email verification?
Does Netflix not require some kind of email verification? I can't see how this would work without the scammer first getting the mark to tell Netflix this is a valid email address
178 publicly visible posts • joined 8 May 2008
... But in this case given how easy the exploit is, and how far removed from the intended functionality, I can't help wondering if disclosing earlier would have been better so people could avoid sending more unencrypted emails that they believed were encrypted
Jira is pretty good, and bitbucket is fine. Bamboo I've found frustrating as you can't prioritise certain builds, or trigger builds by a pull request being created. Fisheye/crucible is pretty terrible, it's very hard to get it to do anything and the UI is really confusing.
But there are very basic, popular feature requests being ignored, e.g. http://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JSWSERVER-9167
I'm afraid it's all true. Nothing to do with the NHS (benefits are handled by a different government department) but yes there are countless stories of atos assessors writing stuff in reports without asking the interviewee or having any way to know.
The other bit of stupidity - this is costing more than it saves.
Someone is doing very well out of it.
This is where keepass works well. I can have a keyfile that I manually install on the devices I want to have access as a one time action (never stored in the cloud). So the file in dropbox is useless without both that key file and my password. But if I add a password on my phone it syncs to my desktop.
I agree completely - something that gives you some detail on the other end of the account before you click yes. E.g. "Please confirm you want to send money to Bodgeit and Scarper builders". If you send money via mobile phone to someone's number, you get that.
If the owner of the account doesn't match what you're expecting, it gives you a 2nd thought. And if the scammers are going as far as getting the name to match the company they're impersonating, it's an extra thing where the bank ought to pick them up on it.
On the other hand, I can see the argument that he's taking one for the team here. He doesn't need to care about rocking the boat - if he gets black listed, so what - but if it's proven that the accounting practices were shady it makes it easier for "the little guy" to get their shares as well.
I don't know for certain that he's got good intentions here, but I do know that the people he's taking on don't...
If statutory holiday was reduced then the people at the bottom of the pile would be exploited - since there are some overheads to having more employees doing doing the same number of total hours, it's cheaper to have fewer people doing longer hours, so companies will push for it. Those who are skilled (like most Register readers) have flexibility here so can insist on better terms, but the people at the bottom of the pile will get exploited, and that's not a society I want to live in.
There are possibly also other benefits that are harder to measure - ensuring people have some time off will benefit their health and so reduce the drain on the nhs/incapacity benefit in the future.
That said more flexibility is useful. My current company ignores bank holidays- you get an equivalent amount of annual leave, you can take it on the bank holidays or at another time, great for taking time off when it's cheaper to go on holiday. My previous one let you buy or sell up to to a week of leave (although when when I went to buy some they looked at me surprised as they were so used to people being overworked and selling some of their leave)
I disagree with the article, but it's good to be challenged as to why I do, more of this sort of thing.
"That plan was derailed by a request to visit a new plant because the CEO would be there."
... wait, what? Why on earth did someone think that was a useful use of your time?
I'm not calling you a liar, but I am trying to understand the logic that goes "We need you to go out and fix this server ASAP.... but first go on a site visit you're blatantly not needed for since you happen to be passing"
Interesting as ever.
Was hoping you would go more into the detail of how British Rail got broken up into its current structure, and how there the government keeps dictating what can be done, how many and what type of trains can be bought... it seems like there we have the worst possible structure. ROSCOs that own the trains budget their leasing costs to pay back the purchase price over 5 years of a projected 30 year life, and then happily take the profits for the rest - and the TOCs can't shop around as they don't have the freedom. That's what angers me, thst we have a combination of all the bad bits of privatisation with all of the bad bits of government ownership.
The EU has given us a lot of things that may not show up on the economic radar but make a difference to people. E.g. the EU is big enough to force airlines to pay compensation for late/cancelled flights. Good luck forcing that through as a country on your own.
Also remember the original reaaon for the EU, avoiding war. I worry that if it breaks up then a decade or 2 later someone will have a pop. That scares me more than many other things.
I put up without AdBlockPlus for a while (websites have to pay their costs) - until I had too many ads with autoplaying video and audio; that is not on. Even worse than the horrible ones that expand as you're reading down the page. AdBlockPlus is back and helps a lot.
So sorry those who want to advertise; a few of you have ruined it for the rest of you.
I wanted to change the address on my driving licence. I went through all of their hoops online-passport number, national insurance, previous addresses (although it insisted that one of the places I lived didn't exist, nor did its postcode - it's been there 500 years)
Then you have to enter a number offf the photocard, and one off the counterpart. After 3 attempts the it kept claiming I was entering the wrong numbers, then said you've made too many mistskes, you need to pay for a lost one.
So I posted it instead!
What does that headline actually mean? How in any sense are these cracks near the Earth's core? Yes they go 20km down, but that really isn't significant. It is like saying Wales is near the USA because from the perspective of England they're in the same direction!
The story is interesting enough without that. These lying headlines make me distrust the rest of the article.