|
jabby posted:Yeah I don't know much about security systems but surely it should be possible to say 'the cardiology F1 needs access to this folder and this ward' then give that to whoever the new cardiology F1 is by default. Instead of them having to find out where the folder they need access to is located and request it themselves. Especially if there isn't anyone present who can actually authorize access. gently caress you could put it in a wiki called 'Middle Managers Guide To Letting The People Who Do The Actual Work Get To Work!' You might have to get the managers authorisation to send to IT to put it up though so I don't know how that would go down  e: On 06/04/1916 Jeremy Corbyn began planning the Brusilov Offensive Despite being a successful campaign he was widely critiqued for being scruffy and not having a bushy enough tash. Seaside Loafer fucked around with this message at 01:31 on Apr 6, 2016 |
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 17:37 |
|
|
My XCOM squad wiped out during a terror mission. Corbyn strikes again. Bastard can't get out quick enough imo
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 01:13
|
|
|
If Jeremy Corbyn was the Commander would he allow Our XCOM to shoot to kill to stop a terror mission?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 01:17
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:If Jeremy Corbyn was the Commander would he allow Our XCOM to shoot to kill to stop a terror mission? X-COM gets real uncomfortable real fast when you start viewing it as an abstracted War on Terror simulator.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 01:19
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:X-COM gets real uncomfortable real fast when you start viewing it as an abstracted War on Terror simulator. X-COM, or XCOM 2?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I put my right shoe on my left foot by accident this morning. Corbyn should resign over it IMO. Zephro posted:I wanted to have toast this morning but then I noticed the bread was mouldy. Corbyn should resign over this. Ddraig posted:My XCOM squad wiped out during a terror mission.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
I think the thing with NHS ICT is that they've got to account for the end-users being woefully incompetent when it comes to using computers. Union strength within the NHS is reasonably strong, so they can't fire you for stupid mistakes - like they could in the private sector (and this is a good thing) - so they need to limit the amount of stuff you could conceivably gently caress up, on the basis that 'million-to-one' chances actually occur often given the sheer number of people who work within the NHS. I do think that if the local ICT service has good staff retention, there's potential to work quite well with the team - one guy would extend me limited Admin functions if I called about something he knew I could sort out myself - but that's a total crapshoot. A story going around my team involves a manager who called to raise a question about her laptop that wasn't working properly - she explained that it was connecting to 3G, but not the network and the reply from the Helpdesk team member was "What's 3G?" Doesn't inspire confidence.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 01:22
|
|
|
Firos posted:X-COM, or XCOM 2? Enemy Unknown. Possibly Enemy Within, too, but I haven't got around to playing that one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 01:22
|
|
|
In Enemy Within you have EXALT which are alien sympathisers who are running operations to spread panic throughout the world. So yeah, it holds up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 01:24
|
|
|
Also magic alien goo that turns your dudes into supermen but only if you kill all the aliens before they set fire to it. Clearly an analogy for oil.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 01:26
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:Enemy Unknown. Possibly Enemy Within, too, but I haven't got around to playing that one. Well, in XCOM 2 you get to play as
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
Edit: Whoops wrong thread there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 06:29
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Not if they shout loudly enough that they're not, they're not. At least, not in the minds of the voters. Or at least that's they're logic, and sadly it's pretty accurate at times. The Tories are well aware that most people pay very little attention to political news, which is why they keep their messages short, simple and persistent. If somebody has no interest in current affairs but sees newspaper headlines in the corner shop: "Labour caused the 2008 crash by overspending" every week, hears on the radio in the background "Labour caused the 2008 crash by overspending", sees spokespeople on the tv stating: "Labour caused the 2008 crash by overspending", then (the Conservatives hope) they'll subliminally absorb that message and accept it as fact, without particularly reflecting on why they think it. Labour have in recent years been much worse at this, talking about all sorts of different issues and focusing on boring old facts and explanations, rather than just chanting: "The Tories will eat your babies" at every opportunity, until it finally penetrates the thick skulls of the electorate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 06:53
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:Yeah fair enough. The general rule (with loads of exceptions) with access to anything from intranet pages to network drives to areas is that authorisation needs to come from your line manager which I can see must be a bit annoying if you dont know who it is and they arent around. An email from them will usually do it, email them, say you need this whatever because reasons and tell them to email IT saying i authorise. The problem with this system is that it's fine if someone's expected to maintain a job for several years, but many trainees are on 4/6 month rotations. It creates a lot of silly busywork to give/remove permissions for fairly uninteresting systems so frequently. It's also a bit dumb when I can just walk into medical records, flash an ID badge at someone, and pick up the patient's folder. Also a fair whack of consultants don't really understand this IT stuff. They don't know why you want to be an ECS superuser or what that even means, so they don't complete the ticket, it expires, and you're left sitting staring at a padlock at 3am when you just want to see the drugs this patient is on. Strike today. hooray.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 07:48
|
|
|
Generally ive noticed obvious problems like this get overlooked because no one takes ownership of the issue cos everyones already over stretched trying to do their own job. The glaringly obvious answer (to me) to you and Jabby's problem is that at least 2 people, one of whom at least is always around, is available for giving you what you need. The security in and of itself isnt the problem, its needed and required by law, its the supply of giving you what you need. Idealy there should always be a designated person available and responding quick to all your needs, but i suppose that would involve spending money and we cant have that can we
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 08:12
|
|
|
winegums posted:There is definately fat in the NHS to cut. Basically 2/3 of the shite that is used to keep doctors on a short leash could be removed with no harm. Some elearning is more useful to have in that format than in face to face format. Also we nurses like our heads of nursing. Doctors are partners, not our bosses.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 08:14
|
|
|
The fat to be cut in the NHS is the obscene money that Trusts are obliged to spend on re-tendering/ competing for contracts. Millions are spent a year on this. My trust spunked 4 million for the privilege of having one of the CCGs underfund the service to the point the CQC have given them final warning notices for unsafe services. Trusts are having to spend a fortune on employing consultants ( not medical ones ) and managers to help the tendering process coz funnily enough due to lack of experience the NHS is poo poo at it compared to the private health care sector. Serotonin fucked around with this message at 08:34 on Apr 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 08:31
|
|
|
Namtab posted:Some elearning is more useful to have in that format than in face to face format. Also we nurses like our heads of nursing. Doctors are partners, not our bosses. I don't. The ones in our Trust are a cattle of overpaid wasters who offer nothing to clinicians on the shop floor. And no doctors aren't out bosses. In fact as a nurse I am the boss of 3 consultant psychiatrists and 4 staff grades.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 08:39
|
|
|
Firos posted:Well, in XCOM 2 you get to play as
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 09:27
|
|
|
No10 statement:quote:There are no offshore funds/trusts which the prime minister, Mrs Cameron or their children will benefit from in future. Our pm is a tax dodger lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 09:54
|
|
|
Hey remember years ago when Osbourne said they should be more transparent about their financial affairs, and Dave Who hosed A Dead Pig agreed and said he was happy to publish his tax returns? And remember yesterday when asked if the Cameron family was benefitting from tax havens it was "a private matter"? I guess my question is why did I have to remember the first thing on my own when it should have been every second sentence in news reports about the Panama papers?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:11
|
|
|
I saw one of those sovereign citizen billboards last night. Its not a very good advertisement
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:26
|
|
|
People have been asking me if I've ever killed someone and I'd just like to assure everybody that I will not be killing anyone in the future. I believe that's sufficiently answered the question.Not Operator posted:Hey remember years ago when Osbourne said they should be more transparent about their financial affairs, and Dave Who hosed A Dead Pig agreed and said he was happy to publish his tax returns? And remember yesterday when asked if the Cameron family was benefitting from tax havens it was "a private matter"? Downing Street spokesperson says if Labour wants to accuse him of wrong doing they need to prove it. So I guess it's not a Private Matter anymore? I hope they co-operate in Labour's investigation now they've sanctioned it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:29
|
|
|
I am predicting a comeback for Bernie Sanders and now genuinely think he could well be the next US president. I even put money on it - 25/1 for him to beat Trump is a good bet by my money. You read it here first.
ThomasPaine fucked around with this message at 10:38 on Apr 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:33
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:I am predicting a comeback for Bernie Sanders and now genuinely think he could well be the next US president. I even put money on it - 25/1 for him to beat Trump is a good bet by money. You read it here first. Sanders/Corbs are good leaders for countries facing the problem of a deeply divided and unfair society full of FYGM assholes (such as the UK and US currently) but not for countries facing the problem of needing to deal with the looming threat of climate and environmental destruction and the need to quickly and effectively rebuild their energy and agricultural sector (such as the UK and US currently).
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:38
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Seaside Loafer posted:Having worked in software development in the nhs since January id be professionally interested in knowing which tight security is bothering you exactly and what you scamps are up to getting around it and why I'm kind of curious (as a software developer myself) what a job writing software for the NHS is like  (Please tell me you guys don't use MUMPS)
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:38
|
|
|
It's going to be Hillary. This isn't some cheeky Corbyn steal of a nomination from a bunch of stuffed shirts, a Hillary presidency is inevitable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:38
|
|
|
Fans posted:It's going to be Hillary. This isn't some cheeky Corbyn steal of a nomination from a bunch of stuffed shirts, a Hillary presidency is inevitable. And it will be agressively mediocre for everyone except Hillary's rich friends.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:39
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:I am predicting a comeback for Bernie Sanders and now genuinely think he could well be the next US president. I even put money on it - 25/1 for him to beat Trump is a good bet by my money. You read it here first. Went to check the odds; found this. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:42
|
|
|
Fans posted:It's going to be Hillary. This isn't some cheeky Corbyn steal of a nomination from a bunch of stuffed shirts, a Hillary presidency is inevitable. Mate when you take the superdelegates out of the mix Sanders is really not far behind Clinton and has many northern states he's likely to do well in ahead of him. Clinton's strongholds in the south have all voted already. And if he gains more pledged delegates it's highly unlikely that the superdelegates would block that decision - there'd be open rebellion in the party. I honestly think he can pull this off, though I accept that it's going to be a tough slog.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:43
|
|
|
blowfish posted:And it will be agressively mediocre for everyone except Hillary's rich friends. I'll take "aggressively mediocre" over "Christo-fascist apocalypse" if that's what's on offer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:44
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:Mate when you take the superdelegates out of the mix Sanders is really not far behind Clinton Yeah but when you leave them in her winning is inevitable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:48
|
|
|
Fans posted:Yeah but when you leave them in her winning is inevitable. The rest of that quote is relevant here Fans and I don't think you should have removed it when replying!!!!!
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:50
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:The rest of that quote is relevant here Fans and I don't think you should have removed it when replying!!!!! The whole point of Superdelegates is to block candidates they don't want. They don't want Bernie. He isn't going to win.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:51
|
|
|
Fans posted:People have been asking me if I've ever killed someone and I'd just like to assure everybody that I will not be killing anyone in the future. I believe that's sufficiently answered the question. Seems like this could come back to bite you. On the one hand it makes you look weak, and on the other if it becomes politically expedient to kill someone in the future the press will see it as a u-turn. I'd go with something like "I am not killing anyone at the moment, and have no current plans to kill anyone, in line with this party's clear policy on killing people. In fact, any deaths occurring today can be rightly attributed to THE PREVIOUS LABOUR GOVERNMENT."
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:51
|
|
|
Fans posted:The whole point of Superdelegates is to block candidates they don't want. They don't want Bernie. He isn't going to win. Which may well be true, but the Democratic Party are not as blind to the optics of this kind of poo poo as the GOP.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:55
|
|
|
Fans posted:The whole point of Superdelegates is to block candidates they don't want. They don't want Bernie. He isn't going to win. They have never in the history of the party done that though. They know that doing so would tear it apart.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 10:57
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:They have never in the history of the party done that though. They know that doing so would tear it apart. They've never needed to, but the purpose of Superdelegates is to block grassroots activists like Bernie. It's their entire reason for being.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 11:03
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:Mate when you take the superdelegates out of the mix Sanders is really not far behind Clinton and has many northern states he's likely to do well in ahead of him. Clinton's strongholds in the south have all voted already. And if he gains more pledged delegates it's highly unlikely that the superdelegates would block that decision - there'd be open rebellion in the party. I honestly think he can pull this off, though I accept that it's going to be a tough slog. Mmm, yes, perhaps, but have you considered that hope is a mistake?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 11:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 17:37 |
|
|
Clinton going to be in jail by the election (not really because its the obama administration that decides whether to prosecute, but it looks like the fbi are going to recommend indictment)
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 11:07
|
|
