People in Britain* have had enough of experts
* Britain being used to mean England and Wales, not as an abbreviation of Great Britain, (or even the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland)
1063 posts • joined 17 Jul 2007
* Britain being used to mean England and Wales, not as an abbreviation of Great Britain, (or even the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland)
On the machines I saw with this issue, it was.
If they had gone the route of sticking BB10 on cheap Chinese hardware I'd have stuck with them, but being forced to Android, then I'm going to stick to cheap Tablet phones.
So the pound hasn't dropped?
Though to be fair, if when article 50 is invoked, it is made clear that EEA membership is the target and the pound recovers, I bet the savings won't be passed on.
I think it has promoted us to the front of the queue, because the cheerleaders for the treaty are basically our government. The rest of the EU didn't like the loss of national sovereignty, and without us pushing it, it is dead in the water.
Now our government will be free to use the TTIP as a template. (Or go back to square one and negotiate something else for seven or eight years.)
My guess we will have our own UK-US TTIP signed before the ink is dried on the Brexit decree absolute, unless pressure from us stops them.
'Allo, 'allo, 'allo. What 'ave we got here then?
(Not sure if I should use an apostrophe when a letter is changed, hopefully someone will advise me for next time)
I'm running an old chuck out Core 2 HP (3GHz 2GB)
I installed windows 7 with a factory disk and the performance was poor. After the upgrade to Windows 10 the performance was far better, good enough to be my main machine. After the anniversary upgrade, I wasn't happy with the performance and did a re-install on a new HD. I also installed Linux Mint (Sarah, Mate, 64). I have found Mint somewhat smoother and a nicer OS. I hardly ever boot to 10 any more.
I have compared the previous version of Mint with (original) Windows 10 on the same laptop and found little difference in usability. Windows 10 being marginally better, (but not worth paying for, it's not eligible for a free upgrade.) However the latest Mint is noticeably slicker, while 10 has gone backwards.
I can see no reason for anyone who doesn't need to run Windows specific software to buy a new windows computer. Especially since a typical £150 Windows 10 laptop is nowhere near the spec of a decent spec XP machine.
You mean like industry standard sip phones?
Software like Linphone, Bria\x-lite, and dozens of others. Also hardware phones. (It is built into some android and symbian phones)
Cross platform; Windows, OS X, Linux, Android, BB OS (6, playbook and 10), iOS (though Apple make it difficult by blocking background UDP), symbian (audio only) and I have even used a client on RISC OS once.
useful service providers:
getonsip.com - provides a (non IE) web interface, and a url that people can use to call in without an account.
draytel.org - PAYG service, that gives you a real land line number with your first £12 credit.
linphone - they provide accounts that work with their software, and allow calls to be received in the background on iOS. (A couple of advanced features need to be turned off to ensure compatibility with all providers and software/phones).
It is the loss of freedom of movement that is the real killer. (Or to be the serious risk of that) that is causing the issues.
A friend of mine who is a scientist has canceled his plans for a £100,000 extension to his house, and is planning to move to Germany. (German wife.)
I'm guessing that is not uncommon in the Science sector. I'm guessing the tech sector will be hit the same once we leave the single market.
If this were democracy, we would be seeking to reverse the move from the EFTA to the EEC (and not voiding our membership of the EEA).
If this were democracy the nations who voted to remain would be getting the opportunity to decide whether they wish to remain with Britain outside the EU or not.
The question asked was about membership of the EU. Not membership of the EEA. Not whether we should give up our human rights.
The result was 26:28 The government is making the outrageous assumption that over 27 of those 28 as well as wishing to leave the EU also wish to leave the EEA and chuck out Johnny Foreigner and furthermore, also want to give up their human rights.
Democracy? My Arse.
Or more correctly due to the mishandling of the whole thing.
Had we had an unambiguous question with respect to the EEA, then we would not be in such a mess.
As it was we had the leave campaign mixing these two totally different choices up, and only quoting the good bits of either.
Had the result been leave the EEA, at least everyone would know where they stand, and could concentrate on making the best of it.
Had the result been move back to the EFTA, then the whole thing would pretty much have been forgotten about by now, and business would be normal.
However we are now in the situation where any business with any serious EEA involvement will be sitting on their hands at best or at worst pushing investment elsewhere. If at the end of it all we are outside the EEA, then not only will we lose a huge chunk of EU businesses, we will also be years behind because of businesses waiting because they can't believe we would do anything so stupid. If we end up in the EEA, we will still be behind on all the investments that were postponed or relocated due to the uncertainty.
And this sort of business is one of the those which will really suffer.
it is probably worth sharing that I don't have a problem with people vaping unflavoured fluid right next to me. Even in a car. (I will not travel in a car with someone smoking.)
The flavoured fluid is a different matter, some of it is pretty awful (though not usually to the same level as smoking).
My feeling is vaping flavoured fluids should be subject to the same laws as smoking, while (adults vaping) unfavoured fluids should be down to the policy of the location itself.
And so I made the new system dual boot with Linux mint.
I've hardly booted into Windows 10 since.
But the store is a good idea, but Linux has had a functionally similar system (except for the cost) for years and years.
I have a 10" dual sim phablet.
It means I don't carry it by default. (Meaning I actually have to experience the world when I am bored, rather than going online.)
It wasn't really PR. It was a preferential vote, still pretty much binary, it's just those with other views get to chose the lesser of the two evils.
If the UK leaves the EEA, then wouldn't businesses with an EU market be better off moving to the first decent industrial estate over the border on the main route to Dublin?
It seems unlikely that the British Isles freedom of movement that predates the EU/EEC would be abolished. (Though I can't see any way around having border controls, which means that promise may have been a softener for the EFTA/EEA option.)
Therefore you can hire EEA and UK staff with no worries about the future.
In fact it might even be sensible to have a location either side of the border, in the worst case scenario, the NI location could become the UK office, and the bulk of the staff could work in the RoI.
Of course if the Government were to actually state an intention to stay in the EEA, then all the stagnation will be swept away and the erosion of investment would stop.
Probably because any result was a win for the Tories.
Decisive remain: The UKIP and Leave Tories would have been shut up and returned to the fold.
Narrow remain. They could whinge and whine to the EU and keep threatening that we may leave to get what they want.
Decisive leave: All the other UK wide parties would be out of the picture for a decade, they would get powers they want back. If it involved leaving the EEA, then their rich mates would not be the ones suffering (and they will probably do all right on the currency markets etc, anyway), and those that would be suffering had been warned about the consequences and had made it clear they are not afraid to face them.
Narrow Leave (which we got): As a decisive leave, but with the added bonus they can do what they like and justify it quite easily.
A very good point.
They really need to have a distinction between not private and insecure.
Have they really never heard of the fable The Boy Who Cried Wolf?
I'm now moving to Telegram (and probably ICQ too).
The ability to use Telegram on multiple devices and only having it tied to having the ability to receive an SMS, rather than an SMS on the single device you want to use it on is a major advantage. (e.g. personal Telegram on work phone, separating work and personal comms, on one device.)
The reason I started to move was their plan to drop support for old phones. (Half the people I used it for will be cut off.)
However the new privacy agreement has made me remove it from my phone, and put it on my old BlackBerry (until the end of the year), which has minimal contacts in the address book, and I didn't allow the app access to the contacts. This is just to catch any messages.
Just watched a recent new voyages. Much better.
The last series really started showing some promise, the Mirror Universe story was excellent. But they canceled it before this promise could develop. (And the final episode was the biggest POS.)
However, the fan made Star Trek Continues really captures the feel of the original. (Not to be confused with the New Voyages, most of which I have seen are pretty rank)
We had a 14:13 majority on a question of whether we should leave the EU, where there was an awful lot of distortions of the truth.
This is not a safe enough margin to be a mandate for the UK to leave the EU.
(I will accept that the margin in England and Wales could be considered safe, but not across the whole UK).
Furthermore the question asked was simply should the UK leave the EU.
It was not should the UK leave the EEA, should the UK throw out all foreigner, should the UK scrap human rights or even should the UK behave like a bunch of Xenophobes.
Anything beyond reversing the move from EFTA to EEC (and hence remaining in the EEA) is an outrageous extrapolation of the already tenuous mandate.
To be fair, although I am pro remain, I think we have totally blown all our credibility in the EU and reversing the decision would be unlikely to leave us in the same position of disproportionate influence we were in, so I feel the Norway model is the only sane option. (Although Scotland should be given the chance to remain in the EU, whether by some federal UK fudge or independence I don't care.)
I'm not expecting it to be quite *that* bad, but I reckon we'll be lucky if our economy is only literally decimated for the next decade. (Assuming common sense doesn't prevail and we leave the EEA.)
Back on topic, does this scenario assume Brexit = WTO? Because an EEA arrangement should preserve all this sort of stuff, shouldn't it?
That is an often quoted point on various issue, but it misses out the fact that that is the status quo.
It is like saying a messy divorce is no problem because you were single before and there are plenty of single people who are fine.
Even better than that, they can quite honestly say that we were warned of the consequences, and we were not frightened of them.
> Meanwhile http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-37286883
Wales is much closer to Lincolnshire than Eastern Europe is. So couldn't he recruit from the extra 200 people who won't be employed by Ford?
I seem to remember this scenario being warned about in 'Ukip: the First Hundred Days'. Obviously the people of Wales decided that it was an acceptable sacrifice. (Along with the EU regional grants)
I'm wondering if Ireland will benefit from this uncertainty of whether the UK will remain in the EEA.
Since the whole British Isles has freedom of movement, predating the EEA, this should continue.
It would seem logical to me that new UK investments are located near the border, with short leases, so that they can simply move down the road, if the worst happens.
Alternatively they might set up in Ireland, removing any uncertainty.
Did it say UK or British Isles for example?
Was it a guarantee or an intention?
Even then it would be quite simple to situate all the expansion next to the Irish border, moving it to the other side (and retaining staff) if we leave the EEA.
It would mean that.
However the small flaw is that we would need a government that wants to do that.
If we leave the EU/EEA then we'll have 2 years of mini economic boom between article 50 and Brexit. (Earning money moving companies out, EU companies stocking up with UK inventory while we are still in the single market, EU citizens visiting while it is still simple, etc.) That combined with their Gerrymandering and the timing of the election will guarantee another 5 years of Tories. And if the Scots leave then that will be another 50 opposition seats gone, meaning there will be bugger all chance of anyone other than the Tories winning in 2025.
I'm not convinced either way.
On one hand she wants loads of things that are impossible under the EU (or EEA).
On the other hand, she has promised things that are impossible outside the EEA (No borders in Ireland).
I don't think she actually cares whether we are in or out of the EU or the EEA, because she gets what she wants one way (and it is what the people voted for, apparently.)
The other ways are better for the country and I suspect it is all down to how it can be spun, which way she goes.
I knew it was an asset strip.
The flaws in your point:
STAYING - as in maintaining the Status Quo. Not moving from within the Euro to outside it.
Areas within the single market not using the Euro won't have any major complications on where the business is located within the single market.
The Euro was a dumb implementation of a good objective anyway. We are well out of it until it has properly settled down. (A few more decades at least I think)
Although there are a few things I feel are not done right.
The rule should have also been changed to allow all non BBC live TV channel to be streamed without a licence. (And eventually, ideally, the same for broadcast TV).
The player apps should require TV licence credentials for all content that requires it.
There should be a cheap option for those who feel the full price is too much. (Netflix and Amazon are both much cheaper.) Repurposing the Black and White licence for this perhaps? (perhaps, monochrome live feed, SD catchup with low limits on number of programs that can be kept for offline viewing at once and number of active devices.)
I have never had a colour TV licence. I used to have black and white until the change from the post office made it to tricky to purchase one. (I tried several times from the little corner shops.) And I realised that I would have zero need of one for the next few months (having only needed it for about 6 hours the previous year), so I decided to pack away the mono TV and wait to try again until I would need it.
However I got enough offensive letters from the licensing authority (implying I was a criminal, not asking politely, had that been the case I would have replied) that I gave away the TV and just watched catchup (and videos).
It was very kind of the BBC to allow this until now, but there is not enough I want to watch that will justify the price, so I shall delete the app from the final bit of kit today.
Would protecting against Denial of Service count as traffic shaping?
Wonder if the UK would offer them a deal after brexit?
I suspect they would only be seriously interested if we remained in the EEA (and that didn't prevent similar preferential deals)
The way I read it is that the EU are chasing dodged taxes for profit within the free market, not having an HQ within that would make it far harder to for Apple to avoid that, with import duties etc.
I'm sure there are easier ways to get my contact list - googlemail for one. So that isn't an issue to me, however I looked up Signal but it appears it suffers from the same limitations as whatsapp, single device and iOS, Android only.
I like telegram because of the multiple device support and the support for Windows, Mac, Linux and there's even a BlackBerry client.
But thanks for the info, I was unaware of Signal previously.
I am planning to stop using whatsapp (unless they allow it to be moved to SD card to reduce its footprint) when they drop support for Nokia and BB phones. (Since it will cut off my mum, my brother and one of my best friends.) I have been advocating Telegram to all my contacts.
Though as far as I can tell telegram isn't likely to happen on Symbian, so it looks like ICQ might be the best replacement.
They won't be losing any rights. In fact if the economy doesn't tank enough that we don't need to replace all the EU migrant workers, they will find it far easier to get their friends and family over. (They will be on a level pegging with Europeans, who probably won't want to come over anyway.)
As far as I can tell this is the current rules for EU workers, so if they have been here 3 years when article 50 is started, then they will have been here 5 years before the rules change.
If they don't qualify then they will obviously hit the earn £35K after 5 years or you're out rule.
I'm just curious how this controlling our borders sits with leaving the RoI/NI border as it is.
How do you stop EEA nationals with freedom of movement entering the UK? How do you stop goods travelling to and from the free market?
Or do you leave NI in the EEA and move the border controls to Great Britain? (Not sure how well that would go down). But if you leave NI in the EEA, then Scotland will justifiably demand the same. So then you'd need border controls between England and Scotland. (What would they do, move the borders and re-use Hadrian's wall?)
Of course any part of the UK remaining within the EEA would result in a shift of corporates to the remaining part.
That is why I am pretty sure we won't actually be leaving the EEA. And to be fair there is no mandate to do that. The question asked was about the UK leaving the EU. (Not breaking up or leaving the EEA).
Leaving the EEA would certainly wreck the UK as a nation. Financially and its unity. Returning to the EFTA and keeping our EEA membership certainly wouldn't do much bad to the economy, and may not even break the UK up.
We really need a better referendum that addresses these issues, and not rely on a 13:14 ratio where the two possible leave options were not differentiated, and the benefits of one and the consequences of the other were presented.
.. as much as you can trust Microsoft to support non-x86 family processors.
Brexit hasn't happened yet. It is at least 2 1/2 years away, if it happens at all.
There are only 2 viable options for the position outside the EU.
Remain within the EEA (presumably by rejoining the EFTA). I believe that were we to pursue an off the shelf agreement then it would be relatively easy to achieve, as long as we don't try to gain exemptions from too many of the responsibilities of EEA membership. From a business perspective this would maintain the status quo, and everything would return to normal just as soon as it starts looking to be decided. The rest of the EEA would not be stupid enough to prevent this. However if we start asking for a special deal it won't happen. (The Swiss have been trying for years and are still effectively regular EEA members.) The EU would be insane to allow it, because it would undermine the whole thing.
The other option is WTO memberships, I believe the result of this will lots of EU headquarters and EU centric manufacturing relocating to remain within the free market. It would also mean lots of EU firms upping their orders from UK firms so they have a big inventory for when it becomes troublesome to purchase from the UK. These two factors will cause a pre-Brexit boom. Lots of contractors will be needed to help relocate. (Once it is over there will be a nasty shock for the UK.)
An interesting point is the delays to article 50 will put the next election very close to the actual leaving date. Which would mean the temporary positive effects would still be there, benefiting the current administration's chances.
Apparently the civil service is evaluating both these options (but not the breakup of the UK, interestingly).
However given the promises about the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland that have been made, I really can't see that an WTO arrangement is possible.
If we are not part of the free market, then at the very least it must be a customs border. Otherwise it is a wide open backdoor in and out of the free market. The EEA could not allow this.
If we want to 'control our borders' ie EU citizens (since we control everyone else), then a passport border would be needed. Otherwise any EU citizen could come legitimately to the RoI, and then into the UK.
So it would appear that this promise, a non-EEA arrangement and an intact UK are mutually incompatible. (You can have any two).
I think we will remain in the EEA. (And to be fair if only one in every 25 leave voters voted based on the Norway model, then the majority of the UK wish to remain in the EEA).
If that happens none of the doom and gloom will come to pass, and I think that business is hoping the same and deferring decisions to pull out. (But they are also deferring investments too.)
A margin of one in fifty when so many lies were told is legitimate?
Whether leave meant moving back to the EFTA or quitting the whole thing was never made clear.
The Norway model was often quoted. So if that is what over 1 in 25 leave voters wanted, then there is no mandate to leave the EEA.
Dragging Scotland and NI out against their wishes is democratic?
The only sensible way forward is another referendum for England and Wales giving three choices.
Remain in the EU
Move to the EFTA
Leave the EU and the EEA
It should be preferential and made clear that should the result be other than remain, then the other parts of the UK will get to decide whether they wish to join us.
Great Britain refers to the union of Scotland and Britain (England and Wales). i.e the whole Island.
The likely outcome of Brexit is this union being broken, meaning 'Britain' will return to meaning England and Wales rather than being an abbreviation for Great Britain.
So the BR in Brexit would be literally Britain.
Brexit would take the Great out of Great Britain and end the United Kingdom.
However it would seem likely to me that were it to be a reversal of our 1970s move from the EFTA to the EEC, then Scotland and NI might accept it and the UK might continue.
What choice do they have? Our currency has already dropped, meaning their cars will cost more, if we are outside the single market, it is our government that will set import tariffs.
Of course the choice they do have is to make it easy for currently UK based businesses such as multinationals' European HQs to move to Germany and remain within the EU. (Relocation allowances, special deals for UK nationals who wish to retain their positions, etc.)
I would think the way Microsoft bribed Nokia to kill Symbian didn't help. All the Nokia Symbian users I knew are now either Android users or still clinging on.
However moving that chunk of the market from Symbian (no royalties) to Android (royalties) proved that the outcome was win-win.
Win winning would have been a win. All those royalties were a win.
Where is BB 10 on the Playbook?
I was also unimpressed by the list of things that my Q5 could not do that the 9700 could. (Although BB10 was otherwise a great platform, it was just very unfinished).
Things that spring to mind that annoyed me.
Scheduled power on/off. (Result; the power button on the Q5 is now well dodgy)
wifi calling. (UMA on 9700, not so important now because of bria)
Ability to choose 2G only (I used to travel through an area where 3G was totally unreliable, the old BB was fine, switched to 2G. The new one, useless there).
There were lots more when I first got the device, each new version of BB10 knocked a few more off the list.
I was waiting until the list got sufficiently short to invest in a Passport to replace the Q5.
No way am I spending hundreds on an Android Phone. Apple is too locked down. So basically I have decided I won't have a personal smartphone any more.
End result; Q5 replaced with £60 Chinese 10" phablet (which was intended to be a stop gap, but is actually so good, I'm sticking with it.)
But Ms May has promised that there will be no border controls between the Republic of Ireland (part of the EU and a country we have personal freedom of movement with that predates the EU) and Northern Ireland.
So assuming that the EU don't notice this wide open back door to the free market, and there are no customs borders between the two British Isles as a result, then tariff free HP sauce is still going to be possible. (Of course quite how they expect to stop European people taking exactly the same route, and meeting the promise to control our borders, I haven't quite figured out.)