Re: Solution
No, the UK isn't. The old duffers in the Lords voted for it but they don't make law, the Commons do and the government are against the idea.
518 publicly visible posts • joined 19 Jun 2018
"Ransomware payments cratered in 2025, but it seems like the cybercrooks launching the attacks didn't get the memo."
Hyperbole. The number of payers dropped significantly but the actual payout dropped just 8%. Hardly "cratered". There was nothing for the crooks to "get". Fewer people pay but the actual payoff is little changed.
"take several minutes to half an hour," that is a systems issue. Nothing genuinely takes half an hour to login. There is no "conflict". Suppliers just need to provide efficednt systems or be heavily penalised financially. There is no technical reason for such a "conflict".
It should be the envy of the world. Idiots who think it isn't should try living elsewhere. Yes, there are delays but the first things they check, when you do visit a hospital or clinic, are your vitals and not your ability to pay extortionate fees. You don't have to choose between eating and medication.
"No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed"
Nor have they been now.
""guilt by association" that has blighted the last few decades." Nonsense. It has always been the case that people and organizations have dissociated themselves from the morally repugnant. There is no unpleasant stain. Contact prior to his conviction is excusable but once Epstein was convicted, further contact with a convicted pedophile is a perfectly good reason to cut ties with someone.
"In industries were everything is completely and properly documented"
You can't document everything. It's impossible unless the tasks are repetitive and simple. No amount of documentation will include all the techniques used to develop code, for example. No documentation records "well we had this problem x number of years ago and carried out action y to solve it". Experience is the learning of ways of working and applying them to new processes and problems.
I don't object to this technology but when things go wrong like this, legal consequences should follow. Fines large enough to make sure that the user pays attention before making false accusations and subjects people to humiliating actions which could have real negative consequences if family, friends or employer saw you being thrown out of a shop on suspicion of being a shoplifter.
"School as prison". Seriously? You think kids should have access everywhere at all times? Walk in store cupboards for dangerous chemicals? When I was at school we were anaesthetizing bugs with ether. Equipment rooms? Plant rooms? Supplies? The secretaries office? Plenty of staff-only rooms exist in a school.
Badge access is much safer and more efficient than a proliferation of physical keys that people can copy far more easily than the proximity chips in an ID badge. Someone leaves? Instantly disable all permissions on their badge. With keys, you have to hope they return them and haven't taken a copy for themselves.
Those moaning about the licence fee: What you're saying is you don't want to pay a small subscription that allows poor people to get decent quality TV and radio at under fifteen quid a month. You don't want niche subjects to be covered that wouldn't be financially viable on other platforms. You don't want higher quality programmes to be made and, for all the poor quality shows that are shown on the BBC, there are extremely good ones. You don't want mostly impartial news - and don't tell me they are majorly biased. I've been on Facebook pages and literally seen both sides of an argument claim the BBC is biased in favour of the other.
Why should someone pay, if they don't use BBC services? Well, when I lived in the centre of England, I didn't whine that I would never need their services. They are a common good. So are the BBC.
How would we know if repressive regimes have used juice-jacking? I've flown all over the world. The first thing people do on stop overs is connect their phones to USB cables in airports with no knowledge of what's on the other end. You'd have to be insane to connect to any device\cable you don't control.
The problem with dispelling these "myths" is that the average person will take it to mean that private wifi is now considered safe. QR codes are safe etc.
One of my own kids had a bluetooth request to pair from an unknown device. Thankfully, I saw it. So yes, I will disable Bluetooth unless it is necessary for a particular task and will then turn it off after use.
"The refusal of the mainstream media to cover this suggests that there is an agenda at work"
The fact that you ignore the fact that this information is, in fact, covered by the mainstream media, such as the BBC, and the fact that tariffs are, in fact, being collected, suggests that you are a conspiracy loon.
I use AI to get a viewpoint that I might not have considered. Much of the time it is simply wrong but it does prompt new ideas. So, it has its uses. But much of it is dangerous nonsense.
I can't stand AI written articles on websites. Most of them are wrong, contradictory and misleading. AI summaries can be useful but are also often wrong\hallucinations. The problem is the hard-of-thinking taking them as fact.
"I also found the whole thing a bit irrational and stupid, and still do."
Then you were\are foolish. Masks, and all the other rules, worked for a covid pandemic. The purpose of masks was to prevent the spread of disease, something they do very well. Why else do you think doctors, dentists and surgeons use them? For self protection they are not good and were never supposed to be. The point is that they don't stop viruses from being inhaled but they do stop the spread of virion laden drops of mucus, because they are so much larger and cannot pass though the mask.
There is no need to wear masks for regular flu seasons. The majority have at least some immunity and many augment it with vaccination. And again, masks do not stop you inhaling viruses but they do reduce the amount of mucus droplets you inhale a little and definitely reduce the much more concentrated at source mucus that you exhale. So, the altruistic would be quite right to wear masks to help stop the spread of the flu - as long as they wore one before the onset of symptoms - even if those masks only provided a very low level of self protection.
I'm in the Midwest. A couple of years ago I temporarily lost the sight in one eye while playing with my toddler - most disconcerting. I was rushed to hospital with the ambulance tech doing little more than keep talking to me for the hour long journey (I live in the middle of nowhere). I got a bill for $8,400 (along with a $2000 bill for an MRI). I was panicking about the cost a little but my insurance did eventually cover it. If I hadn't had insurance then they would still have taken me and I would have been stuck with the bill. Some religiously run hospitals have charitable donations that cover the costs for those who can't pay. Most hospitals do not.
Related: My son was ill with a stomach bug, at a different time, and needed an anti-emetic. Even with insurance the charge for the meds would have been $165. At the time that was a lot so I took the option to just get a half bottle for just over half the price - I could buy another bottle later if needed. Fortunately, he didn't even need the whole of the one we did get. That $90 was with insurance. We could pay it but anyone who couldn't would be out of luck. That's for a sick kid.
I have a medication that, without insurance, costs $1,500 a month. My insurance and my employer cover that. I wouldn't be able to pay it. There are cheaper, much less effective, alternatives. If I didn't have the insurance then I would have to go with one of those with increased risks to my well-being.
So yes, people are left to die for being short of cash but there are some safeguards.
Medicare is federal healthcare for people over 65, some disabled people under 65 and people with end stage renal failure (I don't know why that one condition specifically). Medicaid is for low income people in certain categories such as childen or pregant women. Someone is considered low income if they earn less than about $1,500 a month. A healthy, non-pregnant adult would not qualify, even if they earned less than the low-income level. They are the ones who have to choose whether to call an ambulance or not and who will be hit with massive bills.
BTW: my problem turned out to be a detached retina. All fixed now. I hope your Mom continues to be well.
This just shows a very poor understanding of how modern hospitals work. Even something as simple as viewing x-rays is done via a PC today. And no, they can't keep old technology such as developed films as bavk up. All that old tech would clutter the place and then you have the cost of maintaining it and training people on it. For a situation that may never happen.
And how do you get test results to clinicians when they are now electronically sent to their devices instead of having people running all over a medical campus? The people who may have done that in the past are no longer there.
Reducing incoming patient numbers is entirely sensible.
Do you keep a horse as backup, in case your vehicle breaks down?
"Because this is not in the spirit of Keynesian economics."
Yes, it is. Keynesian economics favours government intervention and, correctly, states that the economy is demand driven. UBI is both these things. Government intervenes to provide a basic level of income to all, giving more people more discretionary cash to spend and so stimulate the economy.
Nonsense. In the UK, at least, any effort to classify as disinformation any truth the establishment did not agree with, would be pounced on by the media.
To suggest that hundreds of independent media outlets would conspire not to challenge such assertions of disinformation, by government, is simply conspiracy paranoia. The evidence is overwhelming that outlets, such as the one whose site we are on, are perfectly happy to challenge anyone and everyone.
You started off well, with your first paragraph, but then veered into conspiracy idiocy.
There are already controls on long established media, from TV to newsprint.
These social media companies are globe spanning, free for alls that use their power to track users, siphon up as much of their data as possible, steal intellectual property and distort society. They need reigning in.
And the comment about vaping is ludicrous. Government are cracking down on both vapes and tobacco, in the interests of health, at least in the UK. Further restrictions on smoking are being proposed.