Okay that's decision made. One thing I am going to do this year is walk more, and I've now got a copy of the "Walk to Mordor" spreadsheet so that I can record my progress against Frodo's journey to destroy the One Ring.
Off out for a walk now!
That is a fantastic idea. I might do the same!
Could you please share a link to the spreadsheet if it's publicly available? The generic one, not your progress.
Sorry, you're right. I should have said "clear to a reasonable person who wasn't politically motivated".
You think her officials are "politically motivated" ?
Why?
Everyone and his dog can smell the upcoming Tory leadership election, she's a leading candidate, they (or someone close to them) don't want her to get it.
You think senior civil servants aren't politically motivated in at least some way? Really?
But this isn't her being retrrospectivley knifed this is something she was told in advance was too expensive, and she turned down Quo Vadis and went ahead anyway. This is terrible for Truss, makes her look as greedy and entitled as flsoj n nut nut.
Why have tw@tter suspended the politics for all et al. network of accounts?
They are clickbaity and recently been going into their own rubbish "exclusives", but unless i missed something it wasn't like they were massive fake news or antivaxxer etc.
On the scale of dodgy social media accounts they are miles away from what I would consider fake news spreaders. 99% of it was literally just aggregator of all the main stream press articles.
Did they buy a load of fake followers or something to boost their presence?
I have read that one or more of their accounts was too free and easy with other people's copyright.
Face masks or not, Omicron will be through schools in no time. You couldn't really ask for a more idea situation for Omicron to spread. 500-1000 people put together into a building, 30 people sitting together in the same room, some rotating among differing groups, all for 6-7hrs a day, 5 days a week.
There's an interesting article in today's Sunday Times about what might have happened if the UK hadn't taken any measures whatsoever to counter Covid-19.
Saint Bart - we would now be in far better place - facts speak for themselves CHB - we will all have had it, long covid, apocalyptic hospital scenes, mass graves RCS - it’s an interesting one, I have just written a sixty page thesis
Moonrabbit: I thought about reading it but went shopping instead?
Charles - "I've just had lunch with the Foreign Secretary and the US trade delegation."
In Maccie D’s. 🙂
I once had a job interview in the McDonalds on Oxford Street. The company I was being interviewed for was coming out of garage mode and becoming a start-up, so its offices were not ready.
From memory, I got an offer, but I went to work for Acorn instead. I was burnt out with London.
Interesting that the left-of-centre New Statesman is starting to publish articles like this.
"My 2022 resolution: Don’t let this be the Year of the New Normal The goalposts for returning to life as it was keep moving. I can't be the only one thinking: what if this never ends? By Rachel Cunliffe"
Okay that's decision made. One thing I am going to do this year is walk more, and I've now got a copy of the "Walk to Mordor" spreadsheet so that I can record my progress against Frodo's journey to destroy the One Ring.
Off out for a walk now!
That is a fantastic idea. I might do the same!
Could you please share a link to the spreadsheet if it's publicly available? The generic one, not your progress.
Enjoy your walk.
Have I managed to post this before Sunil?
St Bart to Mordor. Someone show him the way.
😂
Well, before the lockdown in March 2020 I rode on trains and buses in London a LOT! Then during the rest of 2020 I hardly went anywhere except walking in the local park. But over the last ten months I have done a lot of walks around Ilford North and bordering areas of the neighbouring constituencies, normally doing 5 or 6 mile round trips. For example Gants Hill to Wanstead, or Gants Hill to Chigwell (waves to HYUFD!).
What’s the punchline?
Arn’t you supposed to merely post ‘I can’t run all the way to Eppinggard’
Why have tw@tter suspended the politics for all et al. network of accounts?
They are clickbaity and recently been going into their own rubbish "exclusives", but unless i missed something it wasn't like they were massive fake news or antivaxxer etc.
On the scale of dodgy social media accounts they are miles away from what I would consider fake news spreaders. 99% of it was literally just aggregator of all the main stream press articles.
Did they buy a load of fake followers or something to boost their presence?
I have read that one or more of their accounts was too free and easy with other people's copyright.
Normally they would then suspend that account, not take down the whole network and the personal account of the guy behind it.
Even those on social media who walk the tight rope of talking about some dodgy stuff or making some iffy "jokes", they will have the offending account suspended, but they won't take down everything (at least unless you really go full Alex Jones) e.g. that Carl Benjamin guy, they banned his primary twitter account, but he has a whole network of other things going on which it isn't a big secret he is involved with and they are untouched.
Whenever we engage in an intellectual discussion, our goal ought to be to converge on the truth. But humans are primates - and often the goal is to become the alpha debater.
If we all, come this New Year, take this to heart and resolve to debate with a view to discovering truth rather than to winning each skirmish, just imagine what PB could become!
Really really boring.
If we were genuinely interested in the truth, everybody would just agree with me.
Yep, indeed so, yeah totally, 110% spot on, this, 1000 times this ...
It has. For some people, in some ways, it is fine, as you say it is about individual makeup. Part of my concern, as someone who really does need to seperate home life from working life, even in the physical space, is some people are so excited by the rapid switch to the new way of working that they are jumping too fast to make it the norm for as many as people as possible, without taking the time to consider if that works for everyone, unlike you. I've lost count of the number of meetings I've been in where, despite lip service to such issues at other times, no consideration is given to mental impacts for some, or even the possibility people not like new ways, except as a criticism of people not moving with the times.
Entirely valid points. I have never advocated anyone should be compelled to work from home as normal practice.
I'm also opposed to people being compelled to come into an office - it should be possible in the 21st century to operate a hybrid work-life system which works for the greatest number of people.
Unfortunately, money talks and companies look at half-full offices and are deciding whether it should either be empty (which works financially) or full (ditto). The notion the nature of work needs to evolve is a struggle for those especially managers who led by presenteeism and have this notion if they can't see you working you're not actually working.
I'm hoping such attitudes, redolent as they are of former times, are on the way out.
I do agree more time and thought needs to be given to how organisations operate in this new environment - I've heard the term "agile" banded about but it seems to mean something different to everyone. In my experience, running a mixed physical/remote meeting needs a different skillset to managing a wholly physical meeting.
Of course we must consider the mental health impacts but it's not something employees or individuals always find easy to discuss in front of colleagues or managers. We see in larger organisations workplace counselling services under the catch all title of "wellness" and this needs to be more widely available.
Suffering in silence is still suffering and there need to be support networks available for those who are in trouble and need to talk to someone. In a very real sense, we need to treat the mental health issues of hybrid working as we would the physical manifestations.
Okay that's decision made. One thing I am going to do this year is walk more, and I've now got a copy of the "Walk to Mordor" spreadsheet so that I can record my progress against Frodo's journey to destroy the One Ring.
Off out for a walk now!
That is a fantastic idea. I might do the same!
Could you please share a link to the spreadsheet if it's publicly available? The generic one, not your progress.
Enjoy your walk.
Have I managed to post this before Sunil?
St Bart to Mordor. Someone show him the way.
😂
Well, before the lockdown in March 2020 I rode on trains and buses in London a LOT! Then during the rest of 2020 I hardly went anywhere except walking in the local park. But over the last ten months I have done a lot of walks around Ilford North and bordering areas of the neighbouring constituencies, normally doing 5 or 6 mile round trips. For example Gants Hill to Wanstead, or Gants Hill to Chigwell (waves to HYUFD!).
I have finally cracked the code: Hoist Your Union Flag Defiantly. So you should be able to tell which house is his
Off topic, an issue we have often discussed, within a betting context: Paddy Power have offered 14-1 on a road/rail/tidal barrage being built across Morecambe Bay before 2036, and 5-1 on it being built before 2037.
Personally I'm a massive nimby on tidal power. In principle I'm massively in favour of it. But I love Morecambe Bay, and the view of it from Arnside Knott or Clougha Pike at sunset are amongst my favourites in the UK. I don't really want to see that jeopardised. So if we could do the Severn or Gower plans instead, that'd be great.
In truth, I don't really have a handle on what the downside would be, nor what the visual/environmental impact would be. And I suppose it would make the Furness peninsular rather less remote.
It would mean the Queen's Guide to the Sands would become redundant. But we'd save £15 a year, and gain a nice holiday cottage ...
Sorry, you're right. I should have said "clear to a reasonable person who wasn't politically motivated".
You think her officials are "politically motivated" ?
Why?
Everyone and his dog can smell the upcoming Tory leadership election, she's a leading candidate, they (or someone close to them) don't want her to get it.
You think senior civil servants aren't politically motivated in at least some way? Really?
I don't smell an upcoming Tory leadership contest and the betting markets are starting to agree. 'Johnson still PM at next party Conf' was a quite ridiculous (imo) even money shot a couple of weeks ago but is now into a more realistic 1.33.
Your wrong Kinabalu. Firstly, the money markets is poor guide. Better guide is two clear facts in front of us. Firstly, the Pandora Tin of spin has been opened and covert opps are happening are they not? Secondly, motivation for opening the tin which can’t be unopened: if it’s a late as you claim it’s likely too late for Rishi, now or never for the career politicians.
That’s why you are wrong.
Will be interesting to read your response.
I am quite definitively smug-city and right because I backed at 1.9 and laid at 1.33 two weeks later! But 1.33 does mean a decent chance he *will* be ousted this summer so I'm not totally disagreeing with you. It was just the nearly evens price I thought ridiculous and thus lumped on. If the polls show no Tory recovery AND that they'd do much better with an alternative who's available and up for it then a contest is likely.
You are still not quite getting it.
In all politeness David look at my banana Milliband. Didn’t have the killer instinct. Didn’t strike when it was his moment. Look what delay did for him.
Rishi is different. Not only is he going to bring down Boris he is going to do it in the next fortnight.
It has. For some people, in some ways, it is fine, as you say it is about individual makeup. Part of my concern, as someone who really does need to seperate home life from working life, even in the physical space, is some people are so excited by the rapid switch to the new way of working that they are jumping too fast to make it the norm for as many as people as possible, without taking the time to consider if that works for everyone, unlike you. I've lost count of the number of meetings I've been in where, despite lip service to such issues at other times, no consideration is given to mental impacts for some, or even the possibility people not like new ways, except as a criticism of people not moving with the times.
Entirely valid points. I have never advocated anyone should be compelled to work from home as normal practice.
I'm also opposed to people being compelled to come into an office - it should be possible in the 21st century to operate a hybrid work-life system which works for the greatest number of people.
Unfortunately, money talks and companies look at half-full offices and are deciding whether it should either be empty (which works financially) or full (ditto). The notion the nature of work needs to evolve is a struggle for those especially managers who led by presenteeism and have this notion if they can't see you working you're not actually working.
I'm hoping such attitudes, redolent as they are of former times, are on the way out.
I do agree more time and thought needs to be given to how organisations operate in this new environment - I've heard the term "agile" banded about but it seems to mean something different to everyone. In my experience, running a mixed physical/remote meeting needs a different skillset to managing a wholly physical meeting.
Of course we must consider the mental health impacts but it's not something employees or individuals always find easy to discuss in front of colleagues or managers. We see in larger organisations workplace counselling services under the catch all title of "wellness" and this needs to be more widely available.
Suffering in silence is still suffering and there need to be support networks available for those who are in trouble and need to talk to someone. In a very real sense, we need to treat the mental health issues of hybrid working as we would the physical manifestations.
"I'm also opposed to people being compelled to come into an office - it should be possible in the 21st century to operate a hybrid work-life system which works for the greatest number of people."
Yes, and the same goes for flexible working hours. IMV these steps would be part of the solution to the problems in the threader.
However WfH is not always a good idea. I'd be concerned about confidential information (I believe TSE has talked about this in the past), and some meetings are probably best done face-to-face.
Off topic, an issue we have often discussed, within a betting context: Paddy Power have offered 14-1 on a road/rail/tidal barrage being built across Morecambe Bay before 2036, and 5-1 on it being built before 2037.
Personally I'm a massive nimby on tidal power. In principle I'm massively in favour of it. But I love Morecambe Bay, and the view of it from Arnside Knott or Clougha Pike at sunset are amongst my favourites in the UK. I don't really want to see that jeopardised. So if we could do the Severn or Gower plans instead, that'd be great.
In truth, I don't really have a handle on what the downside would be, nor what the visual/environmental impact would be. And I suppose it would make the Furness peninsular rather less remote.
It would mean the Queen's Guide to the Sands would become redundant. But we'd save £15 a year, and gain a nice holiday cottage ...
Very sad to hear that Cedric Robinson has died. He seemed a real character in interviews.
Yes, something I have always wanted to do is the guided walk from Arnside to Grange. (I think those are the two ends?) Though maybe Heysham to Barrow is so far out in Morecambe Bay that the Arnside to Grange footpath/paddle would remain.
More on the new face mask advice for English secondary schools:
When someone who has Covid coughs, sneezes or exhales they release droplets of infected fluid.
Evidence certainly shows wearing a face-covering reduces the release of these into the environment.
But what's not clear is what impact this has on transmission in the real world of schools.
People wear different types of masks. Some work better than others. Ill-fitting masks or fidgeting with them will also naturally reduce their effectiveness.
Studies that have been done have been pretty inconclusive at least in terms of proving they have a significant impact.
One of the problems is it is difficult to disentangle the impact of one measure with others steps that are being taken to reduce spread of the virus.
What's more, any benefit has to be weighed against the costs in terms of harm to education.
It's the nature of a pandemic that decisions have to be taken without perfect evidence.
But this far in, plenty of experts are wondering why better research has not been done to work out what measures like this achieve.
This seems to be a policy which is being introduced more in the hope it will help significantly, rather than based on strong evidence it actually will.
My emphasis in bold. The policy looks suspiciously like something-must-be-done-ism - and, once again, when looking at other jurisdictions that have relied on mild-to-moderate restrictions like these to control the virus, there's nothing to suggest that they work against Omicron.
I am frustrated that we seem to be making so little effort to ascertain what actually works.
So, does cleaning supermarket trollies achieve anything at all?
When I appear in the High Court and finish with a witness I have to clean the lecturn so my opponent can then use it: is there any point to this?
Is air conditioning a help or a hindrance?
Do masks used by the untrained public actually help?
What is the scientific basis of 1m or 2m separation? Is it more useful to limit the number of people in a shop or office or whatever?
Does washing your hands do anything or is this just another example of a general threat of virus infection that has been cross referenced without an evidence base?
Are the answers to any of these materially different for different variants?
This information seems to me to useful going forwards and surely now we opportunities for real world assessment which, hopefully, will not be repeated. Until the next time.
Off topic, an issue we have often discussed, within a betting context: Paddy Power have offered 14-1 on a road/rail/tidal barrage being built across Morecambe Bay before 2036, and 5-1 on it being built before 2037.
Personally I'm a massive nimby on tidal power. In principle I'm massively in favour of it. But I love Morecambe Bay, and the view of it from Arnside Knott or Clougha Pike at sunset are amongst my favourites in the UK. I don't really want to see that jeopardised. So if we could do the Severn or Gower plans instead, that'd be great.
In truth, I don't really have a handle on what the downside would be, nor what the visual/environmental impact would be. And I suppose it would make the Furness peninsular rather less remote.
It would mean the Queen's Guide to the Sands would become redundant. But we'd save £15 a year, and gain a nice holiday cottage ...
Very sad to hear that Cedric Robinson has died. He seemed a real character in interviews.
Yes, something I have always wanted to do is the guided walk from Arnside to Grange. (I think those are the two ends?) Though maybe Heysham to Barrow is so far out in Morecambe Bay that the Arnside to Grange footpath/paddle would remain.
I considered doing it as part of my coastal walk - and I know at least one coastal walker did so. But it was too much of a faff - I needed to book ahead, and ensure I was there on the right date and time. It just wasn't workable without breaking the walk and waiting for the day.
I'd also like to do the Broomway to Foulness Island.
There are probably two issues with the path and barrage: only a tiny increase in water depth would make it impassable, and any change in currents may create deeper impassable channels. On the other hand, it might cause some silting up...
More on the new face mask advice for English secondary schools:
When someone who has Covid coughs, sneezes or exhales they release droplets of infected fluid.
Evidence certainly shows wearing a face-covering reduces the release of these into the environment.
But what's not clear is what impact this has on transmission in the real world of schools.
People wear different types of masks. Some work better than others. Ill-fitting masks or fidgeting with them will also naturally reduce their effectiveness.
Studies that have been done have been pretty inconclusive at least in terms of proving they have a significant impact.
One of the problems is it is difficult to disentangle the impact of one measure with others steps that are being taken to reduce spread of the virus.
What's more, any benefit has to be weighed against the costs in terms of harm to education.
It's the nature of a pandemic that decisions have to be taken without perfect evidence.
But this far in, plenty of experts are wondering why better research has not been done to work out what measures like this achieve.
This seems to be a policy which is being introduced more in the hope it will help significantly, rather than based on strong evidence it actually will.
My emphasis in bold. The policy looks suspiciously like something-must-be-done-ism - and, once again, when looking at other jurisdictions that have relied on mild-to-moderate restrictions like these to control the virus, there's nothing to suggest that they work against Omicron.
I am frustrated that we seem to be making so little effort to ascertain what actually works.
So, does cleaning supermarket trollies achieve anything at all?
When I appear in the High Court and finish with a witness I have to clean the lecturn so my opponent can then use it: is there any point to this?
Is air conditioning a help or a hindrance?
Do masks used by the untrained public actually help?
What is the scientific basis of 1m or 2m separation? Is it more useful to limit the number of people in a shop or office or whatever?
Does washing your hands do anything or is this just another example of a general threat of virus infection that has been cross referenced without an evidence base?
Are the answers to any of these materially different for different variants?
This information seems to me to useful going forwards and surely now we opportunities for real world assessment which, hopefully, will not be repeated. Until the next time.
The only thing that will work is for either everyone to get three doses or to get infected. Halting the spread is impossible.
Frankly disappointed to see the low rate of very young mothers in Camden, despite all my best efforts
Not surprised, after seeing the wealth in the area when visiting my friend in Camden. What surprised me is Tower Hamlets, not a reference to your efforts but because I thought it was a poor area. Or am I missing something?
More on the new face mask advice for English secondary schools:
When someone who has Covid coughs, sneezes or exhales they release droplets of infected fluid.
Evidence certainly shows wearing a face-covering reduces the release of these into the environment.
But what's not clear is what impact this has on transmission in the real world of schools.
People wear different types of masks. Some work better than others. Ill-fitting masks or fidgeting with them will also naturally reduce their effectiveness.
Studies that have been done have been pretty inconclusive at least in terms of proving they have a significant impact.
One of the problems is it is difficult to disentangle the impact of one measure with others steps that are being taken to reduce spread of the virus.
What's more, any benefit has to be weighed against the costs in terms of harm to education.
It's the nature of a pandemic that decisions have to be taken without perfect evidence.
But this far in, plenty of experts are wondering why better research has not been done to work out what measures like this achieve.
This seems to be a policy which is being introduced more in the hope it will help significantly, rather than based on strong evidence it actually will.
My emphasis in bold. The policy looks suspiciously like something-must-be-done-ism - and, once again, when looking at other jurisdictions that have relied on mild-to-moderate restrictions like these to control the virus, there's nothing to suggest that they work against Omicron.
I am frustrated that we seem to be making so little effort to ascertain what actually works.
So, does cleaning supermarket trollies achieve anything at all?
When I appear in the High Court and finish with a witness I have to clean the lecturn so my opponent can then use it: is there any point to this?
Is air conditioning a help or a hindrance?
Do masks used by the untrained public actually help?
What is the scientific basis of 1m or 2m separation? Is it more useful to limit the number of people in a shop or office or whatever?
Does washing your hands do anything or is this just another example of a general threat of virus infection that has been cross referenced without an evidence base?
Are the answers to any of these materially different for different variants?
This information seems to me to useful going forwards and surely now we opportunities for real world assessment which, hopefully, will not be repeated. Until the next time.
The only thing that will work is for either everyone to get three doses or to get infected. Halting the spread is impossible.
In the long run that is probably true but what applies the brakes and what doesn't?
More on the new face mask advice for English secondary schools:
When someone who has Covid coughs, sneezes or exhales they release droplets of infected fluid.
Evidence certainly shows wearing a face-covering reduces the release of these into the environment.
But what's not clear is what impact this has on transmission in the real world of schools.
People wear different types of masks. Some work better than others. Ill-fitting masks or fidgeting with them will also naturally reduce their effectiveness.
Studies that have been done have been pretty inconclusive at least in terms of proving they have a significant impact.
One of the problems is it is difficult to disentangle the impact of one measure with others steps that are being taken to reduce spread of the virus.
What's more, any benefit has to be weighed against the costs in terms of harm to education.
It's the nature of a pandemic that decisions have to be taken without perfect evidence.
But this far in, plenty of experts are wondering why better research has not been done to work out what measures like this achieve.
This seems to be a policy which is being introduced more in the hope it will help significantly, rather than based on strong evidence it actually will.
My emphasis in bold. The policy looks suspiciously like something-must-be-done-ism - and, once again, when looking at other jurisdictions that have relied on mild-to-moderate restrictions like these to control the virus, there's nothing to suggest that they work against Omicron.
I am frustrated that we seem to be making so little effort to ascertain what actually works.
So, does cleaning supermarket trollies achieve anything at all?
When I appear in the High Court and finish with a witness I have to clean the lecturn so my opponent can then use it: is there any point to this?
Is air conditioning a help or a hindrance?
Do masks used by the untrained public actually help?
What is the scientific basis of 1m or 2m separation? Is it more useful to limit the number of people in a shop or office or whatever?
Does washing your hands do anything or is this just another example of a general threat of virus infection that has been cross referenced without an evidence base?
Are the answers to any of these materially different for different variants?
This information seems to me to useful going forwards and surely now we opportunities for real world assessment which, hopefully, will not be repeated. Until the next time.
All good questions and ones that never seem to be properly researched.
Frankly disappointed to see the low rate of very young mothers in Camden, despite all my best efforts
Not surprised, after seeing the wealth in the area when visiting my friend in Camden. What surprised me is Tower Hamlets, not a reference to your efforts but because I thought it was a poor area. Or am I missing something?
Not many white working class people in Tower Hamlets now - it's got a very large Muslim population (the biggest by proportion in the UK). Quite devout. That would explain this by itself
How do you get hold of lfts - do the home delivery slots open after midnight, or is it midday ? We seem to have plenty of test kits but no buffer solution
Frankly disappointed to see the low rate of very young mothers in Camden, despite all my best efforts
Not surprised, after seeing the wealth in the area when visiting my friend in Camden. What surprised me is Tower Hamlets, not a reference to your efforts but because I thought it was a poor area. Or am I missing something?
Not many white working class people in Tower Hamlets now - it's got a very large Muslim population (the biggest by proportion in the UK). Quite devout. That would explain this by itself
Sorry, you're right. I should have said "clear to a reasonable person who wasn't politically motivated".
You think her officials are "politically motivated" ?
Why?
Everyone and his dog can smell the upcoming Tory leadership election, she's a leading candidate, they (or someone close to them) don't want her to get it.
You think senior civil servants aren't politically motivated in at least some way? Really?
But this isn't her being retrrospectivley knifed this is something she was told in advance was too expensive, and she turned down Quo Vadis and went ahead anyway. This is terrible for Truss, makes her look as greedy and entitled as flsoj n nut nut.
Sorry, you're right. I should have said "clear to a reasonable person who wasn't politically motivated".
You think her officials are "politically motivated" ?
Why?
Everyone and his dog can smell the upcoming Tory leadership election, she's a leading candidate, they (or someone close to them) don't want her to get it.
You think senior civil servants aren't politically motivated in at least some way? Really?
I don't smell an upcoming Tory leadership contest and the betting markets are starting to agree. 'Johnson still PM at next party Conf' was a quite ridiculous (imo) even money shot a couple of weeks ago but is now into a more realistic 1.33.
Your wrong Kinabalu. Firstly, the money markets is poor guide. Better guide is two clear facts in front of us. Firstly, the Pandora Tin of spin has been opened and covert opps are happening are they not? Secondly, motivation for opening the tin which can’t be unopened: if it’s a late as you claim it’s likely too late for Rishi, now or never for the career politicians.
That’s why you are wrong.
Will be interesting to read your response.
I am quite definitively smug-city and right because I backed at 1.9 and laid at 1.33 two weeks later! But 1.33 does mean a decent chance he *will* be ousted this summer so I'm not totally disagreeing with you. It was just the nearly evens price I thought ridiculous and thus lumped on. If the polls show no Tory recovery AND that they'd do much better with an alternative who's available and up for it then a contest is likely.
You are still not quite getting it.
In all politeness David look at my banana Milliband. Didn’t have the killer instinct. Didn’t strike when it was his moment. Look what delay did for him.
Rishi is different. Not only is he going to bring down Boris he is going to do it in the next fortnight.
Hopefully you are right, still be the evil empire in charge but at least one who seems less crooked than your average Tory trough swiller.
They took a US Trade Delegation out for dinner. And you think they should have Ubered out for Greggs.
Yes, but that was the question I asked earlier, and it applied equally when I was in reasonably senior management in private sector pharma. Would the Trade Delegation (or the private clients) make different decisions if they were served a Greggs meal? If so, then shouldn't their employers be asking questions about the self-interested decisions that their delegates are making?
Of course nearly everyone likes a slap-up meal, and it's convenient to think that you're doing your employers a favour by taking them to one (and thereby incidentally having one yourself). But does it actually change the outcome? People in the business say "Yes, otherwise we wouldn't do it", but there isn't a control group to see if that's actually the case. When I was in the business of deciding on very large software contracts for the company, I expect I'd have accepted an invitation to a luxury dinner by the vendors, but I'd still have made the decision on the merits of the software even if they'd just invited me to a cup of tea - I'd have seen anything else as an essentially corrupt breach of my employment contract.
The place i worked at until Christmas had a policy of declaring gifts or hospitality of above £50 and refusing it if over £250 which I think is sensible. Dinners and occasional social outing whether paid by the buyer or vendor can add an element of friendship which can be useful and induce some loyalty especially in the sense that a vendor will go out their way if a request for something to be done with perhaps a deadline. Nothing wrong with this and work should be a place where social contact can be made as well. Otherwise you get a bit puritan. I used to work at a place that had a good golf course as an asset.It would have been silly not to invite key suppliers for a round every now and then including the local MP as they they can put a good experience with the company they are selling to and that helps the relationship.
in fact I worked the hospitality rule at Cheltenham in that I nagged different suppliers/partners to invite me for different days thus keeping under the limits and enjoying a whole week at Cheltenham!
How do you get hold of lfts - do the home delivery slots open after midnight, or is it midday ? We seem to have plenty of test kits but no buffer solution
Sorry, you're right. I should have said "clear to a reasonable person who wasn't politically motivated".
You think her officials are "politically motivated" ?
Why?
Everyone and his dog can smell the upcoming Tory leadership election, she's a leading candidate, they (or someone close to them) don't want her to get it.
You think senior civil servants aren't politically motivated in at least some way? Really?
I don't smell an upcoming Tory leadership contest and the betting markets are starting to agree. 'Johnson still PM at next party Conf' was a quite ridiculous (imo) even money shot a couple of weeks ago but is now into a more realistic 1.33.
Your wrong Kinabalu. Firstly, the money markets is poor guide. Better guide is two clear facts in front of us. Firstly, the Pandora Tin of spin has been opened and covert opps are happening are they not? Secondly, motivation for opening the tin which can’t be unopened: if it’s a late as you claim it’s likely too late for Rishi, now or never for the career politicians.
That’s why you are wrong.
Will be interesting to read your response.
I am quite definitively smug-city and right because I backed at 1.9 and laid at 1.33 two weeks later! But 1.33 does mean a decent chance he *will* be ousted this summer so I'm not totally disagreeing with you. It was just the nearly evens price I thought ridiculous and thus lumped on. If the polls show no Tory recovery AND that they'd do much better with an alternative who's available and up for it then a contest is likely.
You are still not quite getting it.
In all politeness David look at my banana Milliband. Didn’t have the killer instinct. Didn’t strike when it was his moment. Look what delay did for him.
Rishi is different. Not only is he going to bring down Boris he is going to do it in the next fortnight.
Ah ok, well that's a nice bold call and if it comes off I'll remember to hats off you big time.
Let me say what I do agree with you about. You know all this talk about it being in the interests of the various contenders (eg Sunak) to wait because now would be a bad time to take over? This is bollox. Being PM is the ultimate for a politician and if you get a chance you damn well go for it.
So, yes, Sunak - not "Rishi" btw, it's SUNAK, let's please please not start with another 1st name brand - will go for it. You can smell the ambition there. He has what it takes in this regard. Not only that he'll be trying his utmost to engineer a contest asap while he's the fav (or co-fav with Li ... with TRUSS).
But I don't think it'll happen. For me it's only a 1 in 4 chance Johnson goes this year.
They took a US Trade Delegation out for dinner. And you think they should have Ubered out for Greggs.
Yes, but that was the question I asked earlier, and it applied equally when I was in reasonably senior management in private sector pharma. Would the Trade Delegation (or the private clients) make different decisions if they were served a Greggs meal? If so, then shouldn't their employers be asking questions about the self-interested decisions that their delegates are making?
Of course nearly everyone likes a slap-up meal, and it's convenient to think that you're doing your employers a favour by taking them to one (and thereby incidentally having one yourself). But does it actually change the outcome? People in the business say "Yes, otherwise we wouldn't do it", but there isn't a control group to see if that's actually the case. When I was in the business of deciding on very large software contracts for the company, I expect I'd have accepted an invitation to a luxury dinner by the vendors, but I'd still have made the decision on the merits of the software even if they'd just invited me to a cup of tea - I'd have seen anything else as an essentially corrupt breach of my employment contract.
I must say that pharma entertainment of doctors is much less generous than once it was. Occasionally we get treated to dinner after a meeting, but the rules are that we have to buy our own drinks.
The only exception is as a guest speaker. I had a very nice weekend in Padua at a drug companies expense, but did have to give a lecture for it.
I’m sure that the drinks afterwards had been very well earned?
Okay that's decision made. One thing I am going to do this year is walk more, and I've now got a copy of the "Walk to Mordor" spreadsheet so that I can record my progress against Frodo's journey to destroy the One Ring.
Off out for a walk now!
That is a fantastic idea. I might do the same!
Could you please share a link to the spreadsheet if it's publicly available? The generic one, not your progress.
I've added a bit to my version to convert fitbit steps to miles. It's lovely and sunny outside today with a pleasant, strong, electricity generating wind.
How do you get hold of lfts - do the home delivery slots open after midnight, or is it midday ? We seem to have plenty of test kits but no buffer solution
More on the new face mask advice for English secondary schools:
When someone who has Covid coughs, sneezes or exhales they release droplets of infected fluid.
Evidence certainly shows wearing a face-covering reduces the release of these into the environment.
But what's not clear is what impact this has on transmission in the real world of schools.
People wear different types of masks. Some work better than others. Ill-fitting masks or fidgeting with them will also naturally reduce their effectiveness.
Studies that have been done have been pretty inconclusive at least in terms of proving they have a significant impact.
One of the problems is it is difficult to disentangle the impact of one measure with others steps that are being taken to reduce spread of the virus.
What's more, any benefit has to be weighed against the costs in terms of harm to education.
It's the nature of a pandemic that decisions have to be taken without perfect evidence.
But this far in, plenty of experts are wondering why better research has not been done to work out what measures like this achieve.
This seems to be a policy which is being introduced more in the hope it will help significantly, rather than based on strong evidence it actually will.
My emphasis in bold. The policy looks suspiciously like something-must-be-done-ism - and, once again, when looking at other jurisdictions that have relied on mild-to-moderate restrictions like these to control the virus, there's nothing to suggest that they work against Omicron.
I am frustrated that we seem to be making so little effort to ascertain what actually works.
So, does cleaning supermarket trollies achieve anything at all?
When I appear in the High Court and finish with a witness I have to clean the lecturn so my opponent can then use it: is there any point to this?
Is air conditioning a help or a hindrance?
Do masks used by the untrained public actually help?
What is the scientific basis of 1m or 2m separation? Is it more useful to limit the number of people in a shop or office or whatever?
Does washing your hands do anything or is this just another example of a general threat of virus infection that has been cross referenced without an evidence base?
Are the answers to any of these materially different for different variants?
This information seems to me to useful going forwards and surely now we opportunities for real world assessment which, hopefully, will not be repeated. Until the next time.
The only thing that will work is for either everyone to get three doses or to get infected. Halting the spread is impossible.
In the long run that is probably true but what applies the brakes and what doesn't?
The question is whether we want to do that, especially for kids. A short period of disruption is preferable to medium or long term measures that will be a continual disruption. I think you're still playing out scenarios where people can avoid getting it. That's not going to happen.
More on the new face mask advice for English secondary schools:
When someone who has Covid coughs, sneezes or exhales they release droplets of infected fluid.
Evidence certainly shows wearing a face-covering reduces the release of these into the environment.
But what's not clear is what impact this has on transmission in the real world of schools.
People wear different types of masks. Some work better than others. Ill-fitting masks or fidgeting with them will also naturally reduce their effectiveness.
Studies that have been done have been pretty inconclusive at least in terms of proving they have a significant impact.
One of the problems is it is difficult to disentangle the impact of one measure with others steps that are being taken to reduce spread of the virus.
What's more, any benefit has to be weighed against the costs in terms of harm to education.
It's the nature of a pandemic that decisions have to be taken without perfect evidence.
But this far in, plenty of experts are wondering why better research has not been done to work out what measures like this achieve.
This seems to be a policy which is being introduced more in the hope it will help significantly, rather than based on strong evidence it actually will.
My emphasis in bold. The policy looks suspiciously like something-must-be-done-ism - and, once again, when looking at other jurisdictions that have relied on mild-to-moderate restrictions like these to control the virus, there's nothing to suggest that they work against Omicron.
I am frustrated that we seem to be making so little effort to ascertain what actually works.
So, does cleaning supermarket trollies achieve anything at all?
When I appear in the High Court and finish with a witness I have to clean the lecturn so my opponent can then use it: is there any point to this?
Is air conditioning a help or a hindrance?
Do masks used by the untrained public actually help?
What is the scientific basis of 1m or 2m separation? Is it more useful to limit the number of people in a shop or office or whatever?
Does washing your hands do anything or is this just another example of a general threat of virus infection that has been cross referenced without an evidence base?
Are the answers to any of these materially different for different variants?
This information seems to me to useful going forwards and surely now we opportunities for real world assessment which, hopefully, will not be repeated. Until the next time.
It'll be interesting to see what the public inquiry comes out with - if it offers any firm conclusions at all.
I suspect that, in terms of NPIs, all that's really of use against Omicron is radical self-isolation (not going anywhere near anyone else at all; 1m or 2m distancing probably won't help much,) fresh air circulation (to offer some opportunity for the virus particles to disperse,) and very close fitting medical grade masks or respirator hoods.
How do you get hold of lfts - do the home delivery slots open after midnight, or is it midday ? We seem to have plenty of test kits but no buffer solution
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 11h But why? Why restrict the kids after we've already infected so many old folk at Christmas? The hospitalisations peak is already baked in now. Blighting kids' schooling isn't going to help with that any more. So what's the point other than a cosmetic "See! We're doing something!"?
It's a baffling decision.
Doesn’t baffle me. If the teachers are off Ill, no going to school for the kids.
Several likes for that, so I expand on it. Masks in schools, because no teachers no going to school, so parents can’t go into work, and not everyone can work from home. So vicious circle, unless
Max I agree with, this week government will cut isolation to 5 days.
Also this week government will extend mask wearing.
These new measures are to keep the country and economy working.
Sorry, you're right. I should have said "clear to a reasonable person who wasn't politically motivated".
You think her officials are "politically motivated" ?
Why?
Everyone and his dog can smell the upcoming Tory leadership election, she's a leading candidate, they (or someone close to them) don't want her to get it.
You think senior civil servants aren't politically motivated in at least some way? Really?
I don't smell an upcoming Tory leadership contest and the betting markets are starting to agree. 'Johnson still PM at next party Conf' was a quite ridiculous (imo) even money shot a couple of weeks ago but is now into a more realistic 1.33.
Your wrong Kinabalu. Firstly, the money markets is poor guide. Better guide is two clear facts in front of us. Firstly, the Pandora Tin of spin has been opened and covert opps are happening are they not? Secondly, motivation for opening the tin which can’t be unopened: if it’s a late as you claim it’s likely too late for Rishi, now or never for the career politicians.
That’s why you are wrong.
Will be interesting to read your response.
I am quite definitively smug-city and right because I backed at 1.9 and laid at 1.33 two weeks later! But 1.33 does mean a decent chance he *will* be ousted this summer so I'm not totally disagreeing with you. It was just the nearly evens price I thought ridiculous and thus lumped on. If the polls show no Tory recovery AND that they'd do much better with an alternative who's available and up for it then a contest is likely.
You are still not quite getting it.
In all politeness David look at my banana Milliband. Didn’t have the killer instinct. Didn’t strike when it was his moment. Look what delay did for him.
Rishi is different. Not only is he going to bring down Boris he is going to do it in the next fortnight.
Ah ok, well that's a nice bold call and if it comes off I'll remember to hats off you big time.
Let me say what I do agree with you about. You know all this talk about it being in the interests of the various contenders (eg Sunak) to wait because now would be a bad time to take over? This is bollox. Being PM is the ultimate for a politician and if you get a chance you damn well go for it.
So, yes, Sunak - not "Rishi" btw, it's SUNAK, let's please please not start with another 1st name brand - will go for it. You can smell the ambition there. He has what it takes in this regard. Not only that he'll be trying his utmost to engineer a contest asap while he's the fav (or co-fav with Li ... with TRUSS).
But I don't think it'll happen. For me it's only a 1 in 4 chance Johnson goes this year.
Yup. See also bollocks about "a good General Election to lose." No such thing.
How do you get hold of lfts - do the home delivery slots open after midnight, or is it midday ? We seem to have plenty of test kits but no buffer solution
There's an interesting article in today's Sunday Times about what might have happened if the UK hadn't taken any measures whatsoever to counter Covid-19.
Saint Bart - we would now be in far better place - facts speak for themselves CHB - we will all have had it, long covid, apocalyptic hospital scenes, mass graves RCS - it’s an interesting one, I have just written a sixty page thesis
7 likes for that. Does that make me obliged to read all of RCS response? All three parts of it? 😧
Where jokingly said everyone would have had it, even Leon. I have only been on site couple of months, everything already had to stop once, as he had covid false alarm.
Off topic, an issue we have often discussed, within a betting context: Paddy Power have offered 14-1 on a road/rail/tidal barrage being built across Morecambe Bay before 2036, and 5-1 on it being built before 2037.
Personally I'm a massive nimby on tidal power. In principle I'm massively in favour of it. But I love Morecambe Bay, and the view of it from Arnside Knott or Clougha Pike at sunset are amongst my favourites in the UK. I don't really want to see that jeopardised. So if we could do the Severn or Gower plans instead, that'd be great.
In truth, I don't really have a handle on what the downside would be, nor what the visual/environmental impact would be. And I suppose it would make the Furness peninsular rather less remote.
It would mean the Queen's Guide to the Sands would become redundant. But we'd save £15 a year, and gain a nice holiday cottage ...
Very sad to hear that Cedric Robinson has died. He seemed a real character in interviews.
Yes, something I have always wanted to do is the guided walk from Arnside to Grange. (I think those are the two ends?) Though maybe Heysham to Barrow is so far out in Morecambe Bay that the Arnside to Grange footpath/paddle would remain.
I considered doing it as part of my coastal walk - and I know at least one coastal walker did so. But it was too much of a faff - I needed to book ahead, and ensure I was there on the right date and time. It just wasn't workable without breaking the walk and waiting for the day.
I'd also like to do the Broomway to Foulness Island.
There are probably two issues with the path and barrage: only a tiny increase in water depth would make it impassable, and any change in currents may create deeper impassable channels. On the other hand, it might cause some silting up...
Quite difficult to get permission to go to Foulness. I’m not sure what the MoD are up to there these days, but it’s something they don’t want observed.
Sorry, you're right. I should have said "clear to a reasonable person who wasn't politically motivated".
You think her officials are "politically motivated" ?
Why?
Everyone and his dog can smell the upcoming Tory leadership election, she's a leading candidate, they (or someone close to them) don't want her to get it.
You think senior civil servants aren't politically motivated in at least some way? Really?
I don't smell an upcoming Tory leadership contest and the betting markets are starting to agree. 'Johnson still PM at next party Conf' was a quite ridiculous (imo) even money shot a couple of weeks ago but is now into a more realistic 1.33.
Your wrong Kinabalu. Firstly, the money markets is poor guide. Better guide is two clear facts in front of us. Firstly, the Pandora Tin of spin has been opened and covert opps are happening are they not? Secondly, motivation for opening the tin which can’t be unopened: if it’s a late as you claim it’s likely too late for Rishi, now or never for the career politicians.
That’s why you are wrong.
Will be interesting to read your response.
I am quite definitively smug-city and right because I backed at 1.9 and laid at 1.33 two weeks later! But 1.33 does mean a decent chance he *will* be ousted this summer so I'm not totally disagreeing with you. It was just the nearly evens price I thought ridiculous and thus lumped on. If the polls show no Tory recovery AND that they'd do much better with an alternative who's available and up for it then a contest is likely.
You are still not quite getting it.
In all politeness David look at my banana Milliband. Didn’t have the killer instinct. Didn’t strike when it was his moment. Look what delay did for him.
Rishi is different. Not only is he going to bring down Boris he is going to do it in the next fortnight.
Rishi certainly passes the means/motive/opportunity test...
..but why now? And if Rishi's Friends have been sitting on this stuff for over a year, what does that signify?
More on the new face mask advice for English secondary schools:
When someone who has Covid coughs, sneezes or exhales they release droplets of infected fluid.
Evidence certainly shows wearing a face-covering reduces the release of these into the environment.
But what's not clear is what impact this has on transmission in the real world of schools.
People wear different types of masks. Some work better than others. Ill-fitting masks or fidgeting with them will also naturally reduce their effectiveness.
Studies that have been done have been pretty inconclusive at least in terms of proving they have a significant impact.
One of the problems is it is difficult to disentangle the impact of one measure with others steps that are being taken to reduce spread of the virus.
What's more, any benefit has to be weighed against the costs in terms of harm to education.
It's the nature of a pandemic that decisions have to be taken without perfect evidence.
But this far in, plenty of experts are wondering why better research has not been done to work out what measures like this achieve.
This seems to be a policy which is being introduced more in the hope it will help significantly, rather than based on strong evidence it actually will.
My emphasis in bold. The policy looks suspiciously like something-must-be-done-ism - and, once again, when looking at other jurisdictions that have relied on mild-to-moderate restrictions like these to control the virus, there's nothing to suggest that they work against Omicron.
I am frustrated that we seem to be making so little effort to ascertain what actually works.
So, does cleaning supermarket trollies achieve anything at all?
When I appear in the High Court and finish with a witness I have to clean the lecturn so my opponent can then use it: is there any point to this?
Is air conditioning a help or a hindrance?
Do masks used by the untrained public actually help?
What is the scientific basis of 1m or 2m separation? Is it more useful to limit the number of people in a shop or office or whatever?
Does washing your hands do anything or is this just another example of a general threat of virus infection that has been cross referenced without an evidence base?
Are the answers to any of these materially different for different variants?
This information seems to me to useful going forwards and surely now we opportunities for real world assessment which, hopefully, will not be repeated. Until the next time.
It'll be interesting to see what the public inquiry comes out with - if it offers any firm conclusions at all.
I suspect that, in terms of NPIs, all that's really of use against Omicron is radical self-isolation (not going anywhere near anyone else at all; 1m or 2m distancing probably won't help much,) fresh air circulation (to offer some opportunity for the virus particles to disperse,) and very close fitting medical grade masks or respirator hoods.
Aircon is probably NOT a good idea. The air in the room is being recycled. Having a through-draft, while uncomfortable, is probably better.
How do you get hold of lfts - do the home delivery slots open after midnight, or is it midday ? We seem to have plenty of test kits but no buffer solution
They took a US Trade Delegation out for dinner. And you think they should have Ubered out for Greggs.
Yes, but that was the question I asked earlier, and it applied equally when I was in reasonably senior management in private sector pharma. Would the Trade Delegation (or the private clients) make different decisions if they were served a Greggs meal? If so, then shouldn't their employers be asking questions about the self-interested decisions that their delegates are making?
Of course nearly everyone likes a slap-up meal, and it's convenient to think that you're doing your employers a favour by taking them to one (and thereby incidentally having one yourself). But does it actually change the outcome? People in the business say "Yes, otherwise we wouldn't do it", but there isn't a control group to see if that's actually the case. When I was in the business of deciding on very large software contracts for the company, I expect I'd have accepted an invitation to a luxury dinner by the vendors, but I'd still have made the decision on the merits of the software even if they'd just invited me to a cup of tea - I'd have seen anything else as an essentially corrupt breach of my employment contract.
I must say that pharma entertainment of doctors is much less generous than once it was. Occasionally we get treated to dinner after a meeting, but the rules are that we have to buy our own drinks.
The only exception is as a guest speaker. I had a very nice weekend in Padua at a drug companies expense, but did have to give a lecture for it.
On this particular meal and the alleged menu (if true), I'm surprised that La Truss spent £700 serving Spanish wine to a USA trade delegation in pursuit of a trade deal for the UK.
Stepping back a bit from the data here and now, isn't it fairly well established that, as countries become richer and more stable, fewer children are born?
In the west, at least, we've crossed the line from too many to too few, but we're following the same trend, and that's going to be tricky to reverse.
Anyone know how/when attitudes to contraception have changed in Italy? That feels important in shoving the balance between the amount of sex people enjoy and the number of children they want.
I also wonder if the mix of housing matters. In the UK, we've been good at building city centre flats (not great for raising children) and large houses in new suburbs (unaffordable on one salary). Is there a gap in-between?
Increasingly not. This has been the problem with so much of the excess house-building of the last 10 years: building the wrong houses in the wrong places. Towns do not need more Twatty Meadows a development of executive 3 and 4 bedroom homes where the wildflower meadow used to be. They need more starter homes for people moving out of flats - and more flats for people just starting off.
What has so alarmed so many people living on Twatty Meadows-type developments is just how many homes on them are high-turnover private rentals where people can't afford to buy them, can't afford to rent them either but don't have many other options, and end up moving through quickly. Several of them on Teesside became the new council estates in the most negative sense.
I can't recall a new market development that allowed purchase for rental, so the first time that could happen would be on first resale. Though 3 and 4 bed newbuild homes are usaully the worst return in the market, so LLs would be a little stupid or mad to buy them unless they were going for eg HMOs.
On the PoliticsForAll twitter, some people have said that its last tweet was of the video of the Scottish police arresting the people having dinner. Some others are suggesting that makes it Nicola's fault.
More on the new face mask advice for English secondary schools:
When someone who has Covid coughs, sneezes or exhales they release droplets of infected fluid.
Evidence certainly shows wearing a face-covering reduces the release of these into the environment.
But what's not clear is what impact this has on transmission in the real world of schools.
People wear different types of masks. Some work better than others. Ill-fitting masks or fidgeting with them will also naturally reduce their effectiveness.
Studies that have been done have been pretty inconclusive at least in terms of proving they have a significant impact.
One of the problems is it is difficult to disentangle the impact of one measure with others steps that are being taken to reduce spread of the virus.
What's more, any benefit has to be weighed against the costs in terms of harm to education.
It's the nature of a pandemic that decisions have to be taken without perfect evidence.
But this far in, plenty of experts are wondering why better research has not been done to work out what measures like this achieve.
This seems to be a policy which is being introduced more in the hope it will help significantly, rather than based on strong evidence it actually will.
My emphasis in bold. The policy looks suspiciously like something-must-be-done-ism - and, once again, when looking at other jurisdictions that have relied on mild-to-moderate restrictions like these to control the virus, there's nothing to suggest that they work against Omicron.
I am frustrated that we seem to be making so little effort to ascertain what actually works.
So, does cleaning supermarket trollies achieve anything at all?
When I appear in the High Court and finish with a witness I have to clean the lecturn so my opponent can then use it: is there any point to this?
Is air conditioning a help or a hindrance?
Do masks used by the untrained public actually help?
What is the scientific basis of 1m or 2m separation? Is it more useful to limit the number of people in a shop or office or whatever?
Does washing your hands do anything or is this just another example of a general threat of virus infection that has been cross referenced without an evidence base?
Are the answers to any of these materially different for different variants?
This information seems to me to useful going forwards and surely now we opportunities for real world assessment which, hopefully, will not be repeated. Until the next time.
It'll be interesting to see what the public inquiry comes out with - if it offers any firm conclusions at all.
I suspect that, in terms of NPIs, all that's really of use against Omicron is radical self-isolation (not going anywhere near anyone else at all; 1m or 2m distancing probably won't help much,) fresh air circulation (to offer some opportunity for the virus particles to disperse,) and very close fitting medical grade masks or respirator hoods.
Probably also HEPA filtered air purifiers so that you don't breathe in the air of someone who was in that place ten minutes ago.
Why have tw@tter suspended the politics for all et al. network of accounts?
They are clickbaity and recently been going into their own rubbish "exclusives", but unless i missed something it wasn't like they were massive fake news or antivaxxer etc.
On the scale of dodgy social media accounts they are miles away from what I would consider fake news spreaders. 99% of it was literally just aggregator of all the main stream press articles.
Did they buy a load of fake followers or something to boost their presence?
They were often annoying in the way they reported things, but I didn't see anything that justified a ban or suspension.
If you got banned from twitter for being annoying, 99% of accounts would be gone tomorrow....
I can only presume,
1) the AI made a mistake and confused their account with saying something verboten / confused it with another account, 2) there was a bit of suspicion over how they had played the system so well to grow from nothing to a really big "news" aggregator account in a very short space of time. Perhaps they did some dodgy social media "hacks" like buying followers or engagement.
I have to think it might #2, to ban the whole network of accounts and the personal account of the guy behind it in one go.
The sort of people who walk the edge of the rules on social media, its normally they get their "business" suspended a number of times as the warning shot.
The conspiracy theories on twitter are saying it is due to posting videos of the joy sponges in the Scottish police being heavy handed with people on New Year’s Eve
Although these videos are still widely available on twitter so is it likely ?
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 11h But why? Why restrict the kids after we've already infected so many old folk at Christmas? The hospitalisations peak is already baked in now. Blighting kids' schooling isn't going to help with that any more. So what's the point other than a cosmetic "See! We're doing something!"?
It's a baffling decision.
Doesn’t baffle me. If the teachers are off Ill, no going to school for the kids.
Several likes for that, so I expand on it. Masks in schools, because no teachers no going to school, so parents can’t go into work, and not everyone can work from home. So vicious circle, unless
Max I agree with, this week government will cut isolation to 5 days.
Also this week government will extend mask wearing.
These new measures are to keep the country and economy working.
The mask ramping rests critically on the assumption that masks (at least of the kind available to and used by most people) will work.
I wonder what would've happened if the nation had the capacity to manufacture enough FFP3 masks to assure everyone from secondary school age upwards of a limitless supply, and the Government had handed them out for nothing (which would've cost considerably less than £300bn,) along with a major public health campaign basically focussed on the concept of not wearing them as chinstraps or earrings?
It would probably have saved quite a lot of people from the previous variants, and might even have offered some protection against Omicron. These blue paper things, on the other hand, are a weaker intervention and look like they may very well be useless against the new variant. The evidence from elsewhere in Europe seems to suggest this.
On the PoliticsForAll twitter, some people have said that its last tweet was of the video of the Scottish police arresting the people having dinner. Some others are suggesting that makes it Nicola's fault.
Yet those videos are still widely available online.
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn But does that mean more restrictions are needed this week? No, says Ed Argar as hospitals can still cope: "I'm seeing nothing at the moment in the data in front of me that suggests a need for further restrictions".
This is what Chris Hopson has been saying for a few days, nothing in the data warrants new restrictions. The biggest worry is isolation rules making NHS staff stay home unnecessarily and the number of admissions in general (the annual NHS winter crisis, I guess).
The data in the dashboard on hospitalisations is a bit useless at the moment. With such high background prevalence of COVID a measure of that which is based on anyone who has it will inevitably rise. By the 28th around half of all incoming patients on the dash were incidental, by now it will be higher still has Delta works it's way out of the system and Omicron goes up to around 1/15 being infected.
The key publicly facing real time statistic is patients requiring mechanical ventilation. That number is still basically going nowhere, even in London. Last time we saw that rise in proportion to the overall hospitalisation number.
I'd like to know how many people are off work with covid who are:
1) asymptomatic 2) have a 'bit of a cold' 3) actually ill
Yes, the reports are that category 3 is actually pretty small which is why Hopson and other NHS bods are agitating for the government to cut isolation times and get rid of isolation rules for triple jabbed people altogether. We're probably getting to the point of doing away with isolation for asymptomatic people and cutting it to 3 or 4 days to people with mild symptoms.
A problem might be there are too many people who want to have an extra week off while not actually being ill.
More on the new face mask advice for English secondary schools:
When someone who has Covid coughs, sneezes or exhales they release droplets of infected fluid.
Evidence certainly shows wearing a face-covering reduces the release of these into the environment.
But what's not clear is what impact this has on transmission in the real world of schools.
People wear different types of masks. Some work better than others. Ill-fitting masks or fidgeting with them will also naturally reduce their effectiveness.
Studies that have been done have been pretty inconclusive at least in terms of proving they have a significant impact.
One of the problems is it is difficult to disentangle the impact of one measure with others steps that are being taken to reduce spread of the virus.
What's more, any benefit has to be weighed against the costs in terms of harm to education.
It's the nature of a pandemic that decisions have to be taken without perfect evidence.
But this far in, plenty of experts are wondering why better research has not been done to work out what measures like this achieve.
This seems to be a policy which is being introduced more in the hope it will help significantly, rather than based on strong evidence it actually will.
My emphasis in bold. The policy looks suspiciously like something-must-be-done-ism - and, once again, when looking at other jurisdictions that have relied on mild-to-moderate restrictions like these to control the virus, there's nothing to suggest that they work against Omicron.
I am frustrated that we seem to be making so little effort to ascertain what actually works.
So, does cleaning supermarket trollies achieve anything at all?
When I appear in the High Court and finish with a witness I have to clean the lecturn so my opponent can then use it: is there any point to this?
Is air conditioning a help or a hindrance?
Do masks used by the untrained public actually help?
What is the scientific basis of 1m or 2m separation? Is it more useful to limit the number of people in a shop or office or whatever?
Does washing your hands do anything or is this just another example of a general threat of virus infection that has been cross referenced without an evidence base?
Are the answers to any of these materially different for different variants?
This information seems to me to useful going forwards and surely now we opportunities for real world assessment which, hopefully, will not be repeated. Until the next time.
The only thing that will work is for either everyone to get three doses or to get infected. Halting the spread is impossible.
In the long run that is probably true but what applies the brakes and what doesn't?
The point continually being missed is that this is not an either/or issue. It's true, eg, that face masks will not halt the spread of Omicron. It is also true that mask usage will very likely produce a slightly slower rate of spread. It is also true that this will even out the pressure on the medical services. It is also true that this is the underlying reason for most preventative measures.
Frankly disappointed to see the low rate of very young mothers in Camden, despite all my best efforts
Not surprised, after seeing the wealth in the area when visiting my friend in Camden. What surprised me is Tower Hamlets, not a reference to your efforts but because I thought it was a poor area. Or am I missing something?
All central London boroughs are very mixed - lots of ghastly council housing estates, but also lots of new wealth converted apartments for City and West End workers. Sometimes on the same street.
London isn't Paris, with its segregation between the wealthy centre and the poorer multi-ethnic suburbs. It's far more like New York where anything can happen.
Never understood the whole "wipe down trollies" at the supermarket thing. Just wash your hands after if you're worried.
Yes, that surprises me. I think there's some inertia in measures - they can be slow to bring in, and slow to get rid of once they're not needed. Remember all the 'avoid touching your face' at the beginning of the pandemic? It probably comes down to that.
Sorry, you're right. I should have said "clear to a reasonable person who wasn't politically motivated".
You think her officials are "politically motivated" ?
Why?
Everyone and his dog can smell the upcoming Tory leadership election, she's a leading candidate, they (or someone close to them) don't want her to get it.
You think senior civil servants aren't politically motivated in at least some way? Really?
I don't smell an upcoming Tory leadership contest and the betting markets are starting to agree. 'Johnson still PM at next party Conf' was a quite ridiculous (imo) even money shot a couple of weeks ago but is now into a more realistic 1.33.
Your wrong Kinabalu. Firstly, the money markets is poor guide. Better guide is two clear facts in front of us. Firstly, the Pandora Tin of spin has been opened and covert opps are happening are they not? Secondly, motivation for opening the tin which can’t be unopened: if it’s a late as you claim it’s likely too late for Rishi, now or never for the career politicians.
That’s why you are wrong.
Will be interesting to read your response.
I am quite definitively smug-city and right because I backed at 1.9 and laid at 1.33 two weeks later! But 1.33 does mean a decent chance he *will* be ousted this summer so I'm not totally disagreeing with you. It was just the nearly evens price I thought ridiculous and thus lumped on. If the polls show no Tory recovery AND that they'd do much better with an alternative who's available and up for it then a contest is likely.
You are still not quite getting it.
In all politeness David look at my banana Milliband. Didn’t have the killer instinct. Didn’t strike when it was his moment. Look what delay did for him.
Rishi is different. Not only is he going to bring down Boris he is going to do it in the next fortnight.
Rishi certainly passes the means/motive/opportunity test...
..but why now? And if Rishi's Friends have been sitting on this stuff for over a year, what does that signify?
Well, BJ was a great big relatively popular old Hector for much of that time; jockeying for succession would have been easy to dismiss by BJ's friends/the Tele. Now he's a great big despised and possibly fatally weakened old Hector, so..
They took a US Trade Delegation out for dinner. And you think they should have Ubered out for Greggs.
Yes, but that was the question I asked earlier, and it applied equally when I was in reasonably senior management in private sector pharma. Would the Trade Delegation (or the private clients) make different decisions if they were served a Greggs meal? If so, then shouldn't their employers be asking questions about the self-interested decisions that their delegates are making?
Of course nearly everyone likes a slap-up meal, and it's convenient to think that you're doing your employers a favour by taking them to one (and thereby incidentally having one yourself). But does it actually change the outcome? People in the business say "Yes, otherwise we wouldn't do it", but there isn't a control group to see if that's actually the case. When I was in the business of deciding on very large software contracts for the company, I expect I'd have accepted an invitation to a luxury dinner by the vendors, but I'd still have made the decision on the merits of the software even if they'd just invited me to a cup of tea - I'd have seen anything else as an essentially corrupt breach of my employment contract.
I must say that pharma entertainment of doctors is much less generous than once it was. Occasionally we get treated to dinner after a meeting, but the rules are that we have to buy our own drinks.
The only exception is as a guest speaker. I had a very nice weekend in Padua at a drug companies expense, but did have to give a lecture for it.
On this particular meal and the alleged menu (if true), I'm surprised that La Truss spent £700 serving Spanish wine to a USA trade delegation in pursuit of a trade deal for the UK.
Stepping back a bit from the data here and now, isn't it fairly well established that, as countries become richer and more stable, fewer children are born?
In the west, at least, we've crossed the line from too many to too few, but we're following the same trend, and that's going to be tricky to reverse.
Anyone know how/when attitudes to contraception have changed in Italy? That feels important in shoving the balance between the amount of sex people enjoy and the number of children they want.
I also wonder if the mix of housing matters. In the UK, we've been good at building city centre flats (not great for raising children) and large houses in new suburbs (unaffordable on one salary). Is there a gap in-between?
Increasingly not. This has been the problem with so much of the excess house-building of the last 10 years: building the wrong houses in the wrong places. Towns do not need more Twatty Meadows a development of executive 3 and 4 bedroom homes where the wildflower meadow used to be. They need more starter homes for people moving out of flats - and more flats for people just starting off.
What has so alarmed so many people living on Twatty Meadows-type developments is just how many homes on them are high-turnover private rentals where people can't afford to buy them, can't afford to rent them either but don't have many other options, and end up moving through quickly. Several of them on Teesside became the new council estates in the most negative sense.
I can't recall a new market development that allowed purchase for rental, so the first time that could happen would be on first resale. Though 3 and 4 bed newbuild homes are usaully the worst return in the market, so LLs would be a little stupid or mad to buy them unless they were going for eg HMOs.
But perhaps I just live in an area with a normal housing market (?)
Perhaps! Have previously said that my experience on Teesside may not reflect elsewhere.
In summary the developers land bank - not enough houses get built which means they can win decisions on juicier stuff. And so vast estates start getting thrown up - the problem is that how do you keep finding permanent resident buyers when you're building 1,300 homes on this development and there's hundreds more on the next door one?
So you sell to people who want to buy. I lived on Mandale park which was definitely gentrification of a shitbox estate bulldosed to make room. Our early small phase had its issues, but nothing compared to the bigger phases that followed. You're probably right that they don't try and sell to chancers, but there was a string of early repossessions (we moved in 2006) and most of those went BTL. The bigger phases that followed had it far worse - more than a quarter of homes estimated to be lets and big problems with arsehole families and don't care landlords.
It has. For some people, in some ways, it is fine, as you say it is about individual makeup. Part of my concern, as someone who really does need to seperate home life from working life, even in the physical space, is some people are so excited by the rapid switch to the new way of working that they are jumping too fast to make it the norm for as many as people as possible, without taking the time to consider if that works for everyone, unlike you. I've lost count of the number of meetings I've been in where, despite lip service to such issues at other times, no consideration is given to mental impacts for some, or even the possibility people not like new ways, except as a criticism of people not moving with the times.
Entirely valid points. I have never advocated anyone should be compelled to work from home as normal practice.
I'm also opposed to people being compelled to come into an office - it should be possible in the 21st century to operate a hybrid work-life system which works for the greatest number of people.
Unfortunately, money talks and companies look at half-full offices and are deciding whether it should either be empty (which works financially) or full (ditto). The notion the nature of work needs to evolve is a struggle for those especially managers who led by presenteeism and have this notion if they can't see you working you're not actually working.
I'm hoping such attitudes, redolent as they are of former times, are on the way out.
I do agree more time and thought needs to be given to how organisations operate in this new environment - I've heard the term "agile" banded about but it seems to mean something different to everyone. In my experience, running a mixed physical/remote meeting needs a different skillset to managing a wholly physical meeting.
Of course we must consider the mental health impacts but it's not something employees or individuals always find easy to discuss in front of colleagues or managers. We see in larger organisations workplace counselling services under the catch all title of "wellness" and this needs to be more widely available.
Suffering in silence is still suffering and there need to be support networks available for those who are in trouble and need to talk to someone. In a very real sense, we need to treat the mental health issues of hybrid working as we would the physical manifestations.
The issue not being stated here though is that there are people dying to return to the office, there are people wanting to work from home in perpetuity. When you can return to the office however how many of the first group are going to be happy that only half the office is turning up and the rest are working from home. Presumably the return to office crowd want socialising....if half the office isnt turning up they arent getting what they want so they will start agitating that all should be forced to come in
Interesting points on the potential India Trade Deal.
Offering reduced application fees for visas and to encourage education in the UK are no brainers as we have a comparative advantage in higher education, especially when EuCo is still sitting on its hands wrt Horizon.
Plus extending visas after education also seems sensible, bearing in mind what Indians have achieved wrt new businesses in North America.
On the PoliticsForAll twitter, some people have said that its last tweet was of the video of the Scottish police arresting the people having dinner. Some others are suggesting that makes it Nicola's fault.
Comments
Something has to explain a naff politician’s meteoric rise.
From memory, I got an offer, but I went to work for Acorn instead. I was burnt out with London.
"My 2022 resolution: Don’t let this be the Year of the New Normal
The goalposts for returning to life as it was keep moving. I can't be the only one thinking: what if this never ends?
By Rachel Cunliffe"
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/health/2021/12/my-2022-resolution-dont-let-this-be-the-year-of-the-new-normal
Arn’t you supposed to merely post ‘I can’t run all the way to Eppinggard’
Even those on social media who walk the tight rope of talking about some dodgy stuff or making some iffy "jokes", they will have the offending account suspended, but they won't take down everything (at least unless you really go full Alex Jones) e.g. that Carl Benjamin guy, they banned his primary twitter account, but he has a whole network of other things going on which it isn't a big secret he is involved with and they are untouched.
I'm also opposed to people being compelled to come into an office - it should be possible in the 21st century to operate a hybrid work-life system which works for the greatest number of people.
Unfortunately, money talks and companies look at half-full offices and are deciding whether it should either be empty (which works financially) or full (ditto). The notion the nature of work needs to evolve is a struggle for those especially managers who led by presenteeism and have this notion if they can't see you working you're not actually working.
I'm hoping such attitudes, redolent as they are of former times, are on the way out.
I do agree more time and thought needs to be given to how organisations operate in this new environment - I've heard the term "agile" banded about but it seems to mean something different to everyone. In my experience, running a mixed physical/remote meeting needs a different skillset to managing a wholly physical meeting.
Of course we must consider the mental health impacts but it's not something employees or individuals always find easy to discuss in front of colleagues or managers. We see in larger organisations workplace counselling services under the catch all title of "wellness" and this needs to be more widely available.
Suffering in silence is still suffering and there need to be support networks available for those who are in trouble and need to talk to someone. In a very real sense, we need to treat the mental health issues of hybrid working as we would the physical manifestations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen's_Guide_to_the_Sands
Very sad to hear that Cedric Robinson has died. He seemed a real character in interviews.
In all politeness David look at my banana Milliband. Didn’t have the killer instinct. Didn’t strike when it was his moment. Look what delay did for him.
Rishi is different. Not only is he going to bring down Boris he is going to do it in the next fortnight.
Yes, and the same goes for flexible working hours. IMV these steps would be part of the solution to the problems in the threader.
However WfH is not always a good idea. I'd be concerned about confidential information (I believe TSE has talked about this in the past), and some meetings are probably best done face-to-face.
So, does cleaning supermarket trollies achieve anything at all?
When I appear in the High Court and finish with a witness I have to clean the lecturn so my opponent can then use it: is there any point to this?
Is air conditioning a help or a hindrance?
Do masks used by the untrained public actually help?
What is the scientific basis of 1m or 2m separation? Is it more useful to limit the number of people in a shop or office or whatever?
Does washing your hands do anything or is this just another example of a general threat of virus infection that has been cross referenced without an evidence base?
Are the answers to any of these materially different for different variants?
This information seems to me to useful going forwards and surely now we opportunities for real world assessment which, hopefully, will not be repeated. Until the next time.
I'd also like to do the Broomway to Foulness Island.
There are probably two issues with the path and barrage: only a tiny increase in water depth would make it impassable, and any change in currents may create deeper impassable channels. On the other hand, it might cause some silting up...
We seem to have plenty of test kits but no buffer solution
Yes I'm not sure how we've managed it either.
Sleek-headed men and such as sleep a-nights.
Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look.
He thinks too much. Such men are dangerous.
Points to Rishi rather than bojo
I think Tory party politics is going to get very interesting in the next couple of months
in fact I worked the hospitality rule at Cheltenham in that I nagged different suppliers/partners to invite me for different days thus keeping under the limits and enjoying a whole week at Cheltenham!
Seems to be working here (I'm not getting an instant no delivery slots available message).
Let me say what I do agree with you about. You know all this talk about it being in the interests of the various contenders (eg Sunak) to wait because now would be a bad time to take over? This is bollox. Being PM is the ultimate for a politician and if you get a chance you damn well go for it.
So, yes, Sunak - not "Rishi" btw, it's SUNAK, let's please please not start with another 1st name brand - will go for it. You can smell the ambition there. He has what it takes in this regard. Not only that he'll be trying his utmost to engineer a contest asap while he's the fav (or co-fav with Li ... with TRUSS).
But I don't think it'll happen. For me it's only a 1 in 4 chance Johnson goes this year.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/3161847/covid-19-china-xian-cases-edge-down-new-years-day-after-worst
I've added a bit to my version to convert fitbit steps to miles. It's lovely and sunny outside today with a pleasant, strong, electricity generating wind.
I suspect that, in terms of NPIs, all that's really of use against Omicron is radical self-isolation (not going anywhere near anyone else at all; 1m or 2m distancing probably won't help much,) fresh air circulation (to offer some opportunity for the virus particles to disperse,) and very close fitting medical grade masks or respirator hoods.
Max I agree with, this week government will cut isolation to 5 days.
Also this week government will extend mask wearing.
These new measures are to keep the country and economy working.
Where jokingly said everyone would have had it, even Leon. I have only been on site couple of months, everything already had to stop once, as he had covid false alarm.
Here he is. Here he is singing his little song
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h02pNUKInBo
..but why now? And if Rishi's Friends have been sitting on this stuff for over a year, what does that signify?
I also question "high turnover", since frequency of moving house is now more than halved in a generation:
https://www.zoopla.co.uk/discover/property-news/how-often-do-we-move-house-in-britain/
But perhaps I just live in an area with a normal housing market (?)
Although these videos are still widely available on twitter so is it likely ?
I wonder what would've happened if the nation had the capacity to manufacture enough FFP3 masks to assure everyone from secondary school age upwards of a limitless supply, and the Government had handed them out for nothing (which would've cost considerably less than £300bn,) along with a major public health campaign basically focussed on the concept of not wearing them as chinstraps or earrings?
It would probably have saved quite a lot of people from the previous variants, and might even have offered some protection against Omicron. These blue paper things, on the other hand, are a weaker intervention and look like they may very well be useless against the new variant. The evidence from elsewhere in Europe seems to suggest this.
NEW THREAD
The excessive use of LFTs encourages this.
London isn't Paris, with its segregation between the wealthy centre and the poorer multi-ethnic suburbs. It's far more like New York where anything can happen.
Now he's a great big despised and possibly fatally weakened old Hector, so..
In summary the developers land bank - not enough houses get built which means they can win decisions on juicier stuff. And so vast estates start getting thrown up - the problem is that how do you keep finding permanent resident buyers when you're building 1,300 homes on this development and there's hundreds more on the next door one?
So you sell to people who want to buy. I lived on Mandale park which was definitely gentrification of a shitbox estate bulldosed to make room. Our early small phase had its issues, but nothing compared to the bigger phases that followed. You're probably right that they don't try and sell to chancers, but there was a string of early repossessions (we moved in 2006) and most of those went BTL. The bigger phases that followed had it far worse - more than a quarter of homes estimated to be lets and big problems with arsehole families and don't care landlords.
Offering reduced application fees for visas and to encourage education in the UK are no brainers as we have a comparative advantage in higher education, especially when EuCo is still sitting on its hands wrt Horizon.
Plus extending visas after education also seems sensible, bearing in mind what Indians have achieved wrt new businesses in North America.
There's a very interesting 2021 assessment of EU prospects / the horizon wrt India here:
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2021/653646/EXPO_IDA(2021)653646_EN.pdf
Nothing is *ever* Nicola's fault.