Covid restrictions in Scotland are working, insists advisor More now from Scotland’s national clinical director, who’s been telling the BBC that Covid restrictions in place across Scotland are helping to reduce the spread of the Omicron variant.
Prof Jason Leitch says measures such as the closure of nightclubs are making a difference.
The Scottish government has faced criticism that the rules are too tough.
The latest Scottish government Covid report shows average daily cases in Scotland (2,824 per one million population in the week to 6 January) were higher than in England (2,615 per one million) which has fewer Covid restrictions.
An update on Covid rules in Scotland will be given by First Minister Nicola Sturgeon at Holyrood tomorrow.
Scotland restrictions working at preventing the escape of Omicron cases from high prevalence Scotland to low prevalence England?
(I jest, hopefully obviously - without a good counterfactual there's little point trying to link case numbers to restrictions. Generally places with fewest cases have had fewest restrictions and there's a clear positive correlation between more restrictions and more cases, but the causality seems unlikely!)
It's a question of onus. I think that the onus is on those who seek to restrict liberty to make the case for more severe restrictions. They can do this by: (a) demonstrating a clear benefit (nope) (b) explaining that the threat is so severe in terms of hospital admissions that precautionary measures are necessary (nope). (c) identifying some risk factors that are more severe in Scotland than in England (nope).
If they fail to do this then the nonsense of stopping sporting events being watched by more than 500 supporters, the closing of nightclubs, table service in bars and 2m restrictions in public buildings needs to stop. Now. Even if that means we look like we are copying England and were wrong to be so overly cautious.
Nicola has got her "different to the English" policy done, the wind down of restrictions in Scotland will start soon, she's too smart to be caught in the trap of people seeing everything fully open in England but some restrictions in Scotland with little to no difference in the infection rate. She'll call it a worthwhile precaution to protect the NHS or something along those lines but I would be shocked if the restrictions in Scotland last beyond the end of next week.
Interesting piece on the prospects for a second US Civil War. The tldr; version is that a full on war is unlikely but a Northern Ireland kind of situation is possible. Scary.
It’s a decent piece. A civil war is not at all likely; but increased political violence (insurgency) is surely very possible.
The key, as the piece notes, is that in 2045 whites are due to become a minority in the US. This fact seems rather irrelevant in comfortably white Britain, but it must feel very ominous to many here.
I am a lot more sanguine about the longer-term prospects for the US than this article. Sure, it is a more violent society than Western European societies. And yes, the divides are deep and widening. But I just don't see it getting anything nearly as bad as The Troubles.
That said, clearly the Overton window has shifted.
PS The danger point is another Trump minority vote election victory, with much increased authoritarianism at Federal and Red State levels. But I'd see this as more likely to lead to littoral secession than civil war.
About 3,500 died in the Irish troubles over 30 years. The US had 1.4 million gun deaths 1968-2011, so an extra decade. So just rebadge a fairly modest proportion of your gun homicides as political and there's your civil war, right there.
It's still not a civil war if it's not a civil war, no matter how you redefine the statistics to make the point.
Yes, I am not serious about a retrospective redefinition. But as a lot of the shootings seems to have a pretty political flavour in the first place, it would take much less for the US than for most countries to slide into a shooting war.
I am still astonished by the background information in the Arbery case that there had been recent thefts of loaded rifles from unlocked vehicles.
Gun culture is so different from the UK it is hard for most Brits to imagine it until they move to rural or ex-urban US.
Yes. If you had an *empty* rifle taken from a *locked* vehicle here you would never be allowed to own another one.
Interesting piece on the prospects for a second US Civil War. The tldr; version is that a full on war is unlikely but a Northern Ireland kind of situation is possible. Scary.
It’s a decent piece. A civil war is not at all likely; but increased political violence (insurgency) is surely very possible.
The key, as the piece notes, is that in 2045 whites are due to become a minority in the US. This fact seems rather irrelevant in comfortably white Britain, but it must feel very ominous to many here.
By 2100 the only nations which will still definitely be majority white are likely to be Russia, Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe. Though whites will still likely be a plurality in Western Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand
You sound like a white supremacist who thinks that only 100% white is white. I'm not saying you are: just that it sounds like it.
What about someome whose mother was long-term UK white and father Black Jamaican? Is she white or black? And if neither, why don't you score her as 50% for your arithmetic?
And I - pale and pallid except for my freckles - could well be 1/128 or 1/256 Black for all I know. Do you deduct that bit for me?
It's like gender, innit? It's how you self-identify.
I am constantly amazed at how 'black' is defined in the US. I think for some, 1/256 would do it.
Who was the Senator who claimed 1/256 Indigenous ancestry?
Elizabeth Warren.
Hence Donald Trump referring to her as "Pocahontas" since the 2016 campaign - which, although I hate being fair to Trump, is pretty funny as well as pretty damaging.
Interesting piece on the prospects for a second US Civil War. The tldr; version is that a full on war is unlikely but a Northern Ireland kind of situation is possible. Scary.
It’s a decent piece. A civil war is not at all likely; but increased political violence (insurgency) is surely very possible.
The key, as the piece notes, is that in 2045 whites are due to become a minority in the US. This fact seems rather irrelevant in comfortably white Britain, but it must feel very ominous to many here.
By 2100 the only nations which will still definitely be majority white are likely to be Russia, Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe. Though whites will still likely be a plurality in Western Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand
Define "white".
White, non Hispanic
Italians? Greeks? Turks? Syrians? Egyptians? Where does the line get drawn?
*a little off topic *🐖 After Pope said too many petbabies you remember , they had dogbabies in my dad telegraph saying does the Pope have a point. I shared my master plan with my other half. We should have a teacup Pig. She was looking at me so heard me, but didn’t say anything. Maybe it was because she was drinking from a tea mug so got confused. That is a very miniature breed of pig I added. She took a long time but asked - what? In the Flat? Yes. I said. In the flat. Wilbur. She didn’t say anything. Then she put her headphones on and closed her eyes.
Those of you been in relationships longer than me. Do I take this as master plan back to drawing board already? My vision thing can see how nice it would be having little Wilbur to look after
Never said NO so you can always plead ignorance if it goes badly and blame her.
That’s true. LOL. Would be funny if he just appeared, and the look on her face when she finds him asleep on our bed (or chewing her headphones)
I appreciate teacup pigs get big in a year, but even a bigger Wilbur like this one my other half should love, like this picture (which looks a bit like her actually the one on left).
He would be neutered and I’ll soon have him potty trained and showered everyday. They are so intelligent I could get him to use the pot and pul the flush. He could even enjoy the sauna and shower time with me. They like to sweat they do.
What do you think should be the right answer? [Watson Glaser test]
"Virtual employees, or employees who work from home via computer, are an increasing trend. In the US, the number of virtual employees has increased 39% in the last two years and 74% in the last five years."
Is the following statement True, Probably True, Insufficient Data, Probably False or False?
"Today, a majority of the employees in the US are virtual employees."
Having seen the other replies to this, as long as the section makes it clear that you are allowed to bring in prior knowledge (making it an estimation question) then it would be an OK question. I’m not very impressed that “common sense” is being quoted as a sensible input though: using common sense can get you into all sorts of difficulties in maths and science.
Let's vary Stocky's puzzle. Same scenario except there's just the one bag!
A: 2 dips and win if you pick green with either. B: 1 dip and win if it's either green or yellow.
B is still a 50% chance of winning obvs.
What is A now?
With or without replacement? 7/12 without replacement (1/4 + 1/3). 1/2 with (1/4 + 1/4).
I meant without. So, looks like it's A now. Different answer entirely!
But with no time to calculate would you instinctively still go with B if faced with the choice in real life, ie with the bag right there in front of you and, say, £10k up for grabs?
Covid restrictions in Scotland are working, insists advisor More now from Scotland’s national clinical director, who’s been telling the BBC that Covid restrictions in place across Scotland are helping to reduce the spread of the Omicron variant.
Prof Jason Leitch says measures such as the closure of nightclubs are making a difference.
The Scottish government has faced criticism that the rules are too tough.
The latest Scottish government Covid report shows average daily cases in Scotland (2,824 per one million population in the week to 6 January) were higher than in England (2,615 per one million) which has fewer Covid restrictions.
An update on Covid rules in Scotland will be given by First Minister Nicola Sturgeon at Holyrood tomorrow.
Have they used reporting date data to get that? Because the uk.gov dashboard isn't up to 6th of Jan yet and is under 2000 for England currently.
More importantly are the case numbers on the same basis - England and Wales are not since Wales includes reinfections and England cases are actually the number who have been knowingly affected by Covid at least once. What do Scotland cases show ?
Interesting piece on the prospects for a second US Civil War. The tldr; version is that a full on war is unlikely but a Northern Ireland kind of situation is possible. Scary.
It’s a decent piece. A civil war is not at all likely; but increased political violence (insurgency) is surely very possible.
The key, as the piece notes, is that in 2045 whites are due to become a minority in the US. This fact seems rather irrelevant in comfortably white Britain, but it must feel very ominous to many here.
By 2100 the only nations which will still definitely be majority white are likely to be Russia, Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe. Though whites will still likely be a plurality in Western Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand
Define "white".
White, non Hispanic
Italians? Greeks? Turks? Syrians? Egyptians? Where does the line get drawn?
OT. David McClenaghan seems determined to do the impossible and give lawyers a bad name. Trying to wangle money out of Manchester City must be tempting for a lawyer though under the circumstances pretty ludicrous. The connection between the club and McClenaghan's clients seems to non existent except that the club have money.
Interesting piece on the prospects for a second US Civil War. The tldr; version is that a full on war is unlikely but a Northern Ireland kind of situation is possible. Scary.
It’s a decent piece. A civil war is not at all likely; but increased political violence (insurgency) is surely very possible.
The key, as the piece notes, is that in 2045 whites are due to become a minority in the US. This fact seems rather irrelevant in comfortably white Britain, but it must feel very ominous to many here.
By 2100 the only nations which will still definitely be majority white are likely to be Russia, Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe. Though whites will still likely be a plurality in Western Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand
You sound like a white supremacist who thinks that only 100% white is white. I'm not saying you are: just that it sounds like it.
What about someome whose mother was long-term UK white and father Black Jamaican? Is she white or black? And if neither, why don't you score her as 50% for your arithmetic?
And I - pale and pallid except for my freckles - could well be 1/128 or 1/256 Black for all I know. Do you deduct that bit for me?
It's like gender, innit? It's how you self-identify.
I am constantly amazed at how 'black' is defined in the US. I think for some, 1/256 would do it.
I’m looking forward to these racial perversities. Although maybe in New York I will be protected from them.
Strictly speaking, I am “mixed race”, as of course are my children. Not that it’s possible to tell.
Concepts such a mixed race, for me, rely on the concept of racial purity. That is, to be mixed race there must be other people who are not mixed race. I don't think the concept of racial purity is either helpful or interesting.
Yes. I've always wondered how the DNA origins testing works in that respect, as it presumably has to assume that there are some reference populations with homogenous antecedents, and/or a time you can go back to before which there were no population movements.
Not very likely, though perhaps you can get close enough for a rough idea.
Interesting piece on the prospects for a second US Civil War. The tldr; version is that a full on war is unlikely but a Northern Ireland kind of situation is possible. Scary.
It’s a decent piece. A civil war is not at all likely; but increased political violence (insurgency) is surely very possible.
The key, as the piece notes, is that in 2045 whites are due to become a minority in the US. This fact seems rather irrelevant in comfortably white Britain, but it must feel very ominous to many here.
By 2100 the only nations which will still definitely be majority white are likely to be Russia, Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe. Though whites will still likely be a plurality in Western Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand
Define "white".
White, non Hispanic
Italians? Greeks? Turks? Syrians? Egyptians? Where does the line get drawn?
Italians and Greeks mainly are, Turks, Syrians and Egyptians mainly are not
In a few centuries most people will be a bit of everything, assuming we haven't killed each other in the meantime. It was inevitable once the jet engine was invented. I don't know why this prospect bothers anybody.
Interesting piece on the prospects for a second US Civil War. The tldr; version is that a full on war is unlikely but a Northern Ireland kind of situation is possible. Scary.
It’s a decent piece. A civil war is not at all likely; but increased political violence (insurgency) is surely very possible.
The key, as the piece notes, is that in 2045 whites are due to become a minority in the US. This fact seems rather irrelevant in comfortably white Britain, but it must feel very ominous to many here.
By 2100 the only nations which will still definitely be majority white are likely to be Russia, Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe. Though whites will still likely be a plurality in Western Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand
Define "white".
White, non Hispanic
Define Hispanic!
That was an interesting NPR show on just this topic last week. The two hosts concluded that it was not a very useful term, and it would be far better to refer to more specific groups, like Ricans, or Hondurans - as white, indigenous and black Hondurans have more in common with each other than black Hondurans have with black Ricans, for example. And certainly more in common than with native born African Americans.
On the new boundaries Kensington and Westbourne will be safe Labour but Chelsea and Fulham West would still be Tory but go Labour if they won most seats.
It is a long way from 1997 when Kensington and Chelsea was the safest Conservative seat left in the UK, hence Portillo went for it in 1999 when Alan Clark died
I meant the Borough not the seat. @eek was referencing the May elections.
On that you are right, if the Royal Borough went Labour it would suggest Starmer was heading for most seats at least. Though I think Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster will stay Tory even if Barnet and Wandsworth go Labour
I'm not sure about Westminster actually. I'd completely written it off until now because Labour lost so badly on seats in 2018 but I actually wonder if the reduction in seats from 60 to 54 could help Labour and their vote has stood up well in by elections. I think there's a far higher chance of Labour winning an overall majority on Westminster (if they win the Vincent Sq and Pimlico wards) than Barnet as the opposition to the Tories in Finchley is split between Labour and the Lib Dems.
I'm not expecting Labour to gain any councils in London except Wandsworth possibly BTW.
The 52-page plan, which was published online on Friday, covers the Czech government’s financial, social and diplomatic policies for the next four years, including plans for strengthening the Czech Republic’s relationships with Taiwan, India, Japan and South Korea.
The plan also calls for a reassessment of the country’s relationships with China and Russia...
Covid restrictions in Scotland are working, insists advisor More now from Scotland’s national clinical director, who’s been telling the BBC that Covid restrictions in place across Scotland are helping to reduce the spread of the Omicron variant.
Prof Jason Leitch says measures such as the closure of nightclubs are making a difference.
The Scottish government has faced criticism that the rules are too tough.
The latest Scottish government Covid report shows average daily cases in Scotland (2,824 per one million population in the week to 6 January) were higher than in England (2,615 per one million) which has fewer Covid restrictions.
An update on Covid rules in Scotland will be given by First Minister Nicola Sturgeon at Holyrood tomorrow.
Scotland restrictions working at preventing the escape of Omicron cases from high prevalence Scotland to low prevalence England?
(I jest, hopefully obviously - without a good counterfactual there's little point trying to link case numbers to restrictions. Generally places with fewest cases have had fewest restrictions and there's a clear positive correlation between more restrictions and more cases, but the causality seems unlikely!)
It's a question of onus. I think that the onus is on those who seek to restrict liberty to make the case for more severe restrictions. They can do this by: (a) demonstrating a clear benefit (nope) (b) explaining that the threat is so severe in terms of hospital admissions that precautionary measures are necessary (nope). (c) identifying some risk factors that are more severe in Scotland than in England (nope).
If they fail to do this then the nonsense of stopping sporting events being watched by more than 500 supporters, the closing of nightclubs, table service in bars and 2m restrictions in public buildings needs to stop. Now. Even if that means we look like we are copying England and were wrong to be so overly cautious.
Nicola has got her "different to the English" policy done, the wind down of restrictions in Scotland will start soon, she's too smart to be caught in the trap of people seeing everything fully open in England but some restrictions in Scotland with little to no difference in the infection rate. She'll call it a worthwhile precaution to protect the NHS or something along those lines but I would be shocked if the restrictions in Scotland last beyond the end of next week.
She's chasing a moving target though. Boris is going to 5 days isolation soon. Does she try to jump ahead or follow on again like she did with the 10>7 days?
You have a Greek, an Italian, a Turk, an Egyptian, a Syrian, a Kalash, an Inuit, a Romanian, an Icelander, and a Spaniard in a bag. What's the odds of drawing a single white person out in one go. What about at least one from two goes, and what about two from two?
Now suppose the Romanian lives in Italy, and the Greek is resident in Cairo. The Spaniard is on a whaling ship off the coast of Greenland. And there's a goat behind the third door. What colour is the bear?
Interesting piece on the prospects for a second US Civil War. The tldr; version is that a full on war is unlikely but a Northern Ireland kind of situation is possible. Scary.
It’s a decent piece. A civil war is not at all likely; but increased political violence (insurgency) is surely very possible.
The key, as the piece notes, is that in 2045 whites are due to become a minority in the US. This fact seems rather irrelevant in comfortably white Britain, but it must feel very ominous to many here.
By 2100 the only nations which will still definitely be majority white are likely to be Russia, Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe. Though whites will still likely be a plurality in Western Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand
Define "white".
White, non Hispanic
Italians? Greeks? Turks? Syrians? Egyptians? Where does the line get drawn?
Italians and Greeks mainly are, Turks, Syrians and Egyptians mainly are not
In a few centuries most people will be a bit of everything, assuming we haven't killed each other in the meantime. It was inevitable once the jet engine was invented. I don't know why this prospect bothers anybody.
Only in the West and Latin America and maybe the Western Cape in South Africa.
Most of Africa will still be Black however, most of the Middle East will still be Arab, most of India will still be Hindu and most of the Far East will still be Oriental. Russia and Eastern Europe will also still be the last region to be majority white
I meant the Borough not the seat. @eek was referencing the May elections.
On that you are right, if the Royal Borough went Labour it would suggest Starmer was heading for most seats at least. Though I think Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster will stay Tory even if Barnet and Wandsworth go Labour
I think Labour winning K&C would mean rather more than that. The Conservatives have controlled K&C since its creation in 1964. Even in the mid-90s, the Conservatives retained control comfortably and have never, I believe, polled less than 50% in any Borough election.
In 2018 the Conservatives won 36 seats with 51.4% of the vote and Labour won 13 on 33%.
Westminster has also been solidly Conservative since 1964 though in 2018 they polled 42.8% to Labour's 41.1% while Wandsworth has been Conservative since 1978.
Interesting piece on the prospects for a second US Civil War. The tldr; version is that a full on war is unlikely but a Northern Ireland kind of situation is possible. Scary.
It’s a decent piece. A civil war is not at all likely; but increased political violence (insurgency) is surely very possible.
The key, as the piece notes, is that in 2045 whites are due to become a minority in the US. This fact seems rather irrelevant in comfortably white Britain, but it must feel very ominous to many here.
By 2100 the only nations which will still definitely be majority white are likely to be Russia, Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe. Though whites will still likely be a plurality in Western Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand
You sound like a white supremacist who thinks that only 100% white is white. I'm not saying you are: just that it sounds like it.
What about someome whose mother was long-term UK white and father Black Jamaican? Is she white or black? And if neither, why don't you score her as 50% for your arithmetic?
And I - pale and pallid except for my freckles - could well be 1/128 or 1/256 Black for all I know. Do you deduct that bit for me?
It's like gender, innit? It's how you self-identify.
I am constantly amazed at how 'black' is defined in the US. I think for some, 1/256 would do it.
Who was the Senator who claimed 1/256 Indigenous ancestry?
Elizabeth Warren.
Hence Donald Trump referring to her as "Pocahontas" since the 2016 campaign - which, although I hate being fair to Trump, is pretty funny as well as pretty damaging.
Her decision to try and prove it with a DNA test and then er... bullshit about the results was a splendid piece of political self destruction.
Let's vary Stocky's puzzle. Same scenario except there's just the one bag!
A: 2 dips and win if you pick green with either. B: 1 dip and win if it's either green or yellow.
B is still a 50% chance of winning obvs.
What is A now?
With or without replacement? 7/12 without replacement (1/4 + 1/3). 1/2 with (1/4 + 1/4).
Adding probabilities is dangerous and likely to lead you awry, as here.
Without replacement, the probability of not picking green is 3/4 * 2/3 = 6/12 = 1/2
With replacement, the probability of not picking green is 3/4 * 3/4 = 9/16 (as in the original scenario as replacement replicates two identical bags)
Yep, I cocked up. Can see it easily running the possibilities:
Replacement possibilities:
RR 0 RG 1 RB 0 RY 0 GR 1 GG 1 GB 1 GR 1 YR 0 YG 1 YB 0 YY 0 BR 0 BG 1 BB 0 BY 0
(1 = win, 0 = lose). 7/16 as you and turbotubbs (and, latterly, me, stated)
Non-replacement possibilities:
RG 1 RB 0 RY 0 GR 1 GB 1 GR 1 YR 0 YG 1 YB 0 BR 0 BG 1 BY 0
6/12 = 1/2
The approach of working out probability of both losing makes a lot more sense. I didn't allow for conditionality, which was silly after arguing with our piratical friend about that earlier.
There's a reason I work with numerical models than arithmetic solutions
You have a Greek, an Italian, a Turk, an Egyptian, a Syrian, a Kalash, an Inuit, a Romanian, an Icelander, and a Spaniard in a bag. What's the odds of drawing a single white person out in one go. What about at least one from two goes, and what about two from two?
Now suppose the Romanian lives in Italy, and the Greek is resident in Cairo. The Spaniard is on a whaling ship off the coast of Greenland. And there's a goat behind the third door. What colour is the bear?
Now suppose the Romanian lives in Italy, and the Greek is resident in Cairo. The Spaniard is on a whaling ship off the coast of Greenland. And there's a goat behind the third door. What colour is the bear?
You have a Greek, an Italian, a Turk, an Egyptian, a Syrian, a Kalash, an Inuit, a Romanian, an Icelander, and a Spaniard in a bag. What's the odds of drawing a single white person out in one go. What about at least one from two goes, and what about two from two?
Now suppose the Romanian lives in Italy, and the Greek is resident in Cairo. The Spaniard is on a whaling ship off the coast of Greenland. And there's a goat behind the third door. What colour is the bear?
The approach of working out probability of both losing makes a lot more sense.
One thing they taught me at school is that in these situations, the easier calculation is very often 1 minus the inverse of what the question asks for.
You have a Greek, an Italian, a Turk, an Egyptian, a Syrian, a Kalash, an Inuit, a Romanian, an Icelander, and a Spaniard go into a bar. Bouncer says "You can't come in without a Thai."
Interesting piece on the prospects for a second US Civil War. The tldr; version is that a full on war is unlikely but a Northern Ireland kind of situation is possible. Scary.
It’s a decent piece. A civil war is not at all likely; but increased political violence (insurgency) is surely very possible.
The key, as the piece notes, is that in 2045 whites are due to become a minority in the US. This fact seems rather irrelevant in comfortably white Britain, but it must feel very ominous to many here.
By 2100 the only nations which will still definitely be majority white are likely to be Russia, Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe. Though whites will still likely be a plurality in Western Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand
Define "white".
White, non Hispanic
Italians? Greeks? Turks? Syrians? Egyptians? Where does the line get drawn?
Italians and Greeks mainly are, Turks, Syrians and Egyptians mainly are not
In a few centuries most people will be a bit of everything, assuming we haven't killed each other in the meantime. It was inevitable once the jet engine was invented. I don't know why this prospect bothers anybody.
Only in the West and Latin America and maybe the Cape in South Africa.
Most of Africa will still be Black however, most of the Middle East will still be Arab, most of India will still be Hindu and most of the Far East will still be Oriental. Russia and Eastern Europe will also still be the last region to be majority white
Who knows. Much of Africa and India may be uninhabitable owing to climate change, the Middle East too. Japan, Russia and China will probably have seen their populations shrink massively, perhaps leading to more population movements into those areas from elsewhere.
Let's vary Stocky's puzzle. Same scenario except there's just the one bag!
A: 2 dips and win if you pick green with either. B: 1 dip and win if it's either green or yellow.
B is still a 50% chance of winning obvs.
What is A now?
With or without replacement? 7/12 without replacement (1/4 + 1/3). 1/2 with (1/4 + 1/4).
I meant without. So, looks like it's A now. Different answer entirely!
But with no time to calculate would you instinctively still go with B if faced with the choice in real life, ie with the bag right there in front of you and, say, £10k up for grabs?
Or do you think you'd just *know* it was A?
Or would you be paralyzed by indecision?
As demonstrated, I'd quickly do the maths in my head and pick the wrong bag!
Interesting piece on the prospects for a second US Civil War. The tldr; version is that a full on war is unlikely but a Northern Ireland kind of situation is possible. Scary.
It’s a decent piece. A civil war is not at all likely; but increased political violence (insurgency) is surely very possible.
The key, as the piece notes, is that in 2045 whites are due to become a minority in the US. This fact seems rather irrelevant in comfortably white Britain, but it must feel very ominous to many here.
By 2100 the only nations which will still definitely be majority white are likely to be Russia, Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe. Though whites will still likely be a plurality in Western Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand
Define "white".
White, non Hispanic
Italians? Greeks? Turks? Syrians? Egyptians? Where does the line get drawn?
Italians and Greeks mainly are, Turks, Syrians and Egyptians mainly are not
In a few centuries most people will be a bit of everything, assuming we haven't killed each other in the meantime. It was inevitable once the jet engine was invented. I don't know why this prospect bothers anybody.
No particular reason that should be true. All sorts of countries have managed to maintain caste and racial segregation for centuries where jet engines were irrelevant as everybody was in the same place from the start.
Interesting piece on the prospects for a second US Civil War. The tldr; version is that a full on war is unlikely but a Northern Ireland kind of situation is possible. Scary.
It’s a decent piece. A civil war is not at all likely; but increased political violence (insurgency) is surely very possible.
The key, as the piece notes, is that in 2045 whites are due to become a minority in the US. This fact seems rather irrelevant in comfortably white Britain, but it must feel very ominous to many here.
By 2100 the only nations which will still definitely be majority white are likely to be Russia, Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe. Though whites will still likely be a plurality in Western Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand
You sound like a white supremacist who thinks that only 100% white is white. I'm not saying you are: just that it sounds like it.
What about someome whose mother was long-term UK white and father Black Jamaican? Is she white or black? And if neither, why don't you score her as 50% for your arithmetic?
And I - pale and pallid except for my freckles - could well be 1/128 or 1/256 Black for all I know. Do you deduct that bit for me?
It's like gender, innit? It's how you self-identify.
I am constantly amazed at how 'black' is defined in the US. I think for some, 1/256 would do it.
We recently discovered that my Dad's mother had two Jewish parents instead of one, which probably makes me 1/4 Jewish instead of 1/8 (which I think is over the limit the Nazis used). We're treating this as an odd quirk of family history which only affects the details of our applications for Austrian citizenship, as we're all either atheists or Quakers.
I have an American facebook friend who recently discovered he has one Jewish ancestor seven generations back. He's now exploring this aspect of his background by talking to rabbis and wondering how much he owes it to this ancestor to reclaim his Jewish heritage.
I think there's something about the culture of an immigrant country that makes knowing who your antecedents were much more important and consequential feeling.
I meant the Borough not the seat. @eek was referencing the May elections.
On that you are right, if the Royal Borough went Labour it would suggest Starmer was heading for most seats at least. Though I think Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster will stay Tory even if Barnet and Wandsworth go Labour
I think Labour winning K&C would mean rather more than that. The Conservatives have controlled K&C since its creation in 1964. Even in the mid-90s, the Conservatives retained control comfortably and have never, I believe, polled less than 50% in any Borough election.
In 2018 the Conservatives won 36 seats with 51.4% of the vote and Labour won 13 on 33%.
Westminster has also been solidly Conservative since 1964 though in 2018 they polled 42.8% to Labour's 41.1% while Wandsworth has been Conservative since 1978.
If Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster went Labour then yes Boris would face a VONC. However if they stayed Tory despite losses elsewhere in London in areas like Wandsworth and Barnet he would probably not face a VONC.
You have a Greek, an Italian, a Turk, an Egyptian, a Syrian, a Kalash, an Inuit, a Romanian, an Icelander, and a Spaniard in a bag. What's the odds of drawing a single white person out in one go. What about at least one from two goes, and what about two from two?
Now suppose the Romanian lives in Italy, and the Greek is resident in Cairo. The Spaniard is on a whaling ship off the coast of Greenland. And there's a goat behind the third door. What colour is the bear?
Mornington Crescent
Which is exactly equidistant from White City and Blackfriars.
Let's vary Stocky's puzzle. Same scenario except there's just the one bag!
A: 2 dips and win if you pick green with either. B: 1 dip and win if it's either green or yellow.
B is still a 50% chance of winning obvs.
What is A now?
With or without replacement? 7/12 without replacement (1/4 + 1/3). 1/2 with (1/4 + 1/4).
I meant without. So, looks like it's A now. Different answer entirely!
But with no time to calculate would you instinctively still go with B if faced with the choice in real life, ie with the bag right there in front of you and, say, £10k up for grabs?
Or do you think you'd just *know* it was A?
Or would you be paralyzed by indecision?
As demonstrated, I'd quickly do the maths in my head and pick the wrong bag!
Happens to us all when we quickly do the maths. Apart from the @kinster.
Interesting piece on the prospects for a second US Civil War. The tldr; version is that a full on war is unlikely but a Northern Ireland kind of situation is possible. Scary.
It’s a decent piece. A civil war is not at all likely; but increased political violence (insurgency) is surely very possible.
The key, as the piece notes, is that in 2045 whites are due to become a minority in the US. This fact seems rather irrelevant in comfortably white Britain, but it must feel very ominous to many here.
By 2100 the only nations which will still definitely be majority white are likely to be Russia, Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe. Though whites will still likely be a plurality in Western Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand
Define "white".
White, non Hispanic
Italians? Greeks? Turks? Syrians? Egyptians? Where does the line get drawn?
Italians and Greeks mainly are, Turks, Syrians and Egyptians mainly are not
In a few centuries most people will be a bit of everything, assuming we haven't killed each other in the meantime. It was inevitable once the jet engine was invented. I don't know why this prospect bothers anybody.
Only in the West and Latin America and maybe the Western Cape in South Africa.
Most of Africa will still be Black however, most of the Middle East will still be Arab, most of India will still be Hindu and most of the Far East will still be Oriental. Russia and Eastern Europe will also still be the last region to be majority white
You have a Greek, an Italian, a Turk, an Egyptian, a Syrian, a Kalash, an Inuit, a Romanian, an Icelander, and a Spaniard in a bag. What's the odds of drawing a single white person out in one go. What about at least one from two goes, and what about two from two?
Now suppose the Romanian lives in Italy, and the Greek is resident in Cairo. The Spaniard is on a whaling ship off the coast of Greenland. And there's a goat behind the third door. What colour is the bear?
If we're still in Greenland, the bear is clearly green.
You have a Greek, an Italian, a Turk, an Egyptian, a Syrian, a Kalash, an Inuit, a Romanian, an Icelander, and a Spaniard in a bag. What's the odds of drawing a single white person out in one go. What about at least one from two goes, and what about two from two?
Now suppose the Romanian lives in Italy, and the Greek is resident in Cairo. The Spaniard is on a whaling ship off the coast of Greenland. And there's a goat behind the third door. What colour is the bear?
You have a Greek, an Italian, a Turk, an Egyptian, a Syrian, a Kalash, an Inuit, a Romanian, an Icelander, and a Spaniard in a bag. What's the odds of drawing a single white person out in one go. What about at least one from two goes, and what about two from two?
Now suppose the Romanian lives in Italy, and the Greek is resident in Cairo. The Spaniard is on a whaling ship off the coast of Greenland. And there's a goat behind the third door. What colour is the bear?
Mornington Crescent
Which is exactly equidistant from White City and Blackfriars.
Let's vary Stocky's puzzle. Same scenario except there's just the one bag!
A: 2 dips and win if you pick green with either. B: 1 dip and win if it's either green or yellow.
B is still a 50% chance of winning obvs.
What is A now?
I have 0.4975 for A vs 0.50 for B. So just B.
(Above assumes that the first counter pulled out is not replaced in the bag.)
NB: The question involves two bags (Bag 1 and Bag 2), both identical and with four counters in each. I also assumed a single bag with two dips on first reading, but it is two independent and identical bags, which leads to 7/16 for Option A and 8/16 for Option B. Replacement is irrelevant as in every option you only dip into any bag once.
Interesting piece on the prospects for a second US Civil War. The tldr; version is that a full on war is unlikely but a Northern Ireland kind of situation is possible. Scary.
It’s a decent piece. A civil war is not at all likely; but increased political violence (insurgency) is surely very possible.
The key, as the piece notes, is that in 2045 whites are due to become a minority in the US. This fact seems rather irrelevant in comfortably white Britain, but it must feel very ominous to many here.
By 2100 the only nations which will still definitely be majority white are likely to be Russia, Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe. Though whites will still likely be a plurality in Western Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand
Define "white".
White, non Hispanic
Italians? Greeks? Turks? Syrians? Egyptians? Where does the line get drawn?
Italians and Greeks mainly are, Turks, Syrians and Egyptians mainly are not
In a few centuries most people will be a bit of everything, assuming we haven't killed each other in the meantime. It was inevitable once the jet engine was invented. I don't know why this prospect bothers anybody.
Only in the West and Latin America and maybe the Cape in South Africa.
Most of Africa will still be Black however, most of the Middle East will still be Arab, most of India will still be Hindu and most of the Far East will still be Oriental. Russia and Eastern Europe will also still be the last region to be majority white
Who knows. Much of Africa and India may be uninhabitable owing to climate change, the Middle East too. Japan, Russia and China will probably have seen their populations shrink massively, perhaps leading to more population movements into those areas from elsewhere.
Russia and China do not attract many immigrants because of their authoritarian nature. Neither are as prosperous as the West either yet. Their governments are not exactly immigrant friendly, nor really is Japan's
OT. David McClenaghan seems determined to do the impossible and give lawyers a bad name. Trying to wangle money out of Manchester City must be tempting for a lawyer though under the circumstances pretty ludicrous. The connection between the club and McClenaghan's clients seems to non existent except that the club have money.
And insurance.
I don't know if it is true but it is said that the Mississippi Pilots Association had a rule that all pilots must have 3rd party liability insurance, and everybody sued them, so they dropped the rule because premiums became unaffordable, and nobody sued them.
Interesting piece on the prospects for a second US Civil War. The tldr; version is that a full on war is unlikely but a Northern Ireland kind of situation is possible. Scary.
It’s a decent piece. A civil war is not at all likely; but increased political violence (insurgency) is surely very possible.
The key, as the piece notes, is that in 2045 whites are due to become a minority in the US. This fact seems rather irrelevant in comfortably white Britain, but it must feel very ominous to many here.
By 2100 the only nations which will still definitely be majority white are likely to be Russia, Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe. Though whites will still likely be a plurality in Western Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand
Define "white".
White, non Hispanic
Italians? Greeks? Turks? Syrians? Egyptians? Where does the line get drawn?
Italians and Greeks mainly are, Turks, Syrians and Egyptians mainly are not
In a few centuries most people will be a bit of everything, assuming we haven't killed each other in the meantime. It was inevitable once the jet engine was invented. I don't know why this prospect bothers anybody.
Only in the West and Latin America and maybe the Cape in South Africa.
Most of Africa will still be Black however, most of the Middle East will still be Arab, most of India will still be Hindu and most of the Far East will still be Oriental. Russia and Eastern Europe will also still be the last region to be majority white
Who knows. Much of Africa and India may be uninhabitable owing to climate change, the Middle East too. Japan, Russia and China will probably have seen their populations shrink massively, perhaps leading to more population movements into those areas from elsewhere.
Russia and China do not attract many immigrants because of their authoritarian nature. Neither are as prosperous as the West either yet. Their governments are not exactly immigrant friendly, nor really is Japan's
I wonder if being annexed into Russia counts as immigration..
Interesting piece on the prospects for a second US Civil War. The tldr; version is that a full on war is unlikely but a Northern Ireland kind of situation is possible. Scary.
It’s a decent piece. A civil war is not at all likely; but increased political violence (insurgency) is surely very possible.
The key, as the piece notes, is that in 2045 whites are due to become a minority in the US. This fact seems rather irrelevant in comfortably white Britain, but it must feel very ominous to many here.
By 2100 the only nations which will still definitely be majority white are likely to be Russia, Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe. Though whites will still likely be a plurality in Western Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand
Define "white".
White, non Hispanic
Italians? Greeks? Turks? Syrians? Egyptians? Where does the line get drawn?
Italians and Greeks mainly are, Turks, Syrians and Egyptians mainly are not
In a few centuries most people will be a bit of everything, assuming we haven't killed each other in the meantime. It was inevitable once the jet engine was invented. I don't know why this prospect bothers anybody.
No particular reason that should be true. All sorts of countries have managed to maintain caste and racial segregation for centuries where jet engines were irrelevant as everybody was in the same place from the start.
Is that true? You have the caste system in India I suppose, but would DNA analysis show the different groups to be completely distinct? Struggling to think of other examples (lots of "white" people in the US have plenty of other stuff in their ancestry if their forebears have spent a lot of time there, and IIRC most "black" Americans are not of 100% African descent). People have a tendency to mix even when there are legal or other barriers put up to prevent it, and even so more if there aren't.
You have a Greek, an Italian, a Turk, an Egyptian, a Syrian, a Kalash, an Inuit, a Romanian, an Icelander, and a Spaniard go into a bar. Bouncer says "You can't come in without a Thai."
Iceland was of course one of the last places to be settled by humans; assorted Scandinavians, a bit of Irish, some Hebridean. It's even more mixed up now. And the waves of immigration into Iberia must have resulted in a real pot-pourri of DNA!
I see we are already on an only elections which matter are London Boroughs trip a bit early this year. Suppose Labour swept Inner London, but lost most of the WM and S Yorkshire too. Would Boris face a VONC? Or are they intrinsically less important?
If Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster went Labour then yes Boris would face a VONC. However if they stayed Tory despite losses elsewhere in London in areas like Wandsworth and Barnet he would probably not face a VONC.
Remember every MP in Wandsworth is already Labour
I'm sure you're right - the advantage is I cannot conceive of either Kensington & Chelsea or Westminster going Labour. The south of K&C is Conservative heartland - I could see the Conservative majority in Westminster being cut by three or four but that's all.
I do think Wandsworth and Barnet are much more problematic for the Conservatives - the former more than the latter I would suggest. Hillingdon might be interesting - the north of the Borough is strongly Conservative, the south strongly Labour and the Conservatives did well here last time making a net gain of 2 seats.
I think the Conservatives will hold the seat comfortably - Labour didn't win the Charville by-election in arguably the most marginal Conservative seat in May. Even with the change in political fortunes since then, I can really only see 6 Labour gains maximum.
I think the Conservatives might surprise in London and send up with a small net gain of seats.
You have a Greek, an Italian, a Turk, an Egyptian, a Syrian, a Kalash, an Inuit, a Romanian, an Icelander, and a Spaniard in a bag. What's the odds of drawing a single white person out in one go. What about at least one from two goes, and what about two from two?
Now suppose the Romanian lives in Italy, and the Greek is resident in Cairo. The Spaniard is on a whaling ship off the coast of Greenland. And there's a goat behind the third door. What colour is the bear?
Mornington Crescent
Which is exactly equidistant from White City and Blackfriars.
What do you think should be the right answer? [Watson Glaser test]
"Virtual employees, or employees who work from home via computer, are an increasing trend. In the US, the number of virtual employees has increased 39% in the last two years and 74% in the last five years."
Is the following statement True, Probably True, Insufficient Data, Probably False or False?
"Today, a majority of the employees in the US are virtual employees."
Insufficient data. If it was 1% five years ago, it would now be 1.74%.
This is what the test provider says: "in this section of the test, you are allowed to use common sense to choose the right answer. By applying logic to the answer choices, you can surmise that there are many jobs which cannot be done virtually, and that despite the increasing popularity of this trend, it is unlikely that a majority of employees in the US are virtual. Therefore, the correct answer is 'Probably False'."
Was that test set before, during or after the pandemic-induced lockdowns? I would argue that my answer is correct now, but "Probably False" was correct up to March 2021.
Your answer is obviously correct in my view. I think it's a complete nonsense what they are saying.
Covid restrictions in Scotland are working, insists advisor More now from Scotland’s national clinical director, who’s been telling the BBC that Covid restrictions in place across Scotland are helping to reduce the spread of the Omicron variant.
Prof Jason Leitch says measures such as the closure of nightclubs are making a difference.
The Scottish government has faced criticism that the rules are too tough.
The latest Scottish government Covid report shows average daily cases in Scotland (2,824 per one million population in the week to 6 January) were higher than in England (2,615 per one million) which has fewer Covid restrictions.
An update on Covid rules in Scotland will be given by First Minister Nicola Sturgeon at Holyrood tomorrow.
Scotland restrictions working at preventing the escape of Omicron cases from high prevalence Scotland to low prevalence England?
(I jest, hopefully obviously - without a good counterfactual there's little point trying to link case numbers to restrictions. Generally places with fewest cases have had fewest restrictions and there's a clear positive correlation between more restrictions and more cases, but the causality seems unlikely!)
It's a question of onus. I think that the onus is on those who seek to restrict liberty to make the case for more severe restrictions. They can do this by: (a) demonstrating a clear benefit (nope) (b) explaining that the threat is so severe in terms of hospital admissions that precautionary measures are necessary (nope). (c) identifying some risk factors that are more severe in Scotland than in England (nope).
If they fail to do this then the nonsense of stopping sporting events being watched by more than 500 supporters, the closing of nightclubs, table service in bars and 2m restrictions in public buildings needs to stop. Now. Even if that means we look like we are copying England and were wrong to be so overly cautious.
Nicola has got her "different to the English" policy done, the wind down of restrictions in Scotland will start soon, she's too smart to be caught in the trap of people seeing everything fully open in England but some restrictions in Scotland with little to no difference in the infection rate. She'll call it a worthwhile precaution to protect the NHS or something along those lines but I would be shocked if the restrictions in Scotland last beyond the end of next week.
She's chasing a moving target though. Boris is going to 5 days isolation soon. Does she try to jump ahead or follow on again like she did with the 10>7 days?
Wait to see if she sarcastically rubbishes a journalist first for daring to have the temerity to ask such a question.....
You have a Greek, an Italian, a Turk, an Egyptian, a Syrian, a Kalash, an Inuit, a Romanian, an Icelander, and a Spaniard in a bag. What's the odds of drawing a single white person out in one go. What about at least one from two goes, and what about two from two?
Now suppose the Romanian lives in Italy, and the Greek is resident in Cairo. The Spaniard is on a whaling ship off the coast of Greenland. And there's a goat behind the third door. What colour is the bear?
Mornington Crescent
Which is exactly equidistant from White City and Blackfriars.
So the bear is a grey, religious media luvvy?
No. Like I said it's fifty fifty; it's a panda.
But when you open the box it's already died.
There's no room on the boat for the Copenhagen interpretation. Please stick to the nationalities described in the question.
I see we are already on an only elections which matter are London Boroughs trip a bit early this year. Suppose Labour swept Inner London, but lost most of the WM and S Yorkshire too. Would Boris face a VONC? Or are they intrinsically less important?
I wouldn't claim they are the only elections that matter by any stretch.
I live in London and can bring far more insight to London local elections than I can elsewhere.
OT. David McClenaghan seems determined to do the impossible and give lawyers a bad name. Trying to wangle money out of Manchester City must be tempting for a lawyer though under the circumstances pretty ludicrous. The connection between the club and McClenaghan's clients seems to non existent except that the club have money.
And insurance.
I don't know if it is true but it is said that the Mississippi Pilots Association had a rule that all pilots must have 3rd party liability insurance, and everybody sued them, so they dropped the rule because premiums became unaffordable, and nobody sued them.
I doubt MCFC would have needed to bother their insurance companies. At least the old ambulance chasers knew that the mighty NHS was at the end of their rainbow. This new breed seem to be looking for anyone with money. Maybe the judge wasn't told how it works?
Good for Djoko (so far). I think we all agree that we want him to take part in the Australian Open and win it.
Top (Topping?) trolling.
Many questions arise from this: if he's been stuck in a hotel room and unable to do his usual pre-match practice, he's less likely to be able to win compared to opponents who've had their normal practice. Might he be able to sue the government for their illegal detention's effect on his career and winnings?
Good point there's that as well. Go Djoko!
Seriously. He has made a decision and he is going to stand or fall by it. What's the big deal with everyone having a conniption fit over it.
A Cummings-esque episode I think. These guys assume rules are for little people, assumption is tested, they are indeed a class apart from the little people; then they rub it in.
He seems pretty comprehensively to be subject to due process. Which seems to be ongoing including the possibility that he will be told to leave Australia.
He has a job to do there and is trying to do it.
Sure. That's why the visa challenge failed. The Australian immigration people didn't follow their own process.
Djokovic's case is that he was unable to get the required vaccination on medical grounds because he had the virus at the time the purported vaccination was due to take place. This is not a convincing explanation given his well aired objections to vaccination.
But why does that make him think he is a class apart.
He is allowed to have any view on vaccination he wants and people/border forces/legal systems are allowed to respond.
And for whatever reason not wanting to have a vaccination is an entirely logical position to hold.
Don't disagree with your last two comments. Same applies to Cummings and his trip to Barnard Castle. The general public can also come to the conclusion these people are making fools of them.
Interesting piece on the prospects for a second US Civil War. The tldr; version is that a full on war is unlikely but a Northern Ireland kind of situation is possible. Scary.
It’s a decent piece. A civil war is not at all likely; but increased political violence (insurgency) is surely very possible.
The key, as the piece notes, is that in 2045 whites are due to become a minority in the US. This fact seems rather irrelevant in comfortably white Britain, but it must feel very ominous to many here.
By 2100 the only nations which will still definitely be majority white are likely to be Russia, Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe. Though whites will still likely be a plurality in Western Europe, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand
Define "white".
White, non Hispanic
Italians? Greeks? Turks? Syrians? Egyptians? Where does the line get drawn?
Italians and Greeks mainly are, Turks, Syrians and Egyptians mainly are not
In a few centuries most people will be a bit of everything, assuming we haven't killed each other in the meantime. It was inevitable once the jet engine was invented. I don't know why this prospect bothers anybody.
Only in the West and Latin America and maybe the Western Cape in South Africa.
Most of Africa will still be Black however, most of the Middle East will still be Arab, most of India will still be Hindu and most of the Far East will still be Oriental. Russia and Eastern Europe will also still be the last region to be majority white
I understand why you say that, but the quote was 'In a few centuries'. A hell of a lot can happen in a few centuries. Just go back 3 centuries from now and see the massive change in a 2 or 3 continents.
You have a Greek, an Italian, a Turk, an Egyptian, a Syrian, a Kalash, an Inuit, a Romanian, an Icelander, and a Spaniard in a bag. What's the odds of drawing a single white person out in one go. What about at least one from two goes, and what about two from two?
Now suppose the Romanian lives in Italy, and the Greek is resident in Cairo. The Spaniard is on a whaling ship off the coast of Greenland. And there's a goat behind the third door. What colour is the bear?
Mornington Crescent
Which is exactly equidistant from White City and Blackfriars.
Cases - Are rising (some missing data from the regions), but R is plunging towards 1.0. North East is still seeing more of the wave, but that is beginning to fade as well. Admissions - Are bouncing around, but R is heading downward. North East is the area seeing a definite rise still - but is the only region in England to do so. MV beds - level(ish) Death - rising slowly.
I see we are already on an only elections which matter are London Boroughs trip a bit early this year. Suppose Labour swept Inner London, but lost most of the WM and S Yorkshire too. Would Boris face a VONC? Or are they intrinsically less important?
I wouldn't claim they are the only elections that matter by any stretch.
I live in London and can bring far more insight to London local elections than I can elsewhere.
Fair enough. My comment was more aimed at a poster who doesn't. However. It is a repetitive theme of the media that Wandsworth, Westminster, Kensington and Barnet are of vital superimportance. Much larger Metro boroughs elsewhere barely merit a mention.
I see we are already on an only elections which matter are London Boroughs trip a bit early this year. Suppose Labour swept Inner London, but lost most of the WM and S Yorkshire too. Would Boris face a VONC? Or are they intrinsically less important?
Most of the WM region is not up for election this year apart from big cities like Birmingham and Coventry which are still Labour anyway as is most of South Yorkshire. Indeed most of England does not have local elections this year.
However all of London's councils are up for election in May and Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster have always been Tory held so their loss would be what launched a VONC. In 1990 Tories holding Wandsworth and Westminster spun it as an OK night nationally despite Labour gains
Good for Djoko (so far). I think we all agree that we want him to take part in the Australian Open and win it.
Top (Topping?) trolling.
Many questions arise from this: if he's been stuck in a hotel room and unable to do his usual pre-match practice, he's less likely to be able to win compared to opponents who've had their normal practice. Might he be able to sue the government for their illegal detention's effect on his career and winnings?
Good point there's that as well. Go Djoko!
Seriously. He has made a decision and he is going to stand or fall by it. What's the big deal with everyone having a conniption fit over it.
A Cummings-esque episode I think. These guys assume rules are for little people, assumption is tested, they are indeed a class apart from the little people; then they rub it in.
He seems pretty comprehensively to be subject to due process. Which seems to be ongoing including the possibility that he will be told to leave Australia.
He has a job to do there and is trying to do it.
Sure. That's why the visa challenge failed. The Australian immigration people didn't follow their own process.
Djokovic's case is that he was unable to get the required vaccination on medical grounds because he had the virus at the time the purported vaccination was due to take place. This is not a convincing explanation given his well aired objections to vaccination.
But why does that make him think he is a class apart.
He is allowed to have any view on vaccination he wants and people/border forces/legal systems are allowed to respond.
And for whatever reason not wanting to have a vaccination is an entirely logical position to hold.
Don't disagree with your last two comments. Same applies to Cummings and his trip to Barnard Castle. The general public can also come to the conclusion these people are making fools of them.
Oh absolutely. But Djoko isn't putting himself up for election; he must content himself with being arguably the best tennis player on the planet (and actually the best tennis player in the world by current ranking). And he can hold whatever views he wants AFAIC.
As I said it is bringing about an in my view unpleasant curtain-twitching from the PB Covid watchers.
Let's vary Stocky's puzzle. Same scenario except there's just the one bag!
A: 2 dips and win if you pick green with either. B: 1 dip and win if it's either green or yellow.
B is still a 50% chance of winning obvs.
What is A now?
With or without replacement? 7/12 without replacement (1/4 + 1/3). 1/2 with (1/4 + 1/4).
I meant without. So, looks like it's A now. Different answer entirely!
But with no time to calculate would you instinctively still go with B if faced with the choice in real life, ie with the bag right there in front of you and, say, £10k up for grabs?
Or do you think you'd just *know* it was A?
Or would you be paralyzed by indecision?
As demonstrated, I'd quickly do the maths in my head and pick the wrong bag!
Like a golfer who can hole the long ones but misses the odd two footer.
Cases - Are rising (some missing data from the regions), but R is plunging towards 1.0. North East is still seeing more of the wave, but that is beginning to fade as well. Admissions - Are bouncing around, but R is heading downward. North East is the area seeing a definite rise still - but is the only region in England to do so. MV beds - level(ish) Death - rising slowly.
England
10-01-2022 115,998 03-01-2022 137,541
09-01-2022 121,228 02-01-2022 123,547
08-01-2022 130,330 01-01-2022 162,572
07-01-2022 149,405 31-12-2021 160,276
Four days of week on week days by reported drop in England now, the most up to date metric (Other nations by reported is a bit wonky for this analysis due to multiple day dumps).
Covid restrictions in Scotland are working, insists advisor More now from Scotland’s national clinical director, who’s been telling the BBC that Covid restrictions in place across Scotland are helping to reduce the spread of the Omicron variant.
Prof Jason Leitch says measures such as the closure of nightclubs are making a difference.
The Scottish government has faced criticism that the rules are too tough.
The latest Scottish government Covid report shows average daily cases in Scotland (2,824 per one million population in the week to 6 January) were higher than in England (2,615 per one million) which has fewer Covid restrictions.
An update on Covid rules in Scotland will be given by First Minister Nicola Sturgeon at Holyrood tomorrow.
Scotland restrictions working at preventing the escape of Omicron cases from high prevalence Scotland to low prevalence England?
(I jest, hopefully obviously - without a good counterfactual there's little point trying to link case numbers to restrictions. Generally places with fewest cases have had fewest restrictions and there's a clear positive correlation between more restrictions and more cases, but the causality seems unlikely!)
It's a question of onus. I think that the onus is on those who seek to restrict liberty to make the case for more severe restrictions. They can do this by: (a) demonstrating a clear benefit (nope) (b) explaining that the threat is so severe in terms of hospital admissions that precautionary measures are necessary (nope). (c) identifying some risk factors that are more severe in Scotland than in England (nope).
If they fail to do this then the nonsense of stopping sporting events being watched by more than 500 supporters, the closing of nightclubs, table service in bars and 2m restrictions in public buildings needs to stop. Now. Even if that means we look like we are copying England and were wrong to be so overly cautious.
To be honest neither Scotland nor England are applying particularly onerous restrictions. The difference is at the margins and doesn't significantly impact that many people. I agree they still have to be justified. Your point (a) is nearly impossible to prove one way or the other on the counterfactual. The restrictions will have an effect, but is the effect big enough to justify the restriction? (b) I think applies in principle - ie it applies but isn't sufficient to determine the scale of the restrctions - and (c) is irrelevant.
I see we are already on an only elections which matter are London Boroughs trip a bit early this year. Suppose Labour swept Inner London, but lost most of the WM and S Yorkshire too. Would Boris face a VONC? Or are they intrinsically less important?
I wouldn't claim they are the only elections that matter by any stretch.
I live in London and can bring far more insight to London local elections than I can elsewhere.
Isn't it usually the precise opposite? Elections in London don't matter because London is "different", not really Britain, always votes Labour anyway and is full of metropolitan citizens of nowhere. Where elections really matter is in the Redwall where true patriotic salt-of-the-earth Englishmen are to be found. Or similar.
I see we are already on an only elections which matter are London Boroughs trip a bit early this year. Suppose Labour swept Inner London, but lost most of the WM and S Yorkshire too. Would Boris face a VONC? Or are they intrinsically less important?
I wouldn't claim they are the only elections that matter by any stretch.
I live in London and can bring far more insight to London local elections than I can elsewhere.
Fair enough. My comment was more aimed at another poster who doesn't. However. It is a repetitive theme of the media that Wandsworth, Westminster, Kensington and Barnet are of vital superimportance. Much larger Metro boroughs elsewhere barely merit a mention.
There aren't that many councils Labour can gain in the North, possibly Kirklees and Wirral from NOC, the latter at a stretch.
I think Tory control in Dudley, Walsall and Solihull* is probably secure.
*Probably the most interesting theoretical upset if the Tories lose enough seats to Greens and LDs as Solihull could get a Green led council.
Cases - Are rising (some missing data from the regions), but R is plunging towards 1.0. North East is still seeing more of the wave, but that is beginning to fade as well. Admissions - Are bouncing around, but R is heading downward. North East is the area seeing a definite rise still - but is the only region in England to do so. MV beds - level(ish) Death - rising slowly.
England
10-01-2022 115,998 03-01-2022 137,541
09-01-2022 121,228 02-01-2022 123,547
08-01-2022 130,330 01-01-2022 162,572
07-01-2022 149,405 31-12-2021 160,276
Four days of week on week days by reported drop in England now, the most up to date metric (Other nations by reported is a bit wonky for this analysis due to multiple day dumps).
The data by specimen date shows that the probably top of the curve *might* be between the 29th and the 4th. Reporting day is especially all over the place at the moment.
The more detailed localised data is still just up to the 4th....
Good for Djoko (so far). I think we all agree that we want him to take part in the Australian Open and win it.
Top (Topping?) trolling.
Many questions arise from this: if he's been stuck in a hotel room and unable to do his usual pre-match practice, he's less likely to be able to win compared to opponents who've had their normal practice. Might he be able to sue the government for their illegal detention's effect on his career and winnings?
Good point there's that as well. Go Djoko!
Seriously. He has made a decision and he is going to stand or fall by it. What's the big deal with everyone having a conniption fit over it.
A Cummings-esque episode I think. These guys assume rules are for little people, assumption is tested, they are indeed a class apart from the little people; then they rub it in.
He seems pretty comprehensively to be subject to due process. Which seems to be ongoing including the possibility that he will be told to leave Australia.
He has a job to do there and is trying to do it.
Sure. That's why the visa challenge failed. The Australian immigration people didn't follow their own process.
Djokovic's case is that he was unable to get the required vaccination on medical grounds because he had the virus at the time the purported vaccination was due to take place. This is not a convincing explanation given his well aired objections to vaccination.
But why does that make him think he is a class apart.
He is allowed to have any view on vaccination he wants and people/border forces/legal systems are allowed to respond.
And for whatever reason not wanting to have a vaccination is an entirely logical position to hold.
Don't disagree with your last two comments. Same applies to Cummings and his trip to Barnard Castle. The general public can also come to the conclusion these people are making fools of them.
Oh absolutely. But Djoko isn't putting himself up for election; he must content himself with being arguably the best tennis player on the planet (and actually the best tennis player in the world by current ranking). And he can hold whatever views he wants AFAIC.
As I said it is bringing about an in my view unpleasant curtain-twitching from the PB Covid watchers.
Cummings wasn't and never will be putting himself up for election, hilarious as I would find that prospect.
Still, you're right, PBers expressing opinions on the extracurricular behaviour of sportspeople is a shocking new development.
Cases - Are rising (some missing data from the regions), but R is plunging towards 1.0. North East is still seeing more of the wave, but that is beginning to fade as well. Admissions - Are bouncing around, but R is heading downward. North East is the area seeing a definite rise still - but is the only region in England to do so. MV beds - level(ish) Death - rising slowly.
I suspect the deaths picture is still very skewed by Christmas reporting lags because the underlying trend, smoothed over a couple of weeks, has definitely been down (from around 130 per day to closer to 80-90). I also suspect - though can't be sure - that a lot of the reported deaths will be Delta still.
The stats on Omicron severity as well as the ventilated patient data suggest to me that deaths should continue to fall as Delta patients leave the system.
You have a Greek, an Italian, a Turk, an Egyptian, a Syrian, a Kalash, an Inuit, a Romanian, an Icelander, and a Spaniard go into a bar. Bouncer says "You can't come in without a Thai."
Iceland was of course one of the last places to be settled by humans; assorted Scandinavians, a bit of Irish, some Hebridean. It's even more mixed up now. And the waves of immigration into Iberia must have resulted in a real pot-pourri of DNA!
Recently been to Madeira, and I hope shortly off to Cape Verde, both untouched till the 15th C (vs 7th for Iceland)
Cases - Are rising (some missing data from the regions), but R is plunging towards 1.0. North East is still seeing more of the wave, but that is beginning to fade as well. Admissions - Are bouncing around, but R is heading downward. North East is the area seeing a definite rise still - but is the only region in England to do so. MV beds - level(ish) Death - rising slowly.
I suspect the deaths picture is still very skewed by Christmas reporting lags because the underlying trend, smoothed over a couple of weeks, has definitely been down (from around 130 per day to closer to 80-90). I also suspect - though can't be sure - that a lot of the reported deaths will be Delta still.
The stats on Omicron severity as well as the ventilated patient data suggest to me that deaths should continue to fall as Delta patients leave the system.
It is interesting that the hospitalisations are fading almost as fast as the cases - not much of a lag at all..
Comments
Hence Donald Trump referring to her as "Pocahontas" since the 2016 campaign - which, although I hate being fair to Trump, is pretty funny as well as pretty damaging.
Italians? Greeks? Turks? Syrians? Egyptians? Where does the line get drawn?
Are these people white?
https://www.suchtv.pk/media/k2/items/cache/0290496b32c9ca27d6b78debee5bd71d_XL.jpg
I appreciate teacup pigs get big in a year, but even a bigger Wilbur like this one my other half should love, like this picture (which looks a bit like her actually the one on left).
He would be neutered and I’ll soon have him potty trained and showered everyday. They are so intelligent I could get him to use the pot and pul the flush. He could even enjoy the sauna and shower time with me. They like to sweat they do.
Plus ca change...
P(lose) = 3/4 * 2/3 = 1/2
But with no time to calculate would you instinctively still go with B if faced with the choice in real life, ie with the bag right there in front of you and, say, £10k up for grabs?
Or do you think you'd just *know* it was A?
Or would you be paralyzed by indecision?
What do Scotland cases show ?
Without replacement, the probability of not picking green is 3/4 * 2/3 = 6/12 = 1/2
With replacement, the probability of not picking green is 3/4 * 3/4 = 9/16 (as in the original scenario as replacement replicates two identical bags)
Not very likely, though perhaps you can get close enough for a rough idea.
(Above assumes that the first counter pulled out is not replaced in the bag.)
I'm not expecting Labour to gain any councils in London except Wandsworth possibly BTW.
https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2022/01/10/2003771080
...Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala on Thursday approved his government’s four-year administrative plan, which includes measures to bolster partnerships with Taiwan, as well as other democracies in East Asia.
The 52-page plan, which was published online on Friday, covers the Czech government’s financial, social and diplomatic policies for the next four years, including plans for strengthening the Czech Republic’s relationships with Taiwan, India, Japan and South Korea.
The plan also calls for a reassessment of the country’s relationships with China and Russia...
Now suppose the Romanian lives in Italy, and the Greek is resident in Cairo. The Spaniard is on a whaling ship off the coast of Greenland. And there's a goat behind the third door. What colour is the bear?
Most of Africa will still be Black however, most of the Middle East will still be Arab, most of India will still be Hindu and most of the Far East will still be Oriental. Russia and Eastern Europe will also still be the last region to be majority white
In 2018 the Conservatives won 36 seats with 51.4% of the vote and Labour won 13 on 33%.
Westminster has also been solidly Conservative since 1964 though in 2018 they polled 42.8% to Labour's 41.1% while Wandsworth has been Conservative since 1978.
Replacement possibilities:
RR 0
RG 1
RB 0
RY 0
GR 1
GG 1
GB 1
GR 1
YR 0
YG 1
YB 0
YY 0
BR 0
BG 1
BB 0
BY 0
(1 = win, 0 = lose). 7/16 as you and turbotubbs (and, latterly, me, stated)
Non-replacement possibilities:
RG 1
RB 0
RY 0
GR 1
GB 1
GR 1
YR 0
YG 1
YB 0
BR 0
BG 1
BY 0
6/12 = 1/2
The approach of working out probability of both losing makes a lot more sense. I didn't allow for conditionality, which was silly after arguing with our piratical friend about that earlier.
There's a reason I work with numerical models than arithmetic solutions
Bouncer says "You can't come in without a Thai."
I have an American facebook friend who recently discovered he has one Jewish ancestor seven generations back. He's now exploring this aspect of his background by talking to rabbis and wondering how much he owes it to this ancestor to reclaim his Jewish heritage.
I think there's something about the culture of an immigrant country that makes knowing who your antecedents were much more important and consequential feeling.
Remember every MP in Wandsworth is already Labour
I don't know if it is true but it is said that the Mississippi Pilots Association had a rule that all pilots must have 3rd party liability insurance, and everybody sued them, so they dropped the rule because premiums became unaffordable, and nobody sued them.
And the waves of immigration into Iberia must have resulted in a real pot-pourri of DNA!
Suppose Labour swept Inner London, but lost most of the WM and S Yorkshire too.
Would Boris face a VONC? Or are they intrinsically less important?
I do think Wandsworth and Barnet are much more problematic for the Conservatives - the former more than the latter I would suggest. Hillingdon might be interesting - the north of the Borough is strongly Conservative, the south strongly Labour and the Conservatives did well here last time making a net gain of 2 seats.
I think the Conservatives will hold the seat comfortably - Labour didn't win the Charville by-election in arguably the most marginal Conservative seat in May. Even with the change in political fortunes since then, I can really only see 6 Labour gains maximum.
I think the Conservatives might surprise in London and send up with a small net gain of seats.
But when you open the box it's already died.
I live in London and can bring far more insight to London local elections than I can elsewhere.
Cases - Are rising (some missing data from the regions), but R is plunging towards 1.0. North East is still seeing more of the wave, but that is beginning to fade as well.
Admissions - Are bouncing around, but R is heading downward. North East is the area seeing a definite rise still - but is the only region in England to do so.
MV beds - level(ish)
Death - rising slowly.
However. It is a repetitive theme of the media that Wandsworth, Westminster, Kensington and Barnet are of vital superimportance.
Much larger Metro boroughs elsewhere barely merit a mention.
However all of London's councils are up for election in May and Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster have always been Tory held so their loss would be what launched a VONC. In 1990 Tories holding Wandsworth and Westminster spun it as an OK night nationally despite Labour gains
But big rise in numbers in hospital to 17,120 - sounds like its getting ever harder to discharge patients as care homes / local NHS struggle
https://twitter.com/Smyth_Chris/status/1480582039401287687
As I said it is bringing about an in my view unpleasant curtain-twitching from the PB Covid watchers.
It's a great way to be.
251.2
Scotland case rates per 100,000 on the 9th January
260.4
Despite stricter restrictions in Scotland
10-01-2022 115,998
03-01-2022 137,541
09-01-2022 121,228
02-01-2022 123,547
08-01-2022 130,330
01-01-2022 162,572
07-01-2022 149,405
31-12-2021 160,276
Four days of week on week days by reported drop in England now, the most up to date metric (Other nations by reported is a bit wonky for this analysis due to multiple day dumps).
I think Tory control in Dudley, Walsall and Solihull* is probably secure.
*Probably the most interesting theoretical upset if the Tories lose enough seats to Greens and LDs as Solihull could get a Green led council.
The more detailed localised data is still just up to the 4th....
Still, you're right, PBers expressing opinions on the extracurricular behaviour of sportspeople is a shocking new development.
The stats on Omicron severity as well as the ventilated patient data suggest to me that deaths should continue to fall as Delta patients leave the system.
Omicron has not so far increased the number of confirmed COVID-19 patients in ventilation beds.
Indeed yesterday’s total (704) was the lowest since 26/10.
https://twitter.com/fact_covid/status/1480582295023230981?s=20