* Posts by Dr. Mouse

1740 posts • joined 22 May 2007

God save the Queen... from Donald Trump. So say 1 million Britons

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: Executive Presidential Orders are part of the US system of governance

Trump has some way to go before he catches up with what some of his predecessors have done

Given what he's already managed, he is on the right track to surpass any leader of a Western country before the year is out.

0
0
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: @ inmypjs

I agree that politicians have, in general, screwed the pooch for years. People no longer believe what they say, and they are architects of their own demise.

The problem is that what has happened, on both sides of the Atlantic, is that everything has become polarised. There is no centre ground. "I'm right, you're wrong" dominates, and the populations are split about 50/50.

The problem with this is that there is no compromise, no give, no trying to heal the rift. The winners are shouting "we won, suck it losers!", and are ecstatic, as they get everything they ever wanted. The losing side, however, feel they have no voice. They get called anti-democratic when they even suggest that this is not what they want, when they raise any fears, when they try to protest.

So, yes, fine, kick out the political classes. But don't replace them with extremism. It will, and is already, just cause further problems down the road. Why can't we all try to find a compromise, somewhere in between the 2 extremes, where noone gets everything they want but everyone gets something they want.

BTW, just a quick point: There is nothing wrong with political correctness as a concept. It's basically "don't be a dick to people". There are problems with the extremes it has been taken to. However, there is now an anti-political-correctness movement which is just as extreme. Racism is creeping back in (not "wacism" as you put it, but actual racism), as are misogyny and bigotry. The people doing so just cry that people are trying to make them be politically correct, that they are being called "wacist". Actually, they are being absolute c*nts, but the anti-PC crowd get behind them and defend them. So be careful what you wish for...

16
1
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: Where were all these virtue signallers...

@boltar

"If one of the policies was to exterminate the Jews, and he had been elected on that pledge, would you still expect our leaders to stay silent?"

Calling Mr Godwin.... Mr Godwin please come to reception...

You still didn't answer the question.

"Just because lots of people vote for something which is (in my opinion, and those of a very large number of other people) wrong doesn't make it right."

Nor does you believing it to be wrong make it wrong. We could play this game of ping pong logic all day.

No, but I have the right to protest against something I believe to be wrong. Especially when I can see so many parallels in history, none of which ended well.

10
0
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: Really??

I would like him to be detained and subject to "Extreme Vetting". He is more dangerous than any Muslim I have ever met, more dangerous than 99.999% of those from the countries on his list. He also obviously has ideological views which seriously conflict with our British values.

By his own definitions, he qualifies for such.

10
3
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: Let Hime Come

Oh Deity, Trump and Philip in the same room?! There's a scary thought!

0
0
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Seriously fuck me. You are complaining about gay rights in America *and* them restricting entry of Muslims? LBGTQIXYZ demonstrations against islamophobia are about the dumbest fucking thing I have seen in my life.

Firstly, I was responding to another post. It was calling for all Muslim countries to change, while ignoring the vast swathes of America where being openly gay will get you "cast out" of the community and potentially attacked. A great many fundamental religious types think being gay is a sin, and sins should be illegal.

In addition, the LGBT etc community are used to being discriminated against. Maybe they are sticking up for another group who are being discriminated against, knowing that no human being should suffer such treatment...

2
1
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

but how about we lift it when those 'tolerant' states do the following :

1) let people drink alcohol

2) let people renounce Islam without fear of reprisals

3) let people choose religion and open churches

4) choose sexuality and not fear being killed

OK, when America:

1) let's people smoke Marijuana and use other drugs,

2) let's people renounce Christianity without fear of reprisals EVERYWHERE (including the Bible Belt),

3) stops labelling every Muslim a terrorist,

4) stops trying to ban gay marriage, abortion and several other things which disagree with their extremist "Christian" ideal.

21
1
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: Where were all these virtue signallers...

"Despite what some might believe are relationship with the USA is no closer than they have with a lot of other european countries. The whole special relationship is a load of BS. If there is one its almost entirely one way."

None of the EU countries are acting in such a despicable manner. If they did, I would expect a strong reaction from our representatives.

As for the relationship being BS, I agree. But that's how it's presented on the world stage and it's how it's represented by our respective governments. We are talking about impressions and reputations: If 2 people present to the world that they are best mates, one of them does something horrible, and the other doesn't call them out for it, that person gives the impression of approval. It doesn't matter how many cross words are said behind closed doors, or whether those 2 are not really very close after all, the impression counts.

"Trump is enacting the policiies he set out in his manifesto"

If one of the policies was to exterminate the Jews, and he had been elected on that pledge, would you still expect our leaders to stay silent?

Just because lots of people vote for something which is (in my opinion, and those of a very large number of other people) wrong doesn't make it right.

29
3
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: Where were all these virtue signallers...

Firstly, there have been protests all over the world at China's (and other's) human rights records.

But, over all of that, we (UK) are supposed to have a "special relationship" with the USA. We are not so close with China et al. To have such a close partner behaving in such an abhorrent manner tarnishes our own reputation, especially when our own leaders do practically nothing to decry him. In their lack of action, there is a tacit approval. We should be making our feelings and opinions known in the strongest terms possible.

Put another way, it is horrible if a stranger goes out and beats someone up for no valid reason. But if one of your friends does so, it's worse. If that happens and all you say is "I disagree with what he did", you will be tarred with the same brush.

70
7

National Audit Office: UK's military is buying more than it can afford

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Have an upvote for the sentiment, if not the detail.

I believe we need a military. If another country does "go rogue" and threaten us, we need the ability to respond in our defence. We also need to deter foreign powers from attacking us in the first place, and to be able to defend innocent civilians in other countries or help in a humanitarian crisis.

What we don't need to do is throw our weight around, invade countries because they have weapons of mass destruction oil we want, or be America's lap dog. We also, IMHO, don't need as much of a "nuclear deterrent" (or at least not to spend as much on it).

But above all of that, if we are cutting budgets left right and centre, then our current, reasonably safe, position should have entailed more cuts to the military and less to public services.

25
1

UK.gov tells freelance techies to slap 20 per cent on fees as IR35 tax hike looms

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: 20% ain't gonna cut it. Working away from home

"Yes, up to a period of two years"

Not quite accurate, but near as damnit.

However, this no longer applies to contractors caught by IR35, and doesn't apply at all to umbrella company contractors. No subsistence for either group.

Another point to note: normally there's a 5%(?) allowance for business expenses if you are caught by IR35. This won't apply any more in the public sector under the new rules, because "the client is determining your IR35 status, so you don't have to". Of course, this doesn't take into account the costs of doing business (e.g. accountancy, insurance etc), but as we're all just tax dodgers, it's fine.

0
0
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

"Well that's f*cking mental."

Yep. Most contractors, businesses, agencies and public sector bodies agree.

"Are they paying per [sic] taxed money into my company?"

Yep again. I don't know exactly how it will work, but I expect that it'll mean that they are paying the company, but the money is yours, not your companies. In other words, it's a clusterfuck!

But again, it doesn't matter coz tax dodging bla bla bla...

0
0
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

"what happens if like me your contract is direct? I have no agency"

It's down to the end client to collect taxes, effectively through PAYE, before paying the contractor.

It is the responsibility of the entity which pays the contractor's Ltd company to collect the tax. This could be the last in the chain of agencies, or the client itself if the contract is direct.

Remember, though, this only applies where the end client is a public sector body (for now).

1
0
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

I'm a permie, but I would answer NO to all four of those questions, so think again.

As others have stated, if you are in the UK your employer is breaking the law.

1) All employees are entitled to Statutory Sick Pay for illnesses of 4 or more days at £88.45/week [https://www.gov.uk/statutory-sick-pay/overview]

2) All employees are entitled to 5.6 weeks paid holiday (28 days for a normal 5-day week) [https://www.gov.uk/holiday-entitlement-rights/entitlement]

5
0
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: How to remain competetive

B2B is normally quoted ex VAT. I have never quoted my rates inclusive of VAT, and businesses don't expect you to. Besides, they know they can claim it back (as long as they are VAT registered)

2
0
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: 20% ain't gonna cut it.

Without being able to put travel and accommodation through the business it would have been a much less viable contract and probably one I would have passed on for something closer to home. The longer term effect will be to reduce the flexibility of the freelance workforce by limiting our ability to travel for contracts

That's what the govt/HMRC seem to miss: The country benefits massively from the flexibility of the contractor market.

I'm based in Leeds. As long as it's worth it, I'm happy to take a position anywhere in the country. Make it less attractive, and I'll stay near home, spend more time with friends and family, and enjoy the short breaks between contracts. Businesses loose (access to the labour they need when they need it), the govt looses (tax revenue from the contractor and company), and the country looses (attracting businesses, tax revenue, and more).

But it's OK, because we're all tax dodgers and must be punished.

9
0
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

So would any agency actually want you outside of IR35 since it would adversely affect their own profits

The problem is that it's not the agency who decides. All the big agencies had turned around and said they would work hard to determine the true status of their contractors fairly, then the govt decided that it would be the public sector client who would decide. The agency has no say, it's only role would be to collect the taxes.

1
0
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

The tool will present HMRC's interpretation of the rules, which has been shown time and again in tribunals to be wrong. The difference is that the contractor will have to pay the tax from day one, and will have to fight to claim it back, instead of HMRC having to investigate and prove they should have been paying.

It will gain the government no extra income. Contractors will leave or jack up their rates to cover the extra tax. It will actually cost the govt more.

However, it is obvious to all that this is just the first stage. Soon enough, they will force these rules on the private sector. Then all companies and contractors will suffer, and the government might make a bit more tax. The people will be happy, because it'll be presented as "clamping down on tax dodgers", but the whole country will suffer for it (less people contracting, a less flexible workforce, lower productivity, higher prices, etc).

12
0

Trump signs 'no privacy for non-Americans' order – what does that mean for rest of us?

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: Yet ANOTHER Trump story?

It would be nice to see these Trump related stories not written as if to goad and inflame anti-Trump protestors everywhere. That's tabloid stuff.

Those I have seen have presented the facts of each story, along with potential implications, rounded off with the signature Register humour.

They are not anti-Trump, except for the fact that Trump is doing silly things which deserve a bit of piss-take.

8
0

Windows code-signing tweaks sure to irritate software developers

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

"It's interesting that one-man-and-a-dog shops won't be especially affected by the procedural changes, but will complain about the approximate doubling of certificate prices. Meanwhile, large ISVs with automated build-and-test systems won't especially worry about an extra few hundred pounds, but may have to revise their processes a lot."

So, basically, it's going to hit everyone in exactly the way which will hurt them the most. Nice move, MS!

17
0

President Donald Trump taken on by unlikely foe: Badass park rangers

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: About time

overlooked Obama's record on drone strikes (ten times as many as Dubya)

Well, seeing as drones really took off (pun intended) over the past 8 years, that's not really surprising. I'm sure Dubya would have used them a lot more had they been as readily available.

13
0

Top UK judges rule: Government can't pull the Article 50 trigger alone

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

There's no 'uncertainty' about it at all.

No, none at all. Except:

- what trade deals, if any, we end up with and on what terms

- impact on the economy,

- impact on people's rights,

- impact on employment,

- impact on people's wages,

- impact on tax revenues,

- impact on inflation,

- impact on trade,

- what will happen to expats in the EU

- a multitude of other questions

No, no uncertainty at all.

5
0
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: Worst of both worlds

Let's face it, a majority of MP's will not vote against Brexit. Regardless of their opinions on the matter, they realise it would be bad for their careers.

However, a defeat by the government is still possible. A vote against triggering A50 is possible if the govt try to force it through with unacceptable terms (e.g. not enough scrutiny on the negotiations from Parliament). While the most extreme of the Leave voters (and the stupid ones who don't understand the process and think the Supreme Court just ruled against Brexit) would rail against MPs "ignoring the will of the people", it would actually be very sensible to ensure that controls are in place in the Act to stop TM running off and doing whatever the hell she wants.

EDIT: Also, a defeat would probably be seen as a vote of no confidence, as mentioned above.

3
0

US govt can't stop Microsoft taking its Irish email seizure fight to the Supreme Court

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: So basically...

the DoJ is attempting to establish precedent that they can swerve around that need to involve those pesky foreigners by using US ownership as leverage

While true, a decision in their favour could easily be enough to declare "Privacy Shield" (or whatever it's called today) invalid. It could basically end up meaning no company is compliant with EU data protection laws if one of it's parent companies is American. That would really throw a spanner in the works!

I'll get the popcorn!

10
0

Trumping free trade: Say 'King of Bankruptcy' Ross does end up in charge of US commerce

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: wholeheartedly agree

I think their criticism about inequality is mainly that the system, as it is, pushes wealth upwards. so whilst globally more people have improved their circumstances, more and more wealth is still moving upwards - and at a faster rate.

I agree. However, the move to "bring jobs home" is stealing from the poorest to give to the slightly less poor. Or, looked at from the point of view of the poorest, stealing from the poor to give to the rich (as the poorest in the world will see the poorest in the USA and the West as rich).

2
1
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

noone stole your fucking jobs, you obnoxious, dim-witted, insufferable arseholes

Exactly. America and the West have been promoting free trade, free markets and capitalism for decades (if not longer). However, now that the RoW is competing with them, they are whinging "waaa, that's not fair, they're cheating!"

13
0
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

You're seriously trying to defend offshoring of employment as "fixing global inequality"?

With a dash of: You deplorables are part of the top 10% richest in the world anyway?

I'm not defending anything. I'm just pointing out the obvious contradiction of using "fixing inequality" as an excuse for protectionism.

The majority of the world would jump at the chance to be in the bottom 10% of the American (or UK/European etc) population. As stated above, too, the worse it is for the RoW, the more people want to come to "the West" (or get peeved that the West is so rich, and attack/overthrow governments etc). Every job lost in poorer countries means more money must be spent on "keeping the immigrants out", or dealing with uprisings/wars etc.

Consider the car factory which was being built in Mexico that's now been cancelled. Just in building it, there were a hell of a lot of Mexican workers employed. These workers would be much less likely to want to go to the US. The same with those who would be employed in the factory when it was finished. Instead, the plug has been pulled, loads of people find themselves back to barely having enough to put food on the table, and the factory will not employ workers as it won't open.

You now have hundreds more who may consider trying to enter the US illegally. The US, in addition to having to pay more for their cars, will have to spend more on policing the border (or accept an increase in illegal immigration).

It's all so counter productive. The best way to reduce illegal immigration is to make it less attractive by improving the quality of life of those elsewhere. Of course, the other options are the ones being taken by Trump:

- Spend a fortune on protecting the border, and

- Make the US less attractive to foreigners by making it a horrible place

15
1
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

These populist movements seem to wish to end (or at least limit) globalisation. Fair enough, but I wish they'd stop pretending it was about ending inequality.

IIRC everyone in the Western/First world is in the top 10%. This means that, by "bringing jobs home", the top 10% get richer, and everyone else gets poorer. It increases inequality.

That's not to say that something doesn't need doing "at home", too. But at the very least, admit that the attitude is "Screw that guy in China/Korea/India. I don't care if he starves, I want more moneys!!"

20
3

Welcome to the Wipe House: President Trump shreds climate change, privacy, LGBT policies on WhiteHouse.gov

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: I'd offer the world an apology for the garbage that is "American First"

As for the objection to "America First", then you need to bone up what all the other governments are telling their people

Of course all governments put their own countries first. However, there's a difference between "we will prioritise our country, while realising we are part of the whole world" and Trump's "We only care about ourselves, fuck everyone else"*.

We are not the "saviors" or "policemen" of the world, yet, somehow, the world expects us to be

Actually, many people get very pissed off with America going around and forcing it's values and will on everyone. It's caused more problems than it's helped. That's not to say that military action is not sometimes required to keep the world stable, and to help those who are in need, but the film whose theme song is quoted above is how many across the world see your country.

* Yes, I know he didn't say those words, but that's how it sounded. From Trump's rhetoric, I could very well believe that's how it was meant, too, and that's not a good thing for the world (or even for the USA).

6
3

Trump inauguration DDoS protest is 'illegal', warn securobods

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: LOL

The [USA] is the most in debt country in the world by far, and guess what, it's not trumps fault, yet.

The USA is also the largest economy in the world. In relation to GDP, it's been around the 100% mark for the last 4 years, growing slightly.

I have a sneaking suspicion that ANY president would have left office with the debt being higher. The past 8 years have been terrible, and most countries around the world (no matter how much they cut spending) are suffering from a deficit.

If the debt does come down over Trump's time in office, I reckon it'll have more to do with economic conditions than anything else.

0
0
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: A sad day :(

It's a better world when everyone carries his own weight. It's not the job of a gummint (funded by the people) to bail out those who make bad decisions in life.

So what about those barely getting by, who make just enough to live in a low paid job. They have no money to put into a pension, or savings, but are working their arses off to keep a roof over the heads of themselves and their families. Have they just "made bad decisions in life"? If they loose their job, is it OK to let them starve because they "made bad decisions"?

In this world, there are some who really can't make more of themselves. This may be down to intelligence, their abilities, or just the job market. Not everyone in low pay is the lazy idiot many Americans (and others) seem to think they are.

Your reward for "making good decisions" (and having advantages) is a better job, more money (even after taxes and benefits are taken into account), and an overall better quality of life. Be thankful for that, and stop demonising people who don't have the luxuries you take for granted (like being able to afford to pay into a pension, or being able to afford medical insurance and actually have life-saving surgery if they need it).

0
0
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: Land of the Free

There's a difference between ever so slightly delaying a single bus and hobbling every bus in the nation until someone's little temper tantrum blows over.

So, it's like a protest march where thousands of people gather, blocking roads and access to buildings? That sounds like many peaceful protests to me.

1
0
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: Land of the Free

Trying to break something as a form of protest isn't exactly a legal form of protest

A DoS doesn't break anything. It's the equivalent of getting a load of people to ring a phone number to clog it up. Or getting a load of people to gather outside a building to make it difficult for others to get in or out.

DoS is, IMHO, a legitimate form of protest.

1
0
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: 1984

"Ok, my post was rather hastily written, but I'm not going to defend points that you have attributed to me by assumption!"

As I said, I couldn't understand the post, so I stated my assumptions first based on what I could understand from your post and asked you to correct me if I was wrong in them. Thank you for explaining.

However, on this explanation, I believe this is not correct in itself. I think it's perfectly acceptable to try to undermine policies you disagree with. The election was fought with radically polarised views. If someone disagrees with one of Trump's policies, why should they not try to undermine it? Congress certainly did with most of Obama's policies over the last 8 years.

Trump's success or failure will be judged by the results of his time. However, to discount a public figure's personality in judgement of him is a mistake. He will be in the world's view, and how he comes across is important. If he goes round offending people, especially other world leaders, this will be damaging for America.

As to racial issues, I'm not American, but the view I get from outside is that these were made worse by the Trump campaign. His attacks on different races, nationalities, and religions were heard throughout the world, so I wouldn't be surprised if this was true. I do know that it's been widely reported that race-related incidents surged on his election. I know that doesn't automatically mean they had improved with Obama in power, but the feeling I get is that they would have been better without Trump's campaign.

6
0
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: 1984

"The Left needs to hang up that line until they start confronting Islam about how they treat women. Until then, they're not only liars but huge hypocrites."

Personally, I do, but I also respect their culture. Also, only where it actually happens. Most I have met have a perfectly acceptable attitude toward women, including those in Muslim countries. The Right's current obsession with Muslims often blinds them to the fact that they are stereotyping, and not all are how they describe.

American culture does not endorse denigration of women, so an American leader who does so is worse than a leader of a Muslim country (or person in a Muslim country) who does.

And saying "that's just Trump" is not acceptable either. You are basically saying he's a complete dick, but we don't care who he offends. He's not a comedian, he's going to be the leader of the most powerful nation on earth, and going around offending everyone will come back to bite, not only him, but the whole country.

11
5
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

"Ok, so what you're saying is that both sides are just as bad as each other and they should both grow up and accept that in a democracy you don't always get what you want?"

Let's get out the vote! Let's make our voices heard!

We've been given the right to choose between a douche and a turd.

It's democracy in action! Put your freedom to the test.

A big fat turd or a stupid douche. Which do you like best?

I seriously believe that, if the Democrats had chosen ANYONE other than Clinton, they'd have easily won. Even with HER as the opposition, Trump got fewer votes.

13
1
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: Land of the Free

@codejunky:

So because a candidate who is truly repulsive to many, and who won fewer votes than his rival, won the election, someone is calling for people to use their democratic right to protest against his offensive policies and behaviour.

There, FTFY.

12
5
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge
Coffee/keyboard

look up "Brave Agent Pubeit"

LMAO, I just did and thank you! I won't even send you the bill for my new keyboard!

0
0
Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: 1984

I'm just astonished at how obvious the vested powers have been in throwing scorn upon the post of the President of the US of A.

He was voted in, once he is the president and objections are against the 'office', not the man, and shows a complete disregard for the will of the voting public and the democratic process.

We all knew they were slimy bribe taking, nest feathering, lying bastards, but I never thought to see the day when they advertised that fact!

What?

I'm going to make an assumption here, as your post is not particularly legible. I assume you are saying that;

a) All the bad things said about Trump are made up,

b) When someone holds office, you are automatically attacking the office if you say anything bad about the person,

c) If you say you dislike a politician or say bad things about them, you are disregarding "the will of the voting public and the democratic process", and

d) All the people who are saying bad things about Trump are corrupt.

If I am mistaken, feel free to correct me.

I would counter a & c by saying it's extremely unlikely that all are made up, and some are demonstrably true. His attitude towards women, demonstrated by public behaviour, is disgusting. His treatment of anyone who disagrees with him does not demonstrate any ability to articulate a defence of his own position, and relies on shouting people down rather than a reasoned debate. He refused to show his tax records, something convention has required of presidential candidates in the US for many years, on very spurious grounds. He has refused to divest himself of business assets or put them out of his own reach, leaving a strong potential for conflicts of interest. All in all, he comes across as untrustworthy and potentially corrupt himself, in my own personal opinion.

As to b, that's complete poppycock! Someone can be a great person but crap at their jobs, and vice versa. Even so, by saying you dislike Trump as President, you are not saying that the office is bad, you are saying that the current holder of that office is.

As for c, again that's BS. Even ignoring the fact that Clinton got a higher proportion of the vote than Trump, just because someone was elected doesn't mean you have to like it, agree with it, or stay silent. Protest is part of the democratic process, too, as is a free press and freedom of speech. You sound like you just want to silence anyone who doesn't agree with you, because your side won, "ner ner na ner ner". Much the same approach is taken by Leave voters here in the UK, and it's just as wrong.

I wouldn't agree with breaking the law in protest (except in extreme circumstances, the USA's independence came from breaking the law, for instance), but engaging in peaceful protest is perfectly reasonable. And where, exactly, is the harm is someone wants to sit hitting refresh on the Whitehouse website? At worst, if the site goes down, they are hanging a curtain over a poster put up by the govt, which the govt just have to take down when they give up. It's not like it's a vital system or anything.

22
3

IT team sent dirt file to Police as they all bailed from abusive workplace

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

"in this case the prosecution would have obtained evidence legally."

Exactly.

The police obtained evidence from a source. It doesn't matter how that source gained the information, as long as they were not in the employ/under the supervision of the police (e.g. an informant).

The police would need to verify the information (e.g. get a warrant and seize docs/computers/backups) to take them to court. The information provided would be used as supporting evidence to obtain the warrant.

22
0

Uber coughs up $20m after 'lying about how much its drivers make'

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: "anyone" is singular

Their is often used in the singular for non-gender-specific cases, and it doesn't warrant a [sic] IMHO.

Which word would you use in its place?

6
1

Deadly Tesla smash probe: No recall needed, says Uncle Sam

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

I believe the driver is more at fault than the idiot who put their Winnebago on cruise control then went to make a cuppa. The difference being, in this case, all the Tesla manuals specifically state that it's not self-driving and you must remain attentive and ready to take back control.

0
0

What's the biggest danger to the power grid? Hackers? Terrorists? Er, squirrels

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

In 2015, a fox shorting out a substation in Utah caused an outage that shut down an oxygen machine and led to the death of a patient.

In an era where all but the least important servers are protected by UPS, shouldn't a life-critical machine have a backup power supply?! Surely it wouldn't be too difficult to include a few hours of emergency power into it....

4
0

Now that's a Blue Screen of Death: Windows 10 told me to jump off a cliff

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: Forgot your meds this morning ?

"I think you have to be extremely deranged to see a subliminal suicide message in the picture+text."

To not see it, you must;

a) lack a sense of humour, and

b) have never been on the dark side of depression.

56
3

Why the UK is unlikely to get an adequacy determination post Brexit

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Really?

Wow, the security services are ignoring the law and doing whatever the hell they want? I'm shocked!

21
1

Fatal genetic conditions could return in some 'three-parent' babies

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: suck it darwin

so, we've figured a way to beat natural selection... because thats going to end well...

If this is your viewpoint, we have been "defeating natural selection" for thousands of years.

Natural selection/evolution involves mutations which make us better suited to our environment. Conversely, for a hell of a long time, humans have been adapting our environment to suit us. Similarly, we have discovered medicines which stop disease from killing off the weak.

If you want us to get back to your definition of natural selection, we would need to abandon all technological, medical and industrial advancements we have made, and go back to being hunter-gatherers living in caves. Oh, and not wear clothes: Our bodies will evolve fur if we need it.

8
1

Robo-supercar hype biz Faraday Future has invented something – a new word for 'disrupt'

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: Will it.....

While writing this I found myself taking a step back and realizing how far we've come in just a handful of years - it really wasn't long ago that electric cars were a laughing stock... "milk floats", "golf buggies", and so on. And now we're arguing about recharge time. Progress!

It's mind boggling, isn't it. I'm amazed at how far they've come on.

Let's think about this, though. How often does the "average" person do a 300+ mile trip? I would expect 2-3 times a year, tops. Given that, with the savings on fuel, it would probably work out close to cost effective to hire a car for those times you need the range*. In fact, it's something I've wondered about for car manufacturers: Nissan, for instance, could probably afford to include free or discounted car hire to Leaf owners for their long trips.

* Assuming a commuter doing 30mi/day (about 8000mi/yr), and comparing to 50mpg in a fossil fuel powered car, you'd save around £650/yr in fuel costs. This could get you about 3 weeks car hire of a decent sized car. For someone doing a single long distance 2-week trip, plus a couple of 2-3 day hires, you'd be at around break even. If you did more "normal" miles a year the saving, hence the amount of time you could hire a car, increases.

6
5

US Supreme Court to hear case that may ruin Lone Star patent trolls

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: So if this goes through, everyone has to be sued in their state of incorporation

My proposed sensible patent policy:'NO'

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be suggesting that noone should get patents at all. Basically people should have no way to protect their intellectual property.

So, I'm an engineer. If I was to spend years designing and developing, say, a radically new car engine design, it is acceptable for another company to come along and copy my design? I should not be allowed to make a penny from my own design, which I have spent years on?

I would have to disagree with you on that. While I believe patent law, especially in the USA, needs reform, it certainly should NOT be abandoned.

17
1

Meat pies in SPAAAAAAAAAAAACE!

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: Time to raise a pint to Lesters memory

(I presume PARIS is a failed dream at this point?)

Erm... didn't PARIS actually happen? Or did I imagine that? If so, I have some BIG mental health problems...

I think you may have meant LOHAN. I've not heard anything about it for ages. Last I heard it was stalled because they couldn't get clearance from the FAA.

7
0

Blue sky basic income thinking is b****cks

Dr. Mouse
Silver badge

Re: "Radically simplify taxation and benefits"

A Basic Income scheme would have roughly the same complexity as the current benefits system, while having far more claimants. Administering it would cost far more, even ignoring the increased actual payout.... The cost of living (esp. housing and transport) varies across the country. Disability. Children. Single or has a partner. Top-up of salary (working tax credit etc).

A Basic Income system would pay out a set amount per adult. It may be that it would need to be area-specific, especially for London, but should definitely not be inflated for "rich" areas (e.g. housing costs in a high-income area).

Working tax credit is no longer needed as everyone receives a set benefit.

Single or with a partner doesn't matter, each individual gets a set amount. There would probably need to be an amount paid to each child's primary caregiver, but this, too, should cover only the basics required to live.

Disability and a maybe few other types of benefit would still be required, but I doubt their administration would cost any more than they currently do. Therefore there are still the savings on administration of most in- and out-of-work benefits.

As for taxation, there could then be a much simpler tax system. No personal allowance, fewer exemptions, fewer levels, and (I would suggest) no different treatment of different kinds of income. I believe it could just be done as a flat rate tax on all income (except the UBI, no point giving then grabbing back through tax).

Your assertions basically amount to keeping the same system but calling it UBI. The entire point of UBI would be a radical simplification of the tax and benefits systems, without which it would be pointless.

3
1

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017