Posts by ExampleOne 144 posts • joined 27 Jun 2017
And I don't see the value in integrating the WiFi. There is a well-defined abstraction to the network with moderate bandwidth required. It's the archetype for a functionality that should be on a separate chip with a vendor-neutral interface.
I think, in battery powered mobile devices, there is a power benefit to integrating it.
Away from the battery powered mobile device use-case, I completely agree it is better off chip.
I was thinking something similar. Given the terrestrial environments life has been found in, it seems presumptuous to dismiss the possibility out of hand. This may be an environment outside the known parameters, but unless we have multiple examples of such environments here on Earth we can’t say terrestrial life couldn’t survive it, just that it hasn’t had a chance to.
Is this environment that much harsher than the brine lakes under the ice cap in the Antarctic?
If IR35 gave the "contractor" the rights of an employee, along with the tax implications, it wouldn't be so bitterly unpopular.
There is also a difference in intent: In the UK the intention is to effectively force all the contractors into employee relationships (this doesn't prevent short term contracts). In Cali it is to effectively force the employers to offer employee relationships.
Given all you have heard, you are still prepared to consider the app design anything other than “incredibly stupid”? The current design appears to fail completely in the single most important aspect for such an app: encouraging trust sufficient to get people to install it.
That said, it is kind of amusing to listen to all the politicians who threw years ago were assuring us that people were tired of experts and didn’t trust them now appealing to us to trust the experts.
And, while not mainstream or even x86 derived, Raptor had some fun findings on the power draw of the nominally 95W TDP 4-core Power9 CPU from IBM: under load, apparently, they consistently drew around 65W and it was a struggle to get them to draw more.
The only conclusion that could be drawn was the 95W TDP was a “designed to” figure that had been specified before the chips were finalised.
I have no problem with the contention that google are considered a publisher for all material published (I.e. served to an end user) by their servers. This isn’t particularly outrageous. Further, it appears in this case it isn’t the initial publishing of the information that is the subject of the complaint, it was continuing to present the results post notification. This isn’t that far removed from the Spanish case!
The interesting point in this case, and the Spanish case, is that the original website probably has a legitimate interest defence on the original article which sounds like it is an archive site. However old newspapers may no longer be relevant, and google really shouldn’t be allowed to present archive material as recent results, especially once warned presenting without full context could be defamatory.
Any other ruling on “Are google the publisher?” raises the question of who is the publisher for information served by aggregators and other social media sites: I am pretty certain The Age would legitimately be able to defend having their archive available online (not a major problem as most people wont find the article there anyway, and without google etc would almost certainly appreciate the context if they did) and how can they be held liable for the actions of Google? This principle is clearly covered in the EU at least where it is clear that public domain data (I.e. The Age archives) can still be protected data (I.e. not fair game for google to scrape and publish all over the internet).
More amusingly, if you do take this approach, assuming my memories of how the law works in these cases is correct, you are actually suing the retailer, not Belkin.
Want to stop these dead in the channel? Make the consequences of selling them too annoying for PC World.
Except that for plenty of companies, Ink is a lot more reasonable priced once the printer is paid for up front.
I can specifically reference Epson EcoTank where the Epson inks are comparable in price with third party inks on Amazon. I have never checked the Canon MegaTank or Brother equivalents as I don't have them, but assume they are similar.
Interestingly, as alluded in the post you are disagreeing with, the price for cartridge ink per sheet drops dramatically once you move out of the cheap consumer inkjet market. Highend canon photo printers ink cartridge prices aren't ridiculously high, but you are looking at a £500+ printer. This is not a system designed for bulk printing, and is a market that is far more aware of TCO calculations than the regular consumer.
Perhaps there should be two price tiers - the fully costed purchase that accepts third party inks and the gillette model one where the printer is sold at loss but only takes the manufacturer cartridges.
Epson already have this (their CIS EcoTank models), Canon and Brother (AIUI) also have CIS models. Interestingly the CIS models were something like £100-£150 more expensive than the equivalent cartridge models when I was last buying a printer a couple of years ago.
The only problem is HP appear to have moved the other way towards "subscription" ink.
For serious compiling and heavy work, in practice, there really is little evidence that ARM are going to offer any significant benefit over x86 once you build a full, high performance, platform around it. RAM is RAM, PCIe is still PCIe, GPUs remain unchanged, etc...
I would also question the assumption that Apple are magically going to be able to produce an ARM system (not core, an entire system, which is effectively going to be the requirements for an ARM based Mac Pro) given all the people who have tried and failed miserably. Are there any widely available current SoCs at sensible prices with 64GB or 128GB RAM?
I may be surprised, but for Apple, keeping the current split where iPad is ARM for consumption, and Mac is x86 for creation or production, leveraged the strengths of both platforms.
Two thoughts:
1) Apple already has an ARM powered laptop: the iPad Pro with the Smart Keyboard.
2) How to completely alienate your professional workstation customers: finally announce a long awaited successor to your workstation line, then effectively EOL it before it has even hit full availability.
Apple may well be working on a new 5nm higher performance ARM chip, but I somehow doubt they are planning to kill the Intel laptop and desktop lines. They can easily enough run both, given the slight split in their market between consumer and production devices.
Except AIUI the UK approach to these things as a member was:
A) sort of implement something that looks vaguely like the EU directive
B) get sued in CJEU
C) get told it isn’t compatible with EU law
D) GOTO A)
Which was sort of tolerated as a member, but based on history will not be tolerated from a third party state. This means that the UK won’t just have to pay lip service to implementing and enforcing GDPR compatible rules, it will actually have to do it!
I assumed it meant they were going to organise moving the data instead.
Container full of storage on a lorry in London, ship it, at other end replay storage logs since it was cloned in London.
Depending how their storage is set up, this could be pretty trivial or pretty painful, but the basic logistics are not complicated, especially if customers move most of their workloads in advance if the shutoff.
Oh the sweet innocence...
I caught Sky engaging in deep packet manipulation to change the IP in DNS replies from the authoritative servers to my local servers. The only reason I can’t see TalkTalk doing similar is their technical incompetence.
I am no longer a Sky customer, obviously.
On “similar” deals. Without more details on all three details, who was involved, and how the revenue was assigned, it is hard to comment.
Note: I am not saying IBM are squeaky clean here, just that the dispute appears to hinge less on “varying the contract” and more on what revenue is in scope for the commission: IBM are not actually trying to change the percentage involved.
For example, if the commission is on hardware sales, and a large part of the deal is actually support or software, does it count as a hardware sale?
> His portion of the revenue, it's claimed, was about $12.6m, for which he was to receive about $1.4m. Instead, IBM decided the applicable commissionable revenue was only $2m, for which Beard was to receive about $230,000, roughly 15 per cent of the expected amount.
So the disagreement here is not about them trying to change the commission rates, it is about how much of the sale revenue is in scope for commission?
Last year I am sure there were many companies interested in WFH, but felt there were unresolved risks in moving to a more WFH friendly policy. Any change has risk associated with it, and as the current have everyone in the office was mostly working ok, why take on risk?
This year, all of those companies have basically had a risk free pilot because everyone is in the same boat.
It will indeed be interesting to see how many companies move to a far more WFH friendly stance in the next couple of years.
Is it me or is there a pattern of Google discovering non-US judges tend to be less willing to let them play fast and loose?
It sounds a lot like Google are trying to submit evidence hidden in incomprehensible jargon deliberately and are trying to block anyone who might know about the field from actually viewing it. That is not going to fly this side of the Atlantic.
But then they have form for a fairly contemptuous attitude to courts this side of the Atlantic.
While that is how the case played out, that argument hinged on Perens status as for his opinions: does his opinion have any weight in law?
The defamation argument attempted to argue that as an expert in the field his opinion had legal weight. If the court had accepted this argument, the court would have been forced to consider the correctness of his opinion, as it would have been considered exempt from the “first amendment” defence. Most professions aren’t entitled to claim their professional opinions are first amendment protected if they are wrong.
Except that was precisely the ruling from the court, which explicitly refused to comment in any way on the accuracy of Bruce Perens opinion of the law, emphasising that he is not a lawyer, and the statements were clearly and explicitly marked as opinion.
Or having found an excuse to avoid providing a ruling on the GPL they grabbed it and ran away as fast as possible, which is probably a sensible thing to do.
What is your upload? It is fantastic having very high levels of asymmetry in the connection when streaming Netflix, far less so when trying to video conference. I have consistently ignored virgin as a WFH customer for precisely this reason: BT openreach resellers offered as good upload cheaper.
Also, where is the ping to? Could the problems be the other end, with your colleagues on 10mbit BT lines expecting poor performance? What type of connection is the 10mbit line?
Well, as it is not possible to 100% disable the Intel Management Engine, despite LibreMs marketing claims, I am not sure it makes any difference. At least some of its functions are critical to keeping the system running. The HAP bit, which is what LibreM are setting, supposedly disables all the non-essential functionality but Intel have refused to ever confirm or deny that, and frankly are probably not trustable even if they were to.
If you truly want a Management Engine free system, your options are either very old AMD, even older Intel, Via (IIRC) or non-x86.
Nothing prevents you using fixed term PAYE contracts. In fact the only fixed term contract role I have held was precisely like that.
Also, tie the contract length to to project life rather than fixed terms and pay a fixed amount for it, which as I understand it puts the contract clearly outside IR35 (but also loads a LOT of risk onto the contractor).
> Concern that letting Chinese giant in has left Blighty 'utterly friendless'
I thought that ‘utterly friendless’ was a result of a government who thinks ‘give us what we want or we will walk away’ counted as negotiations, and which having got some of what it wanted in the last round is now trying to say that was not what they agreed!
Not really, assuming both sides are being reasonable.
I certainly couldn’t fully specify electrical work for an electrician I hired, I trust him to be able to translate my desires (e.g. power socket here) into a fully specified job and deliver. Somehow I haven’t had issues not having been able to fully specify all the electrical backing to those sockets. In fact, that is pretty much why I hire professionals for this kind of work.
Um... I think my point was that many of the contractors in question are not being hired to do a job, they are being hired as an FTE with easier disposal but a higher price to compensate.
There may also be some manipulating headcount for market reasons going on as well For the public ally listed companies.
I’m not sure how HMRCs rules requiring the client companies to “to give reasonable care” can be enforced against a “they are all on terminable contracts” defence.
As one of the arguments for contractors is they don’t have security and can be terminated on a whim, I don’t see how HMRC can actually enforce the rule against a company that decides that under the new rules they have no interest in serving as government enforcers in yet another way. Any company making that decision could legitimately decide that they will no longer hire any contractor where they might even be asked to serve as enforcer, resulting in all such contracts being terminated whatever HMRC may say.
Of course, this decision may also be idiotic in other ways, but sadly that is the company’s prerogative.
Not everyone likes to be behind someone doing 25, 30, 32, 30, 25, 35, 25, 30, 32, 37, 28... on an stretch of 35mph non-passing road with no weather related hazards.
It eats more fuel having to rollercoaster the speeds, precludes the use of cruise control by drivers following, and causes safe following distance errors.
The cruise control in our car wouldn’t care, it can keeps distance if the car in front is going slower than the speed it is set to.
Which is quite fun when people do stupid things and it responds at computer speeds instead of human speeds
> But if they were protected from their first publication, then it doesn't actually matter what happens later, i.e. becoming a standard. All that means is that, in the case of SQL and C, IBM and at&t will make a shitload more money.
It is even worse, because almost everything now is derived from earlier works, with some new bits added, it means everything is infringing an older copyright. Hence who owns what is going to be an interesting question.
For a simple example, what percentage of the java API is actually owned by K&R, as they probably never signed the copyright no one thought existed over...
Even though I like popcorn, this is not one I really want to reach for the popcorn for!
The Register - Independent news and views for the tech community. Part of Situation Publishing
Join our daily or weekly newsletters, subscribe to a specific section or set News alerts
SUBSCRIBE
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020