But is it on the green list?
Or is quarantine when you get home.
557 posts • joined 14 Dec 2009
That seems to be the ruling. Except that in the option of the court there were insufficient safeguards. However, the court was not asked to rule on safe guards and has no authority in that area. So the (long) article tries to excoriate the UK government with one clause "...didn't break the ECHR per se..." reflecting reality. My guess is that the MI5/6 will see this ruling as a green light to keep on keeping on.
Isn't is a bit moot anyway? My wife bought a Chinese Android mobile phone and we regularly ask after President Xi as he (or his apparatus) are bound to be listening in. We should probably say hi to Boris and Joe as well. Obviously I'll be up in arms if Macron is also listening in as lack of privacy and surveillance has to have *some* limits.
Surely its the responsibility of the person being contracted to make sure the company being used is legit. A quick review of the information held about the company by companies house will reveal the directors new and old, their revenues and financial history. If there's just one director who has changed recently don't use it. It's reasonable to think that if a contractor is choosing using a shady company, they are trying to get one over HMRC and maybe trying to avoid paying their share of tax. I have no sympathy for such behaviour and it seems MPs don't either. This will be self-regulating and more regulation is not needed.
The rate at which bits can be transferred to Perseverance at 200kb is very slow. Why not choose to transmit at a faster rate? Surely the hardware could have been capable. Is it an attempt to keep the power requirements really low so it does not affect Perseverance in some way?
Perhaps any self-respecting believer will argue that the gods did do something to strike back: they took control of an individual and had him commit an act of revenge. The gods *could* have taken out a whole continent/people/creed/sect and so on but, you know, its got to be proportionate and enough to let humanity know of the gods displeasure but not completely unreasonable (for a god)..
So the Chinese have copied again. Wonder of wonders. They appear to have copied an idea that the Americans and Russians tried 50 year ago. This is not your grand father's rocket science. Now we have private individuals lobbing craft into space and, in the case of Musk, returning much of the rocket to earth.
What possible wonder can there be of a country putting a space plane on the nose of a rocket? My view, which worth less than the effort to type it, is that it indicates the problem with China. It can copy but few people are willing to put their heads above the parapet to do innovative things or voice the obvious criticism that it's been tried before and been a failure (yes, the shuttle programme was ultimately a failure).
When does anyone hear of a Chinese product and exclaim the breathtaking originality of the new chemical process or physics or management process. Sure the west got there first but there are still discoveries to be made - just not by a chinese person living in China. Note, I'm explicitly not disparaging the chinese intellect as I am sure that a chinese mind is as capable of being inventive as the minds in other cultures. It's just that those minds operate in an environment in which its not helpful to be unique.
I can understand why you are conflicted. Its a matter of free choice, right? A driver wants to work flexibly and a company wants a work to work flexibly so why not?
Why not is because its a race to the bottom. It there are employment laws and one company is allowed to dodge them and, by doing so making more money for shareholders, the one following the law will likely have to fold or, also, dodge the employment laws. Where does it stop?
Since this is an IT site, maybe its worth pointing out that computer science has a branch of game theory (you know, prisoner's dilimma and all that) called Mechanism Design (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanism_design). Among other things, it studies game strategies that are rational from the perspective of the players of the game but which are detrimental to the wider society in which the game is played. There are countless examples.
The behaviour by Uber and Lyft are examples of this problem. From their perspective offering flexible work terms to self-employed contractors is rational. However, from the perspective of the society in which Uber and Lyft operate it is not appropriate. After all, where does it end? I no longer have small children but if I did maybe I could offer chimney cleaning services as an inducement to get fares.
California and UK (amongst others) have decided it ends with all companies respecting employment laws. If Uber does not want to respect that requirement they do not have to operate in those jurisdictions. It is true that as a result, the cost of get a ride it likely to increase, that rider will be required to pay more and that some drivers will need to find alternative employment. But this is a choice jurisdictions make: either riders will pay more or they will find an alternative form of transportation if hailing a taxi becomes more expensive.
That's for the company to say, not a government official. Presumably the ambassador feels empowered to deliver news on behalf of Huawei and equally presumably, there's a reason for that feeling of empowerment.
If there was ever a way to give the UK government the amunition to further curtail sales opportunities this is it.
saying most "do not see this as a necessary solution in the short to medium term"
There's money marketing 5G. Now some western markets are banishing Huawei this might be a short-term fix while longer term full fat hardware upgrade is rolled. It seems likely to be somewhat attractive to the telecoms provoider's accountants because they get a reason to get more out of existing capital investments.
Clearly this route was available all along. Equally clearly, the vendors of shiny new hardware wanted to sell shiny nerw hardware not software update. I see the argument that this maybe like 2.5G. But is 4.5G that bad if it provides a route to an incremental upgrade? If a telco is putting in new hardware it makes sense to use 5G kit. But in mature markets? Ma be not so much.
"..so when do you think there’ll be a market for expensive and unproven new hardware?" Fair enough but Tesla, SpaceX? I think the question says more about the limitations of the person asking than will be revealed in any answer. And any answer is un likely to satisfy anyone who will ask such a question unless it identifies bums on seats ready to take (and pay for) a trip next week. Hopefully other participants will ask more expansive questions.
In his book 'Ignition!' Dr John Clark provides an informal history of the development of liquid rocket propellants from the perspective of someone who was there (working within the post-war US navy research program). Although published in 1971 it is a very readable book with a foreward by some friend of his and fellow chemist called Isaac Asimov. In the book he describes how US research into propellants was informed by the extensive work undertaken by the Germans before and during WW2. After the war German reasearch and stockpiles of hyrogen peroxide were split between the Brits and the US for further study.
So scientists may have been sequestered but here is an account showing how the German chemical technology was acquired and further developed. Clark describes how in practice the German chemistry, focussed on peroxides, though great for relatively low-power thrusting was not sufficiently powerful for ICBMs and, anyway, it freezes at a relatively high temperature. Instead, being able to work with existing stocks allowed US chemists to discard peroxides quickly and focus on other fuels and oxidizers and ultimately the predominant use of various forms of hyrdazine and nitric acid based oxidizers.
Surely this is evidence ICAAN needs to relocate itself to a more forgiving jurisdiction then start again. This episode seems to show the leaders of ICAAN have an agenda. Without leadership change, the team is surely still motivated to find a way to complete deals like this.
The data has to be stored somewhere and wherever that is there's going to be a code. As for access to the data, on the AWS S3 pricing page (https://aws.amazon.com/s3/pricing/?nc=sn&loc=4) on the 'Data Transfer' tab is this little nugget which may be relevant:
You pay for all bandwidth into and out of Amazon S3, except for the following:
• Data transferred in from the internet.
• Data transferred out to an Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (Amazon EC2) instance, when the instance is in the same AWS Region as the S3 bucket.
• Data transferred out to Amazon CloudFront (CloudFront).
(my emphasis) So providing 'data scientists' are working from an EC2 instance in the same region as the NASA bucket there will be no charge to NASA. Of course there will be a charge to the 'data scientist' to run the EC2 instancein the same region and to add sufficient storage but that's not the concern of NASA. In this scenario the data transfer the costs will be $zero. Of course this assumes NASA staff configure the bucket correctly and only allow access from IP addresses in the same region.
What on earth do delivery drivers do when they call at the door? Swap spit? Cough all over customers? If the sweaty hands of the infected delivery person (or the person at the dispensing burger comany) have been all over the packaging and you pick up the packaging (you have to pick it up, right?) then the virus can be transmitted. It doesn't matter that the delivery person is wearing gloves if they've wiped their nose with them or coughed into them as the virus will be all over the gloves and, so, on the packaging.
You are wrong and being misleading here.
A VAT invoice is only required if a EU businesses is going to offset the VAT paid on purchases from other EU businesses against the VAT that business includes in its own sales. The only relevant consequence of buying from a business that is not VAT registered is that the buyer is not able to offset the VAT. If a business is not VAT registered it can only offer a sales invoice that does not include VAT. If you are being advised that it is not correct to buy without a VAT invoice, I recommend you get a new adviser. Or be honest and admit the reason you prefer to buy from a VAT registered company is so you can reclaim the tax.
Since January 2019 no EU business, wherever they are located within the bloc, only need to register for VAT if their annual revenues will exceed €80,000. Businesses below this threshold are likely to be sole traders but not necessarily.
The UK tax authority, HMRC, has always allowed UK registered companies to opt out of the VAT if the revenues of a company was below a similar revenue threshold. HMRC adopted this approach because of concerns about the burden of VAT on very small businesses. The EU Commission finally agreed and, after initially requiring VAT registration for all businesses, has adopted the UK position because the number of new small businesses in EU member states was falling. Plus the totally impractical requirement that small businesses outside the EU (read USA) had to register for VAT if a EU citizen had the silly idea of wanting to buy one of their products. It was never going to happen so small foreign businesses stopped selling in the EU.
Is they are sometimes promoted by zealots who lose perspective and I wonder if this has happened in the article.
"Who buys, who sells, who reads, what it is, when it was out there"
Who reads? The article's author is advocating a governmental agency should be monitoring, recording, and in the author's ideal view, making searchable what recipients read? So much for privacy and GDPR. Imagine how much of a gold mine that will be for hackers.
As for political advertising: leave it alone. It might be a swamp but in my view better an unregulated swamp than giving some group of mandarins or even worse corporations veto over what our would-be elected representatives want to tell us. If there are crimes committed during a campaign, let the criminal justice system do its work after the event. If your concern is that the criminal justice system cannot or will not do its job, there is a much bigger problem to tackle than adverts you believe are in someway wrong.
A feature of intelligent systems is that they learn. While it is easy to imagine a vision system does not get it right all the time (my own organic one gets it wrong sometimes), surely a system like the one in a Tesla is not going to use just one source of information. Unless there is an extremely good match with a number in the environment, a system can make a comparison with, say, map software. If there's a conflict presumably this would be raised with the driver in some way so it could learn which of the two sources of speed information is correct so it can do better next time.
Since a heuristic like this is so trivial to dream up, my guess is that the systems used by Telsa and others are even more sophisticated. As a result, and because this account seems to be limited to a single, older Telsa, it seems like a worthless anecdote without verification from another source.
I think you need to do some more credibility testing especially over the VAT filing. As a small business owner my experience is that submissions for the last three quarters have been seemless. Maybe the single person used as an example is one of those that gripe when any change is made. Do you remember the whining when online businesses had to start paying VAT back at the beginning of 2015? Where are they now?
Why not provide some more and specific details. Perhaps chase up other business owners reporting issues rather than relying on one example. Surely Sage and other volume processors would have some stories if the issue is real. They have no advantage keeping quiet if the problem is with HMRC. The "we've been trying for two weeks" line seems unlikely unless the user has made a mistake or is using software that does not work.
Good comment. I was going to comment that on the BBC lunchtime news (yesterday now) the reporter was clear that the EE kit being used was sourced from Huawei.
It is unfortunate for EE, the BBC and Huawei that video of the much trumpeted article, which was being broadcast using the 5G network became corrupted after just a few seconds (audio was OK so not a data cap issue).
Given you an up vote. Marketing and activism in the social media age is to put some label together with a small handful of like minded people who share some characteristic (in this case being an Amazon shareholder) then make a claim that sounds like all people with the same characteristic have the same point of view. Which is ridiculous. But it gets picked up by mindless blog drones and amplified without any further qualification. Always disappointing.
From Nixon and until Trump, the US policy on China has been about engagement. US universities are awash with Chinese students - have you reviewed the doctoral science programs at CalTech? The current Chinese president was educated in the mid-west and got his mercantile experience selling agricultural hardware there.
In that time, thanks largely due to the US accommodating massively lop sided trade with China, the middle kingdom has begun to lift itself out of self-inflicted poverty. Good for them. But not so good for US citizens. Sure, they get cheaper products but have lost or have never invested industries that employ millions. Great for those living in cities and greater metro areas. Not so good for the vast numbers living in actual poverty in rural USA. And US voting patterns bear this out.
There is no easy solution. But just spouting sentiments like let's go easy on the Chinese is not a solution either. It's virtue signalling to like minded people who also live in big cities.
I recommend you read "From third world to first" by Lee Kuan Yew, one of the founders of modern Singapore. Although written nearly 20 years ago its still worth the effort. Ethnically chinese (Fujian province) he recounts many meetings with Chinese leaders over his four decades as prime minister and from these explains why it is that he believes China cannot be trusted to be a good international citizen. Again, this is not some western academic. It is someone who grew up in south east asia and who watched China implode under Mao Zedong then begin to claw its way back. He repeatedly points to the cultural Confusianism of the Chinese and the likely effect of that culture on the way China will develop.
So far, his predictions have been on the money. If they continue to be correct, they don't describe a pretty outcome for the US or the west in general or south east asia in particular.
You earn £50K but have a mortgage of £400K (debt) on a house. Why is that you are not a basket case? Because the house is an asset that you hope (and lenders believe) will gain in value. Even if it doesn't, the mortgage payments will be similar to or less than the rental you would pay on a similar property. People with money lend you the £400K on the basis that you pay interest on that loan.
Similarly, the $50bn of debt has been used to purchase assets - VMWare for example - that may gain in value (if someone wants to buy them). However, unlike your mortgage which is 8 x your revenues, the Dell debt is far less than their revenues. In the meantime those assets will be expected to earn their keep by generating revenue. And it seems they are if, as claimed, their positive cash flow is able to generate $14bn this year. Dell is probably charged 5% for the privilege of borrowing $50bn but it seem the assets acquired are generating cash at a greater rate.
He probably wants to go public to convert some or all of that debt (which *has* to be repaid and could be called in) into equity from new shareholders (which doesn't have to be repaid and can't be called in). Much better from a manager's point of view but not necessarily so good from a shareholder's perspective. Moreover, that debt will have been borrowed on the basis that it is used for specific purposes. Equity funds can be used more flexibly so long as the company keeps to the business model outlined in the prospectus. Again, much better for the managers.
So the battle is to show prospective investors that their money is safe in Dell. That they will more than get their money back. That they are generating $14bn in profit on $97bn in revenue and that is could be better if they were not paying interest. That there is room to make more acquisitions using shareholder money to make even more profit.
£400 is not cheap. That's £400 not £399 - let's not play that game. A Porche looks cheap when you compare it to a Rolls Royce but not so cheap when you compare it with a Kia Rio. Again, £400 is not cheap and its disingenuous to suggest that spending that much on a phone is a value deal. In no universe is that true just because Samsung and Apple have found people who are willing to pay a huge idiot tax. It's a shame that journalists can be lead to support the notion that £400 is good value just because there are even more hideously expensive phones a person could purchase. The saying "A fool and their money are easily parted" seems apt.
If people want to spend that much money, why not buy a genuinely cheap phone and give the difference to a charity where it will do some good instead of giving it to wealthy shareholders?
Seems like a fair point but if you applied that logic to the first computers or mobile phones (who else is going to pay for those satellites and masts but rich people) then you will ever get any innovation.
My biggest concern about the design as shown is those uncovered fan blades. Sure, they are *supposed* to switched off while passengers get in and out but, oops.
<authors> ... "have recreated pyrene, a hydrocarbon commonly formed during the combustion processes in car engines, in a lab"
Miracle of miracles. Researchers have created in a lab a molecule that is commonly created by cars. Whoa!
Come on, the story as written is full of logical holes. How about:
"A pressurised mixture of 4-phenanthrenyl - a hydrocarbon with one unpaired electron - another hydrocarbon compound acetylene were injected into a microreactor from a nozzle at supersonic speeds."
According to the title the article is about creating molecules in space where there is no pressure and where there are no reactors.
I am sure these apparent inconsistencies are because details about the research have been have been omitted and maybe it just shows it is possible to edit articles a little too far.
Are you really sure of your facts? I am no lover of Virgin Media but I live in London (one of the alleged hot spots) am a VM subscriber and work from home spending most of my day on a remote machine. If there were a problem affecting connectivity, surely I would have experienced it but I did not. Even if I'd fallen asleep at the times it is claimed the the outage occurred, as my connection to the remote machine is on all the time, I would have noticed a problem because it would have disconnected while asleep. But it didn't.
All of the Windows servers I am using on AWS EC2 use AMD64 processors. AWS and Azure can swap out Intel hardware for AMD hardware with just a virtual machine restart so this may be a preferred option for them.
AWS went through an exercise over the summer to force reboot some servers. We were told it was for essential maintenance of the host hardware. It affected two of my servers. Perhaps the real reason for this exercise was move us onto AMD processors (I wish now I knew the CPUs used before the reboot).
"it's clear that the quality of content would plummet without the BBC"
The BBC is the 800lb gorilla the the UK sitting room. Other UK terrestrial TV companies have to find ways to entice advertisers while the BBC is stealing their ideas. Was the BBC the first to have a nightly soap opera? No. Was it the firs to have a dancing competition? No. But the BBC barges in and takes away viewers from commercial TV providers using our money to do so.
Is it any wonder the offerings of commercial TV providers is lack-lustre when they have to find a way to profitability with a state funded (we *are* the state) broadcaster in the sitting room? If they had more revenues they probably would provide a wider range and better quality of content.
Is it any wonder that the free view channels are stuffed with US content providers who do not need to compete with a state funded content provider.
Sure, have a public service broadcaster but have one that fills niches not occupied by commercial companies, such as Sky at Night or University Challenge, rather than steal other's good ideas. May be then we will have a wider choice of excellent content.
Andrew O reports a ruling as it affects individual privacy. Companies are not individuals and so do not enjoy the benefits of human right legislation. Therefore, as I understand it, the ECJ ruling has no effect in this case. Other commenters have speculated on the reasons for Google's decision to remove the links.
There may be an association between the rise in the number of self-employed and UK productivity being stagnant. But economists ascribe this malaise to UK businesses not investing in productivity boosting tools and technologies. That is, making existing staff more productive.
The productivity issue has been hanging around the UK economy for well over a decade and for this reason alone, attributing it to the rise of the gig economy seems a bit of a stretch. Maybe even a little desperate.
"Reportedly" from where? More questionable news? Even if accurate, the people overseeing the integration sub-contractor who only noticed the problem recently probably needed to be shown the door even if previous reviews were good. Hiding problems can make you seem good until you can't hide the problems any longer.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021