If you like mobile shooters, I urge to try out Call of Duty: Mobile.
It’s basic CoD + BR. It’s surprising good.
Dude across from me says he sent me a message on twitter. I can’t see it.
1 Like
Why even have people come out to give quotes if they all don’t have your businesses best interests in mind. You’re just wasting their time, and yours.
My guess is she already knows what she wants, but just wants an IT company to come out and give the same opinion.
When it comes down to it, there’s multiple ways to do a single task when it comes to pretty much everything in IT.
2 Likes
Haha, Sorry I found this funny.
Why are manholes round?
This is a joke from 1990s, which addresses this:
Richard Feynman, goes to Microsoft for an interview. Following is the excerpt:
Interviewer: Now comes the part of the interview where we ask a question to test your creative thinking ability. Don’t think too hard about it, just apply everyday common sense, and describe your reasoning process.
Here’s the question: Why are manhole covers round?
Feynman: They’re not. Some manhole covers are square. It’s true that there are SOME round ones, but I’ve seen square ones, and rectangular ones.
Interviewer: But just considering the round ones, why are they round?
Feynman: If we are just considering the round ones, then they are round by definition. That statement is a tautology.
Interviewer: I mean, why are there round ones at all? Is there some particular value to having round ones?
Feynman: Yes. Round covers are used when the hole they are covering up is also round. It’s simplest to cover a round hole with a round cover.
Interviewer: Can you think of a property of round covers that gives them an advantage over square ones?
Feynman: We have to look at what is under the cover to answer that question. The hole below the cover is round because a cylinder is the strongest shape against the compression of the earth around it. Also, the term “manhole” implies a passage big enough for a man, and a human being climbing down a ladder is roughly circular in cross-section. So a cylindrical pipe is the natural shape for manholes. The covers are simply the shape needed to cover up a cylinder.
Interviewer: Do you believe there is a safety issue? I mean, couldn’t square covers fall into the hole and hurt someone?
Feynman: Not likely. Square covers are sometimes used on prefabricated vaults where the access passage is also square. The cover is larger than the passage, and sits on a ledge that supports it along the entire perimeter. The covers are usually made of solid metal and are very heavy. Let’s assume a two-foot square opening and a ledge width of 1-1/2 inches. In order to get it to fall in, you would have to lift one side of the cover, then rotate it 30 degrees so that the cover would clear the ledge, and then tilt the cover up nearly 45 degrees from horizontal before the center of gravity would shift enough for it to fall in. Yes, it’s possible, but very unlikely. The people authorized to open manhole covers could easily be trained to do it safely. Applying common engineering sense, the shape of a manhole cover is entirely determined by the shape of the opening it is intended to cover.
Interviewer (troubled) : Excuse me a moment; I have to discuss something with my management team. (Leaves room.)
(Interviewer returns after 10 minutes)
Interviewer: We are going to recommend you for immediate hiring into the marketing department.
2 Likes
You already get so much space with Office 365 that it would be ideal. Bosses are simple. Tell her that it won’t cost anything more since it’s already covered with Office 365. If she’s a good boss then saving money should appeal.
Also, didn’t you start working somewhere new? Is this the new boss?
edit
Oh wait, I see you get lots of space with G Suite too. Ah then it really doesn’t matter.
3 Likes
I’m wondering that as well.
There is also one where you get hosted exchange so you wouldn’t need google and it would all be in one place AFAIK.
1 Like
Yes this is the new boss.
we have a G Suite subscription and office 365…
I know, and the sucky thing is i am the one having to phone people to come out to do shit like this…
1 Like
Hehe bosses. It’s a tough one.
3 Likes
Well, if that’s the case, see if you can find out what your bosses preference is, and then tell the next company you call what she wants.
Although, I’d suggest Google Drive, just because your emails are already Google, and sharing files on drive integrates very nicely when using a web browser for everything. Of course, your boss using Outlook might be a pipe wrench in the cogs…
1 Like
Tell me about it. I have two bosses (a CEO and an upper manager) who don’t agree on most things. They’re married to boot.
The CEO actually walked away from a meeting this morning because the manager was apologizing for the lack of planning on a massive project and stated its both of their faults.
Its like working for a 3 year old throwing a tantrum.
2 Likes
i also think google drive is better, but i have to give reasons why and ja the issue with outlook is a problem, as she likes the look of outlook. She is currently using a mac with microsoft office… so all her stuff is currently being backed up to the icloud in any event as well as google drive, and im sure because she is using outlook stuff is going there already.
i sent her this link this morning
and now she is complaining she doesnt have time to go through articles etc but i have to do a “report” on the pros and cons etc etc etc…
Can i also just mention that she thinks the whole internet is out to hack her computer and hence why she wants cloud storage etc. i am not allowed to create any online profiles for the company or save any company details online cause the chinese will steal the info etc…
2 Likes
That’s actually a good mentality to have… If you know what you’re doing, which she obviously doesn’t.
Copy/pasta key points from that link you just posted and call it your own 
As far as cloud storage, tell her you can trust Google or Microsoft as much as China with her data. No matter where you store your data, it is never truly safe. Best thing you can do is have it on a PC with no network connectivity in a locked room with extreme physical security measures.
3 Likes
Possible suspension, wheel or hub failure. Saw one just last week against the center barrier on the M1. His front drivers side wheel, still connect to the entire section of the axle were lying in the middle lane 200m away.
Saw a lot of that when driving to Mozambique.
1 Like
Indeed metal fatigue is a real thing. When you constantly over load your vehicle.
2 Likes
MEH
C:\Users\wyvre>ping www.google.com
Pinging www.google.com [172.217.170.4] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 172.217.170.4: bytes=32 time=65ms TTL=54
Reply from 172.217.170.4: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=54
Reply from 172.217.170.4: bytes=32 time=115ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Ping statistics for 172.217.170.4:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 3, Lost = 1 (25% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 39ms, Maximum = 115ms, Average = 73ms
C:\Users\wyvre>ping www.google.com
Pinging www.google.com [172.217.170.4] with 32 bytes of data:
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.4: bytes=32 time=116ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.4: bytes=32 time=83ms TTL=54
Ping statistics for 172.217.170.4:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 2, Lost = 2 (50% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 83ms, Maximum = 116ms, Average = 99ms
C:\Users\wyvre>ping www.google.com
Pinging www.google.com [172.217.170.4] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 172.217.170.4: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Ping statistics for 172.217.170.4:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 1, Lost = 3 (75% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 55ms, Maximum = 55ms, Average = 55ms
ISP: Cool Ideas Service Provider (Pty) Ltd
Ping: 37ms
Download: 5.95Mbps
Upload: 3.18Mbps
Test your speed: http://speedtest.co.za
test 5 mins later
ISP: Cool Ideas Service Provider (Pty) Ltd
Ping: 26ms
Download: 1.21Mbps
Upload: 0.05Mbps
Test your speed: http://speedtest.co.za
C:\Users\wyvre>ping www.google.com -t
Pinging www.google.com [172.217.170.36] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=54
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=54
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=54
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=54
Request timed out.
Reply from 172.217.170.36: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=54
Ping statistics for 172.217.170.36:
Packets: Sent = 59, Received = 28, Lost = 31 (52% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 21ms, Maximum = 29ms, Average = 24ms
That smells like a cable problem (damaged? poorly spliced?), or maybe a hard-core network config problem.
That’s worse loss than on a point-to-point Wi-Fi link in a proper highveld thunderstorm.
2 Likes
Morning
3 Likes