|
My redeployment is coming to an end in the next few days, so I'm going to have to take the plunge and spend actual mental energy on trying to do my job a different way (i.e. from home). This will be particularly difficult given that my redeployment has been such a doss. Oh ffs [edit] It were all better back in 1996, when England would definitely win a football
|
#
?
May 19, 2020 22:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 06:57 |
|
|
It came home third
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2020 22:04
|
|
|
Bloodly posted:He's presuming that only loony conspiracy theorists use that term. I'm willing to say that it does happen a lot, but there are others, like Rastafarians and the like. There's Bundists like myself and then there's like, ultra hasids in New York who absolutely spit the word.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2020 22:15
|
|
|
Coohoolin posted:There's Bundists like myself and then there's like, ultra hasids in New York who absolutely spit the word. Plus, and I've said this before, the word is such a broad loving category that it doesn't mean anything anymore. Under some definitions I'm a zionist and I'm pretty sure I hate the current Israeli regime and how the state was founded more than Coohoolin does.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2020 22:19
|
|
|
I like living in East London. Not so much nightlife because  but all the food options both restaurant and supermarket, and the diversity in general. Though it would be nice if there were a non-halal butchers in walking distance 
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2020 22:37
|
|
|
I swear this country gets chuddier by the day UK bulk buys hydroxychloroquine as potential Covid-19 treatment
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2020 22:37
|
|
|
https://www.britishpodcastawards.com/vote What's this worth? How much is in the solidarity fund again?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2020 22:42
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:I like living in East London. Not so much nightlife because You're near Barking, aren't you? Not quite walking distance, but there's a really good butcher in the old Stratford shopping centre and Hawkins in Romford used to be pretty good (not been there in years so I'm not sure if it still is). Mind you if you're going to travel, might as well stay on the H&C an extra 15 minutes to go to the sublime Smithfield Butchers (near Farringdon station)
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2020 22:47
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:His PA made some mildly rebuking comment to him over the handshake to be fair. If facebook, google, apple, IBM, intel and the loving UKIPO can work from home I would say others can, might be an indication of some other out of touch ideas
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2020 23:05
|
|
|
Hey everyone, want to be really angry? https://www.theguardian.com/comment...OCM9RRYqJ52UlJs Prince Charles ordering us peons to pick potatos.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2020 23:23
|
|
|
Camrath posted:Hey everyone, want to be really angry? Don't see why this is necessary, capitalist theory clearly tells us that it'll be trivial to fill needed positions because the pay offered to workers will simply rise until it's sufficient to attract enough of them :thunkmarx:
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2020 23:29
|
|
|
CancerCakes posted:If facebook, google, apple, IBM, intel and the loving UKIPO can work from home I would say others can, might be an indication of some other out of touch ideas I mean they're only just moving from Motif to GTK, soo. Then again it seems pretty typical for SCADA, lots of love for some very 90s GUIs. Despite all that the work seems really interesting, people who work there really knowledgeable, money is decent, architecture of the system is sensible and just generally from what I've seen of the code and development process they appear quite good. Albeit old-fashioned, but I'll take that over strict SCRUMBAN (what another open position for a company making 5G telco software mandates) every day. It's not my first choice (that would be a US biomed giant that still has to get back to me for a final interview) but it's probably the second at this point. Sorry for being a bit  .
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2020 23:50
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:https://www.britishpodcastawards.com/vote Voted.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 00:43
|
|
|
Been listening through the Podcasting is Praxis back-catalogue, I like it, but loving bizarre how many layers of disingenuous shite they gurgled to avoid saying 'electoralism is a thing that exists' in the latest episode.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 00:56
|
|
|
Going through some old family albums and things in my mum's cellar and found a commemorative book for the royal fartcatchers from space year 1985. Nothing unexpected outside of the usual fawning statements, but amusingly their section on Andrew is them half-heartedly trying to polish a turd. 
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 01:06
|
|
|
A page behind but my work from home has been reading Romance of the Three Kingdoms. 
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 02:33
|
|
|
Hypothetically if you were doing WFH for a British company and you decided you'd rather live in [non-eu country, lets say Canada for example] while you performed this work, would you require a work visa or could you move from place to place on tourism visas? Is it country dependent? I suppose income taxes might also be a consideration? I guess this isn't a new question if 'digital nomads' already do it? Working from 'home' forever certainly raises a lot of possibilities.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 02:38
|
|
|
blunt posted:Hypothetically if you were doing WFH for a British company and you decided you'd rather live in [non-eu country, lets say Canada for example] while you performed this work, would you require a work visa or could you move from place to place on tourism visas? Is it country dependent? I suppose income taxes might also be a consideration? Just going by the text of some tourist visas I’ve looked at, legally speaking, you aren’t allowed to do any activity for which you are paid (in their currency or otherwise). So if you declared doing so at the border, you might have issues. In practice, there is no penalisation for visiting a country and happening to do some work stuff there (taking a business phone call, sending some emails etc). It’s mostly unenforceable unless you declare it, and the law hasn’t caught up to ‘digital nomads’ yet. When it does, I imagine it will hinge on a technicality around whether or not you are ‘visiting’ or ‘living’ there. IE, is the work simply an incidental thing that happens infrequently, or are you effectively full-time. (Which will preclude digital nomads)
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 02:54
|
|
|
Vitamin P posted:Been listening through the Podcasting is Praxis back-catalogue, I like it, but loving bizarre how many layers of disingenuous shite they gurgled to avoid saying 'electoralism is a thing that exists' in the latest episode. Is it still Electoralism when you are transitioning into as opposed to out of an authoritarian state?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 05:10
|
|
|
Rip 
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 06:48
|
|
|
blunt posted:Hypothetically if you were doing WFH for a British company and you decided you'd rather live in [non-eu country, lets say Canada for example] while you performed this work, would you require a work visa or could you move from place to place on tourism visas? Is it country dependent? I suppose income taxes might also be a consideration? It depends on the country/ies but that's typically not legal, however, you'd have to be doing something pretty weird to get got for it afaict. And if it does concern you then use a vpn.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 06:52
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:https://www.britishpodcastawards.com/vote Generally hovers around 3k with a few hundred in and out each month. (I voted!)
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 07:56
|
|
|
Ms Adequate posted:It depends on the country/ies but that's typically not legal, however, you'd have to be doing something pretty weird to get got for it afaict. Many companies like mine require you to use a VPN to log in anyway. I could be anywhere right now and noone would know as long as I sporadically replied to mails
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 08:14
|
|
|
This will work fine until all the digital nomads end up working through tech disruptor middlemen based in tax havens, and then the minute they get sick get treated like Taitusi Ratucaucau. Which obviously may affect some groups sooner than others.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 08:54
|
|
|
Why do people insist that because (apparently) Corbyn is 'worth millions' (where do they get this poo poo from) and Starmer possibly has a cleaner (does he? I've no idea) Labour doesn't speak for the working classes, therefore you must vote tory because DePfeffel and co do? Grrr.. my blood pressure is rocketing. Comments made by a 'friend' I have unfollowed on FB but I can see her comments on other peoples' posts. (First time I've felt protective of Starmer LOL)
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 09:01
|
|
|
Jaeluni Asjil posted:Why do people insist that because (apparently) Corbyn is 'worth millions' (where do they get this poo poo from) and Starmer possibly has a cleaner (does he? I've no idea) Labour doesn't speak for the working classes, therefore you must vote tory because DePfeffel and co do? I suspect Corbyn has a house in Islington which is worth >1m by dint of him having owned it for years. That would be enough to make it “true”.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 09:03
|
|
|
Because that's the standard that the press holds them to, despite being owned by multimillionaire tax evaders.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 09:05
|
|
|
I mean the idea that the labour party (and politics in general) is grossly overrepresented in the posh twats department is a valid criticism, the difference is corbyn clearly has not let that limit the boundaries of his thoughts and actions while starmer, like most of his peers, certainly doesn't seem particularly interested in rising above the limitations of his circumstances.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 09:10
|
|
|
Jaeluni Asjil posted:Why do people insist that because (apparently) Corbyn is 'worth millions' (where do they get this poo poo from) and Starmer possibly has a cleaner (does he? I've no idea) Labour doesn't speak for the working classes, therefore you must vote tory because DePfeffel and co do? It's because they are the media and don't want the people to have power, or because they read the media that tells them not to want the people to have power.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 09:12
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I mean the idea that the labour party (and politics in general) is grossly overrepresented in the posh twats department is a valid criticism, the difference is corbyn clearly has not let that limit the boundaries of his thoughts and actions while starmer, like most of his peers, certainly doesn't seem particularly interested in rising above the limitations of his circumstances.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 09:13
|
|
|
Sure, people can make the criticism in bad faith, but it's still a valid criticism which is why it is so effective, and I think the better solution is to make the honest, better, left argument rather than try to pretend it's not good criticism.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 09:16
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I mean the idea that the labour party (and politics in general) is grossly overrepresented in the posh twats department is a valid criticism, the difference is corbyn clearly has not let that limit the boundaries of his thoughts and actions while starmer, like most of his peers, certainly doesn't seem particularly interested in rising above the limitations of his circumstances. The Labour party is a lot less overrepresented in the posh twats department if you look at the whole party - both the whole PLP and the whole membership - rather than just the bits of each that make the papers. It's easy to forget that Labour has the vast majority of the working-class MPs in Parliament, when the only ones you see are the PPE-SPAD-MP track people the press like. That's not to say that more working class and minority representation isn't needed - of course it is - but it's very easy to overlook the fact that it's already there.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 09:18
|
|
|
Red Oktober posted:I suspect Corbyn has a house in Islington which is worth >1m by dint of him having owned it for years. That would be enough to make it “true”. This yes, but also 'the pension pot' stuff as in you would need a pension pot of £xm to get the salary based pension scheme MPs get. (Also seen public sector workers on salary based schemes get tarred with the 'pension pot' brush). OwlFancier posted:Sure, people can make the criticism in bad faith, but it's still a valid criticism which is why it is so effective, and I think the better solution is to make the honest, better, left argument rather than try to pretend it's not good criticism. Sure it's valid criticism, but how to make the leap from "these leftish people have this, therefore do not speak for me, therefore I must vote tory because these rightwing people who have considerably more than these lefty people will speak up for me better." Jaeluni Asjil fucked around with this message at 09:22 on May 20, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 09:19
|
|
|
Jaeluni Asjil posted:Sure it's valid criticism, but how to make the leap from "these leftish people have this, therefore do not speak for me, therefore I must vote tory because these rightwing people who have considerably more than these lefty people will speak up for me better." It's a lot less involved than that though, I think. People who are voting against their interests aren't thinking rationally about the implications of the information they're given, or thinking about the implications of the information they're NOT given (i.e. it's not like the articles about Corbyn being a millionaire mention that Boris is a hundred-millionare, in the same way as the articles about millionaire actors or sports people don't mention the near-trillionaire status of Bezos, or just how wide that gap is), they're just absorbing the information they're given and returning it when asked.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 09:26
|
|
|
For all your hard voting work for the UK poddies, you get a shiny new episode! https://twitter.com/PraxisCast/status/1263020450466193408?s=20
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 09:26
|
|
|
Why does being rich mean you can't want poor people to have better lives? Like, in the millionaire business owner sense it's because that directly undercuts your profits, but why does someone owning a house in London mean they can't want everyone to be able to own a house in London if they need to.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 09:31
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:The Labour party is a lot less overrepresented in the posh twats department if you look at the whole party - both the whole PLP and the whole membership - rather than just the bits of each that make the papers. It does, but less at the top levels, it tends to be more career politicians (which I would not honestly describe as working class, given the kind of people and power they have access to, it doesn't make sense from either a relationship to the means of production sense or from a general "what kind of life do they live" sense) The political system we have inherently works to separate its participants from the working class, and that's visible in a lot of ways and I think is part of why a lot of people rightly don't like it, or the people involved in it. Nothingtoseehere posted:Why does being rich mean you can't want poor people to have better lives? Because being rich means that your fortunes are not tied up in the material conditions of poor people, you have your position because you can exploit the poor to maintain it. That is literally the basis of marxist class relations and it also works for politicians too. They make their living being buoyed into their offices by the working class, and their continued employment and prosperity is predicated on their ability to keep people voting for them, not actually to do any good while they're up there. Which is why the labour party is full of lovely careerists who coast by on performative horseshit and partisan inertia. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 09:34 on May 20, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 09:31
|
|
|
Nothingtoseehere posted:Why does being rich mean you can't want poor people to have better lives? I think some use it just a lovely way of arguing/point scoring. Others genuinely lack empathy (the whole virtue signaling thing). Just yesterday owen jones was having to defend the corbyn section of labour from having too many public school people.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 09:42
|
|
|
Nothingtoseehere posted:Why does being rich mean you can't want poor people to have better lives? In the latter case, there is a pretty strong argument that says if everyone owns a house in London, then when you need to trade up to a bigger one because you had kids or whatever (or you want to move out to the country), you now can't do so as easily, because there's no particular market for people taking your current one. Having a market to sell into requires housing to be a scarce resource. Which is why housing shouldn't be a market commodity, but you know, trying to persuade anyone who's not already eyeballs-deep in breadtube of that sort of reality is a hiding to nothing.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 09:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 06:57 |
|
|
People don't like perceived hypocrites and moral snobs Core of Labour politics is appealing to charity and moral obligations to share - that basis of the liberal, redistributive welfare state - not outrage over violations of natural justice (something something alienation of the worker from their output, old Clause IV, whatever) The closest sense of sniffy headline is identical to when the press editorialises on how much NGO charity directors are paid
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 09:44
|
|
