It’s not a new thing, I remember something called the anarchists cookbook (I think) that wasn’t too hard to find twenty years ago which is illegal to possess.

Edit: it is illegal to possess in the UK, apparently it’s legal in some other countries

It was introduced under the Tories but massively expanded by new labour. The article says that the money won’t be syphoned off by investors and shareholders but I’m extremely sceptical. The only solution is nationalisation.

It’s not going to be fair unless the average person has the ability to rent a council house.

The right to buy is completely useless to people who are paying £1000pcm to the slum lord.

True, but that’s not the point. It’d clearly be unrealistic to equate the crime to things like rape or murder.

The man’s obviously sick in the head but at least didn’t attack a child irl.

To be fair, some phones already have that but they have much lower spec cameras/lenses, so it’s currently a trade off.

If a flag ship phone were to find away to implement a flush top spec camera, it would still only be an incremental improvement rather than a great new technology or a substantial innovation.

Yh, I’m not for bailing out companies that are “too big to fail”, I see it as socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor, but that’s a separate debate.

Tech stocks were a interesting case as they bloated far beyond their actual value during COVID, what happened in 2023 was probably somewhat of a renormalization and now they’re back to business as usual. There will always be peaks and valleys, but I’d be very surprised to see tech stocks fail in the long term.

I’m not going to argue that there has been no progress, just that it’s not on the same scale.

Look at the difference between phones from 2004 to 2014, then from 2014 to 2024 and surely you’d have to agree. We’re looking at huge leaps in tech and innovation Vs much smaller incremental improvements.

And I’d once again like to state that this is not a complaint, just a point of view showing that astonishing amounts of technological innovation are not necessarily required to keep companies in business.

On the contrary, I absolutely appreciate it. I was about 15 when mobile phones first became a thing that everyone owned, so I’ve lived through the entire progression from when they were something only a well to do businessman would have all the way through to today. The first iPhone was 2007, 17 years ago btw.

When mobile phones became popular, each new generation of phones saw HUGE improvements and innovation. However, the last ten years has pretty much just been slight improvements to screen/camera/memory/CPU. Form wise and functionally, they’re very similar to the phone of ten years ago.

I understand that some technophiles will always be able to justify why the new iPhone is worth £1600 and if that’s what they want to spend their money on then good for them, but I personally think that they are kidding themselves. Today you can get a brilliant phone for £300 or even less.

In more recent news;

BBC News - Samsung profits jump by more than 900% on chips https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68738046

I agree. Smartphones, for example, have hardly changed at all over the last ten years, but you don’t see Apple and Samsung going out of business.

I remember when running counter strike at 30fps on a 480p monitor meant you had a good computer.

Modern graphics are amazing, but they’re simply not required to have a good gaming experience.

The hostages were hamas

Yh, not like it’s her job to parent the child, that’s the government’s responsibility!

Follow up question, are there any meats that aren’t edible?

I’ve heard that you shouldn’t eat the livers of predators due to poisonous amounts of vitamin A that can be built up in them, but that’s strictly offal rather than meat.

Not many world leaders do.

Not the point. It’s a comment about how actions would speak louder than words.

Fair point

Yep, likewise, Saddam was a cunt but he killed three times fewer civilians than our war of terror did.

Worth noting that Canning died in office, rather than having to resign in disgrace.

People used twitter?