Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

frank38

New Members
  • Content Count

    28
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About frank38

  • Rank
    HPC Newbie
  1. Sorry for late reply. The letter last week said they would serve notice. The actual agent has not replied to her email she sent at the weekend explaining she had verbal permission. Only the viewing agent who is not involved in the contract. First they said pets were banned from the building. Now they are saying they are not banned but contract was broken and admitting they did not ever say they were banned from the building. But not admitting the viewing agent said was it ok. Have to wait and see now if they actually serve notice. There is three months left on a six month contract so I cannot see them bothering to file a Section 8 in that time frame. She will get a bad reference now whatever happens so no incentive to just move out.
  2. Thanks for advise. She is 3 months into a 6 months fixed term. The dog is a toy breed dog. Tiny. No damage done there at all. I guess they could try a section 8 to get her out or just let her do the 6 months and then move. She would need time to find a new place anyway and has spent £500+ on moving costs/agency fees so would be a waste to just quit considering they said verbally it was ok. That clause is just unenforceable as far as I could tell it would be illegal for the LL to try and enforce it.
  3. Thanks for the replies. She moved into her flat a couple of months ago with her tiny dog. On moving in she discussed with the agent having a dog and they said it would be no problem as an unfurnished flat with no carpets. She signed up and moved in. LL now saying get rid of the dog. Now found out the tenancy has this clause and another saying no pets without written permission. Because of this clause she now fearing this eviction with the landlord coming in immediately. Found her today in the flat with the door double locked. Amazed how much LL and agents try to scare young tenants even in first 6 months of an AST.
  4. I was checking the AST my daughter was given by an agent and a clause says: Ending the agreement immediately I may enter the property and end this agreement, without affecting my rights by law or under this agreement, if you do any of the following. a. You do not pay the rent in full within 14 days of it becoming due. b. You break any condition of this agreement. c. You become bankrupt. Is this legal? She is scared the landlord could just come and take the property off her for playing music or not clearing the gutters.
  5. 'housing expert Lord Best – have tabled amendments stipulating that social housing tenants spend no more than a third of their earnings on rent.' And everyone else has to pay market rent even if that means 50% plus of after tax earnings goes on rent. Is this government ever going to actually do anything to make the system fairer? So many U-turns. Truely pathetic.
  6. We end with a system where the middle classes and the 'poor' all have the same income because the middle classes are taxed more and more to pay benefits. With more and more middle class jobs going to AI we will end up with just the rich and the rest. The reality is the 'rich' are never going to fund this level of welfare. There is a very simple solution. The government needs to build cheap housing to rent out at affordable prices and crowd out the BTL sector. It is madness for billions to be spent on housing benefit when the government can turn worthless land into a valuable asset simply by giving itself planning permission to build low cost housing.
  7. When the state pension first came in back in 1912 it was set at the current life expectancy for men. It was never supposed to be a handout that everyone gets for 30 years to do nothing. Most people in there late 60s are capable of working. Why should today's young payout for 30 years of pensions to finance holidays and BTL properties for people able to work?
  8. The stuff that Deepmind has shown us so far (Atari and Go) is not really AI. The work is almost the same as Tresuro did in the 1990s to play backgammon to masters level. They have simply added deep convolution nets to use on images for feature extraction rather than handcrafted them. The power in the modern GPUs just means the agents can play millions and millions of games to learn the best moves. Humans learn in much fewer moves. There is a massive hole in transfering learning for on environment to another and learning with less experience as humans do. Having said that with GPUs and specialist chips are getting faster and faster does the machine have to be able to transfer knowledge and learn with less experience? Probably not. The whole idea of creating a true AI is red herring in terms of jobs. On any particular domain a machine could learn very quickly using deep learning combined with reinforcement learning without being true AI. The same set of algorithms can learn to do anything well and could replace any sort of analytical job done on currently done on a computer (basic accounting, stock picking, medical scan analysis, spreadsheet sorting, translation, scheduling etc) within 5 years. In fact it could be done now if it was worth specialists coding up the agents to replace the workers. Physical jobs will take longer as it much easier to write software agents than mess about with robots. As others have said Capitalism does not exist anymore anyway. Those who know how to use the technology and the gateways to the consumers will ultimately be very rich and those who do not will be slaves. On a micro level for each company if enough jobs can be replaced by coded agents to save money then the agents will be coded. If this occurs world wide there will need to be a citzens income to provide consumption. Sadly the gateway to the internet is controlled by very few organisations. These same organisations are also trying to grab all the AI scientists. Something needs to be done to break up this concentration of power.
  9. I wouldn't want to hijack a Brexit thread to talk about the Betfair pricing structure. My view is that the commission structure always favoured traders over gamblers which was good for initial liquidity growth but wrong to maintain interest for punters. From an EU perspective it is interesting that despite all the talk of the single market how a new innovative product that would benefit consumers was effectively shut out of doing business in Europe even when It was based and paying taxes in the UK.
  10. The 'stay' camp have a major advantage in that they choose when the vote will take place. My greatest fear is that the leave campaign peaks too soon because they do not control the date of the vote. In all the debates I have seen the leave argument has smashed the stay argument. In fact, the stay argument is very very weak. It is basically defeatist saying we have to except the EU has flaws but we need it or we are economically in trouble. What they really mean is big business will be affected if we leave. Voters need to carefully look at those who are pushing for us to stay. Big business of course wants us to stay. They want cheap labour and a common market and don't care about democracy, consumers, the workers or even the middle classes. They care about one thing... profit for themselves. These are the same multinationals that do whatever they can to avoid taxes. Don't trust them to protect the minimum wage jobs they offer at the moment. I see that Betfair is mentioned above. Betfair was a great idea providing cheap person to person betting and a great benefit to punters. Despite the common market Betfair failed to get into Europe for exchange betting. One by one European countries closed it down. In Germany they wanted a massive turnover tax. In Spain and Italy and seperate costly exchange. In France it is totally banned. What has happened since is a brilliant idea has failed and the company has changed into a typical multinational as a regular sportsbook who overcharges their customers and bans winning punters. Betfair is now based offshore to reduce its tax bill and run by professional management. The founders who set out to create a better world for gamblers are long gone. It has made its current management team very rich, Europe destroyed a great idea because the reality is the markets are not open, Those odds represent the fear factor and the influence big business and politicians who are looking for a big business job after politics. These people have the money and power to influence the vote. I think grass root power will win over and we will vote to leave and form a new relationship with Europe and the world for trade. But even if we do leave I would not bet against big business being there again influencing the trade agreements we make in future.
  11. The two examples given by the OP were Baxter and Deepmind's Learning to play Atari games. Baxter can be taught to do tasks like screwing on caps on bottles and then can be taught to do something completely different. It has been around for several years and I do not see it being used in a widespread manner. It is a neat piece of kit but I think robots will be sticking to specific tasks rather than learning to adapt to new ones for a while yet. In a factory that kind of learning flexibility is not really needed. Deepmind's Atari player is slightly different. It used reinforcement learning combined with deep learning to learn the best action just from 'seeing' the game images. This type of technology could be used for other things. I have used it to learn to trade markets without human intervention. But to do this takes a lot of work by the human to set it up. Each new environment has to be thought through and programmed then the agent can learn by itself and find better solutions than a human could. This sort of tech could be used in fraud detection, stock picking, web analytics, searching to make sense of legal documents and so on. The more times the agent does a task the better it gets. Unlike humans a GPU can try a task a million times very quickly and learn to get better and better. It will be jobs in places like banks, accounting firms and legal firms that will go in the same way as the PC led to less secretaries needed. This time a hedge fund will nolonger need a human stock picker, instead he will need an AI programmer. Low pay service and care jobs will remain to a point. The Japanese humaniod robots will ultimately takeover some care home jobs, particularly companion jobs, leading to better quality of life in old age. The issue is those who control the technology will control the economy. Those who do not will be stuck in low paid work. If the professional middle classes are removed we will end up with a slave type economy with a few mega rich people and the rest of the people with not enough money to buy anything. The good news is learning to use the technology is available to anyone who is interested. Although the firms like Google and Facebook have paid big bucks for the experts the techniques and a lot of code is open source. I do not buy into to the argument that these companies have all the data so no one else has a chance. There is an unlimited amount of data available to anyone by the internet.
  12. Isn't there a danger that people that work cannot afford to have children (or many children) whereas single parent families on tax credits can afford to have (and benefit from) having more kids. This could lead to more and more of the population being brought up in households that rely on benefits. This, in turn, could lead to a society where the majority of people see tax credits as an entitlement and work not paying. Surely we want to install in our children from a very early age that hard work does lead to a better lifestyle. Otherwise ultimately no one will end up working and then who pays for the tax credits? I do not know what the answer is because once single mums have more kids the rest of us have to pay for them. What is the alternative.. let the kids starve?
  13. It is debatable whether this is really artificial intelligence or just machine learning. If you look at the changes they have made to include deep learning into the search process it is clear that there is no 'secret source'. The process takes highly skilled scientists and a lot of fine turning to get the algorithms to learn well. What will be interesting is when the combination of deep learning (or wide learning) combined with reinforcement learning brings in the years to come. It is the reinforcement learning element that will provide the 'magic'. The half billion dollar purchase of the deepmind experts and the amount of data google has clearly will give them a head start on this. However with the internet everyone has the ability to get gather enough data to build AI systems. I imagine that the real breakthroughs will come from individuals working alone or in small groups without the constraints of a big PLC like google. They have snapped up all the key players in deep learning but the tech is available for all to see as the likes of Geoff Hinton are academics by trade and have published many papers.
  14. I thought many HAs got their housing stock through transfers from Councils and development grants. Any landlord could charge less if the properties were initially free.
  15. The whole social housing policy needs to be radically changed. People earning anywhere near the average wage should be no where near social housing. People who can afford to buy a home should be no where near it either. Surely it should just be for people that have no where else to turn. Right to buy and right to live for generations is deeply unfair on the rest of the population. Why are people who's parents managed to get a social house decades ago be allowed to pass on the right to cheap rent to their kids? Their kids go to the same schools and have the same opportunities as the rest of us. Yet because their parents got state aid they get it as well with the possibility of buying a house at a discount to flip? It just seems unfair to me. People living in council houses say why should they not be able to live where they grew up? Good point but why should you and not people who had parents that did not live in social housing? No one should have the right to live anywhere unless they work hard and pay like everyone else. Social housing should just be for the people in the most need. Not for people earning over £30k a year. If people on £30k a year cannot afford to look after themselves what chance do the kids coming through now on minimum wage have? There are no council houses waiting for them to move into.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.