The rear-guard action vs Reform probably more important for the Tories at this point.
We know though at most only a third of the Reform vote would return to the Conservatives. About one sixth would vote Labour and half would stay at home if Reform decided not to fight the next election.
That trims (not slashes) the Labour lead by a (massive) two points.
I suspect Reform are strongest where the Conservatives are strongest so their vote piling up in seats with large Conservative majorities may favour Labour but not much. We saw a hint of this in the Clacton constituency polling.
‘We know though at most only a third of the Reform vote would return to the Conservatives. About one sixth would vote Labour and half would stay at home if Reform decided not to fight the next election.“
No. We Don’t know that Stodge.
If Tories are two points lower next Friday, and Reform two points higher, you posting here that only a third of that 2% will go back to Tory’s at the election and one sixth of that 2% is more likely to go Labour?
No you won’t say that, because to say that about movement over just 1 week would be flipping daft, would it not?
So how long does it have to be with Reform for it to be solid and come under the one third one sixth sub sample questions?
I’m saying never. I’m saying Reform get a PV under 4% at the GE, as soon as election called everything above 4% ref goes 100% straight over to Tories, and you can’t argue with me, because you can’t possibly know I am wrong.
Stop being such a dogmatic, tin-eared, insensitive twat. I was teasing him earlier but actually @kinabalu has written quite eloquently if briefly about his problems with booze addiction. He knows this subject
PB has morphed into a self help group for ageing and cantankerous men who know too much about polling and often need to lose weight but we are also that, a social group, and your remarks are antisocial and crude, so do shut up
Well this makes a pleasant change. Normally if I see I've been tagged by you I brace myself for something gratuitous and upsetting.
Well, if you stopped your effete attempts to get me banned, or your snide accusations that I’m some lurid Nazi, perhaps I’d be a little nicer to you
However you are a valued old voice in the pub of PB, which is pleasantly situated in the Belsize Park of civilised debate, and I will defend any of the regulars against obviously unfair criticism, or crude insults, even including you
I've never tried to get you (or anyone) banned. The one single occasion you're referring to was actually the dead opposite. I saw you posting images that had an "AI" feel to them and I thought to myself, "Oh no, if he does that he'll be banned because the Site has very firm rules against it. I'd better just nip in and give him a heads up so that that doesn't happen. Maybe he isn't thinking straight today." And it worked. You pointed out that the image was not AI (it was just a photo of a doll you had in your bedroom) and therefore all was well. Because of me.
As for "lurid Nazi", I doubt I've ever said that about you but if I have it was unfair and injudicious (I was probably on my 3rd sherry glass of wine) and I'm happy to resile. Lurid, yes, but Nazi would be seriously overegging it. You're vanilla hard(ish) right of the National Populist variety. Nothing that terrible.
Backing down in the face of ardent irrationality just makes you look limp.
But I never have called him a Nazi or tried to get him banned. Which I suppose IS a bit limp, come to think of it. Shape up me!
He’s not a Nazi simply because currently it would make him a pariah.
If the Nazis were at 15% of the UK polls, he’d be out there claiming to have been a founder member.
No-one who has read any history can fail to see how dangerous are his ilk.
Do you honestly think this is a sane discourse and reflects well on you?
I understand I tease you about your only friend, the dog, and I get that you felt humiliated after Covid, but really. Get a kind of life. Maybe a second dog. Threesomes
The nazis thankfully arent on 15% the lds rarely poll above 10%
I don't know how many of you have perused the social media posts of Dawn Queva, a schedule coordinator at BBC 3 but they make for interesting reading, if that is the right word.
Why highlight what is just one more deranged anti semitic rant when there are thousands (millions?) out there. Well she works for the national broadcaster and if an employee of GB News said something similarly offensive I think it is fair to say they'd be many a person wanting to focus on it. Secondly there is the creative use of language from someone who is clearly not without a vocabulary or I presume education. Finally there is the frankness of her behaviour. We all know there are plenty of bigots who hide their beliefs for fear of being ostracised by polite society. Yet presumably she doesn't seem to have considered that holding such views would cause her to be in trouble with the guardians of mainstream cultural life in the UK. What sort of social ecosystem does she inhabit?
You'd be surprised how little time I spend perusing the social media posts of minor channel schedule coordinators, BBC3 or GB News. Heck, I do not even know what a schedule coordinator is.
Let me guess, the Free Speech union has found another cause to champion? Some right wing or left wing techie has programmed an AI chatbot to search the social media posts of anyone even remotely in the public eye in order to get them cancelled?
I suspect even some seasoned antisemites might think she'd gone too far.
I'd never heard 'Holohoax' before, referring to the holocaust being a hoax. That's quite impressively nasty.
I don't think she's going to hold onto her job for much longer. In fact, I can imagine it may be quite hard for her to get other jobs in future as well.
Plenty of employers not yet into the habit of googling people.
Depressingly, I'd say the norotoriety will probably open some doors.
Weren't we reading just the other day that both the Conservative and Labour Parties are scouring candidates' social media posts for possible embarrassment? Their opponents' too, I expect. Now this can be automated, I expect everyone will be at it. Employers, newspapers, police and intelligence agencies.
Deadline - the entertainment industry site, broke the Dawn Queva story, so very much in their purview what behind the scenes ent industry people say or do.
The posts are so horrific it can't be said to be a free speech issue. A company wouldn't employ someone who was openly Nazi as they'd be a threat to other employees. Her posts are indistinguishable from that and dangerous. What's odd is that she's not been shown the door straight away.
The 'any other type of racism' thing can be overplayed. But it's difficult to imagine a manager who'd gone on several tirades full of other racist epithets wouldn't have been unceremoniously shown the door the moment the BBC were asked for comment and checked it was true.
Just got that landing page again. This is some more of what it says, in case anyone's interested.
"This is the default welcome page used to test the correct operation of the Apache2 server after installation on Ubuntu systems. It is based on the equivalent page on Debian, from which the Ubuntu Apache packaging is derived. If you can read this page, it means that the Apache HTTP server installed at this site is working properly. You should replace this file (located at /var/www/html/index.html) before continuing to operate your HTTP server.
If you are a normal user of this web site and don't know what this page is about, this probably means that the site is currently unavailable due to maintenance. If the problem persists, please contact the site's administrator."
Standard template text for a clean install. There is supposed to be a redirect from the page you are hitting:
Just got that landing page again. This is some more of what it says, in case anyone's interested.
"This is the default welcome page used to test the correct operation of the Apache2 server after installation on Ubuntu systems. It is based on the equivalent page on Debian, from which the Ubuntu Apache packaging is derived. If you can read this page, it means that the Apache HTTP server installed at this site is working properly. You should replace this file (located at /var/www/html/index.html) before continuing to operate your HTTP server.
If you are a normal user of this web site and don't know what this page is about, this probably means that the site is currently unavailable due to maintenance. If the problem persists, please contact the site's administrator."
Standard template text for a clean install. There is supposed to be a redirect from the page you are hitting:
@rcs1000 will doubtless be on the case shortly. The other thing users like us can do is update bookmarks to go straight to the https:// version. The trouble is that on MS Edge, at least, it is not easy to update quicklinks rather than bookmarks.
OK fuck it I will tell you. I did advise you to wait for a more seemly hour, but anyway
That photo shows number 7, road 310, Phnom Penh, in the city's trendy BKK district
It may now be full of pho bars and expat pubs and Ethiopian coffee roasters, but back in the day BKK was a very sleepy suburb yet with a faintly seedy reputation. At number 7 there was, in particular, a famous institution, Madam Chum's bordello and opium den
For decades until the Khmer Rouge anyone who was anyone, with low morals, came here
Along with nice pipes of opium it was notorious as the place where the French indochinese sex trick of the "Cholon Duck" was, apparently, perfected. Originating in the stews of Saigon, at Madam Chum's they took the "Cholon Duck" to a new level
First, a butt naked duck had its head stuck in a drawer, then the drawer was shut tight enough, trapping the duck with its arse sticking out. The panic meant the duck's rear orifice opened wider, allowing the drunk and opiated customer to penetrate more easily, with his virile member. This further increased the panic of the duck - being fucked, without even foreplay - so the orifice then tightened and loosened and tightened, in a cycle, causing "tremendous pleasure" for the duck-violator
Furthermore, the flapping of the duck's angry feet against the testicles led, it is said, to the most intense orgasms ever
After the client had enjoyed his wicked way with the duck, it was quickly despatched (if it hadn't died of a heart attack), it was then defeathered, cooked and served to the same customer in a light curry sauce
Funnily enough a relative of Princess Diana told me a similar story about geese and the English upper classes, with the variation that the drawer was slammed shut while the goose was penetrated. I’d imagine a goose would give your bawbag a right battering. Don’t remember any post coital cooking though, probably handed over to the starving peasantry with a knowing smirk.
I am glad Conan-Doyle's publisher persuaded him to remove the more lurid passages from The Blue Carbuncle.
Streisand theft of Range Rovers into most read story on BBC news
Attack insurance companies
I wonder if insurance companies are starting to take into account the danger posed by SUVs to pedestrians/cyclists? That could be part of the reason why they are so expensive to insure. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68188064
Has anyone visited Luxembourg since they made public transport free for everyone, including tourists? Tom Scott video about it from Feb 2020, just before the policy was implemented.
Has anyone visited Luxembourg since they made public transport free for everyone, including tourists? Tom Scott video about it from Feb 2020, just before the policy was implemented.
No, but interesting to see the same arguments in that video that we have in the UK.
Free public transport is not the solution. Better to invest the money and get to a stage where you never need to check a timetable or app - the bus or train comes so often, and goes to so many places, it doesn't matter when you leave the house.
In fact, reliability and frequency is part of the reason why I started cycling. Fed up of waiting for buses that were stuck in traffic.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
My 6 Nations predictions =====≈===== I was too late to predict the France - Ireland game - FWIW I was going with Ireland but by 7 pts. Did not expect such an emphatic win...can not see anyone stopping an Irish Grand Slam.
Italy England should be straightforward enough - Italy have toughened up a bit but still England by 20 pts
Wales Scotland will be closer - but Wales have too many young inexperienced players to match Scotlands wiser heads - Scotland by 7 pts (first win in Cardiff in 22 years). Unless Wales can get some of their injured players back we wont beat Italy either!!
My 6 Nations predictions =====≈===== I was too late to predict the France - Ireland game - FWIW I was going with Ireland but by 7 pts. Did not expect such an emphatic win...can not see anyone stopping an Irish Grand Slam.
Italy England should be straightforward enough - Italy have toughened up a bit but still England by 20 pts
Wales Scotland will be closer - but Wales have too many young inexperienced players to match Scotlands wiser heads - Scotland by 7 pts (first win in Cardiff in 22 years). Unless Wales can get some of their injured players back we wont beat Italy either!!
Yeah, didn’t exactly expect the Irish to get a rout in Marseille, now looking ominous for everyone else trying to stop the green machine running to another Slam.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
Is that the case with AI ?
Surely it's more that we're already rather scared of what it might do, if it proves as powerful as some predict. That it's already surprisingly competent at some tasks, but is unreliable, and we don't entirely understand how it works, is something of a truism.
Just got that landing page again. This is some more of what it says, in case anyone's interested.
"This is the default welcome page used to test the correct operation of the Apache2 server after installation on Ubuntu systems. It is based on the equivalent page on Debian, from which the Ubuntu Apache packaging is derived. If you can read this page, it means that the Apache HTTP server installed at this site is working properly. You should replace this file (located at /var/www/html/index.html) before continuing to operate your HTTP server.
If you are a normal user of this web site and don't know what this page is about, this probably means that the site is currently unavailable due to maintenance. If the problem persists, please contact the site's administrator."
Standard template text for a clean install. There is supposed to be a redirect from the page you are hitting:
@rcs1000 will doubtless be on the case shortly. The other thing users like us can do is update bookmarks to go straight to the https:// version. The trouble is that on MS Edge, at least, it is not easy to update quicklinks rather than bookmarks.
396 for India, a good score but not unbeatable. After the last Test, anything is possible!
On that pitch, a good effort to restrict them to less than 400, after 22 year old Jaiswal's great innings. Almost carried his bat, too. India would be struggling without him.
An opener who also has the fastest 50 in IPL history.
Just got that landing page again. This is some more of what it says, in case anyone's interested.
"This is the default welcome page used to test the correct operation of the Apache2 server after installation on Ubuntu systems. It is based on the equivalent page on Debian, from which the Ubuntu Apache packaging is derived. If you can read this page, it means that the Apache HTTP server installed at this site is working properly. You should replace this file (located at /var/www/html/index.html) before continuing to operate your HTTP server.
If you are a normal user of this web site and don't know what this page is about, this probably means that the site is currently unavailable due to maintenance. If the problem persists, please contact the site's administrator."
Standard template text for a clean install. There is supposed to be a redirect from the page you are hitting:
rcs1000 will doubtless be on the case shortly. The other thing users like us can do is update bookmarks to go straight to the https:// version. The trouble is that on MS Edge, at least, it is not easy to update quicklinks rather than bookmarks.
MS edge is ugh. Why are you using it.?
I use the three main browsers. Firefox for mail, Edge for pb, news and youtube, Chrome for ecommerce. It makes it easier to find stuff on a crowded desktop. And yes, I know I should use a single browser and tab groups and tiled windows but this is easier.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
You’ll need to earn 10m yen ($68k) and it’s only valid for six months, but an amazing opportunity to see a country that’s usually quite closed to immigrants.
Personally I’m interested in going to Expo 2025 in Kyoto, having seen it in my own country of residence in 2021, to be combined with the F1 race in Suzuka.
England trying their hardest to throw it away. India helpfully co-operate by flubbing the chance but they’ll need to do that a lot more if England are to prosper.
What’s a competitive score on this pitch under these circumstances? I would have said anything under 600 sees India still very much in the game.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
England trying their hardest to throw it away. India helpfully co-operate by flubbing the chance but they’ll need to do that a lot more if England are to prosper.
What’s a competitive score on this pitch under these circumstances? I would have said anything under 600 sees India still very much in the game.
When you gave two teams that can score big scores very quickly, along with a vulnerability to abject collapses, prediction isn't easy.
I would be surprised by 4/1 to either England or India.
England trying their hardest to throw it away. India helpfully co-operate by flubbing the chance but they’ll need to do that a lot more if England are to prosper.
What’s a competitive score on this pitch under these circumstances? I would have said anything under 600 sees India still very much in the game.
When you gave two teams that can score big scores very quickly, along with a vulnerability to abject collapses, prediction isn't easy.
I would be surprised by 4/1 to either England or India.
Well, England haven’t made their task any easier with that wicket.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Getting away with things by claiming the technology was ****; not quite the same.
England trying their hardest to throw it away. India helpfully co-operate by flubbing the chance but they’ll need to do that a lot more if England are to prosper.
What’s a competitive score on this pitch under these circumstances? I would have said anything under 600 sees India still very much in the game.
When you gave two teams that can score big scores very quickly, along with a vulnerability to abject collapses, prediction isn't easy.
I would be surprised by 4/1 to either England or India.
(Edit) India still very much in it !
It’s the same ‘fetch’ my dog plays, but with eleven humans running about after the ball
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Yes I think speed cameras had something to do with it.
A lawyer called Nick Freeman made a name for himself challenging speeding tickets by asking for the calibration certificates of speed cameras and speed guns used by police, who also needed to have a training record. It was pretty often the Crown would drop the charges rather than produce calibration certs and training records in court - which suggests they were somewhat less than perfect in keeping record of these things, and that many other motorists who just pleased guilty and took the points could have won if they’d gone to court.
You’ll need to earn 10m yen ($68k) and it’s only valid for six months, but an amazing opportunity to see a country that’s usually quite closed to immigrants.
Personally I’m interested in going to Expo 2025 in Kyoto, having seen it in my own country of residence in 2021, to be combined with the F1 race in Suzuka.
Yeah, it sounds good in principle. Previously you could do 3 months by just showing up on a tourist visa and people used to do that then sod off to Korea for a bit then come back for another 3 months. Also I think it was technically possible to go to immigration and extend a tourist visa. So if you were working remotely and they had no way to know you could basically do this in practice already. But it makes sense to regularize it so you don't have to pretend you're not working and you don't have the lingering uncertainty about the second 3 months.
I expect that when they announce the detail we'll find that they've engineered some way to fuck it up though.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Getting away with things by claiming the technology was ****; not quite the same.
All right, let me rephrase that - ‘by pointing out the technology was imperfect.’
It’s still stupid. Your match your laws to the performance of the enforcement systems, not the other way around.
It is a bit like Goering officially ordering the Luftwaffe that the Allies didn’t have long range fighter capacity despite that fighter being shot down over the Ruhr.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Yes I think speed cameras had something to do with it.
A lawyer called Nick Freeman made a name for himself challenging speeding tickets by asking for the calibration certificates of speed cameras and speed guns used by police, who also needed to have a training record. It was pretty often the Crown would drop the charges rather than produce calibration certs and training records in court - which suggests they were somewhat less than perfect in keeping record of these things, and that many other motorists who just pleased guilty and took the points could have won if they’d gone to court.
This could be another 'miscarriage of justice' - lives destroyed by driving bans and prison sentences based on technically flawed speeding evidence that only the occasional lawyer would have dug into at the time. One of an endless range of dormant and buried injustices, ripe for unearthing.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Yes I think speed cameras had something to do with it.
A lawyer called Nick Freeman made a name for himself challenging speeding tickets by asking for the calibration certificates of speed cameras and speed guns used by police, who also needed to have a training record. It was pretty often the Crown would drop the charges rather than produce calibration certs and training records in court - which suggests they were somewhat less than perfect in keeping record of these things, and that many other motorists who just pleased guilty and took the points could have won if they’d gone to court.
This could be another 'miscarriage of justice' - lives destroyed by driving bans and prison sentences based on technically flawed speeding evidence that only the occasional lawyer would have dug into at the time. One of an endless range of dormant and buried injustices, ripe for unearthing.
I think that a bit unlikely, Tbh. We are talking about ‘margins of error’ in that case. The difference between doing 36 and 32 to get a small fine and penalty points. Not the difference between doing 50 and 30 to get a ban from driving.
Of course, penalty points can add up. But if you’re close to the limit for a ban, it’s open to you to drive *within* the speed limit…
You’ll need to earn 10m yen ($68k) and it’s only valid for six months, but an amazing opportunity to see a country that’s usually quite closed to immigrants.
Personally I’m interested in going to Expo 2025 in Kyoto, having seen it in my own country of residence in 2021, to be combined with the F1 race in Suzuka.
Yeah, it sounds good in principle. Previously you could do 3 months by just showing up on a tourist visa and people used to do that then sod off to Korea for a bit then come back for another 3 months. Also I think it was technically possible to go to immigration and extend a tourist visa. So if you were working remotely and they had no way to know you could basically do this in practice already. But it makes sense to regularize it so you don't have to pretend you're not working and you don't have the lingering uncertainty about the second 3 months.
I expect that when they announce the detail we'll find that they've engineered some way to fuck it up though.
England trying their hardest to throw it away. India helpfully co-operate by flubbing the chance but they’ll need to do that a lot more if England are to prosper.
What’s a competitive score on this pitch under these circumstances? I would have said anything under 600 sees India still very much in the game.
When you gave two teams that can score big scores very quickly, along with a vulnerability to abject collapses, prediction isn't easy.
I would be surprised by 4/1 to either England or India.
(Edit) India still very much in it !
It’s the same ‘fetch’ my dog plays, but with eleven humans running about after the ball
England trying their hardest to throw it away. India helpfully co-operate by flubbing the chance but they’ll need to do that a lot more if England are to prosper.
What’s a competitive score on this pitch under these circumstances? I would have said anything under 600 sees India still very much in the game.
When you gave two teams that can score big scores very quickly, along with a vulnerability to abject collapses, prediction isn't easy.
I would be surprised by 4/1 to either England or India.
Well, England haven’t made their task any easier with that wicket.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Yes I think speed cameras had something to do with it.
A lawyer called Nick Freeman made a name for himself challenging speeding tickets by asking for the calibration certificates of speed cameras and speed guns used by police, who also needed to have a training record. It was pretty often the Crown would drop the charges rather than produce calibration certs and training records in court - which suggests they were somewhat less than perfect in keeping record of these things, and that many other motorists who just pleased guilty and took the points could have won if they’d gone to court.
This could be another 'miscarriage of justice' - lives destroyed by driving bans and prison sentences based on technically flawed speeding evidence that only the occasional lawyer would have dug into at the time. One of an endless range of dormant and buried injustices, ripe for unearthing.
I think that a bit unlikely, Tbh. We are talking about ‘margins of error’ in that case. The difference between doing 36 and 32 to get a small fine and penalty points. Not the difference between doing 50 and 30 to get a ban from driving.
Of course, penalty points can add up. But if you’re close to the limit for a ban, it’s open to you to drive *within* the speed limit…
No, it’s about the police maintaining correct records of calibration certificates and training records. What the computers say is totally irrelevant if they and their operators are not certified.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Yes I think speed cameras had something to do with it.
A lawyer called Nick Freeman made a name for himself challenging speeding tickets by asking for the calibration certificates of speed cameras and speed guns used by police, who also needed to have a training record. It was pretty often the Crown would drop the charges rather than produce calibration certs and training records in court - which suggests they were somewhat less than perfect in keeping record of these things, and that many other motorists who just pleased guilty and took the points could have won if they’d gone to court.
This could be another 'miscarriage of justice' - lives destroyed by driving bans and prison sentences based on technically flawed speeding evidence that only the occasional lawyer would have dug into at the time. One of an endless range of dormant and buried injustices, ripe for unearthing.
Possible, but to get to a driving ban or prison sentence takes a great deal of speeding or other forms of dangerous driving. Police usually apply a margin for error to take account of calibration issues.
That's why the Post Office scandal is so concerning - there was no margin for error, no pattern of behaviour, no other evidence. Horizon = the truth.
England trying their hardest to throw it away. India helpfully co-operate by flubbing the chance but they’ll need to do that a lot more if England are to prosper.
What’s a competitive score on this pitch under these circumstances? I would have said anything under 600 sees India still very much in the game.
When you gave two teams that can score big scores very quickly, along with a vulnerability to abject collapses, prediction isn't easy.
I would be surprised by 4/1 to either England or India.
Well, England haven’t made their task any easier with that wicket.
Why are you so negative?
Because everything time I post something positive, they screw things up.
England trying their hardest to throw it away. India helpfully co-operate by flubbing the chance but they’ll need to do that a lot more if England are to prosper.
What’s a competitive score on this pitch under these circumstances? I would have said anything under 600 sees India still very much in the game.
When you gave two teams that can score big scores very quickly, along with a vulnerability to abject collapses, prediction isn't easy.
I would be surprised by 4/1 to either England or India.
Well, England haven’t made their task any easier with that wicket.
Why are you so negative?
Because every time he isn't, we tend to lose a wicket.
The cricketing jinx is the one superstition I cling to.
You’ll need to earn 10m yen ($68k) and it’s only valid for six months, but an amazing opportunity to see a country that’s usually quite closed to immigrants.
Personally I’m interested in going to Expo 2025 in Kyoto, having seen it in my own country of residence in 2021, to be combined with the F1 race in Suzuka.
Yeah, it sounds good in principle. Previously you could do 3 months by just showing up on a tourist visa and people used to do that then sod off to Korea for a bit then come back for another 3 months. Also I think it was technically possible to go to immigration and extend a tourist visa. So if you were working remotely and they had no way to know you could basically do this in practice already. But it makes sense to regularize it so you don't have to pretend you're not working and you don't have the lingering uncertainty about the second 3 months.
I expect that when they announce the detail we'll find that they've engineered some way to fuck it up though.
This sounds like a 'double tax' nightmare to me.
One of the conditions of the new visa (this may affect @Sandpit ) seems to be that the country you're a tax resident of has to have a taxation treaty with Japan. I know nothing but the knowledgeable people on r/JapanFinance seem to think that this means you wouldn't normally be liable for Japanese income tax as long as your employer isn't a tax resident of Japan.
This is an incredible story. A woman expresses perfectly legal “gender critical” views on Twitter
She is also a fan of the Toon
She is then investigated by some creepy “agency” within the Premier League, they compile an entire dossier on her life and doings, right down to where she walks her dog, the file is passed to NUFC - who ban her from the ground for two seasons
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Yes I think speed cameras had something to do with it.
A lawyer called Nick Freeman made a name for himself challenging speeding tickets by asking for the calibration certificates of speed cameras and speed guns used by police, who also needed to have a training record. It was pretty often the Crown would drop the charges rather than produce calibration certs and training records in court - which suggests they were somewhat less than perfect in keeping record of these things, and that many other motorists who just pleased guilty and took the points could have won if they’d gone to court.
This could be another 'miscarriage of justice' - lives destroyed by driving bans and prison sentences based on technically flawed speeding evidence that only the occasional lawyer would have dug into at the time. One of an endless range of dormant and buried injustices, ripe for unearthing.
Possible, but to get to a driving ban or prison sentence takes a great deal of speeding or other forms of dangerous driving. Police usually apply a margin for error to take account of calibration issues.
That's why the Post Office scandal is so concerning - there was no margin for error, no pattern of behaviour, no other evidence. Horizon = the truth.
Yeah but I think it is an example of a situation of which there are thousands. I'd guess the next thing is criminal convictions based on 'forensics' based on cultural myths such as 'DNA doesn't lie' and star witnesses saying 'its a one in a billion match', with the Criminal Cases Review Commission asleep at the wheel as the doubt creeps in over subsequent years due to technological change. The current situation with Malkinson is a taste of things to come on this front (although in his case the issue is that there was evidence that exonerated him that was being ignored). Whilst the people involved have gone through difficult times, the Post office situation isn't even that serious in the scheme of things.
You’ll need to earn 10m yen ($68k) and it’s only valid for six months, but an amazing opportunity to see a country that’s usually quite closed to immigrants.
Personally I’m interested in going to Expo 2025 in Kyoto, having seen it in my own country of residence in 2021, to be combined with the F1 race in Suzuka.
Yeah, it sounds good in principle. Previously you could do 3 months by just showing up on a tourist visa and people used to do that then sod off to Korea for a bit then come back for another 3 months. Also I think it was technically possible to go to immigration and extend a tourist visa. So if you were working remotely and they had no way to know you could basically do this in practice already. But it makes sense to regularize it so you don't have to pretend you're not working and you don't have the lingering uncertainty about the second 3 months.
I expect that when they announce the detail we'll find that they've engineered some way to fuck it up though.
This sounds like a 'double tax' nightmare to me.
One of the conditions of the new visa (this may affect @Sandpit ) seems to be that the country you're a tax resident of has to have a taxation treaty with Japan. I know nothing but the knowledgeable people on r/JapanFinance seem to think that this means you wouldn't normally be liable for Japanese income tax as long as your employer isn't a tax resident of Japan.
Ah that interesting. There’s confusing reporting between ‘residents’ and ‘citizens’ of various countries, which as you say likely relates to tax treaties. So if you’re British, working for a UK employer, and paying UK income tax then it’s fine, but if you’re British and working for a UAE employer, where there’s no income tax and no tax treaty with Japan, it’s not allowed.
I’ll have to limit my trip to three months then! (Actually it will be two or three weeks, as my wife has a desk job and can’t take months off).
You’ll need to earn 10m yen ($68k) and it’s only valid for six months, but an amazing opportunity to see a country that’s usually quite closed to immigrants.
Personally I’m interested in going to Expo 2025 in Kyoto, having seen it in my own country of residence in 2021, to be combined with the F1 race in Suzuka.
Yeah, it sounds good in principle. Previously you could do 3 months by just showing up on a tourist visa and people used to do that then sod off to Korea for a bit then come back for another 3 months. Also I think it was technically possible to go to immigration and extend a tourist visa. So if you were working remotely and they had no way to know you could basically do this in practice already. But it makes sense to regularize it so you don't have to pretend you're not working and you don't have the lingering uncertainty about the second 3 months.
I expect that when they announce the detail we'll find that they've engineered some way to fuck it up though.
This sounds like a 'double tax' nightmare to me.
One of the conditions of the new visa (this may affect @Sandpit ) seems to be that the country you're a tax resident of has to have a taxation treaty with Japan. I know nothing but the knowledgeable people on r/JapanFinance seem to think that this means you wouldn't normally be liable for Japanese income tax as long as your employer isn't a tax resident of Japan.
Did they look in to social security issues? I think this is often a major barrier to this type of arrangement, employers getting nervous that agreeing to such remote working makes them liable for social security in another country.
England trying their hardest to throw it away. India helpfully co-operate by flubbing the chance but they’ll need to do that a lot more if England are to prosper.
What’s a competitive score on this pitch under these circumstances? I would have said anything under 600 sees India still very much in the game.
When you gave two teams that can score big scores very quickly, along with a vulnerability to abject collapses, prediction isn't easy.
I would be surprised by 4/1 to either England or India.
Well, England haven’t made their task any easier with that wicket.
Why are you so negative?
Because every time he isn't, we tend to lose a wicket.
The cricketing jinx is the one superstition I cling to.
I’m saying nothing. My posts about an impending England victory last Sunday appear to have been the most controversial messages I’ve ever posted on PB.
You’ll need to earn 10m yen ($68k) and it’s only valid for six months, but an amazing opportunity to see a country that’s usually quite closed to immigrants.
Personally I’m interested in going to Expo 2025 in Kyoto, having seen it in my own country of residence in 2021, to be combined with the F1 race in Suzuka.
Yeah, it sounds good in principle. Previously you could do 3 months by just showing up on a tourist visa and people used to do that then sod off to Korea for a bit then come back for another 3 months. Also I think it was technically possible to go to immigration and extend a tourist visa. So if you were working remotely and they had no way to know you could basically do this in practice already. But it makes sense to regularize it so you don't have to pretend you're not working and you don't have the lingering uncertainty about the second 3 months.
I expect that when they announce the detail we'll find that they've engineered some way to fuck it up though.
This sounds like a 'double tax' nightmare to me.
One of the conditions of the new visa (this may affect @Sandpit ) seems to be that the country you're a tax resident of has to have a taxation treaty with Japan. I know nothing but the knowledgeable people on r/JapanFinance seem to think that this means you wouldn't normally be liable for Japanese income tax as long as your employer isn't a tax resident of Japan.
I’ve looked at a few digital nomad visas, and I have to say the Japanese have done well to construct maybe the least appealing DNV of all
1. Tax treaty issues 2. $68k 3. You only get 6 months
How does this differ from getting a normal tourist visa and doing the odd visa run, except it’s much more hassle?
I love Japan, but really, this looks to me like the Japanese realising they have a demographic problem, and trying to fix it, but in a deliberately half arsed way because, deep down, they still don’t want foreigners in Japan
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Yes I think speed cameras had something to do with it.
A lawyer called Nick Freeman made a name for himself challenging speeding tickets by asking for the calibration certificates of speed cameras and speed guns used by police, who also needed to have a training record. It was pretty often the Crown would drop the charges rather than produce calibration certs and training records in court - which suggests they were somewhat less than perfect in keeping record of these things, and that many other motorists who just pleased guilty and took the points could have won if they’d gone to court.
This could be another 'miscarriage of justice' - lives destroyed by driving bans and prison sentences based on technically flawed speeding evidence that only the occasional lawyer would have dug into at the time. One of an endless range of dormant and buried injustices, ripe for unearthing.
Possible, but to get to a driving ban or prison sentence takes a great deal of speeding or other forms of dangerous driving. Police usually apply a margin for error to take account of calibration issues.
That's why the Post Office scandal is so concerning - there was no margin for error, no pattern of behaviour, no other evidence. Horizon = the truth.
Yeah but I think it is an example of a situation of which there are thousands. I'd guess the next thing is criminal convictions based on 'forensics' based on cultural myths such as 'DNA doesn't lie' and star witnesses saying 'its a one in a billion match', with the Criminal Cases Review Commission asleep at the wheel as the doubt creeps in over subsequent years due to technological change. The current situation with Malkinson is a taste of things to come on this front (although in his case the issue is that there was evidence that exonerated him that was being ignored). Whilst the people involved have gone through difficult times, the Post office situation isn't even that serious in the scheme of things.
Speeding fines = low impact, possibly millions of cases (depending on whether margin of error used by police) Post Office = high impact, thousands of cases Rape/murder DNA = extremely high impact, a few cases?
I think TV licensing is more likely to be the next scandal, particularly as I can imagine a conspiracy of silence across the BBC, government, magistrate courts (which process the cases in large batches).
England trying their hardest to throw it away. India helpfully co-operate by flubbing the chance but they’ll need to do that a lot more if England are to prosper.
What’s a competitive score on this pitch under these circumstances? I would have said anything under 600 sees India still very much in the game.
When you gave two teams that can score big scores very quickly, along with a vulnerability to abject collapses, prediction isn't easy.
I would be surprised by 4/1 to either England or India.
Well, England haven’t made their task any easier with that wicket.
Why are you so negative?
Because every time he isn't, we tend to lose a wicket.
The cricketing jinx is the one superstition I cling to.
I’m saying nothing. My posts about an impending England victory last Sunday appear to have been the most controversial messages I’ve ever posted on PB.
You were right, and the rest of us wrong.
I posted that England should just give up and take a few days off, then posted that at least we avoided the innings defeat!
One of the most unlikely wins in the last decade, but that’s why cricket is brilliant.
You’ll need to earn 10m yen ($68k) and it’s only valid for six months, but an amazing opportunity to see a country that’s usually quite closed to immigrants.
Personally I’m interested in going to Expo 2025 in Kyoto, having seen it in my own country of residence in 2021, to be combined with the F1 race in Suzuka.
Yeah, it sounds good in principle. Previously you could do 3 months by just showing up on a tourist visa and people used to do that then sod off to Korea for a bit then come back for another 3 months. Also I think it was technically possible to go to immigration and extend a tourist visa. So if you were working remotely and they had no way to know you could basically do this in practice already. But it makes sense to regularize it so you don't have to pretend you're not working and you don't have the lingering uncertainty about the second 3 months.
I expect that when they announce the detail we'll find that they've engineered some way to fuck it up though.
This sounds like a 'double tax' nightmare to me.
One of the conditions of the new visa (this may affect @Sandpit ) seems to be that the country you're a tax resident of has to have a taxation treaty with Japan. I know nothing but the knowledgeable people on r/JapanFinance seem to think that this means you wouldn't normally be liable for Japanese income tax as long as your employer isn't a tax resident of Japan.
I’ve looked at a few digital nomad visas, and I have to say the Japanese have done well to construct maybe the least appealing DNV of all
1. Tax treaty issues 2. $68k 3. You only get 6 months
How does this differ from getting a normal tourist visa and doing the odd visa run, except it’s much more hassle?
I love Japan, but really, this looks to me like the Japanese realising they have a demographic problem, and trying to fix it, but in a deliberately half arsed way because, deep down, they still don’t want foreigners in Japan
I don't think it's anything to do with demographic problems, since it's clearly time-limited and specific to people without an employer in Japan. I think what's happening is
- PM / economics ministry are saying they should be doing international things and tech things - They noticed that other countries are doing digital nomad visas and asked the Immigration Ministry why Japan wasn't doing that - Immigration ministry doesn't want to change anything because that's how they roll
-> Immigration ministry throw them a bone that basically regularizes what's happening already
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Yes I think speed cameras had something to do with it.
A lawyer called Nick Freeman made a name for himself challenging speeding tickets by asking for the calibration certificates of speed cameras and speed guns used by police, who also needed to have a training record. It was pretty often the Crown would drop the charges rather than produce calibration certs and training records in court - which suggests they were somewhat less than perfect in keeping record of these things, and that many other motorists who just pleased guilty and took the points could have won if they’d gone to court.
This could be another 'miscarriage of justice' - lives destroyed by driving bans and prison sentences based on technically flawed speeding evidence that only the occasional lawyer would have dug into at the time. One of an endless range of dormant and buried injustices, ripe for unearthing.
Possible, but to get to a driving ban or prison sentence takes a great deal of speeding or other forms of dangerous driving. Police usually apply a margin for error to take account of calibration issues.
That's why the Post Office scandal is so concerning - there was no margin for error, no pattern of behaviour, no other evidence. Horizon = the truth.
Using a margin of error to account for calibration issues on “speed guns” has one small flaw.
It’s not actually been tested, scientifically. It’s a made up thing. To get around the chronic inability to actually calibrate the devices and keep records of same.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Yes I think speed cameras had something to do with it.
A lawyer called Nick Freeman made a name for himself challenging speeding tickets by asking for the calibration certificates of speed cameras and speed guns used by police, who also needed to have a training record. It was pretty often the Crown would drop the charges rather than produce calibration certs and training records in court - which suggests they were somewhat less than perfect in keeping record of these things, and that many other motorists who just pleased guilty and took the points could have won if they’d gone to court.
This could be another 'miscarriage of justice' - lives destroyed by driving bans and prison sentences based on technically flawed speeding evidence that only the occasional lawyer would have dug into at the time. One of an endless range of dormant and buried injustices, ripe for unearthing.
Possible, but to get to a driving ban or prison sentence takes a great deal of speeding or other forms of dangerous driving. Police usually apply a margin for error to take account of calibration issues.
That's why the Post Office scandal is so concerning - there was no margin for error, no pattern of behaviour, no other evidence. Horizon = the truth.
Yeah but I think it is an example of a situation of which there are thousands. I'd guess the next thing is criminal convictions based on 'forensics' based on cultural myths such as 'DNA doesn't lie' and star witnesses saying 'its a one in a billion match', with the Criminal Cases Review Commission asleep at the wheel as the doubt creeps in over subsequent years due to technological change. The current situation with Malkinson is a taste of things to come on this front (although in his case the issue is that there was evidence that exonerated him that was being ignored). Whilst the people involved have gone through difficult times, the Post office situation isn't even that serious in the scheme of things.
Speeding fines = low impact, possibly millions of cases (depending on whether margin of error used by police) Post Office = high impact, thousands of cases Rape/murder DNA = extremely high impact, a few cases?
I think TV licensing is more likely to be the next scandal, particularly as I can imagine a conspiracy of silence across the BBC, government, magistrate courts (which process the cases in large batches).
TV licensing is horrific, the victims mostly single mothers existing on benefits, many of whom aren’t actually aware of the case going to court, and the evidence is their own statement to someone who knocked on their door unannounced.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Yes I think speed cameras had something to do with it.
A lawyer called Nick Freeman made a name for himself challenging speeding tickets by asking for the calibration certificates of speed cameras and speed guns used by police, who also needed to have a training record. It was pretty often the Crown would drop the charges rather than produce calibration certs and training records in court - which suggests they were somewhat less than perfect in keeping record of these things, and that many other motorists who just pleased guilty and took the points could have won if they’d gone to court.
This could be another 'miscarriage of justice' - lives destroyed by driving bans and prison sentences based on technically flawed speeding evidence that only the occasional lawyer would have dug into at the time. One of an endless range of dormant and buried injustices, ripe for unearthing.
Possible, but to get to a driving ban or prison sentence takes a great deal of speeding or other forms of dangerous driving. Police usually apply a margin for error to take account of calibration issues.
That's why the Post Office scandal is so concerning - there was no margin for error, no pattern of behaviour, no other evidence. Horizon = the truth.
Yeah but I think it is an example of a situation of which there are thousands. I'd guess the next thing is criminal convictions based on 'forensics' based on cultural myths such as 'DNA doesn't lie' and star witnesses saying 'its a one in a billion match', with the Criminal Cases Review Commission asleep at the wheel as the doubt creeps in over subsequent years due to technological change. The current situation with Malkinson is a taste of things to come on this front (although in his case the issue is that there was evidence that exonerated him that was being ignored). Whilst the people involved have gone through difficult times, the Post office situation isn't even that serious in the scheme of things.
Speeding fines = low impact, possibly millions of cases (depending on whether margin of error used by police) Post Office = high impact, thousands of cases Rape/murder DNA = extremely high impact, a few cases?
I think TV licensing is more likely to be the next scandal, particularly as I can imagine a conspiracy of silence across the BBC, government, magistrate courts (which process the cases in large batches).
The DNA problem I have outlined may become more significant when you factor in things like burglaries and 'irrefutable DNA evidence' leading to rushed guilty pleas, it could easily be escalated to 'post office' levels of significance and more.
Liz Truss is said to have given up on her own leadership ambitions but believes that she will have a significant role in the appointment of the next Tory leader. She has continued inviting candidates, including some in safe seats replacing outgoing MPs, to her favoured club of 5 Hertford Street in Mayfair for drinks.
Truss and other right-wing Tory MPs including Lee Anderson, the former deputy chairman of the Conservative Party, will next week launch a movement called “popular conservatism”. It aims to promote small state, economic liberalism with a socially conservative agenda.
Liz Truss is said to have given up on her own leadership ambitions but believes that she will have a significant role in the appointment of the next Tory leader. She has continued inviting candidates, including some in safe seats replacing outgoing MPs, to her favoured club of 5 Hertford Street in Mayfair for drinks.
Truss and other right-wing Tory MPs including Lee Anderson, the former deputy chairman of the Conservative Party, will next week launch a movement called “popular conservatism”. It aims to promote small state, economic liberalism with a socially conservative agenda.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
Is that the case with AI ?
Surely it's more that we're already rather scared of what it might do, if it proves as powerful as some predict. That it's already surprisingly competent at some tasks, but is unreliable, and we don't entirely understand how it works, is something of a truism.
Of course we're going ahead full tilt anyway.
Depends how much reliability matters.
For some things, generating pictures or magazine articles or simulating conversations, reliability doesn't really matter. It's OK for an AI artist/journalist to be unreliable, because their human equivalents generally are and not much harm is done. As long as said journalists stick to what they are good at and don't try to run the country.
For some things that are really difficult for humans to do, it's plausible for AI to be better than humans. Matching patterns in medical images, probably comes in that category. Working out which bit of information should best come next in a teaching sequence probably does as well.
The difficulty comes with things where we desire high reliability that can be interrogated. Why did the system come to that conclusion? Matters of life and liberty are like that, and I don't think we're getting anywhere with that AI-wise.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Yes I think speed cameras had something to do with it.
A lawyer called Nick Freeman made a name for himself challenging speeding tickets by asking for the calibration certificates of speed cameras and speed guns used by police, who also needed to have a training record. It was pretty often the Crown would drop the charges rather than produce calibration certs and training records in court - which suggests they were somewhat less than perfect in keeping record of these things, and that many other motorists who just pleased guilty and took the points could have won if they’d gone to court.
This could be another 'miscarriage of justice' - lives destroyed by driving bans and prison sentences based on technically flawed speeding evidence that only the occasional lawyer would have dug into at the time. One of an endless range of dormant and buried injustices, ripe for unearthing.
Possible, but to get to a driving ban or prison sentence takes a great deal of speeding or other forms of dangerous driving. Police usually apply a margin for error to take account of calibration issues.
That's why the Post Office scandal is so concerning - there was no margin for error, no pattern of behaviour, no other evidence. Horizon = the truth.
Using a margin of error to account for calibration issues on “speed guns” has one small flaw.
It’s not actually been tested, scientifically. It’s a made up thing. To get around the chronic inability to actually calibrate the devices and keep records of same.
Fair. Still, given the exceptionally low rate of detection, 12 points system etc, the probability of a miscarriage of justice with serious implications are very low.
This might change through the massive increase in cloned plates. Check out various motoring forums for people spending hours finding evidence that their car cannot have been in a ULEZ, speeding fine etc. There will be a point soon at which a registration plate is not enough to convict someone of an offence.
See I always knew the royals making Meghan Markle feel bad was all to do with colour.
The late Queen thought that the Duchess of Sussex’s wedding dress was “too white” for a divorcee, a new book claims.
Ingrid Seward, the former editor-in-chief of Majesty magazine, said that Elizabeth II never voiced her opinion about the duchess to anyone except her closest confidantes, including Lady Elizabeth Anson, her cousin.
Anson is reported in an extract of Seward’s book, My Mother and I, to have claimed that the late Queen considered Meghan’s dress improper for a woman who had been married before.
“In the monarch’s view, it was not appropriate for a divorcee getting remarried in church to look quite so flamboyantly virginal,” Seward writes in an extract of the book, published in the Daily Mail.
Liz Truss is said to have given up on her own leadership ambitions but believes that she will have a significant role in the appointment of the next Tory leader. She has continued inviting candidates, including some in safe seats replacing outgoing MPs, to her favoured club of 5 Hertford Street in Mayfair for drinks.
Truss and other right-wing Tory MPs including Lee Anderson, the former deputy chairman of the Conservative Party, will next week launch a movement called “popular conservatism”. It aims to promote small state, economic liberalism with a socially conservative agenda.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
Is that the case with AI ?
Surely it's more that we're already rather scared of what it might do, if it proves as powerful as some predict. That it's already surprisingly competent at some tasks, but is unreliable, and we don't entirely understand how it works, is something of a truism.
Of course we're going ahead full tilt anyway.
Depends how much reliability matters.
For some things, generating pictures or magazine articles or simulating conversations, reliability doesn't really matter. It's OK for an AI artist/journalist to be unreliable, because their human equivalents generally are and not much harm is done. As long as said journalists stick to what they are good at and don't try to run the country.
For some things that are really difficult for humans to do, it's plausible for AI to be better than humans. Matching patterns in medical images, probably comes in that category. Working out which bit of information should best come next in a teaching sequence probably does as well.
The difficulty comes with things where we desire high reliability that can be interrogated. Why did the system come to that conclusion? Matters of life and liberty are like that, and I don't think we're getting anywhere with that AI-wise.
The trouble with computers, of course, is that they're very sophisticated idiots. They do exactly what you tell them at amazing speed. Even if you order them to kill you. So if you do happen to change your mind, it's very difficult to stop them from obeying the original order.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
Is that the case with AI ?
Surely it's more that we're already rather scared of what it might do, if it proves as powerful as some predict. That it's already surprisingly competent at some tasks, but is unreliable, and we don't entirely understand how it works, is something of a truism.
Of course we're going ahead full tilt anyway.
Depends how much reliability matters.
For some things, generating pictures or magazine articles or simulating conversations, reliability doesn't really matter. It's OK for an AI artist/journalist to be unreliable, because their human equivalents generally are and not much harm is done. As long as said journalists stick to what they are good at and don't try to run the country.
For some things that are really difficult for humans to do, it's plausible for AI to be better than humans. Matching patterns in medical images, probably comes in that category. Working out which bit of information should best come next in a teaching sequence probably does as well.
The difficulty comes with things where we desire high reliability that can be interrogated. Why did the system come to that conclusion? Matters of life and liberty are like that, and I don't think we're getting anywhere with that AI-wise.
AI is used extensively in Australia for mobile phone and seatbelt enforcement - it pings a suspect image to a human who checks the image before issuing a fine.
A brilliant innovation - a rare example of public sector productivity growth - but you can see where it could lead.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Yes I think speed cameras had something to do with it.
A lawyer called Nick Freeman made a name for himself challenging speeding tickets by asking for the calibration certificates of speed cameras and speed guns used by police, who also needed to have a training record. It was pretty often the Crown would drop the charges rather than produce calibration certs and training records in court - which suggests they were somewhat less than perfect in keeping record of these things, and that many other motorists who just pleased guilty and took the points could have won if they’d gone to court.
This could be another 'miscarriage of justice' - lives destroyed by driving bans and prison sentences based on technically flawed speeding evidence that only the occasional lawyer would have dug into at the time. One of an endless range of dormant and buried injustices, ripe for unearthing.
Possible, but to get to a driving ban or prison sentence takes a great deal of speeding or other forms of dangerous driving. Police usually apply a margin for error to take account of calibration issues.
That's why the Post Office scandal is so concerning - there was no margin for error, no pattern of behaviour, no other evidence. Horizon = the truth.
Using a margin of error to account for calibration issues on “speed guns” has one small flaw.
It’s not actually been tested, scientifically. It’s a made up thing. To get around the chronic inability to actually calibrate the devices and keep records of same.
Fair. Still, given the exceptionally low rate of detection, 12 points system etc, the probability of a miscarriage of justice with serious implications are very low.
This might change through the massive increase in cloned plates. Check out various motoring forums for people spending hours finding evidence that their car cannot have been in a ULEZ, speeding fine etc. There will be a point soon at which a registration plate is not enough to convict someone of an offence.
Cloned number plates is also a massive problem. If plates are to be used as evidence of a specific vehicle, then the UK will need to move to a US-style system of stamped plates from a government-run facility.
In the meantime, everyone should make sure that a photo of their car is unique, and distinguishable from a photo of the same make, model, colour car with your number plate on it. Use stickers or otherwise modify your car from the front and back, and take a photo of it the day you do. That photo maybe what gets you off when dragged into court.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Yes I think speed cameras had something to do with it.
A lawyer called Nick Freeman made a name for himself challenging speeding tickets by asking for the calibration certificates of speed cameras and speed guns used by police, who also needed to have a training record. It was pretty often the Crown would drop the charges rather than produce calibration certs and training records in court - which suggests they were somewhat less than perfect in keeping record of these things, and that many other motorists who just pleased guilty and took the points could have won if they’d gone to court.
This could be another 'miscarriage of justice' - lives destroyed by driving bans and prison sentences based on technically flawed speeding evidence that only the occasional lawyer would have dug into at the time. One of an endless range of dormant and buried injustices, ripe for unearthing.
Possible, but to get to a driving ban or prison sentence takes a great deal of speeding or other forms of dangerous driving. Police usually apply a margin for error to take account of calibration issues.
That's why the Post Office scandal is so concerning - there was no margin for error, no pattern of behaviour, no other evidence. Horizon = the truth.
Using a margin of error to account for calibration issues on “speed guns” has one small flaw.
It’s not actually been tested, scientifically. It’s a made up thing. To get around the chronic inability to actually calibrate the devices and keep records of same.
Fair. Still, given the exceptionally low rate of detection, 12 points system etc, the probability of a miscarriage of justice with serious implications are very low.
This might change through the massive increase in cloned plates. Check out various motoring forums for people spending hours finding evidence that their car cannot have been in a ULEZ, speeding fine etc. There will be a point soon at which a registration plate is not enough to convict someone of an offence.
Cloned number plates is also a massive problem. If plates are to be used as evidence of a specific vehicle, then the UK will need to move to a US-style system of stamped plates from a government-run facility.
In the meantime, everyone should make sure that a photo of their car is unique, and distinguishable from a photo of the same make, model, colour car with your number plate on it. Use stickers or otherwise modify your car from the front and back, and take a photo of it the day you do. That photo maybe what gets you off when dragged into court.
The concern is that without such distinguishing features, REG PLATE SAYS GUILTY.
Happily, we have a large online community of car nerds who can identify a 2013 Skoda Fabia from the shade of black on the wing mirrors.
This is an incredible story. A woman expresses perfectly legal “gender critical” views on Twitter
She is also a fan of the Toon
She is then investigated by some creepy “agency” within the Premier League, they compile an entire dossier on her life and doings, right down to where she walks her dog, the file is passed to NUFC - who ban her from the ground for two seasons
I'm always suspicious of this kind of story. Woman says she was banned due to this one legal comment, it might turn out the club says she's been banned due to other reasons entirely. There's normally more to it.
This is an incredible story. A woman expresses perfectly legal “gender critical” views on Twitter
She is also a fan of the Toon
She is then investigated by some creepy “agency” within the Premier League, they compile an entire dossier on her life and doings, right down to where she walks her dog, the file is passed to NUFC - who ban her from the ground for two seasons
I'm always suspicious of this kind of story. Woman says she was banned due to this one legal comment, it might turn out the club says she's been banned due to other reasons entirely. There's normally more to it.
This was an investigation unit originally set up to look at online organising of football violence and racism, that has gone way beyond their remit.
This is an incredible story. A woman expresses perfectly legal “gender critical” views on Twitter
She is also a fan of the Toon
She is then investigated by some creepy “agency” within the Premier League, they compile an entire dossier on her life and doings, right down to where she walks her dog, the file is passed to NUFC - who ban her from the ground for two seasons
I'm always suspicious of this kind of story. Woman says she was banned due to this one legal comment, it might turn out the club says she's been banned due to other reasons entirely. There's normally more to it.
Perhaps, yes
But the Free Speech Union is quite diligent - they take on and WIN big legal cases (unlike Jo “kimono” Maugham)
You’ll need to earn 10m yen ($68k) and it’s only valid for six months, but an amazing opportunity to see a country that’s usually quite closed to immigrants.
Personally I’m interested in going to Expo 2025 in Kyoto, having seen it in my own country of residence in 2021, to be combined with the F1 race in Suzuka.
Yeah, it sounds good in principle. Previously you could do 3 months by just showing up on a tourist visa and people used to do that then sod off to Korea for a bit then come back for another 3 months. Also I think it was technically possible to go to immigration and extend a tourist visa. So if you were working remotely and they had no way to know you could basically do this in practice already. But it makes sense to regularize it so you don't have to pretend you're not working and you don't have the lingering uncertainty about the second 3 months.
I expect that when they announce the detail we'll find that they've engineered some way to fuck it up though.
This sounds like a 'double tax' nightmare to me.
One of the conditions of the new visa (this may affect @Sandpit ) seems to be that the country you're a tax resident of has to have a taxation treaty with Japan. I know nothing but the knowledgeable people on r/JapanFinance seem to think that this means you wouldn't normally be liable for Japanese income tax as long as your employer isn't a tax resident of Japan.
Did they look in to social security issues? I think this is often a major barrier to this type of arrangement, employers getting nervous that agreeing to such remote working makes them liable for social security in another country.
The proposal as reported is that you wouldn't be expected to sign up for Japanese social security (or register in the Japanese social system in any way), and you'd have to have private health insurance to make up for the fact that you weren't in the Japanese health insurance system. So basically they intend to treat you the same as they'd treat someone who'd showed up on a tourist visa and not told them that they were working remotely, provided you piss off after 180 days.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Yes I think speed cameras had something to do with it.
A lawyer called Nick Freeman made a name for himself challenging speeding tickets by asking for the calibration certificates of speed cameras and speed guns used by police, who also needed to have a training record. It was pretty often the Crown would drop the charges rather than produce calibration certs and training records in court - which suggests they were somewhat less than perfect in keeping record of these things, and that many other motorists who just pleased guilty and took the points could have won if they’d gone to court.
This could be another 'miscarriage of justice' - lives destroyed by driving bans and prison sentences based on technically flawed speeding evidence that only the occasional lawyer would have dug into at the time. One of an endless range of dormant and buried injustices, ripe for unearthing.
Possible, but to get to a driving ban or prison sentence takes a great deal of speeding or other forms of dangerous driving. Police usually apply a margin for error to take account of calibration issues.
That's why the Post Office scandal is so concerning - there was no margin for error, no pattern of behaviour, no other evidence. Horizon = the truth.
Using a margin of error to account for calibration issues on “speed guns” has one small flaw.
It’s not actually been tested, scientifically. It’s a made up thing. To get around the chronic inability to actually calibrate the devices and keep records of same.
Fair. Still, given the exceptionally low rate of detection, 12 points system etc, the probability of a miscarriage of justice with serious implications are very low.
This might change through the massive increase in cloned plates. Check out various motoring forums for people spending hours finding evidence that their car cannot have been in a ULEZ, speeding fine etc. There will be a point soon at which a registration plate is not enough to convict someone of an offence.
Cloned number plates is also a massive problem. If plates are to be used as evidence of a specific vehicle, then the UK will need to move to a US-style system of stamped plates from a government-run facility.
In the meantime, everyone should make sure that a photo of their car is unique, and distinguishable from a photo of the same make, model, colour car with your number plate on it. Use stickers or otherwise modify your car from the front and back, and take a photo of it the day you do. That photo maybe what gets you off when dragged into court.
The concern is that without such distinguishing features, REG PLATE SAYS GUILTY.
Happily, we have a large online community of car nerds who can identify a 2013 Skoda Fabia from the shade of black on the wing mirrors.
A similar thing happened to us before Christmas. We live in West Wales and haven't driven to London and beyond in about 5 years, but we received a penalty notice from the Dartford crossing, someone hadn't paid. The very small photograph was of a different coloured car of a different make, the numbers and letters were so small it was difficult to make out in some cases. I suspect the "computer" took a guess and sent out the notice to many permutations. If a human had been involved they would have spotted it straight away. My wife rang up and told them it wasn't us and the photo was rubbish anyway. We haven't heard anything since. So much for computers with their assumption of guilt.
Liz Truss is said to have given up on her own leadership ambitions but believes that she will have a significant role in the appointment of the next Tory leader. She has continued inviting candidates, including some in safe seats replacing outgoing MPs, to her favoured club of 5 Hertford Street in Mayfair for drinks.
Truss and other right-wing Tory MPs including Lee Anderson, the former deputy chairman of the Conservative Party, will next week launch a movement called “popular conservatism”. It aims to promote small state, economic liberalism with a socially conservative agenda.
The year before last, my parents had an issue with their car being cloned, and the clone being used in crimes. It's nice to say for once that the police were excellent throughout. Polite, courteous and helpful.
It probably helped that they felt a couple in their eighties in the Midlands probably were not committing crimes in London...
Liz Truss is said to have given up on her own leadership ambitions but believes that she will have a significant role in the appointment of the next Tory leader. She has continued inviting candidates, including some in safe seats replacing outgoing MPs, to her favoured club of 5 Hertford Street in Mayfair for drinks.
Truss and other right-wing Tory MPs including Lee Anderson, the former deputy chairman of the Conservative Party, will next week launch a movement called “popular conservatism”. It aims to promote small state, economic liberalism with a socially conservative agenda.
The year before last, my parents had an issue with their car being cloned, and the clone being used in crimes. It's nice to say for once that the police were excellent throughout. Polite, courteous and helpful.
It probably helped that they felt a couple in their eighties in the Midlands probably were not committing crimes in London...
Liz Truss is said to have given up on her own leadership ambitions but believes that she will have a significant role in the appointment of the next Tory leader. She has continued inviting candidates, including some in safe seats replacing outgoing MPs, to her favoured club of 5 Hertford Street in Mayfair for drinks.
Truss and other right-wing Tory MPs including Lee Anderson, the former deputy chairman of the Conservative Party, will next week launch a movement called “popular conservatism”. It aims to promote small state, economic liberalism with a socially conservative agenda.
Has she not quite understood that 'popular conservatism' is just, well, not very popular? Not to mention economically suicidal.
Is it economically suicidal? I don't think it's been tried very much lately? Let's at least wait and see how Javier Milei gets on.
Does Liz Truss have a history of social conservatism? Maybe I've not been paying much attention, but I thought she was full-fat libertarian, on social issues as well, at least up until the last few months.
And so, ironically, her adoption of social conservatism can only be achieved by, perhaps, the most blatant bit of naked positioning she has ever indulged in.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Yes I think speed cameras had something to do with it.
A lawyer called Nick Freeman made a name for himself challenging speeding tickets by asking for the calibration certificates of speed cameras and speed guns used by police, who also needed to have a training record. It was pretty often the Crown would drop the charges rather than produce calibration certs and training records in court - which suggests they were somewhat less than perfect in keeping record of these things, and that many other motorists who just pleased guilty and took the points could have won if they’d gone to court.
This could be another 'miscarriage of justice' - lives destroyed by driving bans and prison sentences based on technically flawed speeding evidence that only the occasional lawyer would have dug into at the time. One of an endless range of dormant and buried injustices, ripe for unearthing.
Possible, but to get to a driving ban or prison sentence takes a great deal of speeding or other forms of dangerous driving. Police usually apply a margin for error to take account of calibration issues.
That's why the Post Office scandal is so concerning - there was no margin for error, no pattern of behaviour, no other evidence. Horizon = the truth.
Using a margin of error to account for calibration issues on “speed guns” has one small flaw.
It’s not actually been tested, scientifically. It’s a made up thing. To get around the chronic inability to actually calibrate the devices and keep records of same.
Fair. Still, given the exceptionally low rate of detection, 12 points system etc, the probability of a miscarriage of justice with serious implications are very low.
This might change through the massive increase in cloned plates. Check out various motoring forums for people spending hours finding evidence that their car cannot have been in a ULEZ, speeding fine etc. There will be a point soon at which a registration plate is not enough to convict someone of an offence.
Cloned number plates is also a massive problem. If plates are to be used as evidence of a specific vehicle, then the UK will need to move to a US-style system of stamped plates from a government-run facility.
In the meantime, everyone should make sure that a photo of their car is unique, and distinguishable from a photo of the same make, model, colour car with your number plate on it. Use stickers or otherwise modify your car from the front and back, and take a photo of it the day you do. That photo maybe what gets you off when dragged into court.
The concern is that without such distinguishing features, REG PLATE SAYS GUILTY.
Happily, we have a large online community of car nerds who can identify a 2013 Skoda Fabia from the shade of black on the wing mirrors.
Is that black, a darker shade of black, or a really midnight blue?
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Yes I think speed cameras had something to do with it.
A lawyer called Nick Freeman made a name for himself challenging speeding tickets by asking for the calibration certificates of speed cameras and speed guns used by police, who also needed to have a training record. It was pretty often the Crown would drop the charges rather than produce calibration certs and training records in court - which suggests they were somewhat less than perfect in keeping record of these things, and that many other motorists who just pleased guilty and took the points could have won if they’d gone to court.
This could be another 'miscarriage of justice' - lives destroyed by driving bans and prison sentences based on technically flawed speeding evidence that only the occasional lawyer would have dug into at the time. One of an endless range of dormant and buried injustices, ripe for unearthing.
Possible, but to get to a driving ban or prison sentence takes a great deal of speeding or other forms of dangerous driving. Police usually apply a margin for error to take account of calibration issues.
That's why the Post Office scandal is so concerning - there was no margin for error, no pattern of behaviour, no other evidence. Horizon = the truth.
Yeah but I think it is an example of a situation of which there are thousands. I'd guess the next thing is criminal convictions based on 'forensics' based on cultural myths such as 'DNA doesn't lie' and star witnesses saying 'its a one in a billion match', with the Criminal Cases Review Commission asleep at the wheel as the doubt creeps in over subsequent years due to technological change. The current situation with Malkinson is a taste of things to come on this front (although in his case the issue is that there was evidence that exonerated him that was being ignored). Whilst the people involved have gone through difficult times, the Post office situation isn't even that serious in the scheme of things.
Speeding fines = low impact, possibly millions of cases (depending on whether margin of error used by police) Post Office = high impact, thousands of cases Rape/murder DNA = extremely high impact, a few cases?
I think TV licensing is more likely to be the next scandal, particularly as I can imagine a conspiracy of silence across the BBC, government, magistrate courts (which process the cases in large batches).
TV licensing is horrific, the victims mostly single mothers existing on benefits, many of whom aren’t actually aware of the case going to court, and the evidence is their own statement to someone who knocked on their door unannounced.
Not even just the BBC but some commercial contractor the BBC uses. That sort of thing is about as sympatico with the public as [edit] the use of contractors by Dacorum council to spy on people having a pish in the countryside.
Liz Truss is said to have given up on her own leadership ambitions but believes that she will have a significant role in the appointment of the next Tory leader. She has continued inviting candidates, including some in safe seats replacing outgoing MPs, to her favoured club of 5 Hertford Street in Mayfair for drinks.
Truss and other right-wing Tory MPs including Lee Anderson, the former deputy chairman of the Conservative Party, will next week launch a movement called “popular conservatism”. It aims to promote small state, economic liberalism with a socially conservative agenda.
Liz Truss is said to have given up on her own leadership ambitions but believes that she will have a significant role in the appointment of the next Tory leader. She has continued inviting candidates, including some in safe seats replacing outgoing MPs, to her favoured club of 5 Hertford Street in Mayfair for drinks.
Truss and other right-wing Tory MPs including Lee Anderson, the former deputy chairman of the Conservative Party, will next week launch a movement called “popular conservatism”. It aims to promote small state, economic liberalism with a socially conservative agenda.
Has she not quite understood that 'popular conservatism' is just, well, not very popular? Not to mention economically suicidal.
Is it economically suicidal? I don't think it's been tried very much lately? Let's at least wait and see how Javier Milei gets on.
Economically laissez faire and socially conservative politics is essentially poujadisme. The politics of the self-made small businessman down the golf club after a few drinks.
The trouble is the leaders of these sorts of movements tend not to be very likeable. Trump and Bolsonaro for example.
The year before last, my parents had an issue with their car being cloned, and the clone being used in crimes. It's nice to say for once that the police were excellent throughout. Polite, courteous and helpful.
It probably helped that they felt a couple in their eighties in the Midlands probably were not committing crimes in London...
… then you find the stash box with the passports, guns and an array of large denomination…. Cash.
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
It’s totally bonkers that we’ve got to the point where computer systems are treated as infallible by the courts. Anyone who’s ever worked on computer systems will tell you that there’s always bugs in any piece of software. The Space Shuttle had four flight computers, three of which were the same and could vote out a faulty device; the fourth one was totally different, programmed by different people to the same written specification, and only existed because of the possibility that there was faulty software on all three of the main computers, despite the very extensive testing that went into them. When people can die and headline news gets made if software screws up, it gets reviewed in detail and has a backup system.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
Wasn’t it because GATSO speed cameras had a MoE, so people were getting speeding tickets cancelled by challenging their accuracy?
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
Yes I think speed cameras had something to do with it.
A lawyer called Nick Freeman made a name for himself challenging speeding tickets by asking for the calibration certificates of speed cameras and speed guns used by police, who also needed to have a training record. It was pretty often the Crown would drop the charges rather than produce calibration certs and training records in court - which suggests they were somewhat less than perfect in keeping record of these things, and that many other motorists who just pleased guilty and took the points could have won if they’d gone to court.
This could be another 'miscarriage of justice' - lives destroyed by driving bans and prison sentences based on technically flawed speeding evidence that only the occasional lawyer would have dug into at the time. One of an endless range of dormant and buried injustices, ripe for unearthing.
Possible, but to get to a driving ban or prison sentence takes a great deal of speeding or other forms of dangerous driving. Police usually apply a margin for error to take account of calibration issues.
That's why the Post Office scandal is so concerning - there was no margin for error, no pattern of behaviour, no other evidence. Horizon = the truth.
Yeah but I think it is an example of a situation of which there are thousands. I'd guess the next thing is criminal convictions based on 'forensics' based on cultural myths such as 'DNA doesn't lie' and star witnesses saying 'its a one in a billion match', with the Criminal Cases Review Commission asleep at the wheel as the doubt creeps in over subsequent years due to technological change. The current situation with Malkinson is a taste of things to come on this front (although in his case the issue is that there was evidence that exonerated him that was being ignored). Whilst the people involved have gone through difficult times, the Post office situation isn't even that serious in the scheme of things.
Speeding fines = low impact, possibly millions of cases (depending on whether margin of error used by police) Post Office = high impact, thousands of cases Rape/murder DNA = extremely high impact, a few cases?
I think TV licensing is more likely to be the next scandal, particularly as I can imagine a conspiracy of silence across the BBC, government, magistrate courts (which process the cases in large batches).
TV licensing is horrific, the victims mostly single mothers existing on benefits, many of whom aren’t actually aware of the case going to court, and the evidence is their own statement to someone who knocked on their door unannounced.
Not even just the BBC but some commercial contractor the BBC uses. That sort of thing is about as sympatico with the public as [edit] the use of contractors by Dacorum council to spy on people having a pish in the countryside.
This is an incredible story. A woman expresses perfectly legal “gender critical” views on Twitter
She is also a fan of the Toon
She is then investigated by some creepy “agency” within the Premier League, they compile an entire dossier on her life and doings, right down to where she walks her dog, the file is passed to NUFC - who ban her from the ground for two seasons
I'm always suspicious of this kind of story. Woman says she was banned due to this one legal comment, it might turn out the club says she's been banned due to other reasons entirely. There's normally more to it.
Perhaps, yes
But the Free Speech Union is quite diligent - they take on and WIN big legal cases (unlike Jo “kimono” Maugham)
Indeed. The question is the cases they take on
* Lawrence Fox calls somebody a paedo: FSU is silent * Mad BBC lady rants on about Jews: FSU is silent * Toon lady says woman can't have penis: FSU IS GO! ALL FSU CRAFT LAUNCH NOW!
Liz Truss is said to have given up on her own leadership ambitions but believes that she will have a significant role in the appointment of the next Tory leader. She has continued inviting candidates, including some in safe seats replacing outgoing MPs, to her favoured club of 5 Hertford Street in Mayfair for drinks.
Truss and other right-wing Tory MPs including Lee Anderson, the former deputy chairman of the Conservative Party, will next week launch a movement called “popular conservatism”. It aims to promote small state, economic liberalism with a socially conservative agenda.
Has she not quite understood that 'popular conservatism' is just, well, not very popular? Not to mention economically suicidal.
Is it economically suicidal? I don't think it's been tried very much lately? Let's at least wait and see how Javier Milei gets on.
Does Liz Truss have a history of social conservatism? Maybe I've not been paying much attention, but I thought she was full-fat libertarian, on social issues as well, at least up until the last few months.
And so, ironically, her adoption of social conservatism can only be achieved by, perhaps, the most blatant bit of naked positioning she has ever indulged in.
Yes, she’s been on a journey. And depends on how widely we draw the term “social”. She’s definitely adopted right wing colours on climate and the environment, immigration, traditional teaching, crime and punishment and the relationship with Europe. But not as far as I’m aware on gender issues or topics like abortion.
Liz Truss is said to have given up on her own leadership ambitions but believes that she will have a significant role in the appointment of the next Tory leader. She has continued inviting candidates, including some in safe seats replacing outgoing MPs, to her favoured club of 5 Hertford Street in Mayfair for drinks.
Truss and other right-wing Tory MPs including Lee Anderson, the former deputy chairman of the Conservative Party, will next week launch a movement called “popular conservatism”. It aims to promote small state, economic liberalism with a socially conservative agenda.
This is an incredible story. A woman expresses perfectly legal “gender critical” views on Twitter
She is also a fan of the Toon
She is then investigated by some creepy “agency” within the Premier League, they compile an entire dossier on her life and doings, right down to where she walks her dog, the file is passed to NUFC - who ban her from the ground for two seasons
I'm always suspicious of this kind of story. Woman says she was banned due to this one legal comment, it might turn out the club says she's been banned due to other reasons entirely. There's normally more to it.
Perhaps, yes
But the Free Speech Union is quite diligent - they take on and WIN big legal cases (unlike Jo “kimono” Maugham)
Indeed. The question is the cases they take on
* Lawrence Fox calls somebody a paedo: FSU is silent * Mad BBC lady rants on about Jews: FSU is silent * Toon lady says woman can't have penis: FSU IS GO! ALl FSU CRAFT LAUNCH NOW!
#PBFreeSpeech
FSU don’t really care about rich public figures who can afford to defend themselves, nor do they care about obvious libels, they’re primarily about standing up for the little person who gets their life ruined for an unpopular opinion - such as a football club deciding that saying a person with a penis is a man, is grounds for being banned from attending matches for two years.
Liz Truss is said to have given up on her own leadership ambitions but believes that she will have a significant role in the appointment of the next Tory leader. She has continued inviting candidates, including some in safe seats replacing outgoing MPs, to her favoured club of 5 Hertford Street in Mayfair for drinks.
Truss and other right-wing Tory MPs including Lee Anderson, the former deputy chairman of the Conservative Party, will next week launch a movement called “popular conservatism”. It aims to promote small state, economic liberalism with a socially conservative agenda.
The year before last, my parents had an issue with their car being cloned, and the clone being used in crimes. It's nice to say for once that the police were excellent throughout. Polite, courteous and helpful.
It probably helped that they felt a couple in their eighties in the Midlands probably were not committing crimes in London...
… then you find the stash box with the passports, guns and an array of large denomination…. Cash.
I think we may have found the other two members of the pensioner team that robbed Hatton Garden a couple of years ago.
Comments
No. We Don’t know that Stodge.
If Tories are two points lower next Friday, and Reform two points higher, you posting here that only a third of that 2% will go back to Tory’s at the election and one sixth of that 2% is more likely to go Labour?
No you won’t say that, because to say that about movement over just 1 week would be flipping daft, would it not?
So how long does it have to be with Reform for it to be solid and come under the one third one sixth sub sample questions?
I’m saying never. I’m saying Reform get a PV under 4% at the GE, as soon as election called everything above 4% ref goes 100% straight over to Tories, and you can’t argue with me, because you can’t possibly know I am wrong.
The posts are so horrific it can't be said to be a free speech issue. A company wouldn't employ someone who was openly Nazi as they'd be a threat to other employees. Her posts are indistinguishable from that and dangerous. What's odd is that she's not been shown the door straight away.
The 'any other type of racism' thing can be overplayed. But it's difficult to imagine a manager who'd gone on several tirades full of other racist epithets wouldn't have been unceremoniously shown the door the moment the BBC were asked for comment and checked it was true.
http://politicalbetting.com/
to the secure site:
https://politicalbetting.com/
But it doesn't appear to be working.
https://www.facebook.com/PennLabour/
- Streisand theft of Range Rovers into most read story on BBC news
- Attack insurance companies
I wonder if insurance companies are starting to take into account the danger posed by SUVs to pedestrians/cyclists? That could be part of the reason why they are so expensive to insure. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68188064https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6ymVaq3Fqk
Blank stares.
Showed a picture of Rowan Atkinson and got a "Oh! Mister Bean!".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHEYoMSDoIQ
"What were the skies like when you were young?"
"I dunno. That's a stupid question. Can't remember."
Has anyone visited Luxembourg since they made public transport free for everyone, including tourists? Tom Scott video about it from Feb 2020, just before the policy was implemented.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feCQPD9DSOA
Free public transport is not the solution. Better to invest the money and get to a stage where you never need to check a timetable or app - the bus or train comes so often, and goes to so many places, it doesn't matter when you leave the house.
In fact, reliability and frequency is part of the reason why I started cycling. Fed up of waiting for buses that were stuck in traffic.
Times Radio"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQjVcghNo04
From my header last May (https://www.cyclefree.co.uk/the-cheque-is-in-the-post/) -
"Among all these failings, two deserve very close scrutiny.
The approach to the technical (in this case, computer) evidence
"There is a tendency (not confined to the Post Office) to believe there is one technological system which will provide the answer to a problem; and believe only what that technology tells you. Both are foolish, dangerous impulses. (A lesson for us on the cusp of a new technological revolution.)"
And here is Computer Weekly, which first uncovered this scandal, pointing out the dangers of AI for exactly the same reasons as happened here - https://www.computerweekly.com/opinion/AI-will-create-a-thousand-Post-Office-scandals.
I was right to point out the importance of this scandal months ago (and to keep pointing this out). I am right to point out the current conflicts of interest affecting the prosecuting authorities as they try to grapple with what's happened here. And I'm right to point out the folly of believing that technology is either always right or the answer to our problems. The belief in - the wish to believe in - one-stop shop Messiahs, whether human or technological, is a very human failing - and a dangerous one. What this scandal above all should teach us is that outsourcing our judgment and decisions to artificial, unknowable and powerful systems is very foolish indeed.
=====≈=====
I was too late to predict the France - Ireland game - FWIW I was going with Ireland but by 7 pts. Did not expect such an emphatic win...can not see anyone stopping an Irish Grand Slam.
Italy England should be straightforward enough - Italy have toughened up a bit but still England by 20 pts
Wales Scotland will be closer - but Wales have too many young inexperienced players to match Scotlands wiser heads - Scotland by 7 pts (first win in Cardiff in 22 years). Unless Wales can get some of their injured players back we wont beat Italy either!!
Surely it's more that we're already rather scared of what it might do, if it proves as powerful as some predict.
That it's already surprisingly competent at some tasks, but is unreliable, and we don't entirely understand how it works, is something of a truism.
Of course we're going ahead full tilt anyway.
India would be struggling without him.
An opener who also has the fastest 50 in IPL history.
Computer Weekly have been brilliant on the Post Office scandal, precisely because their journalists have a tech background and understand software. Private Eye have also been very good, because they have old-fashioned investigative hacks on their team, who can sniff a massive scandal from a mile away. The rest of the mainstream media, on the other hand, not so much.
I know that it’s now seen as conspiracy theory that a Chinese-style social credit score system is arriving in the West, whereby you can quickly become a non-person for trivial reasons, yet “Computer Says No” was a comedy skit from two decades ago (yes, that was 2004), the move away from cash and the introduction of digital currencies only makes it more likely that innocent people will become totally cut off from the financial system, and be unable to do anything about it.
https://www.techtimes.com/articles/301284/20240202/japan-launches-new-visa-digital-nomads-work-remotely.htm
You’ll need to earn 10m yen ($68k) and it’s only valid for six months, but an amazing opportunity to see a country that’s usually quite closed to immigrants.
@edmundintokyo what do you think?
Personally I’m interested in going to Expo 2025 in Kyoto, having seen it in my own country of residence in 2021, to be combined with the F1 race in Suzuka.
What’s a competitive score on this pitch under these circumstances? I would have said anything under 600 sees India still very much in the game.
Therefore, the Blair government passed a law that technological evidence could not be challenged in court.
If that is the case, it was a piece of lunacy that makes Iraq look sane. What sort of idiot says ‘People are getting away with things because the technology is shit, why don’t we just declare it isn’t rather than understanding its shortcomings and rethinking accordingly?’
But very New Labour…
I would be surprised by 4/1 to either England or India.
(Edit) India still very much in it !
The dog can do it on his own.
A lawyer called Nick Freeman made a name for himself challenging speeding tickets by asking for the calibration certificates of speed cameras and speed guns used by police, who also needed to have a training record. It was pretty often the Crown would drop the charges rather than produce calibration certs and training records in court - which suggests they were somewhat less than perfect in keeping record of these things, and that many other motorists who just pleased guilty and took the points could have won if they’d gone to court.
I expect that when they announce the detail we'll find that they've engineered some way to fuck it up though.
It’s still stupid. Your match your laws to the performance of the enforcement systems, not the other way around.
It is a bit like Goering officially ordering the Luftwaffe that the Allies didn’t have long range fighter capacity despite that fighter being shot down over the Ruhr.
Tbh. We are talking about ‘margins of error’ in that case. The difference between doing 36 and 32 to get a small fine and penalty points. Not the difference between doing 50 and 30 to get a ban from driving.
Of course, penalty points can add up. But if you’re close to the limit for a ban, it’s open to you to drive *within* the speed limit…
That's why the Post Office scandal is so concerning - there was no margin for error, no pattern of behaviour, no other evidence. Horizon = the truth.
The cricketing jinx is the one superstition I cling to.
She is also a fan of the Toon
She is then investigated by some creepy “agency” within the Premier League, they compile an entire dossier on her life and doings, right down to where she walks her dog, the file is passed to NUFC - who ban her from the ground for two seasons
All for saying “a woman can’t have a penis”
https://x.com/speechunion/status/1753528554929947067?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
I’ll have to limit my trip to three months then! (Actually it will be two or three weeks, as my wife has a desk job and can’t take months off).
1. Tax treaty issues
2. $68k
3. You only get 6 months
How does this differ from getting a normal tourist visa and doing the odd visa run, except it’s much more hassle?
I love Japan, but really, this looks to me like the Japanese realising they have a demographic problem, and trying to fix it, but in a deliberately half arsed way because, deep down, they still don’t want foreigners in Japan
Post Office = high impact, thousands of cases
Rape/murder DNA = extremely high impact, a few cases?
I think TV licensing is more likely to be the next scandal, particularly as I can imagine a conspiracy of silence across the BBC, government, magistrate courts (which process the cases in large batches).
I posted that England should just give up and take a few days off, then posted that at least we avoided the innings defeat!
One of the most unlikely wins in the last decade, but that’s why cricket is brilliant.
- PM / economics ministry are saying they should be doing international things and tech things
- They noticed that other countries are doing digital nomad visas and asked the Immigration Ministry why Japan wasn't doing that
- Immigration ministry doesn't want to change anything because that's how they roll
-> Immigration ministry throw them a bone that basically regularizes what's happening already
It’s not actually been tested, scientifically. It’s a made up thing. To get around the chronic inability to actually calibrate the devices and keep records of same.
TBF to Crawley, taking the bowling on on this pitch seems to have been the right approach, but it's still annoying that he yet again gives it away.
Root in. Needs some runs.
Liz Truss is said to have given up on her own leadership ambitions but believes that she will have a significant role in the appointment of the next Tory leader. She has continued inviting candidates, including some in safe seats replacing outgoing MPs, to her favoured club of 5 Hertford Street in Mayfair for drinks.
Truss and other right-wing Tory MPs including Lee Anderson, the former deputy chairman of the Conservative Party, will next week launch a movement called “popular conservatism”. It aims to promote small state, economic liberalism with a socially conservative agenda.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sunak-attempts-to-rally-the-troops-but-is-running-out-of-time-7m0ppswqk
For some things, generating pictures or magazine articles or simulating conversations, reliability doesn't really matter. It's OK for an AI artist/journalist to be unreliable, because their human equivalents generally are and not much harm is done. As long as said journalists stick to what they are good at and don't try to run the country.
For some things that are really difficult for humans to do, it's plausible for AI to be better than humans. Matching patterns in medical images, probably comes in that category. Working out which bit of information should best come next in a teaching sequence probably does as well.
The difficulty comes with things where we desire high reliability that can be interrogated. Why did the system come to that conclusion? Matters of life and liberty are like that, and I don't think we're getting anywhere with that AI-wise.
This might change through the massive increase in cloned plates. Check out various motoring forums for people spending hours finding evidence that their car cannot have been in a ULEZ, speeding fine etc. There will be a point soon at which a registration plate is not enough to convict someone of an offence.
The late Queen thought that the Duchess of Sussex’s wedding dress was “too white” for a divorcee, a new book claims.
Ingrid Seward, the former editor-in-chief of Majesty magazine, said that Elizabeth II never voiced her opinion about the duchess to anyone except her closest confidantes, including Lady Elizabeth Anson, her cousin.
Anson is reported in an extract of Seward’s book, My Mother and I, to have claimed that the late Queen considered Meghan’s dress improper for a woman who had been married before.
“In the monarch’s view, it was not appropriate for a divorcee getting remarried in church to look quite so flamboyantly virginal,” Seward writes in an extract of the book, published in the Daily Mail.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/queen-called-meghans-wedding-dress-too-white-for-divorcee-qcz9ck0v7
Unpopular Reckless Egotism has a nice ring to her new movement UnPopWrecks,
A brilliant innovation - a rare example of public sector productivity growth - but you can see where it could lead.
In the meantime, everyone should make sure that a photo of their car is unique, and distinguishable from a photo of the same make, model, colour car with your number plate on it. Use stickers or otherwise modify your car from the front and back, and take a photo of it the day you do. That photo maybe what gets you off when dragged into court.
Happily, we have a large online community of car nerds who can identify a 2013 Skoda Fabia from the shade of black on the wing mirrors.
But the Free Speech Union is quite diligent - they take on and WIN big legal cases (unlike Jo “kimono” Maugham)
India will be thinking about the size of their first -innings lead.
If a human had been involved they would have spotted it straight away. My wife rang up and told them it wasn't us and the photo was rubbish anyway. We haven't heard anything since. So much for computers with their assumption of guilt.
It probably helped that they felt a couple in their eighties in the Midlands probably were not committing crimes in London...
The results were not altogether to her advantage...
And so, ironically, her adoption of social conservatism can only be achieved by, perhaps, the most blatant bit of naked positioning she has ever indulged in.
I’ll get my coat. Actually, it’s a turtle neck.
The trouble is the leaders of these sorts of movements tend not to be very likeable. Trump and Bolsonaro for example.
https://www.capita.com/news/capita-announces-five-year-extension-tv-licensing-contract
* Lawrence Fox calls somebody a paedo: FSU is silent
* Mad BBC lady rants on about Jews: FSU is silent
* Toon lady says woman can't have penis: FSU IS GO! ALL FSU CRAFT LAUNCH NOW!
#PBFreeSpeech
Although 'popular conservatism' *is* economically suicidal because it means feathering the nests of the unproductive by screwing over workers.