Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Evolution (Score 4, Interesting) 177

Something went wrong, he throws up the "it wasn't me it must be those evil hackers" defence rather than accepting the blame for putting his device together poorly or letting it go out of range.

The drone looks like a DJI Flamewheel F550, and I'm guessing by his comments he was using the DJI iPad Ground Station (or equivalent) to bluetooth to his iDevice.

That gives any hacker two vectors of opportunity, but also the operator two transmitters to get out of range from, with the Bluetooth connection being the shortest range and most likely culprit. And if it was really a bad guy taking control or disrupting the connection, I suspect the iPad's Bluetooth is again the one any opportunistic villain would be more likely to be familiar with.

Comment: Re:It's lunchtime, you're hungry We know how you f (Score 1) 111

by ozmanjusri (#46680145) Attached to: EU Should Switch To ODF Standard, Says MEP

Until modded down by European Bureaucrats who.

Its more likely to be Microsoft who'll be doing the downmodding, or rather their SMM partners who patrol here.

The thing is, this is where the rubber meets the road for the new, open and friendly MS image they're trying to project with the viewable DOS code and open .NET compiler . If they oppose this move to open and free document formats, we'll know they're still the same old aggressive, monopolistic, and user-hostile company they've always been, and who we are trying to escape from.

If they decide to support open formats and choose to engage with those of us who want interoperability and competition based on quality and features instead of lockin, it'll be a sign they might be on a path to being a good corporate partner.

We can always hope, but personally, I won't be holding my breath.

Comment: Re:adware is malware (Score 3, Informative) 175

Of course if you use Microsoft approved advertising methods, and pay Microsoft the relevant fees, you'll get a pass.

That's exactly what's happening.

Windows 8 has a built-in advertising layer. Microsoft's not doing this to help customers, they're just eliminating competitors.

The answer of just how wrong Microsoft is to cram advertisements in its commercial software will differ from person to person, I'm sure. Me, I'm not too bothered, but I can totally relate to anyone who is. From all I can tell, none of the ads are intrusive, and I appreciate that. As for them being in paid software, that doesn't bother me either because of that above fact. However, I am bothered by other aspects.

The biggest mistake here on Microsoft's behalf is that no one is made aware of these ads until they happen to stumble on them. No one is going to expect ads to be loaded in their paid-for OS, so a notification of that at first boot would be appreciated. Further, no one is given the option to disable them (though I'm sure it'd take little more than an editing of the hosts file). Finally, there's also the fact that these ads haven't decreased the price of the OS, else that'd be a point Microsoft would no doubt flaunt.

Comment: Re:nope! (Score 5, Insightful) 496

by ozmanjusri (#46645091) Attached to: Will Cameras Replace Sideview Mirrors On Cars In 2018?

Sideview mirrors let you see places a rearview camera won't.

That doesn't make sense at all.

You can point a camera anywhere you want, they'd be far more versatile than mirrors, and car makers will be certain to take advantage of that. You'll most likely get multiple cameras, stitched views, and more coverage, not less

I'd be happy just to get a good rearview camera on my motorbike. All I get to see in the mirrors are my elbows...

Comment: Re:Easy stats to pull (Score 1) 367

by ozmanjusri (#46600015) Attached to: More Than 1 In 4 Car Crashes Involve Cellphone Use

Because the National Safety Counsel produces conclusions that do not match their own data.

What the National Safety Council actually says is that there is no trustworthy data available, so they extrapolate from the data they have and predictions based on driver performance studies.

Motor vehicle crashes involving cellphones are "vastly underreported" in national statistics on fatal automobile crashes, according to a new study by the National Safety Council.

Researchers for the Itasca, Ill., -based non-profit organization reviewed 180 fatal crashes from 2009 to 2011 that resulted in one or more deaths. It independently confirmed that those crashes were cellphone-related through means such as the driver admitting it, a caller or texter on the other end during the crash reporting cellphone use, a passenger reporting the driver's cellphone use or police finding an unfinished message on the phone at the crash site.

The NSC pored through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), the national database of fatal motor vehicle crashes and their causes to see how the government had classified those 180 fatal crashes. The council found that, in 2011, the government database had identified 52% of the crashes as cellphone-related. In 2010, it was 35%, and in 2009, 8%.

Even in fatal crashes where the driver admitted using a cellphone, only 50% of those crashes in 2011 were coded in FARS data as involving a cellphone, NSC said.

Comment: Re:Insanity (Score 4, Informative) 151

by ozmanjusri (#46503517) Attached to: Aussie Attorney General's War On Encrypted Web Services

People in power trying to stay in power ?

Almost, but this guy doesn't have the brains to think that far.

George Brandis is s sneering scumbag and lying rodent who wants to be Dick Cheney when he grows up, but lacks the compassion, gun skills and wit.

He used taxpayer money to go to a friend's wedding, but has accepted the task of writing a ministerial code of conduct. He's also told the Australian arts community that they don't have the right to refuse funding from corporate sponsors whose ethical values conflict with those of the artists, and plans to punish them if they don't comply.

Comment: Re:How are those kind of things patentable? (Score 1) 406

by ozmanjusri (#46461219) Attached to: Apple Demands $40 Per Samsung Phone For 5 Software Patents

I can't see how that wasn't what you were saying there, but okay.

Nobody said they were first to build a device with a capacitative screen, just they were first to market with an OS purpose designed for them. E.g. the multitouch pinch-to-zoom stuff that wowed the audiences.

Other phone OSs were more capable than the early versions of iOS, but they didn't have any of the gee-whiz effects, and adding a capacitative screen to an OS that didn't support multitouch actually made them worse, not better to use..

Comment: Re:How are those kind of things patentable? (Score 2) 406

by ozmanjusri (#46461005) Attached to: Apple Demands $40 Per Samsung Phone For 5 Software Patents

First with capacitive touchscreen you say? That's interesting...

Nobody actually said that, and I am (and was) aware of the Prada's hardware capabilities. It was an excellent design, and I have no doubt at all that Apple paid it a LOT of attention when they were planning the iPhone, but...

The OS and software didn't match the hardware design. Running an OS written in Flash on top of WinCE very quickly exposed the limitations of both of those products, including no possibility of multitouch.

Comment: Re:How are those kind of things patentable? (Score 5, Informative) 406

by ozmanjusri (#46460351) Attached to: Apple Demands $40 Per Samsung Phone For 5 Software Patents

did you even use a so called smartphone phone before the iphone?

I did. I developed for Palm, WinCE, Psion/Symbian and Nokia N770/800 (including for SIP/Skype calls) etc before the iPhone as well.

The single biggest differentiator between iPhone and its predecessors was the capacitative screen. Everybody in the business knew it was coming, and would change interfaces. Even Microsoft was experimenting with the multitouch Surface, but Apple were fastest to get in with a phone that had multitouch and dispensed with the stylus (needed for resistive screens).

They did well, and with Fingerworks, managed to patent some of the early multitouch ideas, but they were not especially novel concepts, even at that time.

Comment: Re:Why? (Score 1) 465

by ozmanjusri (#46417019) Attached to: Apple Refuses To Unlock Bequeathed iPad

This is a case of "silly grandma" Not Apple's problem.

I believe you're thinking the way Apple's thinking. It's great you're on the same page with them.

Me, I'm thinking about what it'd be like if my mum or dad died and left me their documents in a storage facility. I'd want to be able to read their recipes, look at the photo albums, read letters they'd saved. I'd expect to be able to do that with reasonable ease by providing the same level of proof I'd need to take possession of all the other goods they left to me.

Pretty much what the family has already provided.

If the vendor then chose to deny me access and insist I get a court order, I'd be unhappy, angry and deeply disappointed. And I very certainly would never use that vendor again, and I'd warn everybody I could to stay away from that vendor.

So I think we all owe Josh Grant a vote of thanks for speaking up and warning us about this heartless company. Anyone who values their family's thoughts and images should avoid buying their product, and warn their friends and family away from it as well.

"Just Say No." - Nancy Reagan "No." - Ronald Reagan