7 ms·

Anything that is core to the function and well being of a state, being owned by a foreign nation poses a national security risk. The U.K. has been stripped and

Anything that is core to the function and well being of a state, being owned by a foreign nation poses a national security risk. The U.K. has been stripped and laid bare of its assets since the era of privatisation. The U.K. needs to wake up and start innovating to take back control.

franktankbank 9mo ago
I think the only reason this is done is because we are in an era of exceptional illegal kickbacks. Unethical/illegal behavior has become so normalized that if you aren't actively working for a party who is doing it/doing it yourself you are losing.
LightBug1 9mo ago
>>Anything that is core to the function and well being of a state, being owned by a foreign nation poses a national security risk. You mean like water? ... I believe we're the only 'developed' country in the world to have sold off / privatised it's water. It's all we do. Sell our country down the river for the benefit of a few wankers. I signed up to the link in the original post, but don't have that much hope. We'll sell our grandma if it'll mean we get a 50p voucher or save 2 more minutes of our day.
- design2203 9mo ago
  Yes that’s exactly what I mean. I’m working on stuff that I can’t say too much about. But let’s just say there is a way out from this - but it will require the smartest minds and folks starving for change to come together and create the change we want. Sometimes an environment that creates a desperate need for change can be a good thing. It’s not going to happen via politics. It has to come by being creative from the outside in.
  - stocksinsmocks 9mo ago
    I’m not very confident in the strategy of immiserating most people to drive positive change. This has been a Communist talking point for a century and a half that has yet to produce positive results, despite many attempts. I am pleased to read someone is taking some initiative.
    - design2203 9mo ago
      I don’t believe in the communism vs capitalist debate. The latter has furthered progress so clearly there are benefits to be had. But yet the dream of the former continues on. Someone who is more open to a “take the best of what exists” is what is needed. Appreciate the positive sentiment.
  - nebula8804 9mo ago
    >I’m working on stuff that I can’t say too much about. But let’s just say there is a way out from this - but it will require the smartest minds and folks starving for change to come together and create the change we want. Sometimes an environment that creates a desperate need for change can be a good thing. Let me guess, its a new Web Framework isn't it? :P
- thebruce87m 9mo ago
  > You mean like water? ... I believe we're the only 'developed' country in the world to have sold off / privatised it's water. Wasn’t it both England and Wales?
re-thc 9mo ago
> The U.K. needs to wake up and start innovating to take back control. That's a nice dream.
- afavour 9mo ago
  It’s not impossible. The UK has a rich history of tech innovation but it’s long since been eclipsed by Silicon Valley and its funding (which the UK can only dream of). But the UK government's GDS team is a fantastic example of doing tech right in government. I can see an expanded government involvement in tech for bodies like the NHS that is a clear alternative to the Silicon Valley model. The salaries would never reach US levels but could still afford a very comfortable life. Problem is that it would require the government to spend money on itself and its employees, which successive governments are loathe to do because the press will punish them for it every time.
  - TheOtherHobbes 9mo ago
    In many ways the UK is a tragic country: top tier talent in many areas, hamstrung by political, management, financial, and media culture rooted in the 19th century, and wholly colonised by offshore owners and foreign powers. Many of the country's assets and infrastructure are now literally owned abroad, and run for the benefit of foreign owners. You regularly get outbreaks of talent like GDS, and they regularly get sidelined/eaten/shut down if they're not aligned with corporate ownership.
    - afavour 9mo ago
      Yes, I also think ossified social structures have a lot to do with it. You work up the chain of management and eventually you find the son of the Earl of Tossingham, who turns out to be completely ineffectual. The US has avoided that fate up until this point but when I look at Larry Ellison’s son buying Paramount with dad’s money, the Trump juniors cashing in on their dads name (and to your point, all of them happily taking investment from the Saudis) I do have a sense of history repeating itself.
      - 9mo ago
Flere-Imsaho 9mo ago
Our whole tech stack is foreign owned and built. Everything from the CPU to the operating system and more. We live in a globalised system and there's no undoing that. The very idea of "nation" is being challenged. To me the NHS is a hang-over from the 20th century, out of date and struggling to keep up. A new system of health care needs to take over. I'm not smart enough to know what that is, but I hope it happens soon.
- giardini 9mo ago
  Democratic governments should not provide health care. Politicians quickly learn to use government services/"rights" as a means of dividing and controlling the population. Instead of thinking about the survival of the nation, people focus on personal survival (e.g., should I vote to live another three years or help pay for a new weapon system?). To provide healthcare is akin to weighing the nations' pancreas on a balance scale against, for example, the Navy. What kind of a country is that? (Ans. "Almost every developed nation today!-(") I believe the term for this is "incommensurability". Whilst money seems to make everything "commensurable" at first glance, it is a mistake to extend the application of money in this manner to government-provided healthcare. https://healthcarereaders.com/insights/healthcare-fundamental-human-right https://healthcarereaders.com/insights/healthcare-fundamenta...
  - Daishiman 9mo ago
    But this is actually not what happens and for the most part democratic governments that do provide health care are the ones with the best health outcomes worldwide, so what point are you trying to make?
    - giardini 9mo ago
      My point is that governments should focus on national security and integrity of elections and law. Every dollar spent on healthcare is a dollar that cannot be used to enhance the nations' defense or legal systems. It also raises the cost of government b/c of the necessary added bureaucracy. Let private businesses sell insurance. Let people buy what insurance they desire.

franktankbank 9mo ago

I think the only reason this is done is because we are in an era of exceptional illegal kickbacks. Unethical/illegal behavior has become so normalized that if you aren't actively working for a party who is doing it/doing it yourself you are losing.

LightBug1 9mo ago

>>Anything that is core to the function and well being of a state, being owned by a foreign nation poses a national security risk. You mean like water? ... I believe we're the only 'developed' country in the world to have sold off / privatised it's water. It's all we do. Sell our country down the river for the benefit of a few wankers. I signed up to the link in the original post, but don't have that much hope. We'll sell our grandma if it'll mean we get a 50p voucher or save 2 more minutes of our day.

design2203 9mo ago
Yes that’s exactly what I mean. I’m working on stuff that I can’t say too much about. But let’s just say there is a way out from this - but it will require the smartest minds and folks starving for change to come together and create the change we want. Sometimes an environment that creates a desperate need for change can be a good thing. It’s not going to happen via politics. It has to come by being creative from the outside in.
- stocksinsmocks 9mo ago
  I’m not very confident in the strategy of immiserating most people to drive positive change. This has been a Communist talking point for a century and a half that has yet to produce positive results, despite many attempts. I am pleased to read someone is taking some initiative.
  - design2203 9mo ago
    I don’t believe in the communism vs capitalist debate. The latter has furthered progress so clearly there are benefits to be had. But yet the dream of the former continues on. Someone who is more open to a “take the best of what exists” is what is needed. Appreciate the positive sentiment.
- nebula8804 9mo ago
  >I’m working on stuff that I can’t say too much about. But let’s just say there is a way out from this - but it will require the smartest minds and folks starving for change to come together and create the change we want. Sometimes an environment that creates a desperate need for change can be a good thing. Let me guess, its a new Web Framework isn't it? :P
thebruce87m 9mo ago
> You mean like water? ... I believe we're the only 'developed' country in the world to have sold off / privatised it's water. Wasn’t it both England and Wales?

re-thc 9mo ago

> The U.K. needs to wake up and start innovating to take back control. That's a nice dream.

afavour 9mo ago
It’s not impossible. The UK has a rich history of tech innovation but it’s long since been eclipsed by Silicon Valley and its funding (which the UK can only dream of). But the UK government's GDS team is a fantastic example of doing tech right in government. I can see an expanded government involvement in tech for bodies like the NHS that is a clear alternative to the Silicon Valley model. The salaries would never reach US levels but could still afford a very comfortable life. Problem is that it would require the government to spend money on itself and its employees, which successive governments are loathe to do because the press will punish them for it every time.
- TheOtherHobbes 9mo ago
  In many ways the UK is a tragic country: top tier talent in many areas, hamstrung by political, management, financial, and media culture rooted in the 19th century, and wholly colonised by offshore owners and foreign powers. Many of the country's assets and infrastructure are now literally owned abroad, and run for the benefit of foreign owners. You regularly get outbreaks of talent like GDS, and they regularly get sidelined/eaten/shut down if they're not aligned with corporate ownership.
  - afavour 9mo ago
    Yes, I also think ossified social structures have a lot to do with it. You work up the chain of management and eventually you find the son of the Earl of Tossingham, who turns out to be completely ineffectual. The US has avoided that fate up until this point but when I look at Larry Ellison’s son buying Paramount with dad’s money, the Trump juniors cashing in on their dads name (and to your point, all of them happily taking investment from the Saudis) I do have a sense of history repeating itself.
    - 9mo ago

Flere-Imsaho 9mo ago

Our whole tech stack is foreign owned and built. Everything from the CPU to the operating system and more. We live in a globalised system and there's no undoing that. The very idea of "nation" is being challenged. To me the NHS is a hang-over from the 20th century, out of date and struggling to keep up. A new system of health care needs to take over. I'm not smart enough to know what that is, but I hope it happens soon.

giardini 9mo ago
Democratic governments should not provide health care. Politicians quickly learn to use government services/"rights" as a means of dividing and controlling the population. Instead of thinking about the survival of the nation, people focus on personal survival (e.g., should I vote to live another three years or help pay for a new weapon system?). To provide healthcare is akin to weighing the nations' pancreas on a balance scale against, for example, the Navy. What kind of a country is that? (Ans. "Almost every developed nation today!-(") I believe the term for this is "incommensurability". Whilst money seems to make everything "commensurable" at first glance, it is a mistake to extend the application of money in this manner to government-provided healthcare. https://healthcarereaders.com/insights/healthcare-fundamental-human-right https://healthcarereaders.com/insights/healthcare-fundamenta...
- Daishiman 9mo ago
  But this is actually not what happens and for the most part democratic governments that do provide health care are the ones with the best health outcomes worldwide, so what point are you trying to make?
  - giardini 9mo ago
    My point is that governments should focus on national security and integrity of elections and law. Every dollar spent on healthcare is a dollar that cannot be used to enhance the nations' defense or legal systems. It also raises the cost of government b/c of the necessary added bureaucracy. Let private businesses sell insurance. Let people buy what insurance they desire.