Posts by Neverwas 14 publicly visible posts • joined 11 Aug 2011
The alternative is they turn up, ask if they can come in, go away when told "no", and the criminals have all the time they need to dispose of phones, clean wipe storage etc etc.
It's not just the ICO. Other prosecutring authorities - e.g. HMRC - have the same power. May well be accompanied by a police constable in uniform if there's risk of a breach of the peace.
"I have zero respect for politicians and the taxman, so I'm all for this sort of dodge. My number one responsibility is to my family and friends, not The Man."
Do you want the NHS to treat you and your family? The police to turn up if you or family members are assaulted? Social security in case you have a stroke tomorrow and never work again? If so don't be surprised if others think something like IR35 is needed.
"even though working through a limited Companies was their idea, sole traders got too many deductible expenses, and the Corporation tax rate was higher in times past when they dreamt this up"
Not my recollection. Inland Revenue (as it was then) never wanted PSCs. Why would they when they meant (a) more work: instead of one tax return they had to deal with a CT return, a Director's return and a PAYE scheme; (b) less yield: eg they allowed contractors to pay even less NICs - and NICS more than tax was often the big driver.. As for rates, during the 1990s the basic rate of income tax fell from 25 to 23%. The small companies CT rate from 25 to 20%. But comparisons had to allow for personal allowances etc. The CT changes that stoked the fires came after IR35 - the 10% rate in 2000 and (bizarre) 0% starting rate in 2002.
The HoC library has a good reputation for impartiality on such things so I commend their https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN05976.
Oh, and Inland Revenue staff advising Ministers had no reason to be jealous of contractors when they mostly had much more contact with (and more in common with in terms of background and skills) senior accountants, lawyers, bankers etc whose salaries and benefits dwarfed most contractors.
AFAIK there is no limit to the number of sockets you can have on a ring final circuit (RFC) in the UK.
So eg if the design calls for 200 sockets for wall warts, each drawing a maximum of 0.15A, a RFC in 2.5mm twin and earth, protected by a 32A RCBO, seems to me an OK solution (subject of course to the cable being derated for insultation etc). Of course it may not be a /sensible/ solution but that's a separate matter.
The lights are potentially more problematical. Eg a lot of LED GU10s on one circuit may require a Type C breaker. And clear warning notices not to replace them all by 50W halogens ;)
The actual words from the announcement are
"fingerprints are not stored and are automatically deleted from the device once they have been checked"
Odd how the article (and many other reports) omitted the "are not stored".
And yes, you can argue that it's a lie and they will be stored after all. After all, none of the many people who would have to be privy to that would leak the fact, would they?
I am unclear what is disgusting and evil about a process being played out in courts of law, open to public scrutiny, and - ultimately - subject to democratic accountability.
But if you see it as so simple I assume you'd also back Apple if the phone contained the location - somewhere near where you live - of a dirty bomb? Or the location of the cellar you have been bricked up in by a member of the security service who has cracked up under the pressure of trying to protect the public which thinks it more important to safeguard their selfies and porn? In short, are you willing to die for your principles?
If "The UK justice system tramples over the Human Rights Act" then the UK will get a good kicking in Strasbourg and prosecutions will be unsafe. But AFAIK the European Court of Human Rights has looked at disclosuree and not seen problems so far - eg holding that whether there is a breach of Article 6 has to be looked at in the context of the case as a whole.
PS
While I recognise the legal point about right to silence etc I'm not sure the example of A claiming "I did it in self-defence" but then switching to argue "I wasn't there" after seeing every piece of prosecution evidence is likely to command a great deal of public support.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
