Posts by Number 39

TikTok isn't protected by Section 230 in 10-year-old’s ‘blackout challenge’ death

Wasn't it recommended? How is that not curation?

Telegram founder and CEO arrested in France

Re: I hope Musk travels to France

It seems odd that the authorities don't use the holes that have been left in the design for access.

Telegram uses SMS for activation and logging in to an account. (With the possibility of email as 2FA).

If authorities know the phone number (and if needed the email this would potentially be harder) they could intercept the code, and log in to Telegram and capture all the cloud data.

Also Telegram now requires an official app to register, making it harder to use securely (you used to be able to sign up on a desktop, now you must use a mobile OS).

Re: I hope Musk travels to France

If you make the control to stop non contacts messaging users unavailable without paying a fee then I think you have crossed the line.

Parliamentarians urge next UK govt to consider ban on smartphones for under-16s

Re: And what about a tablet?

My thought too.

Also what about iPod touch style Android MP3 players?

And Phablets?

And Tablets with data?

Or even android devices with number pads?

Will they ban it by size connectivity, operating system?

Or will it be a vague decision, and then work out what they meant after it had been set in stone? Never a good idea and the most obvious example of such has already be referenced in a previous comment.

Microsoft drags Windows Subsystem for Android into the trash

Sideload

Sideload FDroid and you have opensource apps, (which I have done) Aurora might work from there.

Closure of Windows 10 upgrade path still catching users by surprise

You say

"I would not know how to download and set up a different operating system"

but follow up with

"A few years ago I went to Windows 10 via Windows 8.1"

Which means you have done so already.

Using a different family of OS is not any more challenging (if you choose a friendly one - Linux Mint is probably a safe choice)

Australia imposes cyber sanctions on Russian it says ransomwared health insurer

From the information in the article, the main results would seem to be frightening people not to pay ransoms (what if it is the same guy?) and potential problems for those sharing that name.

UK may demand tech world tell it about upcoming security features

Re: Won't work.

More to the point there will be a crippled version for the UK, (or would it just be GB?).

Google Chrome pushes ahead with targeted ads based on your browser history

Browser Partitioning

I generally try to practice Browser partioning:

e.g.

1. Chrome for Google Properties (and logins)

2. Edge for MS properties

3. Safari for Apple properties (on Apple devices)

4. Firefox for everything else

Perhaps adding Chromium for Amazon Properties, and (if I used any) Brave for Meat properties.

Official: Microsoft unbundles Teams in Europe

Would also be nice if the UI wasn't so dire. ICQ from 20 years ago was better. Telegram is better. Viber is better.I think I recall MSN messenger was better....

Veilid: A secure peer-to-peer network for apps that flips off the surveillance economy

Re: Count Me In

The thing that made Signal a non-starter for me, is the requirement for a smartphone with the app installed. And I also don't like the inability to hide your number and work with a name.

So I use(d) Telegram, but they changed it so it now requires a smartphone for initial logon. Which basically means most of my Telegram only contacts are slowly being disenfranchised. Which means finding a new platform. I like Session, but the performance isn't wonderful, and it's not the simplest for users. I wonder if they will be looking at this project? (Worryingly, Teams is looking like the most viable replacement)

Want tech cred? Learn how to email like a pro

Trimming also reduces the risk of someone being added to a multi recipient message and seeing something they're not intended to that was forgotten in an earlier message.

Soon the most popular 'real' desktop will be the Linux desktop

Re: functionality

The lack of apps could be mitigated by including an android system out of the box (or preferably as a choice on install).

Re: functionality

My malicious compliance would be to use office 97.

Meta says it'll ask Euro peeps nicely before hitting them with personalized ads

X-Farce surely?

Now Apple takes a bite out of encryption-bypassing 'spy clause' in UK internet law

Rather than leaving

Perhaps Signal could make a restricted version that allowed SMS length messages and voice only, (no video or attachements). So no serious possibility of the content that is supposedly the target.

And if they did that, perhaps they could roll out a preview, so people see what they are going to get.

Re: Proof of the UKs diminishing political structure ...

You missed out that Johnson wanted to leave the Single Market which messes up the "Nordic Stuff" idea. Staying in the Single market would have solved all sorts of other problems too. And had that been the plan and inititiated back in 2016, I double anyone would have been speaking about it past 2017.

Brexit Britain looks to French company to save crumbling borders and immigration tech

Re: @Phones Sheridan

"Who choose to make it easier to trade with China than the UK instead of just making trade easier with everywhere."

Boris Johnson, when he chose to exit the EEA as well as the EU.

How would it stop those? The UK always set the rules for non FOM entry.

Non EU immigration was always a significant enough proportion of the whole, that cutting it would have made a massive reduction, so the immigration was obviously required by the economy.

Now of course you have replaced migration (people who go back and forth to fill a need) with immigration, where there is a big investment and so returning is unlikely, so the result (as long as the economy doesn't collapse too badly) is more immigration.

There is a vacuum to be filled, but by those with a vested interest in settling, rather than just visiting seasonally.

Dyson moans about state of UK science and tech, forgets to suck up his own mess

Re: With two-faced "friends" like Dyson, Britain doesn't need enemies

If UK only passport holder is not eligible for an Irish passport and doesn't have a spouse* who is an EU citizen, the only EU country they can move freely to is the Republic of Ireland. Otherwise a visa is required, (some countries will be relatively easy, but a job offer is typically required.)

The actual act of moving will be somewhat more expensive. (I paid about 1500 GBP in 2020 for a sprinter van load, can't imagine it being that cheap, even to France, now.

*FOM covers a spouse of an EU citizen, except of course in their home country, where the citizen are not using it and regular rules apply.

Re: With two-faced "friends" like Dyson, Britain doesn't need enemies

Two points:

1. Without Freedom of Movement it is far harder.

(So your comment seems like trolling).

2. Seems pretty great here, and I'm working in one of the poorer EU countries.

(I moved here prior to the deadline, but but got the job more recently.)

Telegram criticizes Apple for 'intentionally crippling' web app features on iOS

A bit rich Telegram complaining about others crippling things

After they changed their system to require a smartphone, eventually cutting off most of my contacts. Matrix here I come. (And I used to be a massive Telegram advocate)

Tech pros warn EU 'data adequacy' at risk if Brexit Britain goes its own way

Re: Inadequate approach to data adequacy

You mean they took advantage of Johnson wanting something quick and not bothering to read it and then making ridiculous claims about the consequences while campaigning a general election on the basis of signing it?

Can't be ditched unilaterally without massive consequences, and sadly the UK is in a position of abject weakness.

Windows 10 still growing, but Win 11 had another bad month, says AdDuplex

Re: So which is it?

Maybe they weren't meant to be connected, and there was a (poor) implication of it being other people?

I have it on my Raspberry Pi

But it doesn't work very well.

Windows 11 growth at a standstill amid stringent hardware requirements

Re: remember when...?

It was dreadful in 4MB, but usable in 5.

Windows 8 was totally and utterly pathetic.

It's almost as if Windows 8 was designed to be installed on a tablet, that was used in place of a keyboard on the desktop. (With the addition of a regular screen)

And the designer left Microsoft without telling anyone this.

Russia bans foreign software purchases for critical infrastructure

Perhaps Microsoft could revive the windows not activated background.

But this time make it half blue and half yellow.

Hauliers report problems with post-Brexit customs system but HMRC insists it is 'online and working as planned'

Re: Hmm

"You offer no answer to the substantive points:"

Always accuse others of what you yourself are guilty of eh?

But actually I did, but you ignored them.

And you even answered them yourself, failing to understand what you posted wasn't a rebuttal.

1) Yet you still fail to address that the question asked was undefined as to which of the 3 distinct logical destination relationships, and claim imposing the choice of the least popular and remain is democracy.

2) It was certainly a protest vote that went drastically wrong.

"I'll leave you to your foaming." from the supposed fellow remainer who preferred a hard brexit to a soft brexit. Well you got you wish.

(And no claiming Corbyn's plan was a soft brexit, It would still have taken us out of the single market.)

Re: Hmm

"I don't see why you'd pick EEA when you can keep EU."

I wouldn't. Which is why I voted for the party with remain in its manifesto.

But I wouldn't call using a 52% vote on a question to leave the EU, to do so but not leave the EEA either undemocratic or racist. (Or totally stupid).

No, the racist desire was to to take away the rights of Europeans to live in the UK as equals.

(And no, I don't want to hear typical Cobynista claims that it isn't racist because they are white.)

So are you pretending to be a fuckwit because you have realised you are starting from a point of total ignorance of the actual situation and have no arguments of actual substance?

Re: Hmm

"You are trying to make it democratic to not let people vote on issues with long term consequences, except in a way where a yes/no answer is impossible - yeah, seems fair."

That is what proper democracies do. Supermajorities are required, not a 2% win. A majority of the actual electorate, not just those who voted.

"You've decided "Racists" quite without even making a case, and you wish to impose a diminution to peoples rights(EEA), as you think the plebs too foolish to reject any diminution of their rights(Full Membership)."

You quite obviously are clueless about what the EEA is. Remaining in the EEA retains people's rights.

Specifically those denied a vote, who massively outnumber the number the referendum was won by.

It's like arguing with someone who thinks Bill Gates puts 5G chips in Covid vaccine.

"You want to ditch the CU, you haven't articulated a reason, other than EEA is better than leaving SM, by why one should want EEA rather than EU is still a mystery - also unacknowledged or engaged with is the ERG's desired to avoid SM, or why supporting people's right to choose is undemocratic."

Not ditching the CU but leaving the EU means the EU (without us being part of it) decides our trade with the rest of the world, (as is the situation in NI anyway, but at least those born there can get a vote if they want)

Those people who simply wanted less common rules with the EU and independent 3rd country trade deals wanted to remain in the EEA. Those who didn't want project fear coming true would want it too. Those who want to remain European citizens wanted it too.

Yet you demand their choice isn't allowed. The bait and switch was done and they are forced to chose between the switch and what they voted against.

In the choice of four very distinct relationships, YOU decide that the the two more popular non EU relationships are to be denied to voters.

I cannot believe anyone arguing from such a point of ignorance about what the CU and SM are.

Re: Hmm

"This is bizarre: your position if I understand is that, because a referendum was held in 2016, no other public consultation may be sought, our general election vote will be held as the only engagement with the issue allowed."

The only bizarre thing is your lack of understanding. How hard is it to understand that a choice between remain and the leave model that had been so badly rejected that it caused a PM to fall isn't really going to satisfy anybody?

The choice needed to be between remain the realistic models of brexit.

Both get back the ability to do independent trade deals and reduce the number of common laws and regulations required.

The other choices would be remain in the Single Market, not have project fear come true but disappoint the xenophobes and what we got - a 3rd country arrangement. Happy xenophobes and project fear come true.

For completeness Grandpa's Turkey model could have been included too.

Re: Hmm

"I, and Corbyn, amongst others thought they should. HMG and the ERG thought not, so we didn't."

No you didn't you thought they should have a vote on a new relationship that had already been rejected.

Which meant those who wanted out of the EU would not vote Labour. Even if they supported a second referendum on the grounds of fairness.

And thank you for saving me the trouble of explaining why the EEA is of benefit.

It would probably worth you taking the effort to understand what you wrote and how it makes my point for being exactly what the non racist brexiteers wanted. Or perhaps the non racist part of what they wanted.

"So coming out of EU, yet remaining in EEA is worse than Remaining in the EU."

Yes, of course. But staying in the customs union only is far, far worse.

"They rightly got spanked, as it's undemocratic to cancel it, regardless of the sodding manifesto"

You really have a flexible version of democracy don't you?

You do know a government is not bound by the promises of a previous government?

And if they won, why would a referendum be needed?

Re: Hmm

I suspect the Lib Dems would sue you for that.

And your support for taking away their rights undermines you claims.

And I only brand those that wanted to take away rights as racists.(You know, the ones whom you support getting their way.)

So you prefer the huge delta between EU and CU to the tiny delta between EU and EEA?

The one that takes away rights. of people. Hmmm. Curious. Either you totally fail to understand the nature of the way the UK worked, or there's some other reason.

Re: Hmm

You approve of pandering to racists, even though that takes away the rights of those who set up their lives in good faith in the UK.

That shows exactly what sort of person you are, and makes the rest TLDR.

And the ERG never pretended to be the good guys.

Re: Hmm

"1) We were members, changing that was because of a vote. You've decided that, you get to recast that vote as EEA. Which wasn't on the paper - leave was."

Leaving the EU was, leaving the EEA wasn't.

Leaving the EEA (and its consequences) was dismissed as project fear.

So you basically say that Corbyn was right to do what the ERG wanted? So what was the point of a leader of the opposition?

"This is weak mate, come on, try harder. I don't have to vote to understand that losing the right to vote involves a diminution of rights."

Not as weak as your understanding. You are utterly clueless. You actually think that Norway has no representation, and no way to represent its interests?

That's why I asked if you had conversed with anyone who actually attends these meetings, and you haven't.

So stop spouting nonsense.

Re: Hmm

"So your basis to suggest Corbyn lacks integrity, is his principled refusal to support a flagrant stitch up of the public."

So rejecting the part of brexit that delivers xenophobia and at least 60% of the long term damage a no deal brexit would is a stitch up?

Well that puts your position in perspective.

"Why did May needed Labour votes to pass her deal, when as you will of course recall, the Confidence and Supply arrangement gave her a working majority? She couldn't pass the deal because her party didn't want us in the Single Market."

May's deal did not keep us in The Single Market. (Only for goods via a customs union,and the UK is a services economy. It was the precise opposite of what the UK needed for a "successful" Brexit, )

"So you like me would have voted to remain rather than that deal." Of course, but I voted for the party that gave remain as its manifesto rather than offer that choice. But leavers would be voting for the party that offered the deal they wanted (or thought they did, because few of them actually bother to check what being like Canada actually meant).

"which is why I'd put Hard Brexit as an option" Corbyn's target was a hard brexit. Ending free movement is a hard brexit. You speak like one of those gaslighted into thinking any deal is a soft brexit. It isn't.

I think we should have had "Deal, No Deal, Remain" personally but Corbyn was I think unwilling to risk that amount of damage to the country and so never supported it.

There should have been a preferential referendum between Remain in the EU, Remain in the Single Market and become a 3rd country. A deal that does 2/3 the damage of no deal is no choice.

"The man tried and failed"

It is quite clear he tried and succeed. He got the hard brexit he desired, and left the blame with the Tories. But he didn't do it with integrity, he used the same lies all the other brexiteers did.

Re: Hmm

"EEA is worse than remain, why should he advocate for it?"

Only for racists/xenophobes and those benefiting from a Singapore on thames arrangement (not many)

So for you to say that either your evident ignorance of what the relationships in Europe are is in play or you have a vested interest.

Ending free movement of people (which is a requirement of the four freedoms) is pandering to racists.

Anyone who supports pandering to racists does not have integrity.

"The public gets to vote on the deal, with remain option, or Labour won't support you. She refused as again, nobody thinks the public will go for this given a second change to avert the mess, so Labour carried on making the case for 2nd ref."

Not until very late in the game and Corbyn virtually had to be dragged screaming.

But you still don't address how Labours manifesto commitment to give a choice between a version of Brexit that no-one else actually wants and remain is actually democracy. It appears more like a deliberate ploy to lose the election, and let the Tories do their version of a hard brexit and then take

the blame.

"EEA seems like we become subject to rules we can't set. Decided at meetings we don't attend."

You obviously have never spoken to anyone who attends such meets and have no clue of the actual relationship.

And what you state is now the situation if we want to export to our biggest market, or have you missed the news over the last 12 months or so?

Re: Hmm

> "His preferred deal" a phrase I imagine as typed with much venom. What plan do you refer, "Jobs First Brexit"

You, sir have been taking lessons from Boris Johnson in making replies.

A Jobs first brexit would have kept us in the single market. Corbyn was committed to leaving that, so any claims of that, lack any integrity whatsoever.

> You seem to be outraged that a politician tried to get a bunch of conflicting positions to coexist when the only sensible thing to do is flagrantly undemocratic.

No he didn't. He chose an option that was thoroughly rejected and caused the downfall of one PM.

The only sensible position outside the EU is remaining in the EEA. Anything else causes massive damage.

His Brexit was ridiculous. Give up the prosperity of the Single Market for services. Do not get the ability to make free trade deals independently. The only winners would be the racists.

If the UK was going to have a hard brexit, at least get one where you control your own international trading arrangements. (Even if initially, the damage is slightly worse)

And for those who actually believed in and wanted the let's be like Norway option, it would be like throwing out the Baby and keeping the bathwater.

Re: Hmm

That is a gross misrepresentation of the situation, and you know it.

There was a minority government so split it couldn't even get brexit over the line with Labour nto opposing it.

Had Labour supported the remaining in the Single Market, it would have happened.

Corbyn whipped against supporting remaining in the EEA. (Look up around 13 June 2018)

It didn't so we left.

So of course Labour shares the blame.

Re: "Corbyn wasn't in government."

No, but he was the leader of the opposition against a minority government that was so divided a hard Brexit could not be got through.

He was the kingmaker.

Had he said we remain in the Single market, we would have done. (But he whipped against it.)

Re: Hmm

"Corbyn campaigned on giving people a vote on any eventual deal, and said he voted for remain."

The point you miss is the deal he committed to negotiate was the same model that May negotiated as a backstop, and was the reason for her downfall.

So why would leavers vote for him, if they have a choice between that and remain?

Answer, they didn't.

Re: Hmm

"This is daft, he was perceptive enough to understand a fact you refuse to accept."

Interesting, Corbyn was never one to submit to a position he disagreed with, that is where his former integrity came from.

"I agree, but we were never offered that chance, and were never going to be offered that chance, and the only person who offered the public a say on the final deal was Corbyn."

Wrong. The EU made it totally clear that a SM based solution was possible.

And as I pointed out, HIS preferred deal that was already rejected when May offered the same thing.

it wasn't democracy, it was the choice between what he wanted and the former status quo.

You are so blinded by being a fanboy, you are oblivious to this.

Re: Hmm

I don't disagree that those behind brexit wanted out of the single market as well as the Eu.

It is you asserting that Corbyn was correct to get behind that rather than opposed it that I take issue with.

It is clear from your first paragraph you have no idea of what the situation is, and you are simply a fanboy flapping around from a position of ignorance.

Re: Hmm

No, I simply read the manifestos which laid out their commitment to lave the Single Market and remain in the Customs Union.

So you think that was a lie and they would have negotiated something else?

You appear to be a typical Corbyn apologist prepared to twist any logic to defend your hero.

"Corbyn didn't want to leave, pointed out *impossible to remain in single market, and was proved right", which clearly offends you as a foamer."

Of course it was impossible if the leader of both the government and the opposition were committed to leaving it.

Corbyn whipped his MPs against a vote to remain in it. (Around Jun 13, 2018)

And the only foam is that coming out of your mouth while you defend the indefensible.

And Johnson's deal was a simple 3rd country arrangement, as he promised in the election that he won.

So why would I believe that when a notorious liar delivered the type of Brexit he promised, the "man of integrity" would promise one type of brexit and deliver a vote on a different type?

Re: Hmm

You are the one making no sense.

Corbyn's policy was to leave the Single Market, and remain in the Customs Union (leaving an effective single market for goods only)

May's backstop was the same model.

You equate EFTA with the EEA then say you won't quibble about terms? You really are writing from a position of ignorance aren't you?

But when you said they want to leave the Single market, you are correct. However "they" includes Corbyn, which is why I see him as no different from any far right or far left brexiteer.

Leaving the Single market was a choice, and he supported it.

Remaining in the Single market was quite possible. And leaving the Single Market with a deal still does the majority of the damage that leaving with no deal would do.

Re: Hmm

"[1] when did people get to vote on Corbyn's deal - link or retract your lie."

2017 and 2019 (And you can google the labour manifesto yourself).

2. You obviously allowed your Corbyn fanboyism to completely miss the point I made. Please try again.

3. I was talking about a customs union, not a single market. Corbyn wanted to leave the Single market and remain in the CU. Try to keep up.

4. Did you have your head in the sand that year?

5. The point was what leavers wanted, too. They would not vote to be given a choice of a deal they rejected or remain.

6. Yes, So why did Corbyn set himself up to lose?

"If you voted for it, you are an idiot, if you still support it you are a fool."

Why on earth would you think I voted for it or support it?

I voted remain (and had leave meant the promised Norway model, would like most remainers have shut up then and there) and tactically for the party that said they would scrap the whole stupid idea.

You really are delusional.

Saved by the Bill: What if... Microsoft had killed Windows 95?

I am referring to launch time, when I believe Pentiums were still using a larger socket.

Where I worked pretty soon limited sales of windows 95 to well specced 486 systems (no winbond chipsets.) for those planning to run DOS apps and 32 bit apps.

.

You wanted a Pentium, you got 3.1x. You wanted to run 16 bit apps you got 3.1x

No upgrades - wipe and re-install.

No legacy 16 bit drivers.

Later on the Pentiums (I think there was a new support chipset along with a new package) worked fine.

(Not sure the originals were ever any good though.)

I disagree with the assertion of when it was awful.

At launch Windows 95 on a 486 with enough RAM (at least 5MB, but preferably 8) from a fresh install was fine, with 32 bit and DOS software.

Using a Pentium was not. Upgrading Win 3.x was not. Using 16 bit Windows software was not (in most cases).

DOS programs were fine.

Eventually Pentiums were OK running it.

Privacy is for paedophiles, UK government seems to be saying while spending £500k demonising online chat encryption

Re: Inrage and outrage

Doesn't this depend on whether you define end as arriving at the bank or arriving at the employee?