The Windows Registry is a pretty good key-value store for centrally storing config.
Because some, perhaps many, have abused the originally good idea, does not invalidate its positive aspects.
Also, I do not agree it is a file system. It is a key-value storage system that is leagues better than the win.ini, system.ini, and the prolific ini file collection hell it replaced.
Some form of version control would make the registry better.
It’s impressive because they actually achieved that level of centralization. Most systems aim to have a centralized configuration “place” but it doesn’t stick. With windows the registry really did stick
Knife crime statistics include "stop and search" where orinary working people have boxcutters, Leatherman multitools, and Swissarmy knives taken off them. POC and young people are particularly targeted.
– Injury with intent to cause serious harm – 21,421
– Threat to kill – 4,984
– Attempted murder – 465
Yes stop and search affects knife crimes, but there is still a lot of violence, and overall rates of violent knife crime have risen notably faster than the population has grown in London over past 10 years.
Are those numbers isolated events or could one attack fall into multiple categories? Eg there was a threat to kill, then an attack and then an attempt to murder?
No. "Crown Land" in Canada is owned by the provinces.
There is no such thing as a "British Crown Corporation."
Crown Corporations are a Canadian thing.
I lived in Canada for 30 years and now live in the Scotland. CalMac and Scottish Water are not "Crown Corporations," but are nevertheless owned and controlled by the Scottish Ministers. This is contrast to BC Ferries, ICBC, and BC Hydro which are Crown Corporations.
In the UK there is something called the Crown Estate, which is somethint again different.
>> No. "Crown Land" in Canada is owned by the provinces.
Crown land is owned by the Canadian Crown; the monarchy owns all crown land officially. It's administered by a split across federal and provincial jurisdictions.
>> Crown land is owned by the Canadian Crown; the monarchy owns all crown land officially. It's administered by a split across federal and provincial jurisdictions.
No, Crown Land is controlled by the provinces. No, the Canadian monarchy does not own crown land. The Crown owns crown land. Essentially The Crown in Canada is its own legal entity and instrument for the purposes of administration of public lands. The Crown Estates of England and Scotland are something different again, and the Crown Estate owns things like tidal lands and actual real property.
There is Federal Crown Land, but that is almost completely in the northern territories. This is down to Canada's constitutional makeup because provinces control resources.
The Federal government can expropriate land from the provinces when it has a reason to do so like for military bases.
Here is a link that shows Canada Lands. The white area are Provincial Lands.
I suspect that was a reference to the Hudson's Bay Company. I would have to brush up on my history, but they effectively controlled a huge tract of land pre-Confederation and continued to serve many smaller towns until well into the 20th century. I don't think the Hudson's Bay Company was considered a crown corporation, but they were granted a royal charter.
I think they're referring to the fact that the Hudson's Bay Company used to be the legal owner of vast swaths of what is now Canada before selling/surrendering the land to the Canadian government.
National Parks are not Crown Land. National Parks are reserves of land owned and managed by the Federal Parks Department and development is not allowed on that land whatsoever.
Crown Land is land owned and administered by the provinces. Crown Land can be licenced for many uses and sometimes it can be purchased.
We also have national and provincial parks, Crown land is different. A national park is maintained for visitors and for nature, crown land is closer to unused or unclaimed land, generally nothing is done with it unless it's sold off. You are free to camp on crown land, but it's nothing like going to a park, it's full on wilderness camping with no amenities, sites, or anything else.
My point is, Canadians think of government land philosophically as something that is not theirs, but rather, owned by the crown -- the Queen. While Americans see public land as their shared land. This mentality penetrates into many of the differences between the two countries in how they govern.
"Crown" (or "Royal", "Regina", etc.) is used pretty extensively in the Canadian governmental or legal system, and any association in Canadian's minds with the Monarch are pretty much nil.
If you talked about "crown corporations", or "Regina vs." (for criminal cases) no one would associate that with Elizabeth II. "Crown" and anything like that basically just means government.
No, Canadians do not see Crown Land as owned by the Canadian Monarchy, they see Crown Land and owned and controlled by the government as a public asset.
Canadians see the Canadian Royal Family as nothing more than a figurehead of the state.
I am a Canadian and I have studied British and North American History extensively.
I somewhat agree with your main point, but I don't think most Canadians associate the "Crown" as in Crown Land or Crown Corporations with the literal monarchy. Rather it's just a synonym for the (Canadian Federal) government. Most Canadians don't tend to think about the monarchy much at all. (Certainly the Canadian Governor General, theoretically the Queen's representative as head of state, would never be expected to actually take instruction from the Queen.)
Completely not comparable. Openreach has significant marketshare but is also extremely tightly regulated. It has to allow other providers access to basically every element of its offering, now including its physical ducts and poles.
Hence you have a very competitive market landscape in the UK. There are at least 5 major national retail players using various wholesale products (BT, VM, TalkTalk, Sky, Vodafone), plus dozens of altnets offering FTTH on totally seperate fibre infrastructure have started (Hyperoptic, Cityfibre, GNetworks, Community Fibre).
In my flat in London I have access to 4 seperate FTTH networks (with completely different infrastructure) - Openreach FTTH, VM DOCSIS, Hyperoptic FTTB and Community Fibre FTTH. The market works here, prices are low and there are very few data caps.
Yip, things in London are quite different than the rest of the UK.
While Openreach has to allow access to other providers to its infrastructure, most infrastructure is owned and controlled by BT.
If you want FTTP, the underlying service is still BT Openreach. Openreach is very profitable.
At my previous employer it cost us £30K to have BT put in 3000m of fibre that took them 1 afternoon, then it cost £1K a month for a 30Mbs service.
BT owns provides the vast majority of broadband service in the UK and it is somewhat disingenuous to claim BT is on an equal footing as Hyperoptic, VM, or Community Fibre.
TT and Sky use BT OR infra, and EE, Plusnet, and BT Retail are all owned by the BT Group.
The telecom market in the UK is very consolidated and controlled by BT.
You don't even have to leave London to see a night and day difference. I currently live in a new-build flat and have multiple choices for fibre (Hyperoptic are great). I am hopefully soon to be moving less than a mile down the road into a house where my choice is either an offensively slow BT-backed service or an offensively unreliable (so I have heard) Virgin Media service.
If you have a new-build flat in a major UK city you probably have a similar decent choice but the rest of the housing stock (the majority by far) is stuck with BT/Virgin.
You'll almost certainly be getting BT FTTH in the next year or two if you have access to VM. The program is running quickly, something like 6 million premises a year and ramping.
VM can be ok or can be congested depending on the area. BT FTTH doesn't suffer from congestion issues (nor does the FTTC).
Check https://bidb.uk/ for more information. It collates all the altnets and planned roadworks into one dashboard.
>> BT FTTH doesn't suffer from congestion issues (nor does the FTTC).
That is just not true. BT consumer FTTC is contended up to 40 to 1--that is you are sharing your backhaul with upto 40 of your neighbours. I am assuming that their FTTH services are the same.
> If you want FTTP, the underlying service is still BT Openreach. Openreach is very profitable.
Not always. There are many altnets now (cityfibre etc).
> TT and Sky use BT OR infra, and EE, Plusnet, and BT Retail are all owned by the BT Group.
TalkTalk also use cityfibre.
> The telecom market in the UK is very consolidated and controlled by BT.
If you mean physical infrastrure, yes it is (though changing rapidly). Consumer level pricing is competitive though and the services are reliable in the large. It is a different planet compared to the US and especially Canada.
Obviously, you are not very familiar Ukraine, Ukrainian people, or Ukrainian history.
I'm guessing you were not present in 1991 when Ukraine declared itself independent. I am guessing you are oblivious to the very significant Russian casualty figures that are putting this as high as 50,000: 10,000 dead and 40,000 injured.
Ukraine will not cede any land, and is getting significant war material and support from the west.
Putin, quite clearly, is a modern Kaiser Wilhelm II. And I have every suspicion that he was egged on Xi because for China there is no downside. China will basically take control of Eastern Russia over the next 50 years and Russia will be China's vassle state in Europe.
Think of it this way. Russia is like IBM, and their war is like OS/2. China gave Putin tacit permission and support, but China actually has its own objectives which are served by the success or failure. And probably failure even more so.
Because some, perhaps many, have abused the originally good idea, does not invalidate its positive aspects.
Also, I do not agree it is a file system. It is a key-value storage system that is leagues better than the win.ini, system.ini, and the prolific ini file collection hell it replaced.
Some form of version control would make the registry better.