Given that facebook operate their own editorial control..
(For example removing pictures of breast feeding mothers)
... how can they not be regarded as publishers?
1183 posts • joined 17 Jul 2007
(For example removing pictures of breast feeding mothers)
... how can they not be regarded as publishers?
They could release only OS X server for 3rd party hardware.
They could give it a big price tag, and a caveat that it was used either in supported VMs or certified hardware, if you want support.
That wouldn't hit their main market, and price would not be a problem for the target market.
The only concession they should give is to provide a separate unencrypted channel, to send messages if the main secure channel is blocked, but making it completely clear that the channel in use is insecure.
Damn, beat me to it.
I don't see that.
Once the British influence is gone (basically America by proxy, w.r.t Russia) it is advantageous to have a reasonably powerful EU as an ally.
He would be more worried about a broken EU and an Islamic State resurgence.
I believe that is a negotiating ploy, however I do believe that the provision of services will not be separated from freedom of movement.
Goods can be dealt with by the customs union, that would suit the EU, we are a service economy. It would also make the Irish Border our problem only. (Control of EEA citizens crossing).
Bank Passporting, I'm sure they would sell us that because it would avoid a huge budget hole. Though I guess the politically acceptable figures will not match for both sides, so will probably be a non-starter.
If they give us services without freedom of movement and a Norway style contribution, it would undermine the whole EU.
The loss of the ability to sell services (or more likely the loss of the actual companies) will be what cripples us.
I disagree. It pre-dates the EU. It is only for people, not goods and services. EU countries are responsible for their own immigration policies for non EEA citizens.
What has to end in the event of a hard brexit is the open border. It will have to be similar to travelling to and from the Schengen Zone is at present.
This would seem to be much the same as the control system at the height of the troubles.
Not a good situation.
What planet are you on?
They don't want to throw us out.
We are going to leave.
They don't want us to go.
They will offer half measures, but only ones that are consistent with what other EFTA and Customs Union members have.
They will offer us continuing membership of the customs union, (Turkey style)
They will offer us continuing EEA membership (or something equivalent) based on Norway's arrangement.
The may even offer us bank passporting for a figure based on the difference between Norway and Switzerland's contributions.
But unless our government actively seeks these out at the outset, then businesses will assume a hard brexit and start relocating all the non-UK EEA work to an area that will remain in it. (In fact some already have.)
Given our economy has spent the last 30 - 40 years becoming a service industry for the single market, this will hurt. Badly. (In effect we are self inflicting a trade embargo, because outside the single market, many services are impossible. The trade embargo with Russia hit it far harder than they are prepared to admit. Russia is far bigger than us. And they would not have businesses leaving to keep their customers, so they still retained the resources).
All the EU has to do is make reasonable offers and keep rejecting our unreasonable demands, and we are stuffed good and proper.
The only hope is that all this hard brexit nonsense is just a ploy to appease the UKIP voters and will be dropped once A50 is started.
Why do you think the Common Travel Area that includes Ireland and the UK will have to end? It already includes territories that are not in the EU.
Who was talking about it ending? And the problem is about the borders no who is allowed to cross them.
Currently the CTA is effectively like the Schengen zone. Because all the area within in it are members of the customs union and they share area entry policies.
If the UK leaves the Customs union and the single market, then the border will have to become a customs border. Otherwise it is a back door in and out of the single market. (No control of people, but control of what they bring with them, back to how it was in the time of the troubles, basically)
If the UK ends freedom of movement. It will have to become a border controlling people. Because EU nationals will require a visa to enter the UK, (or at the very least to be recorded).
If it isn't then the whole concept of 'controlling our borders' becomes complete nonsense, because that is the only border we don't control.
In which case why are we decimating our economy by leaving the single market?
Being concerned doesn't stop it being ill-considered. (e.g. People who don't vaccinate their children don't actually want them to come to harm, it is just ill-considered.)
I don't have a problem with that viewpoint. Basically a soft brexit. No disasters, socially or economically.
However the issue I do have is the gullibility believing what we would get is anything like that.
Currently to join you have to be a member of the EU or EFTA.
However, we are already a member of it, and we are bigger than the EFTA. Therefore there is no reason if the EU wanted to, we couldn't be a member, even if EFTA didn't want us dominating it.
The EU would bend over backwards to keep us in the EEA, providing we don't insist on a deal that makes the other deals look bad. (However we will, and we'll end up in the WTO, with half our industry moved out of the country and the other half owned by other countries.)
Er no. Was it written on a big red bus?
How dumb would that be?
There is an EFTA court to deal with the non EU countries.
They really don't have to do that.
They can simply offer similar existing arrangements with other non EU countries (EEA, customs union) and let us reject them, knowing that pretty much anything else will be impossible to negotiate in the time frame. (Look at the Swiss bespoke deal, for time scale).
We will punish ourselves.
I believe we will be offered the option of remaining in the customs union. (Like Turkey).
I also believe we will be offered the option of EEA membership (maybe even standalone).
When we reject EEA membership, I suspect they might look at the arrangements Norway (EEA) and Switzerland (effectively EEA without banking and will a lower cost) have.
By looking at the difference, (Both have freedom of movement, and Norway pays twice as much per head) it could be possible to come up with a value for the banking.
That would give a fee for the banking of somewhere in the region of half net our per head contribution, and no freedom of movement. Of course this would have to become a possibility pretty early on, or the banks would a;ready have left.
But, I reckon we will be leaving with no deal, because of our intransigence, rather than the EU's.
If they achieve independence before and the UK breaks up, while still in the EU, they can't be chucked out of it, unless the whole UK were. And if that were the case why is anyone bothering with article 50?
Politically, even if it were the case that if part of a country becomes independent to remain a member and gets chucked out while the part that wants to leave remains a member, that would be so ridiculous that if the EU didn't work around it so that Scotland in effect never stopped being a member, it would lose its credibility.
Also you would have the interesting possibility that if NI and Scotland both voted for independence, England and Wales could quit the UK, leaving it still a member of the EU and get out without Article 50.
The vote actually asked about the EU, but the single market is larger than that, The EU plus the EFTA (whose members except Switzerland, that has its own weird arrangement are all members of the EEA).
The Conservative manifesto has a big commitment to the single market, which seems to have been forgotten, and also promised to honour the ADVISORY referendum (which they have remembered).
We could leave the EU and remain in the EEA (and customs union) with none of the problems anyone is worried about. If we seek to do that the EU will bend over backwards to make it happen within the 2 years.
However that would not please any of the hard right and Mrs May wants their votes back, so we are going to have a hard Brexit which will cause all the issues you highlight and more.
If the UK does break up, which a hard Brexit would seem to ensure, then there will be no UK (unless Scotland NI and Gibraltar stay together and keep the title) and England and Wales will simply become Britain (Great Britain means the whole island, Britain when not used as an abbreviation for GB means England and Wales.)
Sliver lining - finding the right name in drop down boxes will be so much easier.
Effectively you are correct.
However technically, all the nations could unanimously vote to extend the deadline.
(Obviously it would be about the same odds as a wheelbarrow full of frogs staying put on a hot day.)
If they are hellbent on doing a hard brexit, as the rhetoric would imply, this makes things even more interesting.
The Techxodus will keep a lot of contractors busy, but during the same two years, new government systems will be essential for the new situation.
The low pound and the short term nature of their right to stay will put off EU contractors. And after the actual exit, if the EU makes it easy for UK techies to work in the EU, or the destination of the Techxodus is Eire, then it is possible that the reduced need for tech will be offset by a loss of bodies abroad.
There are three ways I can see Brexit being a success for Britain.
1. The decimation plus of our economy, ignites the British spirit and we get ourselves to new levels that we would not have otherwise achieved. Like the numerous motivation stories you see of someone who faces adversity through a loss of a limb, and fights back against it and becomes a bigger success than before. (Though I don't recall any of these stories featuring someone who deliberately cut of a limb.)
2. Enough of the World believes Mrs May's Wizard of Oz style bluster, and invests that it eventually becomes true.
3. Brexit triggers a chain reaction resulting in the end of the EU, resulting in a weak Europe (politically and economically) dominated by the superpowers. We would only be a success relative to Europe in this scenario. (Not compared to our pre referendum situation).
But what I expect to happen is a Techxit. Apparently something like 40% of the largest multinationals EEA HQs are here. they will have to relocate leaving something about 15% of the size to manage the UK. (Though of course the other 60% will need to create UK HQs, it is still a big net loss.)
It wouldn't surprise me if Ireland did well out of this.(They already have some friendly tax laws) Companies moving to the replublic would be able to retain their UK staff and their EU staff. It might even make sense to have the UK office in Northern Ireland for ease. And if somehow the Irish border remains open (as Mrs May seems to want*) then it would be even easier.
*I'm not sure how this would be possible.
If we leave the customs union. The EU could not allow it, because it would be a backdoor into the free market (smugglers paradise) If we have left the EEA because of control-our-borders how can you not have a hard border between where EEA citizens can legally be and the UK? Unless you put the hard border round Great Britain, and give NI some sort of special half in half out status. (Which of course the Scots would also want, which would then mean there would be the same problem on the England Scotland border.
Interesting time. But loads of work for IT contractors and removals companies. then I guess contract work in Dublin after it has happened. (Unless the EU does offer this associate citizenship deal.)
To be fair these people are migrants, come over live on the cheap and work hard for a few months and go home with what after exchange rates is a decent wad. Cutting them out will mean the slack is taken up by immigrants from outside the EU. Immigrants stay put.
To be fair they didn't.
That is simply the motivation of those who hold the key to the marginals at the next election, hence May's hard brexit and Corbyn enabling it.
Wrong sort of civil
It was uncivil letters that that made me decide not to every get a TV licence again. (Though I suspect I would have dropped it eventually anyway).
When the post office stopped selling licences, it became tricky to buy a monochrome licence. I tried several Paypoints (or whatever they are) and none could sell me a replacement. I was working away from home at the time and realised I didn't actually need one legally, the TV (b & w portable) was laying on its side unplugged and had been for months. (I was happy enough to pay because I used iPlayer a little, but certainly not enough to justify a colour licence).
I didn't bother renewing, and got a load of letters basically accusing me of being a criminal, they went in the bin, and I gave the TV to my parents for their caravan.
Had they sent a polite letter, I would have replied explaining the situation and asking where to buy a mono TV licence.
If anyone ever comes round (that was quite a few years ago, and I have heard nothing, the letters dried up after a couple of years). Then if they are civil, then I will explain the situation, but probably not let them in (unless the house actually happened to be tidy), if not they will get told to leave with no information.
The licence used to be a tax on reception of broadcasts. (Streaming live counting as the same.)
Now it also is required for catch up iPlayer, that has broken that logical model.
Ideally we would have a Sky style subscription for the BBC.
However, since this would require a huge re-investment in equipment, this is not feasible just like that.
In the interim (which would realistically have to be at least a decade).
Streaming of non-BBC live TV should not require a licence - (simple to implement)
Any new broadcast tech, (e.g 4K) from the BBC would be encrypted and require activation with a TV licence.
(Any equipment that was only capable of the new system would not need a TV licence to use, except for BBC. Obviously, most kit would still be capable of the current system, so this would be a niche.)
The unencrypted BBC service would be switched off after 20 years maximum and the TV licence would be replaced by subscription. With reviews for 10 years and 15 years,
However whatever happens, streaming non BBC TV live should not require a licence.
And if the dev work is contract work and the contracts are for 2 years, then Brexit won't have happened until they are over.
When they say "sex once a week" are they counting climaxes or sessions?
Because someone could easily be well safe or well at risk depending on which they mean.
Does it prevent you updating old lines of code rather than adding new ones?
Certainly a better idea than his wall and muslim ban.
Sky held onto a number that had been family's since the late 80's. And I had paid to move in the the late 90's. Fortunately, it was not important enough to make a fuss about. (Other than any time someone asks for a recommendation for Sky or not).
Talktalk lost a business number that had a pedigree back to at least the 60s. (I can remember it being a 4 digit number, and I have seen adverts with a previous number with the same last 3 digits.)
I'm not sure how the USA as a mainly service economy like our own could actually help.
It seems likely that all the businesses that rely on being inside the EEA will relocate so they remain within the EEA. We will be left with empty buildings and unemployed people.
The best we can hope for is for our current arrangements with America not to be victims of the America First policy.
I suspect Trump will simply come here for an ego trip, and we'll have to suck up to him to avoid losing our American trade. He knows this, and if May wants to walk away from our trade with Europe, she'll have to do it.
Personally I hope the petition gets big enough to make him have a hissy fit and cancel himself. Perhaps may will them rethink this insane hard brexit.
They will need to separate their UK and EU businesses.
You can't have your EU HQ and data centres outside the EU/EEA.
Those with EU HQs outside the UK are likely to set up UK offices, which will offset the downsizing of those with HQs currently here. Though I suspect we are going to lose far more than we gain.
But the comment was about confidence.
There are basically 4 choices that will be made.
Do we leave the EU?
Since this question was actually asked, we probably ought to, especially given the behaviour immediately after. I think the EU would actually be better of without us.
Do we leave the EEA?
While it is still undetermined if quitting the EU would automatically eject us from the EEA (since we would no longer be a member of either of the bodies whose membership required to join), it is highly unlikely the EU would not make it easy to carry on, it is not in their interests force us out. Leaving this is what will cause economic and social problems. (Our service and financial sectors would be hit hard)
Do we leave the customs union?
Remaining in this would prevent our manufacturing industries taking a hit, and mean that hard borders would not be required between Northern Ireland and the Republic.
Does the UK break up?
By choosing to interpret the arguments made in the referendum, rather than simply acting on the question asked, the government has set a precedent that undermines the validity of the Scottish independence referendum. the question of Scotland being thrown out of the EU on leaving the UK was a strong argument to remain in the UK. This needs to be settled.
The Good Friday peace agreement depends on freedom of movement for people and goods. An open border between a part of the EU and the UK makes a mockery of any claims to 'control our borders' and being outside the customs union and the EEA would make it impossible anyway.
Since yes to any but the first of those will decimate our economy and split our society, and they are all seeming likely, confidence is hit. (Value of the pound being a good indicator, but I suspect there's quite a buffer of 'they can't be mad enough to actually do it' which will dissipate once we actually do)
I spent far more post vote than I would otherwise have in the first three months, basically, because I knew the risk that the government would interpret the vote for their own ends rather than as any expression of what people actually voted for, and that those consequences would be very serious a couple of years down the line, and I wanted to enjoy myself while I had the chance.
Since then I have been in spending lock down.
I suspect the results are a mix of people behaving like me and those who are oblivious to the fact that we are terminating our largest sectors access to their largest markets, and relying on someone who has stated America First to rescue us.
Personally I don't expect the economy to crash until we are actually out. Anything with a return of investment of under two year will carry on. Anything with one of 3 years will be speeded up. Once article 50 is implemented in the self destructive way that has been promised, there will be lots of work moving businesses. (Big EU HQs and data centres moving to the EU and little UK replacements being set up) EU businesses will stock up on inventory from the UK as much as they can before the red tape hits. EU tourists will take advantage of the final 2 years of simple visits.
It might even be a boom. That would make the shock of what follows even worse.
It is worth noting the Russia has been hit quite hard by the EU sanctions, and they are much larger than us. Chunks of our service and financial sectors will be effectively in an equivalent situation. (And what's the betting the sanctions get lifted just as we leave, so the EU doesn't suffer by us being harder to trade with?)
Arm was well prior to Trumpageeddon.
Or am I just more aware of it?
Because it requires a supported smartphone.
Whatsapp has the same issue. (especially since they announced they were dropping support for most of the phones my closest contacts use.)
I have moved to Telegram, because that can be installed on a tablet or PC too.
(I have also resurrected my old ICQ account, to regain a chat system with the old mobiles. ICQ has been seriously upgraded, now using Telegram style authentication, but old accounts still work with old clients and can be upgraded to new style accounts without losing that compatibility.)
The devaluation in sterling, red tape and decimation of the UK economy will be far bigger problems than import duties.
I think they will ease out the sanctions against Russia to take up the slack, they already got free trade with Canada.
Actually, Wales was only a smidgen over the National vote, hardly overwhelming.
The only overwhelming result would be England, if you exclude London.
If they didn't want it to happen, it is easy to turn around.
It was a no lose gamble.
They would have been happy with the reverse result, which would give them more power in Europe, all the time they were in control of the UK.
However this result allows them to remove all the individual and environment protections that come from Europe. replace generally liberal europeans with conservative non-europeans. It guarantees them the next election. And if they lose Scotland and NI, then they could be in power for the forseeable future.
If it wasn't what they wanted they could turn it around easily. Second referendum with proper questions. Or simply just leave the EU and nothing else. (This would lose them prestige on the world stage though.)
But they want a hard brexit. This will have the added benefit of punishing those who voted against the EU as a protest, meaning they will be less likely to bother again.
EEA members have to be signed up to it.
Of the EU. By under 2%. Nothing else was asked.
This is purely being done for political benefit.
There is no democratic mandate other than to leave only the EU.
Of course the aim could be to punish the protest voters who allegedly swung the vote.
And my household's too.
No TV licence. No iPlayer app installed. No Live streaming.
Netflix, ITVPlayer, 4oD (or whatever the current brand is, some very good stuff on there - Humans) My5 (There's usually one series worth following), plus flixster for UV.
$20 to add networking.
Easy for desktops. Reasonably easy for laptops. Tablets do-able. Phones - not really.
I was being facetious.
I could just as easily (and probably more accurately) say that they left all this stuff until we voted to leave because they were sick of our privileged position negotiated by Mrs Thatcher, our constant sabotage of legislation to protect individuals and the environment, our pushing of business interests of the US (TTIP) and China (no blocks on cheap steel) ahead of Europe's, our constant whining that we have it so bad and it's all so unfair, our blaming every mistake our own government makes on them and generally not being a team player, and wanted to encourage us to leave.
and they start fixing all the stupid crap.
Thanks EU, couldn't you have started that a year or two ago?
But Brexit means Brexit.
Either the patent is for something that doesn't work or the lawyers have a good point. Apple are quite happy to install tech that prevents piracy and even people using apps they don't approve, but not something that saves lives.
The obvious way for authorities to disable or access telegram is via the telco.
Intercept the SMS for the number. Register an account (out of hours so the notification isn't noticed immediately, copy everything and delete any notifications. (This wouldn't give secret messages or any that have been deleted.)
You could log out other phones, or close the account.
Similar should apply for any system reliant of SMS or phone messages.
Or at least it will be when it is finished. (Or would have been.)
It is still missing features I used at lot on the old BB system. (Though they have implemented many of the omissions that seriously annoyed me when I first bought my device).
I think the lack of compatibility with the old BlackBerry servers was a seriously bad move. (And the lack of compatibility for old apps too)
They really should have made the first few generations of BB10 devices dual boot with the old BB system.
I have bought Apps for BB6, playbook and apps and movies for BB10. (I also did for symbian).
I'm not buying into a new BB platform again (or Nokia for that matter). I don't see myself bothering with a new smartphone. I have an Android 10" tablet (which works as a phone too). If I ever need a personal pocket sized phone, then I will probably either go for a dumb phone, or an old BB or Nokia with a qwerty.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017