Barely anyone operates Marshmallow
Banging the drum for Wileyfox Swift (Cyanogenmod) here.
Upgraded automatically last week.
2046 posts • joined 5 Mar 2010
Banging the drum for Wileyfox Swift (Cyanogenmod) here.
Upgraded automatically last week.
1. Technology's progress makes a lot of the skills the course was designed for obselete even as its being taught
Not sure about that. In the main we're still running on a Von Neumann architecture.
I think the problem is there are very few "Computer Scientists" of the past 20 years who would understand that statement based on their degree. Although they are probably a whizz with Dreamweaver (or whatever the cool kids are using this year).
My suggestion is that the second chamber (for oversight rather than origination) should be formed from the 2nd choices in a PR electoral system. Only one election, and a way of addressing the "liberals always come second" which used to be the case until recently.
right up until it's in their interests that it is.
True story. MrsJP was issued an electric wheelchair yonks ago (I suspect they had budget to spend). It's spent most of it's life in the garage as (a) it wasn't suitable, and (b) it packed up within a few weeks.
Fast forward a few years, and it's frankly in the way. Repeated calls to various arms (legs and feet) of the local NHS rehab outfit suggests that no-one has any clue as to the provenance or responsibility for said wheelchair.
"I know", I said. "Ring someone up. Tell them we sold it on eBay, and ask where the proceeds should go."
Had a callback within 10 minutes - they had *all* the paperwork, and were in full "prosecute to full extent of the law" mode.
Then you'll know why schemes like this are *extremely* high risk for the authority involved.
Perhaps we could have an El Reg competition to see what the most outlandish thing we can get them to swallow ?
it took a further five months to alert affected staff, who had been left at heightened risk of identity theft and other scams as a result of their employers’s data handling incompetence.
Sorry, given the number of fundamentalist knuckle draggers out there, I'd say - depending what those two fields held - that identity theft would be the *last* of my worries.
You can't eat gold. Nor drink it.
If we ever did enter a post apocalyptic nightmare, you'd be better off hoarding useful skills like how to make and fix things, along with knowledge of farming, husbandry and environmental management.
You know, all those skills the hipster boys dismiss over their macho-lattes .....
The older I get, the more I look forward the collapse of civilisation. I think Douglas Adams had it spot on, and the vast majority of humankind would be dying of hunger wondering how to post the experience on Facebook.
is that you are not the suppliers customer - the reseller is. And generally, the reason resellers are used is because the supplier prefers to have *them* assume the risk (i.e. chasing the debts) than do it themselves. Resellers are effectively a financial buffer.
So when a *single* customer has a beef with a reseller, who will the supplier want to keep sweet at all costs ?
Sell also: car dealers.
One of the evils of the modern world is "reseller", which seems to be a synonym for "rip off merchant". Unless they actually add value.
A few years ago, working for a small company, I had to endure an hours sales pitch from a mobile phone reseller. One of the "services" they added was to sort out any billing issues.
Come month one, and the inevitable billing issue (this was Orange, of course) and we were told in no uncertain terms the reseller would not be able to intervene in billing issues. Repeated subsequent enquiries as to what the reseller actually DID suggested that they
1) got the handsets from Orange
2) helped us put the SIM in, (if we needed it)
3) told us where we could get online help if we needed further support
4) er - that's it.
The only way resellers can exist (IMHO) is because the directors of resellers have come from firms that then place business with resellers.
Luckily, we in the UK don't directly choose our *Prime Minister*. We only get to vote for our local MP (kinda like a senator) and the leader of the party which gets most MPs (senators) gets to be PM.
That said, I can forgive the US confusion on this, since most UK citizens also haven't got a fucking clue how UK democracy works.
I have a vague memory from times gone by that it was also possible to buy a "pre assembled" jigsaw puzzle. So you could frame it, and hang it on the staircase in between the portaits of the Queen and Margaret Thatcher.
It's the decor equivalent of having a wet nurse to do all that icky breast feeding.
Because the underlying systems - a hotchpotch of various benefit and taxation schemes and systems was - charitably - not fit for purpose.
The whole sorry saga is reminiscent of the Blackadder trope of fixing wheels to a tomato. "Time consuming and utterly pointless".
The right approach would be to (a) rationalise tax and benefits and (b) then get a system to automate it.
The only way (and you read it here first) UC will be killed (no, not a stake through the heart) is when the government (any one) has a "review" and discovers that "due to other changes, efficiencies, better ways of working, etc etc" there is no longer a need for universal credit as "it can be delivered in other ways" before being quietly led down a Whitehall alley and given a fare-thee-well bullet through back of the head. (NOTE. This approach also guarantees gongs for all involved).
No one will ever admit it, but part of the creek we are up today is because successive decades of heath badgering about tobacco have managed to double-crimp the state of public finances in the UK.
1) Less income from tobacco (I notice when the smoking ban was introduced, no one was asked how much *more* tax they were willing to pay to cover the lost revenue).
2) People giving up not only drain the economy by drawing their pension for years, rather then considerately dying at 66. They also drain the NHS, as 80% of the NHS budget goes on the last 10-15 years of peoples lives (alzheimers, cancers, dementia etc).
Most people who *want* an iPhone have one. So the market is made up of:
1) People who want an iPhone, but can't afford it (by definition of no interest to Apple)
2) "My first iPhone" - as people grow into them
3) "My umpteenth iPhone" - for people who lose/break them.
4) "My new iPhone" - the shinyphiles
Can I have my £100,000 consultancy fee now ?
victim blaming is not the answer.
Presumably you view scantily clad girls as "asking for it" too ?
And *then* could put a watermark on it.
Could the solution really be so simple it can be expressed in 9 words ?
Can see why I'm not a lawyer ....
I suspect the banks relaxed attitude is premised on the decline of cash, plus the availability (in the UK certainly) of retailer cashback (which is a win win for retailer and bank). I'd wager most banks only see ATMs as a service in decline.
How many new anti-fraud initiatives have been developer for cheques (US:checks) in the past 10 years ?
it's how pendulums work ....
Funnily enough, it's hard to avoid a whiff of deja vu here, in particular:
1) The lack of a coherent (or indeed comprehensible) view of what "out" looks like
2) The repeated assertion by Brexiters of what "they" (i.e. the rest of the world) will do when Brexit happens. Meaning I either believe (for example) Obama, and the American establishment when they state their view (first hand), or I believe Boris' "explanation" of what they say.
I knew the independence campaign was rocky when Alex Salmond told his acolytes what I - and the rest of the UK would do when they got independence.
Do you *really* think that's going to happen ?
Yes. If you watch the (not as dreadful as it might have been) recent "Horizon" on anti-gravity ...
suggests that moving particles distort spacetime. Could it be that this distortion is shifting the centre of mass, and the thrust observed is the drive repositioning ?
As Josh Widdecombes' routine about paying with contactless shows.
"Where am I off to ? the future. See you there, captain chequebook ..."
How does that square with Sky and other subscription *TV* services ?
is measured in decades.
Unlike most (not all, but most) UK/US strategy which is measure in quarters (although I have worked in companies where "month-end" was a bunfight).
There was a pretty good (by current BBC standards*) documentary about quantum effects and how nature may have jumped the shark on this one ...
The way that plants extract energy from sunlight in a quantum fashion is intriguing to say the least.
*I was watching "Horizon" in the 1970s about quarks and the like, without the science-lite approach the modern age demands.
credit to NewsThump
presumably an increase of 1,900 skilled workers needs a proportionate increase in the number of cusodiet custodes ? (Or is that custodiem custodias ?|)
The philosophy (in the UK at least) that private car ownership is BAD. Hence the *deliberately* mistimed light, excessively lengthy pedestrian phases, and "bypasses" (Northfield and Selly Oak on the A38) which take longer than driving through the town (proven many times by myself).
I actually collared a project manager when the A38 bypass was being built, and commented how a simple phase change would let more cars through. He agreed and said the same point had been made to the management committee.However there was a general presumption that nothing should be done to encourage private motoring.
So, next time you find yourself in a queue where you think "if they rephased the lights, more cars would get through", you're right. But they won't.
(The fact this massively increases the pollution footprint of junctions is another tiny pinprick in the AGW hysteria. Once again, if it *really* mattered .....)
The thing is, in this future, what are people going to steal ?
Sophisticated thieves won't be interested in anything the average suburban semi has.
Smackheads would only be interested in something they can sell/trade that's easy to lift and untraceable. Given that Geolocking already locks phones based on location, how long until TVs do the same - bearing in mind stealing a modern SmartTV is particularly dumb, as the second you plug it into the internet, it can alert whoever as to its location ...
I see the move towards autonomous cars happening in discrete steps. The first will be certain roads (motorways) being designated "autonomous control permitted". When an autonomous car joins the road, the driver will be able to press the big button that lights up, and the car will take over.
To be honest I think we're almost there, as assistive technology blurs into adaptive technology.
I would suggest the cast majority of GPs (mine excepted) could start with a decent booking system.
AFAIK, ours is the only one locally which has online booking (a godsend). Seems all others insist you have to ring on the day to discover there are no appointments.
Logo ? Mission statement ? Branding hothousing and market analysis ?
Anyone else have to read that twice ?
1) I did say "a tad" - i.e. the criticism was justified, but mitigated.
2) Not really sure any El Regger should be critical of people who don't immediately click links in every article they read - even if it is El Reg.
In 2016, the amount of quality journalism around
being less than ever means it's impossible to apply critical thinking to every story and work out if it's an April Fools or not.
Until such time as the financial services sector comes up with another way to do the job of a cheque, they are here to stay.
Maybe they are cumbersome, clunky, old-fashioned, and laughable.
However they provide a unique function. The ability to transfer money to a person - not an account. As long as there is a need for such a facility, cheques are going nowhere.
I thought we threw this out in the 90's as a "useful metric" for measuring code?
It was pretty dead in the water in the 1980s, when I graduated.
I wanted to guarantee my family the protection offered by ECHR rights
You did know that the EU has nothing - absolutely *nothing* to do with the ECHR before you moved, didn't you ?
Indeed. This was one of the most striking things about the Scottish independence "debate" of 2014. Which was the sight of Alex Salmond telling everybody what *England* would do, what *the EU* would do, what *the US* would do.
I heard that on the *BBC* back in October. Although if *I* could manage to sell this "news" as exclusive research, I admit I would.
And why does anybody give a flying fuck what they think ?
With pearls of wisdom such as :
"The analyst blamed falling consumer confidence, saying worsening economic conditions – factors that had had negligible impact on smartphone sales were finally taking a toll."
No, you idiots. Smartphone sales have eased because (look around you) everybody who wants one has one (any previous slowdown would be where anybody who needs one has one).
It really is *that* simple.
cf PC sales. Everybody who wants a desktop PC has one (or two, or three). Speaking for family Page, we have had since 1996, about 6 new PCs. However, our current one was bought in 2010 (and was a 2 year old model then).
My Smartphone is a Wileyfox Swift. Bought December 2015, and should last 3-4 years. Mrs Pages smartphone is a 2 year old MotoG, and she doesn't need a replacement anytime soon either.
putting volunteer rescue workers lives in danger
"Are law enforcement officers permitted to commit other felonies whilst in pursuit of a larger crime?"
The final arbiter here, is the courts. If they allow evidence which has been illegally obtained to be presented, then the assumption is, it's "allowed". If they do not allow illegally obtained evidence, then it's not allowed.
The US has a doctrine "the fruit of the poison tree" which is a principle that illegally obtained evidence - and subsequent discoveries - are not permitted. It's a frequent plot device in shows like "Law & Order", and quite fascinating to a UKain, as there's quite a body of precedent and law around it (for example a cop is permitted to search an arrested suspect, but *only* to ensure his own safety (i.e. no hidden weapons).
Here in the UK, 99% of courts (i.e judges) have repeated made it clear they couldn't give a toss what laws may have been broken to bring a case to court. The (somewhat specious) reasoning being that to punish the state for breaking the rules would deny the individual victim in the case justice. Or, in other words (but not ones they'd like, no matter how accurate) "the end justifies the means". Personally, I subscribe to an old-fashioned notion that the law applies to all. But I know that's not really the vogue now.
UK cases where a judge has thrown out dodgy evidence are far and few between, and therefore newsworthy, The last one I can remember (so showing my age, and how shit the system is) is when the judge in the Colin Stagg trial went ballistic at the prosecutions use of tabloid-style psychobabble, and tore the CPS and Met Police a new one - very publicly.
that's it basically.
Closing courts makes sense when you reduce the criminal code, not expand it.
By the way, wasn't there a pledge sometime ago about "a new law in means an old one out" ?
What do I *Need* Windows 10 for ?