But I hate, hate, HATE the "Windowless" Windows UI.
It's called "Metro".
I have to jump through giant hoops to have multiple application windows available (or at least more than 2, right?),
You have to jump through zero hoops to open have multiple application windows available. If you mean arrange applications in windows like you did from Windows 2.0 through Windows 10, there are also zero hoops to jump through. When you open an application, it switches automatically to desktop mode and disables Metro. When you open an App, it stays in metro. So don't install the Skype App, install the Skype Application, and you'll use Skype and never see Metro. If you install the wrong program, you'll see the GUI for the program you run.
There simply shouldn't be a NEED to "block Telemetry". That's one of my biggest bitches about W10.
So you don't want a solution, you want to complain. I treated your first post that way because I correctly read it, and you complained you wanted a real answer, and that I was unhelpful. But now, it's back to a generic complaint about the basic design of MS software.
One of the problems with that stupid non-solution is that I am SURE that the owners of Skype (MS) know VERY well how to do "tunneling", and so can simply push stuff out of a port you CAN'T afford to block, like 80, just like Skype did with its SIP packets, when it was a Peer-Peer network.
If you think a "firewall" does nothing but simple port blocking, you should try a firewall that didn't come free in your $30 home router.
Some guy who calls himself macs4all is asking loaded anti-microsoft questions. Yeah, I didn't take him seriously. Especially since he asked a question like the one you say isn't legitimate.
Productive work producing goods and services that people buy with this money is the only source of input into such a system.
Yes. The input is from productive work. But "money" doesn't change hands only on the creation of productive work. Or are you going to tell me that high-frequency trading is productive work? How about renting out farmland? income for no "productive" anything. We have lots of things in our system where someone with an advantage can profit without improving anything. But that's fine, so long as we reserve that advantage to the advantaged. When the disadvantaged get the same benefits, it's a crime.
Why even have so many feedback loops by taxing prebates except to obfuscate something?
Ask the Fair Tax people. That's the basis of their taxation system.
First off, "money" and "capital" are separate concepts.
Capital is described almost exclusively in terms of money. They may be separate ideas academically, but they are identical (and fungible) in practice. So reality is wrong, if it disagrees with a dictionary definition you read once. Reality doesn't play by those rules.
W7/W8/W8.1 can operate without ever seeing the Metro interface, and the desktop will be visually indistinguishable from XP (if you load an XP theme). Operationally, W10 will not have a start menu, and you'll have to use some effort to avoid seeing Metro. It's easier to use Metro as a start menu. With the tiniest modification of your irrational hates, it's more functional. But no, we can't change your irrational hate. I don't bother with the hacks to avoid seeing Metro completely, and just hit the windows key once when booting, then see metro less than once a week (other than the first flash after boot, until I hit a single key to hide it for the rest of the session).
To block telemetry, you should have a firewall. Handy, you can run that through a MS server as well. Use ISA, and MS won't get telemetry from the PCs, just the server. Put in a 3rd party firewall, and you can block what you want from a central location.
With a WSUS, you can pick and choose the machines that get the updates, so shield the old W7 machines from deadly updates. And encourage the security patches on the new ones.
Why is it that nobody here that's an expert on MS patching and security has never heard of WSUS/SCCM, a service that's been around about 20 years (SMS 1.0, 1994), in various names and functionality?
He did ask for help and he did not mention servers.
No, he asked 3 questions, all "why doesn't this work the way I want it to" rhetorical complaints.
And he did mention "servers". Or do you join a domain with no domain controller? That the server is misconfigured for his business needs shows that his business needs are are not important, or his IT is incompetent. Though, he said he has no IT, so perhaps that's the reason there's an issue.
In the old days, WSUS (or whatever it was called at the time, it has changed names many times) was available for server. Put that on, make it work, and it'll solve all his problems. But his tone made it sound like the problem was IT policy and his hate of MS, which can't be solved technically. The quickest and easiest "fix" is a firewall. Whether a "free" APK hostfile, or a commercial firewall depends on his personal situation. Seems he's fishing for a personal solution to make the problem worse by not following policy (if any).
So, pray tell, at this point, how do your snarky comments actually HELP me?
You didn't ask for help. I told you how other companies dealt with it, as you "asked" in the angry questions I took as rhetorical. I answered them. You didn't like the answer. So now it's my fault for not giving an answer that works for a small business that has servers, but no IT.
If you want that, go outsource your IT to someone in your area that specializes in MS management, and have them fix it for you. My billable rate for something like that is $150 an hour. If it's worth your time to do, it's worth your money to pay someone to do it. If not, I expect you are only interested in complaints. Most people complain about IT, but have no interest in actually fixing it.
I've found the same. 20+ tabs, open all the time and Chrome drains battery, everyone else crashes. Though I haven't used Opera in a while. They were first and best with tabs, for about 5 years. I have no idea how they are now. But IE has never gotten tabs right. They still don't have an option to reliably open your last browser session.
What's wrong with Edge? I find it and IE interchangeable. I don't use MS browsers much, but IE and Edge haven't seemed sufficiently different to make me prefer one over the other, though I don't use either extensively.
In my domain, windows updates are set to a local machine. No update is advertised or pushed unless it makes it to the update server, and is approved for distribution from there. For good measure, the firewall blocks connections to MS's update servers. Never had your problem. It's easy to fix, and many do it. That your work didn't means it's not a priority where you work. It's that simple.
In Matrix, the film was released before it was possible to do the camera tricks it used. It was the first, and until the "making of" came out, "impossible". Yet, those camera shots were liked, because they were impossible, not hated because of it. People are still CGIing that effect.
The aggressiveness in which they pursue the regional restrictions is unrelated to governments. Perhaps the content owners required greater effort, but how would they contractually specify the aggressiveness which Netflix needs to block out-of region access? It'll never be 0%, or 100%.
The "solution" to that is to price at a smaller number for the smaller content. It'll not help their bottom line initially, but when the other options can't compete on price or content, they'll stop buying up content they aren't making available, and Netflix will soar.
After a horrific indoor studio accident involving a real helicopter crashing to the ground and killing two actors,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twilight_Zone_accident That sounds like what you are talking about, but it was outdoors, and 3 dead (two children). Not an exact match, but close.
The details given are not clear, but the impression given to, and by the media, and not corrected by those who know, is that he was in a place he couldn't escape from, and couldn't harm anyone who didn't approach him. Rather than determining he was "harmless", they expected him to charge out for a suicide by cop. So they pre-emtively killed him, at a moment in time he was no danger to anyone.
If a cop tells someone to drop their gun, and they do, then the cop shoots them, would that be wrong? The guy who dropped the gun could pick it back up, or have another hidden gun. He wasn't "safe", but he was no immediate danger to anyone.
The poverty line is what... somewhere in the $30k range? And UBI would be $10k? That's nowhere near enough to eliminate the need for welfare.
Where are you getting your numbers from? $12k for a single person http://www.irp.wisc.edu/faqs/f... $30k is for a large family. And I've seen UBI set at a variety of numbers, the super-high and super-low ones from people that hate it trying to show how bad it is, and the middle numbers by those actually looking at it seriously (whether for or against). UBI of $10k per person would eliminate welfare (and pay more than welfare, especially if children get the full benefit), while paying more than poverty line for everyone other that a single person.
You're missing the point that U stands for Universal -- as in we would be giving money to people who don't pay taxes.
How does that work if the UBI is taxed? Think of it like FairTax. You get a prebate, and that prebate is taxed. Much of the funding of the prebate is taxes on the prebate.
So many people don't pay taxes because they don't make enough to be taxed. With UBI, more people would be taxable, raising the taxable base. And, if the UBI is set appropriately with the tax scale, not diminish the livibility of the UBI.
The detractors count the costs twice and the income never.
Ah, so you concede that the military has no ability to prevent any attack. 9/11 happened with a large, fully funded military, as did OKC. Isolated attacks can't be stopped by the military.
But that's your primary reason to keep a military.
The US military budget was set to be enough to invade anywhere in the world, with no help from anyone. That's a bit much. We don't need that much to prevent an invasion. Nobody can project power over the US very well. China just got their first carrier. But still don't have much ability to project power beyond areas they already claim.
England has one of the best Navies, and I doubt they will be back, after having been ejected in 1776 (or thereabouts).
Slashdot Mirror
But I hate, hate, HATE the "Windowless" Windows UI.
It's called "Metro".
I have to jump through giant hoops to have multiple application windows available (or at least more than 2, right?),
You have to jump through zero hoops to open have multiple application windows available. If you mean arrange applications in windows like you did from Windows 2.0 through Windows 10, there are also zero hoops to jump through. When you open an application, it switches automatically to desktop mode and disables Metro. When you open an App, it stays in metro. So don't install the Skype App, install the Skype Application, and you'll use Skype and never see Metro. If you install the wrong program, you'll see the GUI for the program you run.
There simply shouldn't be a NEED to "block Telemetry". That's one of my biggest bitches about W10.
So you don't want a solution, you want to complain. I treated your first post that way because I correctly read it, and you complained you wanted a real answer, and that I was unhelpful. But now, it's back to a generic complaint about the basic design of MS software.
One of the problems with that stupid non-solution is that I am SURE that the owners of Skype (MS) know VERY well how to do "tunneling", and so can simply push stuff out of a port you CAN'T afford to block, like 80, just like Skype did with its SIP packets, when it was a Peer-Peer network.
If you think a "firewall" does nothing but simple port blocking, you should try a firewall that didn't come free in your $30 home router.
Some guy who calls himself macs4all is asking loaded anti-microsoft questions. Yeah, I didn't take him seriously. Especially since he asked a question like the one you say isn't legitimate.
Sounds like he's asking for help, there.
Why the FUCK would you think a YELLING profanity laden RANT was a LEGITIMATE question?
That's a very damn valid question, as well.
But is a generic question that if, completely answered, wouldn't help him at all.
Productive work producing goods and services that people buy with this money is the only source of input into such a system.
Yes. The input is from productive work. But "money" doesn't change hands only on the creation of productive work. Or are you going to tell me that high-frequency trading is productive work? How about renting out farmland? income for no "productive" anything. We have lots of things in our system where someone with an advantage can profit without improving anything. But that's fine, so long as we reserve that advantage to the advantaged. When the disadvantaged get the same benefits, it's a crime.
Why even have so many feedback loops by taxing prebates except to obfuscate something?
Ask the Fair Tax people. That's the basis of their taxation system.
First off, "money" and "capital" are separate concepts.
Capital is described almost exclusively in terms of money. They may be separate ideas academically, but they are identical (and fungible) in practice. So reality is wrong, if it disagrees with a dictionary definition you read once. Reality doesn't play by those rules.
W7/W8/W8.1 can operate without ever seeing the Metro interface, and the desktop will be visually indistinguishable from XP (if you load an XP theme). Operationally, W10 will not have a start menu, and you'll have to use some effort to avoid seeing Metro. It's easier to use Metro as a start menu. With the tiniest modification of your irrational hates, it's more functional. But no, we can't change your irrational hate. I don't bother with the hacks to avoid seeing Metro completely, and just hit the windows key once when booting, then see metro less than once a week (other than the first flash after boot, until I hit a single key to hide it for the rest of the session).
To block telemetry, you should have a firewall. Handy, you can run that through a MS server as well. Use ISA, and MS won't get telemetry from the PCs, just the server. Put in a 3rd party firewall, and you can block what you want from a central location.
With a WSUS, you can pick and choose the machines that get the updates, so shield the old W7 machines from deadly updates. And encourage the security patches on the new ones.
Why is it that nobody here that's an expert on MS patching and security has never heard of WSUS/SCCM, a service that's been around about 20 years (SMS 1.0, 1994), in various names and functionality?
He did ask for help and he did not mention servers.
No, he asked 3 questions, all "why doesn't this work the way I want it to" rhetorical complaints.
And he did mention "servers". Or do you join a domain with no domain controller? That the server is misconfigured for his business needs shows that his business needs are are not important, or his IT is incompetent. Though, he said he has no IT, so perhaps that's the reason there's an issue.
In the old days, WSUS (or whatever it was called at the time, it has changed names many times) was available for server. Put that on, make it work, and it'll solve all his problems. But his tone made it sound like the problem was IT policy and his hate of MS, which can't be solved technically. The quickest and easiest "fix" is a firewall. Whether a "free" APK hostfile, or a commercial firewall depends on his personal situation. Seems he's fishing for a personal solution to make the problem worse by not following policy (if any).
So, pray tell, at this point, how do your snarky comments actually HELP me?
You didn't ask for help. I told you how other companies dealt with it, as you "asked" in the angry questions I took as rhetorical. I answered them. You didn't like the answer. So now it's my fault for not giving an answer that works for a small business that has servers, but no IT.
If you want that, go outsource your IT to someone in your area that specializes in MS management, and have them fix it for you. My billable rate for something like that is $150 an hour. If it's worth your time to do, it's worth your money to pay someone to do it. If not, I expect you are only interested in complaints. Most people complain about IT, but have no interest in actually fixing it.
I've found the same. 20+ tabs, open all the time and Chrome drains battery, everyone else crashes. Though I haven't used Opera in a while. They were first and best with tabs, for about 5 years. I have no idea how they are now. But IE has never gotten tabs right. They still don't have an option to reliably open your last browser session.
What's wrong with Edge? I find it and IE interchangeable. I don't use MS browsers much, but IE and Edge haven't seemed sufficiently different to make me prefer one over the other, though I don't use either extensively.
In my domain, windows updates are set to a local machine. No update is advertised or pushed unless it makes it to the update server, and is approved for distribution from there. For good measure, the firewall blocks connections to MS's update servers. Never had your problem. It's easy to fix, and many do it. That your work didn't means it's not a priority where you work. It's that simple.
So, what's their "satisfaction" and will it change daily? Sounds like a contract so bad Netflix shouldn't sign it.
In Matrix, the film was released before it was possible to do the camera tricks it used. It was the first, and until the "making of" came out, "impossible". Yet, those camera shots were liked, because they were impossible, not hated because of it. People are still CGIing that effect.
The aggressiveness in which they pursue the regional restrictions is unrelated to governments. Perhaps the content owners required greater effort, but how would they contractually specify the aggressiveness which Netflix needs to block out-of region access? It'll never be 0%, or 100%.
The "solution" to that is to price at a smaller number for the smaller content. It'll not help their bottom line initially, but when the other options can't compete on price or content, they'll stop buying up content they aren't making available, and Netflix will soar.
After a horrific indoor studio accident involving a real helicopter crashing to the ground and killing two actors,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twilight_Zone_accident That sounds like what you are talking about, but it was outdoors, and 3 dead (two children). Not an exact match, but close.
The details given are not clear, but the impression given to, and by the media, and not corrected by those who know, is that he was in a place he couldn't escape from, and couldn't harm anyone who didn't approach him. Rather than determining he was "harmless", they expected him to charge out for a suicide by cop. So they pre-emtively killed him, at a moment in time he was no danger to anyone.
If a cop tells someone to drop their gun, and they do, then the cop shoots them, would that be wrong? The guy who dropped the gun could pick it back up, or have another hidden gun. He wasn't "safe", but he was no immediate danger to anyone.
The poverty line is what... somewhere in the $30k range? And UBI would be $10k? That's nowhere near enough to eliminate the need for welfare.
Where are you getting your numbers from? $12k for a single person http://www.irp.wisc.edu/faqs/f... $30k is for a large family. And I've seen UBI set at a variety of numbers, the super-high and super-low ones from people that hate it trying to show how bad it is, and the middle numbers by those actually looking at it seriously (whether for or against). UBI of $10k per person would eliminate welfare (and pay more than welfare, especially if children get the full benefit), while paying more than poverty line for everyone other that a single person.
You're missing the point that U stands for Universal -- as in we would be giving money to people who don't pay taxes.
How does that work if the UBI is taxed? Think of it like FairTax. You get a prebate, and that prebate is taxed. Much of the funding of the prebate is taxes on the prebate.
So many people don't pay taxes because they don't make enough to be taxed. With UBI, more people would be taxable, raising the taxable base. And, if the UBI is set appropriately with the tax scale, not diminish the livibility of the UBI.
The detractors count the costs twice and the income never.
Ah, so you concede that the military has no ability to prevent any attack. 9/11 happened with a large, fully funded military, as did OKC. Isolated attacks can't be stopped by the military.
But that's your primary reason to keep a military.
The parents should control their kids around unknown hazards. Any child big enough to walk is big enough to hold hands.
I have a toddler, and he's never been run over by a car or robot. He was quite well behaved.
I understand, but it is a UBI, by all definitions, other than being below the living wage (which most definitions don't include).
The US military budget was set to be enough to invade anywhere in the world, with no help from anyone. That's a bit much. We don't need that much to prevent an invasion. Nobody can project power over the US very well. China just got their first carrier. But still don't have much ability to project power beyond areas they already claim.
England has one of the best Navies, and I doubt they will be back, after having been ejected in 1776 (or thereabouts).