Re: The real crime here
Presumably the other perpetrator is repaying the remaining £8
2756 publicly visible posts • joined 21 Jan 2010
“ Big companies are just applying a broad brush to this which is crazy.
Big companies are applying the broad brush as they are risk averse.
HMRC determines roles are inside IR35.
HMRC demands tax be paid immediately and must continue to be paid until a tribunal. Millions of pounds grabbed by HMRC through their interpretation of poorly written legislation.
Tribunals takes 2-3 years to reach a determination before any chance the company can get its money back.
Exemptions! You can register with the Telephone Preference Service (TPS) in an attempt to decline Marketing calls (and any sensible Marketing company would comply), however Political Parties are exempt and don’t need to check the list to see if you’re interested in their “marketing”. Politics at its best.
“ The day the Revenue chase PwC, Fujitsu, Leidos, BT or any other big subby that puts someone on a desk doing what is an employee role, then we can chat.”
IR35 applies to all medium and large companies. If PwC et al are putting third party contractors on desks then PwC are on the hook for ensuring the IR35 status. Doesn’t matter how many layers of intermediaries, it’s turtles all the way down.
If they are putting employees on desks then those employees will already be paying employee PAYE tax and NI, but PwC are making a massive profit on the day rate. Now what possible incentive could there be for the large Consultancies who write reports for HMRC to represent a position which would penalise the small business competition...
Fair enough if your customers can reclaim the VAT and it’s all part of cash flow.
A substantial number of the companies who engage huge numbers of contractors are banks and financial services organisations who provide VAT Exempt or Zero Rated products, and they cannot reclaim any VAT they are charged. So while VAT and IR35 are not directly linked, the additional NI and Income Tax is offset to a reduced VAT take.
"Apple still has the keyskeys"
the plural "s" is important. There are multiple keys involved in every device.
Apple do indeed retain some keys to allow them to update the device. No delusions, they do Other keys, in particular in Apple's case, are generated at first configuration and stored securely on the device and Apple has no access to them.
Yet more keys are generated when you configure certain Apps, and they are secured behind the device user owned keys.
So where do the Government want to put the responsibility? Because Apple (or any other device manufacturer) are not in control of all places keys are generated.
Your principles are sound, and you might be able to pull this philosophical change off in small enterprises.
The big banks are far too big for this to be implemented on a day to day basis. Most are like oil tankers and take years to turn. You can put the tiller full to Starboard (or Port, don't want to discriminate), but she's not going to change direction quickly. It takes a long time for all the parts to get the idea they're moving in a new direction, and you have multiple layers of managers who report through each other, and they don't learn new tricks quickly - they're managers ffs, they know how to do this!.
#cynical
Absolutely correct. The FCA and PRA are issuing the advice to the Business staff, not the IT staff.
IT staff have been protecting the Business staff by insisting on security and resilience. I'm not saying they always get it right, but the fact most stuff is available 24/7 with the odd outage is a good sign.
Business units now have the ability (and appear to have been given the rope to hang themselves) and can bypass "IT". I wouldn't like to be the new CEO of an organisation following that model, it will be very career limiting when it all goes titsup in 2020.
Much as I agree with you in principle, the article does say "its CEO and App Developer settled their involvement back in July."
Now the observant would point out that they should not have been permitted to settle until the report concluded, however, welcome to the free world.
Musk apologised, Unsworth accepted the public apology. Then Musk cam back for more and continued his assertions, Unsworth had no option but to pursue though he courts.
Perhaps the value was too high, and a more amicable settlement could have been reached but Musk refused to engage. $10million to Cave Diving Rescue and a public apology might have made it, but no, Musk believes he's above that.
Not so much the victim than the unlucky detective who had to trawl event logs and compile the evidence.
Early Noughties I was helping out second line doing desktop support for a large financial organisation, using my server skills to remotely fix issues users had logged for XP without having to actually get out my seat and visit them. Since I had admin rights I could remote load Event Logs on Windows and was checking one such log when I came across a "net send" entry that even in those days was unacceptable.
The log file included the source machine, so I was able to load that log too, and started to find conversations between about 10 tech savvy people, some banal ("Coffee?"), some a bit disparaging of managers ("X is a dick!"), some totally homophobic, sectarian and racist.
Showed my boss who set me the task of compiling the entire history. After two days I had about three months of history and we called a stop. Details were passed to the Executive first to pass on to HR. I don't think anyone actually got fired, but I do know some final warning letters were issued.
And the moral of the story is - beware of having fun with the simple tools, even they can leave an audit trail.
"...live in countries where no telecoms company is ever forced to divulge any of our communications.."
Of course the Telecoms companies aren't forced to divulge any of our communications. They're forced to install back doors so the authorities can access the information without even asking.
That ABC is continuing to attempt to keep his name unlinked from criminal activity one can only assume that the new activity he is attempting to undertake could be viewed as criminal.
If only we knew what he was convicted of doing previously and what he is doing new now could we possibly form a conclusion.
It makes no difference. It is entirely irrelevant.
However if you put "Lady Hale" into search engines the first suggested words are "spider" and "broach", something Lady Hale is famous for displaying prominently when appearing.
Lady Hale has long argued that the judiciary needed to become more diverse so that the public have greater confidence in judges. I think wearing spider broaches instead of silly wigs makes that point.
I've replied to a previous comment that adding a VPN might not be what you need. Protecting household-level browsing might introduce snooping in other places and make your browsing both slower and less secure.
For what its worth I use VyprVPN and haven't had any problems. I use it to place my "Internet" connection in other countries so I can access local content such as news sites (many US news sites block European access). I don't have it turned on for general browsing.
Unless the VPN provider has terminations inside the network of where you're browsing to then the traffic will still flow across the open Internet somewhere, and given the way spooks work, they're more likely to try and capture traffic exiting VPN concentrators than the general traffic from home users modem.
I know there will be some people who disagree with the above, people who think there is benefit in encrypting everything over a VPN as well as https and other secured connections. They are entitled to their opinion, and there are people and countries where a VPN is required.
I really dislike NordVPN's averts and their pitch for why home users need one - you probably don't need a VPN and it what it enhances in security it also detracts.
VPNs secure point to point communication. Great if you're a business and you want to secure your staff traffic from their device into your network (i.e. it terminates inside your control). Nobody can snoop the traffic on an open part of the Internet.
If you're a home user doing your banking, shopping, etc, a) the traffic is already encrypted by the bank (https), and b), tunnelling on a VPN from your device to a VPN exit point in Finland then crossing the open Internet to your bank actually makes the routing worse.
There are valid use cases for home users of VPNs, but it's not what they say on the adverts. Consider carefully before you part with good money for a commercial VPN service. You might have a valid use case, or you might be spending money to reduce your security.
There was a meme a few years ago with Bill Gates and Steve Jobs sitting next to each other laughing:
Bill: "Went to see the bank today about a loan"
Steve: "Why do you need a loan?"
Bill: "I don't"
Just makes me wonder when the big cloud providers who already host many of the bank services actually end up buying the banks.
Neither defending nor promoting either position, but ~10 years ago I was involved for a large client in a test of original Lexmark toner cartridges against two proposed third party cartridges.
Same printer model, same paper supplier, same test document set.
The Lexmark originals produced more than twice as many pages as the other two, and jammed significantly less. The print quality was also deemed better on the originals however that wasn't a major concern as the prints were generally for internal consumption only.
Overall cost in the test was cheapest with the originals Lexmark cartridges, which proved to be true after the annual costs were compared on switching from the third party to originals across the estate.
Everyone would need to undertake their own test (or find a trusted source - Which? perhaps?)
Yes, however most are doing this as they are simply not willing to putting the effort into saving themselves money. Rates will go up as a result and the market will balance itself.
Companies are putting themselves in a dangerous situation. By declaring roles as inside when they have previously condoned the classification of those roles as outside they risk not only the contractor being investigated but also themselves being investigated.
Contractors are going to walk and businesses are going to struggle to deliver their planned work, exactly as has happened in the public sector. CEO's however report to shareholders, not government ministers, so at best bonuses are not going to be paid, some may even be sacked by the shareholders for failed business change.
In the UK there are two sets of wire sensors under the road either side of the white line you are meant to stop short of.
The camera is triggered if you cross the sensors after the lights have changed. The camera takes two pictures, one as you cross the line, and one two* seconds later to show if you stopped or carried on. *I think it's two seconds, the point being that you won't be prosecuted for crossing the line if you did actually stop but just not in time.
I'd suggest you read the law.
Amber means "Stop, unless it would be unsafe to do so."
So if you get caught on camera having ignored the Amber to stop and gone through the Red there will also be evidence in the picture of why it was unsafe to stop (e.g the tailgating vehicle that would have rear-ended you).
Leaving aside all the ways around it, it really was a poor choice of technology solutions for the problem at hand (oe-er).
Now look at all those "technology solutions" the Brexit, Leave and Tory Government have said they'll deliver to make Brexit happen.
If they can't deliver this then they haven't got a whelks chance in a Supernova of delivering anything for Brexit
Next stop - macOS for sale as an OS in its own right that you can install on any compatible hardware, e.g. that HP, Dell, Lenovo, Acer, etc hardware commonly known as an x86 laptop.
Why bother making your own hardware when the margins are minuscule and everyone else does it better?
The big question is have the Board of Directors shared their increased risk with the Regulators. Do the FCA and PRA have an opinion on any increased risk to Financial Services industry?
March and April are going to be interesting months for Bank service outages hitting the headlines, and who or what is to blame....
You’ve got to remember this is HMRC brining it’s agenda to the incumbent government.
And HMRC takes its guidance from the big consultancy companies it engaged to make recommendations. The big consultancy companies who will pick up the project work when them pesky independent contractors are out the way.
Is .eu for people, businesses and organisations who have an affiliation with the "European Union" and its operation, or is .eu a geographical representation like .uk, .fr, .de, etc?
If it's the former, then there are millions of ineligible .eu domains across the world used by organisations who have no direct connection the the European Union.
If it's the latter the the United Kingdom will STILL BE IN EUROPE even if they are not members of the European Union. (I know there are some Leavers who still don't understand this, but Geography is Geography - about the only unambiguous statement you can make about Brexit means Brexit).
"Except that on the first day of term, the school knows who the adults (the teachers) are, where they live, and that they’ve passed at least some sort of background check"
OK, let's turn that on its head. What parent would put their children into a room of people they do not know without having some form of due diligence and vetting of people in the room?
You get an invite for your children to attend a party at the house of the new people at the end of the street. You've not met them, your neighbours haven't met them, not even seen them. But it will be fine, let the kids go play. So why as a parent are you letting them loose on Facebook.
I've previously promoted this concept of the government going first, the only down side is that in order to prove its not secure it's going to need to be broken. If you're attempting to hack the US government you're going away if they catch you. And that might not be prison,,,