Re: Its Always The Weakest Link...
I thought you were going down the route of "If you don't know who it is in your circle .. then it's probably you" :)
307 publicly visible posts • joined 15 Jan 2014
That is something that always frustrates me. You have a company doing reasonably well, venture capitalists buy it out, not because they think they can help it do better, but they want to load it with as much debt as possible to fuel their other purchases, then they can drop the one they don't care about and allow it to go under.
Woolworths still springs to mind. Great company, screwed over by the new 'management' mortgaging it to the hilt till as a company it was no longer feasible due to the massive debt servicing costs it now had.
But nothing is ever going to be done about it as the people that run them generally have very good friends in political offices, who's parties regularly receive large donations... cheaper than getting a prison sentence and not being allowed to screw more companies over.
If I'm making a comment I always use a PC, Kudos to you if you type all that on a tablet with good punctuation throughout. :)
Post counts can be frustrating :( Sorry you lost your badge, do you have to start from the beginning now or will you go straight back to silver once your posts are up?
Compared to that, the rest of the world has significantly lower Apple market share, higher tier 2 Android market share with significant brand loyalty in the upper mid-range and top bracket segment most of which are sold through operator retail. The Pixels does not do anything to try to break that.
Maybe not this year but to me it is the start of a slippery slope. 3rd parties have become completely reliant on the Android OS, Google is targeting the high end market, over the next few iterations they will increase the handset to match and be better. Others really need to push on any USP's that they have to compete directly with Google.
Realistically there is only one choice for most consumers and that is sticking to IOS or Android because of application investment. On Android, Yes, there is brand loyalty to some extent but that becomes more blurred when the phones become increasingly similar in their stats.
In reality google has never been about sharing profits it was all about limiting liability whilst they developed and matured their mobile platform. Now they are at the point where they no longer have to worry about appeasing 3rd party manufacturers because the platform is too big. Google uses this same process across the board. When they bring something new out they are happy to have 3rd party affiliates, once it is to the point of no return they make it nigh impossible for 3rd parties to compete and grab all the profits. Rinse repeat.
Welcome to your new world order...
Bravo sir, Bravo.
As much as I don't like what he has done, it is completely disingenuous for HMRC to state
"We will not tolerate tax fraud and our job doesn’t finish when someone is jailed. We will now continue our confiscation proceedings to reclaim all the money he stole,” added Barton.
I suspect the press release really went something like this before the publicity guys re-wrote it
"We will not tolerate tax fraud from someone who didn't employ one of us to develop appropriate loopholes and our job doesn’t finish when someone is jailed unless of course they were rich enough to have paid the appropriatebribesconsultancy fees, in this case we ensure a reduced sentence in a no-security prison so they can still go home every weekend, honestly, between you and I, it's more like a county club. We will now continue our confiscation proceedings to reclaim all the money he stole because, once again, he did NOT go about this in the right way. If only he had listened and employed one of us, we could have earned him significantly more, even after our cut, and we wouldn't have touched it whilst he was at the spa for a few weeks either,”lamentedadded Barton.
Five Guys always reminds me of Michael McIntyre's 'Herb & Spice' skit now though ...
And this is why they should use the predator style drones... Switch out those missiles for alternative non-lethal (optional :P) enforcement and take them down.
The police can follow at a 'safe' distance with a few cars and a van and throw them all in once they ditch the car and are 'apprehended' by drone.
What is so frustrating is that the people being targeted are some of the most vulnerable, and they are more likely to fall for it because every Tom, Dick and Harry company representative rings up and asks for your personal information to 'pass security.' How can we expect people to not fall for this kind of thing when companies have such ridiculously bad practices (most of these are sales calls so it is entirely profit driven).
Rules of thumb should be...
1) NEVER answer 'security' questions when receiving an unsolicited phone call.
2) If a company calls up to speak to someone about something urgent (no sales calls allowed) they should be advising the person to call them back using the contact numbers they already have!
When companies start using better practices and educating their customers, their customers are less likely to be susceptible to fraud.
If it had been done correctly, like for like, without the bunch of numpties running it into the ground each time it 'could' have been beneficial. As it is the UC has just become another cost PR exercise. The thresholds and withdrawal rates are lower and higher respectively. So when people get moved across to it they will be getting less money. But that's OK because it appeals to their target demographic of voters to stick it to the most vulnerable members of society.
The way he was treated was absolutely atrocious but even with that initially I was still in the '$15million, that's just ridiculous and opportunistic!' camp. However, after thinking about it a bit further, all of these institutions (be that police, school or other) are driven by money. Maybe the best way to prevent similar disgustingly small minded and racist behaviour is to hurt their pockets so that they remember the lesson.
They won't get anything near to the initial damages sort, but it is also, presumably, down to it being America and the land of the free market lawyer. They are starting their negotiations from a good figure, there will be an undisclosed settlement at some point in the future for a smaller amount plus legal fees (which will probably dwarf any payment). And on the plus side, whatever he gets out of it (and he most likely will get a reasonable amount) pays for his (and maybe even his siblings) educations and gives them a better financial start in life. Go for it and good luck to them.
It is impossible to test every scenario. With that being said, it does seem that end users are being turned more and more into guinea pigs. We have been using it for over 12 months and have hit some really nasty bugs. Getting proper support has been ridiculous and they still haven't figured out what caused the problem of the latest one.
Still expensive compared with spinning disk. HDDs seem to have plateaued at about £35/TB for the past couple years, SSDs anywhere from £150-£400/TB. Hopefully with some of the higher capacity SSD's coming out it will start to have a reasonable impact on the prices over the next few years. Looking forward to being able to replace my 5x4TB home NAS drives with SSDs.
You missed a bit from their 'misleading' marketing.
*Compared to routers from other major broadband providers in the UK.
Obviously they decide who they are measuring against, anyone that supplies better kit is obviously not a 'major' provider and so therefore they don't test against.
The full test report is here(PDF). 2x Virgin Media, Talk Talk, EE, 2x Sky and even plusnet.
Which other than plusnet (BT owned) being tacked on matches with the latest info I could find on ISP's in order of subscriber numbers.
Very PC disclaimer at the top.
The tests were based on the IEEE802.11T method, to provide robust and repeatable data, taking into account previous Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) rulings and guidance on wi-fi performance claims
Also they are only testing the router itself, not an associated internet connection. Overall it appears less misleading than their normal run of the mill stuff. Always a pleasant surprise.
And they wonder why people complain about them abusing their monopolistic position. I have no problem with a company that is trying to make money in exchange for services rendered, but when that company effectively blackmails everyone, at that point it should be investigated and fined proportional to their revenue.
It is a shame they dropped their original mantra of 'Do No Evil'. A company that pervasive could actually set some good precedences, and still be making ridiculous amounts of money.
What a surprise! So the suppliers will increase their prices to reflect their increases in costs ... which will get passed straight back to the departments. How is this round-a-bout of fee's on badly negotiated deals going to help anyone? Rather than these ridiculously expensive national frameworks that government bodies are forced to use, more leeway should be given to finding the best deal. Rather than trying to get good value, it just looks like CCS is augmenting a management pay hike!
I am sure there are a lot of good police officers. Unfortunately I seem to only have ever had interactions with the muppets amongst them. And as soon as they do something wrong, they all close ranks and pretend nothing happened, and suddenly everything goes missing. Only have to look at the handling of Hillsborough and other catastrophic police failures to see how much they lie and alter evidence when it puts them in a bad light.
Daily Mail to the rescue :P
It once billed itself as 'Britain's Fourth Emergency Service'
Absolutely, it is nigh impossible to get anything useful from these numbers (other than they are massively increasing) without the proper context behind them. Unfortunately when you look at the context behind other arrests we do find out about they regularly paint the police in a negative, over-reacting, over-reaching, law-twisting light. There should be levels of accountability within the police service to reduce unnecessary arrests, but most of the time they appear to close ranks and ignore any criticism.
Unfortunately this is the same of most laws, once they are in place for a given intent they are twisted and, unsurprisingly, it gets abused. The whole debacle over the right to take pictures/film on public property, The misuse of anti-terror laws against peaceful protesters. Anything and everything will be twisted around so they can justify whatever they wish.
I do wonder how 'understaffed' our police service would be if they simplified their over-the-top paperwork and stopped twisting laws to justify arrests that should never have occurred.
That isn't to say I have a problem with the police per say, I think there are many up-standing officers who do sterling work, unfortunately we only get to hear about the stupid ones.
Ha ha ha, reminds me of what one of my friends did when we were much younger, except the nutter buried a load of it in the garden lit the fuse and retreated. Spectacular explosion, made a massive crater, the mud from which flew quite a distance, including splattering all over the house windows ... which he would have got away with if his mum hadn't currently been sat in there, with a few friends.
Because no Government body has ever said one thing to the public and blithely done the exact opposite through back-door deals. **cough** HMRC **cough** Yes, I have absolute trust that our glorious leaders wouldn't abuse their positions to benefit their friends **cough** Post Office undervalued sell off **cough** .. I could go on but I seem to be developing a nasty tickle in my throat.
It's not about penalising them for doing well, it is penalising them for abusing that position of dominance to stop anyone else from being able to have a chance at developing and releasing a competing product as well as practices to stifle the growth of existing competitors. If they focused on making their product the best it could be nobody would be complaining.