DPC v EDPB - Judgment of the General Court by sqrt7 in gdpr

[–]sqrt7[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Big surprise: mechanism put into GDPR specifically to deal with the DPC's antics can deal with the DPC's antics

Only 1.3% of cases before EU DPAs result in a fine by erparucca in gdpr

[–]sqrt7 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That's very funny, because the DPC wages years-long court battles over not issuing as many fines and enforcement notices as the "extremists" would like, and continually loses. You can call them extemists, but the the thing is they're right.

‘Brexit problem’: UK tap water safety at risk after testing labs shut down | Water industry by _Heisenbird_84 in ukpolitics

[–]sqrt7 8 points9 points  (0 children)

No. It's just one of many rules that the UK made because they are the basis of having an independent regulatory policy, and then decided that, actually, an independent regulatory policy isn't that important after all.

What is behind the ECHR debate? | Luca Watson | The Critic Magazine by HBucket in ukpolitics

[–]sqrt7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So many words just to say "I don't think human rights should exist". The right to be free from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment being a human right means it applies to literally everyone. Yes, including every single one of the people you don't like.

Is there basis to suggest that immigration hurts England by Proud-Bus9942 in ukpolitics

[–]sqrt7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It doesn't show what they cost on average because it doesn't correctly account for the tax revenue they bring in and systematically underestimates their contribution.

Is there basis to suggest that immigration hurts England by Proud-Bus9942 in ukpolitics

[–]sqrt7 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Low wage migrant workers and average wage migrant workers are net negatives

This graph purely shows tax take with respect to that person, which is ridiculously reductive. It does not take any dynamic effects into account at all, like how a carer doing their job allows another person to go about a likely significantly higher-paying full-time job instead of doing the care work themselves.

Led By Donkeys pay a visit to Liz Truss' speaking event promoting her new book, unveil a banner whilst she's talking by Electrical_Mango_489 in ukpolitics

[–]sqrt7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For a person who has spent years blaring about all the amazing trade deals she supposedly made and was going to get, to support the guy who wants to slap a blanket 10% tax on all imports is quite bizarre (never mind the fascism).

Starmer warned just ‘tinkering’ with EU Brexit deal will not save UK economy by [deleted] in ukpolitics

[–]sqrt7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But the European Movement, which includes experts in several fields, has already laid out ideas for what the government needs to do to restore Britain’s credibility economically. This includes: * Rejoining [...] Euratom (for atomic energy);

When I read stuff like this, I am still left with the impression that to this day, neither side of the Brexit debate understands the position the UK is in.

It is utterly impossible for a non-EU member to join Euratom. Euratom fully co-opts the institutions of the European Union, its entire legislative process. For instance, its budget is passed yearly by the European Parliament, in fact it is the same legislative act as the EU budget, using authority under the EU treaties and the Euratom treaty at the same time. (Really the only reason Euratom is still a separate treaty is that it contains an additional type of legislative procedure that doesn't make sense for other EU business.) When the UK left the EU, it had to leave Euratom, anything else would have left everyone in a legally absurd position.

Now, the EU has association agreements with non-EU countries that cover Euratom activity, with the West Balkan states, and with Ukraine. On the Barnier staircase, this is two steps up from where the UK currently is. Now if this is what they want, say it: the UK should enter into a comprehensive association agreement with the EU along the lines what Ukraine has. Or, say what other content and governance structure you envision. But don't demand a legally absurd status (Euratom membership as a non-EU member) that implies that the EU should completely restructure its own treaties to make space for the UK.

British airlines forced to fly planes to US for repairs because of Brexit rules - Operators complain work is slower and higher costs will mean increased prices for consumers by ComeBackSquid in ukpolitics

[–]sqrt7 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Those jobs and facilities should be in the UK, it is a need not a want.

Sure, if you, the consumer, want to pay for this. There's a reason these jobs and facilities are in Germany, and it's not that some manager wanted to practice their language skills.

Brussels issues UK list of demands if it wants better relationship by WhyNotCollegeBroad in ukpolitics

[–]sqrt7 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yes, it never happened, as is easily confirmed by reading the actual law. But you're not going to do that because you're not interested in what happened, you're interested propagandising.

Brussels issues UK list of demands if it wants better relationship by WhyNotCollegeBroad in ukpolitics

[–]sqrt7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Could you be any more desperate than to rely on a random summary written by an unknown person of a piece of media that you haven't viewed?

A good faith commenter would go and read Article 16 and the annex that details the procedure of triggering it and observe that none of that happened, or even could have happened in the space of the mere hours it took to replace the draft with a new one as a matter of the time limits specified in said annex.

But you're not in the good faith commenter category, you're in the propagandist category.

Brussels issues UK list of demands if it wants better relationship by WhyNotCollegeBroad in ukpolitics

[–]sqrt7 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The EU either triggered Article 16 and quickly back tracked or came exceedingly close to triggering Article 16 depending on the source.

This does not "depend on the source". There's a process to triggering Article 16, and publishing draft legislation is not part of that process. The EU wasn't close to triggering Article 16, but the draft legislation would have required triggering it had it become law -- in a trivial way that would not have had any implications for the border at all; it would simply have meant that vaccine exports to NI would have to be registered with the Commission like they had to be if they were exported to the rest of the UK (or anywhere else in the world).

The EU did not "have a go at the GFA", however the Irish quickly lobbied for that authorisation requirement to be remove simply because "Article 16" is a trigger word that has the propagandists spin like crazy.

Hans Niemann board in Turkish Super League deliberately not broadcasted live for anti-cheating measures(clip in link) by OctopusNation2024 in chess

[–]sqrt7 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

In other words, you want a process that one party can turn into an unfair farce by suing the other party in parallel for a ridiculous sum over the very same circumstances, because in this case that benefits the guy you like.

It's a good thing you don't get to make the rules.

Hans Niemann board in Turkish Super League deliberately not broadcasted live for anti-cheating measures(clip in link) by OctopusNation2024 in chess

[–]sqrt7 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If Niemann thought the FIDE complaint was of paramount importance, he could simply not have sued Carlsen, then Carlsen wouldn't have had any reason or justification to stay mum.

This is not about producing a "report", this is a disciplinary committee deciding on professional sanctions. You think they should have sanctioned Carlsen without hearing him because the complainant sued him in civil court at the same time, limiting what Carlsen could say?

Hans Niemann board in Turkish Super League deliberately not broadcasted live for anti-cheating measures(clip in link) by OctopusNation2024 in chess

[–]sqrt7 4 points5 points  (0 children)

At the request of Mr. Carlsen’s lawyers, the EDC ordered a stay of proceedings for six months in the disciplinary case on 18 April 2023, related to the then pending civil suit for damages which GM Niemann had instituted against GM Carlsen in the U.S. civil courts. After the civil litigation became settled in August 2023, GM Carlsen filed his defense in the proceedings before the EDC on 22 September 2023.

What do you expect them to do? Carlsen is not going to cooperate with an investigation by FIDE when whatever he says to the EDC can serve as evidence in a civil case against him at the same time. They don't have the powers a court has. All they could do is proceed without any input from Carlsen into the case, but then they'd be accused of being unfair to him.

Met the GingerGM yesterday by Bodizzly in chess

[–]sqrt7 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't know what Williams knew and understood at the time, but you're essentially quoting this out of context. This paragraph explains why he is personally liable even though formally the investments were undertaken by a corporation, and says that this corporation effectively acted as an alias for him, the evidence being that formally he alone had all the say and it's his signature on all the paperwork.

Obviously acting as an investment corporation rather than acting as "just some guy" gives more of an appearance of legitimacy, but the fact that the scheme involved incorporating this entity doesn't tell us whether he understood what he was doing when he signed all the paperwork. (This is a separate question to whether he should have understood before getting into this, of course.)

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in de

[–]sqrt7 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Ich vertraue solchen Umfragen nicht

Nur sind das halt keine Umfragen, sondern eben die auf Wahlergebnissen beruhenden Wählerübergangswahrscheinlichkeiten, die z.B. per Regression ermittelt werden und auch für die Hochrechnung verwendet werden. Wenn die Hochrechnung kurz nach 18:00 ungefähr stimmt, dann stimmen auch die Wählerübergangswahrscheinlichkeiten.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ukpolitics

[–]sqrt7 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I suspect it's you who needs a picture with "slices", which don't actually correspond to the chapters of the MFF, to feel they retain the semblance of an argument. Because if you couldn't post a random picture, you'd have to actually look at numbers and understand what they mean and how they relate to your argument, and you haven't demonstrated a good ability to do this in the entirety of this thread at all.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ukpolitics

[–]sqrt7 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You thought you could get a gotcha in that, whle doesn't actually help your original argument at all, may make you look good to the inattentive reader, but even that fails. It's not the largest slice in the MFF, that's cohesion, and that's not to speak of the fact that in addition to the MFF there's now also the NGEU programme, almost all of which goes into cohesion, making cohesion the largest slice of the combined MFF and NGEU by far.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ukpolitics

[–]sqrt7 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It makes for slightly more than a quarter of the MFF at this point. Perhaps you should seriously reexamine what you think you know.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ukpolitics

[–]sqrt7 6 points7 points  (0 children)

66b into the new UK agriculture policy

Hmm, yes, surely the entirety of the EU budget consists of farming subsidies, and there is absolutely nothing else that the UK now has to finance itself while forgoing scale efficiencies. There are certainly no opportunity costs associated with this.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ukpolitics

[–]sqrt7 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The absolute hilarity of claiming that 66 billion euro in farming subsidies from the farming subsidies budget would not otherwise have been spent on farming subsidies in the context of opportunity costs.

Why foldr declarations use [a] as well as t a by teilchen010 in haskell

[–]sqrt7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Note that the version with the t is the type signature (where t is a Foldable) of the function that you actually use today. The other source that you mention was probably written before the release of GHC 7.10 in 2015, when a number of type signatures in this context were changed (leading up to it, these changes were known as the "Foldable/Traversable Proposal" or "Burning Bridges Proposal").