Honour for Queen's IT manager

The Royal Household's IT systems manager Toby Zeegen made it onto The Queen's birthday honours list today. He is now a member of The Royal Victorian Order, given by The Queen to people who have "served her or the Monarchy in a personal way". There are five classes of the order, and the top two confer knighthoods on the holder …

[Spoddyhalfwit]

Perhaps in another life he'd have used his IT skills developing a voting machine so the great British public would be allowed to have a say as to who rules them. Still he gets a nice gong for his toadying.

[Anonymous Coward]

Toadying?

He is a techie. Toadying doesn't come with the territory, whoever your ultimate boss is.

[Peter2]

I have said it to americans before, and I will doubtlessly say it again.

If we had a choice of abolishing either the Monarchy or Parliament then the Queen would be worrying about the result a lot less than our politicans would be.

We do not love elected politicians on our side of the pond. Quite the contrary, in fact.

[Spoddyhalfwit]

Why the assumption that only Americans don't believe in toadying to unelected rulers?

I mean what good did it do them ditching our monarchy... Other than becoming the richest most powerful nation on this planet?

[142]

Other than becoming the richest most powerful nation on this planet?

...with an utterly dysfunctional health system and mind bending levels of poverty, and by far the highest prison population per capita of anywhere on the planet? Money and power aren't everything...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Other than becoming the richest most powerful nation on this planet?

Well–

The health system isn't dysfunctional if you have a job that comes with benefits. I wonder what we could have if the 1%ers would shut up and the working poor – who think they have a shot at a six figure salaries with their high school drop-out education and have been hoodwinked by the 1%ers – would shut up as well.

Unlike the not-dysfunctional health system in, e.g. Canada, where my daughter couldn't get decent treatment the two times she actually needed it while she was enrolled in university there, and paying for it.

Unlike the not-dysfunctional health system in, e.g. France, where the elderly shop doctors for opinions and accumulate stockpiles of medicines from the prescriptions each doctor writes.

Otherwise, yes, the poverty and prison population observation is spot on.

[Spanners]

Re: Other than becoming the richest most powerful nation on this planet?

I understand that you average three times as much per head of population spent on health as we do.

I recently heard that you have over 49 million people who have no health insurance which might explain how we have a marginally longer average life span (0.1 years).

How much would it cost me if I had some sort of standard employer health cover if my child broke their arm, I had to receive regular medication for say epilepsy or we had another child? In the UK, all these are covered by universal health care.

Your health system still sounds pretty dysfunctional to me.

[Spoddyhalfwit]

Re: Other than becoming the richest most powerful nation on this planet?

I imagine those problems are easy to solve. Give the black dude the job forever and then say his kids can take over when he snuffs it. Problem solved.

[amanfromMars 1]

The truth shall set you free ...... and cause a catastrophic run on the entire banking system?

"Why the assumption that only Americans don't believe in toadying to unelected rulers?

I mean what good did it do them ditching our monarchy... Other than becoming the richest most powerful nation on this planet?" ..... Spoddyhalfwit Posted Saturday 16th June 2012 13:20 GMT

You really ought to get out more, Spoddyhalfwit, for the riches have built a paper tiger and school yard bully, and the very military industrial machine problem that President Eisenhower warned Uncle Sam about* and was to be gravely avoided. The whole edifice is a house of cards built without stable foundations which relies on foreign nations accepting dollar paper and dollar paper IOUs for payment of goods and services and that is vulnerable to their customers wanting other currencies or valuables, if the scam that it is just paper and not wealth at all, is rumbled.

Such though is the elephant in the room that no one is talking about and the abiding, unavoidable problem for the whole system, and that is why it is collapsing with nothing more heavy than the truth destroying the dodgy empires it has built whenever everyone was ignorant and unaware of the Great Illusionist Game being played.

This is an interesting and educational depiction of an inconvenient truth, allied to the above .......... http://demonocracy.info/infographics/usa/us_debt/us_debt.html

And Eisenhower's speech, of which this is just one small but significant and prescient part ...... "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist." ....... can be read in full, here ...... http://www.h-net.org/~hst306/documents/indust.html

It is a jolly good read which fools ignore at their peril.

Over 50 years after he left office, have his darkest fears been realised and are now destroying all that was built and supposed to be great, because it is all built upon dreams which cannot be shared because they are exclusive and self -serving?

[Dire Criti¢]

Other than becoming the richest most powerful nation on this planet?

Not to mention being the most hated.

[NogginTheNog]

Ruler

You seem to be under the common misconception that the monarchy actually rules this country? Now I'm not totally in favour of it myself, I have some misgivings, but I'm also fully aware that HM Qeen PLC is really just a big tourist attraction, Disneyland with better accents if you like, and that the real power in Britain resides in the POLITICAL elite, elected AND unelected.

[Dave Wray]

Re: Ruler

Couldn't agree more.

HM is apolitIcal and hence all of our political power is voted upon. This makes the UK a fully fledged republic state.

[Nick Ryan]

Re: Ruler

Yep... and yet the US CIA World Fact Book (quite a good site with handy summary information) for a while listed the UK as a monarchy. Admittedly it was updated to read "constitutional monarchy" which describes the situation relatively well however could do with a note to indicate that the Monarch, while nominally the head of state, has no real political power and is expressly forbidden from meddling in politics.

[tkioz]

@Spoddyhalfwit

I don't know about others, but I take great comfort in the continuity and sense of history provided by the monarchy. While she has very little real power, she has a great deal of MORAL power, and knowing that if for some reason or another we ended up with someone down right insane in office we've got a safety switch...

Granted it could only be used once, because afterwards whoever took power would make damn sure it could never be used again, but knowing the Queen could stand up and say "this person leading the country is a Y(criminal/wackjob/monster/etc), there will be a new election" and have a lot of people follow her is a great comfort.

Just speaking as an Australian.

[Spoddyhalfwit]

Re: @Spoddyhalfwit

Granted if I was an australian I'd want a foreigner as head of state too.

You have my commiserations.

[jake]

Kind of a useless award ...

It's not like The Queen actually knows what IT is.

I had hopes, all those years ago, when she supposedly sent that email ...

[The Serpent]

Re: Kind of a useless award ...

I have been present for the Queen sending an email. Or at least it looked that way. The mouse the Queen was going to use was bluetacked down with the pointer already over the Send button. All she had to do was press the left button. Another mouse was plugged in at the same time being quietly wielded by my colleague just in case! But her maj did alright.

[Anonymous Coward]

The Royal Email

That marks a considerable advance on 2001: Queen gives email royal thumbs-down.

[jake]

Re: The Royal Email

I was referring to early 1976 (March?) ...

[jake]

To the three chuckletrousers downvoting me (was: Re: The Royal Email)

I was referring to the 26th of March, 1976. Look it up. I did, to get the exact date.

I knew it was 1976 (the USofA was in the throws of the somewhat silly run-up to the bicentennial celebrations at the time), but I'm kinda surprised I correctly guessed March ... maybe I haven't started losing it yet, after all :-)

[amanfromMars 1]

Re: Kind of a useless award ...

"It's not like The Queen actually knows what IT is.

I had hopes, all those years ago, when she supposedly sent that email ........ jake Posted Saturday 16th June 2012 09:04 GMT

One imagines, and probably also trusts in those who would be real servants of the people and true valiant Grand Knights of the realms which deliver sublime guidance and immaculate leadership beneficial to all, that the Palace is more au fait with the virtual sphere and its facilities than they would care to share and submit/admit to.

Should that not be so, would they be, and unnecessarily so, in a very dangerous and precarious position indeed. Such is easily remedied though, with the appropriate services being supplied by competent providers/APT White Knights in Cyber Security Office.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: It's not like The Queen actually knows what IT is

She knows what horses are, I'm sure she can manage computers,

On the other point: Prince Charles is now head of all the armed services: should the govt worry?

[jake]

Re: It's not like The Queen actually knows what IT is

"She knows what horses are, I'm sure she can manage computers,"

As a semi-retired near 40 year veteran IT bod who is owner/operator of a horse ranch and sight-hound kennel, all I can say is that you are deluded. Most animal-oriented people don't know squat about technology ... and vice-versa.

Charles always struck me as a born-commoner, forced into Royal service ... and I don't mean that in a derogatory way. I was shocked when they allowed him to not only learn to fly, but actually partake in Helicopter operations ... I kinda feel sorry for him, in a way. He has a built-in glass ceiling; no matter what he does, he's in the shadows until his mother dies. Poor bastard.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: It's not like The Queen actually knows what IT is

WTF is a sight hound kennel?

[Wensleydale Cheese]

Re: It's not like The Queen actually knows what IT is

"WTF is a sight hound kennel?"

Wiki: Sight hound

"Sighthounds, also called gazehounds, are hounds that primarily hunt by speed and sight, instead of by scent and endurance as scent hounds do."

Well, ya learn something every day.

[jake]

@Wensleydale Cheese (was: Re: It's not like The Queen actually knows what IT is)

A dude/tte who identifies with Wensleydale Cheese didn't know what a Whippet was until consulting Wikipedea? How sad is that?

[AceRimmer]

Re: It's not like The Queen actually knows what IT is

"Charles always struck me as a born-commoner"..."I was shocked when they allowed him to not only learn to fly"

Heaven forbid that commoners should be allowed to fly; its not called the ROYAL Air Force for nothing!

[tkioz]

Re: its not called the ROYAL Air Force for nothing!

I think he's point was having a Prince die in a training accident would be a massive PR disaster, it's my impression that everytime one of them wants to do anything remotely dangerous that "commoners" can do they have to fight with the politicians!

Oh they are compensated well I suppose, but it must be a right bugger not to be able to do "normal" things, living your entire life in a fish-bowl just because you were born into some family.

[JohnG]

Re: It's not like The Queen actually knows what IT is

" I was shocked when they allowed him to not only learn to fly, but actually partake in Helicopter operations"

I think that was a different prince - Andrew flew a helicopter for the Royal Navy during the Falklands conflict, not Charles.

[jake]

@JohnG (was: Re: It's not like The Queen actually knows what IT is)

Charles is a qualified RAF Helicopter pilot (lapsed, probably). Seems to me that he took part in a couple rescues off Cornwall on the mid-1970s. They might have been training missions (lot of water under the ol' bridge ...), but they were still flight operations.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Kind of a useless award ...

It's not like The Queen actually knows what IT is.

Interesting assumption. So you reckon none of the kids will have ever shown Her this? Her Majesty may not deign to use any of the toys we drag around with us, but I would seriously doubt She is unaware of its existence.

[jake]

@AC 19:52 (was: Re: Kind of a useless award ... )

Using iFads and Crackberries doth not make you an IT professional.

[The Serpent]

Good for them

It's not what you know, it's who you know. I spent six months integrating two systems, a task well above my grade as it resulted in a grant of over 3 million quid. What do I get? Fuck all. Of course I see now that my mistake was working for local government, not the queen. Hindsight is a wonderful thing!

[frank ly]

Re: Good for them

Is your real name Sidney?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good for them

Did you really get absolutely ‘f*** all’—did they stiff you? Or did you get paid the rate/salary that you agreed to when you signed the contract? In other words, you did your job and were paid for it (and quite handsomely for work in congenial conditions, compared to many other occupations). But if you’re so very unhappy in your choice of career, there’s a sewerage operative position going in Elgin—£11k, p.a. Good luck.

[The Serpent]

Re: Good for them

So you'll do anything for your employer, regardless of your wage? I would like you to come and work for me, if you weren't such a moron.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Good for them

Take a good look at your life and consider just for one second how incredibly fortunate you are to be living in the 21st Century West. We have access to medicine that ancient tribes could not begin to imagine; our poorest live lifestyles surpassing medieval kings (gold goblets did not make water less contaminated, inferior to that available from any council flat tap); a society so affluent that a problem affecting the poor is *obesity*. Contemplate ‘Baby P’s short, sad life—17 months of neglect and actual, physical torture; and he was neither the first nor the last to suffer such a tragically cruel and short life. Contemplate all of that and ponder how astoundingly lucky you are to have been raised by loving parents; to live in the West, where winter’s cold is defeated with the touch of a button and where can be had entertainment beyond the dreams of Jules Verne.

And while you are whinging—about what, exactly? You completed a task which ‘resulted in a grant of over 3 million quid’—not a saving of 3 mil, not a profit of 3 mil; it looks as if you’ve incurred an extra 3 mil bill to the taxpayer; but whatever. While you are sat in your comfortable chair in your comfortable office, there are young men and women (starting salary, £272 a week) in Afghanistan dodging Taliban bombs, alternately boiling and freezing, p*ss-wet through half the time, whose greatest comfort is getting an uninterrupted kip on a canvas cot in a canvas tent.

If you don’t like your job, find another—it’s that simple. Don’t make your life’s defining paradigm be: ‘I whine therefore I am’.

[The Serpent]

Re: Good for them

Even your command of sanctimonious twaddle isn't impressive. Is it my fault or yours or anyone elses where and when I am born? No, so I hope it fed your requirement for pompous bullshit to waste so much time with paragraph of irrelevent toss. I am fully aware of how to judge my actions against the rest of reality and require no help from you. In the second part of that batch of nonsense I'm sure you thought you were imparting great wisdom as regards the fiscal implications of my activities. Well I'm afraid the entire concept of money relies on robbing Peter to pay Paul but I really can't fix that issue so I await your solution to that problem.

The other implications are that a dozen people don't have to be sacked and thousands of children, with a particular, increased focus on those with special needs and from deprived backgrounds will have access to musical education facilities for the forseeable future that would otherwise be entirely withdrawn and their personal and confidential details are now affored the best security and protection available.

And while you are making assumptions about someone you do not know, I will point out that in my office I do have a relatively agreeable life compared to the manual labour jobs I started out doing in the rain and snow and also the work done in special/failing schools and for those who deal with cases of serious abuse was hard at times as I worked to better my skills in other areas. £272 would have been a bloody godsend early on in my career and if I want to know about the conditions in Afganistan, or Iraq, or Bosnia or Northern Ireland before the peace process I'll ask my brother about how many of his mates he won't see again.

But enough of this bollocks, I sound like you. Would you really be happy for others to be paid more to do a job, fail to do it, hoist the whole affair on to you and then walk off with the proceeds? I think not. If doing the right thing and being annoyed when others do not reciprocate is wrong in your eyes then you should stop trying to tell others how they should be judging their lives and take a look through the smokescreen of words you hide behind to see what is going on behind it.

[Tony S]

Re: Good for them

"entire concept of money relies on robbing Peter to pay Paul "

Actually, no it doesn't. The basis behind the concept of money is to provide a means of comparison. What is an hour of my time worth? One chicken and a dozen eggs; or a half a side of beef?

If you don't understand that fairly basic concept, then I'm not sure that any of your comments have any real value.

[The Serpent]

Re: Good for them

Uh huh, so the concept of money is to provide a means of comparison - I didn't say it wasn't, all I mentioned was the way in which that concept works. And the current mechanism which that concept relies upon is that of an arbitrary token which promises a certain value but does not actually deliver that value in itself, thus meaning that the token must continually borrow credance from another source hence robbing Peter to pay Paul.

As it was you that misunderstood my meaning, does that invalidate everything you have ever said or are likely to say? If that seems unfair then perhaps you'd better not attempt to apply that rule to others lest they apply it back to you.

[Tony S]

Re: Good for them

"all I mentioned was the way in which that concept works. "

Sorry, but that is not what you said. The entire sentence was "Well I'm afraid the entire concept of money relies on robbing Peter to pay Paul but I really can't fix that issue so I await your solution to that problem."

In this case, perhaps it would be better if you thought more carefully before you then write your thoughts down. If you believe that it's my responsibility to understand what you meant, rather than what you wrote, then I am sorry but you are totally wrong - it is your responsibility to make your comments cogent, clear and unambiguous.

[The Serpent]

Re: Good for them

Please explain to me where in that quote I was saying anything about the reasons we have money. I think it is you who is confused, not I. If you find it difficult to answer, it's because you are putting words in my mouth and therefore essentially arguing with yourself. On second thoughts don't bother, just read on.

To extend your way of thinking, you expect to be fed all information directly to you in a way that you cannot possibly misinterpret. Good luck with that. It is perfectly possible for you to misinterpret what you read despite the best efforts of any particular author and your misunderstanding does not make you right. Your troll icon suits you.

[Tony S]

Re: Good for them

It appears that not only are you unable to make your own thoughts clear, but you clearly read into other people comments whatever you choose.

You sir, are the troll.

[The Serpent]

Re: Good for them

Correction, I am unable to make them clear to you.

As I started off my participation in this discussion with a relevent comment about my recent experience with reward (or lack of it), that makes contribution reasonable and valid.

As you simply weighed in with a dismissive statement based on a misunderstanding on your part with no effort to further the original point of conversation, that makes you the troll.

Perhaps your original source of information regarding the definition of a troll wasn't clear enough for you either.

[Blake St. Claire]

Maybe they should rename the Peter Principle

Call it the Charles Principle.

And I bet still nobody listens to him.

[Christoph]

Re: Maybe they should rename the Peter Principle

"And I bet still nobody listens to him."

Rubbish - the trees listen when he talks to them!

[Shagbag]

The Prince of Wales becomes a Field Marshal, Admiral of the Fleet and Marshal of the Royal Air Force

WTF!

[Tim K]

Now that Field / Air / Space Marshall Charles is in charge,

... maybe the UK will finally invade Iceland?!?

[amanfromMars 1]

Virtual Round Tablers .... do IT for the Power of LOVE in the Clouds that Control CHAOS.

Now that Field / Air / Space Marshall Charles is in charge, ... maybe the UK will finally invade Iceland?!?..... Tim K Posted Saturday 16th June 2012 20:33 GMT

It will just suffice and be a most welcome distinction, TimK, for both ITs Grand Knights and APT White Knights in Cyber Security Office, that Charles be aware of what Kings and Queens really can do ...... and that he and the Palace Household be proactively doing it, in every manner required and more suited to these weird times and wonderful spaces.

And to be considered an anachronistic relic of a past time and "really just a big tourist attraction, Disneyland with better accents if you like" is a remarkably stealthy cover like no other, and a fabulous base protocol with foundations which have stood the test of stormy tempestuous times for millenia?

And the simple question mark there would be lest it be much easier today once one has cracked the CodeXSSXXXX for Life in LOVE and are able to hack into all manner of Humanised SCADA Systems, leave a Self Opening Packet of Revolutionary Phorms and be Gone before IT Realises NEUKlearer Command and Control is in Anonymous Absolute Autonomous Charge.

Please be advised, and do not be overly dismayed if you do understand most or even any of the above, that it is not necessary that you understand most or even any of it, for all that is required is that it be known available to those who may, or may not be more than just the Few, and would be similarly active and activated/SMARTR Enabled and Self Actuating in ITs Greater IntelAIgent Game Fields of Future Play.

[tkioz]

So...

I remember a few years ago there was a story about one of the princes (can't recall which) giving the Queen an iPod... I wonder if this poor bugger has to slap the songs on it for her?

And could you imagine dealing with fixing a malware infection for the Queen?

Sounds like an awesome job.

[Stuart Grout]

Typical arrogance!

So the Queen makes her kid a Field Marshal, Admiral of the Fleet and Marshal of the Royal Air Force. Treating the uniform and those that have earned their stripes with contempt.

If our politicians (even those that have served) started awarding themselves military rank and playing dress-up in uniforms they would be subject to well earned ridicule and contempt. But then such stupidity comes as no surprise.

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't she the Armed Forces Top Boss?

Her armed forces; her family. I guess it's a case of Because I Can.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Isn't she the Armed Forces Top Boss?

Same reason the William has a Golden Jubilee medal.

Everyone else had to have been serving since at least 1997 to qualify for the medal when it was awarded in 2002. Queen's grandson joins in 2005, and gets one anyway so his left lapel doesn't look quite so empty.

At least Harry has an active service gong to go with the Diamond Jubilee medal (another chocolate gong).

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Typical arrogance!

"Treating the uniform and those that have earned their stripes with contempt."

You seriously think that anyone at the top of the service has actually worked their way up their from the bottom? With occasional exceptions they're all political appointees.

[Spoddyhalfwit]

Re: Typical arrogance!

I'm guessing you're one of those types who believes that your boss should have got his job on merit, rather than his family connections? That's rather un-British of you. You should respect that your boss comes from a nicer family and went to a nicer school that you. If he wants to award his son employee of the month then thats none of your business.

[Stu 18]

As official IT Manger of my household

I confer upon myself the title of Grand Poobar and A S S of the highest order. I'm also on several other lists. ;o)