It's not "quite expensive" if you compare it to the Australian passport which is 2x as expensive and so notoriously badly bound, holders joke Australian Border Protection forces test for forgeries by checking if the blue cover curls: if not, it's a fake.
The Australian passport curl was so disappointing. I have a decade-old passport from my third-world country of origin, and that was in far better shape than my new Australian passport that was freshly delivered.
For the benefit of anyone else doing this in Japan, these are the documents I had to submit. It will be different depending on circumstance, in particular I think the author may also be born outside the UK which may require other/more documents.
Anyway I had to submit:
Certified copy of my birth certificate, order from the UK general register office.
Original (not photocopy) of Japanese family register and translation.
Certificate of acceptance of notification of birth, original and translation.
Original Marriage certificate and translation.
Colour photocopy of every page of my childs Japanese passport.
Copy photocopy of the passport of an American or British citizen who confirms that child is mine.
The process is pretty unclear, and in general you seem to have to just keep submitting documents until they are satisfied.
If you don't have a legal father then you can't claim British citizenship through your father. That's all pretty straightforward. (Although there's a fun case where you can claim citizenship by double descent because your ancestor wasn't able to claim citizenship because of sexist historical laws).
Weirdly this never came up for me (and I'm in a similar situation). I suspect what documents are ask for varies a lot by who is assessing the application.
Don't know in this case, but some other countries ask for it to deduce your travel history (any current passport itself goes to them, with color copies of every page of old passports). Qatar wanted it because I shared name with somebody born 40 years before me.
I just looked it up. I was dating a Qatari and didn't even dare to explore naturalization. The process is insane. As a man, you can't get citizenship through marriage (only women get that). So, as a guy I would have to live there for 25 continuous years with little time outside the country. Add on that they require you to be rich, Muslim and speak Gulf Arabic at native level. Also, you have to give up your birth citizenship (not always possible) and they can revoke your citizenship on a whim.
Another reason is that the UK forbids the child to have different names on their japanese passport and their UK passport, which is often (almost always?) the case
That’s interesting, no requirement for parental birth certificates?
I was asked to provide (I am British, wife is Hungarian, living in Hungary) both parents’ birth certificates and all four grandparents’ birth certificates.
My wife is not in touch with her father, so we had to submit a cover letter explaining the situation, which was accepted (although I don’t really see why it was relevant anyway, my son’s Britishness is derived from my Britishness, her nationality and the nationality of her parents is essentially irrelevant).
We also didn’t have to copy the passport of anyone else, but we did have to have a family friend do the confirmation online (family friend is a lawyer in the UK, so was on the list of approved jobs for this).
> although I don’t really see why it was relevant anyway, my son’s Britishness is derived from my Britishness, her nationality and the nationality of her parents is essentially irrelevant
This is essentially happened to me, the "75% of the initial doc requests turned out to be irrelevant" was referring to this sort of thing.
In my case, as a British citizen married to a European living outside the UK, I had way fewer requests/demands for documentation.
All I needed to do was submit my own details, and a copy of both the marriage certificate and birth certificate for the child.
The assumption was made that as a married couple the child had me as the father, and as I'm British then so were they.
No references at all to grandparents, or even the mother's details, in the online wizard I filled out. Quite a quick process, which reminds me I probably need to renew their UK passport since it has expired a couple of years back.
Not only can you complete a UK Passport Application completely online (save for mailing any required documentations to HMPO), you can apply for a brand new passport as a "new" citizen (by adoption, naturalisation, or descent), online, from outside the UK, with just a mobile device without downloading some special app, including taking the photos.
Sure, you can play it on "hard mode " and do it with paper and pen for the lulz, but my experience was extremely efficient, fast, and straight-forward.
Renewed recently which was my first time using the online system. The entire process was exceptionally fast. I got the passport back in less than 2 weeks from California.
In comparison my Canadian passport renewal (damaged after 3 years) from California took 4 months. Was entirely paper based and had ridiculous requirements such as requiring a reference and a photograph stamped by photographer.
I know there's a digital pilot that's ongoing. That should be rolled out ASAP.
Just being able to do it via mail sounds like luxury, to renew a Swedish passport you need to visit an embassy in person. And then in 2 weeks go back in person to pick it up. Really fun when the embassy is on the other side of the country and it means expensive plane trips. This was even more of a problem during
COVID when borders were closed, since Sweden doesn't have embassies in every single country.
And they expire in 5 years, not 10 like many other countries.
I need to renew my Belgian passport soon, and I live in the United States.
Even though the consulate has my biometric data, I need to visit them in person.
My only saving grace is that they sometimes visit my city., and I can register there. But that registration is only valid for 1 year, and they don't visit every year...
And that is still 2h+ one way of travel for me, for something they already have.
I went through the UK online passport renewal system last year, and it is the best website I have used in a very very long time. A real breath of fresh air. It worked perfectly on my old computer and 'ancient' browser. Everything very simple / accessible / clear, colours, text, buttons, fields, requirements. A simple step-by-step navigation and actually friendly.
It is a shame that more businesses dont care about their customers enough to invest in such a well designed website. Well done HMPO.
You make it seem much simpler than it is in reality. I accept the process for renewals has been streamlined with considerable success but, as someone who recently helped a friend apply for his first passport a couple of years ago, I can attest the process is drawn out and tedious. An in-person interview is required, as is a signature from a 'responsible person' that many people do not have access to (Doctors are not accepted, for instance).
Haskell has an interesting syntax: it is intuitive after someone explains it to me, but not intuitive much before the explanation.
I don't think it's because I'm used to Algol-based languages (C, Python, etc.). Every Haskell code I've seen is plagued with a plethora of operators which aim to make the code concise but it's not obvious what they do just by looking at them: https://academy.fpblock.com/haskell/tutorial/operators/
> it is intuitive after someone explains it to me, but not intuitive much before the explanation
Isn't that pretty close to what something being intuitive means? Ie. something being intuitive means that it's easily understood or learned without requiring prior knowledge or instruction.
With Haskell code it is often so that the code which actually does something is expressed in terms of combinators. These combinators are often very general, so one must do a bit of mental work to understand what they do in this particular context.
Once you understand what the combinators do in a particular context the code often reads very easily, and what it does is very intuitive and natural.
Best example I can think of is applicative parsers, where there are scattered <*> and <$> operators around, but if you just ignore them the parser just looks like a very intuitive description of what the expressions you want to parse look like.
Most of the operators in that link are bog standard, and among the least interesting things to say about Haskell.
If I didn't know programming and picked at random some Java program, I wouldn't understand much either. If I didn't take a single math course and I tried to read a math formula, I wouldn't understand the operators or anything either.
The standard should be: how much can you understand once you learn the basics and do a couple of tutorials?
At some point, I did a rough count, and the number of operators you encounter in "normal" Haskell code—avoiding lens or domain-specific libraries—was pretty close to the number of operators you'd encounter in, say, JavaScript. This was a while ago and I don't want to redo the exercise now, but, even if we're being generous to JavaScript, practical Haskell needs on the order of 2x as many operators as practical JavaScript, not 10x.
Haskell has some up-front incidental complexity, but it's a difference of degree not kind from popular starting languages. It's easy to underestimate how much you had to learn about Algol-style languages that you've just internalized so well that you don't even realize. I've taught some complete programming beginners (high or middle schoolers) Java and Python and, especially one-on-one, I've seen how they get confused by things I did not even remember required explanation!
For example, in Python, people put : in the wrong place and don't understand how = works. "Basic" syntax like : and = are far more complex than we realize, we've just learned the basics so well that it's second nature. It's similar to how native English speakers don't even realize we have rules for adjective order ("big red ball" vs "red big ball"), while language learners run into it like a brick wall.
no doubt its fashionable to think "perl == line noise == bad"
however, there are certain sub languages (slangs) where the use of punctuation chars as operators is very helpful, of course regex is the most compelling where the code is parsing one char at a time
my regex url {
^ # Start of line
[<http> s? '://'] # Match http or https
['www.' ]? # Optional www.
[<[\w\-]>+ '.' ]+ # One or more domain segments
<[a..z]> ** 2..6 # TLD, 2 to 6 lowercase letters
[ '/' <[\w\-./?%&=]>* ]? # Optional path/query
$ # End of line
}
imo raku has improved the situation a lot by introducing "regex 2.0" with deep support for unicode and with built in grammars that can work smoothly with regex
Oh, I owe a lot to freenode and #haskell and #math in particular. I remember one of them ran a lecture on category theory, live. It was also there I first heard about Martin-Löf type theory.
It was such a great time and place for a young person interested in learning about Haskell.
I don't know if you just counted the JavaScript operators but if you count all the instances where some random symbol is used then it's really a ton. There is
yield*
function*
a?.b?.c
function f(x = 3) {
x ??= 3
...
TypeScript adds even more:
a!.b
Type<T>
type A = B extends C ? D : E
...
and there are countless ECMA proposals and TypeScript feature request that want to pile on even more. People seem to have zero qualms about cryptic syntax. I think the difference is that this syntax is mostly very ad-hoc. If you know the language already, this just adds a liiiittle bit extra to solve some very specific problem. On the other hand, Haskell operators like <$>, <*>, >>= are extremely general. After years I still learn about new and unexpected ways that you can use them (e.g. what the hell is `fix <$> id`). But paradoxically, because they can be used in so many seemingly unrelated contexts, you have no idea what to use them for at all initially.
I think that’s true as far as it goes, but there are further reasons why Haskell is more difficult. Here is one:
In Haskell, the lack of parentheses for function calls plus currying means that to read a function call, you need to already know how many arguments the function takes, which I feel adds a new level of difficulty over languages where you can often guess what a function does based on its name, without looking it up.
As a result, often Haskell reads more like math, where without knowing each symbol’s definition, you’re lost.
> practical Haskell needs on the order of 2x as many operators as practical JavaScript, not 10x.
Yeah but the JavaScript operators are almost all universally understood. There are some exceptions and mistakes, like `===` which shouldn't exist, and `.?` which is new but fairly standard. But most of the operators are just standard maths stuff, normal array/field accesses, etc.
Haskell has normal operators plus a bunch of weird operators that you need to learn. Even if the raw number of operators is only 2x, the number of operators that you have to learn is probably 10x.
Especially when you consider that Javascript operators are fixed so you have to learn them once, whereas Haskell operators are user-defined and Haskell programmers love defining them.
I think Larry Wall mentioned something like this regarding perl. Things can only be intuitive after learning them. I do not think it is syntax you are complaining about either. Some constructs in Haskell reference a certain model (monads, lenses) and no syntax is going to infuse any reader with that knowledge if they do not possess it already.
I just went through hell this with one of my daughters. She was born in Japan and I had a hard time getting my mother’s surname matching what was on my birth certificate.
Long story short, I demonstrated I was born in England and that I have citizenship (a passport) so no matter the possibility, it must be something that can be passed on. That doesn’t match the guidelines of documents required but it’s much less of a pain I reckon.
There was a law change about European Union citizens settlement scheme last week. It's a UK law which is like a tutorial for getting to play the passport game. Anyway, the following was written this year. It starts off by checking if you are a Lisp interpreter:
Changes to Appendix EU
APP EU1. In Annex 1, in sub-paragraph (a) of the definition of ‘continuous qualifying period’, after “(b)(i)(ee) below”, insert “(or unless sub- paragraph (b)(i)(ii) below applies)”.
APP EU2. In Annex 1, for sub-paragraph (b)(i)(ii) of the definition of ‘continuous qualifying period’, substitute:
“(ii) (where the person has limited leave to enter or remain granted under paragraph EU3 or EU3A of this Appendix) any period(s) of absence which did not exceed a total of 30 months in the most recent 60-month period, as at the date of application or (as the case may be) at the date on which, under paragraph EU4, the Secretary of State is considering whether to grant them indefinite leave to enter or remain under paragraph EU2 or (as the case may be) EU2A, without a valid application under this Appendix having been made; or
(jj) any period of absence due directly to an order or decision to which sub-paragraph (b)(iii) below refers, where that order or decision has been set aside or revoked; or”.
APP EU3. In Annex 1, for sub-paragraph (c)(v) of the definition of ‘continuous qualifying period’, substitute:
“(v) a relevant reference is concerned; or
(vi) sub-paragraph (b)(i)(ii) above applies, where, under paragraph EU4 of this Appendix, the Secretary of State is considering whether to grant the person indefinite leave to enter or remain without a valid application under this Appendix having been made”.
My First Reaction: Given that the game can be read as a deconstruction of the concept of Nation States and Citizenship, why would the UK government run such a thing?
I have noticed in Japan the crazy bureaucratization of document applications in the 7-8 years I've been living here. I've had 2 Japanese documents expire, "MyNumber" and "Driving License" in these years, and when trying to re-obtain them the process has become MUCH more complex. I'm bad at remembering all these processes in detail, but these are from memory:
- For the mynumber, first time, it was a simple application, and maybe a trip or two to the City Hall. This was at a moment where Japan was trying everyone to have/use the mynumber system so that might've made it easier on purpose.
- The second time I needed to book an appointment to request the application forms, which were (snail)mailed to me so then I could apply for the card. Yes, that sentence is as bad as it reads.
Now the crazier one is the driving license (conversion process):
- The first time I needed to get a translation, I went to JAL, showed my documents and paid, then received the translation. Took that and 2-3 documents, went to the driving license center, and gave the documents and passports and IDs. Waited few hours and had it done. Oh, I also got the Motorbike license for free.
- The second time I am applying now: need to get the translation, first register online for the translation, for which you need to create an account and a 8-step process. Hard, but still doable [1]. Then you need to book a meeting for the driving license center. But it's very hard to do so, in fact I couldn't find the link at all. I went in person and they showed me a QR code for the booking, I suspect this is hard to find on purpose. Every place is full and cannot be booked, except for 1 of them, 2 months later. Okay, I try to apply. First basic questions, sure, then asks for travel history on my passport that I need to input manually. Note that dates in one part of the form are on the shape of `YYYYMMDD` and in other they are 3 fields of "YYYY", "MM", "DD" (3 different inputs), having to write a dozen of them is maddening. Oh wait, but if I want the motorbike one, which was automatic before, I now need a document from the Spanish embassy as well, another side quest. I'm hoping they can at least provide it in Japanese. I guess I'm halfway that process now, got a meeting booked 2 months later.
Ha! I go to Japan every now and then, as I have friends there, and I've though a couple times about doing the Japanese driving license thing, that looked super easy back at the time (translate your current driving license, book a meeting in the exam center, do a short exam, and you're almost good to go). I was thinking about doing it in my next trip in two weeks, but seems like they've raised the difficulty several levels :)
if you drive on the right at home, they will fail you the first time on principle. If you drive on the left (aus, brit) you have a chance to pass the first time.
I love this. It starts as a parody, then slowly morphs into a serious and elegant solution to the "game". By the end, I almost wish I could play it myself. Bravo.
i think the tooling improves with popularity, so it's a bit of a chicken/egg problem.
But with the recent LSP decoupling of the IDE to the compiler, it is quite possible to make good tooling that is independent of any particular editor. It's just that the language's popularity is what induces contributors (as most are realistically after "fame" and "portfilio" when doing contributions).
That was definitely true many years ago. Nowadays Haskell has some really good tooling.
It has a feature-rich LSP, code formatter, package manager, dead-code checker, configurable linter, thread debugger, memory debugger, vulnerabilities checker, and much more.
That’s just what is provided by external tooling. Then, it also has everything the compiler has to offer, which is bit more than what most languages do. For example, you can now compile to JavaScript or WASM.
I've worked on a variety of large UK government systems for the past ten years.
This blog encapsulates the problem of writing government services/software, which often results in strange outcomes.
Writing software for government is essentially the codification of centuries worth of Acts of Parliament.
Now imagine building the HMPO passport system, and then some underlying Law/Act is changed or repealed etc.
Now someone has to find and change everything that the Law/Act affected in all systems.
Now consider that the government frequently outsources this work to expensive consultancies who are motivated to elongate contracts and extract maximum value from the client... And ideally become entrenched.
All whilst building systems of varying quality and inflexibility so that the next time that a Law/Act is changed then this whole process repeats.
There is no central decision making authority to wrangle this problem (there used to be Spend Controls), which is why Government services delivery is so expensive.
Do you have any insight as to why, seemingly, there is no contractual obligation on contractors to make a working system. They seem to make something approximating a working system, vastly overcharge -- like x1000 -- for output that appears to be 3 months of work by one junior programmer, but then get paid as if the system actually worked.
I recently renewed my passport in France. There is a new-ish platform here for every document one might want to obtain. I had one form to complete online, that was rather easy to follow. I then had to go to the office once to finish the process. That took only 10 minutes and then the passport was delivered. As painless as can be, I believe.
Whatever the situation is in the UK, it is not hopeless. The government needs to stop being afraid of hiring actual employees and bring all development in-house.
Is there an opportunity for reusable OSS rule systems? It seems that every government at every level could use an expressive system for defining and versioning them.
I suspect part of the gap here is, as you note, everything technical is outsourced and so there is not enough institutional capacity to envision and execute what would be a quite revolutionary re-architecture.
I find it extremely frustrating that the government is able to spend tens of millions on contractors for an IT project, but can’t pay market rate for in-house engineers, even if those would be cheaper in the long run.
This problem of law being essentially an append only repository of amendments is not unique to the UK.
I'd be cool to have a system that just needs to be fed "patches" in an append only way instead of having to scatter exceptions (if branches) all around.
Some logic programming languages can do that a little bit, but I think that the real problem is that there's no tech debt budget, and lawyers working around the laws can also profit from things being complicated. It'd be cool to have people devoted to simply laws to keep things as simple as possible.
Despite being born in the UK to a British father my character wasn't previously British due to parents being unmarried and being born after 1983 but before the 2006 rules update.
I'm not totally sure when but I think some time in the 2010s the 2006 update became retroactive so my character was allowed to play. Didn't have to do too many side quests - the main one was retrieving father's birth certificate.
My character also had to attend the endgame ceremony and swear allegiance to the queen, which seemed odd for someone born in the country and lived here all his life
I too have enjoyed a game of *Passport Application* by proxy.
One of the interesting rules the OP doesn't appear to mention is the 'mutable history' rule. Herein, the facts contained in a single document can alter over even short periods of time requiring that a document, already scanned into the Examiners system of fact recording, can be required to be returned for subsequent scans. Verifying documents have not altered in their facts is, some say, tacit acknowledgement by the Examiner breed that a multiverse exists.
The communication channel between the "NPC" telephone agents and the Examiners appears to be somewhat akin to prayer, only vague inferences can truly be received.
Aside, I suspect the OP maybe be a Mornington Crescent aficianado; a game seemingly similar in rule-topology to the aforementioned Passport Application.
This is one of many reasons why America's birthright citizenship is an incredible optimization: most people can prove they are American with a single document, a birth certificate.
> What are the base cases? A base case is an ancestor whose Britishness does not depend on a parent, e.g. someone who was naturalised, or born in the UK before 1983 (which makes one unconditionally british regardless of parents). That's right, further into the future we get from 1983, the taller these call-stacks can get.
This is insane to me, coming from a country that simply has a central database of all citizens and foreign residents, and a citizenship check is probably something like a single SELECT on an SQL table.
I had to do a MN1 application for my US-born daughter as both me and my partner were born abroad. As OP alludes to this is a sort of side quest called "registration" which if you don't do it before the child is 18 lapses (although I think there are still routes to obtain citizenship in these circs).
The most difficult part of the process (not dealt with in this version of Passport Application but maybe a future DLC pack?) was actually finding someone who could certify my evidence (you are meant to submit originals but they keep the docs including passports for 3-6 months which is a bit unrealistic if you are living abroad). I can't remember the exact rules but it wasn't possible to use a US notary or a normal solicitor certification process and instead I needed to go to a council office.
After calling about 5 councils all of whom disavowed any knowledge of the process or its requirements I ended up finding someone at Islington Council who was delightfully helpful. But it was one of the more frustrating UK government interactions I've had.
85 comments
[ 5.4 ms ] story [ 103 ms ] threadAnyway I had to submit:
Certified copy of my birth certificate, order from the UK general register office.
Original (not photocopy) of Japanese family register and translation.
Certificate of acceptance of notification of birth, original and translation.
Original Marriage certificate and translation.
Colour photocopy of every page of my childs Japanese passport.
Copy photocopy of the passport of an American or British citizen who confirms that child is mine.
The process is pretty unclear, and in general you seem to have to just keep submitting documents until they are satisfied.
In fact `applicant's father` (me) was born in the UK in this case, but `applicant's father's father` was not, the cause of the extra complications.
Weirdly this never came up for me (and I'm in a similar situation). I suspect what documents are ask for varies a lot by who is assessing the application.
Hope it all works out!
But why?
Qatar is a fascinating country, though.
I was asked to provide (I am British, wife is Hungarian, living in Hungary) both parents’ birth certificates and all four grandparents’ birth certificates.
My wife is not in touch with her father, so we had to submit a cover letter explaining the situation, which was accepted (although I don’t really see why it was relevant anyway, my son’s Britishness is derived from my Britishness, her nationality and the nationality of her parents is essentially irrelevant).
We also didn’t have to copy the passport of anyone else, but we did have to have a family friend do the confirmation online (family friend is a lawyer in the UK, so was on the list of approved jobs for this).
This is essentially happened to me, the "75% of the initial doc requests turned out to be irrelevant" was referring to this sort of thing.
All I needed to do was submit my own details, and a copy of both the marriage certificate and birth certificate for the child.
The assumption was made that as a married couple the child had me as the father, and as I'm British then so were they.
No references at all to grandparents, or even the mother's details, in the online wizard I filled out. Quite a quick process, which reminds me I probably need to renew their UK passport since it has expired a couple of years back.
Sure, you can play it on "hard mode " and do it with paper and pen for the lulz, but my experience was extremely efficient, fast, and straight-forward.
In comparison my Canadian passport renewal (damaged after 3 years) from California took 4 months. Was entirely paper based and had ridiculous requirements such as requiring a reference and a photograph stamped by photographer.
I know there's a digital pilot that's ongoing. That should be rolled out ASAP.
And they expire in 5 years, not 10 like many other countries.
Even though the consulate has my biometric data, I need to visit them in person.
My only saving grace is that they sometimes visit my city., and I can register there. But that registration is only valid for 1 year, and they don't visit every year...
And that is still 2h+ one way of travel for me, for something they already have.
don't they need to re-record them after X years? I thought that was the whole point of renewing an identity document/passport.
It is a shame that more businesses dont care about their customers enough to invest in such a well designed website. Well done HMPO.
I don't think it's because I'm used to Algol-based languages (C, Python, etc.). Every Haskell code I've seen is plagued with a plethora of operators which aim to make the code concise but it's not obvious what they do just by looking at them: https://academy.fpblock.com/haskell/tutorial/operators/
Isn't that pretty close to what something being intuitive means? Ie. something being intuitive means that it's easily understood or learned without requiring prior knowledge or instruction.
Once you understand what the combinators do in a particular context the code often reads very easily, and what it does is very intuitive and natural.
Best example I can think of is applicative parsers, where there are scattered <*> and <$> operators around, but if you just ignore them the parser just looks like a very intuitive description of what the expressions you want to parse look like.
If I didn't know programming and picked at random some Java program, I wouldn't understand much either. If I didn't take a single math course and I tried to read a math formula, I wouldn't understand the operators or anything either.
The standard should be: how much can you understand once you learn the basics and do a couple of tutorials?
Haskell has some up-front incidental complexity, but it's a difference of degree not kind from popular starting languages. It's easy to underestimate how much you had to learn about Algol-style languages that you've just internalized so well that you don't even realize. I've taught some complete programming beginners (high or middle schoolers) Java and Python and, especially one-on-one, I've seen how they get confused by things I did not even remember required explanation!
For example, in Python, people put : in the wrong place and don't understand how = works. "Basic" syntax like : and = are far more complex than we realize, we've just learned the basics so well that it's second nature. It's similar to how native English speakers don't even realize we have rules for adjective order ("big red ball" vs "red big ball"), while language learners run into it like a brick wall.
#haskell on freenode in the 2000s was a really fun place. I could not for the life of me convince anyone else to use the language.
the perl6 guys ended up inventing the new perl (now renamed raku)
https://rakujourney.wordpress.com/2024/10/12/raku-burritos/
the first perl6 parser (pugs) was written in Haskell btw
however, there are certain sub languages (slangs) where the use of punctuation chars as operators is very helpful, of course regex is the most compelling where the code is parsing one char at a time
imo raku has improved the situation a lot by introducing "regex 2.0" with deep support for unicode and with built in grammars that can work smoothly with regexIt was such a great time and place for a young person interested in learning about Haskell.
In Haskell, the lack of parentheses for function calls plus currying means that to read a function call, you need to already know how many arguments the function takes, which I feel adds a new level of difficulty over languages where you can often guess what a function does based on its name, without looking it up.
As a result, often Haskell reads more like math, where without knowing each symbol’s definition, you’re lost.
I’ve seen cryptic JavaScript too, but less often.
Yeah but the JavaScript operators are almost all universally understood. There are some exceptions and mistakes, like `===` which shouldn't exist, and `.?` which is new but fairly standard. But most of the operators are just standard maths stuff, normal array/field accesses, etc.
Haskell has normal operators plus a bunch of weird operators that you need to learn. Even if the raw number of operators is only 2x, the number of operators that you have to learn is probably 10x.
Especially when you consider that Javascript operators are fixed so you have to learn them once, whereas Haskell operators are user-defined and Haskell programmers love defining them.
* $ is "function application" - f $ x = f x, but lets you elide nested parens: f $ g $ h x = f (g (h x))
* & is "reverse function application" x & f = f x. This reads nicely in pipelines as "and"
* <$> is "fmap" what is like a lifted application over a structure: f <$> [1, 2, 3] = [f 1, f 2, f 3]
* <&> is "reverse fmap", which is nice when you have a big lambda
* Anything in <_> brackets is generally a "lifted" version of some operator
* And so on
Long story short, I demonstrated I was born in England and that I have citizenship (a passport) so no matter the possibility, it must be something that can be passed on. That doesn’t match the guidelines of documents required but it’s much less of a pain I reckon.
>British passports are issued to those who have a claim to British nationality under the British Nationality Act 1981.
Has the British language really evolved that much in the last 50 years?
Legal copy written in 2025 could be considered arcane.
It doesn’t mean the language of the time is hard to understand.
Changes to Appendix EU
APP EU1. In Annex 1, in sub-paragraph (a) of the definition of ‘continuous qualifying period’, after “(b)(i)(ee) below”, insert “(or unless sub- paragraph (b)(i)(ii) below applies)”.
APP EU2. In Annex 1, for sub-paragraph (b)(i)(ii) of the definition of ‘continuous qualifying period’, substitute:
“(ii) (where the person has limited leave to enter or remain granted under paragraph EU3 or EU3A of this Appendix) any period(s) of absence which did not exceed a total of 30 months in the most recent 60-month period, as at the date of application or (as the case may be) at the date on which, under paragraph EU4, the Secretary of State is considering whether to grant them indefinite leave to enter or remain under paragraph EU2 or (as the case may be) EU2A, without a valid application under this Appendix having been made; or
(jj) any period of absence due directly to an order or decision to which sub-paragraph (b)(iii) below refers, where that order or decision has been set aside or revoked; or”.
APP EU3. In Annex 1, for sub-paragraph (c)(v) of the definition of ‘continuous qualifying period’, substitute:
“(v) a relevant reference is concerned; or
(vi) sub-paragraph (b)(i)(ii) above applies, where, under paragraph EU4 of this Appendix, the Secretary of State is considering whether to grant the person indefinite leave to enter or remain without a valid application under this Appendix having been made”.
My First Reaction: Given that the game can be read as a deconstruction of the concept of Nation States and Citizenship, why would the UK government run such a thing?
After a few minutes: Oh wait a minute...
- For the mynumber, first time, it was a simple application, and maybe a trip or two to the City Hall. This was at a moment where Japan was trying everyone to have/use the mynumber system so that might've made it easier on purpose.
- The second time I needed to book an appointment to request the application forms, which were (snail)mailed to me so then I could apply for the card. Yes, that sentence is as bad as it reads.
Now the crazier one is the driving license (conversion process):
- The first time I needed to get a translation, I went to JAL, showed my documents and paid, then received the translation. Took that and 2-3 documents, went to the driving license center, and gave the documents and passports and IDs. Waited few hours and had it done. Oh, I also got the Motorbike license for free.
- The second time I am applying now: need to get the translation, first register online for the translation, for which you need to create an account and a 8-step process. Hard, but still doable [1]. Then you need to book a meeting for the driving license center. But it's very hard to do so, in fact I couldn't find the link at all. I went in person and they showed me a QR code for the booking, I suspect this is hard to find on purpose. Every place is full and cannot be booked, except for 1 of them, 2 months later. Okay, I try to apply. First basic questions, sure, then asks for travel history on my passport that I need to input manually. Note that dates in one part of the form are on the shape of `YYYYMMDD` and in other they are 3 fields of "YYYY", "MM", "DD" (3 different inputs), having to write a dozen of them is maddening. Oh wait, but if I want the motorbike one, which was automatic before, I now need a document from the Spanish embassy as well, another side quest. I'm hoping they can at least provide it in Japanese. I guess I'm halfway that process now, got a meeting booked 2 months later.
[1] https://english.jaf.or.jp/driving-in-japan/drive-in-japan/ab...
(Spaniard here too...)
if you drive on the right at home, they will fail you the first time on principle. If you drive on the left (aus, brit) you have a chance to pass the first time.
But with the recent LSP decoupling of the IDE to the compiler, it is quite possible to make good tooling that is independent of any particular editor. It's just that the language's popularity is what induces contributors (as most are realistically after "fame" and "portfilio" when doing contributions).
It has a feature-rich LSP, code formatter, package manager, dead-code checker, configurable linter, thread debugger, memory debugger, vulnerabilities checker, and much more.
That’s just what is provided by external tooling. Then, it also has everything the compiler has to offer, which is bit more than what most languages do. For example, you can now compile to JavaScript or WASM.
No it isn’t. This is a stupid meme that people just dogmatically perpetuate.
Also, you can build pretty much everything in Haskell with a plain text editor and ghci. You get better code that way too!
This blog encapsulates the problem of writing government services/software, which often results in strange outcomes.
Writing software for government is essentially the codification of centuries worth of Acts of Parliament.
Now imagine building the HMPO passport system, and then some underlying Law/Act is changed or repealed etc.
Now someone has to find and change everything that the Law/Act affected in all systems.
Now consider that the government frequently outsources this work to expensive consultancies who are motivated to elongate contracts and extract maximum value from the client... And ideally become entrenched.
All whilst building systems of varying quality and inflexibility so that the next time that a Law/Act is changed then this whole process repeats.
There is no central decision making authority to wrangle this problem (there used to be Spend Controls), which is why Government services delivery is so expensive.
Whatever the situation is in the UK, it is not hopeless. The government needs to stop being afraid of hiring actual employees and bring all development in-house.
I suspect part of the gap here is, as you note, everything technical is outsourced and so there is not enough institutional capacity to envision and execute what would be a quite revolutionary re-architecture.
I find it extremely frustrating that the government is able to spend tens of millions on contractors for an IT project, but can’t pay market rate for in-house engineers, even if those would be cheaper in the long run.
I'd be cool to have a system that just needs to be fed "patches" in an append only way instead of having to scatter exceptions (if branches) all around.
Some logic programming languages can do that a little bit, but I think that the real problem is that there's no tech debt budget, and lawyers working around the laws can also profit from things being complicated. It'd be cool to have people devoted to simply laws to keep things as simple as possible.
Despite being born in the UK to a British father my character wasn't previously British due to parents being unmarried and being born after 1983 but before the 2006 rules update.
I'm not totally sure when but I think some time in the 2010s the 2006 update became retroactive so my character was allowed to play. Didn't have to do too many side quests - the main one was retrieving father's birth certificate.
My character also had to attend the endgame ceremony and swear allegiance to the queen, which seemed odd for someone born in the country and lived here all his life
One of the interesting rules the OP doesn't appear to mention is the 'mutable history' rule. Herein, the facts contained in a single document can alter over even short periods of time requiring that a document, already scanned into the Examiners system of fact recording, can be required to be returned for subsequent scans. Verifying documents have not altered in their facts is, some say, tacit acknowledgement by the Examiner breed that a multiverse exists.
The communication channel between the "NPC" telephone agents and the Examiners appears to be somewhat akin to prayer, only vague inferences can truly be received.
Aside, I suspect the OP maybe be a Mornington Crescent aficianado; a game seemingly similar in rule-topology to the aforementioned Passport Application.
Try France, or maybe Germany.
This is insane to me, coming from a country that simply has a central database of all citizens and foreign residents, and a citizenship check is probably something like a single SELECT on an SQL table.
I can’t recall the article I read but this is a good presentation.
https://tomassetti.me/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/2018-04-10-...
The most difficult part of the process (not dealt with in this version of Passport Application but maybe a future DLC pack?) was actually finding someone who could certify my evidence (you are meant to submit originals but they keep the docs including passports for 3-6 months which is a bit unrealistic if you are living abroad). I can't remember the exact rules but it wasn't possible to use a US notary or a normal solicitor certification process and instead I needed to go to a council office.
After calling about 5 councils all of whom disavowed any knowledge of the process or its requirements I ended up finding someone at Islington Council who was delightfully helpful. But it was one of the more frustrating UK government interactions I've had.