"Make designing special-purpose hardware as easy as writing software"
Patch Tuesday for hardware.
16427 posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
[robots] that replace people, whose income is taxed – can themselves be taxed, so that governments can redistribute the money to its unemployed citizens, thus giving them a basic income...
First of all, businesses don't exist to pay tax, it being just another expense. They will twist and turn to avoid it, basing themselves in the Seychelles, the Cayman Isles, Panama and any other nation-state where such onerous and unwanted taxes are not raised."
Where the person being replaced is being replaced outside of the country it doesn't really matter whether it's a robot or an outsourced human worker doing the replacement from the tax point of view. For some tasks external replacement wouldn't be possible anyway - the
robot barista vending machine needs to be in reach of the customer. If its work is to be taxed it can be taxed at its location.
But the line of argument in the article seems to assume corporation tax. Where multinationals are concerned corporation tax always favours small countries with a small local tax base. They can attract what are effectively accommodation addresses by offering competitive tax rates that bring in much greater receipts than could be achieved by the most swingeing rates on local businesses - and the local businesses then have the additional advantages of paying low rates themselves.
If corporation tax is failing the objectives of most countries then maybe the time has come to look at an alternative or at least a partial replacement. Tax all money, credit or other proxy for money, leaving the country. That way it gets taxed before it reaches the tax haven. It also replaces import duties as the money leaving the country to pay for the imports is what gets taxed.
"As a born and bred country bumpkin, still resident in my ancestral village, I'm finding it increasingly difficult to snaffle up the pure unadulterated air of yore"
Would that "air of yore" be the the coal smoke that followed on from the introduction of the railways? Because before that it was all wood fires unless you had turbary rights.
BTW I too live in my native village. I quite like the wood smoke from my neighbour's wood-burner.
"What is it 741 people do exactly?"
1. Contingency planning Department
2. Data and Research Department
4. Purchasing Department
5. Technical Department
6. Building Department
Minister, we don't measure our success by results, but by activity. and the activity is considerable. And productive. These 500 people are seriously overworked - the full establishment should be 650.
"I think I should admire all involved here as they've stood by their principles instead of accepting roles as Cabinet Ministers (along with the extra money) in a coalition they have no real faith in."
Alternative view: they have been elected to govern and they're not doing it. Do they get money for not doing what they were elected to do?
"Now, this gentleman from the government would like to speak to regarding your future career."
Which department? Given that he's just a skiddie he has very little skill to offer. On second thoughts he sounds just right for GDS, Universal Credit and quite a few other projects.
Unfortunately, I wasn't properly awake, and instead of quizzing "Mike" immediately about the DHCP problem to try and string the call out for the sake of the less technically aware among us
Hmmm. The current problem should give the stringing along a whole new dimension. "No, you can't connect to my PC, I can't get it connected to the internet."
"The only people worse off are the Irish, who get the same shafting while these multinationals bum off their lower corporation tax as a gateway into Europe."
Not that one again? Ireland sets its corporation tax for the best outcome for Ireland. Low corporation tax strategy is one the works for countries with a relatively small local tax base. It brings in far more tax overall than a high tax strategy would and means that the local tax base is at a competitive advantage by sharing the low tax rates.
"It's a legal argument, some people who think they're smarter than they are think that invoking article 50 is the job of parliament because it affects people's rights."
It's the job of Parliament because Parliament is sovereign. We've been working on that one for over a third of a millennium.
And we don't have a definitive answer yet because HMG appealed the high court decision and we don't yet have the supreme court's verdict.
"Yes, because after six months of Remainers predicting catastrophe their beds, there is no buyer's remorse. We are leaving the EU. People are pleased to be taking back control, even it is less than they might ideally want."
You seem to have a very poor understanding of the time scales at work here. We're in what might be termed the phony war period.
In case you haven't noticed we still don't have a definitive answer to the constitutional way to invoke Article 50. Amazingly the Leavers don't even seem to have thought about that essential preliminary. It doesn't bode well for the rest of their planning.
Apart from that we're just seeing the obvious financial penalty of a devalued pound; it'll be some time before the inflationary effects of that work through. We're quite some way from finding what sort of pig is in the poke the Leavers have contrived to but for us.
"And a General Election would wipe out the Remain parties: Labour and LibDem."
Let's look at the timing. May plans to invoke Article 50 next year. It all becomes effective in 2019. By the time the next election is due there'll have been a year's experience. If it's been a hard Brexit we'll see corporations who have set up EU operations here starting to move them back into the EU and people will be losing their jobs*. If it's been a soft Brexit it will be becoming apparent that things are much as they were - still in the customs union, still with freedom of movement, still subject to the EU regulations etc, still paying something into the EU but with significantly less control. As the consequences start to dawn on the electorate I think it will be the Leave parties that get wiped out.
*Yes, I know you're about to tell us about all the world-wide trade deals. Even if there are any of these that don't involve shafting us they'll be some way from delivering any visible benefits.
"The British voter looked at Europe, saw it was a massive mess, saw that it was impossible to get a better deal for the UK, and voted for sovereignty.
This was a rational decision that prices in the uncertainty and short-term pain."
Do you really believe that that (a) most of the Leave voters priced in anything - which in some cases may well prove to be their jobs - and (b) the result of a long term change will be short-term?
"Do you mind sharing how you recovered 97%?"
I used photorec to help a cousin out. The particular ransomware involved wrote an encrypted file & just deleted the old one. That leaves the data sitting on disk ready to be recovered providing nothing else writes over it. That's the proviso - something, maybe the ransomware whilst writing out another encryption, may have written over some of the files. There was also a load of stuff not recovering - stacks of buttons, logos & what not from the browser cache. In the end it made sense to simply chop all the really tiny files rather than waste the user's time going through them. There's also the possibility that the recovery software might simply not be able to recognise some file formats.
"Because it would be monumentally stupid."
Indeed. But it would be a good idea to punish businesses who persist in training their customers to do just that.
Only a few days ago yet another spam arrived from my bank warning customers about how not to get caught by frauds. At least it purports to be from the bank. It's actually from a
marketing spamming company. It has several links on which customers are invited to click. At least this time they've improved things so that the links are to a server in the bank's domain. Further examination shows that in fact the links actually resolve to a server controlled by the marketing spamming company. The only things that indicate that the bank is actually behind it is that it was addressed to an email alias that was only given to the bank and that the bank employs idiots a marketing department.
"Fear of getting caught deters crime."
Back in the day I handled 2 cases involving the same individual who clearly had some prior form. The first one was a break-in. He accepted that he'd forced an entry but insisted that he didn't actually go inside the premises because at the last moment he realised that if he did it would be actual gaol this time round. The evidence, however, said he did enter. Whilst on remand, and putting off the case in order to get a more lenient judge IIRC he got involved in a gang rape. Whatever the sentence on his original break-in it would now be dwarfed. What his actual sentences were I don't know because I would usually give my evidence & then leave so I'd seldom hear the verdicts. But that was one lad who the leniency conveyor belt delivered right into serious crime and multi-year sentences.
"Vindictive justice at its best."
Vindictive? What part of deterrent did you not understand?
Every day the local paper reports the court appearances of habitual criminals who've been given lots of chances which amount to warnings, suspended sentences etc. so they see no real penalty for themselves or for their peers who are committing the same crimes with the same results. There's no deterrence. By the time they get their first custodial sentences their criminal careers are well established.
A few real penalties, well publicised, might deter their peers and ultimately prevent more lives being ruined by being gradually sucked in.
"Whether they take any notice is somewhat up to people like the Reg readership - there won't be, for instance, a security quality star rating system, unless there's a widespread call for it."
If it was up to the Reg readership there'd be no warrantless spying, no talk about back-doors only accessible to the good guys and a load of other crap.
The really depressing thing is that this is probably the right response. The sort of people who make the decisions to use this sort of software who hear about it aren't going to understand that shooting the messenger is a bad alternative to accepting the message and fixing the problem; in fact, they'd probably do the same thing themselves. And if it keeps the rest of the potential users from hearing about the problem it's served its purpose.
'She said while Brexit might solve the issue of the disallowance fines from Europe, the more immediate problem of farmers "is down to the British government" and its failure to implement a fit-for-purpose IT system.'
I thought one of the facets of Brexit was that we'd be out of the CAP, farmers won't get any more payments, they won't be able to recruit cheap foreign migrant labour* and will go out of business so the IT system for paying them simply won't be needed.
*They might be able to recruit UK migrant labour when all those businesses established here as an EU base for non-EU corporations close down.
"how do you handle companies where two John Smiths work?"
In the original scheme it appeared that naming was somewhat informal allowing scope for ad hoc decisions to resolve problems. If you set up a prescriptive scheme such as that proposed you need to build in a means of ensuring* uniqueness. In another post someone suggested adding x, y or z as dummy initials to a first/last initial scheme; works well right up until you've allocated jxs and then John Xavier Smith joins the company. Essentially it means something along the lines of adding a few digits so that your two John Smiths, or indeed Jane and John Smith, can be handled as smithj01 and smithj02.
*To some degree of statistical acceptability. The example above fails if the company is so big there's a realistic chance of 100 or more smithjnn names being generated in which case you need more digits.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019