Posts by MonkeyCee 1254 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Apr 2013
My local has various piss take items on their menu. They do a decent English and Irish breakfast.
So the breakfast menu also has the Canadian breakfast: a pat on the back, two paracetamol and a pint of tap water
They have a cocktail called "Coldplay's greatest hits".
It's a pint of tap water.
Thing is U2 is much more of a rock band, rather than a pop band. Not all of their stuff, but a lot of the older catalog is proper dance around the room music*.
The biggest issue (IMHO) with U2 is that some prat is singing over an otherwise perfectly good song. Not that Bono should STFU all the timea, he should just stick with ballads, and STFU on the rocking tracks :)
Used to play U2 tunes (without vocals) and they are proper tasty. AC/DC are fun too, but they essentially only do three songs :D
* my four year old refers to rock as "guitar music" when he wants us to dance to it
It's not like this is anything new. I'm more surprised that certain mergers/buyouts were allowed, such as FB acquiring Instagram and WhatsApp.
Part of the problem is that once certain companies enjoy a monopoly (or duopoly) on a market, the best way to maximise profits is to milk the customer while buying out any new entrants. You can also make the entry harder, but that takes active collusion from the regulators. Buying all the competition is perceived as being better. Hence FB's dominance in social media.
Google has already restructured, so there are obviously some benefits.
Amazon needs reigning in much the same way as Walmart does. I'd argue they provide quite a good service, in terms of running a mail order business, since they do a cracking job of warehousing and inventory management. AWS is pretty solid, YMMV and all that, but for cloud it's pretty good value. Damning with faint praise and all that. Again, the parts of Amazon could work separately.
Not sure any streaming service needs much in the way of regulation at the moment.
We've seen some big mergers in the last few years, so I'm not sure the appetite is really for killing off the monoliths. More regulation, sure, but probably not breaking up companies.
What the legislatures are gearing up for is finding a way to regulate and hold accountable social media, in the same way traditional media is. I'll grant you that the traditional media is perfectly capable of drumming up bullshit that people believe because it feels right, but they at least side step around the facts rather than outright falsify them. "In a recently published hit piece disguised as a memoir, some bloke* claims that he heard from a friend that David Cameron...." as compared to "David Cameron shagged a dead pigs head". But many of us wanted to believe the worst about him, so it's an accepted truth. Even if you show it's false, you still kind of want it to be true.
We've been here before with regulation of newspapers, it's why journalists have different protections in different countries, and there are different libel and personal damage laws. Exactly what is free speech, what are allowed to publish etc. So it's (generally) illegal to report a falsehood as true, but it's generally legal to present selected facts (and deliberately omit others) in order to create a narrative. What's the control on social media? Is it public or private speech, or does it not matter? Is there allowance for context and hyperbole** or should your posts be held fully accountable? Who decides what is and isn't acceptable, the Department of Unity?
It'll be interesting to see how this all pans out. At least some congress critters are young enough to know the difference between instagram and facebook :D
*who when asked, claimed he couldn't remember who told him the story
** saying "I'm going to fucking kill you" in person when angry can be judged to mean very different things based on tone of voice and situation. Those words written down are more threatening than most situations that we encounter them in verbal communication.
"The universal hatred/fear of an ID card in England"
Is why they have been introduced by the back door.
You can walk down the street without ID, as long as your not suspicious enough to be questioned.
If you drive, or are in a vehicle stopped by the police, you can be required to prove your identity.
If you want to buy age restricted items, ie drink or smoke, you need ID.
If you are employed, rent a property, open a bank account or register at a surgery, then you need ID.
"The EU is on record, for example, as flatly rejecting repeatedly every attempt by the UK to maintain customs union participation,"
Bollocks.
What the UK has asked for is a customs union with the EU without ECJ oversight. Might as well ask for a customs union with the USA, as long as SCOTUS doesn't have presidence.
The UK can get a CU for goods without an issue, as long as it accepts ECJ rulings related to it. Everyone wants it, even Jeremy Corbyn :)
A CU for services and money will be trickier, but following all the current and any new EU rules should make it possible.
But then, why leave? Block freedom of movement, pay the same fees, get no vote?
Or no custom union. It's very simple, it favors the EU, and it was written that way. At the insistence of the UK, proud EU members :D
"with repeated emphases that the UK's either all-in or all-out."
Because that's the rules, written in part at the insistence of the UK.
"If the EU were decent enough to sit down and actually talk with May about what would need to be done to the deal to make parliament and the 27 member states happy it would have been a lot smoother I bet."
That's exactly what happened.
The EU talked to the 27 states. Formed a position. Then talked to May and a rotating cast of Ministers for Brexit. They reached a deal.
Turns out May hadn't bothered to talk to Parliament.
Maybe she should have done that first....
"There's no doubt that Brexit will result in the reunification of Ireland, so Sinn Fein should be happy."
No offence, but you could do with a wee look at the Good Friday Agreement.
If the people of Northern Ireland want to, they can vote to join Eire. No bloodshed, no bombs. In the long run, Sinn Fein get a united Ireland by waiting it out and being more moral than the DUP. this isn't hard.
The general long term trend is that people are keen on unification, but perhaps it's more hassle than it's worth, both being in the EU and all that.
The main protestant party is the DUP. They are hardline unionists, and are about the only people keen on getting rid of the GFA. They are quite happy with the idea of a hard border. They are slowly losing votes over time.
The NI assembly hasn't sat for three years. Becasue Sinn Fein won't take their shared leadership role until the "cash for ash" scandal gets investigated, and the DUP are up to their eyeballs in the scam, so refuse. So NI is run from England, while the DUP push the boundaries of the GFA.
Thus the elected representatives of ~45% of Northern Ireland won't run the devolved government they've been elected to run, but they do get to sit in the UK parliament and stick their oar in to brexit to try and break the GFA.
The DUP are anti-abortion. So abortion is now legal in Ireland and the UK, except for Norther Ireland. Sinn Fein are now pro legalising abortion (people's choice etc). So you have the DUP insisting NI must be the same as the UK, except when it doesn't want that. Oh, and can you keep running our country while I refuse to face my responsibility in stealing millions in public money.
"because there won't be a path back to the EU. "
Probably no path back to the current situation. If the UK joined again it would probably have to accept the Euro. Generally speaking the EU is fine with the UK being part of it, and the UK was one of the drivers for the project. Rather than Germany, France and the UK fighting a war every generation, we work together, along with all the countries that get invaded along the way. Same with NATO on the military front.
"I'm betting that once you're strong enough to be accepted back into the EU you'll be wondering why you even need to be back."
Because belonging to the largest trade bloc in the world is beneficial, especially when it's on your doorstep.
"as I have no dog in that fight."
While I'm sure that's true personally, it is in the strategic interests of the USA* to see the EU and the UK weakened. The EU recognises this, hence why there is quite an effort for unity and a desire to not punish or humiliate the UK.
The fight is all internal to the UK, within the parties/electorate/Parliament** and between Parliament and the government. The only thing all sides agree on is it needs more time. May's deal is just more time with citizen's rights and the Irish backstop and that not only can't get passed, it set a record for a loss.
IMHO the government should revoke A50, then work out what the fuck the UK wants, assuming the EU sticks to the current rules of the EU, then gets a mandate from Parliament on the reality based position, then calls A50. Even if the plan is for a hard brexit, then two years planning with that as the only goal might make it less of an omnishambles.
*and China, Russia, Australia et al
** and the various agendas, such as the DUP wanting to break the GFA
"Presumably Farage was too busy arranging his second citizenship, or getting drunk in the bar to do his ****ing job."
I believe he's busy getting ready to run in the EU elections, since his "job" is getting elected as a MEP, then failing to do much other than claim the maximum allowances etc.
"We are going to get walked all over in every single fucking trade deal we try to negotiate, because we're run by clowns, and everyone knows we are."
To be fair the EU is pretty keen on making a decent trade agreement. Not as good as the current one, but no-one is really interested in fucking themselves in order to fuck the UK.
The rest of the world is out sharpening the knives. Even with a negotiating team as strong as the EU, the UK is in a much weaker position.
The ex-commonwealth countries will require more access to the labour market (ie immigration) which is going to piss off certain groups.
It's going to be chaos. But for some, chaos is a ladder.
"All it would take is enough power to declare their own self-determination "
Look, I know the magic sovereign fairy gives certain types the woody, but like many "magic" terms, you can't just declare you've got it and everyone else will accept it.
There are two hundred odd countries, and they are sovereign. If you want to make another one, good bloody luck. Prolonged civil war maybe, such as Sudan splitting into two countries.
Unless all the other sovereign nations recognise you, then you can declare yourself God-Emporer all you like, your laws, edicts and refusal to pay taxes don't wash.
Bear in mind that the East India company liked to claim it was "somewhat" sovereign (issued it's own coinage, conducted wars, collected taxes and enforced laws) and had a land army roughly twice the size of the British army, and yet never declared itself sovereign.
"At 13:40 this nutter goes on the rampage, uploading video as he goes. At 14:40 his video goes live. At 16:00 the police figure out who he is. The video has already been live for over an hour."
Not sure if you've been following the case, but the cops had him in custody less than 40 minutes after he started the attack. So on your timeline: 14:36 police ram his vehicle off the road and arrest him.
"But all of these calls to "take responsibility for the content that your users post" are euphemisms for having governments around the world outsource the job of censorship to huge unaccountable multinational companies. "
OK, exactly how do you think current media publishing rules work? There's no government employee who checks over the Mail and the Gruiniard before they go out for publication.
And yes, I do think the Mail needs a bollocking for putting this psychos manifesto and an edited copy of the video up.
"I know from people I've had the misfortune of actually knowing that there are groups with very racist views down there"
Seems to be centered on Timaru. So Christchurch isn't rascist compared to Timaru, Dunedin isn't rascist compared to Christchurch etc...
The mayor is obviously talking out of his arse. I lived in NZ for a couple of decades, of which I spent maybe a dozen nights in Christchurch. Both times I've been assaulted on the street have been there, and while I can't be certain of the political views of the skinheads with swastika tattoos that were busy stomping on me, I'd have guessed at somewhat right of center.
Perhaps the mayor just felt that hating non-pink people or pretty much any religion is just the norm, hence why there's no special attention paid to the skinheads. If he really doesn't think there are any, then he should take a stroll through the center of town on Saturday night in drag.
I'll add, never give your passport away to anyone, full stop. You can allow them to inspect it, and many nations make this easier (France and UK have transparent booths so you can see they aren't doing anything funny).
Many many stories of them being stolen. A stolen kiwi passport is worth $10-50k on the black market, so if you leave yours to rent a motorbike in Laos, don't be shocked if you come back and the guy claims some other white dude took it.
Don't sell it either. Knew one of chap who tried that, when Internal Affairs (NZ home office or state department) got wind of that they got his residence revoked, got him deported from Oz when he went there and locked him up for about the same amount of time as killing someone.
It's government property, and you can refuse to give it up to anyone other than the issuing authority.
"Holding on to your passport for safe keeping" is what gang masters do.
If you can get dual passports or dual citizenship if you travel a lot, having a second option is always nice.
"Whats even worse is that most commentators here would probably think that is fine."
I'd think not. In general, whatever our personal and political disagreements, I find the commantards are not believers in violence. I'm on the fence about fighting actual fascists, but I'd not thump a republican, conservative or national voter just because we held radically different political views. Especially in a two party system, which is going to always involve some amount of nose holding for the party candidate.
I don't like Trump or his politics, but I don't think he should be harmed as a result of that. That extends to his supporters. Don't even think he should be impeached, pretty sure the wheels of justice will grind him down.
I'm pretty sure that the majority of the GoP don't actually like him either, but he was their guy, he's getting 2-3 picks onto the SCOTUS and can be relied on to put the right white fella in place. He also winds the left up like no-ones business :)
"MAGA hat wearers are regularly attacked or abused."
Any more than anyone wearing an open political declaration?
Not that I approve of attacks, but if you're wearing a political slogan, aren't you asking for a reaction?
But yeah, don't fight each other please. Save that for when the buggers who do want our freedoms come for them.
While we're two countries separated by a common language, the USians have used the term "pre-pregnant" to refer to any fertile woman.
In that case it was some of the usual controlling bullshit, essentially that if you could potentially have a baby, you should abide by all the expectations of a pregnant mother. So no drinking, no $FOOD depending on cultural norms*, no drugs etc.
I'm sure urban planners do this all the time. The Dutch are quite effective at it, so while no-one asked if my wife and I were planning to have a kid, being a married couple in a child friendly neighbourhood, I'm pretty sure we we're down as "potential kid" in some planners DB.
Planning for where new schools and child clinics should be sited being based of where future babies are most likely isn't nearly as creepy as the other possible implications of this DB.
* compare the advice for pregnant mums in France versus Germany
My doppelganger is a Russian ballet dancer, with the same first name.
I found this out when I was at a party and a lass he'd hooked up with the previous weekend was there, and she was pissed off with me ignoring her, then "faking" a british accent to claim I was someone else. Oh, and I'd grown six inches in a week :D
First of all, it's OK dude, if you can't grow a beard there's nothing wrong with that.
"Getting very fed up of seeing them. So if you've got one: try being an individual and shave the damn thing off."
The norm for me was that men are expected to shave. So what you mean is please conform and shave.
"It is very unlikely to actually suit you."
Being 40 with the face of a teenager doesn't suit me. Having stubble* unless I've shaved in the last hour doesn't suit me. My options for looking professional at work are to trim my beard a couple of times a week or shave 3+ times a day.
"You probably look like a pillock. "
Sure, but that's got nothing to do with the beard :)
" And it must be like kissing a dog's arse."
In terms of partner and kid complaints about kissing me, it's only ever after shaving or trimming. Like the hair on the rest of your body, it's pretty soft, and gets softer the longer it's around. Assuming you brush it, the natural oils will make it nice and soft.
So unless you shave each time before you kiss someone, beard >>> stubble for comfort purposes.
My memories of my dad and uncles with beards is also that they were very soft. So not sure which beards you've been kissing, but obviously the wrong ones :)
"Oh, and for the love of God, ditch the bloody North Face too, and watch your stupid backpack - there are other people on the train too, you muppet. And stop staring at your phone like a drooling imbecile."
That's pretty specific.... bad commute in this morning? I'm gonna guess (since you're AC) that you were too scared of the response to actually call them on their shitty bag etiquette. Luckily I'm in the the Netherlands, so if people are being pricks with their bags etc on public transport I just call them out. Teenagers rather than hipsters, but I'm sure it works as well.
As for hating hipsters, it'd be easier if they didn't like many of the same things as me, for apparently the same reasons, I've got a fixed wheel bike** as one of my commuting bikes, I do woodwork, I like tasty beer, I wear chucks, I vape rather than smoke, I like practical clothing and I have facial hair. Mind you, I don't live anywhere cool, my beard is far too short for hipster cred (or joining ISIS) and my hair styling is about as basic as you can get.
* dark hair + pale skin = visible stubble pretty much immediately
** oma fietes - grandma bike
So it's normal ML, which is repeating the past. Which is fine for certain situations, but not so hot for many of the fuzzy ones.
"They could be decked out with cameras that identify suspicious items including guns and knives, or include microphones to listen out for gunshots and tell-tale screams."
Don't we have that already with CCTV? Don't we already have the ability to use AI on a central node (rather than an edge device) on these things? So why isn't it being used? Oh wait, it's a lot bloody harder to use sensor data in an uncontrolled environment. Or is the (oft made) claim that all we need are more and better sensors, and better data, so we just need improvements in CCTV :)
"or work alongside police officers."
Er no. Sorry. If there is one job that's not going to be replaced with AI it's beat cops. Many de-escalation techniques involve building a rapport and identification with the suspect, and I'm not sure that a robot is going to have the emotional intelligence or creative thinking to deal with this*. Having non-LEOs working with the cops to deal with situations can also work well, but I'd take a dog over a robot most days.
"Researchers, we were told, are interested in creating roving network-inspecting bots that can study past cyber-attacks, identify patterns in the intruders' data accesses and methods, and use that knowledge to detect future network compromises. "
OK, I'm confused. Is this a fancy network log analyser? Or is it going to have the ability to act on it's suspicions? Because having a tool to flag stuff up to a meatbag is nice, but it's not bloody AI.
* or most members of the public for that matter.
"It's a well established fact in my family that I fix Windows by installing Linux "
Other than pulling their data off first, that's 90% of my computer "support" these days. Mainly switching the language is simple, compared to switching a Windows install between English and Arabic.
"privates these days are of above average intelligence"
To be fair to most of the grunts I knew, they had a choice of one of two lives, both of which involved holding a gun. Since one involved having to some school work, they figured that one had the better long term odds.
After a decade in the military, they have playing dumb down to a fine art. Certainly enough to fool most civvies :D
If it was binding a simple majority would not have been enough.
And stop with all this 48:52 crap.
37.5% of the electorate voted for leave the EU.
34.5% of the electorate voted for remain in the EU.
28% of the electorate didn't vote.
If we held a binding referendum, then having that third group express their opinions might give an accurate picture.
Traditionally a referendum that says "We currently do X, lets do Y instead" counts the net percentage of "do Y" votes and compares them against all the others. In other words, not voting is effectively the same as voting to continue the status quo.
"ask for a fresh referendum due to "alleged" foreign influence and irregularities."
I thought it was because both sides breached campaign spending and finance laws.
I am impressed by Putin's judo hands-off moves. For the cost of dozen cruise missiles he's managed to cause the US and UK to piss off their military allies, distract their legislatures onto petty domestic matters, and create or widen deep divisions within the people.
"and the election which wiped out the EU supporting party"
Bullshit. Neither the conservative or labour had a solid position on EU/Brexit at the last GE, and they aren't clear now. Labour is still fudging it, last I heard they want a customs union, which crosses pretty much all the leavers red lines (have to follow EU laws, abide by ECJ rulings) so I'm not sure whether they are pro or anti EU, but they certainly aren't what most leavers want*.
The conservatives have managed to negotiate a Brexit deal which they can't get passed by their own party, let alone cross party. So again, no idea if they are pro or anti EU since they can't actually agree what they want, let alone what they can negotiate as a party position, government position, let alone as a country.
"But this is the problem with the remain argument."
Other than it's the status quo?
My argument for remain is that it is a complete proposal. All the current systems support it, and there are plenty of things that the leavers want** that the UK could do while remaining part of the EU, but won't (*cough* immigration *cough*). I think drawing attention to the things that are going wrong with the EU is a good thing (whichever side you're on), but Whitehall has spent decades hiding their own incompetence behind the facade of the EU.
As an example DEFRA is unbelievably shite on making payments, so despite the farmers doing their paperwork, the EU paying DEFRA out, British farmers still get paid months after their EU counterparts. So British civil servants being incompetent at doling out EU money is somehow an EU problem. If only the EU was a federal state and could sort out the British civil service, but it turns out that all the EU members are in fact sovereign. Well, sovereign in legal terms, I'm sure there's some other definition :)
If and when I see an actual proposal from the leavers, rather than empty promises, then I'll listen. One that is based on a) the current situation and b) things that are available now would be nice.
Mind you, it would be pretty funny if other policies were allowed the "creative freedom" that leavers utilize. Then we could have a defence debate on the merits of the Royal Navy using laser armed sharks versus powered armored marines. Or energy policy, where parliament can declare that nuclear fusion will solve all our power supply needs, and that it will be available in six weeks time....
"Very few (and I appreciate discussing with them) seem to argue sensibly on fact."
I found that using facts in a debate with leavers is asking for a fight. It's pretty clear that most have a decided position, and it's not based on facts and logic. This is the norm for most politics, and why the "informed voter" is a myth.
* I recognize that identifying what leavers want is very hard, since it's mainly about what they don't want, and that most of the time those "nays" are contradictory. Or undefined. Or are words that means something different to them than me.
** and aren't wrong about, IMHO
"There is a cost to a physical disk, not to mention the cost associated with handling and postage/packaging."
Which should be minimal. Even if you allowed for say two replacement disks per sale, and you spend the minimum effort checking the client claims, it's maybe a buck or two on top of a games price.
It's pretty basic customer service. I'd assume it was essential for any industry that runs a lot on loyalty. If a customer has gone to the effort of getting hold of you, the story of how you treat them is going to be told to quite a few people.
My friend is an avid bibliophile, and buys a couple of hundred hardbacks a year. Half of these are from a single publisher (Baen). Not only does he regularly get "free" books (typically first in a series) from them, but he's had about a dozen books replaced (flood damage) for free. Including shipping. And it works, that's where he spends the bulk of his book money.
"As detected by their "anti-cheat" system."
In certain very old multiplayer games there was a "cheat" flag. I discovered in many games that it didn't take into account certain effects you could stack, and thus you could end up wrecking a long game by cheating.
Always liked that Civ just stuck it on the menu for you :)
There are some who feel taking Ashen Empire Ermor in Dominions 2 is cheating anyway.
"are as strategically useful as the prizes in a country fair tombola."
Depends on the game.
Several recent releases had lootboxes that were pretty much required in order to progress. Star Wars Battlefront and Shadow of Mordor off the top of my head.
After much backlash, the companies got rid of the lootboxes and reduced (by 90% in one case) the amount of grinding needed to unlock in game items. Which quite clearly showed that the game was designed that progression required lootboxes.
"What im saying is they can buy a tiny advantage, not a big one."
That's an argument against pay to win. People will pay for purely cosmetic items, even in single player. In multi player it can become even more important to a certain class of player*.
They are gambling**, and they make money hand over fist like gambling. The PTB are looking for someone to blame for the uptick in youth gambling and for once they might actually be right that video games are to blame :)
Blizzard Activision made 7 billion in revenue in 2017, 4 billion was from in game sales. Just to be clear, a games company made less money selling games and subscriptions than it did by selling lootboxes.
It's gambling, so it should be regulated. To the PTB, that means some goodly chink of sin tax :) For me, I'd just like the honest odds for things, and the right to just buy the damn things if I really want.
Well, what I'd really like is to have a game where I got all the content, and they charged me an appropriate upfront price, rather than a "how much have you got approach?". Or no upfront cost, and all the free to play and pay to win mechanics you want.
* While it's been a while since I played WoW, when I did I'd did I'd make more gold from supplying "fashion designers" with my trash drops and selling mounts than alchemy and all the shuffles on anything but a dead server. A months sub for a pair of low level green pants. To some people, fashion is the ONLY thing.
** Various governments have looked at it, and concluded that paying money for a random chance at an item is indeed gambling. Games company response has been to say "Fuck you Belgium, we'll just pay the fines down the road" and release the latest FIFA/Battlefield etc.
"Suppose the face recognition AI has a 1% false positive rate. I.e., given a 100 innocent mugs it will wrongly recognize only one of them as a criminal. Now conduct a "trial" on a set of 9,800 people coming out of a particular tube station during a given day. There may be 2 real criminals in the bunch, but the AI will flag 98 innocents in addition to them. Out of 100 people identified as criminals in the trial 98% will be false positives."
Surely those are different things? Accuracy and false positives.
I thought a 1% false positive rate was that of 100 positives, one was in fact not a positive. So of 100 images flagged as crims, one is an innocent person.
Now, depending on the ratio of criminals to innocents, you'll get different results. Say 1 in 1000 people are criminal enough to make the database.
So say you sample 100,000 people, which contain exactly 100 crooks. Assuming 0% false negative, 99% true positives and 1% false positive the system should flag the following:
- 99 crims as crims (99% true positive, 0% false negative)
- 1 crim as innocent
- 999 innocents as criminals (1% of 99900)
Making the system roughly 9% accurate.
Mostly I have to explain this sort of thing in regard to medical tests, which tend to (for obvious reasons) have low false negative rates in exchange for high false positive rates. Better to accurately diagnose all the people with a disease while scaring the crap out of healthy people rather than miss a correct diagnosis.
Generally only accuracy = false positive rate when 50% of the population has whatever you're testing for.
"You, likely, come from a country with an unelected hereditary head of state and FPTP electoral system that all but demands tyranny of the minority masquerading as a huge majority"
But the head of state in constitutional monarchies is largely ceremonial. The devolving of power to make laws, declaring war and raise taxes to parliament is pretty fundamental part of the UK constitution. Lizzy is so nice that other countries choose to have her as their head of state.
Not sure where you live that has no FPTP elections, but even in NZ they have FPTP for some roles, MMP is half FPTP, and local councils are FPTP or STV.
The only thing that FPTP does guarantee is a two party system.
"and yet slag off the country that managed to throw off the shackles of medieval thinking."
That's not the USA then? Last I checked congressional and mayoral races are FPTP. So exactly like the UK. The electoral colleges differ by state, but some states are winner take all, which seems like FPTP on crack to me :)
In the other "medieval" countries I've lived in elections are held on weekends or public holidays, so people with jobs can vote. In the "modern" USA they're on a weekday, in order to allow farmers a couple of days to get in to town. You know, like in medieval times...
It's also not possible to tar the USA with a single brush. Certain states take their elections seriously. They're the ones who aren't gerrymandered to pieces (boundaries based on law), have somewhat sane vote counts, and generally aren't big on voter suppression. Other states work VERY hard to ensure that certain voting segments never get their say. Mostly against democrat voters, but I wouldn't be shocked if there was a way to disenfranchise red voters then certain political actors would use it.
Oh, and if you want to shit on UK democracy, the upper house (equivalent of the senate) is unelected, and is for life. Ideologically I object to it, but in practice the Lords have a lot more sense than the commons. In part because they don't need to spend most of their time ensuring they get re-elected, or engaging in the internal party backstabbing sessions.
Pardon my ignorance, but I thought that mass use of drones was part of the Gulf War.
Getting the Iraqis to expend SAMs or light up their radars to target drones pretending to be bombers, while following up with actual bombers, was apparently very successful.
In fact the drones fooled the Iraqi defenses so well that they thought they were doing a lot of damage, shooting down hundreds of planes. Instead they were blowing up drones that cost less than the SAM used to twat them.
Of course if you want to consider a missile or a V2 to be an autonomous drone, then we've had killer drones for quite some time.
"Oddly, every time racial slurs are discussed I see terms that either I've never heard of or didn't realize were slurs."
It's quite culturally dependent too, certain slurs carry a lot more weight depending what side of the Atlantic you're on. There are things I can say to a black chap from London that I couldn't say to a black chap from New York.
It's also about intent. Some things you can give a person a pass for ignorance. So if my Brazilian friend refers to my Scottish friend as English rather than British, he doesn't take offence. But if this Southern pansy called him English he'd be offended.
"If someone just has an "idea", and still needs to make a workable building design from scratch, there are good chances the idea may not go anywhere...."
I'll chip in with my tuppence here.
Crowdfunding anything where the manufacturing side is non standard (ie most tech products) means adding another complex layer to the whole process, one which if mistakes are made can swallow all the funding. This is obviously high risk, even if the people running are experienced in manufacture.
Crowdfunding something where the bulk of the work is on the creative side, with the production being costly but one off, is less risk. It's less risky for things like a movie or a series, more risky for software, as the goalposts are harder to move for the former.
Personally I've only crowdfunded/prepaid for projects where I have enough faith in the people behind it to know I'll either get something I want from it, or the money went to a good cause.
Usually this is books or artwork for me. I never get quite what I expect, but that's what you get for hiring an artist :D
My "worst" crowdfunding experience was paying for a chaps first novel up front. He ended up spending all the cash on meth, having a complete breakdown, jail, rehab, then a McJob. Then he started writing again, so about four years late I got a collection of short stories and a letter of apology/explanation, which functions nicely as an authors foreword. Then a couple of years later the promised novel. Followed a few years later by his stab at YA.
So delivered several years late, but 2-3 times the value over a decade.
Quite frankly I'd rather be buying aspiring writers their booze and drugs rather than a new car for the lawyers and a new pool for the liquidators.
"surely they would need to return (especially since charges were dropped) anything they confiscated, in same condition they were when confiscated."
Not in NZ, and not in the Netherlands.
If the Dutch police search your car for drugs (ie take it to pieces) and don't find any, they will return the car in pieces.
As long as they had legal grounds for a search, and they followed the rules for evidence preservation, then they are covered.
If they only do it to you every three months it also doesn't meet the threshold for harassment.
The induction hobs in the student digs here are quite nice, you set the temperature, and they resistant to stuff spilling on them. They turn off if they don't sense a pan, but it's two presses to get it on set to 120C, and one push for +/- 10C.
I've got gas at home, knobs and all :D
"will need to use gut strings"
A chap I knew was a professional hunter, doing pest control.
One of his sidelines was selling catgut and ratgut strings that he'd made himself. Apparently skinny feral cats and fat rats produce the richest sound.
He's also got a decent answer for "how many ways can you skin a cat?" :D
At one role for a bank the mute button stopped the customer from hearing what you said, but it still went on to the recording.
Reviewing problem calls was always entertaining, since you couldn't tell, except by recall or lack of reaction, when mute was on.
One thing I did learn was that the people calling on the VIP* lines were much more respectful, polite and friendly than those on the regular lines. Even when someone had made a serious cockup, while they were very clear that while they wanted it fixed ASAP they did not consider me at fault, but rather that I was part of the solution.
The business clients were fine too. Since they actually used the system a lot they often knew exactly what they needed doing, or at least had a good idea of what the problem might be. Since 90% of things that went wrong involved payroll there was again the focus on solving the problem first, tidying up the resulting messes, then only doing the blame game to try and prevent things in the future. Also showed me that quite a lot of employers take their responsibilities seriously, so if a payroll batch failed halfway they'd run it again and pay some people twice and sort it later rather than risk anyone not getting the pay on time. Or when there wasn't enough to cover a full second run before overnight clearing deadline, so all the C suite and department heads pay got held back for a few days.
My ex works for the tax department. The list of things she's been called, either directly or on an unmuted phone, are far worse than anything I've had. Best is that it's in three official languages, plus whatever else the caller has. She's Dutch, so is pretty direct about it, so when one client said "oh, it's that cunt from the tax department" when someone in the room with her asked who she was on the phone with, when the client picked up the phone again my ex cheerily said "hi, it's the cunt from the tax department here, do you have that reference code now?". After sorting the client out, she even got a sincere apology, which is pretty rare here in the Netherlands :D
* private banking and share trading, people who would describe themselves as comfortable rather than rich...
Best solution I encountered for the lack of responsibility with cleaning dishes was to make it a managerial responsibility. As in, the manager goes and cleans it up after break and lunch.
Turns out people actually clean their shit up if they know someone senior might have to decrustify their mug.
" in my mind it was more along the lines of damp cellar, naked light bulb hanging from wire, dartboard with photo of TIm Cook in the wall, semi cannibalized remains of old computers in the corner.."
I've worked at the same university that Simon did, albeit after his time.
That's a pretty accurate description of the appearance of some of the IT rooms. Other than the smell, which was quite distinct for some of them...
"I imagine that the building of an EU army will begin from building a shiny, glass HQ in Brussels."
The Kortenberg building perhaps? Where the Common Security and Defence Policy is based? The one that deploys military forces on loan from EU countries? Think that's like 20 years old now.
If NATO forces are being used, the EU won't interfere. It's only if NATO is not that the EU will send in the grunts.
Part of the issue is that non-EU NATO members can effectively veto EU military operations, which rankles those people who are fussy about actual sovereignty*.
So there exist an "EU army" already, it's mpre about redefining their role.
"while the idea of an EU army is pretty hilarious, given how they've dismantled their national ones"
I take it you didn't serve in Africa then. Plenty of French deployed in the global war on nouns. You can make all the jokes you like about googling French military victories, but when the shit hits the fan a Rafale is as good as the RAF.
* if a very broad sense, sovereignty means you can collect tax, make and enforce laws, and conduct war in a fashion that is consider legal by all the other sovereign entities. These days it's countries and institutions, historically it's been individual people, kings,dukes, jarls etc
"whereas $190 million in US currency or gold will likely be worth pretty much the same in five years."
Gold fluctuates based on how good/bad things are perceived to be, and what the Chinese and India governments are doing. In the last 10 years it's been between $400 and $1800 an ounce. I no longer own any since both China and India have been paying spot plus 15% for a couple of years now.
Based on current inflation rates, USD from 5 years ago has lost about 8% of it's purchasing power.
As compared to Lego, which gains about 3% a year in value. Someone even analysed which would be the better investment, and the returns Lego beats gold for about 38 out of 40 years. Obviously there are more traditional investments that beat it too, but it's not quite as good a store of value as it appears.
"he could probably transfer the funds out somewhat easily by sending them to an exchange and getting a different currency."
That requires an exchange that is out of reach of the creditors.
Most legit exchanges have a blacklist of wallets that are known to contain stolen/contested funds, and won't accept deposits from them. Because they then become liable.
In the same way having $137 million in cash would present a problem trying to deposit any significant amount into a bank. Even under formal reporting limits the activity will get flagged.
As I said above, if he planned this in advance, maybe. But faking his death then moving the crypto is dumb. I can't really see how someone "smart" enough to fake his death would also be dumb enough to try and loot out afterwards.
If the cold wallets are empty, I'd have expected reddit to have burst into flames by now :)
The part about the bank deposits requiring access to his computer are either bollocks or imply that there was no other record of where the accounts were held, which is pretty sus.
I can see why they might hold on to them (for the moment) until an agreement is reached on who gets paid back in which order.
Not sure anything is going to calm the conspiracy theory. Not sure what currencies were held, but at least some can be monitored. If the cold wallet is known, then you often can see the balance, and the bank stuff is supposed to have independent financial oversight now.
Now if he's already got his money out before all the attention, and washed into the legal system, then faking your own death and getting a new face and a new life might be a workable plan.
As for cold storage crypto keys, you've got to make a difficult call on those. Anyone who has them also has full access. My choice was to have them* kept by the lawyer who handles my will. It's in a sealed letter, along with all the details of accounts and access details. My business partners can screw me far harder than just emptying the accounts, so they have their own credentials to everything.
Same deal at workplaces, by choice the letter with all the domain passwords was with legal, not the boss. The next best is somewhere only the next BOFH would find it, usually taped it on the bottom of my lowest desk drawer. The one with the single malt, boxes of chocolates and gift cards hidden under assorted ewaste.
*and other property I'd want passed to my next of kin after I died
"I studied Animal Farm & 1984 in the distant past - in my UK skool both were covered at O Level "
Same here for GCSE. I thought the main point was that they were his first and last books. Hence why Animal Farm is somewhat optimistic and comic, wheras 1984 is pretty bleak.
Mind you, it's not like most USians need any introduction to doublethink :)
"Wouldn't that be fun if the person you were raging at was killed shortly thereafter and there you are with that statement being forwarded for enquiry?"
One would hope that when someone gets murdered (or dies suspiciously) that anyone who had enough of a grudge to mouth off about them would at least get a look over. Unless they were a public figure perhaps.
"How long do you figure it will be before someone starts building "AI" systems to figure out, given a large group of pictures, who is the child or parent of who?"
Don't need an AI.
We were covering blood types in biology, and how they get passed on. One lass was very confused, since based on her parents blood type it was highly improbable that she would have the blood type she did. The teacher took her aside for a wee chat after the lesson.
The maternity ward at my local hospital now disguise the blood types on their action board (whiteboard with emergency patient details), they use numbers (AB neg is 7, O is 1 no idea of the others) after a couple came in to see their new grandchild, and the dad saw the daughters blood type and realised that he wasn't her dad, and the new sprog was not in fact his grandchild.
Happens more often than you think. About 10% of the people listed as father on a birth certificate can be shown to not be the biological father. Not that it matters a lot of the time, being a parent is about raising a kid, not just siring them.
"who is the child or parent of who?"
What, like most people can look at Prince Charles and Prince William and see the resemblance as they age, wheras Harry looks like the spitting image of James Hewitt.
"If you allow those scenarios and I think you have to then you have to allow law enforcement, and they come with court orders and subpoenas, so there is independent oversight and comeback if the application is trivial or malign. What exactly is the problem?"
The lack of court orders or subpoenas, while giving access to a confidential database.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
