The Lemon Fool

Lootman wrote:

ursaminortaur wrote:Why have you responded to the same post twice with a virtually identical reply ?

Why do you post the same left-wing nonsense over and over?

????????

Lootman wrote:

ursaminortaur wrote:Why have you responded to the same post twice with a virtually identical reply ?

Why do you post the same left-wing nonsense over and over?

XFool wrote:

Lootman wrote:Why do you post the same left-wing nonsense over and over?

I do not hold it against him. But I do wonder, as anyone would . .

Lootman wrote:

XFool wrote:

I do not hold it against him. But I do wonder, as anyone would . .

Can you point out where I've posted anything remotely "left-wing" in this recent thread ?
As far as I can see I've just explained historical events pertaining to the internet, www, Janet etc and pointed out that the British inventors of the jet engine, TV and hovercraft who you stated made nothing for Britain took out patents and that the UK made money off some of those eg 10% for each hovercraft until the year 2000.

I then politely inquired as to why you responded to the same post twice with a virtually identical response only to get this bizarre response about "left-wing" posts ( I was expecting that you would just explain that you had made a mistake and responded to the same post in error).

ursaminortaur wrote:

Lootman wrote:I do not hold it against him. But I do wonder, as anyone would . .

Can you point out where I've posted anything remotely "left-wing" in this recent thread ?

I can point out both that you appear to agree with me that Brits are terrible at profiting from our inventions.

And of course you have previously admitted to left-wing bias. And even seem proud of it, bizarrely.

Lootman wrote:

ursaminortaur wrote:Can you point out where I've posted anything remotely "left-wing" in this recent thread ?

I can point out both that you appear to agree with me that Brits are terrible at profiting from our inventions.

And of course you have previously admitted to left-wing bias. And even seem proud of it, bizarrely.

I've said that my politics are just slightly left of centre - though from the content of many of your posts you are so far to the right that even those slightly to the right of centre probably appear left wing to you ( just as you likely see the US democrats as extreme left-wing when most people in the UK or Europe would consider them to be on the right).

ursaminortaur wrote:

Lootman wrote:I can point out both that you appear to agree with me that Brits are terrible at profiting from our inventions.

And of course you have previously admitted to left-wing bias. And even seem proud of it, bizarrely.

I've said that my politics are just slightly left of centre - though from the content of many of your posts you are so far to the right that even those slightly to the right of centre probably appear left wing to you ( just as you likely see the US democrats as extreme left-wing when most people in the UK or Europe would consider them to be on the right).

The Overton Window has certainly moved if ursa considers themselves just slightly left wing while Lootman is considered very far to the right.

Lootman wrote:

ursaminortaur wrote:Can you point out where I've posted anything remotely "left-wing" in this recent thread ?

I can point out both that you appear to agree with me that Brits are terrible at profiting from our inventions.

And of course you have previously admitted to left-wing bias. And even seem proud of it, bizarrely.

You should be able to make your point without constantly repeating yourself and sniping at others' politics.

Yes, of course we are bad at profiting from our inventions. We don't value tech in this country. And our city institutions are always looking for quick profits and high dividend payments. Plus our politicians (many of whom come from the same public schools) rarely have tech backgrounds - so they are unable to grasp the potential.

MrFoolish wrote:

Lootman wrote: Yes, of course we are bad at profiting from our inventions. We don't value tech in this country. And our city institutions are always looking for quick profits and high dividend payments. Plus our politicians (many of whom come from the same public schools) rarely have tech backgrounds - so they are unable to grasp the potential.

That's true, but to be fair tech startups can be risky, compared with r&d done within an existing PLC with a track record. I started investing at the tail end of the dot com boom and got my fingers burned with a couple of investments so that's at the back of my mind and I stick with broad based index trackers now.

It's easy to be wise with the benefit of hindsight, but it takes real insight to sift the wheat from the chaff because there's always lots of contenders for the next big thing.

If you want to play in the sandbox, first of all you have to construct the sandbox....

Many fields of technical endeavour need widespread adoption of standards in order for them to take off. These standards tend to be complicated, and require intellectual property from many different sources. The licensing regime must also be economic, which means that much of this property needs to be provided free of charge by academics etc, and those bits provided by private commercial organisations of a licensed basis must be at a low enough cost so as not burden the end result.

Othe examples of widespread adoption of open standards are the use of Linux as the core operating system on which virtually all servers run (it is also the basis on which Android and Mac OS are built). Linux was put into the public domain by Linus Torvalds, and is maintained by many many people around the world on an Open Source basis.

One of the core data transmission technologies that underpin latest generation WiFi and 4G Mobile Telephony is something called OFDM, which was first invented for digital terrestrial broadcast TV and put into the public domain by the BBC.

These things are provided by many engineers in many countries in both educational and commercial organisations.

To describe the UK as being 'no good at making money at it' is a little simplistic to put it mildly.

tuk020
(named inventor in 10 patent filings on digital radio and mobile telephony, and author of the systems requirements definition for one of the European Telecommunications standards)

MuddyBoots wrote:That's true, but to be fair tech startups can be risky, compared with r&d done within an existing PLC with a track record. I started investing at the tail end of the dot com boom and got my fingers burned with a couple of investments so that's at the back of my mind and I stick with broad based index trackers now.

It's easy to be wise with the benefit of hindsight, but it takes real insight to sift the wheat from the chaff because there's always lots of contenders for the next big thing.

From the point of view of the individual consumer, investing for their pension, there's nothing fundamentally wrong with taking a very conservative view to investing. If it helps you to sleep at night, then it makes perfect sense. The FTSE 100 companies won't shoot the lights out, but with re-invested dividends they'll probably give a safe-ish 5% pa over the long term.

But considering the country as a whole, we need to be a bit more ambitious. We can't rely on oils, tobacco and financial services to serve our long term needs. The world is changing and we are getting left behind.

TUK020 wrote:tuk020
(named inventor in 10 patent filings on digital radio and mobile telephony, and author of the systems requirements definition for one of the European Telecommunications standards)

Interesting stuff. But would it not be true (and correct me if I'm wrong) that your contributions have been more along the lines of producing international standards rather than creating saleable products? Which is what Lootman was getting at.

TUK020 wrote:Othe examples of widespread adoption of open standards are the use of Linux as the core operating system on which virtually all servers run (it is also the basis on which Android and Mac OS are built). Linux was put into the public domain by Linus Torvalds, and is maintained by many many people around the world on an Open Source basis.

Ahem. Unix.

Linux is a Unix offshoot, and Apple tech is similarly based on Unix, the BSD variety, and not Linux, unless something has changed that I am not aware of.

To describe the UK as being 'no good at making money at it' is a little simplistic to put it mildly.

This.

GS

Lot of debate going on here.

There's a conference today by the Resolution Foundation, being attended by Hunt and Starmer (sounds like a Law Firm), to address productivity. Another talking shop.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/20 ... ear-wages/

Would a good place to start be with a list of where all the expendure goes within the Public Sector.
NHS expenditure, GP work week productivity, Non-essential medical treatments etc.
Council expenditure, failed investments, no-speculative investment, non-productive employment.
Defence, ineffective aircraft carriers.
Civil Service productivity and AI implementation.
Public Sector Pension sustainability.
Demographic sustainability.

Another clear list of what comprises the Private Sector make up,
Low grade services jobs requiring government subsidy for low wages.
High cost of child care to release mothers to undertake low paid, low skilled work.
The real amount of unemployed people, those that could actually do productive work.
The black economy and tax avoidance.


If we had an honest and clear view of the above and similar items which I'm sure you can all thing of, then THAT would be a good place to start.

Nimrod103 wrote:

ursaminortaur wrote:I've said that my politics are just slightly left of centre - though from the content of many of your posts you are so far to the right that even those slightly to the right of centre probably appear left wing to you ( just as you likely see the US democrats as extreme left-wing when most people in the UK or Europe would consider them to be on the right).

The Overton Window has certainly moved if ursa considers themselves just slightly left wing while Lootman is considered very far to the right.

Let's put it this way: If the Overton Window truly has shifted to the extent that ursaminortaur is now to be considered a "Lefty" and Lootman not "very right-wing", all I can say is you will now need to characterise any middle of the road Labour voter as an anarcho-syndicalist communist.

Perhaps you already do?

TUK020 wrote:Othe examples of widespread adoption of open standards are the use of Linux as the core operating system on which virtually all servers run (it is also the basis on which Android and Mac OS are built).

Depending on whose survey you look at, 25% of servers use Microsoft Windows, 66% use Linux. One survey is https://fortunebusinessinsights.com/ser ... ket-106601. As mentioned elsewhere MacOS is BSD based not Linux.

Regards, Puffster

Nimrod103 wrote:

ursaminortaur wrote:I've said that my politics are just slightly left of centre - though from the content of many of your posts you are so far to the right that even those slightly to the right of centre probably appear left wing to you ( just as you likely see the US democrats as extreme left-wing when most people in the UK or Europe would consider them to be on the right).

The Overton Window has certainly moved if ursa considers themselves just slightly left wing while Lootman is considered very far to the right.

Anyone who thinks that my views are "very far to the right" should take a trip to any one of about 30 States in the US to see what that phrase really means. The UK doesn't really have a true right-wing party of any significance. The Tories are centrist, as can be clearly seen by the way they have raised taxes and punished landlords, whilst doing little to stop the bloated expenditure on welfare and local authorities.

And I am soft, liberal and fluffy on social issues.

Being "right" or "left" is all relative. All main political parties are (in my book) socialist and left leaning to varying degrees, so anyone who as much as whispers that perhaps taxes and expenditure need only a miniscule reduction is going to be called a raving right-wing fascist zealot.

Oggy wrote:Being "right" or "left" is all relative. All main political parties are (in my book) socialist and left leaning to varying degrees, so anyone who as much as whispers that perhaps taxes and expenditure need only a miniscule reduction is going to be called a raving right-wing fascist zealot.

Yes, although it used to be even worse. Back in the 1960s and 1970s the Tories were well to the left of later Labour party leaders like Blair and Starmer. Thatcher changed everything. If not for her I would be writing this from another country, as the UK would still be sick and in the poorhouse.

Oggy wrote:Being "right" or "left" is all relative. All main political parties are (in my book) socialist and left leaning to varying degrees, so anyone who as much as whispers that perhaps taxes and expenditure need only a miniscule reduction is going to be called a raving right-wing fascist zealot.

Ha ha don't forget it's election time soon they've got to tempt us over to their side of the coin somehow!