|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On October 04 2018 04:23 Plansix wrote:
I get the impression that the “no deal” full break from the EU was always the plan for some of the elected folks who pushed for Brexit. They could never sell such a hard break after the vote, so they have been content with shoot down every plan until they get what they want by default.
Didnt boris johnson and nigel farage - the champions of the brexit camp - GG out right after the referendum? Where are these guys now?
|
Boris is trying his darnest to become prime minister.
No vision for Brexit at all from his side though. I doubt he's envisioning anything more in his life than the panties of the ever youngest woman around.
Nigel ironically is a member of the eu Parliament last time I heard of him and his salary got withheld for misspent money earlier this year. Apart from that I don't know.
|
On October 04 2018 04:16 Sent. wrote:
It is silly but in a different way. Conservatives who didn't want Brexit wouldn't let people who wanted Brexit negotiate Brexit. True Brexiter government probably wouldn't have a majority in the parliament.
And how would you get someone in power that represents a majority of people? Democracy? Don't be silly, that directly contradicts the practiced conservative ideology of chosen leaders and grown structures that you so adore.
|
I don't understand, the majority is getting exactly what it wanted - their governement trying to negotiate a deal allowing their country to leave the EU while keeping the benefits of staying in the EU. It just happens to be impossible.
|
On October 04 2018 07:03 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2018 04:16 Sent. wrote:
It is silly but in a different way. Conservatives who didn't want Brexit wouldn't let people who wanted Brexit negotiate Brexit. True Brexiter government probably wouldn't have a majority in the parliament. And how would you get someone in power that represents a majority of people? Democracy? Don't be silly, that directly contradicts the practiced conservative ideology of chosen leaders and grown structures that you so adore.
If you could take a break from being edgy for a moment, what alternative to democracy are you suggesting?
|
On October 04 2018 15:26 Longshank wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2018 07:03 Big J wrote:On October 04 2018 04:16 Sent. wrote:
It is silly but in a different way. Conservatives who didn't want Brexit wouldn't let people who wanted Brexit negotiate Brexit. True Brexiter government probably wouldn't have a majority in the parliament. And how would you get someone in power that represents a majority of people? Democracy? Don't be silly, that directly contradicts the practiced conservative ideology of chosen leaders and grown structures that you so adore. If you could take a break from being edgy for a moment, what alternative to democracy are you suggesting?
I am suggesting more democracy and more free parliamentarism and less "majority party rule". Brexit is a farce because no actual law was voted for. Therefore they interprete it however they like.
|
On October 04 2018 15:53 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2018 15:26 Longshank wrote:On October 04 2018 07:03 Big J wrote:On October 04 2018 04:16 Sent. wrote:
It is silly but in a different way. Conservatives who didn't want Brexit wouldn't let people who wanted Brexit negotiate Brexit. True Brexiter government probably wouldn't have a majority in the parliament. And how would you get someone in power that represents a majority of people? Democracy? Don't be silly, that directly contradicts the practiced conservative ideology of chosen leaders and grown structures that you so adore. If you could take a break from being edgy for a moment, what alternative to democracy are you suggesting? I am suggesting more democracy and more free parliamentarism and less "majority party rule". Brexit is a farce because no actual law was voted for. Therefore they interprete it however they like.
It should never have been a one-off referendum in the first place, as you cannot reasonably have a referendum about a proposal that, in large part, depends on another party for how it is implemented in practice. As it was the referendum was between status quo and a pie in the sky. They should have structured this a lot better with a double vote system: the first vote about the idea of leaving the EU. A declaration of intent, so to speak. Then they negotiate, see what works and then they have a second referendum about the deal, both with as status quo alternative staying in the EU, rather than the status quo now being to bomb out of the EU with no deal, which is apparently the wish of a vocal but small minority, who will continue to undercut May in the hopes of achieving the "no deal" brexit. It's absurd.
|
What is the realistic succes chance of May just putting her foot down at this point and saying no Brexit because it is a stupid idea?
|
On October 04 2018 17:21 solidbebe wrote:
What is the realistic succes chance of May just putting her foot down at this point and saying no Brexit because it is a stupid idea?
Zero chance I'm afraid.
|
On October 04 2018 17:28 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2018 17:21 solidbebe wrote:
What is the realistic succes chance of May just putting her foot down at this point and saying no Brexit because it is a stupid idea?
Zero chance I'm afraid.
Because? How much of the population would go out and riot at this point? It should be pretty evident by now that Britain will not be better off if they continue.
|
On October 04 2018 17:53 solidbebe wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2018 17:28 Jockmcplop wrote:On October 04 2018 17:21 solidbebe wrote:
What is the realistic succes chance of May just putting her foot down at this point and saying no Brexit because it is a stupid idea?
Zero chance I'm afraid. Because? How much of the population would go out and riot at this point? It should be pretty evident by now that Britain will not be better off if they continue.
The tory party's biggest and most vocal faction are hardened eurosceptics, and May needs to keep them onside so she can desperately hold on to the power that the public don't want her to have.
Brexit is an internal Tory party struggle at this point, and no other factors are even relevant. The only question is how stupid we are going to be about it, on a scale from stupid to very stupid.
|
On October 04 2018 17:02 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2018 15:53 Big J wrote:On October 04 2018 15:26 Longshank wrote:On October 04 2018 07:03 Big J wrote:On October 04 2018 04:16 Sent. wrote:
It is silly but in a different way. Conservatives who didn't want Brexit wouldn't let people who wanted Brexit negotiate Brexit. True Brexiter government probably wouldn't have a majority in the parliament. And how would you get someone in power that represents a majority of people? Democracy? Don't be silly, that directly contradicts the practiced conservative ideology of chosen leaders and grown structures that you so adore. If you could take a break from being edgy for a moment, what alternative to democracy are you suggesting? I am suggesting more democracy and more free parliamentarism and less "majority party rule". Brexit is a farce because no actual law was voted for. Therefore they interprete it however they like. It should never have been a one-off referendum in the first place, as you cannot reasonably have a referendum about a proposal that, in large part, depends on another party for how it is implemented in practice. As it was the referendum was between status quo and a pie in the sky. They should have structured this a lot better with a double vote system: the first vote about the idea of leaving the EU. A declaration of intent, so to speak. Then they negotiate, see what works and then they have a second referendum about the deal, both with as status quo alternative staying in the EU, rather than the status quo now being to bomb out of the EU with no deal, which is apparently the wish of a vocal but small minority, who will continue to undercut May in the hopes of achieving the "no deal" brexit. It's absurd.
Yes. Technicalities, methods and details matter. I think locking out the population of such questions is what makes people susceptible to populism in the first place.
As everywhere, when you are not involved in a process you are not really trying to understand it and then you just have to rely on getting "the best deal" and call fraud if the result is not what you wanted it to be.
You don't just "stop migration", you implement technical solutions and then you can live with their efficiency, their cost, their repercussions and their moral implications or you can't.
But if people get a "yeah, we make this for free and you won't even notice" offer they may take it. And they may get angry why the others haven't done that since it is so easy.
|
Dutch intelligence caught some Russian spies trying to hack into the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons wifi network in april. They completely exposed the 4 guys today, names and all, they all had diplomatic passports.
They parked a rental car near the OPCW with some big wifi antenna, hidden by a coat, and specific systems to intercept or hack the signal. They carried 20k in dollars and 20k in euros, and tried to destroy their phones when apprehended. One guy also carried a taxi receipt from a GRU intelligence HQ to moscow airport.
Interestingly the laptop one guy carried had wifi logins saved from a hotel in Switzerland during a WADA conference, and in Kuala Lumpur (MH17)
Interested to see what holiday Russia will say they were on
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/04/netherlands-halted-russian-cyber-attack-on-chemical-weapons-body
|
It amazes me that our governments are all acting like this is business as usual while Putin becomes more brazen. That if they just get to the next election, somehow Putin will stop trying to undermine our democracies.
|
Is Putin really that much of a special case here?
'Russian cybercrime' is no different to Chinese cybercrime, the NSA, MI5, corporate cybercrime etc. etc.
|
It is different as Putin is the only one of those actively trying to undermine Western European democracy and trying to breed chaos in the EU in general.
At least, I havent heard of China doing stuff like this.
|
Talking about Chinese spying. Apparently China has spied on 30 big companies including Apple and Amazon. Great article. It's all pretty scary to be honest.
Nested on the servers’ motherboards, the testers found a tiny microchip, not much bigger than a grain of rice, that wasn’t part of the boards’ original design. Amazon reported the discovery to U.S. authorities, sending a shudder through the intelligence community. Elemental’s servers could be found in Department of Defense data centers, the CIA’s drone operations, and the onboard networks of Navy warships. And Elemental was just one of hundreds of Supermicro customers.
During the ensuing top-secret probe, which remains open more than three years later, investigators determined that the chips allowed the attackers to create a stealth doorway into any network that included the altered machines. Multiple people familiar with the matter say investigators found that the chips had been inserted at factories run by manufacturing subcontractors in China.
This attack was something graver than the software-based incidents the world has grown accustomed to seeing. Hardware hacks are more difficult to pull off and potentially more devastating, promising the kind of long-term, stealth access that spy agencies are willing to invest millions of dollars and many years to get.
www.bloomberg.com
|
On October 05 2018 00:09 Jockmcplop wrote:
Is Putin really that much of a special case here?
'Russian cybercrime' is no different to Chinese cybercrime, the NSA, MI5, corporate cybercrime etc. etc.
Yeah unless China or the US decide to annex parts of Europe I think it's very different
|
On October 05 2018 03:07 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 00:09 Jockmcplop wrote:
Is Putin really that much of a special case here?
'Russian cybercrime' is no different to Chinese cybercrime, the NSA, MI5, corporate cybercrime etc. etc.
Yeah unless China or the US decide to annex parts of Europe I think it's very different
They annexed parts of Europe using cybercrime?
Why is Russia messing with my country's election any less acceptable than Facebook messing with my country's election?
|
On October 05 2018 04:11 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2018 03:07 Nyxisto wrote:On October 05 2018 00:09 Jockmcplop wrote:
Is Putin really that much of a special case here?
'Russian cybercrime' is no different to Chinese cybercrime, the NSA, MI5, corporate cybercrime etc. etc.
Yeah unless China or the US decide to annex parts of Europe I think it's very different They annexed parts of Europe using cybercrime? Why is Russia messing with my country's election any less acceptable than Facebook messing with my country's election?
Both are unacceptable. But Facebook is a private company that the UK can regulate. Russia is a sovereign nation that the UK has no power over. And it is pretty unlikely that Facebook will assassinate anyone in the UK, like ever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/e34986a945a7bf4f4fc2fdce7a999a5bcb786ef0/0_0_3159_2365/master/3159.jpg?width=620&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=2709fea5242951403b65bd2aca37a27b)
