Pyrotechnics look impressive in bad films, but in real life? hardly.
Pyrotechnics look impressive in bad films, but in real life? hardly.
While this device is very good at preventing other people fromgetting that data, it's the worst design possible for preserving it in the face of adversity. All that a bad person would have to do to put you out of business, if you relied on this device, is to say "Boo!" and all your data disappears.
Of course, if you have a backup then that has to be at the same level of "security" as this PC or it becomes the weakest link. Instead it's the most breakable link - which is merely another form of weakness. The same goes for restoring all your lost data: if you rebuild the lost data from across a network connection, that has to be untappable, too. I don't think the people who built this have thought it through properly.
The commission has also set a target for all European households to have access to download speeds of at least 100Mbps by 2025,
All this means is that ISPs will put a new, premium, service on their portfolios, priced at whatever it would cost them to install - or whatever they choose: either to make a killing from, or to discourage uptake.
There is nothing in this target to say the provision has to be affordable. So if an ISP in an out-of-the-way place, maybe halfway up a mountain, decides it would cost them €250,000 to provide their half-dozen subscribers with 100MBit/s connections, they would price the product accordingly.
As such, this is just a wish, but not a practical requirement that EU citizens must be given this sort of speed, for the tenner-a-month they are paying for "ordinary" broadband, now.
This is the exact same reason why companies don't train their (IT) staff. What is the point in spending money to make it easier for them to leave you?
Before deploying a "porn finding" dog, make sure to leave your collection in the police car.
The last thing you'd want to happen is the dog detects your thumb drive, or your phone - which given it's proximity is much more likely.
Or, worse: it detects your supervisor's phone / tablet / sd-card which then has to be taken in as evidence.
Yes, I know this mutt only detects residual fumes off electronics - if it actually "detects" anything at all that it's not pointed at. But the possibility of it grassing up its owner is too amusing.
C-level leadership is elected by the employees for a one-year term.
So how to "ordinary" employees (even ones from a recruitment company) know what qualities to look for in a C-level? Do they understand the legal obligations that C-levelship brings. Do they know what is possible or within scope for a particular "C"?
Or do they simply engage in a beauty contest and vote for people they like, or who make the biggest promises: "vote for me as your CEO and I'll give everyone a pay rise and annual bonus"
It all sounds lovely and group-huggy. But does it actually make the company more successful or a better place to work?
When you enjoyed someone's work, you leave them a tip
But so few articles are worth a dam'. Most aren't even worth the time spent reading them (so the authors should be compensating us for the time wasted by attractive headlines with content that fails to deliver).
However, we already have a system for rewarding authors who consistently produce worthwhile content that is good enough to explicitly seek out: subscriptions. Personally, I am still searching for a publication that produces enough of this high quality content to make the cost of their subs. reasonable. Having the occasional article - maybe one a week - that is relevant, authoritative and informative doesn't make up for all the time spent wading through (in this case: The Guardian) dross just to find it.
* It's been a long time since the last release
* We've put all the updates into a new version to save time updating old releases
* You can now download it from our website
* We fixed a load of bugs
* Auto installs are easier
* You can change the GUI
Is that it? What about new features? What would I be able to do with this release that I couldn't do with an old one? What new "super powers" will it give me?
If I was marketing a software tool intended for technical people, all the new functionality would be at the top of the list. Sure, techies want to download and install it easier, but if they were willing to jump through the hoops needed to install earlier versions, then making this faster doesn't sound like too big a deal. And as for different desktops
It would have to cover build-quality of the drone. Inbuilt safeguards. Limitations on weight / speed, per flight or vehicular licensing. And perhaps the hardest part would be to qualify the flight controls, radio link and default actions on loss of signal.
Once all of these became type-approved, I can't see the price of a drone being anywhere near what an amateur would consider expendable.
Although the world of model aircraft extends right up to 200 mph jets, I would expect that the first time one of those caused a death or was used in a terrorist incident, the entire hobby-space would be slammed shut, instantly. Drones are just a part of this classification.
Ireland should pay
If you read the actual story, it will tell you that the EU is insisting Apple pays the unpaid tax to Ireland
The american government fines european companies billions (BP, Volkswagen). Now the EU has started fining american companies in return.
It seems fair.
I reckon Dyson's comment is merely to conceal the real reason: young engineers are cheap.
There are plenty of them, they are easily manipulated into working long hours.
They are disposable (and "Not taking notice of experts" means your operation will soon go broke: reinventing every wheel that the experienced guys in the neighbouring companies just take, off the shelf).
I doubt that if Dyson had shareholders to worry about, he would take this view. But since the company is his own personal play-thing, he's welcome to spend his money as he pleases. But so far as products go, his company seems to have a problem learning from experience. Nobody I know who bought a "die-soon" vacuum cleaner would ever buy another Dyson product.
What good is a grand new economy if there's nothing in it that I can see myself getting paid to do?
This is the basic problem. All these futurology pieces extrapolate the supply side: what will be available, possible or substituting existing stuff. But none of them take the next step of analysing the demand side: asking who will be the customers for these advances?
Even if we end up removing all the manual manufacturing, office-based administration, transport and food production jobs, who will be able to afford trips in flying cars, or would need an AI in their pocket?
Even if we do get a UBI economy, will that basic income contain provision for computerised meds, and why would people with no prospect of a job - or more importantly: the children of people who don't / can't / will never work in their lives - ever need high quality online education (or any education at all)?
This list doesn't say why any of these things would be beneficial. Take self-driving cars (just because it's at the top of the pile). The benefits are not having to own your own vehicle, being able to get pissed out of your skull and still get home, better access for disabled people, not having to take a test, less congestion, sleeping on the way to work, not having to pay for the vehicle when you're not using it, not having to worry about it being broken - just send for another one.
These are what people will buy into the technology for, not simply to say "Look at me! I've got a driverless car" which seems to be the geek's motivation.
But when it comes to other items, such as AI, the benefits of raw, naked, AI are never stated. Will it really benefit Joe Average to have a computer in his / her / its pocket that is smarter than they are?
And a final point worth considering: how many of these "exciting" technologies will be centrally controlled?
Also works when a 23 year-old "expert" from one of the big consulting firms reports to the CIO that the servers are underutillised.
My reply was "certainly, what level of utilisation would you like?" but the grin on my face gave it away. It was then followed by a laymans explanation of utilisation vs. response times. And a decision that the consultancy wasn't in the company's best interests.
He keeps differentiating, flying off on a tangent.