one at will and it will take them from door to door. Without the need for driving licences there will be nobody that cannot use on and it will be absolutely liberating for the disabled, but lets face up to facts, who would use the bus or tram at that point? Public transport is a dead horse and it is time to stop flogging it.
I would say proprietary systems are a bit more like climate change evangelists claiming that co2 can drive climate without releasing the data in the same way that MS vulnerabilities are patched without MS revealing what really caused them in the first place.
Of course if climate change could be driven by humans then it would need a gas with a much higher global warming potential than 1, but I guess you know that don't you?
That is an interesting point because L.J. Laws ruled that constitutional acts overruled ordinary statute and that the Bill of Rights is indeed a constitutional act (this was in Throburn v Sunderland City Council i.e. the Metric Martyrs case).
I am of the opinion that therefore any demand that a forfeit is paid before conviction is, as the law states, illegal and void.
I wouldn't use a web assembler even if there were one available and I certainly would not want to use one as an end user as it may be doing just about anything in the background without my knowledge. XMLHttpRequests are bad enough as a consumer and more than enough as a developer.
Why do people always talk about China and Russia when referring to surveillance but not the United Kingdom where on the current trajectory cameras will outnumber people, the police retain ANPR data for 2 years, the spooks are about to be permitted to legally break the law if bozo gets it through parliament. The UK is a totalitarian nightmare that is more than comparable with anything Russia and China can throw at individuals.
This has been the writing on the wall for years; I don't even consider development for windows any more, in fact over the past 12 months it has been retired to the occasional virtual machine for legacy software, everything runs on KDE now. Networking with SSHFS is so much better than smb and we have just developed an openssh bridge for printers so that we no longer need VPN and the unnecessary and not insignificant overhead.
Our back office application is written using Ncurses with a portal using web applications written in cgi so our network traffic is now lower than it was way back in 2000 when we were stuck with an ISDN line.
Every single bit of security is now consolidated on openssl so we only have to patch a single source.
It is high time that windows simply became a desktop environment and gave us all a break.
I can see from the number of... Well as you like to call us capable of independent throught "Coviditots" it is only right to reciprocate so I will go with sanctimonious c-ov-unts, that my opinion will not exactly be popular, but if you think I am going to allow myself to be used as a data collection node for the state then you have another think coming.
As those capable of independent thought have already pointed out, there are ways to circumvent this authoritarian nonsense and I shall utilise every single one of them.
PS. If that involves me not spending my hard earned cash in your establishment then that is YOUR loss, not mine.
People talk about "cloud" like it is something that is going to be for ever rather than just a fad. Well these things go around and come around; remember when we all used to call cloud computing terminal services.
Don't get me wrong, from the pov of the provider there is nothing better and easier to manage than terminal services, as someone who develops applications in ncurses I can say this from a first hand perspective as many of the headaches around security are vastly reduced. But I do think that when it comes to everyday applications like office suites, one day the worm will turn and these subscriptions models from MS, Adobe, et. al. will be overtaken by applications that run exclusively on the users own hardware. And I think that ultimately the change will be driven by excessive data slurping.
Internet radio has taken over from DAB and is far more reliable, if anything I have got to the point where I prefer it to FM; it means that I can listen to local stations like XS Manchester while I am working down in Essex and with modern car radios doing bluetooth well I can listen to the uninterrupted signal while travelling too. I just do not see the sense in DAB.
Whether it is "safe" or not is irrelevant; even whether it is deemed "safe" is irrelevant because it is just not possible.
Look at it this way: You can download the source code for openssl and its dependencies and change the algorithms and remove any malicious code that may generate a key pair that would grant anyone with a master key access. You could even do something as simple as add another layer of security.
Another way to circumvent it without developing any further software is to encrypt it with 2 keys. If CA's are mandated to generate certificates that would require a master key then you get one of the CA for transportation purposes and encrypt the data with a self signed key.
At the end of the day, it is just pure unadulterated bullshit.
Never mind pgp, what about OPENSSL? Just about the only way you could possibly allow access to openssl encrypted communications is with a master certificate so anyone who contributes to the openssl project or even went through the code (yes I know ossl code is a nightmare; I work with it) could find and circumvent the generation of any key pair that could be circumvented by means of a back door (and that is nowhere near as difficult as it sounds).
In essence they can legislate as much as they like, but there is no way that anyone is going to use encryption with a built in back door and no way that the only encryption will be closed source. It is completely nuts or it is more bullshit virtue signalling.
Rumours are swirling that there is an api that will allow those who are granted access to it the ability to switch on radio without user intervention or even notification. Anyone know if this is true? I mean I would not be installing the app regardless, but the the api would be delivered by the vendor rather than the application so if this is true I will not be updating my phone in the foreseeable future and long term I will be going back to my Blackberry.
Our house only develops in 2 flavours now, web based and ncurses; everything stays on the server and you can use whatever you like to access it.
In reality MS is the bastard child and for business it is getting worse with ever release. I would not even class it as an operating system any more, it is a data acquisition node that happens to run applications.
The future being terminal service... oops sorry "Cloud based computing" puts MS in a position where sooner or later it is just going to have to accept that it needs to become a desktop that runs on linux in the same manner as KDE; Gnome; et al. in order to evolve and remain relevant.
You base your whole argument on the false premise that anthropogenic co2 can drive climate or is in other ways harmful to the planet; it is not.
The insulation properties of co2 are so low that it cannot possibly drive climate because its addition to the atmosphere causes global greening (healthier plants). As these plants are much more heathy they decay less and subsequently produce less methane.
Methane has insulation properties 12 times greater than co2 therefore there is no way that co2 can drive climate.
The amount of meat we eat on the other hand, and general over population are without doubt a serious problem, but not co2.
If you want to save the planet then the greatest contribution you can make is not to have children.
I am afraid that the dumb turkeys are the ones that voted for Christmas because they were told that goose was on the menu. Let us be honest here for a moment: When asked if they wanted less government, less control over their daily lives, fewer politicians and less regulation 48 percent of voters said NO! Seriously!!! How fucking thick are 48 percent of voters?
I do not think that I have ever read anything that quite so spectacularly misses the point! I mean the EU bringing in mandatory speed control technology; black box recorders and eCall notwithstanding, the whole point of leaving the EU is that we reduce the number of law makers and those that remain are far more accountable to the people that vote for them.
Perhaps the greatest example of this in action is our current parliament. For years it has blamed the EU for every undemocratic action it has ever taken; it is completely unprepared to take responsibility for itself which is why both of the main political parties are collapsing and it is becoming seriously threatened by people and parties that are prepared to be representative (or populist as some term it).
As we develop a more representative parliament (which granted will take time), these laws will have no place in our country, but we cannot expect this to happen over night when our parliament has used the stock excuse of "don't blame us, it is all coming from Europe" for the last 40 years.
And if you want evidence of this, just look how scared both Labour and the Conservatives are about holding European elections!
Of course the simple solution to that is to give Ireland a vote on reunification; Re-unite or have a border, it is up to you. And let the Scottish have another independence vote if they want one while we are at it.
Without the Scottish and the Irish England would never vote for membership of the rotten EU.
I just cannot comprehend why people are so supportive of a regulatory body such as the EU; Do they actually enjoy or feel a need to be told what to do? Are they too spineless to stand up for themselves and feel the need to bully by proxy? Or are they simply brainwashed? Who Knows?
The ironic thing is that if they EU were a regulatory body for the internet then the vast majority of proponents of remaining who read this site would be dead set against it. Why should we accept this freedom inhibiting bunch of cretins in real life but fight tooth and nail against it when somebody wants to regulate the internet in the same manner?
Well that really depends on the sort of repair that you want. For those of us that go off piste and work on digital presses with bespoke environmental and configuration problems who have to bend and fabricate hardware and software in order to meet customer expectations, the title of engineer is what you will use or you will be told to piss off and do it yourself if you think you are so clever.
Galileo is all about road user charging and spying on people, particularly in their cars. If we have no access to it whatsoever than I really cannot see how that would be a bad thing; It may not stop the inevitable greedy government from coming up with new and innovative ways to shaft drivers, but it may hold them back a bit.
If one little company moves out of the UK then I can live with it while thinking of all the money I am saving by not paying for every mile I drive for a little longer.
There will be a period of adjustment and that is all as there is a price to freedom, but it is always preferable to living in somebody else' shadow. It is just like when the little snowflakes move out of mummy and daddies house and get their own place; they have to start taking responsibility for themselves and have to start paying the bills, but that does not mean that they would be better off tied to mummy and daddies apron strings.
I write a lot of code in C++ that has to interface with C libraries and do not have the time nor inclination to create wrappers for every library as I would never get any work done. This is what happens in the real world; most companies are not prepared to pay you to write wrappers and would much rather employ programmers that have a reasonable understanding of C and can use it withing C++ programs and find workarounds where necessary.
The problem with c++ is not the code itself (you either use STL features or you don't, it is up to you); it is the evangelists who insist that you should write everything using strict OOP and every single available feature to write a hello world program.
The good thing about the STL is that it can save an awful lot of documentation if used properly, and OOP too has its place. Where I start to get a little annoyed with cpp is its determination to hide or mess around with what are basically pointers just for the hell of doing so, it makes no sense and over complicates things unnecessarily.
I like the language, I like the features and I like the fact that I can still use C code quite comfortably within, should the need arise or should it make the code more readable (which in many cases it does).
Galileo has nothing to do with security and everything to do with road user charging so thankfully it will set the uk gov back in its quest to futher milk its favourite cash cow. I really cannot see how delays in the UK government's timeline for further shafting drivers can ever be a bad thing.
Surely we don't need speed limits once autonomous cars have proliferated, certainly not the heavily retarded speed limits that we have at present.
There definitely should be no need for the rather laughingly named "Smart" motorways. The whole idea of autonomous cars is that they can communicate with each other and will no longer require the stopping distances that human drivers require. They should also be able to go much faster, much safer.
There will of course need to be an offence of Jaywalking, but that is inevitable anyway otherwise kids and the car hating hippy greens would wreak havoc.
They seem to be thinking along the lines that car ownership will be similar to what it is now (and it simply will not be). Most journeys will be made by autonomous courier vehicles which will be hired by the journey or be provided as part of an automated courier service. For personal transportation most people will opt for an autonomous Uber like service (probably integrating with high speed rail for longer journeys).
By the time cars become fully autonomous they will also be electric and so will likely take themselves off to an induction loop type charging system when they are not needed; This sort of infrastructure will make personal car ownership a little silly for the majority of people and the big tech firms that are ploughing all their money into autonomous vehicles can see this. Uber is base class for the future of personal transportation; nearly all autonomous vehicle use will be derived from it (and this legislation will not fit well with that model).
The good news is that the government's favourite cash cow (the motorist) will no longer provide it with the revenue that it likes to steal; The not so good news is that, government being government, it will find new and innovative ways to steal money from individuals.
I really don't get why so many in IT (so many on here at any rate) support the EU? In IT speak it is blindingly obvious that the EU is tantamount a global variable with input from all directions constantly changing things and no idea who is changing what; why; and more importantly how to stop it. There isn't even anything in place to limit its scope; the very foundation of the EU is what makes it the truly corrupt organisation that it is.
The evidence is based on the models, and the models are not reflecting reality. Additionally no baseline data has been released (i.e. what do the models predict would happen to the climate without additional releases of co2). We can be certain that the climate is changing and we can be certain that either some or all of this change is natural, so surely we should have some data on how we should expect the climate to change without anthropogenic co2. If you ask for this data you are stonewalled.
The problem is that the models are continually getting it wrong. The data is going in, the algorithms are being crunched and future trends are being predicted that are completely out of the ball park. Why is this? Is it because we do not understand the feedback mechanisms? More than likely! Co2 has a tiny GWP and global greening is absorbing far more than we could ever imagine; Could it simply be that the world can easily cope with anthropogenic co2 without changing any more than it ordinarily would. We know that the planet can cope with far more co2 than we can produce and we know that the climate will always change The problem that I have with climate "science" is that when we get data like the Vostok ice cores we are saying "Ok we know that Co2 is causing climate change so why is the data showing that past rises in temperature precede rises in Co2". There is not a single climate scientist working on the theory that the model of anthropogenic Co2 driving climate might be wrong (because they are all following the money). What science shows us is that Co2 is a greenhouse gas; what it has failed to do up until now is show us that when combined with other elements releasing more than a certain amount into the atmosphere will drive climate change. All we know at the moment are that the models are too inaccurate to make predictions and that notwithstanding the political bias, the truth is that the science is far from settled.
So let's just say that we have another referendum and remain win by; hmmmm...; let me think for a minute.... 52%. Do you think that we should have a further referendum or would that be satisfactory for you? 1.7million more people voted to leave than remain; notwithstanding the use of percentages to trivialise it, that is a substantial margin! You lost; get over it; now you know how I felt when the country elected tony friggin blair!
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021