Jump to content

Things that piss you off that shouldn't


AVFCforever1991

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Apparently it's Dr Martins or GTFO. 

I remember when they were a value brand. My parents never once refused to buy me a new pair of Docs, they always passed the parental sensible and good value tests

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sliders.

Cos in sliders, you can still wear socks.

 

I stopped by at my nipper’s digs to drop off some stuff. Sliders and socks.

I don’t think I’ve ever felt so let down.

Probably grow up to be Stoke trailer trash.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must have had 5 or 6 DPA requests from the police today, not that unusual in itself but every single one of them has been utter bobbins

10 digit phone numbers

House numbers too high for the street its in

Completely wrong postcode for the street (Like they looked up the postcode for a road with the same name in a different suburb)

One I actually read three times and still haven't got a clue what was being asked for and on phoning this guys colleague who I'm in contact with regularly, even she just exclaimed WTF!

And other similar bloopers but the latest absolute belter from Greater Manchester Police... they sent it to the completely wrong Taxi Company because we aren't based in sodding Burnley

It's like checking facts isn't something the Police are trained to do

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Wainy316 said:

Pretty sure I've mentioned this before but men wearing flip flops in urban and suburban areas.

That's pretty much all I ever wear away from work in the spring and summer, unless I'm running, cycling or hiking.  Of course, when I do wear shoes I always wear socks.

haters GIF

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I trust that you people who put on flip flops to put the bins out aren't talking about the type with the bit that goes between your first and second toe? As that would necessitate removing your socks. I detest those things anyway - the 'between the toes' bit feels horrible, can't wear them. I have a pair for the beach, that are flats, with just a broad, velcro-fastening strap across the top. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

I trust that you people who put on flip flops to put the bins out aren't talking about the type with the bit that goes between your first and second toe? As that would necessitate removing your socks. I detest those things anyway - the 'between the toes' bit feels horrible, can't wear them. I have a pair for the beach, that are flats, with just a broad, velcro-fastening strap across the top. 

Oh it’s possible

image.jpeg.806e215194350366ddd49c4eb1815d83.jpeg

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, mjmooney said:

I trust that you people who put on flip flops to put the bins out aren't talking about the type with the bit that goes between your first and second toe? As that would necessitate removing your socks. I detest those things anyway - the 'between the toes' bit feels horrible, can't wear them. I have a pair for the beach, that are flats, with just a broad, velcro-fastening strap across the top. 

You can't walk in them for more than 5 minutes without blisters wearing between your toes.  Definitely need the broad strap accross the top of the foot only. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My bins/back garden flip flop isnt the traditional between the tow flip flop, it is as mike describes. My van croc flops are traditional and they are like butter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who performatively goes through the list of cookies and refuses permission for every one then?

I was finally defeated by an American site last week, which had a list of about 10,000 advertisers (I'm not exaggerating) and no way to refuse them except one by one.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the past day I have been using the app Hush to block cookie pop ups. I haven’t had a single one whilst using it. If you have an iphone and use safari I recommend it. 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Am I the only one who performatively goes through the list of cookies and refuses permission for every one then?

I was finally defeated by an American site last week, which had a list of about 10,000 advertisers (I'm not exaggerating) and no way to refuse them except one by one.

I see you’re echoing Butters’ stance on reading through Apple’s terms and conditions for iTunes.

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

Am I the only one who performatively goes through the list of cookies and refuses permission for every one then?

I was finally defeated by an American site last week, which had a list of about 10,000 advertisers (I'm not exaggerating) and no way to refuse them except one by one.

Illegal, they are supposed to have a reject all but essential option

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, HanoiVillan said:

For sure . . .  but they didn't, and what are you gonna do about it really.

Well you could make the futile gesture of reporting to the totally understaffed ICO but that is about it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bickster said:

Well you could make the futile gesture of reporting to the totally understaffed ICO but that is about it

Indeed. What authority would they even have over said US website? I mean if the answer is 'the website could be blocked in Europe' that seems like a pyrrhic victory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Indeed. What authority would they even have over said US website? I mean if the answer is 'the website could be blocked in Europe' that seems like a pyrrhic victory.

Was this the US version of the Amazon website? In which case they have no authority but if it was .co.uk then they do have authority and can levy fines of up to 4% of GLOBAL annual turnover. They can also impose a temporary or permanent ban from data processing at all.

The first step however would be rectification of the issue. It would be a huge courtroom battle which would drag on for years if they didn't comply.

So in reality, nothing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bickster said:

Was this the US version of the Amazon website? In which case they have no authority but if it was .co.uk then they do have authority and can levy fines of up to 4% of GLOBAL annual turnover. They can also impose a temporary or permanent ban from data processing at all.

The first step however would be rectification of the issue. It would be a huge courtroom battle which would drag on for years if they didn't comply.

So in reality, nothing

To be honest, I can't remember what it was for sure. I thought it might have been Vice, but looking just now I see they have a quick system, so not that. It was definitely a .com though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

To be honest, I can't remember what it was for sure. I thought it might have been Vice, but looking just now I see they have a quick system, so not that. It was definitely a .com though.

The rules for what they are worth in regard to US websites use a determinant of if the company is aiming their product at the European (or UK market), so if a UK citizen stumbles across a US website that isn't targeted towards that person the laws don't apply but if that website is courting a UK audience, then they do

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bickster said:

Well you could make the futile gesture of reporting to the totally understaffed ICO but that is about it

This is the problem, firms know the all commissioners offices are massively understaffed and that they won't get around to checking anything unless there's a complaint. Even then it'll be months later and the first step would be telling off not issuing a fine. 

I put in a complaint on a firm who outright ignored my DSAR (including 2 chase emails) and was impressed to hear back from the ICO 4 months later. 

You only have to look at the Irish DPCs office to see how short resourced they are:

spacer.png

Spoiler

Purposefully ignoring they've moved to a larger office. 

 

Edited by Rds1983
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â