Welcome Guest.   Make a donation to an author on the site April 15, 2014, 11:11:28 PM  *

Please login or register.
Or did you miss your validation email?


Login with username and password (forgot your password?)
Why not become a lifetime supporting member of the site with a one-time donation of any amount? Your donation entitles you to a ton of additional benefits, including access to exclusive discounts and downloads, the ability to enter monthly free software drawings, and a single non-expiring license key for all of our programs.


You must sign up here before you can post and access some areas of the site. Registration is totally free and confidential.
 
Check out and download the GOE 2007 Freeware Challenge productivity tools.
   
  Forum Home Thread Marks Chat! Downloads Search Login Register  
  Show Posts
      View this member's profile 
      donate to someone Donate to this member 
Pages: Prev 1 ... 53 54 55 56 57 [58] 59 60 61 62 63 ... 144 Next
1426  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: silly humor - post 'em here! [warning some NSFW and adult content] on: November 29, 2012, 06:40:42 AM
It all makes sense now.

Gay marriage and marijuana being legalized on the same day.

Leviticus 20:13 - "If a man lays with another man he should be stoned."

We've just been interpreting it wrong all along.
1427  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: DOTCOM saga - updates on: November 27, 2012, 03:58:12 PM
This isn't an update, but an interesting and thought-provoking post from reason.com:
(Copied below sans embeddd hyperlinks/images, with my emphasis.)
Quote
Did the Feds Set-Up MegaUpload?

J.D. Tuccille|Nov. 26, 2012 8:11 pm

The long-running MegaUpload saga has become known for the Keystone-Kops shenanigans of New Zealand authorities who secured the wrong legal documents and broke laws against domestic spying in executing the will of their high-handed American masters — understandable, since incompetence and snoopiness are easier to grasp than the intricacies of intellectual property law. But the copyright claims that killed the once-huge company and set in motion events that may well determine how Kiwis cast their votes next election are still in play. And it emerged recently that some of the files that MegaUpload is accused of storing in violation of copyright law were actually retained at the request of the United States government.
 
According to Wired:
Quote
Eighteen months before Megaupload’s operators were indicted in the United States, the company complied with a secret U.S. search warrant targeting five of its users, who were running their own file-sharing service using Megaupload’s infrastructure, according to interviews and newly unsealed court documents.
 
The June 24, 2010 warrant to search the Megaupload servers in Virginia was part of a U.S. criminal investigation into NinjaVideo, which was piggy-backing on Megaupload’s “Megavideo” streaming service. Though the feds had already begun quietly investigating Megaupload months before, in this case the government treated Megaupload as NinjaVideo’s internet service provider, serving Megaupload with the warrant and asking them to keep it quiet.

What did MegaUpload get for its troubles?
Quote
Despite Megaupload’s cooperation, the 39 infringing NinjaVideo files were later used against the popular file-sharing service as evidence to seize Megaupload.com domains and prosecute Dotcom and others connected to the site.

The apparent entrapment may not be so straightforward, since the forbidden files were also found elsewhere on MegaUpload's servers. Theoretically, then, the U.S. Department of Justice could be going after MegaUpload for those other copies, rather than the ones it asked the company to retain.
 
But ...
 
In the past year, we've had internationally coordinated armed raids, as well as a full-court press by the United States government, all over a friggin' copyright case against a company that has a history of cooperating with American authorities. Yes, there is, potentially, a lot of money in digital music and movie files, but this all seems oddly disprportionate to the core concerns in the case. Especially when it turns out that MegaUpload had previously worked with the feds, and the U.S. is complaining about files it asked the company to retain.
 
Far be it from me to suggest—
 
Oh, screw it. No, it isn't. The fact is, it increasingly looks like the United States government rented out the Department of Justice as a hit squad to the entertainment industry to enforce a contract on MegaUpload.
1428  News and Reviews / Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: PDF-XChange Viewer ($FREE version) - Mini-Review on: November 27, 2012, 04:30:44 AM
@cyberdiva: Thanks for the tip about PDF-XChange Lite 2012.
I have downloaded it for a trial. I shall compare it's output to that from PDFCreator (which I have used for years).
1429  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Internet freedoms restrained - SOPA/PIPA/OPEN/ACTA/CETA/PrECISE-related updates on: November 26, 2012, 01:51:38 PM
This is an interesting turn-up for the books:
Verizon Sued For Defending Alleged BitTorrent Pirates
(Copied in the spoiler below sans embedded hyperlinks/images, with my emphasis.)
1430  News and Reviews / Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: PDF-XChange Viewer ($FREE version) - Mini-Review (as at 2012-10-04) on: November 26, 2012, 01:26:13 PM
Updated: 2012-11-27 regarding the OCR feature of PDF-XChange Viewer ($FREE version).
Under Needs improvement:
OCR functionality: seems to work fine on very short, simple document layouts with clear/legible print, but for longer/more complex documents or with mixed and smaller fonts it "hangs" at 67% on the progress bar. Very frustrating.
This gets it 1 x Thumbs-Down, since it is a claimed functionality but which seems, for most purposes to be likely to be well-nigh useless.

+ made other minor amendments.
1431  Other Software / Found Deals and Discounts / Re: Surfulater at BdJ today ($39.50) on: November 24, 2012, 10:50:24 PM
After my comment above, I made a floow-up comment about it, here: Re: Grab Free Desktop Syncing Plus 25GB Storage Space on Box (Lifehacker 2012-08-15)
1432  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Grab Free Desktop Syncing Plus 25GB Storage Space on Box (Lifehacker 2012-08-15) on: November 24, 2012, 10:47:39 PM
In a separate discussion here Re: Surfulater at BdJ today ($39.50), I made the comment that:
If Neville can make it so the cloud storage is under my control
I haven't done this with Surfulater, but I presume you would be able to put it "in the Cloud" already like most other databases - by using a CloudDrive - e.g., (say) Google Drive, Box.net, SkyDrive, or similar.
I'm not sure, but I presume that if you put into the local (PC-based) Google Drive folder a reparse point (Junction folder) that links to the surfulater database folder on the PC, then presumably up the the pipe its contents would go, and after every change also. Then you could access that folder from the CloudDrive via other PCs.
I shall try it out and see when I have some time later today.

...I'm not sure, but I presume that if you put into the local (PC-based) Google Drive folder a reparse point (Junction folder) that links to the surfulater database folder on the PC, then presumably up the the pipe its contents would go, and after every change also.

Well, I tried that, but it doesn't seem to work - though it should work. This probably means that the folders in the Google Drive directory on the PC do not necessarily have all the characteristics of directories - or at least not as Junction or reparse points. However, the thing seems to work OK if you put it around the other way - i.e., if you put your Junction/reparse point as the working folder for your database to access, with the link going to an ordinary folder in the Google Drive directory.

There's one particular caveat I'd make about this: If you are using Google Drive, it might muck about with your data in a couple of ways - one is destructive, the other is excessive duplication:
(a) Convert some of your files into Google docs format, without telling you and without leaving you a backout option.
(b) Duplicate/triplicate etc. your files if you had them multi-labelled (it did this on changeover from "labels" to "folders", and without any warning as far as I could see.

What this really means is that you can't rely on the security of your data on Google drive. - the greatest risk being from Google themselves.
1433  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: Firefox Extensions: Your favorite or most useful on: November 24, 2012, 10:05:36 PM
Not sure if this is the right place to put this, but:
If you, like me, are running FF v17.0, and are being driven crazy because you think things are looking a little fuzzy on the screen, it's probably because they are fuzzy - not necessarily because of your fading eyesight, but due to a bug.
Fix-it notes here: Firefox 17.0.1 to fix blurry font issue in the browser

Basically:
1. about:config
2. find: gfx.content.azure.enabled (It's probably set to "True".)
3. Double click it to set it to "False".
4 Restart FF.

It worked for me. So simple.
1434  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Why did it never occur to me.. You can wash a keyboard in water. on: November 23, 2012, 06:16:09 PM
Washing always works just fine. Just don't try and speed up the drying process using too much heat, like I did...
A few years ago, someone accidentally spilled a bit of red wine on my laptop keyboard. Not enough to flood the insides, but enough to stop the keyboard working.
So I took off the keyboard, washed it with lots of warm water, and because I was in a hurry I popped it into the oven which was still warm from my missus having baked a cake.
Came back a bit later and the keyboard plastic had all shrunk.    embarassed
1435  Other Software / Found Deals and Discounts / Re: Surfulater at BdJ today ($39.50) on: November 23, 2012, 06:10:08 PM
If Neville can make it so the cloud storage is under my control
I haven't done this with Surfulater, but I presume you would be able to put it "in the Cloud" already like most other databases - by using a CloudDrive - e.g., (say) Google Drive, Box.net, SkyDrive, or similar.
I'm not sure, but I presume that if you put into the local (PC-based) Google Drive folder a reparse point (Junction folder) that links to the surfulater database folder on the PC, then presumably up the the pipe its contents would go, and after every change also. Then you could access that folder from the CloudDrive via other PCs.
I shall try it out and see when I have some time later today.
1436  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: DOTCOM saga - updates on: November 22, 2012, 06:30:04 PM
@40hz: Thanks for those video links. I had seen and downloaded the first video some time ago, via a DCF link in another discussion thread, but I had not seen the 2nd vid.
Amazing that you actually do seem to need educational/self-defence videos like this, to maintain your constitutional rights, in a supposedly "free" country and where the aggressors in this case are apparently the police.
1437  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: DOTCOM saga - updates on: November 22, 2012, 02:27:43 AM
This post from TorrentFreak makes a reasonable summary of a lot of what seems to be fundamentally wrong about this Dotcom fiasco - it really does seem to look rather like a deliberate fit-up.
If it is, then what a national shaming if the New Zealand judiciary and the PM continue to play along with it. I suspect that, if it had happened in the UK, then the extradition case - and any other legal action against Dotcom - would have been thrown out of court by this stage.
That probably wouldn't happen in a banana republic though.
(TorrentFreak post copied below sans embedded hyperlinks/images.)
Quote
Megaupload Assisted FBI vs NinjaVideo, But Evidence Then Used Against Them

In 2010, individuals from the now-defunct NinjaVideo site stored copyright-infringing videos on the servers of Megaupload. These subsequently came to the attention of the FBI who were conducting an investigation into NinjaVideo and its operators. As a result Megaupload was served with a criminal search warrant requiring it to hand over information to the authorities, but in a cruel twist Megaupload’s cooperation and a desire not to destroy evidence is now being used as evidence against it.

The February 2012 “Superseding Indictment” document, which lays out the Grand Jury charges against Megaupload, runs to 90-pages long and contains dozens of allegations of illegal behavior against the operators of the now-shuttered file-hosting site.

As outlined in our discussions this week, Dotcom says that some of the allegations are misleading, particularly one claiming that Megaupload failed to delete infringing video files from its servers.

“A member of the Mega Conspiracy informed several of his co-conspirators [in 2010] that he located the named files using internal searches of the Mega Conspiracy’s systems,” the DoJ wrote.

“As of November, 18 2011, thirty-six or the thirty-nine infringing copies of the copyrighted motion pictures were still being stored on servers controlled by the Mega Conspiracy.”

Out of context the claim, that Megaupload ignores the DMCA, looks bad. However, when the full picture is put forward – that Megaupload found these files because a criminal search warrant from the FBI required them to do so – things start to look quite different.

And the plot thickens. Wired has discovered that the infringing files were put on Megaupload’s servers by individuals connected to the now-defunct streaming video site NinjaVideo.

The FBI were conducting a criminal investigation into NinjaVideo (which later resulted in several of its operators going to jail) and required Megaupload’s cooperation after serving the company with a search warrant in June 2010, just days before NinjaVideo was raided.

“Megaupload complied with the warrant and cooperated with the government’s request,” Megaupload lawyer Ira Rothken confirms.

According to Kim Dotcom, the FBI made it clear that the warrant should be kept quiet so as not to jeopardize the NinjaVideo inquiry.

“The agent was concerned that the target could be warned and that this needs to be handled confidentially,” Dotcom informs TorrentFreak.

The Megaupload founder says that this warning was taken seriously and that since the files were clearly evidence in the case none of them were interfered with.

“Obviously when the FBI contacted us they made this clear to us and therefore we did not touch the accounts or the files,” he says.

“We even emailed back to Carpathia [Megaupload's US server host] to ask the FBI (and the FBI had our emails before asking for the Mega domain seizure) if we should do anything about those files. We never got a response.”

But the criminal investigation against NinjaVideo and evidential issues in that respect were pushed aside when it came to building a case against Megaupload and seizing its domain.

“To use this against us and to tell a Judge that the Megaupload domain seizure is justified because we have not removed those 39 files is totally unethical and misleading,” Dotcom concludes.

The fact that the infringing files remained on Mega’s leased servers led the U.S. government to claim that Megaupload infringed copyright, despite the company having been served the original NinjaVideo search warrant as the site’s service provider, one that presumably should have received safe-harbor protection under the DMCA.

As previously reported, NinjaVideo founder Hana Beshara was eventually sentenced to 22 months in jail and ordered to repay almost $210,000.
1438  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: "Corruption" errors on startup of Task Scheduler on: November 21, 2012, 09:07:40 PM
@cranioscopical: Thanks. Though I did find some useful information in the references that I gave, I couldn't find anything quite as helpful step-by-step as this, so, whilst I was writing my own notes in OneNote about what I did (whilst it was still fresh in my memory), I thought it could be useful to record it as a bit of knowledge for others - it might be a common type of problem.
I suspect that many people could have similar problems with the Task Scheduler, but might not actually know it, yet.
I mean, it was a surprise to me, and then I wondered how long this had been going on. I could have remained blissfully unaware of any problems had I not started up Task Scheduler in the first place. Like I said:
Quote
I haven't really looked in the Task Scheduler in ages...
    embarassed
1439  News and Reviews / Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Hard Disk Sentinel PRO - Mini-Review on: November 21, 2012, 08:43:07 PM
Just made a few updates to the Opening Post: Updated application interface shots (added more) and amended some notes/format.
1440  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: "Corruption" errors on startup of Task Scheduler on: November 21, 2012, 01:42:27 AM
It turned out that I had been somewhat premature in thinking I had fixed all 4 errors in Task Scheduler, just by fixing one. Following a laptop reboot the three remaining untreated errors returned, so it seemed that I had only fixed the first error.
So I have made a major change to the OP above, covering the detailed process for fixing the remaining 3 errors.

Task Scheduler is now running properly. I think it had been unable to run properly - if at all - due to the errors. This might explain some of the startup oddities I had been experiencing, as the Task Scheduler is invoked at startup (as well as at other times). The problems had apparently also frustrated the proper update of some standard software (HP Support Assistant), which completed its update just fine after I had fixed the errors in Task Scheduler.
1441  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Reader's Corner - The Library of Utopia on: November 19, 2012, 04:19:52 PM
Need more input? Then scan it.
I am sure that this is a Good Thing:

This is a bit like someone just released the modern-day eBook equivalent of the Guttenburg Press, which device seems to have been hitherto controlled solely by the Publishing oligopolies and cartels.
1442  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Internet freedoms restrained - SOPA/PIPA/OPEN/ACTA/CETA/PrECISE-related updates on: November 18, 2012, 11:21:17 PM
Innovative thinking by Alki-David:
Billionaire Alki David On CBS Lawsuit and His Solution To BitTorrent Piracy
Quote
...So, given a magic wand, how would David solve the piracy dilemma – try to crush torrent sites like The Pirate Bay, or take a different approach?

“I would send the ISP of the websites an invoice for a small fee (say 5 dollars) for each torrent download to give to the rights holders. The ISP would have to collect from the customer or pay it themselves,” David concludes.

That's a dead simple transfer-pricing regime, right there.
1443  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: DOTCOM saga - updates on: November 18, 2012, 10:46:33 PM
Worth a read:
Megaupload Search Warrant Requests Ignored Massive Non-Infringing Use
Quote
As a direct result of the Megaupload raid many legitimate users of the site lost access to their personal files. To find out why the Government put the interests of copyright holders before those of the public, one user convinced the court to unseal the seizure warrant matarials. Surprisingly, however, there is absolutely no mention of Megaupload’s legal use in the released records. In a response Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom says the whole case is a tragic copyright comedy...
(Read the rest at the link.)
Looking at it in practical terms, how might you go about this Dotcom raid if you were the US authorities pursuing the matter?
Some people - not me you understand - might suggest that you could perhaps take the following approach:
  • Objective:
    Stated objective - To nail and bring to justice a commercial group suspected of copyright crime.
    Primary objective 1: To destroy their business enterprise rather than succeed in them being found guilty (guilt being likely to be too difficult to substantiate).
    Primary objective 2: To communicate the message that so-called "copyright crime" could be met with penalties worse than death and is just not worth it.

  • Constraints:
    All strategic instructions and directions are to come from the **AA.
    The police/SS authorities are to be responsible for devising/executing the strategy for surveillance, SWAT and seizure in their respective territories.

  • Problem:
    Authority to proceed needs to be based on evidence that a serious large-scale money-laundering/Mafia-type crime has been committed, however accusations are weak on substantive evidential proof.

  • Solution:
    • Make the proof up! For example, including fitting-up the suspects by getting them to behave like they committed a crime, by telling them to follow the directions from the FBI, during surveillance. Don't mention that you did that in the seizure warrant or subsequent charges/accusations. It'll leak out later.
    • So as to avoid the thing going to trial, arrange to make the raid illegal by default, so that charges will reluctantly have to be dropped - "It was a 'genuine mistake' yer honour".
    • Collaborate closely with the police/SS authorities and keep stressing the threats/risks so as to wind them up into a feva and testosterone/adrenaline-fuelled feel-good state of high alertness.
    • Communicate using FEAR: Act like terrorists so as to make an example that will literally terrify other suspected/potential copyright "criminals" (that's potentially every consumer on the planet). Let the dogs of war loose - make it a no-holds-barred, fun-filled SWAT-fest-with-prejudice exercise! Make it seriously over-the-top excessive violence at all times. (Don't waste all that testosterone/adrenaline!)
      Quote
      "That's the way to do it!" (- Punch, in Punch and Judy).
    • Wiretapping the suspects illegally (without warrant).
    • After seizure, don't mention the humungus amount of legitimate property held on the servers. If there's any liability for damages or consequential losses from any of this, it's an externality that the State will be obliged to foot the bill for.
    • Effectively commit a crime (you're doing all this illegally, don't forget) against tens of thousands of people's property - and probably that of the suspects' themselves - by unwarranted and deliberate excessive use of force and seizure, seizing all servers and property (content/data), in order to destroy the suspect's business. Just Go For It and never mind the collateral damage - this is a SWAT-fest, don't forget!
    • Encourage the police to commit borderline/actual perjury in court, when giving their testimony. They are to just do their job the best they can.

  • Remember to ensure that you do all this illegally - because the warrants were invalid (both in the US and New Zealand, and maybe elsewhere too).

No, promising as this might seem, I really do think that it would be highly inadvisable to follow such an approach as is being suggested above by these people.
I mean, if you did actually do all that has been suggested, then wouldn't it rather look like as well as actually be an illegal action committed by police/SS authorities internationally?
I could be wrong, of course, but that could arguably be a close fit with the definition of a monumental State clusterfark. And then the State would also have the devil of a job trying to pay for and clear up the mess and discombobulation afterwards. Think of the cost in lost votes!

Oh, but wait...maybe that explains why the DOJ dragged their feet so much over releasing the sealed seizure warrant documents...
1444  News and Reviews / Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: SysExporter - (Screen-scraping) Export data from Windows controls - Mini-Review on: November 18, 2012, 04:37:20 PM
You saved me the effort of finding the references to those other programs  smiley
There's a somewhat similar thread, dating to 2007: IDEA: Grab contents of an on-screen list.  It contains a skrommel AHK script, CopyListView.ahk.

There's a veritable mine of information in those old DCF posts, and I did also see the item about CopyListView.ahk - and had meant to mention that opening post as an example of what I called "the general problem".
(I am about to rectify have rectified the omission now by updating the OP.)

By the way, it's probably a good job that you mentioned that particular IDEA thread, as I then went back and read the whole thing through (I did not do that before).
Though I had reckoned that CopyListView was ahead of its time (developed in 2007), I now see (having missed it before) that @JoTo recommends a then current version of SysExporter as an alternative solution.
I thought that was odd, because, if it wasn't then, then CopyListView would now probably be effectively rendered redundant/obsolete by the use of SysExporter.    tellme

Incidentally, I am still discovering/trying out further useful applications of SysExporter - the latest being in analysing the data about all the tasks in Task Scheduler. Take a look at Task Scheduler in SysExporter and you will probably see what I mean - you can get a sort of "flat file" view of all the tasks, which you can then (say) export to Excel for analysis.
I am considering the use of an MS Access database as an alternative/comparison to using Excel for this sort of analysis, but I suspect that Excel will probably win in terms of ease-of-use and flexibility. Still, suck-it-and see to find out.
1445  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Internet freedoms restrained - SOPA/PIPA/OPEN/ACTA/CETA/PrECISE-related updates on: November 18, 2012, 03:36:13 PM
I had seen but had forgotten about this - i.e., mandatory substantive evidential standards of proof required in file-sharing cases - until I came across it in StumbleUpon (which I hardly ever use). It is a post from TorrentFreak from March 2011.

The idea that this could happen in the US or elsewhere could presumably scare the pants off th **AA.
One wonders whether a great deal of commercial/political pressure already has been and will be brought to bear on the Danes to "rectify this anomaly" that they have created.
Substantive evidential proof of guilt indeed! Whoever heard of such a thing?    Cool

Quote
Supreme Court Ruling Makes Chasing File-Sharers Hugely Expensive
March 25, 2011

A court ruling has not only sharply reduced the amount of compensation rightsholders can expect from Danish file-sharing cases, but has also drawn a line on evidential standards. To accurately claim their losses in future, rightsholders will have to gain physical access to an infringer’s computer. A leading lawyer in the field says the costs will prove prohibitively expensive.

In 2005, anti-piracy group Antipiratgruppen (APG) and the underlying music group IFPI tracked a man who they say was sharing 13,000 music tracks via a Direct Connect network. The case moved through the legal system and went all the way to the Supreme Court.

The 6 year-old case has now been concluded and although the rightsholder plaintiffs in the case won their battle – albeit in a much smaller way than anticipated – the Court’s ruling is set to prove a huge setback to their overall war.

The case against the now 57-year-old was brought by APG on behalf of many IFPI-linked record labels and artists. As is so often in these cases, they had hoped for a punishing outcome in order to deter others. The rightsholders had originally demanded 440,000 kroner ($83,400) in compensation but that claimed amount was ultimately reduced to 200,000 ($37,900).

However, yesterday the Supreme Court decided that the defendant should pay only 10,000 kroner ($1,900), a major setback for the rightsholders who had hoped for a much higher precedent-setting amount on which to model future cases.

The compensation-limiting factor problem proved to be the reach of the evidence relied on by Antipiratgruppen. APG used techniques which scraped the index of the files said to be being made available by the defendant and then linked them back to his IP address, a method which has been acceptable in the past. But while the Court accepted that some sharing had occurred due to the defendant’s confession, it wasn’t satisfied that the index was an accurate representation of the files physically present on the defendant’s computer.

Per Overbeck, lawyer for the defendant, said that the lowered compensation award shows that it’s worth fighting back.

“The ruling demonstrates that it pays to be critical of Antipiratgruppen’s claims,” he said.

Speaking with Politiken, IFPI lawyer Johan Schlüter said that the Supreme Court decision to tighten the standard of proof in these cases could mean that Antipiratgruppen has to seize and investigate the defendant’s computer in any forthcoming cases, an expensive process that would require a bailiff, IT experts, and in some cases a locksmith.

“I will not directly say that we can not afford it, but it could be so expensive that it could mean we cannot pursue such matters,” said Schlüter. “We can not accept that we have become completely neutered, so we’ll now sit down with some IT people and think through what we can do to provide better documentation.”

Schlüter commented that the industry is in somewhat of a “cultural battle” with illegal copying and he could have a point. A recent moral standards study in Denmark found that a high percentage of the public found illicit downloading socially acceptable.
1446  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Gadget Fridays on: November 18, 2012, 07:19:59 AM
The problem with plastic is that it can include toxins, like bisphenol A, which is linked to cancer and all kinds of nastiness. It gets worse though... While many manufacturers have eliminated it, they have replaced it with bisphenol S.
20 years ago, nobody really knew about the problems, but more recently, research has been published on it.

There's a whole alphabet of bisphenols for food-plastics manufacturers to get through yet, to discover whether they are harmful. Give the experiment more time.    ohmy
1447  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: How Much Do You Trust Wikipedia? on: November 18, 2012, 07:08:38 AM
How much do I trust Wikipedia? I don't.
Wikipedia does not - cannot - provide an authoritative source of reference.

Whilst there is little doubt in my mind that there is potentially much that could be or indeed is useful and relevant in probably most of the Wikipedia entries, there is also little doubt (from personal experience) that there is much that is seriously flawed - e.g., suffering from graffiti, vandalism, being opinion-based and irrational (as opposed to factual and rational), being biased, based on hearsay, apocryphal, or just plain wrong.
All this rubbish comes from anonymous authors, from registered Wikipedia authors, and from Wikipedia's so-called "professional" editors [Yeah, right.] alike. The latter in particular are very suspect IMHO, because some have been known to even lie about their "credentials" just so as to get into a position where they can influence the wording of specific areas of "history" or knowledge - all in the name of religio-political ideology, apparently. Or maybe they were paid to do it. Who knows?

Somewhat depressingly, I think, there seem to be a lot of people out there who don't like to see any version of the truth being promulgated except their own preferred bias or their own reality bubble or paradigm. In these cases, rational argument/debate is neither wanted/accepted nor tolerated, and often actively discouraged with prejudice. Critical thinking is a victim here.

From my experience, this seems to be especially so in areas relating to religio-political ideology, business management, science, and IT practice and theory - which all covers a potentially huge  area of human information/knowledge.
This gives me some concern. For example, in IT in particular, where I have seen so much rubbish in IT-related areas that it makes me wonder sometimes whether the IT sector hasn't been cursed with attracting some of the most irrational, ignorant and narrowest minds on the planet - as well as some of the brightest.

In any event, my recommendation is to by all means use Wikipedia as a first point of reference - if you wish to do that (and it is very handy) - but not to leave it at that, and to always take what Wikipedia says with a pinch of salt until you can confirm what it says after having accessed authoritative sources.
I therefore avoid mentioning Wikipedia when I need to provide an authoritative reference to clients.
One of my personal favourites since childhood has been Encyclopaedia Britannica.
1448  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / "Corruption" errors on startup of Task Scheduler on: November 18, 2012, 06:06:08 AM
This has been posted in the hope that it might be of help/use to others in fixing what looks like it could be a relatively common problem.

Description of problem:
The PC is an HP ENVY 14 laptop running Win7-64 Home Premium.
For a while now, I have been getting some odd startup error messages on this laptop - nothing serious or fatal - and today I got another one: the HP Support program popped up a message window saying that it had an update task that required a restart. So I restarted.
After restarting, it asked for a restart!
After restarting again, it still asked for a restart.

I figured that the Task Scheduler might have the details on the task, and decided to take a look as the task clearly wasn't working as it should.
I have to admit that I haven't really looked in the Task Scheduler in ages, and when it started up I was a bit alarmed to see that it had 4 errors that popped up one after the other. I closed the Task Scheduler and started it up again, and the same thing happened. I repeated this a third time - same result. So here were a bunch of consistent errors that indicated that the Task Scheduler was probably unable to work properly and that it could have been this way for some time, without my knowing.    embarassed

The errors:

[attach]


Discovery:
I googled the first error that had popped up, using the string:
Quote
Task Scheduler error User_Feed_Synchronization - The task image is corrupt or has been tampered with)
- and came up with several relevant references, which I have copied below. After reading through them and experimenting a bit (trial-and-error), I figured out an approach that was likely to be most relevant for my laptop and OS.

The fix:

[attach]


The Result:
To my delight, with this first fix, all of the Task Scheduler errors went away, and thus no further fixes seemed necessary. (Phew!)    smiley
However, it was too good to be true.    Sad
Following a laptop reboot the three untreated errors returned, so it seemed that I had only fixed the first error.

[attach]

Unresolved issues:
The root cause of the problem (something had apparently corrupted/tampered with the tasks) is unknown - i.e. How does the task get corrupted in the first place?

References:
1449  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Hurricane Sandy Discussion Thread on: November 17, 2012, 10:45:51 AM
After all the misinformation and debate about the cause of H-Sandy, it's good to see some certainty - clear and rational truth being spoken by those who know...
http://www.memri.org/clip/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/3637.htm

Who would'a thunk it?     tellme
1450  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: DOTCOM saga - updates on: November 17, 2012, 08:30:58 AM
@40hz: I suspect that you might have summarised the situation pretty accurately. It will be interesting to see how close your prediction is as events unfold.
Pages: Prev 1 ... 53 54 55 56 57 [58] 59 60 61 62 63 ... 144 Next
DonationCoder.com | About Us
DonationCoder.com Forum | Powered by SMF
[ Page time: 0.107s | Server load: 0.01 ]