Re: Gov Workers /No Expertise required
Glorified?
40485 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
"When in fact they aren't allowed to interfere directly with how a council or council officer does their job, but some still do."
As an elector I'd like to think that overseeing that council officers was what councillors were for. That way my vote might have some effect. As ever, British public life gets things arse about face.
One possible solution occurs to me. A couple of decades ago I had a gig working with material which had similar sensitivity. I and everyone else had to have clearance to S/C. Shouldn't council staff with this exposure also need clearance?
If anything the need should be greater than in my gig as the whole of the database is going to be local to the area from which council staff are likely to be recruited. Without clearance there's an unacceptable probability that a data subject might be known or even related to one of the staff.
A failure like this should then result in the entire command chain losing their clearance and having to be redeployed within the council if they were even able to retain their jobs. This would result in greater awareness of all those involved about their responsibilities and what actions would be permissible.
It's difficult to know what to do when confronted with incompetence of this nature. It's not just the initial breach that's the problem. It's also the attitude that the council decided they could deal with it as an internal matter. Either they didn't know about the GDPR provisions about reporting or simply decided they were too important for that. I'd like to think there was a mechanism for placing them under some sort of adult supervision but where would one find suitable adults? Certainly not in central government.
Can we also have a gurn at those who, having got all their stuff checked through successfully are astonished to discover they have to find the means to pay for it and start rooting in pockets or handbags to find the necessary. The most recent episode was one who dragged out a card wallet absolutely full of the things (so she couldn't claim unfamiliarity with the concept), shuffled through them several times, discovered the one she was wanting wasn't there, had another root in the bag and came up with a purse with more cards in it. Why do these people not realise that waiting in the queue is a good time to get all that done without it being on the critical path?
I tell a lie. It wasn't the most recent. The most recent was the customer service till where, having checked stuff through the customer wanted to deal with some sort of lottery stuff as well, none of which would scan. I was sufficiently pissed off by this to try the SS scanner. Roll up, put the basket down on one side and the carrier on the other an the machine complained. Did nobody consider the use case that the customer needs to free up their hands in order to work the bloody machine and they're going to do that before pressing the button to start? Back to the customer disservice queue. Yes I am a grumpy old man - I've put the time in to get that way.
"just because something is technically possible, it's not always a good idea to do it."
OTOH if it is done it should be done well. My refusal is based on the fact that I'm not being paid to debug them. It used to be he case that I reckoned that the maximum number of items that could be reliably scanned was 3. I've now down-rated that to zero.
"You only warm the pot because historically the china pots were very thin and boiling water risked cracking them."
Real china - porcelain - didn't crack. It was European stuff that cracked until they worked out how to make something better. Much the same reason for the vile habit of putting milk in cups.
"Among the Russia-specific provisions are calls for the White House to produce and maintain a regular report on the net worth of Russian President Vladimir Putin, and any other individuals who would potentially have an interest in meddling with US affairs."
Does this mean we get to see Trump's tax returns? (Along with all other candidates, of course. Can't pick and choose.)
Identity is a slippery concept. What are the data collected? Lists of names? Try a Google search for your own name and see how many hits there are that you know aren't you. Can you work out how many distinct people that represents. How many of them might be close enough on some characteristic that some matching algorithm might merge you? From my own experience I know I've had namesakes in two careers I've followed. I've even had an agency send me a contract for one of them for a gig I didn't apply for and which was outside my area of expertise (dumb agents; should go be company names, not people names). And yet neither my given name nor surname come very high on lists of commonest names.
To be fair I doubt the QC would give you a good account of a case without the documents to hand.
In a big case like this he's probably had time to study the documents in the past few weeks and will have the most significant stuff at his finger-tips now. By the time another case or two have gone by he very likely won't.
My experience was that I would be totally dependent on the case file. It would have been some months at least between writing a report and going into the witness box. I don't know it Apotheker will have had the chance to see the documents he's now being shown; more fool him if he's had the chance and not taken it. If he hasn't had the chance to refresh his memory then it's not surprising that he can't remember a lot of stuff until he's shown it. It's also not surprising that a cross-examiner will jump on it.
The idea that the manufacturer will provide a set of standard lenses would be a problem. They may well come in a standard range of focal lengths which would deal with long and short sightedness but for many of us they'd have to deal with astigmatism which introduces two more variables for each eye, the axis and the cylindrical focal length.
"I didn't have any room thermoststat(s) in my heating system; have all rads with TRVs on, except for bathroom & toilet."
I still have that set-up. Unlike you the boiler has a time switch with individual settings for each 15 mins so it would be a doddle to set up a short burn every few hours to keep frost at bay.