Re: "Good thinking, Batman"
You assume that there is no face id, touch id, pin, pattern or passcode lock on the device that would be a little premature, as the saying goes "Assumption is the mothre of all f***k ups".
8 publicly visible posts • joined 19 Apr 2016
I would guess the merger with Carphone warehouse has something to do with it.
There is still an issue with on line ordering/in store collection which I have noticed. You can order an item even if there is only one/shop floor item in stock. If someone comes along and buys that item before you go and collect it - boom you've been gazumped. I have tried this and know its possible. There is no flagging system in place which lets the store staff know if items have been ear marked (if they have been at all) and no one goes off to take the item off the shelf to ensure it definitely gets retained for the online customer.
This is also bad if the item you are reserving is a TV as apparently they do not sell floor stock, although I suspect this depends on either the store or the floor zombie you talk to.
As a tangent to what the article is about and knowing that The Register a news site specialising in IT, Privacy Infosec & Science etc..., has Mayer given permission for the above photo to be used as it appears to show her Date of Birth and while this may be a stock photo would this really suffice to cover your backsides?
First point, what on earth are the dodgy Civil War comments doing against this Brexit article - not the place i don't think!!!
Secondly are these comments accurate or are they matter of opinion in terms of when the UK leave the EU then the GDPR wont have to apply unless we decide to uphold it within our own laws and have our own Privacy Shield type agreement?
From what I have read elsewhere the GDPR will apply to all countries worldwide where those companies store and/or process EU citizen data. So for those companies that do their seems to be no choice, no need for Safe Harbour style agreements unless you are a UK organisation being passed EU data. If as my company does, you collect EU data directly from EU consumers then there is no choice we have to abide by GDPR just as the US , Canada, China etc... have to.
I am missing the point as to why any none EU country needs a Privacy Shield type agreement in place if EU member states will insist on the GDPR being applied by companies worldwide who process and store EU data - surely this should be the agreement. If EU companies want to use UK,US or other non EU countries for processing or storing data then they simply insist on the GDPR being applied there.
I have been reading the articles on The Register for a few years now and it seems the longer times go on, the more profanity is creeping in, is this absolutely necessary to put the point across? Are there not moderators watching out for this and asking the contributor to tone down their language, I am sorry to be off topic but this puts me off reading articles and actually alongside the somewhat negative view I now hold of the contributor the same is applied to the Register itself. There is no need for it, kindly stop it. We are supposed to be professionals talking about professional topics of interest to us all.
As others have said - here is a capitalist idea. Create auditoriums where mobiles can be used a bit like having 2d and 3d versions of the same movie showing. And charge an even more premium price for the privilege. Those not wanting to pay the higher price who continue to infringe in regular auditoriums get removed & surcharged to cover the extra cost of policing the auditorium.