pricechild

Surely they're not required to get an employer to follow the law. Isn't there a better way?

> Working beyond 10 hours on a day requires authorization and is extra paid.

> Working over weekends requires special approvals and is properly compensated.

I'm amazed that you believe you require a union to ensure proper compensation in a country like Germany?

Is it because you're a contractor rather than an employee or some similar sillyness?

Why isn't being paid for your time the default?

I like the implication here.

Because they're not going to have the specific car/options you want anyway, are they? No, you're going to need to accept what they want to sell...

In my experience, they do what they want.

Another anecdotal data point with a different UK bank: Recently an acquaintance has found themselves frequently locked out of their account because (according to their fraud team) someone is failing authentication challenges on the phone. My acquaintance has had to visit a branch multiple times to verify their identity and get passwords changed.

So even though someone can't prove who they are, they're locking my acquaintance out. How's that fair?

The kicker was one phone call where (after having discovered the account was locked... again...) the fraud team on the phone sounded incredulous, asking why we hadn't gone in to branch like they asked "last night"? Less than 30 seconds later they noticed last night's call was marked suspicious... that authentication failed... and that that phone call had triggered the lock the account.

The worst part is that no "human" will take your case on. They read from a script and aren't allowed to empathise. No "I'm really sorry, I can see why you're upset" or even "If what you're saying is true, I wouldn't be happy either."

I would argue for that position by saying:

1. They don't mind the repercussions they would face themselves for swearing.

2. Young children might copy this behaviour without being able to make an informed decision and face those same repercussions. Is it fair to decide for them? Probably not, default to safe.

It isn't because the minimum repayments are so low they never come close to the large interested accrued?

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2012/sep/24/student-loan-a...

(I don't believe it's changed since)

It scares me that people are taking on these loans with that assumption, spurred on by people like Martin Lewis.

The government has changed the rules before... they may change them again.

To be fair to Mr Lewis, he apparently put his money where his mouth is and engaged lawyers to challenge the recent changes, but I haven't heard of any results... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing... Does anyone know if it was just posturing for the press at the time, hoping we'd forget about it? Was there ever a ruling or result?

  most have education debt taken out on behalf of their children or grandchildren

     Systems Requirements for FaceIt PC
     -- Microsoft Windows 95.
     -- 90 MHz Intel Pentium compatible or higher.
     -- 16 MB RAM/10 MB free hard disc space.
     -- VGA or higher video display adapter.
     -- CD-ROM drive.
     -- Microsoft Video for Windows (VFW) compatible video capture system with
        resolution 320 x 240, depth: 15 bit RGB, capture rate to memory:
        5 frames/sec.

My point is that for internal competition, using a comparison to other members as a target is never going to end well. In the end, the 'average' figure is a pretty meaningless value.

Instead, I think it's more important to target a standard. E.g. a minimum level of literacy/numeracy. "50% of our children can't spell" is a much more meaningful statement. Now as for how you measure that... that's a whole other problem.

Oh how we all love ambiguity in language!

> one in five children in primary schools at the age of 11 are leaving primary school without the national average

> "good" requires pupil performance to exceed the national average, and all schools must be good

I'm sure there was a certain minister who stood up in parliament declaring it to be an outrage that 50% of our children scored below average but I'm struggling to find a reference, partly because politicians keep making this same gaffe.

My point with the original "quote" ('"quote"' is not a quote either) was to illustrate the absurdity of these types of headlines. They're made all the time and they're always ridiculous.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/reality-check-with-poll...

https://leftfootforward.org/2013/10/michael-gove-doesnt-unde...

Some of these only work by capturing http requests and rewriting them to take you to their portal. Funnily enough, that and other methods often work very badly and so you might be left trying to visit a site getting timeouts. Maybe your browser visited it previously and saw HSTS for example and so only tries https?

The point of this site is that when you realise this has happened, you type in 'http://neverssl.com' into your browser to force an http connection which hopefully the network will grab, mangle and take you to the login page.

It's a solution to a problem that really shouldn't exist.

Annoyingly, different client venders require different things. Here's an example of someone working on this: http://www.revk.uk/2016/08/captive-portals-apple.html (and a money quote from the comments: "OS X only does it if you're on Wifi though - for some reason they assume you'll never see a captive portal when wired"

I want to believe in Hilary though!

Sarah Willingham pointed out quite early on how useless it was "the instructions say 'make sure the phone is not muted'? What use is this if I've lost it?". Google's existing solution beats this, being able to bypass audio restrictions. I assume Apple has similar capabilities?

Yes there's still the other half... using your phone to find your keys... but pfft.

Aside... Sarah's contribution reminded me of how technology savvy the dragons are. There was a great moment in a previous series where Hilary Devey teased out of an applicant that they didn't own the source code for their own website. I've often slipped into thinking of them as "business people" but she very clearly understood software and licensing.

You allude to a problem by suggesting blocking u*, these accounts can be created when the old one is blocked. Even subscriber accounts can be created at will & higher cost, though are likely less of an issue.

There is a problem that irc.example.net can't say "These users all seem to be originating from this single open proxy, lets block it." They need irccloud to do that.

The problem with things like irccloud from a network operator perspective isn't that it's difficult to distinguish between users. It's that these systems often subvert protections the network has deemed necessary.

Imagine example.net runs an open proxy scanner on anyone that connects. They find this reduces abuse considerably. If (e.g. irccloud) either 1) doesn't pass the originating user's ip 2) isn't trusted to pass the originating user's ip or 3) doesn't run a similar open proxy scanner, then example.net's open proxy scanner solves nothing.

1) isn't always technically trivial. 2) isn't for us to decide and 3) is probably never going to happen as the network will likely always be ahead.

If you do manage to solve 1&2 between a mitm & a network then awesome. The problem is that this requires buy in from both sides. Just because irccloud.com support it doesn't mean it will automatically work on any irc network you try and connect to.

Not only is it apparently banned from the store, but also it's being removed from existing user's machines, on top of not allowing new installs.

Edit: Going to quote my thread from that discussion as this announcement confirms they were banned over the single use policy...

> Other ad blockers "block ads" and "block annoying eu cookie notices". Should they be removed?

> I just visited the Chrome store and chose the first extension: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/office-online/ndjp.... It makes word documents AND spreadsheets?!

> Hopefully you can see where I'm going... whatever's written in the policy is difficult to enforce literally. Someone has to make the distinction based upon the intent of that policy. A person has to draw the line. If Google have made the decision based on that policy, well that's their decision.

> Reading https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/single_purpose (part 4) makes me thinking "disrupting ad networks" could be that single purpose. Then it'd cover blocking & clicking. Just like "Office Online"'s "edit office documents" covering both "word processing" and "spreadsheets".

I just visited the Chrome store and chose the first extension: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/office-online/ndjp... It makes word documents AND spreadsheets?!

Hopefully you can see where I'm going... whatever's written in the policy is difficult to enforce literally. Someone has to make the distinction based upon the intent of that policy. A person has to draw the line. If Google have made the decision based on that policy, well that's their decision.

Reading https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/single_purpose (part 4) makes me thinking "disrupting ad networks" could be that single purpose. Then it'd cover blocking & clicking. Just like "Office Online"'s "edit office documents" covering both "word processing" and "spreadsheets".

I'm probably inferring something you didn't mean here. By "if they are burning cash" did you mean "yes they're wasting money, but still less than they're making so that's great"

Or is it possible to be "cash flow positive" while spending >1x revenue?

Instead imagine that half the disc you originally bought turned out to be self-destructing ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/3064327.stm ) but you can buy a re-release without the issue for a discount if you trade in the old disc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5S5hRRio-E8 has the radio audio with the CVR transcript overlaid as text.

Why is this? Is it because of increased power requirements of 3g, 4g etc? Or all the extra useless processing devices do? (Ignoring the screen...)

My first phone was a siemens c30. Apparently the battery capacity was ~600mAh and gave >10 days standby where the Apple watch has ~200mAh and gives ~18h. So the c30 lasted over 3 times longer on the same charge?

Is it really unfeasible to expect us getting back to that same efficiency by cutting back in some areas?