Bad beat/Moaning/Venting thread - Mammy told me not to come.

[Denny Crane]

Find it kinda funny that Una Mullaly went on a holiday that cost a multiple of what I spent doing the same thing, never expected to read about her butler catered experience.

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/travel/gorillas-in-the-mist-thrill-of-trekking-these-incredible-animals-1.3766800?mode=amp

[Guest]

Find it kinda funny that Una Mullaly went on a holiday that cost a multiple of what I spent doing the same thing, never expected to read about her butler catered experience.


https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-...66800?mode=amp

Did you do the Gorilla trekking?? Did you do any sort of trip report?
I missed it if you did, I'm attempting to convince GF to do something similar soon.

The Galapagos is a trip I've always wanted to do but I have a couple of friends who did a couple of tours of the Amazon & The Galapagos in one trip and they thought the Amazon was better.

[Strewelpeter]

Find it kinda funny that Una Mullaly went on a holiday that cost a multiple of what I spent doing the same thing, never expected to read about her butler catered experience.

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-...66800?mode=amp

They are quoting a price of 3200 for 4 days but afaik in Rwanda Gorilla trekking permits are 1500 a go. I suppose that still leaves the lodge at 300 a night. If you go on a trek from Uganda it costs much less but there is a sound basis to the argument that everyone should be paying the same and the money from the Rwandan side does seem to reasonably transparently going into conservation. 0% chance that would happen if they upped the price in Uganda

[Rufio]

Any opinions on that Blinkist service?

I signed up for an annual subscription but wont be renewing it.

While I like the idea of it, I just feel like I am not getting the learnings out of the synopsis' of the books that I was hoping, going to just go back to audible and listen to books in full...

Now, I am mostly listening to non-fiction business/sales/marketing books, so it could be down to the content.

If i'm not mistaken there is a seven day free trial...

[Solksjaer!]

I'd forgotten about that actually. Dutch are mad really, all smoke like chimneys yet it doesn't seem to affect their appearance like it does to heavy smokers here, actually get the feeling walking around there that we're just generally genetically inferior to them. Feel like you're in a giraffe enclosure when you first land in the airport.

I remember going to Finland for the 1st time and I was expecting everyone to be towering over me (I’m tall enough myself) but in the main I was above average which surprised me greatly. I then went to Copenhagen , there I found such wondrous beauties 6’4 6’6 , they were walking around like they were normal people like you and I, they didn’t know they were beanstalks. I saw one guy about 16 who was easily 7 foot. 1st time I’ve ever been just up to someone upper arm. It if wasn’t for the 6’4 midgets walking around I’d have felt like a freak altogether. Deffo get back problems the taller you get over 6 foot.

[bp_me]

Setting up metro to need drivers is the madness part. More costs, less opening hours, longer frequency, allows strike carnage All way worse than a driverless system which is old technology at this stage.

Jobs for the boys innit?

Seriously... automation is great.. and Im all for it. But has anyone given serious thought to how we transition from where we are now to a point where basically every automatable job is automated. How would you fund that?

This is some 24th century star trek carry on where humanity just stops using money (like wtf?) and apparently people work because they feel like it.

[Denny Crane]

They are quoting a price of 3200 for 4 days but afaik in Rwanda Gorilla trekking permits are 1500 a go. I suppose that still leaves the lodge at 300 a night. If you go on a trek from Uganda it costs much less but there is a sound basis to the argument that everyone should be paying the same and the money from the Rwandan side does seem to reasonably transparently going into conservation. 0% chance that would happen if they upped the price in Uganda

Yeah it's $600 in Uganda, she said she did it in Bwindi. Ah, think Uganda is much improved.

Did you do the Gorilla trekking?? Did you do any sort of trip report?
I missed it if you did, I'm attempting to convince GF to do something similar soon.

The Galapagos is a trip I've always wanted to do but I have a couple of friends who did a couple of tours of the Amazon & The Galapagos in one trip and they thought the Amazon was better.

Yep I did, didn't write a TR, might try and do one

[Keane]

Yeah it's $600 in Uganda, she said she did it in Bwindi. Ah, think Uganda is much improved.


Yep I did, didn't write a TR, might try and do one

Even a rough itinerary if you can't be arsed doing a TR would be good.

[DeadParrot]

plus ça change

[Strewelpeter]

plus ça change

Déjà vu

[Strewelpeter]

Dutch are mad really, all smoke like chimneys yet it doesn't seem to affect their appearance like it does to heavy smokers here

20% of Dutch smoke every day while we are still at over 24%
Our smokers go through 23 cigs a day while theirs use just under 20

Interesting data here showing a disturbing upward trend in Ireland (I'll page Andy to the thread by speculating that this follows the huge marketing spend by big tobacco on vaping and the increased nicotine consumption it brought amongst young people)
Spain are just barely ahead of us and making better progress France still very high at 27% and surprisingly Austria at nearly 30% is the only EU country other than the outlier Greece at 35%

[ArmaniJeans]

On a vaguely African segue - Deutschland 86 is out there, the sequel to Deutschland 83 which was popular here.
Our hero is now out in southern Africa, flogging East German weapons to the ANC, the Botha Government and Angolan rebels to try raise some dollars.
Meanwhile back in East Berlin the government is facing financial meltdown and losing support from Moscow.

[Raoul Duke III]

20% of Dutch smoke every day while we are still at over 24%
Our smokers go through 23 cigs a day while theirs use just under 20

Interesting data here showing a disturbing upward trend in Ireland (I'll page Andy to the thread by speculating that this follows the huge marketing spend by big tobacco on vaping and the increased nicotine consumption it brought amongst young people)
Spain are just barely ahead of us and making better progress France still very high at 27% and surprisingly Austria at nearly 30% is the only EU country other than the outlier Greece at 35%

Italy? Always thought smoking levels seemed high there.

[ArmaniJeans]

20% of Dutch smoke every day while we are still at over 24%
Our smokers go through 23 cigs a day while theirs use just under 20

Interesting data here showing a disturbing upward trend in Ireland (I'll page Andy to the thread by speculating that this follows the huge marketing spend by big tobacco on vaping and the increased nicotine consumption it brought amongst young people)
Spain are just barely ahead of us and making better progress France still very high at 27% and surprisingly Austria at nearly 30% is the only EU country other than the outlier Greece at 35%

So many graphs to analyse. But isn't the third graph/map the 'smoke every day' one with 24%? And it's from 2012 which would pre-date the 'vape craze'?

[Strewelpeter]

Italy? Always thought smoking levels seemed high there.

22.3 against our 24.3 I'm surprised too

Yeah AJ the last dates on the charts are all from different years.

The consumption per adult in rich countries is interesting, tracked from the 1920's The USA managed to flip from being the highest to the lowest consumers between 1974 and 2010.
They must be doing something better than us... maybe its having to pay for your own healthcare, I heard Avril Whatsherface on the radio yesterday looking for pre emptive lung CT scans for all smokers saying it would be cheaper than the late diagnosis treatment. Add another couple of quid and cut-out coupons on the box and when you have collected enough of them you can go for your CT scan

[Denny Crane]

I was reading a 7(!) page CV today, that included remuneration for every job. How often do people do that?

[DeadParrot]

Took a nice little dig at Churchill too

[shrapnel]

I was reading a 7(!) page CV today, that included remuneration for every job. How often do people do that?

never. bin it

[Ed]

I was reading a 7(!) page CV today, that included remuneration for every job. How often do people do that?

Have seen some pretty terrible CVs over the past few years but think max i've seen was 3 pages and maybe one or two mentioning salary.

[Keane]

I've seen Barnes talking about race a few times, he is very earnest and compelling on the topic.

[Dice75]

22.3 against our 24.3 I'm surprised too

Yeah AJ the last dates on the charts are all from different years.

The consumption per adult in rich countries is interesting, tracked from the 1920's The USA managed to flip from being the highest to the lowest consumers between 1974 and 2010.
They must be doing something better than us... maybe its having to pay for your own healthcare, I heard Avril Whatsherface on the radio yesterday looking for pre emptive lung CT scans for all smokers saying it would be cheaper than the late diagnosis treatment. Add another couple of quid and cut-out coupons on the box and when you have collected enough of them you can go for your CT scan

Gave em up 18 months ago. No vaping/patches/gum just the plain ol gambooling way....

I'm off them till Christmas (about 6 months at the time) I win €20, I have one - you win €2k.

[oleras]

Speaking of Cv's.

Im tempted to move sideways within my current employment, they use a HR portal type thing to apply for these gigs. They also require you upload a CV.

I have been doing the same role for the last 19 years, do i just do a front page with Name, address, dob etc and one line saying 2000-present current role, no need to go back to previous jobs as they would have very little significance to this role im interested in.

Or would that be considered lazy ?

[mocata]

Pulled the trigger on an Easter trip to the Azores, anyone been?

[DeadParrot]

Speaking of Cv's.

Im tempted to move sideways within my current employment, they use a HR portal type thing to apply for these gigs. They also require you upload a CV.

I have been doing the same role for the last 19 years, do i just do a front page with Name, address, dob etc and one line saying 2000-present current role, no need to go back to previous jobs as they would have very little significance to this role im interested in.

Or would that be considered lazy ?

I'd imagine applying as if you dont work there depending on the size of the company (portal would indicate a bigger crowd)
Previous jobs may well be irrelevant and you can leave them out (considering the years of service) but quite possible HR monkey wont have a breeze who you are so single line isn't the best idea imo

[bp_me]

I was reading a 7(!) page CV today, that included remuneration for every job. How often do people do that?

Have gotten an 11 pager in the past.

Never had previous salaries though.

[Solksjaer!]

Your age she's no place on a C V .

[Flushdraw]

Some of this art is incredible

[Flushdraw]

Would have been surprising if Eli wasn't busto all things considered. 40k seems like a meaningless amount to stiff someone though?

We only know about 3/4 of them. I'd imagine there's many more. Saw this from Shaun Deeb today.

From a man that originally said he doesn't borrow, always has 100% of himself and doesn't owe any money. He then said he is staked by Israeli businessmen. I'd say he's busto too.

[DeadParrot]

I like this

[Hitchhiker's Guide To...]

...

[Hitchhiker's Guide To...]

...

[Denny Crane]

Yeah I don't think anyone laments that we have JCBs instead of men with shovels. I guess inequality is the big issue, the difference in salaries is going to be even larger with the extra leverage involved, but absolute levels of living will rise enough to hopefully reduce that as an issue.

[Opr]

Its not that big a deal. Ireland has transitioned from about 70% of people working in agriculture to about 8% in about 80 years. Generally most jobs we do now had vastly different job specs compared to what our parents job specs were in similar jobs.

Take the example of the GP. At the moment a GP is a costly bad search engine. So we're using some of the most intelligent and expensively trained people in society to remember stuff. AI diagnosis will be vastly better at diagnosing people, and it'll be able to constantly surveil people to warn and pre-warn about illnesses and they won't need to make an appointment to do it. The future versions of those bright folks who would have become GPs will instead be able to do something else much more productive in society.

It's hard to imagine any shortage of jobs. What makes jobs is us spending our wages. And those wages will still be spent. We don't know what those jobs will be, but they will be there.

It's hard to imagine any shortage of jobs. What makes jobs is us spending our wages. And those wages will still be spent. We don't know what those jobs will be, but they will be there.

People keep making these points as if they are fact because the future dictates the past and because new areas of employment have sprung up which we couldn't have imagined 10 years the same will happen again. Many would argue that it is much more likely that won't happen this time around unless we unlock some potential in the brain that we are currently not using

Automation in the past has tended toward replacing repetitive tasks but as you well know the scope now goes well beyond. Automation now is tending towards being able to replace people. This is a new paradigm in which computers are outstripping people in all areas of human endeavour. We are reaching a tipping point in which humans can't compete on any level be that physically, mentally, speed, cost etc. New types of jobs we can't conceive will exist in the future that don't exist today but it is hard to imagine how they won't be done better by new types of technology than human. They will simply be better than us.

Opr

[Guest]

Jokes on the robots. Climate change means they won’t be inheriting shit

[Hitchhiker's Guide To...]

...

[Strewelpeter]

Shoshana Zuboff was on start the week yesterday flogging her overblown moral panic book about how terrible Google are without ever coming close to explaining what the actual issue is but successfully conflated them with the Chinese state apparatus.

Some of it is so far off the mark its almost comic, but PSV and tin foil hat
merchants everywhere will lap it up

TBF even if, like me, you don't buy her hyperbole and are highly sceptical of the agenda and assumption of malice aforethought she makes a lot of interesting points and is worth hearing.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0002b8l

[Hitchhiker's Guide To...]

...

[Opr]

I'd approach it the other way around to trying to understand what the jobs will be. The simple fact is that money will be there, and people spending their money is what creates jobs through the multiplier effect. Unless people suddenly start saving big surpluses it will be grand. And if they do start saving big surpluses then then a negative interest rate will sort that out. All jobs are a product of people spending money so this money will eventually flow its way back to other people - thus creating jobs for them.

How is it a fact that money will be there? If people are increasingly unemployed due to automation then it won't. People spending money has created jobs because people are needed for those services. We are talking about a future in which this is no longer the case so that kind of economics no longer will hold. As money is increasing spent on good and services with high levels of automation it will lead to fewer jobs. You are describing the current system and not the one going forward which has massive levels of automation.

This is at the crux of the argument that BP was questioning. If automation leads to high levels of unemployment then how do we cope with that as a society? Another form of distribution is needed at that point through other methods than work. I think Musk talks about having a Tax on automation and the living wage. From the little I have looked into that, it would be a disaster for society as you would further concentration of wealth in areas while providing a baseline living for the majority of society.

Opr

[Raoul Duke III]

But I thought Raoul said he was amazing?

John Barnes, the renowned historian.

Oh no, just some idiot with a dumb opinion. On Twitter. Quelle surprise.

[Dice75]

When he does his thing the crowd goes bananas.

[Denny Crane]

How is it a fact that money will be there? If people are increasingly unemployed due to automation then it won't. People spending money has created jobs because people are needed for those services. We are talking about a future in which this is no longer the case so that kind of economics no longer will hold. As money is increasing spent on good and services with high levels of automation it will lead to fewer jobs. You are describing the current system and not the one going forward which has massive levels of automation.

This is at the crux of the argument that BP was questioning. If automation leads to high levels of unemployment then how do we cope with that as a society? Another form of distribution is needed at that point through other methods than work. I think Musk talks about having a Tax on automation and the living wage. From the little I have looked into that, it would be a disaster for society as you would further concentration of wealth in areas while providing a baseline living for the majority of society.

Opr

But if everything is automated it will take very little to supply everyone with a pretty good standard of living in society (it'll be cheaper for the rich to pay off everyone rather than fight an uprising). It'll free up people to do way more. Reducing the amount of work that's needed to be done can only be a good thing.

[Guest]

How is it a fact that money will be there? If people are increasingly unemployed due to automation then it won't. People spending money has created jobs because people are needed for those services. We are talking about a future in which this is no longer the case so that kind of economics no longer will hold. As money is increasing spent on good and services with high levels of automation it will lead to fewer jobs. You are describing the current system and not the one going forward which has massive levels of automation.

This is at the crux of the argument that BP was questioning. If automation leads to high levels of unemployment then how do we cope with that as a society? Another form of distribution is needed at that point through other methods than work. I think Musk talks about having a Tax on automation and the living wage. From the little I have looked into that, it would be a disaster for society as you would further concentration of wealth in areas while providing a baseline living for the majority of society.

Opr

Rugter Bregman discusses UBI as being the model moving forward, pretty impressive guy irrespective of whether you agree or not https://www.npr.org/2018/01/12/57743...=1549397766899
It's been trialed in Scandinavia though it is coming to an end now https://www.theguardian.com/inequali...ood-to-be-true

I read his book on the topic but I haven't read enough additional stuff to hold a strong opinion but if wealth does concentrate to a degree then perhaps a version of it will exist. I suspect we'll see various thing such as working weeks ubiquitously reducing substantially before it's introduced

[DeadParrot]

Took a nice little dig at Churchill too

But I thought Raoul said he was amazing?

Keep up Hitchbot

[Opr]

But if everything is automated it will take very little to supply everyone with a pretty good standard of living in society (it'll be cheaper for the rich to pay off everyone rather than fight an uprising). It'll free up people to do way more. Reducing the amount of work that's needed to be done can only be a good thing.

It would probably be cheaper for them just to get rid

If that scenario isn’t bleak enough, consider the possibility that mass automation could lead not only to the impoverishment of working people, but to their annihilation. In his book Four Futures, Peter Frase speculates that the economically redundant hordes outside the gates would only be tolerated for so long. After all, they might get restless – and that’s a lot of possible pitchforks. “What happens if the masses are dangerous but are no longer a working class, and hence of no value to the rulers?” Frase writes. “Someone will eventually get the idea that it would be better to get rid of them.” He gives this future an appropriately frightening name: “exterminism”, a world defined by the “genocidal war of the rich against the poor”.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/02/robot-tax-job-elimination-livable-wage

The utopian view of course if that we spread the wealth and everyone lives happily ever after but it doesn't really align with human nature. Maybe it would be cheaper to pay people off to have an OK standard of living but give people an OK standard of living and a shit load of free and they might start to wonder why they don't have an amazing standard of living. You are much more likely to see people take action to level the playing field. On the other side of the fence considering we already have a system in which the top 1% more wealth than the bottom 50% I don't see them playing ball too quickly.

Opr

[Denny Crane]

It's not about spreading it evenly. Right now the top 10% pay most of the taxes, it'll just be that fewer and fewer people will be supporting more and more of society, and it'll be worth their while to have a functioning society.

[Guest]

It would probably be cheaper for them just to get rid

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/02/robot-tax-job-elimination-livable-wage

The utopian view of course if that we spread the wealth and everyone lives happily ever after but it doesn't really align with human nature. Maybe it would be cheaper to pay people off to have an OK standard of living but give people an OK standard of living and a shit load of free and they might start to wonder why they don't have an amazing standard of living. You are much more likely to see people take action to level the playing field. On the other side of the fence considering we already have a system in which the top 1% more wealth than the bottom 50% I don't see them playing ball too quickly.

Opr

I don't quite get the level playing field argument to be honest that is of course assumimg that absolute human well-being continues to improve proportionally to those more wealthy as it has done for much of the past few centuries.

Even someone like Peter Singer who questions a wide array of moral issues (he gives away vast majority of wealth) makes strong arguments for the continued value of capitalist system under the aegis that a rising tide lifts all boats. He notes that the only group who have not had their absolute levels of well-being increase since the 60s are those in extreme poverty. However, although their well-being hasn't increased the proportion of the global population who fall into that category has decreased from >30% to less than 9%.

I don't doubt that a vast increase in wealth inequality could trigger the non-elite to seek more but I simply don't buy that we are even remotely close to that situation.

[Raoul Duke III]

One for all you parkrun types. Would add a bit of a diversion to your jog.

[Wombatman]

More trains today. Automation FTW.

[Opr]

I don't quite get the level playing field argument to be honest that is of course assumimg that absolute human well-being continues to improve proportionally to those more wealthy as it has done for much of the past few centuries.

Even someone like Peter Singer who questions a wide array of moral issues (he gives away vast majority of wealth) makes strong arguments for the continued value of capitalist system under the aegis that a rising tide lifts all boats. He notes that the only group who have not had their absolute levels of well-being increase since the 60s are those in extreme poverty. However, although their well-being hasn't increased the proportion of the global population who fall into that category has decreased from >30% to less than 9%.

I don't doubt that a vast increase in wealth inequality could trigger the non-elite to seek more but I simply don't buy that we are even remotely close to that situation.

Thanks, I'll give him a listen. It has been a while since I have done much reading around the whole concept as while it was a hot topic a year ago it seemed to fall from grace of late in the media.

I think that article is trying to make the point that in the current system workers at least have some control over value/wages they get relative to skillset and get monetarily compensated at a market fair rate. In a system which doesn't need workers and people just receive a UBI. Yes, it lifts far more people out of the very bottom level of poverty but it also probably erodes other classes. You end up with a two-tier society. Those who can earn money which is a tiny % and then a class of society solely reliant on a welfare state. It is at this point that our friend Marx steps in a says fuck that lets just divide it all equally?

You mentioned one trial going on. There are a huge number of them all around the world at this stage. So I guess the best thing is to see what data comes out of them. A few people on Reddit who are part of them have done AMA's.

Opr

[Wombatman]

Kinda on the fence about the nurses but when I hear them claiming they are striking for a better health service for all, I'm like pfft yeah right, the only reason you are striking is for a fatter pay cheque.

[Hitchhiker's Guide To...]

...

[Raoul Duke III]

@IT nerds and geekoids.

I'll actually get a room to myself in the new gaff. Clearly the main activities taking place there will be punting, drinking etc but I will probably do the odd bit of work too. Want to get a decent home office setup with dual monitors (I remote into my VDI) - what's the recommended setup these days?

I have a shitty HP laptop that I'd be quite happy to chuck in the bin. Buy a better laptop or a desktop? Is there still such things as docking stations? Help plz - don't need massive computing power as it's VDI.

TY in advance.

[Hitchhiker's Guide To...]

...

[Hitchhiker's Guide To...]

...

[Hitchhiker's Guide To...]

...

[hotspur]

Binge watching a 6 part series on Netflix called Kingdom - medieval Korea, royal politics, and zombies. It's splendid.

[mocata]

Surface Pro 6 for home computer setup. I have something along these lines in work and home to swap between the 2.
https://www.verticalsurfacedocks.com

[Strewelpeter]

Money is just a measure of scarcity. Most of the things that we spend money on aren't really scarce but are of value because of the shortage of two things that are truly scarce, energy that can be harnessed and common sense. Technology may make the former more abundant in time but common sense appears to becoming less common by to the day.

[Solksjaer!]

Rugby experts. Thoughts?

http://nzh.tw/12200842

[Trippie]

Pulled the trigger on an Easter trip to the Azores, anyone been?

Yeah was there in 2017, flew in and out of ponta delgada and just stayed on the sao miguel island. Think I did a TR here on it, not too sure. It was my favourite trip in recent years. We rented a car and explored different parts of the island very day. It has two of my favourite gins there as well.

Goshawk tangerine and Azor Gin The Azor gin is very smooth and can be drank straight, i love it.