Fake stamps circulating in the UK are originating from China, lawmaker says
Ross_audio @ Ross_audio @lemmy.world Posts 0Comments 271Joined 2 yr. ago
Ross_audio @ Ross_audio @lemmy.world
Posts
0
Comments
271
Joined
2 yr. ago
Fl. Oz are actually nothing to do with weight. They are volume.
For each fluid oz. use 30 ml
It's only approximate but the official measurements for nutrition actually do it in the US so it's not a real unit anyway anymore.
Stamps no longer have a face value. They are 1st or second class.
As they put up the price each year it's becoming common to buy stamps before the price rise and sell them after.
The margin on the last rise was ~13% on 2nd class stamps, 8% on first class stamps.
13% has been roughly the average every year since 2005.
So you can absolutely buy stamps at less than "face value". Someone who bought them 4 years ago could easily give you a 20% discount and still make a profit.
As stamps are not allowed to expire (or have to be replaced if they do) this is a safe investment.
Royal mail have encouraged this to inflate sales in the short term and are suffering from those valid stamps still being available now with no further revenue.
Taking the face value off stamps is what's caused this problem.
There was never an investment opportunity in buying a 90p stamp that was still worth 90p postage years later.
But buying 1000 2nd class stamps that are always worth 2nd class postage has been an inflation beating purchase.
Or they go close to bust and get renationalised.
If Labour are smart about it they'll keep the USO in place and when it's shown the business isn't profitable take the assets back into public hands at a reasonable price.
The key problem with the new stamps is there's no way for someone to check the validity themselves.
It's also just a barcode, so a fake stamp that gets used with that barcode first doesn't get stopped and the legitimate one does.
There have definitely been some batches where the barcodes have leaked.
Hey I'm just checking in with your account status. Definitely just that, not hoping you'll but anything...
All emails companies send you are designed to get you to spend money.
It's an ad.
Of course if that ad comes with a discount I might not be unhappy to get it. But if a(n) status message ad comes in reminding me of pizza and it's on a day they want me to pay full price for dominos. Then I don't want that message.
Either I'll feel hungrier or poorer.
Freud was wrong about a lot of stuff.
You disagree. Very strongly.
Why?
Honestly, Zoom just has a hilariously high frequency of vulnerabilities being discovered.
So now the person back-tracking on their "facts" is claiming others should do better research.
I said you were wrong and you were wrong. So I guess this is where we find out whether you care about objectivity.
Are you going to shift your opinion any iota's to match the facts?
"You are a fish in water, unaware of swimming in it."
Your first instinct was to attack the messenger, not the message. But feel free to take a second stab at it.
The idea that consciousness is a Freudian invention is patiently false.
"The earliest known use of the word unconscious is in the late 1600s.
OED's earliest evidence for unconscious is from 1678, in T. Hobbes' De Mirabilibus Pecci."
You're just making stuff up now. Which I suppose someone defending quackery will do.
You can try to psychoanalyse me all you like, but you'd probably be better off using a psychic to help. A psychic will be able to tell you more things.
As you don't care if the things you make up about me are right or not you might as well go for volume.
So the ideas we all know him for are discredited, like the post says. On top of that you're diminishing the role he's traditionally ascribed in the history of the subject.
Pick a lane because you're going further than I am.
You call his ideas "subjective" like I do. That discredits them. Using subjective or unprovable medical treatments is the definition of quakery.
You also deny his historical impact on the things we do today that matter, psychiatry.
So we seem to be in agreement on Freud.
You seem to want to defend quakery in general in order to defend Freud.
Proportional representation does give a minority voice to these people.
It's the cost of fairness and it is useful to demonstrate minority views are disregarded for no reason other than because they're the minority.
How's that FPTP election going? Nice and stable, no extremists likely to overthrow democracy or anything?
So let's go through it.
Freud tried to be a doctor, tried to be objective about the mind which became psychiatry.
So the father of psychiatry.
But he actually practiced psychoanalysis which is unscientific and now discredited.
It's not a strong opinion anymore than "please use the scientific method".
"Pop quiz: Are you conscious? Next question: Can you prove it objectively? Or is it sufficient that we come to an intersubjective agreement about it to have established a baseline of subjective human experience?
Descartes was a philosopher. Freud tried to be a doctor.
Freud has been discredited as a bad philosopher and a bad psychiatrist.
The idea that he was trying the "study of the subjective" is false.
The reason he is known as the father of psychiatry is he tried to make objective observations about consciousness.
He largely got it wrong, so his ideas are now hokum. But he gets some credit for trying.
Much like Hippocrates. We disregard the stuff he got wrong. His ideas are discredited. We happily ignore the stuff he didn't prove scientifically.
Then we get on with medicine with actual evidence.
Saying Freud only studied the subjective would be discrediting him even more than I'm doing.
What do you think Freud was studying?
Don't treat subjective pseudoscience as medicine.
Calling Freud's work subjective is essentially discrediting it. That's what you're doing.
So to disappoint. This is a shopped title.
But the real thing isn't much different.
Anyway, here's the title track.
So to disappoint. This is a shopped title.
But the real thing isn't much different.
Anyway, here's the title track.
"Psychoanalysis is not about the scientific study of a subject"
We agree.
Now either you discredit pseudoscience or you don't.
Don't go to a psychoanalysts, go to psychiatrists.
Don't go to barbers, go so surgeons.
What you call "psychoanalytic methods" used by modern psychiatrists are long distanced from Freud's ideas. To the point where reputable psychiatrists are avoiding the term psychoanalysis.
We don't treat respiratory issues with "taking the air" by the seaside anymore.
Anyone recommending psychoanalysis and still calling it psychoanalysis is either someone who graduated 50 years ago and failed to keep up recently or a quack.
That's exactly the point psychoanalysis is largely discredited by Psychiatry.
Seeing a psychoanalyst is like seeing a chiropractor.
Seeing a psychiatrist is like seeing a physiotherapist.
I'm sorry, I started joking because you weren't being serious either.
Wait, you were being serious?
Well I've got a solution for you!
Just insert this adapter into the 3.5mm jack and it will be blocked for you. It'll no longer be wasted space because this adapter is a useful place to store several grains of rice for a snack.
Unfortunately you do lose a feature as a result of using this adapter, it will stop one of the speakers from working and degrade your audio quality.
But you shouldn't complain about anything removing a feature, or degrading your audio quality. You've got a new feature of being able to store rice!
You can even buy special fairphone sustainable rice from us. With only a small 300% mark up but an incredible 80% of the sustainability of already available rice. It comes in green!
It would also negate the point of the legislation that means they have to accept stamps in the first place.
You should not have to visit a post office in person or online to post a letter.
There are letter boxes in walking distance. If you've bought a book of stamps everything you need is in your desk.
That's the system we have and it would never be designed by a business that way. But it's a business that's taken on that system alongside the I infrastructure for it.
If you genuinely depend on the post accessibility to it is important. It could be modernised but it was working before, modernisation and cost saving are not the same thing.