Canada and Australia, obviously, have different compliance regimes.
The expectations from the Home Office for Level 4 Visas are quite well documented and have very specific conditions that education providers must show to satisfy, e.g. the students who hold these Visas attend all their classes. A provider (University) can have their ability to sponsor Visas removed if their compliance isn't adequate.
Part of the reasons Universities in the UK record attendance at all is because of the compliance regime from the Home Office. The story therefore is that these universities are inadequately complying.
That video is very interesting because it looks like it's implying a business could/should be advertising a product generated with AI. This is, at best, unethical and, at worst, illegal.
Care to elaborate? How would a bakery using AI generated images of bread be any different than McDonalds or Burger King advertising highly photoshopped / fake products?
The main difference is those restaurants photograph their real products. Even though they use top tier food prep, lighting, camera work and editing for the shoot, they’ve shown the thing you’re ordering and it’s theoretically achievable by the local store.
I’m sure it’s possible to tune an AI to work within similar constraints but I haven’t seen that to exist yet. (You can shoot hundreds of photos of a chicken sandwich for much less money than trying to create one.)
You are sadly naive if you think food shown in advertising is anywhere near close to the real thing. Faking both the appearance of the actual ingredients and using entirely different analogues. Shaving cream instead of whipped cream being one of the more obvious examples.
I remember reading that (at least in some countries) food marketing is regulated and requires you to use the same ingredients and quantities as the real food.
Doesn’t mean someone won’t lovingly make that McDonald’s burger patty and pick the most beautiful color corrected piece of lettuce, but it’s still real.
Having worked in building local government services there's loads of factors of why this hasn't worked (despite GDS trying desperately to make it so).
Most of it comes down to money - the vast majority of residents that use Council services are older and/or less likely to have access to a computer or smartphone and/or more likely to need support in accessing these services from someone else. We're pretty good at designing services for these people for the web but frankly, they aren't using them.
Some of it is because local government pays poverty wages. Much of the staff I worked with in our IT dept (in a pretty well complimented software development team, it must be said) had been working there 20 years or they are trainees on apprenticeships or fixed-term 1 year contracts. Because of that, there's huge difficulties in adopting agile as a working model, changing technology stacks to ones that the GDS and GOV.UK use is incredibly difficult and recruiting staff that can lead the way on this is an impossibility. Instead, we're relying on outsourcing this to companies like Capita who make some of the worst designed government services I've ever seen.
Finally, Councillor's (our budgetholders at the end of the day) just don't see the material benefit of good digital services for their residents. Faced with a year-on-year cut to the grants they get from central government and the poltiics of raising Council Tax, they see IT staff more as a cost centre than as an area for capital development.
If you've ever applied for a job in the UK, you'll know that companies take their right to work compliance obligations very seriously.