Redundancy
They should have used it on their IT rather than their workforce
338 publicly visible posts • joined 11 Sep 2007
because now the internet is full of people learning how to evade Virgin Media's implemented block of Pirate Bay (using Cleanfeed I have heard)
Previously if you had asked "How can I bypass the cleanfeed block" everyone would know you were a kiddy fiddler - now hundreds of thousands of non-geeks are learning how to avoid IWF blocks.
Because virgin media have implemented their piracy blockade using cleanfeed, hundreds of thousands of people who only wanted game of thrones have now learnt techniques to help turn them into kiddly fiddlers.
http://www.janimania.com/2012/05/04/pirate-bay-block-endangers-children/
I used to be a developer at a chemical engineering firm.
They used to enforce a set of rules for password construction and you had to change it every 60 days. This ended up being far too much work for the limited IT staff.
They changed the system to remove the construction rules & enforced 60 day change and instead constantly ran brute force & dictionary attacks on everyone's passwords. If your password got cracked you had to change it.
I was able to retain mine for the remainig 5 years I stayed at the company.
My single mother was very poor so there wasn't much chance of me getting hold of a computer in those days, fortunately many of my friends had parents who could afford them. So I learnt to program on my friend's devices. Often I actually used them more than they did. Many times friends would simply donate their zx81's & then spectrums to me for months on end!
Eventually a few years later my Mum & relatives clubbed together and got me an Amstrad CPC 64 (green screen) and that's when I found the most useful programming book I have ever encountered.
It was a collection of about 30 basic programs for the CPC64, by this time due to the 64k ram typing many pages of basic into the thing was quite a task. The brilliant thing about this book though was that not a single one of the contained programs actually worked as printed! I would spend days going over the code checking for syntax errors on my part.
Once it was clear I had made no mistakes it was time to start trying to fix the code myself. The buzz I used to get when all that gibberish started to make sense was fantastic. Most of the games were nothing to get too excited about, but becuase I had managed to get them working myself they were a lot more satisfying than they would have been.
I'm sure the author(s) of that book didn't set out to produce 30 broken programs, but because they did, I became hooked on the things. Unfortunately I was never in aposition to be able to touch a computer at school or have any formal training until I put myself through college many years later, then university (Bsc. Soft Eng).
The odd thing is after working with the things for so long, I have long since lost any love of computers, gadgets or programming. I detest the way commercial pressures lead to hacking crappy solutions together. I hate to see C++ that is actually C encased in a few ridiculously huge classes and most of all I hate the mainstream uses of the things these days (ie Marketing, repression, rampant capitalism).
The golden age of computers has passed & now we're into the 'functional magic ' era where technology bloggers can learn a bit of markup and think they understand what programming is like.
tl;dr I liked the old days, things were different when I were a kid.
Same here, even though my GF offered to pay for Sky just for F1 - they can F off.
I thought they had said initially that as they are still taking the full broadcast team to each race that they would still show the races live online, but that seems to have changed now.
I believe Channel 4 is also partly public funded by the TV licence? I don't see why the beeb couldn't have shared coverage with them, but apparently they weren't even approached?
He should be going for the actual websites that are publishing it. Even if he were able to get google not to index it, other search sites around the world could and would.
The internet need a constitution laying out certain principles that should be upheld. For instance search indexes should not be liable for indexing something. They are not carrying the content simply stating that it exists FFS.
Or they should start suing telephone directories for listing phone numbers of drug dealers etc.
They both sound terrible. I first used an online streaming service when I lived in the US in 2002. I forget the name of it but it was free to register. There were several 'indie' films available for free and a small number of more mainstream movies for a small fee ~ $2 - $3
I first watched Ghost Town & Memento on that service (I couldn't stand the way the US channels butchered every movie to fit into nice hourly slots so I never bothered getting a TV)
These offerings actually sound worse 10 years later. I think I'll stick to rentals / piracy / waiting until it is shown on TV. Until they offer more choice and single purchase options.
Thanks,
I think google's search results have been as shit as everyone else's for at least 6 months to a year now.
I have been patiently waiting for someone else to start providing decent results, but I don't think it is going to happen. Big corporations own the internet now and they don't want to provide you the results you want, they want to provide you with the results they want you to want.
both my (divorced) parents (both 70 years old) use linux for exactly that reason (moved from Ubuntu to Mint now though) because it is easy to install and use and if it seriously screws up (which has only happened to one of them once) I can get them to reinstall it themselves very simply.
I suspect I will find it a lot harder to talk them through installing secure boot keys through the bios or whatever proprietary interface is provided with their own particular hardware.
..and has the most competetive offline AI available on the consoles. Most console racers have been spoiled by the easy "everyone's a winner" mentality of GT which means you can pick up Shift 2 very cheaply now. Well worth it if you love racing and are just as happy to battle for a mid-field place as for first.
It's by no means perfect though and you default set-ups on a lot of cars are terrible. It also has plenty of bugs, but nonetheless I still love popping it in and doing quick races for a couple of hours.
FYI: I've always hated other N4S titles
It is quite easy to lie about experience or knowledge on your CV but much harder to carry that off when asked direct questions about it.
In addition if you were to put enough detail about that particular point in your CV it would balloon to the dreaded 27 pager that would have been binned long before you got to the interview.
I have encountered individuals who have stated excellent skills at coding and gui design only to discover in interview that they meant being able to define foreground and background colours in html (hilariously though not using CSS) when we were looking for c++ programmers to design complex graphing applications for engineering data visualisation.
Calling it an interior view is somewhat misleading because for most cars it is a silhouette cut-out blocking your view, not an interior.
The key flaw in GT5 is it is just too easy, offers no challenge in the offline game. The AI are no competition at all.
The things they have updated are all marred by Polyphony's distinctly odd perspective of how things should work.
Spec 2.0 does nothing particularly noteworthy for GT5.
It is still a terrible game. GT5 is so poorly designed and implemented, so long overdue and over-budget that I thought it might have been a government IT project
I taught myself to program starting with the zx81 using basic and moving on. However I never had any confidence that I was actually doing things in the best manner. It was utterly impossible to get a job back then without a degree. I eventually went and did a BSc in Software Engineering. I was horrified that some of the computer science degrees at our uni didn't even require a single programming module to be taken over the three year course!
Even of those who did do courses which required some programming many were dreadful to be honest. Lots of them were there because it was a trendy subject which could earn you good money afterwards. I think the answer is
There are good degrees and there are dreadful ones.
There are good educated programmers and dreadful ones
There are good bedroom coders and dreadful ones.
Long interviews and some testing are the only real way to determine who you're dealing with.
Which is exactly what I did for my BSc Soft Eng.
When I graduated I too found that despite the qualification most employers wanted two years experience.
Of course the company I did my sandwhich course with hired me two months later. I worked there for 5 years from code monkey to senior developer. Just don't screw up your year in industry :)
My biggest problem with f1 2010 was actually the lack of a decent replay. Without being able to view what happened to your competitors and no display of lap number / splits/ times etc... You mnight have a great race but have no way to find out what happened to your rivals in the race.
Anyone know if they have made replays actually useful this time?
I avoid all MS products when possible and recommend alternatives whenever anyone asks. So when the shills realise this exists & start the big MS love-in...
I don't care when MS accidentally manages to put out a half decent product they are still a bunch of total wankers who need to be punched repeatedly in the face.
Surely if the manufacturers and OS vendors provided detailed enuogh specs in the first place driver developers would need to infer less. Documentation has always been the big problem in software development of any kind.
Despite 30 years of trying to move software development into the engineering domain, programmers and companies continue to consistently provide sub standard documentation (if any at all). Most companies that I have worked in where they do claim to follow a methodology usually simply go through the motions ticking boxes.
This is even odder considering I was developing chemical process & plant design software and would be told not to spend more than a day or two on design & to get coding right away by people who would spend a year designing a chemical plant before the foundations were laid.
If they built chemical plants (or bridges, skyscrapers, nMRI scanners etc...) using the same methodology as software it would be a very dangerous world!
Unfortunately commercial companies rarely see notice the benefit of accurately designed and documented software.
My team were once able to produce an enhancement to an application which had been allocated 8 months development time in three weeks because we were able to build on an excellent, flexible design of the original app. It was only at that point that my manager had one of those 'aaaaah I see!' moments.
I agree with Dave. This isn't news. Even the eve devblog you link to is 3 years old.
I haven't played Eve for over a year, but this wasn't even news then. The battle between the RMT crowd and the game devs has been pretty much constant for many years and as My Murray pointed out Unholy Rage [http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=687] which happened a year after the your dev blog link, Reduced the farmers by a vast amount.
I regularly read the forums and haven't noticed any new recent spike in problems (or devblogs) regarding the matter?
Slow news day?
I don't see anything worth ranting about here except that forcing plain packets will reduce the production costs for the manufacturers.
As a smoker I'm not keen on anyone banning me from purchasing the stuff, but I do think people should be discouraged from smoking. It is an expensive unhealthy addiction with little personal return.
It's also completely wrong that the ciggy companies do all they can to profit from a highly toxic poison that they know is highly addictive and potentially fatal.
What is the difference at the end of the day between a tobacco company, an alcohol producer and a heroin dealer? All three are highly addictive and the first two cause severe multifaceted health problems. All three operate under the same principles of minimising costs and maximising profits, usually through marketing and misinformation.
Ultimately it is impossible to eradicate use of any of these substances as too many large financial empires have already been built on the profits. Prohibition drives it underground and makes it impossible to regulate out the worst of the lies and ALL of the profits go to the pushers and none get returned to society to help it counter the resulting problems.
I think really the only way of dealing with any of these problems is limited legality, regulation, taxation and education.
They should parade some of us feckless smokers and drunks and some junkies through school assembly every morning so the kids can examine our blackened, yellow teeth and smell the stench on our clothes maybe get us to try and do a couple of star jumps and then ask them.... how cool is that?
Game theory seems to have taken a dive lately, this sounds like another unholy mess of homogeneous crap.
Reward systems should largely be implicit and logical but there appears to be an (understandable) trend to deliberately build in addiction. However attempting this with off the shelf explicit systems usually fails miserably.
You can almost smell the business executive rich committee meeting that spawned this garbage
It still highlights the fact that the infrastructure for more than a very small percentage of the population to drive e-cars simply doesn't exist and is unlikely to do so.
The costs just don't scale to the majority of the population using e-cars.
I'm not a sceptic, I have been interested in climatology since the early 80's, am currently completely convinced by the evidence for man made global warming and have lived a 'green' lifestyle for 23 years.
MS do this all the time, introduce a proprietary product or file format or language extensions and then pull support out from under your feet the moment they see an alternative money making scheme.
I really don't know why anyone is surprised.
The only thing that does surprise me about this is that it actually sounds like a really good product for home use on a win box.
Given their new found love of the OSS domain perhaps they should open source the code?
Must go, I have to blag me one of that flock of pigs roosting in the trees yonder.
Every review I have read has waxed lyrical about this being the grrrrreatest F1 game ever, which is complete rubbish. The replay issue is a major problem for a sport that is about a championship. After winning or losing a race you want to know what happened to your championship rivals, why did Hamiliton finish in 19th when he started on pole? etc...
Whilst it does have set-up options, it has no bloody telemetry data from your laps making it very hard to tell if your setup tweaks have made a material difference.
Whilst the sense of speed with f1 2010 is good Geoff Crammond's GP4 with some community mods added is actually still a lot more immersive and enjoyable to play.
I still have a win32 partition just to play GP4 and Tie Fighter :)
There are some other issues too. The graphics on the PS3 version are sub-par for some reason, no-where near as good as the screen shots or youtube vids.
The frame rate suffers at some circuits, not enough to be unplayable (for me anyway) but it still looks a bit cheap when it occurs.
Finally the bloody press interviews section is so pointless, repetetive and tedious, I can't believe they spent resources implementing this garbage rather than working on a decent replay, or real qualifying timings, or telemetry data
How much have codemasters been paying critics to write such superlative rich reviews?
7/10 absolute maximum.