You really need to compare (say) Tesla under AP (perhaps where AP has been switched on during the journey) with similarly-priced cars of a similar age.
100% of the market for Tesla AP are Telsa buyers so it doesn't really matter how safe it is compared to other cars.
AP sales for Tesla are declining through as their sales mix becomes increasingly dominated by the 3. That's a cheaper car which attracts buyers with less inclination to drop five figures on the AP upgrade. When AP goes to subscription the take up rate will be very high.
You made a comparison between AP crashes and human ones - I'm pointing out you need to be very careful about such comparisons for a number of reasons.
If you are talking only about only Tesla cars: then AP cannot cope with all roads. The ones it can cope with tend to be things like highways - which are generally the safest roads. Most accidents will be occurring on roads where AP is not, or can not, be activated. Again, you need to try to ensure you are not comparing apples with oranges.
You really need to compare (say) Tesla under AP (perhaps where AP has been switched on during the journey) with similarly-priced cars of a similar age.
100% of the market for Tesla AP are Telsa buyers so it doesn't really matter how safe it is compared to other cars.
AP sales for Tesla are declining through as their sales mix becomes increasingly dominated by the 3. That's a cheaper car which attracts buyers with less inclination to drop five figures on the AP upgrade. When AP goes to subscription the take up rate will be very high.
I can't see many people spending $200+ a month on AP given that it won't ever be 100% automatic.
It's one of the reasons I'm looking at other options when I go for an EV - everyone elses version of AP is currently a £4000 or so option with the other toys you get from the top of the range model.
You really need to compare (say) Tesla under AP (perhaps where AP has been switched on during the journey) with similarly-priced cars of a similar age.
100% of the market for Tesla AP are Telsa buyers so it doesn't really matter how safe it is compared to other cars.
AP sales for Tesla are declining through as their sales mix becomes increasingly dominated by the 3. That's a cheaper car which attracts buyers with less inclination to drop five figures on the AP upgrade. When AP goes to subscription the take up rate will be very high.
I can't see many people spending $200+ a month on AP given that it won't ever be 100% automatic.
It's one of the reasons I'm looking at other options when I go for an EV - everyone elses version of AP is currently a £4000 or so option with the other toys you get from the top of the range model.
I’ll spend $200 a month, when it takes the kids the school and picks me up from the pub.
But not when there needs to be a licenced and sober driver, just in case.
I still doubt this sinks Boris. Most of those who will be appalled are already voting Labour after the past garden party photos.
The remainder still voting Tory are diehard anti restrictions voters on the whole. Indeed prominent anti Covid restrictions campaigner Adam Brooks already is concerned this is a plot to replace Boris with a pro restrictions PM eg Hunt or Gove or Javid.
Unless Labour gets a 10% + poll lead from this Boris will likely avoid a VONC
(FPT) I approve this message.
@PadTheHoundsman ... I know I'm late to this discussion thread (and post only rarely anyway), but I need to get this off my chest.
It's not that the UK's Covid rules were wrong - they weren't - but that the cavalier attitude towards them demonstrated by the people in charge of running the top political offices in the country speaks volumes about their commitment to running a properly constructed and effective government. That the PM, a man who himself had only recently experienced the full force of Covid, should have so little empathy with the people he works with that he was prepared for them to risk the same outcome in the name of a large social gathering - something that was illegal for the rest of us - is horrifying. Even if you were to give him the benefit of what little doubt there is and take the view that he attended because he believed he was immune and wasn't a personal threat to anyone doesn't absolve him of the responsibility for allowing the event to go ahead in the first place.
The current strata of people who are running the country - not just the politicians but the special advisors and senior civil servants whose stunning lack of self awareness in the face of a deadly worldwide pandemic is now visible with the light of a thousand suns - should all, to a man, shuffle off into a deep and meaningless retirement and let some people in to run the country who have a sense of professionalism, honour and pride in the quality of their work.
It's not that I carry a candle for the other lot all of a sudden (it's unlikely I ever will) but the PM and his coterie need to depart stage right immediately before they undermine whatever is left of the public's perceptions of the need for health and security in a pandemic that's simply not going to go away any time soon.
I'm a card carrying party member and I voted for him in the leadership election, but I'm now compelled to say BORIS OUT!
"Cavalier attitude" - @PadTheHoundsman is exactly right. That's the problem. not the subtler nuances of what the rules were at the time and whether others were doing the same. The rule setters have to follow them to the letter, and for the avoidance of doubt, even more exactly than everyone else.
Many people at the same time complied with the rules at personal cost and reluctance. For example at this point I had only just been allowed to see my girlfriend again after 2 months - she felt that because of her job she had to observe the rules to the letter. If her, why not Number 10?
Having said that, I don't think this revelation makes much difference, except it is one more drip into the narrative. I still think Johnson survives because it's in nobody's interests to depose him (yet).
Was that ever true? Really? That you could stand two metres from someone if you didn’t know them but not if you did know them? It’s so long ago and much water has flowed under Westminster Bridge, but if that were ever true, it’s even more bonkers than I ever dared believe.
It is completely true. You were allowed to meet one person from outside your household as long as you stayed 2 metres apart. As you were allowed to beach, the park, on picnics etc etc on May 20, 2020 you were obviously going to be 2 metres from people that you did not know, and that was ok. Clearly the police were never going to enforce any of these rules.
Below is from the Guardian in May 2020. People are outraged that people who worked together all day went and stood in a garden with a beer.
This is what average people were doing in "the height of lockdown"
As pointed out frequently, at the time, the use of long lenses to foreshorten perspective and make people appear to be closer to each other than they really were, was a standard create-a-story tactic.
If you took a picture from a drone (say) above that beach, what you would see is family groups with space between them.
The estimates are that 80-90% of people obeyed most of the rules, most of the time.
The most hilarious one of the genre was shot on a London Underground platform, where a long lens was used to create the impression that about 30 people boarding an empty train was a mob. The capacity of such trains is over 1,000.....
The point is though the end of May 2020 was not the "height of lockdown" and you could sit on a beach 2 metres from everyone and drink beer.
It's worth looking at the Bournemouth Beach on Google Earth aerial views. Those groynes are getting on for 200m apart. Those people are nothing like as close together as they appear.
I remember going to Formby beach back in May 2020. I posted a few photos on facebook. Friends were baffled that they appeared to show no-one but my family on the beach. It occurred to me that I probably could have taken a photo which made it look crowded if I'd zoomed right in on one group - but really it wasn't in the least bit crowded. I expect this was fairly typical. Those trying to whip up hysteria about crowding on the beaches are some of the minor villains of the whole affair.
The Downing St garden, looking at Google maps, is around 30,000 sq ft. That’s room for more than 3,000 people all sitting 6’ apart!
Even if I’m wrong by 50%, and it’s only 15,000 sq ft, that gives 100 people 150 sq ft each, about 25’ from each other.
And we are back on dodgy maths. If it were 300 x 100 ft, then you could array people 50 x 15, so 750, if its a simple grid. That may not be the best space filling model, but I struggle to get that to 3000.
This important update may have got lost at the end of the last thread; apologies for repetition if already seen:
I think Boris will be cleared. I've just been passed the statement that he's given to Sue Gray (and the Met):
1. I knew nothing about the party on May 20. I did not read the Reynold's email; I always just delete emails from him, because they are boring. 2. On the evening in question, at 6.30pm. Carrie and I took a glass of Chardonnay into our garden to enjoy the fine weather and discuss our family plans. 3. To my astonishment, dozens of people - SPADs, civil servants, and, I think, Mr Sunak and Ms Truss, were milling about enjoying drinks and snacks. 4. I took a very dim view of this rule-breaking. So I approached each participant individually and told them in no uncertain terms that, as soon as they had finished all their drinks and snacks, they must depart. 5. My strategy was successful; by 11pm, all the participants (except Sunak and Truss, I think) had dispersed, and I had nipped the rule-breaking in the bud. 6. End of statement.
Discovered at 1830 and 'successful' approach that 'nipped the rule-breaking in the bud' had got everyone out a mere 4.5 hours later? Surely you'd give everyone 10-30 minutes max to disperse?
I like the 'as soon as they had finished all their drinks and snacks, they must depart'. So if you'd brought a 12-pack of Stella you were good for some time?
But, if the story stands up and it can't be shown that he knew in advance then he might get away with it, so it's an important statement. If he can be shown to have lied in the statement, then surely toast?
Oh dear - I do hope you realise my post was a joke - satire, if you like. But I guess there's a grain of truth....
I still doubt this sinks Boris. Most of those who will be appalled are already voting Labour after the past garden party photos.
The remainder still voting Tory are diehard anti restrictions voters on the whole. Indeed prominent anti Covid restrictions campaigner Adam Brooks already is concerned this is a plot to replace Boris with a pro restrictions PM eg Hunt or Gove or Javid.
Unless Labour gets a 10% + poll lead from this Boris will likely avoid a VONC
File under 'keep digging'
I’m no Tory nor fan of Boris but I suspect HYUFD is on the money here.
I agree that @HYUFD might be right. This is after all only our various opinions. Personally I think this episode might be the end of him, but we just don't know.
To me the discussion on the moral issue of it all with HYUFD was more important to me as I find that indefensible. As HYUFD rightly pointed out there is the comparison with the Republican party in the USA who are defending/accepting the indefensible. I hope we don't end up there. I think the Tories here are better than that.
You really need to compare (say) Tesla under AP (perhaps where AP has been switched on during the journey) with similarly-priced cars of a similar age.
100% of the market for Tesla AP are Telsa buyers so it doesn't really matter how safe it is compared to other cars.
AP sales for Tesla are declining through as their sales mix becomes increasingly dominated by the 3. That's a cheaper car which attracts buyers with less inclination to drop five figures on the AP upgrade. When AP goes to subscription the take up rate will be very high.
I can't see many people spending $200+ a month on AP given that it won't ever be 100% automatic.
It's one of the reasons I'm looking at other options when I go for an EV - everyone elses version of AP is currently a £4000 or so option with the other toys you get from the top of the range model.
I’ll spend $200 a month, when it takes the kids the school and picks me up from the pub.
But not when there needs to be a licenced and sober driver, just in case.
At about $6000 it was worth the money for what it offered and its potential
At $12000 I suspect other cars are a better bet all round. Now we are probably more aware of things than elsewhere but I can never see Telsa getting to a point where a car can drive itself.
One of the most exciting things about the partygate saga is that, apparently, Boris won't know whether he was at the party or not until Sue Gray tells him. He must be finding the tension unbearable.
Someone asked yesterday why the Swedish PM Magdalena Andersson announced a raft of new Covid restrictions. In my reply I omitted to mention a (perhaps) pertinent fact: Swedish children return to school today.
Ooops! This doesn't look good. It seems that members of Downing St staff had the good sense to question whether such a gathering should go ahead, but Boris Rules Are For Little People Johnson did not even question it. Unfit to lead. Unfit for office.
This important update may have got lost at the end of the last thread; apologies for repetition if already seen:
I think Boris will be cleared. I've just been passed the statement that he's given to Sue Gray (and the Met):
1. I knew nothing about the party on May 20. I did not read the Reynold's email; I always just delete emails from him, because they are boring. 2. On the evening in question, at 6.30pm. Carrie and I took a glass of Chardonnay into our garden to enjoy the fine weather and discuss our family plans. 3. To my astonishment, dozens of people - SPADs, civil servants, and, I think, Mr Sunak and Ms Truss, were milling about enjoying drinks and snacks. 4. I took a very dim view of this rule-breaking. So I approached each participant individually and told them in no uncertain terms that, as soon as they had finished all their drinks and snacks, they must depart. 5. My strategy was successful; by 11pm, all the participants (except Sunak and Truss, I think) had dispersed, and I had nipped the rule-breaking in the bud. 6. End of statement.
Discovered at 1830 and 'successful' approach that 'nipped the rule-breaking in the bud' had got everyone out a mere 4.5 hours later? Surely you'd give everyone 10-30 minutes max to disperse?
I like the 'as soon as they had finished all their drinks and snacks, they must depart'. So if you'd brought a 12-pack of Stella you were good for some time?
But, if the story stands up and it can't be shown that he knew in advance then he might get away with it, so it's an important statement. If he can be shown to have lied in the statement, then surely toast?
Erm, its a joke?
As - obviously! - is my reply in some kind of dry, post-modern way
Well, ok - whooosh! I'm completely fogged over by a cold today (that's my excuse - I haven't even started on the hot toddies yet, though!). I thought it was paraphrasing of an actual statement. Maybe I've got long Covid without the Covid....
One of the most exciting things about the partygate saga is that, apparently, Boris won't know whether he was at the party or not until Sue Gray tells him. He must be finding the tension unbearable.
The PS on Woman's Hour said that the wording of her conclusion would likely be "negotiated" with Number Ten.
FPT and I know we have done this to death but I am interested in @HYUFD view on this:
Re that Town Council election that has had more written on than most GEs:
What do you think would have been the reaction of the 4 Tory candidates if you told them what you had done and it had resulted in them all being unelected and how would you have defended that position?
One of the most exciting things about the partygate saga is that, apparently, Boris won't know whether he was at the party or not until Sue Gray tells him. He must be finding the tension unbearable.
The PS on Woman's Hour said that the wording of her conclusion would likely be "negotiated" with Number Ten.
Why bother with having one then? Do we not have anyone with any integrity left at the top?
Was that ever true? Really? That you could stand two metres from someone if you didn’t know them but not if you did know them? It’s so long ago and much water has flowed under Westminster Bridge, but if that were ever true, it’s even more bonkers than I ever dared believe.
It is completely true. You were allowed to meet one person from outside your household as long as you stayed 2 metres apart. As you were allowed to beach, the park, on picnics etc etc on May 20, 2020 you were obviously going to be 2 metres from people that you did not know, and that was ok. Clearly the police were never going to enforce any of these rules.
Below is from the Guardian in May 2020. People are outraged that people who worked together all day went and stood in a garden with a beer.
This is what average people were doing in "the height of lockdown"
As pointed out frequently, at the time, the use of long lenses to foreshorten perspective and make people appear to be closer to each other than they really were, was a standard create-a-story tactic.
If you took a picture from a drone (say) above that beach, what you would see is family groups with space between them.
The estimates are that 80-90% of people obeyed most of the rules, most of the time.
The most hilarious one of the genre was shot on a London Underground platform, where a long lens was used to create the impression that about 30 people boarding an empty train was a mob. The capacity of such trains is over 1,000.....
The point is though the end of May 2020 was not the "height of lockdown" and you could sit on a beach 2 metres from everyone and drink beer.
It's worth looking at the Bournemouth Beach on Google Earth aerial views. Those groynes are getting on for 200m apart. Those people are nothing like as close together as they appear.
I remember going to Formby beach back in May 2020. I posted a few photos on facebook. Friends were baffled that they appeared to show no-one but my family on the beach. It occurred to me that I probably could have taken a photo which made it look crowded if I'd zoomed right in on one group - but really it wasn't in the least bit crowded. I expect this was fairly typical. Those trying to whip up hysteria about crowding on the beaches are some of the minor villains of the whole affair.
The Downing St garden, looking at Google maps, is around 30,000 sq ft. That’s room for more than 3,000 people all sitting 6’ apart!
Even if I’m wrong by 50%, and it’s only 15,000 sq ft, that gives 100 people 150 sq ft each, about 25’ from each other.
And we are back on dodgy maths. If it were 300 x 100 ft, then you could array people 50 x 15, so 750, if its a simple grid. That may not be the best space filling model, but I struggle to get that to 3000.
Dodgy maths indeed, but not mine. To be 6’ from one another, a person needs to sit in the middle of 9 sq ft, 3’ x 3’. People 6’ apart can nearly touch their fingers if they stretch.
Either way, the garden is way bigger than required for a socially distanced event, for people who have spent the day working in close proximity to each other indoors.
FPT and I know we have done this to death but I am interested in @HYUFD view on this:
Re that Town Council election that has had more written on than most GEs:
What do you think would have been the reaction of the 4 Tory candidates if you told them what you had done and it had resulted in them all being unelected and how would you have defended that position?
I would have told them to stand 6 candidates next time not just 4
Does anyone know what the "culture" was in the No. 11 office? Interesting that Sunak is utterly invisible in all of these parties. How was he running his ship?
Teetotaller?
How about "professional" ?
Dunno if Teetotaller = Professional.
Trump Hitler Kane
Any other notorious teetotallers?
Me
Are you notorious?
(Mr Kelly, formerly of this parish, is omitted from the survey sample.)
You really need to compare (say) Tesla under AP (perhaps where AP has been switched on during the journey) with similarly-priced cars of a similar age.
100% of the market for Tesla AP are Telsa buyers so it doesn't really matter how safe it is compared to other cars.
AP sales for Tesla are declining through as their sales mix becomes increasingly dominated by the 3. That's a cheaper car which attracts buyers with less inclination to drop five figures on the AP upgrade. When AP goes to subscription the take up rate will be very high.
I can't see many people spending $200+ a month on AP given that it won't ever be 100% automatic.
It's one of the reasons I'm looking at other options when I go for an EV - everyone elses version of AP is currently a £4000 or so option with the other toys you get from the top of the range model.
I’ll spend $200 a month, when it takes the kids the school and picks me up from the pub.
But not when there needs to be a licenced and sober driver, just in case.
At about $6000 it was worth the money for what it offered and its potential
At $12000 I suspect other cars are a better bet all round. Now we are probably more aware of things than elsewhere but I can never see Telsa getting to a point where a car can drive itself.
AIUI an issue is that they've sold many tens of thousands of cars, telling the owners that all the hardware they'll need for FSD is on them. If it turns out they cannot make FSD with that hardware they may be in trouble. If it's just uprating processors to newer, more capable ones, that expensive and bothersome. If it's adding new sensors, such as lidar, it may be ruinous.
That's one of the things I dislike about Musk: Tesla cannot know that the hardware will allow them to do it, yet he says it can - and makes people pay for it.
Have that feeling this may be the (last) straw that broke the camel's back.
I'm not sure, unless one of the big three resign (Rishi, Liz, The Saj) I don't see Boris falling. The first one of them to jump won't be the next leader though.
One of the most exciting things about the partygate saga is that, apparently, Boris won't know whether he was at the party or not until Sue Gray tells him. He must be finding the tension unbearable.
The PS on Woman's Hour said that the wording of her conclusion would likely be "negotiated" with Number Ten.
I'm sure that's true, but at the same time Sue Gray spent six years as DG of Propriety and Ethics, and won't countenance drawing improper conclusions to let Johnson off the hook. I've spoken to someone who worked closely with Sue Gray during that period and they're confident that she'll be thorough and impartial.
One of the most exciting things about the partygate saga is that, apparently, Boris won't know whether he was at the party or not until Sue Gray tells him. He must be finding the tension unbearable.
The PS on Woman's Hour said that the wording of her conclusion would likely be "negotiated" with Number Ten.
FPT and I know we have done this to death but I am interested in @HYUFD view on this:
Re that Town Council election that has had more written on than most GEs:
What do you think would have been the reaction of the 4 Tory candidates if you told them what you had done and it had resulted in them all being unelected and how would you have defended that position?
I would have told them to stand 6 candidates next time not just 4
And stamp out the baby stirrings of your Welsh nationalism? That would have been such a shame.
Was that ever true? Really? That you could stand two metres from someone if you didn’t know them but not if you did know them? It’s so long ago and much water has flowed under Westminster Bridge, but if that were ever true, it’s even more bonkers than I ever dared believe.
It is completely true. You were allowed to meet one person from outside your household as long as you stayed 2 metres apart. As you were allowed to beach, the park, on picnics etc etc on May 20, 2020 you were obviously going to be 2 metres from people that you did not know, and that was ok. Clearly the police were never going to enforce any of these rules.
Below is from the Guardian in May 2020. People are outraged that people who worked together all day went and stood in a garden with a beer.
This is what average people were doing in "the height of lockdown"
As pointed out frequently, at the time, the use of long lenses to foreshorten perspective and make people appear to be closer to each other than they really were, was a standard create-a-story tactic.
If you took a picture from a drone (say) above that beach, what you would see is family groups with space between them.
The estimates are that 80-90% of people obeyed most of the rules, most of the time.
The most hilarious one of the genre was shot on a London Underground platform, where a long lens was used to create the impression that about 30 people boarding an empty train was a mob. The capacity of such trains is over 1,000.....
The point is though the end of May 2020 was not the "height of lockdown" and you could sit on a beach 2 metres from everyone and drink beer.
It's worth looking at the Bournemouth Beach on Google Earth aerial views. Those groynes are getting on for 200m apart. Those people are nothing like as close together as they appear.
I remember going to Formby beach back in May 2020. I posted a few photos on facebook. Friends were baffled that they appeared to show no-one but my family on the beach. It occurred to me that I probably could have taken a photo which made it look crowded if I'd zoomed right in on one group - but really it wasn't in the least bit crowded. I expect this was fairly typical. Those trying to whip up hysteria about crowding on the beaches are some of the minor villains of the whole affair.
The Downing St garden, looking at Google maps, is around 30,000 sq ft. That’s room for more than 3,000 people all sitting 6’ apart!
Even if I’m wrong by 50%, and it’s only 15,000 sq ft, that gives 100 people 150 sq ft each, about 25’ from each other.
And we are back on dodgy maths. If it were 300 x 100 ft, then you could array people 50 x 15, so 750, if its a simple grid. That may not be the best space filling model, but I struggle to get that to 3000.
For all of this to even matter each person in the garden would have had to independently invite one other attendee to meet them in the garden, and that's only if you count the Downing Street garden as a public space. The invitation negates that defence and it also shows that it clearly frames it as an after work thing. Also whether it was a party or not is entirely irrelevant. Any social gathering was covered by the regulations.
I like Radek Sikorski's response to the Russian foreign minister's reference to "territories orphaned by the collapse of the Warsaw Pact":
https://twitter.com/radeksikorski/status/1480536745112444936 Get this, @RussianEmbassy, once and for all, in a language you can grasp. We were not orphaned by you because you were not our daddy. More of a serial rapist. Which is why you are not missed. And if you try it again, you'll get a kick in the balls.
I still doubt this sinks Boris. Most of those who will be appalled are already voting Labour after the past garden party photos.
The remainder still voting Tory are diehard anti restrictions voters on the whole. Indeed prominent anti Covid restrictions campaigner Adam Brooks already is concerned this is a plot to replace Boris with a pro restrictions PM eg Hunt or Gove or Javid.
Unless Labour gets a 10% + poll lead from this Boris will likely avoid a VONC
(FPT) I approve this message.
@PadTheHoundsman ... I know I'm late to this discussion thread (and post only rarely anyway), but I need to get this off my chest.
It's not that the UK's Covid rules were wrong - they weren't - but that the cavalier attitude towards them demonstrated by the people in charge of running the top political offices in the country speaks volumes about their commitment to running a properly constructed and effective government. That the PM, a man who himself had only recently experienced the full force of Covid, should have so little empathy with the people he works with that he was prepared for them to risk the same outcome in the name of a large social gathering - something that was illegal for the rest of us - is horrifying. Even if you were to give him the benefit of what little doubt there is and take the view that he attended because he believed he was immune and wasn't a personal threat to anyone doesn't absolve him of the responsibility for allowing the event to go ahead in the first place.
The current strata of people who are running the country - not just the politicians but the special advisors and senior civil servants whose stunning lack of self awareness in the face of a deadly worldwide pandemic is now visible with the light of a thousand suns - should all, to a man, shuffle off into a deep and meaningless retirement and let some people in to run the country who have a sense of professionalism, honour and pride in the quality of their work.
It's not that I carry a candle for the other lot all of a sudden (it's unlikely I ever will) but the PM and his coterie need to depart stage right immediately before they undermine whatever is left of the public's perceptions of the need for health and security in a pandemic that's simply not going to go away any time soon.
I'm a card carrying party member and I voted for him in the leadership election, but I'm now compelled to say BORIS OUT!
As a card carrying member who also voted BJ, I totally agree.
Time for a change.
I'd say only about 25% of the members who tell me they voted for him, disagree,
Welcome, from a founder member, to the ever growing club of right of centre folk who realise Boris Johnson is unfit for office and is a disaster for the Conservative Party and the country. He needs to go.
One of the most exciting things about the partygate saga is that, apparently, Boris won't know whether he was at the party or not until Sue Gray tells him. He must be finding the tension unbearable.
The PS on Woman's Hour said that the wording of her conclusion would likely be "negotiated" with Number Ten.
I'm sure that's true, but at the same time Sue Gray spent six years as DG of Propriety and Ethics, and won't countenance drawing improper conclusions to let Johnson off the hook. I've spoken to someone who worked closely with Sue Gray during that period and they're confident that she'll be thorough and impartial.
Yes, I should be clear that the negotiation she referred to would likely generate "yes minister wording" (the phrase she used) - and she quoted an except from the recent Geidt report to illustrate.
You really need to compare (say) Tesla under AP (perhaps where AP has been switched on during the journey) with similarly-priced cars of a similar age.
100% of the market for Tesla AP are Telsa buyers so it doesn't really matter how safe it is compared to other cars.
AP sales for Tesla are declining through as their sales mix becomes increasingly dominated by the 3. That's a cheaper car which attracts buyers with less inclination to drop five figures on the AP upgrade. When AP goes to subscription the take up rate will be very high.
I can't see many people spending $200+ a month on AP given that it won't ever be 100% automatic.
It's one of the reasons I'm looking at other options when I go for an EV - everyone elses version of AP is currently a £4000 or so option with the other toys you get from the top of the range model.
I’ll spend $200 a month, when it takes the kids the school and picks me up from the pub.
But not when there needs to be a licenced and sober driver, just in case.
At about $6000 it was worth the money for what it offered and its potential
At $12000 I suspect other cars are a better bet all round. Now we are probably more aware of things than elsewhere but I can never see Telsa getting to a point where a car can drive itself.
AIUI an issue is that they've sold many tens of thousands of cars, telling the owners that all the hardware they'll need for FSD is on them. If it turns out they cannot make FSD with that hardware they may be in trouble. If it's just uprating processors to newer, more capable ones, that expensive and bothersome. If it's adding new sensors, such as lidar, it may be ruinous.
That's one of the things I dislike about Musk: Tesla cannot know that the hardware will allow them to do it, yet he says it can - and makes people pay for it.
The entire story of AP is that a lot of people thought it was a solvable problem - and every individual problem is solvable.
The problem is that there are millions of little problems and a lot of them look like X until you suddenly discover it's actually Y and you are now in the wrong place.
And this all needs to be done within the car in milliseconds because there is no way anything remote can be allowed to make the decision.
My test for AP will be can you get from 2 places in Istanbul without crashing - until it can (and it will never be able to) its not close to 100%...
Was that ever true? Really? That you could stand two metres from someone if you didn’t know them but not if you did know them? It’s so long ago and much water has flowed under Westminster Bridge, but if that were ever true, it’s even more bonkers than I ever dared believe.
It is completely true. You were allowed to meet one person from outside your household as long as you stayed 2 metres apart. As you were allowed to beach, the park, on picnics etc etc on May 20, 2020 you were obviously going to be 2 metres from people that you did not know, and that was ok. Clearly the police were never going to enforce any of these rules.
Below is from the Guardian in May 2020. People are outraged that people who worked together all day went and stood in a garden with a beer.
This is what average people were doing in "the height of lockdown"
As pointed out frequently, at the time, the use of long lenses to foreshorten perspective and make people appear to be closer to each other than they really were, was a standard create-a-story tactic.
If you took a picture from a drone (say) above that beach, what you would see is family groups with space between them.
The estimates are that 80-90% of people obeyed most of the rules, most of the time.
The most hilarious one of the genre was shot on a London Underground platform, where a long lens was used to create the impression that about 30 people boarding an empty train was a mob. The capacity of such trains is over 1,000.....
The point is though the end of May 2020 was not the "height of lockdown" and you could sit on a beach 2 metres from everyone and drink beer.
It's worth looking at the Bournemouth Beach on Google Earth aerial views. Those groynes are getting on for 200m apart. Those people are nothing like as close together as they appear.
I remember going to Formby beach back in May 2020. I posted a few photos on facebook. Friends were baffled that they appeared to show no-one but my family on the beach. It occurred to me that I probably could have taken a photo which made it look crowded if I'd zoomed right in on one group - but really it wasn't in the least bit crowded. I expect this was fairly typical. Those trying to whip up hysteria about crowding on the beaches are some of the minor villains of the whole affair.
The Downing St garden, looking at Google maps, is around 30,000 sq ft. That’s room for more than 3,000 people all sitting 6’ apart!
Even if I’m wrong by 50%, and it’s only 15,000 sq ft, that gives 100 people 150 sq ft each, about 25’ from each other.
The average shitmuncher in the queue in Gregg's isn't going be recreating the Downing Street garden in SketchUp to do the maths they are just going to think: Johnson's been at it again. What an arsehole.
Was that ever true? Really? That you could stand two metres from someone if you didn’t know them but not if you did know them? It’s so long ago and much water has flowed under Westminster Bridge, but if that were ever true, it’s even more bonkers than I ever dared believe.
It is completely true. You were allowed to meet one person from outside your household as long as you stayed 2 metres apart. As you were allowed to beach, the park, on picnics etc etc on May 20, 2020 you were obviously going to be 2 metres from people that you did not know, and that was ok. Clearly the police were never going to enforce any of these rules.
Below is from the Guardian in May 2020. People are outraged that people who worked together all day went and stood in a garden with a beer.
This is what average people were doing in "the height of lockdown"
As pointed out frequently, at the time, the use of long lenses to foreshorten perspective and make people appear to be closer to each other than they really were, was a standard create-a-story tactic.
If you took a picture from a drone (say) above that beach, what you would see is family groups with space between them.
The estimates are that 80-90% of people obeyed most of the rules, most of the time.
The most hilarious one of the genre was shot on a London Underground platform, where a long lens was used to create the impression that about 30 people boarding an empty train was a mob. The capacity of such trains is over 1,000.....
The point is though the end of May 2020 was not the "height of lockdown" and you could sit on a beach 2 metres from everyone and drink beer.
It's worth looking at the Bournemouth Beach on Google Earth aerial views. Those groynes are getting on for 200m apart. Those people are nothing like as close together as they appear.
I remember going to Formby beach back in May 2020. I posted a few photos on facebook. Friends were baffled that they appeared to show no-one but my family on the beach. It occurred to me that I probably could have taken a photo which made it look crowded if I'd zoomed right in on one group - but really it wasn't in the least bit crowded. I expect this was fairly typical. Those trying to whip up hysteria about crowding on the beaches are some of the minor villains of the whole affair.
The Downing St garden, looking at Google maps, is around 30,000 sq ft. That’s room for more than 3,000 people all sitting 6’ apart!
Even if I’m wrong by 50%, and it’s only 15,000 sq ft, that gives 100 people 150 sq ft each, about 25’ from each other.
And we are back on dodgy maths. If it were 300 x 100 ft, then you could array people 50 x 15, so 750, if its a simple grid. That may not be the best space filling model, but I struggle to get that to 3000.
Dodgy maths indeed, but not mine. To be 6’ from one another, a person needs to sit in the middle of 9 sq ft, 3’ x 3’. People 6’ apart can nearly touch their fingers if they stretch.
Either way, the garden is way bigger than required for a socially distanced event, for people who have spent the day working in close proximity to each other indoors.
I was working on a packing structure, buy maybe the grid is a poor choice? You've gone with the circles, but that will also leave some gaps - the circles have holes around them! This used to be a 1st yr chemistry practical.
I still doubt this sinks Boris. Most of those who will be appalled are already voting Labour after the past garden party photos.
The remainder still voting Tory are diehard anti restrictions voters on the whole. Indeed prominent anti Covid restrictions campaigner Adam Brooks already is concerned this is a plot to replace Boris with a pro restrictions PM eg Hunt or Gove or Javid.
Unless Labour gets a 10% + poll lead from this Boris will likely avoid a VONC
The Tories don't have the monopoly on being anti-restrictions, you know - nor have they exactly been convincing on this measure. We just got away without another lockdown. We didn't get away without Plan B. Our children are still having to wear masks in schools.
They've been more convincing than Labour, and that's all that really matters(*) in an environment where the next election is being set up to be Tories vs everybody else.
(*) to someone who's going to vote primarily on this issue
I'm not sure it does. It really matters to me that we drop restrictions and make it as hard as possible to bring them in in the future. The Conservatives clearly don't really believe this as a point of principle - too many times in the past they've brought restrictions in far too easily on the basis of clearly dodgy evidence. They've brought things in measures for reasons of political expediency. (I don't say this as an outright criticism - that's how democracy works). Labour have been very pro-restrictions, but I'd say also for reasons of political expediency. But in a market where you have two parties responding to political expediency, it's not massively obvious why I should support the Tories when the Lib Dems have been consistently principled on the side that I would want them to be. If the Tories were pragmatic and Labour were in the isage camp, I can see your argument. You'd vote Tory to keep the isage lot out as people voted Tory to keep Corbyn out. But I don't think Labour are in that camp. I disagree with their position, but I don't fear them. Which leaves me free to vote for a party which has taken a principled stand.
The major difference is the Tories have an organised group of MPs who are anti-restrictions, which Labour doesn't (and some Cabinet ministers who are restriction-sceptic, which Labour wouldn't). So in order for me to be happy with the LDs on this issue, you'd have to convince me that in a Lab/LD coalition, their MPs would play the part of the 100, and their Cabinet ministers would play the role of the restriction-sceptic Tories - and that this would be enough to derail Starmer, who's clearly a restriction zealot.
Has HYUFD been on here yet telling us how Boris Johnson is still a winner?
Need you ask !!!!!!
HYUFD is clinging on to the belief that Johnson is still a winner. I think he's wrong but there you go. Seems to me that he is equally concerned that Truss doesn't succeed as this could put the party in a worse position - and he may be right about that. I heard the rumour the other day of Sunak and Hunt forming a pact to swerve this possibility.
Indeed, on current Tory members surveys there is at least a 50% chance if Truss gets to the final 2 she wins it.
Truss probably leads to an outright Labour majority not the hung parliament of current polls. There is no guarantee removing Boris sees Sunak succeed him
Was that ever true? Really? That you could stand two metres from someone if you didn’t know them but not if you did know them? It’s so long ago and much water has flowed under Westminster Bridge, but if that were ever true, it’s even more bonkers than I ever dared believe.
It is completely true. You were allowed to meet one person from outside your household as long as you stayed 2 metres apart. As you were allowed to beach, the park, on picnics etc etc on May 20, 2020 you were obviously going to be 2 metres from people that you did not know, and that was ok. Clearly the police were never going to enforce any of these rules.
Below is from the Guardian in May 2020. People are outraged that people who worked together all day went and stood in a garden with a beer.
This is what average people were doing in "the height of lockdown"
As pointed out frequently, at the time, the use of long lenses to foreshorten perspective and make people appear to be closer to each other than they really were, was a standard create-a-story tactic.
If you took a picture from a drone (say) above that beach, what you would see is family groups with space between them.
The estimates are that 80-90% of people obeyed most of the rules, most of the time.
The most hilarious one of the genre was shot on a London Underground platform, where a long lens was used to create the impression that about 30 people boarding an empty train was a mob. The capacity of such trains is over 1,000.....
The point is though the end of May 2020 was not the "height of lockdown" and you could sit on a beach 2 metres from everyone and drink beer.
It's worth looking at the Bournemouth Beach on Google Earth aerial views. Those groynes are getting on for 200m apart. Those people are nothing like as close together as they appear.
I remember going to Formby beach back in May 2020. I posted a few photos on facebook. Friends were baffled that they appeared to show no-one but my family on the beach. It occurred to me that I probably could have taken a photo which made it look crowded if I'd zoomed right in on one group - but really it wasn't in the least bit crowded. I expect this was fairly typical. Those trying to whip up hysteria about crowding on the beaches are some of the minor villains of the whole affair.
The Downing St garden, looking at Google maps, is around 30,000 sq ft. That’s room for more than 3,000 people all sitting 6’ apart!
Even if I’m wrong by 50%, and it’s only 15,000 sq ft, that gives 100 people 150 sq ft each, about 25’ from each other.
And we are back on dodgy maths. If it were 300 x 100 ft, then you could array people 50 x 15, so 750, if its a simple grid. That may not be the best space filling model, but I struggle to get that to 3000.
Dodgy maths indeed, but not mine. To be 6’ from one another, a person needs to sit in the middle of 9 sq ft, 3’ x 3’. People 6’ apart can nearly touch their fingers if they stretch.
Either way, the garden is way bigger than required for a socially distanced event, for people who have spent the day working in close proximity to each other indoors.
I was working on a packing structure, buy maybe the grid is a poor choice? You've gone with the circles, but that will also leave some gaps - the circles have holes around them! This used to be a 1st yr chemistry practical.
And looking again - each person with a 3 ft radius occupies 3.141 x 3 x 3, about 28 square ft. So up to 1000, but that ignores the gaps...
FPT and I know we have done this to death but I am interested in @HYUFD view on this:
Re that Town Council election that has had more written on than most GEs:
What do you think would have been the reaction of the 4 Tory candidates if you told them what you had done and it had resulted in them all being unelected and how would you have defended that position?
I would have told them to stand 6 candidates next time not just 4
@HYUFD - A very good answer actually. Spot on. A bit harsh and not always that easy though. I suspect they wouldn't be inviting you for a drink.
One of the most exciting things about the partygate saga is that, apparently, Boris won't know whether he was at the party or not until Sue Gray tells him. He must be finding the tension unbearable.
The PS on Woman's Hour said that the wording of her conclusion would likely be "negotiated" with Number Ten.
I'm sure that's true, but at the same time Sue Gray spent six years as DG of Propriety and Ethics, and won't countenance drawing improper conclusions to let Johnson off the hook. I've spoken to someone who worked closely with Sue Gray during that period and they're confident that she'll be thorough and impartial.
I wish I had your confidence, and I do hope you're right. Lord Geidt crumbled pretty quickly, though, and he was meant to be a chap of great integrity.
Have that feeling this may be the (last) straw that broke the camel's back.
I'm not sure, unless one of the big three resign (Rishi, Liz, The Saj) I don't see Boris falling. The first one of them to jump won't be the next leader though.
Just my gut instinct not a declamaTORY prediction. Don't expect any resignations nor the much fabled VoNC but there's a point where quitting really is the only option. Think we may now be there.
That's not a huge surprise though is it, the US views the EU as a completely unreliable partner. Too many countries including Germany will water down any non-aggression parts of the agreement in order to hold onto German exports. That will make the whole thing completely pointless.
Macron has tried to get the EU a seat at the table and instead the US has decided to take it bilateral and exclude the other UNSC members as well. It was utterly predictable as well. The US has never liked dealing with the EU in any multi-party agreement because suddenly there's 27 different agendas to satisfy and now with Macron blurring the lines between national and EU foreign policy objectives I expect this will continue to happen.
It is a generally accepted rule of electoral behaviour that governments benefit from swingback as polling day approaches. There are however exceptions (the Scottish Lib-Lab coalition government actually sank as polling day loomed in 2007). Could we be currently witnessing one of those rare exceptions? The Tory decline feels “sticky”: those who have gone ain’t coming back for a good long while.
Have that feeling this may be the (last) straw that broke the camel's back.
I'm not sure, unless one of the big three resign (Rishi, Liz, The Saj) I don't see Boris falling. The first one of them to jump won't be the next leader though.
Just my gut instinct not a declamaTORY prediction. Don't expect any resignations nor the much fabled VoNC but there's a point where quitting really is the only option. Think we may now be there.
Interesting post. Not thought of that. Clean break so not messy stuff going on for weeks and Boris may not come out of it that badly (Doing the right thing).
Has HYUFD been on here yet telling us how Boris Johnson is still a winner?
Need you ask !!!!!!
HYUFD is clinging on to the belief that Johnson is still a winner. I think he's wrong but there you go. Seems to me that he is equally concerned that Truss doesn't succeed as this could put the party in a worse position - and he may be right about that. I heard the rumour the other day of Sunak and Hunt forming a pact to swerve this possibility.
Indeed, on current Tory members surveys there is at least a 50% chance if Truss gets to the final 2 she wins it.
Truss probably leads to an outright Labour majority not the hung parliament of current polls. There is no guarantee removing Boris sees Sunak succeed him
Hmm, you seem to have returned to speaking in absolutes, based upon superficial popularity/recognition indicators. Unless you have a supernatural ability to see alternative universes, Truss is no more certain to result in a Labour majority than if Bozo stays in place. She may prove to be an empty suit when it comes to governing just like Johnson has, but maybe not. If she were to present a couple of years of competent government then she might well go on to win. Ditto for Sunak. I will never vote Conservative again while The Clown is in charge, but could be persuaded to if someone who can demonstrate competence replaces the current idiot.
I still doubt this sinks Boris. Most of those who will be appalled are already voting Labour after the past garden party photos.
The remainder still voting Tory are diehard anti restrictions voters on the whole. Indeed prominent anti Covid restrictions campaigner Adam Brooks already is concerned this is a plot to replace Boris with a pro restrictions PM eg Hunt or Gove or Javid.
Unless Labour gets a 10% + poll lead from this Boris will likely avoid a VONC
The Tories don't have the monopoly on being anti-restrictions, you know - nor have they exactly been convincing on this measure. We just got away without another lockdown. We didn't get away without Plan B. Our children are still having to wear masks in schools.
They've been more convincing than Labour, and that's all that really matters(*) in an environment where the next election is being set up to be Tories vs everybody else.
(*) to someone who's going to vote primarily on this issue
I'm not sure it does. It really matters to me that we drop restrictions and make it as hard as possible to bring them in in the future. The Conservatives clearly don't really believe this as a point of principle - too many times in the past they've brought restrictions in far too easily on the basis of clearly dodgy evidence. They've brought things in measures for reasons of political expediency. (I don't say this as an outright criticism - that's how democracy works). Labour have been very pro-restrictions, but I'd say also for reasons of political expediency. But in a market where you have two parties responding to political expediency, it's not massively obvious why I should support the Tories when the Lib Dems have been consistently principled on the side that I would want them to be. If the Tories were pragmatic and Labour were in the isage camp, I can see your argument. You'd vote Tory to keep the isage lot out as people voted Tory to keep Corbyn out. But I don't think Labour are in that camp. I disagree with their position, but I don't fear them. Which leaves me free to vote for a party which has taken a principled stand.
The major difference is the Tories have an organised group of MPs who are anti-restrictions, which Labour doesn't (and some Cabinet ministers who are restriction-sceptic, which Labour wouldn't). So in order for me to be happy with the LDs on this issue, you'd have to convince me that in a Lab/LD coalition, their MPs would play the part of the 100, and their Cabinet ministers would play the role of the restriction-sceptic Tories - and that this would be enough to derail Starmer, who's clearly a restriction zealot.
Well yes, I do take that point. I think you're coming at this from a much more pragmatic angle than me. And in all honesty I'm not totally convinced of the Lib Dems. They haven't exactly been loud in the interests of individual liberty. But they have consistently voted the way I would want them to.
Harry Cole @MrHarryCole · 8s NEW: PM sends the Paymaster General Michael Ellis to answer Labour's UQ in the Commons..
Hospital pass.
I am shocked that the coward who hid in a fridge has done this.
This looks shabby even by his abject standards. He'd have been better off turning up and taking his medicine off the Stockport GILF. Tawse, ballgag, everything.
One of the most exciting things about the partygate saga is that, apparently, Boris won't know whether he was at the party or not until Sue Gray tells him. He must be finding the tension unbearable.
The PS on Woman's Hour said that the wording of her conclusion would likely be "negotiated" with Number Ten.
I'm sure that's true, but at the same time Sue Gray spent six years as DG of Propriety and Ethics, and won't countenance drawing improper conclusions to let Johnson off the hook. I've spoken to someone who worked closely with Sue Gray during that period and they're confident that she'll be thorough and impartial.
I wish I had your confidence, and I do hope you're right. Lord Geidt crumbled pretty quickly, though, and he was meant to be a chap of great integrity.
It's almost touching how people expect "independent inquiries" by various establishment patsies to lead to anything at all. Can anyone point to any such inquiry, in the last 30 years say, that led to a ministerial resignation? Genuine question, as I can't think of one. The British establishment always protects its own.
Has HYUFD been on here yet telling us how Boris Johnson is still a winner?
Need you ask !!!!!!
HYUFD is clinging on to the belief that Johnson is still a winner. I think he's wrong but there you go. Seems to me that he is equally concerned that Truss doesn't succeed as this could put the party in a worse position - and he may be right about that. I heard the rumour the other day of Sunak and Hunt forming a pact to swerve this possibility.
Indeed, on current Tory members surveys there is at least a 50% chance if Truss gets to the final 2 she wins it.
Truss probably leads to an outright Labour majority not the hung parliament of current polls. There is no guarantee removing Boris sees Sunak succeed him
Hmm, you seem to have returned to speaking in absolutes, based upon superficial popularity/recognition indicators. Unless you have a supernatural ability to see alternative universes, Truss is no more certain to result in a Labour majority than if Bozo stays in place. She may prove to be an empty suit when it comes to governing just like Johnson has, but maybe not. If she were to present a couple of years of competent government then she might well go on to win. Ditto for Sunak. I will never vote Conservative again while The Clown is in charge, but could be persuaded to if someone who can demonstrate competence replaces the current idiot.
Yes, I'm sure HYFUD was proclaiming that David Davis would walk it in 2005 based on the pre-conference polling.
V senior Tory says: ‘It’s as bad as it gets. Fact Dowden was telling people what they couldn’t do from one room & less than hour later this was happening in garden is indefensible
Another: ‘Mood terrible -even those who profess loyalty to him are in despair
Was that ever true? Really? That you could stand two metres from someone if you didn’t know them but not if you did know them? It’s so long ago and much water has flowed under Westminster Bridge, but if that were ever true, it’s even more bonkers than I ever dared believe.
It is completely true. You were allowed to meet one person from outside your household as long as you stayed 2 metres apart. As you were allowed to beach, the park, on picnics etc etc on May 20, 2020 you were obviously going to be 2 metres from people that you did not know, and that was ok. Clearly the police were never going to enforce any of these rules.
Below is from the Guardian in May 2020. People are outraged that people who worked together all day went and stood in a garden with a beer.
This is what average people were doing in "the height of lockdown"
As pointed out frequently, at the time, the use of long lenses to foreshorten perspective and make people appear to be closer to each other than they really were, was a standard create-a-story tactic.
If you took a picture from a drone (say) above that beach, what you would see is family groups with space between them.
The estimates are that 80-90% of people obeyed most of the rules, most of the time.
The most hilarious one of the genre was shot on a London Underground platform, where a long lens was used to create the impression that about 30 people boarding an empty train was a mob. The capacity of such trains is over 1,000.....
The point is though the end of May 2020 was not the "height of lockdown" and you could sit on a beach 2 metres from everyone and drink beer.
It's worth looking at the Bournemouth Beach on Google Earth aerial views. Those groynes are getting on for 200m apart. Those people are nothing like as close together as they appear.
I remember going to Formby beach back in May 2020. I posted a few photos on facebook. Friends were baffled that they appeared to show no-one but my family on the beach. It occurred to me that I probably could have taken a photo which made it look crowded if I'd zoomed right in on one group - but really it wasn't in the least bit crowded. I expect this was fairly typical. Those trying to whip up hysteria about crowding on the beaches are some of the minor villains of the whole affair.
The Downing St garden, looking at Google maps, is around 30,000 sq ft. That’s room for more than 3,000 people all sitting 6’ apart!
Even if I’m wrong by 50%, and it’s only 15,000 sq ft, that gives 100 people 150 sq ft each, about 25’ from each other.
The average shitmuncher in the queue in Gregg's isn't going be recreating the Downing Street garden in SketchUp to do the maths they are just going to think: Johnson's been at it again. What an arsehole.
That's why I come here for my political discussions rather than the queue at Gregg's. I LIKE the maths.
What year was it he hid in Afghanistan to avoid having to keep a promise and resign, or break a promise and stay as FS?
2018?
His reception in Afghanistan would be warmer right now than the frosty climate of the next meeting of his parliamentary group. What excuse will he make up for not attending that one?
Has HYUFD been on here yet telling us how Boris Johnson is still a winner?
Need you ask !!!!!!
HYUFD is clinging on to the belief that Johnson is still a winner. I think he's wrong but there you go. Seems to me that he is equally concerned that Truss doesn't succeed as this could put the party in a worse position - and he may be right about that. I heard the rumour the other day of Sunak and Hunt forming a pact to swerve this possibility.
Indeed, on current Tory members surveys there is at least a 50% chance if Truss gets to the final 2 she wins it.
Truss probably leads to an outright Labour majority not the hung parliament of current polls. There is no guarantee removing Boris sees Sunak succeed him
Hmm, you seem to have returned to speaking in absolutes, based upon superficial popularity/recognition indicators. Unless you have a supernatural ability to see alternative universes, Truss is no more certain to result in a Labour majority than if Bozo stays in place. She may prove to be an empty suit when it comes to governing just like Johnson has, but maybe not. If she were to present a couple of years of competent government then she might well go on to win. Ditto for Sunak. I will never vote Conservative again while The Clown is in charge, but could be persuaded to if someone who can demonstrate competence replaces the current idiot.
Yes, I'm sure HYFUD was proclaiming that David Davis would walk it in 2005 based on the pre-conference polling.
The polling of the public in 2005 always showed Cameron doing better v Brown than Davis did anyway, even pre conference
V senior Tory says: ‘It’s as bad as it gets. Fact Dowden was telling people what they couldn’t do from one room & less than hour later this was happening in garden is indefensible
Another: ‘Mood terrible -even those who profess loyalty to him are in despair
Ah, Beth Rigby. What she doesn’t know about parties, isn’t worth knowing.
Isn't it the case that if this isn't the end of him then the next thing or the next one or the next one will be? in other words it needs a mercy killing from the backbenchers now rather than later. He will not become a beacon of probity overnight will he?
Have that feeling this may be the (last) straw that broke the camel's back.
I'm not sure, unless one of the big three resign (Rishi, Liz, The Saj) I don't see Boris falling. The first one of them to jump won't be the next leader though.
Just my gut instinct not a declamaTORY prediction. Don't expect any resignations nor the much fabled VoNC but there's a point where quitting really is the only option. Think we may now be there.
Interesting post. Not thought of that. Clean break so not messy stuff going on for weeks and Boris may not come out of it that badly (Doing the right thing).
Has HYUFD been on here yet telling us how Boris Johnson is still a winner?
Need you ask !!!!!!
HYUFD is clinging on to the belief that Johnson is still a winner. I think he's wrong but there you go. Seems to me that he is equally concerned that Truss doesn't succeed as this could put the party in a worse position - and he may be right about that. I heard the rumour the other day of Sunak and Hunt forming a pact to swerve this possibility.
Indeed, on current Tory members surveys there is at least a 50% chance if Truss gets to the final 2 she wins it.
Truss probably leads to an outright Labour majority not the hung parliament of current polls. There is no guarantee removing Boris sees Sunak succeed him
Hmm, you seem to have returned to speaking in absolutes, based upon superficial popularity/recognition indicators. Unless you have a supernatural ability to see alternative universes, Truss is no more certain to result in a Labour majority than if Bozo stays in place. She may prove to be an empty suit when it comes to governing just like Johnson has, but maybe not. If she were to present a couple of years of competent government then she might well go on to win. Ditto for Sunak. I will never vote Conservative again while The Clown is in charge, but could be persuaded to if someone who can demonstrate competence replaces the current idiot.
Nope. Truss gives Starmer Labour a 16% lead according to Opinium last month. That is 1997 Labour landslide levels compared to current polls only giving Labour a 3 to 5% lead.
You of course voted LD in 2019 anyway when Boris led the Tories to their biggest landslide since 1987
Was that ever true? Really? That you could stand two metres from someone if you didn’t know them but not if you did know them? It’s so long ago and much water has flowed under Westminster Bridge, but if that were ever true, it’s even more bonkers than I ever dared believe.
It is completely true. You were allowed to meet one person from outside your household as long as you stayed 2 metres apart. As you were allowed to beach, the park, on picnics etc etc on May 20, 2020 you were obviously going to be 2 metres from people that you did not know, and that was ok. Clearly the police were never going to enforce any of these rules.
Below is from the Guardian in May 2020. People are outraged that people who worked together all day went and stood in a garden with a beer.
This is what average people were doing in "the height of lockdown"
As pointed out frequently, at the time, the use of long lenses to foreshorten perspective and make people appear to be closer to each other than they really were, was a standard create-a-story tactic.
If you took a picture from a drone (say) above that beach, what you would see is family groups with space between them.
The estimates are that 80-90% of people obeyed most of the rules, most of the time.
The most hilarious one of the genre was shot on a London Underground platform, where a long lens was used to create the impression that about 30 people boarding an empty train was a mob. The capacity of such trains is over 1,000.....
The point is though the end of May 2020 was not the "height of lockdown" and you could sit on a beach 2 metres from everyone and drink beer.
It's worth looking at the Bournemouth Beach on Google Earth aerial views. Those groynes are getting on for 200m apart. Those people are nothing like as close together as they appear.
I remember going to Formby beach back in May 2020. I posted a few photos on facebook. Friends were baffled that they appeared to show no-one but my family on the beach. It occurred to me that I probably could have taken a photo which made it look crowded if I'd zoomed right in on one group - but really it wasn't in the least bit crowded. I expect this was fairly typical. Those trying to whip up hysteria about crowding on the beaches are some of the minor villains of the whole affair.
The Downing St garden, looking at Google maps, is around 30,000 sq ft. That’s room for more than 3,000 people all sitting 6’ apart!
Even if I’m wrong by 50%, and it’s only 15,000 sq ft, that gives 100 people 150 sq ft each, about 25’ from each other.
And we are back on dodgy maths. If it were 300 x 100 ft, then you could array people 50 x 15, so 750, if its a simple grid. That may not be the best space filling model, but I struggle to get that to 3000.
Dodgy maths indeed, but not mine. To be 6’ from one another, a person needs to sit in the middle of 9 sq ft, 3’ x 3’. People 6’ apart can nearly touch their fingers if they stretch.
Either way, the garden is way bigger than required for a socially distanced event, for people who have spent the day working in close proximity to each other indoors.
I was working on a packing structure, buy maybe the grid is a poor choice? You've gone with the circles, but that will also leave some gaps - the circles have holes around them! This used to be a 1st yr chemistry practical.
And looking again - each person with a 3 ft radius occupies 3.141 x 3 x 3, about 28 square ft. So up to 1000, but that ignores the gaps...
Of course, it's 6ft separation. So you also need to consider chubbiness of participants and a circle bigger than 3ft radius. You could fit in more Sunaks than Johnsons
Edit: Or were we 1m+ at that point? All academic anyway, as others have pointed out
Harry Cole @MrHarryCole · 8s NEW: PM sends the Paymaster General Michael Ellis to answer Labour's UQ in the Commons..
Hospital pass.
Wonder how many Cabinet members said no?
It’d have been hilarious if the only cabinet member willing to step up was Alister Jack. His purple complexion would have been perfect for the occasion.
Does anyone know what the "culture" was in the No. 11 office? Interesting that Sunak is utterly invisible in all of these parties. How was he running his ship?
An odd thread really. HYUFD demonstrating just how wrong one man can be about so many things at the same time.
Firstly the Red Wall will not vote for Boris in 2024. Dismissing all other leaders because "they will only vote for Boris" is utterly ludicrous when the polls show they won't vote for Boris.
Secondly pretty much everyone here is lined up with the basics of right and wrong. Two months into Covid restrictions the government giving a 3pm "you will not meet with other people" instruction and a 5pm "everyone round to number 10, bring a bottle, we deserve a party" is demonstrably indefensible. Never mind the political optics, it's indefensible to anyone with a brain, a conscience or morals.
So perhaps he of the high church lecturing the rest of us about Christian values may consider the plank in his own eye. I haven't seen such screaming hypocrisy since IDS claimed to be a man of God before proceeding to smash the poor as hard as humanly possible.
Finally, what the red wall voted for. Yes Boris was a bit of a lad, the anti-politician anti-Tory. But they bought that principally because he offered the solution to their problems. Which wasn't Brexit, it was the reason why they voted for Brexit
There are many planks to this. Some voted to get rid of all the foreigners. Some because they wanted money for the NHS. Some to kick the government. And so many more because they wanted their town and their community and their family to have a chance in life that they unfairly were being denied. Fairness is something very high on the agenda of people in the red wall. So the idea they will still vote for the lying cheating mocking incompetent corrupt charlatan is breathtaking.
Boris Johnson is over. The Tory party can either accept this, replace him with someone who represents the values of both the party and the country and have a chance, or keep him and not only lose the election but smash the party into pieces.
The latest polls have the Tories on 33-35% and Labour with only a 3 to 5% lead and there were plenty of garden drinks party photos before that. That is more Cameron midterm polling, nowhere near pre 1997 polling.
The only hypothetical alternative leader polling from Opinium last month had a Truss or Gove led Tories polling worse than a Boris led Tories. Even a Sunak led Tories were only on 34% ie no better than they are polling now.
So the only one wrong on this is you. As long as Boris continues to impose no new restrictions, especially on the vaccinated, he will survive
Whom the Gods would destroy, they first make mad. If HYFUD prevails, then the Conservatives will face an extinction level event at the next general election. It never seems to occur to him that the opinion polls he consistently and complacently quotes are a lagging indicator.
Look most commentators on here hate Boris and did not even vote for him in 2019. Yet the 33 to 35% the Tories are still polling is still higher than the Tories got from 1997 to 2005, hardly extinction level
Not true, my guess would be about 60% of the active site voted for Johnson in 2019 and sub 20% intend to next time
Yebbut as HYUFD keeps saying mostd of that 60% - indeed also that 20% - aren't Real Tories anyway.
Exactly. You're only a real Tory if you vote Plaid Cymru to support Welsh secession from the Union.
Oh yes, and advocate the creation of an English Parliament and the secession of Antrim from the Union whiles at it.
An English parliament is perfectly compatible with the Union, just a Union based on equality that treats England the same as the other 3 home nations
Agreed.
Quite, which begs the quesiton why it isn't Tory policy.
Tory policy is “Get Brexit Done”, which is impossible, as Brexit will never be “done”.
Last I checked, the United Kingdom has left the European Union...
The UK was a member of the EU for best part of half a century. During that time, entry was never “done”.
Xenophobes can moan for decades on end. So can internationalists.
Contrasting "internationalists" with "xeonphobes" is not a convincing look.
I still doubt this sinks Boris. Most of those who will be appalled are already voting Labour after the past garden party photos.
The remainder still voting Tory are diehard anti restrictions voters on the whole. Indeed prominent anti Covid restrictions campaigner Adam Brooks already is concerned this is a plot to replace Boris with a pro restrictions PM eg Hunt or Gove or Javid.
Unless Labour gets a 10% + poll lead from this Boris will likely avoid a VONC
(FPT) I approve this message.
@PadTheHoundsman ... I know I'm late to this discussion thread (and post only rarely anyway), but I need to get this off my chest.
It's not that the UK's Covid rules were wrong - they weren't - but that the cavalier attitude towards them demonstrated by the people in charge of running the top political offices in the country speaks volumes about their commitment to running a properly constructed and effective government. That the PM, a man who himself had only recently experienced the full force of Covid, should have so little empathy with the people he works with that he was prepared for them to risk the same outcome in the name of a large social gathering - something that was illegal for the rest of us - is horrifying. Even if you were to give him the benefit of what little doubt there is and take the view that he attended because he believed he was immune and wasn't a personal threat to anyone doesn't absolve him of the responsibility for allowing the event to go ahead in the first place.
The current strata of people who are running the country - not just the politicians but the special advisors and senior civil servants whose stunning lack of self awareness in the face of a deadly worldwide pandemic is now visible with the light of a thousand suns - should all, to a man, shuffle off into a deep and meaningless retirement and let some people in to run the country who have a sense of professionalism, honour and pride in the quality of their work.
It's not that I carry a candle for the other lot all of a sudden (it's unlikely I ever will) but the PM and his coterie need to depart stage right immediately before they undermine whatever is left of the public's perceptions of the need for health and security in a pandemic that's simply not going to go away any time soon.
I'm a card carrying party member and I voted for him in the leadership election, but I'm now compelled to say BORIS OUT!
"Cavalier attitude" - @PadTheHoundsman is exactly right. That's the problem. not the subtler nuances of what the rules were at the time and whether others were doing the same. The rule setters have to follow them to the letter, and for the avoidance of doubt, even more exactly than everyone else.
Many people at the same time complied with the rules at personal cost and reluctance. For example at this point I had only just been allowed to see my girlfriend again after 2 months - she felt that because of her job she had to observe the rules to the letter. If her, why not Number 10?
Having said that, I don't think this revelation makes much difference, except it is one more drip into the narrative. I still think Johnson survives because it's in nobody's interests to depose him (yet).
Contempt is the watchword for me. Johnson has contempt for the electorate. Also, I find my own reaction to this interesting - which is unusual because normally it's other people's reactions I'm keen to understand & process. I wasn't particularly angered by the previous examples of Downing St socializing - they seemed quite trivial to me especially cf things like (eg) the Paterson affair - but this one I do find appalling and extremely serious.
I can't be alone in this. The country surely can't be divided neatly into those outraged by all of partygate and those outraged by none of it. There must be plenty like me who have thus far felt, "Hmm, not exactly the worst thing in the world" but have now moved to, "Oh ffs, that is unforgivable, how much more of this can we take?"
One angle I hadn't considered... the Barnard Castle story broke AFTER this party. No wonder Cummings didn't feel he should resign, he knew perfectly well lawbreaking was flagrant in Downing Street.
One angle I hadn't considered... the Barnard Castle story broke AFTER this party. No wonder Cummings didn't feel he should resign, he knew perfectly well lawbreaking was flagrant in Downing Street.
It does explain why the sane approach of not accepting Cummings resignation wasn't used.
One of the most exciting things about the partygate saga is that, apparently, Boris won't know whether he was at the party or not until Sue Gray tells him. He must be finding the tension unbearable.
The PS on Woman's Hour said that the wording of her conclusion would likely be "negotiated" with Number Ten.
I'm sure that's true, but at the same time Sue Gray spent six years as DG of Propriety and Ethics, and won't countenance drawing improper conclusions to let Johnson off the hook. I've spoken to someone who worked closely with Sue Gray during that period and they're confident that she'll be thorough and impartial.
I wish I had your confidence, and I do hope you're right. Lord Geidt crumbled pretty quickly, though, and he was meant to be a chap of great integrity.
It's almost touching how people expect "independent inquiries" by various establishment patsies to lead to anything at all. Can anyone point to any such inquiry, in the last 30 years say, that led to a ministerial resignation? Genuine question, as I can't think of one. The British establishment always protects its own.
Sigh. The first thing to understand is that you appoint independent judges/inquiry leads so that you know in advance the result.
It's not so much the establishment protecting their own, as people protecting themselves. You don't appoint someone who is going to give a bad result. Unless you have lost control of the narrative to that point.
Say you have a case about some people pulling a statue down. If you really want them sent down, you don't knobble the judge.
You assign the case to Judge Jeffreys (descendent of same), who is famous for his book "All the bastards in my courtroom are guilty" and has a side hobby restoring gallows. Then act surprised when he sentences the defendants, the jury, the defending counsel and a number of spectators in the gallery to transportation to Australia....
Was that ever true? Really? That you could stand two metres from someone if you didn’t know them but not if you did know them? It’s so long ago and much water has flowed under Westminster Bridge, but if that were ever true, it’s even more bonkers than I ever dared believe.
It is completely true. You were allowed to meet one person from outside your household as long as you stayed 2 metres apart. As you were allowed to beach, the park, on picnics etc etc on May 20, 2020 you were obviously going to be 2 metres from people that you did not know, and that was ok. Clearly the police were never going to enforce any of these rules.
Below is from the Guardian in May 2020. People are outraged that people who worked together all day went and stood in a garden with a beer.
This is what average people were doing in "the height of lockdown"
As pointed out frequently, at the time, the use of long lenses to foreshorten perspective and make people appear to be closer to each other than they really were, was a standard create-a-story tactic.
If you took a picture from a drone (say) above that beach, what you would see is family groups with space between them.
The estimates are that 80-90% of people obeyed most of the rules, most of the time.
The most hilarious one of the genre was shot on a London Underground platform, where a long lens was used to create the impression that about 30 people boarding an empty train was a mob. The capacity of such trains is over 1,000.....
The point is though the end of May 2020 was not the "height of lockdown" and you could sit on a beach 2 metres from everyone and drink beer.
It's worth looking at the Bournemouth Beach on Google Earth aerial views. Those groynes are getting on for 200m apart. Those people are nothing like as close together as they appear.
I remember going to Formby beach back in May 2020. I posted a few photos on facebook. Friends were baffled that they appeared to show no-one but my family on the beach. It occurred to me that I probably could have taken a photo which made it look crowded if I'd zoomed right in on one group - but really it wasn't in the least bit crowded. I expect this was fairly typical. Those trying to whip up hysteria about crowding on the beaches are some of the minor villains of the whole affair.
The Downing St garden, looking at Google maps, is around 30,000 sq ft. That’s room for more than 3,000 people all sitting 6’ apart!
Even if I’m wrong by 50%, and it’s only 15,000 sq ft, that gives 100 people 150 sq ft each, about 25’ from each other.
And we are back on dodgy maths. If it were 300 x 100 ft, then you could array people 50 x 15, so 750, if its a simple grid. That may not be the best space filling model, but I struggle to get that to 3000.
Dodgy maths indeed, but not mine. To be 6’ from one another, a person needs to sit in the middle of 9 sq ft, 3’ x 3’. People 6’ apart can nearly touch their fingers if they stretch.
Either way, the garden is way bigger than required for a socially distanced event, for people who have spent the day working in close proximity to each other indoors.
I was working on a packing structure, buy maybe the grid is a poor choice? You've gone with the circles, but that will also leave some gaps - the circles have holes around them! This used to be a 1st yr chemistry practical.
And looking again - each person with a 3 ft radius occupies 3.141 x 3 x 3, about 28 square ft. So up to 1000, but that ignores the gaps...
No; each person needs to be in a circle of radius 3.3 feet - it's 2m social distancing remember. That is an area of 35 square feet per person. Then you need to work out the 2-d close packing of those circles touching, which would 'waste' some of the garden space. To a crude approximation you could put each person in a square of 2 x 2m which would be 44 sq feet per person. 681 people. So TT has it about right. But then there is no way to get at the drinkies or food. So you need to make sure each person can access an open lane to the food etc - and that has to be two-way, with passing places at least - but they are getting pissed, so make it two way. THat makes half as many. And deduct a bit for the garden walls, fountains, stachoo of Churchill, etc. We're getting down to 300-odd.
V senior Tory says: ‘It’s as bad as it gets. Fact Dowden was telling people what they couldn’t do from one room & less than hour later this was happening in garden is indefensible
Another: ‘Mood terrible -even those who profess loyalty to him are in despair
I have to say listening to Burley and Rigby on breaking lockdown is surreal
Idle reflection - I'm sure that if Corbyn was PM we'd have various problems and controversies. But holding dodgy parties would definitely not feature - there are times for his sort of Cromwellian rectitude, and mid-pandemic is one of them.
More seriously - perhaps we're moving to the point where a Labour VONC would actually make sense. Normally they will just get voted down and the Opposition will look ineffective. But in this situation there will be Tory MPs who will be quite uncomfortable in voting that they really do have confidence in the PM, and if they do it can be used against them if he does subsequently need to resign.
An odd thread really. HYUFD demonstrating just how wrong one man can be about so many things at the same time.
Firstly the Red Wall will not vote for Boris in 2024. Dismissing all other leaders because "they will only vote for Boris" is utterly ludicrous when the polls show they won't vote for Boris.
Secondly pretty much everyone here is lined up with the basics of right and wrong. Two months into Covid restrictions the government giving a 3pm "you will not meet with other people" instruction and a 5pm "everyone round to number 10, bring a bottle, we deserve a party" is demonstrably indefensible. Never mind the political optics, it's indefensible to anyone with a brain, a conscience or morals.
So perhaps he of the high church lecturing the rest of us about Christian values may consider the plank in his own eye. I haven't seen such screaming hypocrisy since IDS claimed to be a man of God before proceeding to smash the poor as hard as humanly possible.
Finally, what the red wall voted for. Yes Boris was a bit of a lad, the anti-politician anti-Tory. But they bought that principally because he offered the solution to their problems. Which wasn't Brexit, it was the reason why they voted for Brexit
There are many planks to this. Some voted to get rid of all the foreigners. Some because they wanted money for the NHS. Some to kick the government. And so many more because they wanted their town and their community and their family to have a chance in life that they unfairly were being denied. Fairness is something very high on the agenda of people in the red wall. So the idea they will still vote for the lying cheating mocking incompetent corrupt charlatan is breathtaking.
Boris Johnson is over. The Tory party can either accept this, replace him with someone who represents the values of both the party and the country and have a chance, or keep him and not only lose the election but smash the party into pieces.
The latest polls have the Tories on 33-35% and Labour with only a 3 to 5% lead and there were plenty of garden drinks party photos before that. That is more Cameron midterm polling, nowhere near pre 1997 polling.
The only hypothetical alternative leader polling from Opinium last month had a Truss or Gove led Tories polling worse than a Boris led Tories. Even a Sunak led Tories were only on 34% ie no better than they are polling now.
So the only one wrong on this is you. As long as Boris continues to impose no new restrictions, especially on the vaccinated, he will survive
Whom the Gods would destroy, they first make mad. If HYFUD prevails, then the Conservatives will face an extinction level event at the next general election. It never seems to occur to him that the opinion polls he consistently and complacently quotes are a lagging indicator.
Look most commentators on here hate Boris and did not even vote for him in 2019. Yet the 33 to 35% the Tories are still polling is still higher than the Tories got from 1997 to 2005, hardly extinction level
Not true, my guess would be about 60% of the active site voted for Johnson in 2019 and sub 20% intend to next time
Yebbut as HYUFD keeps saying mostd of that 60% - indeed also that 20% - aren't Real Tories anyway.
Exactly. You're only a real Tory if you vote Plaid Cymru to support Welsh secession from the Union.
Oh yes, and advocate the creation of an English Parliament and the secession of Antrim from the Union whiles at it.
An English parliament is perfectly compatible with the Union, just a Union based on equality that treats England the same as the other 3 home nations
Agreed.
Quite, which begs the quesiton why it isn't Tory policy.
Tory policy is “Get Brexit Done”, which is impossible, as Brexit will never be “done”.
Last I checked, the United Kingdom has left the European Union...
The UK was a member of the EU for best part of half a century. During that time, entry was never “done”.
Xenophobes can moan for decades on end. So can internationalists.
Contrasting "internationalists" with "xeonphobes" is not a convincing look.
Where “Internationalists” means “pro-EU”, despite that organisation being one of the most inward looking and protectionist of all international groupings.
Isn't it the case that if this isn't the end of him then the next thing or the next one or the next one will be? in other words it needs a mercy killing from the backbenchers now rather than later. He will not become a beacon of probity overnight will he?
You need Boris to swallow as much bad news as possible so that when the replacement comes he can pin all the disasters on Boris...
That time really isn't now and probably isn't May.
Was that ever true? Really? That you could stand two metres from someone if you didn’t know them but not if you did know them? It’s so long ago and much water has flowed under Westminster Bridge, but if that were ever true, it’s even more bonkers than I ever dared believe.
It is completely true. You were allowed to meet one person from outside your household as long as you stayed 2 metres apart. As you were allowed to beach, the park, on picnics etc etc on May 20, 2020 you were obviously going to be 2 metres from people that you did not know, and that was ok. Clearly the police were never going to enforce any of these rules.
Below is from the Guardian in May 2020. People are outraged that people who worked together all day went and stood in a garden with a beer.
This is what average people were doing in "the height of lockdown"
As pointed out frequently, at the time, the use of long lenses to foreshorten perspective and make people appear to be closer to each other than they really were, was a standard create-a-story tactic.
If you took a picture from a drone (say) above that beach, what you would see is family groups with space between them.
The estimates are that 80-90% of people obeyed most of the rules, most of the time.
The most hilarious one of the genre was shot on a London Underground platform, where a long lens was used to create the impression that about 30 people boarding an empty train was a mob. The capacity of such trains is over 1,000.....
The point is though the end of May 2020 was not the "height of lockdown" and you could sit on a beach 2 metres from everyone and drink beer.
It's worth looking at the Bournemouth Beach on Google Earth aerial views. Those groynes are getting on for 200m apart. Those people are nothing like as close together as they appear.
I remember going to Formby beach back in May 2020. I posted a few photos on facebook. Friends were baffled that they appeared to show no-one but my family on the beach. It occurred to me that I probably could have taken a photo which made it look crowded if I'd zoomed right in on one group - but really it wasn't in the least bit crowded. I expect this was fairly typical. Those trying to whip up hysteria about crowding on the beaches are some of the minor villains of the whole affair.
The Downing St garden, looking at Google maps, is around 30,000 sq ft. That’s room for more than 3,000 people all sitting 6’ apart!
Even if I’m wrong by 50%, and it’s only 15,000 sq ft, that gives 100 people 150 sq ft each, about 25’ from each other.
And we are back on dodgy maths. If it were 300 x 100 ft, then you could array people 50 x 15, so 750, if its a simple grid. That may not be the best space filling model, but I struggle to get that to 3000.
Dodgy maths indeed, but not mine. To be 6’ from one another, a person needs to sit in the middle of 9 sq ft, 3’ x 3’. People 6’ apart can nearly touch their fingers if they stretch.
Either way, the garden is way bigger than required for a socially distanced event, for people who have spent the day working in close proximity to each other indoors.
I was working on a packing structure, buy maybe the grid is a poor choice? You've gone with the circles, but that will also leave some gaps - the circles have holes around them! This used to be a 1st yr chemistry practical.
And looking again - each person with a 3 ft radius occupies 3.141 x 3 x 3, about 28 square ft. So up to 1000, but that ignores the gaps...
No; each person needs to be in a circle of radius 3.3 feet - it's 2m social distancing remember. That is an area of 35 square feet per person. Then you need to work out the 2-d close packing of those circles touching, which would 'waste' some of the garden space. To a crude approximation you could put each person in a square of 2 x 2m which would be 44 sq feet per person. 681 people. So TT has it about right. But then there is no way to get at the drinkies or food. So you need to make sure each person can access an open lane to the food etc - and that has to be two-way, with passing places at least - but they are getting pissed, so make it two way. THat makes half as many. And deduct a bit for the garden walls, fountains, stachoo of Churchill, etc. We're getting down to 300-odd.
Although this is a bit of a laugh, we genuinely were forced to do calculations like this to be allowed back into our chemistry research labs in July 2020. This despite the huge turnover of air via the fume hoods.
Have that feeling this may be the (last) straw that broke the camel's back.
I'm not sure, unless one of the big three resign (Rishi, Liz, The Saj) I don't see Boris falling. The first one of them to jump won't be the next leader though.
Just my gut instinct not a declamaTORY prediction. Don't expect any resignations nor the much fabled VoNC but there's a point where quitting really is the only option. Think we may now be there.
Men in grey suits about to call in with the proverbial bottle (of whisky) and revolver Lord JohnO?
Comments
If you are talking only about only Tesla cars: then AP cannot cope with all roads. The ones it can cope with tend to be things like highways - which are generally the safest roads. Most accidents will be occurring on roads where AP is not, or can not, be activated. Again, you need to try to ensure you are not comparing apples with oranges.
And that's if you believe Tesla's figures ...
It's one of the reasons I'm looking at other options when I go for an EV - everyone elses version of AP is currently a £4000 or so option with the other toys you get from the top of the range model.
But not when there needs to be a licenced and sober driver, just in case.
https://twitter.com/Mij_Europe/status/1480857180286898178?s=20
Many people at the same time complied with the rules at personal cost and reluctance. For example at this point I had only just been allowed to see my girlfriend again after 2 months - she felt that because of her job she had to observe the rules to the letter. If her, why not Number 10?
Having said that, I don't think this revelation makes much difference, except it is one more drip into the narrative. I still think Johnson survives because it's in nobody's interests to depose him (yet).
@sharkastic
Boris Johnson's hobby is making model buses and throwing Playmobil people under them
To me the discussion on the moral issue of it all with HYUFD was more important to me as I find that indefensible. As HYUFD rightly pointed out there is the comparison with the Republican party in the USA who are defending/accepting the indefensible. I hope we don't end up there. I think the Tories here are better than that.
At $12000 I suspect other cars are a better bet all round. Now we are probably more aware of things than elsewhere but I can never see Telsa getting to a point where a car can drive itself.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/is-this-for-real-downing-street-staff-criticised-no-10-party-at-the-time-leaked-messages-show/ar-AASEELu?ocid=entnewsntp
Well, ok - whooosh! I'm completely fogged over by a cold today (that's my excuse - I haven't even started on the hot toddies yet, though!). I thought it was paraphrasing of an actual statement. Maybe I've got long Covid without the Covid....
Re that Town Council election that has had more written on than most GEs:
What do you think would have been the reaction of the 4 Tory candidates if you told them what you had done and it had resulted in them all being unelected and how would you have defended that position?
Either way, the garden is way bigger than required for a socially distanced event, for people who have spent the day working in close proximity to each other indoors.
(Mr Kelly, formerly of this parish, is omitted from the survey sample.)
That's one of the things I dislike about Musk: Tesla cannot know that the hardware will allow them to do it, yet he says it can - and makes people pay for it.
https://twitter.com/radeksikorski/status/1480536745112444936
Get this, @RussianEmbassy, once and for all, in a language you can grasp. We were not orphaned by you because you were not our daddy. More of a serial rapist. Which is why you are not missed. And if you try it again, you'll get a kick in the balls.
The problem is that there are millions of little problems and a lot of them look like X until you suddenly discover it's actually Y and you are now in the wrong place.
And this all needs to be done within the car in milliseconds because there is no way anything remote can be allowed to make the decision.
My test for AP will be can you get from 2 places in Istanbul without crashing - until it can (and it will never be able to) its not close to 100%...
The coming talks in Geneva are bilateral, reviving old fears that the two Cold War powers will forge a deal on their own.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/10/world/europe/us-russia-europe-ukraine-nato.html
Truss probably leads to an outright Labour majority not the hung parliament of current polls. There is no guarantee removing Boris sees Sunak succeed him
Lord Geidt crumbled pretty quickly, though, and he was meant to be a chap of great integrity.
@MrHarryCole
·
8s
NEW: PM sends the Paymaster General Michael Ellis to answer Labour's UQ in the Commons..
Hospital pass.
Hospital pass.
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1480862688842506240
Somebody helpfully pointed I was standing roughly where the IRA mortar landed from the 1991 attack on Downing Street.
Macron has tried to get the EU a seat at the table and instead the US has decided to take it bilateral and exclude the other UNSC members as well. It was utterly predictable as well. The US has never liked dealing with the EU in any multi-party agreement because suddenly there's 27 different agendas to satisfy and now with Macron blurring the lines between national and EU foreign policy objectives I expect this will continue to happen.
🎵 Stay another day 🎵
Boris Johnson exit date
2022
Side
Sell
Stake
£40.00
£42.41
Price
2.06
Matched
£40.00
I think you're coming at this from a much more pragmatic angle than me.
And in all honesty I'm not totally convinced of the Lib Dems. They haven't exactly been loud in the interests of individual liberty. But they have consistently voted the way I would want them to.
What year was it he hid in Afghanistan to avoid having to keep a promise and resign, or break a promise and stay as FS?
2018?
Automated reply: "Unfortunately due to the volume of traffic our email server has collapsed."
@BethRigby
·
56m
Tory party mood dark
V senior Tory says: ‘It’s as bad as it gets. Fact Dowden was telling people what they couldn’t do from one room & less than hour later this was happening in garden is indefensible
Another: ‘Mood terrible -even those who profess loyalty to him are in despair
I LIKE the maths.
Pippa Crerar
@PippaCrerar
·
1h
Just a reminder that my DMs are open and I'm on Signal if you'd like to get in touch. I always protect my sources
You of course voted LD in 2019 anyway when Boris led the Tories to their biggest landslide since 1987
Exhausted apathy rather than anger.
Edit: Or were we 1m+ at that point? All academic anyway, as others have pointed out
I can't be alone in this. The country surely can't be divided neatly into those outraged by all of partygate and those outraged by none of it. There must be plenty like me who have thus far felt, "Hmm, not exactly the worst thing in the world" but have now moved to, "Oh ffs, that is unforgivable, how much more of this can we take?"
That really didn't work out but I still don't see him going as he won't resign and the Tories won't kick him out.
It's not so much the establishment protecting their own, as people protecting themselves. You don't appoint someone who is going to give a bad result. Unless you have lost control of the narrative to that point.
Say you have a case about some people pulling a statue down. If you really want them sent down, you don't knobble the judge.
You assign the case to Judge Jeffreys (descendent of same), who is famous for his book "All the bastards in my courtroom are guilty" and has a side hobby restoring gallows. Then act surprised when he sentences the defendants, the jury, the defending counsel and a number of spectators in the gallery to transportation to Australia....
More seriously - perhaps we're moving to the point where a Labour VONC would actually make sense. Normally they will just get voted down and the Opposition will look ineffective. But in this situation there will be Tory MPs who will be quite uncomfortable in voting that they really do have confidence in the PM, and if they do it can be used against them if he does subsequently need to resign.
That time really isn't now and probably isn't May.