* Posts by codejunky

2140 posts • joined 24 Oct 2011

A game to 'vaccinate' people against fake news? Umm... Fake news

codejunky
Silver badge

Hmm

The problem with fake news is defining it. When it comes the the facts they can be cherry picked. When it comes to extrapolating from those facts there can be errors or bias. When it comes to opinion it meets personal perception and interpretation. When it is without fact it is pure lie.

At what point do we call it fake news?

1
0

UK.gov's Brexiteers warned not to push for divergence on data protection laws

codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Codejunky...

@ Adair

"'Sovereignty' is one of those bullshit words beloved by politicians and nationalists."

Unfortunately the word is abused so badly people dont know if they are coming or going in either camp. It is a real concept (like freedom) but people seem so lazy as to demand absolutes instead of realising the scale which includes accommodating our neighbours, which can only be done with sovereignty.

"The 'EU' (we'll use that label) was and is primarily an attempt to avoid repeating history any time soon. To date it has succeeded"

This is something I severely doubt. Common interests worked but we are all different. The EU tries to pull into being the same (ever closer union) even though they dont want it. As a result the EU has caused multiple crises, pushed people into voting for anti-EU parties and is losing support. Even the French president said France would probably vote out of the EU. If the population wants out and are forced closer in that increases tensions. Provoking Russia as they did increased global tensions. And they even talk of an EU army, which had been commented as potentially useful with this migration crisis Germany caused. An alternative would be falling back to what worked.

"A shambolic clown show with added mendacity. No plan, no clue, arrogant self-interest from the most ardent advocates"

I am not sure it really is that bad. Those who want out want out, thats simple. The problem is the drag of those who want in, or some kind of in (aka in) or some fantasy deal of in but out but in that the EU wont allow. In short we could have voted for the brexit party who had a plan and instead we voted for the saboteur Cameron. Both campaigns sucked but the gov was remain and it was a rigged vote that still didnt go their way. That causes serious distrust for leave who know we got our result despite rigging and yet still these self interested scum are determined to walk over the people further. This gov isnt good but the sewage in politics and propaganda pushing to remain at all cost are the problem.

"The whole Brexit shambles is an edifice built on sand, lies, and a hopeless vainglory"

Unfortunately that was the state of both official campaigns. It was shameful to watch the our politicians making such fools of themselves but worse is the continued shame of watching it continue. We voted, we are doing it so lets do it. Instead we have children and fools demanding an end to democracy and desperate to get on their knees and open wide in the hope that the EU who have been vicious and unfriendly will be nice to us and take us back. What amuses me is nobody suggests the legitimate idea of leaving and then rejoining. Mostly because it would be a bad idea and we would have more EU inflicted upon us.

@ H in The Hague

"In my view there is certainly no "one will" of the people"

And you would be right if we look for unified will of the people with the same idea of outcome or perception. That isnt just for leave but for remain. During the referendum people wanted in for various reasons- EU is perfect/isnt perfect but we need to reform it, a socialist/capitalist/ anti-neoliberal/neoliberal paradise, restrains our government/doesnt interfere with our country, an expansion of our influence/the age of our influence is gone, to remove the threat of war/to be stronger in war, a trading/protectionist paradise.

The thing that joined them was their shared belief in remain. I dont hold that against them even though they have opposite beliefs, I accept they wanted to remain. Of course this applies to leave, except leaving would give us the freedom to vote for our own government who could then act as we want and take the country in that direction vs remain who wont have the influence to make the changes they dream of.

0
2
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: @ iron

@ strum

"I keep seeing this garbage."

And it is garbage to you because you dont seem to understand it.

"There are chains of commerce, sometimes involving dozens of businesses, often crossing many frontiers"

A concept which breaches outside the walls of the EU. If the EU exists purely on its internal resources it turns into the USSR (expanding to claim more resources but not developing). So to claim the world doesnt work unless it is within the borders of the EU is to exclude the world from existing.

"None of them can drop their standards below the highest level encountered"

Hmm. I see the misunderstanding is strong. I want food. I buy food, say from a country with lower standards than the country I sell to. But what I sell to that country is compliant with that country. The buyer gains to their standards, I gain to my standards, the food supplier gains also. Apply to a world of many transactions of many services and products where the EU has its little borders of standards (not mocking) and all the other countries with their own little borders of their own standards. Your claim suggests nobody does business. You are wrong.

"Difference is, we have never had any say in those standards. We are surrendering our say in the standards of the world's biggest market."

Nooooo, dont be so wrong. We are not surrendering our say in the standards of the US and China. We have no say over their standards! Even the EU doesnt. Their standards are up to them, the EU's up to the EU and they negotiate trade to meet a set of agreed standards (acceptable either way). The only standards we might have some influence on in the EU is possibly the EU standards but 1/28th of an influence but bound by all. We leave and we influence 100% of the UK's standards.

0
0
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: No wonder Murdoch, the Republicans and others are in favour of BRexit

@ John Smith 19

"When considering wheather to support a course of action consider who else support it."

So your backing Blair, Mandelson, Osborne, Cameron, etc? If you want to reduce this to XFactor then I take issue with your methodology.

0
0
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Codejunky...

@ Dan 55

"Indeed. Every other country up to the Russian border is in the single market, customs union or both. But accorsing to Brexiteers it apparently makes sense to leave that and isolate ourselves from our neighbours."

Have you now moved on from 28 countries out of 195? Where do you mark the arbitrary lines? Just left of Ireland (since the US isnt in). The interesting part of your comment is the isolation bit. You are talking about isolation, but I am not. Oddly the only people who seem to talk about isolating from the EU is racists (I see this occasionally but not often) and remainers (so often I almost have this rehearsed). How about not isolating ourselves?

"it's not necessary to leave the single market and customs union to leave the EU"

4 pillars of the single market= remaining in the EU. The diktat from the EU for us to have access. You are arguing with the EU when you say that.

0
0
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Codejunky...

@ Adair

"Lets just keep it simple"

I think becoming an orca will be harder than you think. Easier to be an ork, green makeup, pointy things, etc.

"England/Britain is not exceptional, it is just another middling sized country"

Surely thats a point of realisation for you. I dont claim the UK/Britain/England to be exceptional, I point out there are many countries in the world not in the EU and plodding along fine without the EU. it isnt me you need to convince we are just another middling sized country it is the doom mongers who seem to think we are a retarded wasteland and doom and fire.

"relatively very wealthy, but with significant internal problems of social justice"

Noooo not the snowflakes. Please can we pretend you didnt say social justice for all its worthlessness as a thing. With no meaning and abused by every nutter with a grudge. But yes we are wealthy as a country and we have internal problems as does every country. As you say we are just another country.

"Taking the world as it is today, what are the odds of being better together with others, than going it alone"

Well said! I agree. I dont want us to hide behind nationalist borders. Nor do I want us to hide behind supranationalist borders. Instead as demonstrated in the world countries can work together without the all loving boot that is the EU. High tariffs and cartel mentality is cutting us off from the world lets break free from that.

"we are no longer an imperial power who can call the shots - others have that power today"

What is that calling the shots thing? You mean militaristic or overbearing might to enforce our will? Like the EU on its weaker countries? The EU reducing in its share of the global wealth and in multiple crises due to bad governance while the rest of the world ticks on?

"Most nations of the world today, that are economically active and successful, belong to trading blocs of various kind"

Ok so? Are you saying we cant be part of a trade block if we leave the EU if we want to? Do they have a political project over them screwing up their member countries?

"Absolute 'sovereignty' does not exist"

Is this some abusing of words? Or some kind of mental gymnastics? If we cannot leave the EU then we have almost no sovereignty because we dont have the freedom to choose to leave.

"Whether we stay or go we are going to have to work in the world the way it actually is"

Yup well said. Outside the cartel and acting like the many other countries not in the EU.

"The EU is not a panacea"

Damn freaking right with a cherry on top. That we can agree on.

0
2
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: @ Halcin

@ H in The Hague

"Thanks, I'll mention that to a friend who has just invested twenty grand in a coffee roaster for her coffee supply business"

Cool, whatever works for her and her business. Or are you trying to make some kind of point?

0
2
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: @ Halcin

@ H in The Hague

"Not an expert"

I admit that used to be the issue. Positive advancements in technology have provided the world with the capability to ship products world wide in ways never before imagined. World wide advancements have been stunningly amazing.

0
3
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Codejunky...

@ Adair

"your arguments would make sense if we were starting from scratch as a newly formed independent state floating far out in the Atlantic."

Why?

"The argument you should be making is why leaving the large trade bloc we are already in"

Been there and done that. From the stand point of the trade off of being in that particular trade block. The argument to remain in the EU is similar to the argument of being another state in the US (except the US is more successful with a longer history). Many a time I have offered to discuss the costs/benefits of the following areas of leave- democracy, trade, economy, sovereignty, immigration etc. All good arguments for leave which seem to end the discussion quickly.

"If you can make that argument stick you will do a lot of doubting people a big favour"

I do. I dont post on here to convert the hardline remain shouting about the end of the world. They are everywhere and repeating the same discredited bull. I counter the lies and try to add facts to a religious situation. That way the thinking can come to their own conclusion. I respect people thinking remain is a better idea with thought out reason, but not the propagandists and anti-democracy spouted recently sounds like some extremist rally. It is shocking when talking to some voters how much information they have missed out on and how much crud they believe because nobody explained where it was wrong.

"in fact people seem to actively avoid trying to make a cogent case, resorting to vacuous and laughable 'trust me' arguments instead"

Read some of the comments I put up with. I have idiots trying to convince me to be racist so they can argue with me. Or writing some of the dumbest caricatures because that is their level of discussion. Now I am called brexshitter or brexidiot and the time before that was eurosceptic (fell out of favour when we were proved right over the Euro debate years back).

"Please remember that many/most of the problems besetting the UK currently are of our own making (little or nothing to do with membership of the EU) and within our means (legally and economically) to deal with, if our politicians and ourselves have the guts to tackle them."

I wont argue with that. What nobody has yet managed to explain is how having bad government is solved by putting over it a less accountable bad government? The EU is in multiple actual crises after stunning and dangerous failures. At least we can vote for a different party in this country. Think of the worst politician you can imagine. In this country it is the voters fault if they get in. In the EU we have no control over that.

0
6
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: @ Halcin

@ mje11

"The roasted coffee tariffs is a big myth that refuses to die"

I am sorry if this is incorrect. I must admit the document I am looking at is from 2011 (section9 page5)- http://www.ico.org/documents/icc-107-7e-tariffs-trade.pdf

This points out the 7.5% has an effective rate much higher. I linked to this source from- https://capx.co/how-the-eu-starves-africa-into-submission/

0
4
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: @ Halcin

@ Nick Ryan

"So you're OK that a huge number of UK businesses, particularly the smaller ones (who employ more people than the big businesses that everybody focusses on) will go to the wall due to a huge increase in red-tape and costs?"

I have no problem with that. I would have issue if we were expected to end up with high unemployment, but that is not the case. As leaving would reduce some costs and increase others it would adjust the economy. But to argue against that is to argue against trading with those who are cheaper/better than you. Personally I want the cheaper/better product or service, not protect uncompetitive business.

"Does this have anything to do with the example of the UK businesses that will be considerably less competitive all of a sudden?"

I suggest you read the comment if you dont understand.

"What may be the case is that companies operating in Germany"

You are right it is the companies. Benefiting from the trade law Germany has which is the EU trade law and we are discussing trade law.

"There is nothing stopping UK, Spanish, Irish, French or whatever organisations doing exactly the same"

You miss the point. It isnt that members of the cartel can exploit this, it is that outside the cartel we will be rejoining the world. Africa is locked out by the EU but the world is not.

"Flattening such tarriff differences between raw and manufacturerd goods will only bring a small benefit to those purchasing the end product, because they may be able to purchase the product cheaper - however they may be less sure of the production quality and checks required and what happens to those that are no longer employed by the local coffee roasting companies when they close down?"

This is the difference in view. It wont provide the customer a much cheaper product necessarily but it will take people out of absolute poverty in poorer countries and save lives while improving cooperation and mutual advantage. While you are considering those in rich countries who have a welfare system until they find work in one of the many other job options.

"You are quite right about China, they are heavily investing for mutual gain however if a Chinese company owns your infrastructure where does that leave locals?"

With the infrastructure. Unless you suggest China buys the infrastructure and then moves it away? Except they are laying rail to connect through a number of countries which will benefit them all. And the industries set up in those local areas will be in the local areas for the locals. More jobs and employment and mutual benefit. Is that a bad thing?

"Interest rates will go up"

Why is this seen as bad? Currently we have ultra low rates in comparison to the very law rates we had before which was low compared to the double digits it has been in the past. Increasing the interest rates (a good thing) is because inflation is going up (a good thing) which returns us to a better position to deal with the next market correction. The very actions the BoE and treasury have been trying to do since 2008. The very actions continued to this day.

"costs of pretty much everything will go up due to a huge increase in red-tape and bureaucracy"

Ah big mistake. The EU tariffs are a cost. Drop them and the cheaper options become available and red tape on imports is controlled by us (outside the EU). This is where outward looking remainers should group with the outward looking leavers and push the government in that direction. Instead of remainers claiming we are all (can only assume them included) are racists who want to pull up the drawbridge. Nearly all the protectionist and nationalistic statements I hear seem to come from remainers claiming to speak for leave.

"Removing all tariffs, which is a very bad idea because removing them will advantage importers of products that can be produced in cheaper locales"

Do you argue for high tariffs? I am not sure of your position on this. I am happy with low tariffs which mean we get what we want (the people) instead of trapping us with lesser producers.

0
9
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: @ Halcin

@ Jason Bloomberg

"You are right, but if my business has to trade with the EU and incurs regulatory and tariff costs in doing that I am at a commercial disadvantage to competing businesses who have less costs in only having to meet local regulations."

That is true and I am sorry to hear that. Apparently Germany roasts and sells coffee. The EU tariff on roasted coffee being high but on green coffee beans low, so Germany buys them cheap from Africa, roasts them and sells at a nice profit. So yes I can see how tariffs could be used against a country which is a problem for poor countries who have starving populations. The good news for Africa is China. Since the EU is protectionist and enforcing disadvantage it has been China's advantage to move in and help with developing for mutual gain. It is the same protectionism with tariffs that will bring the cost of food down for the whole country (rich and poor alike) when we leave.

"Let brexiteers and the dole office worry about all the people that puts out work."

Ok. I have to ask if you care at all of the people the EU has killed (locking out poor countries from trade) or the many people the EU put out of work (Eurozone)? I can understand your concern of problems affecting you. I wish you well in whatever you decide.

0
10
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: @ Halcin

@ Dan 55

"No, that was dictated in May's first speech at Lancaster House"

To be in the single market we must accept the 4 pillars of the EU aka remain.

"now you seem to believe the UK will a say in setting standards for 169 countries"

I am so glad I expanded your world beyond 28 countries to the entire world. But you seem not to understand the point. Deduct the UK from the world and where do we get to set the standards? Yet the world still trades without dictating their standards onto supplying countries (only the products/services/businesses supplied).

"The UK will either accept those standards or it won't but it will be in no position to get the EU to change its standards"

Why? Do we accept the American standard 2 pin plug, or even the EU plug? Did the UK suddenly start driving on the other side of the road? It is at business level they need to supply to the standards of the target country in or out of the EU. That doesnt mean we enforce other countries standards on the UK and since there are so many different countries with different rules it would be impossible to encompass them all.

"The UK has no leverage and no bargaining power either with the EU or with other countries"

By bargaining power do you mean power over others? Effectively force? I can understand why you might think that way as Greece found out with the EU. But cooperative mutual gain is something which seems to work (see- world) and if the EU doesnt want that with us it is up to them. But then that would be the EU's choice.

0
9
codejunky
Silver badge

@ Doctor Syntax

"?????? If we had more lax data regulations in the UK than GDPR we'd then have two schemes, out own and GDPR"

And yet there are a lot of countries in this world, each with their own standards and laws, each trading with each other. I suggest you and Dan go suggest the world submit to the warm embrace of the EU. Go on it will be funny.

0
7
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: @ Halcin

@ Adam 52

"There was no 2016 vote on leaving the European Single Market."

Actually the EU are dictating that leaving the EU (voted for) requires leaving the single market. The UK wanting frictionless trade and the EU wanting a wall in Ireland and for the UK to pay for it.

1
24
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: @ Halcin

@ Professor Clifton Shallot

"if we want to trade with the EU then we have to comply with their rules for trade" != "The 'at all costs' position is the refusal to comply even if it means losing the ability to trade"

How is this complicated? It really isnt. If a business wants to trade with a client in another country the product/service must meet the regs of the country. FFS this is easy. Doesnt matter if the country is US, India, China, Small island in the middle of nowhere or even the freakin EU. To trade the business must be compliant. The Business not the whole freakin country.

Why should we care if the EU want to slap their businesses with all kinds of red tape? We shouldnt. Any business wanting to do business with them will but the rest of us dont need to care.

All costs means taking any rule from the EU and applying it to the UK because the political project we didnt elect and have voted out says so.

"As a punter GDPR looks like a good example of legislation that works in my favour in theory but is not something I'm ever likely to think about much. As a Data Processor it's a pain in the bum."

Congrats you have just summed up the EU. Who cares unless it affects them. For those who do care and start looking at the EU it really does come up short. Then you spend your time explaining the same things to people who dont care but want us to remain.

2
20
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: @ Halcin

@ Dan 55

"why we would want change our regulations to make all those products and services already targeted at our area of the world incompatible with our country"

Nonsense. Please rewrite this so it does make sense.

"how we can make our own magically better regulations and then force 27 other countries to use them"

Nonsense. This assumes countries cannot trade with each other at all in the entire world.

"what advantage is there is for us in pulling out of the decision making processes which set regulations for 28 countries"

28 of 195.

"what products and services do you envision could be better and with our own esoteric incompatible standards set just to shown who's taken control"

Nonsense. Try again with sense.

Wow that was quick and easy

1
28
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: @ iron

@ Dan 55

"The EU would insist the very least on a personal data firewall between businesses not dealing with the EU and businesses dealing with the EU"

You mean different businesses? Some businesses doing business with the EU and others not? That oddly is a very correct statement even now. But only those doing business with the foreign country need follow the rules of the foreign country, as we do with the rest of the world.

2
9
codejunky
Silver badge

@ Halcin

"So, Everyone is advocating we comply with EU regulations"

No, mostly remainers. The ones who want to be in the EU at all costs including your first to last born. The ones who are happy to ignore the only democratic vote for our EU membership and then want to retrospectively add additional thresholds which the vote to be in certainly dont meet. The same people who think we are all plebs and shouldnt have the vote, but yet I suspect complain about the gov.

Not exactly reliable people.

4
41
codejunky
Silver badge

@ iron

"UK businesses would end up with two different data protection schemes that they have to comply with, making the whole thing cost even more than it will with GDPR alone"

Doubt it-

Business not dealing with the EU= lax rules.

Business dealing with the EU= GDPR.

Business dealing with anyone other than EU= whatever their laws require.

Businesses trading in the world must meet the requirements of the countries they trade with, EU or not. So trading with the EU would be like trading with anywhere else in the world.

5
21

UK.gov: Psst. Belgium. Buy these Typhoon fighter jets from us, will you?

codejunky
Silver badge

Re: @ wolfetone

@ EvilDrSmith

He does have a huge bias against them. I just dont know many from the forces (personally) who particularly disagreed. But at the time it seemed very much another way of pleasing the EU. Maybe I am just a bit cynical but at the time labour were selling us hook line and sinker as Blair wanted to be EU president.

0
0
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: @ wolfetone

@ EvilDrSmith

"The Eurofighter / Typhoon was designed to meet a number of requirements"

I suggest you read some of lewis page's writings on this. If you can grab a copy of his book 'lions donkeys and dinosaurs' it is a fun read. A quick search brought up this-

http://www.theregister.co.uk/Print/2011/03/03/eurofighter_nao_analysis/

0
0
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: @ wolfetone

@ Lars

"I think you need one to explain that sentence, unless it's me who needs one."

Np, sorry if I wasnt clear. We bought the Eurofighter, brought them back here for 'upgrades' to add air to ground capability (if I remember that right) at additional expense. It didnt do what we wanted but we bought it anyway and then fudge a fix to make it work. I am not arguing in favour of the F-35 particularly and not the B variant which while cool seems to be more complicated than an aircraft needs to be.

We do just seem to have bought the Eurofighter to please the EU.

@ Mine's a Large One

"We need an air defence aircraft to intercept Russian aircraft heading for our airspace."

I agree. And of the air to ground aircraft available we bought the Eurofighter for political reasons and had to make conversions to it here to make it useful. I might be tempted to go grab lewis's book and reread the problems with the Eurofighter. Been a while since this has come up.

0
0
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: @ wolfetone

@ Yet Another Anonymous coward

"The eurofighter is a vital first line of defence against the East German airforce's Migs"

Wonderful but what does that have to do with the UK? The UK air requirements is air to ground, which would be why after we bought lots of EU expensive candy which didnt do what we wanted, the UK modified them to do air to ground at our expense.

I believe the F-35 is more useful. Previous versions of aircraft are currently available and do the job. The UK while selling out to the EU pumped them more money for an aircraft that didnt do what we wanted. If we bought the Eurofighter without it doing what we need then why did we buy it? Why did we agree to it as we had a PM who wanted to be president of the EU?

The argument over US aircraft is BAE ripping us off to install cat and trap on the carriers forcing us to buy the expensive and more complex aircraft. The Eurofighter was if it had any use to us and the expense of making it any use.

0
4
codejunky
Silver badge

@ wolfetone

The UK bought the eurofighter for the obvious reason of showing our love for the EU by buying an air fighter at daft expense to then bring it here to modify it for air to ground. I assume the reason for the F-35 is its ability to move on an aircraft carrier which I dont think the eurofighter does or at least with issues of our short aircraft carriers without the required short jump/arrester wires.

The Eurofighter being one of those moments we were shamelessly on our knees pleasing the EU

3
54

PM urged to protect data flows post-Brexit ahead of Munich speech

codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Be carful what you ask for.

@ strum

"the UK is leaving the EU, not the other way round"

Well done for noticing. What does that have to do with shared intelligence for mutual protection?

"The UK has to adapt to deal with the consequences; the EU doesn't."

Now that is delusional. Both sides have to adapt. And it is up to how both sides decide to move forward that produces the end result. If one side is willing and the other is not then it doesnt happen. And the UK is willing to continue sharing security information.

@ stopthebollocks

Wish I could give you more than one up vote

1
1
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Project Fear is still alive and well at camp remoan.

@ CJatCTi

"In all these stories just substitute US for EU and you see what rubbish it is,"

You will upset fragile minds by suggesting such sense. Thumb up

1
0
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Be carful what you ask for.

@ John G Imrie

"Isn't this what BoJo and his Brexit friends wanted?"

Actually this is what the EU wants. Its pretty easy to read that the UK would still like to share intelligence with the EU but the EU is the problem. It is the EU who are happy to reduce cooperation.

Of course its up to the EU if they want to do that. There is nothing we can do if they want to be like that. Just make no mistake that it is the EU who are doing this.

1
2

Robot cars will kill London jobs – but only from 2030, say politicans

codejunky
Silver badge

hmm

"Transport for London condemned driverless car technology last year on the grounds that it would reduce tax income for the rapacious transport authority."

Thats pretty much all we need to know.

8
1

Bloke sues Microsoft: Give me $600m – or my copy of Windows 7 back

codejunky
Silver badge

Re: What I did

I have upgraded a few people from windows 8/8.1/10 to linux mint. I do check what they use the machine for in case they have any windows specific tie-ins but they are often pleasantly surprised at how quick their machine suddenly is and how easy things are.

I do have a windows 7 partition (I use it purely for games and nothing else) and I can very well understand his demand to 'downgrade' to the much better operating system.

I am hopeful MS will go back to that style of OS at some point. Even though I only use windows for games I dread the idea of having to put their recent offerings on my nice PC.

23
3

UK Home Sec Amber Rudd unveils extremism blocking tool

codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Different Configuration

@ smudge

"Such a filter already exists. We call it a "General Election".

Unfortunately it doesn't seem to work so well."

Upvote from me. We need more options/variation.

13
0

MPs: Lack of technical skills for Brexit could create 'damaging, unmanageable muddle'

codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Hmm

Following on-

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/09/northern-ireland-will-stay-in-single-market-after-brexit-eu-says

EU wants a border or to take Ireland. Since N Ireland want out that would be the EU taking them over. Because the EU want a border. The UK wants frictionless trade. The simple answer of course being to tell the EU we wont make a border and if they want one they can make one. Neither Ireland want one and we dont want one... will the EU force (read that word) the creation of one? While N Ireland wouldnt have such imposed upon them.

0
5
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Hmm

@ Lars

"There are a few very simple solutions for the UK to solve the problem they have created, that is, if honouring a agreement or not is a problem. The problem is not caused by the EU."

Hang on. Are you claiming the UK is not allowed to leave the EU because the EU wouldnt progress talks until they have an Irish border? Oh well when you put it that way. Ffs. If the EU want a border they can make one. Failing that it doesnt exist.

0
4
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Hmm

@ strum

"What 100Bn would that be? The one invented by the Daily Fail? Or the one invented by The SUN?"

Or even mentioned in the guardian or anywhere else (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/18/eu-talks-divided-over-britains-brexit-divorce-bill-mooted-at-66bn). Another excuse for why we should not be leaving by remainers who think the EU is entitled to money. All of it being invented but little confirmed. The EU wanting more and to punish us, reality putting them back in their box. But the 3 demands were money, border, court rights.

"since the EU have made it abundantly and repeatedly clear that they don't want a hard border there"

Thats an interesting interpretation. Since the EU was arguing it wouldnt go on to round 2 of negotiations until the Irish border issue was resolved (they wanted one) and their solution of course being to take N Ireland into the EU (against their wishes). Then of course rejecting offers of a 'soft' border.

0
4
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Clueless on everything

@ Warm Braw

"The evidence points to the available treaty options being significantly inferior in total to those we have now and little better in terms of trade with any specific individual country outside the EU than the current arragements."

Thats sounds interesting but debatable. The locked in situation we get with the EU is a cost. That cost vs reward being the debatable point.

0
5
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Hmm

@ anonymous boring coward

I guess its good enough for Luxembourg!

0
2
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: "One of these statements is a lie."

@ John Smith 19

"I have no idea what this technology will be"

If I am honest I expect it to be a lie. Claim there is a border and thats it.

@ Doctor Syntax

"Slightly more than half of those who voted did."

So more people voted out than in. Yes. As the first vote on our membership of the EU we have only ever voted out. If our EU vote needs a high threshold then pro-membership have never won one. If we count all the people who didnt vote and add them to remain then remain wins, but if we add them to leave then leave again wins (because more people voted out).

"In a couple of years time your going to be hard pressed to find anyone who'll claim admit to having voted Leave."

Will they die out like Euro supporters who used to call people like me eurosceptic? Those cowards who made the same arguments against leave for not joining the Euro, and were proved not only wrong but stonkingly wrong. And if leave turns out not to sink us (unlikely to do so) and even the EU sinks under its crises (yes that is the multiple) or transforms to what people dont want (one of their aims- ever closer union) there might be a rock somewhere we could peak under to find a remain voter. I am glad you said that because we eurosceptics have experience trying to find those so badly mistaken.

"Beggars can't be choosers."

You commented this against the EU making demands before being willing to negotiate anything. Since the EU is entitled to nothing (not money, not an Irish hard border, not extra rights over our country) the EU is the beggar and we have no reason to give in to that. Why you would have that the wrong way around I dont know.

0
4
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Clueless on everything

@ Loyal Commenter

"conclude"

The worst part is he is probably going to keep his belief that he is right but also repeat it. I do get some crap for regularly posting on these topics but nearly all of it is repeatedly correcting these repeated untruths.

And since correcting these mistakes earn me a good few down votes I can only assume the myths are believed and correcting their comments is necessary

1
4
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Hmm

@ Smooth Newt

"40 billion Euros is a big step up from "go whistle".1"

Go whistle was definitely the stance when the EU wanted more than the closing out of our membership. The EU demanding money because the UK (a net contributor) was leaving but didnt want to cut down the EU spending. 60bn being the amusing piss take that popped up originally, then 80 then 100. Offering the EU we will pay our previous commitments is quite honourable and nice. Adding that they mustnt be pricks about negotiating or they get nothing was just common sense.

"and even suggested the EU should give the UK £10bn instead for its share of the European Investment Bank."

I do like these statements. They demonstrate the poor ground the EU is standing on. Isnt gonna happen but still a good stick to beat them with when they act like children.

"But feel free to forget all this and just pick the largest figure you have ever heard bandied around"

See above. The start was 60 if I remember right which was laughed off. Dont feel free to forget that.

"Paragraph 38 of the agreement"

Cheers for the link. I will have a look at that. Always nice to have a bit more/up to date information

1
11
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Clueless on everything

@ Charlie Clark

"Nope, can't even negotiate. Can ask if anyone's interested. Meanwhile the beer's gone flat and the nibbles are stale."

Yep can negotiate, they just cant come into force until we leave the EU. There is no support within the EU treaties or law to stop a member from negotiating deals which begin after leaving the EU. Which is why this myth didnt live for too long and I am shocked you suggest it.

2
7
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Clueless on everything

@ The Specialist

"My understanding is, while one is still a member of the club, one is not allowed to enter into negotiations."

Cant sign any but can negotiate. Something that upset the EU as our leave vote signalled to the world we were willing to trade and a few countries approached us as we approached others. Once we sign to leave we can sign whatever agreements we want.

2
6
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Hmm

@ Smooth Newt

"The UK committed to cough up tens of billions of Euros"

Tens? Not the 100bn euro demand that was laughed out of the room? Nor the 80bn? Wow its almost like we are willing to be reasonable but not screwed over. And it is on the proviso that the EU actually negotiate so I still have hope for a no deal EU get nothing brexit.

"cases relating to EU citizens in the UK can be referred to the European Court of Justice"

I would be interested to see this bit. Not seen it and wouldnt be shocked if May backed down, even though I hope the leave MP's force her not to.

"Except for the wall, the UK agreed not to have a wall on the Irish border."

You mean the EU demand for a hard border isnt gonna be met? That was an EU demand not UK. The EU wanted us to make an Irish border, pay for it and man it. I am glad they backed down. Them spineless bastards wouldnt dare build one themselves and it is better for the Irish not to have a border.

2
16
codejunky
Silver badge
Thumb Up

Re: Hmm

@ Alt C

very true

1
2
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: Hmm

@ Notrub

"Well, if when you say "negotiate", you are referring to the Brexit dictionary, then, yes, the EU made clear they weren't going to lean over and open their rear orifice."

Ha! So the EU's opening- you will pay X Euro (X being a moving number often calculated by laughter), EU courts over EU citizens remaining in the UK (more laughter) and the EU want a wall and the UK will pay for it (think of trump as you say it and so even more laughter). And that is before they are willing to negotiate.

Our refusal to bend over and open our rear orifice being a fairly good choice.

2
26
codejunky
Silver badge

Hmm

A pretty easy situation. We voted out, we are leaving and the EU have made clear they didnt want to negotiate so it was hard brexit. At what point was this too complicated for a government? Send token negotiators to console the EU negotiators who have no power to negotiate and put the real effort into the rest of the world.

Amusingly the sticking point of this process seems to be the government and how slow it is to react to an issue it is already aware of ahead of time. This is what we have as government! Surely this should be a wake up call for people wanting big governments to realise it is too slow and incapable of coping with the real world. Less gov means more money for the public services or even to not take from the people.

If the government cant keep up maybe it should consider slimming down.

4
34
codejunky
Silver badge
Thumb Up

Re: Clueless on everything

@AC

Damn good comment.

2
2

UK PM Theresa May orders review of online abuse laws in suffrage centenary speech

codejunky
Silver badge

Re: The last general election results ...

@ acid andy

"Good points and I actually *want* it to be difficult for governments to change things."

I fear labour would have enough freedom to turn around the fortunes of the country (that would be to drag us down).

"There are increasing electricity and water shortages under the current regime"

Well said, lets look. Labour decimated our energy supply. Prices have risen and our reserve is short and it is all (100%) the govs fault. The gov caused the shutdown of powerplants by regulation, gave priority to expensive and failing technologies and none of that has been the private sector. Water was so badly under-invested until it was privatised. How can these private companies solve the problems if the gov wont let them, but actually creates them?

"I disliked almost all the initiatives that Blair and Brown's governments poured their money into. Many of them just seemed to erode civil liberties and others created work for busybody pen pushers."

That is government. They make those decisions because that gives them more power of a larger department to command more resources. That is what such an organisation does because those people will always join where that power is. Also any failure blamed on gov/public sector tends to result in more scrutiny and that means another body/department to push more paper. And they need managers.

"I've already been very clear that I don't support extreme Socialism."

All socialism is extreme except the new version which will work. That again is consistent. And as I mentioned, Corbyn is offering the same. It has been tried, it has never worked... but it will this time because the others were extreme. Honest.

"rather than sitting on assets and concentrating wealth at the very top"

Ah. The extreme socialism. Rob from the rich, give to the needy. Take a wee percentage but I'm not greedy (Shrek had that perfect). Venezuela is now far more equal. Oddly the poor countries are pretty much all that way. Not so much the rich. Greece became more equal after the EU crushed it. Not what I would want to live in however. We have checks and balances. To think we dont is also extreme.

"All the previous housing bubbles in the 70s, 80s and 90s corrected naturally within a few years."

Thats not much of a history. in the past 100 yrs there has been an equivalent crash in the 1930's but the way we handled it this time has been better than last time. By doing the things your arguing against.

"The whole thing is so fragile it wouldn't take much to get it to correct back to a real fair market value"

Now this is dangerous talk. Fair means nothing. Fair is a bad word because it can mean anything and so means nothing. The values currently are the actual real market value. If you want it lower you have to do the proven things to reduce it. 2 ways to achieve this- 1. the country is recovering (increased inflation) which means increased base rate which slows the housing market. 2. make building houses cheaper!

"And yet stopping a housing bust is something Nu Labour and the Tories have been desperately trying to do for years - with exactly the consequences you have just stated above."

Yup. Governments forget they are not the ultimate power. Boom and bust cannot be legislated away. Corbyn most certainly wont have that power also.

"I want increased civil liberties for the individual and ideally a good environment for small businesses"

Everyone wants more liberties. And they are a cost. That isnt a bad thing, we just need to understand it needs to be paid for and that cost is unavoidable. Otherwise everyone will be worse off because of ill thought out good intentions.

"In the current situation big business has almost become its own wing of the government, such is their lobbying power and financial clout."

Absolutely. A big government that is so large as to be unmanageable and then we are shocked that people with the resources have influence.

"Good question. Blair, Brown, Cameron and May's extreme brands of Neo-Liberalism aren't working."

Neo-Liberalism seems to be a fancy swear word which has come to mean 'things I dont like'. Not accusing you of using it that way but I would like a clarification on your meaning of it. As for Neo-Liberalism it has been the one time in history to have a serious impact on the reduction of absolute poverty with the possibility of actually eliminating it within our lifetime. It has brought wealth and prosperity to where poverty now means 'they have more than me' or shortened to 'inequality'. And the success is visible in how we got through this recession especially when compared to the previous comparable recession. The EU (eurozone) gave a good example of getting it wrong but not as devastating as the 1930's.

"Let's learn from our mistakes and give JC a chance to fix this mess."

What you seem to be classing as mistakes is success. We dont want that fixed. There is plenty wrong but Corbyn isnt offering solutions to real problems. JC may have good intentions, but lets not mistake that for wisdom. If you need surgery do you want someone with good intentions or someone who had learned from history (a surgeon)? When it comes to mental health should we go to well meaning exorcists or people who have learned from history? Anyone can offer something different, and most people are well meaning. That doesnt mean they have a good idea or even a clue as to why it is wrong. But they will be certain it will work this time (see religious believers selling everything and waiting up a hill to be saved).

0
0
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: The last general election results ...

@ acid andy

"Yes, they're getting them, but they're taking many years."

Part of this is trying to get it past the EU rules. If it takes so long to make changes then people cant be blaming the tories and instead blame the coalition, the coalition cant be blamed it was labour etc.

"Even if I'm wrong, if we have a recession, to many that would still be a price worth paying in the short term to restore our public services and support network back to their former glory for the longer term."

What former glory? Blackouts and British rail? Underinvestment in water and sewage, BT. Unions on strike. The NHS nearly went under when it was created due to its expense. Begging to the IMF.

"In the last recession no such improvements took place"

In what way? The last recession is compared to the 1930's recession which we didnt repeat in this country nor did the US and the EU nearly did which is why Greece had to rely on private companies freely giving drugs for cancer patients to have any healthcare at all. Saying a recession is worth it to "restore our public services" (I assume you mean spending even more, a failed concept even under the last labour gov) is poor management. The services are there for those on hard times, pushing more into hard times to spend more on that support network is chicken and egg to misery.

"The problem I have is that there really is no status quo"

Very true. We have seen under 13 yrs of labour what more money into the public sector and expanding it rapidly has done. Here we are complaining about those services. Reducing the state reduces the burden on the economy and it is the private economy that pays for the state. I want more money for the public services but I think it should come from slimming the public sector and having a large enough private sector to pay for it.

"From what I understand their policies were arguably too extreme, poorly implemented and they were too reliant on oil wealth"

Socialism will work this time, all the other times they did it wrong. Thats a lot of failures and almost no successes in that tally. The only successful socialist country is N Korea. Against all odds they have survived this long. Granted the rest of the world has to provide aid or their people die but the gov controlled economy exists unopposed by its people. I dont like that model if I am honest.

"Apparently they were also dealing with a lack of housing supply"

Amusingly they had a lack of toilet paper supply! This was achieved by setting the price of toilet paper to below manufacturing costs! And people have been arrested for making cakes because bread is price controlled and deemed necessary while cakes are not and so can be sold to cover the costs.

"If rent controls can deflate the monstrous housing bubble then I say bring it on!"

It cant. History is not on his side again.

"Regarding people's QE, I'm not even sure what you're talking about but if it's something that would get just a bit of the wealth back to the middle and working classes then maybe it's something worth considering."

Literally printing money to push into the economy at governments whim without any bond backing. Again no it wont work, it will not give you more value (paper yes not value) see Venezuela.

"Your assumption is they will implement far left socialism and you look to other attempts at that for your examples of failure."

Yes I look at the implementation of the proposed solutions and base my belief on their failure on the fact that they have failed consistently wherever applied.

"My own expectation and hope is rather that they will restore the climate in this country back a bit more to how it was towards the end of the last century before the madness of the housing and credit bubbles"

So heading towards the 1930's crash. You cannot stop boom and bust, it is part of the business cycle. In fact the more you restrain it the harder life becomes for all and less money for those lovely social services you want.

"I would argue train prices must be pretty inelastic because there's something of a captive market. When you travel by train in this country you typically do it because you can't find another viable option"

Totally agree. So where are the additional tracks to cope with the increased demand? That is not in private hands, that can be resolved right now by the gov planning and placing new tracks. Where is it? Why is the gov (not private companies) not dealing with it? You say the private sector is motivated by profit... yes. So place more tracks and there will be more capacity and the prices will fall. If the gov takes over the trains it will still not have more track to deal with capacity.

"Perhaps because the current government are not interested in investing wealth in improving public services?"

Yes yes yes and yes but remove current. HS2 is a shiny toy they can offer like the millennium dome, garden bridge and other ideas they can flash. HS2 is a huge cost to the tax payer for something that doesnt even sound like it will work. And you want more government? Government is doing this.

"Corbyn on the other hand comes across as genuinely saying what he believes and wanting to actually help people"

I wouldnt be shocked if he believes he is trying to do good. I am sure many a mad man have the same beliefs. But believing exorcism helps mental patients or prayer heals cancer or that this brand of socialism will succeed where all others have failed is belief. When we look at facts, experimentation, history we should be able to learn from our mistakes. So why repeat what we know doesnt work?

0
0
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: The last general election results ...

@AC

"Seeing as most of the manifesto pledges in the last Labour manifesto were taken from Scandinavia where they have been successfully implemented, then perhaps "failed" is not quite the right word."

Nope failed was the right word. Homogeneous populations, smaller governments with taxation and services being more local and privatised healthcare (and so on). Does that sound like Corbyn? The places that have tried Corbyns way dont turn out very well.

"As opposed to the Tory manifesto that was effectively ripped up the day after the election."

Yup. Knowing Corbyn is a terrible idea doesnt mean thinking the Tories are good. And as my point was originally that there are plenty authoritarian choices but few going the other way

0
0
codejunky
Silver badge

Re: The last general election results ...

@ acid andy

"Corbyn is sensible enough to implement only incremental change. It won't trash the economy or the country."

That sounds like a lot of hope. So he wont try to make the changes within the 5 years he is in power if he was to be elected? As for trash the economy- Venezuela.

"He only wants to raise corporation tax very slightly for example back to what it was just a few years ago."

That all? No peoples quantitative easing? No rent controls? No building trident to please the unions but not arm it to please his followers? No nationalising?

"Their manifesto has been fully costed"

Their 'ideas' have also been tried and failed. The outcome being fairly well known.

"British Rail had its faults but our trains can't get much worse than they are now. Extremely overpriced, dirty, cramped and unreliable."

Yes they can, they could be in government hands. Why do they cost so much for dirty, cramped and unreliable? Because people will pay for it. There is a fixed amount of track and the state of the track is not in private hands so why is the gov not adding more track and maintaining it better? Why do public services tend to be accused of underinvestment when it is run by the utopia of big gov? Because the gov wants voters which means big and shiny (think of any of those projects?), things that can be seen. Maintenance is low on that list.

0
1

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018