Re: Still waiting for HMRC to get to the 21st Century
"The government is under no obligation to give you free stuff."
Is it not? So why are taxpayers under obligation to give the government free stuff?
655 posts • joined 15 Oct 2008
Why don't public sector employment contracts have them? Most private sector employment contracts state that for the period of 6-24 months after leaving the job you must not go work for a supplier / customer / anyone introduced to you as part of your job after leaving the job.
"Because the clear cases of tax evasion don't go to tribunals, obviously. People who are caught red handed tend to be keen to settle instead of facing criminal charges."
Of the cases that don't make it as far as tribunals, the HMRC success rate is even lower. QDOS have a success ratio of 99.6% (they lost 6 cases of the ~1500 IR35 enquiries they defended):
So what you just stated has no basis in fact whatsoever. HMRC's success rate of ~10% at tax tribunals is positively towering over their success rate of 0.4% of the cases that never make it as far as the tribunal.
Quite true - and this is why it is unlawful to pre-emptively or blanket assess the role as inside IR35 without assessing what else somebody is doing, since it cannot be determined without assessing the individual contractor.
The problem is that HMRC have publicly on many occasions given advice that this blanket assessing is OK despite the fact that it is outright unlawful by the letter of the legislation that HMRC are expected to not only understand but actually enforce.
It just about covers it (look up how much it costs to have professional indemnity insurance if you are working on development of medical, process control, or oil and gas industry components). Then there is the cost of certifications that have to be renewed every three years, and cost thousands and require taking a week off billable time work to attend the update certification course, which if you are permanent you would get paid for at no cost to you if particularly relevant to your work.
In addition to having none of those cost overheads, permanent staff get paid holidays, sick pay, and employer's pension contributions, all of which add up to about 20% - which roughly covers the difference. So yes, contractors are being scapegoated with what is purely a tax on competence.
If contracting was such a win-win, everybody would be doing it. And before somebody suggests that they do permanent work because they like to "contribute more to society" through higher taxes, there is nothing stopping you from going contracting and then writing a cheque for the difference in tax to your preferred charity. But I have yet to see anybody partaking in such a whinge actually doing that.
Therefore, the bitching can only be a result of the politics of jealousy.
Depends on the exact use case. ZFS performs better than most file systems on relatively dumb flash devices like SD cards with a bit of tuning. If you get an A1 or A2 rated card, the performance even on random writes is actually pretty decent.
Of course there is no reason you couldn't hang a SATA disk off it with a USB-SATA adapter if you need it for some intensive workload.
Err, no, apparently you didn't, judging by your explanations.
ZIL turns sync operations into async operations. It is only ever read on an unclean shutdown. It isn't a write cache. Buffering is done in RAM.
L2ARC is populated by what is evicted from ARC and reset on export/reboot. Unless you have a very long running system with a working set that significantly exceeds your RAM, L2ARC will be we get even populated, let alone used.
Various things never get cached in ARC (e.g. IIRC sequential reads), because the win is typically not big enough. If it doesn't get cached in ARC, it will never be in L2ARC. So I'll hazard a guess your testing didn't account for anything but the naive case of cat-ing big files to /dev/null.
I can tell you never tried it. Memory requirements are no greater than any other file system. I have it running on ARM machines with 256-512MB of RAM just fine.
You only need tons of RAM if you use deduplication - and if you are using deduplication you better make damn sure you know what you are doing because if you merely _think_ you know what you are doing you will find yourself buying more disks and restoring from a backup as soon as your data size grows to a point where restoring from a backup is inconvenient.
MTD makes no difference whatsoever for the availability of this data.
All MTD does is force you to submit the 6 boxes of your VAT return via a REST API instead of via the web form. That's literally it - no other difference. The only difference is that I now have to pay for MTD compatible submission software. In my case, I use a bridging spreadsheet plugin that costs me £7.50 every time I submit a return.
So the process hasn't changed, the visibility of anything else to HMRC or anyone else using their data hasn't changed, the only thing that has changed is that now there is effectively an overhead of at least £30/year per VAT paying business being paid to providers of 3rd party software for submitting the VAT.
This was purely a crony money grab for big companies selling accounting software. There is no other possible explanation given that it does absolutely nothing but change the API for submitting the same 6 numbers as before.
By extension of your logic, you should also get private medical insurance and not use the NHS under any circumstances, and never claim your state pension. If taking advantage of legally ratified benefits such as salary sacrifice schemes is tax evasion, then conversely by the same logic taking advantage of benefits you get in exchange for your tax contributions is equally frownable upon sponging off the state.
So just because something is defined internationally that makes it OK?
Regardles, pension contribution limits and tax advantages vary massively between tax jurisdictions, just as tax rates vary between them.
Sole traders don't pay a meaningfully different total of tax+NI than ltd companies in a like-for-like comparison. Self employed don't pay employer's NI - specifically the thing that IR35 is trying to squeeze out of people by pushing them into false employment. I suggest you actually look at the tax rates and do the maths before waving your jealous ignorance around.
@AC: How much tax do you dodge by putting money aside into a pension fund? After all, pension contributions are completely tax exempt. If you are going to mouth off based on your politics of jealousy, I suggest you go pay tax on your pension contributions at your top rate of tax. I'm sure HMRC will forgive you for that error on your tax return.
"The tax take goes up if everyone just went permie."
No it doesn't. Perm roles pay half as much because employers have higher additional obligations to cover, such as sick pay, holiday pay, employer's pension contributions, and employers' NI. IR35 is specifically supposed to be about employer's NI, but employers pay way more in in sick pay, holiday pay and mandatory pension contributions than in employer's NI - and those are all coming off the employer's bottom line, making it the cost of doing business and thus not subject to tax.
And then there's the flexibility premium for contractors.
So actually, the overall total tax take would go down dramatically - possibly by more than half.
Let's be frank about it, this isn't about total tax collection, this is a beggar-thy-neighbour politics of jealousy.
"They're deemed to take everything as pay for purposes of taxation but they can leave however much of the post-tax in the company as they want to pay sick leave etc. Yup, that makes perfect sense if you're a weasel."
It makes no sense even in weasel speak, because what's left in the company should be subject to corporation tax, not to PAYE and NI. They are fundamentally different things.
Again, different context. The problem with the ARM SoC manufacturers is that they produced terrible code that just about compiled, threw it over the fence at device manufacturers and walked away. If they stood by their product enough to get their code cleaned up and upstreamed, they would have been welcomed rather than berated.
It is only now, years later, that things have improved, because of pressure from the device manufacturers. They realized that their customers want security updates for their devices, and that meant that they started using best supported SoCs rather than the most cost effective ones. That finally kicked off the competition among the SoC manufacturers and got them to own their code, at which point it was cheaper in the longer term to actually do things right, clean up their code, and get it upstreamed.
The original point stands, though - the SoC manufacturers at the time of Linus' infamous rant absolutely deserved his ire.
"The problem is that every SoC is completely different. Therefore you cannot have one image for (nearly) all ARM-servers. To contrast this on the PC-platform everything is standardized well enough so you can just install any OS on (nearly) any server and it'll run."
Not true any more. UEFI has come to ARM to bring the much needed standardisation. I have a CentOS 7 install DVD (with a custom mainline kernel to support more SoCs than the distro kernel) that will boot the installer on just about any UEFI aarch64 machine, including Gigabyte MP30-AR1 and Raspberry Pi 3 (you have to make it boot the UEFI boot loader from the SD card, but that's no big deal).
Standards have in fact come to ARM. It happened a couple of years ago.
ARM is different because it has worked it's way up from being the underdog, from embedded devices where it is unstoppably ubiquitous, through laptop grade hardware up to server grade hardware more recently. I have an ATX form factor ARM board under my desk with 128GB of RAM and a couple of PCIe x16 slots, with a clock-for-clock performance per watt on server loads that is about double compared to a reasonably equivalent Xeon, and very comparable cost, too.
Previous competitors like SPARC, POWER, MIPS and Alpha fought with very little underlying deployment base. Unlike those, ARM is _everywhere_, and is not going away. Intel tried and failed to compete in the market where ARM dominates. ARM is eating it's way up toward server deployments like creeping doom.
I agree with you on the first part, but the point you make about Linus' comment on ARM SoC manufacturers is misguided. He was absolutely right in what he said, in the context it was in. The simple fact is that various SoC manufacturers produced appalling code to make the kernel work on their SoCs, they hardly ever bothered to upstream it, and were responsible for a situation where there was a total of one kernel that ever works on a particular SoC, which is then immediately orphaned and will never receive any further fixes for various issues that are later discovered in that branch.
You don't have to look far for evidence if this - just look what version of the kernel various embedded devices are using, and look at the last triplet of the version number. It is never even the latest mainline version for that kernel series, let alone a something that us supported for any length of time after the device is shipped.
Fire icon because: "Worked in dev. Ops problem now."
It works for some people - namely those that like all the work prevention devices that enable them to spend an hour on some work, half a day on admin to actually work around the security measures, and the rest to slack off.
Of course it will drive everyone who actually enjoys being productive nuts in days and they'll probably choose to leave guilt free on 1 day's notice before their probation period is up.
You are overthinking it.
ssh -D 1080 firstname.lastname@example.org
Set Firefox to use localhost:1080 as socks5 proxy with remote DNS lookups.
No need to mess about with DNS or anything of the sort. You just have to find a port that isn't filtered by the firewall and run sshd on that port on your.server.
"Does it stop people using cars as weapons against people and infrastructure? No, but it massively reduces the possibility."
I don't see how licensing drivers in any way reduces the possibility of a driver deliberately using a vehicle as a weapon against people and infrastructure. At a push it might slightly reduce incidence of incompetence, but certainly not of a deliberate act.
Sure - rowhammer can be made to work - on certain hardware. I've yet to own a device on which it was reproducible using various test programs in 8 hours, and I doubt I'm that lucky. But if it can be made to flip 1 bit statistically in n seconds, then it follows that in n^2 seconds you should be able to flip 2 bits in the same row, and in n^3 seconds, flip 3 bits. But since we are into O(n^3) territory, I wouldn't lose sleep over it.
"But if three bits could be changed simultaneously, ECC would not catch the modification."
Wow! So they actually read up on how ECC memory that has been in used in servers for 30 years works! Are they hoping for some praise medals for participation?
It must be a really slow day if this is news.
"A fair point, but lets face it, at the moment somebody in China would copy your product anyway if there's a significant domestic market."
Similarly with Zotye SR9 (Porsche Macan clone). Interestingly, the Porsche dealers in China aren't at all concerned, and for a very good reason - anybody who can afford even a used Porsche won't be buying a Zotye knock-off.
The thing to take away from this is that competing on the cheap end of the market in a place where labour is much cheaper is a foolish thing to be attempting at the first place. If you can't compete on quality first, at least earn some good karma by not expending more of the finite planet on making yet more worthless tat.
"Up until a local copycat product (that's copied to such a point as including your copyright marks) goes on sale for less than your product"
Cost of doing business in China, it seems. The only winning move is not to play.
For what it's worth, some headway toward addressing that had been made at some point, as short lived it may have been:
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022