Are they, once again, behind the curve? My car has a wireless charging cradle and we have one in the living room and bedroom because it will do my wife’s Samsung and my iPhone. They’re now spreading in public.
I am totally in favour of standardisation. This helps.
Next step, power outlets - total nonsense.
Type J is genius
Is that really Switzerland, Liechtenstein and….. Rwanda?
Britain’s is the most satisfying to plug in. It feels the safest. You can also fInd it in curious old corners of the Empire, not just the ones given, eg I have found it widespread in Sri Lanka and India, and in odd parts of S E Asia
British plugs also won 'most painful to stand on' - I feel proud.
Are they, once again, behind the curve? My car has a wireless charging cradle and we have one in the living room and bedroom because it will do my wife’s Samsung and my iPhone. They’re now spreading in public.
I am totally in favour of standardisation. This helps.
As for wireless: it is the regime of witches, who cackle over their cauldrons as they brew their hideous concoctions. Beware the fool who enters their domain ...
(I may just be married to an RF witch...)
maybe so - but increasing numbers of people are so in love with wireless charging, that they are building it into cupboards and kitchen counters.
Would you buy a device for multiple-£100 that had only wireless charging, with no cabled backup for charging or data transfer? Especially if the wireless charging protocols were proprietary?
In your world we're still using USB Micro connectors, though because the innovation that forced USB-C uptake was never worthwhile.
Wireless charging and data transfer is absolutely the future, I can't wait until everything uses it and I can dump the majority of my cables.
Last September when I upgraded my iPhone I transferred half a terabyte of data from my old phone to my new phone in around half an hour.
All I had to do was put the old phone next to the new one and boom!
Today's EU ruling makes me wish I had voted Leave.
My Pixel did that too, it just needed to be next to my old one and it was all done, no cables, no fuss.
Are they, once again, behind the curve? My car has a wireless charging cradle and we have one in the living room and bedroom because it will do my wife’s Samsung and my iPhone. They’re now spreading in public.
I am totally in favour of standardisation. This helps.
Next step, power outlets - total nonsense.
Type J is genius
Is that really Switzerland, Liechtenstein and….. Rwanda?
Britain’s is the most satisfying to plug in. It feels the safest. You can also fInd it in curious old corners of the Empire, not just the ones given, eg I have found it widespread in Sri Lanka and India, and in odd parts of S E Asia
I think it's South Africa, Liberia and Rwanda.
Britain is the most satisfying to plug in, and feels most secure. It also has on/off, which I appreciate.
The US, though, has one advantage. Those prongs can be easily folded inward, allowing for very compact charging bricks that can be tossed in a bag.
And plugs are an area where standards have proved vital. It is just that standards that were national are becoming problematic with increasing international travel.
So a question: what proportion of mains-plug devices are actually used in a country other than the one they are sold in? 1%? 5%?
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
Election Maps suggesting if Redfields red wall polling goes well they are planning blue wall polling too
Redfield a tad you gov in number and volatility of their polls? The problem then is, if you dislike the headline from one of their polls, another headline will soon be along more to your liking.
Opinium have yet to give Lab a lead greater than 4, Lab higher than 38 or Tories lower than 33. It 2 a month, so two similar in a row of movement with opinium would fill me with confidence some movement is happening, starting this Sunday I think.
Redfield havent been ultra volatile until that weird poll a week and a bit ago, i think theres some value in tracking their movement and red/blue wall regular polling would be very useful for spotting opportunitues at constituency level imo as we approach a GE
How about the 4% lead this week with Tories back up to 34? I have half a mind it’s a tad outside.
It’s their Monday one again. Are they using something slightly different between Monday and Thursday?
Its only a 1 point movement on each. If the 'true' lead is, say 6 or 7, id expect polling in the 4 to 10 point lead range with a very occasional outlier 10 to 12 or 2 to 4.
Unless the “out there” has moved from last poll so what looks a MOE 6 to 4 drop is actually more outside MOE sample than it looks.
What I do is not just look at the gap, but the % of party for trend, and the 34 for Tories you would call MOE is outside trend in my book. For example if it should have been 32 not 34, and by Thursday after yesterday it is 30, they will show headline grabbing -4 drop - Which isn’t really a minus 4 drop just like it wasn’t a +5 rise? I see what you mean, so I only 25% don’t really trust their polls, but do you see what I mean not trusting them the full 100% anymore?
Well that really depends on the trend elsewhere surely? I nean we have that 11% Comres and we ought to see tonight or tomorrow a new one from them to see if it was a blip or a trend. Everyone else is pretty much unmoved lately. 34 isnt far enough from what everyone else shows or from Redfields own track to stand out. Yet.
Edit - its also very possible to get a short term firming up from the 30% left who still vote Boris as best PM or 'still an asset' as a reaction to the negatives which pulls things up temporarily. He is not yet universally loathed and much of the Tory decline is lack of certainty rather than switchers so a 'screw you, im voting boris if youre trying to oust him' reaction from them is possible i suppose
At least This is proper PB conversation Wooly. 👍🏻 What a flat day after hopeful PMcide last night!
My mood is below basement. However i shall throw myself into the loving arms of data crunching and obscure constituency analysis pending the restart of fat beast hunting.
Plus some nonsense to delight and enrage in unequal measure.
I’m not against constituency polls. There needs to be a few in same place not just one though for confidence in them, like trackers.
There was yellow wall constituency polls for 2015 election that told us exactly what’s about to happen BUT Paddy still was going to eat his hat rather than believe them 🤦♀️
In the US, I saw that Milo Yiannopoulos is now working as an intern for Marjorie Taylor Greene.
That's right: the alt right "commentator" who got into trouble for saying paedophilia was ok, is not working for someone who believes senior Democrats run a paedophile ring.
I'm amazed more isn't made of the longeat serving GOP hoise
Are they, once again, behind the curve? My car has a wireless charging cradle and we have one in the living room and bedroom because it will do my wife’s Samsung and my iPhone. They’re now spreading in public.
I am totally in favour of standardisation. This helps.
As for wireless: it is the regime of witches, who cackle over their cauldrons as they brew their hideous concoctions. Beware the fool who enters their domain ...
(I may just be married to an RF witch...)
maybe so - but increasing numbers of people are so in love with wireless charging, that they are building it into cupboards and kitchen counters.
Would you buy a device for multiple-£100 that had only wireless charging, with no cabled backup for charging or data transfer? Especially if the wireless charging protocols were proprietary?
In your world we're still using USB Micro connectors, though because the innovation that forced USB-C uptake was never worthwhile.
Wireless charging and data transfer is absolutely the future, I can't wait until everything uses it and I can dump the majority of my cables.
That's not 'my world'.
And as you well know, 'wireless charging and data transfer' depends on standards. If everyone creates devices that work with the same standards as everyone else, that's fine. If people go down their own routes and so not support standards, that's a problem.
Standards can also evolve and grow. You can have your own standard, as long as you fully support the same standards everyone else does. And who knows, if your own is better, and your licences are fine, it may become the basis of a new standard.
The Internet has not stagnated because of standards. People support the standards (cough Microsoft IE... (*)) and build upon them.
(*) Though AIUI that is more complex then people think.
But how does a company move to a new port that isn't USB-C without taking their device off the shelves in the EU?
I think USB-C is a great standard, yet I also know it's got a limited shelf life, one day it will be replaced at which point it's no longer up to companies, but a bureaucratic body who have to approve it. That is absolutely going to slow down the pace of innovation. Simply, in Apple's place I'd tell the EU to go and get fucked and enlist the US government to fight my corner.
You are using a medium that is 100% based on those 'bureaucratic bodies' to allow communication. Imagine if MS had got the US government to fight its corner over the MSH walled garden. Or France over Mintel.
That's your world.
No because I'm not saying that Apple should ask that Lightning become the only available connection, just that the open market remains. People who buy iPhones know what they are getting and still buy them, that's it.
But it increases the walled garden. And that's what I'm against - particularly given Apple's historic hideous licensing charges. And this matters with things like cars.
Are they, once again, behind the curve? My car has a wireless charging cradle and we have one in the living room and bedroom because it will do my wife’s Samsung and my iPhone. They’re now spreading in public.
I am totally in favour of standardisation. This helps.
As for wireless: it is the regime of witches, who cackle over their cauldrons as they brew their hideous concoctions. Beware the fool who enters their domain ...
(I may just be married to an RF witch...)
maybe so - but increasing numbers of people are so in love with wireless charging, that they are building it into cupboards and kitchen counters.
Would you buy a device for multiple-£100 that had only wireless charging, with no cabled backup for charging or data transfer? Especially if the wireless charging protocols were proprietary?
What I would do and the rest of the world would do is often not a matching set.
Plenty of people will buy wireless charging only products. I don't see many dying in a ditch for a charging port, to be honest.
My guess is that Apple will go down this road fairly soon.
As long as they support open standards, that's fine; it's the market.
If their charging is proprietary, they can FOAD.
Standards matter. After all, we're communicating via standards.
That is true but not mandated standards. Ethernet, wifi, token ring, Decnet (ask your granny about the last two) co-existed. VHS conquered Betamax without the EU getting involved, and now we use neither (hat-tip The Saj).
One of my dad's fitters had a Betamax player. He was pi**ed off that his purchase proved to be a dead-end after a couple of years.
You might want to look at the success of Nokia and Vodafone (amongst others) due to the EU setting aside frequencies for mobile standards in the 1980s. Compared to the US's three competing mobile standards. It's a big reason why those two companies became international behemoths in the 1990s.
Standards matter. They do not need to be generationally stagnant.
Yes: standardisation in Europe around GSM, around 900 and 1800 MHz was a massive boon for Nokia, Ericsson and European mobile operators. The US, by contrast, had a patchwork of CDMA, TDMA and GSM, and numerous different frequencies. That patchwork is almost certainly why telecoms equipment is one of the few tech areas where European companies remain globally competitive. (And by contrast, other than a tiny presence by Qualcomm, the US has no notable wireless telecoms equipment vendors.)
I suspect that the claim that HYUFD is paid to post here is absolute garbage.
I'm not a fan of his politics but he's a political hobbyist and indeed is a very community-minded nice bloke in real life.
The idea that he is some sort of Central Office asset trying to influence a load of gastronomically ignorant, undersexed middle-aged trainspotters on PB is ludicrous.
How very dare you. I'm not that bothered about trains.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Nothing creepy about that post, the little un can be proud of his big un. Huzzah.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
I suspect that the claim that HYUFD is paid to post here is absolute garbage.
I'm not a fan of his politics but he's a political hobbyist and indeed is a very community-minded nice bloke in real life.
The idea that he is some sort of Central Office asset trying to influence a load of gastronomically ignorant, undersexed middle-aged trainspotters on PB is ludicrous.
How very dare you. I'm not that bothered about trains.
Alas, I am not even sure I classify as middle-aged any more. What is the definition?
PS See from a quick Google it is 45-65, so I still squeak in.
Are they, once again, behind the curve? My car has a wireless charging cradle and we have one in the living room and bedroom because it will do my wife’s Samsung and my iPhone. They’re now spreading in public.
I am totally in favour of standardisation. This helps.
Next step, power outlets - total nonsense.
Type J is genius
Is that really Switzerland, Liechtenstein and….. Rwanda?
Britain’s is the most satisfying to plug in. It feels the safest. You can also fInd it in curious old corners of the Empire, not just the ones given, eg I have found it widespread in Sri Lanka and India, and in odd parts of S E Asia
I think it's South Africa, Liberia and Rwanda.
Britain is the most satisfying to plug in, and feels most secure. It also has on/off, which I appreciate.
The US, though, has one advantage. Those prongs can be easily folded inward, allowing for very compact charging bricks that can be tossed in a bag.
An advantage of the Aussie one is that it frequently doesn't have/need the earth and so you'll often get plugs without the earth and its very obviously visible which way around it goes when two-pronged.
European and American ones aren't as immediately obvious.
Election Maps suggesting if Redfields red wall polling goes well they are planning blue wall polling too
Redfield a tad you gov in number and volatility of their polls? The problem then is, if you dislike the headline from one of their polls, another headline will soon be along more to your liking.
Opinium have yet to give Lab a lead greater than 4, Lab higher than 38 or Tories lower than 33. It 2 a month, so two similar in a row of movement with opinium would fill me with confidence some movement is happening, starting this Sunday I think.
Redfield havent been ultra volatile until that weird poll a week and a bit ago, i think theres some value in tracking their movement and red/blue wall regular polling would be very useful for spotting opportunitues at constituency level imo as we approach a GE
How about the 4% lead this week with Tories back up to 34? I have half a mind it’s a tad outside.
It’s their Monday one again. Are they using something slightly different between Monday and Thursday?
Its only a 1 point movement on each. If the 'true' lead is, say 6 or 7, id expect polling in the 4 to 10 point lead range with a very occasional outlier 10 to 12 or 2 to 4.
Unless the “out there” has moved from last poll so what looks a MOE 6 to 4 drop is actually more outside MOE sample than it looks.
What I do is not just look at the gap, but the % of party for trend, and the 34 for Tories you would call MOE is outside trend in my book. For example if it should have been 32 not 34, and by Thursday after yesterday it is 30, they will show headline grabbing -4 drop - Which isn’t really a minus 4 drop just like it wasn’t a +5 rise? I see what you mean, so I only 25% don’t really trust their polls, but do you see what I mean not trusting them the full 100% anymore?
Well that really depends on the trend elsewhere surely? I nean we have that 11% Comres and we ought to see tonight or tomorrow a new one from them to see if it was a blip or a trend. Everyone else is pretty much unmoved lately. 34 isnt far enough from what everyone else shows or from Redfields own track to stand out. Yet.
Edit - its also very possible to get a short term firming up from the 30% left who still vote Boris as best PM or 'still an asset' as a reaction to the negatives which pulls things up temporarily. He is not yet universally loathed and much of the Tory decline is lack of certainty rather than switchers so a 'screw you, im voting boris if youre trying to oust him' reaction from them is possible i suppose
At least This is proper PB conversation Wooly. 👍🏻 What a flat day after hopeful PMcide last night!
My mood is below basement. However i shall throw myself into the loving arms of data crunching and obscure constituency analysis pending the restart of fat beast hunting.
Plus some nonsense to delight and enrage in unequal measure.
I’m not against constituency polls. There needs to be a few in same place not just one though for confidence in them, like trackers.
There was yellow wall constituency polls for 2015 election that told us exactly what’s about to happen BUT Paddy still was going to eat his hat rather than believe them 🤦♀️
Rather than polls i prefer just surfing results and looking for oddities or stick outs that might be an opportunity or just a curio.
"Just a few weeks after one of its MPs was forced to quit for watching porn in the Commons, the Tory party now resembles a blue-on-blue movie...the current orgy of division and dysfunction is more about snark than sex – but it’s still X-rated to watch."
Are they, once again, behind the curve? My car has a wireless charging cradle and we have one in the living room and bedroom because it will do my wife’s Samsung and my iPhone. They’re now spreading in public.
I am totally in favour of standardisation. This helps.
Next step, power outlets - total nonsense.
Type J is genius
Is that really Switzerland, Liechtenstein and….. Rwanda?
Britain’s is the most satisfying to plug in. It feels the safest. You can also fInd it in curious old corners of the Empire, not just the ones given, eg I have found it widespread in Sri Lanka and India, and in odd parts of S E Asia
I think it's South Africa, Liberia and Rwanda.
Britain is the most satisfying to plug in, and feels most secure. It also has on/off, which I appreciate.
The US, though, has one advantage. Those prongs can be easily folded inward, allowing for very compact charging bricks that can be tossed in a bag.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Nothing creepy about that post, the little un can be proud of his big un. Huzzah.
Given you wrote a post implying I was a negligent dad the other week, I might politely ask you stop this slightly weird obsession with me. And when have I ever said 'big 'un'?
If my writing "little 'un" in respect to my son triggers you, I might suggest the problem is with you, not me. And especially as I did not even say that in any of these posts.
"Just a few weeks after one of its MPs was forced to quit for watching porn in the Commons, the Tory party now resembles a blue-on-blue movie...the current orgy of division and dysfunction is more about snark than sex – but it’s still X-rated to watch."
I suspect that the claim that HYUFD is paid to post here is absolute garbage.
I'm not a fan of his politics but he's a political hobbyist and indeed is a very community-minded nice bloke in real life.
The idea that he is some sort of Central Office asset trying to influence a load of gastronomically ignorant, undersexed middle-aged trainspotters on PB is ludicrous.
How very dare you. I'm not that bothered about trains.
Alas, I am not even sure I classify as middle-aged any more. What is the definition?
PS See from a quick Google it is 45-65, so I still squeak in.
Are they, once again, behind the curve? My car has a wireless charging cradle and we have one in the living room and bedroom because it will do my wife’s Samsung and my iPhone. They’re now spreading in public.
I am totally in favour of standardisation. This helps.
As for wireless: it is the regime of witches, who cackle over their cauldrons as they brew their hideous concoctions. Beware the fool who enters their domain ...
(I may just be married to an RF witch...)
maybe so - but increasing numbers of people are so in love with wireless charging, that they are building it into cupboards and kitchen counters.
Would you buy a device for multiple-£100 that had only wireless charging, with no cabled backup for charging or data transfer? Especially if the wireless charging protocols were proprietary?
In your world we're still using USB Micro connectors, though because the innovation that forced USB-C uptake was never worthwhile.
Wireless charging and data transfer is absolutely the future, I can't wait until everything uses it and I can dump the majority of my cables.
That's not 'my world'.
And as you well know, 'wireless charging and data transfer' depends on standards. If everyone creates devices that work with the same standards as everyone else, that's fine. If people go down their own routes and so not support standards, that's a problem.
Standards can also evolve and grow. You can have your own standard, as long as you fully support the same standards everyone else does. And who knows, if your own is better, and your licences are fine, it may become the basis of a new standard.
The Internet has not stagnated because of standards. People support the standards (cough Microsoft IE... (*)) and build upon them.
(*) Though AIUI that is more complex then people think.
But how does a company move to a new port that isn't USB-C without taking their device off the shelves in the EU?
I think USB-C is a great standard, yet I also know it's got a limited shelf life, one day it will be replaced at which point it's no longer up to companies, but a bureaucratic body who have to approve it. That is absolutely going to slow down the pace of innovation. Simply, in Apple's place I'd tell the EU to go and get fucked and enlist the US government to fight my corner.
You are using a medium that is 100% based on those 'bureaucratic bodies' to allow communication. Imagine if MS had got the US government to fight its corner over the MSH walled garden. Or France over Mintel.
That's your world.
No because I'm not saying that Apple should ask that Lightning become the only available connection, just that the open market remains. People who buy iPhones know what they are getting and still buy them, that's it.
But it increases the walled garden. And that's what I'm against - particularly given Apple's historic hideous licensing charges. And this matters with things like cars.
How does it? It's a completely open market, companies and individuals are free to choose whatever they want to do. You, by closing out all options than USB-C are creating a gigantic walled garden.
Standardisation by market participation and participants is no issue and I might remind you that Apple were one of the original founders of the USB-C standard and it is used across a huge number of their products.
The issue I have and you seem to be completely ignoring is that this previously open market that voluntarily adopted USB-C is now being forced to keep it. Just be glad that the EU didn't do this during the USB Micro era because we'd all be stuck with that.
Your desire to hate on Apple is blinding you to the actual creation of a walled garden which is going to stifle innovation within the tech sector. Worse is that the EU is going to expand this "successful" idea to other sectors so suddenly we end up with stuff like NVME and CF Express never being invented because eSATA and microSD were "good enough".
It's such a backwards decision and one I have come to expect from a backwards organisation like the EU.
Are they, once again, behind the curve? My car has a wireless charging cradle and we have one in the living room and bedroom because it will do my wife’s Samsung and my iPhone. They’re now spreading in public.
I am totally in favour of standardisation. This helps.
As for wireless: it is the regime of witches, who cackle over their cauldrons as they brew their hideous concoctions. Beware the fool who enters their domain ...
(I may just be married to an RF witch...)
maybe so - but increasing numbers of people are so in love with wireless charging, that they are building it into cupboards and kitchen counters.
Would you buy a device for multiple-£100 that had only wireless charging, with no cabled backup for charging or data transfer? Especially if the wireless charging protocols were proprietary?
In your world we're still using USB Micro connectors, though because the innovation that forced USB-C uptake was never worthwhile.
Wireless charging and data transfer is absolutely the future, I can't wait until everything uses it and I can dump the majority of my cables.
That's not 'my world'.
And as you well know, 'wireless charging and data transfer' depends on standards. If everyone creates devices that work with the same standards as everyone else, that's fine. If people go down their own routes and so not support standards, that's a problem.
Standards can also evolve and grow. You can have your own standard, as long as you fully support the same standards everyone else does. And who knows, if your own is better, and your licences are fine, it may become the basis of a new standard.
The Internet has not stagnated because of standards. People support the standards (cough Microsoft IE... (*)) and build upon them.
(*) Though AIUI that is more complex then people think.
But how does a company move to a new port that isn't USB-C without taking their device off the shelves in the EU?
I think USB-C is a great standard, yet I also know it's got a limited shelf life, one day it will be replaced at which point it's no longer up to companies, but a bureaucratic body who have to approve it. That is absolutely going to slow down the pace of innovation. Simply, in Apple's place I'd tell the EU to go and get fucked and enlist the US government to fight my corner.
You are using a medium that is 100% based on those 'bureaucratic bodies' to allow communication. Imagine if MS had got the US government to fight its corner over the MSH walled garden. Or France over Mintel.
That's your world.
No because I'm not saying that Apple should ask that Lightning become the only available connection, just that the open market remains. People who buy iPhones know what they are getting and still buy them, that's it.
But it increases the walled garden. And that's what I'm against - particularly given Apple's historic hideous licensing charges. And this matters with things like cars.
As an aside, the EU mandating a common electric vehicle charging spec is almost certainly a positive too. The US has a bloody awful patchwork of different networks and connectors, even though (eventually) everyone bar Tesla is going with J1772/CCS.
The question, though, is how you maintain innovation, while at the same time encouraging standardisation.
Another thing to remember about standardisation - whether of plugs, wireless standards or whatever - is that it usually comes with a easy licensing on terms that are Fair, Reasonable and Non Discriminatory. It will therefore tend to encourage new market entrants, who might otherwise be shut out, as with Lightning, by patents.
I suspect that the claim that HYUFD is paid to post here is absolute garbage.
I'm not a fan of his politics but he's a political hobbyist and indeed is a very community-minded nice bloke in real life.
The idea that he is some sort of Central Office asset trying to influence a load of gastronomically ignorant, undersexed middle-aged trainspotters on PB is ludicrous.
How very dare you. I'm not that bothered about trains.
Alas, I am not even sure I classify as middle-aged any more. What is the definition?
PS See from a quick Google it is 45-65, so I still squeak in.
It is also impossible to argue that "it doesn't cost me anything". It makes my shopping more expensive. Unless they are literally taking it out of their profits. Which they aren't.
The incremental gross profit contribution is expected to be positive even after the cost of the promotion. So it’s not making your shopping more expensive
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
Are they, once again, behind the curve? My car has a wireless charging cradle and we have one in the living room and bedroom because it will do my wife’s Samsung and my iPhone. They’re now spreading in public.
I am totally in favour of standardisation. This helps.
As for wireless: it is the regime of witches, who cackle over their cauldrons as they brew their hideous concoctions. Beware the fool who enters their domain ...
(I may just be married to an RF witch...)
maybe so - but increasing numbers of people are so in love with wireless charging, that they are building it into cupboards and kitchen counters.
Would you buy a device for multiple-£100 that had only wireless charging, with no cabled backup for charging or data transfer? Especially if the wireless charging protocols were proprietary?
In your world we're still using USB Micro connectors, though because the innovation that forced USB-C uptake was never worthwhile.
Wireless charging and data transfer is absolutely the future, I can't wait until everything uses it and I can dump the majority of my cables.
That's not 'my world'.
And as you well know, 'wireless charging and data transfer' depends on standards. If everyone creates devices that work with the same standards as everyone else, that's fine. If people go down their own routes and so not support standards, that's a problem.
Standards can also evolve and grow. You can have your own standard, as long as you fully support the same standards everyone else does. And who knows, if your own is better, and your licences are fine, it may become the basis of a new standard.
The Internet has not stagnated because of standards. People support the standards (cough Microsoft IE... (*)) and build upon them.
(*) Though AIUI that is more complex then people think.
But how does a company move to a new port that isn't USB-C without taking their device off the shelves in the EU?
I think USB-C is a great standard, yet I also know it's got a limited shelf life, one day it will be replaced at which point it's no longer up to companies, but a bureaucratic body who have to approve it. That is absolutely going to slow down the pace of innovation. Simply, in Apple's place I'd tell the EU to go and get fucked and enlist the US government to fight my corner.
You are using a medium that is 100% based on those 'bureaucratic bodies' to allow communication. Imagine if MS had got the US government to fight its corner over the MSH walled garden. Or France over Mintel.
That's your world.
No because I'm not saying that Apple should ask that Lightning become the only available connection, just that the open market remains. People who buy iPhones know what they are getting and still buy them, that's it.
But it increases the walled garden. And that's what I'm against - particularly given Apple's historic hideous licensing charges. And this matters with things like cars.
How does it? It's a completely open market, companies and individuals are free to choose whatever they want to do. You, by closing out all options than USB-C are creating a gigantic walled garden.
Standardisation by market participation and participants is no issue and I might remind you that Apple were one of the original founders of the USB-C standard and it is used across a huge number of their products.
The issue I have and you seem to be completely ignoring is that this previously open market that voluntarily adopted USB-C is now being forced to keep it.
Just be glad that the EU didn't do this during the USB Micro era because we'd all be stuck with that.
You're desire to hate on Apple is blinding you to the actual creation of a walled garden which is going to stifle innovation within the tech sector. Worse is that the EU is going to expand this "successful" idea to other sectors so suddenly we end up with stuff like NVME and CF Express never being invented because eSATA and microSD were "good enough".
It's such a backwards decision and one I have come to expect from a backwards organisation like the EU.
FRAND:
Anyone can produce a USB C charger and license the relevant patents.
Not everyone (in fact very few people can given Apple's licensing policies) produce a Lightning charging cable.
The question is: which serves consumers more, competition around providers or competition around standards?
I would also note that connectors - like power - have always been a special case, with standards enforced by BSO/ISO/etc.
I suspect that the claim that HYUFD is paid to post here is absolute garbage.
I'm not a fan of his politics but he's a political hobbyist and indeed is a very community-minded nice bloke in real life.
The idea that he is some sort of Central Office asset trying to influence a load of gastronomically ignorant, undersexed middle-aged trainspotters on PB is ludicrous.
How very dare you. I'm not that bothered about trains.
Alas, I am not even sure I classify as middle-aged any more. What is the definition?
PS See from a quick Google it is 45-65, so I still squeak in.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
So I was right, You are a beta cuck house-husband, and your wife was out being pleasured by the alpha male as you fed softened rusks to the bairns
Well done, once again. Are you sure they’re yours?
As an aside, does the EU legislation specifically reference USB C, or does it reference standards produced by ANSI/AEC in respect to the USB Implementers Forum?
If the latter, then presumably the approved plug/socket will change as and when the industry evolves.
Are they, once again, behind the curve? My car has a wireless charging cradle and we have one in the living room and bedroom because it will do my wife’s Samsung and my iPhone. They’re now spreading in public.
I am totally in favour of standardisation. This helps.
As for wireless: it is the regime of witches, who cackle over their cauldrons as they brew their hideous concoctions. Beware the fool who enters their domain ...
(I may just be married to an RF witch...)
maybe so - but increasing numbers of people are so in love with wireless charging, that they are building it into cupboards and kitchen counters.
Would you buy a device for multiple-£100 that had only wireless charging, with no cabled backup for charging or data transfer? Especially if the wireless charging protocols were proprietary?
In your world we're still using USB Micro connectors, though because the innovation that forced USB-C uptake was never worthwhile.
Wireless charging and data transfer is absolutely the future, I can't wait until everything uses it and I can dump the majority of my cables.
Last September when I upgraded my iPhone I transferred half a terabyte of data from my old phone to my new phone in around half an hour.
All I had to do was put the old phone next to the new one and boom!
Today's EU ruling makes me wish I had voted Leave.
My Pixel did that too, it just needed to be next to my old one and it was all done, no cables, no fuss.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
Are they, once again, behind the curve? My car has a wireless charging cradle and we have one in the living room and bedroom because it will do my wife’s Samsung and my iPhone. They’re now spreading in public.
I am totally in favour of standardisation. This helps.
As for wireless: it is the regime of witches, who cackle over their cauldrons as they brew their hideous concoctions. Beware the fool who enters their domain ...
(I may just be married to an RF witch...)
maybe so - but increasing numbers of people are so in love with wireless charging, that they are building it into cupboards and kitchen counters.
Would you buy a device for multiple-£100 that had only wireless charging, with no cabled backup for charging or data transfer? Especially if the wireless charging protocols were proprietary?
In your world we're still using USB Micro connectors, though because the innovation that forced USB-C uptake was never worthwhile.
Wireless charging and data transfer is absolutely the future, I can't wait until everything uses it and I can dump the majority of my cables.
That's not 'my world'.
And as you well know, 'wireless charging and data transfer' depends on standards. If everyone creates devices that work with the same standards as everyone else, that's fine. If people go down their own routes and so not support standards, that's a problem.
Standards can also evolve and grow. You can have your own standard, as long as you fully support the same standards everyone else does. And who knows, if your own is better, and your licences are fine, it may become the basis of a new standard.
The Internet has not stagnated because of standards. People support the standards (cough Microsoft IE... (*)) and build upon them.
(*) Though AIUI that is more complex then people think.
But how does a company move to a new port that isn't USB-C without taking their device off the shelves in the EU?
I think USB-C is a great standard, yet I also know it's got a limited shelf life, one day it will be replaced at which point it's no longer up to companies, but a bureaucratic body who have to approve it. That is absolutely going to slow down the pace of innovation. Simply, in Apple's place I'd tell the EU to go and get fucked and enlist the US government to fight my corner.
You are using a medium that is 100% based on those 'bureaucratic bodies' to allow communication. Imagine if MS had got the US government to fight its corner over the MSH walled garden. Or France over Mintel.
That's your world.
No because I'm not saying that Apple should ask that Lightning become the only available connection, just that the open market remains. People who buy iPhones know what they are getting and still buy them, that's it.
But it increases the walled garden. And that's what I'm against - particularly given Apple's historic hideous licensing charges. And this matters with things like cars.
How does it? It's a completely open market, companies and individuals are free to choose whatever they want to do. You, by closing out all options than USB-C are creating a gigantic walled garden.
Standardisation by market participation and participants is no issue and I might remind you that Apple were one of the original founders of the USB-C standard and it is used across a huge number of their products.
The issue I have and you seem to be completely ignoring is that this previously open market that voluntarily adopted USB-C is now being forced to keep it.
Just be glad that the EU didn't do this during the USB Micro era because we'd all be stuck with that.
You're desire to hate on Apple is blinding you to the actual creation of a walled garden which is going to stifle innovation within the tech sector. Worse is that the EU is going to expand this "successful" idea to other sectors so suddenly we end up with stuff like NVME and CF Express never being invented because eSATA and microSD were "good enough".
It's such a backwards decision and one I have come to expect from a backwards organisation like the EU.
FRAND:
Anyone can produce a USB C charger and license the relevant patents.
Not everyone (in fact very few people can given Apple's licensing policies) produce a Lightning charging cable.
The question is: which serves consumers more, competition around providers or competition around standards?
I would also note that connectors - like power - have always been a special case, with standards enforced by BSO/ISO/etc.
The point is that it's an open market, no one is forcing us to buy iPhones, if someone doesn't like using the Lightning connector then they can go and buy a Pixel or Samsung.
It's also worth noting that a lot of the innovations that Apple made in Lightning were used as a basis for USB-C and Apple are part of the consortium that launched USB-C. In many ways USB-C is a descendant of Lightning as much as USB Micro.
In the end, it just smacks of solving a problem that doesn't exist.
Are they, once again, behind the curve? My car has a wireless charging cradle and we have one in the living room and bedroom because it will do my wife’s Samsung and my iPhone. They’re now spreading in public.
I am totally in favour of standardisation. This helps.
As for wireless: it is the regime of witches, who cackle over their cauldrons as they brew their hideous concoctions. Beware the fool who enters their domain ...
(I may just be married to an RF witch...)
maybe so - but increasing numbers of people are so in love with wireless charging, that they are building it into cupboards and kitchen counters.
Would you buy a device for multiple-£100 that had only wireless charging, with no cabled backup for charging or data transfer? Especially if the wireless charging protocols were proprietary?
In your world we're still using USB Micro connectors, though because the innovation that forced USB-C uptake was never worthwhile.
Wireless charging and data transfer is absolutely the future, I can't wait until everything uses it and I can dump the majority of my cables.
That's not 'my world'.
And as you well know, 'wireless charging and data transfer' depends on standards. If everyone creates devices that work with the same standards as everyone else, that's fine. If people go down their own routes and so not support standards, that's a problem.
Standards can also evolve and grow. You can have your own standard, as long as you fully support the same standards everyone else does. And who knows, if your own is better, and your licences are fine, it may become the basis of a new standard.
The Internet has not stagnated because of standards. People support the standards (cough Microsoft IE... (*)) and build upon them.
(*) Though AIUI that is more complex then people think.
But how does a company move to a new port that isn't USB-C without taking their device off the shelves in the EU?
I think USB-C is a great standard, yet I also know it's got a limited shelf life, one day it will be replaced at which point it's no longer up to companies, but a bureaucratic body who have to approve it. That is absolutely going to slow down the pace of innovation. Simply, in Apple's place I'd tell the EU to go and get fucked and enlist the US government to fight my corner.
You are using a medium that is 100% based on those 'bureaucratic bodies' to allow communication. Imagine if MS had got the US government to fight its corner over the MSH walled garden. Or France over Mintel.
That's your world.
No because I'm not saying that Apple should ask that Lightning become the only available connection, just that the open market remains. People who buy iPhones know what they are getting and still buy them, that's it.
But it increases the walled garden. And that's what I'm against - particularly given Apple's historic hideous licensing charges. And this matters with things like cars.
As an aside, the EU mandating a common electric vehicle charging spec is almost certainly a positive too. The US has a bloody awful patchwork of different networks and connectors, even though (eventually) everyone bar Tesla is going with J1772/CCS.
The question, though, is how you maintain innovation, while at the same time encouraging standardisation.
Another thing to remember about standardisation - whether of plugs, wireless standards or whatever - is that it usually comes with a easy licensing on terms that are Fair, Reasonable and Non Discriminatory. It will therefore tend to encourage new market entrants, who might otherwise be shut out, as with Lightning, by patents.
This highlights an issue: software is easy to change; hardware less so. It is (relatively) easy to adapt a software protocol to do something different, but much harder to adapt hardware. Yet hardware is vital - we cannot always be wireless.
Ethernet connectors were first standardised in the ?early 1980s?, and although it is seen less by consumers, is still widely used. I don't see ethernet as having stifled innovation - in fact, I'd argue it has accelerated innovation. It was a catalyst for the wider Internet.
I once saw figures for Apple's pricing for Firewire in cars. It was eye-boggingly expensive (I won't mention, as I can't fully remember). I believe they've reduced it since, but licensing costs can be an evil.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
One reason I'm pro WFH is my children.
In my final year at Crossrail, during 2019, I didn't see her awake at all during the week as I had to get up early for a long commute before she woke, and then I got back well after she'd gone to bed. She could barely recognise me at the weekend.
That all changed during lockdown, and we are now very close, so I have no desire to go back to that.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
I agree that babies are hard work.
Yeah. The chair I had to sit in whilst Mrs J was in labour for many hours was really uncomfortable. I suffered.
I suspect that the claim that HYUFD is paid to post here is absolute garbage.
I'm not a fan of his politics but he's a political hobbyist and indeed is a very community-minded nice bloke in real life.
The idea that he is some sort of Central Office asset trying to influence a load of gastronomically ignorant, undersexed middle-aged trainspotters on PB is ludicrous.
How very dare you. I'm not that bothered about trains.
Alas, I am not even sure I classify as middle-aged any more. What is the definition?
PS See from a quick Google it is 45-65, so I still squeak in.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
I agree that babies are hard work.
Yeah. The chair I had to sit in whilst Mrs J was in labour for many hours was really uncomfortable. I suffered.
Congratulatory cigar can be tough on the lungs too, so I understand.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
So I was right, You are a beta cuck house-husband, and your wife was out being pleasured by the alpha male as you fed softened rusks to the bairns
Well done, once again. Are you sure they’re yours?
Yeah, pretty sure. And as Mrs J works with engineers, there're few 'alpha-males' about.
Can you say the same? And how many other mini-Sean's are running about from your purchased relationships?
Are they, once again, behind the curve? My car has a wireless charging cradle and we have one in the living room and bedroom because it will do my wife’s Samsung and my iPhone. They’re now spreading in public.
I am totally in favour of standardisation. This helps.
As for wireless: it is the regime of witches, who cackle over their cauldrons as they brew their hideous concoctions. Beware the fool who enters their domain ...
(I may just be married to an RF witch...)
maybe so - but increasing numbers of people are so in love with wireless charging, that they are building it into cupboards and kitchen counters.
Would you buy a device for multiple-£100 that had only wireless charging, with no cabled backup for charging or data transfer? Especially if the wireless charging protocols were proprietary?
In your world we're still using USB Micro connectors, though because the innovation that forced USB-C uptake was never worthwhile.
Wireless charging and data transfer is absolutely the future, I can't wait until everything uses it and I can dump the majority of my cables.
That's not 'my world'.
And as you well know, 'wireless charging and data transfer' depends on standards. If everyone creates devices that work with the same standards as everyone else, that's fine. If people go down their own routes and so not support standards, that's a problem.
Standards can also evolve and grow. You can have your own standard, as long as you fully support the same standards everyone else does. And who knows, if your own is better, and your licences are fine, it may become the basis of a new standard.
The Internet has not stagnated because of standards. People support the standards (cough Microsoft IE... (*)) and build upon them.
(*) Though AIUI that is more complex then people think.
But how does a company move to a new port that isn't USB-C without taking their device off the shelves in the EU?
I think USB-C is a great standard, yet I also know it's got a limited shelf life, one day it will be replaced at which point it's no longer up to companies, but a bureaucratic body who have to approve it. That is absolutely going to slow down the pace of innovation. Simply, in Apple's place I'd tell the EU to go and get fucked and enlist the US government to fight my corner.
You are using a medium that is 100% based on those 'bureaucratic bodies' to allow communication. Imagine if MS had got the US government to fight its corner over the MSH walled garden. Or France over Mintel.
That's your world.
No because I'm not saying that Apple should ask that Lightning become the only available connection, just that the open market remains. People who buy iPhones know what they are getting and still buy them, that's it.
But it increases the walled garden. And that's what I'm against - particularly given Apple's historic hideous licensing charges. And this matters with things like cars.
How does it? It's a completely open market, companies and individuals are free to choose whatever they want to do. You, by closing out all options than USB-C are creating a gigantic walled garden.
Standardisation by market participation and participants is no issue and I might remind you that Apple were one of the original founders of the USB-C standard and it is used across a huge number of their products.
The issue I have and you seem to be completely ignoring is that this previously open market that voluntarily adopted USB-C is now being forced to keep it.
Just be glad that the EU didn't do this during the USB Micro era because we'd all be stuck with that.
You're desire to hate on Apple is blinding you to the actual creation of a walled garden which is going to stifle innovation within the tech sector. Worse is that the EU is going to expand this "successful" idea to other sectors so suddenly we end up with stuff like NVME and CF Express never being invented because eSATA and microSD were "good enough".
It's such a backwards decision and one I have come to expect from a backwards organisation like the EU.
FRAND:
Anyone can produce a USB C charger and license the relevant patents.
Not everyone (in fact very few people can given Apple's licensing policies) produce a Lightning charging cable.
The question is: which serves consumers more, competition around providers or competition around standards?
I would also note that connectors - like power - have always been a special case, with standards enforced by BSO/ISO/etc.
The point is that it's an open market, no one is forcing us to buy iPhones, if someone doesn't like using the Lightning connector then they can go and buy a Pixel or Samsung.
It's also worth noting that a lot of the innovations that Apple made in Lightning were used as a basis for USB-C and Apple are part of the consortium that launched USB-C. In many ways USB-C is a descendant of Lightning as much as USB Micro.
In the end, it just smacks of solving a problem that doesn't exist.
AIUI, USB-C introduced four main innovations:
(1) A reversible plug, which was aping Apple's Lightning (2) PD mode, that reflected the fact that people were using this data connection standard to charge devices, and which allowed (3) Same connectors for host and client (4) Flowing from this, a complete rewrite of the underlying networking stack to enable things other than power and data to flow over the cables - such as video
Other than (1) - and Lighting was not the first reversible cable - none of those innovations came from Apple.
In my final year at Crossrail, during 2019, I didn't see her awake at all during the week as I had to get up early for a long commute before she woke, and then I got back well after she'd gone to bed. She could barely recognise me at the weekend.
That all changed during lockdown, and we are now very close, so I have no desire to go back to that.
Testify.
Sadly people like AndyJS and Another Richard don't realise that helps boost our productivity rather than being in the office.
No ball breaking train journeys at 6am help a lot as well.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
I agree that babies are hard work.
Babies are the worst STD.
Life is a 100% fatal sexually-transmitted disease.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
So I was right, You are a beta cuck house-husband, and your wife was out being pleasured by the alpha male as you fed softened rusks to the bairns
Well done, once again. Are you sure they’re yours?
JJ strikes me as someone who is comfortable in his own skin, and perhaps a deal more masculine than those who attempt to wear theirs for all to see. Masculinity is a little like class; if you have to boast of it, you don't have much.
Anyway, how are your fantasies about Tom Daley these days? Is it the speedos that are the cause of your admiration?
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
Well said.
I'm not really sure Leon is joking. I suspect not. The kind of male attitude which is thankfully dying out.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
So I was right, You are a beta cuck house-husband, and your wife was out being pleasured by the alpha male as you fed softened rusks to the bairns
Well done, once again. Are you sure they’re yours?
Yeah, pretty sure. And as Mrs J works with engineers, there're few 'alpha-males' about.
Can you say the same? And how many other mini-Sean's are running about from your purchased relationships?
So your reason for presuming your wife’s fidelity is that there was no one more masculine available than her clearly beta husband. Ie you? So she had no one to tempt her?
That is thin thin ice, my friend
Women find two things primarily attractive: a man who is taller than them. And a man who earns more than them. It is depressingly functionalist but it is also true, all surveys show it, and they show it across societies as well
Are they, once again, behind the curve? My car has a wireless charging cradle and we have one in the living room and bedroom because it will do my wife’s Samsung and my iPhone. They’re now spreading in public.
I am totally in favour of standardisation. This helps.
As for wireless: it is the regime of witches, who cackle over their cauldrons as they brew their hideous concoctions. Beware the fool who enters their domain ...
(I may just be married to an RF witch...)
maybe so - but increasing numbers of people are so in love with wireless charging, that they are building it into cupboards and kitchen counters.
Would you buy a device for multiple-£100 that had only wireless charging, with no cabled backup for charging or data transfer? Especially if the wireless charging protocols were proprietary?
In your world we're still using USB Micro connectors, though because the innovation that forced USB-C uptake was never worthwhile.
Wireless charging and data transfer is absolutely the future, I can't wait until everything uses it and I can dump the majority of my cables.
That's not 'my world'.
And as you well know, 'wireless charging and data transfer' depends on standards. If everyone creates devices that work with the same standards as everyone else, that's fine. If people go down their own routes and so not support standards, that's a problem.
Standards can also evolve and grow. You can have your own standard, as long as you fully support the same standards everyone else does. And who knows, if your own is better, and your licences are fine, it may become the basis of a new standard.
The Internet has not stagnated because of standards. People support the standards (cough Microsoft IE... (*)) and build upon them.
(*) Though AIUI that is more complex then people think.
But how does a company move to a new port that isn't USB-C without taking their device off the shelves in the EU?
I think USB-C is a great standard, yet I also know it's got a limited shelf life, one day it will be replaced at which point it's no longer up to companies, but a bureaucratic body who have to approve it. That is absolutely going to slow down the pace of innovation. Simply, in Apple's place I'd tell the EU to go and get fucked and enlist the US government to fight my corner.
You are using a medium that is 100% based on those 'bureaucratic bodies' to allow communication. Imagine if MS had got the US government to fight its corner over the MSH walled garden. Or France over Mintel.
That's your world.
No because I'm not saying that Apple should ask that Lightning become the only available connection, just that the open market remains. People who buy iPhones know what they are getting and still buy them, that's it.
But it increases the walled garden. And that's what I'm against - particularly given Apple's historic hideous licensing charges. And this matters with things like cars.
How does it? It's a completely open market, companies and individuals are free to choose whatever they want to do. You, by closing out all options than USB-C are creating a gigantic walled garden.
Standardisation by market participation and participants is no issue and I might remind you that Apple were one of the original founders of the USB-C standard and it is used across a huge number of their products.
The issue I have and you seem to be completely ignoring is that this previously open market that voluntarily adopted USB-C is now being forced to keep it.
Just be glad that the EU didn't do this during the USB Micro era because we'd all be stuck with that.
You're desire to hate on Apple is blinding you to the actual creation of a walled garden which is going to stifle innovation within the tech sector. Worse is that the EU is going to expand this "successful" idea to other sectors so suddenly we end up with stuff like NVME and CF Express never being invented because eSATA and microSD were "good enough".
It's such a backwards decision and one I have come to expect from a backwards organisation like the EU.
FRAND:
Anyone can produce a USB C charger and license the relevant patents.
Not everyone (in fact very few people can given Apple's licensing policies) produce a Lightning charging cable.
The question is: which serves consumers more, competition around providers or competition around standards?
I would also note that connectors - like power - have always been a special case, with standards enforced by BSO/ISO/etc.
The point is that it's an open market, no one is forcing us to buy iPhones, if someone doesn't like using the Lightning connector then they can go and buy a Pixel or Samsung.
It's also worth noting that a lot of the innovations that Apple made in Lightning were used as a basis for USB-C and Apple are part of the consortium that launched USB-C. In many ways USB-C is a descendant of Lightning as much as USB Micro.
In the end, it just smacks of solving a problem that doesn't exist.
AIUI, USB-C introduced four main innovations:
(1) A reversible plug, which was aping Apple's Lightning (2) PD mode, that reflected the fact that people were using this data connection standard to charge devices, and which allowed (3) Same connectors for host and client (4) Flowing from this, a complete rewrite of the underlying networking stack to enable things other than power and data to flow over the cables - such as video
Other than (1) - and Lighting was not the first reversible cable - none of those innovations came from Apple.
Thunderbolt is/was an Apple/Intel standard which covers point 2 and 4.
I'm all in favour of consolidation, yet I'm not in favour of some bureaucrat making that decision. Let the market decide.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
One reason I'm pro WFH is my children.
In my final year at Crossrail, during 2019, I didn't see her awake at all during the week as I had to get up early for a long commute before she woke, and then I got back well after she'd gone to bed. She could barely recognise me at the weekend.
That all changed during lockdown, and we are now very close, so I have no desire to go back to that.
WfH is complex, and everyone's experience will be different.
We have two friends who are archaeologists. They have two kids and live in a small house. During Covid, they had to share the kitchen table to work and educate their young kids - whilst not showing data to the others (they worked for different firms). It was a nightmare, and they both returned to their previous working patterns as quickly as possible.
Mrs J worked one day per week from home pre-Covid. At first, full-time WfH worked well as existing projects motored on. After six months WfH started to impact things, as testing and setting up new projects suffered from lack of face-to-face arguments.
Like people with big gardens saying lockdown was good, WfH can vary massively depending on circumstances. For many people it is brilliant; for others in the same roles it can be a bit if a bu**er
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
So I was right, You are a beta cuck house-husband, and your wife was out being pleasured by the alpha male as you fed softened rusks to the bairns
Well done, once again. Are you sure they’re yours?
JJ strikes me as someone who is comfortable in his own skin, and perhaps a deal more masculine than those who attempt to wear theirs for all to see. Masculinity is a little like class; if you have to boast of it, you don't have much.
Anyway, how are your fantasies about Tom Daley these days? Is it the speedos that are the cause of your admiration?
Lol. Are you reduced to “accusing me of being gay”?
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Nothing creepy about that post, the little un can be proud of his big un. Huzzah.
Given you wrote a post implying I was a negligent dad the other week, I might politely ask you stop this slightly weird obsession with me. And when have I ever said 'big 'un'?
If my writing "little 'un" in respect to my son triggers you, I might suggest the problem is with you, not me. And especially as I did not even say that in any of these posts.
Grow up.
Big un was an extrapolation on my part
And I hate to say this and I wouldn't say it to anyone who wasn't such a self righteous prick about ooh look at me I'm a parent, but excuses for having one child and one only, unless they are medical or you have the Chinese government holding a gun to your groin, are thin on the ground. Children need siblings
And btw an apostrophe signifies an omission. Little un, not little 'un, unless the child in question is a little 'un'.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
So I was right, You are a beta cuck house-husband, and your wife was out being pleasured by the alpha male as you fed softened rusks to the bairns
Well done, once again. Are you sure they’re yours?
Yeah, pretty sure. And as Mrs J works with engineers, there're few 'alpha-males' about.
Can you say the same? And how many other mini-Sean's are running about from your purchased relationships?
So your reason for presuming your wife’s fidelity is that there was no one more masculine available than her clearly beta husband. Ie you? So she had no one to tempt her?
That is thin thin ice, my friend
Women find two things primarily attractive: a man who is taller than them. And a man who earns more than them. It is depressingly functionalist but it is also true, all surveys show it, and they show it across societies as well
My reason for 'presuming' my wife's fidelity is that she is a decent person who I trust. That might make me a fool, but I'm fairly sure it doesn't. It's called love and trust.
As for 'beta' husband: that's funny. I ran every day last year, about 2,700 miles. So I can guarantee I can f*** harder and better than you, and without the aid of blue pills.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Nothing creepy about that post, the little un can be proud of his big un. Huzzah.
Given you wrote a post implying I was a negligent dad the other week, I might politely ask you stop this slightly weird obsession with me. And when have I ever said 'big 'un'?
If my writing "little 'un" in respect to my son triggers you, I might suggest the problem is with you, not me. And especially as I did not even say that in any of these posts.
Grow up.
Big un was an extrapolation on my part
And I hate to say this and I wouldn't say it to anyone who wasn't such a self righteous prick about ooh look at me I'm a parent, but excuses for having one child and one only, unless they are medical or you have the Chinese government holding a gun to your groin, are thin on the ground. Children need siblings
And btw an apostrophe signifies an omission. Little un, not little 'un, unless the child in question is a little 'un'.
Oh, whatever. You are boringly stupid and obsessed.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Nothing creepy about that post, the little un can be proud of his big un. Huzzah.
Given you wrote a post implying I was a negligent dad the other week, I might politely ask you stop this slightly weird obsession with me. And when have I ever said 'big 'un'?
If my writing "little 'un" in respect to my son triggers you, I might suggest the problem is with you, not me. And especially as I did not even say that in any of these posts.
Grow up.
And I hate to say this and I wouldn't say it to anyone who wasn't such a self righteous prick about ooh look at me I'm a parent, but excuses for having one child and one only, unless they are medical or you have the Chinese government holding a gun to your groin, are thin on the ground. Children need siblings
Ignoring the personal animosity at play here, that seems like an extraordinarily severe view. It'd be like saying that because a two parent home is in most cases more stable and better for children that it is impossible for children in single parent homes to be well adjusted and successful, which would obviously be nonsense.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
So I was right, You are a beta cuck house-husband, and your wife was out being pleasured by the alpha male as you fed softened rusks to the bairns
Well done, once again. Are you sure they’re yours?
Yeah, pretty sure. And as Mrs J works with engineers, there're few 'alpha-males' about.
Can you say the same? And how many other mini-Sean's are running about from your purchased relationships?
So your reason for presuming your wife’s fidelity is that there was no one more masculine available than her clearly beta husband. Ie you? So she had no one to tempt her?
That is thin thin ice, my friend
Women find two things primarily attractive: a man who is taller than them. And a man who earns more than them. It is depressingly functionalist but it is also true, all surveys show it, and they show it across societies as well
My reason for 'presuming' my wife's fidelity is that she is a decent person who I trust. That might make me a fool, but I'm fairly sure it doesn't. It's called love and trust.
As for 'beta' husband: that's funny. I ran every day last year, about 2,700 miles. So I can guarantee I can f*** harder and better than you, and without the aid of blue pills.
Authentic weirdness. If you cannot tell running from fucking the sparsity of your offspring is explained
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
So I was right, You are a beta cuck house-husband, and your wife was out being pleasured by the alpha male as you fed softened rusks to the bairns
Well done, once again. Are you sure they’re yours?
JJ strikes me as someone who is comfortable in his own skin, and perhaps a deal more masculine than those who attempt to wear theirs for all to see. Masculinity is a little like class; if you have to boast of it, you don't have much.
Anyway, how are your fantasies about Tom Daley these days? Is it the speedos that are the cause of your admiration?
Lol. Are you reduced to “accusing me of being gay”?
HAHAHAHAHAHAH
I recall your numerous comments about him and recognised it as a kind of Freudian revelation of your inner repressed homoerotic fantasies. Your reaction to my inference is possible further evidence. Repressed homosexuality is one of the most common reasons for overt expression of machismo. It doesn't mean you are full on homosexual, just that you might have inner guilt about feelings of attraction when you look at Tom in his speedos. It is perfectly OK, and makes you no less a man, than say, a man that is happy looking after babies.
Are they, once again, behind the curve? My car has a wireless charging cradle and we have one in the living room and bedroom because it will do my wife’s Samsung and my iPhone. They’re now spreading in public.
I am totally in favour of standardisation. This helps.
As for wireless: it is the regime of witches, who cackle over their cauldrons as they brew their hideous concoctions. Beware the fool who enters their domain ...
(I may just be married to an RF witch...)
maybe so - but increasing numbers of people are so in love with wireless charging, that they are building it into cupboards and kitchen counters.
Would you buy a device for multiple-£100 that had only wireless charging, with no cabled backup for charging or data transfer? Especially if the wireless charging protocols were proprietary?
In your world we're still using USB Micro connectors, though because the innovation that forced USB-C uptake was never worthwhile.
Wireless charging and data transfer is absolutely the future, I can't wait until everything uses it and I can dump the majority of my cables.
That's not 'my world'.
And as you well know, 'wireless charging and data transfer' depends on standards. If everyone creates devices that work with the same standards as everyone else, that's fine. If people go down their own routes and so not support standards, that's a problem.
Standards can also evolve and grow. You can have your own standard, as long as you fully support the same standards everyone else does. And who knows, if your own is better, and your licences are fine, it may become the basis of a new standard.
The Internet has not stagnated because of standards. People support the standards (cough Microsoft IE... (*)) and build upon them.
(*) Though AIUI that is more complex then people think.
But how does a company move to a new port that isn't USB-C without taking their device off the shelves in the EU?
I think USB-C is a great standard, yet I also know it's got a limited shelf life, one day it will be replaced at which point it's no longer up to companies, but a bureaucratic body who have to approve it. That is absolutely going to slow down the pace of innovation. Simply, in Apple's place I'd tell the EU to go and get fucked and enlist the US government to fight my corner.
You are using a medium that is 100% based on those 'bureaucratic bodies' to allow communication. Imagine if MS had got the US government to fight its corner over the MSH walled garden. Or France over Mintel.
That's your world.
No because I'm not saying that Apple should ask that Lightning become the only available connection, just that the open market remains. People who buy iPhones know what they are getting and still buy them, that's it.
But it increases the walled garden. And that's what I'm against - particularly given Apple's historic hideous licensing charges. And this matters with things like cars.
How does it? It's a completely open market, companies and individuals are free to choose whatever they want to do. You, by closing out all options than USB-C are creating a gigantic walled garden.
Standardisation by market participation and participants is no issue and I might remind you that Apple were one of the original founders of the USB-C standard and it is used across a huge number of their products.
The issue I have and you seem to be completely ignoring is that this previously open market that voluntarily adopted USB-C is now being forced to keep it.
Just be glad that the EU didn't do this during the USB Micro era because we'd all be stuck with that.
You're desire to hate on Apple is blinding you to the actual creation of a walled garden which is going to stifle innovation within the tech sector. Worse is that the EU is going to expand this "successful" idea to other sectors so suddenly we end up with stuff like NVME and CF Express never being invented because eSATA and microSD were "good enough".
It's such a backwards decision and one I have come to expect from a backwards organisation like the EU.
FRAND:
Anyone can produce a USB C charger and license the relevant patents.
Not everyone (in fact very few people can given Apple's licensing policies) produce a Lightning charging cable.
The question is: which serves consumers more, competition around providers or competition around standards?
I would also note that connectors - like power - have always been a special case, with standards enforced by BSO/ISO/etc.
The point is that it's an open market, no one is forcing us to buy iPhones, if someone doesn't like using the Lightning connector then they can go and buy a Pixel or Samsung.
It's also worth noting that a lot of the innovations that Apple made in Lightning were used as a basis for USB-C and Apple are part of the consortium that launched USB-C. In many ways USB-C is a descendant of Lightning as much as USB Micro.
In the end, it just smacks of solving a problem that doesn't exist.
Its the wrong solution, for the problems of a decade (or two) ago.
Back at the turn of the century where every phone model almost, let alone every phone brand, had its own unique cable that was a right royal pain in the arse. But the market was evolving, the technology rapidly improving, and we've long since slimmed down from a plethora of cables, or every device having its own cable, to USB A then B and now C being the standard because that's what customers have chosen rather than because of decree.
The market has already resolved to use USB C because it works best, apart from exceptions that people can choose not to buy. But if someone were to invent a next generation step forward they should be allowed to innovate with that rather than decreeing we must use the cables of the past.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
So I was right, You are a beta cuck house-husband, and your wife was out being pleasured by the alpha male as you fed softened rusks to the bairns
Well done, once again. Are you sure they’re yours?
Yeah, pretty sure. And as Mrs J works with engineers, there're few 'alpha-males' about.
Can you say the same? And how many other mini-Sean's are running about from your purchased relationships?
So your reason for presuming your wife’s fidelity is that there was no one more masculine available than her clearly beta husband. Ie you? So she had no one to tempt her?
That is thin thin ice, my friend
Women find two things primarily attractive: a man who is taller than them. And a man who earns more than them. It is depressingly functionalist but it is also true, all surveys show it, and they show it across societies as well
My reason for 'presuming' my wife's fidelity is that she is a decent person who I trust. That might make me a fool, but I'm fairly sure it doesn't. It's called love and trust.
As for 'beta' husband: that's funny. I ran every day last year, about 2,700 miles. So I can guarantee I can f*** harder and better than you, and without the aid of blue pills.
“My reason for 'presuming' my wife's fidelity is that she is a decent person who I trust.”
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
So I was right, You are a beta cuck house-husband, and your wife was out being pleasured by the alpha male as you fed softened rusks to the bairns
Well done, once again. Are you sure they’re yours?
JJ strikes me as someone who is comfortable in his own skin, and perhaps a deal more masculine than those who attempt to wear theirs for all to see. Masculinity is a little like class; if you have to boast of it, you don't have much.
Anyway, how are your fantasies about Tom Daley these days? Is it the speedos that are the cause of your admiration?
Lol. Are you reduced to “accusing me of being gay”?
HAHAHAHAHAHAH
I think he may be confusing you with @JohnLoony who is rather fond of Tom Daley. Hard to think why.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
So I was right, You are a beta cuck house-husband, and your wife was out being pleasured by the alpha male as you fed softened rusks to the bairns
Well done, once again. Are you sure they’re yours?
JJ strikes me as someone who is comfortable in his own skin, and perhaps a deal more masculine than those who attempt to wear theirs for all to see. Masculinity is a little like class; if you have to boast of it, you don't have much.
Anyway, how are your fantasies about Tom Daley these days? Is it the speedos that are the cause of your admiration?
Lol. Are you reduced to “accusing me of being gay”?
HAHAHAHAHAHAH
I recall your numerous comments about him and recognised it as a kind of Freudian revelation of your inner repressed homoerotic fantasies. Your reaction to my inference is possible further evidence. Repressed homosexuality is one of the most common reasons for overt expression of machismo. It doesn't mean you are full on homosexual, just that you might have inner guilt about feelings of attraction when you look at Tom in his speedos. It is perfectly OK, and makes you no less a man, than say, a man that is happy looking after babies.
I mean the ex guy was a handsy nonce, its not challenging. And they want to be in power, all this 'send a message' nonsense. It should be vote for your next government, your next PM, for our programme. Proudly take back Wakefield, fight in Tiverton, try and win everywhere and be the govt in waiting. Labour though, as ever, find gesture and opposition politics easier. Like todays pointless opposition motion on the ministerial code.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
So I was right, You are a beta cuck house-husband, and your wife was out being pleasured by the alpha male as you fed softened rusks to the bairns
Well done, once again. Are you sure they’re yours?
JJ strikes me as someone who is comfortable in his own skin, and perhaps a deal more masculine than those who attempt to wear theirs for all to see. Masculinity is a little like class; if you have to boast of it, you don't have much.
Anyway, how are your fantasies about Tom Daley these days? Is it the speedos that are the cause of your admiration?
Lol. Are you reduced to “accusing me of being gay”?
HAHAHAHAHAHAH
I think he may be confusing you with @JohnLoony who is rather fond of Tom Daley. Hard to think why.
@Leon made a number of posts in praise of Tom, and Tom is a very attractive young man. @Leon or @JohnLoony should not worry about having such an object of homoerotic desire. I am sure they are not alone.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
One reason I'm pro WFH is my children.
In my final year at Crossrail, during 2019, I didn't see her awake at all during the week as I had to get up early for a long commute before she woke, and then I got back well after she'd gone to bed. She could barely recognise me at the weekend.
That all changed during lockdown, and we are now very close, so I have no desire to go back to that.
WfH is complex, and everyone's experience will be different.
We have two friends who are archaeologists. They have two kids and live in a small house. During Covid, they had to share the kitchen table to work and educate their young kids - whilst not showing data to the others (they worked for different firms). It was a nightmare, and they both returned to their previous working patterns as quickly as possible.
Mrs J worked one day per week from home pre-Covid. At first, full-time WfH worked well as existing projects motored on. After six months WfH started to impact things, as testing and setting up new projects suffered from lack of face-to-face arguments.
Like people with big gardens saying lockdown was good, WfH can vary massively depending on circumstances. For many people it is brilliant; for others in the same roles it can be a bit if a bu**er
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
So I was right, You are a beta cuck house-husband, and your wife was out being pleasured by the alpha male as you fed softened rusks to the bairns
Well done, once again. Are you sure they’re yours?
Yeah, pretty sure. And as Mrs J works with engineers, there're few 'alpha-males' about.
Can you say the same? And how many other mini-Sean's are running about from your purchased relationships?
So your reason for presuming your wife’s fidelity is that there was no one more masculine available than her clearly beta husband. Ie you? So she had no one to tempt her?
That is thin thin ice, my friend
Women find two things primarily attractive: a man who is taller than them. And a man who earns more than them. It is depressingly functionalist but it is also true, all surveys show it, and they show it across societies as well
My reason for 'presuming' my wife's fidelity is that she is a decent person who I trust. That might make me a fool, but I'm fairly sure it doesn't. It's called love and trust.
As for 'beta' husband: that's funny. I ran every day last year, about 2,700 miles. So I can guarantee I can f*** harder and better than you, and without the aid of blue pills.
Authentic weirdness. If you cannot tell running from fucking the sparsity of your offspring is explained
Did you read Leon's post? He reduced faithfulness in a woman to the earning potential and height of her partner.
That is ridiculous. I was pointing out that women might have other views on the attractiveness of their partners. Physical fitness being one. Or humour. Or being able to put up with their muppetness.
And as an aside, your post is characteristically nasty.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
So I was right, You are a beta cuck house-husband, and your wife was out being pleasured by the alpha male as you fed softened rusks to the bairns
Well done, once again. Are you sure they’re yours?
JJ strikes me as someone who is comfortable in his own skin, and perhaps a deal more masculine than those who attempt to wear theirs for all to see. Masculinity is a little like class; if you have to boast of it, you don't have much.
Anyway, how are your fantasies about Tom Daley these days? Is it the speedos that are the cause of your admiration?
Lol. Are you reduced to “accusing me of being gay”?
HAHAHAHAHAHAH
I recall your numerous comments about him and recognised it as a kind of Freudian revelation of your inner repressed homoerotic fantasies. Your reaction to my inference is possible further evidence. Repressed homosexuality is one of the most common reasons for overt expression of machismo. It doesn't mean you are full on homosexual, just that you might have inner guilt about feelings of attraction when you look at Tom in his speedos. It is perfectly OK, and makes you no less a man, than say, a man that is happy looking after babies.
This is just…. WEIRD
The human subconscious and repression (that normally starts in childhood) is a fascinating area. If you want to consider it weird that is understandable considering your general reactionary nature.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
One reason I'm pro WFH is my children.
In my final year at Crossrail, during 2019, I didn't see her awake at all during the week as I had to get up early for a long commute before she woke, and then I got back well after she'd gone to bed. She could barely recognise me at the weekend.
That all changed during lockdown, and we are now very close, so I have no desire to go back to that.
WfH is complex, and everyone's experience will be different.
We have two friends who are archaeologists. They have two kids and live in a small house. During Covid, they had to share the kitchen table to work and educate their young kids - whilst not showing data to the others (they worked for different firms). It was a nightmare, and they both returned to their previous working patterns as quickly as possible.
Mrs J worked one day per week from home pre-Covid. At first, full-time WfH worked well as existing projects motored on. After six months WfH started to impact things, as testing and setting up new projects suffered from lack of face-to-face arguments.
Like people with big gardens saying lockdown was good, WfH can vary massively depending on circumstances. For many people it is brilliant; for others in the same roles it can be a bit if a bu**er
So, we should offer people a choice.
I don't see the problem in that.
Indeed. Although that choice is mostly not available for most roles (you cannot work from home as a train driver, a delivery person, a checkout worker, or a binman) and flexitime is perhaps more important for most jobs.
We should not forget flexitime; it is the beneficial partner of WfH.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
So I was right, You are a beta cuck house-husband, and your wife was out being pleasured by the alpha male as you fed softened rusks to the bairns
Well done, once again. Are you sure they’re yours?
Yeah, pretty sure. And as Mrs J works with engineers, there're few 'alpha-males' about.
Can you say the same? And how many other mini-Sean's are running about from your purchased relationships?
So your reason for presuming your wife’s fidelity is that there was no one more masculine available than her clearly beta husband. Ie you? So she had no one to tempt her?
That is thin thin ice, my friend
Women find two things primarily attractive: a man who is taller than them. And a man who earns more than them. It is depressingly functionalist but it is also true, all surveys show it, and they show it across societies as well
My reason for 'presuming' my wife's fidelity is that she is a decent person who I trust. That might make me a fool, but I'm fairly sure it doesn't. It's called love and trust.
As for 'beta' husband: that's funny. I ran every day last year, about 2,700 miles. So I can guarantee I can f*** harder and better than you, and without the aid of blue pills.
“My reason for 'presuming' my wife's fidelity is that she is a decent person who I trust.”
Awww, bless you, Josias, Bless you
A comment that shows why you have had to buy so many 'relationships'.
Seriously though, I think you have a slightly (ahem) skewed version of relationships.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
One reason I'm pro WFH is my children.
In my final year at Crossrail, during 2019, I didn't see her awake at all during the week as I had to get up early for a long commute before she woke, and then I got back well after she'd gone to bed. She could barely recognise me at the weekend.
That all changed during lockdown, and we are now very close, so I have no desire to go back to that.
WfH is complex, and everyone's experience will be different.
We have two friends who are archaeologists. They have two kids and live in a small house. During Covid, they had to share the kitchen table to work and educate their young kids - whilst not showing data to the others (they worked for different firms). It was a nightmare, and they both returned to their previous working patterns as quickly as possible.
Mrs J worked one day per week from home pre-Covid. At first, full-time WfH worked well as existing projects motored on. After six months WfH started to impact things, as testing and setting up new projects suffered from lack of face-to-face arguments.
Like people with big gardens saying lockdown was good, WfH can vary massively depending on circumstances. For many people it is brilliant; for others in the same roles it can be a bit if a bu**er
Are they, once again, behind the curve? My car has a wireless charging cradle and we have one in the living room and bedroom because it will do my wife’s Samsung and my iPhone. They’re now spreading in public.
I am totally in favour of standardisation. This helps.
Next step, power outlets - total nonsense.
Type J is genius
Is that really Switzerland, Liechtenstein and….. Rwanda?
Britain’s is the most satisfying to plug in. It feels the safest. You can also fInd it in curious old corners of the Empire, not just the ones given, eg I have found it widespread in Sri Lanka and India, and in odd parts of S E Asia
I think it's South Africa, Liberia and Rwanda.
Britain is the most satisfying to plug in, and feels most secure. It also has on/off, which I appreciate.
The US, though, has one advantage. Those prongs can be easily folded inward, allowing for very compact charging bricks that can be tossed in a bag.
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
Are they, once again, behind the curve? My car has a wireless charging cradle and we have one in the living room and bedroom because it will do my wife’s Samsung and my iPhone. They’re now spreading in public.
I am totally in favour of standardisation. This helps.
As for wireless: it is the regime of witches, who cackle over their cauldrons as they brew their hideous concoctions. Beware the fool who enters their domain ...
(I may just be married to an RF witch...)
maybe so - but increasing numbers of people are so in love with wireless charging, that they are building it into cupboards and kitchen counters.
Would you buy a device for multiple-£100 that had only wireless charging, with no cabled backup for charging or data transfer? Especially if the wireless charging protocols were proprietary?
In your world we're still using USB Micro connectors, though because the innovation that forced USB-C uptake was never worthwhile.
Wireless charging and data transfer is absolutely the future, I can't wait until everything uses it and I can dump the majority of my cables.
That's not 'my world'.
And as you well know, 'wireless charging and data transfer' depends on standards. If everyone creates devices that work with the same standards as everyone else, that's fine. If people go down their own routes and so not support standards, that's a problem.
Standards can also evolve and grow. You can have your own standard, as long as you fully support the same standards everyone else does. And who knows, if your own is better, and your licences are fine, it may become the basis of a new standard.
The Internet has not stagnated because of standards. People support the standards (cough Microsoft IE... (*)) and build upon them.
(*) Though AIUI that is more complex then people think.
But how does a company move to a new port that isn't USB-C without taking their device off the shelves in the EU?
I think USB-C is a great standard, yet I also know it's got a limited shelf life, one day it will be replaced at which point it's no longer up to companies, but a bureaucratic body who have to approve it. That is absolutely going to slow down the pace of innovation. Simply, in Apple's place I'd tell the EU to go and get fucked and enlist the US government to fight my corner.
You are using a medium that is 100% based on those 'bureaucratic bodies' to allow communication. Imagine if MS had got the US government to fight its corner over the MSH walled garden. Or France over Mintel.
That's your world.
No because I'm not saying that Apple should ask that Lightning become the only available connection, just that the open market remains. People who buy iPhones know what they are getting and still buy them, that's it.
But it increases the walled garden. And that's what I'm against - particularly given Apple's historic hideous licensing charges. And this matters with things like cars.
How does it? It's a completely open market, companies and individuals are free to choose whatever they want to do. You, by closing out all options than USB-C are creating a gigantic walled garden.
Standardisation by market participation and participants is no issue and I might remind you that Apple were one of the original founders of the USB-C standard and it is used across a huge number of their products.
The issue I have and you seem to be completely ignoring is that this previously open market that voluntarily adopted USB-C is now being forced to keep it.
Just be glad that the EU didn't do this during the USB Micro era because we'd all be stuck with that.
You're desire to hate on Apple is blinding you to the actual creation of a walled garden which is going to stifle innovation within the tech sector. Worse is that the EU is going to expand this "successful" idea to other sectors so suddenly we end up with stuff like NVME and CF Express never being invented because eSATA and microSD were "good enough".
It's such a backwards decision and one I have come to expect from a backwards organisation like the EU.
FRAND:
Anyone can produce a USB C charger and license the relevant patents.
Not everyone (in fact very few people can given Apple's licensing policies) produce a Lightning charging cable.
The question is: which serves consumers more, competition around providers or competition around standards?
I would also note that connectors - like power - have always been a special case, with standards enforced by BSO/ISO/etc.
The point is that it's an open market, no one is forcing us to buy iPhones, if someone doesn't like using the Lightning connector then they can go and buy a Pixel or Samsung.
It's also worth noting that a lot of the innovations that Apple made in Lightning were used as a basis for USB-C and Apple are part of the consortium that launched USB-C. In many ways USB-C is a descendant of Lightning as much as USB Micro.
In the end, it just smacks of solving a problem that doesn't exist.
Its the wrong solution, for the problems of a decade (or two) ago.
Back at the turn of the century where every phone model almost, let alone every phone brand, had its own unique cable that was a right royal pain in the arse. But the market was evolving, the technology rapidly improving, and we've long since slimmed down from a plethora of cables, or every device having its own cable, to USB A then B and now C being the standard because that's what customers have chosen rather than because of decree.
The market has already resolved to use USB C because it works best, apart from exceptions that people can choose not to buy. But if someone were to invent a next generation step forward they should be allowed to innovate with that rather than decreeing we must use the cables of the past.
Governments have a role to regulate markets to ensure safety, prevent fraud, and for some other reasons, but I find the regulation in this case to be excessive. Very much sledgehammer for a nut territory.
I also don't like the idea of having to convince a committee to be allowed to sell something. Everything should be allowed unless specifically forbidden for good reason.
There's a lot of innovation in electricity storage technology at the moment. Can you imagine how difficult they would be if you had to persuade a government committee that your technology was worth using?
Aside from commuting costs, which is another argument, fundamentally I think people like WFH because it affords them privacy and comfort, both those things could be provided at the workplace. But for some reason, modern workplaces have neither of those things, and then bosses wonder why people would rather WFH.
The other notable motivation here I think is those with young families (not my observation -- as a single dude I missed this til somebody pointed it out). Being able to have lunch with your children, or knock off at 6pm and see them immediately rather than having a long commute home first, or not have to find and pay for an extra hour or two a day of childcare to cover the time you're spending commuting -- that's the kind of thing that can be a massive quality of life improvement, and that you might well be willing to change jobs over.
Most of the fathers of rather young kids that I know… go to the office to escape their kids
It’s no slight on the kids or the fathers. But young kids are a lot of work and generally quite boring after about 30 minutes. Especially when eating
Speak for yourself.
I absolutely love my three-year old daughter, and hate being away from her.
We have a ball together.
Good, I envy you. Enjoy
But plenty of Dads don’t feel that.
Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4, after that they are enchanting but still wearing, I loved my kids from about 7-11, the perfect age, to my mind
My older daughter’s mother is entirely different and she loves babies.
It’s probably a Darwinian thing so the child always has an adult that is interested
Being a stay-at-home dad was brilliant in those early years. Although if I had had to work full-time as well, it might have been a different matter.
It's a different experience. I can understand why someone who just wants to shag around and be an arse might want to avoid the nappies stage, but that's the real parenting. You need to be involved with your kids as much as possible, at all ages.
What man doesn’t want to ‘fuck around and be an arse’?
You beta cuck weirdo. Grow some cullions
LOL. Your empty-shell life appears to be wearing thin.
What is an “empty shell” life?
Genuine question. Curious
All about appearances. Posts pictures of their lovely holidays to impress, whilst having an empty black hole within. Lives all about the image rather than the reality
(Slightly joking, although I have known people like this.)
As an example: how many kids do you have, and how many were you around every day whilst they were babies?
Well now you’ve stopped being an insulting twat, I will answer you honestly
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
You said: "Personally I couldn’t get on with the kids until they were about 4,"
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
OK, well done you
I had the advantage of not having to work, which meant I took a more (ahem) traditionally feminine role. Something that is becoming more common as women choose to work when they are the higher earner.
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
One reason I'm pro WFH is my children.
In my final year at Crossrail, during 2019, I didn't see her awake at all during the week as I had to get up early for a long commute before she woke, and then I got back well after she'd gone to bed. She could barely recognise me at the weekend.
That all changed during lockdown, and we are now very close, so I have no desire to go back to that.
WfH is complex, and everyone's experience will be different.
We have two friends who are archaeologists. They have two kids and live in a small house. During Covid, they had to share the kitchen table to work and educate their young kids - whilst not showing data to the others (they worked for different firms). It was a nightmare, and they both returned to their previous working patterns as quickly as possible.
Mrs J worked one day per week from home pre-Covid. At first, full-time WfH worked well as existing projects motored on. After six months WfH started to impact things, as testing and setting up new projects suffered from lack of face-to-face arguments.
Like people with big gardens saying lockdown was good, WfH can vary massively depending on circumstances. For many people it is brilliant; for others in the same roles it can be a bit if a bu**er
Competitive archaeology??
Contracts. There's big money in archaeology before big construction projects, and they are bid for. In addition, there are more routine issues with personnel data being seen outside a company.
"Just a few weeks after one of its MPs was forced to quit for watching porn in the Commons, the Tory party now resembles a blue-on-blue movie...the current orgy of division and dysfunction is more about snark than sex – but it’s still X-rated to watch."
Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efh4k6TJa2c
And plugs are an area where standards have proved vital. It is just that standards that were national are becoming problematic with increasing international travel.
So a question: what proportion of mains-plug devices are actually used in a country other than the one they are sold in? 1%? 5%?
I have two daughters. One in Oz and one in UK. Similar ages (mid teens)
I was absent for my Australia daughter 98% of the time - of necessity, her mum has brought her up in Sydney. But she still calls me ‘Dad’ and we have an affectionate relationship
My London daughter I was absent a lot when she was 0-3 and less so since, Was that bad? Probably. But I wasn’t living with her mum so…
She and I now have a good enough relationship that we can go on a week long holiday to northern Scotland, alone, just the two of us, she 15 and me in my late 50s, and we have a hoot. Laughing all the time
That’s a better relationship than i had with MY Dad when I was 15. Even tho he ostensibly “stayed at home” (he didn’t really he was a shagger)
So, horses for courses. I am loathe to criticize anyone else for their parenting skills and styles, Tho I would agree that presence is obviously better than absence
There was yellow wall constituency polls for 2015 election that told us exactly what’s about to happen BUT Paddy still was going to eat his hat rather than believe them 🤦♀️
I'm not that bothered about trains.
Which appears to be because you were absent from their lives until they were at least that age.
That must hurt anyone with a soul. Believe me, you missed a massive amount of joy.
Babies are hard work. But you get out much more than you put in (fnarr, fnarr).
PS See from a quick Google it is 45-65, so I still squeak in.
European and American ones aren't as immediately obvious.
If my writing "little 'un" in respect to my son triggers you, I might suggest the problem is with you, not me. And especially as I did not even say that in any of these posts.
Grow up.
Standardisation by market participation and participants is no issue and I might remind you that Apple were one of the original founders of the USB-C standard and it is used across a huge number of their products.
The issue I have and you seem to be completely ignoring is that this previously open market that voluntarily adopted USB-C is now being forced to keep it. Just be glad that the EU didn't do this during the USB Micro era because we'd all be stuck with that.
Your desire to hate on Apple is blinding you to the actual creation of a walled garden which is going to stifle innovation within the tech sector. Worse is that the EU is going to expand this "successful" idea to other sectors so suddenly we end up with stuff like NVME and CF Express never being invented because eSATA and microSD were "good enough".
It's such a backwards decision and one I have come to expect from a backwards organisation like the EU.
7 June - global plug comparisons
That's how you sort the wheat from the chaff.
The question, though, is how you maintain innovation, while at the same time encouraging standardisation.
Another thing to remember about standardisation - whether of plugs, wireless standards or whatever - is that it usually comes with a easy licensing on terms that are Fair, Reasonable and Non Discriminatory. It will therefore tend to encourage new market entrants, who might otherwise be shut out, as with Lightning, by patents.
I think Labour calls it “investing for growth”
Babies are hard work, but fun. I would not have missed it for the world, but know many people (mostly men) do, for work or other reasons. It is their loss.
Anyone can produce a USB C charger and license the relevant patents.
Not everyone (in fact very few people can given Apple's licensing policies) produce a Lightning charging cable.
The question is: which serves consumers more, competition around providers or competition around standards?
I would also note that connectors - like power - have always been a special case, with standards enforced by BSO/ISO/etc.
Well done, once again. Are you sure they’re yours?
If the latter, then presumably the approved plug/socket will change as and when the industry evolves.
It's also worth noting that a lot of the innovations that Apple made in Lightning were used as a basis for USB-C and Apple are part of the consortium that launched USB-C. In many ways USB-C is a descendant of Lightning as much as USB Micro.
In the end, it just smacks of solving a problem that doesn't exist.
Ethernet connectors were first standardised in the ?early 1980s?, and although it is seen less by consumers, is still widely used. I don't see ethernet as having stifled innovation - in fact, I'd argue it has accelerated innovation. It was a catalyst for the wider Internet.
I once saw figures for Apple's pricing for Firewire in cars. It was eye-boggingly expensive (I won't mention, as I can't fully remember). I believe they've reduced it since, but licensing costs can be an evil.
In my final year at Crossrail, during 2019, I didn't see her awake at all during the week as I had to get up early for a long commute before she woke, and then I got back well after she'd gone to bed. She could barely recognise me at the weekend.
That all changed during lockdown, and we are now very close, so I have no desire to go back to that.
After all his hero, Churchill, sent troops to deal with striking miners in Wales.
Can you say the same? And how many other mini-Sean's are running about from your purchased relationships?
(1) A reversible plug, which was aping Apple's Lightning
(2) PD mode, that reflected the fact that people were using this data connection standard to charge devices, and which allowed
(3) Same connectors for host and client
(4) Flowing from this, a complete rewrite of the underlying networking stack to enable things other than power and data to flow over the cables - such as video
Other than (1) - and Lighting was not the first reversible cable - none of those innovations came from Apple.
Sadly people like AndyJS and Another Richard don't realise that helps boost our productivity rather than being in the office.
No ball breaking train journeys at 6am help a lot as well.
So, Apple is perfectly allowed to have its own connector. But it has to be willing to license it at a reasonable rate.
Anyway, how are your fantasies about Tom Daley these days? Is it the speedos that are the cause of your admiration?
I'm not really sure Leon is joking. I suspect not. The kind of male attitude which is thankfully dying out.
Well done JJ.
Monday: Who's going to be the next Prime Minister?
Tuesday: What's your favourite plug shape?
Wednesday: Probably back to sodding Brexit.
That is thin thin ice, my friend
Women find two things primarily attractive: a man who is taller than them. And a man who earns more than them. It is depressingly functionalist but it is also true, all surveys show it, and they show it across societies as well
I'm all in favour of consolidation, yet I'm not in favour of some bureaucrat making that decision. Let the market decide.
We have two friends who are archaeologists. They have two kids and live in a small house. During Covid, they had to share the kitchen table to work and educate their young kids - whilst not showing data to the others (they worked for different firms). It was a nightmare, and they both returned to their previous working patterns as quickly as possible.
Mrs J worked one day per week from home pre-Covid. At first, full-time WfH worked well as existing projects motored on. After six months WfH started to impact things, as testing and setting up new projects suffered from lack of face-to-face arguments.
Like people with big gardens saying lockdown was good, WfH can vary massively depending on circumstances. For many people it is brilliant; for others in the same roles it can be a bit if a bu**er
HAHAHAHAHAHAH
And I hate to say this and I wouldn't say it to anyone who wasn't such a self righteous prick about ooh look at me I'm a parent, but excuses for having one child and one only, unless they are medical or you have the Chinese government holding a gun to your groin, are thin on the ground. Children need siblings
And btw an apostrophe signifies an omission. Little un, not little 'un, unless the child in question is a little 'un'.
As for 'beta' husband: that's funny. I ran every day last year, about 2,700 miles. So I can guarantee I can f*** harder and better than you, and without the aid of blue pills.
Back at the turn of the century where every phone model almost, let alone every phone brand, had its own unique cable that was a right royal pain in the arse. But the market was evolving, the technology rapidly improving, and we've long since slimmed down from a plethora of cables, or every device having its own cable, to USB A then B and now C being the standard because that's what customers have chosen rather than because of decree.
The market has already resolved to use USB C because it works best, apart from exceptions that people can choose not to buy. But if someone were to invent a next generation step forward they should be allowed to innovate with that rather than decreeing we must use the cables of the past.
Awww, bless you, Josias, Bless you
NEW THREAD
And they want to be in power, all this 'send a message' nonsense. It should be vote for your next government, your next PM, for our programme. Proudly take back Wakefield, fight in Tiverton, try and win everywhere and be the govt in waiting.
Labour though, as ever, find gesture and opposition politics easier. Like todays pointless opposition motion on the ministerial code.
I don't see the problem in that.
That is ridiculous. I was pointing out that women might have other views on the attractiveness of their partners. Physical fitness being one. Or humour. Or being able to put up with their muppetness.
And as an aside, your post is characteristically nasty.
We should not forget flexitime; it is the beneficial partner of WfH.
Seriously though, I think you have a slightly (ahem) skewed version of relationships.
I also don't like the idea of having to convince a committee to be allowed to sell something. Everything should be allowed unless specifically forbidden for good reason.
There's a lot of innovation in electricity storage technology at the moment. Can you imagine how difficult they would be if you had to persuade a government committee that your technology was worth using?