* Posts by Reality_Cheque

10 publicly visible posts • joined 5 Apr 2019

IPv6 may already be irrelevant – but so is moving off IPv4, argues APNIC's chief scientist

Reality_Cheque

IP6 isn't all bad

Remember... if BT had been in charge, we would have IP6 addresses looking like 192.168.0.0.1

France charges Telegram CEO with multiple crimes

Reality_Cheque

Re: "It looks like he didn't comply"

I agree with both the facts and the spirit of what you've said, but that isn't the way the game is played. Ask Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe.

Tesla fires gigafactory staff after someone made the mistake of mentioning unions

Reality_Cheque

Re: 19th Century England or 21st Century USA?

I'm surprised that you have written this in the context of the current industrial relations disgruntlement. Here in the UK we are facing a massive wave of strikes - rail, nurses, teachers, mail, etc. and these are all organised by unions. Unions are clearly not illegal, clearly still have teeth, and are clearly not shy or wrecking businesses to get their way.

Cookie consent crumbles under fresh UK data law proposals

Reality_Cheque

Cookies - Yes, more options, see options, maybe, but never 'no'

The primary user annoyance with cookies is the inability to simply click 'no'. You can have 'yes', or 'more options', but I'm pretty sure that's not how it was supposed to work.

It takes more clicks to reject their cookies than accept them, so France fines Facebook and Google over €200m

Reality_Cheque

Erm... glass houses?

Here on The Register site. "Accept All Cookies" or...no.. not "Reject All Cookies" but rather "Customise Settings".

Thunderbird 91 lands: Now native on Apple Silicon, swaps 'master' for 'primary' password, and more

Reality_Cheque

Training

Alas, I need to "primary" the skill of being PC.

I no longer have a burning hatred for Jewish people, says Googler now suddenly no longer at Google

Reality_Cheque

Re: This is an indictment on Google, again.

I agree with your first para, but you went off the rails in the second. Racial familiarity (perhaps 'cultural comfort') is part of what diversity actually is, but if I were to suggest that diversity brings negative impacts as well as positive ones I would get kebabbed here quicker than the subject of the article.

At face value, the path taken out of racism is something to be lauded, not punished. All Google has done here is to discourage people from talking about their reform and enlightening others. What next? Google attending self-help groups to identify and punish reformed addicts, reformed criminals, etc.

As Brit cyber-spies drop 'whitelist' and 'blacklist', tech boss says: If you’re thinking about getting in touch saying this is political correctness gone mad, don’t bother

Reality_Cheque

Wouldn't it be far, far easier....

...if we simply stopped calling black people 'black'?

Oh dear... AI models used to flag hate speech online are, er, racist against black people

Reality_Cheque

Walking on eggshells

The problem is that what is considered relaxed banter amongst African-Americans, is considered racist when used by white people. The flaw isn't in the algorithm, it is in society. For example, there are a dozen informal but inoffensive ways to refer to a British person (Brit, Tommy, limey, Pom, etc), and any white or black person is welcome to use these. Give one example of an informal but INOFFENSIVE way to refer to an African, Indian or Pakistani. There are a few when used by a black person, but a white speaker is reduced to using the strictly formal, or grossly offensive. Fixing that differentiation is the issue, not trying to filter according to the race of the speaker.

Blundering London council emails unredacted version of notorious Gangs Matrix to 44 people. Data ends up on Snapchat

Reality_Cheque

ICO gets 145k. Victims get nothing.

We have seen breach after breach of privacy by phone companies, councils, and other organisations. The ICO gets richer, and the victims get nothing.

In this particular case, I can live with it. A gang member doesn't deserve anything even if his privacy has been breached, but in almost every other case the victims deserve compensation yet receive none at all.

If data is negligently shared then each victim should receive £20 as a MINIMUM as an apology. It's not much, but it will encourage companies to not keep too much data in the same place, don't you think?