"The one who knows the hard questions, and will ask them."
You can get fired for asking questions like that. Not a team player.
40557 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
"That said, the first ever from-the-metal-upwards restore test I did was the single most nerve-wracking thing I've done in my career"
I've worked in two places where we had DR contracts including rights to run practice restores. They can be learning experiences, especially the first one. /etc was the last directory on the last dump tape. We had to sit twiddling thumbs waiting to get a system we could log into & then ran out of time before we had a restored system. It ensured the dumps were better organised for the next pass.
"These guys are so funny lol! The Queen "embarrassed" What a joke. The queen does not embarrass - that is the point of the Queen."
This guy seems to disagree with you: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38805196
Of course he's only an expert so doesn't know as much as you.
"We should have a third petition asking for Brian Blessed to be invited to the event."
And recite Ozymandias; that's what that wall puts me in mind of.
"'...
My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!'
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away."
That should be read at the ceremony appointing any political leader.
"The real solution is to educate users that when they get a message that is not for them, they either delete it or they reply directly."
It was pointed out in an earlier comment that the users only saw a single email address to which they replied directly. It wasn't their fault, however well educated, that that one address was expanded by the system into a list of everybody.
"Some products such as full screen readers are very complex products which are expensive develop and keep up to date with every change to the underlying operating system"
So have the OS provide a consistent interface for it.
Consistency: that's what interfaces are for, as per my previous comment.
I have heard that an auto manufacturer (Ford?) had an "Old Suit". Young, svelte designers were made to ware it during development.
...
Various specs to blur and restrict vision
I'd like to borrow that as punishment for whatever eejits specify the horrible plastic bags supermarkets provide for self-service veg. etc.
BTW, add thick gloves to the spec.
"Remember the GUI paradigm was developed by some very wise people in the 60's and 70's."
Remember also that the concept of separation between interface and implementation was also developed by some very wise people at that time.
The thinking was that if needed the implementation could change whilst the interface remained consistent so that users didn't have to adapt to a new implementation. The whole concept was functional.
Consistency is a functional requirement of an interface.
Unfortunately it seems we have software put together by numpties who still wouldn't recognise a functional requirement if it reared up and bit them in the arse - as it's quite likely to do eventually if ignored.
"Don't let me get started on letting dev's become sys-devs."
Back in the day we were the (very small) Unix/DB team. Design, develop and manage. That way you didn't develop what you couldn't run and you understood the application level consequences of what you did as an administrator.
Yes, it harks back to the idea that if you were a Unix user you were a C programmer. It might have its downside but has the situation where you had to write a stack of documents to have the system guys release a slab of storage space for the DBAs to add as a chunk to the database engine, a process that seemed to occupy most of the 4 weeks I spent as holiday cover there.
"only coding for what is currently required"
Not necessarily a good idea. I've been effectively instructed to code myself into a corner with that approach.
I then watched them having to hack database and code every time a new requirement was added. In the meantime I'd set up the next project which started off by chucking out all the "currently required" code of the first project and replacing it with an open-ended approach that took new requirements in its stride - including being re-used in the project after that.
However, have an upvote for the rest of the post.
"It just turned out that a hand-held portable device like a phone is a good candidate for a general-purpose handheld computing platform. ... Somebody has to see stars or else we're all just looking down at the sidewalk."
Too many people are doing neither, they're just looking at their general-purpose handheld computing platforms.
Here's one I made earlier, it seems appropriate to repeat it here:
"Your freezer has just been switched to defrost and all the controls disabled for 24 hours.
Normal operation will be restored on payment of {$CURRENCY UNITS}25. We think you'll find this represents good value for money as our estimate of the value of the freezer's current contents is at least 4 times this.
You can use the following link to make your payment."
"Naturally that fridge will be made in America and require servicing at twice the frequency of similar models built in Korea and Germany."
Servicing? I can't remember how long ago we bought our fridge except it's >15 years ago and probably much older. It's never heeded servicing. But it's dumb.
Nevertheless it's a Unix fridge: do one thing and do it well. Buying food and keeping it cool are two different things. My fridge does the latter.
Thus the "we need more scientists" waffle we hear in the press every year.
That actually translates to "we want more scientists". The more who are trained the easer it is to keep the pay rates down. It was just as true 50+ years ago.
"He shows signs of being a tin that actually contains what it said on the outside before it got elected.
Something very rare and wonderful in politics."
Rare, yes. Maybe not wonderful. Once they get elected most politicians realise they have to start acting rationally and responsibly. It's just that that seems to have gone out of fashion in the last year or so.
"Why can't we have a prime minister, just as we have now, without the Royal barnacles clinging to the hull weighing us down?"
There are two distinct roles, head of government and head of state. We keep them separate. The US doesn't. I'm surprised at that. At the time of the revolting colonials we'd already separated them. I find it odd that the US should, in the name of democracy, have devised a system that doesn't. They have checks and balances in that the legislative body can counter the head of govt & state. However, as far as I've seen, the most they can do is impose paralysis in most circumstances with impeachment as the only option. We have a situation whereby Parliament can, by a vote of confidence, provoke a general election and, less drastically, the cabinet (senior members of the majority party, which largely amounts to the same thing) can effectively remove the head of government.
We certainly don't have, as May has discovered, an equivalent of the Executive Order.
And having removed the monarch from active politics we have a non-political head of state which I think is a good thing although it's certainly cruel and unusual punishment to put anyone in the position of having to soldier on with no chance of retirement.
"Remember, she was an avid Remainer under Cameron till June last year."
Avid? As far as I could see she was the least amount of of Remainer she could be consistent with her retaining her job after the expected result. The EU was nothing more to her than a stone in her kitten heels as a Home Sec.
Maybe it means that security is finally being moved higher up the corporate food-chain. The bad new is that it might simply mean that existing dwellers up there are simply adding it to their job titles - the Didos of this world could do that without a qualm.
But could you believe anything from a man who can emit garbage like this:"Businesses must foster a culture of learnability"?