Private parking companies are absolute scum. Anybody who’s ever had the misfortune of dealing with them can attest to this.

The fact that the NHS were forced to sell a bunch of carparks to these criminals boils my piss on an almost weekly basis.

As the crimes were committed in the 1980s, Roberts’ sentence reflected the legal norms of that period.

I can see the logic to this, but holy shit, was 4 years for sexually abusing a 7 year old a typical sentence back then?

Kill thousands of fish and god knows what other wildlife, get a measly £300k fine that will be paid by customers rather than management anyway.

Yet another turd in the septic tank that is Thatcher’s legacy of privatising everything that used to be owned by the public.

I’m willing to bet it’s mostly AI, which is what caused Nvidia stock to skyrocket. Linux is the dominant platform for AI work. They definitely don’t want flaky drivers on Linux going ahead.

Given the current Chinese owners are battling tooth and nail to not have to foot 50% of the bill for the new furnaces (which is already generous from the gov), I highly doubt they are good custodians of British Steel in the long term.

Canada literally isn’t the UK.

The motion that was passed is nothing like the framework Canada has.

Plenty of countries ban drinking alcohol. You may as well be saying that having restrictions on alcohol for under 18s means it’s a slippery slope and it’ll be banned here. After all, Saudi Arabia literally did it. America literally did it. Qatar literally did it. Etc.

Like I said, I want evidence. Not slippery slope fallacy. Show me MPs saying they intend to implement the system Canada has.

Because “they just will mate. Slippery slope innit.” isn’t one IMO.

^^

You’re just back at the “it’s a slippery slope” argument.

Lol you’re just trolling now. You don’t even know how those work.

Calling out the slippery slope argument for being the nonsense that it is is not an example of circular reasoning.

Me sharing my experience and saying that I think you’d have a different view if you had seen what I’ve seen is not an anecdotal fallacy - that is where you use anecdotes and try to represent them as objective facts.

I didn’t dismiss your view via ad populum fallacy, I just said it’s pointless moaning about the idea of people dying painlessly if they choose because the debate has already been settled by MPs and the public don’t have the appetite to have them backtrack on it.

The appeal to authority fallacy is about dismissing an opinion as being invalid because an authorative figure days otherwise. That’s not what I said. I said the debate has been settled, so it’s pointless campaigning against right now.

Why do you want people to suffer for as long as possible? What evidence do you have that the law will become so lax that doctors will aggressively push people to being euthanised? Is there any evidence? Because “they just will mate. Slippery slope innit.” isn’t one IMO.

It literally is a fallacy. This is not up for debate. The slippery slope fallacy is a real fallacy, and this is an example of that fallacy.

And again, this is nothing like the protocols Canada has.

You need to be terminally ill with less than 6 months to live, of sound mind, have the go-ahead from two unaffiliated doctors, and it needs to be reviewed and signed off by a judge.

You’re advocating for real, horrific, suffering to continue because hypothetically the law could be changed in future in a way that could be bad.

I’ve worked in care homes full of people who barely sleep, and spend their entire days in agony that you and I cannot even conceive of. They begged to die. They begged us to covertly kill them. But our job was to forcefully keep them alive against their will, prolonging their suffering for as long as we possibly could. No attention given to their comfort or quality of life, just ensuring they are kept alive as long as possible. That’s what we had targets for. Seriously harrowing stuff.

If you had seen that, day in day out, I doubt you’d have this “we need to make them suffer, because hypothetically in X years we could be like Canada, where some doctors made a recommendation they really shouldn’t have.”

Regardless, it’s pointless talking about. Your viewpoint has been rejected by the populace and most importantly, by MPs.

No, they aren’t correct. They just happen to like their tea prepared differently, and look down on anybody who doesn’t like what they like.

If you think offering people with less than 6 months to live a way to die painlessly and with dignity is actually a conspiracy to mass-murder everybody on benefits, then you are a fucking lunatic.

You can take issue with the bill without spinning some conspiracy theory about Starmer wanting to bring about a second Holocaust.

So the slippery slope fallacy, got it.

“If we allow terminally ill the choice to die painlessly and with dignity, we’re actually welcoming doctors telling anybody with any ailment to kill themselves” is a wild take.

You can apply the same fallacy to practically any law. It’s absurd.

“They’ve introduced an age of consent?? This is a slippery slope! Soon the government will prevent all reproduction!1”

“They’ve introduced a 70MPH national speed limit?? This is a slippery slope! Soon you’ll only be able to travel at 5mph! More 15 minute city dystopia!!”

One of the biggest arguments against women getting the right to vote was that it would be a slippery slope that would lead to society becoming matriarchal and men becoming subservient to women.

It’s a silly fallacy.

This is an amazing change. I’ve seen way too many people suffering in a way that before my previous job, I couldn’t have even begun to imagine. People in agony begging to die but being forced to live.

People that would get a few hours of interrupted sleep a day, and then spend 20 hours of the day awake living in excruciating pain, begging us to covertly put them out of their misery.

Except this is nothing like the procedure Canada has in place.

People seeking this out need to be terminally ill with less than 6 months to live, it needs to be approved by two doctors and a judge, I believe it has to be brought up by the patient, etc.

It’s tragic that you drink tea to feel “classy”, rather than to simply enjoy it as a drink.

And to answer your question - a lot of countries add milk to tea. I don’t know where this myth that only the UK does it comes from.

Stop chatting shit.

In 2013, Haigh was 24-years-old and working as a public policy manager for the insurance company Aviva.

Following reports by Sky and The Times on Thursday, Haigh issued a statement, explaining she made a police report after a “terrifying” mugging in London.

She said she reported the phone as one of a number of items she believed had been stolen, and was issued with a new work phone.

Some time later, she discovered the handset was still in her house, and she switched it on, which “triggered police attention” and she was called in for questioning.

“My solicitor advised me not to comment during that interview and I regret following that advice,” she said, and the matter was sent to magistrates.

Haigh said she pleaded guilty to making a false report to police at a magistrates’ court, six months before becoming an MP in the 2015 election, and received a discharge - the “lowest possible outcome”.

I’m surprised she’s resigning over something so minor tbh.

Well yeah, even if you designed the most ergonomic thing that’s ever been created, there will always be some it doesn’t work for, because everybody is different.

And when you go onto a popular forum and look for people who feel the same, you will find some, even if the vast majority find it comfortable.

Reviews pretty much all said the deck is very ergonomic.

The Deck is very ergonomic.

I don’t know how well flat sides would work for a normal controller, though, as your hands/arms are much closer together.

Good, I guess. Better than X or Threads.

But Mastodon would be even better. It’s the only one I use anymore, I just wish it was a more active platform.