Easing users into the world of Windows 10 IoT Enterprises eyeing their crusty old Windows CE apps with alarm as Microsoft yanks the plug on its legacy operating systems will be relieved to see the company making good on its promised CE container technology.…
Ramen, katsu curry and a side of finest BSOD Bork!Bork!Bork!  Amid the table football, beanbags and overpriced coffee, London's silicon roundabout also plays host to that most modern of afflictions: the BSOD bork.…
Some of the wood that burned in the cathedral of Notre Dame in Paris on Monday was put in place in the year 1160.Nearly a millennium ago it was forest; today, after a catastrophe that cuts to the heart of French culture and human history, it’s ash.“It was one of the oldest—until today—surviving roofs of that kind,” says Robert Bork, an architectural historian at the University of Iowa.Flames and a column of smoke made it even more striking, and as the flames spread the potential impact of the blaze became more clear.Four hundred fire fighters mustered.The cathedral’s lead-and-wood spire, built by Eugène-Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc in 1860 as part of a controversial remodel, caught fire and fell.
Last week, presidential candidate Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts) announced an ambitious plan to break up big tech companies like Google, Facebook, and Amazon and block them from selling their own products on their platforms.Warren called out Facebook's acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp and Google's acquisition of online advertising giant DoubleClick as examples of the deals she'd like to see reversed.In his book, The Curse of Bigness: Antitrust in the New Gilded Age, published in November, legal scholar Tim Wu explains how conservative views of antitrust laws first promoted by Robert Bork and the “Chicago School” in the 1970s became fully mainstream by the early 2000s.That left companies like Google and Facebook, which offer their main services for free, largely free from oversight even as they acquired competitors and amassed enormous power over the information people see.Wu points to more than a century of "trust busting" tradition to make the case that elected leaders have the legal power, and the responsibility, to break up monopolies that reduce competition, slow the pace of innovation, and damage the fabric of democracy.But the Republican Party has historically had more of a concern with promoting competition and preventing monopoly.
If you tried to turn on your Xbox One today only to be greeted with a borked boot up sequence and a series of black screens, you’re not the only one.Apparently, there’s an issue with Xbox Live that’s stopping some consoles from being able to start up normally.We are aware of reports of Xbox One console startup, title update and sign-in errors.We will keep everyone informed once we have more information to share.Thank you all for your patience.— Xbox Support (@XboxSupport) January 30, 2019
Vid biz's admission shows that no data is privateA tweet sent in jest from Netflix's official Twitter account on Sunday evening has called the company's data practices into question."To the 53 people who've watched A Christmas Prince every day for the past 18 days: Who hurt you?"To the general public, the issue can be summarized as no harm, no foul.To understand why video privacy is even an issue, rewind several decades to 1987 when reporter Michael Dolan went looking for and found the video rental history of Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork, who had expressed his view that the Constitution does not support privacy protection.This may seem like a quaint concern in an era when elected officials shrug of charges off pedophilia, sexual assault, and treason, but there was a time when public image mattered.
In a class-action lawsuit that alleged illegal tracking of kids web browsing and video-viewing habits, Google was released from the action by the US Third Circuit Court of Appeals but Viacom, owner of Nickelodeon and associated websites, was not.Plaintiffs in the case were kids under 13 and their families .The plaintiffs alleged that defendants, Viacom and Google, collected information about their viewing and browsing behavior on Viacom s websites — in violation of state privacy laws and the the federal Video Privacy Protection Act.The latter, passed in 1988 in response to publication of then US Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork s video rental history by the Washington Post, makes illegal any disclosure of personally identifying information relating to viewers consumption of video-related services.On its child-oriented websites, including Nick.com, Viacom promised that it would not collect kids personal information: HEY GROWN-UPS: We don t collect ANY personal information about your kids.Which means we couldn t share it even if we wanted to!