Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
Apple could make a mockery of the regulation if they wanted to by switching to wireless charging only, and ending EU sales of legacy or cheaper models with lightning ports.
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
JRM is a moron, but not over this.
Phone manufacturers have already all but one merged on USB-C which was done so without the EU forcing them to do so, and they did so with their own motivations because it was the right thing to do (indeed since early in the 21st century phone manufacturers were collaborating together on how to come up with a universal design, before USB-C was even designed).
But there should be absolutely nothing preventing innovation. USB-C has a plethora of flaws in the design, the protocols are not universal and some plug converters and some cables won't work with some devices. Half my USB-C cables are not powerful enough to allow the Nintendo Switch to operate on the TV for instance.
If someone can come up with a newer and much better design and wants to lead with it first, lets call it USB-D for reference, then there should not be a law preventing USB-D coming onto the market and insisting people continue to use the far inferior USB-C at that point.
Problem is there won't be a USB-D as the design is about as far as good as you would sanely get.
What we will start to see is proper labelling of cables - which is essential because the plan for USB-C is to now support delivery of up to 240 watts (to power TVs and high power laptops).
Anyway, Daughter has had an interesting time applying for jobs on her return from holiday.
Lots of interviews. But some employers really need to up their game.
- One advertised a permanent job but when she turned up it turned out to be a short-term 8 week contract doing something completely different to what was advertised. - One well known hotel group spent half the interview bitching about its previous staff. On inquiry it turned out that most of their staff had only just been hired. - One place wanted her to do shifts of a duration which would be in breach of the rules. - Some don't bother to respond at all or leave it so long that they may as well not bother.
She has had a number of offers but two good ones, one in hospitality and one in events management. She's having a day with the latter this weekend to get to know the team and is, subject to no nasties being revealed, going to go with them. They had the most professional and friendly approach and are offering a good salary for a permanent job. Plus it gives her the best opportunity to expand her skills, network with a wide range of of people and learn about a new area, as well as giving her a bit of financial security.
So fingers crossed.
I know that finding good staff is not easy but treating applicants decently is the bare minimum. If Daughter could do it with her staff then more established employers can do the same.
Managing people, understanding them, motivating them, inspiring and leading them, teaching them, setting them a good example, setting them high expectations and making it clear what the boundaries are, what behaviour will not be accepted, what crosses the line, helping them get past their frailties, working effectively with them is hard work, the hardest work anyone ever has to do. And by far the most valuable – and rewarding.
It's the single most important thing employers need to do. Too many don't. Employees are people. Not "human resources". Ghastly phrase.
Rant over.
Employees are among our most valuable assets, right there after carbon paper.
I suppose a problem is people will never vote tactical quite so effectively at a GE, and fewer incumbent supporters will stay at home, but its still significant if voters mostly independently do what needs doing at a by election.
I think one of the things that makes tactical voting more likely in any future by-election is that LDs really like Starmer, and so the "Do you want this guy as your PM?" question that stopped LDs tactically endorsing Corbyn disappears. The bigger question for me is whether left leaning Labour voters who dislike Starmer decide to abstain, vote Lab or vote other party like Green (I can't imagine the LDs picking up votes to the left of Starmer unless they have another leadership change and Daisy Cooper ended up in charge).
For reference Starmer does better amongst LDs than Lab voters on issues of trustworthiness (very slightly), PM in waiting (also very slightly) and in his role as Lab leader (as of YouGov trackers).
I think in by-elections, there's a growing "anyone but Tory" mentality for huge swathes of the broad left, and vote lending in accordance with that. As long as they can agree who's best placed to win - not necessarily the previous second place - it's do-able. But that's going to be a more tricky principle to switch to a GE where you're electing a government.
I agree with that, but to the question of "could this be a long lasting phenomenon" I think the answer could be yes when it comes to LDs voting for Lab in areas they weren't willing to before in 2019. I think the bigger question is do LDs have the ability to reach Labour voters in seats where they are tactically in place to succeed. Or, indeed, the unasked part of this, would Tories abstain from voting as they did to help with Blair's surge back in 97 in a GE with Johnson with a likely Starmer led government as the other option (does the Scottish Nationalists still act as a bogeyman that allows Johnson to keep getting away with it).
"...do LDs have the ability to reach Labour voters in seats where they are tactically in place to succeed?"
I think this is what changed in North Shropshire. At the start of the campaign, there was a day or two of indignant "we were second in 2019, we're the bigger party, why would we play softball against a party who got 5 thousand votes last time?"-type comments from Labour.
And then the penny dropped that the very clear answer was "because they're waaaaaay better positioned to win Tory transfers, so if you all hold your noses together, you can give Boris and Owen and the candidate from Birmingham a kicking". Combined with a decent slate of Brexity right-wingers (which I see is replicated in T&H today), there's plenty of opportunity for the disaffected to peel off in either direction.
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
The only issue with USB-C is that it's already a mishmash of protocols which means you can't be sure that the cable you pick up from the pile can do what you want it to do.
There are USB-C cables rated for x watts so can't cope with y and others which are power only so can't be used for connecting item a to item b.
Some consistency in design there would have been helpful but it's too late now and too late change things.
Also, Thunderbolt over USB C leads to significant confusion.
Thunderbolt is just a grade A mess - mind you so is both intel and AMD's implementation of USB 4.
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
The only issue with USB-C is that it's already a mishmash of protocols which means you can't be sure that the cable you pick up from the pile can do what you want it to do.
There are USB-C cables rated for x watts so can't cope with y and others which are power only so can't be used for connecting item a to item b.
Some consistency in design there would have been helpful but it's too late now and too late change things.
That's actually not correct, because the phone also subscribes to the standard so a sub-standard cable will either be rejected or told to charge at a lower rate. The big plus of USB-C is that it is two way.
Of course you can buy dodgy USB-A cables too that damage things, this is however not a reason not to enforce a connector standard.
The brilliant thing is that Thunderbolt and USB now have the same connector, so anything you would want to connect, can be connected.
The fact that so many cables can be rejected by so many devices is part of the problem. As I said, our Switch will reject most of our "universal" cables - and when you're packing up to go away for a trip, you need to ensure which of the identical-looking cables is actually an acceptable one and which isn't. So much for "universality".
But either way, there is no justification to "enforce" a standard. The standard has already been agreed, voluntarily, by every company barring Apple pretty much and even Apple are implementing USB-C on more devices nowadays. But USB-C is not the be-all and end-all. Why enforce crappy standards now, in law, when they're already being used when better standards with fewer flaws and better utility might be around the corner?
If someone can design a USB-D, why should that be barred from going on the market.
This is absolutely a bonus of Brexit. We can keep using USB-C, as its the standard, which we already have available. But if anyone wants to innovate, they're entitled to do so in the UK first while the sclerotic EU will have to lag behind and update their standards when the time comes.
So, so thanks for asking. I pulled something in my back last week, coincidentally on my last day of my thirties. I felt it go as it happened. Its gotten progressively worse this week and really hurts to move now.
I hope this is just a temporary strain and isn't what its going to be like throughout forties onwards 😂
How are you?
Get well soon, I completely sympathise. I can’t hold anything in my left hand right now after Tuesday’s argument with a car bumper so I had an enjoyable morning ordering PhD students and a couple of professors around a field site.
Ouch, I hope you get well soon too.
Mine embarrassingly enough was a run in with a shopping trolley and a six year old. I was putting my daughter in the seat which she still loves to sit in, when she suddenly decided she didn't want to be in the seat and jerked to get herself into the trolley itself, without warning. I felt something go in my back then and there, it wasn't too bad for the next couple of days, but its been really bad all week this week. Hope it passes soon.
So, so thanks for asking. I pulled something in my back last week, coincidentally on my last day of my thirties. I felt it go as it happened. Its gotten progressively worse this week and really hurts to move now.
I hope this is just a temporary strain and isn't what its going to be like throughout forties onwards 😂
How are you?
Get well soon, I completely sympathise. I can’t hold anything in my left hand right now after Tuesday’s argument with a car bumper so I had an enjoyable morning ordering PhD students and a couple of professors around a field site.
Ouch, I hope you get well soon too.
Mine embarrassingly enough was a run in with a shopping trolley and a six year old. I was putting my daughter in the seat which she still loves to sit in, when she suddenly decided she didn't want to be in the seat and jerked to get herself into the trolley itself, without warning. I felt something go in my back then and there, it wasn't too bad for the next couple of days, but its been really bad all week this week. Hope it passes soon.
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
The only issue with USB-C is that it's already a mishmash of protocols which means you can't be sure that the cable you pick up from the pile can do what you want it to do.
There are USB-C cables rated for x watts so can't cope with y and others which are power only so can't be used for connecting item a to item b.
Some consistency in design there would have been helpful but it's too late now and too late change things.
That's actually not correct, because the phone also subscribes to the standard so a sub-standard cable will either be rejected or told to charge at a lower rate. The big plus of USB-C is that it is two way.
Of course you can buy dodgy USB-A cables too that damage things, this is however not a reason not to enforce a connector standard.
The brilliant thing is that Thunderbolt and USB now have the same connector, so anything you would want to connect, can be connected.
The fact that so many cables can be rejected by so many devices is part of the problem. As I said, our Switch will reject most of our "universal" cables - and when you're packing up to go away for a trip, you need to ensure which of the identical-looking cables is actually an acceptable one and which isn't. So much for "universality".
But either way, there is no justification to "enforce" a standard. The standard has already been agreed, voluntarily, by every company barring Apple pretty much and even Apple are implementing USB-C on more devices nowadays. But USB-C is not the be-all and end-all. Why enforce crappy standards now, in law, when they're already being used when better standards with fewer flaws and better utility might be around the corner?
If someone can design a USB-D, why should that be barred from going on the market.
This is absolutely a bonus of Brexit. We can keep using USB-C, as its the standard, which we already have available. But if anyone wants to innovate, they're entitled to do so in the UK first while the sclerotic EU will have to lag behind and update their standards when the time comes.
USB-D would be a complete waste of time and would not serve any useful purpose.
A refinement of the USB-C standard is what is required, not another connector.
What's interesting with onshore wind is the very differing regional variations for it.
Drive along the M56 and there are a lot of wind turbines available, especially around Runcorn. Along the M58 there is a fair amount too.
Drive along the M6, especially north of Preston, and its much, much rarer in comparison.
Areas that were used to lots of industry seem to have absolutely no qualms with turbines.
For me, I love onshore wind turbines. They're just a part of the background, like power pylons, but they look nice too. Especially compared to the alternative, I used to have to drive past Fiddlers Ferry power station on a daily basis and my car would turn from red to grey due to the amount of emissions from the power station that would land on my car. That can't be good for your breath either, I'd assume. So that area being covered in turbines rather than Fiddlers Ferry operating is a mammoth improvement. 👍
Solve the intermittency problem, and you can build all the wind turbines you want.
Right now you can't.
What intermittency problem?
As it stands 100% of the energy produced is able to be either consumed, stored or exported - and its economically far, far cheaper than either gas or coal. Even before the recent commodity spike in costs it already was, now its even cheaper.
So how is that a problem? If we were generating energy we couldn't use, that'd be a problem, but we're not.
Er....sometimes the wind doesn't blow, and the turbines don't go around. But we still need the electricity.....??
The Telegraph reckons if we get a wind drought of the order of some of the recent ones, then we are looking at blackouts this winter. That's why Kwarteng is leaning on some existing power sources not to shut down.
When the turbines can store some of the energy during windy times, via green ammonia or new battery technology that does not exist yet, then you will have a strong case.
But how is that a problem?
We already have a strong case, because wind is so cheap. When wind is blowing, you can use wind, when wind isn't blowing, you can use gas, but wind is far cheaper than gas.
Having gas etc available as a backup when wind isn't blowing is only logical, but that's not a reason to use the far more expensive gas all the time, rather than using the far cheaper wind when it is blowing now, is it?
In the longer term if you wish to eliminate CCGT's then you'll need a viable alternative, but in the shorter term there is literally no reason not to be using the much cheaper onshore wind.
The government's has a net zero by 2050 target though and that entails having precisely zero gas backup. Or oil backup. Or coal backup. or any backup except solar and nuclear??
Its not going to be anywhere near enough. Its not in the same ballpark as enough.
By 2050, yes. We aren't in 2050, we're in 2022.
By 2050 there will be lots more energy storage, some is already getting built and much more is being developed. There will be TWh of storage from electric vehicles alone, and if homes have their own storage each (increasingly cheap and common, especially if used in conjunction with electric vehicles) then that will expand storage even more. So by 2050 its certainly plausible we can be using wind energy when the wind isn't blowing.
In the meantime though, in 2022, we can use wind instead of gas when the wind is blowing. Agreed?
How frequently do you need to turn the gas power stations on and off to deal with the wind or lack of it?
Me? Never. I switch my lights on, or TV on, or computer on etc, and they come on.
I couldn't care less whether my electricity supply is getting switched from gas to wind and vice-versa once, ten times or a thousand times a day, so long as my supply is uninterrupted, and it is, and its as cheap as possible - which means using as much wind as possible, and as little gas as possible.
What about you?
Hilarity aside, what I mean is how quickly can power supply from gas be ramped up or wound down to compensate for the vagaries of wind power production? I don't know, just asking.
A subsequent post of yours was shaky on this issue imo - you said (correctly) that electrical cars and similar charging could be down at times of increased electricity supply, but that means overnight, not be waiting until it's windy.
I think one of the things that makes tactical voting more likely in any future by-election is that LDs really like Starmer, and so the "Do you want this guy as your PM?" question that stopped LDs tactically endorsing Corbyn disappears. The bigger question for me is whether left leaning Labour voters who dislike Starmer decide to abstain, vote Lab or vote other party like Green (I can't imagine the LDs picking up votes to the left of Starmer unless they have another leadership change and Daisy Cooper ended up in charge).
For reference Starmer does better amongst LDs than Lab voters on issues of trustworthiness (very slightly), PM in waiting (also very slightly) and in his role as Lab leader (as of YouGov trackers).
I think in by-elections, there's a growing "anyone but Tory" mentality for huge swathes of the broad left, and vote lending in accordance with that. As long as they can agree who's best placed to win - not necessarily the previous second place - it's do-able. But that's going to be a more tricky principle to switch to a GE where you're electing a government.
Do you include Gaulkeists and Grievesters in your "broad left" church?
Probably in by-elections, certainly with BJ at the helm. I can see a lot returning for a GE under a different leader.
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
JRM is a moron, but not over this.
Phone manufacturers have already all but one merged on USB-C which was done so without the EU forcing them to do so, and they did so with their own motivations because it was the right thing to do (indeed since early in the 21st century phone manufacturers were collaborating together on how to come up with a universal design, before USB-C was even designed).
But there should be absolutely nothing preventing innovation. USB-C has a plethora of flaws in the design, the protocols are not universal and some plug converters and some cables won't work with some devices. Half my USB-C cables are not powerful enough to allow the Nintendo Switch to operate on the TV for instance.
If someone can come up with a newer and much better design and wants to lead with it first, lets call it USB-D for reference, then there should not be a law preventing USB-D coming onto the market and insisting people continue to use the far inferior USB-C at that point.
Problem is there won't be a USB-D as the design is about as far as good as you would sanely get.
What we will start to see is proper labelling of cables - which is essential because the plan for USB-C is to now support delivery of up to 240 watts (to power TVs and high power laptops).
Never say never.
If there's no USB-D, then fine, we keep using USB-C as we already are and the market operates and nobody comes up with alternative cables as they don't want to be locked out of using what everyone else already uses (which is why even Apple are now supplying USB-C devices).
But if someone does come up with something better, then innovation shouldn't be legally verboten.
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
The only issue with USB-C is that it's already a mishmash of protocols which means you can't be sure that the cable you pick up from the pile can do what you want it to do.
There are USB-C cables rated for x watts so can't cope with y and others which are power only so can't be used for connecting item a to item b.
Some consistency in design there would have been helpful but it's too late now and too late change things.
That's actually not correct, because the phone also subscribes to the standard so a sub-standard cable will either be rejected or told to charge at a lower rate. The big plus of USB-C is that it is two way.
Of course you can buy dodgy USB-A cables too that damage things, this is however not a reason not to enforce a connector standard.
The brilliant thing is that Thunderbolt and USB now have the same connector, so anything you would want to connect, can be connected.
The fact that so many cables can be rejected by so many devices is part of the problem. As I said, our Switch will reject most of our "universal" cables - and when you're packing up to go away for a trip, you need to ensure which of the identical-looking cables is actually an acceptable one and which isn't. So much for "universality".
But either way, there is no justification to "enforce" a standard. The standard has already been agreed, voluntarily, by every company barring Apple pretty much and even Apple are implementing USB-C on more devices nowadays. But USB-C is not the be-all and end-all. Why enforce crappy standards now, in law, when they're already being used when better standards with fewer flaws and better utility might be around the corner?
If someone can design a USB-D, why should that be barred from going on the market.
This is absolutely a bonus of Brexit. We can keep using USB-C, as its the standard, which we already have available. But if anyone wants to innovate, they're entitled to do so in the UK first while the sclerotic EU will have to lag behind and update their standards when the time comes.
USB-D would be a complete waste of time and would not serve any useful purpose.
A refinement of the USB-C standard is what is required, not another connector.
That’s what was said when the USB-A connector came out, that we would never need another one.
No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.
Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph? My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.
Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....
What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?
Firstly, it may well be that betting markets have overcorrected.
But that doesn't mean it's all narrative and no facts.
JonWC saying he's seen relatively little activity is interesting, although it doesn't really tie up with numbers of activists piling in and some other responses and vox pops from the area. I think he's said he is in one of the local villages, and it seems conceivable (and perhaps unsurprising) that the Tiverton, Honiton and Cullompton have seen disproportionate action. I do think there is good evidence it's had a strong Lib Dem campaign as seen in two recent, successful efforts.
The mood music also matters. The Lib Dem campaign team presumably have a decent amount and quality of data. Not perfect, and turnout matters a lot, but decent. If they felt they were coming up short based on that data, they'd be trying to reposition - all the "a mountain to climb", "give them a scare", "strong Brexit area", "never mind the win, look at the swing" stuff would come in. That isn't happening. It's quite possible they've misjudged it - parties do - but these are people with a lot of data behaving as if they are looking at the hat-trick.
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
The only issue with USB-C is that it's already a mishmash of protocols which means you can't be sure that the cable you pick up from the pile can do what you want it to do.
There are USB-C cables rated for x watts so can't cope with y and others which are power only so can't be used for connecting item a to item b.
Some consistency in design there would have been helpful but it's too late now and too late change things.
That's actually not correct, because the phone also subscribes to the standard so a sub-standard cable will either be rejected or told to charge at a lower rate. The big plus of USB-C is that it is two way.
Of course you can buy dodgy USB-A cables too that damage things, this is however not a reason not to enforce a connector standard.
The brilliant thing is that Thunderbolt and USB now have the same connector, so anything you would want to connect, can be connected.
The fact that so many cables can be rejected by so many devices is part of the problem. As I said, our Switch will reject most of our "universal" cables - and when you're packing up to go away for a trip, you need to ensure which of the identical-looking cables is actually an acceptable one and which isn't. So much for "universality".
But either way, there is no justification to "enforce" a standard. The standard has already been agreed, voluntarily, by every company barring Apple pretty much and even Apple are implementing USB-C on more devices nowadays. But USB-C is not the be-all and end-all. Why enforce crappy standards now, in law, when they're already being used when better standards with fewer flaws and better utility might be around the corner?
If someone can design a USB-D, why should that be barred from going on the market.
This is absolutely a bonus of Brexit. We can keep using USB-C, as its the standard, which we already have available. But if anyone wants to innovate, they're entitled to do so in the UK first while the sclerotic EU will have to lag behind and update their standards when the time comes.
USB-D would be a complete waste of time and would not serve any useful purpose.
A refinement of the USB-C standard is what is required, not another connector.
That’s what was said when the USB-A connector came out, that we would never need another one.
Shortly afterwards, someone wondered what to do with the other end of the cable and USB-B was born
I think one of the things that makes tactical voting more likely in any future by-election is that LDs really like Starmer, and so the "Do you want this guy as your PM?" question that stopped LDs tactically endorsing Corbyn disappears. The bigger question for me is whether left leaning Labour voters who dislike Starmer decide to abstain, vote Lab or vote other party like Green (I can't imagine the LDs picking up votes to the left of Starmer unless they have another leadership change and Daisy Cooper ended up in charge).
For reference Starmer does better amongst LDs than Lab voters on issues of trustworthiness (very slightly), PM in waiting (also very slightly) and in his role as Lab leader (as of YouGov trackers).
I think in by-elections, there's a growing "anyone but Tory" mentality for huge swathes of the broad left, and vote lending in accordance with that. As long as they can agree who's best placed to win - not necessarily the previous second place - it's do-able. But that's going to be a more tricky principle to switch to a GE where you're electing a government.
I agree with that, but to the question of "could this be a long lasting phenomenon" I think the answer could be yes when it comes to LDs voting for Lab in areas they weren't willing to before in 2019. I think the bigger question is do LDs have the ability to reach Labour voters in seats where they are tactically in place to succeed. Or, indeed, the unasked part of this, would Tories abstain from voting as they did to help with Blair's surge back in 97 in a GE with Johnson with a likely Starmer led government as the other option (does the Scottish Nationalists still act as a bogeyman that allows Johnson to keep getting away with it).
"...do LDs have the ability to reach Labour voters in seats where they are tactically in place to succeed?"
I think this is what changed in North Shropshire. At the start of the campaign, there was a day or two of indignant "we were second in 2019, we're the bigger party, why would we play softball against a party who got 5 thousand votes last time?"-type comments from Labour.
And then the penny dropped that the very clear answer was "because they're waaaaaay better positioned to win Tory transfers, so if you all hold your noses together, you can give Boris and Owen and the candidate from Birmingham a kicking". Combined with a decent slate of Brexity right-wingers (which I see is replicated in T&H today), there's plenty of opportunity for the disaffected to peel off in either direction.
But does that hold at GE? At GE I would assume Ed Davies actually being interviewed on tv and being important, and I doubt there will be an "I agree with Ed" moment al la 2010. So do the LDs have to offer something other than "just give the Tories a kicking" that appeals to traditional Labour voters? I'm thinking back to the pre coalition time where the LDs were seen as being to the left of Labour on some issues, I'm wondering if an open acceptance that of course Ed won't be PM, but would push for and support Labour on x, y and z policies. Things that the liberal centre found unacceptable doing when Corbyn was LOTO.
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
The only issue with USB-C is that it's already a mishmash of protocols which means you can't be sure that the cable you pick up from the pile can do what you want it to do.
There are USB-C cables rated for x watts so can't cope with y and others which are power only so can't be used for connecting item a to item b.
Some consistency in design there would have been helpful but it's too late now and too late change things.
That's actually not correct, because the phone also subscribes to the standard so a sub-standard cable will either be rejected or told to charge at a lower rate. The big plus of USB-C is that it is two way.
Of course you can buy dodgy USB-A cables too that damage things, this is however not a reason not to enforce a connector standard.
The brilliant thing is that Thunderbolt and USB now have the same connector, so anything you would want to connect, can be connected.
The fact that so many cables can be rejected by so many devices is part of the problem. As I said, our Switch will reject most of our "universal" cables - and when you're packing up to go away for a trip, you need to ensure which of the identical-looking cables is actually an acceptable one and which isn't. So much for "universality".
But either way, there is no justification to "enforce" a standard. The standard has already been agreed, voluntarily, by every company barring Apple pretty much and even Apple are implementing USB-C on more devices nowadays. But USB-C is not the be-all and end-all. Why enforce crappy standards now, in law, when they're already being used when better standards with fewer flaws and better utility might be around the corner?
If someone can design a USB-D, why should that be barred from going on the market.
This is absolutely a bonus of Brexit. We can keep using USB-C, as its the standard, which we already have available. But if anyone wants to innovate, they're entitled to do so in the UK first while the sclerotic EU will have to lag behind and update their standards when the time comes.
USB-D would be a complete waste of time and would not serve any useful purpose.
A refinement of the USB-C standard is what is required, not another connector.
That’s what was said when the USB-A connector came out, that we would never need another one.
USB-A was never sold as being a standard for all devices. USB-C is.
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
News you won't read in Britain today.
PMIs show Germany and France growth slowing to a crawl, as the ECB thinks about moving rates from current negative levels back to zero. Inflation at 8% (estimated).
Far from stagflation says the central bank. Far from reality, more like.
What's interesting with onshore wind is the very differing regional variations for it.
Drive along the M56 and there are a lot of wind turbines available, especially around Runcorn. Along the M58 there is a fair amount too.
Drive along the M6, especially north of Preston, and its much, much rarer in comparison.
Areas that were used to lots of industry seem to have absolutely no qualms with turbines.
For me, I love onshore wind turbines. They're just a part of the background, like power pylons, but they look nice too. Especially compared to the alternative, I used to have to drive past Fiddlers Ferry power station on a daily basis and my car would turn from red to grey due to the amount of emissions from the power station that would land on my car. That can't be good for your breath either, I'd assume. So that area being covered in turbines rather than Fiddlers Ferry operating is a mammoth improvement. 👍
Solve the intermittency problem, and you can build all the wind turbines you want.
Right now you can't.
What intermittency problem?
As it stands 100% of the energy produced is able to be either consumed, stored or exported - and its economically far, far cheaper than either gas or coal. Even before the recent commodity spike in costs it already was, now its even cheaper.
So how is that a problem? If we were generating energy we couldn't use, that'd be a problem, but we're not.
Er....sometimes the wind doesn't blow, and the turbines don't go around. But we still need the electricity.....??
The Telegraph reckons if we get a wind drought of the order of some of the recent ones, then we are looking at blackouts this winter. That's why Kwarteng is leaning on some existing power sources not to shut down.
When the turbines can store some of the energy during windy times, via green ammonia or new battery technology that does not exist yet, then you will have a strong case.
But how is that a problem?
We already have a strong case, because wind is so cheap. When wind is blowing, you can use wind, when wind isn't blowing, you can use gas, but wind is far cheaper than gas.
Having gas etc available as a backup when wind isn't blowing is only logical, but that's not a reason to use the far more expensive gas all the time, rather than using the far cheaper wind when it is blowing now, is it?
In the longer term if you wish to eliminate CCGT's then you'll need a viable alternative, but in the shorter term there is literally no reason not to be using the much cheaper onshore wind.
The government's has a net zero by 2050 target though and that entails having precisely zero gas backup. Or oil backup. Or coal backup. or any backup except solar and nuclear??
Its not going to be anywhere near enough. Its not in the same ballpark as enough.
By 2050, yes. We aren't in 2050, we're in 2022.
By 2050 there will be lots more energy storage, some is already getting built and much more is being developed. There will be TWh of storage from electric vehicles alone, and if homes have their own storage each (increasingly cheap and common, especially if used in conjunction with electric vehicles) then that will expand storage even more. So by 2050 its certainly plausible we can be using wind energy when the wind isn't blowing.
In the meantime though, in 2022, we can use wind instead of gas when the wind is blowing. Agreed?
How frequently do you need to turn the gas power stations on and off to deal with the wind or lack of it?
Me? Never. I switch my lights on, or TV on, or computer on etc, and they come on.
I couldn't care less whether my electricity supply is getting switched from gas to wind and vice-versa once, ten times or a thousand times a day, so long as my supply is uninterrupted, and it is, and its as cheap as possible - which means using as much wind as possible, and as little gas as possible.
What about you?
Hilarity aside, what I mean is how quickly can power supply from gas be ramped up or wound down to compensate for the vagaries of wind power production? I don't know, just asking.
A subsequent post of yours was shaky on this issue imo - you said (correctly) that electrical cars and similar charging could be down at times of increased electricity supply, but that means overnight, not be waiting until it's windy.
Yes, gas turbines can spin up in minutes. Coal takes much longer and nuclear the longest. The fastest is hydro which can be moving in seconds. We pump water uphill during the day with excess load to store it for filling fast grid transients (like the TV pickup when Eastenders finishes and everyone puts the kettle on).
What's interesting with onshore wind is the very differing regional variations for it.
Drive along the M56 and there are a lot of wind turbines available, especially around Runcorn. Along the M58 there is a fair amount too.
Drive along the M6, especially north of Preston, and its much, much rarer in comparison.
Areas that were used to lots of industry seem to have absolutely no qualms with turbines.
For me, I love onshore wind turbines. They're just a part of the background, like power pylons, but they look nice too. Especially compared to the alternative, I used to have to drive past Fiddlers Ferry power station on a daily basis and my car would turn from red to grey due to the amount of emissions from the power station that would land on my car. That can't be good for your breath either, I'd assume. So that area being covered in turbines rather than Fiddlers Ferry operating is a mammoth improvement. 👍
Solve the intermittency problem, and you can build all the wind turbines you want.
Right now you can't.
What intermittency problem?
As it stands 100% of the energy produced is able to be either consumed, stored or exported - and its economically far, far cheaper than either gas or coal. Even before the recent commodity spike in costs it already was, now its even cheaper.
So how is that a problem? If we were generating energy we couldn't use, that'd be a problem, but we're not.
Er....sometimes the wind doesn't blow, and the turbines don't go around. But we still need the electricity.....??
The Telegraph reckons if we get a wind drought of the order of some of the recent ones, then we are looking at blackouts this winter. That's why Kwarteng is leaning on some existing power sources not to shut down.
When the turbines can store some of the energy during windy times, via green ammonia or new battery technology that does not exist yet, then you will have a strong case.
But how is that a problem?
We already have a strong case, because wind is so cheap. When wind is blowing, you can use wind, when wind isn't blowing, you can use gas, but wind is far cheaper than gas.
Having gas etc available as a backup when wind isn't blowing is only logical, but that's not a reason to use the far more expensive gas all the time, rather than using the far cheaper wind when it is blowing now, is it?
In the longer term if you wish to eliminate CCGT's then you'll need a viable alternative, but in the shorter term there is literally no reason not to be using the much cheaper onshore wind.
The government's has a net zero by 2050 target though and that entails having precisely zero gas backup. Or oil backup. Or coal backup. or any backup except solar and nuclear??
Its not going to be anywhere near enough. Its not in the same ballpark as enough.
By 2050, yes. We aren't in 2050, we're in 2022.
By 2050 there will be lots more energy storage, some is already getting built and much more is being developed. There will be TWh of storage from electric vehicles alone, and if homes have their own storage each (increasingly cheap and common, especially if used in conjunction with electric vehicles) then that will expand storage even more. So by 2050 its certainly plausible we can be using wind energy when the wind isn't blowing.
In the meantime though, in 2022, we can use wind instead of gas when the wind is blowing. Agreed?
How frequently do you need to turn the gas power stations on and off to deal with the wind or lack of it?
Me? Never. I switch my lights on, or TV on, or computer on etc, and they come on.
I couldn't care less whether my electricity supply is getting switched from gas to wind and vice-versa once, ten times or a thousand times a day, so long as my supply is uninterrupted, and it is, and its as cheap as possible - which means using as much wind as possible, and as little gas as possible.
What about you?
Hilarity aside, what I mean is how quickly can power supply from gas be ramped up or wound down to compensate for the vagaries of wind power production? I don't know, just asking.
A subsequent post of yours was shaky on this issue imo - you said (correctly) that electrical cars and similar charging could be down at times of increased electricity supply, but that means overnight, not be waiting until it's windy.
When you have lots of wind turbines the variation in output is reasonably easy to predict far in advance. They don't just happen randomly.
The grid is already capable of coping when an entire nuclear power plant instantly trips off the grid in one go. Ramping up back-up supply to cover variations in wind output is a lot easier.
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
News you won't read in Britain today.
PMIs show Germany and France growth slowing to a crawl, as the ECB thinks about moving rates from current negative levels back to zero. Inflation at 8% (estimated).
Far from stagflation says the central bank. Far from reality, more like.
Its not just Britain.
The UK has lower growth than every other country other than Russia. Tories suck on the economy
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
The only issue with USB-C is that it's already a mishmash of protocols which means you can't be sure that the cable you pick up from the pile can do what you want it to do.
There are USB-C cables rated for x watts so can't cope with y and others which are power only so can't be used for connecting item a to item b.
Some consistency in design there would have been helpful but it's too late now and too late change things.
That's actually not correct, because the phone also subscribes to the standard so a sub-standard cable will either be rejected or told to charge at a lower rate. The big plus of USB-C is that it is two way.
Of course you can buy dodgy USB-A cables too that damage things, this is however not a reason not to enforce a connector standard.
The brilliant thing is that Thunderbolt and USB now have the same connector, so anything you would want to connect, can be connected.
The fact that so many cables can be rejected by so many devices is part of the problem. As I said, our Switch will reject most of our "universal" cables - and when you're packing up to go away for a trip, you need to ensure which of the identical-looking cables is actually an acceptable one and which isn't. So much for "universality".
But either way, there is no justification to "enforce" a standard. The standard has already been agreed, voluntarily, by every company barring Apple pretty much and even Apple are implementing USB-C on more devices nowadays. But USB-C is not the be-all and end-all. Why enforce crappy standards now, in law, when they're already being used when better standards with fewer flaws and better utility might be around the corner?
If someone can design a USB-D, why should that be barred from going on the market.
This is absolutely a bonus of Brexit. We can keep using USB-C, as its the standard, which we already have available. But if anyone wants to innovate, they're entitled to do so in the UK first while the sclerotic EU will have to lag behind and update their standards when the time comes.
USB-D would be a complete waste of time and would not serve any useful purpose.
A refinement of the USB-C standard is what is required, not another connector.
Why?
The history of IT is full of people improving upon standards and coming up with better alternatives.
It might be that USB-C is the be-all and end-all which can never be improved upon. Great, if so, then the market will operate that way and that will be the end of the matter, so there's no reason for legislators to get involved.
But in the event that someone can come up with an innovative, superior standard, that does serve a useful purpose, why should that be barred from sale by law?
So, so thanks for asking. I pulled something in my back last week, coincidentally on my last day of my thirties. I felt it go as it happened. Its gotten progressively worse this week and really hurts to move now.
I hope this is just a temporary strain and isn't what its going to be like throughout forties onwards 😂
How are you?
Get well soon, I completely sympathise. I can’t hold anything in my left hand right now after Tuesday’s argument with a car bumper so I had an enjoyable morning ordering PhD students and a couple of professors around a field site.
Ouch, I hope you get well soon too.
Mine embarrassingly enough was a run in with a shopping trolley and a six year old. I was putting my daughter in the seat which she still loves to sit in, when she suddenly decided she didn't want to be in the seat and jerked to get herself into the trolley itself, without warning. I felt something go in my back then and there, it wasn't too bad for the next couple of days, but its been really bad all week this week. Hope it passes soon.
See a physio for any kind of vaguely persistent back problems. A fucked up back is one of those things you really, really don’t want later in life. Fix it now, before it becomes an issue.
Get some back strengthening exercises recommended for you, as well.
By-election day in #TivertonandHoniton , so let me tell about their former MP, who was once one of the most famous people in England, a national hero, a disgraced fraudster, and an astonishingly accomplished piratical maniac.
No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.
Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph? My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.
Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....
What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?
My gut says narrow Tory hold - winning by 1-3,000 votes.
I think the constituency has been difficult for the LDs to blanket with activists, the offence committed by the former MP is relatively minor, and the Labour tactical votes probably not there.
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
The only issue with USB-C is that it's already a mishmash of protocols which means you can't be sure that the cable you pick up from the pile can do what you want it to do.
There are USB-C cables rated for x watts so can't cope with y and others which are power only so can't be used for connecting item a to item b.
Some consistency in design there would have been helpful but it's too late now and too late change things.
That's actually not correct, because the phone also subscribes to the standard so a sub-standard cable will either be rejected or told to charge at a lower rate. The big plus of USB-C is that it is two way.
Of course you can buy dodgy USB-A cables too that damage things, this is however not a reason not to enforce a connector standard.
The brilliant thing is that Thunderbolt and USB now have the same connector, so anything you would want to connect, can be connected.
The fact that so many cables can be rejected by so many devices is part of the problem. As I said, our Switch will reject most of our "universal" cables - and when you're packing up to go away for a trip, you need to ensure which of the identical-looking cables is actually an acceptable one and which isn't. So much for "universality".
But either way, there is no justification to "enforce" a standard. The standard has already been agreed, voluntarily, by every company barring Apple pretty much and even Apple are implementing USB-C on more devices nowadays. But USB-C is not the be-all and end-all. Why enforce crappy standards now, in law, when they're already being used when better standards with fewer flaws and better utility might be around the corner?
If someone can design a USB-D, why should that be barred from going on the market.
This is absolutely a bonus of Brexit. We can keep using USB-C, as its the standard, which we already have available. But if anyone wants to innovate, they're entitled to do so in the UK first while the sclerotic EU will have to lag behind and update their standards when the time comes.
USB-D would be a complete waste of time and would not serve any useful purpose.
A refinement of the USB-C standard is what is required, not another connector.
That’s what was said when the USB-A connector came out, that we would never need another one.
USB-A was never sold as being a standard for all devices. USB-C is.
Yes, but why can't USB-C be inferior, theoretically, to a potential USB-D?
USB-B was approaching a universal standard for all devices before it was replaced by USB-C, so if it had been one, then should USB-C have been banned by law?
No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.
Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph? My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.
Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....
What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?
My gut says narrow Tory hold - winning by 1-3,000 votes.
I think the constituency has been difficult for the LDs to blanket with activists, the offence committed by the former MP is relatively minor, and the Labour tactical votes probably not there.
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
News you won't read in Britain today.
PMIs show Germany and France growth slowing to a crawl, as the ECB thinks about moving rates from current negative levels back to zero. Inflation at 8% (estimated).
Far from stagflation says the central bank. Far from reality, more like.
Its not just Britain.
The UK has lower growth than every other country other than Russia. Tories suck on the economy
That's a forecast. If you believe it to be absolutely true, you could probably make some decent money betting on it.
Even a wager on the Tories winning Wakefield might be better value, though.
No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.
Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph? My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.
Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....
What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?
Firstly, it may well be that betting markets have overcorrected.
But that doesn't mean it's all narrative and no facts.
JonWC saying he's seen relatively little activity is interesting, although it doesn't really tie up with numbers of activists piling in and some other responses and vox pops from the area. I think he's said he is in one of the local villages, and it seems conceivable (and perhaps unsurprising) that the Tiverton, Honiton and Cullompton have seen disproportionate action. I do think there is good evidence it's had a strong Lib Dem campaign as seen in two recent, successful efforts.
The mood music also matters. The Lib Dem campaign team presumably have a decent amount and quality of data. Not perfect, and turnout matters a lot, but decent. If they felt they were coming up short based on that data, they'd be trying to reposition - all the "a mountain to climb", "give them a scare", "strong Brexit area", "never mind the win, look at the swing" stuff would come in. That isn't happening. It's quite possible they've misjudged it - parties do - but these are people with a lot of data behaving as if they are looking at the hat-trick.
You can't really get away with getting smashed in the villages here though - they are about 35pct of the total electors and more of the likely voters. Plus the town I have seen nothing from is actually the third biggest, after Tiverton and Honiton. It is one of only 4 polling districts the LDs appear to have matched or bettered the Tories in the only time they got any worthwhile vote, and the other three were all villages and include the one I live in!
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
News you won't read in Britain today.
PMIs show Germany and France growth slowing to a crawl, as the ECB thinks about moving rates from current negative levels back to zero. Inflation at 8% (estimated).
Far from stagflation says the central bank. Far from reality, more like.
Its not just Britain.
The UK has lower growth than every other country other than Russia. Tories suck on the economy
That's a forecast. If you believe it to be absolutely true, you could probably make some decent money betting on it.
Even a wager on the Tories winning Wakefield might be better value, though.
Its also a relatively meaningless forecast.
The UK was one of the first countries out of lockdown, so had the fastest growth. Subsequently now, other countries which were laggards out of lockdown are now forecast to be having their recovery growth that the UK has already had.
One of the worst things that partisans love to do is use these one year forecasts as international cock swinging measurement. What is far more interesting is growth over a period of time, but then most forecasts fall down upon what assumptions the forecaster has put into their model.
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
Apple could make a mockery of the regulation if they wanted to by switching to wireless charging only, and ending EU sales of legacy or cheaper models with lightning ports.
They’ve long been heading that way - biggest cause of damage/failover in phones is related to the connection port. Not the screen, surprisingly.
Wireless charging would allow a fully sealed unit - both mics and speakers can have sealing membranes.
No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.
Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph? My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.
Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....
What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?
My gut says narrow Tory hold - winning by 1-3,000 votes.
I think the constituency has been difficult for the LDs to blanket with activists, the offence committed by the former MP is relatively minor, and the Labour tactical votes probably not there.
OTOH on that sort of narrowness the Tories could go to town on the subject of tractorophilia. Not so much looking it up in Kraft-Ebing but how they use it in what they come out with tonight:
"We won despite the gross depths of tractor porn - it is a glorious victory for us." "We lost thanks to the gross filthiness of tractor porn, just a one-off, will never be repeated, huge majority there really. What's that you say? My goodness me, no other Tories are into tractor porn oh no sir/madam, definitely not."
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
News you won't read in Britain today.
PMIs show Germany and France growth slowing to a crawl, as the ECB thinks about moving rates from current negative levels back to zero. Inflation at 8% (estimated).
Far from stagflation says the central bank. Far from reality, more like.
Its not just Britain.
The UK has lower growth than every other country other than Russia. Tories suck on the economy
That's a forecast. If you believe it to be absolutely true, you could probably make some decent money betting on it.
Even a wager on the Tories winning Wakefield might be better value, though.
Actually the UK composite PMI was OK-ish compared to France, Germany and US ( which just announced downside surprise).
None of them great to be fair. At least rates are positive in UK/US!
So, so thanks for asking. I pulled something in my back last week, coincidentally on my last day of my thirties. I felt it go as it happened. Its gotten progressively worse this week and really hurts to move now.
I hope this is just a temporary strain and isn't what its going to be like throughout forties onwards 😂
How are you?
Get well soon, I completely sympathise. I can’t hold anything in my left hand right now after Tuesday’s argument with a car bumper so I had an enjoyable morning ordering PhD students and a couple of professors around a field site.
Ouch, I hope you get well soon too.
Mine embarrassingly enough was a run in with a shopping trolley and a six year old. I was putting my daughter in the seat which she still loves to sit in, when she suddenly decided she didn't want to be in the seat and jerked to get herself into the trolley itself, without warning. I felt something go in my back then and there, it wasn't too bad for the next couple of days, but its been really bad all week this week. Hope it passes soon.
See a physio for any kind of vaguely persistent back problems. A fucked up back is one of those things you really, really don’t want later in life. Fix it now, before it becomes an issue.
Get some back strengthening exercises recommended for you, as well.
I would agree with that. Mine recommended me this, and it is a very useful book.
Walking, yoga, and pilates all help build the core back muscles and maintain flexibility, but it needs to settle a bit first. Some self traction is good too, there being a few ways to do this.
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
Apple could make a mockery of the regulation if they wanted to by switching to wireless charging only, and ending EU sales of legacy or cheaper models with lightning ports.
They’ve long been heading that way - biggest cause of damage/failover in phones is related to the connection port. Not the screen, surprisingly.
Wireless charging would allow a fully sealed unit - both mics and speakers can have sealing membranes.
The next version of the iPad Pro is reputed to have a bigger (glass) Apple logo on the rear - to allow wireless charging...
Rather than stupid laws over usb-c connectors the EU would be far better concentrating on all the dodgy practices over app stores, right to repair, providing chargers less than max just to upsell you the "proper" one.
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
I think one of the things that makes tactical voting more likely in any future by-election is that LDs really like Starmer, and so the "Do you want this guy as your PM?" question that stopped LDs tactically endorsing Corbyn disappears. The bigger question for me is whether left leaning Labour voters who dislike Starmer decide to abstain, vote Lab or vote other party like Green (I can't imagine the LDs picking up votes to the left of Starmer unless they have another leadership change and Daisy Cooper ended up in charge).
For reference Starmer does better amongst LDs than Lab voters on issues of trustworthiness (very slightly), PM in waiting (also very slightly) and in his role as Lab leader (as of YouGov trackers).
I think in by-elections, there's a growing "anyone but Tory" mentality for huge swathes of the broad left, and vote lending in accordance with that. As long as they can agree who's best placed to win - not necessarily the previous second place - it's do-able. But that's going to be a more tricky principle to switch to a GE where you're electing a government.
I agree with that, but to the question of "could this be a long lasting phenomenon" I think the answer could be yes when it comes to LDs voting for Lab in areas they weren't willing to before in 2019. I think the bigger question is do LDs have the ability to reach Labour voters in seats where they are tactically in place to succeed. Or, indeed, the unasked part of this, would Tories abstain from voting as they did to help with Blair's surge back in 97 in a GE with Johnson with a likely Starmer led government as the other option (does the Scottish Nationalists still act as a bogeyman that allows Johnson to keep getting away with it).
"...do LDs have the ability to reach Labour voters in seats where they are tactically in place to succeed?"
I think this is what changed in North Shropshire. At the start of the campaign, there was a day or two of indignant "we were second in 2019, we're the bigger party, why would we play softball against a party who got 5 thousand votes last time?"-type comments from Labour.
And then the penny dropped that the very clear answer was "because they're waaaaaay better positioned to win Tory transfers, so if you all hold your noses together, you can give Boris and Owen and the candidate from Birmingham a kicking". Combined with a decent slate of Brexity right-wingers (which I see is replicated in T&H today), there's plenty of opportunity for the disaffected to peel off in either direction.
But does that hold at GE? At GE I would assume Ed Davies actually being interviewed on tv and being important, and I doubt there will be an "I agree with Ed" moment al la 2010. So do the LDs have to offer something other than "just give the Tories a kicking" that appeals to traditional Labour voters? I'm thinking back to the pre coalition time where the LDs were seen as being to the left of Labour on some issues, I'm wondering if an open acceptance that of course Ed won't be PM, but would push for and support Labour on x, y and z policies. Things that the liberal centre found unacceptable doing when Corbyn was LOTO.
No. This is by-elections.
GE patterns may follow slowly, and I agree it's easier with SKS rather than Jezza, but the 'hold your nose, it's only a by-election' vibe is hard to replicate when we're electing a five-year government.
I suspect its party activists rather than voters who are the stumbling block.. voters are less tribal. Activists have spent the last four years explaining why every other party is second only to child killers.
Anyway, Daughter has had an interesting time applying for jobs on her return from holiday.
Lots of interviews. But some employers really need to up their game.
- One advertised a permanent job but when she turned up it turned out to be a short-term 8 week contract doing something completely different to what was advertised. - One well known hotel group spent half the interview bitching about its previous staff. On inquiry it turned out that most of their staff had only just been hired. - One place wanted her to do shifts of a duration which would be in breach of the rules. - Some don't bother to respond at all or leave it so long that they may as well not bother.
She has had a number of offers but two good ones, one in hospitality and one in events management. She's having a day with the latter this weekend to get to know the team and is, subject to no nasties being revealed, going to go with them. They had the most professional and friendly approach and are offering a good salary for a permanent job. Plus it gives her the best opportunity to expand her skills, network with a wide range of of people and learn about a new area, as well as giving her a bit of financial security.
So fingers crossed.
I know that finding good staff is not easy but treating applicants decently is the bare minimum. If Daughter could do it with her staff then more established employers can do the same.
Managing people, understanding them, motivating them, inspiring and leading them, teaching them, setting them a good example, setting them high expectations and making it clear what the boundaries are, what behaviour will not be accepted, what crosses the line, helping them get past their frailties, working effectively with them is hard work, the hardest work anyone ever has to do. And by far the most valuable – and rewarding.
It's the single most important thing employers need to do. Too many don't. Employees are people. Not "human resources". Ghastly phrase.
Rant over.
Employees are among our most valuable assets, right there after carbon paper.
One of Dilbert's best.
Mislabelling in adverts really irritates me, and often it's surely done to defeat filters in searches. Property adverts are the worst - a room in a three-bedroom house share is not a three-bedroom house!
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
My parents fell for the first part of this, just hy chance i was visiting the next day and managed them stopping them falling for the second leg of it.
Anyway, Daughter has had an interesting time applying for jobs on her return from holiday.
Lots of interviews. But some employers really need to up their game.
- One advertised a permanent job but when she turned up it turned out to be a short-term 8 week contract doing something completely different to what was advertised. - One well known hotel group spent half the interview bitching about its previous staff. On inquiry it turned out that most of their staff had only just been hired. - One place wanted her to do shifts of a duration which would be in breach of the rules. - Some don't bother to respond at all or leave it so long that they may as well not bother.
She has had a number of offers but two good ones, one in hospitality and one in events management. She's having a day with the latter this weekend to get to know the team and is, subject to no nasties being revealed, going to go with them. They had the most professional and friendly approach and are offering a good salary for a permanent job. Plus it gives her the best opportunity to expand her skills, network with a wide range of of people and learn about a new area, as well as giving her a bit of financial security.
So fingers crossed.
I know that finding good staff is not easy but treating applicants decently is the bare minimum. If Daughter could do it with her staff then more established employers can do the same.
Managing people, understanding them, motivating them, inspiring and leading them, teaching them, setting them a good example, setting them high expectations and making it clear what the boundaries are, what behaviour will not be accepted, what crosses the line, helping them get past their frailties, working effectively with them is hard work, the hardest work anyone ever has to do. And by far the most valuable – and rewarding.
It's the single most important thing employers need to do. Too many don't. Employees are people. Not "human resources". Ghastly phrase.
Rant over.
Employees are among our most valuable assets, right there after carbon paper.
One of Dilbert's best.
Mislabelling in adverts really irritates me, and often it's surely done to defeat filters in searches. Property adverts are the worst - a room in a three-bedroom house share is not a three-bedroom house!
Sad to see how bonkers the guy behind dilbert went over trump stuff, because his cartoons are great.
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
My parents fell for the first part of this, just hy chance i was visiting the next day and managed them stopping them falling for the second leg of it.
Scotsman URL seems to be a story about a different fraud?
Rather than stupid laws over usb-c connectors the EU would be far better concentrating on all the dodgy practices over app stores, right to repair, providing chargers less than max just to upsell you the "proper" one.
I believe Vesteger’s competition office is investigating the first, and the second is in EU and UK law (but not yet covering small consumer electronics). I’d expect tablets and smartphones to be added before long.
No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.
Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph? My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.
Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....
What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?
Firstly, it may well be that betting markets have overcorrected.
But that doesn't mean it's all narrative and no facts.
JonWC saying he's seen relatively little activity is interesting, although it doesn't really tie up with numbers of activists piling in and some other responses and vox pops from the area. I think he's said he is in one of the local villages, and it seems conceivable (and perhaps unsurprising) that the Tiverton, Honiton and Cullompton have seen disproportionate action. I do think there is good evidence it's had a strong Lib Dem campaign as seen in two recent, successful efforts.
The mood music also matters. The Lib Dem campaign team presumably have a decent amount and quality of data. Not perfect, and turnout matters a lot, but decent. If they felt they were coming up short based on that data, they'd be trying to reposition - all the "a mountain to climb", "give them a scare", "strong Brexit area", "never mind the win, look at the swing" stuff would come in. That isn't happening. It's quite possible they've misjudged it - parties do - but these are people with a lot of data behaving as if they are looking at the hat-trick.
You can't really get away with getting smashed in the villages here though - they are about 35pct of the total electors and more of the likely voters. Plus the town I have seen nothing from is actually the third biggest, after Tiverton and Honiton. It is one of only 4 polling districts the LDs appear to have matched or bettered the Tories in the only time they got any worthwhile vote, and the other three were all villages and include the one I live in!
I agree they can't get "smashed" in the villages. I'm just making the point that activity levels (in all seats) can and do vary a fair bit across a constituency. So personal experience is interesting but may not be representative. Certainly, activists have been piling in, and they have been busy whilst there.
No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.
Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph? My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.
Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....
What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?
My gut says narrow Tory hold - winning by 1-3,000 votes.
I think the constituency has been difficult for the LDs to blanket with activists, the offence committed by the former MP is relatively minor, and the Labour tactical votes probably not there.
I spent 3 days last week in Tiverton. The enthusiasm of voters to tell us that they were voting Liberal Democrat this time was incredible. Some who said they have always voted Conservative, some who said they had sworn never to vote Lib Dem after the coalition, Hugh Fearnley Whittingstall a Green who had said he wouldn't vote tactically -I could go on. People asked me for posters and stake boards. I spent 6 days in North Shropshire (much nearer) and thought it would be a few hundred either way and the Lib Dems won by 6,000 (previous Con Majority 23,000). Conservatives have this time at least chosen a local candidate - but she is just awful. The Tory in Shropshire was impressive though didn't know where Shropshire was. Boris Johnson was a big, big issue in Chesham and Amersham before partygate - he is a bigger issue in Devon.
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
My parents fell for the first part of this, just hy chance i was visiting the next day and managed them stopping them falling for the second leg of it.
Scotsman URL seems to be a story about a different fraud?
Read all of it. You fall for the DPD bit, then you get the spoofed bank call.
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
Spoofing phone numbers is incredibly easy (in fact way too easy but you can't put the cat back into the bag).
The only solution for this is for banks to provide people with a reference code and then for people to call the bank back and quote said code to get to the correct department.
Some banks grasp why I insist on doing the above - others don't have the first clue why I ask for it and are shocked when, at the end of the call they ask is there anything else I need, I ask what the easiest process to close all my accounts is.
No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.
Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph? My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.
Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....
What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?
My gut says narrow Tory hold - winning by 1-3,000 votes.
I think the constituency has been difficult for the LDs to blanket with activists, the offence committed by the former MP is relatively minor, and the Labour tactical votes probably not there.
I spent 3 days last week in Tiverton. The enthusiasm of voters to tell us that they were voting Liberal Democrat this time was incredible. Some who said they have always voted Conservative, some who said they had sworn never to vote Lib Dem after the coalition, Hugh Fearnley Whittingstall a Green who had said he wouldn't vote tactically -I could go on. People asked me for posters and stake boards. I spent 6 days in North Shropshire (much nearer) and thought it would be a few hundred either way and the Lib Dems won by 6,000 (previous Con Majority 23,000). Conservatives have this time at least chosen a local candidate - but she is just awful. The Tory in Shropshire was impressive though didn't know where Shropshire was. Boris Johnson was a big, big issue in Chesham and Amersham before partygate - he is a bigger issue in Devon.
Is Mr J an issue because of local matters such as farming, or his general, erm, ambience?
So, so thanks for asking. I pulled something in my back last week, coincidentally on my last day of my thirties. I felt it go as it happened. Its gotten progressively worse this week and really hurts to move now.
I hope this is just a temporary strain and isn't what its going to be like throughout forties onwards 😂
How are you?
Get well soon, I completely sympathise. I can’t hold anything in my left hand right now after Tuesday’s argument with a car bumper so I had an enjoyable morning ordering PhD students and a couple of professors around a field site.
Ouch, I hope you get well soon too.
Mine embarrassingly enough was a run in with a shopping trolley and a six year old. I was putting my daughter in the seat which she still loves to sit in, when she suddenly decided she didn't want to be in the seat and jerked to get herself into the trolley itself, without warning. I felt something go in my back then and there, it wasn't too bad for the next couple of days, but its been really bad all week this week. Hope it passes soon.
See a physio for any kind of vaguely persistent back problems. A fucked up back is one of those things you really, really don’t want later in life. Fix it now, before it becomes an issue.
Get some back strengthening exercises recommended for you, as well.
I would agree with that. Mine recommended me this, and it is a very useful book.
Walking, yoga, and pilates all help build the core back muscles and maintain flexibility, but it needs to settle a bit first. Some self traction is good too, there being a few ways to do this.
Thank you to you and Malmesbury for the the recommendation of a physio, I was just waiting for it to pass naturally.
I've just called my GP and they've given me an appointment for Monday next week to see a physio. 👍
No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.
Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph? My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.
Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....
What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?
My gut says narrow Tory hold - winning by 1-3,000 votes.
I think the constituency has been difficult for the LDs to blanket with activists, the offence committed by the former MP is relatively minor, and the Labour tactical votes probably not there.
I spent 3 days last week in Tiverton. The enthusiasm of voters to tell us that they were voting Liberal Democrat this time was incredible. Some who said they have always voted Conservative, some who said they had sworn never to vote Lib Dem after the coalition, Hugh Fearnley Whittingstall a Green who had said he wouldn't vote tactically -I could go on. People asked me for posters and stake boards. I spent 6 days in North Shropshire (much nearer) and thought it would be a few hundred either way and the Lib Dems won by 6,000 (previous Con Majority 23,000). Conservatives have this time at least chosen a local candidate - but she is just awful. The Tory in Shropshire was impressive though didn't know where Shropshire was. Boris Johnson was a big, big issue in Chesham and Amersham before partygate - he is a bigger issue in Devon.
Likewise the Tory candidate in Chesham and Amersham who foolishly said that HS2 was a great idea...
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
Spoofing phone numbers is incredibly easy (in fact way too easy but you can't put the cat back into the bag).
The only solution for this is for banks to provide people with a reference code and then for people to call the bank back and quote said code to get to the correct department.
Some banks grasp why I insist on doing the above - others don't have the first clue why I ask for it and are shocked when, at the end of the call they ask is there anything else I need, I ask what the easiest process to close all my accounts is.
Yeah, if I get an ootb call I ask for the name of the operator and the reason for calling, then hang up and call the number on the company website. I don’t think I’ve encountered a fraudulent one yet but it’s good practice.
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
Spoofing phone numbers is incredibly easy (in fact way too easy but you can't put the cat back into the bag).
The only solution for this is for banks to provide people with a reference code and then for people to call the bank back and quote said code to get to the correct department.
Some banks grasp why I insist on doing the above - others don't have the first clue why I ask for it and are shocked when, at the end of the call they ask is there anything else I need, I ask what the easiest process to close all my accounts is.
Yes. Never, EVER, discuss your account or transactions with the bank, if they have called you. Always call them back, on the number you have for them.
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
My parents fell for the first part of this, just hy chance i was visiting the next day and managed them stopping them falling for the second leg of it.
Scotsman URL seems to be a story about a different fraud?
Step 1 of most frauds - find people likely to fall for them using a method that can be done in bulk cheaply.
Step 2 having found a suitable set of fools spend some time on the more sophisticated fraud...
So, so thanks for asking. I pulled something in my back last week, coincidentally on my last day of my thirties. I felt it go as it happened. Its gotten progressively worse this week and really hurts to move now.
I hope this is just a temporary strain and isn't what its going to be like throughout forties onwards 😂
How are you?
Get well soon, I completely sympathise. I can’t hold anything in my left hand right now after Tuesday’s argument with a car bumper so I had an enjoyable morning ordering PhD students and a couple of professors around a field site.
Ouch, I hope you get well soon too.
Mine embarrassingly enough was a run in with a shopping trolley and a six year old. I was putting my daughter in the seat which she still loves to sit in, when she suddenly decided she didn't want to be in the seat and jerked to get herself into the trolley itself, without warning. I felt something go in my back then and there, it wasn't too bad for the next couple of days, but its been really bad all week this week. Hope it passes soon.
See a physio for any kind of vaguely persistent back problems. A fucked up back is one of those things you really, really don’t want later in life. Fix it now, before it becomes an issue.
Get some back strengthening exercises recommended for you, as well.
I would agree with that. Mine recommended me this, and it is a very useful book.
Walking, yoga, and pilates all help build the core back muscles and maintain flexibility, but it needs to settle a bit first. Some self traction is good too, there being a few ways to do this.
Thank you to you and Malmesbury for the the recommendation of a physio, I was just waiting for it to pass naturally.
I've just called my GP and they've given me an appointment for Monday next week to see a physio. 👍
Probably wise. If it’s nothing then they’ll send you home with anti-inflammatories. I got taken to A&E for an x-ray, where I felt like a bit of a fraud given I figured I was fine. Fortunately nothing broken but I’d have been glad of it if they’d needed to splint anything.
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
My parents fell for the first part of this, just hy chance i was visiting the next day and managed them stopping them falling for the second leg of it.
I fell for the first part. Because I m abroad and I am getting a lot of deliveries so I just didn't think more than a moment and it was a tiny sum - £2.99. What can go wrong?
Then they call you back posing as the bank and tell you that you have been scammed. As soon as they started talking about transferring money I got suspicious - but they invite you to check their credentials - the right number, tick - then if you persist with questions they hand you up to the "manager of the Fraud Department", and he invites you to check his Linkedin account - which pans out...
But by this point I was even more suspicious, because tiny details of his background were off. eg the "manager" didn't understand that Royal Holloway College is actually a uni - the uni he supposedly went to - not a 6th form college
etc
Fiendishly clever tho. Wait til GPT5 and Dalle-6 have a go at defrauding us. Ouch. We will be helpless in the face of the Deepfakes
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
Spoofing phone numbers is incredibly easy (in fact way too easy but you can't put the cat back into the bag).
The only solution for this is for banks to provide people with a reference code and then for people to call the bank back and quote said code to get to the correct department.
Some banks grasp why I insist on doing the above - others don't have the first clue why I ask for it and are shocked when, at the end of the call they ask is there anything else I need, I ask what the easiest process to close all my accounts is.
Yeah, if I get an ootb call I ask for the name of the operator and the reason for calling, then hang up and call the number on the company website. I don’t think I’ve encountered a fraudulent one yet but it’s good practice.
Presumably you make sure the connection has been broken? Else you end up still speaking to the fraudsters. We phone a friend briefly before the bank just to make sure it has. (Not sure if this affects mobiles.)
No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.
Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph? My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.
Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....
What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?
Firstly, it may well be that betting markets have overcorrected.
But that doesn't mean it's all narrative and no facts.
JonWC saying he's seen relatively little activity is interesting, although it doesn't really tie up with numbers of activists piling in and some other responses and vox pops from the area. I think he's said he is in one of the local villages, and it seems conceivable (and perhaps unsurprising) that the Tiverton, Honiton and Cullompton have seen disproportionate action. I do think there is good evidence it's had a strong Lib Dem campaign as seen in two recent, successful efforts.
The mood music also matters. The Lib Dem campaign team presumably have a decent amount and quality of data. Not perfect, and turnout matters a lot, but decent. If they felt they were coming up short based on that data, they'd be trying to reposition - all the "a mountain to climb", "give them a scare", "strong Brexit area", "never mind the win, look at the swing" stuff would come in. That isn't happening. It's quite possible they've misjudged it - parties do - but these are people with a lot of data behaving as if they are looking at the hat-trick.
You can't really get away with getting smashed in the villages here though - they are about 35pct of the total electors and more of the likely voters. Plus the town I have seen nothing from is actually the third biggest, after Tiverton and Honiton. It is one of only 4 polling districts the LDs appear to have matched or bettered the Tories in the only time they got any worthwhile vote, and the other three were all villages and include the one I live in!
I agree they can't get "smashed" in the villages. I'm just making the point that activity levels (in all seats) can and do vary a fair bit across a constituency. So personal experience is interesting but may not be representative. Certainly, activists have been piling in, and they have been busy whilst there.
I still expect the LibDems to win on a tide of "what part of Boris out don't you understand?" but I'm becoming less confident. Your last sentence cannot possibly be correct if they are not really visible in a good quarter of the constituency as far as I can see. There is a fairly limited amount you can do on the phone now and the doorstep requires massive numbers of repeat canvass sweeps and it simply has not happened.
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
Spoofing phone numbers is incredibly easy (in fact way too easy but you can't put the cat back into the bag).
The only solution for this is for banks to provide people with a reference code and then for people to call the bank back and quote said code to get to the correct department.
Some banks grasp why I insist on doing the above - others don't have the first clue why I ask for it and are shocked when, at the end of the call they ask is there anything else I need, I ask what the easiest process to close all my accounts is.
Yes. Never, EVER, discuss your account or transactions with the bank, if they have called you. Always call them back, on the number you
already
have for them.
Not the phone number they give you but one you've got from a trusted source (i.e. the number printed on the back of your bank card or bank statement. At a push use the customer service number displayed in your bank's phone app but don't 100% trust a website search).
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
My parents fell for the first part of this, just hy chance i was visiting the next day and managed them stopping them falling for the second leg of it.
Scotsman URL seems to be a story about a different fraud?
Step 1 of most frauds - find people likely to fall for them using a method that can be done in bulk cheaply.
Step 2 having found a suitable set of fools spend some time on the more sophisticated fraud...
Quite. I've read that the crap nature of email scams (misspellings etc) is nastily deliberate, to act as a filter to pick out anyone who is not all there or who is losing it (typically the elderly).
No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.
Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph? My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.
Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....
What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?
My gut says narrow Tory hold - winning by 1-3,000 votes.
I think the constituency has been difficult for the LDs to blanket with activists, the offence committed by the former MP is relatively minor, and the Labour tactical votes probably not there.
I spent 3 days last week in Tiverton. The enthusiasm of voters to tell us that they were voting Liberal Democrat this time was incredible. Some who said they have always voted Conservative, some who said they had sworn never to vote Lib Dem after the coalition, Hugh Fearnley Whittingstall a Green who had said he wouldn't vote tactically -I could go on. People asked me for posters and stake boards. I spent 6 days in North Shropshire (much nearer) and thought it would be a few hundred either way and the Lib Dems won by 6,000 (previous Con Majority 23,000). Conservatives have this time at least chosen a local candidate - but she is just awful. The Tory in Shropshire was impressive though didn't know where Shropshire was. Boris Johnson was a big, big issue in Chesham and Amersham before partygate - he is a bigger issue in Devon.
All of which could be the case with the Tories holding on, so whats your take? The mood music from reporters doing vox pops has been more mixed than Salop, suggesting an element of 'hes doing his best' remaining. You talk here like its a walkover.....
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
My parents fell for the first part of this, just hy chance i was visiting the next day and managed them stopping them falling for the second leg of it.
Scotsman URL seems to be a story about a different fraud?
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
Spoofing phone numbers is incredibly easy (in fact way too easy but you can't put the cat back into the bag).
The only solution for this is for banks to provide people with a reference code and then for people to call the bank back and quote said code to get to the correct department.
Some banks grasp why I insist on doing the above - others don't have the first clue why I ask for it and are shocked when, at the end of the call they ask is there anything else I need, I ask what the easiest process to close all my accounts is.
Yes. Never, EVER, discuss your account or transactions with the bank, if they have called you. Always call them back, on the number you have for them.
I would have done that, except I am in Georgia and it would cost me trillions and I wanted it sorted ASAP.
I reckon they are also relying on the fact that, post Covid, call queueing is taking hours
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
Spoofing phone numbers is incredibly easy (in fact way too easy but you can't put the cat back into the bag).
The only solution for this is for banks to provide people with a reference code and then for people to call the bank back and quote said code to get to the correct department.
Some banks grasp why I insist on doing the above - others don't have the first clue why I ask for it and are shocked when, at the end of the call they ask is there anything else I need, I ask what the easiest process to close all my accounts is.
Yeah, if I get an ootb call I ask for the name of the operator and the reason for calling, then hang up and call the number on the company website. I don’t think I’ve encountered a fraudulent one yet but it’s good practice.
Presumably you make sure the connection has been broken? Else you end up still speaking to the fraudsters. We phone a friend briefly before the bank just to make sure it has. (Not sure if this affects mobiles.)
I forgot that happens with landlines. I don't think I've ever had that happen with a mobile, and I haven't had a landline for many years now. Does it still happen with landlines? For some reason I'd have assumed that had gone away like analogue TV.
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
Spoofing phone numbers is incredibly easy (in fact way too easy but you can't put the cat back into the bag).
The only solution for this is for banks to provide people with a reference code and then for people to call the bank back and quote said code to get to the correct department.
Some banks grasp why I insist on doing the above - others don't have the first clue why I ask for it and are shocked when, at the end of the call they ask is there anything else I need, I ask what the easiest process to close all my accounts is.
Yeah, if I get an ootb call I ask for the name of the operator and the reason for calling, then hang up and call the number on the company website. I don’t think I’ve encountered a fraudulent one yet but it’s good practice.
Presumably you make sure the connection has been broken? Else you end up still speaking to the fraudsters. We phone a friend briefly before the bank just to make sure it has. (Not sure if this affects mobiles.)
I don’t believe this affects mobiles. I don’t give my landline phone number to anyone bar my close relatives and has a spam blocker on it. They seem to immediately hang up if they get an automated response.
No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.
Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph? My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.
Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....
What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?
My gut says narrow Tory hold - winning by 1-3,000 votes.
I think the constituency has been difficult for the LDs to blanket with activists, the offence committed by the former MP is relatively minor, and the Labour tactical votes probably not there.
I spent 3 days last week in Tiverton. The enthusiasm of voters to tell us that they were voting Liberal Democrat this time was incredible. Some who said they have always voted Conservative, some who said they had sworn never to vote Lib Dem after the coalition, Hugh Fearnley Whittingstall a Green who had said he wouldn't vote tactically -I could go on. People asked me for posters and stake boards. I spent 6 days in North Shropshire (much nearer) and thought it would be a few hundred either way and the Lib Dems won by 6,000 (previous Con Majority 23,000). Conservatives have this time at least chosen a local candidate - but she is just awful. The Tory in Shropshire was impressive though didn't know where Shropshire was. Boris Johnson was a big, big issue in Chesham and Amersham before partygate - he is a bigger issue in Devon.
That's enough fence sitting. How much is the Tory going to win by?
No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.
Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph? My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.
Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....
What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?
My gut says narrow Tory hold - winning by 1-3,000 votes.
I think the constituency has been difficult for the LDs to blanket with activists, the offence committed by the former MP is relatively minor, and the Labour tactical votes probably not there.
I spent 3 days last week in Tiverton. The enthusiasm of voters to tell us that they were voting Liberal Democrat this time was incredible. Some who said they have always voted Conservative, some who said they had sworn never to vote Lib Dem after the coalition, Hugh Fearnley Whittingstall a Green who had said he wouldn't vote tactically -I could go on. People asked me for posters and stake boards. I spent 6 days in North Shropshire (much nearer) and thought it would be a few hundred either way and the Lib Dems won by 6,000 (previous Con Majority 23,000). Conservatives have this time at least chosen a local candidate - but she is just awful. The Tory in Shropshire was impressive though didn't know where Shropshire was. Boris Johnson was a big, big issue in Chesham and Amersham before partygate - he is a bigger issue in Devon.
All of which could be the case with the Tories holding on, so whats your take? The mood music from reporters doing vox pops has been more mixed than Salop, suggesting an element of 'hes doing his best' remaining. You talk here like its a walkover.....
I'm sticking with a LD majority of around 3,000 votes as a prediction.
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
Spoofing phone numbers is incredibly easy (in fact way too easy but you can't put the cat back into the bag).
The only solution for this is for banks to provide people with a reference code and then for people to call the bank back and quote said code to get to the correct department.
Some banks grasp why I insist on doing the above - others don't have the first clue why I ask for it and are shocked when, at the end of the call they ask is there anything else I need, I ask what the easiest process to close all my accounts is.
Yes. Never, EVER, discuss your account or transactions with the bank, if they have called you. Always call them back, on the number you have for them.
I would have done that, except I am in Georgia and it would cost me trillions and I wanted it sorted ASAP.
I reckon they are also relying on the fact that, post Covid, call queueing is taking hours
When my parents fell for the first bit i told them to immediately phone the bank, it took 3-4hrs to get through to anybody, who then said you need to get transferred to...it was an all day experience.
No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.
Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph? My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.
Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....
What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?
My gut says narrow Tory hold - winning by 1-3,000 votes.
I think the constituency has been difficult for the LDs to blanket with activists, the offence committed by the former MP is relatively minor, and the Labour tactical votes probably not there.
I spent 3 days last week in Tiverton. The enthusiasm of voters to tell us that they were voting Liberal Democrat this time was incredible. Some who said they have always voted Conservative, some who said they had sworn never to vote Lib Dem after the coalition, Hugh Fearnley Whittingstall a Green who had said he wouldn't vote tactically -I could go on. People asked me for posters and stake boards. I spent 6 days in North Shropshire (much nearer) and thought it would be a few hundred either way and the Lib Dems won by 6,000 (previous Con Majority 23,000). Conservatives have this time at least chosen a local candidate - but she is just awful. The Tory in Shropshire was impressive though didn't know where Shropshire was. Boris Johnson was a big, big issue in Chesham and Amersham before partygate - he is a bigger issue in Devon.
Is Mr J an issue because of local matters such as farming, or his general, erm, ambience?
He is seen as a soon to be Ex Prime Minister - the sort that people would warn their children about!!
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
The only issue with USB-C is that it's already a mishmash of protocols which means you can't be sure that the cable you pick up from the pile can do what you want it to do.
There are USB-C cables rated for x watts so can't cope with y and others which are power only so can't be used for connecting item a to item b.
Some consistency in design there would have been helpful but it's too late now and too late change things.
That's actually not correct, because the phone also subscribes to the standard so a sub-standard cable will either be rejected or told to charge at a lower rate. The big plus of USB-C is that it is two way.
Of course you can buy dodgy USB-A cables too that damage things, this is however not a reason not to enforce a connector standard.
The brilliant thing is that Thunderbolt and USB now have the same connector, so anything you would want to connect, can be connected.
The fact that so many cables can be rejected by so many devices is part of the problem. As I said, our Switch will reject most of our "universal" cables - and when you're packing up to go away for a trip, you need to ensure which of the identical-looking cables is actually an acceptable one and which isn't. So much for "universality".
But either way, there is no justification to "enforce" a standard. The standard has already been agreed, voluntarily, by every company barring Apple pretty much and even Apple are implementing USB-C on more devices nowadays. But USB-C is not the be-all and end-all. Why enforce crappy standards now, in law, when they're already being used when better standards with fewer flaws and better utility might be around the corner?
If someone can design a USB-D, why should that be barred from going on the market.
This is absolutely a bonus of Brexit. We can keep using USB-C, as its the standard, which we already have available. But if anyone wants to innovate, they're entitled to do so in the UK first while the sclerotic EU will have to lag behind and update their standards when the time comes.
USB-D would be a complete waste of time and would not serve any useful purpose.
A refinement of the USB-C standard is what is required, not another connector.
Why?
The history of IT is full of people improving upon standards and coming up with better alternatives.
It might be that USB-C is the be-all and end-all which can never be improved upon. Great, if so, then the market will operate that way and that will be the end of the matter, so there's no reason for legislators to get involved.
But in the event that someone can come up with an innovative, superior standard, that does serve a useful purpose, why should that be barred from sale by law?
It won't be banned.
There are three aspects to this: the physical connection, the voltages and protocols, and the comms standard. If your connector is different, that is fine: just put a USB-C connector on as well. If it is the same, then ensure you can drive both your new amazing standard and the USB-C standard.
As others have said, mobiles will probably go wireless.
I think Apple are the only manufacturer having a strop about this. Just because they want to make a fortune from cable sales want to be different.
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
Spoofing phone numbers is incredibly easy (in fact way too easy but you can't put the cat back into the bag).
The only solution for this is for banks to provide people with a reference code and then for people to call the bank back and quote said code to get to the correct department.
Some banks grasp why I insist on doing the above - others don't have the first clue why I ask for it and are shocked when, at the end of the call they ask is there anything else I need, I ask what the easiest process to close all my accounts is.
Yeah, if I get an ootb call I ask for the name of the operator and the reason for calling, then hang up and call the number on the company website. I don’t think I’ve encountered a fraudulent one yet but it’s good practice.
Presumably you make sure the connection has been broken? Else you end up still speaking to the fraudsters. We phone a friend briefly before the bank just to make sure it has. (Not sure if this affects mobiles.)
I forgot that happens with landlines. I don't think I've ever had that happen with a mobile, and I haven't had a landline for many years now. Does it still happen with landlines? For some reason I'd have assumed that had gone away like analogue TV.
It could happen so check before as Carnyx suggests. Best to be safe rather than sorry. And the advice my parents and MiL have is to call me before calling the bank...
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
Spoofing phone numbers is incredibly easy (in fact way too easy but you can't put the cat back into the bag).
The only solution for this is for banks to provide people with a reference code and then for people to call the bank back and quote said code to get to the correct department.
Some banks grasp why I insist on doing the above - others don't have the first clue why I ask for it and are shocked when, at the end of the call they ask is there anything else I need, I ask what the easiest process to close all my accounts is.
Yes. Never, EVER, discuss your account or transactions with the bank, if they have called you. Always call them back, on the number you have for them.
And totally disconnect the line before calling them back in case they're doing one of those "staying on the line" scams.
Are we back to "SKS is crap" now we've had another 2 point lead?
Ive never wavered from it. He is crap
I don't think anyone that turns around 26 point deficit is crap.
Could be better, absolutely
They've got to make him better. He needs a completely different approach. He needs to be much more proactive. Get a load of Blair tapes and see how it's done.
Tell people things they don't necessarily agree with. Tell them that sending asylum seekers to Rwanda is an abomination. (Even if he doesn't think so).
People will conjure up a whole set of attitudes based on that. They'll start to build up a picture. Blair did it all the time. "I want to stop fox hunting BECAUSE IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO".
...so now he's got a heart and and people can make assumptions.
Then a few memorable soundbites and the REAL Keir Starmer will start to materialise
No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.
Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph? My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.
Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....
What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?
My gut says narrow Tory hold - winning by 1-3,000 votes.
I think the constituency has been difficult for the LDs to blanket with activists, the offence committed by the former MP is relatively minor, and the Labour tactical votes probably not there.
I spent 3 days last week in Tiverton. The enthusiasm of voters to tell us that they were voting Liberal Democrat this time was incredible. Some who said they have always voted Conservative, some who said they had sworn never to vote Lib Dem after the coalition, Hugh Fearnley Whittingstall a Green who had said he wouldn't vote tactically -I could go on. People asked me for posters and stake boards. I spent 6 days in North Shropshire (much nearer) and thought it would be a few hundred either way and the Lib Dems won by 6,000 (previous Con Majority 23,000). Conservatives have this time at least chosen a local candidate - but she is just awful. The Tory in Shropshire was impressive though didn't know where Shropshire was. Boris Johnson was a big, big issue in Chesham and Amersham before partygate - he is a bigger issue in Devon.
All of which could be the case with the Tories holding on, so whats your take? The mood music from reporters doing vox pops has been more mixed than Salop, suggesting an element of 'hes doing his best' remaining. You talk here like its a walkover.....
I'm sticking with a LD majority of around 3,000 votes as a prediction.
No eve of poll or good morning leaflets from anyone. There is a LibDem teller but no Tory.
Interesting. Were it not for Chesham id think Shropshire N was an abberation based on Paterson and Dogs behaviour but Chesham makes me think this is gone gone gone. But no last minute bumph? My instintive reaction to that is either its in the bag for LDs (massive mahoosive swing for it to be safe!) Or a relatively comfortable tory hold and we have been kidded along by the messaging but that is hugely counter intuituve.
Given how far back LDs are to start i cant see how they could be confident without the sort of voter strike/voter rage anecdata from Shropshire etc.....
What im asking is have we convinced ourselves this is a LD gain becauae it fits a narrative not because of facts? And has the betting overcorrected because of Chesham and Salop?
My gut says narrow Tory hold - winning by 1-3,000 votes.
I think the constituency has been difficult for the LDs to blanket with activists, the offence committed by the former MP is relatively minor, and the Labour tactical votes probably not there.
I spent 3 days last week in Tiverton. The enthusiasm of voters to tell us that they were voting Liberal Democrat this time was incredible. Some who said they have always voted Conservative, some who said they had sworn never to vote Lib Dem after the coalition, Hugh Fearnley Whittingstall a Green who had said he wouldn't vote tactically -I could go on. People asked me for posters and stake boards. I spent 6 days in North Shropshire (much nearer) and thought it would be a few hundred either way and the Lib Dems won by 6,000 (previous Con Majority 23,000). Conservatives have this time at least chosen a local candidate - but she is just awful. The Tory in Shropshire was impressive though didn't know where Shropshire was. Boris Johnson was a big, big issue in Chesham and Amersham before partygate - he is a bigger issue in Devon.
Is Mr J an issue because of local matters such as farming, or his general, erm, ambience?
He is seen as a soon to be Ex Prime Minister - the sort that people would warn their children about!!
So the tractor porn bit is a mere historical detail, so to speak? Interesting.
PS The point being that the circs of the next Tory MP to vacate a seat will probably be almost irrelevant to the result.
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
The only issue with USB-C is that it's already a mishmash of protocols which means you can't be sure that the cable you pick up from the pile can do what you want it to do.
There are USB-C cables rated for x watts so can't cope with y and others which are power only so can't be used for connecting item a to item b.
Some consistency in design there would have been helpful but it's too late now and too late change things.
That's actually not correct, because the phone also subscribes to the standard so a sub-standard cable will either be rejected or told to charge at a lower rate. The big plus of USB-C is that it is two way.
Of course you can buy dodgy USB-A cables too that damage things, this is however not a reason not to enforce a connector standard.
The brilliant thing is that Thunderbolt and USB now have the same connector, so anything you would want to connect, can be connected.
The fact that so many cables can be rejected by so many devices is part of the problem. As I said, our Switch will reject most of our "universal" cables - and when you're packing up to go away for a trip, you need to ensure which of the identical-looking cables is actually an acceptable one and which isn't. So much for "universality".
But either way, there is no justification to "enforce" a standard. The standard has already been agreed, voluntarily, by every company barring Apple pretty much and even Apple are implementing USB-C on more devices nowadays. But USB-C is not the be-all and end-all. Why enforce crappy standards now, in law, when they're already being used when better standards with fewer flaws and better utility might be around the corner?
If someone can design a USB-D, why should that be barred from going on the market.
This is absolutely a bonus of Brexit. We can keep using USB-C, as its the standard, which we already have available. But if anyone wants to innovate, they're entitled to do so in the UK first while the sclerotic EU will have to lag behind and update their standards when the time comes.
USB-D would be a complete waste of time and would not serve any useful purpose.
A refinement of the USB-C standard is what is required, not another connector.
Why?
The history of IT is full of people improving upon standards and coming up with better alternatives.
It might be that USB-C is the be-all and end-all which can never be improved upon. Great, if so, then the market will operate that way and that will be the end of the matter, so there's no reason for legislators to get involved.
But in the event that someone can come up with an innovative, superior standard, that does serve a useful purpose, why should that be barred from sale by law?
It won't be banned.
There are three aspects to this: the physical connection, the voltages and protocols, and the comms standard. If your connector is different, that is fine: just put a USB-C connector on as well. If it is the same, then ensure you can drive both your new amazing standard and the USB-C standard.
As others have said, mobiles will probably go wireless.
I think Apple are the only manufacturer having a strop about this. Just because they want to make a fortune from cable sales want to be different.
**** 'em.
I think the issue is that a lightning plug is slightly smaller and uses a standardised interface that apple produces in bulk (hardly surprising).
Changing it on phones is a pile of work even if you are talking models that are 18 months away. And while I can see the iphone 15 going wireless charging only it's an issue with cheaper models which just rehash an older design with a faster processor.
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
The only issue with USB-C is that it's already a mishmash of protocols which means you can't be sure that the cable you pick up from the pile can do what you want it to do.
There are USB-C cables rated for x watts so can't cope with y and others which are power only so can't be used for connecting item a to item b.
Some consistency in design there would have been helpful but it's too late now and too late change things.
That's actually not correct, because the phone also subscribes to the standard so a sub-standard cable will either be rejected or told to charge at a lower rate. The big plus of USB-C is that it is two way.
Of course you can buy dodgy USB-A cables too that damage things, this is however not a reason not to enforce a connector standard.
The brilliant thing is that Thunderbolt and USB now have the same connector, so anything you would want to connect, can be connected.
The fact that so many cables can be rejected by so many devices is part of the problem. As I said, our Switch will reject most of our "universal" cables - and when you're packing up to go away for a trip, you need to ensure which of the identical-looking cables is actually an acceptable one and which isn't. So much for "universality".
But either way, there is no justification to "enforce" a standard. The standard has already been agreed, voluntarily, by every company barring Apple pretty much and even Apple are implementing USB-C on more devices nowadays. But USB-C is not the be-all and end-all. Why enforce crappy standards now, in law, when they're already being used when better standards with fewer flaws and better utility might be around the corner?
If someone can design a USB-D, why should that be barred from going on the market.
This is absolutely a bonus of Brexit. We can keep using USB-C, as its the standard, which we already have available. But if anyone wants to innovate, they're entitled to do so in the UK first while the sclerotic EU will have to lag behind and update their standards when the time comes.
USB-D would be a complete waste of time and would not serve any useful purpose.
A refinement of the USB-C standard is what is required, not another connector.
Why?
The history of IT is full of people improving upon standards and coming up with better alternatives.
It might be that USB-C is the be-all and end-all which can never be improved upon. Great, if so, then the market will operate that way and that will be the end of the matter, so there's no reason for legislators to get involved.
But in the event that someone can come up with an innovative, superior standard, that does serve a useful purpose, why should that be barred from sale by law?
It won't be banned.
There are three aspects to this: the physical connection, the voltages and protocols, and the comms standard. If your connector is different, that is fine: just put a USB-C connector on as well. If it is the same, then ensure you can drive both your new amazing standard and the USB-C standard.
As others have said, mobiles will probably go wireless.
I think Apple are the only manufacturer having a strop about this. Just because they want to make a fortune from cable sales want to be different.
**** 'em.
So would you be happy to have USB-B enforced by law and USB-C verboten?
Not all devices fit 2 connectors. If a company wishes to innovate, they should be allowed to do so.
The idea that USB-C is the pinnacle of what connectors can be and could never, ever be improved upon is a very weird one.
England haven't reviewed an LBW and it would have been out.
Wonder how the game would change if every LBW decision was not called but instantly hawkeyed & snickoed.
We'd get 50 overs in a day of Test Cricket.
No, the system wouldn't stop the game for LBW shouts, a computer would merely quickly assess them in the background and let the umpire know if there's one that's out (3 reds, no bat/ball spike, muffled pad/ball spike).
Are we back to "SKS is crap" now we've had another 2 point lead?
Ive never wavered from it. He is crap
I don't think anyone that turns around 26 point deficit is crap.
Could be better, absolutely
They've got to make him better. He needs a completely different approach. He needs to be much more proactive. Get a load of Blair tapes and see how it's done.
Tell people things they don't necessarily agree with. Tell them that sending asylum seekers to Rwanda is an abomination. (Even if he doesn't think so).
People will conjure up a whole set of attitudes based on that. They'll start to build up a picture. Blair did it all the time. "I want to stop fox hunting BECAUSE IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO".
...so now he's got a heart and and people can make assumptions.
Then a few memorable soundbites and the REAL Keir Starmer will start to materialise
England haven't reviewed an LBW and it would have been out.
Wonder how the game would change if every LBW decision was not called but instantly hawkeyed & snickoed.
We'd get 50 overs in a day of Test Cricket.
No, the system wouldn't stop the game for LBW shouts, a computer would merely quickly assess them in the background and let the umpire know if there's one that's out (3 reds, no bat/ball spike, muffled pad/ball spike).
It still takes time to do that, you'd need to stop the game inbetween. They currently stop the game until hawkeye is ready when a review occurs.
In the future it might be technologically possible, but not yet.
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
The only issue with USB-C is that it's already a mishmash of protocols which means you can't be sure that the cable you pick up from the pile can do what you want it to do.
There are USB-C cables rated for x watts so can't cope with y and others which are power only so can't be used for connecting item a to item b.
Some consistency in design there would have been helpful but it's too late now and too late change things.
That's actually not correct, because the phone also subscribes to the standard so a sub-standard cable will either be rejected or told to charge at a lower rate. The big plus of USB-C is that it is two way.
Of course you can buy dodgy USB-A cables too that damage things, this is however not a reason not to enforce a connector standard.
The brilliant thing is that Thunderbolt and USB now have the same connector, so anything you would want to connect, can be connected.
The fact that so many cables can be rejected by so many devices is part of the problem. As I said, our Switch will reject most of our "universal" cables - and when you're packing up to go away for a trip, you need to ensure which of the identical-looking cables is actually an acceptable one and which isn't. So much for "universality".
But either way, there is no justification to "enforce" a standard. The standard has already been agreed, voluntarily, by every company barring Apple pretty much and even Apple are implementing USB-C on more devices nowadays. But USB-C is not the be-all and end-all. Why enforce crappy standards now, in law, when they're already being used when better standards with fewer flaws and better utility might be around the corner?
If someone can design a USB-D, why should that be barred from going on the market.
This is absolutely a bonus of Brexit. We can keep using USB-C, as its the standard, which we already have available. But if anyone wants to innovate, they're entitled to do so in the UK first while the sclerotic EU will have to lag behind and update their standards when the time comes.
USB-D would be a complete waste of time and would not serve any useful purpose.
A refinement of the USB-C standard is what is required, not another connector.
Why?
The history of IT is full of people improving upon standards and coming up with better alternatives.
It might be that USB-C is the be-all and end-all which can never be improved upon. Great, if so, then the market will operate that way and that will be the end of the matter, so there's no reason for legislators to get involved.
But in the event that someone can come up with an innovative, superior standard, that does serve a useful purpose, why should that be barred from sale by law?
It won't be banned.
There are three aspects to this: the physical connection, the voltages and protocols, and the comms standard. If your connector is different, that is fine: just put a USB-C connector on as well. If it is the same, then ensure you can drive both your new amazing standard and the USB-C standard.
As others have said, mobiles will probably go wireless.
I think Apple are the only manufacturer having a strop about this. Just because they want to make a fortune from cable sales want to be different.
**** 'em.
So would you be happy to have USB-B enforced by law and USB-C verboten?
Not all devices fit 2 connectors. If a company wishes to innovate, they should be allowed to do so.
The idea that USB-C is the pinnacle of what connectors can be and could never, ever be improved upon is a very weird one.
No-one saying it is the pinnacle. Standards evolve and change. But the vast majority of the different cables out there were just because manufacturers wanted to be different - there were few advantages to any of them.
As I said, I believe all manufacturers aside from Apple are fine with this change (I think!). These guys are all innovative.
Jeepers. I was just the nearly the victim of an extremely clever, elaborate banking fraud
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
My parents fell for the first part of this, just hy chance i was visiting the next day and managed them stopping them falling for the second leg of it.
Scotsman URL seems to be a story about a different fraud?
Yes I'm still wondering exactly what the scam is.
it would take about 3 pages to explain. It's highly elaborate, even elegant. A clever sting
There are oddities tho. The first guy who calls has this super honest, friendly, modestly posh Scottish voice. Trustworthy. I wonder if it is an out-of-work actor. The script is deft
Then he hands you to his manager when you get suspicious (they are obvs prepared for this). The second guy sounds different and older - senior! - and yet at one point he lapsed into a Scottish accent (I think) - which makes me wonder if it is the same actor doing all the roles
They invite you to call them back but they warn you there will be a loooooong queue, and time is of the essence, and of course when you do check there IS a loooong queue, so they call you again and apologise for the queue and all the time they are warning you that these fraudsters have your deets and you have to act FAST
England haven't reviewed an LBW and it would have been out.
Wonder how the game would change if every LBW decision was not called but instantly hawkeyed & snickoed.
We'd get 50 overs in a day of Test Cricket.
No, the system wouldn't stop the game for LBW shouts, a computer would merely quickly assess them in the background and let the umpire know if there's one that's out (3 reds, no bat/ball spike, muffled pad/ball spike).
It still takes time to do that, you'd need to stop the game inbetween. They currently stop the game until hawkeye is ready when a review occurs.
In the future it might be technologically possible, but not yet.
I think most of "hawkeye" is theatre at the moment. The actual tracking part could very likely be set up to run much much more quickly in the background (Like goal line technology in football). It isn't because that's not the way it works at the moment.
Jacob Rees-Mogg - "Thankfully we left the EU before it decided to mandate what sort of phone chargers we can have... "
JRM is a moron. An international standard is a good idea
The only issue with USB-C is that it's already a mishmash of protocols which means you can't be sure that the cable you pick up from the pile can do what you want it to do.
There are USB-C cables rated for x watts so can't cope with y and others which are power only so can't be used for connecting item a to item b.
Some consistency in design there would have been helpful but it's too late now and too late change things.
That's actually not correct, because the phone also subscribes to the standard so a sub-standard cable will either be rejected or told to charge at a lower rate. The big plus of USB-C is that it is two way.
Of course you can buy dodgy USB-A cables too that damage things, this is however not a reason not to enforce a connector standard.
The brilliant thing is that Thunderbolt and USB now have the same connector, so anything you would want to connect, can be connected.
The fact that so many cables can be rejected by so many devices is part of the problem. As I said, our Switch will reject most of our "universal" cables - and when you're packing up to go away for a trip, you need to ensure which of the identical-looking cables is actually an acceptable one and which isn't. So much for "universality".
But either way, there is no justification to "enforce" a standard. The standard has already been agreed, voluntarily, by every company barring Apple pretty much and even Apple are implementing USB-C on more devices nowadays. But USB-C is not the be-all and end-all. Why enforce crappy standards now, in law, when they're already being used when better standards with fewer flaws and better utility might be around the corner?
If someone can design a USB-D, why should that be barred from going on the market.
This is absolutely a bonus of Brexit. We can keep using USB-C, as its the standard, which we already have available. But if anyone wants to innovate, they're entitled to do so in the UK first while the sclerotic EU will have to lag behind and update their standards when the time comes.
USB-D would be a complete waste of time and would not serve any useful purpose.
A refinement of the USB-C standard is what is required, not another connector.
Why?
The history of IT is full of people improving upon standards and coming up with better alternatives.
It might be that USB-C is the be-all and end-all which can never be improved upon. Great, if so, then the market will operate that way and that will be the end of the matter, so there's no reason for legislators to get involved.
But in the event that someone can come up with an innovative, superior standard, that does serve a useful purpose, why should that be barred from sale by law?
It won't be banned.
There are three aspects to this: the physical connection, the voltages and protocols, and the comms standard. If your connector is different, that is fine: just put a USB-C connector on as well. If it is the same, then ensure you can drive both your new amazing standard and the USB-C standard.
As others have said, mobiles will probably go wireless.
I think Apple are the only manufacturer having a strop about this. Just because they want to make a fortune from cable sales want to be different.
**** 'em.
So would you be happy to have USB-B enforced by law and USB-C verboten?
Not all devices fit 2 connectors. If a company wishes to innovate, they should be allowed to do so.
The idea that USB-C is the pinnacle of what connectors can be and could never, ever be improved upon is a very weird one.
No-one saying it is the pinnacle. Standards evolve and change. But the vast majority of the different cables out there were just because manufacturers wanted to be different - there were few advantages to any of them.
As I said, I believe all manufacturers aside from Apple are fine with this change (I think!). These guys are all innovative.
All manufacturers apart from Apple have made the change freely in a free market, not because the law compelled them to do so.
At the moment eg Samsung don't have better alternative to USB-C so they use USB-C. If they come up with a much greater alternative, why should they be forbidden from trying to sell it?
Innovation is a good thing. The market already leads to harmonisation on charging, where innovation isn't occurring, because that's what consumers want and apart from Apple every other company wants their device to be compatible with their consumers cables.
So its a non-issue. There's no benefit from making the change (you can already boycott Apple) but only harm if you block innovation in the future.
Comments
What we will start to see is proper labelling of cables - which is essential because the plan for USB-C is to now support delivery of up to 240 watts (to power TVs and high power laptops).
I think this is what changed in North Shropshire. At the start of the campaign, there was a day or two of indignant "we were second in 2019, we're the bigger party, why would we play softball against a party who got 5 thousand votes last time?"-type comments from Labour.
And then the penny dropped that the very clear answer was "because they're waaaaaay better positioned to win Tory transfers, so if you all hold your noses together, you can give Boris and Owen and the candidate from Birmingham a kicking". Combined with a decent slate of Brexity right-wingers (which I see is replicated in T&H today), there's plenty of opportunity for the disaffected to peel off in either direction.
But either way, there is no justification to "enforce" a standard. The standard has already been agreed, voluntarily, by every company barring Apple pretty much and even Apple are implementing USB-C on more devices nowadays. But USB-C is not the be-all and end-all. Why enforce crappy standards now, in law, when they're already being used when better standards with fewer flaws and better utility might be around the corner?
If someone can design a USB-D, why should that be barred from going on the market.
This is absolutely a bonus of Brexit. We can keep using USB-C, as its the standard, which we already have available. But if anyone wants to innovate, they're entitled to do so in the UK first while the sclerotic EU will have to lag behind and update their standards when the time comes.
A refinement of the USB-C standard is what is required, not another connector.
A subsequent post of yours was shaky on this issue imo - you said (correctly) that electrical cars and similar charging could be down at times of increased electricity supply, but that means overnight, not be waiting until it's windy.
If there's no USB-D, then fine, we keep using USB-C as we already are and the market operates and nobody comes up with alternative cables as they don't want to be locked out of using what everyone else already uses (which is why even Apple are now supplying USB-C devices).
But if someone does come up with something better, then innovation shouldn't be legally verboten.
But that doesn't mean it's all narrative and no facts.
JonWC saying he's seen relatively little activity is interesting, although it doesn't really tie up with numbers of activists piling in and some other responses and vox pops from the area. I think he's said he is in one of the local villages, and it seems conceivable (and perhaps unsurprising) that the Tiverton, Honiton and Cullompton have seen disproportionate action. I do think there is good evidence it's had a strong Lib Dem campaign as seen in two recent, successful efforts.
The mood music also matters. The Lib Dem campaign team presumably have a decent amount and quality of data. Not perfect, and turnout matters a lot, but decent. If they felt they were coming up short based on that data, they'd be trying to reposition - all the "a mountain to climb", "give them a scare", "strong Brexit area", "never mind the win, look at the swing" stuff would come in. That isn't happening. It's quite possible they've misjudged it - parties do - but these are people with a lot of data behaving as if they are looking at the hat-trick.
PMIs show Germany and France growth slowing to a crawl, as the ECB thinks about moving rates from current negative levels back to zero. Inflation at 8% (estimated).
Far from stagflation says the central bank. Far from reality, more like.
Its not just Britain.
The grid is already capable of coping when an entire nuclear power plant instantly trips off the grid in one go. Ramping up back-up supply to cover variations in wind output is a lot easier.
The history of IT is full of people improving upon standards and coming up with better alternatives.
It might be that USB-C is the be-all and end-all which can never be improved upon. Great, if so, then the market will operate that way and that will be the end of the matter, so there's no reason for legislators to get involved.
But in the event that someone can come up with an innovative, superior standard, that does serve a useful purpose, why should that be barred from sale by law?
Get some back strengthening exercises recommended for you, as well.
I reject the notion that its impossible for anyone in the future to come up with a better standard though.
https://www.nts.org.uk/visit/places/culross
Very nice place to visit BTW. IIRC his childhood and later house is at the top of the hill, but not part of the NTS estate.
I think the constituency has been difficult for the LDs to blanket with activists, the offence committed by the former MP is relatively minor, and the Labour tactical votes probably not there.
USB-B was approaching a universal standard for all devices before it was replaced by USB-C, so if it had been one, then should USB-C have been banned by law?
Even a wager on the Tories winning Wakefield might be better value, though.
https://parti.research.google/
The UK was one of the first countries out of lockdown, so had the fastest growth. Subsequently now, other countries which were laggards out of lockdown are now forecast to be having their recovery growth that the UK has already had.
One of the worst things that partisans love to do is use these one year forecasts as international cock swinging measurement. What is far more interesting is growth over a period of time, but then most forecasts fall down upon what assumptions the forecaster has put into their model.
Wireless charging would allow a fully sealed unit - both mics and speakers can have sealing membranes.
"We won despite the gross depths of tractor porn - it is a glorious victory for us."
"We lost thanks to the gross filthiness of tractor porn, just a one-off, will never be repeated, huge majority there really. What's that you say? My goodness me, no other Tories are into tractor porn oh no sir/madam, definitely not."
None of them great to be fair. At least rates are positive in UK/US!
Treat Your Own Back https://amzn.eu/d/2kmz2yi
Walking, yoga, and pilates all help build the core back muscles and maintain flexibility, but it needs to settle a bit first. Some self traction is good too, there being a few ways to do this.
Call from "Santander Fraud Dept". They spoofed the right Santander number and even had the correct social media accounts of Santander employees when asked
This is the fraud. Beware!
https://www.scotsman.com/read-this/warning-over-dpd-scam-text-heres-what-to-do-if-you-receive-a-fake-delivery-tracking-message-3317258
GE patterns may follow slowly, and I agree it's easier with SKS rather than Jezza, but the 'hold your nose, it's only a by-election' vibe is hard to replicate when we're electing a five-year government.
I suspect its party activists rather than voters who are the stumbling block.. voters are less tribal. Activists have spent the last four years explaining why every other party is second only to child killers.
Mislabelling in adverts really irritates me, and often it's surely done to defeat filters in searches. Property adverts are the worst - a room in a three-bedroom house share is not a three-bedroom house!
Just told her to delete it, which she did.
The elaborate stuff comes when you've already half fallen for it.
I'm very glad you dodged the scam.
The only solution for this is for banks to provide people with a reference code and then for people to call the bank back and quote said code to get to the correct department.
Some banks grasp why I insist on doing the above - others don't have the first clue why I ask for it and are shocked when, at the end of the call they ask is there anything else I need, I ask what the easiest process to close all my accounts is.
I've just called my GP and they've given me an appointment for Monday next week to see a physio. 👍
Step 2 having found a suitable set of fools spend some time on the more sophisticated fraud...
Then they call you back posing as the bank and tell you that you have been scammed. As soon as they started talking about transferring money I got suspicious - but they invite you to check their credentials - the right number, tick - then if you persist with questions they hand you up to the "manager of the Fraud Department", and he invites you to check his Linkedin account - which pans out...
But by this point I was even more suspicious, because tiny details of his background were off. eg the "manager" didn't understand that Royal Holloway College is actually a uni - the uni he supposedly went to - not a 6th form college
etc
Fiendishly clever tho. Wait til GPT5 and Dalle-6 have a go at defrauding us. Ouch. We will be helpless in the face of the Deepfakes
https://twitter.com/hashtag/dogsatpollingstations?src=hashtag_click
I reckon they are also relying on the fact that, post Covid, call queueing is taking hours
Cricket and tennis have it right.
There are three aspects to this: the physical connection, the voltages and protocols, and the comms standard. If your connector is different, that is fine: just put a USB-C connector on as well. If it is the same, then ensure you can drive both your new amazing standard and the USB-C standard.
As others have said, mobiles will probably go wireless.
I think Apple are the only manufacturer having a strop about this. Just because they want to make a fortune from cable sales want to be different.
**** 'em.
Tell people things they don't necessarily agree with. Tell them that sending asylum seekers to Rwanda is an abomination. (Even if he doesn't think so).
People will conjure up a whole set of attitudes based on that. They'll start to build up a picture. Blair did it all the time. "I want to stop fox hunting BECAUSE IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO".
...so now he's got a heart and and people can make assumptions.
Then a few memorable soundbites and the REAL Keir Starmer will start to materialise
PS The point being that the circs of the next Tory MP to vacate a seat will probably be almost irrelevant to the result.
Changing it on phones is a pile of work even if you are talking models that are 18 months away. And while I can see the iphone 15 going wireless charging only it's an issue with cheaper models which just rehash an older design with a faster processor.
Not all devices fit 2 connectors. If a company wishes to innovate, they should be allowed to do so.
The idea that USB-C is the pinnacle of what connectors can be and could never, ever be improved upon is a very weird one.
In the future it might be technologically possible, but not yet.
As I said, I believe all manufacturers aside from Apple are fine with this change (I think!). These guys are all innovative.
When did 14 year old booster for polio at school come into being standard policy in UK?
There are oddities tho. The first guy who calls has this super honest, friendly, modestly posh Scottish voice. Trustworthy. I wonder if it is an out-of-work actor. The script is deft
Then he hands you to his manager when you get suspicious (they are obvs prepared for this). The second guy sounds different and older - senior! - and yet at one point he lapsed into a Scottish accent (I think) - which makes me wonder if it is the same actor doing all the roles
They invite you to call them back but they warn you there will be a loooooong queue, and time is of the essence, and of course when you do check there IS a loooong queue, so they call you again and apologise for the queue and all the time they are warning you that these fraudsters have your deets and you have to act FAST
At the moment eg Samsung don't have better alternative to USB-C so they use USB-C. If they come up with a much greater alternative, why should they be forbidden from trying to sell it?
Innovation is a good thing. The market already leads to harmonisation on charging, where innovation isn't occurring, because that's what consumers want and apart from Apple every other company wants their device to be compatible with their consumers cables.
So its a non-issue. There's no benefit from making the change (you can already boycott Apple) but only harm if you block innovation in the future.