Posts by Lotaresco 1501 publicly visible posts • joined 24 Sep 2007
They are offering a whole one month's pay to take early redundancy? That's mean by anyone's standards. I wonder how many takers they will get? I'm contrasting this with the 1990s when the tech. firm I was working for collapsed and the minimum pay out to employees was six months' pay.
"He should be saying shit like 'artificial intelligence', 'machine learning', 'quantum computing', etc."
Well, they are saying "DevOps" a lot and I've already had "Mobile First" from them and CSC were keen on "Software Robots" and "Robotic Process Automation" so I bet they are continuing with that nonsense too. "Blockchain", "IoT", "Quantum Computing" and "Microservice Architecture" are probably about to be spewed upon us as their suits attempt to bamboozle our suits.
"Who, exactly, are going to replace those skills and knowledge set that management have made redundant?"
And the bad news is... that many of those directly responsible for the cock-ups, failures to deliver, and sheer inability to give the customer the system they specified are set to move on and take their "special knowledge" to other companies. I've already seen some people hanging around places where I work who I hoped I'd never, ever see again. Have they learned? No. They are re-running the same strategy that failed in the past.
"And then cane the off-shore push. All technical work was to be done in India; we were supposed to co-ordinate that work with the client."
A colleague of min was sacked for "racial prejudice" because that colleague complained to the boss that none of us could understand what the people in India were saying. Their accents were so thick and their vocabulary that weird. We shouldn't have worried. It turned out they weren't doing anything. They kept saying "No problem" and "The project is on track" but refused to issue any documentation. At go-live they admitted they didn't understand what was wanted but had pretended the programme was on-track "To keep the boss happy."
Having worked for both of the organisations that joined to form DXC, I note that the policies that each had before the "merger" haven't changed at all. Keep wages down, reduce the workforce, pile more work on those who remain, maintain senior salaries and bonuses as high as possible. It's a strategy that failed in the past and will continue to fail as those who know what they are doing leave and the only people left to do the work are the ones who have no choice other than to work for DXC. I also note that the customers are now deciding that it's more cost effective to hire talent direct than it is to engage with some cloth-eared Dilbert-style DXC pointy-haired boss who thinks technology is for losers.
In my time at HPES I was so encouraged by the news that following a policy of cutting staff wages and cancelling all staff bonuses that we could rejoice because Meg Whitman had been given a $2 million bonus by a grateful board of directors. Woo-Hoo!
I did a civil service contract at the turn of the millennium, and one thing that puzzled me for weeks was that any email sent to the Head of Department was incredibly slow, the fastest reply would take three days. Often we were in need of urgent replies since the HoD micromanaged everything, no movement unless the issue was cleared with him first. Contacting him by phone was frowned upon and usually that was diverted to his PA who would take a note, ask him then phone back 24 hours later. But of course the answer would be useless because the PA didn't understand the question. Knocking on his door was a hanging offence and there would usually be all of the HoDs huddling together somewhere avoiding the workers.
I thought I'd have a crack at solving the email delays - but the server logs just showed delivered, then opened about 16:30 then responded to about 17:00 two days later, so just a problem with boss not reading mail until late in the day and taking ages to reply.
I visited the PA to ask if they could push the boss to answering faster. Then she explained the system. Although HoD had a computer and a mail account he thought touching a computer was for lesser mortals. So he had given his log on details to his PA and permitted her to access his mail when he left the office about 16:00. The PA printed copies of all mail and then put the pages into a leather book with glassine paper separators and left that book on his desk. He would then annotate each email the next day using a fountain pen and leave the book on his desk when he left. PA then took the book after printing off new emails, stripped out the pages, copied them and filed the originals, re-inserted the new mails and went home because it was after 17:00. The next day the PA would take the previous day's annotated copies into the HoD's office and type the replies and send them. At the end of the day of course because HoD didn't like being disturbed.
"You are assuming that anywhere I want to do this is fully equipped with network connections, servers, computers... That is not the case."
You're assuming that I'm your personal tech support guy. I checked my invoicing and you haven't paid for support. You're getting free advice and that's worth what you pay for it.
You also didn't specify your requirements but apparently expect me to provide a response personalised to your exact needs. It also appears that you're disinclined to actually go and look for a USB stick that meets your particular needs. Go to Amazon or other retail site of your choice. Type "ipad USB stick" into the search and choose from the (literally) hundreds of devices available in wide range of form factors.
Yes, of course. You just need the right USB stick. There are lots of options, this is just one manufacturer.
Of course there's not much need to do this[1], but I guess habits die hard.
[1] Generally I solve the issue of transferring files by mailing them to their destination. It's easier than scratching around finding a USB stick and most environments that I work in have the USB ports locked down to discourage the introduction of malware via that USB stick someone dragged out of the back of their knife drawer. I also just transfer files to a shared drive, which is how most people I work with do it also.
"I'd buy a USB dongle thing if I could actually transfer files..."
I've been doing this with my iPhone and iPad for some years now. What's stopping you?
Use File Explorer (from the App store)
Options:
Transfer files to a NAS and write to USB from there.
Transfer to your laptop (ditto)
Transfer to a USB device attached to the Lightning connector
Transfer to your cloud storage
I'm sure there are other ways of skinning the cat, but these work for me.
There's also taking a different look at things and instead of using a USB stick use something like an Asus Travelair. That lets you easily transfer data between any devices that support WiFi or USB.
When I worked for a large American company into cyber security and other "stuff" they decided to subcontract some work to China. The team that went to China to inspect pre-production models reported back that the Chinese company involved had asked if they also wanted to buy some knock-off copies which could be badged, CE marked etc as if they were another manufacturer's kit. The sales pitch was made that this could make huge profits. That company was honest enough to decline the kind offer. It looks as if this one wasn't.
Before HMRC waste time chasing down individuals over imagined IR35 infringements they could do with spending some time sorting out the clustermess that is "Making Tax Digital". I can't see how HMRC got themselves to where they are with that. We're all supposed to be using accounting software supplied by major players (with amusing annual licence fee structures) or pay an accountant to do it on our behalf. Yes, some plucky individuals are supplying Excel sheets that will perform MTD submissions, but that's not helping any organisation with bespoke software or even the large number who don't use MS products.
No only that but the entire crock of manure seems to have come about for no good reason other than some propeller head at HMRC thought it sounded "cool".
"Charge him with something, or give his stuff back."
One of the things that the judge determined, beyond reasonable doubt, is that it's not all his stuff and that there is stuff there for which ownership cannot be determined without his co-operation. The judge is saying that until Love choses to decrypt the information in order to make a decision if the content belongs to him or someone else he can't have it. He is being asked to prove that he owns the data he claims to own.
Love is in the situation of someone being in a hotel where someone has stolen a diamond. He wants to take a sealed container in his possession out of the hotel, stating that there is nothing in it other than stuff he owns. But he's refusing to open the box. Forensics show that the box had been at the scene of the crime. Police are therefore not willing to let him leave with the box unopened. He can leave the box in custody or he can open it and prove it contains no diamonds then he can leave.
Actually it's worse than that, because the evidence to-date shows he was in possession of "quite a bit" of other people's "stuff" like credit card details and personal data. He certainly not entitled to have continuing access to that "stuff".
"Rather like saying that because his wallet contained a counterfeit bank note, that he wasn't entitled to have the wallet back."
If you follow your analogy to its logical conclusion, as a judge would, that means that he could have the metal case back and the rest would be sequestered because he is not able to establish that the data he is requesting belongs to him.
"Personally I think it's a screw up of language somewhere along the line and the reality is that some of the drive was readable and the rest was encrypted in a trucrypt volume."
I agree with you.
This is a judge's summary. I don't expect a judge to know much about disk forensics. I used to belong to a group that existed to raise awareness of technical issues between forensic analysts, IT practitioners and the legal profession. Even though we were dealing with intelligent, motivated people it's difficult to ram several years of knowledge of IT and forensics into someone with limited time.
Given that it's decent enough summary. The problem for the black helicopter/tinfoil hat brigade is that they imagine there is one unexpected trick that will cause a legal case to collapse, as it does on TV. That's rarely so.
In this case - "We recovered this information from the unencrypted disk, it contained some encrypted containers some of which we could access and others we couldn't." is a charitable take on what probably happened.
BTW, based on what has been recovered, Love's "Poor little innocent me." claims aren't looking too good.
"Only struggling artists use Macs and only cheapskate dole wallahs use that free Linux thing."
Making a rod for my own back, I know, but having found that there's no support for Open/Libre Office at all (so far only big accounting packages and some add-ins for Excel support MTD). I've asked HMRC how I can register as a developer so that I can produce something to interface Libre Office to the HMRC API. I'd rather contribute some hours/days to a project than stick money into the pockets of the big five.
In another masterpiece of planning, with companies struggling to cope with whatever Brexit will bring, because we still don't know, and government clearly doesn't have a clue. HMRC chose to have their flawed "Make Tax Digital! (MTD)" initiative coincide with Brexit. To demonstrate how little they care for the people who have to make MTD work, they have listed lots of approved products but offer absolutely no guidance at all about which product will work with a particular OS. If you want to know, you have to trawl every website listed looking for details. And of course the vendors are most unwilling to make it clear which platforms they support and they are certainly not going to be clear about how much it will cost.
To compound woes there's very little written guidance from HMRC. Some moron thought that making several long videos with "friendly" little animations that take a long time to say nothing was more important than writing some short, effective guides to what the changes actually mean.
It's a perfect clustermess. Two significant changes in a four week period, but neither is defined, there's no help available and the government departments concerned don't care. All to be made at a time when, if the politicians slip on the banana skins that they have used to carpet Westminster, business will bear the brunt.
Gee thanks gummint, you really do have the attitude that Boris Johnson showed, "F*ck business!"
Cranes used for materials handling have other safety systems besides software. They have to, because having a crane suddenly drop stuff isn't a desired outcome. So entertaining as it may be to speculate, speculation should take into effect the mechanical controls and also the (usually) ladder logic controls built into limit the cranes being used unsafely or becoming unsafe as a consequence of mechanical, electrical or electronic failure.
I'm not daft enough to say "never", but do bear in mind that safety controls are overlapping and it takes a cascade of failure rather than a single event. Yes, I know cascades happen but the guiding principle is ALARP, not "never fail under any circumstances".
"For some reason I had a flashback to 1970s television: an image of a gorilla wearing a bizarre helmet and riding a horse."
A gorilla wearing a bizarre helmet and riding a horse? You mean Harvey Smith?
The claim that Crapita brought something that the Armed Forces did not have is complete and utter horse-feathers. Crapita had no relevant experience and certainly had no L33t Skillz previously absent. The previous contract had been run well by an organisation that understood military recruitment. Crapita had no experience of military systems to draw on.
As you say, the only experience available was negative.
"If I was feeling really cynical, I'd say that it is just the another step of the ongoing attempts to privatise the entire British state."
You can be as cynical as you like, but Army recruiting had been privatised years ago. Capita just bid for and got the contract that had previously been awarded to and run by another systems integrator. The odd thing, and a thing the Select Committee didn't focus on, was that the previous contract was run well and didn't suddenly leave the Armed Forces without recruits.
Once can only assume that the Capita bid was "reassuringly cheap" and that those awarding the contracts were blinded by the cheapness.
Well, duh. But sometimes it goes wrong. I lost a domain set to auto-renew because the registrar took the money and forgot to renew it. However if you check the contract, all you can get back is the fee. Still, the loss of the domain wasn't an issue for me, and I told the Russian cyber-squatter who tried to hold me to ransom over it to take a hike.
From time to time I check the domain, as in "just now" and yes, the idiot is still sitting on the domain and it has cost him more than I paid for it, ten times more, to maintain it. He's an idiot.
"I hate to think what else it has committed you to but I guess any business now done in the EU is taxed in Estonia."
Gosh yes, that would be terrible. Having to pay a flat rate (proportional, not "progressive") tax rate of 20% with no higher rate tax, no Corporation Tax, no withholding tax. How do those poor Estonian's manage, eh? Oh, by being wealthy, happy, most digitally switched-on in Europe with universal free education, free healthcare and the best maternity leave in Europe. And they are full-fledged members of the Euro. Life must be hell.
Remind me, why are we leaving the EU?
"I think I was one of Demon's first thousand;"
I was, IIRC Demon's twenty fourth customer. Having been aware of Giles Todd at university I got a tip-off that the service would be starting and knew that I could trust the Demon team who were all well-known among geeks at the time. I lasted as a customer up until Godfrey vs Demon Internet and the sale of Demon to Thus plc. at which point the Demon "Crack Legal team" swung into action and demanded that customers sign an open-ended agreement to indemnify Demon without limit for any future libel action. I declined the offer to underwrite Demon's costs and went elsewhere around 2002, I think. That was when their "Crack Legal Team" started to get all shouty and threaten disconnection unless I signed a document that no one in their right mind would sign.
"So the fact that the USA is the only industrialised country to REDUCE CO2 emissions must please you?"
That sort of claim is so easy to debunk. When you say "only industrialised country to REDUCE (sic) CO2 emissions" all someone needs to do is to provide evidence that a single industrialised country has reduced CO2 emissions and you end up with egg on your face. Not only that, but if the USA has actually increased its CO2 emissions you end up egged from head to foot.
Consider yourself egged. The UK has reduced its CO2 emissions from 600Mt to 379Mt, a 36% reduction, and is on target to meet its Second Carbon budget (internationally agreed) emissions. Meanwhile the USA's CO2 emissions have *increased* from the 1990 baseline (5 billion tonnes in 1990, 5.2 billion tonnes currently).
I suggest that you do a little bit of research before making bold statements and that you cease obtaining your news from the US propaganda machine.
"Not even close. The highest jet-powered/non-rocket-powered aircraft so far is the Ye-266, which is a modified MIG-25 that reached 37.65km."
SpaceShip One piloted by Brian Binnie reached 112,010 m (367,487 ft), quite a bit higher than the 37.65 km achieved by the Mikoyan Gurevitch E-266M. SpaceShip Two should be able to reach the same height as SpaceShip One, although probably not when full of paying guests. SpaceShip One currently holds the altitude record for a manned aeroplane.
It makes sense, but you need to read carefully through the guarded language used by barristers.
Instead of overtly stating that CA was operated fraudulently, they have to tease out the evidence on piece at a time. The information that Emerdata were funding CA's costs is (IMO) damning because it shows that Emerdata are effectively cutting CA free in the hope that the problems with CA are not then traced back to the wider group of companies and that Emerdata don't have to face any legal consequences. If they succeed, and it looks as if they have, then they get to open another CA-like company and do it all over again. The picking around Green's involvement appears to be trying to highlight that CA wasn't necessarily bankrupt but was positioning itself to become bankrupt in the hope that would kill off any SARs.
"Second step - centralised database linking all government data"
Already exists.
"Third step - mandatory registration of CCTV systems with government"
Already required.
"Fifth step - mandatory tracking of all vehicles..."
Already done.
"... to replace outdated fuel duty and VED."
Probably a good idea.
One problem with conspiracy nuts is that they don't seem to be aware of which systems have already been implemented. ID Cards will be the last piece of the jigsaw, not the first.
"Try Turkey"
Are you sure that you want to use Turkey, with its dreadful human rights record, as the poster child for ID cards? It's a country where people practice self-censorship because they know the cost of speaking out against government abuse of power.
Even membership of Amnesty International can see one facing charges of being "a member of a terrorist organisation". And the Turkish government has a clever wheeze of putting people into indefinite "pre-trial detention" so that they don't even have to take them to court.
"An ongoing state of emergency set a backdrop for violations of human rights. Dissent was ruthlessly suppressed, with journalists, political activists and human rights defenders among those targeted."
--Amnesty International
Over a decade ago I was appointed by a client to look at the resilience of their operations. They wanted proper 24/7 always on operation but they had a single data centre and that was handily located under the final approach to "a major airport". The "backup strategy" consisted of making tapes stored locally, some of which were migrated to a "secure location". From time to time. I wrote a report detailing the flaws in their approach. Surprisingly they took it quite well and decided to spend the big bucks creating a second data centre to provide remote backup and failover. That was also situated at the end of a runway.
I pointed out that this was just the same as their current, flawed, installation and got the message "Don't be silly, what are the chances of having two crashes on the same day?"
At the planning stage it was zero cost to ensure that both DCs had different risk profiles. In fact a very good location (old nuclear bunker) had just come up for sale which would have cost a fraction of the price of the new build that they did. However that had been rejected because it was in a location that didn't attract government grants; even though with the grants the new build option was still more expensive.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
