
Someone contact Scott Adams
Bob the Dinosaur is a COBOL programmer if I remember correctly.
14 publicly visible posts • joined 23 Jul 2008
I saw this at the end of an article written by Richard Aucock for Motoring Research. Seems like a good plan to me.
The treasury will be keen to solve this dilemma, particularly as the amount lost due to licence evasion has gone up so dramatically. The answer, it seems, is simply a better reminder system.
Motoring Research has one idea that might work: a brightly-coloured piece of paper on the windscreen telling everyone who looked at it if the vehicle was licenced or not, instantly, at a glance.
Even if the car’s owner forgot, their partner, or kids, or neighbours might spot it. It would be very obvious indeed if you’d evaded road tax – and who wants the embarrassment of displaying to the world that they’re a tax-dodger?
We estimate it could only cost £10 million a year to enact, a mere fraction of the amounts being lost to road tax evasion. It’s such a strong idea, we’ll certainly be sending it on to the DfT. We’ll let you know how we get on.
Full article at
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/cars/enthusiasts/the-%c2%a3100-million-question-why-is-car-tax-evasion-rocketing/ar-BBF3xa0
Umm, the article clearly says that the system admin sent the message *to* the problem distribution list which means the sender would have been the system admin and not the problem distribution list. In every implementation I've seen, a "reply" only goes to the sender of the message and it takes a "reply to all" to go to the entire distribution list.
So it seems to me that the issue *was* people doing "reply to all", a problem which is as old as email.
To use an old joke, "We try to make our systems idiot proof but they just keep making better idiots"
They should talk to British Gas who claim the ability to contact the dead.
Some six months after my father died I received a letter addressed to him from British Gas. In it they said that as he had failed to keep a pre arranged appointment to inspect the gas meter they were now going to seek a warrant to force entry to his house.
I phoned British Gas and asked how and when they had contacted my father. The person said by phone and gave a date about a month previously. "Really?" I replied. "Could you tell me what number you called him on?". At this point the person asked why I wanted to know so I answered "Because he died six months ago, I never got to say good bye and it would be really nice to talk to him one last time".
Cue stunned silence followed by desperate search for excuses.
Seems to me that what is really going on is that Lloyds are dumbing down the HBOS systems to their level. "We bought them so they have to be transferred onto our systems and processes even if theirs are (marginally) better"
In the past, when you went into an HBOS branch to pay in cash or a cheque all they needed to do was swipe your debit card and take the cash or cheque. Then they automatically gave you a printed receipt.
Now you have to manually fill in a paying in slip (like you have always had to do in Lloyds). So that's more great progress eh?
Still, at least they still automatically give you a receipt unlike Lloyds where you have to ask for one and get funny looks for doing so. Wonder how long before HBOS adopt this part of the Lloyds model as well?
I agree with the comment above about "Gringots" but I think it applies to Lloyds even more than to HBOS.
I think Rik and others should have read the original article more carefully (follow the "Johnson was quoted" link).
I just did and noticed it says
"The RSPCA says the number of complaints about dog fights has risen 12-fold between 2004 and 2008."
Notice the word is "fights" not "bites".
Now to me, a dog fight is usually a fight between two dogs and doesn't necessarily involve any harm to a person. Rik has translated this into "dog attacks" which may well be what Alan Johnson was hoping for. So sounds suspiciously like a politician using skewed data to push his own agenda...Naaa...they never do that do they?
Regardless of the reasons, it won't produce the result which any sane person would hope for (reduction in dog related aggression, attacks, injuries etc) because the people who are the cause of the problem simply won't comply. It is just yet another way for the government to extract extra revenue from the law abiding while those who ignore the law get away with it as usual.
Hi All
Well, I sent the picture because I saw the previous article about excess packaging, it made me laugh and I thought "Yeah, I've seen that". So my intention was only to amuse. But it seems to have stirred up a Hornets nest so just a few comments.
The picture is genuine. It wasn't staged, artificially created or Photo Shopped. The way I described it was exactly the way it happened.
I agree that the tape says Kuehne and Nagel. But my company outsources all its IT support and procurement to HP so this was ordered through HP.
I did say "It was a while ago". But this isn't the first time I've seen excess packaging nor I suspect will it be the last. This was just the most excessive example I've ever seen.
To anyone I've offended, I apologise
To anyone I've amused, you're welcome
To anyone who doesn't believe me, you are entitled to your beliefs.
Here's hoping someone can top this and win the 5000 rolls of packing tape :-)
Mike