Posts by whileI'mhere 84 posts • joined 18 Dec 2014
"I just programmed them all for 'TURN TV OFF', so it didn't matter what he pressed."
Hmm. So how did he turn it on? Another of those remotes, with all the buttons programmed to turn it on? And another for volume up and another for volume down? And a fifth for channel cycling? Each remote carefully labelled as to its function.
I think that's a system that might just work. ;-)
"part of the European Rubber Duck Mountain?"
I think that technically it is the European Rubber Duck Pool. But we have got out, picked up our towel, and will be drying ourselves off for the next 11 months while we wonder which of the now available shark-infested waters to swim in. No more rubber ducks for us!
"And because I love Europe so much, I want a better EU."
So on balance it would probably have been better to remain and work harder to change it for the better. Leaving it is certainly not going to enable whatever flavour of 'better' you think it ought to be.
This post has been deleted by a moderator
"The issue is people who entered the junction on green, but couldn't exit the junction before the lights went red. I.e. Amber wasn't long enough before the lights went red."
The article failed to make that clear. Does make more sense.
But. again, if I entered the junction on green, amber's length is irrelevant. Absent a yellow hatched/box junction, I might be prevented from exiting the junction (e.g. by stopped traffic ahead) when the light turn red. I do not get a 'red light infraction' fine for that. It is - and should only be - all about when you enter the junction. Unless there is a MINIMUM speed limit then all the tinkering in the world with amber light periods cannot prevent someone being in the position of leaving a junction when the light is red. The case you note implies there must be an assumed minimum speed for the amber light period to be calculated.
If you have legitimately entered the junction (crossed the line) on amber (under circumstances described above) what on earth does it matter if you are turning right or left or going straight on and/or whether the light is red before you leave the junction? Either you entered the junction legitimately on amber or you did not. I really do not understand what all the rest of the fuss is about.
"Jo Mason, if you haven’t already, start sweating profusely. Sal looks like he’s plenty capable of cutting his own steak. Which means, you represent no “tangible” value whatsoever."
While Mikey is Chairman until Dec 31 she can rest easy. If Salvino takes a day longer to sack her, he will have proven his lack of competence.
She can find another job by then. I'm betting it will turn out to be some form of domestic employment. (Mikey will still someone who can deal with his meat.)
This guy will not be at DXC for long. His "openness" and implied criticisms are tantamount to saying "no" to Mikey.
Mikey does not like "no" and people who say it swiftly "depart".
But should you really be boasting that you were also on the call? It's bad enough from DXC mgt perspective that the content of these calls gets leaked, but if they believe employees are sitting with El Reg journos on their calls, they'll end up only being accessible from DXC office numbers (not that they have the technical capabity or competence to arrange that, in all probablilty).
"Makes sense, given the banks are also insurance brokers."
No. No it does not. Brokers are agents - they sell insurance but do not write it. They do not underwrite or carry third party risk. Conversely, for many risks that you might assume they would insure against, they may choose to self-insure (i.e. just take the risk and suffer the loss). The fact that banks sell some forms of insurance to customers has no link to why they may or may not be insured by a insurer for acts of theft or criminal damage.
Reminds me of an apocryphal WWII RAF exam question for pilots. Something like 'you are the pilot flying Winston Churchill, the PM, and his staff to an overseas conference when the rear cargo hatch blows open and WC is ejected from the plane. How do you react?' The answers varied from ' swoop down and catch him', jump out with a parachute and catch him', to 'divert to RIo and disappear'. The correct answer was, of course, 'adjust rear ailerons to compensate for reduced weight in rear cargo compartment'
According to some stories last year (?) a £50 note is not cash. Rather, it is a drug-smuggling/criminal proceeds money-laundering device. Apparently they are so rarely used by normal people and disproportionately used by those types that some central bankers and law enforcers want high denomination notes removed from circulation.
And anyway, what with the advent of super jumbo extra outsize choccy bars and the price of the stuff in general, I reckon a couple of said bars would not get much change out of £50 these days.
Several years ago I was heartened to see the French media regulator tell the French public broadcaster's TV news guys to just stop advertising their Twitter ID on air, as it was de facto advertising for a commercial entity on the public airwaves, and other social media were available. They probably long since lost that battle, but an admirable stance, for sure.
"...and it's the new office - not sure about client meetings though."
I seem to recall some time ago (1970s?) seeing a film extract on Barry Norman's Film programme of that year (if only I could remember which year) where the concept was to reverse eating and shitting. The extract showed a company board meeting taking place with everyone on a shitter, free to raise the lid and let rip, while those needing any food or drink had to excuse themselves to a small ante-room and do it in private, quietly. It was, of course, a foreign-langauge film. Wish I could find out what it was...
The Register - Independent news and views for the tech community. Part of Situation Publishing
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022
