"However, the spoken word is soo last century, dahhling..."
Are you sure? How are you going to explain Moz://a to Alexa et al?
42029 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
"Only when shops can recognise people by their faces will they enable full monetisation of a customer's data."
They'll still fail because they'll not be able to work out what you actually want. Their best guess is what you bought before.
Milk? Probably likely you'll buy more.
Big value items such as a new TV? How many do you think I'll buy?
"I wonder what would happen if very large numbers of their customers sent them Data Access requests for all the information being held on them?"
They'd pocket the tenner & ensure they could get the data out to you for less. Probably outsourced to an Indian company who therefore also has the data, no scruples and no inconvenient DPA.
"much more time on their hands."
Too much time. Way too much.
I know it seems a way out idea but have they ever thought of offering good customer service, competitive prices, well stocked stores and good quality stock kept in good condition e.g. premix concrete hasn't gone hard in the bags? It might get better results than creeping out customers by spying on them.
"People really seem to have forgotten what version numbers are actually FOR these days - they're to communicate that something significant has changed and this new version might break stuff"
The other side of that coin is that if version numbers aren't being changed they've decided to stop breaking stuff. We can always hope...
" but the loyalty that XP still seems to have (especially seen as though XP was a pain in the arse) baffles me."
Time to do some hard thinking.
Imagine you have some extremely expensive piece of kit, say a million or so of your favoured currency units. When bought it had a projected life of 20 years. A replacement would cost at least 50% more than the original, isn't in your budget and not likely to be within the next few years.
This very expensive item is working hard. You can't afford not to have it. But it's controlled by software written for XP. It's proprietary code and you don't have source. The company that wrote it is long gone. There's a regulatory requirement that the entire installation have a specific certification which the original installation has.
Do you
(a) kill the PC because it's running XP, scrap the kit which is no longer able to work because you can't run the S/W, close down the service you were providing with it and sit on you backside doing nothing for several years until you can afford to replace it?
(b) reverse engineer the S/W kill the PC, get the program rewritten for a different OS and in the meantime close down the service you were providing and sit on your backside soing nothing whilst the program is rewritten and recertified at considerable expense over the course of a year or so?
(c) protect the PC from the net and carry on?
Are you still baffled?
"look to Tory austerity, the foolish deregulation of banking"
Would that be "foolish deregulation of banking" have anything to do with Brown's having the BoE set interest rates based on a metric which ignored house-price inflation and a huge appetite for personal debt in response to the consequent low interest rates. After that bubble burst there was little alternative to austerity - we're still paying for that excess.
"Scotland is not England and was only part of Great Britain from maybe 1707"
Shame to spoil your post with an inaccuracy. It was always part of the island of Great Britain (unless you go a good way back into geological time). It wasn't part of the United Kingdom until the accession of James VI of Scotland as James I of England. In fact the UK was his idea. That's right, the UK was a Scottish invention.
"No, that started in 1992 when Major signed us up to Maastricht without a vote, and it became less slow when the single currency was introduced."
I agree that there should have been referenda EU-wide to ratify the treaties - with supermajorities required, unlike this advisory referendum that we suddenly seem to have found wasn't advisory after all.
You may not have noticed but we were never part of the single currency.
But deciding, on the flimsiest of political whims, to take this particular unilateral action is stupidity from the consequences of which I doubt the country will recover in my life-time - and I've no intention of going just yet.
Actually, having read the previous post again maybe the argument was that leaving the EU was a necessary precursor for resiling from both the ECHRs, Convention and Court. So it would, but that might be a more difficult step for which she might hope as there are other agreements which tie us into that, thankfully.
Having read the original post I think the argument must have been that leaving the EU is the prerequisite for leaving both ECHRs, Convention and Court. I think that is the basis on which she's acting & I found difficulty believing she was a remainer because of that. However I think she'll find it's not that easy because the Good Friday agreement requires we stick with that and also her Brexit minister doesn't seem to be in tune with her Home Sec ambitions.
"if the UK is so desperately to leave, why doesn't it hurry up and leave?"
I suspect that the reason for this - and Farage's attitude to Art 50 - is that nobody really expected the vote to go as it did so nobody had given it any real thought (as opposed to an impressive sounding manifesto) and thus didn't have a clue what to do next or how to get out of what they'd brought down on themselves. Even after the vote I got the impression that they wanted - and expected - Cameron to pick up the pieces & do the hard work for them.
Now they have to work out what to do and are, I suspect, still clueless about how it can possibly be made to work. Not all of the, of course. Some are still expecting magic to happen and complaining bitterly when someone who should know what they're talking about, say an experienced diplomat, tries to tell them it isn't going to happen. Personally, I think each of that crowd should be given a minor govt job, assigned a small area of economic activity, preferably one close to their constituency's interests, and told to develop Brexit policy for it.
"So we have to work out how to split them. And those quotas were set in 2004 when the EU only had 15 member states so nobody knows what those quotas actually are."
If the WTO is managing to continue working with with quotas when they don't know what they are continuing to work with different but equally undefined quotas might not be a problem in practical terms.
"The company is now almost unrecognisable to the one she inherited, with the PC and print businesses spun out, Enterprise Services spun out in a deal with another caring corp CSC, and the Software division spun out to Micro Focus."
Given that she now has much less to manage, surely she should be taking much less pay.
" I am thinking specifically of the way Access can move fields from large records into separate tables. This means, for example, that city and county names can be defined just once and used consistently."
I'd have thought that any self-respecting data analyst would have done that before creating the tables. It's called normalisation, been around for about 45 years.
"The majority of NHS staff are not IT literate."
Unfortunately this is no longer a sustainable approach.
The previous comment mentioned that all staff will be be aware that they shouldn't leave leaking clinical wast lying about. That doesn't require them to have microbiological knowledge, it just requires them to know what are the appropriate procedures for handling it. The same applies to IT procedures.
"I don't see how stopping spam in phone calls is all that much easier than stopping it in email, and we all see evidence in our inboxes that email spam is still very much a thing."
The solution in both cases would be to revise the protocols so that the alleged source (From: line in email headers) can be verified by the system before the connection is accepted.