Posts by Rainman

Re: "Flew halfway around the world" = "Auckland to Sydney"?

The only thing vaguely "clickbaity" around here is the wuckfittery of your post. It's generated more clicks and comment than the other responses combined ... and there I go falling for the combait. Damn, I'm just a moth to a flame.

Re: A whole 4% you say.

Well 4% for every breach ... by the time they're done wouldn't be much FB left. Besides if FB got wiped out in one go by one truly massive fine then it wouldn't be anywhere near as much fun to watch. I'd have to ram popcorn down my throat by the fist-load.

Re: Sorry, I still don't get it...

It's not at all about being faster than under the VSC whilst in the pit lane.

It's about the time you loose when pitting relative to the pace that the rest of the field are running. VSC or not, your time to pit will be fairly similar excluding entry and exit speed - your slowest points are under pit lane limits plus the time to complete the stop, and these parts are relatively constant and similar across most of the field. The larger difference is dictated by the relative pace of the rest of the cars at the time of your stop. You loose less time relative to full race pace because track speed is slower when under VSC. If you pit under VSC you loose less time (a net gain) against the competition, and you loose even less time by pitting under the real safety car because it is even slower.

The reason we have VSC is because the real safety car is so slow compared to the operating window of an F1 car on slicks, so much so that tyre temps quickly drop out of the operating window which ultimately causes more crashes when the race restarts - you suddenly have 19 cars (because one just crashed) bunched up behind the safety car with cold tyres ready to gun it the moment the safety car pulls in. So, VSC allows cars to keep tyres closer to their operating window by allowing a pace that the real safety car just can't achieve, therefore hopefully less crashes with yet more safety cars making a bad situation worse.

Yours, a former F1 consultant.

@James 51

> “Patient data is a national asset"

> No it is not. My data belongs to me. The NHS gets to hold onto it to do its job but that does not mean > that it belongs to the NHS or the nation.

Alas law enforcement and bodies responsible for national security are exempted from GDPR. They could quite easily deem that enforcing immigration is both. No, the NHS should not be sharing our data but in this instance if they didn't share it this way then I'm sure it would just get shared via some other much less overt manner. In light of everything I'd much rather it happened like this so we know about it and it can be scrutinised, than for it to happen under the radar.

Since it's going to happen one way or the other, then perhaps having the transaction (rightly or wrongly) out in the open then it serves as a warning and to dissuade any non-UK parties considering a trip to the UK for free treatment.

Re: Another problem

Your IP address gives that away before your GPS does.

"DontFeedTheTrolls, I guess you've never worked with someone who seems to get more time "off sick" than the rest of the team get between them if you add all their holiday allowances together..."

No one "gets time off sick". You fall sick and then take time off to recuperate. You don't get awarded time off for being sick. If you're sick enough your GP might sign you off indefinitely, but the whole point of this article is that frankly, someone elses illness is none of your gerddam beeswax! So what if someone is off sick? Just do your own job and watch your own back. That's the trouble these days, too many sticky beaks that feel that they need to know other people private lives. Sheesh!

Re: THAT Price for one View?

Well clearly it does because people pay it. If boxing is your thing then it might well be a bargain. Obviously it's not to you and nor me, but I wouldn't be so quick to pass judgement on someone that thinks that £20 to watch two (not one, or it might just be a tenner) half-naked swetty blokes beat ten bales out of each other .... or maybe I would .... so confused.

Re: know better

Or maybe the filters are now up to date and not blocking as many sites because some are actually not pr0nz at all?

The figures are completely meaningless and totally subjective, and only reflect the sensitivities and the accuracy of the small number of individuals employed to come up with a black-list to push out to customers devices or services. Many URLs won't have even been visited by the vendor of the filtering product or service to confirm the real nature the content - they couldn't possibly visit every site. They may also be blocking based on URL string alone. There are plenty of web-pundits that publish to the blog-o-sphere and think it highly amusing to put their content behind a risqué URL, coz they think it's clever - only for it to be blocked by most filters by default and then wonder why they don't get any hits.

We already have an organisation which administers accreditation and licensing to fly this type of kit. It's called the British Model Flying Association, which is actually part of the Civil Aviation Authority. The BMFA needs some teeth, however anyone can just go down to Maplin and buy a ready-to-fly system off the shelf and it's completely legal to fly one in your back garden or on private property where permission has been granted without any kind of license or insurance. The restriction needs to be enforced upon suppliers selling to people without a license or insurance, thus making the sales traceable. The trouble is that everyone sells this kit now - it's no longer the preserve of your friendly local model shop.

However, given all that I've said, there is nothing to stop you buying all your own non-drone-specific components and creating one from scratch based on the open source Arduino based Arducopter software. Not being able to readily buy an off the peg ready-to-fly system might only delay you getting something in the air by no more than a couple of days.