Ranty McRant Thread 2

Anything not relating to the X-Universe games (general tech talk, other games...) belongs here. Please read the rules before posting.

Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum

Alan Phipps
Moderator (English)
Moderator (English)
Posts: 30368
Joined: Fri, 16. Apr 04, 19:21
x4

Re: Ranty McRant Thread 2

Post by Alan Phipps » Tue, 16. Apr 19, 21:11

So, basically, it is far safer to keep a 5G phone in your pocket than an oily rag. (See testicular cancer and dermatitis stats for the trade of garage mechanic.)
A dog has a master; a cat has domestic staff.

User avatar
Observe
Posts: 5079
Joined: Fri, 30. Dec 05, 17:47
xr

Re: Ranty McRant Thread 2

Post by Observe » Wed, 17. Apr 19, 02:41

Ketraar wrote:
Tue, 16. Apr 19, 19:23
Does it being radio waves not imply that they are of low energy and thus not really an issue?
Radio waves are part of the electromagnetic spectrum of frequencies, running from sub-audio to gamma rays, with radio, microwave, light and x-rays in between. The higher the frequency, the greater amount of energy is present in the wave.

Because of the high bandwidth of 5G, the frequency required to carry it, must also be high - around 6 GHz as I recall. There is some debate about the health risks of being in proximity to high energy electromagnetic waves.

pjknibbs
Posts: 41359
Joined: Wed, 6. Nov 02, 20:31
x4

Re: Ranty McRant Thread 2

Post by pjknibbs » Wed, 17. Apr 19, 08:35

Observe wrote:
Wed, 17. Apr 19, 02:41
Because of the high bandwidth of 5G, the frequency required to carry it, must also be high - around 6 GHz as I recall. There is some debate about the health risks of being in proximity to high energy electromagnetic waves.
AFAIK there are two frequency bands used for 5G, a chunk below 6GHz (which is usually in the 3.5GHz range) and then stuff up above 24GHz (so-called "millimetre band"). It isn't just "higher=bad", though, a typical microwave oven uses a frequency of only 2.45GHz--the actual transmission power has to be taken into consideration here.

User avatar
Chips
Posts: 4873
Joined: Fri, 19. Mar 04, 19:46
x4

Re: Ranty McRant Thread 2

Post by Chips » Fri, 3. May 19, 10:36

"Lack of humans and/or intelligence by companies" is best to sum this up.

My Gran died last year, in dealing with her estate the usual sorts of bills and stuff arise. That's no biggy. However, her Electricity provider went bust and so the "debt" has been passed onto whatever company reclaims bust companies stuff. Forgot the name for it... anyhew, they don't do electricity or have people used to dealing with that stuff. As far as they know, they ask the meter reading and collect the money. That's it.

Anyhew, submit meter readings for electricity - there's 2 meters, one is working/connected the other is not connected and hasn't moved for 30 years or something. For some reason they chose to ignore that and just made up numbers for the non working meter reading... and sent the bill.

The bill is for £30,000 of electricity use in 3 months. Despite years of near constant usage, they suddenly (without batting an eye or raising an eyebrow) believe a dead person is using 3 months of electricity EVERY SINGLE DAY over a 3 month period.

It's been ongoing now to resolve for 4 months. It's just insane... (and no, there's absolutely no way it's legit, they're just *that* retarded). I mean... just look at the numbers and surely think "wait, what?" ... but nope.

Alan Phipps
Moderator (English)
Moderator (English)
Posts: 30368
Joined: Fri, 16. Apr 04, 19:21
x4

Re: Ranty McRant Thread 2

Post by Alan Phipps » Fri, 3. May 19, 12:35

@ Chips: That's a case of a collection agency trying it on while hoping that there is uncontested non-probate estate and that any executors don't have legal advice. I would either let the estate's solicitor deal with it (at a cost) or refer it to Citizen's Advice Bureau (or equivalent). Meanwhile, write to the director or whatever of the collection agency explaining the facts in simple terms and mention that if it is not resolved sensibly within 14 days, your next letters will be to the ombudsman and the local press. Keep hard copies of all correspondence.
A dog has a master; a cat has domestic staff.

User avatar
BugMeister
Posts: 13647
Joined: Thu, 15. Jul 04, 04:41
x4

Re: Ranty McRant Thread 2

Post by BugMeister » Wed, 15. May 19, 23:01

- the lunacy of corporate oligarchy:
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... rk-669-sex
- megalomania running riot.. :lol:
- the whole universe is running in BETA mode - we're working on it.. beep..!! :D :thumb_up:

User avatar
red assassin
Posts: 4613
Joined: Sun, 15. Feb 04, 15:11
x3

Re: Ranty McRant Thread 2

Post by red assassin » Sun, 19. May 19, 19:39

Fairly regularly, I drive about an hour along a fairly standard A road (for the non-Brits, it's a moderately bendy road with one lane in each direction and no central barrier, with a standard speed limit of 60mph). Along this road, there are a couple of places where there are speed cameras. Most of the time I'll be in a group of cars, with a typical average speed anywhere between say 45 and 60mph. You'll note that this entire range falls below the speed limit. And yet, every time when we come to a speed camera, one of the cars in the group in front of me will brake sharply, causing every car behind them to also have to brake. I don't understand the reasoning here. Do they not know the speed limit? Do they not know what speed they're travelling at? Do they not understand how speed cameras work? Are they just so used to speeding they brake on reflex every time they see a speed camera? Depending on road conditions and how sharply they brake this is anywhere between annoying and inefficient and actively dangerous, and yet every time...
A still more glorious dawn awaits, not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise, a morning filled with 400 billion suns - the rising of the Milky Way

Alan Phipps
Moderator (English)
Moderator (English)
Posts: 30368
Joined: Fri, 16. Apr 04, 19:21
x4

Re: Ranty McRant Thread 2

Post by Alan Phipps » Wed, 22. May 19, 20:59

Re: speed camera braking. I don't condone or approve of it but I think I know what is probably going on.

Typical and normally law-abiding/safe drivers thinking about other things can currently be driving pretty much on autopilot and so not really noticing mundane things like speed limit and other road signs, and especially not the near-ubiquitous speed cameras may operate in this area warning signs. Therefore, when they see ahead something more threatening such as a speed camera box, speed hatching in the road, cameras on gantries, bridges and overpasses, a parked police/highways camera van, a parked or oncoming police car or an officer in a yellow vest by the road aiming something, they just go into 'OMG, I didn't notice the speed limit here!' mode and brake just in case before working out the reality of it (or even looking in the driving mirror).

Probably even more silly are drivers who brake hard just as they go past camera pylons on average speed check routes.
A dog has a master; a cat has domestic staff.

User avatar
Chips
Posts: 4873
Joined: Fri, 19. Mar 04, 19:46
x4

Re: Ranty McRant Thread 2

Post by Chips » Thu, 23. May 19, 19:30

Same happens whenever they see a Police car, or flashing blue lights of any type... slam the anchors on.

User avatar
BugMeister
Posts: 13647
Joined: Thu, 15. Jul 04, 04:41
x4

Re: Ranty McRant Thread 2

Post by BugMeister » Sun, 2. Jun 19, 12:38

- serious matters..
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... production

- doom and gloom
- the end is nigh.. :( :(
- the whole universe is running in BETA mode - we're working on it.. beep..!! :D :thumb_up:

User avatar
Chips
Posts: 4873
Joined: Fri, 19. Mar 04, 19:46
x4

Re: Ranty McRant Thread 2

Post by Chips » Fri, 14. Jun 19, 13:45

Windows 10 Update(s). Windows appears to have failed to update about 48 times. Indeed, it seems to fail on both systems I have (PC, Laptop). Some error about .net version 3.5 - which I thought was a relic from 2007 and I have nothing to do with, so unsure why an MS update is failing due to an MS product.

Anyone else getting this? I mean 48 updates which include "critical security..." and I'm only aware of failing as I finally thought "it's doing an update again? It's the wrong time for a monthly... oh look at all these failures in the Updater".

Alan Phipps
Moderator (English)
Moderator (English)
Posts: 30368
Joined: Fri, 16. Apr 04, 19:21
x4

Re: Ranty McRant Thread 2

Post by Alan Phipps » Fri, 14. Jun 19, 15:27

May 14, 2019—KB4495620 Cumulative Update for .NET Framework 3.5 and 4.8 for Windows 10, version 1903

If that is your recent update, then you can see it is for 2 versions of .NET Framework. Mine installed OK first time. I do recall though that these are sensitive updates because of the way they have to replace existing code seamlessly and hence are easily disturbed or discontinued by any issues that they find in code delivery or in that to be replaced.

There are MS update issue pages associated with every specific update and it may be worth browsing the appropriate one(s). These also give information on how to install the complete latest framework version from scratch if necessary.
A dog has a master; a cat has domestic staff.

User avatar
Chips
Posts: 4873
Joined: Fri, 19. Mar 04, 19:46
x4

Re: Ranty McRant Thread 2

Post by Chips » Fri, 14. Jun 19, 15:38

They do, but each time it's using their updates... they don't just supply a cab file or something.
I've tried the .net framework repair tool (failed), i've tried installing .net again (it fails), i've tried removing (fails). Uninstalled anti virus to be sure as well.

May try rolling back updates and starting again at this rate.

Laptop, however, is currently seeming to succeed with the update - so it'd appear to be having more luck :D

Why does it still need .net Framework 3.5 ... and it's fine to try installing again and again - but after that many there comes a time when it should be "Hi, this needs intervention".

pjknibbs
Posts: 41359
Joined: Wed, 6. Nov 02, 20:31
x4

Re: Ranty McRant Thread 2

Post by pjknibbs » Fri, 14. Jun 19, 16:45

It (meaning Windows) probably doesn't still need that version of the framework. You might have programs installed on it that need that version, though--the way Microsoft fixed the old issue of "DLL hell" (e.g. you have a program installed that works with a certain version of a system DLL, but not the one you happen to have installed) was by making programs advertise what version of the .NET Framework they use, and having all those separate versions still installed. You can still install version 1.0 of the framework if you have a program that still needs it.

User avatar
Chips
Posts: 4873
Joined: Fri, 19. Mar 04, 19:46
x4

Re: Ranty McRant Thread 2

Post by Chips » Fri, 14. Jun 19, 17:50

It's windows update that needs it; i don't... and windows update can't install it. That's why it's so irritating. It's a "Service on demand" - select it, installs, deselect, uninstalls. Shows selected. De-select, can't uninstall it says... it's not installed. But can't then install it if selecting it either - gives this error message that if you follow, recommends a load of stuff... none of which works.

However, am downloading 3.5 to see whether just a plain old fashioned install works. It is, after all, for Windows XP and before :D

Turns out that won't work either.

https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/hel ... 0x800f0907

Alan Phipps
Moderator (English)
Moderator (English)
Posts: 30368
Joined: Fri, 16. Apr 04, 19:21
x4

Re: Ranty McRant Thread 2

Post by Alan Phipps » Fri, 14. Jun 19, 19:36

@ Chips: As a long shot, run sfc /scannow and see if it throws up any errors that it can fix. Then try Windows Update again.
A dog has a master; a cat has domestic staff.

User avatar
Chips
Posts: 4873
Joined: Fri, 19. Mar 04, 19:46
x4

Re: Ranty McRant Thread 2

Post by Chips » Sat, 15. Jun 19, 00:10

I tried that, it won't run either :D Error message isn't resolved with recommendations for that one either.
It really does seem borked in some way. Also can't right click properties on anything either, and no fix for that too. Anti vir scans and others are all fine and dandy, so guessing something got corrupted and it just can't sort itself out.

Will try reinstall tomorrow. Backed up files to the spare drive this evening.

Post Reply

Return to “Off Topic English”