"4,535 kilograms, or five tons". Well I suppose you do have some among your audience who still use historic units but given your likely audience, is it really a priority?
64 posts • joined 19 Jun 2013
This is the second time a whole bunch of highly skilled, well-meaning people have behaved as if they were idiots. The last time it happened I was professionally involved as an IG manager for a large NHS body. The whole process was so half-baked I personally opted out of sharing. In due course the process was "fixed". Now we are in it again.
To be plain, I'm quite content (even keen) for my data to be shared for the good purposes which can follow for medicine, even the NHS and others involved in the private sector. (I'm a capitalist.)
What I'm not happy with is the thought that if the Government is so incompetent in announcing/selling this, how incompetent are they going to be in delivering secure data use?
All right, give me a chance. I'll get a haircut just as soon as the hairdressers are allowed to open. At the moment I have exactly what this outfit does not like. Shortish sides and longish at the back (with curls!) I can trim the sides for comfort but messing around with scissors at the back is just too risky. :-)
> Methinks their website design is more competent than their aircraft design.
And their web design might be competent if you have decent broadband. All of the site appears to be chucked into one page which has all to be loaded. It then betrays some of the most irritating "clever" tricks which web designers with little or no user experience skills adopt.
This might be their design; certainly there does not seem to be any attribution.
Why on earth does any organisation calling itself a "business" rely on a service such as this? Getting your own domain, getting it hosted with someone who provides an email service is so cheap and easy to do. If this one month notice is all that TalkTalk has given, then that is bad practice. I would reward that with a migration away from TalkTalk. If they did give decent notice before, then the fault is entirely on those who ignored that notice.
Right to repair? - I'd establish a duty for devices to be easily repairable. For example, replacing the battery in my mobile phone should require no tools (other than an "ordinary" screwdriver perhaps). No need for prising, heating to melt glue or "proprietary" restrictions, e.g. trademarked connectors.
Interesting. I am told that more accidents are caused by pilots than by equipment failure. Could Chesley Sullenberger have been replaced by AI? If you are the sort of person who believes that a vehicle could safely navigate on our roads without a driver, then I guess that you would say Yes, the Hudson River is an easy choice. Another viewpoint is that the airliner of the future will have a pilot and a dog in the cockpit. The pilot to make a couple of announcements to the self-loading cargo and the dog to bite the pilot if they touch any of the controls.
There are plenty of aircraft ejection systems where the seat is intended to break the canopy and some where it is the fall-back option if canopy ejection or canopy fragmentation (by small explosive charges in those wavy lines you see) fail. For a blurry bureaucratic report see https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP75B00285R000400170001-9.pdf. Or the Martin-Baker website.
Recently using a self-serve till in Sainsburys and about a dozen items in - blue screen - Options to reboot in safe mode and, since I had no keyboard to fiddle with, a reboot in normal mode. Windows 7 EPOS splash screen displayed. Cashier said that it would take seven minutes to reboot so use another till!
"International custom is for the manufacturer to analyse these boxes;" I don't think so. The analysis is by international agreement the responsibility of the aviation investigation authorities in the country of the incident (different rules if outside a country - https://www.emsa.europa.eu/retro/Docs/marine_casualties/annex_13.pdf. (Ignore the marine in the link, it is aviation)). Black box analysis, particularly in technically difficult cases, is most highly developed in a few countries and those countries are often invited to assist the responsible state. The assistance of manufacturers (or anybody else) may be sought but that is at the discretion of the responsible country.
I'm sure I recall many years ago a court decision that an "automatically added "signature" did not have the effect of a signature" but if the originator typed their name as a signature with or without any automatic addition, then that was binding.
Has that changed or was it from a court which did not generate a binding precedent in this case?
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021