Pipeline-based providers are still a significantly greater percentage of the UK's overall gas consumption
Could the UK not rebalance its imports from LNG to more pipeline-based gas? It seems like the UK has managed to cut out Russian LNG imports completely already.
woah this is my first time hearing about dns64, this seems really fascinating.
I might sound naive but why aren't we moving towards ipv6 if there is already a service which can make migrations easy I suppose for the end customer.
It seems that it is easy for a ipv6 client to connect to ipv4 lets say by using dns64 but it seems that the same isn't true for vice versa?
Now I am genuinely uncertain but Couldn't something like this be possible lets say by having both ipv4 and ipv6 running and the ipv4 could be through some tunneling software like serveo.net or the alikes and map-E seems to allow them to coexist too
I mean it seems that cloudflare warp can do this too if you want to connect to ipv6 and you have ipv4 but that adds a level of trust into cloudflare and etc. but still, do the benefits of ipv6 over ipv4 justify the migration of sorts or would these two things always coexist is a question/mystery
Like.. I searched the benefits and it seems that the truly great benefit is that everyone can get a ipv6 because of its higher size (basically limitless ipv6) as compared to ipv4 which are limited/exhausted right now.
IPSec seems to be another benefit which was optional and complex in ipv4 and its mandatory in ipv6 and it seems really nice to have encryption and so much more at a packet level.
What is the blocker? Like, as a server, do I really ever need a ipv4 if I have a ipv6 server, I think I might need it if I want everyone to view my website or etc. things on my server if their devices could be ipv4 and they can't access my ipv6 website I think but still aren't there any mitigations around it or sorts, I am kinda curious.
the BNA is even more complex today after some additional changes
as a British person living abroad who gave birth to a child abroad, it took me a lot of time and mental energy to determine
- what type of British nationality I am (yes, really)
- how that affects my child as she was born abroad
- how that affects any children she has in the future
varying circumstance around birth of all the people listed above change whether they are British citizens automatically, by application or simply not eligible at all
Because I heard he was going to have some advisory or executive capacity on government operation. There's a significant conflict of interest there if he's running and owning these companies at the same time.
Its hard to determine a conflict of interest when the role isn't clear though, and the problem there is that everyone can really go off of what they heard through the grape vine.
If the role truly is advisory I wouldn't personally see that as a conflict of interest. Regulators are often asking for advise from those they are meant to regulate without it getting flagged as a conflict of interest (for better or worse).
It used to be that even a WHIFF of conflict of interest was treated as "no smoke without fire, better divest".
Carter placed his peanut farm in a blind trust to avoid precisely that - sadly, we have seen a complete erosion of norms, standards, and morals in public life.
I don't think it's that hard to determine. He has big companies involved in significant regulatory actions and oversight, he would stand to gain a lot by influencing things slightly in his favor. Sure, taken to absurdity everybody in government has a conflict of interest because they are alive on the same planet and have heir own views on things, but for the case of someone like Musk it's pretty clear.
Politicians and bureaucrats can and should consult with the people they govern of course. The "proper" way to do that would be via reasonably open and transparent process that is open to interested parties so competitors, customers, unions, scientists could have their say.
Again I'm fully aware this isn't how things actually work, so I'm not saying Musk is really doing anything outside the norm in American politics by buying a seat at the table. He's just being slightly more open about it than most of them.
I wouldn't be opposed to going after such situations as corruption or conflict of interest issues, but that's going to be a big can of worms.
From the FAA and Boeing to multiple health agencies and pharmaceutical companies, there are a ton of advisory type roles that involve industry leaders "recommending" policy. I'd be surprised if Musk ended up at the top of the list when sorted by impact, counted either by financial impact or number of rules and regulations impacted by industry.
No pay for being on call by itself is still poor, particularly when it comes to swapping rotations between team members to provide flexibility amongst each other.
You’re making yourself available 24/7. That has a non trivial lifestyle impact which I’ve always thought deserves more than is typically rewarded.
As long as the on-call coverage is as specified at the time of hiring, this is just a difference in form of payment.
If I receive 100 total units of compensation, I'd way rather get 100 units of base pay (and 0 on-call pay) than 90 units of base pay and 10 units of specific on-call pay. (What if the company eliminates on-call? What if I get injured and my insurance only covers base pay? Severance is usually based only on base pay; I would not be paid on-call while I'm on PTO or other paid leave, annual raise percentages typically apply to base pay, etc...)
How can the on-call coverage be specified at hiring? Can the company guarantee that my team will never shrink or that the page rate won't increase?
What will financially encourage my company to stop paging me overnight if there isn't a labor cost to the company every time an on-call incident occurs?
> What if I get injured and my insurance only covers base pay?
Insurance payouts can be easily based on wages that include reported commissions, tips, and overtime. They can very easily be based on an average of past actual wages paid in the last handful of months at the company.
> Severance is usually based only on base pay
Severance is a completely optional practice that is based entirely on what the company wants to do. I would argue that severance is more accurately based on "The lowest safe number to pay to this particular employee to make sure their termination does not become a legal risk."
> I would not be paid on-call while I'm on PTO or other paid leave
But also, PTO days and on-call days don't indersect. If you took time off during an on-call shift you would be trading it with a team member, so you would never lose that extra wage.
Example: I'm taking a week off, it's during my scheduled on-call shift. I would normally get paid my on-call hours but I didn't this week. But when I get back from my vacation, I'm picking up an extra on-call shift because my team member covered my shift when I was on vacation.
Now, I'm taking a week off, but it's not during my on-call shift. I wouldn't have been paid on-call hours this week anyway. When I get back from my vacation, I am going on my normally scheduled on-call shift.
I personally have never felt compensated dynamically enough for on-call schedules. Most corporate jobs seem to pay for a sliver of the life disruption, maybe paying for half my phone and Internet bill or something like that. They all say that the on-call is baked into the compensation, but I'm not so sure.
>"Severance is a completely optional practice that is based entirely on what the company wants to do. I would argue that severance is more accurately based on "The lowest safe number to pay to this particular employee to make sure their termination does not become a legal risk."
Almost right! I see it as an extension of what I call the basic rules, "I am as nice to you as you are to me", and "I care exactly as much as you do."
That does, in some cases, expand severance a little beyond the cold risk calculation. If the severance is going to someone who helped the company make it, then helping make sure they make it to their next gig is part of the equation.
Not everyone boils it all down that far, but a whole lot of us do!
Which makes your comment solid, and mine a quibble, but one I consider worthy of some discussion.
Germany (among other countries) has laws around this. My company pays I think 200 euro a day that someone is on call, so my German reports end up making a decent amount in months they have their on call shifts, especially felt when the team is smaller and rotations more frequent!
> If you took time off during an on-call shift you would be trading it with a team member, so you would never lose that extra wage.
I think this is true in _most cases_, but is not a given. I myself have encountered scenarios where it isn’t true: switching with someone much later in the rotation, only to then end up having to switch again for instance. You could envision a nefarious teammate weaseling out of their fair share with sneaky switches like this, too, though paying for it would maybe incentivize them not to!
Not to mention that there is incentive to keep having oncall pages, because that's how you get paid. Or not participate at all. On the other hand, with a flat payment, there is a big incentive to prevent issues and not have(reduce) ooh incidents, and participate in the rota.
In OP's case it sounds like they do get compensated with the day off, which is PTO. It's not a trade everyone would make but an extra day off into a long weekend is one I would have taken earlier in my career.
+1! You can't travel very much, you can't go hiking or biking in places without cell coverage, your whatever thing you are busy with gets interrupted, you can get woken up in the middle of the night, etc etc. That deserves some compensation.
Proficient English is just a “plus-alpha”, as they say.
You don’t need it, but it might open up a few more doors.
Then there’s certain topics, like science/medicine where English to some extent is absolutely necessary to keep up with research. Even then, I find some of these people still struggle with speaking and listening, but reading and writing can be pretty solid.
Not sarcasm. Where I work, they talk a big game about "we don't want know-it-alls we want learn-it-alls", and "upskilling" and all that.
But we don't get any dedicated time to actually do that training during business hours. The implication of course is that managers expect it to happen on evenings and weekends.
