Garacesh

Depends. I've found that when this issue rears its head, I can add the printer manually by going to \\print-server\ in file explorer and right-click/connect to the printer. But there's a pretty easy way of distinguishing what the problem was. If the machine/console user profile is experiencing the issue then the printer does not show up in Devices and Printers but does show up in list of available printers when the user tries to print from a program (IE, SIMS, Word, etc) If the machine/console user profile isn't affected by the issue, the printer shows up in Devices and Printers as normal.

You're assuming laptops are purchased as teachers are recruited. This is often not the case. A lot of places people won't do either mass-staff-laptops or forced-encryption and are now looking at their options. Suddenly buying ≈75-150 laptops looks pretty damn expensive. Well, yeah, but reasonably speaking, there's things like drive-by-exploits that can still infect machines. To be clear, I'm not insinuating a memory stick is any better, an encrypted memory stick can still get infected if it's attached to an infected machine, I'm just trying to point out it's neither here-nor-there, really. It does if you need to access work held elsewhere. Giving a laptop to a member of staff is 100% useless if it has no way to get the work they've done in school, no? The member of staff takes the laptop home, switches it on and... nothing. They still need either internet (to access cloud storage or to use remote access) or a memory stick/external hard drive to move files between the machines. Don't get me wrong, your approach works, but going with the encrypted USB stick method is likely more familiar to a user, has better redundancy (a laptop can be lost/stolen/misplaced whilst it's switched on and thus unecrypted), and costs considerably less to replace in the event of any issues.

I don't think the publicity particularly matters. KFC is KFC. If you like it, you like it. You're most likely still going to go there once this is all resolved. Nobody is going to decide "Oh, I would go to KFC, but they didn't have chicken that one time, so now I won't eat there." lol. They're haemorrhaging money, most likely, but I don't reckon they'll lose many customers. It does make me wonder, though.. The issue is apparently in the delivery of said chicken, I presume the supply isn't impeded. So, what? Are there warehouses full of frozen chicken where workers are just twiddling their thumbs waiting on a lorry to show up? Or is it all in the back of wagons already and just not going anywhere?

But judging by your avatar, you're OK with funding the NHS who have to deal with people giving themselves cancer via smoking? At least food is a necessity to, y'know, the whole 'living' thing. Smoking ain't so much. Minutes? I beg to differ. I find that the vast majority of recipes take a minimum of 20-30 minutes. Hardly something you can do when you're out and about. I tend to find that there isn't enough space for an oven, fridge and kitchen cupboard in my daily 'out and about' bag.. It's also not about laziness. Numerous studies have found that it's actually considerably more expensive to eat healthy than unhealthy. Granted this isn't quite so much about takeaways or fast food, but in the grand scheme of things, you'll find that financially struggling families often have poorer diets because it's more affordable for them, and that also contributes to the lack of proper diet in society. Dunno what fast food places you've been going to, but that's sounds pretty exaggerated to me. I've never had to wait longer than maybe 5 minutes on a 'normal' day, and any time people are queuing up for longer you can bet the town/shopping centre/venue/etc is so rammed there's no space anywhere else either (restaurants, cafes, etc). Or you, y'know, eat it once in a while like a normal person. It's completely fine to have the occasional burger/chicken/pizza/etc as long as there's no CI/CO surplus in the long-term. Ordering a pizza or a curry once a week isn't going to end up with you being this hypothetical burden on the NHS you put forward. Over-simplifying it to suit your argument is a serious misrepresentation of the issue. Fast food doesn't kill people. Unhealthy diets cause issues that kill people. Coronary heart disease kills people. Diabetes kills people. These things can be brought on as a result of a vastly unhealthy diet. This is true. Too much fast food in your diet can result in it becoming unhealthy, which in turn leads to the aforementioned issues. Also true. But to say flat-out that "fast food kills people" is oversimplifying it to absurdity. All-in-all, the issue is considerably more nuanced than you give it credit for. It's not just 'people being lazy'. Sometimes it is, undoubtedly. But I fail to see that there's anything wrong with grabbing a quick burger whilst you're out and about. Ooops. Sorry @elsiegee40, was typing out as you made your reply. Perhaps it's worth splitting off?

Eh, fast food has its place. It's not meant to be healthy. Sure, some of them might market themselves as being healthier than some others, but that's not the point. The point is it's fast. That's why it's called fast food. Decent cooking isn't going to get you very far when you're out in the town centre at 3pm on a Saturday and all the cafes are packed This idea that fast food is causing the obesity crisis is a little bit over-exaggerated. Sure, it plays its part. Deep-fried chicken isn't the healthiest option in the world, no. But calories in is only half of the problem. The other half is calories out (or the lack thereof)

KFC shuts more stores in chicken crisis - BBC News KFC still has no chicken. More closures.

Yeah we do that too. Same with things like user areas, so there aren't usually clashes there. This is just the way it was when I got here. It could be changed, but it would create a lot of hassle. Alas we're getting off-topic. I reckon sooner or later someone, probably PSE1 or Skills for Life, are going to ask me to unblock it because job/college/work experience applications. And whilst knowing the pupils age/name/school is completely justifiable and not an issue for those specific circumstances, it's everything else that they could email that raises my concerns. Since it isn't feasible to whitelist everything, I'd probably recommend a moderated approach. But I wonder does that come with its own set of issues, like if the kids are emailing off CV's that means I2 have access to their home addresses, phone numbers, etc. Fine I could get some of that info via SIMS if I wanted to, but still. And if the kids start signing up for services using their school email, I2, by virtue have access to all of those accounts since I can intercept password resets (which again, I could do anyway just by taking control of their entire account, so, does it really matter?), PLUS, and here's the bigg'un, what if for example they send an email discussing personal medical issues, or something related to a criminal offence. Again, given how G Suite operates, I have access to all of this information anyway. For example I can change any users' password and seize control of their account, or I can use Vault to pull back all emails sent by a user even if they've been deleted. But there's a fine line between reactive and proactive security, and I feel any attempt at proactive security would be considered too invasive. Maybe it could legally all be rendered kosher by a big 'Outgoing/Incoming emails are moderated.' disclaimer, but I wouldn't know for certain. 1: Or PSHCE or whatever other bloomin' acronym it is now. 2: Or whatever other poor sap gets put in charge of moderating incoming/outgoing emails.

We need some way of identifying year group A) for our benefit ('Joe Bloggs in year 10 has no files in his user area, can they be recovered?') and because we constantly have multiple pupils with the same Surname/First-Initial combo. The vast majority of the time it's parents naming their kids John and Jane, Edward and Eliza, Stephen and Sophie, etc. But not always.

Yeah, alright then, good luck with that one. A) Laptops cost more B) Laptops can also be infected with viruses C) Teachers like to feel self-sufficient, and the majority of them feel 'It works, why change it?' D) It doesn't require an internet connection You're not wrong. I support what you've said in principle. But it just isn't feasible. Every teacher does some degree of their work from home. Maybe that's just marking, maybe it's lesson planning, maybe it's everything they do in school. They need some degree of getting that working at home, and things like remote access aren't always viable depending on your setup and what tech they have at home. Boolean statement: Are you blocking any and all external storage media? If no, your teachers are using USB sticks already. Far better to adapt the current method to suit data protection laws than to try and push such a huge change.

Since we only run delprof2 on our pupil machines, I think I'm going to take out the Delete user profiles older than a specified number of days on system restart setting from our GPO's and secretly reimage a few staff machines, see if the issue re-occurs. The Delete cached copies of roaming profiles policy has never been enabled for our staff as they use local profiles, but is enabled for our kids. I'm going to leave that one in place for the kids at the moment since I'm only testing with staff machines. I'll report back if the issue still occurs, but given how sporadically it gets reported, there's no guarantee I'll know quickly or not.

Valid point, I hadn't considered that. It's the same here. email from 14BloggsJ@[domain] displays in GMail as "Joe Bloggs <14bloggsj@[domain]>" and presumably as similar in other mail clients/websites. So realistically, one email from a user contains a Forename, Surname, what school they attend, and (if you're smart enough to figure it out..) an approximate age. Definitely enough PII to have me concerned about DPA/GDPR.

All of our school-provided email addresses bar pupils from emailing anybody who isn't part of the school gmail domain, but I suspect this may need to change in future years.. My problem here is this isn't really a rule that can be 'relaxed', you can't possibly whitelist all the legit addresses, so email is either on, off, or moderated (and I'm sure as hell not paid enough to moderate all Y10/11 emails) Is there anything definitive that says their should be no PII in the email address? We currently use [2 Digit Year of Entry (if they came in Y7)][surname][Forename-Initial] (eg 14BloggsJ) If I'm going to have to say "No, we can't do that, child protection." if when I'm asked to relax the rules, I'd like to have something concrete I can use to back my corner.

I know considerably little about SIMS so I hope I'm making sense.. One of our Admin team is trying to, from what I can gather, edit Templates. She says she has to edit them and import the Aspect. The problem is, with SRP in place, she gets an error that says it's blocked by group policy. The SRP is a whitelist policy that whitelists the following locations: %HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\SystemRoot% and %HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\ProgramFilesDir% (default entries) %ProgramFiles%\ %ProgramFiles(x86)%\ %SystemRoot%\ (with a disallow rule for %SystemRoot%\Temp\) %UserProfile%\ (with a disallow rule for %Temp%\) Does anyone know what I'm missing? Please don't tell me it wants to execute from %TEMP%...

But wouldn't there be a big ol' pit of empty space (or a crater topside) since the initial 'burst' from the gate disintegrates everything in its path?

From what I know of my housemate playing the game, your choices are: Make lockpicks; Rent movies to raise stats; Work on ranking up your chosen waifu; Go do levels in the underground (I forget what it's called).

KFC chicken shortage closes outlets - BBC News

Is there anything you guys can't make puns out of? I'd luft to take a look inside your brains and see waffe makes you tick..

We had the same issue. It's to do with what PowerPoint calls 'Presenter View'. User Configuration/Policies/Administrative Templates/Microsoft PowerPoint 2016/PowerPoint Options/Advanced Do not allow PowerPoint to automatically extend display when presenting on a laptop or tablet : Enabled

Had this one again earlier today, managed to do a sliver of testing. net stop spooler > gpupdate /force > net start spooler brought some back, in a fashion.. Devices and Printer only showed one available printer, whereas going to the Print dialogue in Foxit produced that printer, plus another printer. The two bigg'uns in Reprographics didn't show up again though.

We have many cameras, but none of them are passively displayed on a screen somewhee. Camera feeds are brought up and examined only when a CCTV request is made. This request gets logged (who, when, why, and what footage from when was viewed) and needs to be authorised by a member of SMT. We did, at one point, have a passive live feed of the car park running in the Business Manager's office, but that's because we had an issue with vehicle vandalism. That's no longer a thing any more.

I've not been for a few years

There were a lot of IWB/pseudo-IWB's on display this year. Which is great, because IWB's were exactly what I went down for (that, and free MS exams.) Seeing a lot of (what basically amounts to) touchscreen telly's, or a (non-interactive) whiteboard/projector combo with some flavour of infrared tech so to facilitate the touch features.

The mane event will always be the cow puns, but this is trotting in at a close second.

My bad! Didn't catch that it had already been posted.

I would love - neigh, pay - to see that.