Re: Happens in Google sheets as well.
There was 24:00 up until 2019!
16 posts • joined 10 Dec 2009
And up until 2019 your argument would have been wrong - however TIL since ISO 8601-1:2019, both the term "midnight" and "24" as an hour value have been deprecated. You're now meant to say "beginning of the day" (as opposed to the end of the day, which is presumably "00:00"). Retrograde meddling.
Are they ePubs? Bang them into a Dropbox and download (free) BlueFire from the App Store. Open them from Dropbox into BlueFire (admittedly one at a time, which is a palaver) and you won't need iTunes. Worked ok for me when I found out Stanza was borked; which in fairness is Amazon's fault for buying it out and then letting it die so it didn't compete with Kindle.
Not sure what other formats BlueFire supports, so YMMV.
The theme of some of the commenters here appears to be that the Police are doing somehting underhanded or inefficient in requesting the data from Google without resorting to an Order. This is simply not true. It's far more efficient to ask Google to provide the image (which could either be done voluntarily or under the protection of the DPA exemption) than to spend more time than is necessary going to court.
Shame on Google for not supplying the information. If it was an image where there would be a reasonable expectation of privacy then I'd have a bit more sympathy for their argument (notwithstanding the fact that they shouldn't really be invading privacy) but that's just not the case here.
Seems the Police are a bit damned if they do and damned if they don't. As a general question, do readers think that the Reg comments shows a certain anti-Police bias these days?
I tend to agree.
It seems eminiently sensible that Apple would remove an App that just duplicates something that Safari can do. It doesn't seem to add value. I'm aware that not all value-less apps in the store have been removed, I don't think anyone has disagreed that the policy is applied inconsistently. I just doubt there is any other motivation for the removal.
Do you actually mean CEOP - the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre?
You want to drown the Competent Authority (yes it is, it's part of SOCA) in charge of tackling the exploitation of children?
Just do me a favour, read their remit (http://www.ceop.gov.uk/about/) again and confirm you want to drown them before I judge you to be an idiot.
I'm not a fanboi. That implies I'm blindly devoted to a concept because of who espouses it.
I simply have a carefully considered opinion about the relative merits of the SCR scheme that doesn't rely on the standard straw-men ("the data will be wrong becasue it's input by minimum wages trained baboons", "it means I'll be forced to carry ID wherever I go", "insurance companies will steal my medicalz!").
I find most of that type of reasoning spurious. I don't think the implementation of SCR is perfect by a long shot, but it's better than whhatever my GP must use currently, which presumably involves random number generation.
So yes, I downvote posts where I don't think the issue is considered in a balanced way when held up against reasoning like the above, or where someone attacks a poster for the manner in which they post, or where they are just wrong. That's the point, and you are free to do the same.
...has been known to cut bits off me and inject me with things purely on my verbally-declared name and DoB.
If I am out driving, I will almost always have my wallet on me, which contains my driving licence, which has sufficient information to identify me. In fact, I almost always have my driving licence on me whereever I am. Now, at risk of inciting any "in our facist police state" or "papers, citizen" comments, I think there should be a requirement to carry ID when you drive like most EU states and (I believe) the USA. Mind you, I'm not averse to having to carry ID all the time.
However, I digress. Given the (relatively) low threshold for ID verification I have seen in the past, I would imagine that any ID you might be carrying, the registration details of your car (I assume some sort of accident scenario here, where the police would be present), or the PNC insurance database would probably be sufficient to locate my SCR.
Yes, I agree. I think your solution is reasonable. However, I think it would become unmanagable and might require some sort of roving regional IT team, or maybe someone in each surgery with some responsibility for this (for standardisation, compliance, performance issues maybe?) and that could be a problem on its own.
I guess if I were the hypothetical patient here I wouldn't care whether the point the system failed was central or local to me, and the central model seems more robust to me.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020