scott_w

8 ms·

151.
by scott_w 8mo ago
> You say the consultancy “absolutely can substitute one worker with another.” In practice, clients regularly contract for named individuals, reject substitutes, and retain the same person for years. But it does not matter, because the s
152.
by scott_w 8mo ago
> “multiple clients / own equipment / flexible hours” is not some automatic escape hatch I never said the escape hatch was automatic. The number of questions in the HMRC questionnaire make it clear that there's no 1 trigge
153.
by scott_w 8mo ago
> You are using class-loaded language. Nobody says a worker is “operating via” a Big Four consultancy, but when it is a one-person company, suddenly it is framed as some artificial wrapper. This is not classist, you're conflating 2
154.
by scott_w 8mo ago
> The rule set was sharpened the moment skilled workers realised the agency / consultancy was charging £2k a day for their labour while paying them £60k a year, and decided to leave on Friday and invoice on Monday. Same desk. Same c
155.
by scott_w 8mo ago
Thanks for the info. I left retail work in 2011, when I definitely did have it in my contract, so things have changed a little bit since then.
156.
by scott_w 8mo ago
What on earth are you waffling on about? Disguised employee is the term used when a person fits into the legal definition of an employee but are contracted, as opposed to being employed. HMRC sets out the conditions it uses to determine thi
157.
by scott_w 8mo ago
0-hour contracts have nothing to do with "Uberised" working arrangements, which are essentially a contracted worker. In a 0-hour contract, the worker does not have the freedom to "offer labour without commitment." - Th
158.
by scott_w 8mo ago
> which I suppose makes sense if 30% of people simply lack the ability to reason You can't really infer that from survey data, and particularly from this question. A few criticisms that I came up with off the top of my head: - What
159.
by scott_w 8mo ago
> For a disease which (to my knowledge) can’t be slowed down or reversed, I think it’s a fair question why we would want to detect Alzheimer’s. Maybe there are other reasons, but my suspicion is that we will be able to, and an easy detec
160.
by scott_w 8mo ago
Unfortunately it started to be taken seriously, at least by academics who went on to infect an industry. I shit you not when I tell you the Software Project Management module I took at university described Agile as “Waterfall but done much
161.
by scott_w 8mo ago
Same here. It’s like the author just finishes their Software Project Management module at uni, saw AI and had their mind blown without ever learning this thing called “The Agile Manifesto” exists!
162.
by scott_w 8mo ago
That would be no more legal than what the Supreme Court just struck down.
163.
by scott_w 8mo ago
No they absolutely did. Trump promised tariffs on multiple occasions: https://www.export.org.uk/insights/trade-news/us-presidentia... When you vote, you vote for an entire platform and you especially vote for ce
164.
by scott_w 8mo ago
You’re arguing in this context: > wouldn't the ability to automatically rewrite sqlite in Rust be a valuable asset? If you want to rewrite SQLite, you must accept their position. Otherwise you simply aren’t rewriting SQLite, you’re
165.
by scott_w 8mo ago
That’s not my requirement, that’s SQLite’s requirement. If you want to dispute their claim, I recommend you write to them, however I strongly suspect they know more about this than you do.
166.
by scott_w 8mo ago
Except that doesn’t work if you need to use the result…
167.
by scott_w 8mo ago
Correct, that's what I mean. I trust SQLite's devs to know more about this, so I trust what they wrote. There are parts of Rust code that are basically: do_thing().expect(...); This branch is required by the code, even if i
168.
by scott_w 8mo ago
Not really because it's not possible for SQLite written in Rust to pass SQLite's checks. See https://www.sqlite.org/whyc.html
169.
by scott_w 8mo ago
> Rule of thumb for everyone (i.e. both). That's never been how humans work. Going back to the specific example: the question is so nonsensical on its face that the only logical conclusion is that the asker is taking the piss out of
170.
by scott_w 8mo ago
But you're ascribing understanding to the LLM, which is not what it's doing. If the LLM understood you, it would realise it's a trick question and, assuming it was British, reply with "You'd drive it because how els
171.
by scott_w 8mo ago
There's a lot of overlap between the smartest bears and the dumbest humans. However, we would want our tools to be more useful than the dumbest humans...
172.
by scott_w 8mo ago
> You would be surprised, however, at how much detail humans also need to understand each other. But in this given case, the context can be inferred. Why would I ask whether I should walk or drive to the car wash if my car is already at
173.
by scott_w 8mo ago
As others have said, currency conversion has been a well-known "scam" for as long as I can remember. I'm sure Martin Lewis has been talking about this since at least the early 2000s in some form.
174.
by scott_w 8mo ago
It’s not a dialect thing, the river is literally called “River Wear” irrespective of your accent or dialect. Plymouth (Plih Muth) and Tynemouth (Tyne Mouth) are pronounced completely differently and I don’t call Plymouth “Ply Mouth” just be
175.
by scott_w 8mo ago
That’s the word I was looking for!
176.
by scott_w 8mo ago
While I get what you're going for, unfortunately, the pronunciation of Wear means it doesn't work. The correct pronunciation is more like Whee-ah (sounds a little bit like wheel) as opposed to sounding like "where" ;-)
177.
by scott_w 8mo ago
You can complain all you want about it but, unless you can push up the cost of the claim, that’s what corporations will do.
178.
by scott_w 8mo ago
> it pre-supposes that the company has an unlimited amount of valuable work to be done. In effect, there is, yes. At the very least, there’s more high value work that most companies can do than there are engineers to do said work. There’
179.
by scott_w 8mo ago
It doesn't matter: the equation is exactly the same. Why would you hire someone to work on a bug fix or security fix when you could hire that same person and have them work on something even more valuable again?
180.
by scott_w 8mo ago
And, as others point out for manual workers, they don't fully recover. As it's their job, many professional athletes will perform while partially injured and exacerbate it. And it's not even professionals! One of the older me

More ›