In the UK? The charge is driving without due care and attention. Unless you kill someone. Then it's causing death by dangerous driving.
2344 posts • joined 31 Jul 2009
In the UK? The charge is driving without due care and attention. Unless you kill someone. Then it's causing death by dangerous driving.
In the morning the Mrs. will sometimes ask how I slept. I usually don't know, because I was asleep. If I know the answer it's because I didn't sleep so good ( fortunately rarely). I also know what time I went to bed and what time it is when I wake up ( hint, alarm clock next to bed). Why would I need to wear a watch to tell me these things.
Having a nice watch on the wrist is convenient for a quick time check, more so than picking up my phone. Ditto, in other circumstances having a tough old watch that doesn't mind a few knocks, that I can risk getting scratched etc. if I'm doing a bit of gardening, tidying, cooking, other messy work.
If I could have such a watch that would also pass me my messages I'd be pleased and might even get one. GPS could be useful to me too if it was made practical, since it saves holding the phone in my hand. I'm a bit puzzled by the fitness app thing. Yes there are plenty of joggers. But really are there that many fitness fanatics around?
As to any other "smart" features; what's the point? If you want to do BookFace/Twitting and so on you are going to spend long enough to make it worthwhile to pick up your mobile with a decent screen.
I am hoping for trickle up fiscal policies. The money always floats to the “top” anyway.
That's in the Wikip article too. But the neocons who are in control wouldn't like that. Trickle down is an excuse to let them do what they want, not a real economic phenomenon. Which is why the gap between (very) rich and poor has widened so much, There's fuck all trickling down, it's all accumulating in off-shore and concealed ( as in property left empty) investments.
No. That stuff about things being more affordable is nothing to do with it, Even the rest of the comment isn't quite there with it.
Trickle down is very explicitly the view that as the top get richer they will increase prosperity for the rungs below. Rising tide lifts all boats etc.
Yup. I almost bought a Dremel at 50% Prime Day reduction.
But when I got to checkout I noticed that most of the reduction was pre-existing and the Prime Day reduction was just an extra 13%. It was still a good deal being a 50% reduction compared to the Argos price for the same thing. But I cancelled. I reckon if I really wanted it it would be available at other places, or at another time too. And for a measly 13% extra reduction I'll take the risk they can take a hike.
Took a quick look. Amazon is where my birthday gifts (i.e. vouchers) live. And have been there for a couple of years already. So I'd have liked to find a bargain or two to spend some on.
Don't get it. There are the usual discounts on items I don't want. And the usual nothing on the things I do want. Which may well be how the algorithm works.
Which, funnily enough, in another thread
I wondered if this was Microsoft's cunning plan too. Computing as a service...
The point is that if you can hotdesk (like it or not), with the available PC and roaming profile then you have the fundamentals of Grab and Go. And school laptops use this principle anyway. A kid gets given a laptop from the pile and logs in.
Adding connection to a remote data store ( i.e. "The Cloud") is no great earth shattering innovation. However providing a working device without access to the internet in some dead spot is a whole nother boiling vessel of aquatic sustenance.
Well, that's why I wrote it. Apparently there really are some troglodyte Win 8.x fans who want the stupid, invisible, only-activate-by-accident corner controls.
But then, also are in the internet sites for all sorts of other masochistic weirdos. (Or so I've heard)
Interestingly there are various references in the interwebs to ways of bringing hot corners back to Win 10. Interesting because I've never met in person anybody who actually wanted the damn things. I've met many ( actually everybody ) who had had experience of them and wanting nothing greater than to get rid of the bloody nuisance. It's like there were two different worlds
Over the last couple of days I've been reading the comments. Mostly the usual stuff (welcome back Bob - I was getting worried we'd have to start putting the spare CAPS into storage).
As I've thought about it I've started to wonder if Microsoft see Windows as becoming a kind of front end for a web/cloud/internet based computing system. Kind of like a global thin-client.
That'd explain things like the importance of Ondrive in their thinking, moving to a cloud based Office subscription, deprecating OneNote to a Store item and removing user control and customisation of the start menu, hiding settings/control panel etc etc.
Computing as a service, rented from Microsoft and mediated through a Windows Interface?
The OS in itself seems pretty stable. But the underlying attitude isn't. The whole "We'll force you to keep our favoured apps in the Start menu where we decided to put them." thing i.e. unmovable and unremovable just stinks.
And the simple networking is just plain crap. I find that shared folders and even the whole other device will just randomly refuse to be seen. Which I put down to them wanting domestic and SOHO users to use their Godawful "Home groups".
See also elsewhere on el reg their removal of proper Onenote 2016 to make users use the shitty cut down store version.
Wouldn't recommend it.
But the main feature of such sites is that you can't trust anyone who may know what they're talking about. And sadly that's become mainstream politics. We don't trust "experts", after all, what do they know?
Weapon 3 of the science deniers is to deny the credibility of the scientists. 2b will have laid the groundwork. All that's needed then is to suggest that the scientists are working for some evil enterprise. (Big Pharma is good, because that one is, to say the least, a bit too plausible. But the government is always there as Aunt Sally if needed). It becomes beautifully circular, self defining and impervious at that point. Any further scientist who supports the research is obviously in on the conspiracy - otherwise they wouldn't be confirming the research, because everyone knows it's a fake..Anyone who questions the reason (why would they go to to all that trouble and risk to fake the moon landings?) is just a dupe. Unless they are in on it, of course.
Yes, weapon number two* of the anti-science conspiracy theorists is to undermine the strength of the science by equating it with other trivial irrelevant or even non-existent material (Darwin is just a theory). The BBC is terrible for this. They'll, say, bring a respected scientist into the studio but then square him/her off with a known climate denying spokesman with no scientific background. as if that person has equal credentials.
*Version 2b is to undermine the science by focussing on minor or non-substantive variations to argue that the scientist aren't agreed.
John Brown (no body)
Sorry I disagree. "Fake(news) still means fake. All that has changed is the frequency that it is used to undermine honest truth by mislabelling it. This is not Orwell's Newspeak however chilling it may be. The meaning remains the same. The blatancy and frequency in which it is misused has changed, that's all.
Well said. One of the weapons of the fake news/Anti-vaxxers/etc. is to say that a 100% negative hasn't been proved. But of course it never can be, let alone to their loony "standards". Because no negative ever can be proved 100%. I can't 100% prove that there aren't fairies at the bottom of my garden, or that there isn't a conspiracy of lizards running the world.
No claiming it's fake doesn't make it fake. believing it's fake equally doesn't make it fake. Being fake makes it fake.
It is almost as of the term "news" has been hijacked and come to mean, on the internet at least, "It's not what they're telling you."
Fake news is "news" that is unsubstantiated by observation and observable facts. And claims that try to undermine such validated observed news by contradicting it with unobserved and unobservable non-facts. As in comparing evidence based support for vaccination with the anti-vax cobblers based on a bit of faked research coming our of our own Royal Free Hospital because of one dodgy doctor - Wakefield.
And the idea of the NHS is pure humanity, not a pay monthly health treatment plan. When we are earning we pay tax and national Insurance. When we're not we are still 100% entitled to the full treatment to the extent it is beneficial.
And, as noted today and other times recently (passim as Private Eye might say) the Blair government removed much of the restriction on the gambling industry, making it an open market industry, leading to the curse of the high speed gambling machines in all these betting shops (of which there are now far more, so that they can get around one of the few limitations; number of machines per den of vice) and the increased number of rather disingenuous, if not downright objectionable, gambling adverts on TV, particularly during the world cup when there were plenty of kids watching i.e. describing throwing money away by the bucket load as "more fun". hardly supporting traditional Labour principles.
Oh. And don't forget PFI.
Maybe the negative comments about the use of fax machines ( in the NHS and elsewhere) tie in with various other posting around El Reg over the last few years, when for whatever reason Fax has been mentioned. There does seem to be a core of Commentards who just don't like Fax and won't hear a good word about it. To me it's just one more tool. And if it does the job and gets the result I need I'll use it if I can.. And why not?
Sometimes having something physical that can be seen and picked up as it comes out of the machine, can be held as you walk around and can be kept on the (real) desk top so that you can refer back to it is the best way.
Whereas the number of people who have a long list of unread emails in a mail folder points out one weakness of that system- emails seem to be easier to ignore (or get overwhelmed by). Perhaps partly due to the fact that because it is so effortless it becomes undervalued. A physical fax has a degree of substance that one more email just doesn't.
And since I had a fax on my 4in1 printer until a few weeks ago, when I had to replace it, I am very aware that a complaint email to a senior manager gets automatically fobbed off by the automated (or AI) systems, but a fax pretty much always got a proper response, and usually a resolution.
We took a Smart meter - because my wife didn't want to keep sending in meter readings. But the bastards fitted one that only read the electricity - said they couldn't supply one that read the gas meter. . So eventually they had to come around and replace that.
By which time we were looking at changing suppliers. The new suppliers can't read from it, So our shiny new meter has been turned into a dumb meter. Or at least the reading display no longer works. And apart from having to look in the-cupboard-under-the-stairs it makes not the blindest bit of difference.
The idea, was, I think, that we'd use less fuel. But it won't because it doesn't give an appliance by appliance, or even room reading. So we can't just look and see where we're using too much. - if we were.
Or explode, since a goodly number seem to have developed gas leaks, due I gather to the speed of installation required. And when they come to fix these leaks they sometimes seem to find extra faults that no one had noticed previously (including when the original installation was done just three weeks before), that aren't covered so you need a qualified gas man to find a resolve the problem before they can put it back on, but Hey, they have a repair service you can pay to fix it.
And yes, this did happen to us, but no we didn't have to rely on them, we got our friendly local Gas Safe engineer to check it out for us. Who found nothing.
Bastards! Just bastards!
My impression, when I was still using Evernote, was that they were trying to turn a good note taking programme into (just) another big general purpose admin tool. Microsoft seem, on the other hand, to be wanting to do something the opposite, i.e. replace Onenote with a general purpose admin tool.
Neither seem to want to understand that sometimes a programme is just what it needs to be.
I assume that in both cases it comes down to "we can charge more for a bigger programme".
A bit like if Peugeot-Citroen decided to replace the C1/108s with Berlingos. Sometimes you just need the right tool for the right job. [When my kids were little we had a Berlingo - a brilliant, functional, general purpose, family carrier. Now they're all growed up they drive their own 108 type cars and we have something more comfortable]
John H Woods
I think yes. I can't remember all the limitations. But yes that's basically how I recall the "Store App" version.
It's truly a pile of poo.
I'm on 2010 still, too. but use the 2016 version of Onenote, which is stand alone, free and I think still available. But there's still the 2010 to fall back on I guess.
(Also, I think Microsoft's Evernote competitor is really OneNote. But this is already a very long post, so I'll let others talk about that.)
Yes. Which is the point. As simple note taking and sharing programmes Evernote and OneNote are both pretty good for being what they are - a simple, free form information store that can share notes across platforms and users.
There are lots of complex programmes out there that can organise a company's stock list, or it's customer data. But not much that can allow a field worker to jot down a user's comments on a phone or tablet, then go back to the office ( and maybe see them on the main computer) ready to be written up into report. Or to keep track of expenses while at a site, and then paste them into an internal claim form when they get back to base. Or make a list of who's paid their tea money. Or the syndicate's lottery numbers.
i.e. simple, small scale note taking ( the clue's in the names). Stuff that happens in real work places - not in the mind of corporate CEOs.
"The OneNote Win32 desktop app is being deprecated for a UWP version with less functionality and it will no longer be part of Office."
I used Evernote, not in any corporate context, to share notes across my PC/laptop/phone/tablet/.
And that was almost totally personal notes, with may be the odd jotting of a number or a name for work purposes. An electronic Filofax. But I used the free version. because I can't justify the cost for the bit of convenience (almost £40 a year, every year)*. And then they changed the rules so that the free version could only be used on a couple of devices.
OneNote wasn't quite as good, but I could use it on everything. And the full version in Office allows me to create simple templates, organise and format the data etc. that I could then apply it on my phone.
So Microsoft, in their usual idiocy are choosing to kill off the good version and keep the crappy one.
*It's not so much the headline cost- which is high enough - it's that it's a yearly subscription. I can't justify that much cash for one year's use. Not when it's for personal convenience. If it was as a business application, I guess that'd be OK. And that's the problem with all these kinds of subscription models. OK for business, but,still an unjustifiable expense to pay from the family budget every year , indefinitely- for a bit of personal use. The free versions, if not too limited have been fine. A small annual cost, say £5-£10 would still be OK, I can justify that to myself and the missus. But once the personal use cost is a commercial amount it just stops being viable.
More to the point; could you train a 'bot to handle...
"You keep sending me a gas bill for £27,000. I don't even have a gas supply and no I can't give you my account number, because when I gave you my electricity account number you wouldn't accept it because I've never held an account with you and I've lived here for 12 years...."
Or even, as happened to me yesterday;
" I'm calling because you haven't sent me the credit cards for the account you agreed to open three weeks ago"
"I'll look into it, can you give me your 6 digit security number?"
"No, because you haven't sent me anything yet, so I haven't been given the number".
"I'm sorry but without the number I can't access your account".
And that wasn't even a fucking 'bot.
" tire of dealing with grumpy customers and leave in droves. "
Let's see if I've understood this right.
You piss off your customers, by providing lousy, penny pinching and incompetent service. They phone to get it sorted out and you make them talk to a 'bot; which however good it might be at "natural language" is not going to be able to respond well to the customer trying to explain the total confusion and misery that your botched service has created - so is unlikely to be able to find a creative solution that gets the issues sorted out and the customer's satisfaction with you restored.
But this is not just about finding an even cheaper way of fobbing off angry customers rather than taking responsibility to resolve the issues, after you've messed up.
Have I got that right?
I agree. It seems to me that for these engineers (etc) as members of this organisation there are a set of benefits. One of which was to have an email address with that degree of prestige. Forget the technicalities - it is an address. And it's a benefit of membership that the members seem to have valued. No different in that sense from the benefits that any other club or society confers, like being able to buy expensive coffee in a "members lounge" ( or for Friends of the RA, in the Keepers House).
How that email address was hosted is a different matter, but it surely wouldn't be too expensive per head to continue this somehow.
I admit it. I did have a look. I guess this is what the politicians call the enterprise economy. Certainly a niche market. I wonder how anyone got on to this idea in the first place, though. My best guess is that even the women who pose in front of cameras need tech support-when the technology goes TI...... ( no I can't bring myself to write that) and one of them IT guys must have had a bright idea.
The story says "Jeff's phone..." but that don't mean it's literally the Smartphone that he owns and uses in his private life. Or that his bosses are requiring him to install this app on his own property. The most we can read from that phrase is that it's the phone he uses in his job. I'm sure his bosses could find somewhere to buy phones for the delivery people. That's if he's a direct employee, anyway.
Do Amazon even employ their own delivery fleet? Our stuff comes from all sorts of delivery companies.
John Brown (no body)
Yes, but it was better to not complete the day's work on a Friday, because at weekend it was double time.
Loss aversion seems to run deeply in British management. Underlying this is a bit of well documented psychology that says we all see a small loss as more significant than a small gain.
But in management terms this comes out in the wash as being happy to waste 40 hours of company time each week to prevent staff wasting four hours.
Dabsy's columns are usually serious. The points he makes are often very serious commentary on modern tech lead society. It's just that he's funny about it
In my yoof I briefly worked in a big industrial printers . And there was a time clock. And the queue to clock off at the permitted time went half way round the building.
I don't usually add a PS - especially after 3 days.
But since then Virgin have told me to forward phishing spam emails to their phishing@ address. So I tried and... I'm sure you're ahead of me, it got bounced by their servers because it contained Spam
Me too. I actually have firstname.surname in all sorts of email accounts and variations alongside for family use. There's an idiot woman in the USA who sometimes uses my Gmail address. So I get emails about social events, quotes for catering family events. etc. I used to politely inform the senders. Nowadays I'm less tolerant. I send a stroppy email instead (reply all is best here). My aim is to embarrass her as much as possible. And it seems to have worked, I don't often get them anymore.
I have various free email accounts. I never get Spam via Google's. I never get spam via "Outlook.com".
But Virgin Media's email ( since they stopped using Google's and switched to the parent company service) is ghastly. Mostly on my wife's address- probably since it's the one she uses most.
Most annoyingly, pernicious obvious spam that a hamster could recognise at 50 paces gets through, but if I try to forward any of these to a phishing@(name of bank etc) address it does get blocked by their servers, because it contains spam. Emails that are forwarded to phishing@ addresses will contain spam - what a surprise that is.
Slightly disagree. it's not technical competence that seems to be what companies want, either. Not in selling. More often than not they seem to appoint people with a motivation in selling, rather than in the product. Sincerity is faked. Tomorrow they could be working for the opposition and dissing your product, Or working in a totally different area. Thing is some purchasers still fall for the glib tongue and false ( if vague) assurances. In effect some sales staff are just slimey. They're in sales because that's all they're good at.
Now the joke.
A man walks into a shop. The shelves are lined with packets of salt. That's all. Just salt.
"Wow"", he says. "You must sell a lot of salt here".
"Nah" says the shopkeeper. "No one wants the salt. I can't sell any of it. But they guy who sells me salt. Boy can he sell salt!".
This has been going on for a long, long time now. Major companies that haven't innovated or adapted much suddenly see the future, too late. And then try to become part of that future instead of looking for new innovations of their own. I'd guess that businesses run by bean counters don't want to risk trying new stuff*, they just want to talk as if that's what they do. Like when some amongst us (older types) try talking our kids' slang - by which time it no longer is being used by them or means something different.
*See also Hollywood, with its endless remakes and sequels. As in.... Conan the Barbarian was a good idea and made pots of cash. Lets make it again.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018