Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
A lot of ticket fraud could be eliminated if ticket validators were
mandated at the departure station. You could even eliminate split ticketing >> by doing this, should that be a desirable policy objective.
Interesting side discussion:
A few times recently I've decided to change my journey plans when already >en-route, purchasing a ticket online mid-journey.
In my instance it was pure leisure journeys, and I realised I had time to
get extra mileage riding that particular type of train; but other >possibilities include changing which station you're being picked up from,
due to road or rail delays.
Would a 'ticket not valid unless scanned in at origin station' split >ticketing restriction also prevent this?
Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
A lot of ticket fraud could be eliminated if ticket validators were
mandated at the departure station. You could even eliminate split ticketing >>> by doing this, should that be a desirable policy objective.
Interesting side discussion:
A few times recently I've decided to change my journey plans when already
en-route, purchasing a ticket online mid-journey.
In my instance it was pure leisure journeys, and I realised I had time to
get extra mileage riding that particular type of train; but other
possibilities include changing which station you're being picked up from,
due to road or rail delays.
Would a 'ticket not valid unless scanned in at origin station' split
ticketing restriction also prevent this?
Pre Internet days how would you have solved this problem?
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <114vjsd$338ba$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:12:13 on Wed, 5 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <mee67ltnunf3h8b8fv412418tb37q5u9pr@4ax.com>, at 14:26:07 on >>>> Wed, 5 Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 14:11:50 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote: >>>>>
In message <114v670$2tvcj$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:18:56 on Wed, 5 Aug >>>>>> 2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
ThererCOs been a TV series following SWR and TfL RPI teams. This >>>>>>>> scam is well-known to them, and they routinely catch lots ofIs it practical to have bar code validators at every station? ie you must
culprits. This latest report looks like they have had an even >>>>>>>> bigger recent focus on it.
scan your ticket before getting on the train. Even paper tickets can be >>>>>>> issued with a bar code.
Can they? I'm not sure I've seen a ticket paper ought from a TVM with a >>>>>> barcode on it.
They come with QR codes.
The most recent one I have here, didn't.
But that doesnrCOt mean itrCOs impossible to issue paper tickets with barcodes.
Nobody claimed it was impossible. But someone said it was happening
today, which isn't the experience I've had.
TfL is also not particularly well known for having bar-code enabled
gates. It wouldn't be impossible, but they don't seem to want to.
Ditto railcard discounts for contactless fares.
I think you will find more TfL fares with scanners soon and possibly the railcard discount issue will get resolved. They have a new ticketing
supplier and the transition to them was held up by a court challenge by the previous supplier.
On 05/08/2026 17:13, Tweed wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:Barcode or E-Tickets for journeys which may include a TfL are not issued.
In message <114vjsd$338ba$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:12:13 on Wed, 5 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <mee67ltnunf3h8b8fv412418tb37q5u9pr@4ax.com>, at 14:26:07 on >>>>> Wed, 5 Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 14:11:50 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote: >>>>>>
In message <114v670$2tvcj$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:18:56 on Wed, 5 Aug >>>>>>> 2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
ThererCOs been a TV series following SWR and TfL RPI teams. This >>>>>>>>> scam is well-known to them, and they routinely catch lots of >>>>>>>>> culprits. This latest report looks like they have had an even >>>>>>>>> bigger recent focus on it.Is it practical to have bar code validators at every station? ie you must
scan your ticket before getting on the train. Even paper tickets can be
issued with a bar code.
Can they? I'm not sure I've seen a ticket paper ought from a TVM with a >>>>>>> barcode on it.
They come with QR codes.
The most recent one I have here, didn't.
But that doesnrCOt mean itrCOs impossible to issue paper tickets with barcodes.
Nobody claimed it was impossible. But someone said it was happening
today, which isn't the experience I've had.
TfL is also not particularly well known for having bar-code enabled
gates. It wouldn't be impossible, but they don't seem to want to.
Ditto railcard discounts for contactless fares.
I think you will find more TfL fares with scanners soon and possibly the
railcard discount issue will get resolved. They have a new ticketing
supplier and the transition to them was held up by a court challenge by the >> previous supplier.
In message <114vuuh$37o7l$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:21:05 on Wed, 5 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <114vr88$36b8u$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at
18:18:35 on Wed, 5 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked: >>> Roland Perry wrote:
I have changed nothing, nada, zilch, about my setup. And everyone else's
urls continue to work. It's the Times, who have changed ***THEIR*** >>>>>> setup.
The only failed times ;onk I encounter are when I'm not logged-in an
the URL is "snapped" in ways we've discussed elsewhere.
The only failed links I've encountered are two, in just the last couple
of days. Before then it was fine.
In the medium term, they could think that I might buy a subscription >>>> eventually. But I don't need to, because my GF already has one. (But >>>> the only benefit I get, is when she shares an article with me).
Rather than asking her to generate shared links per article for you,
I wasn't proposing asking for that.
she could set you up with what they call a "bonus account" that gives
you full access, providing you don;t mind logging in to the website?
And will that work if the Times site doesn't let me past their
bot-check.
IrCOve never had a bot check by the Times website, at least not one IrCOm aware
of. Certainly not the very obvious Cloudflare one.
If it's not a bot-check, what is the "Verifying your device, please
wait" message?
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <114vuuh$37o7l$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:21:05 on Wed, 5 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <114vr88$36b8u$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at
18:18:35 on Wed, 5 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked: >>>>> Roland Perry wrote:
I have changed nothing, nada, zilch, about my setup. And everyone else's
urls continue to work. It's the Times, who have changed ***THEIR*** >>>>>>>> setup.
The only failed times ;onk I encounter are when I'm not logged-in an >>>>> the URL is "snapped" in ways we've discussed elsewhere.
The only failed links I've encountered are two, in just the last couple >>>> of days. Before then it was fine.
In the medium term, they could think that I might buy a subscription >>>>>> eventually. But I don't need to, because my GF already has one. (But >>>>>> the only benefit I get, is when she shares an article with me).
Rather than asking her to generate shared links per article for you,
I wasn't proposing asking for that.
she could set you up with what they call a "bonus account" that gives >>>>> you full access, providing you don;t mind logging in to the website?
And will that work if the Times site doesn't let me past their
bot-check.
IrCOve never had a bot check by the Times website, at least not one IrCOm aware
of. Certainly not the very obvious Cloudflare one.
If it's not a bot-check, what is the "Verifying your device, please
wait" message?
I did get that message for the first Times article in that thread (Firefox, Ubuntu, uBlock Origin) but I didn't for the second. Evidently it has
decided I'm 'ok' as far as not being a bot.
It wasn't a Cloudflare check, it looked like the Times homebrewed their
own.
Theo
I suspect itrCOs not for Bot defences but rather to enforce not sharing of >usernames.If it's not a bot-check, what is the "Verifying your device, please
wait" message?
I did get that message for the first Times article in that thread (Firefox, >> Ubuntu, uBlock Origin) but I didn't for the second. Evidently it has
decided I'm 'ok' as far as not being a bot.
It wasn't a Cloudflare check, it looked like the Times homebrewed their
own.
Theo
On 05/08/2026 17:13, Tweed wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <114vjsd$338ba$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:12:13 on Wed, 5 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <mee67ltnunf3h8b8fv412418tb37q5u9pr@4ax.com>, at 14:26:07 on >>>>> Wed, 5 Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 14:11:50 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote: >>>>>>
In message <114v670$2tvcj$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:18:56 on Wed, 5 Aug >>>>>>> 2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
ThererCOs been a TV series following SWR and TfL RPI teams. This >>>>>>>>> scam is well-known to them, and they routinely catch lots of >>>>>>>>> culprits. This latest report looks like they have had an even >>>>>>>>> bigger recent focus on it.Is it practical to have bar code validators at every station? >>>>>>>>ie you must scan your ticket before getting on the train. Even >>>>>>>>paper tickets can be issued with a bar code.
Can they? I'm not sure I've seen a ticket paper ought from a TVM with a >>>>>>> barcode on it.
They come with QR codes.
The most recent one I have here, didn't.
But that doesnrCOt mean itrCOs impossible to issue paper tickets
with barcodes.
Nobody claimed it was impossible. But someone said it was happening
today, which isn't the experience I've had.
TfL is also not particularly well known for having bar-code enabled
gates. It wouldn't be impossible, but they don't seem to want to.
Ditto railcard discounts for contactless fares.
I think you will find more TfL fares with scanners soon and possiblyBarcode or E-Tickets for journeys which may include a TfL are not
the railcard discount issue will get resolved. They have a new
ticketing supplier and the transition to them was held up by a court >>challenge by the previous supplier.
issued.
In message <1157ksn$1l9aa$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:18:31 on Sat, 8 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
I suspect itrCOs not for Bot defences but rather to enforce not sharing of >> usernames.If it's not a bot-check, what is the "Verifying your device, please
wait" message?
I did get that message for the first Times article in that thread (Firefox, >>> Ubuntu, uBlock Origin) but I didn't for the second. Evidently it has
decided I'm 'ok' as far as not being a bot.
It wasn't a Cloudflare check, it looked like the Times homebrewed their
own.
Theo
Given that the browser I was using didn't have a Times login saved (thus
no username to be clocked) that theory is clearly wrong.
ItrCOs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any attempted login.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157ksn$1l9aa$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:18:31 on Sat, 8 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
I suspect itrCOs not for Bot defences but rather to enforce not sharing of >>> usernames.If it's not a bot-check, what is the "Verifying your device, please
wait" message?
I did get that message for the first Times article in that thread (Firefox,
Ubuntu, uBlock Origin) but I didn't for the second. Evidently it has
decided I'm 'ok' as far as not being a bot.
It wasn't a Cloudflare check, it looked like the Times homebrewed their >>>> own.
Theo
Given that the browser I was using didn't have a Times login saved (thus
no username to be clocked) that theory is clearly wrong.
ItrCOs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any >attempted login.
Tweed wrote:
ItrCOs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any
attempted login.
It's been a long time since the various fingerprint test sites *didn't*
say I was unique :-(
<https://amiunique.org/fingerprint>
No need to install the app, the website test is plenty.
In message <1157nov$1mauq$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:07:44 on Sat, 8 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157ksn$1l9aa$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:18:31 on Sat, 8 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
I suspect itrCOs not for Bot defences but rather to enforce not sharing of >>>> usernames.If it's not a bot-check, what is the "Verifying your device, please >>>>>> wait" message?
I did get that message for the first Times article in that thread (Firefox,
Ubuntu, uBlock Origin) but I didn't for the second. Evidently it has >>>>> decided I'm 'ok' as far as not being a bot.
It wasn't a Cloudflare check, it looked like the Times homebrewed their >>>>> own.
Theo
Given that the browser I was using didn't have a Times login saved (thus >>> no username to be clocked) that theory is clearly wrong.
ItrCOs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any
attempted login.
Groundhog day... yes, but why is their fingerprinting code so broken it doesn't even time out?
In message <1157q7p$1n5eb$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at
18:51:01 on Sat, 8 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:
Tweed wrote:
ItrCOs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any >>> attempted login.
It's been a long time since the various fingerprint test sites *didn't*
say I was unique :-(
<https://amiunique.org/fingerprint>
No need to install the app, the website test is plenty.
I'm not running Android on my laptop.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157q7p$1n5eb$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at
18:51:01 on Sat, 8 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:
Tweed wrote:
ItrCOs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any >>>> attempted login.
It's been a long time since the various fingerprint test sites *didn't*
say I was unique :-(
<https://amiunique.org/fingerprint>
No need to install the app, the website test is plenty.
I'm not running Android on my laptop.
Why do you think Android is required?
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157nov$1mauq$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:07:44 on Sat, 8 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157ksn$1l9aa$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:18:31 on Sat, 8 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
I suspect itrCOs not for Bot defences but rather to enforce not sharing ofIf it's not a bot-check, what is the "Verifying your device, please >>>>>>> wait" message?
I did get that message for the first Times article in that thread >>>>>>(Firefox,
Ubuntu, uBlock Origin) but I didn't for the second. Evidently it has >>>>>> decided I'm 'ok' as far as not being a bot.
It wasn't a Cloudflare check, it looked like the Times homebrewed their >>>>>> own.
Theo
usernames.
Given that the browser I was using didn't have a Times login saved (thus >>>> no username to be clocked) that theory is clearly wrong.
ItrCOs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any >>> attempted login.
Groundhog day... yes, but why is their fingerprinting code so broken it
doesn't even time out?
Because they donrCOt really care?
In message <1157tik$1oflo$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:46:44 on Sat, 8 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157q7p$1n5eb$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at
18:51:01 on Sat, 8 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked: >>>> Tweed wrote:
ItrCOs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any >>>>> attempted login.
It's been a long time since the various fingerprint test sites *didn't* >>>> say I was unique :-(
<https://amiunique.org/fingerprint>
No need to install the app, the website test is plenty.
I'm not running Android on my laptop.
Why do you think Android is required?
That link says so.
In message <1157tfv$1oepo$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:45:20 on Sat, 8 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157nov$1mauq$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:07:44 on Sat, 8 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157ksn$1l9aa$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:18:31 on Sat, 8 Aug >>>>> 2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
I suspect itrCOs not for Bot defences but rather to enforce not sharing ofIf it's not a bot-check, what is the "Verifying your device, please >>>>>>>> wait" message?
I did get that message for the first Times article in that thread >>>>>>> (Firefox,
Ubuntu, uBlock Origin) but I didn't for the second. Evidently it has >>>>>>> decided I'm 'ok' as far as not being a bot.
It wasn't a Cloudflare check, it looked like the Times homebrewed their >>>>>>> own.
Theo
usernames.
Given that the browser I was using didn't have a Times login saved (thus >>>>> no username to be clocked) that theory is clearly wrong.
ItrCOs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any >>>> attempted login.
Groundhog day... yes, but why is their fingerprinting code so broken it
doesn't even time out?
Because they donrCOt really care?
I mentioned that possibility several days ago.
Tweed remarked:^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^>>>
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
Andy Burns remarked:
Tweed wrote:
ItrCOs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to >>>>> any
attempted login.
It's been a long time since the various fingerprint test sites *didn't* >>>> say I was unique :-(
<https://amiunique.org/fingerprint>
No need to install the app, the website test is plenty.
I'm not running Android on my laptop.
Why do you think Android is required?
That link says so.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157tik$1oflo$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:46:44 on Sat, 8 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157q7p$1n5eb$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at
18:51:01 on Sat, 8 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked: >>>>> Tweed wrote:
ItrCOs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any
attempted login.
It's been a long time since the various fingerprint test sites *didn't* >>>>> say I was unique :-(
<https://amiunique.org/fingerprint>
No need to install the app, the website test is plenty.
I'm not running Android on my laptop.
Why do you think Android is required?
That link says so.
It doesnrCOt. Have a re-read.
The page has a banner inviting you to download their app for testing >Android. IrCOm assuming the app can find out more than the web page, or
is perhaps better at reporting the results back to the researchers. But
the web page works on any platform. Even the OP mentioned that you
donrCOt need the app.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157tfv$1oepo$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:45:20 on Sat, 8 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157nov$1mauq$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:07:44 on Sat, 8 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157ksn$1l9aa$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:18:31 on Sat, 8 Aug >>>>>> 2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
I suspect itrCOs not for Bot defences but rather to enforce not >>>>>>>sharing ofIf it's not a bot-check, what is the "Verifying your device, please >>>>>>>>> wait" message?
I did get that message for the first Times article in that
(Firefox, Ubuntu, uBlock Origin) but I didn't for the second. >>>>>>>>Evidently it has decided I'm 'ok' as far as not being a bot.
It wasn't a Cloudflare check, it looked like the Times homebrewed their
own.
Theo
usernames.
Given that the browser I was using didn't have a Times login saved (thus >>>>>> no username to be clocked) that theory is clearly wrong.
ItrCOs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any >>>>> attempted login.
Groundhog day... yes, but why is their fingerprinting code so broken it >>>> doesn't even time out?
Because they donrCOt really care?
I mentioned that possibility several days ago.
Ok, but donrCOt go around stating that points made by others are clearly >wrong, when that may not be the case.
See also assertions about the Scots language.
It's a very poorly designed page
but yes I've found the web results
now, and I'm 0.00% for everything.
Roland Perry wrote:
It's a very poorly designed page
I agree with you, you visit a page wanting check its result, and it
very prominently pushes the app instead, that's why I mentioned
ignoring it.
but yes I've found the web results now, and I'm 0.00% for
everything.
Even a single 0% rating means you are uniquely identifiable, I only
have four 0% ratings and can't get rid of them. But if you have
everything at 0% it suggests your browser isn't behaving normally,
so you stick out like a sore thumb, maybe that's why the Times is >suspicious?
In message <1159fpa$26n5c$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at
10:04:49 on Sun, 9 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
It's a very poorly designed page
I agree with you, you visit a page wanting check its result, and it
very prominently pushes the app instead, that's why I mentioned
ignoring it.
but yes I've found the web results now, and I'm 0.00% for
everything.
Even a single 0% rating means you are uniquely identifiable, I only
have four 0% ratings and can't get rid of them. But if you have
everything at 0% it suggests your browser isn't behaving normally,
It's a perfectly normal, unmodified, Opera browser.
so you stick out like a sore thumb, maybe that's why the Times is
suspicious?
But what, exactly, are they suspicious of?
Tweed wrote:
ItrCOs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any
attempted login.
It's been a long time since the various fingerprint test sites *didn't*
say I was unique :-(
<https://amiunique.org/fingerprint>
No need to install the app, the website test is plenty.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1159fpa$26n5c$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at
10:04:49 on Sun, 9 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
It's a very poorly designed page
I agree with you, you visit a page wanting check its result, and it
very prominently pushes the app instead, that's why I mentioned
ignoring it.
but yes I've found the web results now, and I'm 0.00% for
everything.
Even a single 0% rating means you are uniquely identifiable, I only
have four 0% ratings and can't get rid of them. But if you have
everything at 0% it suggests your browser isn't behaving normally,
It's a perfectly normal, unmodified, Opera browser.
rCa running on an exceedingly rare, vintage version of Windows.
Is it 32-bit?
Is it a similarly rare, vintage version of Opera?
so you stick out like a sore thumb, maybe that's why the Times is
suspicious?
But what, exactly, are they suspicious of?
Perhaps it thinks that such a machine is impossible, and so itrCOs being >spoofed?
In message <BBYdS.433$IHg2.424@fx02.ams1>, at 10:26:41 on Sun, 9 Aug
2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1159fpa$26n5c$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at
10:04:49 on Sun, 9 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked: >>>> Roland Perry wrote:
It's a very poorly designed page
I agree with you, you visit a page wanting check its result, and it
very prominently pushes the app instead, that's why I mentioned
ignoring it.
but yes I've found the web results now, and I'm 0.00% for
everything.
Even a single 0% rating means you are uniquely identifiable, I only
have four 0% ratings and can't get rid of them. But if you have
everything at 0% it suggests your browser isn't behaving normally,
It's a perfectly normal, unmodified, Opera browser.
rCa running on an exceedingly rare, vintage version of Windows.
It's quite a popular version of Windows, actually.
Is it 32-bit?
Of course, don't be ridiculous.
Is it a similarly rare, vintage version of Opera?
Even if it was, why would that matter? 2016 as it happens, which isn't Vintage.
so you stick out like a sore thumb, maybe that's why the Times is
suspicious?
But what, exactly, are they suspicious of?
Perhaps it thinks that such a machine is impossible, and so itrCOs being
spoofed?
Then they are fuckwits.
But you've evaded the question - why would that matter?
I am one of 10.88% of users running MacOS (actually
iPadOS), one of 2.87% running Safari (sounds suspiciously low), one of
65.98% running in English and one of 16.09% in the UTC+1 time zone.
I simply canrCOt believe IrCOm the first-ever UK iPad user to have performed the test.
Recliner wrote:
I am one of 10.88% of users running MacOS (actually
iPadOS), one of 2.87% running Safari (sounds suspiciously low), one of
65.98% running in English and one of 16.09% in the UTC+1 time zone.
I simply canrCOt believe IrCOm the first-ever UK iPad user to have performed >> the test.
Those are their four broad categories, combinations of those aren't
likely to make you unique. It's the other "little" factors such as
having an uncommon font installed, using a specific screen size or zoom >factor, etc that single you out.
Browser manufacturers tend to camouflage some factors, e.g. rather than >reporting a build ID in the form of YYYYMMDDHHMMSS which they used to, >almost all browsers now lie and say 20181001000000.--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
There are other fingerprint checks (e.g. panopticlick) which try to
assess how much identifying you is likely to be worth to advertisers.
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
Tweed wrote:
ItrCOs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any >>> attempted login.
It's been a long time since the various fingerprint test sites *didn't*
say I was unique :-(
<https://amiunique.org/fingerprint>
No need to install the app, the website test is plenty.
I have my suspicions about the accuracy of the reported results. My
perfectly standard iPad Pro, running the almost-latest version of iPadOS, using the default Safari browser, is reported as:
Yes! You are unique among the 5406230 fingerprints in our entire dataset.
It reports that I am one of 10.88% of users running MacOS (actually
iPadOS), one of 2.87% running Safari (sounds suspiciously low), one of
65.98% running in English and one of 16.09% in the UTC+1 time zone.
I simply canrCOt believe IrCOm the first-ever UK iPad user to have performed the test.
Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Certes <Certes@example.org> wrote:Is it practical to have bar code validators at every station? ie you must
On 05/08/2026 08:16, Tweed wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <j3n9km-of4.ln1@castle-combe.rilynn.me.uk>, at 19:20:01 on >>>>>> Tue, 4 Aug 2026, Roger <usenet@rilynn.me.uk> remarked:
On 04/08/2026 08:06, Andy Burns wrote:
Tweed wrote:
hat Times page [...] doesnrCOt work correctly
on a browser with JavaScript disabled.
It works for me without Javascript or cookies and advertisements blocked in
both Seamonkey and Firefox.
I'm no longer surprised by pages like that, but /why/ can't they use a >>>>>>>> <noscript> tag to let me know?
What is particularly annoying is when sites that have never needed >>>>>>> Javascript or cookies suddenly require both just to get past their robot
blocker.
I'll let people know if the next Times url I see, works or not.
HererCOs one to try
Crackdown on rCyshort faringrCO train ticket loophole at London stations >>>>>
https://www.thetimes.com/article/29846a6c-0d95-4381-84f3-d09254b33f83?shareToken=694c7f3e5ecccf30e568f198b30aca84
Good to see some cheats finally being caught.
The link works for me even with scripts, cookies and XHR turned off.
ThererCOs been a TV series following SWR and TfL RPI teams. This scam is >>> well-known to them, and they routinely catch lots of culprits. This latest >>> report looks like they have had an even bigger recent focus on it.
scan your ticket before getting on the train. Even paper tickets can be
issued with a bar code.
WerCOve had discussions here about misuse of season tickets in that way (rCydoughnuttingrCO) rCo have a valid season ticket for each end of a journey,
but travel without a valid ticket in the middle section. Some, such as
Neil, suggested that season tickets should always have to be scanned on
both entry and exit for the journey to be valid. ThatrCOs probably going too far, the TOCs should be automatically scanning for seasons that are habitually scanned at only one end of most journeys.
This particular scam is with digital tickets bought on-line, and only
scanned at one end. Perhaps, again, the TOCs should search their databases for such half-scanned tickets, and see if the same buyers are involved repeatedly? It looks like an easy task for AI.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <BBYdS.433$IHg2.424@fx02.ams1>, at 10:26:41 on Sun, 9 Aug
2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1159fpa$26n5c$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at
10:04:49 on Sun, 9 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked: >>>>> Roland Perry wrote:
It's a very poorly designed page
I agree with you, you visit a page wanting check its result, and it
very prominently pushes the app instead, that's why I mentioned
ignoring it.
but yes I've found the web results now, and I'm 0.00% for
everything.
Even a single 0% rating means you are uniquely identifiable, I only
have four 0% ratings and can't get rid of them. But if you have
everything at 0% it suggests your browser isn't behaving normally,
It's a perfectly normal, unmodified, Opera browser.
rCa running on an exceedingly rare, vintage version of Windows.
It's quite a popular version of Windows, actually.
Why are you suspiciously unwilling to name it then?
Is it 32-bit?
Of course, don't be ridiculous.
DoesnrCOt your museum Usenet client require that? Or is it 16-bit?
Is it a similarly rare, vintage version of Opera?
Even if it was, why would that matter? 2016 as it happens, which isn't
Vintage.
It certainly is where web browsers are concerned. My version of Opera
updates itself frequently.
so you stick out like a sore thumb, maybe that's why the Times is
suspicious?
But what, exactly, are they suspicious of?
Perhaps it thinks that such a machine is impossible, and so itrCOs being >>> spoofed?
Then they are fuckwits.
ItrCOs their content, and they can decide who gets free access. You failed to >qualify.
But you've evaded the question - why would that matter?
They clearly are testing for something that they think matters, and your >vintage hardware is outside the scope of their tests.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1159fpa$26n5c$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at
10:04:49 on Sun, 9 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
It's a very poorly designed page
I agree with you, you visit a page wanting check its result, and it
very prominently pushes the app instead, that's why I mentioned
ignoring it.
but yes I've found the web results now, and I'm 0.00% for
everything.
Even a single 0% rating means you are uniquely identifiable, I only
have four 0% ratings and can't get rid of them. But if you have
everything at 0% it suggests your browser isn't behaving normally,
It's a perfectly normal, unmodified, Opera browser.
rCa running on an exceedingly rare, vintage version of Windows. Is it 32-bit? Is it a similarly rare, vintage version of Opera?
so you stick out like a sore thumb, maybe that's why the Times is
suspicious?
But what, exactly, are they suspicious of?
Perhaps it thinks that such a machine is impossible, and so itrCOs being spoofed?
In message <IWYdS.2159$zEP6.156@fx17.ams1>, at 10:49:12 on Sun, 9 Aug
2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <BBYdS.433$IHg2.424@fx02.ams1>, at 10:26:41 on Sun, 9 Aug
2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1159fpa$26n5c$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at
10:04:49 on Sun, 9 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked: >>>>>> Roland Perry wrote:
It's a very poorly designed page
I agree with you, you visit a page wanting check its result, and it >>>>>> very prominently pushes the app instead, that's why I mentioned
ignoring it.
but yes I've found the web results now, and I'm 0.00% for
everything.
Even a single 0% rating means you are uniquely identifiable, I only >>>>>> have four 0% ratings and can't get rid of them. But if you have
everything at 0% it suggests your browser isn't behaving normally,
It's a perfectly normal, unmodified, Opera browser.
rCa running on an exceedingly rare, vintage version of Windows.
It's quite a popular version of Windows, actually.
Why are you suspiciously unwilling to name it then?
Because it's not necessary, and nobody ever answers my similar
questions.
And you consistently refuse to explain why you stalk me on the pretext
of wanting to know about (amongst other things) my IT arrangements. Is
it because I identified you as a Walter Mitty hospitality hostess?
Is it 32-bit?
Of course, don't be ridiculous.
DoesnrCOt your museum Usenet client require that? Or is it 16-bit?
I think my excellent, not broken so no need to fix, Usenet client would
work on both 16-bit and 32-bit Windows.
The most recent update was to
work around some bugs in a then newly-released version of Windows.
Is it a similarly rare, vintage version of Opera?
Even if it was, why would that matter? 2016 as it happens, which isn't
Vintage.
It certainly is where web browsers are concerned. My version of Opera
updates itself frequently.
As I've already said (are you suffering from memory issues) the browser refuses to update because it says my Windows is out of date. Why that's something they are concerned about is a mystery.
so you stick out like a sore thumb, maybe that's why the Times is
suspicious?
But what, exactly, are they suspicious of?
Perhaps it thinks that such a machine is impossible, and so itrCOs being >>>> spoofed?
Then they are fuckwits.
ItrCOs their content, and they can decide who gets free access. You failed to
qualify.
As I've already said (are you suffering from memory issues) if they
don't want me to read their content, I'll read some other publisher's newspaper.
On 09/08/2026 11:26, Recliner wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1159fpa$26n5c$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at
10:04:49 on Sun, 9 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked: >>>> Roland Perry wrote:
It's a very poorly designed page
I agree with you, you visit a page wanting check its result, and it
very prominently pushes the app instead, that's why I mentioned
ignoring it.
but yes I've found the web results now, and I'm 0.00% for
everything.
Even a single 0% rating means you are uniquely identifiable, I only
have four 0% ratings and can't get rid of them. But if you have
everything at 0% it suggests your browser isn't behaving normally,
It's a perfectly normal, unmodified, Opera browser.
rCa running on an exceedingly rare, vintage version of Windows. Is it
32-bit? Is it a similarly rare, vintage version of Opera?
I've just downloaded an old version of Opera from 2013, running on
windows 10, and that shows the error.
On Mon, 10 Aug 2026 10:28:51 +0100, Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> wrote:
On 09/08/2026 11:26, Recliner wrote:
rCa running on an exceedingly rare, vintage version of Windows. Is it
32-bit? Is it a similarly rare, vintage version of Opera?
I've just downloaded an old version of Opera from 2013, running on
windows 10, and that shows the error.
What version of Opera is that? I'm currently on Opera 134.0.5954.46. But that modern version of Opera presumably won't
run on Roland's self-inflicted disaster of an ancient PC.
In message <114vv7n$37r5b$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at
19:26:34 on Wed, 5 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
Andy Burns remarked:
she could set you up with what they call a "bonus account" that
gives you full access, providing you don;t mind logging in to the
website?
And will that work if the Times site doesn't let me past their
bot-check.
I suspect the only answer to that comes from you trying it?
As I was expecting, having set up an account (on a different machine)
it won't let me log in on my laptop. As before, getting stuck at the "Verifying device" stage.
I've just downloaded an old version of Opera from 2013, running on >>windows 10, and that shows the error.
What version of Opera is that? I'm currently on Opera 134.0.5954.46.
But that modern version of Opera presumably won't run on Roland's >self-inflicted disaster of an ancient PC.
On 10/08/2026 13:54, Recliner wrote:
On Mon, 10 Aug 2026 10:28:51 +0100, Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> wrote: >>
On 09/08/2026 11:26, Recliner wrote:
rCa running on an exceedingly rare, vintage version of Windows. Is it >>>> 32-bit? Is it a similarly rare, vintage version of Opera?
I've just downloaded an old version of Opera from 2013, running on
windows 10, and that shows the error.
What version of Opera is that? I'm currently on Opera
134.0.5954.46. But that modern version of Opera presumably won't
run on Roland's self-inflicted disaster of an ancient PC.
18.0.1284.68. I assume there are more versions which don't send
headers with User-Agent, but did not go through any.
It's quite a popular version of Windows, actually.
Why are you suspiciously unwilling to name it then?
Because it's not necessary, and nobody ever answers my similar
questions.
Of course itrCOs necessary rCo itrCOs the primary cause of your incompatibility
with the modern world.
And you consistently refuse to explain why you stalk me on the pretext
of wanting to know about (amongst other things) my IT arrangements. Is
it because I identified you as a Walter Mitty hospitality hostess?
Is it 32-bit?
Of course, don't be ridiculous.
DoesnrCOt your museum Usenet client require that? Or is it 16-bit?
I think my excellent, not broken so no need to fix, Usenet client would
work on both 16-bit and 32-bit Windows.
But not 64-bit, like modern software.
The most recent update was to
work around some bugs in a then newly-released version of Windows.
But now long discontinued version.
Is it a similarly rare, vintage version of Opera?
Even if it was, why would that matter? 2016 as it happens, which isn't >>>> Vintage.
It certainly is where web browsers are concerned. My version of Opera
updates itself frequently.
As I've already said (are you suffering from memory issues) the browser
refuses to update because it says my Windows is out of date. Why that's
something they are concerned about is a mystery.
I donrCOt care that yourCOve made yourself into a laughing stock, but am amused
at how you pretend itrCOs not all your own fault.
so you stick out like a sore thumb, maybe that's why the Times is >>>>>>> suspicious?
But what, exactly, are they suspicious of?
Perhaps it thinks that such a machine is impossible, and so itrCOs being >>>>> spoofed?
Then they are fuckwits.
ItrCOs their content, and they can decide who gets free access. You failed to
qualify.
As I've already said (are you suffering from memory issues) if they
don't want me to read their content, I'll read some other publisher's
newspaper.
Except that you donrCOt.
On 2026-08-05 5:53 p.m., Recliner wrote:
All of RolandrCOs Usenet problems would disappear if he spent -u0.00 to
upgrade to the modern era, but, if course, he wonrCOt.
I know... but this latest episode tipped the scales...
In message <115cjke$2tq2o$2@dont-email.me>, at 14:27:44 on Mon, 10 Aug
2026, Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> remarked:
On 10/08/2026 13:54, Recliner wrote:
On Mon, 10 Aug 2026 10:28:51 +0100, Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> wrote: >>>
On 09/08/2026 11:26, Recliner wrote:
rCa running on an exceedingly rare, vintage version of Windows. Is it >>>>> 32-bit? Is it a similarly rare, vintage version of Opera?
I've just downloaded an old version of Opera from 2013, running on
windows 10, and that shows the error.
What version of Opera is that? I'm currently on Opera
134.0.5954.46. But that modern version of Opera presumably won't
run on Roland's self-inflicted disaster of an ancient PC.
18.0.1284.68. I assume there are more versions which don't send
headers with User-Agent, but did not go through any.
Mine is 36.0.2130.80
In message <USgeS.3170$l417.640@fx11.ams1>, at 09:30:28 on Mon, 10 Aug
2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
It's quite a popular version of Windows, actually.
Why are you suspiciously unwilling to name it then?
Because it's not necessary, and nobody ever answers my similar
questions.
Of course itrCOs necessary rCo itrCOs the primary cause of your incompatibility
with the modern world.
My failure to name it is completely irrelevant to why one particular >newspaper website has recently broken.
And you consistently refuse to explain why you stalk me on the pretext
of wanting to know about (amongst other things) my IT arrangements. Is
it because I identified you as a Walter Mitty hospitality hostess?
Is it 32-bit?
Of course, don't be ridiculous.
DoesnrCOt your museum Usenet client require that? Or is it 16-bit?
I think my excellent, not broken so no need to fix, Usenet client would
work on both 16-bit and 32-bit Windows.
But not 64-bit, like modern software.
So what? You do seem very desperate to pour scorn on my IT. Why is that?
Is it a reaction to the Walter Mitty thing.
On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 16:39:26 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <115cjke$2tq2o$2@dont-email.me>, at 14:27:44 on Mon, 10 Aug >>2026, Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> remarked:
On 10/08/2026 13:54, Recliner wrote:
On Mon, 10 Aug 2026 10:28:51 +0100, Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> wrote: >>>>
On 09/08/2026 11:26, Recliner wrote:
rCa running on an exceedingly rare, vintage version of Windows. Is it >>>>>> 32-bit? Is it a similarly rare, vintage version of Opera?
I've just downloaded an old version of Opera from 2013, running on >>>>> windows 10, and that shows the error.
What version of Opera is that? I'm currently on Opera
134.0.5954.46. But that modern version of Opera presumably won't
run on Roland's self-inflicted disaster of an ancient PC.
18.0.1284.68. I assume there are more versions which don't send
headers with User-Agent, but did not go through any.
Mine is 36.0.2130.80
So, only 98 major versions out of date!
In message <60im7ltdob261u9var0eaj3fkssienc5q7@4ax.com>, at 17:04:48 on
Tue, 11 Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 16:39:26 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <115cjke$2tq2o$2@dont-email.me>, at 14:27:44 on Mon, 10 Aug >>>2026, Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> remarked:
On 10/08/2026 13:54, Recliner wrote:
On Mon, 10 Aug 2026 10:28:51 +0100, Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> wrote:
On 09/08/2026 11:26, Recliner wrote:
rCa running on an exceedingly rare, vintage version of Windows. Is it >>>>>>> 32-bit? Is it a similarly rare, vintage version of Opera?
I've just downloaded an old version of Opera from 2013, running on >>>>>> windows 10, and that shows the error.
What version of Opera is that? I'm currently on Opera >>>>>134.0.5954.46. But that modern version of Opera presumably won't
run on Roland's self-inflicted disaster of an ancient PC.
18.0.1284.68. I assume there are more versions which don't send >>>>headers with User-Agent, but did not go through any.
Mine is 36.0.2130.80
So, only 98 major versions out of date!
It only fails to work on one newspaper's recently broken site.
What's your hidden agenda, and when are you shipping me the new laptop >(third time of asking).
In message <60im7ltdob261u9var0eaj3fkssienc5q7@4ax.com>, at 17:04:48 onWhich isn't for other Mere Mortals.
Tue, 11 Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 16:39:26 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <115cjke$2tq2o$2@dont-email.me>, at 14:27:44 on Mon, 10 Aug
2026, Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> remarked:
On 10/08/2026 13:54, Recliner wrote:
On Mon, 10 Aug 2026 10:28:51 +0100, Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> wrote:
On 09/08/2026 11:26, Recliner wrote:
rCa running on an exceedingly rare, vintage version of Windows. Is it >>>>>>> 32-bit? Is it a similarly rare, vintage version of Opera?
I've just downloaded an old version of Opera from 2013, running on >>>>>> windows 10, and that shows the error.
What version of Opera is that? I'm currently on Opera
134.0.5954.46. But that modern version of Opera presumably won't
run on Roland's self-inflicted disaster of an ancient PC.
18.0.1284.68. I assume there are more versions which don't send
headers with User-Agent, but did not go through any.
Mine is 36.0.2130.80
So, only 98 major versions out of date!
It only fails to work on one newspaper's recently broken site.
In message <115cjke$2tq2o$2@dont-email.me>, at 14:27:44 on Mon, 10 Aug
2026, Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> remarked:
On 10/08/2026 13:54, Recliner wrote:
On Mon, 10 Aug 2026 10:28:51 +0100, Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> wrote: >>>
On 09/08/2026 11:26, Recliner wrote:
rCa running on an exceedingly rare, vintage version of Windows.-a Is it >>>>> 32-bit?-a Is it a similarly rare, vintage version of Opera?
-a I've just downloaded an old version of Opera from 2013, running on
windows 10, and that shows the error.
-aWhat version of Opera is that?-a I'm currently on Opera 134.0.5954.46. >>> But that modern version of Opera presumably won't
run on Roland's self-inflicted disaster of an ancient PC.
18.0.1284.68. I assume there are more versions which don't send headers
with User-Agent, but did not go through any.
Mine is 36.0.2130.80
In message <USgeS.3170$l417.640@fx11.ams1>, at 09:30:28 on Mon, 10 Aug
2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
It's quite a popular version of Windows, actually.
Why are you suspiciously unwilling to name it then?
Because it's not necessary, and nobody ever answers my similar
questions.
Of course itrCOs necessary rCo itrCOs the primary cause of your incompatibility
with the modern world.
My failure to name it is completely irrelevant to why one particular newspaper website has recently broken.
On 2026-08-11 9:34 a.m., Roland Perry wrote:
In message <60im7ltdob261u9var0eaj3fkssienc5q7@4ax.com>, at 17:04:48 on
Tue, 11 Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 16:39:26 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote: >>>
In message <115cjke$2tq2o$2@dont-email.me>, at 14:27:44 on Mon, 10 Aug >>>> 2026, Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> remarked:
On 10/08/2026 13:54, Recliner wrote:
On Mon, 10 Aug 2026 10:28:51 +0100, Nick Finnigan >>>>>><nix@genie.co.uk> wrote:
On 09/08/2026 11:26, Recliner wrote:
rCa running on an exceedingly rare, vintage version of Windows. Is it >>>>>>>> 32-bit? Is it a similarly rare, vintage version of Opera?
I've just downloaded an old version of Opera from 2013, running on >>>>>>> windows 10, and that shows the error.
What version of Opera is that? I'm currently on Opera
134.0.5954.46. But that modern version of Opera presumably won't
run on Roland's self-inflicted disaster of an ancient PC.
18.0.1284.68. I assume there are more versions which don't send
headers with User-Agent, but did not go through any.
Mine is 36.0.2130.80
So, only 98 major versions out of date!
It only fails to work on one newspaper's recently broken site.
Which isn't for other Mere Mortals.
On 11/08/2026 16:45, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <USgeS.3170$l417.640@fx11.ams1>, at 09:30:28 on Mon, 10
Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
It's quite a popular version of Windows, actually.
Why are you suspiciously unwilling to name it then?
Because it's not necessary, and nobody ever answers my similar
questions.
Of course itrCOs necessary rCo itrCOs the primary cause of your >>>incompatibility with the modern world.
My failure to name it is completely irrelevant to why one particular >>newspaper website has recently broken.Strange isn't it? Only one person has had a problem with this website
and that is you!
On 11/08/2026 16:45, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <USgeS.3170$l417.640@fx11.ams1>, at 09:30:28 on Mon, 10 AugStrange isn't it? Only one person has had a problem with this website
2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
It's quite a popular version of Windows, actually.
Why are you suspiciously unwilling to name it then?
Because it's not necessary, and nobody ever answers my similar
questions.
Of course itrCOs necessary rCo itrCOs the primary cause of your
incompatibility
with the modern world.
My failure to name it is completely irrelevant to why one particular
newspaper website has recently broken.
and that is you!
On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 17:34:08 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <60im7ltdob261u9var0eaj3fkssienc5q7@4ax.com>, at 17:04:48 on >>Tue, 11 Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 16:39:26 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote: >>>
In message <115cjke$2tq2o$2@dont-email.me>, at 14:27:44 on Mon, 10 Aug >>>>2026, Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> remarked:
On 10/08/2026 13:54, Recliner wrote:
On Mon, 10 Aug 2026 10:28:51 +0100, Nick Finnigan >>>>>><nix@genie.co.uk> wrote:
On 09/08/2026 11:26, Recliner wrote:
rCa running on an exceedingly rare, vintage version of Windows. Is it >>>>>>>> 32-bit? Is it a similarly rare, vintage version of Opera?
I've just downloaded an old version of Opera from 2013, running on >>>>>>> windows 10, and that shows the error.
What version of Opera is that? I'm currently on Opera >>>>>>134.0.5954.46. But that modern version of Opera presumably won't
run on Roland's self-inflicted disaster of an ancient PC.
18.0.1284.68. I assume there are more versions which don't send >>>>>headers with User-Agent, but did not go through any.
Mine is 36.0.2130.80
So, only 98 major versions out of date!
It only fails to work on one newspaper's recently broken site.
What's your hidden agenda, and when are you shipping me the new laptop >>(third time of asking).
I told you that you could get a modern Usenet client for -u0.00.
You keep telling us how many computers you own, so there must be one
without too many cobwebs to run it.
And you consistently refuse to explain why you stalk me on the pretext >>>> of wanting to know about (amongst other things) my IT arrangements. Is >>>> it because I identified you as a Walter Mitty hospitality hostess?
Is it 32-bit?
Of course, don't be ridiculous.
DoesnrCOt your museum Usenet client require that? Or is it 16-bit?
I think my excellent, not broken so no need to fix, Usenet client would >>>> work on both 16-bit and 32-bit Windows.
But not 64-bit, like modern software.
So what? You do seem very desperate to pour scorn on my IT. Why is that?
Is it a reaction to the Walter Mitty thing.
If you'd just stop complaining that the modern world is out of step
with your vintage software, nobody would have any reason to comment on
it.
You should simply assume that if something doesn't work for you, the
problem is almost certainly at your end, and keep quiet about.
On 11/08/2026 21:47, ColinR wrote:
On 11/08/2026 16:45, Roland Perry wrote:I find that the Times guest URLs sometimes do not work here. I'm using Linux with with my operating system and browsers kept updated.
In message <USgeS.3170$l417.640@fx11.ams1>, at 09:30:28 on Mon, 10 AugStrange isn't it? Only one person has had a problem with this website
2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
It's quite a popular version of Windows, actually.
Why are you suspiciously unwilling to name it then?
Because it's not necessary, and nobody ever answers my similar
questions.
Of course itrCOs necessary rCo itrCOs the primary cause of your
incompatibility
with the modern world.
My failure to name it is completely irrelevant to why one particular
newspaper website has recently broken.
and that is you!
I suspect they have updated their website with more AI (or other) protections and still fiddling with the updates.
On 11/08/2026 21:47, ColinR wrote:
On 11/08/2026 16:45, Roland Perry wrote:I find that the Times guest URLs sometimes do not work here. I'm using Linux with with my operating system and browsers kept updated.
In message <USgeS.3170$l417.640@fx11.ams1>, at 09:30:28 on Mon, 10 AugStrange isn't it? Only one person has had a problem with this website
2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
It's quite a popular version of Windows, actually.
Why are you suspiciously unwilling to name it then?
Because it's not necessary, and nobody ever answers my similar
questions.
Of course itrCOs necessary rCo itrCOs the primary cause of your
incompatibility
with the modern world.
My failure to name it is completely irrelevant to why one particular
newspaper website has recently broken.
and that is you!
I suspect they have updated their website with more AI (or other) protections and still fiddling with the updates.
In message <kbim7ldvbv37qh7t49iult4ounrbe2k87h@4ax.com>, at 17:13:33 on
Tue, 11 Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
And you consistently refuse to explain why you stalk me on the pretext >>>>> of wanting to know about (amongst other things) my IT arrangements. Is >>>>> it because I identified you as a Walter Mitty hospitality hostess?
I think my excellent, not broken so no need to fix, Usenet client would >>>>> work on both 16-bit and 32-bit Windows.Is it 32-bit?
Of course, don't be ridiculous.
DoesnrCOt your museum Usenet client require that? Or is it 16-bit? >>>>>
But not 64-bit, like modern software.
So what? You do seem very desperate to pour scorn on my IT. Why is that? >>> Is it a reaction to the Walter Mitty thing.
If you'd just stop complaining that the modern world is out of step
with your vintage software, nobody would have any reason to comment on
it.
There's no need to comment on it anyway, especially the way you misuse
the word "vintage". What an enormous chip you have on your shoulder!
You should simply assume that if something doesn't work for you, the
problem is almost certainly at your end, and keep quiet about.
As they say "when you assume, you make an ass out of you and me", which
is why I never assume anything.
And you are clearly so poor at IT fault-finding, I'd recommend going
back to serving drinks and canap|-s to your passengers.
In message <MnXeS.5820$eq6e.1741@fx15.ams1>, at 09:52:44 on Wed, 12 Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
You should simply assume that if something doesn't work for you, the
problem is almost certainly at your end, and keep quiet about.
As they say "when you assume, you make an ass out of you and me", which
is why I never assume anything.
You assume the rest of the world is at fault when itrCOs nearly always your >> fault.
It's not my fault if people create dodgy anti-bot code.
You should simply assume that if something doesn't work for you, the
problem is almost certainly at your end, and keep quiet about.
As they say "when you assume, you make an ass out of you and me", which
is why I never assume anything.
You assume the rest of the world is at fault when itrCOs nearly always your >fault.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <MnXeS.5820$eq6e.1741@fx15.ams1>, at 09:52:44 on Wed, 12 Aug
2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
You should simply assume that if something doesn't work for you, the >>>>> problem is almost certainly at your end, and keep quiet about.
As they say "when you assume, you make an ass out of you and me", which >>>> is why I never assume anything.
You assume the rest of the world is at fault when itrCOs nearly always your >>> fault.
It's not my fault if people create dodgy anti-bot code.
But it worked!
Strange isn't it? Only one person has had a problem with this websiteI find that the Times guest URLs sometimes do not work here. I'm using
and that is you!
Linux with with my operating system and browsers kept updated.
I suspect they have updated their website with more AI (or other)
protections and still fiddling with the updates.
I think theyrCOve simply improved their perryscope so that it can more >reliably detect and block him.
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <MnXeS.5820$eq6e.1741@fx15.ams1>, at 09:52:44 on Wed, 12 Aug >>> 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
You should simply assume that if something doesn't work for you, the >>>>>> problem is almost certainly at your end, and keep quiet about.
As they say "when you assume, you make an ass out of you and me", which >>>>> is why I never assume anything.
You assume the rest of the world is at fault when itrCOs nearly always your
fault.
It's not my fault if people create dodgy anti-bot code.
But it worked!
There comes a point where itrCOs not worth supporting backwards compatibility. Microsoft and Apple have two very different approaches. MS
try to keep backwards compatibility going as long as they can, but arenrCOt very good at warning when things get cut. eg some old office formats canrCOt be opened with the latest office software. Windows is also riddled with security holes because of, though not solely because of, support for
ancient stuff. Apple will just dump support after a number of years,
usually around 7 or 8. As an example, theyrCOve supported a compatibility layer for Intel code running on their current ARM processors. They publicly state that the next operating system release will no longer have that compatibility layer. Both approaches have their merits and disadvantages.
But if you are a developer for the Times website, probably working via the lowest tender, you arenrCOt going to care much if some bloke in Cambridge running an ancient OS and browser canrCOt access the site. Key metric is whether the vast majority of your paying subscribers can use the site. The Times has around three quarters of a million paying subscribers, which in
the modern world is quite an achievement. (Though how many of those are on cheap introductory subscriptions is not revealed).
Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <MnXeS.5820$eq6e.1741@fx15.ams1>, at 09:52:44 on Wed, 12 Aug >>>> 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
You should simply assume that if something doesn't work for you, the >>>>>>> problem is almost certainly at your end, and keep quiet about.
As they say "when you assume, you make an ass out of you and me", which >>>>>> is why I never assume anything.
You assume the rest of the world is at fault when itrCOs nearly always your
fault.
It's not my fault if people create dodgy anti-bot code.
But it worked!
There comes a point where itrCOs not worth supporting backwards
compatibility. Microsoft and Apple have two very different approaches. MS
try to keep backwards compatibility going as long as they can, but arenrCOt >> very good at warning when things get cut. eg some old office formats canrCOt >> be opened with the latest office software. Windows is also riddled with
security holes because of, though not solely because of, support for
ancient stuff. Apple will just dump support after a number of years,
usually around 7 or 8. As an example, theyrCOve supported a compatibility
layer for Intel code running on their current ARM processors. They publicly >> state that the next operating system release will no longer have that
compatibility layer. Both approaches have their merits and disadvantages. >>
But if you are a developer for the Times website, probably working via the >> lowest tender, you arenrCOt going to care much if some bloke in Cambridge
running an ancient OS and browser canrCOt access the site. Key metric is
whether the vast majority of your paying subscribers can use the site. The >> Times has around three quarters of a million paying subscribers, which in
the modern world is quite an achievement. (Though how many of those are on >> cheap introductory subscriptions is not revealed).
In the old days of print media, the Times always lost money, but the Sunday Times was profitable. The publisher hoped that the latterrCOs profits would more or less cover the formerrCOs losses, and sometimes it did. But in the new world:
Times Media (publisher of The Times and The Sunday Times) reported a
pre-tax profit of -u69.2 million on revenues of -u390.7 million for the 12 months to June 2025, driven by an increase of 46,000 digital subscribers.
Pre-tax profit: Rose 13% to -u69.2 million (up from -u61 million the previous year).
Revenue: Increased to -u390.7 million (up from -u383.4 million).
Operating profit: Adjusted operating profit hit -u76.3 million before restructuring costs.
Digital subscriptions: Continued expansion in digital readership
successfully offset ongoing print declines.
Strategic shift: Growing digital-first revenue streams have established long-term financial stability for the publisher's core journalism across digital and audio platforms.
rCorCorCo
So they seem to know what theyrCOre doing. Perhaps their enhanced perryscope can now successfully detect and block ancient machines whose geriatric keepers would be unable to purchase digital subscriptions?
In message <115fmeq$6ila$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:34:19 on Tue, 11 Aug
2026, Nobody <jock@soccer.com> remarked:
On 2026-08-11 9:34 a.m., Roland Perry wrote:
In message <60im7ltdob261u9var0eaj3fkssienc5q7@4ax.com>, at 17:04:48 on
Tue, 11 Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 16:39:26 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote: >>>>
In message <115cjke$2tq2o$2@dont-email.me>, at 14:27:44 on Mon, 10 Aug >>>>> 2026, Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> remarked:
On 10/08/2026 13:54, Recliner wrote:
On Mon, 10 Aug 2026 10:28:51 +0100, Nick Finnigan >>>>>>><nix@genie.co.uk> wrote:
On 09/08/2026 11:26, Recliner wrote:
rCa running on an exceedingly rare, vintage version of Windows. Is it
32-bit? Is it a similarly rare, vintage version of Opera?
I've just downloaded an old version of Opera from 2013, running on >>>>>>>> windows 10, and that shows the error.
What version of Opera is that? I'm currently on Opera
134.0.5954.46. But that modern version of Opera presumably won't >>>>>>> run on Roland's self-inflicted disaster of an ancient PC.
18.0.1284.68. I assume there are more versions which don't send
headers with User-Agent, but did not go through any.
Mine is 36.0.2130.80
So, only 98 major versions out of date!
It only fails to work on one newspaper's recently broken site.
Which isn't for other Mere Mortals.
Feel free to do a survey of their fifteen million readers, and come back
and tell us it any of them are experiencing a similar problem.
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <MnXeS.5820$eq6e.1741@fx15.ams1>, at 09:52:44 on Wed, 12 Aug
2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
You should simply assume that if something doesn't work for you, the >>>>>> problem is almost certainly at your end, and keep quiet about.
As they say "when you assume, you make an ass out of you and me", which >>>>> is why I never assume anything.
You assume the rest of the world is at fault when itrCOs nearly always your
fault.
It's not my fault if people create dodgy anti-bot code.
But it worked!
There comes a point where itrCOs not worth supporting backwards >compatibility. Microsoft and Apple have two very different approaches. MS
try to keep backwards compatibility going as long as they can, but arenrCOt >very good at warning when things get cut. eg some old office formats canrCOt >be opened with the latest office software. Windows is also riddled with >security holes because of, though not solely because of, support for
ancient stuff. Apple will just dump support after a number of years,
usually around 7 or 8. As an example, theyrCOve supported a compatibility >layer for Intel code running on their current ARM processors. They publicly >state that the next operating system release will no longer have that >compatibility layer. Both approaches have their merits and disadvantages.
But if you are a developer for the Times website, probably working via the >lowest tender, you arenrCOt going to care much if some bloke in Cambridge >running an ancient OS and browser canrCOt access the site.
Key metric is whether the vast majority of your paying subscribers can
use the site. The Times has around three quarters of a million paying >subscribers, which in the modern world is quite an achievement. (Though
how many of those are on cheap introductory subscriptions is not
revealed).
So they seem to know what theyrCOre doing. Perhaps their enhanced perryscope >> can now successfully detect and block ancient machines whose geriatric
keepers would be unable to purchase digital subscriptions?
I doubt itrCOs anything to do with deliberately blocking old software. ItrCOs >simply not worth expending the cost of testing against all possible >combinations of old tech.
In message <115hmv9$pjti$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:55:21 on Wed, 12 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
So they seem to know what theyrCOre doing. Perhaps their enhanced perryscope
can now successfully detect and block ancient machines whose geriatric
keepers would be unable to purchase digital subscriptions?
You sad old git, can't give it a rest, can you?
In case you've failed to keep up (which wouldn't surprise me, seems
par for the course with you) I have a Times subscription on a
different PC,
so it's not a case of failing to get a subscription,
but NON_SUBSCRIPTION [you can't even get that right] links failing
to work on my version of Opera.
I doubt itrCOs anything to do with deliberately blocking old software. ItrCOs >>simply not worth expending the cost of testing against all possible >>combinations of old tech.
That's what test suites are for. I was working on them for mainframes as >long ago as 1977. It's not difficult.
And in this case I don't think it's the "combination" you claim, rather
than something specific with Opera (because others have reported the
same problem on other platforms).
it will be a sad day when Microsoft stop shipping Notepad and/or
Wordpad, because there are times it's almost essential to able use them.
In message <115hkbn$ooeo$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:10:47 on Wed, 12 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Key metric is whether the vast majority of your paying subscribers can
use the site. The Times has around three quarters of a million paying >>subscribers, which in the modern world is quite an achievement. (Though >>how many of those are on cheap introductory subscriptions is not >>revealed).
I agree with much of what you say, but it will be a sad day when
Microsoft stop shipping Notepad and/or Wordpad, because there are times
it's almost essential to able use them.
In message <115hkbn$ooeo$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:10:47 on Wed, 12 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <MnXeS.5820$eq6e.1741@fx15.ams1>, at 09:52:44 on Wed, 12 Aug >>>> 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
You should simply assume that if something doesn't work for you, the >>>>>>> problem is almost certainly at your end, and keep quiet about.
As they say "when you assume, you make an ass out of you and me", which >>>>>> is why I never assume anything.
You assume the rest of the world is at fault when itrCOs nearly always your
fault.
It's not my fault if people create dodgy anti-bot code.
But it worked!
There comes a point where itrCOs not worth supporting backwards
compatibility. Microsoft and Apple have two very different approaches. MS
try to keep backwards compatibility going as long as they can, but arenrCOt >> very good at warning when things get cut. eg some old office formats canrCOt >> be opened with the latest office software. Windows is also riddled with
security holes because of, though not solely because of, support for
ancient stuff. Apple will just dump support after a number of years,
usually around 7 or 8. As an example, theyrCOve supported a compatibility
layer for Intel code running on their current ARM processors. They publicly >> state that the next operating system release will no longer have that
compatibility layer. Both approaches have their merits and disadvantages.
But if you are a developer for the Times website, probably working via the >> lowest tender, you arenrCOt going to care much if some bloke in Cambridge
running an ancient OS and browser canrCOt access the site.
They are only "ancient" in the metrics of today's youth. Who look at a
3.5" floppy disc and say "someone just 3D printed the 'Save' icon".
I also get nagging messages from credit card companies warning of fraud,
and describing the circumstances I should "hang up the phone". But where
do I attach the bit of string to hang my smartphone up somewhere?
ps My VoIP system does have a vintage phone, with a cradle. One good
reason is that its ring(sic) is distinctively different from all the
noises throw around by appliances several times an hour. Even the
dishwasher plays a tune when it's finished.
Key metric is whether the vast majority of your paying subscribers can
use the site. The Times has around three quarters of a million paying
subscribers, which in the modern world is quite an achievement. (Though
how many of those are on cheap introductory subscriptions is not
revealed).
I agree with much of what you say, but it will be a sad day when
Microsoft stop shipping Notepad and/or Wordpad, because there are times
it's almost essential to able use them.
Roland Perry wrote:
it will be a sad day when Microsoft stop shipping Notepad and/or
Wordpad, because there are times it's almost essential to able use them.
They already removed wordpad, and they "enhanced" notepad such that
.txt files can be used as a malware vector ...
I also get nagging messages from credit card companies warning of fraud,
and describing the circumstances I should "hang up the phone". But where
do I attach the bit of string to hang my smartphone up somewhere?
ps My VoIP system does have a vintage phone, with a cradle. One good
reason is that its ring(sic) is distinctively different from all the
noises throw around by appliances several times an hour. Even the
dishwasher plays a tune when it's finished.
LetrCOs not get pedantic about icons or common phrases. Everyone knows what >to hang up a call means, even if they donrCOt know its origins. YourCOll be >complaining that you didnrCOt see a steam locomotive whilst approaching an >ungated level crossing.
Roland Perry wrote:Actually not .txt files, but markdown files (.md) which are associated
it will be a sad day when Microsoft stop shipping Notepad and/or
Wordpad, because there are times it's almost essential to able use them.
They already removed wordpad, and they "enhanced" notepad such that .txt files can be used as a malware vector ...
Andy Burns wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
it will be a sad day when Microsoft stop shipping Notepad and/or >>>Wordpad, because there are times it's almost essential to able use them.They already removed wordpad, and they "enhanced" notepad such that
.txt files can be used as a malware vector ...
Actually not .txt files, but markdown files (.md) which are associated
with notepad, and until 6 months ago could contain harmful hyperlinks.
I don't think I've ever used a .md file.Win11 notepad uses them if you use rich text formatting ... it's kind-of
In message <115i05f$sos5$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at 15:33:38
Actually not .txt files, but markdown files (.md) which are associated
with notepad, and until 6 months ago could contain harmful hyperlinks.
I don't think I've ever used a .md file.
In message <115hurm$sa83$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at 15:11:20
on Wed, 12 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
it will be a sad day when Microsoft stop shipping Notepad and/or
Wordpad, because there are times it's almost essential to able use them.
They already removed wordpad, and they "enhanced" notepad such that
.txt files can be used as a malware vector ...
More reasons not to sheepishly follow the latest version of things.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <115hurm$sa83$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at 15:11:20
on Wed, 12 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
it will be a sad day when Microsoft stop shipping Notepad and/orThey already removed wordpad, and they "enhanced" notepad such that
Wordpad, because there are times it's almost essential to able use them. >>>
.txt files can be used as a malware vector ...
More reasons not to sheepishly follow the latest version of things.
YourCOd obviously never buy one, but you ought to be aware that there are professional text editors that you need to pay for (so, outside your price bracket).
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <115hurm$sa83$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at 15:11:20 >>> on Wed, 12 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
it will be a sad day when Microsoft stop shipping Notepad and/orThey already removed wordpad, and they "enhanced" notepad such that
Wordpad, because there are times it's almost essential to able use them. >>>>
.txt files can be used as a malware vector ...
More reasons not to sheepishly follow the latest version of things.
YourCOd obviously never buy one, but you ought to be aware that there are
professional text editors that you need to pay for (so, outside your price >> bracket).
Notepad++ is a free open source text editor, so even if Microsoft ditch >Notepad thererCOs an immediate alternative.
Or this
https://www.theregister.com/os-platforms/2026/06/30/former-microsoft-eng >ineer-shrinks-notepad-down-to-size/5264319
Not entirely sure if MicrosoftrCOs dropping of Wordpad, the stripped down >word processor is the end of the world.
ThererCOs a number of free word processors. Some of which can even read
old Word files that Word itself canrCOt even open these days.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <115hurm$sa83$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at 15:11:20
on Wed, 12 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
it will be a sad day when Microsoft stop shipping Notepad and/orThey already removed wordpad, and they "enhanced" notepad such that
Wordpad, because there are times it's almost essential to able use them. >>>
.txt files can be used as a malware vector ...
More reasons not to sheepishly follow the latest version of things.
YourCOd obviously never buy one, but you ought to be aware that there are >professional text editors that you need to pay for (so, outside your price >bracket).
In message <115i477$u78o$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:41:27 on Wed, 12 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <115hurm$sa83$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at 15:11:20 >>>> on Wed, 12 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
it will be a sad day when Microsoft stop shipping Notepad and/orThey already removed wordpad, and they "enhanced" notepad such that
Wordpad, because there are times it's almost essential to able use them. >>>>>
.txt files can be used as a malware vector ...
More reasons not to sheepishly follow the latest version of things.
YourCOd obviously never buy one, but you ought to be aware that there are >>> professional text editors that you need to pay for (so, outside your price >>> bracket).
Notepad++ is a free open source text editor, so even if Microsoft ditch
Notepad thererCOs an immediate alternative.
Or this
https://www.theregister.com/os-platforms/2026/06/30/former-microsoft-eng
ineer-shrinks-notepad-down-to-size/5264319
Not entirely sure if MicrosoftrCOs dropping of Wordpad, the stripped down
word processor is the end of the world.
It probably isn't, but not for the first time you apparently didn't read
the "and/or" in my earlier posting.
ThererCOs a number of free word processors. Some of which can even read
old Word files that Word itself canrCOt even open these days.
In message <60im7ltdob261u9var0eaj3fkssienc5q7@4ax.com>, at 17:04:48 on
Tue, 11 Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 16:39:26 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
Mine is 36.0.2130.80
So, only 98 major versions out of date!
It only fails to work on one newspaper's recently broken site.
On 11/08/2026 17:34, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <60im7ltdob261u9var0eaj3fkssienc5q7@4ax.com>, at 17:04:48
on Tue, 11 Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 16:39:26 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
wrote:
Mine is 36.0.2130.80
So, only 98 major versions out of date!
It only fails to work on one newspaper's recently broken site.
-aIt probably can't see the sun either,
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <115i477$u78o$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:41:27 on Wed, 12 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <115hurm$sa83$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at 15:11:20 >>>>> on Wed, 12 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
it will be a sad day when Microsoft stop shipping Notepad and/or >>>>>>> Wordpad, because there are times it's almost essential to able use them.
They already removed wordpad, and they "enhanced" notepad such that >>>>>> .txt files can be used as a malware vector ...
More reasons not to sheepishly follow the latest version of things.
YourCOd obviously never buy one, but you ought to be aware that there are >>>> professional text editors that you need to pay for (so, outside your price >>>> bracket).
Notepad++ is a free open source text editor, so even if Microsoft ditch
Notepad thererCOs an immediate alternative.
Or this
https://www.theregister.com/os-platforms/2026/06/30/former-microsoft-eng >>> ineer-shrinks-notepad-down-to-size/5264319
Not entirely sure if MicrosoftrCOs dropping of Wordpad, the stripped down >>> word processor is the end of the world.
It probably isn't, but not for the first time you apparently didn't read
the "and/or" in my earlier posting.
ThererCOs a number of free word processors. Some of which can even read
old Word files that Word itself canrCOt even open these days.
How so I ignored your and/or?
On 11/08/2026 17:34, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <60im7ltdob261u9var0eaj3fkssienc5q7@4ax.com>, at 17:04:48
on Tue, 11 Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 16:39:26 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote: >>>It only fails to work on one newspaper's recently broken site.
Mine is 36.0.2130.80
So, only 98 major versions out of date!
It probably can't see the sun either,
but the Wall Street Journal has a different approach.--
In message <115iaec$10efk$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:27:40 on Wed, 12 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <115i477$u78o$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:41:27 on Wed, 12 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <115hurm$sa83$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at 15:11:20 >>>>>> on Wed, 12 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:YourCOd obviously never buy one, but you ought to be aware that there are >>>>> professional text editors that you need to pay for (so, outside your price
Roland Perry wrote:
it will be a sad day when Microsoft stop shipping Notepad and/or >>>>>>>> Wordpad, because there are times it's almost essential to able use them.
They already removed wordpad, and they "enhanced" notepad such that >>>>>>> .txt files can be used as a malware vector ...
More reasons not to sheepishly follow the latest version of things. >>>>>
bracket).
Notepad++ is a free open source text editor, so even if Microsoft ditch >>>> Notepad thererCOs an immediate alternative.
Or this
https://www.theregister.com/os-platforms/2026/06/30/former-microsoft-eng >>>> ineer-shrinks-notepad-down-to-size/5264319
Not entirely sure if MicrosoftrCOs dropping of Wordpad, the stripped down >>>> word processor is the end of the world.
It probably isn't, but not for the first time you apparently didn't read >>> the "and/or" in my earlier posting.
ThererCOs a number of free word processors. Some of which can even read >>>> old Word files that Word itself canrCOt even open these days.
How so I ignored your and/or?
Because the worst case scenario would have been Microsoft withdrawing
both Notepad *and* Wordpad.
Leaving people to scrabble around trying to find substitutes. In my experience the various "Open Source" equivalents to things are very much
out of the frying pan and into the fire. Good intentions, but usually
end in tears.
On 12/08/2026 18:36, Nick Finnigan wrote:
On 11/08/2026 17:34, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <60im7ltdob261u9var0eaj3fkssienc5q7@4ax.com>, at 17:04:48
on Tue, 11 Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 16:39:26 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
wrote:
Mine is 36.0.2130.80
So, only 98 major versions out of date!
It only fails to work on one newspaper's recently broken site.
-a-aIt probably can't see the sun either,
Because of the eclipse?
The steam locomotive icon is interesting, because the success of Flying Scotsman, Tornado, Harry Potter, and others, means a lot of people will
have seen one in the flesh(sic).
On 12/08/2026 15:25, Roland Perry wrote:
The steam locomotive icon is interesting, because the success of
Flying Scotsman, Tornado, Harry Potter, and others, means a lot of
people will have seen one in the flesh(sic).
And even more will have been read Thomas the Tank Engine stories as
children or watched the TV programmes.
the worst case scenario would have been Microsoft withdrawing
both Notepad *and* Wordpad.
Leaving people to scrabble around trying to find substitutes. In my
experience the various "Open Source" equivalents to things are very much
out of the frying pan and into the fire. Good intentions, but usually
end in tears.
IrCOve long used TextPad. Among other things, it supports regular >expressions.
In message <Tr4fS.5824$eq6e.4040@fx15.ams1>, at 20:11:31 on Wed, 12 Aug >2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
the worst case scenario would have been Microsoft withdrawing
both Notepad *and* Wordpad.
Leaving people to scrabble around trying to find substitutes. In my
experience the various "Open Source" equivalents to things are very much >>> out of the frying pan and into the fire. Good intentions, but usually
end in tears.
IrCOve long used TextPad. Among other things, it supports regular >>expressions.
One of the nice things about my oft-criticised Usenet/email client is it >supports regular expressions (for filtering). Does yours?
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <MnXeS.5820$eq6e.1741@fx15.ams1>, at 09:52:44 on Wed, 12 Aug
2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
You should simply assume that if something doesn't work for you, the >>>>>> problem is almost certainly at your end, and keep quiet about.
As they say "when you assume, you make an ass out of you and me", which >>>>> is why I never assume anything.
You assume the rest of the world is at fault when itrCOs nearly always your
fault.
It's not my fault if people create dodgy anti-bot code.
But if you are a developer for the Times website, probably working via the lowest tender, you arenrCOt going to care much if some bloke in Cambridge running an ancient OS and browser canrCOt access the site.
On Thu, 13 Aug 2026 09:13:00 +0100
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> gabbled:
In message <Tr4fS.5824$eq6e.4040@fx15.ams1>, at 20:11:31 on Wed, 12
Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
the worst case scenario would have been Microsoft withdrawing
both Notepad *and* Wordpad.
Leaving people to scrabble around trying to find substitutes. In my
experience the various "Open Source" equivalents to things are very much >>>> out of the frying pan and into the fire. Good intentions, but usually
end in tears.
IrCOve long used TextPad. Among other things, it supports regular >>>expressions.
One of the nice things about my oft-criticised Usenet/email client is
it supports regular expressions (for filtering). Does yours?
Regexps are fine for simple filtering on strings and some basic "or" stuff, >but for anything that involves more complicated logic forget it.
In message <1159bhg$25bit$1@dont-email.me>, at 07:51:12 on Sun, 9 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157tfv$1oepo$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:45:20 on Sat, 8 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157nov$1mauq$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:07:44 on Sat, 8 Aug >>>>> 2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157ksn$1l9aa$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:18:31 on Sat, 8 Aug >>>>>>> 2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
I suspect itrCOs not for Bot defences but rather to enforce not >>>>>>>> sharing ofIf it's not a bot-check, what is the "Verifying your device, please >>>>>>>>>> wait" message?
I did get that message for the first Times article in that
(Firefox, Ubuntu, uBlock Origin) but I didn't for the second. >>>>>>>>> Evidently it has decided I'm 'ok' as far as not being a bot. >>>>>>>>>
It wasn't a Cloudflare check, it looked like the Times homebrewed their
own.
Theo
usernames.
Given that the browser I was using didn't have a Times login saved (thus
no username to be clocked) that theory is clearly wrong.
ItrCOs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any
attempted login.
Groundhog day... yes, but why is their fingerprinting code so broken it >>>>> doesn't even time out?
Because they donrCOt really care?
I mentioned that possibility several days ago.
Ok, but donrCOt go around stating that points made by others are clearly
wrong, when that may not be the case.
I'm very careful to only speak the truth.
See also assertions about the Scots language.
That's been flogged to death by now.
In message <Tr4fS.5824$eq6e.4040@fx15.ams1>, at 20:11:31 on Wed, 12 Aug >2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
the worst case scenario would have been Microsoft withdrawing
both Notepad *and* Wordpad.
Leaving people to scrabble around trying to find substitutes. In my
experience the various "Open Source" equivalents to things are very much >>> out of the frying pan and into the fire. Good intentions, but usually
end in tears.
IrCOve long used TextPad. Among other things, it supports regular >>expressions.
One of the nice things about my oft-criticised Usenet/email client is it >supports regular expressions (for filtering). Does yours?
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
Tweed wrote:
ItAs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any
attempted login.
It's been a long time since the various fingerprint test sites *didn't*
say I was unique :-(
<https://amiunique.org/fingerprint>
No need to install the app, the website test is plenty.
I have my suspicions about the accuracy of the reported results. My
perfectly standard iPad Pro, running the almost-latest version of iPadOS, >using the default Safari browser, is reported as:
Yes! You are unique among the 5406230 fingerprints in our entire dataset.
It reports that I am one of 10.88% of users running MacOS (actually
iPadOS), one of 2.87% running Safari (sounds suspiciously low), one of
65.98% running in English and one of 16.09% in the UTC+1 time zone.
I simply canAt believe IAm the first-ever UK iPad user to have performed
the test.
On Sun, 09 Aug 2026 10:35:16 GMT, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com>
wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:Apparently I am one of 0.08% using -
Tweed wrote:
It-As entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any >>>> attempted login.
It's been a long time since the various fingerprint test sites *didn't* >>> say I was unique :-(
<https://amiunique.org/fingerprint>
No need to install the app, the website test is plenty.
I have my suspicions about the accuracy of the reported results. My
perfectly standard iPad Pro, running the almost-latest version of iPadOS,
using the default Safari browser, is reported as:
Yes! You are unique among the 5406230 fingerprints in our entire dataset.
It reports that I am one of 10.88% of users running MacOS (actually
iPadOS), one of 2.87% running Safari (sounds suspiciously low), one of
65.98% running in English and one of 16.09% in the UTC+1 time zone.
I simply can-At believe I-Am the first-ever UK iPad user to have performed >> the test.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML,
like Gecko) Chrome/151.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
It looks like the identification delves a bit deeper than just the
main browser type.
Content language is 0.00% shared, possibly due to a times I have used auto-translate or viewed foreign-language FB videos? en,en-US,cy,it,zh-TW,ko,zh-CN,id,es,ml
In message <115k14r$h706$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:01:15 on Thu, 13 Aug
2026, boltar@caprica.universe remarked:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2026 09:13:00 +0100
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> gabbled:
In message <Tr4fS.5824$eq6e.4040@fx15.ams1>, at 20:11:31 on Wed, 12
Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
the worst case scenario would have been Microsoft withdrawing
both Notepad *and* Wordpad.
Leaving people to scrabble around trying to find substitutes. In my
experience the various "Open Source" equivalents to things are very much >>>>> out of the frying pan and into the fire. Good intentions, but usually >>>>> end in tears.
IrCOve long used TextPad. Among other things, it supports regular >>>>expressions.
One of the nice things about my oft-criticised Usenet/email client is
it supports regular expressions (for filtering). Does yours?
Regexps are fine for simple filtering on strings and some basic "or" stuff, >>but for anything that involves more complicated logic forget it.
For someone with as little brainpower as you, yes I suggest you forget
it.
In message <1157tik$1oflo$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:46:44 on Sat, 8 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157q7p$1n5eb$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at
18:51:01 on Sat, 8 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked: >>>> Tweed wrote:
ItrCOs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any >>>>> attempted login.
It's been a long time since the various fingerprint test sites *didn't* >>>> say I was unique :-(
<https://amiunique.org/fingerprint>
No need to install the app, the website test is plenty.
I'm not running Android on my laptop.
Why do you think Android is required?
That link says so.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157tik$1oflo$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:46:44 on Sat, 8 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <1157q7p$1n5eb$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org>, at
18:51:01 on Sat, 8 Aug 2026, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked: >>>>> Tweed wrote:
ItrCOs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any
attempted login.
It's been a long time since the various fingerprint test sites *didn't* >>>>> say I was unique :-(
<https://amiunique.org/fingerprint>
No need to install the app, the website test is plenty.
I'm not running Android on my laptop.
Why do you think Android is required?
That link says so.
Maybe thatrCOs whatrCOs confusing The Times.
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
Tweed wrote:
ItrCOs entirely possible your system might get fingerprinted prior to any >>> attempted login.
It's been a long time since the various fingerprint test sites *didn't*
say I was unique :-(
<https://amiunique.org/fingerprint>
No need to install the app, the website test is plenty.
I have my suspicions about the accuracy of the reported results. My
perfectly standard iPad Pro, running the almost-latest version of iPadOS, using the default Safari browser, is reported as:
Yes! You are unique among the 5406230 fingerprints in our entire dataset.
It reports that I am one of 10.88% of users running MacOS (actually
iPadOS), one of 2.87% running Safari (sounds suspiciously low), one of
65.98% running in English and one of 16.09% in the UTC+1 time zone.
I simply canrCOt believe IrCOm the first-ever UK iPad user to have performed the test.
On Thu, 13 Aug 2026 11:23:35 +0100
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> gabbled:
In message <115k14r$h706$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:01:15 on Thu, 13 Aug >>2026, boltar@caprica.universe remarked:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2026 09:13:00 +0100
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> gabbled:
In message <Tr4fS.5824$eq6e.4040@fx15.ams1>, at 20:11:31 on Wed, 12 >>>>Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
the worst case scenario would have been Microsoft withdrawing
both Notepad *and* Wordpad.
Leaving people to scrabble around trying to find substitutes. In my >>>>>> experience the various "Open Source" equivalents to things are very much >>>>>> out of the frying pan and into the fire. Good intentions, but usually >>>>>> end in tears.
IrCOve long used TextPad. Among other things, it supports regular >>>>>expressions.
One of the nice things about my oft-criticised Usenet/email client
is it supports regular expressions (for filtering). Does yours?
Regexps are fine for simple filtering on strings and some basic "or" stuff, >>>but for anything that involves more complicated logic forget it.
For someone with as little brainpower as you, yes I suggest you forget
it.
If you're such a genius why don't you write your own newsreader like I did.
On Thu, 13 Aug 2026 09:13:00 +0100
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> gabbled:
In message <Tr4fS.5824$eq6e.4040@fx15.ams1>, at 20:11:31 on Wed, 12
Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
the worst case scenario would have been Microsoft withdrawing
both Notepad *and* Wordpad.
Leaving people to scrabble around trying to find substitutes. In my
experience the various "Open Source" equivalents to things are very
much
out of the frying pan and into the fire. Good intentions, but usually
end in tears.
IrCOve long used TextPad. Among other things, it supports regular
expressions.
One of the nice things about my oft-criticised Usenet/email client is
it supports regular expressions (for filtering). Does yours?
Regexps are fine for simple filtering on strings and some basic "or" stuff, but for anything that involves more complicated logic forget it.
the worst case scenario would have been Microsoft withdrawing
both Notepad *and* Wordpad.
Leaving people to scrabble around trying to find substitutes. In my
experience the various "Open Source" equivalents to things are
very much
out of the frying pan and into the fire. Good intentions, but usually >>>>> end in tears.
IrCOve long used TextPad. Among other things, it supports regular
expressions.
One of the nice things about my oft-criticised Usenet/email client
is it supports regular expressions (for filtering). Does yours?
Regexps are fine for simple filtering on strings and some basic "or" >>stuff, but for anything that involves more complicated logic forget
it.
I wonder what Perry has against Open Source? My home is a Microsoft
free zone and I live very well without paid software, without their
forced obsolescence, and without their failure to understand exactly
how people actually use their PCs.
Perhaps their enhanced perryscope
In message <115knvc$1ojcp$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:30:52 on Thu, 13 Aug
2026, boltar@caprica.universe remarked:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2026 11:23:35 +0100
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> gabbled:
In message <115k14r$h706$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:01:15 on Thu, 13 Aug >>>2026, boltar@caprica.universe remarked:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2026 09:13:00 +0100
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> gabbled:
In message <Tr4fS.5824$eq6e.4040@fx15.ams1>, at 20:11:31 on Wed, 12 >>>>>Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
the worst case scenario would have been Microsoft withdrawing
both Notepad *and* Wordpad.
Leaving people to scrabble around trying to find substitutes. In my >>>>>>> experience the various "Open Source" equivalents to things are very much
out of the frying pan and into the fire. Good intentions, but usually >>>>>>> end in tears.
IrCOve long used TextPad. Among other things, it supports regular >>>>>>expressions.
One of the nice things about my oft-criticised Usenet/email client >>>>>is it supports regular expressions (for filtering). Does yours?
Regexps are fine for simple filtering on strings and some basic "or" stuff, >>>>but for anything that involves more complicated logic forget it.
For someone with as little brainpower as you, yes I suggest you forget >>>it.
If you're such a genius why don't you write your own newsreader like I did.
I don't have to. Some good friends of mine wrote an excellent newsreader
for me.
On 13/08/2026 10:01, boltar@caprica.universe wrote:
Regexps are fine for simple filtering on strings and some basic "or" stuff, >> but for anything that involves more complicated logic forget it.
I wonder what Perry has against Open Source? My home is a Microsoft
free zone and I live very well without paid software, without their
forced obsolescence, and without their failure to understand exactly how >people actually use their PCs.
On Thu, 13 Aug 2026 17:17:37 +0100
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> gabbled:
In message <115knvc$1ojcp$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:30:52 on Thu, 13 Aug >>2026, boltar@caprica.universe remarked:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2026 11:23:35 +0100I don't have to. Some good friends of mine wrote an excellent
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> gabbled:
In message <115k14r$h706$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:01:15 on Thu, 13
Aug 2026, boltar@caprica.universe remarked:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2026 09:13:00 +0100
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> gabbled:
In message <Tr4fS.5824$eq6e.4040@fx15.ams1>, at 20:11:31 on Wed, >>>>>>12 Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
the worst case scenario would have been Microsoft withdrawing
both Notepad *and* Wordpad.
Leaving people to scrabble around trying to find substitutes. In my >>>>>>>> experience the various "Open Source" equivalents to things are >>>>>>>>very much
out of the frying pan and into the fire. Good intentions, but usually >>>>>>>> end in tears.
IrCOve long used TextPad. Among other things, it supports regular >>>>>>>expressions.
One of the nice things about my oft-criticised Usenet/email client >>>>>>is it supports regular expressions (for filtering). Does yours?
Regexps are fine for simple filtering on strings and some basic "or" stuff,
but for anything that involves more complicated logic forget it.
For someone with as little brainpower as you, yes I suggest you
forget it.
If you're such a genius why don't you write your own newsreader like I did. >>
newsreader for me.
Translation: I can't.
On Thu, 13 Aug 2026 17:46:00 +0100
Martin <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> gabbled:
On 13/08/2026 10:01, boltar@caprica.universe wrote:
Regexps are fine for simple filtering on strings and some basic "or" stuff, >>> but for anything that involves more complicated logic forget it.
I wonder what Perry has against Open Source? My home is a Microsoft
free zone and I live very well without paid software, without their
forced obsolescence, and without their failure to understand exactly
how people actually use their PCs.
He still seems to be using Windows 3.1 as far as I can tell.
But yes, I tend to avoid MS where possible, their OS is junk and their >developer tooling is over complicated and often barely works properly.
On Wed, 12 Aug 2026 08:16:53 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <115fmeq$6ila$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:34:19 on Tue, 11 Aug
2026, Nobody <jock@soccer.com> remarked:
On 2026-08-11 9:34 a.m., Roland Perry wrote:
In message <60im7ltdob261u9var0eaj3fkssienc5q7@4ax.com>, at 17:04:48 on >>>> Tue, 11 Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 16:39:26 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote: >>>>>
In message <115cjke$2tq2o$2@dont-email.me>, at 14:27:44 on Mon, 10 Aug >>>>>> 2026, Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> remarked:
On 10/08/2026 13:54, Recliner wrote:
On Mon, 10 Aug 2026 10:28:51 +0100, Nick Finnigan >>>>>>>><nix@genie.co.uk> wrote:
On 09/08/2026 11:26, Recliner wrote:
rCa running on an exceedingly rare, vintage version of
Is it 32-bit? Is it a similarly rare, vintage version of >>>>>>>>>>
I've just downloaded an old version of Opera from 2013, running on >>>>>>>>> windows 10, and that shows the error.
What version of Opera is that? I'm currently on Opera
134.0.5954.46. But that modern version of Opera presumably won't >>>>>>>> run on Roland's self-inflicted disaster of an ancient PC.
18.0.1284.68. I assume there are more versions which don't send
headers with User-Agent, but did not go through any.
Mine is 36.0.2130.80
So, only 98 major versions out of date!
It only fails to work on one newspaper's recently broken site.
Which isn't for other Mere Mortals.
Feel free to do a survey of their fifteen million readers, and come back >>and tell us it any of them are experiencing a similar problem.
How did you dream up that absurd number?
Was it from one of the imaginary newspapers you claim to read every
day?
And, btw, by definition, their readers obviously *can* access the
content, whether by app, website, or both (as I do).
But the most convenient way, by far, is the iPad app.
On Wed, 12 Aug 2026 14:48:56 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <115hkbn$ooeo$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:10:47 on Wed, 12 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
Key metric is whether the vast majority of your paying subscribers can >>>use the site. The Times has around three quarters of a million paying >>>subscribers, which in the modern world is quite an achievement. (Though >>>how many of those are on cheap introductory subscriptions is not >>>revealed).
I agree with much of what you say, but it will be a sad day when
Microsoft stop shipping Notepad and/or Wordpad, because there are times >>it's almost essential to able use them.
Perhaps you're not aware that MSFT no longer ships Wordpad?
On Wed, 12 Aug 2026 14:55:34 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <115hmv9$pjti$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:55:21 on Wed, 12 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
So they seem to know what theyrCOre doing. Perhaps their enhanced >>>>perryscope
can now successfully detect and block ancient machines whose geriatric >>>> keepers would be unable to purchase digital subscriptions?
You sad old git, can't give it a rest, can you?
In case you've failed to keep up (which wouldn't surprise me, seems
par for the course with you) I have a Times subscription on a
different PC,
No you don't. You're being allowed free access to someone else's subscription.
so it's not a case of failing to get a subscription,
but NON_SUBSCRIPTION [you can't even get that right] links failing
to work on my version of Opera.
I doubt itrCOs anything to do with deliberately blocking old software. ItrCOs
simply not worth expending the cost of testing against all possible >>>combinations of old tech.
That's what test suites are for. I was working on them for mainframes as >>long ago as 1977. It's not difficult.
And in this case I don't think it's the "combination" you claim, rather >>than something specific with Opera (because others have reported the
same problem on other platforms).
It works fine using modern Opera versions. The only fault is at your
end, as per usual.
No, Roland was simply confused, again.
HerCOs the one thatrCOs confused, not the Times, whose perryscope
worked as designed.--
In message <rgvo7lhr2ti686ceetiiu30jnqe4nbsu1t@4ax.com>, at 15:08:41 on
Wed, 12 Aug 2026, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2026 14:55:34 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <115hmv9$pjti$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:55:21 on Wed, 12 Aug
2026, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
So they seem to know what theyrCOre doing. Perhaps their enhanced
perryscope
can now successfully detect and block ancient machines whose geriatric >>>>> keepers would be unable to purchase digital subscriptions?
You sad old git, can't give it a rest, can you?
In case you've failed to keep up (which wouldn't surprise me, seems
par for the course with you) I have a Times subscription on a
different PC,
No you don't. You're being allowed free access to someone else's subscription.
so it's not a case of failing to get a subscription,
but NON_SUBSCRIPTION [you can't even get that right] links failing
to work on my version of Opera.
I doubt itrCOs anything to do with deliberately blocking old software. ItrCOs
simply not worth expending the cost of testing against all possible
combinations of old tech.
That's what test suites are for. I was working on them for mainframes as >>> long ago as 1977. It's not difficult.
And in this case I don't think it's the "combination" you claim, rather
than something specific with Opera (because others have reported the
same problem on other platforms).
It works fine using modern Opera versions. The only fault is at your
end, as per usual.
The fault is at the Times website, for failing to implement sufficient backwards compatibility.
In message <115ms4e$2fdi7$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:54:06 on Fri, 14 Aug
2026, boltar@caprica.universe remarked:
I wonder what Perry has against Open Source? My home is a Microsoft >>>free zone and I live very well without paid software, without their >>>forced obsolescence, and without their failure to understand exactly
how people actually use their PCs.
He still seems to be using Windows 3.1 as far as I can tell.
As ever, you are wrong. I did use Windows 3.1 thirty-five years ago, but >moved on to more recent versions shipped with hardware I've bought this >century.
But yes, I tend to avoid MS where possible, their OS is junk and their >>developer tooling is over complicated and often barely works properly.
But you are an autistic geek, and my target audience is ordinary members
of the public.
On Fri, 14 Aug 2026 13:27:23 +0100
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> gabbled:
In message <115ms4e$2fdi7$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:54:06 on Fri, 14 Aug
2026, boltar@caprica.universe remarked:
I wonder what Perry has against Open Source? My home is a Microsoft
free zone and I live very well without paid software, without their
forced obsolescence, and without their failure to understand exactly
how people actually use their PCs.
He still seems to be using Windows 3.1 as far as I can tell.
As ever, you are wrong. I did use Windows 3.1 thirty-five years ago, but
moved on to more recent versions shipped with hardware I've bought this
century.
So maybe Windows XP sp1 then.
But yes, I tend to avoid MS where possible, their OS is junk and their
developer tooling is over complicated and often barely works properly.
But you are an autistic geek, and my target audience is ordinary members
of the public.
I may be many things but autistic isnt one of them, and I'm pretty sure normal users would have been quite happy for MS to leave the user interface the hell alone since XP and just update the underlying kernel and tools. Clearly they weren't listening to anyone when they threw that abortion called Windows 8 over the fence and Windows 11 is still a bloody mess.
LetrCOs not get pedantic about icons or common phrases. Everyone knows what to hang up a call means, even if they donrCOt know its origins. YourCOll be complaining that you didnrCOt see a steam locomotive whilst approaching an ungated level crossing.
Yes, ironically, one of the reasons IrCOm happy to stay on Win 10 is that I know MSFT wonrCOt change or break anything. Just doing security fixes is enough, and I hope it relents, and keeps doing them for another year or
two, till it fully reinstates the Win 10 UI in Win 11.
Is the sign for a speed-camera in the UK still a stylised Rolleiflex medium-format camera the like of which practically nobody in the country will have ever seen?-a That never made any sense to me (although I do in fact own medium and large format bellows cameras ;-).)
On 15/08/2026 09:42, Recliner wrote:
Yes, ironically, one of the reasons IrCOm happy to stay on Win 10 is that I >> know MSFT wonrCOt change or break anything. Just doing security fixes is
enough, and I hope it relents, and keeps doing them for another year or
two, till it fully reinstates the Win 10 UI in Win 11.
They have relented for another year (depending on when you mean).
Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> wrote:
On 15/08/2026 09:42, Recliner wrote:
Yes, ironically, one of the reasons IrCOm happy to stay on Win 10 is that I >>> know MSFT wonrCOt change or break anything. Just doing security fixes is >>> enough, and I hope it relents, and keeps doing them for another year or
two, till it fully reinstates the Win 10 UI in Win 11.
They have relented for another year (depending on when you mean).
IrCOm covered till this October. IrCOm hoping they extend it to Oct 27 (or later).
On 15/08/2026 12:21, Recliner wrote:
Nick Finnigan <nix@genie.co.uk> wrote:"Windows 10 support has ended.rC>You can enroll in ESU any time until the programme ends on 12 October, 2027."
On 15/08/2026 09:42, Recliner wrote:
Yes, ironically, one of the reasons IrCOm happy to stay on Win 10 is that I
know MSFT wonrCOt change or break anything. Just doing security fixes is >>>> enough, and I hope it relents, and keeps doing them for another year or >>>> two, till it fully reinstates the Win 10 UI in Win 11.
They have relented for another year (depending on when you mean).
IrCOm covered till this October. IrCOm hoping they extend it to Oct 27 (or >> later).
https://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/windows/extended-security-updates
I do plan to buy a new workstation with Win 11, but assume that
continuing improvements in things like GPUs mean I can get one with a
longer life by waiting a bit longer.
Recliner wrote:
I do plan to buy a new workstation with Win 11, but assume that
continuing improvements in things like GPUs mean I can get one with a
longer life by waiting a bit longer.
Several of this year's new model phones have less RAM and/or FLASH than
last year's, for a higher price tag; what makes you think GPUs will be different?
Clutterbug <clutterbug@andyburns.uk> wrote:
Recliner wrote:
I do plan to buy a new workstation with Win 11, but assume that
continuing improvements in things like GPUs mean I can get one with a
longer life by waiting a bit longer.
Several of this year's new model phones have less RAM and/or FLASH than
last year's, for a higher price tag; what makes you think GPUs will be
different?
IrCOm hoping for the RTX 50 Super.
On 15/08/2026 09:46, Clank wrote:
Is the sign for a speed-camera in the UK still a stylised Rolleiflex
medium-format camera the like of which practically nobody in the country
will have ever seen?-a That never made any sense to me (although I do in
fact own medium and large format bellows cameras ;-).)
It is a distinctive image, more so than one of what most people use to
take photographs - mobile phone or cheap throwaway camera.
On 12/08/2026 17:19, Tweed wrote:
LetrCOs not get pedantic about icons or common phrases. Everyone knows what >> to hang up a call means, even if they donrCOt know its origins. YourCOll be >> complaining that you didnrCOt see a steam locomotive whilst approaching an >> ungated level crossing.
Is the sign for a speed-camera in the UK still a stylised Rolleiflex >medium-format camera the like of which practically nobody in the
country will have ever seen?
That never made any sense to me (although I do in fact own medium and--
large format bellows cameras ;-).)
I rather like that the sign for "no photography" around things like
military bases here in Romania is very clearly a classic Leica >rangefinder... Or perhaps more likely, a Zorki/FED replica of one :-).
On Fri, 14 Aug 2026 13:27:23 +0100
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> gabbled:
In message <115ms4e$2fdi7$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:54:06 on Fri, 14 Aug >>2026, boltar@caprica.universe remarked:
I wonder what Perry has against Open Source? My home is a Microsoft >>>>free zone and I live very well without paid software, without their >>>>forced obsolescence, and without their failure to understand exactly >>>>how people actually use their PCs.
He still seems to be using Windows 3.1 as far as I can tell.
As ever, you are wrong. I did use Windows 3.1 thirty-five years ago,
but moved on to more recent versions shipped with hardware I've bought >>this century.
So maybe Windows XP sp1 then.
Clearly they weren't listening to anyone when they threw that abortion called >Windows 8 over the fence and Windows 11 is still a bloody mess.
The fault is at the Times website, for failing to implement sufficient
backwards compatibility.
Their perryscope worked perfectly.
As always, the fault was years.
You earn full marks for consistency!--
In message <115p7co$37vol$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:18:33 on Sat, 15 Aug
2026, boltar@caprica.universe remarked:
On Fri, 14 Aug 2026 13:27:23 +0100
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> gabbled:
In message <115ms4e$2fdi7$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:54:06 on Fri, 14 Aug >>>2026, boltar@caprica.universe remarked:
I wonder what Perry has against Open Source? My home is a Microsoft >>>>>free zone and I live very well without paid software, without their >>>>>forced obsolescence, and without their failure to understand exactly >>>>>how people actually use their PCs.
He still seems to be using Windows 3.1 as far as I can tell.
As ever, you are wrong. I did use Windows 3.1 thirty-five years ago,
but moved on to more recent versions shipped with hardware I've bought >>>this century.
So maybe Windows XP sp1 then.
No. Newer than that.
Clearly they weren't listening to anyone when they threw that abortion called >>Windows 8 over the fence and Windows 11 is still a bloody mess.
And yet when I stick with Windows 7 on some of my machines, you and
others pour scorn on the decision. Make your mind up!
On 15/08/2026 09:46, Clank wrote:
Is the sign for a speed-camera in the UK still a stylised Rolleiflex
medium-format camera the like of which practically nobody in the
country will have ever seen?-a That never made any sense to me
(although I do in fact own medium and large format bellows cameras ;-).)
It is a distinctive image, more so than one of what most people use to
take photographs - mobile phone or cheap throwaway camera.
On 15/08/2026 13:55, JMB99 wrote:
On 15/08/2026 09:46, Clank wrote:
Is the sign for a speed-camera in the UK still a stylised Rolleiflex
medium-format camera the like of which practically nobody in the
country will have ever seen?-a That never made any sense to me
(although I do in fact own medium and large format bellows cameras ;-).)
It is a distinctive image, more so than one of what most people use to
take photographs - mobile phone or cheap throwaway camera.
It's more the very specificness of it I find odd; why a Rollei?-a Indeed,
of all the types of camera that I would consider representative of "a camera" it's probably the least distinctive.-a Medium Format with waist- level finder was niche even when film was dominant.
On 17/08/2026 09:42, Clank wrote:
On 15/08/2026 13:55, JMB99 wrote:
On 15/08/2026 09:46, Clank wrote:
Is the sign for a speed-camera in the UK still a stylised Rolleiflex
medium-format camera the like of which practically nobody in the
country will have ever seen?-a That never made any sense to me
(although I do in fact own medium and large format bellows cameras ;-).) >>>
It is a distinctive image, more so than one of what most people use to
take photographs - mobile phone or cheap throwaway camera.
It's more the very specificness of it I find odd; why a Rollei?-a Indeed, >> of all the types of camera that I would consider representative of "a
camera" it's probably the least distinctive.-a Medium Format with waist-
level finder was niche even when film was dominant.
(Follow up to my own post - with hindsight, I don't mean least
distinctive - it's very distinctive ;-) - least *representative* would
be better. I should also say, I don't hate it, and it does the job - I
just find it curious.)
On 17/08/2026 09:42, Clank wrote:
On 15/08/2026 13:55, JMB99 wrote:
On 15/08/2026 09:46, Clank wrote:
Is the sign for a speed-camera in the UK still a stylised Rolleiflex
medium-format camera the like of which practically nobody in the
country will have ever seen?-a That never made any sense to me
(although I do in fact own medium and large format bellows cameras
;-).)
It is a distinctive image, more so than one of what most people use
to take photographs - mobile phone or cheap throwaway camera.
It's more the very specificness of it I find odd; why a Rollei?
Indeed, of all the types of camera that I would consider
representative of "a camera" it's probably the least distinctive.
Medium Format with waist- level finder was niche even when film was
dominant.
(Follow up to my own post - with hindsight, I don't mean least
distinctive - it's very distinctive ;-) - least *representative* would
be better.-a I should also say, I don't hate it, and it does the job - I just find it curious.)
I suspect the bloke who designed it secretly wanted to own one
On 17/08/2026 08:09, Graeme Wall wrote:
I suspect the bloke who designed it secretly wanted to own one
Probably just someone found a sheet or page of camera icons and picked one.
There are ones here that are more accurate representations of a camera
but none stand out as being easier to be recognised from a moving vehicle.
https://www.flaticon.com/free-icons/camera
JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
On 17/08/2026 08:09, Graeme Wall wrote:
I suspect the bloke who designed it secretly wanted to own one
Probably just someone found a sheet or page of camera icons and picked one. >>
There are ones here that are more accurate representations of a camera
but none stand out as being easier to be recognised from a moving vehicle. >>
https://www.flaticon.com/free-icons/camera
rCL403 That request didn't go through. Our security filter flagged something. >You don't have permission to access this page.rCY
UmmrCa
Works fine, here.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 74 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 55:01:21 |
| Calls: | 1,101 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 1,339 |
| Messages: | 276,444 |