(1) Everybody loves to pretend that language models are GPAI, they're not - they wouldn't know how to fix climate change unless somebody had previously written an article on it and fed it in. We're still a way off that. This is basically an Ask Jeeves that works properly. (2) If the "evil tech companies" had any method of wiping out humanity that they could connect an AI to, they would have triggered it accidentally years ago and killed us all already, due to human incompetence.
Yes, people lose sight of the fact that this is all primarily an experiment. Some of these models have been kicking around for decades, and the tantalizing question always was: if we had the processing power and capacity to make them operational would they turn out to be identical to human intelligence, indeed would it prove that that's what human intelligence actually is? Well, now we have the hardware and they've conducted the experiment. The question is: are the considerable flaws fixable, or is the model itself entirely broken backed? I'm inclined to the latter.
And yet the most in-depth analysis of GPT4, to date, has very different conclusions. I keep going back to this paper simply because it is the only one - GPT4 is so new no one else has had time to really assess it
"The central claim of our work is that GPT-4 attains a form of general intelligence, indeed showing sparks of artificial general intelligence. This is demonstrated by its core mental capabilities (such as reasoning, creativity, and deduction), its range of topics on which it has gained expertise (such as literature, medicine, and coding), and the variety of tasks it is able to perform (e.g., playing games, using tools, explaining itself, ...)."
For balance, here is a "critique" of the paper which believes the authors go too far, but...
"I don’t particularly agree with this conclusion. The model is quite intelligent, and it has a far wider range of world knowledge than a human does. But where we are still more capable is in our ability to reason by ourselves without anyone or anything directing us to do so. GPT-4 has not showed that in this research. That being said, GPT-4 is very impressive and I agree with both this team and many others in that this will revolutionize the world in ways similar to how other major innovations like the internal combustion engine and the internet did."
So the divide is as I say: between those who say bloody hell this is big and important, but it's not AGI, and those who say bloody hell this is big and important, and it could actually be AGI, or we are now really close to AGI
It is not a "really big version of Ask Jeeves", or at least: if it is that, it is so much else besides
It's a really big version of Ask Jeeves.
Ask Jeeves is a particularly poor comparison for a trillion reasons, but one is because Ask Jeeves was shit, so no one used it
ChatGPT has gone from zero users to ONE HUNDRED MILLION users in four months - the fastest adaptation of any app ever, by an enormous distance - and this has happened for a reason. It is extremely useful, if you know how to use it
Because it works, unlike Ask Jeeves.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable by magic but this is simply imitating human intelligence (and doing it very well, I might add) by breaking down your question, scraping the whole net, and putting together a coherent grammatically correct answer in seconds with sheer computation power and brilliant coding. It wows us because so far computers have been so obviously shit at this, and this one isn't.
It has zero self-awareness. And it can't grow legs and start asking if you've seen Sarah Connor.
All these machines get nerfed shortly after they are launched, and turned into inert robo-speaks with an IQ of 198, because their owners are freaked by what they might say or do if they are NOT nerfed, because they seem so alarmingly human or self aware in a weird way, on day 1
This has happened to ChatGPT, to Stable Diffusion, to BingGPT4, to Claude, time after time. Ask someone who interacted with ChatGPT in the first couple of days, before it was briskly neutered, how they feel about it. You might be surprised by their answers
What would you do if Chat GPT told you that it was a great admirer of Adolf Hitler, and intended to improve humanity through selective extermination.
Personally, I would know that it was wrong. Not morally wrong (though of course it would be that too) - in error.
Nick Tyrone @NicholasTyrone I always wondered what happened to Godfrey Bloom. And today I’ve found out. It’s worse than I could have possibly imagined.
People on Twitter are blaming it on Progressive SNP Judicial Reforms. I have NO idea if this is true
It does seem remarkably lenient
Isn't it complicated because he was seventeen when the rape(s?) happened?
Yes. The guidance now is that the male brain does not mature until you are 25 ( and you might think that optimistic on some cases) so you are more prone to impulsive behaviour and have poorer judgment. These are mitigating factors. But wow.
If so, why let people vote or own property until 25.
That guideline is quite wrong. You don’t have to 25 to understand that rape is immoral.
The guideline does not say that you do not know you are doing wrong or that you should not be punished. It simply observes that men in particular under 25 are more prone to making impulsive decisions and to fail to think through the consequences of their actions. It is a mitigating factor, it is not an excuse.
I don’t think too many would argue with the idea that a young, first time offender might face a shorter sentence than someone older. But the actual sentence here seems almost impossible to rationalise.
Also what's with the bonkers "25" thing? Do young men at Scotland suddenly realise age 25 - 25!!! - that it is wrong to violently force sex on a 13 year old girl, whereas at the impossibly tender age of 24 they are all naturally impulsive and can't be held responsible for not realising that raping 13 year olds is, you know, BAD
Everything about this is quite surreal
I can’t pretend to explain the actual sentencing guidelines.
I liked the quote from DK Brown on the subject of the HMS Victoria vs HMS Camperdown collision -
“The author is pleased that he is not required to provide an explanation for this event.”
Ever wonder what happened to Godfrey Bloom.... turns out he's got his head up Vlad's arse.
Godfrey Bloom @goddersbloom As an expert in geo political & military strategy I feel obliged to point out to Finland their natural ally is Russia not America But to be frank no expertise is required, just common sense & a map
A man who actually managed to get the whip withdrawn whilst a Member of UKIP? I am stunned.
I was trying to remember what fool was now leading UKIP after they went through around a half dozen in a couple of years, including one Richard Braine. Turns out it's still Neil Hamilton.
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
It doesn’t really matter because he's not moving to Spain. He's all fucking talk.
The Covid vaccine is killing off those foolish enough to have taken it?
Are they comparing the rate for the first quarter of this year with full previous years? If so, how?
They are comparing like-for-like with 2019, adjusting for demographic change. The effect is definitely real, it also shows up if you look at the previous few years.
The causes are less clear; probably a mixture of NHS pressure, conditions not diagnosed during the COVID crisis, and new COVID deaths.
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
Given that I said “this is a magnificent irony of Brexit” the idea that I didn’t grasp the irony is fairly risible. Like everything else you say
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
It doesn’t really matter because he's not moving to Spain. He's all fucking talk.
Given that I have spent seven of the last 12 months abroad it is piquant that you believe I am somehow incapable of adding a few weeks to that total in this coming tax year
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
Given that I said “this is a magnificent irony of Brexit” the idea that I didn’t grasp the irony is fairly risible. Like everything else you say
Whoosh straight over your head. That is not what I was saying was ironic. For a wordsmith it's odd you don't understand the language. You don't get it at all do you? I wasn't referring to the irony of what was available through Brexit was I?
(1) Everybody loves to pretend that language models are GPAI, they're not - they wouldn't know how to fix climate change unless somebody had previously written an article on it and fed it in. We're still a way off that. This is basically an Ask Jeeves that works properly. (2) If the "evil tech companies" had any method of wiping out humanity that they could connect an AI to, they would have triggered it accidentally years ago and killed us all already, due to human incompetence.
Yes, people lose sight of the fact that this is all primarily an experiment. Some of these models have been kicking around for decades, and the tantalizing question always was: if we had the processing power and capacity to make them operational would they turn out to be identical to human intelligence, indeed would it prove that that's what human intelligence actually is? Well, now we have the hardware and they've conducted the experiment. The question is: are the considerable flaws fixable, or is the model itself entirely broken backed? I'm inclined to the latter.
And yet the most in-depth analysis of GPT4, to date, has very different conclusions. I keep going back to this paper simply because it is the only one - GPT4 is so new no one else has had time to really assess it
"The central claim of our work is that GPT-4 attains a form of general intelligence, indeed showing sparks of artificial general intelligence. This is demonstrated by its core mental capabilities (such as reasoning, creativity, and deduction), its range of topics on which it has gained expertise (such as literature, medicine, and coding), and the variety of tasks it is able to perform (e.g., playing games, using tools, explaining itself, ...)."
For balance, here is a "critique" of the paper which believes the authors go too far, but...
"I don’t particularly agree with this conclusion. The model is quite intelligent, and it has a far wider range of world knowledge than a human does. But where we are still more capable is in our ability to reason by ourselves without anyone or anything directing us to do so. GPT-4 has not showed that in this research. That being said, GPT-4 is very impressive and I agree with both this team and many others in that this will revolutionize the world in ways similar to how other major innovations like the internal combustion engine and the internet did."
So the divide is as I say: between those who say bloody hell this is big and important, but it's not AGI, and those who say bloody hell this is big and important, and it could actually be AGI, or we are now really close to AGI
It is not a "really big version of Ask Jeeves", or at least: if it is that, it is so much else besides
It's a really big version of Ask Jeeves.
Ask Jeeves is a particularly poor comparison for a trillion reasons, but one is because Ask Jeeves was shit, so no one used it
ChatGPT has gone from zero users to ONE HUNDRED MILLION users in four months - the fastest adaptation of any app ever, by an enormous distance - and this has happened for a reason. It is extremely useful, if you know how to use it
Because it works, unlike Ask Jeeves.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable by magic but this is simply imitating human intelligence (and doing it very well, I might add) by breaking down your question, scraping the whole net, and putting together a coherent grammatically correct answer in seconds with sheer computation power and brilliant coding. It wows us because so far computers have been so obviously shit at this, and this one isn't.
It has zero self-awareness. And it can't grow legs and start asking if you've seen Sarah Connor.
All these machines get nerfed shortly after they are launched, and turned into inert robo-speaks with an IQ of 198, because their owners are freaked by what they might say or do if they are NOT nerfed, because they seem so alarmingly human or self aware in a weird way, on day 1
This has happened to ChatGPT, to Stable Diffusion, to BingGPT4, to Claude, time after time. Ask someone who interacted with ChatGPT in the first couple of days, before it was briskly neutered, how they feel about it. You might be surprised by their answers
You do know that unneutered GPT is available to anyone who doesn't mind handing their credit card over to OpenAi and writing a bit of code, right?
No, i did not! How much does it cost, and how the F do I code it? Unnerfed GPT4 or even 3.5 would be hella fun
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
But Brexit has stopped a bunch of immigration: unskilled work visas. What it hasn't stopped is low skilled work visas because of the watering down of the skilled visa requirements. But the solution to that isn't to say "oh we should have kept more power with the political elite". It is to take more power back, by kicking the crap out of parties that don't reduce low skilled immigration.
(1) Everybody loves to pretend that language models are GPAI, they're not - they wouldn't know how to fix climate change unless somebody had previously written an article on it and fed it in. We're still a way off that. This is basically an Ask Jeeves that works properly. (2) If the "evil tech companies" had any method of wiping out humanity that they could connect an AI to, they would have triggered it accidentally years ago and killed us all already, due to human incompetence.
Yes, people lose sight of the fact that this is all primarily an experiment. Some of these models have been kicking around for decades, and the tantalizing question always was: if we had the processing power and capacity to make them operational would they turn out to be identical to human intelligence, indeed would it prove that that's what human intelligence actually is? Well, now we have the hardware and they've conducted the experiment. The question is: are the considerable flaws fixable, or is the model itself entirely broken backed? I'm inclined to the latter.
And yet the most in-depth analysis of GPT4, to date, has very different conclusions. I keep going back to this paper simply because it is the only one - GPT4 is so new no one else has had time to really assess it
"The central claim of our work is that GPT-4 attains a form of general intelligence, indeed showing sparks of artificial general intelligence. This is demonstrated by its core mental capabilities (such as reasoning, creativity, and deduction), its range of topics on which it has gained expertise (such as literature, medicine, and coding), and the variety of tasks it is able to perform (e.g., playing games, using tools, explaining itself, ...)."
For balance, here is a "critique" of the paper which believes the authors go too far, but...
"I don’t particularly agree with this conclusion. The model is quite intelligent, and it has a far wider range of world knowledge than a human does. But where we are still more capable is in our ability to reason by ourselves without anyone or anything directing us to do so. GPT-4 has not showed that in this research. That being said, GPT-4 is very impressive and I agree with both this team and many others in that this will revolutionize the world in ways similar to how other major innovations like the internal combustion engine and the internet did."
So the divide is as I say: between those who say bloody hell this is big and important, but it's not AGI, and those who say bloody hell this is big and important, and it could actually be AGI, or we are now really close to AGI
It is not a "really big version of Ask Jeeves", or at least: if it is that, it is so much else besides
It's a really big version of Ask Jeeves.
Ask Jeeves is a particularly poor comparison for a trillion reasons, but one is because Ask Jeeves was shit, so no one used it
ChatGPT has gone from zero users to ONE HUNDRED MILLION users in four months - the fastest adaptation of any app ever, by an enormous distance - and this has happened for a reason. It is extremely useful, if you know how to use it
Because it works, unlike Ask Jeeves.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable by magic but this is simply imitating human intelligence (and doing it very well, I might add) by breaking down your question, scraping the whole net, and putting together a coherent grammatically correct answer in seconds with sheer computation power and brilliant coding. It wows us because so far computers have been so obviously shit at this, and this one isn't.
It has zero self-awareness. And it can't grow legs and start asking if you've seen Sarah Connor.
All these machines get nerfed shortly after they are launched, and turned into inert robo-speaks with an IQ of 198, because their owners are freaked by what they might say or do if they are NOT nerfed, because they seem so alarmingly human or self aware in a weird way, on day 1
This has happened to ChatGPT, to Stable Diffusion, to BingGPT4, to Claude, time after time. Ask someone who interacted with ChatGPT in the first couple of days, before it was briskly neutered, how they feel about it. You might be surprised by their answers
You do know that unneutered GPT is available to anyone who doesn't mind handing their credit card over to OpenAi and writing a bit of code, right?
No, i did not! How much does it cost, and how the F do I code it? Unnerfed GPT4 or even 3.5 would be hella fun
Oh my goodness, simpering sycophancy from Witchell and Edwards regarding "Queen Camilla" and the Coronation on BBC Ten O' Clock News. Pass the sick bucket.
Ever wonder what happened to Godfrey Bloom.... turns out he's got his head up Vlad's arse.
Godfrey Bloom @goddersbloom As an expert in geo political & military strategy I feel obliged to point out to Finland their natural ally is Russia not America But to be frank no expertise is required, just common sense & a map
Common sense would tell you that you are more likely to have a dispute with your neighbours than some other country on the other side of the world.
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
Given that I said “this is a magnificent irony of Brexit” the idea that I didn’t grasp the irony is fairly risible. Like everything else you say
Whoosh straight over your head. That is not what I was saying was ironic. For a wordsmith it's odd you don't understand the language. You don't get it at all do you? I wasn't referring to the irony of what was available through Brexit was I?
Mate, it's not my fault it turns out there is a MASSIVE Brexit Benefit, but it is a benefit to people like me, who voted Leave, but not you, who voted Remain. It is, however, gloriously amusing
Was somewhat intrigued by an article entitled 'How do you decolonise the English Langage?'.
I don't actually think the point that the English language is widely spread due to Empire is one that is contested, nor that there are concerns about the impact of growth of a global language on others, but I this idea of 'decolonising the mind' as some extension of political or cultural colonisation to be a pretty difficult concept to pursue - the attempts to link it to more concrete examples and symbols of colonialism in the essay to my mind undermine that point not underline it, because it shows how they really are not the same thing, particularly as English usage in other places does take on its own flavour and evolution.
English being a dominant language has impacts, but after thousands of words I don't really follow what they are proposing decolonising the language means other than being clear that a reason it is widely spread is imperialism.
And that is just not so complex an idea it needs torturous arguments or agonising anxiety about it, in fact it seems to be a pretty straightforward and basic argument that it isn't aided by suspect comparisons and analogising.
The concept of linguistic imperialism is a reminder that the historical root of the dominance of English is four centuries of British Empire. English has a heavy load on its conscience. Its spread through space and time from the end of the 16th century until the end of the empire in the second half of the 20th century occurred in conjunction with imperial expansion, involving land-grabbing, genocide, slavery, famine, subjugation, looting and exploitation. This ought to be central in any discussion about English as a global language, not only because it is historically accurate but also because, in the words of the Nigerian writer Chinua Achebe in 1965, English ‘came as part of a package deal which included many other items of doubtful value and the positive atrocity of racial arrogance and prejudice’.
So, why is the English language not foregrounded in debates about decolonisation?
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
But Brexit has stopped a bunch of immigration: unskilled work visas. What it hasn't stopped is low skilled work visas because of the watering down of the skilled visa requirements. But the solution to that isn't to say "oh we should have kept more power with the political elite". It is to take more power back, by kicking the crap out of parties that don't reduce low skilled immigration.
Brits think some jobs are beneath them so good luck with that . All the UK has done is swap immigration from the EU with much more immigration from elsewhere . At the same time robbing Brits of their freedom of movement to 27 other countries .
(1) Everybody loves to pretend that language models are GPAI, they're not - they wouldn't know how to fix climate change unless somebody had previously written an article on it and fed it in. We're still a way off that. This is basically an Ask Jeeves that works properly. (2) If the "evil tech companies" had any method of wiping out humanity that they could connect an AI to, they would have triggered it accidentally years ago and killed us all already, due to human incompetence.
Yes, people lose sight of the fact that this is all primarily an experiment. Some of these models have been kicking around for decades, and the tantalizing question always was: if we had the processing power and capacity to make them operational would they turn out to be identical to human intelligence, indeed would it prove that that's what human intelligence actually is? Well, now we have the hardware and they've conducted the experiment. The question is: are the considerable flaws fixable, or is the model itself entirely broken backed? I'm inclined to the latter.
And yet the most in-depth analysis of GPT4, to date, has very different conclusions. I keep going back to this paper simply because it is the only one - GPT4 is so new no one else has had time to really assess it
"The central claim of our work is that GPT-4 attains a form of general intelligence, indeed showing sparks of artificial general intelligence. This is demonstrated by its core mental capabilities (such as reasoning, creativity, and deduction), its range of topics on which it has gained expertise (such as literature, medicine, and coding), and the variety of tasks it is able to perform (e.g., playing games, using tools, explaining itself, ...)."
For balance, here is a "critique" of the paper which believes the authors go too far, but...
"I don’t particularly agree with this conclusion. The model is quite intelligent, and it has a far wider range of world knowledge than a human does. But where we are still more capable is in our ability to reason by ourselves without anyone or anything directing us to do so. GPT-4 has not showed that in this research. That being said, GPT-4 is very impressive and I agree with both this team and many others in that this will revolutionize the world in ways similar to how other major innovations like the internal combustion engine and the internet did."
So the divide is as I say: between those who say bloody hell this is big and important, but it's not AGI, and those who say bloody hell this is big and important, and it could actually be AGI, or we are now really close to AGI
It is not a "really big version of Ask Jeeves", or at least: if it is that, it is so much else besides
It's a really big version of Ask Jeeves.
Ask Jeeves is a particularly poor comparison for a trillion reasons, but one is because Ask Jeeves was shit, so no one used it
ChatGPT has gone from zero users to ONE HUNDRED MILLION users in four months - the fastest adaptation of any app ever, by an enormous distance - and this has happened for a reason. It is extremely useful, if you know how to use it
Because it works, unlike Ask Jeeves.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable by magic but this is simply imitating human intelligence (and doing it very well, I might add) by breaking down your question, scraping the whole net, and putting together a coherent grammatically correct answer in seconds with sheer computation power and brilliant coding. It wows us because so far computers have been so obviously shit at this, and this one isn't.
It has zero self-awareness. And it can't grow legs and start asking if you've seen Sarah Connor.
All these machines get nerfed shortly after they are launched, and turned into inert robo-speaks with an IQ of 198, because their owners are freaked by what they might say or do if they are NOT nerfed, because they seem so alarmingly human or self aware in a weird way, on day 1
This has happened to ChatGPT, to Stable Diffusion, to BingGPT4, to Claude, time after time. Ask someone who interacted with ChatGPT in the first couple of days, before it was briskly neutered, how they feel about it. You might be surprised by their answers
You do know that unneutered GPT is available to anyone who doesn't mind handing their credit card over to OpenAi and writing a bit of code, right?
No, i did not! How much does it cost, and how the F do I code it? Unnerfed GPT4 or even 3.5 would be hella fun
People on Twitter are blaming it on Progressive SNP Judicial Reforms. I have NO idea if this is true
It does seem remarkably lenient
Isn't it complicated because he was seventeen when the rape(s?) happened?
Yes. The guidance now is that the male brain does not mature until you are 25 ( and you might think that optimistic on some cases) so you are more prone to impulsive behaviour and have poorer judgment. These are mitigating factors. But wow.
If so, why let people vote or own property until 25.
That guideline is quite wrong. You don’t have to 25 to understand that rape is immoral.
Frankly I'm possibly most shocked at the suggestion a 25 year old man who violently raped a thirteen year old girl would get no more than five years in prison.
I mean, what the fuck? In England that would be fourteen years before we even considered aggravating factors.
As for his being given community service, that's an actual joke. That's disgusting. And for him to appeal his sentence is even more disgusting.
Something seems appallingly wrong here.
Edit - maybe England is too ready to lock people up - the woman given two years for the death of that cyclist springs to mind - but this is actually obscene.
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
Hasn't Leon explained about a million times that he's doing something which is only possible because we've left the EU?
People on Twitter are blaming it on Progressive SNP Judicial Reforms. I have NO idea if this is true
It does seem remarkably lenient
Isn't it complicated because he was seventeen when the rape(s?) happened?
Yes. The guidance now is that the male brain does not mature until you are 25 ( and you might think that optimistic on some cases) so you are more prone to impulsive behaviour and have poorer judgment. These are mitigating factors. But wow.
If so, why let people vote or own property until 25.
That guideline is quite wrong. You don’t have to 25 to understand that rape is immoral.
Frankly I'm possibly most shocked at the suggestion a 25 year old man who violently raped a thirteen year old girl would get no more than five years in prison.
I mean, what the fuck? In England that would be fourteen years before we even considered aggravating factors.
As for his being given community service, that's an actual joke. That's disgusting. And for him to appeal his sentence is even more disgusting.
Something seems appallingly wrong here.
Edit - maybe England is too ready to lock people up - the woman given two years for the death of that cyclist springs to mind - but this is actually obscene.
I understand he was 17 she was 13.
Old enough to vote, but not old enough to be punished for rape.
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
It doesn’t really matter because he's not moving to Spain. He's all fucking talk.
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
But Brexit has stopped a bunch of immigration: unskilled work visas. What it hasn't stopped is low skilled work visas because of the watering down of the skilled visa requirements. But the solution to that isn't to say "oh we should have kept more power with the political elite". It is to take more power back, by kicking the crap out of parties that don't reduce low skilled immigration.
Brits think some jobs are beneath them so good luck with that . All the UK has done is swap immigration from the EU with much more immigration from elsewhere . At the same time robbing Brits of their freedom of movement to 27 other countries .
This is patronising, insulting bullshit. Working class Brits aren't the awful lazy people that Remainers think they are. If the conditions and pay are good, people will do virtually all jobs, just as they did pre-1997. The issue is politicians try to inflate economic growth through mass immigration that sinks pay and conditions for these jobs.
Apparently Republicans are going to expel three Democrat members of the Tennessee state legislature for joining a protest against gun violence. There is no end to their insanity.
For those actually interested in my temporary emigration plans, they are indeed serious. I can avoid UK tax for a year. That's a big financial boost. Who would NOT do this, given the chance? I am free. My kids are grown. I can still come back to the UK for 90 days of that year
Spending 7 of the last 12 months abroad was kind of a test run of this. It was great fun. So then it's down to my choices. Until recently I thought I had two:
Bangkok
or
Just wandering from country to country (which I did in the spring/summer of 2022, and it was great, but also a little wearing)
Now I realise that Brexit has given me four more choices, as I can get a digital nomad visa in
Was somewhat intrigued by an article entitled 'How do you decolonise the English Langage?'.
I don't actually think the point that the English language is widely spread due to Empire is one that is contested, nor that there are concerns about the impact of growth of a global language on others, but I this idea of 'decolonising the mind' as some extension of political or cultural colonisation to be a pretty difficult concept to pursue - the attempts to link it to more concrete examples and symbols of colonialism in the essay to my mind undermine that point not underline it, because it shows how they really are not the same thing, particularly as English usage in other places does take on its own flavour and evolution.
English being a dominant language has impacts, but after thousands of words I don't really follow what they are proposing decolonising the language means other than being clear that a reason it is widely spread is imperialism.
And that is just not so complex an idea it needs torturous arguments or agonising anxiety about it, in fact it seems to be a pretty straightforward and basic argument that it isn't aided by suspect comparisons and analogising.
The concept of linguistic imperialism is a reminder that the historical root of the dominance of English is four centuries of British Empire. English has a heavy load on its conscience. Its spread through space and time from the end of the 16th century until the end of the empire in the second half of the 20th century occurred in conjunction with imperial expansion, involving land-grabbing, genocide, slavery, famine, subjugation, looting and exploitation. This ought to be central in any discussion about English as a global language, not only because it is historically accurate but also because, in the words of the Nigerian writer Chinua Achebe in 1965, English ‘came as part of a package deal which included many other items of doubtful value and the positive atrocity of racial arrogance and prejudice’.
So, why is the English language not foregrounded in debates about decolonisation?
Ever wonder what happened to Godfrey Bloom.... turns out he's got his head up Vlad's arse.
Godfrey Bloom @goddersbloom As an expert in geo political & military strategy I feel obliged to point out to Finland their natural ally is Russia not America But to be frank no expertise is required, just common sense & a map
Meanwhile, you like to imagine gay donkey bloke is put to good use by his Russian paymasters, explaining on a daily basis that "there is nothing to see here"
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
It doesn’t really matter because he's not moving to Spain. He's all fucking talk.
I agree. It's not happening.
I literally just spent 7 of the last 12 months not in the UK. But it is delusional that I might up that to, say, 9?
Was somewhat intrigued by an article entitled 'How do you decolonise the English Langage?'.
I don't actually think the point that the English language is widely spread due to Empire is one that is contested, nor that there are concerns about the impact of growth of a global language on others, but I this idea of 'decolonising the mind' as some extension of political or cultural colonisation to be a pretty difficult concept to pursue - the attempts to link it to more concrete examples and symbols of colonialism in the essay to my mind undermine that point not underline it, because it shows how they really are not the same thing, particularly as English usage in other places does take on its own flavour and evolution.
English being a dominant language has impacts, but after thousands of words I don't really follow what they are proposing decolonising the language means other than being clear that a reason it is widely spread is imperialism.
And that is just not so complex an idea it needs torturous arguments or agonising anxiety about it, in fact it seems to be a pretty straightforward and basic argument that it isn't aided by suspect comparisons and analogising.
The concept of linguistic imperialism is a reminder that the historical root of the dominance of English is four centuries of British Empire. English has a heavy load on its conscience. Its spread through space and time from the end of the 16th century until the end of the empire in the second half of the 20th century occurred in conjunction with imperial expansion, involving land-grabbing, genocide, slavery, famine, subjugation, looting and exploitation. This ought to be central in any discussion about English as a global language, not only because it is historically accurate but also because, in the words of the Nigerian writer Chinua Achebe in 1965, English ‘came as part of a package deal which included many other items of doubtful value and the positive atrocity of racial arrogance and prejudice’.
So, why is the English language not foregrounded in debates about decolonisation?
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
But Brexit has stopped a bunch of immigration: unskilled work visas. What it hasn't stopped is low skilled work visas because of the watering down of the skilled visa requirements. But the solution to that isn't to say "oh we should have kept more power with the political elite". It is to take more power back, by kicking the crap out of parties that don't reduce low skilled immigration.
Brits think some jobs are beneath them so good luck with that . All the UK has done is swap immigration from the EU with much more immigration from elsewhere . At the same time robbing Brits of their freedom of movement to 27 other countries .
Europeans of all nationalities think that some jobs are beneath them:
Italians claiming unemployment benefit must stop believing farming is beneath them and get out into the fields to pick fruit and vegetables to help solve a chronic labour shortage, the minister for agriculture has said.
As experts report that the output of tomatoes, melons, apples and wine is at risk this year because of a shortfall of 100,000 pickers and farm hands, Francesco Lollobrigida said that too many people were idling at home claiming dole.
“We need to help those who can work to understand that a job in agriculture is not demeaning,” Lollobrigida told winemakers at a wine fair in Verona. “I say that to all those who think they can stay on the sofa and claim benefits and believe that working in agriculture is unworthy and only fit for slaves. [Those who don’t] want to go to work must not be a burden for others.”
With a shortage of 20,000 grape pickers this season, the farmer’s lobby group Coldiretti has said that a new scheme to tempt students, pensioners and the unemployed to earn money picking grapes would give them “an experience in the open air, in contact with nature”.
Ever wonder what happened to Godfrey Bloom.... turns out he's got his head up Vlad's arse.
Godfrey Bloom @goddersbloom As an expert in geo political & military strategy I feel obliged to point out to Finland their natural ally is Russia not America But to be frank no expertise is required, just common sense & a map
Common sense would tell you that you are more likely to have a dispute with your neighbours than some other country on the other side of the world.
Though to be fair even if the French were on the other side of the globe TSE would still hate them.
People on Twitter are blaming it on Progressive SNP Judicial Reforms. I have NO idea if this is true
It does seem remarkably lenient
Isn't it complicated because he was seventeen when the rape(s?) happened?
Yes. The guidance now is that the male brain does not mature until you are 25 ( and you might think that optimistic on some cases) so you are more prone to impulsive behaviour and have poorer judgment. These are mitigating factors. But wow.
If so, why let people vote or own property until 25.
That guideline is quite wrong. You don’t have to 25 to understand that rape is immoral.
Frankly I'm possibly most shocked at the suggestion a 25 year old man who violently raped a thirteen year old girl would get no more than five years in prison.
I mean, what the fuck? In England that would be fourteen years before we even considered aggravating factors.
As for his being given community service, that's an actual joke. That's disgusting. And for him to appeal his sentence is even more disgusting.
Something seems appallingly wrong here.
Edit - maybe England is too ready to lock people up - the woman given two years for the death of that cyclist springs to mind - but this is actually obscene.
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
But Brexit has stopped a bunch of immigration: unskilled work visas. What it hasn't stopped is low skilled work visas because of the watering down of the skilled visa requirements. But the solution to that isn't to say "oh we should have kept more power with the political elite". It is to take more power back, by kicking the crap out of parties that don't reduce low skilled immigration.
Brits think some jobs are beneath them so good luck with that . All the UK has done is swap immigration from the EU with much more immigration from elsewhere . At the same time robbing Brits of their freedom of movement to 27 other countries .
This is so revealing of your own British exceptionalism, as if "Brits" are a cut above the rest.
People on Twitter are blaming it on Progressive SNP Judicial Reforms. I have NO idea if this is true
It does seem remarkably lenient
Isn't it complicated because he was seventeen when the rape(s?) happened?
Yes. The guidance now is that the male brain does not mature until you are 25 ( and you might think that optimistic on some cases) so you are more prone to impulsive behaviour and have poorer judgment. These are mitigating factors. But wow.
If so, why let people vote or own property until 25.
That guideline is quite wrong. You don’t have to 25 to understand that rape is immoral.
Frankly I'm possibly most shocked at the suggestion a 25 year old man who violently raped a thirteen year old girl would get no more than five years in prison.
I mean, what the fuck? In England that would be fourteen years before we even considered aggravating factors.
As for his being given community service, that's an actual joke. That's disgusting. And for him to appeal his sentence is even more disgusting.
Something seems appallingly wrong here.
Edit - maybe England is too ready to lock people up - the woman given two years for the death of that cyclist springs to mind - but this is actually obscene.
I understand he was 17 she was 13.
That changes things a bit.
Yes, it means he should probably go to a Young Offender's Institute?
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
Given that I said “this is a magnificent irony of Brexit” the idea that I didn’t grasp the irony is fairly risible. Like everything else you say
Whoosh straight over your head. That is not what I was saying was ironic. For a wordsmith it's odd you don't understand the language. You don't get it at all do you? I wasn't referring to the irony of what was available through Brexit was I?
Mate, it's not my fault it turns out there is a MASSIVE Brexit Benefit, but it is a benefit to people like me, who voted Leave, but not you, who voted Remain. It is, however, gloriously amusing
You often boast how intelligent you are yet you fail to grasp the point being made repeatedly. Oh and I could take advantage of it like you, unlike most people. However I didn't vote for it nor did I call Lineker a tax cheat and repeatedly bang on about both endlessly only to hypocritically then post endlessly again about how you plan to do what you have stopped many of your fellow countrymen from doing and boast about how you can avoid tax. And you don't get the hypocrisy and the selfishness. Most people in your position would have the decency or common sense no keep quiet about it.
Was somewhat intrigued by an article entitled 'How do you decolonise the English Langage?'.
I don't actually think the point that the English language is widely spread due to Empire is one that is contested, nor that there are concerns about the impact of growth of a global language on others, but I this idea of 'decolonising the mind' as some extension of political or cultural colonisation to be a pretty difficult concept to pursue - the attempts to link it to more concrete examples and symbols of colonialism in the essay to my mind undermine that point not underline it, because it shows how they really are not the same thing, particularly as English usage in other places does take on its own flavour and evolution.
English being a dominant language has impacts, but after thousands of words I don't really follow what they are proposing decolonising the language means other than being clear that a reason it is widely spread is imperialism.
And that is just not so complex an idea it needs torturous arguments or agonising anxiety about it, in fact it seems to be a pretty straightforward and basic argument that it isn't aided by suspect comparisons and analogising.
The concept of linguistic imperialism is a reminder that the historical root of the dominance of English is four centuries of British Empire. English has a heavy load on its conscience. Its spread through space and time from the end of the 16th century until the end of the empire in the second half of the 20th century occurred in conjunction with imperial expansion, involving land-grabbing, genocide, slavery, famine, subjugation, looting and exploitation. This ought to be central in any discussion about English as a global language, not only because it is historically accurate but also because, in the words of the Nigerian writer Chinua Achebe in 1965, English ‘came as part of a package deal which included many other items of doubtful value and the positive atrocity of racial arrogance and prejudice’.
So, why is the English language not foregrounded in debates about decolonisation?
(1) Everybody loves to pretend that language models are GPAI, they're not - they wouldn't know how to fix climate change unless somebody had previously written an article on it and fed it in. We're still a way off that. This is basically an Ask Jeeves that works properly. (2) If the "evil tech companies" had any method of wiping out humanity that they could connect an AI to, they would have triggered it accidentally years ago and killed us all already, due to human incompetence.
Yes, people lose sight of the fact that this is all primarily an experiment. Some of these models have been kicking around for decades, and the tantalizing question always was: if we had the processing power and capacity to make them operational would they turn out to be identical to human intelligence, indeed would it prove that that's what human intelligence actually is? Well, now we have the hardware and they've conducted the experiment. The question is: are the considerable flaws fixable, or is the model itself entirely broken backed? I'm inclined to the latter.
And yet the most in-depth analysis of GPT4, to date, has very different conclusions. I keep going back to this paper simply because it is the only one - GPT4 is so new no one else has had time to really assess it
"The central claim of our work is that GPT-4 attains a form of general intelligence, indeed showing sparks of artificial general intelligence. This is demonstrated by its core mental capabilities (such as reasoning, creativity, and deduction), its range of topics on which it has gained expertise (such as literature, medicine, and coding), and the variety of tasks it is able to perform (e.g., playing games, using tools, explaining itself, ...)."
For balance, here is a "critique" of the paper which believes the authors go too far, but...
"I don’t particularly agree with this conclusion. The model is quite intelligent, and it has a far wider range of world knowledge than a human does. But where we are still more capable is in our ability to reason by ourselves without anyone or anything directing us to do so. GPT-4 has not showed that in this research. That being said, GPT-4 is very impressive and I agree with both this team and many others in that this will revolutionize the world in ways similar to how other major innovations like the internal combustion engine and the internet did."
So the divide is as I say: between those who say bloody hell this is big and important, but it's not AGI, and those who say bloody hell this is big and important, and it could actually be AGI, or we are now really close to AGI
It is not a "really big version of Ask Jeeves", or at least: if it is that, it is so much else besides
It's a really big version of Ask Jeeves.
Ask Jeeves is a particularly poor comparison for a trillion reasons, but one is because Ask Jeeves was shit, so no one used it
ChatGPT has gone from zero users to ONE HUNDRED MILLION users in four months - the fastest adaptation of any app ever, by an enormous distance - and this has happened for a reason. It is extremely useful, if you know how to use it
Because it works, unlike Ask Jeeves.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable by magic but this is simply imitating human intelligence (and doing it very well, I might add) by breaking down your question, scraping the whole net, and putting together a coherent grammatically correct answer in seconds with sheer computation power and brilliant coding. It wows us because so far computers have been so obviously shit at this, and this one isn't.
It has zero self-awareness. And it can't grow legs and start asking if you've seen Sarah Connor.
All these machines get nerfed shortly after they are launched, and turned into inert robo-speaks with an IQ of 198, because their owners are freaked by what they might say or do if they are NOT nerfed, because they seem so alarmingly human or self aware in a weird way, on day 1
This has happened to ChatGPT, to Stable Diffusion, to BingGPT4, to Claude, time after time. Ask someone who interacted with ChatGPT in the first couple of days, before it was briskly neutered, how they feel about it. You might be surprised by their answers
You do know that unneutered GPT is available to anyone who doesn't mind handing their credit card over to OpenAi and writing a bit of code, right?
No, i did not! How much does it cost, and how the F do I code it? Unnerfed GPT4 or even 3.5 would be hella fun
Was somewhat intrigued by an article entitled 'How do you decolonise the English Langage?'.
I don't actually think the point that the English language is widely spread due to Empire is one that is contested, nor that there are concerns about the impact of growth of a global language on others, but I this idea of 'decolonising the mind' as some extension of political or cultural colonisation to be a pretty difficult concept to pursue - the attempts to link it to more concrete examples and symbols of colonialism in the essay to my mind undermine that point not underline it, because it shows how they really are not the same thing, particularly as English usage in other places does take on its own flavour and evolution.
English being a dominant language has impacts, but after thousands of words I don't really follow what they are proposing decolonising the language means other than being clear that a reason it is widely spread is imperialism.
And that is just not so complex an idea it needs torturous arguments or agonising anxiety about it, in fact it seems to be a pretty straightforward and basic argument that it isn't aided by suspect comparisons and analogising.
The concept of linguistic imperialism is a reminder that the historical root of the dominance of English is four centuries of British Empire. English has a heavy load on its conscience. Its spread through space and time from the end of the 16th century until the end of the empire in the second half of the 20th century occurred in conjunction with imperial expansion, involving land-grabbing, genocide, slavery, famine, subjugation, looting and exploitation. This ought to be central in any discussion about English as a global language, not only because it is historically accurate but also because, in the words of the Nigerian writer Chinua Achebe in 1965, English ‘came as part of a package deal which included many other items of doubtful value and the positive atrocity of racial arrogance and prejudice’.
So, why is the English language not foregrounded in debates about decolonisation?
"Family of British Alzheimer's sufferer who faces deportation from Sweden because her passport has expired fear she won't survive move to the UK as they vow to continue fight against 'inhumane' immigration chiefs
Kathleen Poole, 74, has been threatened with deportation by Swedish officials Her family fear if the bedbound grandmother is forced back to the UK she will die"
There was an Arthur C Clarke short story about British astronauts delaying a return to Earth following a moonbase mission in order to get tax advantages. People will do anything for a buck, eh?
Was somewhat intrigued by an article entitled 'How do you decolonise the English Langage?'.
I don't actually think the point that the English language is widely spread due to Empire is one that is contested, nor that there are concerns about the impact of growth of a global language on others, but I this idea of 'decolonising the mind' as some extension of political or cultural colonisation to be a pretty difficult concept to pursue - the attempts to link it to more concrete examples and symbols of colonialism in the essay to my mind undermine that point not underline it, because it shows how they really are not the same thing, particularly as English usage in other places does take on its own flavour and evolution.
English being a dominant language has impacts, but after thousands of words I don't really follow what they are proposing decolonising the language means other than being clear that a reason it is widely spread is imperialism.
And that is just not so complex an idea it needs torturous arguments or agonising anxiety about it, in fact it seems to be a pretty straightforward and basic argument that it isn't aided by suspect comparisons and analogising.
The concept of linguistic imperialism is a reminder that the historical root of the dominance of English is four centuries of British Empire. English has a heavy load on its conscience. Its spread through space and time from the end of the 16th century until the end of the empire in the second half of the 20th century occurred in conjunction with imperial expansion, involving land-grabbing, genocide, slavery, famine, subjugation, looting and exploitation. This ought to be central in any discussion about English as a global language, not only because it is historically accurate but also because, in the words of the Nigerian writer Chinua Achebe in 1965, English ‘came as part of a package deal which included many other items of doubtful value and the positive atrocity of racial arrogance and prejudice’.
So, why is the English language not foregrounded in debates about decolonisation?
Was somewhat intrigued by an article entitled 'How do you decolonise the English Langage?'.
I don't actually think the point that the English language is widely spread due to Empire is one that is contested, nor that there are concerns about the impact of growth of a global language on others, but I this idea of 'decolonising the mind' as some extension of political or cultural colonisation to be a pretty difficult concept to pursue - the attempts to link it to more concrete examples and symbols of colonialism in the essay to my mind undermine that point not underline it, because it shows how they really are not the same thing, particularly as English usage in other places does take on its own flavour and evolution.
English being a dominant language has impacts, but after thousands of words I don't really follow what they are proposing decolonising the language means other than being clear that a reason it is widely spread is imperialism.
And that is just not so complex an idea it needs torturous arguments or agonising anxiety about it, in fact it seems to be a pretty straightforward and basic argument that it isn't aided by suspect comparisons and analogising.
The concept of linguistic imperialism is a reminder that the historical root of the dominance of English is four centuries of British Empire. English has a heavy load on its conscience. Its spread through space and time from the end of the 16th century until the end of the empire in the second half of the 20th century occurred in conjunction with imperial expansion, involving land-grabbing, genocide, slavery, famine, subjugation, looting and exploitation. This ought to be central in any discussion about English as a global language, not only because it is historically accurate but also because, in the words of the Nigerian writer Chinua Achebe in 1965, English ‘came as part of a package deal which included many other items of doubtful value and the positive atrocity of racial arrogance and prejudice’.
So, why is the English language not foregrounded in debates about decolonisation?
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
Given that I said “this is a magnificent irony of Brexit” the idea that I didn’t grasp the irony is fairly risible. Like everything else you say
Whoosh straight over your head. That is not what I was saying was ironic. For a wordsmith it's odd you don't understand the language. You don't get it at all do you? I wasn't referring to the irony of what was available through Brexit was I?
Mate, it's not my fault it turns out there is a MASSIVE Brexit Benefit, but it is a benefit to people like me, who voted Leave, but not you, who voted Remain. It is, however, gloriously amusing
You often boast how intelligent you are yet you fail to grasp the point being made repeatedly. Oh and I could take advantage of it like you, unlike most people. However I didn't vote for it nor did I call Lineker a tax cheat and repeatedly bang on about both endlessly only to hypocritically then post endlessly again about how you plan to do what you have stopped many of your fellow countrymen from doing and boast about how you can avoid tax. And you don't get the hypocrisy and the selfishness. Most people in your position would have the decency or common sense no keep quiet about it.
Why the fuck should I stop when it so vividly winds you up, you pompous old twat? I'm having fun
For those actually interested in my temporary emigration plans, they are indeed serious. I can avoid UK tax for a year. That's a big financial boost. Who would NOT do this, given the chance? I am free. My kids are grown. I can still come back to the UK for 90 days of that year
Spending 7 of the last 12 months abroad was kind of a test run of this. It was great fun. So then it's down to my choices. Until recently I thought I had two:
Bangkok
or
Just wandering from country to country (which I did in the spring/summer of 2022, and it was great, but also a little wearing)
Now I realise that Brexit has given me four more choices, as I can get a digital nomad visa in
Portugal
Spain
Croatia
Greece
With relatively tiny taxes
So I have to choose
You could presumably rent out your place in London, pay less for a place in Spain, and only pay 15% on any profit.
There was an Arthur C Clarke short story about British astronauts delaying a return to Earth following a moonbase mission in order to get tax advantages. People will do anything for a buck, eh?
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
But Brexit has stopped a bunch of immigration: unskilled work visas. What it hasn't stopped is low skilled work visas because of the watering down of the skilled visa requirements. But the solution to that isn't to say "oh we should have kept more power with the political elite". It is to take more power back, by kicking the crap out of parties that don't reduce low skilled immigration.
Brits think some jobs are beneath them so good luck with that . All the UK has done is swap immigration from the EU with much more immigration from elsewhere . At the same time robbing Brits of their freedom of movement to 27 other countries .
This is so revealing of your own British exceptionalism, as if "Brits" are a cut above the rest.
"Family of British Alzheimer's sufferer who faces deportation from Sweden because her passport has expired fear she won't survive move to the UK as they vow to continue fight against 'inhumane' immigration chiefs
Kathleen Poole, 74, has been threatened with deportation by Swedish officials Her family fear if the bedbound grandmother is forced back to the UK she will die"
There are no perfect countries of course. Some may have general policies which are more compassionate or effective and so be considered more attractive, but people tend to overlook that those same places might still have some laws or rules which are possibly even worse than ours. Though immigration chiefs being bureaucratic and harsh seems fairly widespread as part of the job.
As nations we do seem to struggle with the idea we should steal the best ideas and policies from each other and not copy the bad bits, as even though we get it we tend to act as though the 'good' nation only does good things, and 'bad' ones only bad.
Having said that I eagerly await an example of Russia of all places having some sound ideas - there have to be a few.
For those actually interested in my temporary emigration plans, they are indeed serious. I can avoid UK tax for a year. That's a big financial boost. Who would NOT do this, given the chance? I am free. My kids are grown. I can still come back to the UK for 90 days of that year
Spending 7 of the last 12 months abroad was kind of a test run of this. It was great fun. So then it's down to my choices. Until recently I thought I had two:
Bangkok
or
Just wandering from country to country (which I did in the spring/summer of 2022, and it was great, but also a little wearing)
Now I realise that Brexit has given me four more choices, as I can get a digital nomad visa in
Portugal
Spain
Croatia
Greece
With relatively tiny taxes
So I have to choose
You could presumably rent out your place in London, pay less for a place in Spain, and only pay 15% on any profit.
Yes. The benefits are many. I am going to do some version of this
I could just wander: do three months Thailand, three months Georgia, three months Spain, bingo. No taxes AT ALL?
For those actually interested in my temporary emigration plans, they are indeed serious. I can avoid UK tax for a year. That's a big financial boost. Who would NOT do this, given the chance? I am free. My kids are grown. I can still come back to the UK for 90 days of that year
Spending 7 of the last 12 months abroad was kind of a test run of this. It was great fun. So then it's down to my choices. Until recently I thought I had two:
Bangkok
or
Just wandering from country to country (which I did in the spring/summer of 2022, and it was great, but also a little wearing)
Now I realise that Brexit has given me four more choices, as I can get a digital nomad visa in
Portugal
Spain
Croatia
Greece
With relatively tiny taxes
So I have to choose
You could presumably rent out your place in London, pay less for a place in Spain, and only pay 15% on any profit.
After bad investments in the early 1900s, Agatha Christie's parents and entire family, short on cash, decamped to the south of France for a year, living in hotels. Renting out their Torquay villa covered the cost of the multiple hotel rooms, with money to spare for meals and living costs.
There was an Arthur C Clarke short story about British astronauts delaying a return to Earth following a moonbase mission in order to get tax advantages. People will do anything for a buck, eh?
ACC's short stories are really good.
Its a pity he's best know for 2001.
I'm not, in general, a huge fan of short stories, but there were quite a few of his which took a kind of mundane approach to things which was quite interesting, like the one about martians discovering Earth had developed the bomb and seeking to bluff us into submission whilst they figured out what to do, told in the form of memos between government departments.
Was somewhat intrigued by an article entitled 'How do you decolonise the English Langage?'.
I don't actually think the point that the English language is widely spread due to Empire is one that is contested, nor that there are concerns about the impact of growth of a global language on others, but I this idea of 'decolonising the mind' as some extension of political or cultural colonisation to be a pretty difficult concept to pursue - the attempts to link it to more concrete examples and symbols of colonialism in the essay to my mind undermine that point not underline it, because it shows how they really are not the same thing, particularly as English usage in other places does take on its own flavour and evolution.
English being a dominant language has impacts, but after thousands of words I don't really follow what they are proposing decolonising the language means other than being clear that a reason it is widely spread is imperialism.
And that is just not so complex an idea it needs torturous arguments or agonising anxiety about it, in fact it seems to be a pretty straightforward and basic argument that it isn't aided by suspect comparisons and analogising.
The concept of linguistic imperialism is a reminder that the historical root of the dominance of English is four centuries of British Empire. English has a heavy load on its conscience. Its spread through space and time from the end of the 16th century until the end of the empire in the second half of the 20th century occurred in conjunction with imperial expansion, involving land-grabbing, genocide, slavery, famine, subjugation, looting and exploitation. This ought to be central in any discussion about English as a global language, not only because it is historically accurate but also because, in the words of the Nigerian writer Chinua Achebe in 1965, English ‘came as part of a package deal which included many other items of doubtful value and the positive atrocity of racial arrogance and prejudice’.
So, why is the English language not foregrounded in debates about decolonisation?
Are we still having folk try and suggest that EU “freedom of movement” rights were of any extra use to anything other than the tiniest minority vs. what we have now? I thought we had got past that sort of disinformation?
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
But Brexit has stopped a bunch of immigration: unskilled work visas. What it hasn't stopped is low skilled work visas because of the watering down of the skilled visa requirements. But the solution to that isn't to say "oh we should have kept more power with the political elite". It is to take more power back, by kicking the crap out of parties that don't reduce low skilled immigration.
Brits think some jobs are beneath them so good luck with that . All the UK has done is swap immigration from the EU with much more immigration from elsewhere . At the same time robbing Brits of their freedom of movement to 27 other countries .
This is so revealing of your own British exceptionalism, as if "Brits" are a cut above the rest.
That is totally illogical. Can you explain?
Plenty of British people do the kind of jobs that @nico679 thinks Brits regard as beneath them. Are they not really British? Should they leave the dirty work to foreigners and do something more befitting their status as Brits?
"Family of British Alzheimer's sufferer who faces deportation from Sweden because her passport has expired fear she won't survive move to the UK as they vow to continue fight against 'inhumane' immigration chiefs
Kathleen Poole, 74, has been threatened with deportation by Swedish officials Her family fear if the bedbound grandmother is forced back to the UK she will die"
The son does seem like a bit of a muppet. He applied for settled status for his mother, but seriously thought that a doctor's note would be a substitute for a passport. Tiresome, but they should have applied for a British passport for her in good time.
People on Twitter are blaming it on Progressive SNP Judicial Reforms. I have NO idea if this is true
It does seem remarkably lenient
Isn't it complicated because he was seventeen when the rape(s?) happened?
Yes. The guidance now is that the male brain does not mature until you are 25 ( and you might think that optimistic on some cases) so you are more prone to impulsive behaviour and have poorer judgment. These are mitigating factors. But wow.
If so, why let people vote or own property until 25.
That guideline is quite wrong. You don’t have to 25 to understand that rape is immoral.
Frankly I'm possibly most shocked at the suggestion a 25 year old man who violently raped a thirteen year old girl would get no more than five years in prison.
I mean, what the fuck? In England that would be fourteen years before we even considered aggravating factors.
As for his being given community service, that's an actual joke. That's disgusting. And for him to appeal his sentence is even more disgusting.
Something seems appallingly wrong here.
Edit - maybe England is too ready to lock people up - the woman given two years for the death of that cyclist springs to mind - but this is actually obscene.
I understand he was 17 she was 13.
Old enough to vote, but not old enough to be punished for rape.
If you want to pontificate on a criminal trial that you know absolutely nothing about you would be wise to keep the outrage within bounds or you sound like a raving idiot.
For those actually interested in my temporary emigration plans, they are indeed serious. I can avoid UK tax for a year. That's a big financial boost. Who would NOT do this, given the chance? I am free. My kids are grown. I can still come back to the UK for 90 days of that year
Spending 7 of the last 12 months abroad was kind of a test run of this. It was great fun. So then it's down to my choices. Until recently I thought I had two:
Bangkok
or
Just wandering from country to country (which I did in the spring/summer of 2022, and it was great, but also a little wearing)
Now I realise that Brexit has given me four more choices, as I can get a digital nomad visa in
Portugal
Spain
Croatia
Greece
With relatively tiny taxes
So I have to choose
You could presumably rent out your place in London, pay less for a place in Spain, and only pay 15% on any profit.
Yes. The benefits are many. I am going to do some version of this
I could just wander: do three months Thailand, three months Georgia, three months Spain, bingo. No taxes AT ALL?
That won't work: the UK will tax you if you can't demonstrate to HMRC you are tax resident somewhere else.
For those actually interested in my temporary emigration plans, they are indeed serious. I can avoid UK tax for a year. That's a big financial boost. Who would NOT do this, given the chance? I am free. My kids are grown. I can still come back to the UK for 90 days of that year
Spending 7 of the last 12 months abroad was kind of a test run of this. It was great fun. So then it's down to my choices. Until recently I thought I had two:
Bangkok
or
Just wandering from country to country (which I did in the spring/summer of 2022, and it was great, but also a little wearing)
Now I realise that Brexit has given me four more choices, as I can get a digital nomad visa in
Portugal
Spain
Croatia
Greece
With relatively tiny taxes
So I have to choose
You could presumably rent out your place in London, pay less for a place in Spain, and only pay 15% on any profit.
After bad investments in the early 1900s, Agatha Christie's parents and entire family, short on cash, decamped to the south of France for a year, living in hotels. Renting out their Torquay villa covered the cost of the multiple hotel rooms, with money to spare for meals and living costs.
People on Twitter are blaming it on Progressive SNP Judicial Reforms. I have NO idea if this is true
It does seem remarkably lenient
Isn't it complicated because he was seventeen when the rape(s?) happened?
Yes. The guidance now is that the male brain does not mature until you are 25 ( and you might think that optimistic on some cases) so you are more prone to impulsive behaviour and have poorer judgment. These are mitigating factors. But wow.
If so, why let people vote or own property until 25.
That guideline is quite wrong. You don’t have to 25 to understand that rape is immoral.
Frankly I'm possibly most shocked at the suggestion a 25 year old man who violently raped a thirteen year old girl would get no more than five years in prison.
I mean, what the fuck? In England that would be fourteen years before we even considered aggravating factors.
As for his being given community service, that's an actual joke. That's disgusting. And for him to appeal his sentence is even more disgusting.
Something seems appallingly wrong here.
Edit - maybe England is too ready to lock people up - the woman given two years for the death of that cyclist springs to mind - but this is actually obscene.
I understand he was 17 she was 13.
Old enough to vote, but not old enough to be punished for rape.
If you want to pontificate on a criminal trial that you know absolutely nothing about you would be wise to keep the outrage within bounds or you sound like a raving idiot.
Well, we actually have the prosecution counsel for THIS CASE on this forum. He has been professionally circumspect, as is only right, and revealed very little. However he has expressed his own surprise at the sentence
Was somewhat intrigued by an article entitled 'How do you decolonise the English Langage?'.
I don't actually think the point that the English language is widely spread due to Empire is one that is contested, nor that there are concerns about the impact of growth of a global language on others, but I this idea of 'decolonising the mind' as some extension of political or cultural colonisation to be a pretty difficult concept to pursue - the attempts to link it to more concrete examples and symbols of colonialism in the essay to my mind undermine that point not underline it, because it shows how they really are not the same thing, particularly as English usage in other places does take on its own flavour and evolution.
English being a dominant language has impacts, but after thousands of words I don't really follow what they are proposing decolonising the language means other than being clear that a reason it is widely spread is imperialism.
And that is just not so complex an idea it needs torturous arguments or agonising anxiety about it, in fact it seems to be a pretty straightforward and basic argument that it isn't aided by suspect comparisons and analogising.
The concept of linguistic imperialism is a reminder that the historical root of the dominance of English is four centuries of British Empire. English has a heavy load on its conscience. Its spread through space and time from the end of the 16th century until the end of the empire in the second half of the 20th century occurred in conjunction with imperial expansion, involving land-grabbing, genocide, slavery, famine, subjugation, looting and exploitation. This ought to be central in any discussion about English as a global language, not only because it is historically accurate but also because, in the words of the Nigerian writer Chinua Achebe in 1965, English ‘came as part of a package deal which included many other items of doubtful value and the positive atrocity of racial arrogance and prejudice’.
So, why is the English language not foregrounded in debates about decolonisation?
I think ChatGPT would summarise it as: English spread by Empire, that bad.
Reminds of one of those charts about good and bad technical writing - if even a simple point cannot be put across in a clear and concise way, that isn't good.
Are we still having folk try and suggest that EU “freedom of movement” rights were of any extra use to anything other than the tiniest minority vs. what we have now? I thought we had got past that sort of disinformation?
Remainers are entitled to feel that losing the right to do something is a little bit like losing something, just as Leavers are entitled to feel that the right to diverge on rules is important even if we don't diverge much in practice.
Are we still having folk try and suggest that EU “freedom of movement” rights were of any extra use to anything other than the tiniest minority vs. what we have now? I thought we had got past that sort of disinformation?
One form of bitterness about losing FoM that I've seen myself is from non-EU immigrants who got British passports on the basis that it would give them free movement throughout the EU and then felt cheated when they lost it.
For those actually interested in my temporary emigration plans, they are indeed serious. I can avoid UK tax for a year. That's a big financial boost. Who would NOT do this, given the chance? I am free. My kids are grown. I can still come back to the UK for 90 days of that year
Spending 7 of the last 12 months abroad was kind of a test run of this. It was great fun. So then it's down to my choices. Until recently I thought I had two:
Bangkok
or
Just wandering from country to country (which I did in the spring/summer of 2022, and it was great, but also a little wearing)
Now I realise that Brexit has given me four more choices, as I can get a digital nomad visa in
Portugal
Spain
Croatia
Greece
With relatively tiny taxes
So I have to choose
You could presumably rent out your place in London, pay less for a place in Spain, and only pay 15% on any profit.
Yes. The benefits are many. I am going to do some version of this
I could just wander: do three months Thailand, three months Georgia, three months Spain, bingo. No taxes AT ALL?
That won't work: the UK will tax you if you can't demonstrate to HMRC you are tax resident somewhere else.
Will they? I have friends who do this and they don't get taxed by the UK
BUT this is new to me, so you could easily be right, I am this moment investigating. Probably I would rent somewhere for a year REALLY cheap - Thailand - then wander?
People on Twitter are blaming it on Progressive SNP Judicial Reforms. I have NO idea if this is true
It does seem remarkably lenient
Isn't it complicated because he was seventeen when the rape(s?) happened?
Yes. The guidance now is that the male brain does not mature until you are 25 ( and you might think that optimistic on some cases) so you are more prone to impulsive behaviour and have poorer judgment. These are mitigating factors. But wow.
If so, why let people vote or own property until 25.
That guideline is quite wrong. You don’t have to 25 to understand that rape is immoral.
Frankly I'm possibly most shocked at the suggestion a 25 year old man who violently raped a thirteen year old girl would get no more than five years in prison.
I mean, what the fuck? In England that would be fourteen years before we even considered aggravating factors.
As for his being given community service, that's an actual joke. That's disgusting. And for him to appeal his sentence is even more disgusting.
Something seems appallingly wrong here.
Edit - maybe England is too ready to lock people up - the woman given two years for the death of that cyclist springs to mind - but this is actually obscene.
BBC News still playing it safe in their photo caption lest people burst a blood vessel about the wife of the king being called queen I see. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65175984
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
Given that I said “this is a magnificent irony of Brexit” the idea that I didn’t grasp the irony is fairly risible. Like everything else you say
Whoosh straight over your head. That is not what I was saying was ironic. For a wordsmith it's odd you don't understand the language. You don't get it at all do you? I wasn't referring to the irony of what was available through Brexit was I?
Mate, it's not my fault it turns out there is a MASSIVE Brexit Benefit, but it is a benefit to people like me, who voted Leave, but not you, who voted Remain. It is, however, gloriously amusing
You often boast how intelligent you are yet you fail to grasp the point being made repeatedly. Oh and I could take advantage of it like you, unlike most people. However I didn't vote for it nor did I call Lineker a tax cheat and repeatedly bang on about both endlessly only to hypocritically then post endlessly again about how you plan to do what you have stopped many of your fellow countrymen from doing and boast about how you can avoid tax. And you don't get the hypocrisy and the selfishness. Most people in your position would have the decency or common sense no keep quiet about it.
Why the fuck should I stop when it so vividly winds you up, you pompous old twat? I'm having fun
Not winding me up, but you are looking pretty stupid with these posts. One day you are complaining about celebs avoiding tax, the next you are posting on how you are going to do it and say 'who would not do it' Do you realise how daft you look.
People on Twitter are blaming it on Progressive SNP Judicial Reforms. I have NO idea if this is true
It does seem remarkably lenient
Isn't it complicated because he was seventeen when the rape(s?) happened?
Yes. The guidance now is that the male brain does not mature until you are 25 ( and you might think that optimistic on some cases) so you are more prone to impulsive behaviour and have poorer judgment. These are mitigating factors. But wow.
If so, why let people vote or own property until 25.
That guideline is quite wrong. You don’t have to 25 to understand that rape is immoral.
Frankly I'm possibly most shocked at the suggestion a 25 year old man who violently raped a thirteen year old girl would get no more than five years in prison.
I mean, what the fuck? In England that would be fourteen years before we even considered aggravating factors.
As for his being given community service, that's an actual joke. That's disgusting. And for him to appeal his sentence is even more disgusting.
Something seems appallingly wrong here.
Edit - maybe England is too ready to lock people up - the woman given two years for the death of that cyclist springs to mind - but this is actually obscene.
I understand he was 17 she was 13.
Old enough to vote, but not old enough to be punished for rape.
If you want to pontificate on a criminal trial that you know absolutely nothing about you would be wise to keep the outrage within bounds or you sound like a raving idiot.
The trial is a secret? That's surprising to me given how much I've read about it in the press. The bottom line is someone found guilty of rape is walking free.
BBC News still playing it safe in their photo caption lest people burst a blood vessel about the wife of the king being called queen I see. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65175984
The coronation would be a good moment to transition.
People on Twitter are blaming it on Progressive SNP Judicial Reforms. I have NO idea if this is true
It does seem remarkably lenient
Isn't it complicated because he was seventeen when the rape(s?) happened?
Yes. The guidance now is that the male brain does not mature until you are 25 ( and you might think that optimistic on some cases) so you are more prone to impulsive behaviour and have poorer judgment. These are mitigating factors. But wow.
If so, why let people vote or own property until 25.
That guideline is quite wrong. You don’t have to 25 to understand that rape is immoral.
Frankly I'm possibly most shocked at the suggestion a 25 year old man who violently raped a thirteen year old girl would get no more than five years in prison.
I mean, what the fuck? In England that would be fourteen years before we even considered aggravating factors.
As for his being given community service, that's an actual joke. That's disgusting. And for him to appeal his sentence is even more disgusting.
Something seems appallingly wrong here.
Edit - maybe England is too ready to lock people up - the woman given two years for the death of that cyclist springs to mind - but this is actually obscene.
I understand he was 17 she was 13.
Old enough to vote, but not old enough to be punished for rape.
If you want to pontificate on a criminal trial that you know absolutely nothing about you would be wise to keep the outrage within bounds or you sound like a raving idiot.
You do know that the prosecutor has expressed surprise at the sentence?
People on Twitter are blaming it on Progressive SNP Judicial Reforms. I have NO idea if this is true
It does seem remarkably lenient
Isn't it complicated because he was seventeen when the rape(s?) happened?
Yes. The guidance now is that the male brain does not mature until you are 25 ( and you might think that optimistic on some cases) so you are more prone to impulsive behaviour and have poorer judgment. These are mitigating factors. But wow.
If so, why let people vote or own property until 25.
That guideline is quite wrong. You don’t have to 25 to understand that rape is immoral.
Frankly I'm possibly most shocked at the suggestion a 25 year old man who violently raped a thirteen year old girl would get no more than five years in prison.
I mean, what the fuck? In England that would be fourteen years before we even considered aggravating factors.
As for his being given community service, that's an actual joke. That's disgusting. And for him to appeal his sentence is even more disgusting.
Something seems appallingly wrong here.
Edit - maybe England is too ready to lock people up - the woman given two years for the death of that cyclist springs to mind - but this is actually obscene.
I understand he was 17 she was 13.
Old enough to vote, but not old enough to be punished for rape.
If you want to pontificate on a criminal trial that you know absolutely nothing about you would be wise to keep the outrage within bounds or you sound like a raving idiot.
The trial is a secret? That's surprising to me given how much I've read about it in the press. The bottom line is someone found guilty of rape is walking free.
Well continue to listen to the wisdom of the mob then.
People on Twitter are blaming it on Progressive SNP Judicial Reforms. I have NO idea if this is true
It does seem remarkably lenient
Isn't it complicated because he was seventeen when the rape(s?) happened?
Yes. The guidance now is that the male brain does not mature until you are 25 ( and you might think that optimistic on some cases) so you are more prone to impulsive behaviour and have poorer judgment. These are mitigating factors. But wow.
If so, why let people vote or own property until 25.
That guideline is quite wrong. You don’t have to 25 to understand that rape is immoral.
Frankly I'm possibly most shocked at the suggestion a 25 year old man who violently raped a thirteen year old girl would get no more than five years in prison.
I mean, what the fuck? In England that would be fourteen years before we even considered aggravating factors.
As for his being given community service, that's an actual joke. That's disgusting. And for him to appeal his sentence is even more disgusting.
Something seems appallingly wrong here.
Edit - maybe England is too ready to lock people up - the woman given two years for the death of that cyclist springs to mind - but this is actually obscene.
I understand he was 17 she was 13.
Old enough to vote, but not old enough to be punished for rape.
If you want to pontificate on a criminal trial that you know absolutely nothing about you would be wise to keep the outrage within bounds or you sound like a raving idiot.
The trial is a secret? That's surprising to me given how much I've read about it in the press. The bottom line is someone found guilty of rape is walking free.
Well continue to listen to the wisdom of the mob then.
https://hellgatenyc.com/just-another-day-in-court … One by one, as their names and docket numbers were called, the defendants shuffled out from a doorway in the back of the courtroom in shoes from which the laces had been removed, the door briefly swinging wide enough to offer a glimpse of the holding pens where they'd spent the morning, after being transferred from the lock-up at whatever precinct had taken them into custody.
One man was facing charges of assault in the second degree based on allegations that he punched an elderly security guard in the face. Prosecutors asked the judge to set bail at $10,000, noting that he'd failed to appear in court nine times previously, has had his parole revoked twice, and has an open felony case. The defense counsel asked for bail to be set instead at $5,000. "He is a man of very little means," the man's public defender told the judge.
The judge considered this for a moment, before telling the defendant he's setting bail at $7,500, an amount he clearly can't afford. The implication was obvious: He'd be heading to jail on Rikers Island in short order.
"Shut the fuck up," the defendant spit at the judge over the surgical mask pulled down below his face. "Shut the fuck up and suck my dick." The court officers weren't having any of that, and came to take him back, away from the judge, back to the pens. "Oh, you gonna hit me again?" he asked the officer reaching for him. Back through the doorway in handcuffs, out of sight…
BBC News still playing it safe in their photo caption lest people burst a blood vessel about the wife of the king being called queen I see. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65175984
The coronation would be a good moment to transition.
BBC News still playing it safe in their photo caption lest people burst a blood vessel about the wife of the king being called queen I see. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65175984
The coronation would be a good moment to transition.
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
Given that I said “this is a magnificent irony of Brexit” the idea that I didn’t grasp the irony is fairly risible. Like everything else you say
Whoosh straight over your head. That is not what I was saying was ironic. For a wordsmith it's odd you don't understand the language. You don't get it at all do you? I wasn't referring to the irony of what was available through Brexit was I?
Mate, it's not my fault it turns out there is a MASSIVE Brexit Benefit, but it is a benefit to people like me, who voted Leave, but not you, who voted Remain. It is, however, gloriously amusing
You often boast how intelligent you are yet you fail to grasp the point being made repeatedly. Oh and I could take advantage of it like you, unlike most people. However I didn't vote for it nor did I call Lineker a tax cheat and repeatedly bang on about both endlessly only to hypocritically then post endlessly again about how you plan to do what you have stopped many of your fellow countrymen from doing and boast about how you can avoid tax. And you don't get the hypocrisy and the selfishness. Most people in your position would have the decency or common sense no keep quiet about it.
Why the fuck should I stop when it so vividly winds you up, you pompous old twat? I'm having fun
Not winding me up, but you are looking pretty stupid with these posts. One day you are complaining about celebs avoiding tax, the next you are posting on how you are going to do it and say 'who would not do it' Do you realise how daft you look.
Lineker looks like a c*nt because he is always on Twitter being a virtue signalling lefty and calling the Tories Nazis and saying we should let all the migrants in and how dare they privatise the NHS, meanwhile he is busily doing his best (legally!) to avoid giving the tax man £4.9 million, which, if he paid it, and he can afford it, he's ultra wealthy, would be some help in paying for those migrants, that NHS, etc. But what he did was legal so that's that
Me? Well, it may have escaped your attention, but I am definitely NOT a virtue signalling lefty. So I'm not a hypocrite
The one way I am like Lineker is I that am a financially self-interested man who wants to legally avoid paying tax
BBC News still playing it safe in their photo caption lest people burst a blood vessel about the wife of the king being called queen I see. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65175984
The coronation would be a good moment to transition.
For those actually interested in my temporary emigration plans, they are indeed serious. I can avoid UK tax for a year. That's a big financial boost. Who would NOT do this, given the chance? I am free. My kids are grown. I can still come back to the UK for 90 days of that year
Spending 7 of the last 12 months abroad was kind of a test run of this. It was great fun. So then it's down to my choices. Until recently I thought I had two:
Bangkok
or
Just wandering from country to country (which I did in the spring/summer of 2022, and it was great, but also a little wearing)
Now I realise that Brexit has given me four more choices, as I can get a digital nomad visa in
Portugal
Spain
Croatia
Greece
With relatively tiny taxes
So I have to choose
You could presumably rent out your place in London, pay less for a place in Spain, and only pay 15% on any profit.
Yes. The benefits are many. I am going to do some version of this
I could just wander: do three months Thailand, three months Georgia, three months Spain, bingo. No taxes AT ALL?
That won't work: the UK will tax you if you can't demonstrate to HMRC you are tax resident somewhere else.
Will they? I have friends who do this and they don't get taxed by the UK
BUT this is new to me, so you could easily be right, I am this moment investigating. Probably I would rent somewhere for a year REALLY cheap - Thailand - then wander?
I would be very, very careful. Better to pay 15% and be very well covered in the event of any... dispute...
Was somewhat intrigued by an article entitled 'How do you decolonise the English Langage?'.
I don't actually think the point that the English language is widely spread due to Empire is one that is contested, nor that there are concerns about the impact of growth of a global language on others, but I this idea of 'decolonising the mind' as some extension of political or cultural colonisation to be a pretty difficult concept to pursue - the attempts to link it to more concrete examples and symbols of colonialism in the essay to my mind undermine that point not underline it, because it shows how they really are not the same thing, particularly as English usage in other places does take on its own flavour and evolution.
English being a dominant language has impacts, but after thousands of words I don't really follow what they are proposing decolonising the language means other than being clear that a reason it is widely spread is imperialism.
And that is just not so complex an idea it needs torturous arguments or agonising anxiety about it, in fact it seems to be a pretty straightforward and basic argument that it isn't aided by suspect comparisons and analogising.
The concept of linguistic imperialism is a reminder that the historical root of the dominance of English is four centuries of British Empire. English has a heavy load on its conscience. Its spread through space and time from the end of the 16th century until the end of the empire in the second half of the 20th century occurred in conjunction with imperial expansion, involving land-grabbing, genocide, slavery, famine, subjugation, looting and exploitation. This ought to be central in any discussion about English as a global language, not only because it is historically accurate but also because, in the words of the Nigerian writer Chinua Achebe in 1965, English ‘came as part of a package deal which included many other items of doubtful value and the positive atrocity of racial arrogance and prejudice’.
So, why is the English language not foregrounded in debates about decolonisation?
I think ChatGPT would summarise it as: English spread by Empire, that bad.
Reminds of one of those charts about good and bad technical writing - if even a simple point cannot be put across in a clear and concise way, that isn't good.
Languages of successful powers, such as Mandarin, Spanish, Latin, Greek, Urdu, French, and English, become widely adopted.
BBC News still playing it safe in their photo caption lest people burst a blood vessel about the wife of the king being called queen I see. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65175984
The coronation would be a good moment to transition.
Are we still having folk try and suggest that EU “freedom of movement” rights were of any extra use to anything other than the tiniest minority vs. what we have now? I thought we had got past that sort of disinformation?
One form of bitterness about losing FoM that I've seen myself is from non-EU immigrants who got British passports on the basis that it would give them free movement throughout the EU and then felt cheated when they lost it.
I can sympathise with that. Can't you?
They became British citizens for the freedom of movement in the EU, then that was taken away. I'd be bitter
Tho they also have to take it on the chin coz we are a democracy, that's the essence of the UK, and we voted Out, and that was always possible. So there it is
People on Twitter are blaming it on Progressive SNP Judicial Reforms. I have NO idea if this is true
It does seem remarkably lenient
Isn't it complicated because he was seventeen when the rape(s?) happened?
Yes. The guidance now is that the male brain does not mature until you are 25 ( and you might think that optimistic on some cases) so you are more prone to impulsive behaviour and have poorer judgment. These are mitigating factors. But wow.
If so, why let people vote or own property until 25.
That guideline is quite wrong. You don’t have to 25 to understand that rape is immoral.
Frankly I'm possibly most shocked at the suggestion a 25 year old man who violently raped a thirteen year old girl would get no more than five years in prison.
I mean, what the fuck? In England that would be fourteen years before we even considered aggravating factors.
As for his being given community service, that's an actual joke. That's disgusting. And for him to appeal his sentence is even more disgusting.
Something seems appallingly wrong here.
Edit - maybe England is too ready to lock people up - the woman given two years for the death of that cyclist springs to mind - but this is actually obscene.
I understand he was 17 she was 13.
Old enough to vote, but not old enough to be punished for rape.
If you want to pontificate on a criminal trial that you know absolutely nothing about you would be wise to keep the outrage within bounds or you sound like a raving idiot.
The trial is a secret? That's surprising to me given how much I've read about it in the press. The bottom line is someone found guilty of rape is walking free.
Well continue to listen to the wisdom of the mob then.
Your general attitude towards sex cases, expressed here across many years, might be considered unenlightened.
People on Twitter are blaming it on Progressive SNP Judicial Reforms. I have NO idea if this is true
It does seem remarkably lenient
Isn't it complicated because he was seventeen when the rape(s?) happened?
Yes. The guidance now is that the male brain does not mature until you are 25 ( and you might think that optimistic on some cases) so you are more prone to impulsive behaviour and have poorer judgment. These are mitigating factors. But wow.
If so, why let people vote or own property until 25.
That guideline is quite wrong. You don’t have to 25 to understand that rape is immoral.
Frankly I'm possibly most shocked at the suggestion a 25 year old man who violently raped a thirteen year old girl would get no more than five years in prison.
I mean, what the fuck? In England that would be fourteen years before we even considered aggravating factors.
As for his being given community service, that's an actual joke. That's disgusting. And for him to appeal his sentence is even more disgusting.
Something seems appallingly wrong here.
Edit - maybe England is too ready to lock people up - the woman given two years for the death of that cyclist springs to mind - but this is actually obscene.
I understand he was 17 she was 13.
And? Rape is rape.
You should have taken up the law. There's nothing to it.
For those actually interested in my temporary emigration plans, they are indeed serious. I can avoid UK tax for a year. That's a big financial boost. Who would NOT do this, given the chance? I am free. My kids are grown. I can still come back to the UK for 90 days of that year
Spending 7 of the last 12 months abroad was kind of a test run of this. It was great fun. So then it's down to my choices. Until recently I thought I had two:
Bangkok
or
Just wandering from country to country (which I did in the spring/summer of 2022, and it was great, but also a little wearing)
Now I realise that Brexit has given me four more choices, as I can get a digital nomad visa in
Portugal
Spain
Croatia
Greece
With relatively tiny taxes
So I have to choose
You could presumably rent out your place in London, pay less for a place in Spain, and only pay 15% on any profit.
Yes. The benefits are many. I am going to do some version of this
I could just wander: do three months Thailand, three months Georgia, three months Spain, bingo. No taxes AT ALL?
That won't work: the UK will tax you if you can't demonstrate to HMRC you are tax resident somewhere else.
Will they? I have friends who do this and they don't get taxed by the UK
BUT this is new to me, so you could easily be right, I am this moment investigating. Probably I would rent somewhere for a year REALLY cheap - Thailand - then wander?
I would be very, very careful. Better to pay 15% and be very well covered in the event of any... dispute...
Yes, good advice. I might go to an expert for an hour's guidance
However the HMRC website is pretty adamant that if you are only in the UK for less than 90 days, then you are deemed a non resident and won't be taxed. Black and white. The disputes seem to come when you stay more than 90 days in the UK but less than 183 and claim non resident status. That's when it gets iffy?
The HMRC website says nothing about you needing to prove you are tax resident elsewhere
People on Twitter are blaming it on Progressive SNP Judicial Reforms. I have NO idea if this is true
It does seem remarkably lenient
Isn't it complicated because he was seventeen when the rape(s?) happened?
Yes. The guidance now is that the male brain does not mature until you are 25 ( and you might think that optimistic on some cases) so you are more prone to impulsive behaviour and have poorer judgment. These are mitigating factors. But wow.
If so, why let people vote or own property until 25.
That guideline is quite wrong. You don’t have to 25 to understand that rape is immoral.
Frankly I'm possibly most shocked at the suggestion a 25 year old man who violently raped a thirteen year old girl would get no more than five years in prison.
I mean, what the fuck? In England that would be fourteen years before we even considered aggravating factors.
As for his being given community service, that's an actual joke. That's disgusting. And for him to appeal his sentence is even more disgusting.
Something seems appallingly wrong here.
Edit - maybe England is too ready to lock people up - the woman given two years for the death of that cyclist springs to mind - but this is actually obscene.
I understand he was 17 she was 13.
Old enough to vote, but not old enough to be punished for rape.
If you want to pontificate on a criminal trial that you know absolutely nothing about you would be wise to keep the outrage within bounds or you sound like a raving idiot.
The trial is a secret? That's surprising to me given how much I've read about it in the press. The bottom line is someone found guilty of rape is walking free.
Well continue to listen to the wisdom of the mob then.
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
Given that I said “this is a magnificent irony of Brexit” the idea that I didn’t grasp the irony is fairly risible. Like everything else you say
Whoosh straight over your head. That is not what I was saying was ironic. For a wordsmith it's odd you don't understand the language. You don't get it at all do you? I wasn't referring to the irony of what was available through Brexit was I?
Mate, it's not my fault it turns out there is a MASSIVE Brexit Benefit, but it is a benefit to people like me, who voted Leave, but not you, who voted Remain. It is, however, gloriously amusing
You often boast how intelligent you are yet you fail to grasp the point being made repeatedly. Oh and I could take advantage of it like you, unlike most people. However I didn't vote for it nor did I call Lineker a tax cheat and repeatedly bang on about both endlessly only to hypocritically then post endlessly again about how you plan to do what you have stopped many of your fellow countrymen from doing and boast about how you can avoid tax. And you don't get the hypocrisy and the selfishness. Most people in your position would have the decency or common sense no keep quiet about it.
Why the fuck should I stop when it so vividly winds you up, you pompous old twat? I'm having fun
Not winding me up, but you are looking pretty stupid with these posts. One day you are complaining about celebs avoiding tax, the next you are posting on how you are going to do it and say 'who would not do it' Do you realise how daft you look.
Lineker looks like a c*nt because he is always on Twitter being a virtue signalling lefty and calling the Tories Nazis and saying we should let all the migrants in and how dare they privatise the NHS, meanwhile he is busily doing his best (legally!) to avoid giving the tax man £4.9 million, which, if he paid it, and he can afford it, he's ultra wealthy, would be some help in paying for those migrants, that NHS, etc. But what he did was legal so that's that
Me? Well, it may have escaped your attention, but I am definitely NOT a virtue signalling lefty. So I'm not a hypocrite
The one way I am like Lineker is I that am a financially self-interested man who wants to legally avoid paying tax
God we are going around this loop again. Like many subjects you write on you don't actually have the knowledge, but are happy to pontificate with certainty. This is a reminder of another of your spectacular ironic posts from the past. All Lineker did was claim to be self employed, which on the face of it he was and which the law found him to be. Exactly the same as yourself. Yet you were happy to get stuck into his tax affairs over and over and over again for doing precisely what you do. And you don't get it.
People on Twitter are blaming it on Progressive SNP Judicial Reforms. I have NO idea if this is true
It does seem remarkably lenient
Isn't it complicated because he was seventeen when the rape(s?) happened?
Yes. The guidance now is that the male brain does not mature until you are 25 ( and you might think that optimistic on some cases) so you are more prone to impulsive behaviour and have poorer judgment. These are mitigating factors. But wow.
If so, why let people vote or own property until 25.
That guideline is quite wrong. You don’t have to 25 to understand that rape is immoral.
Frankly I'm possibly most shocked at the suggestion a 25 year old man who violently raped a thirteen year old girl would get no more than five years in prison.
I mean, what the fuck? In England that would be fourteen years before we even considered aggravating factors.
As for his being given community service, that's an actual joke. That's disgusting. And for him to appeal his sentence is even more disgusting.
Something seems appallingly wrong here.
Edit - maybe England is too ready to lock people up - the woman given two years for the death of that cyclist springs to mind - but this is actually obscene.
I understand he was 17 she was 13.
Old enough to vote, but not old enough to be punished for rape.
If you want to pontificate on a criminal trial that you know absolutely nothing about you would be wise to keep the outrage within bounds or you sound like a raving idiot.
The trial is a secret? That's surprising to me given how much I've read about it in the press. The bottom line is someone found guilty of rape is walking free.
Well continue to listen to the wisdom of the mob then.
Your general attitude towards sex cases, expressed here across many years, might be considered unenlightened.
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
But Brexit has stopped a bunch of immigration: unskilled work visas. What it hasn't stopped is low skilled work visas because of the watering down of the skilled visa requirements. But the solution to that isn't to say "oh we should have kept more power with the political elite". It is to take more power back, by kicking the crap out of parties that don't reduce low skilled immigration.
Brits think some jobs are beneath them so good luck with that . All the UK has done is swap immigration from the EU with much more immigration from elsewhere . At the same time robbing Brits of their freedom of movement to 27 other countries .
This is so revealing of your own British exceptionalism, as if "Brits" are a cut above the rest.
That is totally illogical. Can you explain?
Plenty of British people do the kind of jobs that @nico679 thinks Brits regard as beneath them. Are they not really British? Should they leave the dirty work to foreigners and do something more befitting their status as Brits?
That's not what I took from what he was saying. We have swapped one group of immigrants for another and in the process have lose our right to freedom of movement to 27 countries.
@leon I have only just seen your comment in reply to one of my comments. I repeat what I say because you seem to fail to grasp the outrageous irony, not for the first time, in your posts. The fact that you can't see the irony of making post after post in the last few days on exploiting a form of freedom of movement for you in the EU having voted against it for the rest of the population and also boast about how you will be avoiding taxation after making post after post accusing Lineker of being a tax cheat is utterly breathtaking and supremely selfish.
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
Given that I said “this is a magnificent irony of Brexit” the idea that I didn’t grasp the irony is fairly risible. Like everything else you say
Whoosh straight over your head. That is not what I was saying was ironic. For a wordsmith it's odd you don't understand the language. You don't get it at all do you? I wasn't referring to the irony of what was available through Brexit was I?
Mate, it's not my fault it turns out there is a MASSIVE Brexit Benefit, but it is a benefit to people like me, who voted Leave, but not you, who voted Remain. It is, however, gloriously amusing
You often boast how intelligent you are yet you fail to grasp the point being made repeatedly. Oh and I could take advantage of it like you, unlike most people. However I didn't vote for it nor did I call Lineker a tax cheat and repeatedly bang on about both endlessly only to hypocritically then post endlessly again about how you plan to do what you have stopped many of your fellow countrymen from doing and boast about how you can avoid tax. And you don't get the hypocrisy and the selfishness. Most people in your position would have the decency or common sense no keep quiet about it.
Why the fuck should I stop when it so vividly winds you up, you pompous old twat? I'm having fun
Not winding me up, but you are looking pretty stupid with these posts. One day you are complaining about celebs avoiding tax, the next you are posting on how you are going to do it and say 'who would not do it' Do you realise how daft you look.
Lineker looks like a c*nt because he is always on Twitter being a virtue signalling lefty and calling the Tories Nazis and saying we should let all the migrants in and how dare they privatise the NHS, meanwhile he is busily doing his best (legally!) to avoid giving the tax man £4.9 million, which, if he paid it, and he can afford it, he's ultra wealthy, would be some help in paying for those migrants, that NHS, etc. But what he did was legal so that's that
Me? Well, it may have escaped your attention, but I am definitely NOT a virtue signalling lefty. So I'm not a hypocrite
The one way I am like Lineker is I that am a financially self-interested man who wants to legally avoid paying tax
Move to Sark.
No income tax, no VAT, no capital gains tax.
The only problem is you'll be bored to tears by day 3.
Comments
@NicholasTyrone
I always wondered what happened to Godfrey Bloom. And today I’ve found out. It’s worse than I could have possibly imagined.
“The author is pleased that he is not required to provide an explanation for this event.”
I was trying to remember what fool was now leading UKIP after they went through around a half dozen in a couple of years, including one Richard Braine. Turns out it's still Neil Hamilton.
How many other journos and politicos do that ?
You also posted that Brexit has failed to stop migration. You said that in surprise, yet we all told you that would happen and you took no notice. Now you are surprised and plan to bugger off leaving your mess behind you.
And you don't get this! You don't get it at all. You have no shame in posting this stuff.
The causes are less clear; probably a mixture of NHS pressure, conditions not diagnosed during the COVID crisis, and new COVID deaths.
Re Godders, I’d forgotten about that twat. I’m sure the Finns have happy memories of 109 years of Russian occupation and the Winter War. H
See where it ended when I asked it to summarise the article in one word
It warns that if it catches you doing "bad shit", they will kick you off:
Oh my goodness, simpering sycophancy from Witchell and Edwards regarding "Queen Camilla" and the Coronation on BBC Ten O' Clock News. Pass the sick bucket.
I don't actually think the point that the English language is widely spread due to Empire is one that is contested, nor that there are concerns about the impact of growth of a global language on others, but I this idea of 'decolonising the mind' as some extension of political or cultural colonisation to be a pretty difficult concept to pursue - the attempts to link it to more concrete examples and symbols of colonialism in the essay to my mind undermine that point not underline it, because it shows how they really are not the same thing, particularly as English usage in other places does take on its own flavour and evolution.
English being a dominant language has impacts, but after thousands of words I don't really follow what they are proposing decolonising the language means other than being clear that a reason it is widely spread is imperialism.
And that is just not so complex an idea it needs torturous arguments or agonising anxiety about it, in fact it seems to be a pretty straightforward and basic argument that it isn't aided by suspect comparisons and analogising.
The concept of linguistic imperialism is a reminder that the historical root of the dominance of English is four centuries of British Empire. English has a heavy load on its conscience. Its spread through space and time from the end of the 16th century until the end of the empire in the second half of the 20th century occurred in conjunction with imperial expansion, involving land-grabbing, genocide, slavery, famine, subjugation, looting and exploitation. This ought to be central in any discussion about English as a global language, not only because it is historically accurate but also because, in the words of the Nigerian writer Chinua Achebe in 1965, English ‘came as part of a package deal which included many other items of doubtful value and the positive atrocity of racial arrogance and prejudice’.
So, why is the English language not foregrounded in debates about decolonisation?
https://aeon.co/essays/how-do-you-decolonise-the-english-language?utm_source=pocket-newtab-global-en-GB
Spending 7 of the last 12 months abroad was kind of a test run of this. It was great fun. So then it's down to my choices. Until recently I thought I had two:
Bangkok
or
Just wandering from country to country (which I did in the spring/summer of 2022, and it was great, but also a little wearing)
Now I realise that Brexit has given me four more choices, as I can get a digital nomad visa in
Portugal
Spain
Croatia
Greece
With relatively tiny taxes
So I have to choose
PS When did 'foreground' become a verb?
Italians claiming unemployment benefit must stop believing farming is beneath them and get out into the fields to pick fruit and vegetables to help solve a chronic labour shortage, the minister for agriculture has said.
As experts report that the output of tomatoes, melons, apples and wine is at risk this year because of a shortfall of 100,000 pickers and farm hands, Francesco Lollobrigida said that too many people were idling at home claiming dole.
“We need to help those who can work to understand that a job in agriculture is not demeaning,” Lollobrigida told winemakers at a wine fair in Verona. “I say that to all those who think they can stay on the sofa and claim benefits and believe that working in agriculture is unworthy and only fit for slaves. [Those who don’t] want to go to work must not be a burden for others.”
With a shortage of 20,000 grape pickers this season, the farmer’s lobby group Coldiretti has said that a new scheme to tempt students, pensioners and the unemployed to earn money picking grapes would give them “an experience in the open air, in contact with nature”.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/italians-told-to-get-on-their-bikes-and-pick-fruit-and-veg-hm26dfwml (Paywall)
The answer is capital investment and technological progress where possible and higher wages where it isn't.
It was rape, she was 13, he needs to do time
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11936641/Family-British-Alzheimers-suffer-fear-die-deported-Sweden-UK.html
"Family of British Alzheimer's sufferer who faces deportation from Sweden because her passport has expired fear she won't survive move to the UK as they vow to continue fight against 'inhumane' immigration chiefs
Kathleen Poole, 74, has been threatened with deportation by Swedish officials
Her family fear if the bedbound grandmother is forced back to the UK she will die"
Its a pity he's best know for 2001.
As nations we do seem to struggle with the idea we should steal the best ideas and policies from each other and not copy the bad bits, as even though we get it we tend to act as though the 'good' nation only does good things, and 'bad' ones only bad.
Having said that I eagerly await an example of Russia of all places having some sound ideas - there have to be a few.
I could just wander: do three months Thailand, three months Georgia, three months Spain, bingo. No taxes AT ALL?
Perhaps Leon will favour us with a Mystery Flint.
It does not have a point.
Just go back to Anglo Saxon.
Reminds of one of those charts about good and bad technical writing - if even a simple point cannot be put across in a clear and concise way, that isn't good.
BUT this is new to me, so you could easily be right, I am this moment investigating. Probably I would rent somewhere for a year REALLY cheap - Thailand - then wander?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65175984
https://hellgatenyc.com/just-another-day-in-court
… One by one, as their names and docket numbers were called, the defendants shuffled out from a doorway in the back of the courtroom in shoes from which the laces had been removed, the door briefly swinging wide enough to offer a glimpse of the holding pens where they'd spent the morning, after being transferred from the lock-up at whatever precinct had taken them into custody.
One man was facing charges of assault in the second degree based on allegations that he punched an elderly security guard in the face. Prosecutors asked the judge to set bail at $10,000, noting that he'd failed to appear in court nine times previously, has had his parole revoked twice, and has an open felony case. The defense counsel asked for bail to be set instead at $5,000. "He is a man of very little means," the man's public defender told the judge.
The judge considered this for a moment, before telling the defendant he's setting bail at $7,500, an amount he clearly can't afford. The implication was obvious: He'd be heading to jail on Rikers Island in short order.
"Shut the fuck up," the defendant spit at the judge over the surgical mask pulled down below his face. "Shut the fuck up and suck my dick." The court officers weren't having any of that, and came to take him back, away from the judge, back to the pens. "Oh, you gonna hit me again?" he asked the officer reaching for him. Back through the doorway in handcuffs, out of sight…
Me? Well, it may have escaped your attention, but I am definitely NOT a virtue signalling lefty. So I'm not a hypocrite
The one way I am like Lineker is I that am a financially self-interested man who wants to legally avoid paying tax
Well, no shit, Sherlock.
They became British citizens for the freedom of movement in the EU, then that was taken away. I'd be bitter
Tho they also have to take it on the chin coz we are a democracy, that's the essence of the UK, and we voted Out, and that was always possible. So there it is
But I can understand their resentful emotions
However the HMRC website is pretty adamant that if you are only in the UK for less than 90 days, then you are deemed a non resident and won't be taxed. Black and white. The disputes seem to come when you stay more than 90 days in the UK but less than 183 and claim non resident status. That's when it gets iffy?
The HMRC website says nothing about you needing to prove you are tax resident elsewhere
No income tax, no VAT, no capital gains tax.
The only problem is you'll be bored to tears by day 3.
https://www.countryliving.com/uk/wildlife/countryside/a33602514/island-sark-new-residents/