Ephelyon

Not really. That comment is very generic (and very wise), which was always in the spirit of Who. Another unwritten rule has always been that contemporary real-world people (and to some extent events) are not referred to explicitly, which is precisely because it's almost impossible to refer to them without appearing to make some sort of comment. So you have the British Prime Minister and Cabinet referred to in Aliens of London as all being killed by the spaceship crash, but not who they are or which party is in power. It's also why Yes Minister constantly referred to the Prime Minister, but never by name or by party. And why J. K. Rowling made occasional references to the Muggle Prime Minister throughout the Harry Potter novels, including one scene in Prisoner of Azkaban where he's present and has dialogue, but again, no further details. The only thing we know about him from the Potterverse is that, at that time, the Prime Minister is male. That said, there's a very long-winded discussion of it here, with lots of different opinions in the mix: My own opinion is probably closest to this comment from that discussion:

Anybody at all? Or anybody involved in what we're talking about?

I think what's getting under people's skin is that there's a certain sense of insistence about it, of moral posturing but with a very particular agenda at hand. I'm all for moralising, but there's a particular rulebook that's being followed here and that does come across. It's not just "doing good" - it's doing what SJWs would describe as good and playing very close to that tune at all times, which does grate on you after a while if you're not of that persuasion yourself. But this isn't just something to throw at Chibnall/Whittaker. The first time I noticed it was in a comment by the Twelfth Doctor along the lines that there are some bad things that happen in the world that you just can't predict, like X, X, X, "or Donald Trump". That really, really annoyed me, not because I have any truck with the man myself, but because Doctor Who is largely for children and the unwritten rule has always been that that means it should never, ever be political. But, see, that's the thing with SJW-style moralising: rules like that get torn up and thrown out the window, because they've decided their particular brand of moral posturing is so important that the old rules - which were there for a reason - get thrown out. If you disagree with that, you're wrong!!1!one! And that's how you can tell the difference.

It was better prior to 12 and 13 though, I thought.

I'm finding quite a lot of this writing rather rushed. We don't really get proper closure on the spiders; their fate is merely hinted at and then, as though the dramatic (though predictable) slaughter of the mother spider somehow implies the end of the rest of them, that's it. No more screen time for this episode's Big Bad, even if they weren't all that bad (and I can't stand spiders). The second episode felt similar at the end... we slightly get to know these two supporting characters, then *whoosh* they're gone... I guess if that's the pace that's needed to package each story into a single episode (as the producers indicated would be the case throughout this series), then maybe it's not such a good idea ... ?

… but still worth knowing about for smaller environments that do use WSUS but don't use a print server - like mine here at the moment, although that'll be changing soon... =]

Just occurred to me that it presumably won't matter if you're using a print server anyway as it'll just pull the driver off that, I guess...

What about WSUS? Do we need to enable the Drivers category, which is said not to be a good idea? Or is the new Windows 10 build smart enough to bypass WSUS for these new driver updates and go directly to Microsoft for them? It never used to be for things like language packs, for example... Worth seeing if any further information comes to light in the coming weeks...

A "wide lens", in post-reboot Star Trek? Who'd have thought … ?

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/09/18/microsoft_managed_desktop_service/ ... because M$ have always done really well at managing security and feature updates on their own terms...

Also doesn't mention the cloud once...

And let's not forget the Microsoft fudge of a couple of years ago when they tried to pretend they could save us all money by moving everything to (their) cloud because they thought an average secondary school spent £50K/annum on on-prem solutions...

Just thought I'd share the video created by Paessler for this year's Sysadmin Appreciation Day... https://blog.paessler.com/1-day-without-admin.-what-could-possibly-go-wrong

Final static void

Free Cloud-Drive-Mapper alternative for anyone who's strapped for cash: OneDriveMapper | Liebensraum

Hokay then. If you did want to try the "use a cr*ppy hub" option, you could always temporarily unteam one of your host NICs and connect it physically to this testing hub, then create a new External vSwitch in Hyper-V specifically for that NIC and then point your MDT VM at that vSwitch instead. Then connect a testing workstation to said hub to test it. That won't affect the rest of the virtual host running the factory then. That way, you'd eliminate whether it has anything to do with the VM's configuration specifically vs something switchy.

Okay. ESXi, is it? Or Hyper-V? Or Xen etc?

Even though you've tried booting a client on the same VLAN as the PXE server, I think it's still something to do with the way VLANs/routing is being handled by your switches. What I'd suggest is: grab a cr*ppy old hub (or cheapo unmanaged switch) from somewhere and hook your PXE server (or host if it's a VM) and a test workstation into that and see if the latter can boot from it. If they suddenly can, your problem is probably somewhere on the switching side. If they still can't, I'd say it's somewhere on the server side.

It hasn't thus far... although, as I've now left education (at least for the time being), it would be nice to get together with people for a performance or two, for the nostalgia factor if nothing else... =]

UPDATE: in case anyone is still subscribed to this thread... This song has now been published by The Register! =] https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/03/30/on_call/

Just to add to that, another example that has happened at my last-but-one school: Google Search: "how to make teachers not find out about self harm" (this is an additional needs student, MLD and profoundly deaf) Picked up through Securus, dealt with immediately. There should be no expectation of privacy on a school network, and we make this clear in our AUPs. Anything you do may well be monitored and/or recorded, although I see nothing wrong with reasonable limits on how long this will be stored for. I have no problem with technologies such as Impero or Securus for detecting these things, although I do object to e.g. eSafe's way of doing things, whereby they monitor externally and will call the police if they detect something extremely serious, even if the school doesn't consent to this. I had a good long chat with their MD about this a couple of BETTs ago. My view is that the duty of care should ultimately lie with the school, as that's where it originates, not with a private firm that doesn't actually have statutory obligations to these kids. Put bluntly: safeguarding trumps privacy. That said, I think there's a valid debate about what, if anything, should change once a student turns 18. But even then, as an adult employee I don't expect full privacy from my employer when it comes to e.g. web searches or accessing pornography/gambling, assuming I were using the employer's equipment to do so while I'm at work. My private life, and my own personal equipment, is none of their business, although even then I'd argue that if I connect my personal phone to the employer's guest WiFi and authenticate as myself, I'm still accountable for what goes on via my credentials and I don't expect it to be completely private.

What we monitor at school isn't home life, though - quite the reverse. This is more the "work life" of minors for whom a duty of care applies. I don't really understand why students should have an expectation of privacy in their use of school systems, although I do agree that there are potentially valid concerns around the use of e.g. Lightspeed to monitor all activity on a school-issued student tablet at home as well.

Indeed, besides the risk that these keywords will then somehow get into the hands of the kids, who will then invent new nicknames for things (as they do anyway, but still). It's a bit like telling the security/intelligence services that they ought to be "more transparent"...

Just point them in the general direction of PREVENT... =] Although I'd agree with their point that I can't see a need for any of this logging/metadata to be shared externally... might put that firm eSafe in a tricky position if enough fuss were made though...

Ah, I discovered this too and went and told the Capita folk directly a couple of BETTs ago. Demonstrated the issue and everything, using both Impero logs and "wmic process get caption,commandline /value"... don't seem to have done anything about it... :/