The brits are in for a rough ride

[pmv]

Honestly, that Post Office story deserves some serious investigation and analysis.

It seems a paradigmatic example of many trends in society. Not just the usual abuse of power by those at the top and the appalling treatment of the 'little guy', or the problems when governments contract-out services to avaricious corporations instead of doing the work in-house, but it also seems to relate to the increasing dependence on computer systems that are treated as unquestionable and infallible.

I've seen comments from IT professionals comparing it to the Challenger disaster - where the engineers directly involved in the process were fully aware the system wasn't perfect and might have potential points-of-failure, but the senior management (deliberately?) failed to grasp that reality and gave false assurances that it was flawless.

This seems similar, insofar as the assumption was that any shortfall must be due to the post-masters stealing money, rather than being due to the reality that software systems always have bugs.

Just hope it doesn't get "kicked into the long grass" and referred to some interminable 'inquiry' that will go on-and-on-and-on till everyone has forgotten about it (the Grenfell inquiry _still_ hasn't issued it's final report, 7 years on, and still, as far as I know, nobody has faced criminal or even civil penalties for the disaster)

Edit - this seems like a start in addressing the problems revealed - seems it extends beyond the UK.

Update law on computer evidence to avoid Horizon repeat, ministers urged

Critics say assumption in English and Welsh law that computers are ‘reliable’ reverses usual burden of proof in criminal cases

www.theguardian.com

In English and Welsh law, computers are assumed to be “reliable” unless proven otherwise. But critics of this approach say this reverses the burden of proof normally applied in criminal cases.


Stephen Mason, a barrister and expert on electronic evidence, said: “It says, for the person who’s saying ‘there’s something wrong with this computer’, that they have to prove it. Even if it’s the person accusing them who has the information.”

The influence of English common law internationally means that the presumption of reliability is widespread. Mason cites cases from New Zealand, Singapore and the US that upheld the standard and just one notable case where the opposite happened.


In 2007, a Toyota Camry on an Oklahoma highway accelerated suddenly and stopped responding to controls, eventually crashing and killing a woman and seriously injuring a second. It was one of a rash of claims at the time that Toyota’s vehicles were experiencing uncontrolled acceleration, but thanks to panicked messages from the car’s passengers, one of the only ones with hard evidence suggesting an electronic malfunction.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Honestly, that Post Office story deserves some serious investigation and analysis.

It seems a paradigmatic example of many trends in society. Not just the usual abuse of power by those at the top and the appalling treatment of the 'little guy', or the problems when governments contract-out services to avaricious corporations instead of doing the work in-house, but it also seems to relate to the increasing dependence on computer systems that are treated as unquestionable and infallible.

I've seen comments from IT professionals comparing it to the Challenger disaster - where the engineers directly involved in the process were fully aware the system wasn't perfect and might have potential points-of-failure, but the senior management (deliberately?) failed to grasp that reality and gave false assurances that it was flawless.

This seems similar, insofar as the assumption was that any shortfall must be due to the post-masters stealing money, rather than being due to the reality that software systems always have bugs.

Just hope it doesn't get "kicked into the long grass" and referred to some interminable 'inquiry' that will go on-and-on-and-on till everyone has forgotten about it (the Grenfell inquiry _still_ hasn't issued it's final report, 7 years on, and still, as far as I know, nobody has faced criminal or even civil penalties for the disaster)

Edit - this seems like a start in addressing the problems revealed - seems it extends beyond the UK.

Update law on computer evidence to avoid Horizon repeat, ministers urged

Critics say assumption in English and Welsh law that computers are ‘reliable’ reverses usual burden of proof in criminal cases

www.theguardian.com

"In English and Welsh law, computers are assumed to be “reliable” unless proven otherwise. But critics of this approach say this reverses the burden of proof normally applied in criminal cases."

Utter, unadulterated insanity. Even reliable systems need verification checks to understand why it arrived at the point that it's at. You NEVER turn your back on a computer.

 

[pmv]

"In English and Welsh law, computers are assumed to be “reliable” unless proven otherwise. But critics of this approach say this reverses the burden of proof normally applied in criminal cases."

Utter, unadulterated insanity. Even reliable systems need verification checks to understand why it arrived at the point that it's at. You NEVER turn your back on a computer.

Yeah, it sounds like a massively out-dated presumption, derived from the days when physical devices were much simpler. And it really needs to be reassessed for the computer age, yet alone AI. As it says it

"stems from an older common law principle that “mechanical instruments” should be presumed to be in working order unless proven otherwise. That assumption means that if, for instance, a police officer quotes the time on their watch, a defendant cannot force the prosecution to call a horologist to explain from first principles how watches work.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Yeah, it sounds like a massively out-dated presumption, derived from the days when physical devices were much simpler. And it really needs to be reassessed for the computer age, yet alone AI. As it says it

*glances at the entire field of calibration standards* yeah let's just ignore all that over there.

 

[igor_kavinski]

An even bigger fiasco waiting to be unleashed: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...risk-grenfell-safety-government-a8592436.html

Tower blocks across the UK, home to an estimated 100,000 people, have a systemic structural flaw that puts them at risk of collapse, housing experts have told The Independent.

In the wake of the Grenfell disaster, safety problems have come to light at towers built using the Large Panel System (LPS) method during the 1960s and 1970s, which house more than 41,000 flats in cities up and down the country.

The flawed construction method has left cracks in some flats wide enough to allow residents to slide their hands in between the walls.

 

[pmv]

An even bigger fiasco waiting to be unleashed: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...risk-grenfell-safety-government-a8592436.html

Interesting, though I thought LPS was known to be problematic since the Ronan Point disaster? Last time I was looking for a flat I specifically checked whether they were LPS construction, for that very reason. A dead giveaway is if the block has no gas supply - they removed gas from most LPS buildings precisely because of what happened at Ronan Point - an internal gas explosion blew out the supporting walls, and with that form of construction that then causes the entire building to collapse. Hence I kept seeing these places that relied on expensive-to-run electric heating systems.

I've since heard that Ronan Point also had construction flaws like those mentioned in the article, that made the problem worse.

The Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete problem is more worrying to me, in that it seems there's no easy way to tell if a building has been built using it rather than normal reinforced concrete, unless that was recorded somewhere at the time of construction.

 

[MrSquished]

The people voted, the measure passed, that's how democracy works. It proves the one serious flaw in the democratic process, a million stupid people don't make better decisions than one stupid person.

Exactly. So after Brexit, America said Hold my beer, and gave us the new free to be itself Republican party in 2016

 

[cytg111]

And still it's like the Brits have learned not much cause Nigel is still pretty popular.

The seat where Nigel Farage could beat Tories if he stood as Reform candidate

Nigel Farage could beat a Conservative candidate by 10 points if he stood to become a Reform UK MP, a poll suggests.

www.yahoo.com

 

[cytg111]

The people voted, the measure passed, that's how democracy works. It proves the one serious flaw in the democratic process, a million stupid people don't make better decisions than one stupid person.

Well, that's obviously not true. It's a statistics thing.

 

[pmv]

Apparently they reckon the only solution for them is to be get still more xenophobic, so as to appeal to an ever-diminishing group of racist pensioners. Never mind what the rest of the electorate wants.

 

[pmv]

Liking the latest opinion poll tracker. Intriguing that the Tories are just one major crisis (shock rise in inflation? another partygate-type scandal?) away from being neck-and-neck with the minor parties. Maybe Reform are going to supplant them as the right-wing opposition? Not sure if that's something to wish for or not, though.

Voting Intention: Con 20%, Lab 47% (16-17 Jan 2024) | YouGov

Latest YouGov Westminster voting intention figures

yougov.co.uk

 

[mikeymikec]

As much as I want the Conservative party kicked to the curb, I'll believe it when I see it.

"We either deliver on small boats or we will be destroyed"... ah yes, the big issues, nothing completely insignificant like the economy, corruption in the conservative party, the state of the NHS and public services in general, the roads, or the environment. Just the big issues.

 

[mikeymikec]

Boris writes a love letter to Trump.

Boris Johnson says Trump back in White House is ‘what the world needs’

Ex-PM backs disgraced former US president ahead of election, saying he ‘won’t ditch the Ukrainians’

www.theguardian.com

I've downgraded my impression of BJ to "Trump, just more coherent"... imagine being a former PM and being so profoundly ignorant that you weren't aware that Trump not only opposed aiding Ukraine but he actually tried to extort Ukraine into helping him boost his election prospects in exchange for aid and was in fact impeached for it. It even went down while Boris was PM!

Are these two going to try and out-stupid each other? "Have you eaten the poo out of your adult nappy today? No? See, I'm way better!"

 

[WelshBloke]

As much as I want the Conservative party kicked to the curb, I'll believe it when I see it.

"We either deliver on small boats or we will be destroyed"... ah yes, the big issues, nothing completely insignificant like the economy, corruption in the conservative party, the state of the NHS and public services in general, the roads, or the environment. Just the big issues.

I absolutely don't understand why they have made "the small boats" and specifically their unworkable Rwanda "solution" their only recognised policy!
Like ok, your base are a bunch of xenophobes but why tie your immigration policy into a third country when you don't want to be constrained by international law?
Is the average UK person actually affected by immigration levels to the same extent that they are affected by the underfunding of the NHS, schools, rising energy costs, low wages...

 

[Timorous]

Is the average UK person actually affected by immigration levels to the same extent that they are affected by the underfunding of the NHS, schools, rising energy costs, low wages...

Kind of. With the same amount of underfunding but less immigration the services would still be better off due to less demand. Also because there would be fewer employees wages would be forced higher just through supply and demand.

Of course the better answer would have been not to underfund in the 1st place but the horse has already bolted on that one.

Edit: I suppose a counter to this is due to an aging population lower immigration would require even higher taxes to support pensioners.

 

[brycejones]

Kind of. With the same amount of underfunding but less immigration the services would still be better off due to less demand. Also because there would be fewer employees wages would be forced higher just through supply and demand.

Of course the better answer would have been not to underfund in the 1st place but the horse has already bolted on that one.

Edit: I suppose a counter to this is due to an aging population lower immigration would require even higher taxes to support pensioners.

Your edit is the real answer

 

[pmv]

Kind of. With the same amount of underfunding but less immigration the services would still be better off due to less demand. Also because there would be fewer employees wages would be forced higher just through supply and demand.

Of course the better answer would have been not to underfund in the 1st place but the horse has already bolted on that one.

Edit: I suppose a counter to this is due to an aging population lower immigration would require even higher taxes to support pensioners.

I have no strong views on on all that. For every argument either way there seems to be a counter-point. Migrants also provide much of the workforce for many of these services, particularly the NHS and social care.

They also increase the tax base that pays for them.

On the other hand, migrants also get old, so migration doesn't seem a water-tight answer to an aging population. They also increase the size of the economy, but then you have to subtract the money they might send "home" or take home with them if they leave again, which is effectively removed from that economy. Furthermore the costs and benefits they cause for public services are not evenly distributed geographically.

But even ignoring all that, the other point is that the "small boats" make up a very small proportion of total inward migration in any case (and a substantial proportion of them, at least, if maybe not all, are genuinely desperate people fleeing war zones and the like).

The extreme emphasis the Tories are putting on this single issue just seems weird to me, when there are so many far larger issues that affect people's lives directly. They seem completely obsessed with this one issue. Makes me suspect they are just trying to appeal to one small part of the electorate, a part who have such an easy life that they can afford to fixate on foreigners without the right papers arriving on beaches.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

The extreme emphasis the Tories are putting on this single issue just seems weird to me, when there are so many far larger issues that affect people's lives directly. They seem completely obsessed with this one issue. Makes me suspect they are just trying to appeal to one small part of the electorate, a part who have such an easy life that they can afford to fixate on foreigners without the right papers arriving on beaches.

Very much right. Many times in recorded history, simple men convince other simple men that there's a simple explanation as to why they're unhappy, why their lot in life sucks, why they aren't rich/famous/having sex, and the simplest explanation used is 'the other'. The easiest 'other' to target are immigrants because they look different, talk different, and eat weird food, so it's really really easy to separate them from the 'tribe'. It's intellectual laziness to the extreme, and serves only to make a few people extremely powerful, and everyone else far worse than they were before.

 

[mikeymikec]

I absolutely don't understand why they have made "the small boats" and specifically their unworkable Rwanda "solution" their only recognised policy!
Like ok, your base are a bunch of xenophobes but why tie your immigration policy into a third country when you don't want to be constrained by international law?
Is the average UK person actually affected by immigration levels to the same extent that they are affected by the underfunding of the NHS, schools, rising energy costs, low wages...

Conservatism 101: Go after made-up problems.

Once a politician has accepted that as a core value, their logic is always going to be a bit shaky.

The extreme emphasis the Tories are putting on this single issue just seems weird to me

Conservatism relies strongly on a character cult to work (e.g. Trump / Thatcher / BJ). The tory party knows that their current leader (and any realistic prospects as leader) is a tall drink of water. Therefore the red flag to wave at prospective voters / distraction needs to be greater.

The tories have an additional problem whereby they're the incumbent candidate, and what do they have to show for it: Less than nothing good.

 

[igor_kavinski]

Are these two going to try and out-stupid each other? "Have you eaten the poo out of your adult nappy today? No? See, I'm way better!"

They are both orangutans. Trump is just King Orangutan. More majestic. Only settles for asses that look like his daughter's.

 

[pmv]

If anyone needs to be deported to Rwanda it's all those involved at the top of the Post Office, in Fujitsu, and in government who were implicated in the Horizon fiasco. Then send everyone responsible for Grenfell.

Though the Rwandans need to be warned not to trust anything they say.

 

[igor_kavinski]

If anyone needs to be deported to Rwanda it's all those involved at the top of the Post Office, in Fujitsu, and in government who were implicated in the Horizon fiasco. Then send everyone responsible for Grenfell.

Though the Rwandans need to be warned not to trust anything they say.

I want to watch the UK version of Judge Dredd based on YOUR script!

 

[pmv]

Sick of these icy temperatures. As this government recently passed a law declaring Rwanda to be a "safe country", while they are engaging in performative pronouncements, determining reality through legal dictat, can they please pass a law declaring that it's now summer, and that it's no longer cold?

 

[Indus]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1750631730443137488

When everyone lies, telling the truth isn’t just rebellion.

It’s an act of revolution.

 

[uallas5]

The UK can't even get a trade deal sorted with Canada. More winning from team Brexit.

UK-Canada trade rift: What it means for cheese, beef and cars

A pause in talks could mean tougher trading terms for the UK - but what will the impact be on consumers?

www.bbc.com