Nigel from O2 on DownDetector
... and his handle is N-O2
aka Laughing Gas.
212 posts • joined 13 Sep 2011
I work with colleagues who maintain an XML based interface to HMRC that is used to pass payroll information (RTI)
It changes every year.
The changes are not well documented
Edge cases are not properly thought through (not all payrolls are weekly or monthly), so there are often late-breaking changes.
In short, you are largely correct, there is no real reason for the API to change,
but it does, and keeping in step costs.
the car detects one or more people it _might_ injure
- how about slowing down so the probability of any injury is < x%
the car detects one or more people it _will_ injure (for whatever reason)
- it should not have been going that fast - you (the human in the car) are about to commit GBH / manslaughter
the car does not detect one or more people it _will_ injure (for whatever reason)
- see B and as the car did not detect anyone, there is no decision tree to traverse.
queue bunfight over what x% is.
He may not be as rich as Bill G (who was reportedly also v. foul mouthed at times), but should have as much or more respect.
The only thing he should have done imo is to have a named 'understudy' in place a couple of years ago.
You need something like that- after all he could (literally) have fallen under a bus etc and on a project like this you cannot really just stop while the new person learns the ropes.
Hope the new person understands that.
The last one that had a proper keyboard.
Built like a tank
Still in use
... Love it.
The only signature characteristics retained are the distinctive air vent and hinges - and the massive bezel around the display.
reminds me that the X220 vent is about 80% blocked when you plug it into the docking station.
In 2022 you will see people wearing well-crafted images on their t-shirts that have the effect of causing any autonomous vehicle to halt.
Of course Toyota (other manufacturers are available) will then update their firmware.
And then someone will come up with a new image. (The image will be subject to 1st amendment rights - you cannot stop this)
new t-shirts will be produced.
Humans look at something and recognise the things in the picture
This is done by recognising _all the things they look like_ and then choosing the most likely in the context.
AI currently just says chair / not chair and that is why it is so easily spoofed.
Part of the problem is - what is a chair?
It suits the current political agenda to have insecure voting machines.
(easy to point fingers at the Republicans but Dems do not have clean hands)
If you win, there was 'no significant' tampering and 'no evidence' of interference
If you lose - we was robbed!!!!
It is a symptom in the growth of distrust in the US and I can see someone just not accepting the result of an election over t he next 20-30 years
After all the alternative facts are out there....
What happens if I lose both of my Security Keys?
If you still have access to a logged-in session, you can visit myaccount.google.com and register replacement keys in place of the lost keys. If you have lost both keys and do not have access to a logged-in session, you will need to submit a request to recover your account. It will take a few days for Google to verify it’s you and grant you access to your account.
So, to use the fictitious names used above,
Client to Frank (long serving and knowledgeable) "I want to do X"
Frank to Client (who knows things) "That'll cost Y and take Z time"
Client to Frank (trusted) "Ok"
Client to Richard (new guy just doing the job) "I want to do X"
Richard to Client (who just asked and then added on some uncertainty) "That'll cost Y*3 and take Z*2 time"
Client to Richard (for they have little choice) "Ok"
... and if you are in a regulated industry, a 50% bonus for _absolutely no choice_
2FA is used by a very small percentage of the population.
Probably a small percentage of El Reg's readers.
As long as it stays that way, I am happy as that means criminals will stick to the low hanging fruit and I will be relatively safe.
I use the word 'relatively' as anyone who is really motivated can gain access - or point a gun at me and gain access, but I am not rich nor do I have any juicy secret emails etc - so chances are very much against it.
Someone gets shot. There are two general responses
a) In the US some people say that if more people had guns and carried them around, there would be fewer shootings as there would be an 'Active response' and things woul
b) In other countries some people think that if you stop people having guns, things might be better.
In the context of malware, if you are running windows, you will have windows defender / mcaffee / abp/ noscript / ghostscript / this new tool etc keeping you safe. You are carrying more and more (metaphorical) guns to keep you safe.
That adds up to an increasing part of the CPU you bought and the electricity you paid for.
Or you try to find a way of regulating things.
all the posters going into great detail about how it was the human's fault for crossing the road in front of an autonomous car
- and -
all the posters going into great detail about how it was NOT the human's fault for crossing the road in front of an autonomous car
all miss one big thing:
In a public environment, Humans should not be killed by autonomous things ever.
Autonomous cars are there for the benefit of humans, not the other way round.
I have no idea how effective advertising is.
I do know that Unilever has groups of people measuring exactly that, and suspect other similar companies do the same.
Unilever spends billions.
I view it as a sort of 'peacock' style evolution.
If you spend nothing, you lose, if you spend, you needs to spend about the same as your competiors (certerus paribus) otherwise you lose.
So the displays slowly grow until they restrict the ability to do something more useful, like product development.
I was expecting someone who has actual expertise to comment but I thought that as the big bang was 13.x v.v years ago and the speed of light was finite, the volume of space we can observe is finite even though the universe is infinite and from that it follows that the number of worlds we can see is finite.
As others have mentioned, if the job requires less than one person, outsourcing makes sense.
Consider getting your car serviced - not many people diy, most take it to kwik fit. Consider having your teeth filled - not many people diy, most take it to a dentist
Following on. Many large cos have outsourced cleaners, but, Not many large cos outsource their accounting function.
So, outsourcing does work for non-core functions that can be done better by a more specialised group.
The thing is that with the rise of t'internet, that specialised knowledge is out there for anyone for find for not much.
This tells me that outsourcing should work where you employ less than one person (or in a complex area, where you cannot employ enough people to maintain the knowledge).
Beyond that it should work for a while, in new areas or areas where the business processes are changing, but once he work is well understood, and the processes change less, it will tend to work less well than in-sourcing.
This is why Jon Lewis (!) keeps on saying that Capita is an IT company and in the 'change' / 'transformation' business as that is where a viable outsourcing business _might_ be.
Well, I have a car for sale that has travelled 77,000 miles on the motorway and 7,000 in the north african desert.
Can I claim that this car was 'driven on the motorway' without being misleading?
Most people wouldn't care.
So, never mind the tech, if you claim it is Fibre, it should be fibre
and not fibre (and some copper).
It does not matter whether or not some small sample of people care or not.
It is not true
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018