* Posts by A nosy macro wound

4 posts • joined 7 Aug 2016

Mayday in Moscow as devs will be Russian to Putin mandatory apps on phones, laptops, TVs

A nosy macro wound

Re: "the company cannot tolerate that kind of risk"

China don't need to force OEMs to pre-install their surveillance software, as their police just forcibly install it after-market.


Don't let Google dox me on Lumen Database, nameless man begs

A nosy macro wound

Re: the hearing, which ended at about 6pm on a Bank Holiday Friday.

That would have required the counterparty (Google) to apply for a contempt order, and in the circumstances I suspect they felt that their interests were best served by remaining as silent as possible!

Court throws out BT's plans to reduce pension rates

A nosy macro wound

RPI not reliable

I haven't checked, but I assume BT were advancing the argument that RPI is erroneous (which it is: the ONS announced they were dumping it as an official measure of inflation in 2013 due to its flawed use of an arithmetic rather than geometric mean).

The ONS did for a while publish an alternative index, RPIJ, which recalculated RPI using a geometric mean instead—but they have recently decided to abandon that on the basis that it was only designed to illustrate how flawed RPI is.

GIven that the government's official statistics authority very publicly states that RPI gets inflation wrong (an effect which compounds exponentially over time), it does seem to me quite right that pension liabilities be determined according to some other index that calculates it correctly instead (e.g. CPI). To do otherwise places a totally unaffordable burden on the fund.

Assuming that this point was litigated, then I guess the court determined the fund's contractual commitments cannot be varied to account for this (long term) error—despite the disastrous impact this will have on it and its members.

'ICANN's general counsel should lose his job over this'

A nosy macro wound

Re: "Maybe I'm naïve, but I hope they do the right thing."

> Only disadvantaged in the fantasy world where registrars are entitled to rake in profits from utterly pointless domain names.

No, disadvantaged in the very real world where he paid hundreds of thousands of dollars under a contract in consideration of which ICANN had promised (explicitly or implicitly) to deal with his application fairly—a contractual promise that they have unquestionably breached.

I very much doubt the courts would care to hear argument about the merits of his application, or the consequential losses ("profits from utterly pointless domain names") he might have suffered: like the IRP, their concern will probably rest entirely on the question of whether the process was conducted properly.


Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021