Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bad beat/Moaning/Venting thread - Lockdown City

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post

    You do get the point though that they've designed it like this to allow dodgy videos to be forwarded that they can wipe their hands of? Its a design choice, so its fully in their control to come up with an alternative design that doesn't allow this. For example they could allow reporting of any message, that would allow flags to be attached to messages that could then be used to stop those messages being forwarded. But that would be a bit like OnlyFans banning sex workers.
    Twitter and Facebook are designed in a way that allows them to be moderated but WhatsApp isn't, are you saying you think it should be
    Turning millions into thousands

    Comment


      Originally posted by Strewelpeter View Post

      Twitter and Facebook are designed in a way that allows them to be moderated but WhatsApp isn't, are you saying you think it should be
      If hitch had his way we'd all be under Chinas Great firewall

      Comment


        Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post

        You do get the point though that they've designed it like this to allow dodgy videos to be forwarded that they can wipe their hands of? Its a design choice, so its fully in their control to come up with an alternative design that doesn't allow this. For example they could allow reporting of any message, that would allow flags to be attached to messages that could then be used to stop those messages being forwarded. But that would be a bit like OnlyFans banning sex workers.
        As a simple experiment, instead of using the "forward message" in Whatsapp, save the file locally, and then create a new message with only it in it, and see that you can forward as many times as you want.

        It's that simple to get around the forward flags contained in the meta data.

        Due to how end-to-end encryption works, an identical payload can be sent between A and B as is sent between X and Y, yet A and B have a cat video from it, and X and Y are sending PDFs of how to make bombs.

        Not sure what any perceived benefit of flagging anything as inappropriate would do.
        Last edited by Emmet; 22-08-21, 16:10.

        Comment


          Originally posted by Strewelpeter View Post

          Twitter and Facebook are designed in a way that allows them to be moderated but WhatsApp isn't, are you saying you think it should be
          Sure. A modicum of moderation. Like being able to flag posts and that allows those posts to be evaluated and if deemed inappropriate those messages cant be forwarded. Why not? Its a cesspit of misinformation.
          "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

          Comment


            Originally posted by Emmet View Post

            As a simple experiment, instead of using the "forward message" in Whatsapp, save the file locally, and then create a new message with only it in it, and see that you can forward as many times as you want.

            It's that simple to get around the forward flags contained in the meta data.

            Due to how end-to-end encryption works, an identical payload can be sent between A and B as is sent between X and Y, yet A and B have a cat video from it, and X and Y are sending PDFs of how to make bombs.

            Not sure what any perceived benefit of flagging anything as inappropriate would do.
            Yep. But most people won't do that. So it will end up not being forwarded as much.
            "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

            Comment


              Originally posted by Hectorjelly View Post

              If hitch had his way we'd all be under Chinas Great firewall
              As long as my particular brands of pornographic fetish are still allowed, then sure bring on the firewall.
              "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

              Comment


                There's no parts of any of our communication where we have a presumed right to absolute privacy, why would we have it just in messaging, and mainly to allow the forwarding of fake news?

                Imagine - if you will - a video of your kid, now a teenager, doing something stupid with another kid in a back of a taxi. The taxi driver has it filmed unbeknownst to you. Out it goes onto WhatsApp and makes its way through thousands of groups, no mechanism in place to stop it. Or maybe there should be a mechanism to stop it? That someone could see it and go - that's clearly inappropriate. Flag it - off it goes to WhatsApp HQ in Grand Canal Dock and they go - these people could not possibly have given their permission for their image to be used in this way. Block all further forwarding of this message. Alert the police to the details of the original uploader. Why should we not have those rights, or our kids? Why should Mark in SanFran be able to say that our kids shouldn't have their EU-given GDPR rights to their own image?

                (the video of the back of the taxi story is based on an approximation of a real one currently happening in Northern Ireland, just for added pointedness).
                Last edited by Hitchhiker's Guide To...; 22-08-21, 16:30.
                "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post

                  Sure. A modicum of moderation. Like being able to flag posts and that allows those posts to be evaluated and if deemed inappropriate those messages cant be forwarded. Why not? Its a cesspit of misinformation.
                  How? The keys to unlock the message are on the sender and receivers' phones only.

                  You can't 'raise something to a moderator' if they cannot see the content. You forwarding the content doesn't prove that's what was sent to you either, as once again, the WhatsApp server doesn't see the payload. You could attach anything you wanted back in with the previous metadata if you were so inclined.

                  What you're suggesting is that WhatsApp move away from basing their communication on an end to end encrypted protocol and instead become a mass surveillance outfit. Gas that you then start talking about GDPR given that it would explicitly prevent what you are suggesting!

                  Comment




                    Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post
                    The worthies would have you believe that credit union loans are the solution. But they so much are not. Ridiculous levels of admin and complex rigid repayments.The reason why Provident were once so popular was because despite their massive interest cost they made everything exceedingly simple for the user. The proper access to money solution are things like the payday loan idea of Revolut and the pay-in-installment idea of Klarna. Exceedingly user friendly. Or we could just increase the minimum wage and lower housing costs, but those ideas are surprisingly less popular with the people who want to say how poor people should handle their limited money.
                    Where are you getting the bolded bit from? I'm not saying they are a solution to anything but I've had dozens of credit union loans over the years and each application was super straight forward with cheque/cash/deposit to my bank account usually within a day or two. The repayments are somewhat up to you in that you get to choose weekly or monthly and the you request a certain time frame at the time of the loan application but you can always pay it off early at no extra cost. I've paid off pretty much every credit union loan I've ever got early and there was never an issue.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by Emmet View Post

                      How? The keys to unlock the message are on the sender and receivers' phones only.

                      You can't 'raise something to a moderator' if they cannot see the content. You forwarding the content doesn't prove that's what was sent to you either, as once again, the WhatsApp server doesn't see the payload. You could attach anything you wanted back in with the previous metadata if you were so inclined.

                      What you're suggesting is that WhatsApp move away from basing their communication on an end to end encrypted protocol and instead become a mass surveillance outfit. Gas that you then start talking about GDPR given that it would explicitly prevent what you are suggesting!
                      It's got zero to do with GDPR for WhatsApp to moderate illegal content. Absolutely zero GDPR implication. They've designed their app to allow viral news, a lot of it fake, because that creates more stickiness and therefore more money eventually.
                      "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by Lao Lao View Post



                        Where are you getting the bolded bit from? I'm not saying they are a solution to anything but I've had dozens of credit union loans over the years and each application was super straight forward with cheque/cash/deposit to my bank account usually within a day or two. The repayments are somewhat up to you in that you get to choose weekly or monthly and the you request a certain time frame at the time of the loan application but you can always pay it off early at no extra cost. I've paid off pretty much every credit union loan I've ever got early and there was never an issue.
                        A lot of those things - paper applications, cheques, standing orders, APRs, going into a branch to speak to someone or authority are things that we know people from poor backgrounds are very uncomfortable about. That's why something like Provident was so successful it removed almost everyone of those things.
                        "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                        Comment




                          Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post

                          A lot of those things - paper applications, cheques, standing orders, APRs, going into a branch to speak to someone or authority are things that we know people from poor backgrounds are very uncomfortable about. That's why something like Provident was so successful it removed almost everyone of those things.

                          You can apply online for credit union loans. They give you an option of how to get the money, cheque/cash/transfer to a bank account so a cheque is not required. You also don't have to set up a standing order. You can just make a transfer each month from you bank account to your credit union account. Everything can be done online without ever having to go into a branch or speak to anybody, whether they are in authority or not.

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by Lao Lao View Post




                            You can apply online for credit union loans. They give you an option of how to get the money, cheque/cash/transfer to a bank account so a cheque is not required. You also don't have to set up a standing order. You can just make a transfer each month from you bank account to your credit union account. Everything can be done online without ever having to go into a branch or speak to anybody, whether they are in authority or not.
                            Well then people don't know it. As they've been offering special loans aimed at people with low resources for a few years and have had almost no uptake. They are clearly doing something absolutely wrong. And it's not lack of publicity. Also the system as you have redescribed it is still far too complex.

                            Plus not all credit unions work like you say. I had to go into a branch to open an account and now have to go back in as they forgot to give me an online pin number. They've four different types of loans that look a bit complicated. It's a real thing - financial terminology and system intimidation - that's why people keep going for options that are worse for them - because those worse organisations have simplified matters enough because they understand the people.

                            And interestingly even you that understands the system and were baffled why people weren't using the simple system first chose to use all the terms that are complex to understand to describe it. I'd say credit unions do the same, and don't user test their interfaces and processes with representative populations.
                            "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                            Comment




                              Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post

                              Well then people don't know it. As they've been offering special loans aimed at people with low resources for a few years and have had almost no uptake. They are clearly doing something absolutely wrong. And it's not lack of publicity. Also the system as you have redescribed it is still far too complex.

                              Plus not all credit unions work like you say. I had to go into a branch to open an account and now have to go back in as they forgot to give me an online pin number. They've four different types of loans that look a bit complicated. It's a real thing - financial terminology and system intimidation - that's why people keep going for options that are worse for them - because those worse organisations have simplified matters enough because they understand the people.

                              And interestingly even you that understands the system and were baffled why people weren't using the simple system first chose to use all the terms that are complex to understand to describe it. I'd say credit unions do the same, and don't user test their interfaces and processes with representative populations.

                              Why do you constantly try to argue things you don't seem to know much on? It's completely and utterly baffling.

                              You've changed your argument on this one a few times now. From being paper based applications, to people not knowing that you can apply online. Now, you're trying to say that I used terms that were complex to understand? Can you very clearly highlight the terms I used that were so taxing on the brain?

                              Seriously, it's OK to not know everything about everything.

                              Comment


                                The two things are quite related.

                                WhatsApp delivers a video of a poor woman being beheaded and we exclaim about how we couldn't possibly change the way WhatsApp works

                                Credit Unions develop a product for poor people that a recent government report found had almost no uptake and we exclaim about how great the credit unions are and there's no need for new credit services for poor people.

                                Defaults are hard to change!

                                "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                                Comment


                                  Originally posted by Lao Lao View Post




                                  Why do you constantly try to argue things you don't seem to know much on? It's completely and utterly baffling.

                                  You've changed your argument on this one a few times now. From being paper based applications, to people not knowing that you can apply online. Now, you're trying to say that I used terms that were complex to understand? Can you very clearly highlight the terms I used that were so taxing on the brain?

                                  Seriously, it's OK to not know everything about everything.
                                  This is literally my area of expertise Financial behaviour and how people make financial decisions. Not that it means much outside of academia, but I'm the editor of the main research journal in the area and we frequently publish research on the topic.

                                  And I haven't changed my thoughts on the matter. There are paper based issue and online issues.

                                  https://www.journals.elsevier.com/jo...mental-finance
                                  "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                                  Comment


                                    Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post

                                    This is literally my area of expertise Financial behaviour and how people make financial decisions. Not that it means much outside of academia, but I'm the editor of the main research journal in the area and we frequently publish research on the topic.

                                    And I haven't changed my thoughts on the matter. There are paper based issue and online issues.

                                    https://www.journals.elsevier.com/jo...mental-finance
                                    I'll leave it to Tar to explain in future!

                                    Comment


                                      Originally posted by Lao Lao View Post

                                      I'll leave it to Tar to explain in future!
                                      I feel Tar wouldn't mind me saying on his behalf that users need to use a service in order for it to be useful!
                                      "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                                      Comment


                                        Originally posted by Lao Lao View Post




                                        Why do you constantly try to argue things you don't seem to know much on? It's completely and utterly baffling.

                                        You've changed your argument on this one a few times now. From being paper based applications, to people not knowing that you can apply online. Now, you're trying to say that I used terms that were complex to understand? Can you very clearly highlight the terms I used that were so taxing on the brain?

                                        Seriously, it's OK to not know everything about everything.
                                        Knowledge vs applied knowledge.
                                        "We are not Europeans. Those people on the continent are freaks."

                                        Comment


                                          Originally posted by Raoul Duke III View Post

                                          Knowledge vs applied knowledge.
                                          Not in this case. The applied knowledge is that nobody uses the loans, the knowledge is that they should be using them according to Lao Lao.
                                          "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                                          Comment


                                            Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post

                                            Not in this case. The applied knowledge is that nobody uses the loans, the knowledge is that they should be using them according to Lao Lao.
                                            Can you provide a link to the government report you mentioned above?

                                            From Central Banks reports I've seen, loans were down in 2020 in credit unions which seems to be more Covid related as it reversed the trend of 2019 when loans were up.

                                            Comment


                                              Originally posted by Lao Lao View Post
                                              Can you provide a link to the government report you mentioned above?

                                              From Central Banks reports I've seen, loans were down in 2020 in credit unions which seems to be more Covid related as it reversed the trend of 2019 when loans were up.
                                              It isn't about overall loan levels. It's about loans to the types of desperate borrowers who might need payday loans. That's where they fail. The credit union is a great piggy bank that the middle class can dip in and out of, but it's original mission was for the working classes and it has moved far away from that. Mainly through the types of boards they have fully of worthies, but not enough people from working class backgrounds to understand their needs and that's why those people turn to other providers and their loans aren't fit for purpose. I'll get that government report in a moment.
                                              "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                                              Comment


                                                Page 37 of this report talks about uptake:

                                                https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...EvyE35NEUioPwg

                                                It's this shambles of a scheme:

                                                https://www.creditunion.ie/what-we-o...-micro-credit/

                                                Edit: its not a government report, but Pascal Donoghue referred to it earlier in the year when he was talking about introducing a moneylending Bill.
                                                Last edited by Hitchhiker's Guide To...; 22-08-21, 20:30.
                                                "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                                                Comment


                                                  Arguing about the Credit Union.

                                                  A new low.
                                                  I hold silver in tit for tat, and I love you for that

                                                  Comment


                                                    Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post
                                                    Page 37 of this report talks about uptake:

                                                    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...EvyE35NEUioPwg

                                                    It's this shambles of a scheme:

                                                    https://www.creditunion.ie/what-we-o...-micro-credit/

                                                    Edit: its not a government report, but Pascal Donoghue referred to it earlier in the year when he was talking about introducing a moneylending Bill.
                                                    Is that 'the government report'?
                                                    "We are not Europeans. Those people on the continent are freaks."

                                                    Comment


                                                      Originally posted by Strewelpeter View Post

                                                      Probably from 15 years ago, if its verified as current it will make the news tonight.
                                                      Well

                                                      a) It shouldn't matter how long ago it it is really. Shouldn't really be shared on whattapp
                                                      b) i doubt you are suggesting if we hear of no Taliban atrocities on the mainstream news, with veritable video evidence - there are none.

                                                      Comment


                                                        Originally posted by Raoul Duke III View Post

                                                        Is that 'the government report'?
                                                        I remembered Pascal Donoghue referred to a moneylending report earlier in the year. My bad if my memory of a report read months ago and mentioned by a minister turned out to not be perfectly precise, albeit correct about the uselessness of the credit union 'solution'.
                                                        "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                                                        Comment


                                                          On a more neutral topic. I'm following the course on China that hotspur posted last week and it is fascinating (the 7th century Chinese public sector system seems superior in practice and efficiency to the current Irish one). I'd say a lot of history buffs would love it. The quality of the delivery is excellent and the prof is quite the renowned an expert. It does though require having the space in your life to watch 25 hours of videos.

                                                          https://www.wondrium.com/the-fall-and-rise-of-china

                                                          "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                                                          Comment


                                                            Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post
                                                            Page 37 of this report talks about uptake:

                                                            https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...EvyE35NEUioPwg

                                                            It's this shambles of a scheme:

                                                            https://www.creditunion.ie/what-we-o...-micro-credit/

                                                            Edit: its not a government report, but Pascal Donoghue referred to it earlier in the year when he was talking about introducing a moneylending Bill.
                                                            Ah here, sweet Jesus. That is not a government report like you claimed it was initially.

                                                            Also, the loan scheme is a state backed scheme that they've asked the credit unions to roll out as they have always been the people who do look after the poorer people - the credit unions didn't think it up.

                                                            Credit unions didn't sign up to the plan in huge numbers as they said the scheme had huge amounts of onerous bureaucracy.

                                                            You can't blame the credit unions when a shit government scheme is pushed onto them.

                                                            Comment


                                                              Comment


                                                                Originally posted by Degag View Post

                                                                Well

                                                                a) It shouldn't matter how long ago it it is really. Shouldn't really be shared on whattapp
                                                                b) i doubt you are suggesting if we hear of no Taliban atrocities on the mainstream news, with veritable video evidence - there are none.
                                                                I seem to live a fairly sheltered WhatsApp existence.

                                                                B) is interesting, feels like a flip between whether they will revert to the batshit crazy mode or make some sort of an accommodation with the societal changes that have happened in the last 15 years. Probably a good idea to take unverified reports of atrocities or of major shifts to liberalism with a large grain of salt for the next few months.
                                                                If they blatantly revert to type then its going to be hard for the west to sit back and watch it happen.
                                                                Turning millions into thousands

                                                                Comment


                                                                  Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post
                                                                  It does though require having the space in your life to watch 25 hours of videos.

                                                                  https://www.wondrium.com/the-fall-and-rise-of-china
                                                                  One could listen to it on Audible too. Probably take Tar two of his average walks to get through it.

                                                                  Comment


                                                                    Originally posted by Lao Lao View Post
                                                                    Ah here, sweet Jesus. That is not a government report like you claimed it was initially.

                                                                    Also, the loan scheme is a state backed scheme that they've asked the credit unions to roll out as they have always been the people who do look after the poorer people - the credit unions didn't think it up.

                                                                    Credit unions didn't sign up to the plan in huge numbers as they said the scheme had huge amounts of onerous bureaucracy.

                                                                    You can't blame the credit unions when a shit government scheme is pushed onto them.
                                                                    right. first of all, I'm going to ignore the pedantic nonsense about the reports providence - if its good enough to influence state thoughts on moneylending its an important report. And as i said in the previous post, I was working off memory. Its not a desperately faulty memory that I can't precisely remember the providence of a report I read a good few months ago, but still got it approximately right.

                                                                    As a second point - yes, the state had to come up with their own crappy scheme because the credit unions had moved too far away from their origin of lending to the working class, to being a hobby bank for the middle classes, and were no longer lending to the working classes. Thats why the government had to come up with essentially a bribery scheme for credit unions to get them to go back to their original mission.

                                                                    Then the credit unions managed to fuck it up so spectacularly, or because they have no interest in the working class, that nobody used the scheme.

                                                                    So can we stop with this nonsense that you started with by saying the credit unions are actually good for low income people to borrow money from. No they are clearly not fine. They have to have external interventions to get them lending to the poor, and even then manage to mess it up as the report says. They are provably shit. There should be a regulation that says the boards of credit unions must have people from every socioeconomic demographic on their board, and not just professionals who have no idea of the needs or how to lend to the poor, as they have lost sight of how they began.
                                                                    Last edited by Hitchhiker's Guide To...; 22-08-21, 21:32.
                                                                    "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                                                                    Comment


                                                                      Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post

                                                                      right. first of all, I'm going to ignore the pedantic nonsense about the reports providence - if its good enough to influence state thoughts on moneylending its an important report. And as i said in the previous post, I was working off memory. Its not a desperately faulty memory that I can't precisely remember the providence of a report I read a good few months ago, but still got it approximately right.

                                                                      As a second point - yes, the state had to come up with their own crappy scheme because the credit unions had moved too far away from their origin of lending to the working class, to being a hobby bank for the middle classes, and were no longer lending to the working classes. Thats why the government had to come up with essentially a bribery scheme for credit unions to get them to go back to their original mission.

                                                                      Then the credit unions managed to fuck it up so spectacularly, or because they have no interest in the working class, that nobody used the scheme.

                                                                      So can we stop with this nonsense that you started with by saying the credit unions are actually good for low income people to borrow money from. No they are clearly not fine. They have to have external interventions to get them lending to the poor, and even then manage to mess it up as the report says. They are provably shit. There should be a regulation that says the boards of credit unions must have people from every socioeconomic demographic on their board, and not just professionals who have no idea of the needs or how to lend to the poor, as they have lost sight of how they began.
                                                                      Actual LOL.

                                                                      I did not start this.

                                                                      I never said that credit unions were actually good for low income people to borrow money for.

                                                                      You started this by spouting absolute nonsense stating credit unions had "Ridiculous levels of admin and complex rigid repayments"

                                                                      When I called you out on that, you consistently pivoted your argument multiple times to try settle on something that you are right about, which you still haven't managed to do by the by.

                                                                      And now. Now, you try to say that I started this by saying something that I never said.

                                                                      Good luck and good night.

                                                                      Comment


                                                                        Originally posted by Emmet View Post

                                                                        that's about 30/40k steps per day. Some going if right!
                                                                        Depends on weight/speed/body composition/height/etc but yeah a rough guesstimate of calories at an average of 26k.

                                                                        Funny it seems that an an average speed burns less calories than a slow or fast speed, according to these calculators anyway.
                                                                        Last edited by Tar.Aldarion; 22-08-21, 21:59.

                                                                        Comment



                                                                          Originally posted by Lao Lao View Post

                                                                          You started this by spouting absolute nonsense stating credit unions had "Ridiculous levels of admin and complex rigid repayments"

                                                                          When I called you out on that, you consistently pivoted your argument multiple times to try settle on something that you are right about, which you still haven't managed to do by the by.
                                                                          You are right, I didn't emphasise enough the bureaucracy in the scheme aimed at the working class. I was talking from the beginning about access to credit for poor people - thats what this whole conversation is about, it dates back to the conversation about Revolut and payday loans for poor people. I should have emphasised in more detail how the scheme is bureaucratic, to counteract your point that it was effortless. Luckily, at the last minute, someone came in to support my point. Step forward , errrr, ...

                                                                          Originally posted by Lao Lao View Post
                                                                          Ah here, sweet Jesus. That is not a government report like you claimed it was initially.

                                                                          Also, the loan scheme is a state backed scheme that they've asked the credit unions to roll out as they have always been the people who do look after the poorer people - the credit unions didn't think it up.

                                                                          Credit unions didn't sign up to the plan in huge numbers as they said the scheme had huge amounts of onerous bureaucracy.

                                                                          You can't blame the credit unions when a shit government scheme is pushed onto them.



                                                                          I also showed this in the TASC report, where it quotes MABS advisors saying how useless the scheme was. And your only point about that is that 'oh its not a government report' as if TASC are making up fake money advisors. Come on now.
                                                                          "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                                                                          Comment


                                                                            Originally posted by Tar.Aldarion View Post

                                                                            Depends on weight/speed but average 26k this month.
                                                                            7000 steps an hour, according to google, that's a solid 4 hours worth of walking a day. jaysus.
                                                                            "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                                                                            Comment


                                                                              Gonna throw this out of shits and giggles...

                                                                              Don't know any of ye but a long term lurker from the Boards days. There are some fantastically intelligent people on here and i thoroughly enjoy reading on a daily basis. I've even tried engaging in recent months.

                                                                              There are some posters that catch my attention more than others.... and one is Hitch. Obviously a very intelligent guy, but; seems to (wants to) know everything about everything.

                                                                              A thing about lurking over the years; i've see certain changes in certain posters. Hitch for example before i thought, was far more allowable to the fact he may be wrong on certain occasion. We all are of course. Recently though i feel he thinks he must defend every opinion he has to the death. To his detriment i feel.

                                                                              Have learned alot from this little thread over the years and just said i'd share. I could be way off the mark with the above, especially as Hitch is one of the best contributers on here (this ain't an attack on him!)... but hey!

                                                                              Comment


                                                                                Tell us what you really think Daragh...

                                                                                Turning millions into thousands

                                                                                Comment


                                                                                  Originally posted by Lao Lao View Post

                                                                                  I'll leave it to Tar to explain in future!
                                                                                  I can bring him from:

                                                                                  "That could not possibly be the case as it would undermine the very essence of a single European banking market" in one post to "Lao Lao and credit unions are superior" for one low fee, monthly or weekly repayments available @7.8% APR, and reprogram him for free.

                                                                                  Comment


                                                                                    Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post


                                                                                    You are right, I didn't emphasise enough the bureaucracy in the scheme aimed at the working class. I was talking from the beginning about access to credit for poor people - thats what this whole conversation is about, it dates back to the conversation about Revolut and payday loans for poor people. I should have emphasised in more detail how the scheme is bureaucratic, to counteract your point that it was effortless. Luckily, at the last minute, someone came in to support my point. Step forward , errrr, ...




                                                                                    I also showed this in the TASC report, where it quotes MABS advisors saying how useless the scheme was. And your only point about that is that 'oh its not a government report' as if TASC are making up fake money advisors. Come on now.
                                                                                    Yet again, you cherry pick bits of information and completely ignore other bits to try and suit your utterly flawed arguments.

                                                                                    The credit unions did NOT invent this loan  scheme.

                                                                                    The credit unions did NOT come up with the onerous bureaucratic requirements - They have all come from the state.

                                                                                    Your TASC report clearly states that credit unions have been critical of the loan scheme as well. Below is a direct quote from your "non government" TASC report


                                                                                    However, even though it fits with a traditional credit union ethos and would provide them with new clients, the take-up of the Scheme by credit unions has been relatively slow, with less than 35% of credit unions around the country taking part. The Scheme has critics on both sides – representatives of credit unions say that there is a huge bureaucratic and administrative burden on credit unions to deploy the PMC scheme, and representatives of community groups (and some from MABS) argue that
                                                                                    the administrative burden is too much for potential borrowers, who have to open a credit union account in order to take part. There is a limited amount of money that credit unions have to offer for the Scheme, and so the take-up has been minimal.

                                                                                    According to one MABS Money Advisor,

                                                                                    Now, our local credit unions [in Dublin] do offer them [It Makes Sense Loans], but I have yet to see a client of mine get one. The criteria are very tight and also credit unions only have a limited amount to do it with. So, I haven’t seen any results from that. […] And it’s a pity, because there is [limited] risk for the Credit Unions, because repayments [can be] deducted at source and from social welfare.
                                                                                    I know you're not big into details so let me summarise the quoted bit from the report that you brought into this debate.

                                                                                    The onerous bureaucratic regulations on the credit unions combined with the administrative burden and very tight criteria on the applicant, all of which come from the GOVERNMENT are the reasons why the scheme has largely failed so far.





                                                                                    Comment


                                                                                      Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post

                                                                                      7000 steps an hour, according to google, that's a solid 4 hours worth of walking a day. jaysus.
                                                                                      It's not too bad broken up, or at the speed my 6 foot 6 walking buddy walks at. It's very good for the mind too.

                                                                                      Comment


                                                                                        you could be right degag! It might be due to going deeper into academic argumentation over the years. In general, research theories only work if you cling strongly to them until you need to reject them - you have to love the theory and defend it against everything until it becomes clear it can no longer be defended, as that process allows you to truly understand the phenomenon you are trying to study (or so the idea goes anyway). So I've got into the habit of strongly sticking to an idea and defending it until it is collapsed in real life as in academia.

                                                                                        Maybe also given the job is idea generation, its useful practice to float loads of ideas and see what work. So you might have loads of stupid ideas, but its still a good idea to come up with them, because the good ideas emerge along the stupid ideas. But it probably means then you have more ideas than are a good idea to have.
                                                                                        "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                                                                                        Comment


                                                                                          Originally posted by Lao Lao View Post

                                                                                          The onerous bureaucratic regulations on the credit unions combined with the administrative burden and very tight criteria on the applicant, all of which come from the GOVERNMENT are the reasons why the scheme has largely failed so far.
                                                                                          I think you are maybe thinking that the end user - the person who wants to access the service - gives a fuck who exactly fucked up the service. The key point is the credit unions are offering a service which, as we've both agreed now, you reluctantly, is most definitely bureaucratic as I said in my opening post.

                                                                                          Plus there's the fundamental point you conveniently chose to ignore from my post - the government had to come up with this service, because institutions like credit unions, that the working class used to be able to turn to for help, were no longer helping those working classes. They were instead offering great services to well paid people like you - which is why the middle class and the Irish Times is full of praise and defence for credit unions and their boards of directors are stuffed with barristers and vicars, but they can't work out how to offer services to the people they are originally intended to serve
                                                                                          "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                                                                                          Comment


                                                                                            Anyway, I'll stop now. Will even give you the last word on the matter. Its entirely possible I'm in a bad mood in general trying to work out what to do about our house that was meant to be bought next week but now looks like collapsing, and then I'm unfairly taking it out on innocent passersby.
                                                                                            "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                                                                                            Comment


                                                                                              I went to have a look at Stoneybatter house too and won't get it as it isn't cat friendly, so you know, quite similar and stressful.

                                                                                              Comment




                                                                                                Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post

                                                                                                I think you are maybe thinking that the end user - the person who wants to access the service - gives a fuck who exactly fucked up the service. The key point is the credit unions are offering a service which, as we've both agreed now, you reluctantly, is most definitely bureaucratic as I said in my opening post.

                                                                                                Plus there's the fundamental point you conveniently chose to ignore from my post - the government had to come up with this service, because institutions like credit unions, that the working class used to be able to turn to for help, were no longer helping those working classes. They were instead offering great services to well paid people like you - [B]which is why the middle class and the Irish Times is full of praise and defence for credit unions and their boards of directors are stuffed with barristers and vicars[B], but they can't work out how to offer services to the people they are originally intended to serve

                                                                                                You've consistently stated that the reason the loan scheme hasn't worked is due to the incompetence of the credit unions. This simply isn't the case.

                                                                                                You are also stating that credit unions have changed their ethos and no longer want to lend money to poor people which is also simply not the case. To yet again quote your non government TASC report that you are basing all your arguments on, it states the following;

                                                                                                Borrowing from high interest moneylenders was another cause of problem debt raised by Money Advisors. Research has proven that “banks do not generally provide the sort of small, short term loans poorer people typically need at short notice” (Mosedale et al. 2018, 7). Devising an alternative lending option for low-income households remains a persistent policy challenge – and one that is greatly
                                                                                                needed.

                                                                                                For example, according to one MABS Money Advisor, the appeal of high interest loans from moneylenders is based on their accessibility:
                                                                                                They’ve burnt their bridges with the credit union. They already have a debt with them. So, where else do they go? I understand the appeal of [moneylenders]. For people on low-incomes. And they [moneylenders] absolutely know what they are doing. They become their friends. And they don’t want to let them down. They will be the first person they pay - they might not pay their gas bill. But they will pay Mr(Moneylender) man
                                                                                                So just to be clear, poor people aren't going to moneylenders because the credit union won't help them. The credit union has already helped them and they haven't paid them back!

                                                                                                Also, the bolded bit above is just complete and utter nonsense that you are spouting out as fact and doesn't even warrant a proper response.

                                                                                                I'm done with this!





                                                                                                Comment


                                                                                                  Surely the answer to it all is 'better financial education'.

                                                                                                  Then payday lenders (shivers) become irrelevant.
                                                                                                  "We are not Europeans. Those people on the continent are freaks."

                                                                                                  Comment


                                                                                                    Originally posted by Raoul Duke III View Post
                                                                                                    Surely the answer to it all is 'better financial education'.

                                                                                                    Then payday lenders (shivers) become irrelevant.
                                                                                                    I don't think we needed three or four fecking posts in a row about it anyway. On to more important matters? Did ya decide on what dag to get?
                                                                                                    Jayzus, Sheila! I forgot me feckin' trousers

                                                                                                    Comment


                                                                                                      Originally posted by Raoul Duke III View Post
                                                                                                      Surely the answer to it all is 'better financial education'.

                                                                                                      Then payday lenders (shivers) become irrelevant.
                                                                                                      Well done for coming up with the one proposed solution that every country in the world has tried and failed at. Although we could do a lot better.
                                                                                                      "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                                                                                                      Comment


                                                                                                        Have a vaccine question, in light of this proposed idea to open everything up

                                                                                                        ​​​​https://www.irishtimes.com/news/poli...53508?mode=amp

                                                                                                        When they talk about vaccine effectiveness as being say 85%, what exactly do they mean?

                                                                                                        Is it that if you come into contact with someone with covid, you've a 15% chance of getting covid from them and a 86% chance of not getting it?

                                                                                                        Or is it that 85% of people vaccinated now won't get symptomatic covid, while 15% of people will probably catch it if they come into contact with someone with covid?
                                                                                                        ​​​​​​

                                                                                                        ​​​​​​Do you know what I mean?
                                                                                                        "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                                                                                                        Comment


                                                                                                          Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post
                                                                                                          Have a vaccine question, in light of this proposed idea to open everything up

                                                                                                          ​​​​https://www.irishtimes.com/news/poli...53508?mode=amp

                                                                                                          When they talk about vaccine effectiveness as being say 85%, what exactly do they mean?

                                                                                                          Is it that if you come into contact with someone with covid, you've a 15% chance of getting covid from them and a 86% chance of not getting it?

                                                                                                          Or is it that 85% of people vaccinated now won't get symptomatic covid, while 15% of people will probably catch it if they come into contact with someone with covid?
                                                                                                          ​​​​​​

                                                                                                          ​​​​​​Do you know what I mean?
                                                                                                          https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journ...21)00075-X.pdf



                                                                                                          His rival it seems, had broken his dreams,By stealing the girl of his fancy.Her name was Magill, and she called herself Lil,But everyone knew her as Nancy.

                                                                                                          Comment


                                                                                                            Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post
                                                                                                            Here's the actual product. It seems genuinely non exploitative.
                                                                                                            https://www.irishtimes.com/business/...ally-1.4651039
                                                                                                            I looked into this as promised. Obviously I can see that's they are less out to pillage Johnny Pleb. I'm not sure I's go as far as to say it's non-exploitive. It looks to exactly be a payday loan, just with lower rates. And those rates are yet to be confirmed.
                                                                                                            A quick google suggests that a payday loan charges 18p per day per £100. So somebody paid fortnightly who gets £250 a week early pays £3.15. Revolute look to be be charging £1.50
                                                                                                            Obliviously miles less grime sauce on the side on their offering. And being a flat fee, means that higher earners paid monthly are more less hit is they want to take a few K early. Plus integrating with payroll will see it paid back on time all the time. It's facilitating people being less-shit with their money.

                                                                                                            It also means that people get paid their salary directly into their Revolut account. The cost impact of that has to be factored in too.

                                                                                                            Comment


                                                                                                              Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post

                                                                                                              Well done for coming up with the one proposed solution that every country in the world has tried and failed at. Although we could do a lot better.
                                                                                                              I blame the financial educators myself
                                                                                                              "We are not Europeans. Those people on the continent are freaks."

                                                                                                              Comment


                                                                                                                Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View Post
                                                                                                                When they talk about vaccine effectiveness as being say 85%, what exactly do they mean?

                                                                                                                Is it that if you come into contact with someone with covid, you've a 15% chance of getting covid from them and a 86% chance of not getting it?

                                                                                                                Or is it that 85% of people vaccinated now won't get symptomatic covid, while 15% of people will probably catch it if they c into contact with someone with covid?
                                                                                                                ​​​
                                                                                                                ​​
                                                                                                                You know when you do studies and you find something like - being male is associated with being 80% less likely to save than being female? It's like that, but the comparison is between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups getting Covid.

                                                                                                                It says nothing about one's absolute chances of getting it.

                                                                                                                Comment



                                                                                                                  Originally posted by Pat Mustard View Post

                                                                                                                  Thousands everyday? Why are Gardai only convicting about 150-200 per week?
                                                                                                                  Catching 200 a week represents <5% of the people actually drink driving. So that would mean thousands are doing that. Possibly 10s, depending on how low that % gets.

                                                                                                                  Originally posted by Degag View Post
                                                                                                                  Anyone with a credit card paying anything other than the €30 (?) Gov fee is doing it wrong IMO.
                                                                                                                  Disagree. The cheapest credit card are generally terrible, and lack most of the features that make a credit card advantageous. That's without considering the rates.
                                                                                                                  Cheaper cards are generally pay less, get nothing situations.


                                                                                                                  Comment


                                                                                                                    Kids # 1&2 just jabbed.
                                                                                                                    Seemed to be approx 80% 12-15 y/os in the vaccine centre and then the rest looked to be younger adults presumably on Jab 2.

                                                                                                                    You'd imagine they'll be closing up some of the MVCs pretty soon, given there'll be no-one left to jab.
                                                                                                                    "We are not Europeans. Those people on the continent are freaks."

                                                                                                                    Comment


                                                                                                                      Crazy the WhatsApp would employ content moderators if nothing can be done about offensive WhatsApp content.............

                                                                                                                      https://time.com/6080450/facebook-wh...nt-moderators/
                                                                                                                      Happiness is not a goal; it is a by-product. ~Eleanor Roosevelt

                                                                                                                      Comment


                                                                                                                        Originally posted by Mellor View Post


                                                                                                                        Disagree. The cheapest credit card are generally terrible, and lack most of the features that make a credit card advantageous. That's without considering the rates.
                                                                                                                        Cheaper cards are generally pay less, get nothing situations.

                                                                                                                        Are you talking about rewards etc? There's no obvious option in the Irish market atm. In some other countries you can easily game points and cashback. This can make credit cards a very obvious proposition. The KBC card I have comes with a small cashback percentage on certain purchases but it's capped at €10 a month. I always cover the stamp duty and a few quid extra but it's hardly of massive benefit. I think the old schemes from AIB/BOI/UB had some monthly fees but you would get great discounts on various stuff like Ticketmaster, Aer Lingus, insurance and others. They were nuked a while back afaik.

                                                                                                                        Comment


                                                                                                                          Originally posted by Raoul Duke III View Post

                                                                                                                          I blame the financial educators myself
                                                                                                                          I think so. We need to design an education system for early intervention also. I think its around 6, 7, 8 that a lot of kids have their essential views on money formed.
                                                                                                                          "We're not f*cking Burundi" - Big Phil

                                                                                                                          Comment

                                                                                                                          Working...
                                                                                                                          X