There are so many programming languages available that it can be
very difficult to get to know them all well enough to pick the
right one for you. On the other hand most men know what kind of
woman appeals to them. So here is a handy guide for many of the
popular programming languages that describes what kind of women
they would be if programming languages were women.
Assembler - A female track star who holds all the world speed
records. She is hard and bumpy, and so is not that pleasant to
embrace. She can cook up any meal, but needs a complete and
detailed recipe. She is not beautiful or educated, and speaks in
monosyllables like "MOV, JUMP, INC". She has a fierce and
violent temper that make her the choice of last resort.
FORTRAN - Your grey-haired grandmother. People make fun of her
just because she is old, but if you take the time to listen, you
can learn from her experiences and her mistakes. During her
lifetime she has acquired many useful skills in sewing and
cooking (subroutine libraries) That no younger women can match,
so be thankful she is still around. She has a notoriously bad
temper and when angered will start yelling and throwing dishes.
It was mostly her bad temper that made grandad search for another
wife.
COBOL - A plump secretary. She talks far too much, and most of
what she says can be ignored. She works hard and long hours, but
can't handle really complicated jobs. She has a short and
unpredictable temper, so no one really likes working with her.
She can cook meals for a huge family, but only knows bland
recipes.
BASIC - The horny divorcee that lives next door. Her specialty
is seducing young boys and it seems she is always readily
available for them. She teaches them many amazing things, or at
least they seem amazing because it is their first experience.
She is not that young herself, but because she was their first
lover the boys always remember her fondly. Her cooking and
sewing skills are mediocre, but largely irrelevant, it's the
frolicking that the boys like. The opinion that adults have of
Mrs. BASIC is varied. Shockingly, some fathers actually
introduce their own sons to this immoral woman! But generally
the more righteous adults try to correct the badly influenced
young men by introducing them to well behaved women like Miss
Pascal.
PL/I - A bordello madam. She wears silk dresses, diamonds, furs
and red high heels. At one time she seemed very attractive, but
now she just seems overweight and tacky. Tastes change.
C - A lady executive. An avid jogger, very healthy, and not too
talkative. Is an good cook if you like spicy food. Unless you
double check everything you say (through LINT) you can unleash
her fierce temper. Her daughter C++ is still quite young and
prone to tantrums, but it seems that she will grow up into a fine
young woman of milder temper and more sophisticated character.
ALGOL 60 - Your father's wartime sweetheart, petite, well
proportioned, and sweet tempered. She disappeared mysteriously
during the war, but your dad still talks about her shapely form
and their steamy romance. He never actually tasted much of her
cooking.
Pascal - A grammar school teacher, and Algol 60's younger sister.
Like her sister she is petite and attractive, but very bossy.
She is a good cook but only if the recipe requires no more than
one pot (module).
Modula II - A high-school teacher and Pascal's daughter. Very
much like her mother, but she has learned to cook with more than
one pot.
ALGOL 68 - Algol 60's niece. A high-society woman, well educated
and terse. Few men can fully understand her when she talks, and
her former lovers still discuss her mysterious personality. She
is very choosy about her romances and won't take just any man as
her lover. She hasn't been seen lately, and rumor has it that
she died in a fall from an ivory tower.
LISP - She is an aging beatnik, who lives in a rural commune with
her hippie cousins SMALLTALK and FORTH. Many men (mostly college
students) who have visited the farmhouse,-- enthusiastically
praise the natural food, and perpetual love-ins that take place
there. Others criticize the long cooking times, and the abnormal
sexual postures (prefix and postfix). Although these women seldom
have full-time jobs, when they do work, their employers praise
them for their imagination, but usually not for their efficiency.
APL - A fancy caterer specializing in Greek food. She can cook
delicious meals for rows and rows of tables with dozens of people
at each table. She doesn't talk much, as that would just slow her
work down. Few people can understand her recipes, since they are
in a foreign language, and are all recorded in mirror writing.
LOGO - A grade-school art teacher. She is just the kind of
teacher that you wish you had when you were young. She is shapely
and patient, but not an interesting conversationalist. She can
cook up delicious kiddie snacks, but not full-course meals.
LUCID & PROLOG - These clever teenagers show a new kind of cooking
skill. They can cook-up fine meals without the use of recipes,
working solely from a description of the desired meal (declarative
cooking). Many men are fascinated by this and have already
proposed marriage. Others complain that the girls work very
slowly, and that often the description of the meal must be just as
long as a recipe would be. It is hard to predict what these girls
will be like when they are fully mature.
Ada - A WAC colonel built like an amazon. She is always setting
strict rules, but if you follow them, she keeps her temper. She
is quite talkative, always spouting army regulations, and using
obscure military talk. You gotta love her though, because the
army says so.
Showing posts with label Tech. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tech. Show all posts
Sunday, 29 April 2012
Programming Languages are Like Women
Sunday, 23 October 2011
Laws for 21st century: A guide to Canada’s proposed cyber investigation bills
Kathryn Blaze Carlson Oct 22, 2011 – 10:35 AM ET | Last Updated: Oct 23, 2011 11:01 AM ET
Canadians spend more time online than anyone else in the world — an average of 44 hours per month — and nearly a third of the population owns a smartphone, spending more than 17 hours on the device each week. So when the Conservative government reintroduces three pieces of lawful access legislation aimed at giving police greater powers and more tools to conduct investigations using new technologies, Canadians should have a clear understanding of what is on the table. However, much of the rhetoric circulating online about the legislation is patently untrue, distracting from the meat of the bills and the very real privacy implications at stake. Although it is unclear whether the bills will appear exactly as they did when they were first tabled in the spring, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews said this month his government is committed to reintroducing the lawful access legislation. Post reporter Kathryn Blaze Carlson has studied the previous legislation and spoken to experts. Here, she offers up eight things it would do — and three it would not:
1. CREATING “BACK DOORS” FOR POLICE INTERCEPTION The Investigative Powers for the 21st Century Act would require telecommunications and Internet service providers to be capable of decrypting, decoding, and preserving historic and real-time online and telephone communications, essentially creating built-in “back doors” for police interception. Some providers already have this capability, but they preserve information on their servers for different lengths of time depending on company policy. Some smaller providers do not have this capability at all, particularly certain ones in northern Ontario and Quebec, said Christopher Parsons, a doctoral candidate at the University of Victoria studying digital surveillance. Tom Stamatakis, president of the Canadian Police Association, said it is “very frustrating from an investigative perspective” when police obtain a court order to intercept communications, only to learn the relevant Internet service provider is technically incapable of digging up the communications data. The act would also give the RCMP and CSIS the authority to conduct background security checks on any employees who are involved in intercepting communications. Mr. Parsons said it is unclear whether the legislation will target anything more than the “low-hanging fruit” because savvy criminals will be able to evade authorities by encrypting their messages and sending them through several network nodes.
2. OBTAINING BASIC CUSTOMER INFORMATION WITHOUT A WARRANT Police could demand that telecommunications and Internet service providers turn over a customer’s name, address, telephone number, email address, and Internet protocol address — and they could do so without a warrant under exceptional circumstances. “When Internet service providers hear ‘exceptional circumstances,’ they hear ‘whenever (police) want,’” Mr. Parsons said. Michael Geist, chair of Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, said that sort of customer information could be linked with other bits of information to build a detailed profile. It can also be used to “out” someone using a pseudonym in an online chat forum. “All of a sudden, you go from ‘HoneyBunny14’ or ‘BlackAnarchist’ to ‘John Smith’ living at a particular address with a particular phone number,” Mr. Parsons said, adding that social activists are concerned police will use the provision to monitor people organizing legal protests or expressing dissent online. Beyond that, the target is not necessarily the only person using a particular Internet protocol address, so others could be inadvertently monitored at a later stage in the investigation. Mr. Stamatakis said this sort of additional power would be exercised to investigate only the most serious crimes, including child pornography, organized crime and terrorism. “The legislation recognizes the technology criminals are using today,” he said, echoing Mr. Toews comments earlier this month that the Criminal Code contains out-of-date language such as the word “telegraph.”
3. CREATING NEW POLICE POWERS TO OBTAIN COMMUNICATIONS DATA Without a warrant, police could make a “preservation demand” requiring telecommunications and Internet service providers to single out a customer and preserve for 90 days what Dwayne Winseck, a Carleton University communications professor who has studied the Internet for two decades, called “meta data.” So-called meta data is communications information generated during the creation, transmission or reception of a communication including the type, time, duration, origin, and destination of the communication. Police would then have to ask a judge for a “production order” to actually obtain the preserved information. Once police get the court order, they could, for example, find out who a person called on their cell phone, the duration of the call, and when the call was placed. Importantly, the proposed legislation excludes the actual content of the conversation. Once police have a copy of what they want, the service providers must destroy the information. The warantless provision is a welcome one, Mr. Stamatakis said, because it acts as a stop-gap measure while police work to obtain a warrant — a lengthy, labour-intensive process at times.
4. CUSTOMERS MAY NEVER KNOW IF, OR WHY, THEY WERE TARGETED The proposed surveillance legislation says authorities could prohibit telecommunications and Internet service providers from telling a customer that he or she was the subject of information disclosures. The potential cumulative effect of all this legislation, said Mr. Geist, is self-censorship: “What we’re creating is nothing like the Chinese firewall … but I think it could have a chilling effect in terms of people’s willingness to express themselves online, even if they’re not doing anything illegal.”
5. POSSIBLY INCREASED COSTS FOR CELL PHONE AND INTERNET SERVICE If telecommunications and Internet service providers are forced to upgrade their technology and train their staff to use it, then their capital and operating costs will inevitably climb. “Customers might end up paying the added cost for something that could be used against them at any time,” Mr. Parsons said, adding the requirement could also squeeze out smaller, cash-strapped providers.
6. TRACKING DIALED NUMBERS WITHOUT A WARRANT The proposed legislation would allow police to install and use number recorders without a warrant in “exigent circumstances.” A number recorder, which records the telephone numbers associated with outgoing and incoming calls, would be installed remotely by a telecommunications provider at their call centre hub. The installation can last up to 60 days, but it could be extended to one year if a warrant is obtained and if the investigation involves organized crime or terrorism.
7. COVERTLY ACTIVATING DEVICES TO TRACK CELL PHONES AND VEHICLES The proposed legislation brings police powers into the 21st century by tacitly acknowledging that vehicles and mobile phones — and therefore the people using them — can be tracked using GPS or cell towers. The Criminal Code currently says police can, with a warrant or without one in an emergency, “install, maintain and remove a tracking device in or on any thing, including a thing carried, used or worn by any person.” The proposed bill would extend that list to include the power to “activate” a device, “including covertly.” Mr. Parsons said this allows police to “take advantage of existing technologies,” and said he would not object to the provision if it ensured there would be court oversight.
8. OPENING THE DOOR TO “FISHING EXPEDITIONS” The legislation surrounding preservation and production orders would allow police to get information from telecommunications and Internet service providers based on “reasonable grounds to suspect” the information would “assist an investigation.” The existing Criminal Code does not offer a similarly vague suspicion, but rather stipulates “reasonable grounds to believe” an offence “has been or is suspected to have been committed” or that the information will “afford evidence respecting the commission of the offence.” Mr. Winseck said this opens the door for police to go on “fishing expeditions” and potentially “turns the relationship between the cops and (Internet Service Providers) into a routine one.”
… AND THREE MISCONCEPTIONS
1. HYPERLINKING TO HATE PROPAGANDA WILL BE CRIMINALIZED When the legislative summary of one of the bills surfaced saying “the offences of public incitement of hatred and willful promotion of hatred may be committed… by creating a hyperlink that directs web surfers to a website where hate material is posted,” onlookers criticized the bill as overly far-reaching. However, the actual bill makes no explicit reference to hyperlinking, instead expanding the definition of “communicating” hate material to include “making available.” It is true the vague definition of “communicating” could capture posting a link to another website, but a recent Supreme Court libel decision will likely quiet that fear: The judges decided unanimously this week that a person cannot be held responsible for what appears on a hyperlinked site.
2. POLICE WILL GET NEW POWERS TO LISTEN IN ON PRIVATE COMMUNICATIONS
The legislation does not extend police powers to intercept the actual content of private communications, for example what was said in a telephone call or written in an email. Mr. Toews has said those claims — put forward by online privacy activists — are a “complete fabrication.” Also, the Criminal Code already allows police to intercept private communications without a warrant, so long as the situation is urgent and the interception could prevent serious harm to a person or property.
3. INTERNET PROVIDERS WILL MONITOR ALL CANADIANS, ALL THE TIME
The government has been accused of embarking on warrantless online wiretapping where Canadians will be constantly monitored, but Mr. Geist said on his blog these charges amount to “political softball.” Yes, telecommunications and Internet service providers will need the capability to preserve information on all users, regardless of whether or not they are subject to an investigation. But those providers must only preserve and produce information relating to users who are actually targeted by police.
National Post kcarlson@nationalpost.com
Canadians spend more time online than anyone else in the world — an average of 44 hours per month — and nearly a third of the population owns a smartphone, spending more than 17 hours on the device each week. So when the Conservative government reintroduces three pieces of lawful access legislation aimed at giving police greater powers and more tools to conduct investigations using new technologies, Canadians should have a clear understanding of what is on the table. However, much of the rhetoric circulating online about the legislation is patently untrue, distracting from the meat of the bills and the very real privacy implications at stake. Although it is unclear whether the bills will appear exactly as they did when they were first tabled in the spring, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews said this month his government is committed to reintroducing the lawful access legislation. Post reporter Kathryn Blaze Carlson has studied the previous legislation and spoken to experts. Here, she offers up eight things it would do — and three it would not:
1. CREATING “BACK DOORS” FOR POLICE INTERCEPTION The Investigative Powers for the 21st Century Act would require telecommunications and Internet service providers to be capable of decrypting, decoding, and preserving historic and real-time online and telephone communications, essentially creating built-in “back doors” for police interception. Some providers already have this capability, but they preserve information on their servers for different lengths of time depending on company policy. Some smaller providers do not have this capability at all, particularly certain ones in northern Ontario and Quebec, said Christopher Parsons, a doctoral candidate at the University of Victoria studying digital surveillance. Tom Stamatakis, president of the Canadian Police Association, said it is “very frustrating from an investigative perspective” when police obtain a court order to intercept communications, only to learn the relevant Internet service provider is technically incapable of digging up the communications data. The act would also give the RCMP and CSIS the authority to conduct background security checks on any employees who are involved in intercepting communications. Mr. Parsons said it is unclear whether the legislation will target anything more than the “low-hanging fruit” because savvy criminals will be able to evade authorities by encrypting their messages and sending them through several network nodes.
2. OBTAINING BASIC CUSTOMER INFORMATION WITHOUT A WARRANT Police could demand that telecommunications and Internet service providers turn over a customer’s name, address, telephone number, email address, and Internet protocol address — and they could do so without a warrant under exceptional circumstances. “When Internet service providers hear ‘exceptional circumstances,’ they hear ‘whenever (police) want,’” Mr. Parsons said. Michael Geist, chair of Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, said that sort of customer information could be linked with other bits of information to build a detailed profile. It can also be used to “out” someone using a pseudonym in an online chat forum. “All of a sudden, you go from ‘HoneyBunny14’ or ‘BlackAnarchist’ to ‘John Smith’ living at a particular address with a particular phone number,” Mr. Parsons said, adding that social activists are concerned police will use the provision to monitor people organizing legal protests or expressing dissent online. Beyond that, the target is not necessarily the only person using a particular Internet protocol address, so others could be inadvertently monitored at a later stage in the investigation. Mr. Stamatakis said this sort of additional power would be exercised to investigate only the most serious crimes, including child pornography, organized crime and terrorism. “The legislation recognizes the technology criminals are using today,” he said, echoing Mr. Toews comments earlier this month that the Criminal Code contains out-of-date language such as the word “telegraph.”
3. CREATING NEW POLICE POWERS TO OBTAIN COMMUNICATIONS DATA Without a warrant, police could make a “preservation demand” requiring telecommunications and Internet service providers to single out a customer and preserve for 90 days what Dwayne Winseck, a Carleton University communications professor who has studied the Internet for two decades, called “meta data.” So-called meta data is communications information generated during the creation, transmission or reception of a communication including the type, time, duration, origin, and destination of the communication. Police would then have to ask a judge for a “production order” to actually obtain the preserved information. Once police get the court order, they could, for example, find out who a person called on their cell phone, the duration of the call, and when the call was placed. Importantly, the proposed legislation excludes the actual content of the conversation. Once police have a copy of what they want, the service providers must destroy the information. The warantless provision is a welcome one, Mr. Stamatakis said, because it acts as a stop-gap measure while police work to obtain a warrant — a lengthy, labour-intensive process at times.
4. CUSTOMERS MAY NEVER KNOW IF, OR WHY, THEY WERE TARGETED The proposed surveillance legislation says authorities could prohibit telecommunications and Internet service providers from telling a customer that he or she was the subject of information disclosures. The potential cumulative effect of all this legislation, said Mr. Geist, is self-censorship: “What we’re creating is nothing like the Chinese firewall … but I think it could have a chilling effect in terms of people’s willingness to express themselves online, even if they’re not doing anything illegal.”
5. POSSIBLY INCREASED COSTS FOR CELL PHONE AND INTERNET SERVICE If telecommunications and Internet service providers are forced to upgrade their technology and train their staff to use it, then their capital and operating costs will inevitably climb. “Customers might end up paying the added cost for something that could be used against them at any time,” Mr. Parsons said, adding the requirement could also squeeze out smaller, cash-strapped providers.
6. TRACKING DIALED NUMBERS WITHOUT A WARRANT The proposed legislation would allow police to install and use number recorders without a warrant in “exigent circumstances.” A number recorder, which records the telephone numbers associated with outgoing and incoming calls, would be installed remotely by a telecommunications provider at their call centre hub. The installation can last up to 60 days, but it could be extended to one year if a warrant is obtained and if the investigation involves organized crime or terrorism.
7. COVERTLY ACTIVATING DEVICES TO TRACK CELL PHONES AND VEHICLES The proposed legislation brings police powers into the 21st century by tacitly acknowledging that vehicles and mobile phones — and therefore the people using them — can be tracked using GPS or cell towers. The Criminal Code currently says police can, with a warrant or without one in an emergency, “install, maintain and remove a tracking device in or on any thing, including a thing carried, used or worn by any person.” The proposed bill would extend that list to include the power to “activate” a device, “including covertly.” Mr. Parsons said this allows police to “take advantage of existing technologies,” and said he would not object to the provision if it ensured there would be court oversight.
8. OPENING THE DOOR TO “FISHING EXPEDITIONS” The legislation surrounding preservation and production orders would allow police to get information from telecommunications and Internet service providers based on “reasonable grounds to suspect” the information would “assist an investigation.” The existing Criminal Code does not offer a similarly vague suspicion, but rather stipulates “reasonable grounds to believe” an offence “has been or is suspected to have been committed” or that the information will “afford evidence respecting the commission of the offence.” Mr. Winseck said this opens the door for police to go on “fishing expeditions” and potentially “turns the relationship between the cops and (Internet Service Providers) into a routine one.”
… AND THREE MISCONCEPTIONS
1. HYPERLINKING TO HATE PROPAGANDA WILL BE CRIMINALIZED When the legislative summary of one of the bills surfaced saying “the offences of public incitement of hatred and willful promotion of hatred may be committed… by creating a hyperlink that directs web surfers to a website where hate material is posted,” onlookers criticized the bill as overly far-reaching. However, the actual bill makes no explicit reference to hyperlinking, instead expanding the definition of “communicating” hate material to include “making available.” It is true the vague definition of “communicating” could capture posting a link to another website, but a recent Supreme Court libel decision will likely quiet that fear: The judges decided unanimously this week that a person cannot be held responsible for what appears on a hyperlinked site.
2. POLICE WILL GET NEW POWERS TO LISTEN IN ON PRIVATE COMMUNICATIONS
The legislation does not extend police powers to intercept the actual content of private communications, for example what was said in a telephone call or written in an email. Mr. Toews has said those claims — put forward by online privacy activists — are a “complete fabrication.” Also, the Criminal Code already allows police to intercept private communications without a warrant, so long as the situation is urgent and the interception could prevent serious harm to a person or property.
3. INTERNET PROVIDERS WILL MONITOR ALL CANADIANS, ALL THE TIME
The government has been accused of embarking on warrantless online wiretapping where Canadians will be constantly monitored, but Mr. Geist said on his blog these charges amount to “political softball.” Yes, telecommunications and Internet service providers will need the capability to preserve information on all users, regardless of whether or not they are subject to an investigation. But those providers must only preserve and produce information relating to users who are actually targeted by police.
National Post kcarlson@nationalpost.com
Thursday, 6 October 2011
Saturday, 1 October 2011
Who here thinks YOU aren't being spied on ?
Taken from WIRED
Which Telecoms Store Your Data the Longest? Secret Memo Tells All By David Kravets Email Author September 28, 2011 | 6:30 am |
The single-page Department of Justice document, “Retention Periods of Major Cellular Service Providers,” is a guide for law enforcement agencies looking to get information — like customer IP addresses, call logs, text messages and web surfing habits – out of U.S. telecom companies, including AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon.
The document, marked “Law Enforcement Use Only” and dated August 2010, illustrates there are some significant differences in how long carriers retain your data.
Verizon, for example, keeps a list of everyone you’ve exchanged text messages with for the past year, according to the document. But T-Mobile stores the same data up to five years. It’s 18 months for Sprint, and seven years for AT&T.
That makes Verizon appear to have the most privacy-friendly policy. Except that Verizon is alone in retaining the actual contents of text messages. It allegedly stores the messages for five days, while T-Mobile, AT&T, and Sprint don’t store them at all.
The document was unearthed by the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina via a Freedom of Information Act claim. (After the group gave a copy to Wired.com, we also discovered it in two other places on the internet by searching its title.)
“People who are upset that Facebook is storing all their information should be really concerned that their cell phone is tracking them everywhere they’ve been,” said Catherine Crump, an ACLU staff attorney. “The government has this information because it wants to engage in surveillance.”
The biggest difference in retention surrounds so-called cell-site data.
That is information detailing a phone’s movement history via its connections to mobile phone towers while its traveling. Verizon keeps that data on a one-year rolling basis; T-Mobile for “a year or more;” Sprint up to two years, and AT&T indefinitely, from July 2008.
The document also includes retention policies for Nextel and Virgin Mobile. They have folded into the Sprint network.
The document release comes two months before the Supreme Court hears a case testing the government’s argument that it may use GPS devices to monitor a suspect’s every movement without a warrant. And the disclosure comes a month ahead of the 25th anniversary of the Electronic Privacy Communications Act, an outdated law that the government often invokes against targets to obtain, without a warrant, the data the Justice Department document describes.
“I don’t think there there is anything on this list the government would concede requires a warrant,” said Kevin Bankston, a staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “This brings cellular retention practices out of the shadows, so we can have a rational discussion about how the law needs to be changed when it comes to the privacy of our records.”
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) has proposed legislation to alter the Electronic Privacy Communications Act to protect Americans from warrantless intrusions. Debate on the issue is expected to heat up as the anniversary nears, and the Justice Department document likely will take center stage.
Which Telecoms Store Your Data the Longest? Secret Memo Tells All By David Kravets Email Author September 28, 2011 | 6:30 am |
________________________________________________________________
The nation’s major mobile-phone providers are keeping a treasure trove of sensitive data on their customers, according to newly-released Justice Department internal memo that for the first time reveals the data retention policies of America’s largest telecoms.The single-page Department of Justice document, “Retention Periods of Major Cellular Service Providers,” is a guide for law enforcement agencies looking to get information — like customer IP addresses, call logs, text messages and web surfing habits – out of U.S. telecom companies, including AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon.
The document, marked “Law Enforcement Use Only” and dated August 2010, illustrates there are some significant differences in how long carriers retain your data.
That makes Verizon appear to have the most privacy-friendly policy. Except that Verizon is alone in retaining the actual contents of text messages. It allegedly stores the messages for five days, while T-Mobile, AT&T, and Sprint don’t store them at all.
The document was unearthed by the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina via a Freedom of Information Act claim. (After the group gave a copy to Wired.com, we also discovered it in two other places on the internet by searching its title.)
“People who are upset that Facebook is storing all their information should be really concerned that their cell phone is tracking them everywhere they’ve been,” said Catherine Crump, an ACLU staff attorney. “The government has this information because it wants to engage in surveillance.”
The biggest difference in retention surrounds so-called cell-site data.
That is information detailing a phone’s movement history via its connections to mobile phone towers while its traveling. Verizon keeps that data on a one-year rolling basis; T-Mobile for “a year or more;” Sprint up to two years, and AT&T indefinitely, from July 2008.
The document release comes two months before the Supreme Court hears a case testing the government’s argument that it may use GPS devices to monitor a suspect’s every movement without a warrant. And the disclosure comes a month ahead of the 25th anniversary of the Electronic Privacy Communications Act, an outdated law that the government often invokes against targets to obtain, without a warrant, the data the Justice Department document describes.
“I don’t think there there is anything on this list the government would concede requires a warrant,” said Kevin Bankston, a staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “This brings cellular retention practices out of the shadows, so we can have a rational discussion about how the law needs to be changed when it comes to the privacy of our records.”
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) has proposed legislation to alter the Electronic Privacy Communications Act to protect Americans from warrantless intrusions. Debate on the issue is expected to heat up as the anniversary nears, and the Justice Department document likely will take center stage.
Tuesday, 2 August 2011
Wednesday, 20 July 2011
Monday, 13 June 2011
Skynet is closer than you think...
Expect these to be prowling your 'hood soon. From a purely geek / toy / wow factor, this thing is awesome but I can easily see the police and military investing in a gaggle of them to patrol streets, office buildings, venues etc. Spooky !! And it's so damn quiet but can hit 60km/h ? Whoa !!
Friday, 10 June 2011
Hover-Bike !! GOTTA get me one of these !!
Holy Bat-Bike Batman, this is so freakin' AWESOME !!
I gotta get me one. That's it honey, I'm selling the car, the house, the kids and you're working a corner if that's what it takes !!
I gotta get me one. That's it honey, I'm selling the car, the house, the kids and you're working a corner if that's what it takes !!
 |
| Click to Expand |
 |
| Click to Expand |
 |
| Click to Expand |
 |
| Click to Expand |
 |
| Click to Expand |
 |
| Click to Expand |
Wednesday, 8 June 2011
Majestic shuttle in unique station image
 |
| Click to enlarge |
Science correspondent, BBC News
The picture was taken by Italian astronaut Paolo Nespoli as he left the International Space Station in May in a Soyuz capsule to return to Earth.
Safety procedures mean the Russian vehicle would never normally be in transit when a shuttle is present.
It makes this the first-ever image of an American orbiter docked to the ISS.
Endeavour sits firmly on the bow of the station, which is moving across the surface of the Earth at a speed of 27,000km/h (17,000mph) and at an altitude of approximately 355km (220 miles).
Nespoli's camera is looking along the ISS's truss, or backbone, which carries the four sets of giant solar wings. The stern is occupied by Europe's robotic freighter - the Johannes Kepler ship.
The pictures were acquired on 23 May but were only released by the US space agency (Nasa) on Tuesday. They had been eagerly awaited by space fans.
 |
| Click to enlarge |
Nespoli had spent a lot of time during his 159-day stay at the station taking pictures of Earth and life aboard the international outpost. Many of these images were posted on his mission Flickr account. It was widely expected therefore that the European Space Agency astronaut would get some excellent shots during the unique departure.
Enthusiasts on the ground with telescopes routinely try to snap a shuttle attached to the ISS, and some of the results have been very impressive. But none of these pictures compares to the majestic portrait acquired by Nespoli so close to the orbiting complex.
The timing and subject are also perfect. Endeavour is seen here making her final sortie into orbit, making the last big US assembly item delivery - a $2bn particle physics experiment known as the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer. The seven-tonne machine now sits on top of the platform.
Endeavour was also the orbiter chosen to take up the first American segment of the platform when the project had just got started in the late 1990s.
The youngest of Nasa's shuttles returned to Earth on 1 June and will now be prepared for public display at a science museum in California. Sister ship Atlantis stands ready on the launch pad in Florida for a swansong of her own in July. Once her mission is done, no orbiter will ever fly again.
 |
| Click to enlarge |
Their replacements blasted off from Kazakhstan on Tuesday in another Soyuz vehicle. Nasa astronaut Mike Fossum, Russian cosmonaut Sergei Volkov and Japanese astronaut Satoshi Furukawa are scheduled to arrive at the ISS on Thursday, raising its complement once again to six individuals.
The venerable Soyuz will be the only way for astronauts and cosmonauts to reach the platform in the years following the retirement of the shuttle fleet.
Nasa hopes some US commercial carriers will become available in the middle of the decade.
Sunday, 5 June 2011
Who Needs NASA ?
Yes kiddies, for only $75,000 you too could reach for the stars, impress people by claiming to be a Rocket Scientist and basically just freak out your neighbors, NORAD, your government and who knows, kick off your own version of "Wargames" ?
Kewl........
"Danish amateur rocket, Heat-1X Tycho Brahe, a MSC (micro spacecraft), launches in the Baltic Sea east of Bornholm, carrying a doll of human size. The goal for the Danish amateur rocket builders was to send the rocket 15 to 16 Km up in the air, but it reached only 2,8 km and flew a total of 8.5 km."
Friday, 27 May 2011
The Scale of our Universe in 3D
New 3D maps of the Universe released today. This is the most detailed look at what scientists have been able to piece together over literally years of study, data and number crunching.
Now for those of you who aren't technical, or geeks or interested in the slightest, I invite you to look at the following link to completely blow your mind.
I am in absolute AWE of what this website illustrates. Our place in the Universe and just how completely AWESOME all of everything is.
I hope you enjoy it and get just a small taste of what I experienced.
(photos blatantly plagerized from PC Mag here)
 |
| Click Me |
 |
| Click Me |
I am in absolute AWE of what this website illustrates. Our place in the Universe and just how completely AWESOME all of everything is.
I hope you enjoy it and get just a small taste of what I experienced.
Monday, 23 May 2011
Friday, 20 May 2011
Rogers - The Demon Spawn of TelCo's (Part 2)
## If you have never dealt with Roger's, DON'T, if you are with Rogers, GET OUT while you can ##
I didn't think it possible. I mean that, literally and honestly. I didn't think they could or even would try but Rogers has gone and topped themselves earlier this evening. For a shining example of corporate gluttony, bureaucratic ineptitude, flat out greed and a complete lack of customer relations ability, look no further than Rogers.
I got a call earlier today from a Rogers manager who was looking to help me resolve my ongoing BlackBerry issues. The first words out of his mouth after introductions were
"What seems to be the problem with your phone ?"
Well, once more I have to explain it all, this time to Mohamed who I gather is a manager of some sort. He obviously had all the notes from my previous calls infront of him but he wanted me to re-hash everything. At the end of my 5 minute monologue which is basically
"The phone doesn't work, it's under warranty, 6 weeks old, I've lost time, money, data and patience and I want Rogers to make it right..."
I hear him inhale and so it begins.......
Rogers is going to offer me one of two solutions but he highly recommends the second
First off, why would I want a refurbished phone ? If I bought a brand new car that didn't work, would I really want the dealer to offer me as a replacement some other guy's that wasn't quite working and had just recently been in the shop getting repaired ? Second, why in the hell should I pay Rogers $35 for the "privelage" of having them provide me with a working handset ? It's obvious that the one they sold me isn't working and I have to pay to correct that issue ?
As for the option to hand over my handset and then get a loaner for only $100 deposit.....(inset rolling eyes and confused look here). I don't know about you but I don't have $100 to give Rogers and then have them apply a credit to my account down the road. They don't trust me to return their crappy loaner and demand $100 to make sure I don't walk off with it ? That's insulting.
What's more, their loaner is an older model. By old I don't mean last year's old, I mean OLD. Like Bush era presidency old. This handset doesn't have the memory, speed or features that I've already paid for nor will it run the software that I've already purchased for my existing handheld. To top it all off, any data that I enter on my "loaner" won't be transferable back onto my returned & hopefully repaired phone. So now I've lost my original data, plus any data on the "loaner" phone and I get charged my full monthly fees PLUS $100 for my efforts ?!?
I suggest to the man from Rogers that a simple, easy and quick alternative solution would be for them to simply put a brand new handset on a truck and ship it off to me. Easy as pie..... I get the model and the features that I paid for, Rogers gets the original handset back to use as a "loaner" for the next guy after it's been "refurbished".
But no, this is not permitted. Rogers claims the handset costs them $750 and they've only made a 3% markup on it when they sold the first one to me so they couldn't possibly do that. Honestly, if Rogers is paying $750 for a BlackBerry 9780, RIM is doing better than I thought and Rogers has no business sense when it comes to negotiating what must be a volume contract with RIM.
It's only when I asked for a day to consider my options, evaluate other carriers and also my legal standing with regards to the warranties that he came back with one counter offer after another.
Splitting of the $35 fees for a "refurbished" phone, waiving the fees, loaning me a non-internet phone for a lower deposit etc...etc..etc.. When I mentioned the fact that I paid for, needed and expected an internet ready phone as per my contract he actually claimed that I wasn't entitled to anything beyond the RIM handset warranty and should just accept what he had offered.
The fact that this whole affair has cost me time, money and a great deal of inconvenience he suggested, could be written off as a business expense by me. I should write off the $35 or I should write off the $100 etc. My jaw dropped. He was actually admitting that I had and would continue to incurr expenses and inconvenience but that I should write them off as a business expense ? But Rogers was in no way obligated to compensate me for the issues with the phone & service that I have paid them to provide ?
Once again, Rogers demonstrates that once a company gets large enough, they couldn't give a rat's ass for you as a customer. They will promise you champagne service and deliver you flat ginger-ale. If you have never dealt with Rogers, DON'T, if you, like me are stuck with them, then at your earliest convenience leave. Put plainly, Rogers sucks ass.
I didn't think it possible. I mean that, literally and honestly. I didn't think they could or even would try but Rogers has gone and topped themselves earlier this evening. For a shining example of corporate gluttony, bureaucratic ineptitude, flat out greed and a complete lack of customer relations ability, look no further than Rogers.
I got a call earlier today from a Rogers manager who was looking to help me resolve my ongoing BlackBerry issues. The first words out of his mouth after introductions were
"What seems to be the problem with your phone ?"
Well, once more I have to explain it all, this time to Mohamed who I gather is a manager of some sort. He obviously had all the notes from my previous calls infront of him but he wanted me to re-hash everything. At the end of my 5 minute monologue which is basically
"The phone doesn't work, it's under warranty, 6 weeks old, I've lost time, money, data and patience and I want Rogers to make it right..."
I hear him inhale and so it begins.......
Rogers is going to offer me one of two solutions but he highly recommends the second
I request a new phone which will be shipped out to me at a cost of $35.00 but the phone's not actually new, it's a refurbished phone. This is one that belonged to someone else, Rogers/RIM think they've got it working now and are willing to let me have it. Obviously I have to give them my current handset which then goes and get's "refurbished" to get passed off on the next lucky guy.
OR
I go to a Rogers store, give them my current, broken handset and a $100 deposit for which they will loan me an older model. Problem is, their "loaner" phone doesn't have the same functionality as my model nor can I use the loaner for 10 days and then transfer all my data back onto my original phone when it gets returned to me from RIM.
First off, why would I want a refurbished phone ? If I bought a brand new car that didn't work, would I really want the dealer to offer me as a replacement some other guy's that wasn't quite working and had just recently been in the shop getting repaired ? Second, why in the hell should I pay Rogers $35 for the "privelage" of having them provide me with a working handset ? It's obvious that the one they sold me isn't working and I have to pay to correct that issue ?
As for the option to hand over my handset and then get a loaner for only $100 deposit.....(inset rolling eyes and confused look here). I don't know about you but I don't have $100 to give Rogers and then have them apply a credit to my account down the road. They don't trust me to return their crappy loaner and demand $100 to make sure I don't walk off with it ? That's insulting.
What's more, their loaner is an older model. By old I don't mean last year's old, I mean OLD. Like Bush era presidency old. This handset doesn't have the memory, speed or features that I've already paid for nor will it run the software that I've already purchased for my existing handheld. To top it all off, any data that I enter on my "loaner" won't be transferable back onto my returned & hopefully repaired phone. So now I've lost my original data, plus any data on the "loaner" phone and I get charged my full monthly fees PLUS $100 for my efforts ?!?
I suggest to the man from Rogers that a simple, easy and quick alternative solution would be for them to simply put a brand new handset on a truck and ship it off to me. Easy as pie..... I get the model and the features that I paid for, Rogers gets the original handset back to use as a "loaner" for the next guy after it's been "refurbished".
But no, this is not permitted. Rogers claims the handset costs them $750 and they've only made a 3% markup on it when they sold the first one to me so they couldn't possibly do that. Honestly, if Rogers is paying $750 for a BlackBerry 9780, RIM is doing better than I thought and Rogers has no business sense when it comes to negotiating what must be a volume contract with RIM.
It's only when I asked for a day to consider my options, evaluate other carriers and also my legal standing with regards to the warranties that he came back with one counter offer after another.
Splitting of the $35 fees for a "refurbished" phone, waiving the fees, loaning me a non-internet phone for a lower deposit etc...etc..etc.. When I mentioned the fact that I paid for, needed and expected an internet ready phone as per my contract he actually claimed that I wasn't entitled to anything beyond the RIM handset warranty and should just accept what he had offered.
The fact that this whole affair has cost me time, money and a great deal of inconvenience he suggested, could be written off as a business expense by me. I should write off the $35 or I should write off the $100 etc. My jaw dropped. He was actually admitting that I had and would continue to incurr expenses and inconvenience but that I should write them off as a business expense ? But Rogers was in no way obligated to compensate me for the issues with the phone & service that I have paid them to provide ?
Once again, Rogers demonstrates that once a company gets large enough, they couldn't give a rat's ass for you as a customer. They will promise you champagne service and deliver you flat ginger-ale. If you have never dealt with Rogers, DON'T, if you, like me are stuck with them, then at your earliest convenience leave. Put plainly, Rogers sucks ass.
Wednesday, 18 May 2011
Rogers - The demon spawn of Telcos
There was once a time when customer service could be summed up with the phrase "The Customer is ALWAYS right." Those days are long gone at Rogers, a Canadian TelCo, CableCo and general corporate badass.
I was recently forced to "upgrade" from my iPhone at Rogers because mine had stopped working (I couldn't dial out). Rogers, in it's infinite wisdom decided that they would only offer me an early "upgrade" to a BlackBerry because iPhones were out of stock, too expensive and I wasn't worth the effort. If I had been a new customer off the street they would've sold me the iPhone for $99 but they wanted to charge me $399 (after 12 years as a customer of theirs).
Long story short, Rogers gets me a new Blackberry, it's not what I wanted and not what I could afford based on their unique (lets screw the people already on contract) pricing structure but it's the best they would offer me and hey, I need a working phone so I agreed to it.
Well, the Blackberry and I had a couple of weeks of teething problems but in time I got used to using it though I did sorely miss the iPhone. The only saving grace of the BlackBerry is the size of the handset and the physical keys but I digress.
Anyways, just recently my BlackBerry stopped syncing with my online calendar and like any self respecting geek, I went to the handset's setup application to check the settings and try to diagnose the problem. Big Mistake. The BlackBerry told me I had to upgrade my "Email Setup Application" and so I started and voila, 30 minutes later, my now 6 week old Blackberry is crashed, bricked, fubar, a paperweight. The RIM/Rogers software upgrade managed to crash the handheld's operating system making the whole thing completely unusable.
"WHAT THE FUCK ?!?!?" I shouted at the handset and laptop as I scrambled to figure out what had happened.
So I call Rogers on a landline (I was visiting someone who still had an actual phone with a cord) and proceeded to deal with the tech support person. After about 90 minutes of very garbled english and an even more garbled attempt to diagnose the problem and offer a solution, I finally gave up on Rogers and went to the RIM (BlackBerry's Maker) support website to see if I could do this on my own seeing as how the Rogers tech seemed to have no idea what he was doing, let alone a basic grasp of english pronunciation.
A few hours later, I managed to get the phone limping back to life. Still not sure what happened to it and it still wasn't working properly but at least I could dial out on it and it WAS giving me email. Problem is, all the data I had entered into the phone (Bookmarks, Passwords, Calendar entries, Contacts, Memos, Notes etc.) were ALL GONE !! Those backups I'd been making every week "just in case" ? Well, they were worth shit as the phone didn't want to restore them. BAH !!
Then yesterday, like an idiot I go back to RIM's website and read up a bit more on the issue looking for some glimmer of hope in terms of getting my phone back up & running. I am delusional, I know this but I truly thought that in todays day & age, the manufacturer's site would be the best source of information and advice. Pffft...was I ever an innocent lamb in the woods.
Following the advice of other RIM customers I thought that I would try the app update one more time, the very same thing that caused this whole problem to begin with, but this time I knew the steps to recover and had read of some people who had successfully installed the upgrade and were merrily BB'ing forth. I wanted into that promised land of email, calendar AND phone in my palm so, as I said above, like an idiot I tried one more time. Can you guess where this is headed ?
Last night at precisely 6:49pm, I proved that man should not be allowed to mess with the primeval forces of BlackBerry, especially a man as obviously gullible as me. Once again I had transformed a semi-working BlackBerry into a $300 paperweight, but hey, I at least did it in record time....Yippie !! (insert laugh track here)
So 7:00pm rolls around and I'm on a landline talking with a Rogers Tech support person AGAIN. Only this time he's asking me to use a Windows computer. Funny, I don't remember seeing a label on the BB that said it didn't roll with the Mac OS-X crowd but apparently, if you wanna be a BB geek, Windows is the only way to roll. So I get Windows installed on my Mac Laptop, do as the tech suggests, try installing this and that, connecting, refreshing, pulling batteries out of the handset over and over, rebooting, installing, waiting and seething.
One hour later and I completely loose it on the tech.
I tried using a chronology to explain things to him like you would to a two year old.
1. I am trying to get a calendar and email to work on a phone that was doing this fine until last week
2. I read the manual and tried to use the Blackberry provided program that sets this whole thing up in the first place.
3. The Blackberry program demands that it be upgraded before it can proceed so........I upgrade
4. The upgrade breaks my phone, crashing it and causing data loss
5. I then get to spend 45 minutes reinstalling the system to get back to step 1 without fixing the original problem
I paid good money for the handset, I pay good money every month for the services and I now have a handset that makes calls only. Unacceptable, I demand service, a solution, a fix and I expect someone to compensate me for my wasted time, lost data and productivity...etc....
What does Rogers offer me ? A tech who wants to experiment on my phone and when I lose it on him and demand a manager, he gets me on to someone from Customer Service. Now these people are the cream of the crop, you know the ones...They can give you free texting or knock $5 off your bill. These are the real "fixers" at Rogers. The people who are endowed with that extra thick skin and the ever so slightly condescending voice that basically says "We'll throw you a little bone but never admit we screwed you over".
This woman proved to be nothing of the sort. She was from the get go a brick wall, I could have mistaken her for a voice recording, some pavlovian response was all she could muster.
"It's a technical issue and you'll have to deal with them"
"Well, I had been, for the last several hours you dim-wit !!" (I think I was a bit more polite though)
"Well what would you like me to do sir"
"Fix it, get me a new phone that works, that does what I am paying you to have it do......"
"It's a technical issue and you'll have to deal with them"
"Well, I had been, for the last several hours you dim-wit !!" (I was becoming less polite now)
LATHER, RINSE, REPEAT....45 minutes later......
"Rogers Technical Support....How can I help you......."
AARRGGHHHHHHHHHHH !!!
I was recently forced to "upgrade" from my iPhone at Rogers because mine had stopped working (I couldn't dial out). Rogers, in it's infinite wisdom decided that they would only offer me an early "upgrade" to a BlackBerry because iPhones were out of stock, too expensive and I wasn't worth the effort. If I had been a new customer off the street they would've sold me the iPhone for $99 but they wanted to charge me $399 (after 12 years as a customer of theirs).
Long story short, Rogers gets me a new Blackberry, it's not what I wanted and not what I could afford based on their unique (lets screw the people already on contract) pricing structure but it's the best they would offer me and hey, I need a working phone so I agreed to it.
Well, the Blackberry and I had a couple of weeks of teething problems but in time I got used to using it though I did sorely miss the iPhone. The only saving grace of the BlackBerry is the size of the handset and the physical keys but I digress.
Anyways, just recently my BlackBerry stopped syncing with my online calendar and like any self respecting geek, I went to the handset's setup application to check the settings and try to diagnose the problem. Big Mistake. The BlackBerry told me I had to upgrade my "Email Setup Application" and so I started and voila, 30 minutes later, my now 6 week old Blackberry is crashed, bricked, fubar, a paperweight. The RIM/Rogers software upgrade managed to crash the handheld's operating system making the whole thing completely unusable.
"WHAT THE FUCK ?!?!?" I shouted at the handset and laptop as I scrambled to figure out what had happened.
So I call Rogers on a landline (I was visiting someone who still had an actual phone with a cord) and proceeded to deal with the tech support person. After about 90 minutes of very garbled english and an even more garbled attempt to diagnose the problem and offer a solution, I finally gave up on Rogers and went to the RIM (BlackBerry's Maker) support website to see if I could do this on my own seeing as how the Rogers tech seemed to have no idea what he was doing, let alone a basic grasp of english pronunciation.
A few hours later, I managed to get the phone limping back to life. Still not sure what happened to it and it still wasn't working properly but at least I could dial out on it and it WAS giving me email. Problem is, all the data I had entered into the phone (Bookmarks, Passwords, Calendar entries, Contacts, Memos, Notes etc.) were ALL GONE !! Those backups I'd been making every week "just in case" ? Well, they were worth shit as the phone didn't want to restore them. BAH !!
Then yesterday, like an idiot I go back to RIM's website and read up a bit more on the issue looking for some glimmer of hope in terms of getting my phone back up & running. I am delusional, I know this but I truly thought that in todays day & age, the manufacturer's site would be the best source of information and advice. Pffft...was I ever an innocent lamb in the woods.
Following the advice of other RIM customers I thought that I would try the app update one more time, the very same thing that caused this whole problem to begin with, but this time I knew the steps to recover and had read of some people who had successfully installed the upgrade and were merrily BB'ing forth. I wanted into that promised land of email, calendar AND phone in my palm so, as I said above, like an idiot I tried one more time. Can you guess where this is headed ?
Last night at precisely 6:49pm, I proved that man should not be allowed to mess with the primeval forces of BlackBerry, especially a man as obviously gullible as me. Once again I had transformed a semi-working BlackBerry into a $300 paperweight, but hey, I at least did it in record time....Yippie !! (insert laugh track here)
So 7:00pm rolls around and I'm on a landline talking with a Rogers Tech support person AGAIN. Only this time he's asking me to use a Windows computer. Funny, I don't remember seeing a label on the BB that said it didn't roll with the Mac OS-X crowd but apparently, if you wanna be a BB geek, Windows is the only way to roll. So I get Windows installed on my Mac Laptop, do as the tech suggests, try installing this and that, connecting, refreshing, pulling batteries out of the handset over and over, rebooting, installing, waiting and seething.
One hour later and I completely loose it on the tech.
I tried using a chronology to explain things to him like you would to a two year old.
1. I am trying to get a calendar and email to work on a phone that was doing this fine until last week
2. I read the manual and tried to use the Blackberry provided program that sets this whole thing up in the first place.
3. The Blackberry program demands that it be upgraded before it can proceed so........I upgrade
4. The upgrade breaks my phone, crashing it and causing data loss
5. I then get to spend 45 minutes reinstalling the system to get back to step 1 without fixing the original problem
I paid good money for the handset, I pay good money every month for the services and I now have a handset that makes calls only. Unacceptable, I demand service, a solution, a fix and I expect someone to compensate me for my wasted time, lost data and productivity...etc....
What does Rogers offer me ? A tech who wants to experiment on my phone and when I lose it on him and demand a manager, he gets me on to someone from Customer Service. Now these people are the cream of the crop, you know the ones...They can give you free texting or knock $5 off your bill. These are the real "fixers" at Rogers. The people who are endowed with that extra thick skin and the ever so slightly condescending voice that basically says "We'll throw you a little bone but never admit we screwed you over".
This woman proved to be nothing of the sort. She was from the get go a brick wall, I could have mistaken her for a voice recording, some pavlovian response was all she could muster.
"It's a technical issue and you'll have to deal with them"
"Well, I had been, for the last several hours you dim-wit !!" (I think I was a bit more polite though)
"Well what would you like me to do sir"
"Fix it, get me a new phone that works, that does what I am paying you to have it do......"
"It's a technical issue and you'll have to deal with them"
"Well, I had been, for the last several hours you dim-wit !!" (I was becoming less polite now)
LATHER, RINSE, REPEAT....45 minutes later......
"Rogers Technical Support....How can I help you......."
AARRGGHHHHHHHHHHH !!!
Monday, 16 May 2011
Thursday, 28 April 2011
Mmmmm...Beer (but it ain't cheap)
If you’re serious about home brewing and you want to do it with style and ease, the WilliamsWarn Personal Brewery might be perfect, assuming you care enough about your beer to spend $4,500.
Look here. http://www.williamswarn.com/
Saturday, 23 April 2011
Saturday, 16 April 2011
BlackBerry Sucks Ass & Rogers taught it how...
Well, it's official. BlackBerry Sucks Ass. I'm not going to sugar coat it. You can put lipstick all over this pig but it still sucks ass. Let me explain.....
I was a content (not ecstatic) iPhone 3GS owner before being bumped into the BlackBerry world. Not by choice but by bad hardware and by Rogers.com who are the dark overlord of Canadian Tel-Coms. My touch-screen developed a region where it would accept NO input. None, Nada, zilch.
So this meant that for all intents & purposes, I now had a semi-functioning iPhone. I could answer calls, play music and take photos/video but actually entering text would be next to impossible with a few rows of the keyboard being dead. Well this was unacceptable since the mobile is my only phone and I did need to actually make a few calls, respond to a few emails and enter some text from time to time.
When this occurred my warranty had expired 2 weeks previously and even though I've been a longtime customer, they basically offered me a replacement at full price which is unacceptable (see an earlier rant of mine about Rogers.com the Dark Overlord). Well, that left me with an option to go on a waiting list for an iPhone 3GS at full price ($300+) or get a BlackBerry now. Guess what I did, since I needed a phone NOW cause it's my only phone ? Yep, I got a brand spanking new BOLD 9780.
Now I'd had a BB once before when I was living in NYC and it was a great handset if only a bit bulky. It certainly worked fine and at the time, was without peer for connectivity. It gave me email, let me txt, let me surf the web (albeit poorly) and have phone conversations. I was expecting a similar experience with this new handset which was supposed to be one of their top of the line models. HA !!
This new BB lets me check my Gmail account alright, but only via POP and not IMAP. So all that folder goodness that Gmail provides me, well that's toast. I've gotta rely on a third party app for that.
The provided RIM applications look like something that was designed by some myopic, dyslexic and perversely inept first year Waterloo Comp-Sci student after a bender of vodka and RedBull.
Ahhhhh....I could go on about this piece of shit but I've spewed enough bile for now.
Notice I said nothing about the hardware. Now that is the only place where this device shines. The screen's too small but considering the perfect size of the handset overall, it's livable. Other than that, I love the actual handset. It feels good in my hand, is compact but usable, has a real keyboard (though my sausage fingers do occasionally hit the wrong letters).
I wonder if we could get Apple to write the software for RIM's hardware. Now that would be a step in the right direction.
I was a content (not ecstatic) iPhone 3GS owner before being bumped into the BlackBerry world. Not by choice but by bad hardware and by Rogers.com who are the dark overlord of Canadian Tel-Coms. My touch-screen developed a region where it would accept NO input. None, Nada, zilch.
So this meant that for all intents & purposes, I now had a semi-functioning iPhone. I could answer calls, play music and take photos/video but actually entering text would be next to impossible with a few rows of the keyboard being dead. Well this was unacceptable since the mobile is my only phone and I did need to actually make a few calls, respond to a few emails and enter some text from time to time.
When this occurred my warranty had expired 2 weeks previously and even though I've been a longtime customer, they basically offered me a replacement at full price which is unacceptable (see an earlier rant of mine about Rogers.com the Dark Overlord). Well, that left me with an option to go on a waiting list for an iPhone 3GS at full price ($300+) or get a BlackBerry now. Guess what I did, since I needed a phone NOW cause it's my only phone ? Yep, I got a brand spanking new BOLD 9780.
Now I'd had a BB once before when I was living in NYC and it was a great handset if only a bit bulky. It certainly worked fine and at the time, was without peer for connectivity. It gave me email, let me txt, let me surf the web (albeit poorly) and have phone conversations. I was expecting a similar experience with this new handset which was supposed to be one of their top of the line models. HA !!
This new BB lets me check my Gmail account alright, but only via POP and not IMAP. So all that folder goodness that Gmail provides me, well that's toast. I've gotta rely on a third party app for that.
The provided RIM applications look like something that was designed by some myopic, dyslexic and perversely inept first year Waterloo Comp-Sci student after a bender of vodka and RedBull.
- The Calendar has decent functionality but I keep getting duplicates and am convinced that my meetings are being rescheduled every time I sync with the BlackBerry Desktop Manager.
- The built-in clock app allows for only one alarm. Now I know that I only need one to wake up in the morning but for anything more than that one recurring alarm, I've gotta go into my calendar and effectively create a new recurring event. Couldn't they just have added that functionality to the clock itself and not make me enter alarms two different ways ?
- The browser is...well...compared to the iPhone, this is a joke. First off, unless you have the eyesight of a freakin' eagle, you can't see shit. Second, it's slower than molasses. Third, I can add bookmarks but I can't get them organized into folders, or alphabetically ? BAH !!
- The Documents To Go that comes bundled with the Blackberry might as well have FUCK YOU written all over it for all the good it does ya. I mean you wanna open a new doc ? Buy the full version cause the once that comes with the handset it read only (unless you wanna play around with sending yourself blank docs as templates). Do me a favor RIM, if you're gonna include something, make it something that actually works.
- Desktop Manager. This is the crowning turd on top of the whole simmering stew crap that is RIM software. I am on a MacBook Pro. The Desktop Manager specifically for the Mac is next to useless. In fact I am convinced that it is there to try my patience and hog my HD space...Period. This thing took (no exaggeration) 45 minutes to install a 245KB file and reboot the handset. All the while telling me not to unplug the handset. What the hell was it doing ? I mean I'm an intelligent man and have been using computers since the days that Pentium 75MHz was king and this is crazy stoopid. WTF were they thinking ?
Ahhhhh....I could go on about this piece of shit but I've spewed enough bile for now.
Notice I said nothing about the hardware. Now that is the only place where this device shines. The screen's too small but considering the perfect size of the handset overall, it's livable. Other than that, I love the actual handset. It feels good in my hand, is compact but usable, has a real keyboard (though my sausage fingers do occasionally hit the wrong letters).
I wonder if we could get Apple to write the software for RIM's hardware. Now that would be a step in the right direction.
Monday, 11 April 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)