Re: Think of the children
Somehow I read that as "... Ferengi keep a straight face..."
See rules 2, 5, 13, 29, 30, 39, 43, 44, 52, 74, 77, 82, 87, 92, 100, 151, 153, 162, 189, 208, 218, 227, 243 & 267.
9611 publicly visible posts • joined 11 Sep 2009
Well... it was if you used it as a visual editor instead of a LSE. And I've only just finished removing all the legacy crap it spewed over our website by way of ancillary .LCK files and _notes folders. But it was a different kind of spew to the Microsoft crud - somehow more understandable.
Ah. I remember the days of authors buying reprints for their own purposes. One of my jobs was retrieving them from the filing system and posting them out. I reindexed the entire system of incoming reprints and created a database linked to our reference manager. Made my life easier too because another of my jobs was double checking the actual thing being referenced whilst preparing papers for publication. My professor had a mind like a steel trap - he could recall exactly what was said and where it was said from literally thousands of papers in his collection.
Hm... There is a very strong case for linking familial records, for genetic disease... but is this done? Will the data show "family history of diabetes / cancer / heart disease / schizophrenia" etc? In which case deanonymisation would be data that could be potentially combined with an application for insurance cover whereby the individual's details ARE known by an organisation - see my later post where I questioned the research methodology of deanonymisation and the value of it; you have answered my question there. Thank you.
I am curious about that research though. In order to "deanonymise" one needs to know the identity and certain identifying features to begin with. Is this to do with combining data sets? In which case the bigger they are, the harder it would be to combine because of the number of non-unique matches.
The example in the article, a male aged 30 born on 5th January living in NYC with a dog, two female children and driving a red sports car... you know who you are looking for anyway in order to be that specific. Are they talking about combining say the insurance accident record for red cars and sports cars and male drivers and age of driver with medical records of vehicle collisions... and what to find? That you have the same individual in both datasets and the data you can gather about them extends to what? Income bracket (possibly predictable from the fact they own a sports car and can afford a family), co-morbidities? Parking tickets?
Having said that, I disagree about the release of GP data to commercial organisations, especially when it's sold as regional healthcare provision which most people would understand as NHS rather than the private companies the NHS deal with.
I mean I work very, very close to healthcare and yet the business of Big Pharma is opaque even from that distance. I just can't connect the rationale behind access to these data by someone like Wilmington. What value is it in there for them? There are some obvious things like knowing that GPs in a certain area have a higher than average number of e.g. arthritis patients and therefore they can target pushing their brand of arthritis pill / care package / support service to all the GPs in that area... how much is that worth? Are GPs & practice managers too busy to shop around? What gives?
It also reeks to high heaven that the kind of management who are the gatekeepers to these resources may be referring to a handbook of good practice written by the very people that they are charged with justifying and clearing for access! Smacks to me of the Young One's book of Household Rules where every rule carries the codicil "except Mike".
I'm on M200 and get ~220Mbps. I've not seen any advertising for FTTP from them yet. Which is odd as they are the second most promiscuous ad-flingers in my town, the first being the Lib Dem council who never miss a trick to promote themselves and who received massive criticism during full lockdown by continuing to send people door-to-door posting irrelevant electioneering bumf which they claimed was (1) essential local news [it wasn't] and (2) making use of the existing postal service partially [true, but less than helpful when they are walk sorting to every door down a street like some kind of super vector]
Not sure it works that way. If the handbrake slipped then the owner of the vehicle is still going to be responsible, as is arguably the driver of the vehicle, should it be shown that, in fact, their actions caused the handbrake to fail. If the owner is responsible for maintenance and that was the cause, then they are liable. If the owner is made liable in all events anyway, then if THEY suffer a loss as a result of a different DRIVER'S actions, then they have a route to remedy through the courts under vicarious liability law.
I do like the idea of Chinese Space Junk... Makes me think of something like this and this.
I had a zero rate card with them last year. I just cancelled it. They are appalling.
The app couldn’t vary the direct debit amount.
The app crashed every single time you selected a manual payment.
It was near impossible to get through security to set the online banking up.
The payment to clear the account so I could close it was 1 direct debit sum less than the balance because direct debits take time to stop and if you stop it yourself they can mark it in your credit record as a missed payment even if you owe nothing.
They didn’t take the direct debit because of the excess payment that month unlike every other bank and their own blurb.
I had to send a physical letter to them to close the account which I think they’ve done but can’t tell.
My app has now reverted to wanting security again so I can’t check the outstanding balance.
They are atrocious. I will be glad to be rid of them.
Yep. Been there, done that. Long drawn out divorce due to limited finances - just left things in abeyance and half finished for far too long, but it worked out OK in the end. We can still talk without tearing holes, not that that was my style anyway which is in part why the marriage broke down. Tried to minimise the amount of asset lost in the "friction" of fitting sandpaper lawyers to the process. Still lost in excess of £5k from the kitty on legal expenses. Didn't cost that much to get married in the first place!
Ah you see?! I knew that would get a thumbs down. I suppose it’s a matter of perspective. The argument was presented that the majority of gun owners are rational, right minded, mentally stable individuals. From one perspective the desire to own a gun would preclude rationality in that individual given no good reason for owning one, from another it seems totally reasonable to have one for personal or home defence or some such. From one angle that looks like paranoia from another the non-gun owners must be taking a mad risk.
I suppose one question regarding mental health and firearms is “Are you mentally healthy to want to own a firearm which is not required for your employment?”
Or recreation I guess if you’re a hunter. I mean I’ve been clay shooting and target shooting but the guns were kept at the range in a steel safe in a concrete bunker (exWW2).
It’s a question rather than a statement one way or another. Do you wish to keep a device with the sole function of taking a life in your home/car/handbag? Could it be described as healthy, mentally, to have that desire or plan?
Pet peeves about Teams (at least on MacOS):
1. The pop up notification for messages in the chat of a meeting appear over the LEAVE button, preventing one from clicking it because every fucker in the room types "Great meeting! Bye!" as they go.
2. If you change to another Teams window, say a private chat one, during a Teams Live event, the Live window shrinks to a pop over and you can then ONLY go back to full screen, not resume the windowed version.
3. The already elaborated upon screen sharing one. And if you DO manage to get it to work, videos and animations don't work on the Mac unless you share the screen instead of the application window, which ALWAYS throws a guest lecturer.
4. Everything else. It's a terrible UI, it's unintuitive, clumsy, invasive... just very unpleasant indeed. Like driving an early model of the Smart Car - it would get you from A to B alright, but it leaves you wishing you'd taken the bus instead.
My pet hate is the lorries in lane 2 that are overtaking other lorries in lane 1 but only at a relative speed of +1-2mph. By the time you've got up to the braking distance of a lorry (minimum safe gap and point where the faster driver decides to overtake) + length of lorry being overtaken + length of lorry overtaking + another length of lorry braking distance (so as not to encroach on the lorry being overtaken's space), around 2 miles has been travelled and there's often ONLY lane 3 available for all of the cars zipping up at a delta speed of 10-20mph. And you can bet 5 minutes later the overtaken lorry will now overtake the lorry that overtook them!