Re: If only there were a cheap-to-deploy land based positioning system...
You park the base stations on top of them.
42029 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
OK, here's this once again:
1. Allocate a number such as 1476 (nicely away from miskeying 1471.
2. Dial that after the nuisance call.
3. Until a threshold of reports has been reached your telco holds a record of your report.
4. Once the threshold has been reached your telco credits your account with a few, say £1 for each call or £2 if you're registered with TPS.
5. The telco charges whoever originated the call to them and adds a handling charge. If it's the actual caller it goes straight on their bill, if not it's up to the telco who forwarded to yours to keep records and charge their source, along with their handling charge.
6. If some telco along the line didn't keep track they're on the hook and won't be doing it again.
7. The telcos are given notice to prepare for all this.
8. The telcos realise there'll be upfront costs plus even if they don't kill the practice stone dead with credit control to protect themselves the costs will kill the rogue-calling industry and their upfront costs won't e recouped in handling charges.
9. The telcos suddenly discover previously unknown ways to stop the problem at source so there's no need to incur those costs.
Requires only will on the part of government to empower the regulator.
"My brother went for a job, in the late 90s I think. At a listed company. And was told his CV had to be hand written. Turned out they employed a graphologist to spout bollocks about what your handwriting said about your suitability for the job."
The interview is also your chance to evaluate the company.
"I mean, you could."
Ultimately the internet runs an a mutual agreement to trust a particular root service and sync all the mirrors to it. That implies that a mutual agreement to distrust it and trust one of the mirrors would be possible. If that were to happen the US would have the options, after all the shouting, of accepting it or cutting itself off from the rest of the world.
“We at Rotherwood Group take the protection of personal data very seriously. Once we became aware of a security issue affecting some data held on our cloud-based system, we took immediate steps to rectify it."
Rectifying after someody else finds your mistake is not taking protection seriously. Taking protection seriously is not making such a mistake in the first place.
"I am happy to report that at my current workplace the hand dryer is actually perfect; warm, resonable volume and timed to perfection. Its the more tradtional style dryer with the push button and the rotating nozzle."
And only slightly less effective at distributing microbiota into the air. Use disposable paper towels instead.
"That's not to do with PR, but Civil War politics"
The two are not mutually exclusive. AIUI one of the effects of FPTP is to exaggerate* the ratio of votes when determining the ratio of seats. That's likely to make a stalled outcome less likely.
* I remember reading a long time ago that the ratio of seats is proportional to the ratio of the squares of the votes.
"From what I understand, the $50M worth of bitcoins aren't all proceeds of crime. He doesn't owe all that money to the police/courts does he?"
Good question. AIUI the original investment was from the proceeds of crime. It would be a function of Irish law as to whether he'd have been able to keep the gains on the Bitcoin value.
In other words "we'll buy back shares" which takes money. Where does that come from?
They can borrow it which means that the remaining shares are loaded with debt. That, of course, is also the Xerox takeover solution.
Alternatively they can divert money that might have been reinvested or used to pay dividends to shareholders. The latter isn't a good idea if you're a shareholder looking for dividend income.
One possibility, which they can't possibly say out loud because it goes against everything stock markets assume, is that they realise the hardware market is now saturated; there's nowhere to grow and it makes more sense to trim manufacturing capacity to mostly replacement needs. They also need to trim ink prices to stop subsidising H/W sales that aren't going to be made.
"it was built out of the best materials available and with the most precise mechanical engineering at the time of construction."
It was also built for a simple task. Add a perpetual calendar and day of week function and either (a) you have to be able to set d-o-w independently of the calendar or (b) you have to build in the correct leap year algorithm or (c) it goes out of kilter on 2100-03-01.
"But my company (and indeed my family home) is outside the UK and I was told I would be inside ir35."
That's an interesting one. I'd been wondering about what would happen if the contractors worked via, billed from and were paid by Irish registered businesses. It would, of course, depend on the terms negotiated with the EU but I'd think there would be serious problems if HMRC were to try interfering with commercial contracts with an overseas company.
I suspect all these companies have been engaging freelancers via their HR departments. HR only understand employment contracts. Would they let HR hire a builder to put up the shell of a new DC? Or an electrician to wire it up? Or an HVAC technician to install the cooling? So why let HR hire the people to set up the computers inside it?