As Mumsnet et al (likely the only people actually "consulted" about Starmer's social media ban for under-16s) squeal and cavort about yet another "victory" (they believe their last one was the EHRC guidance about trans people...and tall women...and women with broad shoulders...and women with flat chests...you know, the one that doesn't stop - and which they don't want to stop - a grown, clearly cisgender, violently aggressive man chasing a woman into the women's toilets, and assaulting her because he "thought she looked trans"...such protection...so much safety...), I'm already preparing for the reality that, as soon as this pointless act of government overreach and control for control's sake comes in, I'll have to hope like hell that people who have been very vocal about being anti-Digital ID actually put their boots on that ground, and engage with my freelance business being something I will no longer be able to run online....
Image shows the acronym NHS in white on a mid-blue background Sir James Mackey, the head of NHS England, has said something that is true, but unpopular: The NHS doesn't need more money. Almost no established business needs more money. Very few new businesses need a lot of money. When you throw money at a problem, or even a series of problems, you don't actually solve anything. Instead, you add a new problem - decision paralysis. The more money you have to solve your problems, the more things you could do, and therefore the more choices you need to make. Humans typically aren't that good at making choices - just think about how common the complaint of "But how am I supposed to decide what to have for dinner every day for the rest of my life?!" is. When, especially if it's just you, that should be effortless - you know whether you enjoy a lot of cooking or not. You know what food you like. You know how many stove burners and pans you have. You know how...