Jump to content


Senior Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Endy0816

  1. 4 hours ago, studiot said:

    The GFA is basically an agreement between two parties, those in Ulster and those Eire.
    They are the only ones who can directly 'break' the agreement.

    The rest of the parties involved are really bystanders since they are not actually present in the island of Ireland.

    In my view, the correct action for the UK government would be to take no action except to promote good relations.
    A border is not necessary.
    It currently works very well without one and would continue to do so if unhindered by the interference of outside parties and bystanders, most of whom regard the issue as ammunition in their dealings with other outside parties and bystanders.

    NI an Ireland are no longer in the same Customs Union. If there is to be no free trade agreement, then past the transition period checks on goods will need to begin. It will be seen as the UK giving the EU preferential treatment otherwise.



    1. Most-favoured-nation (MFN): treating other people equally  Under the WTO agreements, countries cannot normally discriminate between their trading partners. Grant someone a special favour (such as a lower customs duty rate for one of their products) and you have to do the same for all other WTO members.

    This principle is known as most-favoured-nation (MFN) treatment (see box). It is so important that it is the first article of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which governs trade in goods. MFN is also a priority in the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) (Article 2) and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) (Article 4), although in each agreement the principle is handled slightly differently. Together, those three agreements cover all three main areas of trade handled by the WTO.

    Some exceptions are allowed. For example, countries can set up a free trade agreement that applies only to goods traded within the group —   discriminating against goods from outside. Or they can give developing countries special access to their markets. Or a country can raise barriers against products that are considered to be traded unfairly from specific countries. And in services, countries are allowed, in limited circumstances, to discriminate. But the agreements only permit these exceptions under strict conditions. In general, MFN means that every time a country lowers a trade barrier or opens up a market, it has to do so for the same goods or services from all its trading partners — whether rich or poor, weak or strong.


    Once the transition period ends, over a hundred countries are about to become involved here.

  2. 1 hour ago, studiot said:

    If you think EU standards are good, think again.

    Nearly all Euronorm standards are inferior to the good old BS they replaced.
    It is my opinion that the UK ought to be a beacon of higher standards, not lower.

    Yes WA does, but I see no evidence that the EU considers itself bound to follow any of them.
    Look at the way it bullied Eire a couple of years back over their due deomocratic process.
    They didn't like the resuult of the Eire poll so they made them keep going back to vote again until they returned the result the unelected commisioners wanted.

    The EU simply has no right to expect to interfere in what will be a totally sovereign nation after 31st Dec 2020.
    Next we will here they want to drill for oil off Cornwall, or somesuch.

    I'm glad you mentioned bridges, satellites and truck parks.

    What's wrong with with bridges ?

    The UK has been one of the major contributors to the EU satnav system to be.
    Yet, despite all that, the first thing the EU said in the negotiations is that they would not allow the UK access to it anymore and not pay back a penny we gave them.

    Was referencing Boris's Garden Bridge and OneWeb actually. You may actually end up rejoining Galileo now that OneWeb plans are being scrapped.




    Truck parks ?
    Well the EU exports more to the UK than the UK does to the EU.
    Yet the UK has to build truck parks to accomodate the flood of EU trucks.
    Good show if we stopped that.

    Right! You should just stop all trade with the EU cold.

  3. 2 hours ago, CharonY said:

    That is roughly what I think, too. My biggest worry is if folks try to use the lowest common denominator. 

    My hope is that the US might adopt something closer to EU standards at some point in the future. Now that many Nation States are in or entering into one Union or another, I figure we'll start moving towards super-blocs next.


    2 hours ago, studiot said:

    I'm glad my OP provided you Gentlemen and Ladies with some lively discussion after initial adverse reactions had settled down.

    Nowhere did I say that I wished to prevent anyone buying American food and eating it or feeding it to the dogs or whatever.
    I said I don't wish to be stuck with it as the only stock on offer in the supermarket.

    So the argument should not be "should we allow US food or not" , in my view of course we should.
    But only so long as it does not displace other offerings.
    It is not so long since my celiac friends could not buy anything in the supermarket.

    I don't trust Boris not to "Cry Havoc and let loose the dogs".

    Talking of Boris and the other part of this thread.

    I don't agree.

    Ministers have been wrong often enough before and the gutter press even more often.
    If only they had adopted my solution to the Irish border question, there would have been no problem or issue whatsoever with either the UK or Eire.
    Mrs May could have chosen this path and had a trade deal by now, but insted let this Irish issue break her.


    The long and the short of it is there is no breach of international or national law.
    The situation is that at present the UK has left the EU but has agreed to adhere to all the rules and standards of the EU until at least 31st Dec 2020.
    After that the UK can choose to continue to follow some or all or none of these.
    The Bill does nothing to change this, merely allows the UK government to choose one of these options after the given date.

    The EU want to force the UK to continue with their rules on their terms.

    As to the Fish, catch quotas (as currently set by the EU) in UK national waters may be sold on an annual basis.
    My relatives in Aberdeen (one of the UK's principal fishing ports) tell me that the EU wish to force the UK to continue this into the indefinite future, as do the Scottish Nationalists.


    WA also contains parts that continue on past the withdrawal date. Everyone else will see the Internal Market Bill as the UK attempting to give itself an opt out.


    UK could have simply bought the quotas back honestly or worked out a gradual decrease of foreign fishermen. UK government just seems phenomenally cheap for all the money the manage to blow on bridges, satellite projects and truck parks.



  4. Not sure about elsewhere in the world, but US and EU employ different approaches to the problem of food safety. US primarily tackles it towards the end, while EU tries to maintain hygienic conditions the whole way through. Both approaches have positives and negatives.

    I've been in a few discussions on the subject and have to say it is hard for everyone to remain objective. We're all naturally comfortable with our own food.

  5. 2 hours ago, John Cuthber said:

    "Figures suggest that the percentage of people who fall ill with food poisoning annually is up to ten times higher in the US than the UK."



    And, not to put too fine a point on it; I'm not very concerned about chlorinated chicken; I'm concerned about chlorinated chicken sh1t.

    I've seen those numbers but there's also the counter argument that the methodology behind determining those numbers differs.



    Real problem is the sheer size difference of the markets. None of us might care for US food standards and yet we can still be sure that they are likely to be adopted in an expansive agreement.


    3 hours ago, Curious layman said:

    If people are so concerned about not buying American food, then there will be incentive for food manufacturers who use better food practices to advertise it on their product. Like they already do with organic or corn fed etc...

    Have a feeling they'll request mutual acceptance of certifications as well. Besides most people going purely off of price, our companies are also no strangers to buying up UK brands for camouflage.


    Here is the summary of US negotiating objectives, if anyone is interested.


  6. 56 minutes ago, Curious layman said:

    Why wouldn't it have country of origin written on it. Every item of food I buy has this. If people don't trust American food then they can choose something else. It's not hard to buy good quality food.

    You have answered your own question. If the FTA gets rid of the labels, then there is no ability to discriminate.


  7. 1 hour ago, studiot said:


    Which is no doubt why the EU wishes to break International Law and steal our fish  ??

    I have yet to see any evidence that Boris' Bill breaks any Law national or international.
    Reporting on this issue is soley by comments from former leave campaigners who would no doubt like to hand the UK over on a plate.

    UK fishermen had sold their fishing quotas over. The EU at the time even advised against countries permitting this sort of thing, but the UK thought it knew better. UK hasn't exactly been building up its fishing fleet either, so I doubt anything will even change after all this.


    When asked if the proposed legislation would defy or breach international laws, Lewis said,”Yes, this does break international law in a very specific and limited way”.



    Realistically we've been involved from the outset of the GFA. Pretty sure US is down as a guarantor as well. Would have a long-term negative impact on our reputation if it fails, besides simply wanting peace for the sake of peace.

    UK really needs a major treaty to get itself on its feet, even if we ignore the poor starving as prices jump and delays begin. There are few other countries big enough or close enough as the US. We can both supply the UK with food and take in UK exports. Trade deal with the US was even something of campaign promise so they're only giving the people what they voted for.

    Practically speaking a gaping hole in the UK's border will be an issue for trade in general anyways. WTO Rules are about to kick in. Even in a best case scenario, I'm expecting to see a multitude of complaints lodged against the UK with repercussions to follow.

    Border in the sea solves most of the problems and is what the WA set out in the first place.


  8. 7 hours ago, Externet said:

    Google did changes to the search process and capability a while ago and cannot access some foreign things now.

    Trying to locate a russian brand/factory of electric bicycles from several years ago, to find if they are still in business or production.  From USA, cannot see internal russian sites any more  ¿?

    That manufacturer had also a video of the bicycle; and a full site for the product.  Can someone capable of doing such search inside Russia post a link where I could see maaaany results to choose the correct one ?

    Might try going into settings on the search results page and changing your Region setting.

  9. Quote

    A sojourn in space is a great way to ruin one’s physique — the microgravity results in dramatic loss of muscle mass. Residents of the International Space Station exercise regularly to stave off the atrophy, but perhaps there’s another way. Scientists have now found that if they treat spacefaring mice with a particular molecule, the animals not only maintain their muscles, they even bulk up a bit.

    The treatment also preserved and boosted bone density, another problem in microgravity, researchers reported September 7 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

    Can read more of the article here:



    Really happy about this as it will make moving between different levels of gravity easier and make living in lower gravity long term much more viable.

  10. 5 hours ago, studiot said:

    People have a desire to keep numbers and quantities they are working with to within small number limits.
    Very often when the numbers start to get large or spread out they introduce a new unit

    1 foot, 2 feet, 3 feet or 1 yard.

    This is not infallibles since other requirements pull in other directions eg the need for finer measurement 12 innches or 1 foot.

    Would probably take some meticulous work to get right but I was thinking you could do reverse forensic accounting.

    Rather than use purely random numbers or keyboard mashing; set up a program that returns numbers biased to having low value initial digits.


    Want to say did learn about this law  when I was younger but don't remember many of the details now.  Never had a reason to try to cook some books though lol

  11. 48 minutes ago, Dord said:

    I learnt about this when I was a criminal fraud investigator in the Inland Revenue for reviewing potentially fraudulent invoices, accounts, till rolls etc.

    Apparently when someone tries to fake a list of numbers for nefarious purposes they are more likely to either choose a fairly even spread from 0 to 9 or over select 5 to 7 creating a bell curve when the numbers are plotted on a graph.

    It's not enough to convict, obviously, but is a useful investigative tool.

    I always wondered about that. Does this mean you only have to be smart enough to incorporate this law into your number generator?

  12. We have a ton of area and volume  available to us on Earth still. We could also potentially relocate bits to free up space, depending on what people are okay with and available technology.  I think we'll be good for a long time yet as long as we're smart about it. That's really the part that remains to be seen.

    Main issue with Earth-like planets is  always eventually going to be their Sun expanding, close secondary concern would be the difficulty in defending them. Of course this is still assuming there's no developments in technology that allows to easily handle these problems.

    I read some talk about disassembling planets to repurpose them for the greater area in O'Neill cylinders but I don't know if it'll be really necessary.  Stations/vessels that are mostly air and cargo nets offer even more living space for less effort


  13. 12 hours ago, dimreepr said:

    Is it though?

    That's like saying "fusion is just a matter of energy and pressure"...

    Of course it can be done, but that doesn't mean we can do it.

    The brain might be in the cloud and T-6969 might need a power cable but would be as realistic as anything.


    4 hours ago, Airbrush said:

    Yeah humans have other problems to deal with like climate change and pandemics before fooling around with a lark like this.

    The terminator robot is very sophisticated.  It is indistinguishable from a real person.  And it is very tough, almost indestructible.

    Maybe in a couple of hundred years, if we survive other problems.


    Always going to be something going on. Granted this year it sure does feel like everything is happening at once.

    Think only something like stunt robots might need to be both human looking and especially durable. Even evil AI's would typically be better off optimizing one way or the other.

  14. 44 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

    Very funny remarks above, but the question has not been answered.  How long until robotic and AI technology reach the level of a terminator robot, just like in the first Terminator movie?

    My guess is it will take a long time, maybe 100 years?

    Mostly just a matter of power and onboard computing requirements this point.

    Could slap an animatronic head on to a torso frame along with biomimetic limbs though. Give, realistically, multiple cloud-based programs ls control over that various bits and then just setup a control program to provide overall direction. A few different learning algorithms wouldn't be all that unrealistic either to add in.




  15. Yeah...1 and 0 are more symbolic representations than actual. May want to look at something like non-return to zero encoding.


    1 might be ~+12 volts and 0 might be ~-12 volts for instance.

    Should note that everything is still analog if you scratch beneath the surface.  It'll rarely ever be exactly some value, rather it'll be within a range and that is what we use as our digital signal.

  16. 6 hours ago, muruep00 said:

    If you were inside the probe, why would you require to send the info out?

    This is again speculation on a speculative idea, but supermassive black holes might even be a habitable place, although no planets could be created with repulsive gravity, unless some electromagnetic interaction holds them up.

    I get your point, but I think the fact that no direct observation can be made for now, is something we encounter every day in QM. Can you measure directly the wave function of a particle? No, you just believe that there is a wave function when you do not collapse it because the model that we have that describes better the direct observations we can make in the quantum scale require them! That is an indirect observation pointing out the existance of something unobservable, just like the one I proposed in my first post.

    Your skepticism about the fact that I use negative matter that can be directly seen, can be compared with skepticism about the fact that QM requires the assumption of unobservable wave functions for particles, which must exist when you dont measure and collapse them (this I far as I understand QM).

    The problem is c represents a physical limit, rather than one we might solve with technology. It wouldn't truly be a black hole if information can come back out of it.

    Even flying in might not work. May run afoul of the No-Cloning Theorem from QM.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.