* Posts by bridgebuilder

10 posts • joined 31 Jul 2021

Microsoft suspends free trials for Windows 365 after a day due to 'significant demand'

bridgebuilder
Unhappy

>Why would people suddenly flock to them now?

Because the non-cloudy products are getting worse.

Teams regularly hogging 100% CPU on a decently specced machine? Ah well, lots of people have been complaining for a year but apparently this is not really a priority for MS to fix. Or MS is not capable of fixing it.

bridgebuilder
Joke

Re: Should it not be called Windows 361 or something

>The "O" indicates octal base

Wrong. The "O" stands for "Occasional".

US SEC chair calls for crypto regulation

bridgebuilder

Re: He doesn't go far enough

>Sure, but people are not willingly usually to exchange anvils or paintings.

Well, they might exchange anvils by sending them on airborne trajectories towards each other in order to settle an argument.

Less common with paintings but I am sure it happens.

bridgebuilder
Flame

Re: Probably Long Overdue

>What a cryptocurrency token essentially is, is film footage of you setting fire to a pile of money.

In other words: It is an NFT representing the film footage.

Facebook takes bold stance on privacy – of its ads: Independent transparency research blocked

bridgebuilder
Headmaster

Brain migration, please

Can all the bright minds that are working on finding ever new ways of selling users(' data) to advertisers please switch their efforts towards creating business models that do NOT rely on ads?

Thank you.

US govt calmly but firmly tells Blue Origin it already has a ride to the Moon's surface with SpaceX, thanks

bridgebuilder

Re: "NASA hopes to send astronauts to the Moon by 2023"

Maybe Jeff can bid for *returning* the astronauts ... .

A warm stand-by, so to speak.

Australian court rules an AI can be considered an inventor on patent filings

bridgebuilder

Re: nothing in Australia law says the applicant for a patent must be human

>why didn't the guy claim to have invented them himself?

This.

The whole discussion is moot since the operator of the AI can easily submit all those auto-generated "inventions" under their own name.

Prohibiting AI-submitted patents might be a good idea for various reasons but it certainly does not solve the issue of the patent system being flooded with auto-generated applications.

Huawei to America: You're not taking cyber-security seriously until you let China vouch for us

bridgebuilder
Mushroom

Evolutionary dead-end

As the saying goes, a cyber attacker only has to be successful once whereas people trying to defend against attacks have to be successful every time. As more and more countries become dependent on their IT infrastructure just to function as countries, more and more countries become vulnerable to Keystone-like events (and worse). Consequently, the appetite for mutual non-cyberaggression pacts will increase (with pacts covering both active attacks and passive attacks in the sense of letting ransomware gangs use the own territory as an operating base).

The hard part is to figure out who to negotiate with ... it won't be enough to assemble the big powers round the table in a recap of 80s nuclear disarmament talks

Icon because the overall geostrategic situation is surprisingly similar.

Tech spec experts seek allies to tear down ISO standards paywall

bridgebuilder

Re: The Management.

Not quite.

As has been pointed out, most of the standardisation work is done by experts who are paid by their organisation (often from a standards lobbying budget) but are not paid by ISO. The same applies, incidentally, for the sister organisations IEC and ITU as well as the ISO/IEC JTC1 where a lot of the IT-related standards have their home (AI is subcommittee 42 ... someone read their Hitchhiker's Guide, apparently, but I digress.)

The budgets of ISO, IEC and ITU are used for administration purposes. A lot of admin work is involved in managing approval processes among the national bodies, creating new committees, managing workspaces etc. I am sure there is waste, just like in any bureaucratic organisation, but the comparison with Nominet is rather unfair.

The argument for making standards freely available is solid. This means that ISO, IEC and ITU budgets will need to be funded solely by national body contributions, which in turn means that national bodies need to raise additional income (often this is a government grant). Maybe it is indeed time to do just that.

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR WEEKLY TECH NEWSLETTER

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021