I have a Fujitsu ScanSnap S1500, I scan through that... it auto names my post based on timestamp and drops it into a folder.
I rename it how I want to file it within my "Files" folder in Google Drive but leaving the datestamp intact, i.e. "2016-05-03T07:13:01 Finance - HMRC - P60.pdf" and I move it into another folder.
A cron comes along, looks at everything in that folder, fires a little Go util that uploads it to Google Drive (splitting " - " into subfolders), and finishes off by adding it as a calendar ever.
This would be a lot easier on Windows or Mac as I think you have Google Drive clients that sync whereas on Linux this doesn't exist.
I thankfully don't receive a lot of post, but when I do it's only 30 seconds to scan something and a few seconds to rename and move into another folder.
> an adult worker is entitled to an uninterrupted rest period of not less than 24 hours in each seven-day period
The key word is "entitled", meaning that an employer cannot force them to work (or fire them if they don't work). The worker can choose to do whatever they want with their time, so long as they retain the right to exercise their legally permitted break.
It would be a very weird law to not allow a worker to do any work related to their job during their free time. Would that mean that a musician couldn't play music during their free time?
Before googling for something you need to actually realise first that there's something that you don't know, but could.
Lots of useful things don't fit that pattern.
To take one example from here, I use 'pry' regularly, but before reading https://github.com/jbranchaud/til/blob/master/ruby/editing-c..., I didn't even think to wonder whether there was a way to fire up an editor from within it. It's not something I've ever actively needed, but it's a very useful shortcut now that I know about it.
People who write songs and materials for Churches do it to make a living. It's actually a big problem for folks who write songs and arrangements for Church Choirs--many of their customers don't feel they should be paid! I've been to conferences at Music and Musician trade shows where this very issue is discussed.
Right, and work for hire means a writer gets paid one time to do the job, and the residuals are owned by whomever hired the person do write the speech / book / song / lyrics / tambourine solo.
Doesn't matter if it's churches or playing in jazz clubs, writing and making music for a living is a tough business. I've worked some churches that paid quite well - at least industry standard - and I could go online now on CraigsList and find 5+ requests per day asking for music volunteers because religion. In my experience, churches are simply another ill-informed group that frequently want all the benefits of live music without compensating for it. Same goes for well-meaning volunteer organizations.
> many of their customers don't feel they should be paid
This happens to physical products too, I don't see how specific individuals not wanting to pay for something has any bearing on the existence / effectiveness of copyright.
> What about a plumbing business which dispatches jobs within a 5 mile radius. If the employee moves 2 hours away, suddenly the company has to pay 4 hours a day of commuting.
As you say, if the company has a fixed office at the centre of that radius, they can still tell the worker that their days begin when they arrive at the office, and then the 'worktime' begins once they get there, ready to travel out to the first customer. That's how many businesses operate anyway — and how the business at the centre of this case used to work. The case was brought once they closed that office down.
Having to get off the train for 75 minutes, with all your luggage etc., is effectively "changing train" to most people, even if you end up getting back on the same train.
Even without getting into complex election fraud, parties in many countries already know how to buy votes in a paper-ballot system: you simply offer a bottle of vodka for a cell-phone photo of the ballot marked the way you want.
And even without that, there's a much simpler calculation in play in Estonia. Keskerakond (the party closely allied with Putin's party), only got 7.7% of the e-votes in the most recent election: the demographics of online voters has very little overlap with their supporters. If only the paper-based votes were counted, Keskerakond would have won the election.
Sure, they'd still have the complication of actually forming a government; but it's much more likely they'd be able to do that with a first-place showing (and possibly without Savisaar).
With those sorts of numbers, if I were a Keskerakond strategist, I'd be doing everything I possibly could to discredit e-voting too. And the more "useful idiots" I could find, who'll merrily interfere in the elections a country they know very little about because it suits their own ideals, the better.
> you simply offer a bottle of vodka for a cell-phone photo of the ballot marked the way you want
you have to keep tens of thousands of people quiet for that to work without any suspicion at all. with e-voting you can commit major fraud without anyone noticing and with much much less evidence trail.
The Estonian voting system already allows you to verify your vote from a second device for a short time period.
This certainly doesn't protect against all attacks (and it's only one part of the security system) — but it _does_ help against the threat of a virus that invisibly intercepts your vote to turn it into something different. If people started reporting that their phone showed a different vote to what they thought they'd cast via their laptop, then the election would be in trouble.
The fact that it only shows you this for a short time period also gets around the problem of you being able to show to a third party how you voted (in cases of vote-buying or coercion), because under the Estonian system you can also vote as many times as you like (with only the final vote being counted). So you could use this verification to 'prove' to someone that you voted the way they wanted you to — and then log in again an hour later and vote for someone different.
But it also means that a virus that intercepts your PIN and your ID card can log in an hour later and vote for someone different. You then would have no way of knowing.
As I said, this particular approach isn't a solution to every potential problem.
However, I'm much less concerned with this threat than with the much simpler virus that simply changes your vote in real time.
Most people I know don't leave their ID card connected at all time; so the virus would need to wait for the next opportune moment, rather than silently casting this vote whilst you're not at my computer — thus significantly increasing the chances that at least some people would notice it. If it also had to load the voting software again to send the vote (I don't know enough about the protocols around this to know if it would have to or not), then it would be even more likely that some people would notice.
And on top of that, don't forget that the ID-card software shows on launch how many times you've digitally signed things. Most people almost certainly don't pay much attention to that number, but I'm sure some people would notice it rising unexpectedly from the virus, and an investigation could happen.
Oh, very nice idea. What's your workflow for doing this?