>>29172

My job is so high stakes that it would be ludicrous for any* email inbox (except Brendas) to go ignored for more than ten minutes at a time, 24 hours a day. Any operational role left unfilled would be genuinely dangerous. I see now that most businesses don't run like that, suppose I hadn't really thought about it that much.

*maybe not any, but certainly anyone handling our service provisioning

>>29176
Ignore the mailbox for more than 10 minutes and people die. Sounds like a really boring version of Speed.

>>29176

I've seen surgeons in high-end hospitals get caught wandering off to take a shit when their patient is due to move from theatres to intensive care. I'm genuinely curious what your industry is that you aren't allowed to be away for ten minutes.

You lot's autistic bickering about e-mails has rather tickled me. I don't work in big high flying business where millions of pounds depend on me answering an e-mail, but I do know this.

If I ever need to actually genuinely get hold of someone for something that actually matters, I'll fucking phone them or their department. Sending an e-mail is by its very nature a "this can wait" method of communication, and getting annoyed over it or your perceived importance of it only suggests to me that your businesses are daft as fuck or you have a poor understanding of what's actually important.

It's all too common for people with middling status to overestimate the importance of their role, after all. An out of office reply is a polite courtesy, not a life or death issue of essential precedent.

>>29179
>I'll fucking phone them or their department

You sick bastard.

>>29179
This guy's got the biggest dick itt.

>>29179
BOSSLADM8

>>29176

> My job is so high stakes that it would be ludicrous for any* email inbox (except Brendas) to go ignored for more than ten minutes at a time, 24 hours a day.

I find it curious that your job is so "high stakes" yet your company apparently doesn't have personal email boxes or use personal pgp keys to verify email contents and sender. Do you just have big shared email addresses rather than using an alias to forward an email to e.g. helpdesk@ to all the relevant people? If there are no personal email accounts and no verifiable PKI, how on earth is there any responsibility for exactly which person sends what and when? The setup sounds bizarre.

>>29174

Me too mate. Me too.

>>29183

>The setup sounds bizarre

I hadn't even considered it to be this odd, but clearly it is, or I'm just not explaining it well. I suppose the simplest way to explain it is that there are desks that need to be manned 24/7, and each desk has an email address. I don't mean to say that we organise critical emergencies via email, but constant monitoring of the emails (and phone and many other more specialised communications tools) is vital for continued operation. A missed email probably wouldn't kill anyone (though I can imagine extremes in which it could) but it would certainly cause a huge fucking mess that you'd probably hear about. There's non-operational people with personal inboxes (I have one for my managerial duties outside of my active ops role) just as you'd expect, but the majority of the communication is essentially sent to desk1.location@company.com, and so on.

I'm probably making this sound a lot more complicated than it is.

>>29184

So what you really mean by important is that you'd risk breaching one of your SLAs, and the bosses would go mental because it might hit their bonus. Am I far off?

>other more specialised communications tools

Like what, do you have emergency semaphore operators or something? Instant messengers are a subgenre of e-mail.

Are any of you hiring?

>>29186
Yes, but no dogs, blacks or Irish.

>>29179
> your businesses are daft as fuck or you have a poor understanding of what's actually important.

You'd be surprised how seat-of-your-pants pants-on-head-retarded the internal workings of even billion dollar companies can be, but I generally agree. In our case if there's a single point of failure they are either important enough to have a PA who handles their comms and coverage (and they do enough cocaine that they are always up if not working anyway) or they're not as important as they think. Or, in rare cases, about to be fired for hiding the operational failures they're responsible for; company's "fix first blame never" culture does a very good job of avoiding this.

A workflow where someone's job is to watch their inbox is believable but I lack the imagination necessary to come up with a scenario that both requires them to be on their inbox like a hawk and also take meaningful action in response while still watching their inbox. Every scenario I can come up with is either a glorified bash script or a text to speech system wired to a loud speaker.

>>29185

>Am I far off?

Yes, sorry. We're talking about tangible services that millions use per day, not ethereal business applications. Our SLAs are largely concerned with safety even at the expense of performance. Our fuck ups (in a general sense, not just my workplace) tend to make the news.

>do you have emergency semaphore operators or something?

Not quite but also not that far off - it's really rather analogue. Some of the systems we use are very old indeed, in terms of technology.

>Every scenario I can come up with is either a glorified bash script or a text to speech system wired to a loud speaker.

Before email, this inbox would have been instead served by a TELEX printer, or at least something very much like it. Simply a channel to be monitored with information to be passed throughout the operation, or replied to. Perhaps a human text to speech system is not too unfair an analogy, though it still requires decision making and is only a very small part of the overall workload.

I should probably just explain the job less vaguely at this point as I feel like it seems like I'm just trying to be mysterious now, but I'm not actually allowed to fully explain certain procedures so I'm not entirely sure what I can and can't say at this point. I also realise saying this will only further muddy the waters, I can assure you it's a lot more mundane an industry than I'm making it seem. I think you're all just trying to imagine the wrong sort of business.

>>29192

I was specifically imagining you're some sort of IT subcontractor holding up networks and services for the NHS or a bank or something of that sort.

Either way I've worked and have friends who work in that sort of field. Anything where an SLA is involved means it's not that catastrophic in the real, physical Earth world, but does incur a big fee and therefore gets made to seem like a big deal in office space.

>>29193

It's not that, though I see why you'd guess that. It's more of an active service than technical maintenance.

We do have SLAs as we provide services to companies, but alongside the SLAs we have actual, proper regulations to follow while providing said services. Breaking the SLA would just cost money and time, failing to follow the regulations would be physically, actually catastrophic. Brenda not replying to my email straight away would be neither.

I've recently renewed my NUS card, rebranded as Totum for some reason, but it wouldn't work in Co-op this morning so I couldn't get my 10% discount. Fuck sake.

I'll keep a browser tab about gravitational waves or the Czeckoslovakian security services during the Cold War open for literally months, but something important like the a parcel price calculator or my online banking I'll close just as soon I look away from it for a second.

>>29196
Don't you ever turn your computer off?

>>29197
Why would he want to do that?

>>29197
Not him, but no. I never turn it off. Is it bad?

>>29197
I'm also not sure why you'd ever need to turn a computer off, or also why you think browsers magically forget what was open if you do.

>>29197
Why on earth would you do that?

I always turn mine off when I'm not using it, I'm pretty sure there are reasons for it beyond habit. Not leaving machines running 24/7 tends to extend their useful life. Plus I have to pay the electricity bill.

>>29197
I do, but as far as I know every single modern browser saves your last session so the tabs don't go anywhere just because I shut the machine down.

Is putting it to hibernate acceptable?

>>29202

Things might have moved on since I last cared about the hardware level of a consumer PC/Laptop but it was generally considered that the overall "stress" of running one 24/7 was less than the stress of repeated boot-ups.

I figure with SSDs and what not these days there's probably less overall wear and tear with reboots than what there used to be.

>>29205
From https://computer.howstuffworks.com/powering-down-computer.htm

>Modern PCs are built to handle 40,000 on-off cycles before failure [source: EnergyStar.gov]. If you shut down your computer at night and start it back up in the morning, you should be good for the next 109 years.

>If anything wears down your computer, it's leaving the machine on. Computers build up heat when they are actively processing data and running software. Heat itself can damage internal components, but it also causes your computer's fan to run longer [source: Greenemeier]. The more the fan runs, the quicker it will wear out its bearings [source: Gwinn].

There's a house on the street behind me with their Christmas tree up.

>>29207
Well... It is almost December... I have mine up.

I applied to volunteer for Labour this morning but haven’t heard back. If I hear nothing by 10AM I’m voting IIIWW Party.

Why is rye bread a luxury item? Finland lives on that stuff.

>>29209
The mods clearly intended this as an awkward acronym for Third World War, but every time I see it I just read it as International Workers of the World.

>>29211

>awkward acronym for Third World War

Is there a less awkward alternative?

I've got texts from Virgin Mobile and I don't like the fake pally-ness of them. Things like sending "Alright?" after a message with instructions from them.

Pic.

>>29213
I was thinking recently about how stupid the pretend matey attitude you get in error messages on websites or crash screens these days. Much prefer the all caps, top secret style of my bank's texts.

>>29213

I use one of those 'smart banking assistant' things for savings, and while the service itself is great and very effective, I'm absolutely fucking sick of it sending me emojis and saying "Wowzers! You've saved soooo much this month!". Wish there was a "not fun" mode.

>>29215
It's not Monzo, is it? I'm planning on moving to them but if they pull any shit like that they can fuck right off.

>>29216

It's Plum. From what I can tell, Monzo is much better, though Plum isn't a proper bank, they just do savings. I'm probably going to move to Monzo too as Plum just don't seem that reliable in general, despite getting a positive review from me.

Getting drunk at home. I thought about going out to see where the night might take me, but I have somehow managed to ascend past the booze-induced myopia and from a third person perspective I remember that my past drunken excursions have never met my expectations. In the past I was hoping to find meaningful connections on both the platonic and romantic level but for some very mysterious reason I only ever found other drunks whose quest for the same thing was both depressing and insulting because it wasn't on my obviously elevated and superior wavelength.

I don't even know why I started typing all this out in the first place. /101/ for the mind perpetually trying to create melodrama.

>>29218

It's like money, or jobs. It's easier to find Friends when you already have them.

Going out and getting into a drunken chat with a randomer is fine as long as you're with some mates and you're clearly just floating off for a smoke or they're all busy playing pool or something. But if you're out on your own and start talking to strangers it's hard nit to come off as creepy.

That said I went on a coke bender in a well known provincial town not too long back and woke up the next morning with about six new Facebook friends. Instead of a feeling of accomplishment for making new friends, I actually wanted to die of shame and embarrassment the next day.

I've just got a new phone, the Huawei P30 Lite, and the back of the case is so smooth that I can't rest it on my thigh when I have a poo because it won't keep still and starts sliding off. This is a worrying development. I didn't realise I had to factor this in to my choice of phone.

>>29220
Just put some tape on it

>>29220

If you don't want to use any kind of case, stick a skin on it.

https://easyskinz.com/collections/huawei-p30-lite

>>29220
The matt back panel of googles pixel phones is one of the subtle things about them that makes a big difference to the useability, but every other wanker just goes "but gloss looks better".

>>29220
You could just rough up the surface with some sandpaper or a scouring pad.

>>29222
I am planning on getting something like an Otterbox for it, but I have no real idea what are the best things to buy.

>>29223
My last few phones have all been Moto Gs, so I just assumed all phones were a bit grippy like them.

>>29225

My preferred post-Nexus phones are the Google Pixel XL range (I'm happy with a 150 quid pixel XL off Ebay to be honest). The Otterbox for the Pixel XL is the bee's nuts lad, you could easily beat a mugger to death with the cunt and still call and the police to come pick up the fucker's body afterwards.

When I can't get a Pixel for geographic reasons (I lost my last one in the middle east and needed a phone quick-sharp) then I always go with a Motorola G-something.

I was on a G5-something-play, currently on a G8-something-play.

No idea if you can get Otterboxes for them but if you can I'd recommend it.

The missus always buys Samsung and I always feel like beating myself to death with the bastard thing within minutes of trying to use it. Stick with the Motorola / Lenovo brand as a commodity phone and the Google phones as a higher tier "don't lose this in an Arab taxi unless you're really drunk" kind of phone.

>>29226

>The missus always buys Samsung and I always feel like beating myself to death with the bastard thing within minutes of trying to use it.

Why? They're nearly indistinguishable from stock android.

>>29220 here again.

It slid out of my pocket whilst I was standing up and now the screen has cracked in the corner. Welp.