Do you have any idea how prosecution of driving offences works in the UK?
The police are regulated because they have been found do abuse traffic laws. The equipment they can use is regulated, the places they can operate are regulated, the way they can detect offences is regulated. And still there is abuse.
There is heavy pressure for you to settle the matter out of court. Pay your fine, go on an "awareness" course, don't fight it in court. If you do fight it, you need to pay for your own defence, and if you lose also the court fees.
Defending yourself can be very tricky. The courts are corrupt and tend to side with the police unless you have extremely powerful evidence of your innocence.
Examples of abuse include the misuse of speed guns and CCTV cameras positioned to give a misleading impression, e.g. due to perspective effects making vehicles appear closer than they really are.
And now they want to get the public in on an already very unfair and unbalanced system. No doubt they will produce some very clear cut, extreme examples to gain support. But I have do doubt that there will be a huge number of innocent people accused and railroaded by the system.
How will you feel when someone uploads a carefully edited clip that makes it look like you are a bad driver, when in fact you were avoiding an accident with someone else?
As ever, the problem with vigilante justice is the lack of due process and fairness.
I prefer not having the busy/DND options and just ignoring stuff. The busy indicator just leaks information about your status and makes people upset when you appear to be available but don't answer.
Better to just keep them wondering if they are being ignored or you are in the bathroom or what. Might even encourage them to send an async message rather than demanding your attention immediately.
I'm more interested in knowing if it's illegal to ever take the "same" photo.
There was a case about that in the UK a few years back. Guy took a photo of a bus crossing a bridge in London. Someone else took a very similar photo and he sued. He won as well because the court found that the artistic composition was the same.
Always seemed kind of insane to me that we want doctors and lawyers to work ridiculous hours in high stress jobs, when the consequences of them making mistakes are relatively severe.
Seems like if you have someone working 60 hours a week that's an indication that you actually need two people.
They need a comprehensive overhaul of labour laws. 37.5 hour standard working week, legal maximum of 48 hours.
At least 25 days holiday based on that 37.5 hours/week, if you work more or less then holiday time scales by the same amount. Regular overtime increases your holiday allowance. Employer must allow you to take all of it every year, and any kind of punishment for taking it or benefit for not taking it (bonuses, promotions etc.) is illegal.
Strong and free-for-the-employee tribunals to oversee it all and resolve conflicts.
None of that changes the fact that tariffs are hurting the US, particularly smaller companies that actually try to make stuff there instead of outsourcing to China. It's ironic that the ones now suffering from component shortages and higher material costs are the ones providing jobs to Americans, while the people who already moved manufacturing to China are much less affected.
These are the US tariffs on electronic components, by the way, not the retaliatory ones from China. The pain from the Chinese ones will come on top, along with the EU ones.
It should be illegal for cites and states to offer special advantages to anyone.
It is in the EU. That's why the EU is so great, and why the UK wants out. British businesses want to abuse British workers and taxpayers in the same way as they see happening in the US, and need to get out of the EU to make it happen.
The BBC has certainly moved a bit to the right over the last 15 years, but only a little. QT has many problems but with Dimbleby retiring there is a chance it might improve. His brother does a much better job on Any Questions.
I agree that it's frustrating how little coverage the BBC gives to some things, especially the anti-Brexit movement. But there also isn't much else. C4 News is pretty good but that's it really.
There were some good stories about the Doctor and the Time Lords back in the classic era.
The problem is that the new era keeps hinting at interesting stories about the Time War and what happened to that race, but then never delivers. I guess they are trying to keep the Doctor mysterious but eventually you get fed up of being teased.
Nuclear is too expensive, has too many problems and doesn't even cut CO2 emissions that much. The economics are steadily getting worse and the timescales involved in building it make any investment extremely risky and uncertain.
Climate change is the fault of stupid, short-sighted fanboys like you who are stuck on nuclear instead of renewables.
The big problem with AI at the moment is that we don't understand how it makes decisions. You can ask a doctor why they made a certain diagnosis, but you can't ask an AI in many cases. So at best the AI result can prompt a human doctor to look again, but it can't give much in the way of hints as to why it disagrees with the human.
This is a huge problem and one which the EU has addressed with the GDPR, which gives you the right to know how decisions were made and on what grounds. That prevents companies simply telling you that "computer says no". If they want to use AIs for making decisions about you then the AI either needs to explain itself or they will have to have a human review anything you query.
The BBC is worth it for their news alone. It keeps everyone else honest, by providing a reliable source of information that can be compared to bullshit like RT. The benefit to democracy is huge too, especially with programmes like Newsnight.
Where the BBC tends to suck is entertainment. But entertainment is also where it tends to pay for itself through commercial sales overseas and merchandise.
So on that basis I'm okay paying for it, although it might be better done through general taxation rather than a licence fee.
Moffat's biggest problem is that he never gives you the pay-off. Every episode feels like it's building towards something big, but it never comes. The end is always just some nonsense deus-ex-machina and setting up the/next/ big thing for next season.
Anyway, he is gone now so maybe things will improve.
On the other hand, if you have genuine reason to fear you might be harmed or killed, or that if word of your leaving gets out your family left back home might be targeted...
How is obeying the rules fair when the rules are gonna get you killed? And why assume the rules are reasonable or fair anyway, when they are clearly designed not to be?
What actually matters here? Getting a 100% rejection rate on people who lied or made any kind of mistaken statement, or figuring out who is a security risk but erring on the side of humanity otherwise?
By the way, taking a hard line in public is virtue signalling, as is complaining about virtue signalling.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you have any idea how prosecution of driving offences works in the UK?
The police are regulated because they have been found do abuse traffic laws. The equipment they can use is regulated, the places they can operate are regulated, the way they can detect offences is regulated. And still there is abuse.
There is heavy pressure for you to settle the matter out of court. Pay your fine, go on an "awareness" course, don't fight it in court. If you do fight it, you need to pay for your own defence, and if you lose also the court fees.
Defending yourself can be very tricky. The courts are corrupt and tend to side with the police unless you have extremely powerful evidence of your innocence.
Examples of abuse include the misuse of speed guns and CCTV cameras positioned to give a misleading impression, e.g. due to perspective effects making vehicles appear closer than they really are.
And now they want to get the public in on an already very unfair and unbalanced system. No doubt they will produce some very clear cut, extreme examples to gain support. But I have do doubt that there will be a huge number of innocent people accused and railroaded by the system.
I think I'd be less tired if I didn't have to spend 12 hours on an airplane, especially in an economy class seat.
Unfortunately supersonic transport is likely to be insanely expensive.
It's got police force logos on it, which implies that they endorse it. If they don't then hopefully they will pay Nextbase a visit to sort that out.
How will you feel when someone uploads a carefully edited clip that makes it look like you are a bad driver, when in fact you were avoiding an accident with someone else?
As ever, the problem with vigilante justice is the lack of due process and fairness.
I prefer not having the busy/DND options and just ignoring stuff. The busy indicator just leaks information about your status and makes people upset when you appear to be available but don't answer.
Better to just keep them wondering if they are being ignored or you are in the bathroom or what. Might even encourage them to send an async message rather than demanding your attention immediately.
I'm more interested in knowing if it's illegal to ever take the "same" photo.
There was a case about that in the UK a few years back. Guy took a photo of a bus crossing a bridge in London. Someone else took a very similar photo and he sued. He won as well because the court found that the artistic composition was the same.
Copyright is stupid.
I tell my boss that Slashdot is how I keep my skills sharp.
I just hope she doesn't ask which skills.
Always seemed kind of insane to me that we want doctors and lawyers to work ridiculous hours in high stress jobs, when the consequences of them making mistakes are relatively severe.
Seems like if you have someone working 60 hours a week that's an indication that you actually need two people.
They need a comprehensive overhaul of labour laws. 37.5 hour standard working week, legal maximum of 48 hours.
At least 25 days holiday based on that 37.5 hours/week, if you work more or less then holiday time scales by the same amount. Regular overtime increases your holiday allowance. Employer must allow you to take all of it every year, and any kind of punishment for taking it or benefit for not taking it (bonuses, promotions etc.) is illegal.
Strong and free-for-the-employee tribunals to oversee it all and resolve conflicts.
None of that changes the fact that tariffs are hurting the US, particularly smaller companies that actually try to make stuff there instead of outsourcing to China. It's ironic that the ones now suffering from component shortages and higher material costs are the ones providing jobs to Americans, while the people who already moved manufacturing to China are much less affected.
These are the US tariffs on electronic components, by the way, not the retaliatory ones from China. The pain from the Chinese ones will come on top, along with the EU ones.
It should be illegal for cites and states to offer special advantages to anyone.
It is in the EU. That's why the EU is so great, and why the UK wants out. British businesses want to abuse British workers and taxpayers in the same way as they see happening in the US, and need to get out of the EU to make it happen.
Even your own carefully cherry-picked GISS temperature record shows a "cooling" of 0.1 degrees compared to a warming of 1.5 degrees since 1880.
Here's a better graph based on Nasa data: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
As you can see there is a very clear trend, excepting the spike for WW2 and subsequent reduction in emissions as industry recovered.
The BBC has certainly moved a bit to the right over the last 15 years, but only a little. QT has many problems but with Dimbleby retiring there is a chance it might improve. His brother does a much better job on Any Questions.
I agree that it's frustrating how little coverage the BBC gives to some things, especially the anti-Brexit movement. But there also isn't much else. C4 News is pretty good but that's it really.
There were some good stories about the Doctor and the Time Lords back in the classic era.
The problem is that the new era keeps hinting at interesting stories about the Time War and what happened to that race, but then never delivers. I guess they are trying to keep the Doctor mysterious but eventually you get fed up of being teased.
Greenpeace favour 100% renewable energy: https://www.greenpeace.org/arc...
Nuclear is too expensive, has too many problems and doesn't even cut CO2 emissions that much. The economics are steadily getting worse and the timescales involved in building it make any investment extremely risky and uncertain.
Climate change is the fault of stupid, short-sighted fanboys like you who are stuck on nuclear instead of renewables.
The big problem with AI at the moment is that we don't understand how it makes decisions. You can ask a doctor why they made a certain diagnosis, but you can't ask an AI in many cases. So at best the AI result can prompt a human doctor to look again, but it can't give much in the way of hints as to why it disagrees with the human.
This is a huge problem and one which the EU has addressed with the GDPR, which gives you the right to know how decisions were made and on what grounds. That prevents companies simply telling you that "computer says no". If they want to use AIs for making decisions about you then the AI either needs to explain itself or they will have to have a human review anything you query.
The BBC is worth it for their news alone. It keeps everyone else honest, by providing a reliable source of information that can be compared to bullshit like RT. The benefit to democracy is huge too, especially with programmes like Newsnight.
Where the BBC tends to suck is entertainment. But entertainment is also where it tends to pay for itself through commercial sales overseas and merchandise.
So on that basis I'm okay paying for it, although it might be better done through general taxation rather than a licence fee.
What if he didn't open the parachute? I don't think anyone actually saw it open.
The money was never spent.
How is that known? The money hasn't been recovered, and could have been spent overseas or in a non-recorded transaction.
Moffat's biggest problem is that he never gives you the pay-off. Every episode feels like it's building towards something big, but it never comes. The end is always just some nonsense deus-ex-machina and setting up the /next/ big thing for next season.
Anyway, he is gone now so maybe things will improve.
On the other hand, if you have genuine reason to fear you might be harmed or killed, or that if word of your leaving gets out your family left back home might be targeted...
How is obeying the rules fair when the rules are gonna get you killed? And why assume the rules are reasonable or fair anyway, when they are clearly designed not to be?
What actually matters here? Getting a 100% rejection rate on people who lied or made any kind of mistaken statement, or figuring out who is a security risk but erring on the side of humanity otherwise?
By the way, taking a hard line in public is virtue signalling, as is complaining about virtue signalling.
But what about lying about your name or the town you came from or your former occupation as a sex worker?
Remember that refugees are fleeing something, and they don't know the system or always make the best decisions. A zero tolerance policy is unfair.
Some genuine refugees lie, for a whole variety of reasons. They are still refugees and the system has to recognise that.
Merkel is the one who oversaw in introduction of really strong privacy laws and tried to find a workable, humane solution to the migrant crisis.