* Posts by codejunky

4026 posts • joined 24 Oct 2011

Not content with distorting actual reality, Facebook now wants to build a digital layer for the world

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Meh

@doublelayer

"You do not understand your own metaphors. Let's limit ourselves to two examples. The worst, email, and the best, megaphones. Best still means bad."

Ok. So what is a good metaphor for a very public place that people can freely go to and put up anything they like from the mundane to the profane which many people will then be audience to worldwide? Hence many metaphors of things that dont exactly do the same thing, which is oddly how FB fills that niche.

So if you have a better one feel free... Nope... just "focusing on these hideously inaccurate comparisons" as if you had nothing better to add to the actual discussion.

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Meh

@doublelayer

"Email accounts allow person-to-person communication, not publishing."

Spam

"Paper manufacturers make printing possible, not distribution"

Which people can do with lampposts, walls, handing them out, door to door.

"Megaphone and banner manufacturers may make distribution easier, but they do not provide the venue for it to happen"

Yet if people go to the venue where these things have been put up they will see them.

Basically FB is a platform. Its people putting stuff on there (or advertisers) and so its not the platform at fault unless the platform is specifically participating in pushing falsehoods. There is so much stuff by so many people that FB cant be a filter without breaking it as a media form. And while some people want that due to green eyes and conspiracy theory that would just be stupid.

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Translation:

@DS999

Likewise if the falsehoods of the Russia collaboration dossier cant circulate. Except facebook is a platform and yet news outlets can actually talk shit on TV (Maddows and the tax thing being an obvious one but both sides have their outlets).

Facebook is a platform for people to put stuff on. Instead of blaming the people for some reason FB is getting the blame.

codejunky Silver badge

Meh

"By permitting conspiracies and blatant falsehoods to circulate unchallenged"

Just like paper making companies allow people to make leaflets doing the same. Megaphone manufacturers. Banner producers. Email accounts. Almost like its a media format or something.

However as for the tech, good luck giving it a go. Google glasses fell over, maybe this one will succeed where it failed but probably not. Eventually someone might achieve it and it might be desirable. Or not.

How do you solve 'disruption' at the UK border after Brexit? Let's call Peter Thiel! AI biz Palantir – you're hired

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Hmm

@AC

"So a Jewish refugee from Germany in 1938 should have stopped in France - how did that work out then?"

Was France at war at that point and was France considered a safe country?

"But crossing the channel, getting off the boat and walking to a police station and asking for asylum is legal."

Yes. If you are claiming asylum you can illegally enter a country to then go and ask to stay. Hmm but I dont like this one so I will go to the next and the next illegally crossing from safe country to safe country... that is a migrant crossing illegally. No longer fleeing but instead being picky about where they would like to live.

https://www.continentaltelegraph.com/2020/09/casuistry-at-the-huffington-post-about-refugees/

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Hmm

@Lon24

"Which International Law is this please? Neither the 1951 Refugee Convention nor EU law requires a refugee to claim asylum in one country rather than another - https://www.amnesty.org.uk/truth-about-refugees"

I guess it comes down to interpretation then. While it isnt explicitly stated you must apply for asylum in the first safe country, you are no longer looking for asylum (fleeing the country from persecution etc) when you try to apply in the second, third, fourth, etc. After you reach a safe country you are an economic migrant if you then try to move to another and apply there.

The EU stopped applying that as international law when Germany invited the middle east to move in and got overwhelmed.

I will also point out that these people are criminals in that they are illegally trying to enter the UK. If that was from an unsafe country that would be acceptable obviously but unless you wish to claim that of France?

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Hmm

@Weylin

"To send British border patrol boats into French territorial waters and "arrest" French law enforcement officers is not very clever."

I dont think it would be too big a problem. International law on asylum seeking puts the responsibility on the first safe country (which to us would be France, to France would be wherever they entered). By not intervening the Border guards are effectively supporting the illegal migration, or in this case intentionally allowing these migrants to sink in UK waters by refusing to intervene which puts the responsibility on them. We could even claim to be doing the French a favour by bringing these criminals to international courts to decide on the legality of their efforts. Maybe they could be tried for negligence or attempted murder as well as supporting the illegal crossing.

After such a public shaming even if the border guards are considered innocent it might make a difference.

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Hmm

@AC

"These people have the right to board a dinghy in France or Belgium or wherever and have a nice little sail around the Channel waters."

Erm, are you sure? If these people had the legal right to board the dinghy in those countries then they would also have the right to enter the UK via legal means. That people travel through multiple countries to illegally enter the UK from our neighbour countries is not their legal right.

"The French navy is not escorting them. They are keeping an eye on them to make sure they do not sink and drown, but under what pretence should they be stopping them?"

That is an interesting comment which does come with the reasonable position that we shouldnt even bother saving these people since it is the French allowing them to drown in UK waters. But as illegal migrants it is on the French to deal with them and not pass on the problem to the UK.

https://metro.co.uk/2020/09/17/french-border-guards-escort-overcrowded-migrant-boat-into-uk-waters-13284642/

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Hmm

@First Light

"There is no way the reduction in fish stocks is due to EU regs. The regs are there to save whatever is left of the stock after overfishing, some of which may be from illegal Russian or Chinese supertrawlers."

The regs might be there with the best intentions but its the consequences that matter. Just as the gov might have the best intentions with its covid advice while making an amusing/irritating mess.

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Hmm

@AC

"Don't understand the weird fetishism over fishing"

i dont get it either. But then I prefer office work. Different interests for different people.

"the stock which Brits actually eat permanently depleted"

Not sure its permanent but the reduction in fishing stocks seemed to be attributable to EU regulations from what I read. Alternatively leasing areas would probably work better since they make more money by actually having fish vs just meeting a quota by politicians.

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Hmm

@AC

"Your comment shows a real lack of understanding as to the serious, very real issues affecting our ability to control our borders."

Actually it is a serious problem that again occurred. People smuggling by a country that doesnt want them there so helps them enter another country illegally. Not missing how sick it is for them not to pick these people up from an overcrowded boat that is literally sinking as the French border patrol just watched.

codejunky Silver badge

Hmm

For a start we should probably start arresting French border patrol boats for escorting sinking migrant dinghies into UK waters.

The Battle of Britain couldn't have been won without UK's homegrown tech innovations

codejunky Silver badge

Re: you could read that two ways...

@Mark Billenness

"We were fotunate that there was strong opposition to the governments' austerity policies at the time and money did eventually go to the RAF."

Apparently the Germans practised tank manoeuvres on bicycles which I thought was an impressive act, considering the USSR churned out much better tanks with much better armour and still lost to panzers.

I recall Freeman Dyson mentioning how Brits invested in air power, but found that day raids got them shot down and at night the smallest target they could hit was a City. Not sure how correct the book is but Blood, Sweat and Arrogance (https://www.amazon.com/Blood-Sweat-Arrogance-Churchills-Phoenix/dp/0304367389) was a very interesting read of how limited our capability was.

Interestingly the same guy writing about WW1 heaped a lot more praise on how the Brits conducted the war compared to how WW2 was conducted.

codejunky Silver badge

Re: you could read that two ways...

@Hairy Spod

"We didnt invest enough or at least invest in the right places."

It is unfortunate that we dont know what we need to invest in until the time arrives or even has gone. Not wanting trench warfare like WW1 informed a lot of the decisions, but that was the war to end all wars. Instead of military the money was spent other ways.

I do wonder if we are doing the same now in Europe. How many countries are prepared under NATO? When Russia kicked off I seem to remember seeing assumptions that the Russians (should they invade Europe) would make great gains before meeting resistance. Watching the worry in Germany that Trump moved US troops from there to Poland.

UK and Japan agree to free trade deal that excludes data localisation requirements

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Nice

Is that 4 people who dont want to trade with Japan?

codejunky Silver badge

Nice

Got to start somewhere.

Brit MPs to Apple CEO: Please stop ignoring our questions about repairability and the environment

codejunky Silver badge

Erm

Why is this an issue for a committee of politicians? Did they get bored of meeting about which biscuits they should have next meeting? People obviously want the stuff so they even pay a huge premium (if its Apple) to get it. Apple is not in the environment business and just because they are big does not mean they should be slammed for the problem.

If there is an environmental clean up cost to getting rid of this stuff then add it as a tax to the product. That way the people buying it (from anyone not just Apple) are paying the cost of clean up. How repairable and whatever daft sustainability criteria is up to the people, and they vote with their wallets.

£2.5bn sueball claims Google slurps kids' YouTube browsing habits then sells them on

codejunky Silver badge

Hmm

So parents forget to parent, blame someone else. Google even made a kid friendly version for those parents who really must put their kid on youtube (I am not knocking it, its a great distraction) so it is up to the parent to guide their children. Its just like teaching the kid about fire, you dont give them a lighter and let rip. If the parents are concerned about Google's standard service acting like Google's standard service then the parents need to think for a moment and hopefully will see the problem.

Or it will be Google's fault because Google bad (but still gonna use it).

Zuck says Facebook made an 'operational mistake' in not taking down US militia page mid-protests. TBH the whole social network is a mistake

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Propaganda

@diodesign

It looks like another upstanding citizen was shot purely for their skin colour and so another peaceful protest took place in his name.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8734021/Quiet-night-Lancaster-revealed-knifeman-violent-history.html

Until the facts came to light.

Ireland unfriends Facebook: Oh Zucky Boy, the pipes, the pipes are closing…from glen to US, and through the EU-side

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Wouldn’t it be better if the US adopted GDPR?

@AC

"You must be a troll. Why else would you be so brazen as to accuse *remainers* of not having a clue about how the EU works?!"

I didnt. I asked if he is one of those remainers who doesnt have a clue. Not having a clue being a subset of the group not a general statement of remainers. And thats why I asked which bit about an EU army he considered bollocks. Because some people dont seem to realise the EU is and has been strongly considering creating it.

"Why are you so scared of an EU army? That's the bollocks being talked about."

Are you DF118? If so why the AC? Of not then who are you to tell me what he thinks? Hopefully he does know of the EU's desire to make an army and considers something specific to be bollocks. But until he explains what he thinks is bollocks I can only assume the usual 'the EU army idea isnt real'.

"Even when we were in the EU, there would have been no requirement to join in. We've always had 100% control of our armed forces."

I didnt even think we would. It would be our money funding it as one of the few net contributors.

"Anyway, with NATO on dodgy ground, it may be a good idea - better than loads of small individual forces."

And that is just wrong. NATO isnt an army, its an agreement that an attack on one is an attack on all. Who will the EU army be loyal to? How will it be directed (majority member votes? With veto?)? What happens when the army has to be deployed against a member country or if member countries disagree with a course of action?

Things get much more complicated when its an actual army instead of a joint defensive agreement.

"By the way, as someone so scared, you should have wanted to remain within the EU. Now there will be nothing stopping those pesky foreigners from coming here and stealing our cheddar!"

You mention scared a few times. Not sure why. Thinking its a dumb idea is different to being scared. As I already mentioned, a lot of these European countries struggle to meet NATO spending on their forces. Now they want to make another money hole.

codejunky Silver badge

Re: @AC

@John Brown (no body)

"That was a deliberate policy of de-listing by Google et al to make a point and try to stop a precedent being set"

Yes. Google did the right thing. Web crawlers read the robots.txt to read the instructions of where to index. The news providers got greedy and made demands of payment while also expecting google to shove readers their way. Google was in the right.

"It was blackmail by Google et al"

Kind of. If it is blackmail for Google to only provide its service to those who want it.

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Wouldn’t it be better if the US adopted GDPR?

@DF118

"I do love it when foam-mouthed Brexiters throw up that "EU armed forces" bollocks."

Oh no. Please dont tell me your one of those people who support the EU but havnt a clue? At what point do you think it is bollocks? You didnt miss them trying to explain it would be to complement NATO instead of a replacement while Trump was trying to get Europe to pay for some of its security?

codejunky Silver badge

@AC

"Wouldn't it be good if the European countries got together as a trade group to take on the world"

Its a good idea but the creeping desire to conquer Europe under one stupidity keeps showing up. They just cant stop at a trade block.

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Wouldn’t it be better if the US adopted GDPR?

@A random security guy

"Wouldn’t it be better if the US adopted GDPR?"

Not really. There is a reason the EU is an attempt to create a federalised system, and their GPS desires, and their EU military dreams, and their envy that the US can make globally successful tech companies.

The US shouldnt try to become what the copycat is. Better to be the VW golf than something that tries to be (VW golf advert in the UK).

codejunky Silver badge

@AC

It worked with google news and a couple of EU countries who tried to make google pay the news providers. Situation going back to before when the news sites rapidly lost viewings.

There seems to be a lot of entitlement and assumption that these things dont contribute.

China, Russia and Iran all attacking US elections and using some nasty new tactics, says Microsoft

codejunky Silver badge

@Whiskers

"Something unprecedented seems to have happened to voters in the US and UK"

We both seemed to be sick of being jerked around by slick politicians. Also it didnt help with the development of sjw's and snowflakes into academia and then the outside world.

Brexit border-line issues: Would you want to still be 'testing' software designed to stop Kent becoming a massive lorry park come 31 December?

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Time to up the level of smuggling.

@A K Stiles

"That would be the Scottish Independence referendum that the Tory government of the time spent a heap of money saying "if you leave then you don't get to be part of the EU - you can only have that if you stay in the UK""

Well that is factually true. That is Scotland only being in the EU as part of the UK. On its own it would not be allowed to join (the whacking deficit, Spain not wanting to encourage independence) and if it did would be an application as a new member without opt outs.

If it makes you feel any better Britain was threatened with the punishment budget if we didnt vote the right way and the gov also spent time and a heap of money trying to rig the vote.

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Time to up the level of smuggling.

@A K Stiles

"I've long thought that the answer was surely for England to cede from the union"

Why? The Scots voted to remain and that was their choice. Wales doesnt stomp their feet like the Scots so why would they not want the money. Similar situation with Ireland. So why would England be such a dick as to ditch the union which England pays for?

"But then the argument isn't actually about self-government, it's about Westminster government not having to be answerable to anyone else, whilst treating the 'lesser' folks of the member nations in exactly the way they claim and object that the E.U. are treating the U.K"

Scotland had a referendum to leave the UK, as did the UK to leave the EU. Scotland voted remain, UK voted leave. Are you suggesting a democratic vote should be won by the minority? That the minority of people should dictate the union?

codejunky Silver badge

Re: "I'm going to make some money by betting on the economy going to shite, "

@sed gawk

"I live here, and have British Citizenship, so I'm not in the position to benifit from the knowledge it's going to be bad."

Hang on with the shock and awe as I pick myself up. Thank you so much, now can you go tell those moronic remainers claiming us brexit voters are in it for the money because you guarantee its gonna be shit but for some reason dont think you can make money on it. Although I would suggest looking into investments and foreign currency if you are so sure of your knowledge.

"If you look at the people in the ERG, there is a lot of capital betting on volatility. Some of those people own hedge funds."

And you wont be betting because you are certain! So get your money in there, all you can to take advantage of that volatility.

"If you cannot see the delta between these positions, you're unwilling to see it."

There is such a thing as a stocks and shares ISA (an Osborne thing) where you can invest tax free in investment funds!! And with your knowledge you will surely make a packet! Or go the non-ISA route and you have access to even more investment opportunities from individual stocks to a wide range of funds in all kinds of stocks, commodities and more.

codejunky Silver badge

Re: You have it backwards.

@sed gawk

"It's democratic due to the number of people voting having an effect on the people being elected."

Did you vote for the German war minister?

"I live in England, so the laws affecting this country are drafted in Westminster."

With an amount under the direction of the EU. Which Blair loved to gold plate to show how willing he was to drop trow and bend over.

"The commission (people nominated by EU member states) propose legislation"

We elect them? Since they propose the legislation?

"the EU Parliament (directly elected by voters using PR) debates ammendments"

So we elect people to yey or ney what they are told.

"it's tiresome spoonfeeding you."

What were those president names again (no looking it up).

"The current trio is made up of the presidencies of the Germany, Portugal and Slovenia."

Trio? I count 8 when I look it up and I dont see you providing any names (not full names, partials are fine). Those county names, they are not the member state country are they? If so looking it up agrees with Germany. In fact it claims 3 of them are Germany.

"You seem to miss the point, it's a protectionist system, so we're collectively (aka everyone in the country) worse off outside of it."

You assume protectionist to mean good. There is a huge area of disagreement with you there. The UK's past being one example.

"I ran a tiny business paying UK tax while selling to people paying in Euro, how is that cashing in?

Okay, I'm an evil capitalist grinding the faces of the poor or some shite like that?"

Excellent we can agree (and not in a name calling way). You are looking to your businesses self interest as your reason for protectionism, and its only natural. Kudo's on your business tiny or not, and while you use this so do bigger players. But protectionism is a massive cost which drives down quality and drives up prices. We are both evil capitalists looking at this from different sides of the economic protectionism.

"how does putting people in the country out of work, help the people in the country? It's mental."

Thank you. That is one of the arguments against protectionism.

"Either we maintain the same quality of food, so it costs us more, and our food production industry goes to the wall. Or we lower the qalitity of food so our food production industry goes to the wall."

First of all the protectionist tariffs on things we dont produce are stupid so scrap those. Second the EU uses quality regs as additional protectionist barriers which is where the chlorinated chicken argument left a lot of remainers red faced and looking sideways at their salad. With the removal of EU protectionism there are very few who claim food would be more expensive except where they use an asterisk and point out they mean from the EU.

"And you care because ? They are shit because they move around. Mate you're past the bottom of the barrel and excavating the damp earth beneath."

Really? It doesnt bother you that this supranational above political stupidity cant agree on a single place to set up? Instead costing the people to move every so often so they appease a couple of members? This bastion of intelligence and cooperation cant even agree where to park their arses costing the people 2 buildings for shits and giggles?

You can call that bottom of the barrel. I call it head in trough.

"We didn't join the Euro as Brown understood the Euro is a shit currency"

We can agree its a shit currency.

"The UK in not in the Euro and not in the EU and is in recession, funny how that works, it's almost like there are other factors at play."

First you cant be telling me you missed out on the global financial crisis which the EU made much worse on the Eurozone (shit currency as we agree). Second the UK, EU and many others are in recession due to covid. Are you claiming the US and UK didnt bounce out of the global recession while the EU almost fell into deflation? That would be an amazing claim to make.

"I'm just offended that these people could be described as left wing"

Thats exactly what I ment by left wing nerve. Its the same reaction some people have when suggested Blair was left wing, he was still to the right of Stalin so offends some people.

"it makes it impossible to describe corbyn as left wing when you content that the tories are left wing"

No it doesnt. Corbyn is most certainly much further left than the tories. As I understood it he is a marxist and mcdonnell a communist.

"It's investment"

Investment comes with profit return. That is why a lot of claims of investing are not so.

"The desperate people are refugees, not migrants. We have a proud tradition of helping people, see the"

No, you said people in dingys and they dont go far, basically you mean from France. Which you are either claiming is some unsafe shithole or that people sneaking over from there to illegally enter this country are economic migrants. We do have a proud tradition of helping people. That is why with Syria instead of inviting the country to move in we funded and supplied safe zones nearby so when the war is over they can go rebuild. The economic migrants trying it on tend to get sent out of the country-

https://www.continentaltelegraph.com/2020/09/casuistry-at-the-huffington-post-about-refugees/

"I cannot imagine that when fleeing for your life, you choose a destination based on the number of opt outs from the EU"

Very true. You instead go to the nearest safe country and apply for asylum as per the rules.

codejunky Silver badge

Re: You have it backwards.

"We vote for MEP, using PR."

Cool. So which presidents did you vote for in the EU? What were the names again? (not open book).

"The people we cannot select are called the Lords, try to keep up."

So you advocate adding another layer of unelected government who are also further removed from the issues of the country? Still not explained how this is a solution.

"Impose their will, proof, not assertion"

Going to throw your own words back at you- 'The laws and regulations'. I didnt realise I had to parrot back to you for you to read your own words.

Also another quote of yours- 'Our rationale for staying in the EU is protection from of the "Incompetent government".'. How is this achieved if the EU is not above our government to overrule them?

"The EU doesn't impose anything, we have a veto"

Except we gold plate EU laws and directives. Do we grow oranges in this country? Because we have a protectionist tariff to protect Spain's orange production. And of course various other protections for various countries that are not ours. So we might have a veto but we also seem to be under the EU.

"We decide if we'll veto legislation that we vote on, and if we ratify it, we draft a law to implement it in our country - It's a model of good transparent governance."

Hang on. So we elect people who either yey or ney legislation drawn up by who? Who do we elect for that? And who are these presidents again?

"We don't have difficultly leaving"

So after the initial transition period we left and there isnt a transition period currently going on? Or did we get extensions, hear that art50 was purposefully written badly to discourage use and only in this last gov finally start making moves to leave but with the negotiation still going on?

codejunky Silver badge

Re: @H in The Hague

@sed gawk

"But tie your scarf tightly and three cheers for vassalage."

Who to? So far we have been a member of the EU to which we pay tribute for the benefits of its guiding hand (aka subordinate to aka vassalage). Or do you mean the US, to which you then mention Blairs wars in the middle east.

"All the social and economic gains made since 1997 have been reversed since the 2010 election of the Bacon Botherer and his Illiberal mates."

Since before 2010 you might note. Something to do with a massive expansion of public money being spent, a certain amount of selling off gold at rock bottom prices and badly negotiated PFI contracts leaving the country in the hole and the new treasurer coming to a note telling them there is nothing left.

"Hence why we are now neck deep in the brown stuff while you carry on dribbiling out this guff in the vain hope that if you say it enough times, it will be come true."

Pre covid what brown stuff? I am happy to accept the response to covid is an overreaction but pre covid? While the EU is again sinking further into the brown stuff.

We can all hold our own opinions of how left/right the tories are, but last I checked right wing was ment to be small government less spending. Yet we dont get a bonfire of quango's and we have higher spending than the Brown years (during the period claimed to be austerity! Pre covid)

codejunky Silver badge

Re: "https://briefingsforbritain.co.uk"

@John Smith 19

"No more trustworthy than the Daily Heil."

No refuting it then? Ok.

codejunky Silver badge

Re: "I'm going to make some money by betting on the economy going to shite, "

@John Smith 19

The bit you quoted is what I responded to. And if he is so certain as he claims then he will surely make a load of money out of this as will a load of remainers. Assuming of course the economy goes to shit.

"Then you'd be like the big investors (because let's be real this was a "business opportunity" for them) who bankrolled this insanity."

The UK gov pumped extra money (from the tax payer) to support remain beyond the allowed financial rules. The gov directly threatened the population with a punishment budget if we didnt vote remain.

https://briefingsforbritain.co.uk/the-money-behind-remain/

codejunky Silver badge

Re: You have it backwards.

@sed gawk

"By the way, as per usual, you've not answered a single one of the questions RE the EU and the supposed lack of democratic accountability."

Ignorance might be bliss but I did answer the question when you couldnt tell me the names of presidents of the EU (remember its not open book). You claim they hold our gov to account, but who holds them to account?

"All you've shown is that you thought Mandelson was a tool, as if it's an either or choice."

Actually you brought Cummings into this so I pointed out similar past problems in this country. Which I maintain is still not good reason for adding the same problems as another layer of gov above ours.

"It was a no deal from the start, as everyone paying attention could see."

Hoped so but was worried when remainers tried to hijack the result and impose their will like a bunch of fascists.

codejunky Silver badge

Re: You have it backwards.

@sed gawk

"So Brexit, not a single statement to explain why it won't be a shit show."

No evidence for it being a shitshow. Lots of opinion but beyond that thin on the ground. We were warned by auto and air manufacturers they would leave, then the tune changed when brexit looked like it was actually happening. We know of the doom and gloom claims, most of which passed their time to occur without even a peep. Such predictions seem to be the norm while not much comes of it.

"In short, you put up a suggestion that the utter shower in power currently are improved by removing any check on their behaviour, and forbidding us from escaping or doing business abroad."

The shower in power who are voted for vs the shower in power we cannot select but as you point out impose their will. Your really not selling this EU thing. And when you say forbidding escaping or doing business abroad do you mean EU protectionism or how we seem to have difficulty leaving the project?

codejunky Silver badge

@H in The Hague

"Yup. What really gets me is that for decades the Conservatives have been complaining about Labour wasting taxpayers' money in that way - and now they want to do it themselves."

The distance between Conservative and New labour being pretty thin. I think Boris moved the needle back a bit but not greatly.

codejunky Silver badge

@DJO

"which is a bonfire of regulations turning the UK into a low regulation, low tax (for the rich) regime which all us proles will have to pay for."

Fingers crossed.

codejunky Silver badge

Re: You have it backwards.

@sed gawk

"And that has what to do with PR or FPTP?"

Cmon you claim its democratic so you voted for these presidents didnt you? They are presidents of the EU which is above our government and you claim democratic so who did you vote for of these presidents?

"It's like trying to debate someone with ADD, if you can name the person in charge of X, doesn't have any baring on the degree of democratic deficit in them assuming the role."

So you dont need to know who is in charge of the EU hence laws and regulations affecting this country? I aint asking for the jobsworths just the presidents (because the EU has a few for some reason).

"Protectionism is rather the point, we'll be on the outside of a protectionist system"

Ok, so that works for you but what about the customers (aka everyone in the country) who are affected by lower quality and higher prices because of protectionism? Why must everyone pay for you to cash in (assuming you benefit from it)?

"You don't seem to recognise, that enormous numbers of business that employ UK people, pay UK tax, are simply going to go to the wall. I declare a personal interest, including mine."

Ok. So at what point do we care about the people in the country then? We must suffer the costs of protectionism because the protectionism has created these protectionist jobs? Your trying to sell me a cost as a benefit.

"Telling you our political class is shit, is not the same as saying all political actors are shit."

Ok. But the EU gov is shit. They cant even sit in one place, instead have to move to appease a member with pork.

"Try to accept a level of nuance"

Ok. Blair sold the country to the EU because he wanted a job with the EU. We were saved from the appalling Euro because Brown hated Blair. We have seen how good the EU is at running things, they decked economies to protect their currency. The UK bounced out of recession while the EU trashed poorer economies in the Eurozone.

"The Tories are left wing only in the imagination of the politically stunted."

I seem to have hit a left wing nerve there. With blow out spending (pre-covid) and making policies such as triple lock pensions. That of course while claiming austerity.

"A left wing approach would be UBI, free internet, feeding hungry children without being shamed by premiership footballers."

So more free stuff. Yes that would be further left.

"Left wing, might involve asking why people are so desperate that they'll cross the worlds busiest shipping lane in a poundland dingy to try and seek safety (hint because we colonised their home countries so they speak English)."

I thought economic migrants trying to get here in a dingy were just running away from the French. That glorious place fully on board with membership of the EU. Yet they want to come here with our opt outs and leaving the EU. Even travelling through other EU countries to get here.

Job planning, temp staffing: NHS England tosses out £30m for HR and people systems to support new ways of working

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Integrated Care Systems

@Alister

They gotta justify their existence somehow. I wonder if the fax machines will go.

Tech ambitions said to lie at heart of Britain’s bonkers crash-and-burn Brexit plan

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Its stupid

@cyberdemon

"Maybe in looking to the continent you picked a bad example."

I intentionally looked across the continent as that is where we are comparing against (due to brexit). My position is politicians generally suck at this stuff. Doesnt matter if they are at local or supranational level.

codejunky Silver badge

@Doctor Syntax

Well said

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Its stupid

@nsld

Heylookoverthere! You kinda missed the point that the waste went from EU level down to local level with politicians all the way down. As I said 'Governments trying to pick winners is just terrible.'

"The metro in Athens is excellent, and the majority of that Daily Mail article from 9 years ago is horseshit"

I have to take your word for it. Not many seem to want to discuss the cost/return on the project. This is a more recent one but misses figures-

https://www.balcanicaucaso.org/eng/All-the-news/Railways-in-Greece-poor-service-no-competition-199234

codejunky Silver badge

Its stupid

Governments trying to pick winners is just terrible. For example the EU funds toward the Greek railway project that will never be sustainable. Or the money thrown at Poland to make oversized airports for nothingtowns. Maybe we can get a right wing (or really a more libertarian) party to vote for after brexit has finally been done.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2007949/The-Big-Fat-Greek-Gravy-Train-A-special-investigation-EU-funded-culture-greed-tax-evasion-scandalous-waste.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-poland-airports-specialreport/special-report-eu-funds-help-poland-build-ghost-airports-idUSKBN0JS06K20141214

SMEs to UK.gov: We need vouchers for tech and training ahead of final Brexit curtain falling

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Hmm

@Doctor Syntax

"I don't think there's any evidence that all those campaigning for leave* had any idea what to do after the vote"

Leave like remain was made up of a lot of people with various opinions of how to go forward. That both sides were made up of people wanting trade with the world and people wanting isolationism from free market to commie made the arguments varied and incompatible.

At the same time we had a remainer Cameron to lead the way, and leave had Farage (not in power) and Boris (finally in power). Until now we have had Cameron insisting he would stay regardless of the result (then running thank god) to be replaced by May (ffs) to finally after all this time have one of the leave campaign in charge and with 1 year to fix everything including previous bodge jobs.

"Cameron was going to stay on and run it. Where was the essential planning before the vote? Where were the impact assessments? Where was the cost/benefit analysis?"

Well said. The stitch up was so sickening that our own government could be so against its own population. All power gatekeepered by Cameron and his insistence that he will remain regardless of the result.

"Vote Leave were caught in the headlights by winning and then being left to deal with the reality of it"

The brexit side were ready. The only one in any position of any power being Farage from the EU machine. As has been made clear, here is the deadline and we are going on that date, do with that as you will. This is only a recent stand as of Boris (hate singing his praises as I still dont trust him). Finally a leave leader.

"Their one hope is that, arguing form a position of extreme weakness, they can persuade the EU to give them a safety net."

That is the remain position. Leave is pretty unambiguous, we are going deal or no. The position of weakness has been begging for a deal we dont need and an extension we dont want.

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Hmm

@AC

"Are you seriously trying to tell us that you think that the current Government could have managed to sort out a customs mess at the same time as dealing with Covid?"

You need to reread what I said in my original comment. Had we left when we should we would have had this sorted long before now. Before Covid.

"They have been spectacularly inept at the latter, without the total mess of the former."

I agree.

"If, as the article states, there will be, to quote you, " years of uncertainty (an actual economic damage cause)" How would that have magically vanished in 1 year?"

You misunderstand. The years of uncertainty is what we have had, we voted leave and yet have to fight tooth and nail for a politician to actually get us out. Had we left when we should have we would not still be uncertain of what our arrangement will be.

"If you consider lockdowns during Covid to have been an overreaction, would you care to comment on the state of those areas of the US where they didn't implement even as half-hearted a lockdown as this Governmment did?"

Not really, the US is a big place of varying methods (different states etc). In the UK the lockdown was applied to stop the NHS getting overwhelmed, and it didnt. And it isnt. The lockdown doesnt get rid of the virus it is litteraly about limiting how many people get it at the same time. Not about stopping the virus.

"Would you further care to comment on the fact that, since the easing of the general lockdown, cases in the UK are once again rising and we have seen a number of areas returning to a semi-lockdown?"

Cases are irrelevant as a problem but cases to actual hospitalisation and actual death is the comparison worth anything. In fact we want the cases to go up but the other two down (death being the main one to go down). FYI you will get more cases as more testing is done (a shambles of the public sector in the US and UK) but also whenever lockdown is reduced. You cannot stop it. When people interact you spread the virus, you cannot lift lockdown without people interacting. And lockdown too long and people ignore it (as they did) and lockdown becomes worthless.

"Posting as AC as I am skirting round what I am officially allowed to say on an open Forum due to my job"

Cheers for explaining that but I would also like to say thank you for a polite response as AC. Doesnt happen often enough. Hopefully I have explained my position more clearly for you here.

codejunky Silver badge

Re: Hmm

@Adair

"Would you like to spell out in some detail what you understand the consequences of your preferred option would actually be"

We would have been out of the EU already and these issues would be solved by now. Even if the lack of planning government had cocked up customs it would be resolved by now. As per the article years of uncertainty (an actual economic damage cause) would not have existed reducing the cost to the country of this 'negotiation'.

Instead we have lockdowns and furloughs during covid (which I consider an overreaction and certainly is now) and businesses are still waiting to find out the situation with the EU negotiations.

codejunky Silver badge

Hmm

"Businesses crave predictability, but Brexit uncertainty, compounded by the impact of the worldwide coronavirus pandemic - along with the accompanying furlough scheme provided by UK.gov, which is due to close next month - has left many fearing for the future."

Almost as if dicking around instead of leaving was a bad idea. Instead of extensions and trying to keep us in against the various votes we have had we should have been out of the EU by now. The good news is we left before the federalised Covid bailout, that would have been expensive and difficult to leave.

China launches and lands its first re-usable spacecraft

codejunky Silver badge

Re: @Sirius Lee - Staggered by the misplaced wonder

@96percentchimp

"Sure, the 'free market' has pulled people from poverty and peasantry, if you shrug off the millions trampled, displaced, murdered, poisoned and otherwise disenfranchised on the way there"

Fair comment. I wont deny that. Just that it actually produces a better off population than the alternatives tried especially communism.

"There's never any middle ground and not a scrap of self-awareness."

The problem is that the starting point is all that death and destruction. Free market progresses people out of that to the point of relative problems instead of absolute. Communism drags people back even if they progressed forward previously, Back to that state of absolute problems you mention.

codejunky Silver badge

Re: @Sirius Lee - Staggered by the misplaced wonder

@AC

"I understand you though, those Communists were supposed to be an exemplary failure, something like Venezuela or Cuba and that's what is bothering many people in the Western world."

They were. Dragging their people into actual poverty not the relative stuff in the rich world. Managing to kill vast amounts of their own people for the ideology that has failed consistently without any successes (the nearest being N.Korea).

I am thoroughly impressed with the Chinese putting in huge effort and actually managing to catch up to the 20th century. I hold out hope that they might be able to break through to being a success as Japan was, but of course it comes with huge risk and requires China fixing some of its political shortcomings.

But the more global and capitalist (actually freer market) it has become the more of a success it has been and the more people pulled from that actual poverty and peasantry.

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR WEEKLY TECH NEWSLETTER

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020