Re: Hanlon's razor
But how many times do you have to encounter this sort of behaviour in HMG before you ask yourself if they're really that stupid?
40485 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
"Right up to the point you want to validate the random sequence of characters claiming to be data. Both XML and ASN.1 are unnecessarily cumbersome, but they do solve a problem that the old Unix standby of parsing an ASCII string and hoping for the best does not."
And you don't have to reinvent anything to do that. The libraries are all there waiting to be used.
My first reaction on encountering XML was that I wished it'd been available years ago.
"the myriad vulnerabilities that result from folks getting it wrong"
The advantage of XML is that it stands a good chance of telling you that it's wrong. Having been on the receiving end of XML that the sender had got wrong I appreciate the advantage of that. What's more the same mistakes were repeated every 6 months or so as the last lot of developers at the client end had their visas expire and were replaced by a new lot of alleged graduates.
It's a times like this that I remember that the unfailingly stupid manglement of big BT* let O2 go. And that the price of BT's getting back into mobile when it became painfully obvious they should never have got out was to sell a chunk of itself to Deutsch Telekom.
* Big BT was the usual term used for the rest of the business in BT Mobile which became part of O2. It was never a term of endearment
Let's say Joe Public has installed the app. It goes off telling him that he's been in contact with someone who has tested positive. What is he supposed to do? AIUI rather than go and get a test to check he's supposed to hole up for 14 stressful days waiting to see if he develops symptoms. A good proportion of those alerts are going to be false positives. How many of those will Joe tolerate before he gets thoroughly pissed off and deletes the app - assuming he's allowed to?
Unless it's backed up by a quick and easy to access testing system with the capacity to handle the alerts* the whole system is going to be dead in the water in a few months' time.
*And for positive results, access to prophylactic treatment if the drug trials come out with something that works.
'Twas ever thus. It's called body-shopping. Back in the day the IR even had a standard contract as a PDF on their site which included a "key man" clause which is what you're referring to. Oddly enough this specimen contract disappeared from the site some time after IR35 was introduced but not before I'd taken a copy in case I ever needed to use it a evidence.
As civil cases, which includes tax cases, are decided on the balance of probabilities it seems quite wrong to me that the probability that the relevant clause in a freelancer's contract isn't such a commercial "key man" clause isn't considered.
"You can also employ your spouse"
I've removed your superfluous quotes. Although, AFAIK, it's not necessary for small companyies to have a Company Secretary these days it's still an option. SWMBO was my CoSec and it was she who signed contracts on behalf of the company. The CoSec has legal responsibility for the company and should be entitled to be paid for that responsibility. If accepting that legal responsibility isn't genuine employment I don't know what is.
"consultancies that happen to be party donors"
I always reckoned that when IR35 was introduced we should have had a whip-round and see if we could raise half a Bernie to contribute to Labour to get it rescinded. Then it could have been found out (with a few hints to the media) and they'd have had to give it back.
eBay is as almost as bad. Maybe three hits and then an almost unnoticeably small caption introducing items with fewer words followed by a list from the wild blue yonder. Or an equally overlookable intro to ads from international vendors when you've specifically clicked UK only because you don't want to wait for whatever it was to arrive on a slow boat from China.
"Why should I listen to people talking about master and slave when primary and secondary is a better description and white list / black list when allow / deny is more descriptive?"
See the comment above about secondary master etc. And why is deny list more descriptive? Why do you want to deny a list?
These are terms which have had specific engineering meanings for years. The only result of changing them is confusion. If you find them problematic you should ask yourself if you're in the right field - assuming of course, that this really is your field and that you're not just a visiting A/C.
"The first time I saw people openly carrying Rifles while out shopping freaked me out. That was part of my decision not to want to stay there beyond my 2-year secondment."
I don't think I'd want to go there for two minutes and I lived in N Ireland for 19 years, mostly during the troubles.
I think the basis is that proximity has to continue for some threshold period. OTOH it would need to add up the number of sub-threshold encounters. After all, it's some level of probability that should be the trigger.
But I think you're right. It will generate a lot of false positives, too many for those thus identified to be isolated. It needs to be the fornt-end for testing and a more capale testing system than currently exists.
Not just bit-barns. The Beeb had this interview with the head of Barclays who said that maybe big head offices mightn't be needed either: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-52467965
The interesting part was the idea of staff not necessarily working from home but from branches, post pandemic. Suddenly the idea of closing all those high street branches doesn't seem a good idea after all. We may finally get over the idea that so many businesses have to be crammed into a small area.
The proprietary consumables are an income stream for the manufacturer. The reason to stop supplying them would be that demand has fallen as the product supported has dropped out of use which probably means that it was withdrawn from the market a long time ago. The few remaining consumers have had a fair crack of the whip by then.
If, however, the product is sold requiring a service provided by the someone with no ongoing charge then it wouldn't be an unreasonable expectation on the part of the consumer that they have paid for that service as part of the initial cost, nor would it be unreasonable to expect that they should receive what they paid for. If the product has become faulty for whatever reason in an unduly short space of time and hasn't been damaged by accident or misuse then naturally they should have recourse to whoever sold it.
"or not knowing they need to know"
That's the core of a lot of our problems. They don't know they need to know a whole lot of stuff. They don't know they need to know how their toys work. They don't know they need to know viruses have nothing to do with telecom base stations. They don't know they need to know who's manipulating them through social networks or to what ends.