Re: Brexvid-19
Time to stockpile tar and feathers. There'll be a need for them on Jan 1st.
42400 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
What is it with DWP and their precursors? My direct experience of them is limited but does extent back more than 50 years and is consistent with stories such as this. Is it simply self-perpetuating ineptness - the inept rising up a management structure of their peers and recruiting more like themselves? Or is the the Civil Service filtering recruits, the flyers going to Treasury and FCO whilst those who didn't even make HO end up in DWP?
"work" is a dubious concept if data that should be in parameters are hard-coded.
I have been in a similar position with a client. They were offering a service which processed data received via XML. I could see that one coming. The XML documents were going to be sufficiently large due to large numbers of work orders in each that they would bust the machine's memory if they were processed as a whole. A SAX parse would process the document an order at a time and throw it into the rest of the system with no problems but does need to have the element names hard-coded.
The solution was to run the incoming data through XSLT (Saxon can handle the file sizes to do that) and rewrite it into a dedicated namespace which is what the SAX parser used.
Next customer with a similar job but their own XML schema - no problem, just change the stylesheet. Give or take some minor tweaks (back-compatible) the core could remain common to multiple contracts.
Not Invented Here.
They're probably taking a leaf out of the Downing Street playbook. It's got to be world beating. If it's world beating it can't be the same as the rest of the world is using so have to cobble up something new. Stir some overconfidence in there and they believe their own hype. The rest of us can see exactly where that's going.
I like the idea but failure rate could be a bit tricky. Functions A, B & C were delivered but not D & E. Function G wasn't in the original but the client added it later and insisted that F was delayed to make way for it. All functions of different complexity and value. What's the failure rate?
I can't see anything wrong with Voatz position - providing, of course, that they're* then on the hook for consequences, civil and/or criminal, if the product gets hacked in ways that the unauthorised testing could have brought to their attention.
* They including the management in person as well as the company.
"Failing that, merge all the co,me&org .uk domain registries with the TLD, so that a single purchase buys&renews access to the four UK domains."
Sounds like a good move for the cybersquatting business. I have a geographically-based .org.uk address registered with no fuss. I have no interest at all in any of the others. The .co.uk is being squatted by someone who probably registered as many of the unclaimed contents as possible from a gazetteer and has been for some time. Anyone who wants that is going to have to come up with whatever he wants to charge.
"a mask can reduce the quantity of virus-laden crud you breathe out and reduce the amount of virus-laden crud you breathe in"
The former more than the latter I'd expect. By the time they comes to be breathed in the droplets will have shrunk by evaporation.
I'm old enough to remember that the term used to be "filterable viruses", i.e. (not very well characterised) infective agents that could pass through filters.
OTOH they have a massive incentive to rubber stamp them because of the fees.
The way to reverse this would be to make them liable for all the challengers' costs on successful challenges.
There might even be an argument for making them liable for the holder of the failed patent on the grounds that is the patent had been refused initially they wouldn't have made the failed attempt to assert it. However covering the costs of trolls ought not to be supported by public policy - best just to return their fees.
“personalized information push service technology based on data analysis"
Based on the sort of "your might be interested in" garbage the usual web souks* push at me I'd not expect the absence of this to make it any less valuable.
Perhaps this "valuable" technology could just be licensed. The licensing terms and audits could be based on those used by the successful purchaser for their own business software.
* to use standard el Reg terminology
face-to-face meetings may be the "gold standard" of interaction
My recollection of face-to-face meetings to start projects would be to look around, spot the two or three people you'll end up working with to deliver the project (i.e. those you've worked with successfully before), those who will get in the way, those will sit there doing neither and wondering about the new faces. The ones you'll work with you can work with by any means of communication. The oxygen-consuming obstructions will operate mostly through other meetings. The inert ones will get their time wasted by the previous group assuming they do stuff when they're not in meetings. The unknowns are only of value if they turn out to belong in the first group.
Gold standard? You can keep it.
"Many more people lose jobs. (Aside: do office workers realize how many people even a smallish restaurant employs?)"
I live in the country. I don't need to go into a city to help give employment to workers in smallish restaurants. I was about to say I can't remember the last time I went into a city other than to ask awkward questions at a Building Soc AGM - then I remembered. Summer of 2018 we took the grandkids to the Titanic exhibition in Belfast; even that's not really in the city centre. Before that? Must be years.
The reason cost of living isn't the same everywhere is because the notion of cramming thousands on office jobs into the same small area raises the cost of living for all those who work there. Commuting costs and the cost of housing because everyone wants to live as close as possible to cut down commuting time are the main drivers. Take out that distorting factor and cost of living can even out.
In city centres income per square (unit of choice) for commercial purposes will be far greater than that generated by using the same building for residential purposes, particularly if there is a stipulation for "affordable" rent.
You're assuming there's still going to be a market for all that commercial square footage. The essence of this entire thread is that there might not be. In that case those who change tack quickly will lose less than those who continue to base there policies on the assumption that income per square for commercial purposes will be far greater than that generated by using the same building for residential purposes.
"when the mass evictions and foreclosures start,"
If people are being evicted or foreclosed because they can't afford rent or payments because of COVID 19 where do the landlords and lenders think they're going to get new tenants and buyers once the limited amount of slack has been taken out of the market? From other people who also can't afford rent or payments because of COVID 19?
Those who are able to afford to rent or buy will be in the driving seat. They'll be able to drive property prices down.
Landlords and lenders would be far better off, assuming the tenants/borrowers have been OK before, coming to arrangements and being prepared to write off some lost income.
"If rent dropped to say mid 90s levels and they've bought or refinanced a building in the past 25 years they are still going to be in trouble."
Whatever they do some of them are going to be in trouble. Call it overshoot, call it a property bubble, whatever. It's taken this to start bringing home to people what should have been obvious for years now - the growth of big cities has exceeded rational limits. Their time has gone.
"Fewer people will want to live in the big cities if they're working from home and commute time is no longer a factor. You can live just about anywhere so long as you have decent broadband."
Not everyone will be working from home. Mixing residential and business would make it easier for those whose employers are dedicated to presenteeism to avoid commutes.
AFAICS the growth of cities has been in overshoot for a good while now. Simply getting people into work in big cities has been a major headache for years, not helped, at least in the UK for town planning policies which, for more or less the whole of the post-war period, have been dedicated to separating residential end working zones. Just to add insult to injury for those condemned to long commutes, they were then blamed for causing congestion.
It's time to rethink. Don't build more offices in cities. Look at the possibility of shared work spaces in the peripheral towns. Move as many of those who continue to work in cities and are prepared to live there into converted ex-offices. And accept that even then there will be redundant space there.