Re: Dreaming up barriers to adoption...
I can't imagine why you think this is a right wing government.
83 posts • joined 8 Dec 2008
In a free country no laws like this should exist, so clearly we are not now a free country. the idea of jailing someone because of *something they read* is obscene. it should not need arguing against, it should not need deconstructing, it is obscene. Anyone who proposes trash like that is my enemy and should be the enemy of all decent people. We need to clear out the Westminster stables, and the phoney NGO parasites like Liberty who actively enable this crap.
See mofos, it's all actually happening. Every word you say, every word you type, monitored for thoughtcrimes at all times.
You can't say you were not warned.
Keep laughing. Keep making excuses for it. Please, keep laughing. If you keep laughing it can't hurt you.
Taxing *turnover*? Let's remember that many companies have high turnovers and are, as yet, not profitable. So you would tax companies into deeper losses. And taxing companies be diktat? IE, we will tax this company and that company, but not you, you'r eok.
How can anyone be okay with this? Open your eyes people. This is rotten.
So when Facebook or Twitter decide you're a racist, who do you appeal to? With a *court*, you have a right of appeal, and fixed definitions to unpick. What do you have with Twitter and FB?
Governments are intentionally offshoring their censorship so they can squeal "oh no, we're not censors.... " And also so they don't have to have untidy and public debates in parliament regarding which 15% of their populations they're going to gag.
How many people saw the entire media claiming Trump didn't know how to feed carp, or that he'd claimed Sweden had had a terrorist attack, when it hadn't? Totally fake. Totally mainstream generated.
Basically believe nothing unless you see it with your own eyes.
After being closely involved with a work colleague being scammed - first alerting her to it, and ccd in all bank discussions - it is VERY obvious that all these frauds are based on insiders within banks and utilities passing out personal information. Plus, I heard of another recent case that almost went as far as prosecution, then the CPS inexplicably "lost" all evidence. I think we need to accept that we now live in an extremely corrupt society. It wasn't always like this.
Every government built website to date either attracts a hundredth of predicted concurrent visitors, or a hundred times it. They either drift on, unloved, or crash under unexpected load. This one had everyone from Obama to Geldof begging people to visit it before it closed and.... it crashed at that point. Gosh. The Russians? Or SNAFU?
Very obviously, SNAFU, and yet our hopelessly Remainiac media once again weave their fake news on top of wishful thinking and pure blind fantasy.
I feel embarrassed for them, to be honest. Leavers are meant to be the thick ones?
I remember the best part of twenty years ago when I first wrote about the IWF being able to lean on ISPs to block alleged child porn content, backed by Home Office muscle but no laws, that this was the slippery end of an unregulated slope - and I was called paranoid. Anyone calling me paranoid now? The courts are saying because the *architecture* is in place, why not force people to use it?
Footie today, Wikileaks tomorrow.
" "97% of scientists agree on humanmade climate change." That's the "fact" they demand people accept - and of course it isn't a fact at all. One clue is in the term "humanmade" but the other is the failure to define which scientists, or precisely what they are agreeing to. And if we dig into the origins of this dubious stat we find it's pure cobblers. Watts Up With That has a good debunking
There's a war going on for your mind. This "vaccine" is probably the daftest weapon yet unleashed, but I imagine the nastiest ones will never be discussed. The scariest remains the MSM, which seems unable to distinguish truth from lie itself.
Worth pointing out that the Norths were adamant that the referendum would be lost because the leave campaigns weren't listening to them? They were furious with Farage, with Boris, with everyone who wasn't arguing for "Flexit". They were certain the public would only accept a detailed plan, dotted is, crossed ts, that gave a ten year roadmap for exit. They were totally wrong.
And Richard is wrong now - the flaw with Flexcit is that once you're in that halfway house YOU WILL NEVER LEAVE. If we put ourselves just slightly offshore, WE WILL NEVER LEAVE. he's a bright guy but he does not understand politics. If this is to be done it must be bloody, short, irreversible.
Don't you get it?
"The kids" will happily sign away their kidneys for free wifi. If the Eu gives it to them, everywhere, with a tiny little privacy catch.... kaboom, that becomes the new normal. There is an expectation of continual surveillance, an expectation of continual censorship. Our youth already love Big Brother.
"Would we have to run a set of ID's we trust, or is some pan-European authentication platform being formed to support this - given the mobility of people around the world."
Exactly what the Commission proposed way back when. Using state-mandated offline ID to log in with online, everywhere, as soon as you go online. No internet access other than through an EU-approved membership system.
Still think they're the good guys?
The FT is rabidly pro-EU yes, and you make a fool of yourself by accepting the line that anyone voted out of the EU to get £350m a week spent on our NHS. That might be the spin the BBC put on it, it's not the reality.
Our referendum was nothing less than a proper proletarian revolution against the bourgeoisie. You may be surprised what might happen in Ireland if the opportunity was offered.
The point folks, surely, is that Ireland should be free to manage its own tax affairs, and the EU should not be imposing diktats in a capricious and unlawful way? Retrospective legislation? Threats? This not a club I'd like to be part of. Oh, we voted out. Hurrah. Iexit next?
Are these people idiots? I can see so many problems with this law, apart from the disproportionate horror of locking people up for clicking "Submit". How is a court going to establish what the tangled nature of consent was at the time? How will they decide if consent was withdrawn, and that was clearly communicated? if the pics were posted when all was rosy, and then consent was withdrawn, does it become an offence to refuse to delete them? What if the images were posted somewhere were they CANNOT be deleted? What if the uploaded has forgotten their passwords? What if they forgot where they posted them? What if a thousand people repost?
Stupid damned idea. No doubt it will become law.
.... I don't think anyone can deny that this is the world we live in now? The left dominate the airwaves, the media, government, civil service, NGOs - they pay lipservice to free speech but woe betide you if you say anything to upset them or one of their client groups. If gays want marriage they should go through the normal democratic process to achieve that (they didn't do that here in the UK) and when they do that it is *entirely legitimate* for others to oppose them, as Eich did. Without free speech we have no democracy.
I won't be using firefox in future, not even as a development tool. Will have to figure out other approaches. I don't care to endorse the fascists or their appeasers.
Sean, I'd just make a couple of responses to that; firstly, are you really telling me anything more than a tiny percentage of designers are actually artists? I really can't see any definition of 'art' that encompasses "we don't want empty space, we want branding!". I said upthread, I couldn't do that job - sat there at a Mac with some know-nothing account director at your shoulder proding every pixel of 'design'... that ain't art. It CAN be, sure, but how often is it?
UIs - good point, but how it looks is, IMO, trivial compared to how it works, how it *feels*, and that's about the software and, to a greater extent right now, the hardware. They're not called fondleslabs because of how they look.
And criticise Linux... but then what do you say about Ubuntu?
"Any chance you can stop reducing my job to paint by numbers? It's pretty insulting and shows a complete lack of knowledge about the field."
Oh you use paint? So sorry, you're clearly a step up the ladder. My insults were aimed at the crayoners.
In all seriousness, I would *hate* to do your job. sitting there with some halfwit peering over your shoulder asking for everything to be pinker, redder, bluer, and everything bigger than everything else? God no.
Persuasion is the key - I think it's where technical people often fail; we spend so much time getting it RIGHT, that we neglect to focus on persuading others why it's right, how tricky it was to get right, why it's better doing it this way than that way.
So yes, in the end you are correct; what matters is convincing others.
Real where the evidence appears, in computer models. It's absolutely right - if you fiddle the variables int he right fashion, temperatures soar - in RAM. However, in the real world, everything AGW propagandists talk about is, at best, correlation. At worst sheer fakery. And the idea that science is some kind of democracy where the majority view should automatically prevail is pure tosh. Steve Jones should know that.
I'm happy to be called a denier, an extremist, a sceptic - i don't mind. The evidence for catastrophic man made global warming just isn't there. It ain't.
They SAY they have 'safeguarded' these kids, they 'say' they have arrested people - but how do we know any of this is valid? Is this all in the UK? Were charges brought? How many 'safeguarded' kids were kids taken off men *suspected* of offences?
I have to say, I dont' trust these people an inch. Particularly when they're as intent on talking up their 'brand' (wankers) as anything else.
positive censorship? There is no such thing. If you don't like someone's views, persuade them of the error of their ways, don't try to gag them.
For one thing it's totally counterproductive. If someone suggest you're sick, and you try to silence him, via prosecution, persecution, or a flame mob, he'll go away still thinking you're sick, but also thinking you're an arsehole.
And it's Apple's perogative of course, it's their walled garden. But it does follow a pattern of increasing insistence from the (not)-liberal left that everyone think their way...
By all means punish someone who physically attacks homosexuals - but punish someone who says they think it's wrong? Which is effectively what you're doing if all dissent attracts twitter wars, firings, media outrage, and sometimes prosecution? Nah. I value free speech. You'd think the gay lobby would too; there are notable exceptions - Peter Tatchell being one - but most of the gay lobby really do think it should be against the law to upset them. Sod that.
I have no problem with anyoen doing anything they like in their bedroom. But no one, under any circumstances, ever, gets to tell me what I should do in my head.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020