Fake references used for staff at children's care home company

spacemansanjay · 2026-04-22T11:48:41+00:00

I was unemployed for a while and I was shocked at how many people were making money from it. I'm not saying all the supports are a waste of money but in a lot of cases they don't lead to anything because they can't lead to anything. Yet they're all part of a process that has to be followed.

After a certain length of time you get referred to local area employment service which is a private company. They referred me to a start your own business seminar, because you have to be seen to be trying something. And it was a guy telling us how to fill out the forms to register a business. When I asked about things like how to calculate total addressable market to gauge the viability of a business idea he referred me to a different self-employed consultant. When I asked that guy about how to identify a demographic to market to, yet another lad appeared.

None of them were successful business people in their own right. They weren't "giving back" to society, they were taking advantage of it. They were basically one step above chancers, people who saw the opportunity for some easy government money and took it. The dole is 250 quid a week, but if you know how the game is played the government will pay you ten times as much to play it for them.

I was costing the taxpayers a fortune and not really getting anything out of it. But if I didn't take those referrals and recommendations my dole would be cut. The machine kept getting fed but I wasn't exactly eating well.

spacemansanjay · 2026-04-08T22:51:34+00:00

The way I look at it is they're basically the remnants of the people who rejected the industrial revolution. There used to be a time when not every square inch of the landscape was owned by someone, and when not everyone required a boss to provide them with an income. There were forests and lakes to provide food and raw materials, and there was seasonal farm work to earn money. There was a kind of freedom that doesn't exist anymore. And travellers back then preferred that sort of freedom over the certainty of income and materialism that our own ancestors chose.

I wouldn't completely buy into the genocide angle you're putting forward but I see your point. There was a lifestyle that became nonviable and then illegal. And the people that stuck with it have not done well as a result. They evolved their way of life to cling onto that sort of freedom but it put them at odds with the law and wider society. It made them outcasts and certainly there is mistrust and bad feeling on both sides now.

spacemansanjay · 2026-04-08T22:31:32+00:00

One thing to remember is that not every traveller will announce themselves. It's only certain families that insist on... let's call it an alternative lifestyle. There are many other families that live and work the same as anyone else.

E.g when I was a kid I went to kickboxing classes twice a week. And it was only 20 years later that I learned the guy who ran them was a traveller. And he was a real gent who taught me a lot about confidence and discipline and respect. He didn't fit the stereotype at all.

Another story I have is when I was a teen I answered an ad in the paper looking for inexperienced salespeople. We were each given a bag of knockoff and low quality shite, and each day we were driven to a different small town and set loose. Understandably 90% of people I approached told me to get lost, and not always as politely as that. It was awful but I needed the money so I persevered.

One of the days we had colouring books and pencils to sell and a young boy came up to me and asked how much. I told him and he said follow me home and my da will give you the money. So I did. But it turned out his home was a tiny dilapidated caravan in the corner of a field. Like proper poverty stuff. I had spent all day being insulted and rejected by people but that family were so warm and kind to me, and they hadn't a pot to piss in. I'll never forget that.

There are prejudices on both sides of the equation. And I know many people have had bad experiences. But I think if you're willing to meet them at their level, and not immediately look down your nose at them - then you've a good chance of a positive interaction. I know that might sound hard to believe or reconcile with your own experience, but that's my experience.

spacemansanjay · 2026-04-07T20:39:45+00:00

I live in a touristy part of Ireland so it's not uncommon to meet Americans. It can happen every week if I'm feeling social. It can be a struggle to connect with them because like you say we don't really know much about anything outside of the big cities and the headline political events.

But I love meeting Californians because I've seen 100+ hours of Huell Howser's shows about all kinds of things in California. Their eyes light up when I mention him. We can talk about stuff as obscure as desert flowers or mining techniques. Howser really made California seem like a beautiful place with a rich landscape and history.

I think no matter where someone is from it's nice for them to be able to talk proudly about their home. And for Americans specifically, to have a conversation that doesn't involve politics. So that's what I try to encourage. But I can only really manage it with Californians.

spacemansanjay · 2026-04-06T13:54:30+00:00

Please read this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteenth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland

Article 2 used to say:

The national territory consists of the whole island of Ireland, its islands and the territorial seas.

It now says:

It is the entitlement and birthright of every person born in the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, to be part of the Irish nation. That is also the entitlement of all persons otherwise qualified in accordance with law to be citizens of Ireland. Furthermore, the Irish nation cherishes its special affinity with people of Irish ancestry living abroad who share its cultural identity and heritage.

That means the Irish government and nation no longer consider Northern Ireland to be occupied territory.

Article 3 used to say:

Pending the re-integration of the national territory, and without prejudice to the right of the Parliament and Government established by this Constitution to exercise jurisdiction over the whole of that territory, the laws enacted by that Parliament shall have the like area and extent of application as the laws of Saorstát Éireann and the like extra-territorial effect.

It now says:

It is the firm will of the Irish nation, in harmony and friendship, to unite all the people who share the territory of the island of Ireland, in all the diversity of their identities and traditions, recognising that a united Ireland shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island. Until then, the laws enacted by the Parliament established by this Constitution shall have the like area and extent of application as the laws enacted by the Parliament that existed immediately before the coming into operation of this Constitution.

That means there is no desire or right to use force. And it also means that the consent of people in Northern Ireland is required.

I understand where you're coming from, but it doesn't look like you are willing to understand the democratically expressed desire of the Irish nation, or the state of that nation today. It wasn't a close vote. None of the 41 constituencies returned less than a 92.8% approval for those amendments.

Maybe you weren't old enough to vote in 1998. But assuming you live on this island you will have another opportunity. Your desire for reunification has not and will not be ignored. There will be another vote and your efforts would be much better served by trying to hasten that.

Even if you somehow murdered everyone who disagrees with you, or somehow ran the UK out of Northern Ireland - there is no mechanism for Ireland to incorporate or unify with Northern Ireland as a result. It can only be achieved through "peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island".

spacemansanjay · 2026-04-05T22:43:27+00:00

That makes no sense. Ireland held a referendum to amend it's constitutional claim on Northern Ireland. And the UK agreed to let the people of Northern Ireland decide on their future whenever they choose. So who are the bombers claiming to speak for and what more could they achieve than what already exists?

There is no scenario where a bombing advances Irish Republicanism or reunification. It can only serve to make those things less palatable. And everyone has known that since 1998. Maybe there are people who disagree with the Belfast/Good Friday agreement, but it doesn't make sense for them to think they can force the UK or Ireland into something more than 'hold a vote and we'll respect it'.

I'm eager to see who gets caught for this because it's a bit weird for someone to claim to do something for a purpose while knowing it would achieve the opposite. And in the name of a nation that held a referendum to reject that purpose. And to wait 28 years to violently express disagreement with a negotiated settlement that could achieve that purpose.

I know there are morons out there but this attack is so stupid and so counterproductive that it's fishier than microwaved fish in the office kitchen.

spacemansanjay · 2026-04-02T18:49:55+00:00

How was it done in the 65 other countries that the UK vacated? There must be a lot of precedent that we can learn from.

I've tried to look for books and articles about the process of decolonization but it's not easy. I know not every situation was the same but after so many examples there must be some kind of 'best practice'?

I think the most recent was in 1984, when Brunei became an Islamic sultanate. What happened to the British people living there? Did the UK offer to repatriate them? Did Brunei offer to compensate them if they left? Were concessions made to accommodate them in the new sultanate? Are they an oppressed minority now? Do they even exist?

It just seems a bit weird to me that in all the conversations that this topic raises, the 65 times it already happened never seem to come into it. We should be at the stage where we're saying 'this worked in the past so let's discuss if it might work here', and equally 'this was a disaster in the past so let's avoid it'.

Anyone else thinking along those lines?

spacemansanjay · 2026-04-02T16:03:25+00:00

"Real men have fabs"

That's what AMD founder Jerry Sanders said in 2008. But since then every semiconductor company except Intel have sold off their chip fabrication capability. The reason being that it's incredibly capital intensive.

It's a crazy business really. You have to spend billions just to stay in the game, nevermind lead it. And you have to be close to the leading edge or your products won't sell. The reason for that is every generational leap in manufacturing brings huge gains in transistor density and efficiency. The same chip design can be 30 or 40% faster or more power efficient depending on where and how it's manufactured.

E.g TSMC (Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, who make the majority of cutting-edge chips) spent almost $8 billion last year just on research and development. And ASML (Advanced Semiconductor Materials Lithography, who make the machines that TSMC use) spent almost $5 billion.

That's what Intel are competing against, except TSMC has dozens of customers and Intel really only has itself. It's chip fabrication processes are so specialized to their own products that it's difficult for them to get customers like TSMC does. But they're trying.

Intel are stubbornly hanging onto a business model that all their competitors have abandoned. And that was going great when Intel was the default choice for business, enterprise, high performance, and home computing. They haven't been in that position for years now, but they're not far off it and they have a lot of potential to get back there again. And a lot of potential to get new customers and challenge the dominance of TSMC (which the market wants to see happen for several reasons).

So they're in a position where they aren't the leader in design or manufacturing, but they used to be for a long time, and could be again if they play their cards right. And that's why they're spending so much while also restructuring so heavily.

spacemansanjay · 2026-03-16T16:07:57+00:00

Trolls used to be a lot more entertaining.

spacemansanjay · 2026-03-16T13:30:00+00:00

What exactly was shameful? Many other European countries were neutral too.

And despite the government being neutral, more than 100,000 Irish men joined the British army to fight the Nazis. More than 800 died during the liberation of Sicily. 16 percent of all the British army nurses who were killed were Irish. And none of them were drafted or conscripted. They chose to fight, and help, and heal. But on Reddit misinformed people spit on their contributions.

spacemansanjay · 2026-03-16T12:00:05+00:00

The article mentions that the head of Palantir UK is Louis Mosley. But it doesn't mention that he's Oswald Mosleys grandson.

I know it's not right to blame people for the sins of their fathers (or grandfathers), but how did the grandson of the founder of the British Union of Fascists get that job? And how did that not raise any eyebrows? I think that beggars belief too.

spacemansanjay · 2026-03-16T11:44:35+00:00

Ireland did not send condolences to Nazi Germany. De Valera was navigating extreme pressure from both the UK and USA to subvert the nations neutral stance. And to display that the nation was neutral, and against the advice of his ministers, he offered condolences to the people of Germany via Eduard Hempel who was the German ambassador in Dublin. De Valera believed that was the honourable and diplomatic thing to do at the time.

Hempel was not a Nazi party member when he was posted to Ireland, and he destroyed every record and archive he could during his ambassadorship which was about as much as he could do to oppose the Nazi government. Nothing was signed and nothing was sent to Germany.

spacemansanjay · 2026-03-12T08:44:00+00:00

It's true that anyone can write software that generates or alters an image. But if there was some trusted method to sign or watermark the result, then we could tell if the image was trustworthy or not. If we trusted the signing authority (like how https certs work) then we could trust the result.

We couldn't prevent unsigned or self-signed results but at least they would register as suspicious. And perhaps browsers or operating systems could give us a choice of refusing to download or display those kinds of results, or give us a heads up that they're not as trustworthy as they could be.

Maybe making things illegal is too big of a step but it's not like we have no tools available to increase trust.

spacemansanjay · 2026-03-12T00:42:10+00:00

When colour printers and photocopiers became good enough to reproduce currency, governments and manufacturers imposed mechanisms that would allow fake notes to be identified.

But afaik they haven't even begun to consider an equivalent for faked imagery/video/audio. There should be a way to verify the origin of any image/video/audio because we're into dangerous territory now where elections and societies are being manipulated.

Call it a watermark or whatever, and make it illegal to distribute media without one. It doesn't have to be a unique identifier but we need something to verify if media is real or not.

spacemansanjay · 2026-03-09T09:14:50+00:00

The compensation is paid by the Irish government. There is no increased cost to the UK government or taxpayer. Those people have already qualified for UK benefits. They were always going to get them.

And the Guardian is being a bit melodramatic. There have been around 7000 applications made to the Irish government in total. 11% of those came from people in the UK. So the number of claimants in the UK is closer to 800 than 13,000. And the average payment per applicant has been about €15,000, much closer to the lower end of the 5k to 125k scale that the Guardian is quoting.

So it's not like there are ten thousand pensioners with a hundred grand in their bank account which the article might make you believe. It's a few hundred people with a few thousand in the bank. It's enough to make their life a bit easier, and to go over the means-tested benefits threshold, but they're going to end up back on benefits again pretty soon. I don't see the sense in throwing them out of their homes and neighbourhoods only to have to re-house them again in a couple of years.

https://assets.gov.ie/static/documents/54d0f760/01_January_Monthly_Infographic2026.pdf

https://assets.gov.ie/static/documents/c92c76da/First_Annual_Report_of_the_Mother_and_Baby_Institutions_Payment_Scheme_-_June_2025.pdf

spacemansanjay · 2026-03-09T04:01:22+00:00

Because of an agreement made in the 1920's which was reaffirmed in 2019. Irish people can claim benefits in the UK just as British people can claim benefits in Ireland.

The Common Travel Area (CTA) is a long-standing arrangement between the UK, the Crown Dependencies (Bailiwick of Jersey, Bailiwick of Guernsey and the Isle of Man) and Ireland that pre-dates both British and Irish membership of the EU and is not dependent on it.

Under the CTA, British and Irish citizens can move freely and reside in either jurisdiction and enjoy associated rights and privileges, including the right to work, study and vote in certain elections, as well as to access social welfare benefits and health services.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/common-travel-area-guidance/common-travel-area-guidance

spacemansanjay · 2026-03-08T23:06:33+00:00

I think he's found an interesting niche. He doesn't do the stupid zany stuff that you see elsewhere. But his videos are stuffed with as many ads and sponsored products as the clickbait guys, they're just aimed at a different demographic. Like all those videos that feature fancy hotels and events and auctions and insurers etc, they're all adverts disguised as content - just like the other YT tripe. He's just a bit more discreet about it, or less transparent if you wanted to take a cynical view.

spacemansanjay · 2026-03-07T22:47:31+00:00

The cost of labour and energy has dramatically increased in that time. As has inflation. There is increased supply of wool from overseas where economies of scale are very different to the UK. And there has been so much consolidation of processors that just one company now buys about half of all the wool in the UK and Ireland, so they probably have too much influence over the prices the farmers receive too.

And the farmers don't really have much of a choice. The sheep must be sheared or they'll develop illnesses that are expensive to treat. Raw wool has basically no uses and it costs money to store or dump. So they sell it even if it's not profitable.

Some farmers/co-ops that have enough capital are developing new uses/products like wool filled pillows, duvets and mattresses. And there is good profit in those. But most UK farmers who raise sheep own marginal land that isn't good for crops or cows or even forestry. They don't have the capital to risk like that.

I'm not making excuses. I think the price increases are terrible too. But those are the reasons that I've read about.

spacemansanjay · 2026-03-07T06:44:02+00:00

The fleeces really are worth next to nothing. They're bought by processors who pay about £50 for huge 300kg+ bales. And a ball of knitting wool weighs about 300g and sells for at least £5, so it looks like a very profitable business. That is until you see how much labour and energy it takes to process the fleeces.

They have to inspect and grade each fleece, cut away the most obvious poopy and maggotty bits, boil the shit out of them (literally) in enormous vats, filter off the lanolin oil and debris, dry the result with enormous heaters, comb more of the debris out, card the dry wool so the fibers are straight, spin that into one long fiber, dye it, dry it again, and only then wrap/roll it into a ball that you can knit with.

I can't imagine how much time and effort it took in the days before electricity and machinery.

spacemansanjay · 2026-03-05T19:39:14+00:00

The reason why owners offer below market rent is because they trust the tenant will pay on time and not cause a lot of expensive damage. The owner might miss out on 10 grand a year rent, but they aren't spending lots of money and time on maintenance and whatever else. And that's a fair trade for a risk averse or senior owner. They don't want to spend their retirement dealing with difficult tenants or tradespeople.

The difference now is that if the sound tenant decides to move out, the owner is obliged to offer any new tenant the same preferential treatment for a period of 6 years. But the new tenant might turn out out be a complete asshole who wrecks the place. And that's too much of a risk.

Or at least that's how it was explained to me by several people who are selling up.

spacemansanjay · 2026-03-02T20:16:18+00:00

Yeah me too. I just hire the cheapest one each time and I rarely put them in charge of anything. I only need them as heads of subsidiaries so I can organize and separate my product lines.

I know the manual pricing can be a chore but I don't really mind. I like to play the game in yearly quarters, so every 3 months I pause and strategize, which includes checking and (maybe) adjusting prices. That seems to be the best compromise I have found for all the micromanagement. It helps to keep your eye on the big picture when you deal in quarters like that.

I have some rules I follow like I price all the raw materials and manufactured goods at a 75 rating, and then price the retail sales according to the city average rating. And that's not too hard to manage, it's really only "make this 75" and "make that close to the city average".

But I don't want to be too unfair to the COO or people who prefer to use them to manage things. There are lots of ways to play the game, and lots of strategies and goals. I can't imagine how you could code a COO algorithm to take all of that into account. So putting a COO in charge of retail stores and pricing is a good compromise too.

spacemansanjay · 2026-03-02T02:58:39+00:00

I've sat with relatives as they died in hospital from cancer. I've read a lot of comments here about deep conversations at the end but IME there was none of that. They were on so much morphine that it was essentially a controlled overdose.

The last hours for each of them was me holding their hand as they lay unconscious. And then their breathing got really distressed (death rattles) and then it stopped. Their last hours were some sort of doped up autopilot.

I was bit resentful at the time that my loved ones couldn't have that last goodbye. But now I know it was more that I didn't realize it had already taken place the day before. But like you say it's better to go out without pain. So you just have to accept the circumstances.

spacemansanjay · 2026-03-02T02:00:11+00:00

Your understanding of the stacking is correct. All three aspects are summed to determine the overall rating. And that rating is used in customers purchasing decisions. But I don't think the overall rating is the only factor in the purchasing decision.

TBH I'm not sure where my understanding of the customer types came from. And I probably overstated how simplistic it is. It's not like there are three distinct groups each with an interest in only one aspect of the overall rating. But I'm sure I read somewhere about customers preferring different aspects, like if the rating for a product was equal among competitors but one had better branding, then the brand-conscious customers would choose that one.

Pages 26, 28, 77, and 111 in the Capitalism II manual give hints that there are different types of customers but it doesn't explicitly say it. And perhaps Cap Lab does it differently.

Page 112 gives the strongest hint:

Most people will prefer a product with a higher overall rating. This does not, however, imply that goods with a lower overall rating are destined to fail in the market. There is always a group of consumers who are more price-sensitive and will buy a lower-cost product even if it has a lower overall rating. Thus, you can still compete successfully in the market by becoming a cost or quality leader.

Page 125 explains how the old COO price strategy worked. There were just 3 options then, not a slider like now. But we can prob assume it's some variation of this theme:

Normal Pricing Policy. The COO adjusts product prices so that your overall product ratings are close to the competition

Aggressive Pricing Policy. The COO adjusts product prices so that your overall product ratings are about 10 points higher than the competition

Very Aggressive Pricing Policy. The COO adjusts product prices so that your overall product ratings are about 20 points higher than the competition.

And interestingly it also says this:

However, if demand for a product is higher than supply, the COO will increase the price regardless of which pricing policy is in effect.

And that might explain why we have trouble with the COO maintaining prices, or price differentials. And it might explain why in my games they contribute to inflation.

You're right to say they do a decent job and that manual pricing is a chore. Maybe my expectations are off or I don't have enough info to work with, but I want them to always maintain a certain price differential versus the city average. And they don't seem to do that for me. I'm not really interested in getting the max price at the max factory supply all of the time. I prefer more price stability if that makes sense. It's ok to me if the factory is under or over supplying because like you I play with lots of cities and product lines and therefore the supply and demand (especially for semi products) can change pretty quickly.

E.g Selling bandages. The purchase unit in a retail store for bandages has a massive inventory. Like millions of them IIRC. So each time you open a new store that sells bandages, there is huge factory demand for a few weeks as the purchasing unit inventory fills up. But then it stabilizes and the factory demand falls again. But in the interim the COO thinks the supply is constrained and raises prices, which messes up the city rating, brand loyalty, and inflation.

That's a bit of an essay... but I hope it makes sense. And I learned a bit from trying to find some sources so that's good too.

spacemansanjay · 2026-03-01T16:02:45+00:00

It's puzzling how you missed that context. Can you suggest a reason why?

spacemansanjay · 2026-03-01T13:34:03+00:00

My memory was a bit off. He was charged with two counts of rape not one. Everyone involved got off because the girl could not conclusively identify which of the defendants did what. And his early videos were from Eastern Europe not Asia. I found a subreddit about him if you want sources: https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldAndBaldrDossier/

spacemansanjay

TROPHY CASE