[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
Subject   (new thread)
File  []
>> No. 83192 Anonymous
19th July 2017
Wednesday 6:30 pm
83192 Pensions thought
So the pension age has been stuck up again, this is due to the argument that more old people, more pension, more money etc etc etc.

However, if people work longer and we have more old people in employment, then aren't they going to block up the job market resulting in less jobs for young people? If there's less jobs for young people they will end up being dependent on the state and claim benefits.

Does this not mean that regardless of what is done it's going to hit one budget or the other, essentially? Either it's going to cost more long term in pension or more long term in benefits and essentially cancel out any gains made.

I'm only putting this out there as a thought I've had for a while and never really heard anyone else putting the point across and I was wondering, is that because I'm making a fucking stupid point?
3 posts omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 83199 Anonymous
22nd July 2017
Saturday 1:24 am
83199 spacer
>>83198 But with automation, won't unemployment increase massively in the next 50 odd years? I think in Japan they have computers doing insurance claims or something.
>> No. 83200 Anonymous
22nd July 2017
Saturday 3:28 am
83200 spacer


The standard economic theory at the moment is that we'll have a hollowing out of the jobs market, with ultra-high-skilled work on one end and menial work at the other, with very little in between.

Anyone whose work is highly creative and can be scaled via technology will do very well indeed. Being the best or most famous of something will become increasingly valuable. Expect to see a lot more software billionaires and YouTube millionaires. If someone invents a robot chef, then Gordon Ramsay and Heston Blumenthal can personally cook for diners in hundreds of restaurants simultaneously. The best teachers will have classes of thousands linked together by telepresence, or develop AI teaching algorithms based on their techniques.

Many tasks are very low-skilled for a human, but extremely challenging for robots. Sweeping the roads is easy for a machine, but cleaning a toilet is remarkably complex. It's known as Moravec's paradox - tasks that require little conscious effort for humans tend to be fiendishly difficult for AIs. The oldest, most animalistic parts of our brain are phenomenally sophisticated compared to our higher cognitive faculties.

The flipside of Moravec's paradox will be deeply troubling - cognitive tasks that are difficult for humans are relatively easy for AIs. The most sophisticated robots in the world are barely better than a five-year-old at throwing and catching, but an obsolete phone can beat the world champion at chess.

AIs are now doing a lot of routine legal work, because they're immeasurably better than human beings at wading through vast quantities of information. Software by Narrative Science is being used to write business reports for Fortune 500 companies and sports journalism for major newspapers. IBM's Watson is being used to diagnose cancer and provide tax advice. Middle-class office jobs are under far greater threat than semi-skilled manual jobs.

There's also a lot of stuff that we just prefer humans to do. We already have automated coffee machines, but coffee shops are doing a roaring trade. People will pay £3 for a cup of coffee because the experience is designed to make both the customer and the coffee seem special. It's your particular drink, customised the way you want it. The baristas are all young and fashionable. They ask your name and write it on the cup. There's an element of theatre or ceremony involved in making the drink - the gleaming chrome machine, the I need a humour transplant of steam, the artistic little pattern in the foam. Psychology and marketing will play an increasing role in the economy.
Message too long. Click here to view the full text.
>> No. 83201 Anonymous
22nd July 2017
Saturday 5:47 am
83201 spacer
Thing is this whole mess is caused by long term population decline so you have the net pool of workers declining as the pension age is raised coupled with inevitable physical and cognitive decline opening up spots as the elderly are moved on to till work. The last part sounds horrible but I figure if you've sorted your outgoings and saved properly it might be pretty nice working a couple of hours everyday at Tesco. You'll probably have change leftover to buy yourself a few 20 bags throughout the week. OAG style.

Personally I'm more concerned that even with a steadily raising pension age across the west the national budget is going to take one hell of a battering. Everyone talks about the impact on healthcare but how about maintaining international peace and security if we continue down the road of the UNSC outsourcing to regional actors or China who has a chequered past on human rights concerns.

Kurzgesagt did a good video on the subject if you would like to know more:


Personally I'm a little sceptical on the limits of this thinking. People have shit themselves throughout history over new technology and while at the moment job creation appears to be negative it is very early days to be saying that is now the norm or to get too excited about new technology.

I mean at the very least all those young men with nothing to do and no girlfriends to calm them will start scrapping providing a boom in jobs for our noble arms industry.

>The baristas are all young and fashionable. They ask your name and write it on the cup.

Message too long. Click here to view the full text.
>> No. 83202 Anonymous
22nd July 2017
Saturday 8:14 am
83202 spacer

>Moravec's paradox

Is the reason for this more to do with limitations in how computers "think", or more that we can't build robotic bodies with the same versatility and functionality of a human one?
>> No. 83203 Anonymous
22nd July 2017
Saturday 3:12 pm
83203 spacer

>The reason nobody uses automated coffee machines is a question of hygiene and fresh ingredients which I don't see a robot handling anytime soon.

Solved problems. A modern super-automatic espresso machine produces coffee in exactly the same way as a barista using traditional equipment. You pour milk into a refrigerated canister, whole coffee beans into a hopper and the machine does the rest. A customer chooses and customises their drink on a touchscreen; it would be a trivial job to integrate contactless payment. On a functional level, any coffee shop could run with a single member of staff and a bank of super-automatic machines, but they don't, because it feels cheap.

>the problem is when you apply economies of scale for things like education it soon becomes less than ideal

I think you're under-estimating the rate of progress in AI and the innate advantages of machine intelligence. Clearly it will take some time to develop the natural language processing technology required to teach in a traditional way. When we do develop that level of technology (and it's very much a when rather than an if), the machines have some immense advantages over human teachers. Every pupil in the class can get intensive, one-on-one teaching. The AI can watch every pupil's efforts on every task, quickly identifying and addressing difficulties and misconceptions. The AI is endlessly patient, endlessly supportive and available 24/7; machines don't get tired, bored, frustrated, or develop an irrational dislike for someone. AI teachers can all work from a shared database, so they're all equally expert in every subject and have learned from every mistake made by every AI teacher.

We're already deploying AI psychotherapists. They're very crude compared to a human therapist, but they have a lot of innate advantages. You can speak to the therapist at any time and don't have to wait for an appointment. The AI can use data from every single patient to guide its responses; for example, it can identify subtle patterns of behaviour and interaction that might indicate an elevated risk of suicide or self-harm. Patients feel very comfortable talking to an AI, because they know that the machine is incapable of judging them. AI psychotherapy won't be a complete replacement for traditional psychotherapy any time soon, but it's an extremely powerful adjunct and could easily replace the lower-intensity interventions provided by services like IAPT.


Message too long. Click here to view the full text.

>> No. 83195 Anonymous
20th July 2017
Thursday 6:21 pm
83195 The Brexit Negotiations
We finally have some hard information on the specifics of the positions of both sides.

Today was the first joint technical document release, with each side's position on citizen's rights. It's patchy.


I will attempt to keep this thread updated as the weeks go by.
Expand all images.
>> No. 83196 Anonymous
20th July 2017
Thursday 7:39 pm
83196 spacer
They're finally agreeing on at least something.

>> No. 83112 Anonymous
11th July 2017
Tuesday 9:15 pm
83112 The great British Brexit robbery: how our democracy was hijacked
Not sure if I should have put this in /boo/ but:

>A shadowy global operation involving big data, billionaire friends of Trump and the disparate forces of the Leave campaign influenced the result of the EU referendum

>This is Britain in 2017. A Britain that increasingly looks like a “managed” democracy. Paid for by a US billionaire. Using military-style technology. Delivered by Facebook. And enabled by us. If we let this referendum result stand, we are giving it our implicit consent. This isn’t about Remain or Leave. It goes far beyond party politics. It’s about the first step into a brave, new, increasingly undemocratic world.

So it seems a British defense contractor helped the Leave campaign. Cambridge Analytica exploited the system for Vote Leave to get away with funding that would have normally broken electoral rules. All bankrolled by a billionaire hedge fund manager. Welcome to plutocracy.

64 posts and 1 image omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 83185 Anonymous
16th July 2017
Sunday 6:55 pm
83185 spacer
Don't be fucking ridiculous. Why are you even on about deporting Asians? Nobody except you is claiming the Asians who diddled in the likes of Rotherham are representative of all Joe's.

The simple fact is that the climate the lefties created enabled the likes of Rotherham to happen for so long. It's part of the reason why lefties are their own worst enemies and their actions were a major contributor to Brexit happening.
>> No. 83186 Anonymous
16th July 2017
Sunday 7:05 pm
83186 spacer

>Nobody except you is claiming the Asians who diddled in the likes of Rotherham are representative of all Joe's.
No, I'm not the one claiming that. You're the one claiming that.
>> No. 83189 Anonymous
19th July 2017
Wednesday 12:22 am
83189 spacer

>But they don't have any more propensity towards diddling kids than the locals

With regards to grooming cases Asian males are disproportionately over represented. And the incest thing is an unpleasant, inarguable fact too.
>> No. 83190 Anonymous
19th July 2017
Wednesday 1:26 am
83190 spacer
That's not necessarily true. The numbers that normally go with this claim come from a report that specifically deals with street grooming.

>The data submitted refers only to the ‘localised grooming’ model of child sexual exploitation and does not include online
grooming, trafficking of children into the UK, peer-on-peer abuse or other forms of sexual exploitation.
>This assessment cannot be seen as fully representative of the nature and scale of child sexual exploitation in the U.K., or, indeed, of the 'localised grooming' model.


>In particular, the report raises concerns over its ethnic representation:
>"Caution should be taken in drawing conclusions about ethnicity due to the relatively small number of areas where agencies have been proactive around this particular type of crime. We do not draw national conclusions about ethnicity from the data available at this time because it is too inconsistent."

>We therefore need to be cautious about Keith Vaz's claim, as the source he uses explicitly warns against drawing any nationwide conclusions on the basis of its research.
>While both the HM Prison Service and CEOP datasets have problems associated with them, there is nevertheless some evidence to suggest that sex offenders are 'overwhelmingly white' in terms of the raw numbers.

Message too long. Click here to view the full text.
>> No. 83191 Anonymous
19th July 2017
Wednesday 3:27 am
83191 spacer
Yeah yeah, spout facts, nerd.

>> No. 82573 Anonymous
8th June 2017
Thursday 6:27 am
82573 2017 General Election polling day/results thread
Morning, lads.

As per .gs tradition, it's time for the separate polling day/results thread.

Results are expected slightly earlier than previous years as there's no local elections at the same time.
348 posts and 43 images omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 83089 Anonymous
2nd July 2017
Sunday 11:41 am
83089 spacer
>I'm sure you are aware that being out in the public is a position where you can do harm to others
Yes, but then I'm sure you are aware that you're taking the piss, since we're talking specifically about being in a position of power.

>No I did not, calm yourself
Actually, yes, you did. The exact word with which you disagreed were "doesn't make you any less of a person". By disagreeing, you are, in fact, saying that it does make you less of a person.

>10 seconds on google.
No, that report is not evidence of "significant detrimental impact". It even says so right there in the abstract.
>> No. 83168 Anonymous
15th July 2017
Saturday 9:23 pm
83168 spacer

Vesting power in a small group of people is better is it?

Did you know that the supposed democracy we have in this country is actually a vote to give away democracy for 4 years?

From time to time you get some bullshit referendum like leaving the EU - it was amazing how many people were suddenly experts on the EU and knew exactly what was going to happen. No one fucking knows! Why are we suddenly voting for these extremely complicated and abstract ideas? Because you're not allowed to vote on anything you truly understand or want. Where's the referendum to erase all debt?

The public can vote for reality TV stars on Big Brother, or for performers on Britain's Got Talent - these programmes provide enough illusion of democracy and power to satisfy the public and keep them apathetic.

>"The static results suggest that the statistically significant negative effects of immigration on wages are concentrated among skilled production workers, and semi/unskilled service workers. In the latter cases, the coefficients indicates that a 10 percentage point rise in the proportion of immigrants working in semi/unskilled services — that is, in care homes, bars, shops, restaurants, cleaning, for example — leads to a 1.88 percent reduction in pay."

Does this mean immigration is bad, or the people who employ and take advantage of immigrants are bad?

>No they differ diagnostically for reasons I have outlined that psychopathy is open to subjectivity and furthermore ASPD operates on a spectrum. That someone is advocating denying someone the right to stand for office based on a criteria they clearly don't understand it is significant.
Message too long. Click here to view the full text.
>> No. 83169 Anonymous
15th July 2017
Saturday 9:27 pm
83169 spacer
>Does this mean immigration is bad, or the people who employ and take advantage of immigrants are bad?
It means >>83088 apparently can't do maths.
>> No. 83173 Anonymous
15th July 2017
Saturday 11:23 pm
83173 spacer
>Actually, yes, you did. The exact word with which you disagreed were "doesn't make you any less of a person". By disagreeing, you are, in fact, saying that it does make you less of a person.

Is there really any point in talking to you when your position is automatically "anyone or anything that disagrees with me is racist" including widely recognised concepts like borders and nationality?

I mean I did just assume we were wasting our time here but here we go and the thread is back up.

>No, that report is not evidence of "significant detrimental impact". It even says so right there in the abstract.

Read the quote then do a Ctrl+f and understand the context. Abstract browsers are on par with people who try and bullshit you on what footnotes say.

>Vesting power in a small group of people is better is it?

I wouldn't call the checks and balances we have in modern society small. Certainly it could be bigger in some areas but if cabinet tried to pass some nonsense today you can imagine the uphill battle they would face against backbenchers, the media, potential protests, facebook memes etc.
Message too long. Click here to view the full text.
>> No. 83174 Anonymous
15th July 2017
Saturday 11:39 pm
83174 spacer
>Is there really any point in talking to you when your position is automatically "anyone or anything that disagrees with me is racist" including widely recognised concepts like borders and nationality?
Put that straw man away, lad. My position is "anyone or anything that disagrees with me does not agree with me".

>Read the quote then do a Ctrl+f and understand the context
It's your argument. Chapter and verse to support your claim that the report claims "substantial detrimental impact". I suspect you can't provide one because either the report doesn't say what you think it says or you just can't add up.

>> No. 83097 Anonymous
10th July 2017
Monday 10:59 pm
83097 spacer

I challenge anyone to read this and still oppose the need for radical social change.
10 posts omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 83108 Anonymous
11th July 2017
Tuesday 3:25 pm
83108 spacer

It appears that the people in control of the remaining 'Anonymous' news channels have sunk to the level of Godlike Productions, that's not particularly interesting, seems inevitable in retrospect. That is what you meant, right? I tried to skip through the chemtrails rubbish at the start but it seemed to go on for the entire video, so I can only conclude ...
>> No. 83109 Anonymous
11th July 2017
Tuesday 5:51 pm
83109 spacer
>None of what I said is wrong.
You're right there, albeit not in the way you were thinking.
>> No. 83110 Anonymous
11th July 2017
Tuesday 6:49 pm
83110 spacer

Were you always a smug cunt or did they send you to a public school for socially abrasive children?
>> No. 83111 Anonymous
11th July 2017
Tuesday 9:09 pm
83111 spacer
The especially scariest part of that article for me, is the ancient plagues being released.
>> No. 83124 Anonymous
12th July 2017
Wednesday 7:32 pm
83124 spacer

I thought Anonymous specifically didn't believe in Xenu?

trump intelligence.png
>> No. 82497 Anonymous
16th May 2017
Tuesday 2:19 pm
82497 Trump impeachement... pending
What exactly is it that the man needs to do to get impeached? There seems to be a scandal that would damn any other leader every week.

8 posts omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 82544 Anonymous
24th May 2017
Wednesday 9:14 pm
82544 spacer
You haven't quite grasped how this works. Let me translate some of those terms for you:

>impeachable offence
Anything that will pass the House by simple majority.

>can stand up in court
Senators can bring themselves to vote for it.

While the Supreme Court haven't entirely ruled it out, they have declined to hear every appeal against impeachment that has been put to them, and if one takes the Constitution at its face then there is no right of appeal against conviction. However, to convict requires a two-thirds majority in the Senate and, unlike the filibuster, it's not a procedural rule but mandated by the Constitution.
>> No. 83092 Anonymous
8th July 2017
Saturday 3:14 am
83092 Trump accepts Putin's claims that Russia did not meddle in US election
Well I'm glad they settled that for us.

>> No. 83093 Anonymous
8th July 2017
Saturday 12:42 pm
83093 spacer
Yeah, but even after 6 months of harping on about Trump/Russia they'll carry on doing it and people will carry on believing it's true.
>> No. 83095 Anonymous
8th July 2017
Saturday 2:52 pm
83095 spacer
This. It's just like Jimmy Savile. Years after his death people keep harping on about him supposedly being a kiddy fiddler even though he said he couldn't have done it because he didn't like kids.
>> No. 83096 Anonymous
9th July 2017
Sunday 11:26 am
83096 spacer

To clarify, by people, you mean multiple intelligence services right?

>> No. 83060 Anonymous
25th June 2017
Sunday 9:52 pm
83060 sack Parliament IT department
This is fucking balls. First, all MPs should have two factor authentication enabled on their accounts. Second, the local IT team should have password policies enabled. Third, they should be brute force testing their own accounts regularly. What the actual fuck are they up to?

Also, this is now going to be hilarious. Because 90 parliamentary email accounts just got into the public domain.
1 post omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 83062 Anonymous
25th June 2017
Sunday 10:13 pm
83062 spacer
I can't wait for Theresa's reaction to this.
>> No. 83063 Anonymous
25th June 2017
Sunday 10:25 pm
83063 spacer

C7b60CSXQAA8C2w.jpg large.jpg
>the local IT team should have password policies enabled.
Password policies are really fucking annoying, and the clientele includes MPs who are Too Bloody Important to have to put up with them. Also, a lot of the time they're counterproductive anyway, since they encourage sequences. If you put in measures to prevent sequences, you'll just end up either flooding your helpdesk with "I can't remember the 128-character line-noise password you made me set last week" or leaving yourself open to the Post-It Note Attack.
>> No. 83065 Anonymous
25th June 2017
Sunday 10:47 pm
83065 spacer


The real answer is surely 2fa. The City have pretty much abandoned passwords - they're using security tokens and biometrics.
>> No. 83066 Anonymous
25th June 2017
Sunday 11:06 pm
83066 spacer
I was going to ask how Jacob Rees-Mogg would cope, but then again he probably employs someone to sit in front of the magic lantern and type on the plastic typewriter for him.
>> No. 83075 Anonymous
27th June 2017
Tuesday 8:49 pm
83075 spacer
'Laugh-out-loud' as they say in the Rees-Mogg household.

>> No. 83033 Anonymous
24th June 2017
Saturday 10:38 pm
83033 spacer
>The Government is hiding a devastating report that shows rehabilitation courses taken by thousands of jailed rapists and paedophiles make them more dangerous once they are released.

>According to the study, prisoners who take the courses are at least 25 per cent more likely to be convicted of further sex crimes than those who do not, suggesting that the sessions may have created hundreds of extra victims.

>The controversial Sex Offender Treatment Programme (SOTP), a six-month psychological group-therapy course, is believed to have cost taxpayers well over £100 million since it was set up in 1991.

>Before the report was compiled, about 1,000 prisoners had been taking the 'core' programme at a cost of about £7 million a year, many at eight sex offender treatment 'hubs' – specialist jails where thousands of such criminals are concentrated.

>The worst offenders went on to an 'extended' course, which was also found to make them more dangerous. An investigation by this newspaper has revealed:

>• The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) was initially reluctant to accept the bombshell findings, but after they were independently endorsed, it abruptly axed both programmes – but kept the decision secret;

>• Experts had for years been warning that the programmes were flawed, and there was no good evidence that they cut reoffending;

>• Paedophiles convicted of physically attacking children are especially likely to offend again after taking the SOTP;
Message too long. Click here to view the full text.
17 posts omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 83056 Anonymous
25th June 2017
Sunday 1:32 pm
83056 spacer
What? No. It doesn't matter if the animal wants to be let out, don't do it.
>> No. 83057 Anonymous
25th June 2017
Sunday 2:09 pm
83057 spacer
>However, some experts have disputed such claims for many years. One was William Marshall, whose own, very different sex offender rehabilitation programmes in Canada have been shown to achieve huge cuts in reoffending rates.

>Until 2004, Dr Marshall was employed as an external consultant to SOTPs in Britain. But exasperated by what he saw as the programme's shortcomings and the Government's failure to remedy them, he resigned. 'There were a lot of problems with SOTP and I didn't want to be identified with a programme I didn't agree with,' he said. 'They weren't adapting the course in line with developing knowledge, and many of those delivering the programme were not qualified.'

>The worst problem was that the numbers being enrolled on the courses were 'far too ambitious', leading to a shortage of qualified therapists. In fact, most SOTP facilitators were chaplains, ordinary prison officers and other 'para-professionals'.

>According to Dr Marshall, their lack of training meant that the facilitators were forced to stick rigidly to 'scripts' drawn from a thick SOTP manual. He said: 'Manuals take the therapist out of the loop. For sex offender treatment to succeed, you have to be flexible enough to keep adapting to every individual. A revamp is long overdue.'

>Another prominent sceptic was David Ho, a forensic psychiatrist who has treated some of the country's most disturbed offenders at Broadmoor, and is now research chief at a secure unit in Essex.

>He said: 'I'm not surprised by the new evaluation. Both the academic community and the public have the right to see the full results.' Previous studies claiming SOTPs worked were fundamentally flawed, he said – as he had been arguing for years.

Read the article before you post, team. The problem has been one of ambition without the resources so you've just sat some paedos together to discuss molesting kids for years while the local vicar brings tea and stickies (hmm...)

As much as I would like to say that Liz Truss has been a naughty girl the government suppressing the report seems reasonable in light of our countries history.
Message too long. Click here to view the full text.
>> No. 83058 Anonymous
25th June 2017
Sunday 6:07 pm
83058 spacer
>Read the article before you post, team.
It's the Mail. That's generally a waste of time, for obvious reasons.
>> No. 83059 Anonymous
25th June 2017
Sunday 6:47 pm
83059 spacer

Even a werewolf is entitled to a defence.
>> No. 83064 Anonymous
25th June 2017
Sunday 10:38 pm
83064 spacer

Like a silver-proof vest?

>> No. 82964 Anonymous
17th June 2017
Saturday 6:30 pm
82964 spacer
Anarchylad, I have mocked you for years, but now I agree it's time to end this bullshit.
43 posts and 3 images omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 83008 Anonymous
18th June 2017
Sunday 9:24 pm
83008 spacer
>If the ballot paper didn't have the parties written on them do you think people would really have any idea of who they were voting for?
Er, yes. At least, if the evidence of how people voted in the days when party affiliation and logos were not printed prominently on the ballot paper is anything to go by.
>> No. 83009 Anonymous
18th June 2017
Sunday 9:28 pm
83009 spacer

So you haven't noticed how people talk about Corbyn constantly, or voting for Corbyn, even though they probably don't live in North Islington? And therefore he presumably had no relivance to how people voted in the general election outside of that area.
>> No. 83010 Anonymous
18th June 2017
Sunday 10:27 pm
83010 spacer
Are you an idiot? Of course he is relevant to all people voting Labour, not just those in North Islington.
>> No. 83011 Anonymous
18th June 2017
Sunday 11:42 pm
83011 spacer
Yes I have. I've also noticed how other people talk about how they hate Corbyn but vote for the Labour candidate anyway because they like their MP or hate the Tories even more.

Party leaders certainly have relevance to national voter trends. That doesn't translate to "a vote for an MP is as good as a vote for a leader", though, that's total bollocks. To get a sense of how favourable people's opinions of party leaders are you have to, you know, actually ask them a question about it.
>> No. 83012 Anonymous
19th June 2017
Monday 7:41 am
83012 spacer
He reaction to Grenfell has really seen her take a battering.
Go down and talk to the firemen but avoid the people because they might be ruffians. Jez goes right down and hugs people. He walks among the people like he has his entire life.

Theresa is essentially shamed into meeting a select few at downing street on her own terms a couple of days later.

hufflepuff pride.jpg
>> No. 75779 Anonymous
20th July 2016
Wednesday 1:55 pm
75779 spacer
The Liberal Democrats have started a consultation process on what the parties next manifesto should look like. Its open to non-members and I thought everyone could benefit from you lads giving views.


It asks an interesting question: What would you spend £2 billion on?

I thought about putting the money towards adult education programs. Things like the Open University are fundamentally good ideas that gives people who otherwise can't study because of career and family commitments the chance to learn new skills and achieve lifelong learning. It sounds non-controversial but I'm sure there is ample chance to start a cunt-off on that idea.

Another interesting question is that it asks whether the Lib Dems should focus on staying in the European Union or on what Brexit should now be. An interesting option given the party is fervently pro-EU and I wonder what will fill the vacuum if its abandoned.
100 posts and 6 images omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 82932 Anonymous
14th June 2017
Wednesday 8:13 pm
82932 spacer
I'm glad he has stuck to his views. The fact the liberal party is crushing him for it is shameful on them.
>> No. 82933 Anonymous
14th June 2017
Wednesday 8:18 pm
82933 spacer
If he'd simply given a straight answer then the spectre of homosexuality wouldn't have lingered around him like a bad fart. His failure to deal with this made it an issue.
>> No. 82934 Anonymous
14th June 2017
Wednesday 8:33 pm
82934 spacer
Funny how the leader whose father was a vicar and presumably has similarly backward views didn't get pulled up on it.
>> No. 82935 Anonymous
14th June 2017
Wednesday 8:53 pm
82935 spacer
Similar backwards views as in she was the first prominent Tory to support Out4Marriage?


Similar backwards views that she, together with Gideon and Hague, wrote a letter in The Telegraph in 2013 telling other Tories to back same sex marriage?

Similar backwards views that it was Theresa May herself who wrote a foreword to the 2010 Tory manifesto pledging to look into expanding civil partnerships into gay marriage?

Please don't tell me you're basing your opinion on Theresa May on social media memes.
>> No. 82936 Anonymous
14th June 2017
Wednesday 9:54 pm
82936 spacer
Sorry, you're right. When Tim Farron publicly supports same-sex marriage, he's betraying his religion, whereas when Theresa May publicly supports same-sex marriage, she really means it.

I've got a bridge you might be interested in.

first orange president.jpg
>> No. 64250 Anonymous
15th July 2015
Wednesday 6:46 pm
64250 US elections 2016
This man is going to be the next President of the US and it's going to be fucking awesome.
3096 posts and 315 images omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 82870 Anonymous
11th June 2017
Sunday 2:24 pm
82870 spacer
>I would like to see more world leaders do this kind of thing, only way to deal with him.

As much as I'd love to see the Tony Blair version I don't know what good former politicians rehabilitating their legacy would achieve.
>> No. 82872 Anonymous
11th June 2017
Sunday 4:07 pm
82872 spacer
>> No. 82876 Anonymous
11th June 2017
Sunday 7:37 pm
82876 spacer
Of course, the best part about all of this is that we can't be shot of Trump. Just look down the order of succession and see the cunts that would replace him. Remember that for any of those people on the list to reach the presidency, everyone above them has to come and go, and their jobs have to remain vacant. If Mike Pence takes the reins, only if nobody is appointed to replace him does Paul Ryan get a go.
>> No. 82879 Anonymous
11th June 2017
Sunday 7:47 pm
82879 spacer

Fast times
>> No. 82883 Anonymous
12th June 2017
Monday 1:11 am
82883 spacer
Yep, this youtube video sure will be what takes him down.

>> No. 80668 Anonymous
2nd December 2016
Friday 12:09 pm
80668 spacer
What an upset, also a pleasant surprise.

Perhaps the Lib Dems can make a comeback at the next election.
42 posts and 2 images omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 82811 Anonymous
9th June 2017
Friday 11:07 pm
82811 spacer
Because they're not human.
>> No. 82843 Anonymous
10th June 2017
Saturday 5:47 pm
82843 spacer
>If you were getting grilled at work by somebody and getting paid 75k a year, no matter how unfairly you perceived it, you wouldn't just walk out would you?

I'd fire them for insubordination.
>> No. 82847 Anonymous
10th June 2017
Saturday 7:34 pm
82847 spacer
Corbs has done exactly the same to be honest.
>> No. 82867 Anonymous
11th June 2017
Sunday 12:45 pm
82867 spacer
>Never kissed a LibDem.

Come on lad,
There's only one way to beat them
Get round the back

>> No. 82873 Anonymous
11th June 2017
Sunday 4:32 pm
82873 spacer

Jesus wept. It's as if the lib dems don't want to be taken seriously.

>> No. 82568 Anonymous
7th June 2017
Wednesday 6:49 pm
82568 1984 Internet

Justify this, Tory voters.
3 posts omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 82572 Anonymous
8th June 2017
Thursday 2:58 am
82572 spacer
I don't think it's a party political issue. A Labour government instituted the first Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act. Blair was mad keen on identity cards and instituted vast swathes of dodgy counter-terrorism legislation. The majority of Labour MPs voted aye on the final reading of the 2016 RIPA; Corbyn and Abbott both abstained.

I think that the general public are just very ignorant about technology, so the cry that "something must be done" is far louder than any voices of caution. Encryption is too boring and technical for the mainstream media to talk about in any meaningful way.
>> No. 82814 Anonymous
9th June 2017
Friday 11:46 pm
82814 spacer
N-Now now lad, don't you go pointing out the commies crimes and injustices! W-why everyone knows everything bad right now is because of the last 2 Governments!
>> No. 82817 Anonymous
10th June 2017
Saturday 1:38 am
82817 spacer
I don't think you can really blame the other lot when you've had two parliaments in which to fix things. In most jobs, if you just slacked off and blamed everything on the guy that was there before you, your prospects wouldn't look too good.
>> No. 82818 Anonymous
10th June 2017
Saturday 1:54 am
82818 spacer

Thatcher New Labour.jpg
>> No. 82819 Anonymous
10th June 2017
Saturday 2:55 am
82819 spacer

I'm not blaming either party, that's my entire point. Neither side can be trusted with the internet, because neither they nor the general public understand it. The media has comprehensively failed to communicate the issues and the tech industry hasn't lobbied effectively to defend internet freedoms. There's also a peculiar acceptance of surveillance in this country, as shown by our extraordinarily high per-capita number of CCTV cameras.

Blaming surveillance on the Tories won't help, because a Labour government would do pretty much exactly the same. Parliament is stuffed to the rafters with PPE graduates and old codgers who just don't understand the value of encryption and an open internet. It's up to savvy, privacy-conscious people to push the issue.

>> No. 82634 Anonymous
8th June 2017
Thursday 10:54 pm
82634 spacer
After this election, this man is going to be the next Prime Minister and it's going to be fucking awesome.
24 posts and 5 images omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 82774 Anonymous
9th June 2017
Friday 3:08 pm
82774 spacer
>That's how you calculate swing from the Conservatives to Labour, specifically .
Erm, yes. That being what swing is. A change in relative vote share between two parties.

>that would be a fucking stupid thing to talk about in an election where the collapse of support for third parties was a major factor.
You appear to have misspelled "important" as "stupid" there.
>> No. 82775 Anonymous
9th June 2017
Friday 3:17 pm
82775 spacer
No, sunshine, that's what two party swing is. The clue that I wasn't talking about two party swing was that I didn't mention two parties.
>> No. 82777 Anonymous
9th June 2017
Friday 3:25 pm
82777 spacer
>No, sunshine, that's what two party swing is.
Well, yes, what with there being literally no other meaningful measure of swing. Otherwise you end up saying stupid things like how Corbyn isn't so bad because he gained 10 points. Then you have to accept other stupid things like how May brilliantly delivered the Tories their best total since 1992 and their best share since 1983. All of which would be monumentally stupid things to say.
>> No. 82778 Anonymous
9th June 2017
Friday 3:31 pm
82778 spacer
Yes, there are in fact other meaningful measures of swing, and two party swing is particularly unhelpful when, I repeat, collapsing support for third parties is a major factor influencing the outcome. Never mind, though. We all make mistakes sometimes.
>> No. 82780 Anonymous
9th June 2017
Friday 3:40 pm
82780 spacer
>and two party swing is particularly unhelpful when, I repeat, collapsing support for third parties is a major factor influencing the outcome
Yes, if by unhelpful you mean helpful. Otherwise, no.

Delete Post []
Previous[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]