Brits on holiday, however, will be able to use it.
Will that make us more or less annoying to the locals?
The Translators’ Union voted for it to be banned?
The tech looks to be game changing, the only reason I don’t like it is because I got the ‘old’ AirPods Pro for Christmas last year and they still work just fine.
"By effectively removing all barriers to communication between different races and cultures, (this) has caused more and bloodier wars than anything else in the history of creation..."
Are you Babelfishing for likes?
Quite likely!
I know we are kind of used to this now and quite a few on here know how it all works but it still strikes me as utterly bonkers that a throwaway bit of science fiction amusement from about 40 years ago is a least replicable with current technology.
Surely someone will have to make a fish shaped earphone just for the lolz.
Does the translation from English into French one get louder and louder if you repeat the same thing more than once?
Was quite surprised the other day when I found that Mrs C's new Samsung earbuds are supposed to contain translation facility stuff. I mildly wondered about getting a couple of those soy sauce fish ...
An interesting Newsagents. The US is in serious trouble . A congress woman accusing the Democrats of being totally responsible for this shooting though not agreeing that Repulicans were responsible for two Democrats being shot.
An interesting Newsagents. The US is in serious trouble . A congress woman accusing the Democrats of being totally responsible for this shooting though not agreeing that Repulicans were responsible for two Democrats being shot.
Bridget Philipson has some warmth. Good communicator.
Phillipson is favourite, but what about a nibble on Deeply Dippy Powell at 4-1?
Phillipson is the continuity Starmer candidate
After this week, how many Labour MPs want that?
It's nothing to do with MPs now. They've just decided the two nominations. Who wins depends on CLPs, party members and affiliates. The outcome is fairly unpredictable.
I think Phillipson has it in the bag. Did you see her speech at the TUC this week?
Yes, and I'm voting for her. But I don't think she's got it in the bag. I say this because there's a possibility that members will prefer not to have a current senior Cabinet member as DL. I can see a lot of folk voting for the backbench option, and Powell is perfectly okay and no nutter.
This seems to me to be a good "responding to events" podcast on Charlie Kirk by Emily Maitlis and Lewis Goodall. Some commentary, and no one will agree with all of it - I don't,
I prefer them being journalist-like rather than analytical. Imo it catches his style as a rhetorical debater. 25 minutes.
The Oxford Union’s incoming president appeared to celebrate the shooting of Charlie Kirk just months after debating him.
In messages seen by The Telegraph, Mr Abaraonye posted: “Charlie Kirk go shot, let’s f---ing go”
Another message, believed to be on the student’s Instagram account, stated “Charlie Kirk got shot loool”, an exaggeration of the abbreviation “laughing out loud”
From me, a list of Trump supporters who killed, or tried to kill, Democrats and opponents of Trump in recent years (since the right are now claiming all the political violence is from the left!)
The Oxford Union’s incoming president appeared to celebrate the shooting of Charlie Kirk just months after debating him.
In messages seen by The Telegraph, Mr Abaraonye posted: “Charlie Kirk go shot, let’s f---ing go”
Another message, believed to be on the student’s Instagram account, stated “Charlie Kirk got shot loool”, an exaggeration of the abbreviation “laughing out loud”
The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has issued a warning about what it calls the "worrying trend" of students hacking their own school and college IT systems for fun or as part of dares.
It has told teachers that they are failing to understand and recognise what it calls the "insider threat" pupils pose.
It says more the majority of so-called "insider" cyber attacks and data breaches in education settings - meaning they have been carried out by someone with access to internal systems - originate with students.
But they will never work out VPNs and bypassing OSA.
If an illegal activity was committed using a VPN, the police can trace the users via a warrant to id them from the ISP and then the VPN provider
LOL...you really don't understand VPNs do you. Most paid reputable ones operate no log, RAM cache, IP mixing. Pc Plod is absolutely shit out of luck. Most of those caught doing really dodgy stuff have required a) intelligence services and b) they let something slip unrelated to VPN usage. GCHQ did have a zero day for OpenVPN, but it was closed and they won't burn something like that on some spotty teenager hacking their school.
No, some operate no log as you say not all and as you say intelligence services can be brought in to track cookies and browser fingerprints can be used as well.
And if you are accessing and running child porn sites, planning terrorist outrages and hate crimes with others then GCHQ will be brought in to find you even if your VPN provider has no logs
That is quite an escalation from spotty teenager hacks own school, which is the original conversation.
Also you have repeated showed you don't understand this VPN and anonymising yourself ok the internet, but you keep trying to make ridiculous points when somebody mentions OSA.
No, I do understand it, if you are using VPNs to commit serious crimes then VPN provider logs or not GCHQ will likely eventually catch you.
OSA was brought in primarily to stop under 10s finding porn sites and violent sites by mistake, something clearly and worryingly you don't care about, not to stop spotty teens 13+ watching legal adult porn
What - you haven't a clue
Clearly more than you it seems
I have children and grandchildren and a son who is head of IT at a local school to call on
Your last paragraph could only be written by someone who has no practical knowledge of children's interaction with the Internet
I suggested upthread, Mr G, that he lives a sheltered, perhaps unworldly, life.
Given 69% of adults back the Online Safety Act it is certainly not just the sheltered and unworldly who support it, indeed it is one of the few popular acts of this Labour government ensuring it was implemented.
Most of the public are far more authoritarian than the average PB poster
Most people, like you, are utterly, utterly ignorant about online matters.
My favourite was talking to some friends who were in favour of the OSA. Their 13 year old boy sets up and runs the family IT - cloud, WiFi etc
They couldn’t be bothered to learn. And they genuinely thought that they would get some control…..
No most are parents or grandparents who don't want their 7 year old children or grandchildren for example stumbling across porn or violent websites
And as has been repeatedly said to you the age verification is easily avoided by children of all ages
You are to become a parent later this year so you will soon be learning the issues with children and the internet and the ineffective nature of OSA
And as has been repeatedly said to you children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN and also unlikely to be searching intentionally for porn or violent material
Apart from yourself repeating the same nonsense who else has agreed with you ?
You know nothing about this subject but maybe will gain experience from your own youngster you are expecting
Our 10 year old grandson would run rings round you with his knowledge of IT
Over 60% of the voters, as I posted from Yougov.
This libertarian or liberal dominated blog obviously won't, does your 10 year old want to regularly find porn or violence in his searches? I doubt it and nor will a 5 year old much less familiar with IT
'And as has been repeatedly said to you children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN and also unlikely to be searching intentionally for porn or violent material
Over 60% of the voters, as I posted on Yougov.'
Please link to where yougov said children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN
Over 60% backed the OSA and please show me a 5 year old who knows how to use a VPN?
The Oxford Union’s incoming president appeared to celebrate the shooting of Charlie Kirk just months after debating him.
In messages seen by The Telegraph, Mr Abaraonye posted: “Charlie Kirk go shot, let’s f---ing go”
Another message, believed to be on the student’s Instagram account, stated “Charlie Kirk got shot loool”, an exaggeration of the abbreviation “laughing out loud”
My piccie for the day. Wet wipe island foreshaw in Hammersmith, which changed the course of the river. Now cleared - 5 million wet wipes flushed down the loo (I assume).
It is simples: if your products contain plastic and are non-biodegradable, and are found as a significant part of this issue, you get a mahoosive fine.
That'll fix it.
Many of the offending products are labelled "flushable".
The manufacturers should definitely take at least half of the blame for this.
Not disagreeing with the sentiment - I'd read this stomachturning report a few weeks back:
But presumably Thames Water do too, for letting them through the sewerage system? (And some, belated, credit for the new interceptor sewers.)
AIUI the bigger problem occurs in the sewerage pipes, when fat and other non-biodegradable items get clogged. As happened to ours recently (*). The resultant fatbergs are both amazing and amazingly gross. When you have that much coming through, it'll clog *something*.
The Oxford Union’s incoming president appeared to celebrate the shooting of Charlie Kirk just months after debating him.
In messages seen by The Telegraph, Mr Abaraonye posted: “Charlie Kirk go shot, let’s f---ing go”
Another message, believed to be on the student’s Instagram account, stated “Charlie Kirk got shot loool”, an exaggeration of the abbreviation “laughing out loud”
Oxford needs to move quickly. Utterly unacceptable
Oxford University can't do anything about it, as the Oxford Union is an entirely independent membership club.
Unless you mean he should be sent down from the University for offensive comments on social media, in which case it's a view, and a most interesting one to hear coming from you.
Don't get me wrong - awful comments, and I think he probably should resign from his role and reflect on being a very naughty boy - hopefully he'll do better when he moves out of his teens. But you do realise you're just indulging in cancel culture, don't you? Social media means that comments that in my day would have been made to a handful of drunk associates in the Eagle & Child (and led to him being called a stupid wanker) are repeated around the world, and every newspaper columnist and every arsehole on every internet messageboard piles on.
The Oxford Union’s incoming president appeared to celebrate the shooting of Charlie Kirk just months after debating him.
In messages seen by The Telegraph, Mr Abaraonye posted: “Charlie Kirk go shot, let’s f---ing go”
Another message, believed to be on the student’s Instagram account, stated “Charlie Kirk got shot loool”, an exaggeration of the abbreviation “laughing out loud”
The Oxford Union’s incoming president appeared to celebrate the shooting of Charlie Kirk just months after debating him.
In messages seen by The Telegraph, Mr Abaraonye posted: “Charlie Kirk go shot, let’s f---ing go”
Another message, believed to be on the student’s Instagram account, stated “Charlie Kirk got shot loool”, an exaggeration of the abbreviation “laughing out loud”
The impact of the Epstein Yahoo mailbox story linked earlier on the testimony Ghislaine Maxwell gave to Trump's personal lawyers who run the Department of Justice, of which the transcript and audio (not sure if it was full audio) was published, will be ... interesting.
There are 20 years of emails in it, comprising 18,000 emails.
The Oxford Union’s incoming president appeared to celebrate the shooting of Charlie Kirk just months after debating him.
In messages seen by The Telegraph, Mr Abaraonye posted: “Charlie Kirk go shot, let’s f---ing go”
Another message, believed to be on the student’s Instagram account, stated “Charlie Kirk got shot loool”, an exaggeration of the abbreviation “laughing out loud”
Yes, but aren't the debate votes supposedly based on quality of argument rather than the intrinsic question?
I wouldn't know, tbh. But thanks anyway. It's an interesting blog anyway - not least the two chaps who moved to have it deleted from the record. If I read it rightly they came back from Pmt etc. to do so.
Bridget Philipson has some warmth. Good communicator.
Phillipson is favourite, but what about a nibble on Deeply Dippy Powell at 4-1?
Phillipson is the continuity Starmer candidate
After this week, how many Labour MPs want that?
It's nothing to do with MPs now. They've just decided the two nominations. Who wins depends on CLPs, party members and affiliates. The outcome is fairly unpredictable.
I think Phillipson has it in the bag. Did you see her speech at the TUC this week?
Yes, and I'm voting for her. But I don't think she's got it in the bag. I say this because there's a possibility that members will prefer not to have a current senior Cabinet member as DL. I can see a lot of folk voting for the backbench option, and Powell is perfectly okay and no nutter.
The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has issued a warning about what it calls the "worrying trend" of students hacking their own school and college IT systems for fun or as part of dares.
It has told teachers that they are failing to understand and recognise what it calls the "insider threat" pupils pose.
It says more the majority of so-called "insider" cyber attacks and data breaches in education settings - meaning they have been carried out by someone with access to internal systems - originate with students.
But they will never work out VPNs and bypassing OSA.
If an illegal activity was committed using a VPN, the police can trace the users via a warrant to id them from the ISP and then the VPN provider
LOL...you really don't understand VPNs do you. Most paid reputable ones operate no log, RAM cache, IP mixing. Pc Plod is absolutely shit out of luck. Most of those caught doing really dodgy stuff have required a) intelligence services and b) they let something slip unrelated to VPN usage. GCHQ did have a zero day for OpenVPN, but it was closed and they won't burn something like that on some spotty teenager hacking their school.
No, some operate no log as you say not all and as you say intelligence services can be brought in to track cookies and browser fingerprints can be used as well.
And if you are accessing and running child porn sites, planning terrorist outrages and hate crimes with others then GCHQ will be brought in to find you even if your VPN provider has no logs
That is quite an escalation from spotty teenager hacks own school, which is the original conversation.
Also you have repeated showed you don't understand this VPN and anonymising yourself ok the internet, but you keep trying to make ridiculous points when somebody mentions OSA.
No, I do understand it, if you are using VPNs to commit serious crimes then VPN provider logs or not GCHQ will likely eventually catch you.
OSA was brought in primarily to stop under 10s finding porn sites and violent sites by mistake, something clearly and worryingly you don't care about, not to stop spotty teens 13+ watching legal adult porn
What - you haven't a clue
Clearly more than you it seems
I have children and grandchildren and a son who is head of IT at a local school to call on
Your last paragraph could only be written by someone who has no practical knowledge of children's interaction with the Internet
I suggested upthread, Mr G, that he lives a sheltered, perhaps unworldly, life.
Given 69% of adults back the Online Safety Act it is certainly not just the sheltered and unworldly who support it, indeed it is one of the few popular acts of this Labour government ensuring it was implemented.
Most of the public are far more authoritarian than the average PB poster
Most people, like you, are utterly, utterly ignorant about online matters.
My favourite was talking to some friends who were in favour of the OSA. Their 13 year old boy sets up and runs the family IT - cloud, WiFi etc
They couldn’t be bothered to learn. And they genuinely thought that they would get some control…..
No most are parents or grandparents who don't want their 7 year old children or grandchildren for example stumbling across porn or violent websites
And as has been repeatedly said to you the age verification is easily avoided by children of all ages
You are to become a parent later this year so you will soon be learning the issues with children and the internet and the ineffective nature of OSA
And as has been repeatedly said to you children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN and also unlikely to be searching intentionally for porn or violent material
Apart from yourself repeating the same nonsense who else has agreed with you ?
You know nothing about this subject but maybe will gain experience from your own youngster you are expecting
Our 10 year old grandson would run rings round you with his knowledge of IT
Over 60% of the voters, as I posted from Yougov.
This libertarian or liberal dominated blog obviously won't, does your 10 year old want to regularly find porn or violence in his searches? I doubt it and nor will a 5 year old much less familiar with IT
'And as has been repeatedly said to you children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN and also unlikely to be searching intentionally for porn or violent material
Over 60% of the voters, as I posted on Yougov.'
Please link to where yougov said children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN
Over 60% backed the OSA and please show me a 5 year old who knows how to use a VPN?
You confuse backing for the OSA to its effectiveness which is simply easy to avoid by young people who are tec savvy and indeed could run rings round your knowledge
And you bring in 5 year olds when you started at 10 year olds
Hopefully your forthcoming young one will educate you in the years to come
Tomorrow I will be sacking every Manchester United and Chelsea fan who works for me.
I will also ask future interviewees their opinions about pineapple on pizza and why they think Die Hard isn't a Christmas film.
Denying someone a job over football allegiances is ‘perfectly lawful’
Ruling made in case of a Russian woman who sued for losing a marketing job because interviewers said they didn’t ‘vibe’ with her
Football fans can be legally denied jobs if current staff support a rival team, a judge has ruled.
Potential employers are allowed to base recruitment decisions on whether a prospective colleague might “damage office harmony”, Employment Judge Daniel Wright said.
He added the boss of a business would not be breaking employment law if he rejected a job application from a Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder because his office is full of Arsenal fans.
The ruling came in the case of a Russian woman who sued after she lost out on a job with a marketing agency because interviewers said they did not “vibe” with her as well as they did with the successful candidate.
Maia Kalina claimed that she was racially discriminated against because, unlike British people, her culture does not involve going to the pub or swearing.
Judge Wright dismissed her claims and said employers had the right to consider whether a prospective employee would get on well with existing staff.
He said: “There may be times when it is perfectly lawful for an employer to decide that somebody just will not be a fit with the team and that therefore it would be difficult to work together.
“An example of this could be a small company where everybody who works in the office is an ardent supporter of Arsenal Football Club, and they decide to pick an Arsenal fan at interview over a similarly qualified Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder because they do not want to damage the harmony of the office.
The Oxford Union’s incoming president appeared to celebrate the shooting of Charlie Kirk just months after debating him.
In messages seen by The Telegraph, Mr Abaraonye posted: “Charlie Kirk go shot, let’s f---ing go”
Another message, believed to be on the student’s Instagram account, stated “Charlie Kirk got shot loool”, an exaggeration of the abbreviation “laughing out loud”
My piccie for the day. Wet wipe island foreshaw in Hammersmith, which changed the course of the river. Now cleared - 5 million wet wipes flushed down the loo (I assume).
It is simples: if your products contain plastic and are non-biodegradable, and are found as a significant part of this issue, you get a mahoosive fine.
That'll fix it.
Many of the offending products are labelled "flushable".
The manufacturers should definitely take at least half of the blame for this.
Not disagreeing with the sentiment - I'd read this stomachturning report a few weeks back:
But presumably Thames Water do too, for letting them through the sewerage system? (And some, belated, credit for the new interceptor sewers.)
AIUI the bigger problem occurs in the sewerage pipes, when fat and other non-biodegradable items get clogged. As happened to ours recently (*). The resultant fatbergs are both amazing and amazingly gross. When you have that much coming through, it'll clog *something*.
(*) *****ing shared sewage pipes, and ******ing Anglian Water....
There's always been a problem in places like Soho with cornercutting restaurants putting fat down the sinkhole, which the sewermen had to clear, so it is clearly the modern wet wipes adding fibre to the lipid matrix to give a turbocharged additional tenacity to that appalling composite material ...
Tomorrow I will be sacking every Manchester United and Chelsea fan who works for me.
I will also ask future interviewees their opinions about pineapple on pizza and why they think Die Hard isn't a Christmas film.
Denying someone a job over football allegiances is ‘perfectly lawful’
Ruling made in case of a Russian woman who sued for losing a marketing job because interviewers said they didn’t ‘vibe’ with her
Football fans can be legally denied jobs if current staff support a rival team, a judge has ruled.
Potential employers are allowed to base recruitment decisions on whether a prospective colleague might “damage office harmony”, Employment Judge Daniel Wright said.
He added the boss of a business would not be breaking employment law if he rejected a job application from a Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder because his office is full of Arsenal fans.
The ruling came in the case of a Russian woman who sued after she lost out on a job with a marketing agency because interviewers said they did not “vibe” with her as well as they did with the successful candidate.
Maia Kalina claimed that she was racially discriminated against because, unlike British people, her culture does not involve going to the pub or swearing.
Judge Wright dismissed her claims and said employers had the right to consider whether a prospective employee would get on well with existing staff.
He said: “There may be times when it is perfectly lawful for an employer to decide that somebody just will not be a fit with the team and that therefore it would be difficult to work together.
“An example of this could be a small company where everybody who works in the office is an ardent supporter of Arsenal Football Club, and they decide to pick an Arsenal fan at interview over a similarly qualified Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder because they do not want to damage the harmony of the office.
The Oxford Union’s incoming president appeared to celebrate the shooting of Charlie Kirk just months after debating him.
In messages seen by The Telegraph, Mr Abaraonye posted: “Charlie Kirk go shot, let’s f---ing go”
Another message, believed to be on the student’s Instagram account, stated “Charlie Kirk got shot loool”, an exaggeration of the abbreviation “laughing out loud”
Oxford needs to move quickly. Utterly unacceptable
#pbfreespeech
Free Speech - in the American sense - is nothing to do with allowing people to say anything they want. It is about control of speech - allowing the people who have control to say what they like, but silencing those with a different message.
Tomorrow I will be sacking every Manchester United and Chelsea fan who works for me.
I will also ask future interviewees their opinions about pineapple on pizza and why they think Die Hard isn't a Christmas film.
Denying someone a job over football allegiances is ‘perfectly lawful’
Ruling made in case of a Russian woman who sued for losing a marketing job because interviewers said they didn’t ‘vibe’ with her
Football fans can be legally denied jobs if current staff support a rival team, a judge has ruled.
Potential employers are allowed to base recruitment decisions on whether a prospective colleague might “damage office harmony”, Employment Judge Daniel Wright said.
He added the boss of a business would not be breaking employment law if he rejected a job application from a Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder because his office is full of Arsenal fans.
The ruling came in the case of a Russian woman who sued after she lost out on a job with a marketing agency because interviewers said they did not “vibe” with her as well as they did with the successful candidate.
Maia Kalina claimed that she was racially discriminated against because, unlike British people, her culture does not involve going to the pub or swearing.
Judge Wright dismissed her claims and said employers had the right to consider whether a prospective employee would get on well with existing staff.
He said: “There may be times when it is perfectly lawful for an employer to decide that somebody just will not be a fit with the team and that therefore it would be difficult to work together.
“An example of this could be a small company where everybody who works in the office is an ardent supporter of Arsenal Football Club, and they decide to pick an Arsenal fan at interview over a similarly qualified Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder because they do not want to damage the harmony of the office.
I did wonder when I read that. Not least because a football fan's allegiances aren't inseparable from other, truly protected, aspects. One thinks of Liverpool, perhaps. And as for West Central Scotland ...
The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has issued a warning about what it calls the "worrying trend" of students hacking their own school and college IT systems for fun or as part of dares.
It has told teachers that they are failing to understand and recognise what it calls the "insider threat" pupils pose.
It says more the majority of so-called "insider" cyber attacks and data breaches in education settings - meaning they have been carried out by someone with access to internal systems - originate with students.
But they will never work out VPNs and bypassing OSA.
If an illegal activity was committed using a VPN, the police can trace the users via a warrant to id them from the ISP and then the VPN provider
LOL...you really don't understand VPNs do you. Most paid reputable ones operate no log, RAM cache, IP mixing. Pc Plod is absolutely shit out of luck. Most of those caught doing really dodgy stuff have required a) intelligence services and b) they let something slip unrelated to VPN usage. GCHQ did have a zero day for OpenVPN, but it was closed and they won't burn something like that on some spotty teenager hacking their school.
No, some operate no log as you say not all and as you say intelligence services can be brought in to track cookies and browser fingerprints can be used as well.
And if you are accessing and running child porn sites, planning terrorist outrages and hate crimes with others then GCHQ will be brought in to find you even if your VPN provider has no logs
That is quite an escalation from spotty teenager hacks own school, which is the original conversation.
Also you have repeated showed you don't understand this VPN and anonymising yourself ok the internet, but you keep trying to make ridiculous points when somebody mentions OSA.
No, I do understand it, if you are using VPNs to commit serious crimes then VPN provider logs or not GCHQ will likely eventually catch you.
OSA was brought in primarily to stop under 10s finding porn sites and violent sites by mistake, something clearly and worryingly you don't care about, not to stop spotty teens 13+ watching legal adult porn
What - you haven't a clue
Clearly more than you it seems
I have children and grandchildren and a son who is head of IT at a local school to call on
Your last paragraph could only be written by someone who has no practical knowledge of children's interaction with the Internet
I suggested upthread, Mr G, that he lives a sheltered, perhaps unworldly, life.
Given 69% of adults back the Online Safety Act it is certainly not just the sheltered and unworldly who support it, indeed it is one of the few popular acts of this Labour government ensuring it was implemented.
Most of the public are far more authoritarian than the average PB poster
Most people, like you, are utterly, utterly ignorant about online matters.
My favourite was talking to some friends who were in favour of the OSA. Their 13 year old boy sets up and runs the family IT - cloud, WiFi etc
They couldn’t be bothered to learn. And they genuinely thought that they would get some control…..
No most are parents or grandparents who don't want their 7 year old children or grandchildren for example stumbling across porn or violent websites
And as has been repeatedly said to you the age verification is easily avoided by children of all ages
You are to become a parent later this year so you will soon be learning the issues with children and the internet and the ineffective nature of OSA
And as has been repeatedly said to you children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN and also unlikely to be searching intentionally for porn or violent material
Apart from yourself repeating the same nonsense who else has agreed with you ?
You know nothing about this subject but maybe will gain experience from your own youngster you are expecting
Our 10 year old grandson would run rings round you with his knowledge of IT
Over 60% of the voters, as I posted from Yougov.
This libertarian or liberal dominated blog obviously won't, does your 10 year old want to regularly find porn or violence in his searches? I doubt it and nor will a 5 year old much less familiar with IT
'And as has been repeatedly said to you children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN and also unlikely to be searching intentionally for porn or violent material
Over 60% of the voters, as I posted on Yougov.'
Please link to where yougov said children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN
Over 60% backed the OSA and please show me a 5 year old who knows how to use a VPN?
You confuse backing for the OSA to its effectiveness which is simply easy to avoid by young people who are tec savvy and indeed could run rings round your knowledge
And you bring in 5 year olds when you started at 10 year olds
Hopefully your forthcoming young one will educate you in the years to come
They won't reach 10 for a decade, meanwhile when they are 5, 7, 8 I want to ensure any internet searches they may do are safe
The impact of the Epstein Yahoo mailbox story linked earlier on the testimony Ghislaine Maxwell gave to Trump's personal lawyers who run the Department of Justice, of which the transcript and audio (not sure if it was full audio) was published, will be ... interesting.
There are 20 years of emails in it, comprising 18,000 emails.
I think Farage will be fine, its the rest of his finances that need to be squeaky clean. However taking specialist tax advice was a misstep imo, it smacks of over covering your tender arse
If it floats it's a witch! If it sinks it's a witch!
The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has issued a warning about what it calls the "worrying trend" of students hacking their own school and college IT systems for fun or as part of dares.
It has told teachers that they are failing to understand and recognise what it calls the "insider threat" pupils pose.
It says more the majority of so-called "insider" cyber attacks and data breaches in education settings - meaning they have been carried out by someone with access to internal systems - originate with students.
But they will never work out VPNs and bypassing OSA.
If an illegal activity was committed using a VPN, the police can trace the users via a warrant to id them from the ISP and then the VPN provider
LOL...you really don't understand VPNs do you. Most paid reputable ones operate no log, RAM cache, IP mixing. Pc Plod is absolutely shit out of luck. Most of those caught doing really dodgy stuff have required a) intelligence services and b) they let something slip unrelated to VPN usage. GCHQ did have a zero day for OpenVPN, but it was closed and they won't burn something like that on some spotty teenager hacking their school.
No, some operate no log as you say not all and as you say intelligence services can be brought in to track cookies and browser fingerprints can be used as well.
And if you are accessing and running child porn sites, planning terrorist outrages and hate crimes with others then GCHQ will be brought in to find you even if your VPN provider has no logs
That is quite an escalation from spotty teenager hacks own school, which is the original conversation.
Also you have repeated showed you don't understand this VPN and anonymising yourself ok the internet, but you keep trying to make ridiculous points when somebody mentions OSA.
No, I do understand it, if you are using VPNs to commit serious crimes then VPN provider logs or not GCHQ will likely eventually catch you.
OSA was brought in primarily to stop under 10s finding porn sites and violent sites by mistake, something clearly and worryingly you don't care about, not to stop spotty teens 13+ watching legal adult porn
What - you haven't a clue
Clearly more than you it seems
I have children and grandchildren and a son who is head of IT at a local school to call on
Your last paragraph could only be written by someone who has no practical knowledge of children's interaction with the Internet
I suggested upthread, Mr G, that he lives a sheltered, perhaps unworldly, life.
Given 69% of adults back the Online Safety Act it is certainly not just the sheltered and unworldly who support it, indeed it is one of the few popular acts of this Labour government ensuring it was implemented.
Most of the public are far more authoritarian than the average PB poster
Most people, like you, are utterly, utterly ignorant about online matters.
My favourite was talking to some friends who were in favour of the OSA. Their 13 year old boy sets up and runs the family IT - cloud, WiFi etc
They couldn’t be bothered to learn. And they genuinely thought that they would get some control…..
No most are parents or grandparents who don't want their 7 year old children or grandchildren for example stumbling across porn or violent websites
And as has been repeatedly said to you the age verification is easily avoided by children of all ages
You are to become a parent later this year so you will soon be learning the issues with children and the internet and the ineffective nature of OSA
And as has been repeatedly said to you children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN and also unlikely to be searching intentionally for porn or violent material
Apart from yourself repeating the same nonsense who else has agreed with you ?
You know nothing about this subject but maybe will gain experience from your own youngster you are expecting
Our 10 year old grandson would run rings round you with his knowledge of IT
Over 60% of the voters, as I posted from Yougov.
This libertarian or liberal dominated blog obviously won't, does your 10 year old want to regularly find porn or violence in his searches? I doubt it and nor will a 5 year old much less familiar with IT
'And as has been repeatedly said to you children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN and also unlikely to be searching intentionally for porn or violent material
Over 60% of the voters, as I posted on Yougov.'
Please link to where yougov said children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN
Over 60% backed the OSA and please show me a 5 year old who knows how to use a VPN?
You confuse backing for the OSA to its effectiveness which is simply easy to avoid by young people who are tec savvy and indeed could run rings round your knowledge
And you bring in 5 year olds when you started at 10 year olds
Hopefully your forthcoming young one will educate you in the years to come
They won't reach 10 for a decade, meanwhile when they are 5, 7, 8 I want to ensure any internet searches they may do are safe
Er, you do realise that one day they will be able to get at this website? (It's a general issue for PB as also for all social media, to be fair.)
The Oxford Union’s incoming president appeared to celebrate the shooting of Charlie Kirk just months after debating him.
In messages seen by The Telegraph, Mr Abaraonye posted: “Charlie Kirk go shot, let’s f---ing go”
Another message, believed to be on the student’s Instagram account, stated “Charlie Kirk got shot loool”, an exaggeration of the abbreviation “laughing out loud”
Oxford needs to move quickly. Utterly unacceptable
#pbfreespeech
Also, the Oxford Union is a private body, not related to the University; it is not the real Student Union. Which has caused a lot of confusion.
The Oxford Union produces future Tory leaders and Cabinet Ministers and the odd PM like Heath, Heseltine and Hague or Liberal/SDP/LD leaders like Thorpe and Jenkins.
The Students' Union tends to be favoured by future Labour Cabinet Members like Anneliese Dodds, who was a past OUSU President
Rayner didn't take legal advice about stamp duty when she needed to. Farage did take legal advice about stamp duty when he didn't need to.
I hear this a lot about Rayner, that she naively failed to get the appropriate advice (probably her working class roots, poor thing), but isn't it a bit less passive than that. As I understand it, and I don't pretend to understand it fully, the thing involved re-designating what was her main home, her second home etc. That is an active process designed to minimise her liabilities - it's not some poor innocent thinking she was buying a new Wendy House.
Tomorrow I will be sacking every Manchester United and Chelsea fan who works for me.
I will also ask future interviewees their opinions about pineapple on pizza and why they think Die Hard isn't a Christmas film.
Denying someone a job over football allegiances is ‘perfectly lawful’
Ruling made in case of a Russian woman who sued for losing a marketing job because interviewers said they didn’t ‘vibe’ with her
Football fans can be legally denied jobs if current staff support a rival team, a judge has ruled.
Potential employers are allowed to base recruitment decisions on whether a prospective colleague might “damage office harmony”, Employment Judge Daniel Wright said.
He added the boss of a business would not be breaking employment law if he rejected a job application from a Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder because his office is full of Arsenal fans.
The ruling came in the case of a Russian woman who sued after she lost out on a job with a marketing agency because interviewers said they did not “vibe” with her as well as they did with the successful candidate.
Maia Kalina claimed that she was racially discriminated against because, unlike British people, her culture does not involve going to the pub or swearing.
Judge Wright dismissed her claims and said employers had the right to consider whether a prospective employee would get on well with existing staff.
He said: “There may be times when it is perfectly lawful for an employer to decide that somebody just will not be a fit with the team and that therefore it would be difficult to work together.
“An example of this could be a small company where everybody who works in the office is an ardent supporter of Arsenal Football Club, and they decide to pick an Arsenal fan at interview over a similarly qualified Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder because they do not want to damage the harmony of the office.
To me that ruling legitimises arsehole behaviour - particularly the example of rival football fans. I'd never sift out a candidate on such a flimsy basis, already work with sometimes difficult people who make up for it by their other attributes.
Also gives an easy excuse for people excluding religions, genders etc. OTOH, I do manage a Leeds fan.
The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has issued a warning about what it calls the "worrying trend" of students hacking their own school and college IT systems for fun or as part of dares.
It has told teachers that they are failing to understand and recognise what it calls the "insider threat" pupils pose.
It says more the majority of so-called "insider" cyber attacks and data breaches in education settings - meaning they have been carried out by someone with access to internal systems - originate with students.
But they will never work out VPNs and bypassing OSA.
If an illegal activity was committed using a VPN, the police can trace the users via a warrant to id them from the ISP and then the VPN provider
LOL...you really don't understand VPNs do you. Most paid reputable ones operate no log, RAM cache, IP mixing. Pc Plod is absolutely shit out of luck. Most of those caught doing really dodgy stuff have required a) intelligence services and b) they let something slip unrelated to VPN usage. GCHQ did have a zero day for OpenVPN, but it was closed and they won't burn something like that on some spotty teenager hacking their school.
No, some operate no log as you say not all and as you say intelligence services can be brought in to track cookies and browser fingerprints can be used as well.
And if you are accessing and running child porn sites, planning terrorist outrages and hate crimes with others then GCHQ will be brought in to find you even if your VPN provider has no logs
That is quite an escalation from spotty teenager hacks own school, which is the original conversation.
Also you have repeated showed you don't understand this VPN and anonymising yourself ok the internet, but you keep trying to make ridiculous points when somebody mentions OSA.
No, I do understand it, if you are using VPNs to commit serious crimes then VPN provider logs or not GCHQ will likely eventually catch you.
OSA was brought in primarily to stop under 10s finding porn sites and violent sites by mistake, something clearly and worryingly you don't care about, not to stop spotty teens 13+ watching legal adult porn
What - you haven't a clue
Clearly more than you it seems
I have children and grandchildren and a son who is head of IT at a local school to call on
Your last paragraph could only be written by someone who has no practical knowledge of children's interaction with the Internet
I suggested upthread, Mr G, that he lives a sheltered, perhaps unworldly, life.
Given 69% of adults back the Online Safety Act it is certainly not just the sheltered and unworldly who support it, indeed it is one of the few popular acts of this Labour government ensuring it was implemented.
Most of the public are far more authoritarian than the average PB poster
Most people, like you, are utterly, utterly ignorant about online matters.
My favourite was talking to some friends who were in favour of the OSA. Their 13 year old boy sets up and runs the family IT - cloud, WiFi etc
They couldn’t be bothered to learn. And they genuinely thought that they would get some control…..
No most are parents or grandparents who don't want their 7 year old children or grandchildren for example stumbling across porn or violent websites
And as has been repeatedly said to you the age verification is easily avoided by children of all ages
You are to become a parent later this year so you will soon be learning the issues with children and the internet and the ineffective nature of OSA
And as has been repeatedly said to you children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN and also unlikely to be searching intentionally for porn or violent material
Apart from yourself repeating the same nonsense who else has agreed with you ?
You know nothing about this subject but maybe will gain experience from your own youngster you are expecting
Our 10 year old grandson would run rings round you with his knowledge of IT
Over 60% of the voters, as I posted from Yougov.
This libertarian or liberal dominated blog obviously won't, does your 10 year old want to regularly find porn or violence in his searches? I doubt it and nor will a 5 year old much less familiar with IT
'And as has been repeatedly said to you children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN and also unlikely to be searching intentionally for porn or violent material
Over 60% of the voters, as I posted on Yougov.'
Please link to where yougov said children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN
Over 60% backed the OSA and please show me a 5 year old who knows how to use a VPN?
You confuse backing for the OSA to its effectiveness which is simply easy to avoid by young people who are tec savvy and indeed could run rings round your knowledge
And you bring in 5 year olds when you started at 10 year olds
Hopefully your forthcoming young one will educate you in the years to come
They won't reach 10 for a decade, meanwhile when they are 5, 7, 8 I want to ensure any internet searches they may do are safe
Surely you wouldn't rely on the government to do that?
The Oxford Union’s incoming president appeared to celebrate the shooting of Charlie Kirk just months after debating him.
In messages seen by The Telegraph, Mr Abaraonye posted: “Charlie Kirk go shot, let’s f---ing go”
Another message, believed to be on the student’s Instagram account, stated “Charlie Kirk got shot loool”, an exaggeration of the abbreviation “laughing out loud”
Oxford needs to move quickly. Utterly unacceptable
#pbfreespeech
Also, the Oxford Union is a private body, not related to the University; it is not the real Student Union. Which has caused a lot of confusion.
The Oxford Union produces future Tory leaders and Cabinet Ministers and the odd PM like Heath, Heseltine and Hague or Liberal/SDP/LD leaders like Thorpe and Jenkins.
The Students' Union tends to be favoured by future Labour Cabinet Members like Anneliese Dodds, who was a past OUSU President
The impact of the Epstein Yahoo mailbox story linked earlier on the testimony Ghislaine Maxwell gave to Trump's personal lawyers who run the Department of Justice, of which the transcript and audio (not sure if it was full audio) was published, will be ... interesting.
There are 20 years of emails in it, comprising 18,000 emails.
And Trump isn't in them
Now, he famously refused to use email back then...
The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has issued a warning about what it calls the "worrying trend" of students hacking their own school and college IT systems for fun or as part of dares.
It has told teachers that they are failing to understand and recognise what it calls the "insider threat" pupils pose.
It says more the majority of so-called "insider" cyber attacks and data breaches in education settings - meaning they have been carried out by someone with access to internal systems - originate with students.
But they will never work out VPNs and bypassing OSA.
If an illegal activity was committed using a VPN, the police can trace the users via a warrant to id them from the ISP and then the VPN provider
LOL...you really don't understand VPNs do you. Most paid reputable ones operate no log, RAM cache, IP mixing. Pc Plod is absolutely shit out of luck. Most of those caught doing really dodgy stuff have required a) intelligence services and b) they let something slip unrelated to VPN usage. GCHQ did have a zero day for OpenVPN, but it was closed and they won't burn something like that on some spotty teenager hacking their school.
No, some operate no log as you say not all and as you say intelligence services can be brought in to track cookies and browser fingerprints can be used as well.
And if you are accessing and running child porn sites, planning terrorist outrages and hate crimes with others then GCHQ will be brought in to find you even if your VPN provider has no logs
That is quite an escalation from spotty teenager hacks own school, which is the original conversation.
Also you have repeated showed you don't understand this VPN and anonymising yourself ok the internet, but you keep trying to make ridiculous points when somebody mentions OSA.
No, I do understand it, if you are using VPNs to commit serious crimes then VPN provider logs or not GCHQ will likely eventually catch you.
OSA was brought in primarily to stop under 10s finding porn sites and violent sites by mistake, something clearly and worryingly you don't care about, not to stop spotty teens 13+ watching legal adult porn
What - you haven't a clue
Clearly more than you it seems
I have children and grandchildren and a son who is head of IT at a local school to call on
Your last paragraph could only be written by someone who has no practical knowledge of children's interaction with the Internet
I suggested upthread, Mr G, that he lives a sheltered, perhaps unworldly, life.
Given 69% of adults back the Online Safety Act it is certainly not just the sheltered and unworldly who support it, indeed it is one of the few popular acts of this Labour government ensuring it was implemented.
Most of the public are far more authoritarian than the average PB poster
Most people, like you, are utterly, utterly ignorant about online matters.
My favourite was talking to some friends who were in favour of the OSA. Their 13 year old boy sets up and runs the family IT - cloud, WiFi etc
They couldn’t be bothered to learn. And they genuinely thought that they would get some control…..
No most are parents or grandparents who don't want their 7 year old children or grandchildren for example stumbling across porn or violent websites
And as has been repeatedly said to you the age verification is easily avoided by children of all ages
You are to become a parent later this year so you will soon be learning the issues with children and the internet and the ineffective nature of OSA
And as has been repeatedly said to you children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN and also unlikely to be searching intentionally for porn or violent material
Apart from yourself repeating the same nonsense who else has agreed with you ?
You know nothing about this subject but maybe will gain experience from your own youngster you are expecting
Our 10 year old grandson would run rings round you with his knowledge of IT
Over 60% of the voters, as I posted from Yougov.
This libertarian or liberal dominated blog obviously won't, does your 10 year old want to regularly find porn or violence in his searches? I doubt it and nor will a 5 year old much less familiar with IT
'And as has been repeatedly said to you children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN and also unlikely to be searching intentionally for porn or violent material
Over 60% of the voters, as I posted on Yougov.'
Please link to where yougov said children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN
Over 60% backed the OSA and please show me a 5 year old who knows how to use a VPN?
You confuse backing for the OSA to its effectiveness which is simply easy to avoid by young people who are tec savvy and indeed could run rings round your knowledge
And you bring in 5 year olds when you started at 10 year olds
Hopefully your forthcoming young one will educate you in the years to come
They won't reach 10 for a decade, meanwhile when they are 5, 7, 8 I want to ensure any internet searches they may do are safe
Er, you do realise that one day they will be able to get at this website? (It's a general issue for PB as also for all social media, to be fair.)
The Oxford Union’s incoming president appeared to celebrate the shooting of Charlie Kirk just months after debating him.
In messages seen by The Telegraph, Mr Abaraonye posted: “Charlie Kirk go shot, let’s f---ing go”
Another message, believed to be on the student’s Instagram account, stated “Charlie Kirk got shot loool”, an exaggeration of the abbreviation “laughing out loud”
Oxford needs to move quickly. Utterly unacceptable
#pbfreespeech
Also, the Oxford Union is a private body, not related to the University; it is not the real Student Union. Which has caused a lot of confusion.
The Oxford Union produces future Tory leaders and Cabinet Ministers and the odd PM like Heath, Heseltine and Hague or Liberal/SDP/LD leaders like Thorpe and Jenkins.
The Students' Union tends to be favoured by future Labour Cabinet Members like Anneliese Dodds, who was a past OUSU President
My piccie for the day. Wet wipe island foreshaw in Hammersmith, which changed the course of the river. Now cleared - 5 million wet wipes flushed down the loo (I assume).
It is simples: if your products contain plastic and are non-biodegradable, and are found as a significant part of this issue, you get a mahoosive fine.
That'll fix it.
Many of the offending products are labelled "flushable".
The manufacturers should definitely take at least half of the blame for this.
Not disagreeing with the sentiment - I'd read this stomachturning report a few weeks back:
But presumably Thames Water do too, for letting them through the sewerage system? (And some, belated, credit for the new interceptor sewers.)
AIUI the bigger problem occurs in the sewerage pipes, when fat and other non-biodegradable items get clogged. As happened to ours recently (*). The resultant fatbergs are both amazing and amazingly gross. When you have that much coming through, it'll clog *something*.
(*) *****ing shared sewage pipes, and ******ing Anglian Water....
There's always been a problem in places like Soho with cornercutting restaurants putting fat down the sinkhole, which the sewermen had to clear, so it is clearly the modern wet wipes adding fibre to the lipid matrix to give a turbocharged additional tenacity to that appalling composite material ...
Decades ago, my dad's company had the contract to provide a pump and pipes to a firm. They were only used for a few days a year, but were never used for any other purpose. In fact, they were stored on a remote part of the tip (an area of wasteland used for storage).
The firm was a slaughterhouse, and the pump and pipes were used in an annual clean and inspection of sumps or something similar. However much we washed them afterwards, we could never get the stench out of pump or pipes. And no other company would ever want to hire them.
Stripping down and maintaining the pump was never a pleasant job.
The Oxford Union’s incoming president appeared to celebrate the shooting of Charlie Kirk just months after debating him.
In messages seen by The Telegraph, Mr Abaraonye posted: “Charlie Kirk go shot, let’s f---ing go”
Another message, believed to be on the student’s Instagram account, stated “Charlie Kirk got shot loool”, an exaggeration of the abbreviation “laughing out loud”
Oxford needs to move quickly. Utterly unacceptable
#pbfreespeech
Also, the Oxford Union is a private body, not related to the University; it is not the real Student Union. Which has caused a lot of confusion.
The Oxford Union produces future Tory leaders and Cabinet Ministers and the odd PM like Heath, Heseltine and Hague or Liberal/SDP/LD leaders like Thorpe and Jenkins.
The Students' Union tends to be favoured by future Labour Cabinet Members like Anneliese Dodds, who was a past OUSU President
Rayner didn't take legal advice about stamp duty when she needed to. Farage did take legal advice about stamp duty when he didn't need to.
I hear this a lot about Rayner, that she naively failed to get the appropriate advice (probably her working class roots, poor thing), but isn't it a bit less passive than that. As I understand it, and I don't pretend to understand it fully, the thing involved re-designating what was her main home, her second home etc. That is an active process designed to minimise her liabilities - it's not some poor innocent thinkkng she was buying a new Wendy House.
She didn't own two houses at once.
She disposed of the former family home and had no remaining ownership rights in it, other than that it housed her disabled son, to which she was trustee. Normally with such trusts for the disabled, the tax treatment is that things are done as if the trust recipient, not the trustee, was the owner, etc.; but by an anomaly of the law this did not apply to the stamp duty. Moreover, if she had waited 4 months to do the transfer [edit] and then house purchase she wouldn't have had to pay any extra stamp duty at all, the child reaching 18. That's not an active process but a complete ballsup.
Rayner didn't take legal advice about stamp duty when she needed to. Farage did take legal advice about stamp duty when he didn't need to.
I hear this a lot about Rayner, that she naively failed to get the appropriate advice (probably her working class roots, poor thing), but isn't it a bit less passive than that. As I understand it, and I don't pretend to understand it fully, the thing involved re-designating what was her main home, her second home etc. That is an active process designed to minimise her liabilities - it's not some poor innocent thinking she was buying a new Wendy House.
If she'd waited 6 months she could have claimed all the tax back anyway. It points to incompetence more than anything. Labour should provide an approved list of personal lawyers etc a bit like football clubs do for the suddenly rich.
Tomorrow I will be sacking every Manchester United and Chelsea fan who works for me.
I will also ask future interviewees their opinions about pineapple on pizza and why they think Die Hard isn't a Christmas film.
Denying someone a job over football allegiances is ‘perfectly lawful’
Ruling made in case of a Russian woman who sued for losing a marketing job because interviewers said they didn’t ‘vibe’ with her
Football fans can be legally denied jobs if current staff support a rival team, a judge has ruled.
Potential employers are allowed to base recruitment decisions on whether a prospective colleague might “damage office harmony”, Employment Judge Daniel Wright said.
He added the boss of a business would not be breaking employment law if he rejected a job application from a Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder because his office is full of Arsenal fans.
The ruling came in the case of a Russian woman who sued after she lost out on a job with a marketing agency because interviewers said they did not “vibe” with her as well as they did with the successful candidate.
Maia Kalina claimed that she was racially discriminated against because, unlike British people, her culture does not involve going to the pub or swearing.
Judge Wright dismissed her claims and said employers had the right to consider whether a prospective employee would get on well with existing staff.
He said: “There may be times when it is perfectly lawful for an employer to decide that somebody just will not be a fit with the team and that therefore it would be difficult to work together.
“An example of this could be a small company where everybody who works in the office is an ardent supporter of Arsenal Football Club, and they decide to pick an Arsenal fan at interview over a similarly qualified Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder because they do not want to damage the harmony of the office.
To me that ruling legitimises arsehole behaviour - particularly the example of rival football fans. I'd never sift out a candidate on such a flimsy basis, already work with sometimes difficult people who make up for it by their other attributes.
Also gives an easy excuse for people excluding religions, genders etc. OTOH, I do manage a Leeds fan.
Isn't it that religion and gender are protected characteristics, but football teams are not?
I think the Judge is simply using football teams as an example. It allows employers to use their judgement at interview as to whether someone fits.
“ In a post on X, the deputy secretary of state Chris Landau has said that he’s directed consular officials to “undertake appropriate action” against any “foreigners who glorify violence and hatred”.
He added that he’s “been disgusted to see some on social media praising, rationalizing, or making light” of Kirk’s assassination.
Notably, Landau said consular officials would also be monitoring his post to crowd source submissions from users who see posts that aren’t in line with the department’s views.”
Bridget Phillipson read history and French at university and Lucy Powell read chemistry (granted they were both at the dump).
We've said we need more non PPEists at the top of politics.
You know who else read chemistry at Oxford.
(And for once, it's not the Ken Livingstone answer.)
Mrs T. Including a research component (effectively a MSc by research added on to the BSc, though they called it a BA Hons and probably still do).
Indeed, doing X-ray crystallography. Which all the best people did, until computers took the fun out of it.
Happy memories of seeing the stacked layers and layers of perspex with felt-tip contours of electron density, or huge agglomerations of balls on sticks, in display cases in departmental corridors.
That suddenly reminds me - surely her supervisor wasn't Dorothy Hodgkin? Yes, on checking, she was.
Tomorrow I will be sacking every Manchester United and Chelsea fan who works for me.
I will also ask future interviewees their opinions about pineapple on pizza and why they think Die Hard isn't a Christmas film.
Denying someone a job over football allegiances is ‘perfectly lawful’
Ruling made in case of a Russian woman who sued for losing a marketing job because interviewers said they didn’t ‘vibe’ with her
Football fans can be legally denied jobs if current staff support a rival team, a judge has ruled.
Potential employers are allowed to base recruitment decisions on whether a prospective colleague might “damage office harmony”, Employment Judge Daniel Wright said.
He added the boss of a business would not be breaking employment law if he rejected a job application from a Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder because his office is full of Arsenal fans.
The ruling came in the case of a Russian woman who sued after she lost out on a job with a marketing agency because interviewers said they did not “vibe” with her as well as they did with the successful candidate.
Maia Kalina claimed that she was racially discriminated against because, unlike British people, her culture does not involve going to the pub or swearing.
Judge Wright dismissed her claims and said employers had the right to consider whether a prospective employee would get on well with existing staff.
He said: “There may be times when it is perfectly lawful for an employer to decide that somebody just will not be a fit with the team and that therefore it would be difficult to work together.
“An example of this could be a small company where everybody who works in the office is an ardent supporter of Arsenal Football Club, and they decide to pick an Arsenal fan at interview over a similarly qualified Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder because they do not want to damage the harmony of the office.
The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has issued a warning about what it calls the "worrying trend" of students hacking their own school and college IT systems for fun or as part of dares.
It has told teachers that they are failing to understand and recognise what it calls the "insider threat" pupils pose.
It says more the majority of so-called "insider" cyber attacks and data breaches in education settings - meaning they have been carried out by someone with access to internal systems - originate with students.
But they will never work out VPNs and bypassing OSA.
If an illegal activity was committed using a VPN, the police can trace the users via a warrant to id them from the ISP and then the VPN provider
LOL...you really don't understand VPNs do you. Most paid reputable ones operate no log, RAM cache, IP mixing. Pc Plod is absolutely shit out of luck. Most of those caught doing really dodgy stuff have required a) intelligence services and b) they let something slip unrelated to VPN usage. GCHQ did have a zero day for OpenVPN, but it was closed and they won't burn something like that on some spotty teenager hacking their school.
No, some operate no log as you say not all and as you say intelligence services can be brought in to track cookies and browser fingerprints can be used as well.
And if you are accessing and running child porn sites, planning terrorist outrages and hate crimes with others then GCHQ will be brought in to find you even if your VPN provider has no logs
That is quite an escalation from spotty teenager hacks own school, which is the original conversation.
Also you have repeated showed you don't understand this VPN and anonymising yourself ok the internet, but you keep trying to make ridiculous points when somebody mentions OSA.
No, I do understand it, if you are using VPNs to commit serious crimes then VPN provider logs or not GCHQ will likely eventually catch you.
OSA was brought in primarily to stop under 10s finding porn sites and violent sites by mistake, something clearly and worryingly you don't care about, not to stop spotty teens 13+ watching legal adult porn
What - you haven't a clue
Clearly more than you it seems
I have children and grandchildren and a son who is head of IT at a local school to call on
Your last paragraph could only be written by someone who has no practical knowledge of children's interaction with the Internet
I suggested upthread, Mr G, that he lives a sheltered, perhaps unworldly, life.
Given 69% of adults back the Online Safety Act it is certainly not just the sheltered and unworldly who support it, indeed it is one of the few popular acts of this Labour government ensuring it was implemented.
Most of the public are far more authoritarian than the average PB poster
Most people, like you, are utterly, utterly ignorant about online matters.
My favourite was talking to some friends who were in favour of the OSA. Their 13 year old boy sets up and runs the family IT - cloud, WiFi etc
They couldn’t be bothered to learn. And they genuinely thought that they would get some control…..
No most are parents or grandparents who don't want their 7 year old children or grandchildren for example stumbling across porn or violent websites
And as has been repeatedly said to you the age verification is easily avoided by children of all ages
You are to become a parent later this year so you will soon be learning the issues with children and the internet and the ineffective nature of OSA
And as has been repeatedly said to you children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN and also unlikely to be searching intentionally for porn or violent material
Apart from yourself repeating the same nonsense who else has agreed with you ?
You know nothing about this subject but maybe will gain experience from your own youngster you are expecting
Our 10 year old grandson would run rings round you with his knowledge of IT
Over 60% of the voters, as I posted from Yougov.
This libertarian or liberal dominated blog obviously won't, does your 10 year old want to regularly find porn or violence in his searches? I doubt it and nor will a 5 year old much less familiar with IT
'And as has been repeatedly said to you children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN and also unlikely to be searching intentionally for porn or violent material
Over 60% of the voters, as I posted on Yougov.'
Please link to where yougov said children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN
Over 60% backed the OSA and please show me a 5 year old who knows how to use a VPN?
About any 5 year old born after 2000 can figure things out online fairly rapidly. Especially when using a VPN requires no skills whatsoever.
Any kid who wants to circumvent a ban can figure it out in about 6, 7 seconds.
Dubai resident Richard Tice defends his leader from tax dodging when someone bought him a house in Clacton......Good to see Mr Balls on the case. Maybe the Telegraph could bring their experience to bear
I just bumped into a senior Westminster figure who pondered a once hypothetical which never happened.
Just imagine if the prime minister had appointed Nigel Farage as the UK's Ambassador in Washington, as was talked up by some (including Farage himself).
Extraordinary as it would have been, it would have avoided this row, and put the man who has become Sir Keir Starmer's biggest threat out of political harms way.
How different our political debate and the fortunes of some of its biggest parties might have been.
I said this. And I am not a senior Westminster figure, but perhaps said figure has been reading PB!
Tomorrow I will be sacking every Manchester United and Chelsea fan who works for me.
I will also ask future interviewees their opinions about pineapple on pizza and why they think Die Hard isn't a Christmas film.
Denying someone a job over football allegiances is ‘perfectly lawful’
Ruling made in case of a Russian woman who sued for losing a marketing job because interviewers said they didn’t ‘vibe’ with her
Football fans can be legally denied jobs if current staff support a rival team, a judge has ruled.
Potential employers are allowed to base recruitment decisions on whether a prospective colleague might “damage office harmony”, Employment Judge Daniel Wright said.
He added the boss of a business would not be breaking employment law if he rejected a job application from a Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder because his office is full of Arsenal fans.
The ruling came in the case of a Russian woman who sued after she lost out on a job with a marketing agency because interviewers said they did not “vibe” with her as well as they did with the successful candidate.
Maia Kalina claimed that she was racially discriminated against because, unlike British people, her culture does not involve going to the pub or swearing.
Judge Wright dismissed her claims and said employers had the right to consider whether a prospective employee would get on well with existing staff.
He said: “There may be times when it is perfectly lawful for an employer to decide that somebody just will not be a fit with the team and that therefore it would be difficult to work together.
“An example of this could be a small company where everybody who works in the office is an ardent supporter of Arsenal Football Club, and they decide to pick an Arsenal fan at interview over a similarly qualified Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder because they do not want to damage the harmony of the office.
To me that ruling legitimises arsehole behaviour - particularly the example of rival football fans. I'd never sift out a candidate on such a flimsy basis, already work with sometimes difficult people who make up for it by their other attributes.
Also gives an easy excuse for people excluding religions, genders etc. OTOH, I do manage a Leeds fan.
Isn't it that religion and gender are protected characteristics, but football teams are not?
I think the Judge is simply using football teams as an example. It allows employers to use their judgement at interview as to whether someone fits.
Gender is not a protected characteristic. Gender reassignment is.
Dubai resident Richard Tice defends his leader from tax dodging when someone bought him a house in Clacton......Good to see Mr Balls on the case. Maybe the Telegraph could bring their experience to bear
Farage girlfriend buys a house and he co- habits with her
What has he done wrong
And nobody dislikes Farage more than I do but there are a lot more ways to trip him up than this
What exactly has Farage got that persuades his French girlfriend to spend over a million Euros to buy him a house in Clacton? Shouldn't someone investigate?
The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has issued a warning about what it calls the "worrying trend" of students hacking their own school and college IT systems for fun or as part of dares.
It has told teachers that they are failing to understand and recognise what it calls the "insider threat" pupils pose.
It says more the majority of so-called "insider" cyber attacks and data breaches in education settings - meaning they have been carried out by someone with access to internal systems - originate with students.
But they will never work out VPNs and bypassing OSA.
If an illegal activity was committed using a VPN, the police can trace the users via a warrant to id them from the ISP and then the VPN provider
LOL...you really don't understand VPNs do you. Most paid reputable ones operate no log, RAM cache, IP mixing. Pc Plod is absolutely shit out of luck. Most of those caught doing really dodgy stuff have required a) intelligence services and b) they let something slip unrelated to VPN usage. GCHQ did have a zero day for OpenVPN, but it was closed and they won't burn something like that on some spotty teenager hacking their school.
No, some operate no log as you say not all and as you say intelligence services can be brought in to track cookies and browser fingerprints can be used as well.
And if you are accessing and running child porn sites, planning terrorist outrages and hate crimes with others then GCHQ will be brought in to find you even if your VPN provider has no logs
That is quite an escalation from spotty teenager hacks own school, which is the original conversation.
Also you have repeated showed you don't understand this VPN and anonymising yourself ok the internet, but you keep trying to make ridiculous points when somebody mentions OSA.
No, I do understand it, if you are using VPNs to commit serious crimes then VPN provider logs or not GCHQ will likely eventually catch you.
OSA was brought in primarily to stop under 10s finding porn sites and violent sites by mistake, something clearly and worryingly you don't care about, not to stop spotty teens 13+ watching legal adult porn
What - you haven't a clue
Clearly more than you it seems
I have children and grandchildren and a son who is head of IT at a local school to call on
Your last paragraph could only be written by someone who has no practical knowledge of children's interaction with the Internet
I suggested upthread, Mr G, that he lives a sheltered, perhaps unworldly, life.
Given 69% of adults back the Online Safety Act it is certainly not just the sheltered and unworldly who support it, indeed it is one of the few popular acts of this Labour government ensuring it was implemented.
Most of the public are far more authoritarian than the average PB poster
Most people, like you, are utterly, utterly ignorant about online matters.
My favourite was talking to some friends who were in favour of the OSA. Their 13 year old boy sets up and runs the family IT - cloud, WiFi etc
They couldn’t be bothered to learn. And they genuinely thought that they would get some control…..
No most are parents or grandparents who don't want their 7 year old children or grandchildren for example stumbling across porn or violent websites
And as has been repeatedly said to you the age verification is easily avoided by children of all ages
You are to become a parent later this year so you will soon be learning the issues with children and the internet and the ineffective nature of OSA
And as has been repeatedly said to you children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN and also unlikely to be searching intentionally for porn or violent material
Apart from yourself repeating the same nonsense who else has agreed with you ?
You know nothing about this subject but maybe will gain experience from your own youngster you are expecting
Our 10 year old grandson would run rings round you with his knowledge of IT
Over 60% of the voters, as I posted from Yougov.
This libertarian or liberal dominated blog obviously won't, does your 10 year old want to regularly find porn or violence in his searches? I doubt it and nor will a 5 year old much less familiar with IT
'And as has been repeatedly said to you children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN and also unlikely to be searching intentionally for porn or violent material
Over 60% of the voters, as I posted on Yougov.'
Please link to where yougov said children under 10 are unlikely to know how to use a VPN
Over 60% backed the OSA and please show me a 5 year old who knows how to use a VPN?
About any 5 year old born after 2000 can figure things out online fairly rapidly. Especially when using a VPN requires no skills whatsoever.
Any kid who wants to circumvent a ban can figure it out in about 6, 7 seconds.
I doubt most 5 year olds even know what a VPN is and they certainly won't be interested in porn at that age and so should be protected from coming across it by accident
Bridget Phillipson read history and French at university and Lucy Powell read chemistry (granted they were both at the dump).
We've said we need more non PPEists at the top of politics.
Only Yvette Cooper at the top tier of Cabinet read PPE, most read law, Badenoch read Computer Science, Jenrick read History, Cleverly read hospitality management, Farage read nothing at all. Davey only party leader who read PPE
Tomorrow I will be sacking every Manchester United and Chelsea fan who works for me.
I will also ask future interviewees their opinions about pineapple on pizza and why they think Die Hard isn't a Christmas film.
Denying someone a job over football allegiances is ‘perfectly lawful’
Ruling made in case of a Russian woman who sued for losing a marketing job because interviewers said they didn’t ‘vibe’ with her
Football fans can be legally denied jobs if current staff support a rival team, a judge has ruled.
Potential employers are allowed to base recruitment decisions on whether a prospective colleague might “damage office harmony”, Employment Judge Daniel Wright said.
He added the boss of a business would not be breaking employment law if he rejected a job application from a Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder because his office is full of Arsenal fans.
The ruling came in the case of a Russian woman who sued after she lost out on a job with a marketing agency because interviewers said they did not “vibe” with her as well as they did with the successful candidate.
Maia Kalina claimed that she was racially discriminated against because, unlike British people, her culture does not involve going to the pub or swearing.
Judge Wright dismissed her claims and said employers had the right to consider whether a prospective employee would get on well with existing staff.
He said: “There may be times when it is perfectly lawful for an employer to decide that somebody just will not be a fit with the team and that therefore it would be difficult to work together.
“An example of this could be a small company where everybody who works in the office is an ardent supporter of Arsenal Football Club, and they decide to pick an Arsenal fan at interview over a similarly qualified Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder because they do not want to damage the harmony of the office.
Bridget Phillipson read history and French at university and Lucy Powell read chemistry (granted they were both at the dump).
We've said we need more non PPEists at the top of politics.
You know who else read chemistry at Oxford.
(And for once, it's not the Ken Livingstone answer.)
Mrs T. Including a research component (effectively a MSc by research added on to the BSc, though they called it a BA Hons and probably still do).
Indeed, doing X-ray crystallography. Which all the best people did, until computers took the fun out of it.
Back when I was doing my PhD a friend went to Canada as a post doc running a crystallography service. At the time it was the done thing to put the X ray crystallographer on any papers as it was still an involved task, albeit becoming much more computer driven and indeed automated. He racked up a couple of dozen papers in a year, unheard of for his original field, organometallics. Nowadays I think a crystallographer probably merits an acknowledgement rather than being an author, and researchers are much more likely to solve their own structures.
Sky reporting Security Services raised issues about Mandelson and No 10 overruled them
Considerable dismay in the Security Serviced about the blame game
This is quite some development
This is the kind of scandal that can quickly escalate and bring down a government. I see Burnham making some interesting noises this afternoon…
Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas . Labour MPs aren’t going to bring down their own government , at most it might force Starmer out but even that’s a stretch .
Having such a large Labour majority may in the end prove to be more of a danger to Starmer's leadership than having a much smaller one, it appears to have emboldened the government backbenches to become more openly critical and rebellious very quickly. Starmer's authority is draining away and the Labour deputy leadership contest and conference is only going to highlight this further in the run up to the Autumn budget.
Comments
Rayner didn't take legal advice about stamp duty when she needed to.
Farage did take legal advice about stamp duty when he didn't need to.
I prefer them being journalist-like rather than analytical. Imo it catches his style as a rhetorical debater. 25 minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbWDypOhN7M
From me, a list of Trump supporters who killed, or tried to kill, Democrats and opponents of Trump in recent years (since the right are now claiming all the political violence is from the left!)
Receipts:
https://x.com/mehdirhasan/status/1966160369182978274
https://sites.hertford.ox.ac.uk/library-archives/capturing-the-inter-war-generation-3-the-king-and-country-debate-the-coming-of-war/
This one weighed 130 tonnes:
https://hydro-cleansing.com/blog/the-whitechapel-fatberg-the-worlds-largest-fatberg
(*) *****ing shared sewage pipes, and ******ing Anglian Water....
Unless you mean he should be sent down from the University for offensive comments on social media, in which case it's a view, and a most interesting one to hear coming from you.
Don't get me wrong - awful comments, and I think he probably should resign from his role and reflect on being a very naughty boy - hopefully he'll do better when he moves out of his teens. But you do realise you're just indulging in cancel culture, don't you? Social media means that comments that in my day would have been made to a handful of drunk associates in the Eagle & Child (and led to him being called a stupid wanker) are repeated around the world, and every newspaper columnist and every arsehole on every internet messageboard piles on.
Farage knows what's happening is as dodgy as f*** so is minimising the attack points.
There are 20 years of emails in it, comprising 18,000 emails.
And you bring in 5 year olds when you started at 10 year olds
Hopefully your forthcoming young one will educate you in the years to come
I will also ask future interviewees their opinions about pineapple on pizza and why they think Die Hard isn't a Christmas film.
Denying someone a job over football allegiances is ‘perfectly lawful’
Ruling made in case of a Russian woman who sued for losing a marketing job because interviewers said they didn’t ‘vibe’ with her
Football fans can be legally denied jobs if current staff support a rival team, a judge has ruled.
Potential employers are allowed to base recruitment decisions on whether a prospective colleague might “damage office harmony”, Employment Judge Daniel Wright said.
He added the boss of a business would not be breaking employment law if he rejected a job application from a Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder because his office is full of Arsenal fans.
The ruling came in the case of a Russian woman who sued after she lost out on a job with a marketing agency because interviewers said they did not “vibe” with her as well as they did with the successful candidate.
Maia Kalina claimed that she was racially discriminated against because, unlike British people, her culture does not involve going to the pub or swearing.
Judge Wright dismissed her claims and said employers had the right to consider whether a prospective employee would get on well with existing staff.
He said: “There may be times when it is perfectly lawful for an employer to decide that somebody just will not be a fit with the team and that therefore it would be difficult to work together.
“An example of this could be a small company where everybody who works in the office is an ardent supporter of Arsenal Football Club, and they decide to pick an Arsenal fan at interview over a similarly qualified Tottenham Hotspur season ticket holder because they do not want to damage the harmony of the office.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/09/10/denying-someone-job-football-allegiances-perfectly-lawful/?recomm_id=445255e8-03d0-4298-810d-bdf9a8969805
Lol, on the ropes
The Students' Union tends to be favoured by future Labour Cabinet Members like Anneliese Dodds, who was a past OUSU President
Bridget Phillipson read history and French at university and Lucy Powell read chemistry (granted they were both at the dump).
We've said we need more non PPEists at the top of politics.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgvexelmkgo
I've come round on Chris Mason. He's no Nick Robinson, but he's alright.
Also gives an easy excuse for people excluding religions, genders etc. OTOH, I do manage a Leeds fan.
Also, bomb threat at the DNC in America
Now, he famously refused to use email back then...
The firm was a slaughterhouse, and the pump and pipes were used in an annual clean and inspection of sumps or something similar. However much we washed them afterwards, we could never get the stench out of pump or pipes. And no other company would ever want to hire them.
Stripping down and maintaining the pump was never a pleasant job.
(And for once, it's not the Ken Livingstone answer.)
She disposed of the former family home and had no remaining ownership rights in it, other than that it housed her disabled son, to which she was trustee. Normally with such trusts for the disabled, the tax treatment is that things are done as if the trust recipient, not the trustee, was the owner, etc.; but by an anomaly of the law this did not apply to the stamp duty. Moreover, if she had waited 4 months to do the transfer [edit] and then house purchase she wouldn't have had to pay any extra stamp duty at all, the child reaching 18. That's not an active process but a complete ballsup.
I think the Judge is simply using football teams as an example. It allows employers to use their judgement at interview as to whether someone fits.
That suddenly reminds me - surely her supervisor wasn't Dorothy Hodgkin? Yes, on checking, she was.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28801302
And it all paid off with the ozone layer years later.
NEW THREAD
Any kid who wants to circumvent a ban can figure it out in about 6, 7 seconds.
Just imagine if the prime minister had appointed Nigel Farage as the UK's Ambassador in Washington, as was talked up by some (including Farage himself).
Extraordinary as it would have been, it would have avoided this row, and put the man who has become Sir Keir Starmer's biggest threat out of political harms way.
How different our political debate and the fortunes of some of its biggest parties might have been.
I said this. And I am not a senior Westminster figure, but perhaps said figure has been reading PB!