prt64.bsky.social
106 posts
6 followers
1 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
I understand it was actually for a number of criminal offences not for being gay.
comment in response to
post
actually those in the picture more than likely worked with Tutte and Flowers - Turing was shipped out in late 42 well before colossus was designed or built.
comment in response to
post
Others did as much and more during WW2, people like Flowers, Tutte etc - he produced a few theoretical papers and others did most of the codebreaking. The Bombe machines were designed by poles, enigma was first cracked by the poles. his role has been exaggerated , even according to his own family
comment in response to
post
Mr marginal gains steps back after making massive gains from touting corporate rubbish.....only succes was when he was given ne of biggest budget in history of cycling that was said to be greater than rest of world put together....
comment in response to
post
They know if water is nationalised then the entire privatisation scam edifice will crash and the establishment can't have that and a cut to their dividends. If water collapses, people will realise that health, rail, energy & other crucial services handed to the market have been nothing but robbery.
comment in response to
post
To be honest I am surprised that there are that many blue woad painted celts left....do tattoos count as a skin colour that's not white?
comment in response to
post
The real danger is if it happens and works, the entire privatisation eddifice crumbles, which is why they will become circus contortionist to ensure it doesn't.
comment in response to
post
One thing that does alienate voters is the endless bullshit and exaggeration by politicians to be seen to appear successful or having achieved something significant. Bevan did something significant with the creation of the NHS, not a small contract to reduce the damage of other actions.
comment in response to
post
Actually looking at sailor numbers the issue is not insufficient crew - but ships stuck in maintenance and repair, replacements still decades away and old ships going to scrap. Ships are the problem not crew.
comment in response to
post
its not the biggest investment for decades - nowhere near, the extra money in the budget wouldnt pay for one broken aircraft carrier. Sub replacements, decades away, current ship replacements decades behind. Half of new things are for sale to others. Splurge on unusable nuclear capability. All spin
comment in response to
post
All bets on nuclear as a deterrent - well that's worked in Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine etc. Procurement still a disaster, delivery of replacements decades too slow. SDR more a PR exercise in how to spin things for a very limited vision and funding, already decided a while ago. UK not serious...
comment in response to
post
Speeches / headlines all misleading - 12 subs - several of which will go to Australia, others replace existing ones. No fleet expansion at all. Drones are the answer to everything - Ukraine is fighting with an army of 1.2m, not under 100k with some plastic electric toys. Still decades to deliver
comment in response to
post
Can understand need to bolster conventional defence. But investing in a single use end of world capability while reducing more useful options seems insane. Them again the 12 nuke subs is more likely the total to be built for US & Australia not for uk navy. So is it just silly bullsh*t to seem tough
comment in response to
post
wants to be a dictator perhaps this was his inspiration?
comment in response to
post
Been left of centre all my life and do appreciate the climate issues now i am coming towards the end, for my grand childrens sake. I dont feel i have a political home anymore with labour and are tempted towards green policies. However do think we need to invest in defence - whats the green position?
comment in response to
post
the societal impacts of AI are being ignored, a capitalist model of economy that is based on capital and employees will not cope with an environment where employees are not needed, while the capital side of things will be very happy at becoming richer the rest poverty awaits....no one talks about it
comment in response to
post
Suspect it's much wider than nhs, hearing home office looking for a reason to pass justice data to them as well. Someone must be working hard with ministers and have a lot of access....
comment in response to
post
Clegg showed what kind of human he was in 2010 - siding with the self appointed public school elite, which he was part of. That decision ruined the UK, led to Brexit and now he is telling everyone the rich can take what they want, when they want, no matter what work you did. What a twat...
comment in response to
post
too many successive governments have seen aid as a replacement for defence or vice versa, we actually need to do both much better. China have developed global influence by using both, but they think long term, not short term like most UK politicians
comment in response to
post
part v - thats why it favours the big guys and smes are excluded, they cant afford to play the game, plus the big guys can afford lobbying operations, its why some suppliers seem to have a fast track as they are seen by ignorant civil servants as the answer to everything, even though they are not.
comment in response to
post
part iv - another thing is that the main drivers of government change is legislation and policy. tech change is pretty low in the priorities. So new tech to facilitate efficiency is lower in priority compared legal issues, policy objectives & process. Tech as innovation is very much the last resort.
comment in response to
post
Part III - procurement based mainly on cost, a lot of government contracts , price is 40 to 50% of the score. So bid low, win and then hit them with increases during life of project. Procurement teams fail a lot of the time, they dont approach it, understanding they are tendering for a monopoly.
comment in response to
post
Part II - inertia is cheaper than transformation...government doesnt do multi year funding on projects, its obsessed with in year spend. so its easier to sweat the asset, even if its costs increase. Procurement is an issue, it favours the big outsources and providers, cost of participating too high.
comment in response to
post
An issue overlooked with aging IT systems in government is that they are big. changing them costs tons of money, not just for procurement but in all the additional things like training, process change etc etc. so often its easier to go for small enhancements, hence limited real change.
comment in response to
post
Not just the Post Office - doesnt take much research to see how many billions have been wasted across all government departments on grand IT schemes. HO, NHS etc etc.