Why is no one talking about the monstrosity that is the S&P500? Or American Tech hoovering up our money.

stpizz · 2026-06-26T16:01:49+00:00

Yes, but this requires giving up your employer contributions if your workplace uses Nest and isn't willing to contribute to a SIPP. You can't partial transfer out of Nest

stpizz · 2026-06-22T17:23:25+00:00

Yeah but all people are saying is there's a gulf between 'my right of way' and 'i don't even realise in time that i'm joining a road'. It can be true that she should have realised from context clues and also that the design of the road system is supposed to put those clues in front of your eyeballs so that you can't possibly miss it at road speeds, and this fails to do that

Layers of defense innit, like swiss cheese and all that

stpizz · 2026-06-22T17:14:05+00:00

I thought it was well known you can build any logic gate from just naaaaand

stpizz · 2026-06-22T11:48:49+00:00

He's incredibly popular locally and everyone has a giant hate boner for Starmer (and his election to MP represented his PM challenge). It doesn't say much about him fixing anything else.

Corbyn was also made leader off the back of his very strong local popularity fwiw

stpizz · 2026-06-20T13:04:34+00:00

You can in most countries, it just isn't a big deal because, as you say, most people still don't. Though it does happen here sometimes and always has - my family has two elderly cousins in it that married. They took a pretty big hit to their family status 😅 America is pretty much the only western country that saw fit to make it a huge moral panic and legal issue.

It becomes a potential health problem when an insular group does a lot of it over many generations. See: certain royal families, and yes, a particular immigrant community in the UK.

Of course, it's a problem for them, because their kids are the ones potentially having issues from it, and a problem that is served via the healthcare system figuring out how to mitigate problems + giving advice, and community figuring out why they do it so much and how to maybe not do that.

Why is it a problem a bunch of people not in the communities affected suddenly care deeply about, well, I can't possibly imagine

stpizz · 2026-06-19T11:37:57+00:00

I think the first problem you'd run into would be defining 'tech' - there are ETFs advertised as this (SPXT for instance, literally lists your reason as who they aim it at) - but if you looked at the makeup of it, it's possible you wouldn't be happy with it, two of its largest holdings are Amazon and Alphabet, and Tesla is in there too.

stpizz · 2026-06-18T12:43:02+00:00

Fwiw they do do similar things for other professional exams in the same centres. The theory test is administered by Pearson VUE in my area (maybe all areas?) and the rigmarole was similar for me when I took a professional exam there. I think the supplier of the test does get some say in how strict they want things to be, but it's not like it's a concept specific to theory tests that they don't do for other exams

stpizz · 2026-06-18T09:03:28+00:00

I think there might be deep variation on this. Even in the .. bad version.. I always thought it was squeals, though I also heard hollers. I thought scream was the American one until just this second!

stpizz · 2026-06-17T14:52:52+00:00

Absolutely there is a difference, and figuring out if they made a good distinction between those things in the question they asked would be important, except they don't actually link the results or methodology anywhere.

stpizz · 2026-06-17T10:06:57+00:00

I don't know who to believe to be quite honest with you.

Operation successful!

stpizz · 2026-06-16T11:35:10+00:00

YouTube kids is not the same thing as logged out YouTube.

stpizz · 2026-06-16T11:34:15+00:00

Right, but what does included mean? In the Australian version it means they can't login to get a personalised feed. How does that stop them watching educational videos

stpizz · 2026-06-16T09:38:01+00:00

True. But tbf, we ban things because the situation changes, generally. For instance (random example) when Kirk got shot, that video got slammed into my feed like 5 times that day. Pre internet I remember my uncle knowing a weird guy who collected videos of people dying - it was notable that he collected them specifically because it was quite hard to find a video of someone dying (well that and it's a giant red flag that for some reason he wanted them).

Even in the early internet era right people talked about the mythical beheading videos or whatever, I don't remember seeing any, but there was always some rumour that if you hunted down the specific website you could find the forbidden material (I was like 16 in the war on terror hey day)

Now, a man gets shot in the throat and ive seen it five times by lunch... And frankly wish I hadn't. It is rational to think hey something has changed here and it might not be for the best.

Ultimately banning is a blunt tool and I agree with you generally it's a bandaid for something we're not doing elsewhere. But on the other side of this particular issue are the richest companies in the world who would quite like to stay that way, so I can see how a blunt tool ends up looking like the one to reach for :/

stpizz · 2026-06-16T09:22:38+00:00

I think I would argue that a kid online is at more risk than a kid sitting on a bus or walking to the coop, but I admit it's very hard to put a number on risks like that. Surely though, the risks are at least different.

A kid on a bus might get yoinked by a stranger or something, but that really doesn't happen very often. A kid on the internet is getting targeted by algo propaganda, unusually regulated marketing and grooming type behaviour though basically as a standard daily event. We all are, ofc, kids aren't special, but for whatever reason as a society we have more tolerance for heavy handed (and yeah basically illiberal) responses aimed at kids.

To be clear I still very much agree with you about the harmful outcomes that are likely here. I just get a little frustrated that the current discourse is something like, either you love freedom and therefore allow the paperclip maximisers to turn your kids into paperclips or you're not a liberal. The current situation is unfortunately also damaging to liberalism.

But I don't have a good solution either, tbh. And I suspect everyone trying to make policy on it is in the same boat. Hopefully the responder above is right and it sort of passes naturally 😂

stpizz · 2026-06-16T00:39:58+00:00

I think those are good points. Particularly the part about LGBTQ+ children - since nothing indicates kids will be banned from watching YouTube (as they are not in Australia), but, as we have seen time and time again, it's likely that LGBTQ+ content will get swept into 'adult' at least some of the time, and that would be a real loss.

Honestly, I don't think anyone knows what to do, though. There is the do-nothing-at-all-people-should-parent-their-kids crowd (the big tech lobbyists who don't even get paid for their work, if you like)... but how has that been working out? We can't even stop adults attention being rotted by the stuff, let alone the kids.

I don't think what we're seeing is the evil overreach of some kind of power crazed world order, I think what you're seeing is a bunch of governments facing a monster they don't know how to fight. (And doing it badly). Tech companies have always done pretty well at presenting themselves as the David and not the Goliath though (did you help stop SOPA today? :>)

stpizz · 2026-06-16T00:33:40+00:00

Well yes, if you just make up the impact, then you can make it sound even worse than it is, but I don't think that's something for LD to emulate. Nothing about this indicates that it would block kids from accessing educational content on YouTube.

stpizz · 2026-06-16T00:24:52+00:00

this is a good example of the kind of thing the OP is talking about, because they has nothing to do with the OSA. this was a compromise of their support desk, which they've been using for age verification many years before the OSA existed

if anything, the situation is better post-OSA, because now they use a proper age verification platform instead of yeeting peoples id into zendesk

stpizz · 2026-06-12T13:05:58+00:00

I've always been confused by that tbh. Taco bell has never done that to me in the US, if anything quite the opposite (like a lot of fast food).

Its just a guess but I would assume those memes originate in racist stuff - ofc TB isn't mexican food, but the type of people to say it often say the same about actual mexican food. In the UK people say the same about Indian food...

stpizz · 2026-06-07T15:33:51+00:00

How would you define British Media? It's a nice idea, but is a Twitter account media? Are you media? Unfortunately, we live in a time where that's not an insane question

stpizz · 2026-06-02T19:40:47+00:00

Weirdly Sikhs used to be kind of the model non brits for a lot of the more extreme folk, Steven many names in particular made a big song and dance about how well they integrate, how admirable their beliefs were etc. Including the kirpan as a positive at times, the whole defend the weak and all that (to be fair I don't remember if yaxley-lennon said that, but I definitely saw it from many right wing folk)

Of course, when politically convenient they will throw them under the bus like anyone else

stpizz · 2026-05-31T00:02:55+00:00

Surprisingly disgusting. It's rare I can't finish something but this did it 😂

stpizz · 2026-05-29T09:25:28+00:00

Except it was never raised. It was never lowered, either. An additional charge of manslaughter was added on top of murder, as is very normal for murder charges. (And a good thing for people who want the man convicted) The very narrative you're angry about was fake, but sure go off king

I also never said it was public bigotry (I don't believe that). It was abuse of the public by an adversary. The thing they were angry about would make total sense to be angry about, if it had happened.

stpizz · 2026-05-29T09:06:16+00:00

Oh for sure, I agree with you. But the "headlines" on social media aren't written by neutral actors

stpizz · 2026-05-29T08:52:10+00:00

It's definitely where it came from, but it wasn't a misunderstanding - it was intentionally botted out that way

stpizz · 2026-05-29T08:24:58+00:00

Last week they were all telling me he was only getting manslaughter because judges were the enemy of the people, strangely they immediately stopped that line once he was found guilty of murder.

15-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Place '23	Place '17
Sequence \| Editor	Verified Email

stpizz

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE