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

Tougher rules for sellers of internet-enabled devices in the UK

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 71 posts

Re: Tougher rules for sellers of internet-enabled devices in the UK

#61

Post by graemep »

matt-p wrote: post #43
graemep wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would actually prefer a low that (in addition?) required a reasonable standard of care with regard to security, imposed responsibility for consequential loss for negligence, and left the courts to interpret it.

You can already sue a manufacturer for consequential loss if you can prove negligence?

Yes, but 1) I would like to make it clearer that failing to meet generally accepted good security practice is negligence, and 2) make importers and retailers liable to some extent for negligence with regard to security, not just manufacturers.

I would apply this to hardware, not pure software, or separately sold software.

Re: Tougher rules for sellers of internet-enabled devices in the UK

#62

Post by graemep »

Symbiote wrote: post #54
graemep wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not true. The leaders of both the Brexit campaigns (Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage) both clearly said that they wanted more non EU (so mostly non-white) immigration - provided it was skilled people. Government policy since Brexit has made non-EU immigration easier. Remainers wanted less non-EU immgration and more EU immigration. So somehow the people who wanted less white immigration and more non-white immigr…

The first point is true, but > Remainers wanted less non-EU immgration and more EU immigration. This is not true. I don't think there's a consensus on what 'remainers' wanted to do with non-EU immigration.

Given 1) the remainers in both the major parties wanted the keep the status quo, and 2) no prominent remainer politician or any significant remain campaign called for easier non-EU immigration I think it is reasonable to conclude that remainers in general (not all) were opposed to more non-EU immigration, and the policies they favoured lead to (and the actual effect of Brexit was) more non-white immigration and less white immigration.

Re: Tougher rules for sellers of internet-enabled devices in the UK

#63

Post by graemep »

short_sells_poo wrote: post #57
graemep wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not true. The leaders of both the Brexit campaigns (Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage) both clearly said that they wanted more non EU (so mostly non-white) immigration - provided it was skilled people. Government policy since Brexit has made non-EU immigration easier. Remainers wanted less non-EU immgration and more EU immigration. So somehow the people who wanted less white immigration and more non-white immigr…

I don't remember seeing any emphasis on immigration from the remainers. The remainers simply wanted to stay part of the EU for the economic and travel benefits. The Brexit campaign made immigration a focus point, and of course both Johnson and Farage had to provide some reasoning about replacing EU immigration. Once out of the EU, the only other immigration to replace it with was non-EU. So their argument was: we don…

> Basically the UK replaced the culturally and economically close immigration from EU with culturally and economically far immigration from other countries

Really culturally closer? What about former colonies with substantial English speaking populations and a a strong British influence on their culture. My South Asian ancestors all speak English as a first language, and had an education heavy in British culture, grew up with a common law based legal system, etc. Far easier to integrate (socially or into work) than people from most of Europe (Ireland being the main exception).

> they might come up with a variety of excuses why they are voting against their fellow countrymen being able to immigrate like they did, but ultimately it's quite clearly an attempt to burn the bridge behind them to close off further competiton for their own jobs

We are voted for more of our (or our ancestors) fellow countrymen to be allowed to immigrate. This is the exact opposite of your LatAm anti-immigration Republicans.

Re: Tougher rules for sellers of internet-enabled devices in the UK

#64

Post by short_sells_poo »

graemep wrote: post #63
short_sells_poo wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't remember seeing any emphasis on immigration from the remainers. The remainers simply wanted to stay part of the EU for the economic and travel benefits. The Brexit campaign made immigration a focus point, and of course both Johnson and Farage had to provide some reasoning about replacing EU immigration. Once out of the EU, the only other immigration to replace it with was non-EU. So their argument was: we don…

> Basically the UK replaced the culturally and economically close immigration from EU with culturally and economically far immigration from other countries Really culturally closer? What about former colonies with substantial English speaking populations and a a strong British influence on their culture. My South Asian ancestors all speak English as a first language, and had an education heavy in British culture, gre…

I can promise you that if you anonymously asked the majority of the rural Brexit voters (rural areas being where the majority of Brexit votes came from), they'll all say that they are culturally closer to white Europeans than to dark skinned non-Europeans.

The UK shares much more and much longer of it's history with Europe than with it's former colonies. We are talking about thousands of years going back to Roman times, instead the less than hundred that the general British colonial rule lasted. The Royal family has Danish and German blood.

Does this mean anything? Not really. It's all semantics.

The actual outcome is very simple: the UK demolished it's ties with it's closest neighbours and biggest single economic block, for some questionable ties with very far away countries. In doing so, it now has very little negotiating power on it's own and has to build many relationships from scratch, from a very weak starting position.

The financial situation of much of the population is dire. The only real reason why one would want to immigrate to the UK is the financial sector, which is still hanging on. If you voted for Brexit, I'd like to say "good luck, I hope you like the taste of the meal you cooked".

Re: Tougher rules for sellers of internet-enabled devices in the UK

#65

Post by short_sells_poo »

graemep wrote: post #62
Symbiote wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first point is true, but > Remainers wanted less non-EU immgration and more EU immigration. This is not true. I don't think there's a consensus on what 'remainers' wanted to do with non-EU immigration.

Given 1) the remainers in both the major parties wanted the keep the status quo, and 2) no prominent remainer politician or any significant remain campaign called for easier non-EU immigration I think it is reasonable to conclude that remainers in general (not all) were opposed to more non-EU immigration, and the policies they favoured lead to (and the actual effect of Brexit was) more non-white immigration and less…

You keep pushing this strawman. Just because someone wasn't for something, it doesn't mean they were against it. Immigration was simply not an issue on the Remainers' minds. Immigration was the main Brexiter point.

Re: Tougher rules for sellers of internet-enabled devices in the UK

#66

Post by short_sells_poo »

immibis wrote: post #52
maccard wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that was true 10 years ago, but now it seems to have evened off a bit. Generally speaking (in my circles and the circles I see around me with family etc) there’s an acceptance of the “polish plumber” as a hard working person getting by these days.

This happens to each race in turn. First they're brown people coming to steal our jobs, then they're hard workers and some other race is stealing our jobs, then they're white or white-equivalent.

It's likely down to the fact that once the proverbial Polish Plumbers left, a lot of people realized that there's nobody here who actually wants to do that work, no matter the price. So we have no nurses, we have no truck drivers, we have no electricians. And the list goes on.

And it's impossible to import these people anymore, because a) the wages in the UK are low - lower than in most of the EU and much lower than in the US, and b) many of these professions are not really classified as high skill, even if they take a lot of practice.

Re: Tougher rules for sellers of internet-enabled devices in the UK

#67

Post by hyperman1 »

karma_pharmer wrote: post #59
hyperman1 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I regularly see the same product on AliExpress and in cheap EU shops. Most Ali things have a CE mark. Most of my electronics has an FCC mark, even if it means nothing here. (I presume USA inhabitants see CE marks?) Globalization means it's cheaper to make 1 product, compliant with US and EU, then sell it from AliExpress too. This is exactly what the EU is counting on.

Chinese manufacturers claim that marking means "Chinese Export". They have some ridiculous story about how the curvature of the "C" is different when it means "Council of Europe". I know, it's bogus, but this is their explanation.

China Export is a nasty one indeed. I recognize them by looking at the line between the 2 ends of the C : If the middle left of the E falls on the same line, it's a fake.

Re: Tougher rules for sellers of internet-enabled devices in the UK

#68

Post by graemep »

short_sells_poo wrote: post #65
graemep wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given 1) the remainers in both the major parties wanted the keep the status quo, and 2) no prominent remainer politician or any significant remain campaign called for easier non-EU immigration I think it is reasonable to conclude that remainers in general (not all) were opposed to more non-EU immigration, and the policies they favoured lead to (and the actual effect of Brexit was) more non-white immigration and less…

You keep pushing this strawman. Just because someone wasn't for something, it doesn't mean they were against it. Immigration was simply not an issue on the Remainers' minds. Immigration was the main Brexiter point.

> Immigration was the main Brexiter point.~

Evidence?

> Immigration was simply not an issue on the Remainers' minds.

Which implies being happy with the status quo.

Re: Tougher rules for sellers of internet-enabled devices in the UK

#69

Post by defrost »

graemep wrote: post #68
short_sells_poo wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You keep pushing this strawman. Just because someone wasn't for something, it doesn't mean they were against it. Immigration was simply not an issue on the Remainers' minds. Immigration was the main Brexiter point.

> Immigration was the main Brexiter point.~ Evidence? > Immigration was simply not an issue on the Remainers' minds. Which implies being happy with the status quo.

EU regulation and UK border control by far and away were the two leading pre 2016 Brexit vote talking points, both up front on stump and in the social churn as dog whistles.

University of Oxford:

    Migration was a defining issue in the UK’s June 2016 referendum on EU membership. This page brings together resources and analysis informing the exit process and our previous analysis of the referendum.
https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/projects/migration-and...

That was then, this is now: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/23/world/europe/uk-brexit-mi...

Re: Tougher rules for sellers of internet-enabled devices in the UK

#70

Post by short_sells_poo »

graemep wrote: post #68
short_sells_poo wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You keep pushing this strawman. Just because someone wasn't for something, it doesn't mean they were against it. Immigration was simply not an issue on the Remainers' minds. Immigration was the main Brexiter point.

> Immigration was the main Brexiter point.~ Evidence? > Immigration was simply not an issue on the Remainers' minds. Which implies being happy with the status quo.

Your first point was addressed by my sibling comment.

> Which implies being happy with the status quo.

At this point it feels like you are trolling. By your logic, I hope you are out in Angola distributing food, because otherwise you are obviously happy about people dying of starvation. See what I did there?

Brexit built it's entire campaign on "taking back control of the borders and restricting immigration". For Remain, the issue with Brexit was losing access to the EU single market and Schengen free movement zone, which were the focal points of their campaign. None of the sides campaigned against hunger in Angola, therefore by your logic everyone in the UK - including you - is positively happy about the status quo of Angolans starving?

Post reply on HN