SPAM random annoying things

[Chilly]

Nice Monte Carlo porn. I raise you the ATLAS experiment at CERN:
View attachment 15403
We have over 100 000 CPUs in use constantly simulating billions of high energy collisions.

boner

 

[old.Tohtori]

Go on. Make a good argument why this is unfair,

There are problems ofcourse, special cases etc which have to be appealed. Kind of like in the news article; Someone makes 20k/month, gets fined right after and is skint(say a market guy loses all) and gets fined by that 20k/month way.

The law is fair around here though(exceptons to rule apply etc), so it's not that big of a problem.

 

[Lethul]

Is it Finland where they fine traffic offences based on your net worth?

Switzerland has that, read something about a traffic fine for a couple of millions (a speeding ferrari )

 

[Lamp]

Watching Luther and realising you really should make an effort to do some work.
Having that Friday feeling at 10.25am
Text from a mate: "Hey, do you fancy a few beers lunchtime?". Hmm...
May have to flip a coin to see if I take the day off or not
I think I'll flip a coin to decide if I flip the coin. Yep. I'll do that.

 

[Scouse]

So. Finland and Swizerland so far.

How's my "stupid idea" sound now soze + Raven

 

[Raven]

Stupid.

 

[TdC]

Nice Monte Carlo porn. I raise you the ATLAS experiment at CERN:
View attachment 15403
We have over 100 000 CPUs in use constantly simulating billions of high energy collisions.

hehe that does make my grids look small. I'd say our most powerful MC based grid is 32 Tesla K20's and the most poweful CPU based grid is 420 Intel Xeon. not the size that matters

 

[MYstIC G]

Fines are a punishment. If you're poor then the punishment is much harsher than if you're rich.

Fines should be a percentage of your total net worth.

No they shouldn't because then governments could easily keep people poor by inventing stupid fines.

 

[DaGaffer]

No they shouldn't because then governments could easily keep people poor by inventing stupid fines.

Its not really in any (capitalist) government's interest to "keep people poor"; quite the reverse in fact. For the record I don't really have much of a problem with the idea of ability to pay, so long as its not stupid; there should be a cap, even if its quite high. Fining someone a million euros for speeding as a punishment is disproportionate to the crime (and in Switzerland they are particularly sneaky when it comes to speed cameras - there's no safety angle in play with a lot of them, just little boxes hidden behind bushes on the motorway).

 

[MYstIC G]

Its not really in any (capitalist) government's interest to "keep people poor"; quite the reverse in fact. For the record I don't really have much of a problem with the idea of ability to pay, so long as its not stupid; there should be a cap, even if its quite high. Fining someone a million euros for speeding as a punishment is disproportionate to the crime (and in Switzerland they are particularly sneaky when it comes to speed cameras - there's no safety angle in play with a lot of them, just little boxes hidden behind bushes on the motorway).

I'm just of the view that to be fair and even handed the system only works on the basis that if an individual makes a mistake then there is a set punishment which applies. So if two people speed in their cars then they both receive the same penalty as they've both made the same mistake. Income should be an irrelevance.

 

[Raven]

It's the basis of our legal system, everyone is equal in the eyes of the law. Quite frankly I don't care what two other countries do, neither of them are the UK. They chop people hands off in some countries too.

If you speed 4 times (or less in some cases) you lose your license, that is enough punishment.

Parking is completely different, if idiots want to pay £60 to park somewhere then that's up to them. I couldn't care less where people park tbh.

 

[DaGaffer]

I'm just of the view that to be fair and even handed the system only works on the basis that if an individual makes a mistake then there is a set punishment which applies. So if two people speed in their cars then they both receive the same penalty as they've both made the same mistake. Income should be an irrelevance.

Depends how you look at it; I'd argue they're not receiving the same "penalty" if its a minor irritant to one and a trip to Wonga.com for the other. In the case of traffic offences, the points side of things is the real punishment that hurts, even if you're rich (but even then, I got a speeding ban for 28 days once and because I was a company director my boss arranged a driver; I wouldn't have got that working on the bins), but in the case of things like parking tickets, the rich can just say "ah fuck it" and pretty much park where they like so long as its not a towing zone.

 

[TdC]

personally I think punishment to means is actually pretty nifty. I mean...how can a 50 euro speeding fine make any difference to a bajillionaire?

 

[Raven]

Not a lot but the points on his license will make a difference eventually, it's supposed to be a fairly minor offence that, if repeated costs you your license. Get caught doing 100 in the UK and you are likely to lose it in one go, as many rich people have found out.

If anything it is less of a punishment for poorer people as some of them just drive without a license, insurance, MOT anyway.

 

[Scouse]

No they shouldn't because then governments could easily keep people poor by inventing stupid fines.

Governments kept people poor by deciding to allow the charging of interest on loans.

 

[Raven]

What incentive would there be to loan money without it?

 

[Scouse]

It's the basis of our legal system, everyone is equal in the eyes of the law

Percentages are equal in the eyes of the law.

Hypothetical example: If you are convicted of dangerous driving you may receive a fine and points on your licence.

6 points on everyone's licence is 6 points. For everyone. Regardless of wealth.

£60 is a punitive fine for the poor given maybe £1500 monthly income. For a bazillionaire it's a portion of a second's interest on his current account.

£60 is 4% of the £1500-earner's income for that month. 4% of your monthly income is not unreasonable. If your monthly income happens to be billions then 4% is still 4%.

 

[Ormorof]

Not a lot but the points on his license will make a difference eventually, it's supposed to be a fairly minor offence that, if repeated costs you your license. Get caught doing 100 in the UK and you are likely to lose it in one go, as many rich people have found out.

If anything it is less of a punishment for poorer people as some of them just drive without a license, insurance, MOT anyway.

and yet they lose their licences and get caught driving without them then get fined a couple of grand which for them is pennies so its hardly an issue for them - this was the situation with Tevez, the guy was banned from driving and gets slapped with a laughable fine in comparison to his wages

he might have paid attention if he was fined 3-4 months wages instead tbh

 

[Vae]

Percentages are equal in the eyes of the law.

Hypothetical example: If you are convicted of dangerous driving you may receive a fine and points on your licence.

6 points on everyone's licence is 6 points. For everyone. Regardless of wealth.

£60 is a punitive fine for the poor given maybe £1500 monthly income. For a bazillionaire it's a portion of a second's interest on his current account.

£60 is 4% of the £1500-earner's income for that month. 4% of your monthly income is not unreasonable. If your monthly income happens to be billions then 4% is still 4%.

Particularly true when you look at fines in the context of disposable income. The person on £1500 per month might have no disposable income and would probably wish to receive a few hours community service instead. For the millionaire he'd be far more put out by some community service than a minuscule (to him) fine.

 

[MYstIC G]

Particularly true when you look at fines in the context of disposable income. The person on £1500 per month might have no disposable income and would probably wish to receive a few hours community service instead. For the millionaire he'd be far more put out by some community service than a minuscule (to him) fine.

Then you go down the route of "the rich can pay to get out of trouble" which creates an inequality.

Same fine/sentence per person is the only truly fair method.

 

[Madmaxx]

I plain don't get woman, I ask a girl out from our old college course (fck it the course has ended it was a no risk move, and we got along fine) she says no maybe another time; that's fine I'm bored waiting for uni to start I can take the knockback it was a curiosity thing.

Then she comes back to me a minute later with some business plan about using ebay and auctions to buy and sell items so we can share the profit, what the fuck.

And it came with terms such as e.g. she cant take item where she lives ..so I have to take all the items and deal with postage and packaging...she will order and buy the things online and arrange to sell them ..LMAO.

How do I get myself in these situations seriously, trying to build a social life is so painfull I should have stuck with MMO gaming during college being a no lifer was so much simpler.

 

[DaGaffer]

Then you go down the route of "the rich can pay to get out of trouble" which creates an inequality.

Same fine/sentence per person is the only truly fair method.

Except the rich can and do pay to get out of trouble already, so the inequality is already there. May as well capitalise on it.

 

[Madmaxx]

I'm going to have to have some sort of a game plan going to uni being the "nice guy" has got me no where

 

[Raven]

I plain don't get woman, I ask a girl out from our old college course (fck it the course has ended it was a no risk move, and we got along fine) she says no maybe another time; that's fine I'm bored waiting for uni to start I can take the knockback it was a curiosity thing.

Then she comes back to me a minute later with some business plan about using ebay and auctions to buy and sell items so we can share the profit, what the fuck.

And it came with terms such as e.g. she cant take item where she lives ..so I have to take all the items and deal with postage and packaging...she will order and buy the things online and arrange to sell them ..LMAO.

How do I get myself in these situations seriously, trying to build a social life is so painfull I should have stuck with MMO gaming during college being a no lifer was so much simpler.

Just tell her to go fuck herself, or you...whichever she prefers.

 

[rynnor]

Just tell her to go fuck herself, or you...whichever she prefers.

I agree with Raven - she doesn't want to go out with you but thinks you are desperate enough for her to use you as a sucker in her scam.

Using your address means when it all gets found out your address gets blocked and she's free to scam again.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Here's an alternate view; in womens minds a relationship question(wanna go out?) doesn't mean that other options(business plan) is out of the question. To be fair, not a bad way to look at things.

It's mostly men who go about the route "Don't wanna f*ck me? Well f*ck you!"

Not that the business "plan" is any good mind you

 

[rynnor]

It's mostly men who go about the route "Don't wanna f*ck me? Well f*ck you!"

There are also women who try to exploit guys who are interested in them - sometimes multiple blokes at the same time.

 

[Billargh]

Sounds like people here have had some fun experiences with woman and/or are paranoid.

 

[caLLous]

It looks like she has rejected his advances and tried to take advantage of the fact that he is into her by getting him to do the dodgy bits of an ebay scam.

 

[old.Tohtori]

There are also women who try to exploit guys who are interested in them - sometimes multiple blokes at the same time.

True, those are around too. All comes down to the woman in question and we don't really know enough about her to call on it. Well, in my opinuon that is.