Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 249 posts

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#231

Post by lazyjones »

lm28469 wrote: post #228
lazyjones wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem comes from people who have no business in the vote, no knowledge of the issues, are not even aware of what biases are, and drink the propaganda kool aid. Of course, that's always the other people... > Well first off London only strives because of international financial businesses London isn't the UK and "international" doesn't mean "about the EU-27". > Since the vote Brexit cost the UK much more than w…

> Of course, that's always the other people... I never said that. It's all about intellectual honesty. I know that I'm not qualified for my opinion to matter on the topic (I'm just debunking low quality propaganda here) despite the fact that I did hours of research on it. We don't ask random people about their opinion on string theory, do we ? > Laughable nonsense. https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-econom…

Regarding your "googled sources" for the hilarious claim: GDP isn't wealth. Reduced GDP isn't "cost to Britain".

If you "spent hours researching" the topic, you should at least try to question such claims instead of quoting shoddy journalism and publications by dubious lobbyist groups. That's what intellectual honesty is all about.

PS. I remember these predictions - do you? https://www.bbc.com/news/business-37921036

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#232

Post by robsont »

lm28469 wrote: post #229
ahje wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should we expect random politicians to know better? After all, a stupid decision taken by uninformed politicians isn't necessarily better than a stupid decision made by the people.

> random politicians to know better? They're not random, you're supposed to vote for them. And they're supposed to represent your general opinion. They're supposed to have an education in politic/economics/&c. which makes them better equipped to make informed decisions. And it's supposed to be their full time job. Just like anyone can bake bread at home with no tools / minimum knowledge but the bakery at the corner o…

This. An advisory referendum is advisory. Constitutions use advisory refs for issues that are complicated and not suited for direct democracy. In the UK though, politicians were too coward to do their job and treated the referendum result as law.

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#233

Post by megous »

coldtea wrote: post #219
megous wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Those that didn't vote either way, don't count, and shouldn't count. That's 3 years ago. There are ~3-4 mil. more young people that are now elligible for vote. Should they have no say?

> That's 3 years ago. There are ~3-4 mil. more young people that are now elligible for vote. Should they have no say? They don't have a say in any other long-term-implementation matter which was voted before they became eligible for vote, so why would this be an exception?

You just can't say what the country wants. You may only say what it wanted 3 years ago.

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#234

Post by huffmsa »

isostatic wrote: post #208
huffmsa wrote: post #53

The chance to "petition" was before the vote happened in 2016. You've made your bed, time to sleep in it.

The country has changed its mind, but those in power haven't, because May (stubborn) and Corbyn (wants a hard brexit which he thinks will drive people to his brand of economics) don't accept it.

Then have a vote about rejoining the EU after you crash out.

Real life isn't a video game. You don't get to replay from your last save if you don't like the outcome.

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#235

Post by Anthony-G »

pjc50 wrote: post #187
arethuza wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about the English Civil war which ended up with Charles I being executed? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_I_of_England Also the later, and peaceful, Glorious Revolution?

I don't think either of those count as popular revolutions; more the layer below the monarchy deciding to switch out the monarch for a more compliant one. Parliamentary, rather than popular, sovereignty. (This is partly why I'm fed up with all this pretending that "will of the people" was a thing in English politics - it wasn't until 2015. Different in Scotland with the Claim of Right.)

You’re not wrong – though history could have turned out differently.

After the First English Civil War, there were two broad factions within the New Model Army: the Grandees (aristocratic wing) and the Levellers (the more radical, egalitarian, democratic and progressive republicans). Unfortunately, Cromwell’s faction won that particular power struggle and the rest is history. Nevertheless, this period of revolution acted as inspiration for the colonists in America, which in turn inspired the French republicans, thus influencing countless other revolutionary movements.

Related link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Putney_Debates

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#236

Post by ksec »

ariehkovler wrote: post #17

Hey, that's my tweet! At the time it went down, I was seeing 2k signups a minute and rising. I was just thinking how the load handling was impressive when poof it was down. Back now, though, which is also pretty good. https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584 UPDATE: It's down again. 502 bad gateway. I was seeing close to 3k signups a minute when it fell over this time. UPDATE 2: Seems to be back? Clearly unsta…

It crashed at peak 6K Signup / Min. I am hoping this won't turn into bad press for Ruby Rails.

Or in marketing terms they could have use Request / Min.

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#237

Post by gmueckl »

stordoff wrote: post #213
gmueckl wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the reading is very clear to me: a withdrawal cannot be lawful if it is made with the intent to continue exit negotiations. If negotiations were to continue the proceedings have not ended. A new invocation of Article 50 can only be made as the start a new and completely independent process. Everything that has been negotiated and decided so far would have to be ignored.

> Everything that has been negotiated and decided so far would have to be ignored. I'm not disagreeing. The current procedures are brought to close. IF new proceedings were brought, the EU would be well within its rights to say no and that anything it agreed to previously no long applies if the UK tried to rely on anything negotiated previously. It does not, however, prevent those new, independent proceedings startin…

The question is whether it is even possible to get to the initiation of new proceedings from where we are now. I doubt it. Any restart in the near future would imply that the preceding withdrawal was unlawful.

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#238

Post by repolfx »

warbucks wrote: post #174
misnome wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> surely the original referendum counts as being listened to in some way? Even ignoring all the illegality and fraud about the referendum, and ignoring that because it was advisory large portions of british citizens living abroad were prevented from having a say, and ignoring the arguments about 16-year-olds who it would be directly affecting because of the time lags, and ignoring the arguments around the fact that t…

Why such an important decision wasn't required to be 60/40 to pass completely baffles me. Almost as much as how the referendum is treated as some iron-clad decision while passing at 51/49.

Classic Remainer logic. If Leave had won 61/39 it'd have become "for such an important decision it should have been 75/25 to pass".

The reason decisions like elections use a simple majority is that otherwise it'd be a small minority of people oppressing the will of the majority, which is unstable, and otherwise known as dictatorship.

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#239

Post by repolfx »

threeseed wrote: post #194
microcolonel wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> commit political suicide by administering a no deal Brexit I don't know how this would be political suicide, it is currently the most popular option in polling, and it's not considered to have any greater economic costs than the other options (including reversing the referendum decision entirely!).

1. It is not the most popular option in polling. Right now it is to remain in the EU. 2. The idea that it has no greater cost than the options is ridiculous. UK Treasury and economists from all around the world have all come to the conclusion that a hard brexit is significantly more harmful than a soft brexit. And it's common sense since it imposes trade friction on the UK's largest trading partner.

UK Treasury and economists from all around the world have all come to the conclusion that a hard brexit is significantly more harmful than a soft brexit

The problem is that these same people all came to the conclusion that on voting Leave, during the negotiation period the UK would lose 500,000 - 800,000 jobs and enter a massive recession caused by "uncertainty".

The UK has since hit the lowest levels of unemployment on record and economic growth is outstripping Germany, France and Italy.

Economists have no credibility with regards to Brexit. None. They have less than zero credibility in fact: if they're saying something, it's a good sign the reality is the opposite.

Thus the idea that no deal would be bad for the UK is a deeply suspect one. There are many things the UK can do outside the EU that would accelerate growth even further still, according to conventional economics. But regardless of what you personally believe, at this point it's just guessing - your views have no more legitimacy than the views of people who think any sort of deal with the EU is bound to be harmful to the country and its prosperity.

Re: UK Parliament petitions site crashes under traffic for petition to cancel Brexit

#240

Post by repolfx »

isostatic wrote: post #203
SeanDav wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it had gone the other way, all these points would have been exactly the same - why would it be any more/less acceptable (from a democratic process point of view)?

Normally major constitutional changes require supermajorities to pass

Not in the UK. All constitutional referendums have used 50%+1 including the original remain/leave referendum that happened a few years after joining.
Post reply on HN