Which pune? The article title one is obvious, but is a somewhat failed attempt. If it was a story about someone losing their job and then shredding or burning letters then it'd be "going postal" (albeit without the death) and would be a fitting title pune.
Not always. Pratchett's Going Postal didn't have much killing (unless you include the indirect deaths attributed to Moist von Lipwig's con artist antics that Mr Pump counts up)
Maybe we'll get a migration to Linux. After all, if you don't want to use Windows and pick Mac then why move to Windows when your Java development dries up? Linux isn't terrible, but it could do with a bit of consistency polish in some places:)
You do know that 'Java' is to 'JavaScript' as 'car' is to 'carpet'.
I'd say it was closer to the "Cheese" in "Cheese Strings" or any other fake cheese products (of which I hear the US has many). It's there to get attention and make an incorrect connection in people's minds over the slightest similarity (cheese strings claim to be cheese, but are more like packaged plastic, and JavaScript was so named to gain tangential interest from Java developers with its approximately similar syntax).
Car and carpet, on the other hand, have no connection other than the letters.
Huhwhatnow? Am I just reading that wrong? Apple's custom rebuild of Java was available from the update centre, the same as most other Apple bits. Windows users have to have yet another background updater running. Linux users get Java from their repos (the same as any sane person) and get updates automatically, the same as Apple used to.
I'm still confused by the message. Is Apple ditching Java altogether, or just is custom rebuild?
You obviously haven't watched "Yes, Prime Minister". It's a fantastic comedy from the 80s, politicians have since been interviewed and said that the politicians were wrong but the civil servants were right, and the civil servants have said that the politicians were right but the civil servants were wrong.
One of my wife's family friends was also in a similar position to some of those civil servants, and he won't watch it because it reminds him of what it was like.
But if you breath on it and it goes in the cooling intake then couldn't you claim that they hadn't licensed your breath to be used as cooling in their machine? See how they like that frivolous law suit!
Yes, I'm surprised. Not at the fact that "private" data (in this case a UID that identifies a user that can be used to get their profile page and anything that they haven't hidden) has been released. No, I'm surprised at the fact that they are reporting it as an "inadvertent" release from the games and that people are shocked.
If Facebook let data slip to the games when they didn't mean to then that'd be news. The fact that games (which, lets face it, appear to rely on either a) horrible advertising or b) selling your details, because there's no other way they could make it so profitable) give out extra data to advertisers that Facebook policy says that they weren't meant to seems like just another day at the office for many of those time wasting game developers.
The operating theory here, I think, is that at some point, a government will stop doing such idiotic things as cyber warfare because the costs are too high.
Did I miss something? AFAIK the costs of nuclear MAD are in the "somewhat high" category, yet no-one has yet gone "you know what, we'll get rid of them all because it just isn't worth it - it'll all go wrong, no-one wins and it is an expense we just can't manage".
If you meant the financial cost of daily ops and overheads, who said it even needed to be official? Various nations have nationalist zealots who take the slightest hint from the government as an excuse to launch their own attack. The government has complete denial, as they didn't order it, but they still get their objectives. Even better if the attacks are launched from foreign third-party nations as it'll be them who gets 'cyber-nuked' in return.
It's much easier to launch cyber attacks through a third-party than it is to do it physically without people noticing.
It wasn't part of my class curriculum either, and I've not read it. I only found out about it through GitS (actually, GitS:SAC - it is the "Stand Alone Complex" series rather than the film). They do mention that it is from Catcher in the Rye in one episode, but that comes after the phrase has been mentioned a few times. Someone has a rather aged copy and there is a bit of a "these funny people with their ageing paper books" tone, given the setting, but it is acknowledged in a fairly intellectual way.
I've been asked to login after what was (I think) my first click of the day, so I think it might not like corporate networks that proxy lots of people through a very small number of IP addresses!
I'm sure there are sites out there to help with "free account required" login pages, but what's the betting that they start slowly creeping the payments in and creeping the freebies down?
I can't find the paper at the moment, but I've seen examples of something similar done with a CCTV camera and encryption. It has the advantage of having a fairly fixed view, so it can easily repaint the background in, but the idea was that it recognises and encrypts the imagery of a person in the shot. The CCTV then captures everyone who walks through the shot in case actions need to be reviewed in future (e.g. "did we see a guy matching the vague description of the perpetrator in the area before the crime and can we get a better shot of him?") but without the decryption key then all of the "innocents" have their privacy protected because they're not shown.
Of course, there is the obvious question of "how do you know that someone is in the picture without knowing that they're in the picture? or do you just have to brute-force the video?", but assuming that they can tag an ID and a unique encryption key to a video image of a person then the idea of CCTV that shows nothing until law enforcement decrypt the necessary (and only the necessary) parts is interesting.
Yeah, just watch what they do with the top CGI films these days. Parts of Alice in Wonderland (the latest film I watched with CGI) are pretty much indistinguishable from reality, except for the bit where the thing is nigh-on impossible without huge expense and months of prep time for a single shot (like long shafts full of rough edges and trinkets that *could* be dug and prepared, but are realistically going to be graphics).
LotR painted all sorts of stuff in, and Gollum was painted over the top of Andy Serkis in his gimp suit, so they got the background from somewhere (he isn't a big chap, but he isn't that skinny!). Touching up non-live video is just a more resource-intensive version of touching up a photo at its simplest (touch up each frame).
He did it before that, though. When he kidnapped Serano from his own home then he was visible to Serano, but not to his guards. As far as the guards were concerned then Serano was just walking out on his own and nothing was unusual. That would probably be more impressive because he did it to lots of people at once, not just a single person who was chasing him as he left a hotel and casually escaped (IIRC).
Not only are they paid to, but they get (or at least used to get) paid more for the more prominent positions. About five years ago I worked at a company that sold the full range of computer equipment (laptops through to servers) and I worked on the software behind their website. Towards the end of my year there then they moved the "X recommends MS Windows XP" from below their header to in their header. It looked damned fugly and unprofessional to me, but the marketing department just cared that they were getting bigged kick-backs from MS for putting it higher up the page.
While the headline says that 71% are "ignored", TFA does at least say that they get "no reaction" (i.e. no reply or retweet). TBH, that's probably reasonable from my experience - I follow several announcement feeds but don't retweet them most of the time because they're specific to my interests and anyone else who is also interested can follow it themselves.
What I do wonder, though, is what proportion of those multi-level responses (replies to replies) and replies in general are from the unwashed masses with their inane drivel replying to the inane drivel of their friends. If only computers could classify "interesting technical pointers, snippets and announcements" versus "inane drivel about bodily functions or other personal activity" so that we could see the difference in the two and whether there are more replies to the important stuff or to the drivel that any sensible person ignores.
Who said it needed to be recorded and broadcast over town? The logical conclusion of that analogy would be that you opened the door, recorded the speech and left the recording there for people to listen to or duplicate if they wanted to come in to your house and re-play it (bringing their own recorder if they wanted it for later).
In the analogy then the streets are the Internet and the houses/buildings are the servers and websites - people can freely walk the Internet and drop in on whatever server they want, but they're also free to wander the Internet for ever, never knowing that your server has an open door. The only slight mis-match is that houses with open doors aren't soundproof, so there's a little bit of audio leakage that doesn't occur from just "travelling past" a server, but that could be made analogous to the tiny fraction of your site that leaks out in search engines (although you need the bots to get the link to your site first, but then again people need to walk past a house first).
No, hosting a site on the Internet is opening your door. Everything you've said about promoting it is putting up a big sign or going out and shouting about it.
"Publishing" and "your own system" varies depending on how you look at "the Internet" - if the server is your system then you may publish to that server, but that server isn't publishing anything, yet it is still available on (via) the web.
Hosting it yourself, but making it available globally. There's a difference - you make it sound like radio, where you'd get lots of noise. This is more like opening your front door and saying "come in and read/listen if you want", in that there's no extra noise unless you go there.
Yeah, they're not selling followers as much as selling "ad" space that suggests that people with interests that seem to be in line with what you're targeting might want to follow your account. Okay, so it might cut off after X followers rather than X impressions, but it still isn't "Twitter lets you buy followers and make them auto-follow you".
Facebook has been doing its adverts targeted on your interests for ages, I think. My wife uses them for her shop. As long as they're marked as such then I don't have a problem.
As for Twitter, I'm just glad I've got a GUI client most of the time and don't need the web interface and its annoying new design and the extras that came before it (like "why not follow" lists)
Slashdot Mirror
Which pune? The article title one is obvious, but is a somewhat failed attempt. If it was a story about someone losing their job and then shredding or burning letters then it'd be "going postal" (albeit without the death) and would be a fitting title pune.
Not always. Pratchett's Going Postal didn't have much killing (unless you include the indirect deaths attributed to Moist von Lipwig's con artist antics that Mr Pump counts up)
Maybe we'll get a migration to Linux. After all, if you don't want to use Windows and pick Mac then why move to Windows when your Java development dries up? Linux isn't terrible, but it could do with a bit of consistency polish in some places :)
I'd say it was closer to the "Cheese" in "Cheese Strings" or any other fake cheese products (of which I hear the US has many). It's there to get attention and make an incorrect connection in people's minds over the slightest similarity (cheese strings claim to be cheese, but are more like packaged plastic, and JavaScript was so named to gain tangential interest from Java developers with its approximately similar syntax).
Car and carpet, on the other hand, have no connection other than the letters.
Huhwhatnow? Am I just reading that wrong? Apple's custom rebuild of Java was available from the update centre, the same as most other Apple bits. Windows users have to have yet another background updater running. Linux users get Java from their repos (the same as any sane person) and get updates automatically, the same as Apple used to.
I'm still confused by the message. Is Apple ditching Java altogether, or just is custom rebuild?
You obviously haven't watched "Yes, Prime Minister". It's a fantastic comedy from the 80s, politicians have since been interviewed and said that the politicians were wrong but the civil servants were right, and the civil servants have said that the politicians were right but the civil servants were wrong.
One of my wife's family friends was also in a similar position to some of those civil servants, and he won't watch it because it reminds him of what it was like.
But if you breath on it and it goes in the cooling intake then couldn't you claim that they hadn't licensed your breath to be used as cooling in their machine? See how they like that frivolous law suit!
True, although that wouldn't explain people having issues with plugins. The GP was talking about PowerPoint, though, where as I was thinking of S5.
Quick, where's the "-1, Someone let a Manager loose on Slashdot" modding option? :D
All I can say is "Death by PowerPoint". That and "You can do good quality presentations in HTML or PDF, if you wanted - less is often more".
Yes, I'm surprised. Not at the fact that "private" data (in this case a UID that identifies a user that can be used to get their profile page and anything that they haven't hidden) has been released. No, I'm surprised at the fact that they are reporting it as an "inadvertent" release from the games and that people are shocked.
If Facebook let data slip to the games when they didn't mean to then that'd be news. The fact that games (which, lets face it, appear to rely on either a) horrible advertising or b) selling your details, because there's no other way they could make it so profitable) give out extra data to advertisers that Facebook policy says that they weren't meant to seems like just another day at the office for many of those time wasting game developers.
Did I miss something? AFAIK the costs of nuclear MAD are in the "somewhat high" category, yet no-one has yet gone "you know what, we'll get rid of them all because it just isn't worth it - it'll all go wrong, no-one wins and it is an expense we just can't manage".
If you meant the financial cost of daily ops and overheads, who said it even needed to be official? Various nations have nationalist zealots who take the slightest hint from the government as an excuse to launch their own attack. The government has complete denial, as they didn't order it, but they still get their objectives. Even better if the attacks are launched from foreign third-party nations as it'll be them who gets 'cyber-nuked' in return.
It's much easier to launch cyber attacks through a third-party than it is to do it physically without people noticing.
It wasn't part of my class curriculum either, and I've not read it. I only found out about it through GitS (actually, GitS:SAC - it is the "Stand Alone Complex" series rather than the film). They do mention that it is from Catcher in the Rye in one episode, but that comes after the phrase has been mentioned a few times. Someone has a rather aged copy and there is a bit of a "these funny people with their ageing paper books" tone, given the setting, but it is acknowledged in a fairly intellectual way.
I've been asked to login after what was (I think) my first click of the day, so I think it might not like corporate networks that proxy lots of people through a very small number of IP addresses!
I'm sure there are sites out there to help with "free account required" login pages, but what's the betting that they start slowly creeping the payments in and creeping the freebies down?
I can't find the paper at the moment, but I've seen examples of something similar done with a CCTV camera and encryption. It has the advantage of having a fairly fixed view, so it can easily repaint the background in, but the idea was that it recognises and encrypts the imagery of a person in the shot. The CCTV then captures everyone who walks through the shot in case actions need to be reviewed in future (e.g. "did we see a guy matching the vague description of the perpetrator in the area before the crime and can we get a better shot of him?") but without the decryption key then all of the "innocents" have their privacy protected because they're not shown.
Of course, there is the obvious question of "how do you know that someone is in the picture without knowing that they're in the picture? or do you just have to brute-force the video?", but assuming that they can tag an ID and a unique encryption key to a video image of a person then the idea of CCTV that shows nothing until law enforcement decrypt the necessary (and only the necessary) parts is interesting.
Yeah, just watch what they do with the top CGI films these days. Parts of Alice in Wonderland (the latest film I watched with CGI) are pretty much indistinguishable from reality, except for the bit where the thing is nigh-on impossible without huge expense and months of prep time for a single shot (like long shafts full of rough edges and trinkets that *could* be dug and prepared, but are realistically going to be graphics).
LotR painted all sorts of stuff in, and Gollum was painted over the top of Andy Serkis in his gimp suit, so they got the background from somewhere (he isn't a big chap, but he isn't that skinny!). Touching up non-live video is just a more resource-intensive version of touching up a photo at its simplest (touch up each frame).
He did it before that, though. When he kidnapped Serano from his own home then he was visible to Serano, but not to his guards. As far as the guards were concerned then Serano was just walking out on his own and nothing was unusual. That would probably be more impressive because he did it to lots of people at once, not just a single person who was chasing him as he left a hotel and casually escaped (IIRC).
Twin-X-Twin-I
(Sorry, I've watched Gilgamesh recently)
Either that or it is Scottish. At least that fits better than the people who can't spell leer and are making jokes on that.
Not only are they paid to, but they get (or at least used to get) paid more for the more prominent positions. About five years ago I worked at a company that sold the full range of computer equipment (laptops through to servers) and I worked on the software behind their website. Towards the end of my year there then they moved the "X recommends MS Windows XP" from below their header to in their header. It looked damned fugly and unprofessional to me, but the marketing department just cared that they were getting bigged kick-backs from MS for putting it higher up the page.
While the headline says that 71% are "ignored", TFA does at least say that they get "no reaction" (i.e. no reply or retweet). TBH, that's probably reasonable from my experience - I follow several announcement feeds but don't retweet them most of the time because they're specific to my interests and anyone else who is also interested can follow it themselves.
What I do wonder, though, is what proportion of those multi-level responses (replies to replies) and replies in general are from the unwashed masses with their inane drivel replying to the inane drivel of their friends. If only computers could classify "interesting technical pointers, snippets and announcements" versus "inane drivel about bodily functions or other personal activity" so that we could see the difference in the two and whether there are more replies to the important stuff or to the drivel that any sensible person ignores.
Who said it needed to be recorded and broadcast over town? The logical conclusion of that analogy would be that you opened the door, recorded the speech and left the recording there for people to listen to or duplicate if they wanted to come in to your house and re-play it (bringing their own recorder if they wanted it for later).
In the analogy then the streets are the Internet and the houses/buildings are the servers and websites - people can freely walk the Internet and drop in on whatever server they want, but they're also free to wander the Internet for ever, never knowing that your server has an open door. The only slight mis-match is that houses with open doors aren't soundproof, so there's a little bit of audio leakage that doesn't occur from just "travelling past" a server, but that could be made analogous to the tiny fraction of your site that leaks out in search engines (although you need the bots to get the link to your site first, but then again people need to walk past a house first).
No, hosting a site on the Internet is opening your door. Everything you've said about promoting it is putting up a big sign or going out and shouting about it.
"Publishing" and "your own system" varies depending on how you look at "the Internet" - if the server is your system then you may publish to that server, but that server isn't publishing anything, yet it is still available on (via) the web.
Hosting it yourself, but making it available globally. There's a difference - you make it sound like radio, where you'd get lots of noise. This is more like opening your front door and saying "come in and read/listen if you want", in that there's no extra noise unless you go there.
Yeah, they're not selling followers as much as selling "ad" space that suggests that people with interests that seem to be in line with what you're targeting might want to follow your account. Okay, so it might cut off after X followers rather than X impressions, but it still isn't "Twitter lets you buy followers and make them auto-follow you".
Facebook has been doing its adverts targeted on your interests for ages, I think. My wife uses them for her shop. As long as they're marked as such then I don't have a problem.
As for Twitter, I'm just glad I've got a GUI client most of the time and don't need the web interface and its annoying new design and the extras that came before it (like "why not follow" lists)
Wait no longer, mere mortal, for there is indenti.ca (and has been for a long time now!)