Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
The problem with things like YouTube, Facebook and especially Twitter, is that the content delivered is individually curated (*) for you. I see what I see on my feed, but have no idea if my experience is common to others. If I'm seeing an increase in right-wing content, is that because I've liked someone who themselves likes right-wing content, or is it a bias in the algorithms?
But given Musk's recent shenanigans, I'm fairly happy calling out Twitter as becoming increasingly a right-wing cesspool. I have an account, but have never tweeted, and follow just 26 accounts. I've given precisely two likes to tweets. Most of the people I follow would be classed as left-wing (mainly because many are into trains).
So why am I getting American right-wingers on my twitter feed?
(*) Is that the correct word?
Because the algorithm wants you to argue with them.
That's an assumption. In which case I'd expect right-wingers to get lots of leftists.
And that's the problem: as everyone's experience is individual on these platforms, and are ruled by the Holy RNGorithm, it's hard to know if what I see is typical or not.
That’s exactly what happens.
And if you express opinions, the algorithms tend to serve up “similar but harder line views” for you to agree with as well.
The later is considered to be a big part of self radicalisation - in conjunction with the first.
You are presented with a world full of scary people you hate - and a nice comfort zone of people with the right idea, if a bit hard core..
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
When I've made pro-Ukraine replies to other tweets about Ukraine recently - returning after having a break - I notice that I now receive a lot more pro-Russian replies, which themselves receive a lot more likes than my comments.
So it's not just the algorithm making anti-Ukraine tweets more prominent, it's an actual change in the userbase. Given the tenor of the replies I think it's doubtful that it's people changing their mind. Much more likely to be bots and trolls that would previously have been banned but are now unconstrained.
What's also particularly noticeable is that NAFO seems to have disappeared. That might be anti-Ukraine algorithm tweaking, or they might have got themselves banned when criticising Musk's so-called peace plan.
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
The problem with things like YouTube, Facebook and especially Twitter, is that the content delivered is individually curated (*) for you. I see what I see on my feed, but have no idea if my experience is common to others. If I'm seeing an increase in right-wing content, is that because I've liked someone who themselves likes right-wing content, or is it a bias in the algorithms?
But given Musk's recent shenanigans, I'm fairly happy calling out Twitter as becoming increasingly a right-wing cesspool. I have an account, but have never tweeted, and follow just 26 accounts. I've given precisely two likes to tweets. Most of the people I follow would be classed as left-wing (mainly because many are into trains).
So why am I getting American right-wingers on my twitter feed?
(*) Is that the correct word?
(Emphasis added by me) Is that a typo for 'trans' or are train enthusiasts known for being left-wing? Thinking of PB, the out* train enthusiasts do seem to be more left-leaning.
* of the... goods shed? I allow that we may still have some closet goods shed train enthusiasts
IME most rail enthusiasts tend to be more left-wing than right-wing, though as always there are often exceptions, and it does tend to be a spectrum.
There are actually quite a few 'hidden' rail enthusiasts, people who are famous and are quite into trains. Rod Stewart and Pete Waterman are just the start. One or two are even known to get their elbows mucky at weekends at preserved railways, or on railtours...
And yes, I know of at least two trans trains fans.
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
The problem with things like YouTube, Facebook and especially Twitter, is that the content delivered is individually curated (*) for you. I see what I see on my feed, but have no idea if my experience is common to others. If I'm seeing an increase in right-wing content, is that because I've liked someone who themselves likes right-wing content, or is it a bias in the algorithms?
But given Musk's recent shenanigans, I'm fairly happy calling out Twitter as becoming increasingly a right-wing cesspool. I have an account, but have never tweeted, and follow just 26 accounts. I've given precisely two likes to tweets. Most of the people I follow would be classed as left-wing (mainly because many are into trains).
So why am I getting American right-wingers on my twitter feed?
(*) Is that the correct word?
(Emphasis added by me) Is that a typo for 'trans' or are train enthusiasts known for being left-wing? Thinking of PB, the out* train enthusiasts do seem to be more left-leaning.
* of the... goods shed? I allow that we may still have some closet goods shed train enthusiasts
Anyone into trains is a good egg in my book. These algorithms are quite powerful, they seem to have figured out my proclivities and push Deltics, Westerns, Hoovers and Tractors on me quite aggressively on FB. Not that I'm complaining - nothing makes me happier than seeing some diesel in rail blue powering through the 1970s British countryside. It is my own harmless form of nostalgia.
Good algorithm. Keeps the Sulzer stuff out of your feed!
I gave you a like, but really, how can you not love a 45?
In Dorothy L Sayers masterpiece 'The Nine Tailors' her detective, Peter Wimsey, avoids walking round a church anticlockwise for this very reason.
The only problem with that book was that her knowledge of campanology was a bit ropey.
Well that, and DLS's invasive snobbishness & pretentiousness.
Wimsey is one of the most irritating detectives in fiction.
Having come late in life to the books, I think Rex Stout's Nero Wolfe is my all-time favourite now.
The real hero of Rex Stout's wonderful series is Archie Goodwin, not Nero Wolfe, which is what makes it so special. That and the orchids.
BTW PG Wodehouse was a huge Rex Stout fan - which shows just how good he was.
And, finally, yes, Wimsey is annoying. The Nine Tailors sees him at his best, and his presence is muted by the greatness of the picture of fen life in 1930 somewhere on the borders of Lincs, Cambs and Norfolk. Not all that far from Algarkirk.
I agree with you -- the most interesting portions of 'The Nine Tailors' are the descriptions of Fenland life.
Harriet Vane is more interesting than the absurd Wimsey & the feudal Bunter. The best of DLS's books is Gaudy Night where Vane (& female education) is centre stage.
I was on the side of the bedder who attacks all the dons and I was heartbroken when she was caught by the wretched monocled Wimsey.
Goodwin & Wolfe are an incredible combo. I prefer Wolfe to Goodwin. Both Aunt Dahlia and Bertie Wooster were big fans, as was their creator.
I think the Nero Wolfe novels are stylistically very close to PG Wodehouse -- in that they create a highly artificial, yet enchanting & somehow believable, Universe in the brownstone on West 35th Street.
I mean, there is no-one who ever lived who was anything like Nero Wolfe. Or Archie Goodwin.
Just like there was no-one who ever lived who was anything like Jeeves. Or Bertie Wooster.
Sweet Poison is great.
I love the jury forewoman who really doesn't care whether Harriet killed her boyfriend or not, because the man was a cad, and deserved it.
Strong Poison.
The portrayal of the venomous solicitor confirms all my prejudices about the legal profession, so I do like the book.
Generally, the more Vane and the less Bunter the better.
I would agree with that, and would note that of the three strongest DLS books (IMHO Strong Poison, Murder Must Advertise and Gaudy Night), two feature Ms Vane.
That said, the one set in Cornwall (?) and which is almost entirely through Ms Vane's eyes is not that great.
The worst is The Five Red Herrings -- the one set in Galloway with lots of pantomime Scotsmen. It is Vane-less.
I agree with your choice of the best three, though MMA is mainly interesting for the working conditions in the advertising agency.
I have a soft spot for the Lemmy Caution novels by Peter Cheyney. Jean-Luc Godard used the name for his detective character in Alphaville too as he was a fan, apparently.
In Dorothy L Sayers masterpiece 'The Nine Tailors' her detective, Peter Wimsey, avoids walking round a church anticlockwise for this very reason.
The only problem with that book was that her knowledge of campanology was a bit ropey.
Well that, and DLS's invasive snobbishness & pretentiousness.
Wimsey is one of the most irritating detectives in fiction.
Having come late in life to the books, I think Rex Stout's Nero Wolfe is my all-time favourite now.
The real hero of Rex Stout's wonderful series is Archie Goodwin, not Nero Wolfe, which is what makes it so special. That and the orchids.
BTW PG Wodehouse was a huge Rex Stout fan - which shows just how good he was.
And, finally, yes, Wimsey is annoying. The Nine Tailors sees him at his best, and his presence is muted by the greatness of the picture of fen life in 1930 somewhere on the borders of Lincs, Cambs and Norfolk. Not all that far from Algarkirk.
I agree with you -- the most interesting portions of 'The Nine Tailors' are the descriptions of Fenland life.
Harriet Vane is more interesting than the absurd Wimsey & the feudal Bunter. The best of DLS's books is Gaudy Night where Vane (& female education) is centre stage.
I was on the side of the bedder who attacks all the dons and I was heartbroken when she was caught by the wretched monocled Wimsey.
Goodwin & Wolfe are an incredible combo. I prefer Wolfe to Goodwin. Both Aunt Dahlia and Bertie Wooster were big fans, as was their creator.
I think the Nero Wolfe novels are stylistically very close to PG Wodehouse -- in that they create a highly artificial, yet enchanting & somehow believable, Universe in the brownstone on West 35th Street.
I mean, there is no-one who ever lived who was anything like Nero Wolfe. Or Archie Goodwin.
Just like there was no-one who ever lived who was anything like Jeeves. Or Bertie Wooster.
Sorry: just to make sure that there's no mistake here.
You supported the "bedder" who attacked the dons because she was opposed to female education?
I want to make absolutely sure there's no misunderstanding here.
I am always on the side of the degraded in the gutter because they have been thrown there.
The bedder's final speech is deranged and magnificent. The dons are shocked to silence by its emotional power.
Nevertheless, her reign of terror was because she was opposed to female education.
Motivated by an injustice -- which even the perpetrator accepted was unjust by the end of the novel.
The dons were too stupid to catch her.
I am on the side of anyone who can organise a reign of terror within the sedate confines of an Oxford College.
She did not go far enough -- assassination of the Senior Tutor & burning down the Chapel are necessary for a true reign of terror.
The injustice was that her husband was sacked and stripped of his degree for forging a historical thesis.
Which is unjust only in the sense it doesn't happen today which is why the likes of Richard Carrier, Robert Price and Naomi Wolfe continue to boast of their doctorates. Even though they should have them withdrawn.
But it wasn't acknowledged to be unjust. Anything but. The only thing they felt was wrong was neglecting him afterwards. 'Miss Lydgate would have acted as I did: but she would also have made it her business to enquire into what became of that unhappy man.'
Yup. For a modern version…
IIRC a journalist ran a plagiarism detector against theses of a number of prominent German politicians.
The resulting efforts to *not* find them guilty of plagiarism are quite inspiring. In a way.
Does paying someone else to write the thesis count as plagiarism? I knew of a case where an Iranian emigré who'd been close to the Shah did that. He had so much money he didn't know what to do with it, and he felt like getting a PhD the way he might buy a block of flats or a yacht... Nothing happened to him, despite at least one member of the Higher Degrees Committee being fully aware of what he'd done.
Would be reasonably hard to do that here with viva voce examinations for PhD - you'd need to at least understand what the other person had written for you (and reasons behind it) to be able to defend it.
ETA: Definitely against University Ethics. Might get away with it at Kent
It was at one of Scotland's Russell Group universities. I won't narrow it down any further. This was about 30 years ago. At the viva there would have been his supervisor (who was no fool and must surely have known), the head of the ~department who didn't know his arsehole from his elbow and would have been a cinch to con (and almost certainly didn't read the thesis anyway), one internal examiner (I don't know who that was), and an external examiner whose identity I also didn't know but most of the time in most British universities the external examiner is chosen in practice (although not in theory) by the candidate.
In 2001 with Somerset five down for not many against Warwickshire in the C&G semi final, Rob Turner did some rapid sums and realised all he and Keith Dutch needed to do was bat out the overs and they would win.
So the two knocked the ball safely into gaps for singles, then with five overs left Dutch opened his shoulders, hit a few fours and the match was won.
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
The problem with things like YouTube, Facebook and especially Twitter, is that the content delivered is individually curated (*) for you. I see what I see on my feed, but have no idea if my experience is common to others. If I'm seeing an increase in right-wing content, is that because I've liked someone who themselves likes right-wing content, or is it a bias in the algorithms?
But given Musk's recent shenanigans, I'm fairly happy calling out Twitter as becoming increasingly a right-wing cesspool. I have an account, but have never tweeted, and follow just 26 accounts. I've given precisely two likes to tweets. Most of the people I follow would be classed as left-wing (mainly because many are into trains).
So why am I getting American right-wingers on my twitter feed?
(*) Is that the correct word?
(Emphasis added by me) Is that a typo for 'trans' or are train enthusiasts known for being left-wing? Thinking of PB, the out* train enthusiasts do seem to be more left-leaning.
* of the... goods shed? I allow that we may still have some closet goods shed train enthusiasts
Anyone into trains is a good egg in my book. These algorithms are quite powerful, they seem to have figured out my proclivities and push Deltics, Westerns, Hoovers and Tractors on me quite aggressively on FB. Not that I'm complaining - nothing makes me happier than seeing some diesel in rail blue powering through the 1970s British countryside. It is my own harmless form of nostalgia.
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
The problem with things like YouTube, Facebook and especially Twitter, is that the content delivered is individually curated (*) for you. I see what I see on my feed, but have no idea if my experience is common to others. If I'm seeing an increase in right-wing content, is that because I've liked someone who themselves likes right-wing content, or is it a bias in the algorithms?
But given Musk's recent shenanigans, I'm fairly happy calling out Twitter as becoming increasingly a right-wing cesspool. I have an account, but have never tweeted, and follow just 26 accounts. I've given precisely two likes to tweets. Most of the people I follow would be classed as left-wing (mainly because many are into trains).
So why am I getting American right-wingers on my twitter feed?
(*) Is that the correct word?
(Emphasis added by me) Is that a typo for 'trans' or are train enthusiasts known for being left-wing? Thinking of PB, the out* train enthusiasts do seem to be more left-leaning.
* of the... goods shed? I allow that we may still have some closet goods shed train enthusiasts
Anyone into trains is a good egg in my book. These algorithms are quite powerful, they seem to have figured out my proclivities and push Deltics, Westerns, Hoovers and Tractors on me quite aggressively on FB. Not that I'm complaining - nothing makes me happier than seeing some diesel in rail blue powering through the 1970s British countryside. It is my own harmless form of nostalgia.
Good algorithm. Keeps the Sulzer stuff out of your feed!
I gave you a like, but really, how can you not love a 45?
Probably best not to launch into that debate, but by way of looking for common ground, I do have a soft spot for Rats, MacRats and Cromptons. And Cromptons are my wife's favourites.
In Dorothy L Sayers masterpiece 'The Nine Tailors' her detective, Peter Wimsey, avoids walking round a church anticlockwise for this very reason.
The only problem with that book was that her knowledge of campanology was a bit ropey.
Well that, and DLS's invasive snobbishness & pretentiousness.
Wimsey is one of the most irritating detectives in fiction.
Having come late in life to the books, I think Rex Stout's Nero Wolfe is my all-time favourite now.
The real hero of Rex Stout's wonderful series is Archie Goodwin, not Nero Wolfe, which is what makes it so special. That and the orchids.
BTW PG Wodehouse was a huge Rex Stout fan - which shows just how good he was.
And, finally, yes, Wimsey is annoying. The Nine Tailors sees him at his best, and his presence is muted by the greatness of the picture of fen life in 1930 somewhere on the borders of Lincs, Cambs and Norfolk. Not all that far from Algarkirk.
I agree with you -- the most interesting portions of 'The Nine Tailors' are the descriptions of Fenland life.
Harriet Vane is more interesting than the absurd Wimsey & the feudal Bunter. The best of DLS's books is Gaudy Night where Vane (& female education) is centre stage.
I was on the side of the bedder who attacks all the dons and I was heartbroken when she was caught by the wretched monocled Wimsey.
Goodwin & Wolfe are an incredible combo. I prefer Wolfe to Goodwin. Both Aunt Dahlia and Bertie Wooster were big fans, as was their creator.
I think the Nero Wolfe novels are stylistically very close to PG Wodehouse -- in that they create a highly artificial, yet enchanting & somehow believable, Universe in the brownstone on West 35th Street.
I mean, there is no-one who ever lived who was anything like Nero Wolfe. Or Archie Goodwin.
Just like there was no-one who ever lived who was anything like Jeeves. Or Bertie Wooster.
Sorry: just to make sure that there's no mistake here.
You supported the "bedder" who attacked the dons because she was opposed to female education?
I want to make absolutely sure there's no misunderstanding here.
I am always on the side of the degraded in the gutter because they have been thrown there.
The bedder's final speech is deranged and magnificent. The dons are shocked to silence by its emotional power.
Nevertheless, her reign of terror was because she was opposed to female education.
Motivated by an injustice -- which even the perpetrator accepted was unjust by the end of the novel.
The dons were too stupid to catch her.
I am on the side of anyone who can organise a reign of terror within the sedate confines of an Oxford College.
She did not go far enough -- assassination of the Senior Tutor & burning down the Chapel are necessary for a true reign of terror.
The injustice was that her husband was sacked and stripped of his degree for forging a historical thesis.
Which is unjust only in the sense it doesn't happen today which is why the likes of Richard Carrier, Robert Price and Naomi Wolfe continue to boast of their doctorates. Even though they should have them withdrawn.
But it wasn't acknowledged to be unjust. Anything but. The only thing they felt was wrong was neglecting him afterwards. 'Miss Lydgate would have acted as I did: but she would also have made it her business to enquire into what became of that unhappy man.'
Yup. For a modern version…
IIRC a journalist ran a plagiarism detector against theses of a number of prominent German politicians.
The resulting efforts to *not* find them guilty of plagiarism are quite inspiring. In a way.
Does paying someone else to write the thesis count as plagiarism? I knew of a case where an Iranian emigré who'd been close to the Shah did that. He had so much money he didn't know what to do with it, and he felt like getting a PhD the way he might buy a block of flats or a yacht... Nothing happened to him, despite at least one member of the Higher Degrees Committee being fully aware of what he'd done.
Would be reasonably hard to do that here with viva voce examinations for PhD - you'd need to at least understand what the other person had written for you (and reasons behind it) to be able to defend it.
ETA: Definitely against University Ethics. Might get away with it at Kent
It was at one of Scotland's Russell Group universities. I won't narrow it down any further. This was about 30 years ago. At the viva there would have been his supervisor (who was no fool and must surely have known), the head of the ~department who didn't know his arsehole from his elbow and would have been a cinch to con (and almost certainly didn't read the thesis anyway), one internal examiner (I don't know who that was), and an external examiner whose identity I also didn't know but most of the time in most British universities the external examiner is chosen in practice (although not in theory) by the candidate.
Supervisors attended vivas at that uni? That's a bit unusual isn't it?
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
When I've made pro-Ukraine replies to other tweets about Ukraine recently - returning after having a break - I notice that I now receive a lot more pro-Russian replies, which themselves receive a lot more likes than my comments.
So it's not just the algorithm making anti-Ukraine tweets more prominent, it's an actual change in the userbase. Given the tenor of the replies I think it's doubtful that it's people changing their mind. Much more likely to be bots and trolls that would previously have been banned but are now unconstrained.
What's also particularly noticeable is that NAFO seems to have disappeared. That might be anti-Ukraine algorithm tweaking, or they might have got themselves banned when criticising Musk's so-called peace plan.
The West long ago accepted China’s invasion, occupation, then ethnic cleansing and mass plantation of Tibet.
If the bully is big enough they eventually get away with it.
Luckily, som bullies are not as big as they like to think they are anymore.
In Dorothy L Sayers masterpiece 'The Nine Tailors' her detective, Peter Wimsey, avoids walking round a church anticlockwise for this very reason.
The only problem with that book was that her knowledge of campanology was a bit ropey.
Well that, and DLS's invasive snobbishness & pretentiousness.
Wimsey is one of the most irritating detectives in fiction.
Having come late in life to the books, I think Rex Stout's Nero Wolfe is my all-time favourite now.
The real hero of Rex Stout's wonderful series is Archie Goodwin, not Nero Wolfe, which is what makes it so special. That and the orchids.
BTW PG Wodehouse was a huge Rex Stout fan - which shows just how good he was.
And, finally, yes, Wimsey is annoying. The Nine Tailors sees him at his best, and his presence is muted by the greatness of the picture of fen life in 1930 somewhere on the borders of Lincs, Cambs and Norfolk. Not all that far from Algarkirk.
I agree with you -- the most interesting portions of 'The Nine Tailors' are the descriptions of Fenland life.
Harriet Vane is more interesting than the absurd Wimsey & the feudal Bunter. The best of DLS's books is Gaudy Night where Vane (& female education) is centre stage.
I was on the side of the bedder who attacks all the dons and I was heartbroken when she was caught by the wretched monocled Wimsey.
Goodwin & Wolfe are an incredible combo. I prefer Wolfe to Goodwin. Both Aunt Dahlia and Bertie Wooster were big fans, as was their creator.
I think the Nero Wolfe novels are stylistically very close to PG Wodehouse -- in that they create a highly artificial, yet enchanting & somehow believable, Universe in the brownstone on West 35th Street.
I mean, there is no-one who ever lived who was anything like Nero Wolfe. Or Archie Goodwin.
Just like there was no-one who ever lived who was anything like Jeeves. Or Bertie Wooster.
Sorry: just to make sure that there's no mistake here.
You supported the "bedder" who attacked the dons because she was opposed to female education?
I want to make absolutely sure there's no misunderstanding here.
I am always on the side of the degraded in the gutter because they have been thrown there.
The bedder's final speech is deranged and magnificent. The dons are shocked to silence by its emotional power.
Nevertheless, her reign of terror was because she was opposed to female education.
Motivated by an injustice -- which even the perpetrator accepted was unjust by the end of the novel.
The dons were too stupid to catch her.
I am on the side of anyone who can organise a reign of terror within the sedate confines of an Oxford College.
She did not go far enough -- assassination of the Senior Tutor & burning down the Chapel are necessary for a true reign of terror.
The injustice was that her husband was sacked and stripped of his degree for forging a historical thesis.
Which is unjust only in the sense it doesn't happen today which is why the likes of Richard Carrier, Robert Price and Naomi Wolfe continue to boast of their doctorates. Even though they should have them withdrawn.
But it wasn't acknowledged to be unjust. Anything but. The only thing they felt was wrong was neglecting him afterwards. 'Miss Lydgate would have acted as I did: but she would also have made it her business to enquire into what became of that unhappy man.'
Yup. For a modern version…
IIRC a journalist ran a plagiarism detector against theses of a number of prominent German politicians.
The resulting efforts to *not* find them guilty of plagiarism are quite inspiring. In a way.
Does paying someone else to write the thesis count as plagiarism? I knew of a case where an Iranian emigré who'd been close to the Shah did that. He had so much money he didn't know what to do with it, and he felt like getting a PhD the way he might buy a block of flats or a yacht... Nothing happened to him, despite at least one member of the Higher Degrees Committee being fully aware of what he'd done.
Would be reasonably hard to do that here with viva voce examinations for PhD - you'd need to at least understand what the other person had written for you (and reasons behind it) to be able to defend it.
ETA: Definitely against University Ethics. Might get away with it at Kent
It was at one of Scotland's Russell Group universities. I won't narrow it down any further. This was about 30 years ago. At the viva there would have been his supervisor (who was no fool and must surely have known), the head of the ~department who didn't know his arsehole from his elbow and would have been a cinch to con (and almost certainly didn't read the thesis anyway), one internal examiner (I don't know who that was), and an external examiner whose identity I also didn't know but most of the time in most British universities the external examiner is chosen in practice (although not in theory) by the candidate.
When one of Ghaddafi’s sons published some stuff about more-democratic-than-democracy, though LSE, LSE praised it.
Someone commented that he hoped that they had been bribed, since the alternative was much worse.
In Dorothy L Sayers masterpiece 'The Nine Tailors' her detective, Peter Wimsey, avoids walking round a church anticlockwise for this very reason.
The only problem with that book was that her knowledge of campanology was a bit ropey.
Well that, and DLS's invasive snobbishness & pretentiousness.
Wimsey is one of the most irritating detectives in fiction.
Having come late in life to the books, I think Rex Stout's Nero Wolfe is my all-time favourite now.
The real hero of Rex Stout's wonderful series is Archie Goodwin, not Nero Wolfe, which is what makes it so special. That and the orchids.
BTW PG Wodehouse was a huge Rex Stout fan - which shows just how good he was.
And, finally, yes, Wimsey is annoying. The Nine Tailors sees him at his best, and his presence is muted by the greatness of the picture of fen life in 1930 somewhere on the borders of Lincs, Cambs and Norfolk. Not all that far from Algarkirk.
I agree with you -- the most interesting portions of 'The Nine Tailors' are the descriptions of Fenland life.
Harriet Vane is more interesting than the absurd Wimsey & the feudal Bunter. The best of DLS's books is Gaudy Night where Vane (& female education) is centre stage.
I was on the side of the bedder who attacks all the dons and I was heartbroken when she was caught by the wretched monocled Wimsey.
Goodwin & Wolfe are an incredible combo. I prefer Wolfe to Goodwin. Both Aunt Dahlia and Bertie Wooster were big fans, as was their creator.
I think the Nero Wolfe novels are stylistically very close to PG Wodehouse -- in that they create a highly artificial, yet enchanting & somehow believable, Universe in the brownstone on West 35th Street.
I mean, there is no-one who ever lived who was anything like Nero Wolfe. Or Archie Goodwin.
Just like there was no-one who ever lived who was anything like Jeeves. Or Bertie Wooster.
Sorry: just to make sure that there's no mistake here.
You supported the "bedder" who attacked the dons because she was opposed to female education?
I want to make absolutely sure there's no misunderstanding here.
I am always on the side of the degraded in the gutter because they have been thrown there.
The bedder's final speech is deranged and magnificent. The dons are shocked to silence by its emotional power.
Nevertheless, her reign of terror was because she was opposed to female education.
Motivated by an injustice -- which even the perpetrator accepted was unjust by the end of the novel.
The dons were too stupid to catch her.
I am on the side of anyone who can organise a reign of terror within the sedate confines of an Oxford College.
She did not go far enough -- assassination of the Senior Tutor & burning down the Chapel are necessary for a true reign of terror.
The injustice was that her husband was sacked and stripped of his degree for forging a historical thesis.
Which is unjust only in the sense it doesn't happen today which is why the likes of Richard Carrier, Robert Price and Naomi Wolfe continue to boast of their doctorates. Even though they should have them withdrawn.
But it wasn't acknowledged to be unjust. Anything but. The only thing they felt was wrong was neglecting him afterwards. 'Miss Lydgate would have acted as I did: but she would also have made it her business to enquire into what became of that unhappy man.'
Yup. For a modern version…
IIRC a journalist ran a plagiarism detector against theses of a number of prominent German politicians.
The resulting efforts to *not* find them guilty of plagiarism are quite inspiring. In a way.
Does paying someone else to write the thesis count as plagiarism? I knew of a case where an Iranian emigré who'd been close to the Shah did that. He had so much money he didn't know what to do with it, and he felt like getting a PhD the way he might buy a block of flats or a yacht... Nothing happened to him, despite at least one member of the Higher Degrees Committee being fully aware of what he'd done.
Would be reasonably hard to do that here with viva voce examinations for PhD - you'd need to at least understand what the other person had written for you (and reasons behind it) to be able to defend it.
ETA: Definitely against University Ethics. Might get away with it at Kent
It was at one of Scotland's Russell Group universities. I won't narrow it down any further. This was about 30 years ago. At the viva there would have been his supervisor (who was no fool and must surely have known), the head of the ~department who didn't know his arsehole from his elbow and would have been a cinch to con (and almost certainly didn't read the thesis anyway), one internal examiner (I don't know who that was), and an external examiner whose identity I also didn't know but most of the time in most British universities the external examiner is chosen in practice (although not in theory) by the candidate.
I'd like to think that's impossible now at any vaguely reputable university, even Russell Group!
Typical now is one internal and one external, sometimes one or more supervisor may observe (when I did mine my supervisor was not present; I've not been present for any of my students'). In my experience the supervisor leads on suggesting at least external examiners.
I do believe the degree to which a student is really tested varies very widely.
I think Nick Fletcher (Don Valley) is my favourite MP. Last week asked a question decrying the international socialist conspiracy which is 15 minute cities ("I don't want this for Doncaster!"). This week asks a question about why schools tell him they can't afford to turn the heating on when they have PHSE teaching materials about being transgender.
Best thing isn't that he has the IQ of 95% fat free mince. Its that he asks the questions like Vic Reeves Bra Man. I know there are plenty of shitkickers in Conisborough, but did they really vote for *that*? What an advert for their community!
Is "my schools can't afford to turn their heating on" something he should be proud of as an MP for the party responsible? And why didn't he suggest they just burn the Lady Cock propaganda materials for warmth?
Under Ms Sturgeon’s plans, Scotland would have continued to use the pound sterling for a period before moving to a Scottish pound. A paper released last year added: “The change would take place as soon as practicable through a careful, managed and responsible transition, guided by criteria and economic conditions rather than a fixed timetable.”
Ms Regan, who is the self-confessed outsider in the leadership race, said she does not support setting tests before a currency is introduced.
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
The problem with things like YouTube, Facebook and especially Twitter, is that the content delivered is individually curated (*) for you. I see what I see on my feed, but have no idea if my experience is common to others. If I'm seeing an increase in right-wing content, is that because I've liked someone who themselves likes right-wing content, or is it a bias in the algorithms?
But given Musk's recent shenanigans, I'm fairly happy calling out Twitter as becoming increasingly a right-wing cesspool. I have an account, but have never tweeted, and follow just 26 accounts. I've given precisely two likes to tweets. Most of the people I follow would be classed as left-wing (mainly because many are into trains).
So why am I getting American right-wingers on my twitter feed?
(*) Is that the correct word?
(Emphasis added by me) Is that a typo for 'trans' or are train enthusiasts known for being left-wing? Thinking of PB, the out* train enthusiasts do seem to be more left-leaning.
* of the... goods shed? I allow that we may still have some closet goods shed train enthusiasts
Anyone into trains is a good egg in my book. These algorithms are quite powerful, they seem to have figured out my proclivities and push Deltics, Westerns, Hoovers and Tractors on me quite aggressively on FB. Not that I'm complaining - nothing makes me happier than seeing some diesel in rail blue powering through the 1970s British countryside. It is my own harmless form of nostalgia.
Good algorithm. Keeps the Sulzer stuff out of your feed!
I gave you a like, but really, how can you not love a 45?
Though we apparently have Deltic heretics on PB...
In Dorothy L Sayers masterpiece 'The Nine Tailors' her detective, Peter Wimsey, avoids walking round a church anticlockwise for this very reason.
The only problem with that book was that her knowledge of campanology was a bit ropey.
Well that, and DLS's invasive snobbishness & pretentiousness.
Wimsey is one of the most irritating detectives in fiction.
Having come late in life to the books, I think Rex Stout's Nero Wolfe is my all-time favourite now.
The real hero of Rex Stout's wonderful series is Archie Goodwin, not Nero Wolfe, which is what makes it so special. That and the orchids.
BTW PG Wodehouse was a huge Rex Stout fan - which shows just how good he was.
And, finally, yes, Wimsey is annoying. The Nine Tailors sees him at his best, and his presence is muted by the greatness of the picture of fen life in 1930 somewhere on the borders of Lincs, Cambs and Norfolk. Not all that far from Algarkirk.
I agree with you -- the most interesting portions of 'The Nine Tailors' are the descriptions of Fenland life.
Harriet Vane is more interesting than the absurd Wimsey & the feudal Bunter. The best of DLS's books is Gaudy Night where Vane (& female education) is centre stage.
I was on the side of the bedder who attacks all the dons and I was heartbroken when she was caught by the wretched monocled Wimsey.
Goodwin & Wolfe are an incredible combo. I prefer Wolfe to Goodwin. Both Aunt Dahlia and Bertie Wooster were big fans, as was their creator.
I think the Nero Wolfe novels are stylistically very close to PG Wodehouse -- in that they create a highly artificial, yet enchanting & somehow believable, Universe in the brownstone on West 35th Street.
I mean, there is no-one who ever lived who was anything like Nero Wolfe. Or Archie Goodwin.
Just like there was no-one who ever lived who was anything like Jeeves. Or Bertie Wooster.
Sorry: just to make sure that there's no mistake here.
You supported the "bedder" who attacked the dons because she was opposed to female education?
I want to make absolutely sure there's no misunderstanding here.
I am always on the side of the degraded in the gutter because they have been thrown there.
The bedder's final speech is deranged and magnificent. The dons are shocked to silence by its emotional power.
Nevertheless, her reign of terror was because she was opposed to female education.
Motivated by an injustice -- which even the perpetrator accepted was unjust by the end of the novel.
The dons were too stupid to catch her.
I am on the side of anyone who can organise a reign of terror within the sedate confines of an Oxford College.
She did not go far enough -- assassination of the Senior Tutor & burning down the Chapel are necessary for a true reign of terror.
The injustice was that her husband was sacked and stripped of his degree for forging a historical thesis.
Which is unjust only in the sense it doesn't happen today which is why the likes of Richard Carrier, Robert Price and Naomi Wolfe continue to boast of their doctorates. Even though they should have them withdrawn.
But it wasn't acknowledged to be unjust. Anything but. The only thing they felt was wrong was neglecting him afterwards. 'Miss Lydgate would have acted as I did: but she would also have made it her business to enquire into what became of that unhappy man.'
Yup. For a modern version…
IIRC a journalist ran a plagiarism detector against theses of a number of prominent German politicians.
The resulting efforts to *not* find them guilty of plagiarism are quite inspiring. In a way.
Does paying someone else to write the thesis count as plagiarism? I knew of a case where an Iranian emigré who'd been close to the Shah did that. He had so much money he didn't know what to do with it, and he felt like getting a PhD the way he might buy a block of flats or a yacht... Nothing happened to him, despite at least one member of the Higher Degrees Committee being fully aware of what he'd done.
Would be reasonably hard to do that here with viva voce examinations for PhD - you'd need to at least understand what the other person had written for you (and reasons behind it) to be able to defend it.
ETA: Definitely against University Ethics. Might get away with it at Kent
It was at one of Scotland's Russell Group universities. I won't narrow it down any further. This was about 30 years ago. At the viva there would have been his supervisor (who was no fool and must surely have known), the head of the ~department who didn't know his arsehole from his elbow and would have been a cinch to con (and almost certainly didn't read the thesis anyway), one internal examiner (I don't know who that was), and an external examiner whose identity I also didn't know but most of the time in most British universities the external examiner is chosen in practice (although not in theory) by the candidate.
I'd like to think that's impossible now at any vaguely reputable university, even Russell Group!
Typical now is one internal and one external, sometimes one or more supervisor may observe (when I did mine my supervisor was not present; I've not been present for any of my students'). In my experience the supervisor leads on suggesting at least external examiners.
I do believe the degree to which a student is really tested varies very widely.
I'd agree with this (supervisor generally picks, or at least strongly suggests the external). On how hard the student is tested, I still to this day marvel at how short my viva was - 55 minutes. I came out, popped to see my supervisor who asked 'Are you having a break?" - I replied, no, it was over. Kinda feel short changed. Not least as the external said he had read the thesis on a flight to Spain (from Bristol). Assuming a bit of faffing with drinks and take off and landing, I reckon he gave it about 55 minutes of reading too...
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
The problem with things like YouTube, Facebook and especially Twitter, is that the content delivered is individually curated (*) for you. I see what I see on my feed, but have no idea if my experience is common to others. If I'm seeing an increase in right-wing content, is that because I've liked someone who themselves likes right-wing content, or is it a bias in the algorithms?
But given Musk's recent shenanigans, I'm fairly happy calling out Twitter as becoming increasingly a right-wing cesspool. I have an account, but have never tweeted, and follow just 26 accounts. I've given precisely two likes to tweets. Most of the people I follow would be classed as left-wing (mainly because many are into trains).
So why am I getting American right-wingers on my twitter feed?
(*) Is that the correct word?
(Emphasis added by me) Is that a typo for 'trans' or are train enthusiasts known for being left-wing? Thinking of PB, the out* train enthusiasts do seem to be more left-leaning.
* of the... goods shed? I allow that we may still have some closet goods shed train enthusiasts
Anyone into trains is a good egg in my book. These algorithms are quite powerful, they seem to have figured out my proclivities and push Deltics, Westerns, Hoovers and Tractors on me quite aggressively on FB. Not that I'm complaining - nothing makes me happier than seeing some diesel in rail blue powering through the 1970s British countryside. It is my own harmless form of nostalgia.
Good algorithm. Keeps the Sulzer stuff out of your feed!
I gave you a like, but really, how can you not love a 45?
In 2001 with Somerset five down for not many against Warwickshire in the C&G semi final, Rob Turner did some rapid sums and realised all he and Keith Dutch needed to do was bat out the overs and they would win.
So the two knocked the ball safely into gaps for singles, then with five overs left Dutch opened his shoulders, hit a few fours and the match was won.
And then they won the trophy.
Where's Rob Turner when we need him?
No sure he would cut the mustard now.. he is 55...
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
The problem with things like YouTube, Facebook and especially Twitter, is that the content delivered is individually curated (*) for you. I see what I see on my feed, but have no idea if my experience is common to others. If I'm seeing an increase in right-wing content, is that because I've liked someone who themselves likes right-wing content, or is it a bias in the algorithms?
But given Musk's recent shenanigans, I'm fairly happy calling out Twitter as becoming increasingly a right-wing cesspool. I have an account, but have never tweeted, and follow just 26 accounts. I've given precisely two likes to tweets. Most of the people I follow would be classed as left-wing (mainly because many are into trains).
So why am I getting American right-wingers on my twitter feed?
(*) Is that the correct word?
(Emphasis added by me) Is that a typo for 'trans' or are train enthusiasts known for being left-wing? Thinking of PB, the out* train enthusiasts do seem to be more left-leaning.
* of the... goods shed? I allow that we may still have some closet goods shed train enthusiasts
Anyone into trains is a good egg in my book. These algorithms are quite powerful, they seem to have figured out my proclivities and push Deltics, Westerns, Hoovers and Tractors on me quite aggressively on FB. Not that I'm complaining - nothing makes me happier than seeing some diesel in rail blue powering through the 1970s British countryside. It is my own harmless form of nostalgia.
Good algorithm. Keeps the Sulzer stuff out of your feed!
I gave you a like, but really, how can you not love a 45?
Probably best not to launch into that debate, but by way of looking for common ground, I do have a soft spot for Rats, MacRats and Cromptons. And Cromptons are my wife's favourites.
Your wife has a 'favourite' loco??? My goodness, you've got a keeper there! Mrs J's eyes glaze over when I try to inform her about the difference between a 44, 45 and 46.
Then again, I'm more likely to witter on about different types of track and rail "oooh look, 95lb a yard bullhead on early concrete sleepers!"
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
When I've made pro-Ukraine replies to other tweets about Ukraine recently - returning after having a break - I notice that I now receive a lot more pro-Russian replies, which themselves receive a lot more likes than my comments.
So it's not just the algorithm making anti-Ukraine tweets more prominent, it's an actual change in the userbase. Given the tenor of the replies I think it's doubtful that it's people changing their mind. Much more likely to be bots and trolls that would previously have been banned but are now unconstrained.
What's also particularly noticeable is that NAFO seems to have disappeared. That might be anti-Ukraine algorithm tweaking, or they might have got themselves banned when criticising Musk's so-called peace plan.
The West long ago accepted China’s invasion, occupation, then ethnic cleansing and mass plantation of Tibet.
If the bully is big enough they eventually get away with it.
Luckily, som bullies are not as big as they like to think they are anymore.
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
The problem with things like YouTube, Facebook and especially Twitter, is that the content delivered is individually curated (*) for you. I see what I see on my feed, but have no idea if my experience is common to others. If I'm seeing an increase in right-wing content, is that because I've liked someone who themselves likes right-wing content, or is it a bias in the algorithms?
But given Musk's recent shenanigans, I'm fairly happy calling out Twitter as becoming increasingly a right-wing cesspool. I have an account, but have never tweeted, and follow just 26 accounts. I've given precisely two likes to tweets. Most of the people I follow would be classed as left-wing (mainly because many are into trains).
So why am I getting American right-wingers on my twitter feed?
(*) Is that the correct word?
(Emphasis added by me) Is that a typo for 'trans' or are train enthusiasts known for being left-wing? Thinking of PB, the out* train enthusiasts do seem to be more left-leaning.
* of the... goods shed? I allow that we may still have some closet goods shed train enthusiasts
Anyone into trains is a good egg in my book. These algorithms are quite powerful, they seem to have figured out my proclivities and push Deltics, Westerns, Hoovers and Tractors on me quite aggressively on FB. Not that I'm complaining - nothing makes me happier than seeing some diesel in rail blue powering through the 1970s British countryside. It is my own harmless form of nostalgia.
Good algorithm. Keeps the Sulzer stuff out of your feed!
I gave you a like, but really, how can you not love a 45?
Though we apparently have Deltic heretics on PB...
Great PR move by the king: evict his son Harry Egalité so the ever popular Andrew can move in. That'll go down well in the focus groups.
His being visited by Ursula von der Leyen in connection with the Windsor Framework (!) didn't please Nigel Farage at all. Is it possible the king will have the rightwing press against him by the time of his coronation? He's got to pull a few positives out of the hat or else have a utility-scheme crowning job - and the latter's not happening.
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
The problem with things like YouTube, Facebook and especially Twitter, is that the content delivered is individually curated (*) for you. I see what I see on my feed, but have no idea if my experience is common to others. If I'm seeing an increase in right-wing content, is that because I've liked someone who themselves likes right-wing content, or is it a bias in the algorithms?
But given Musk's recent shenanigans, I'm fairly happy calling out Twitter as becoming increasingly a right-wing cesspool. I have an account, but have never tweeted, and follow just 26 accounts. I've given precisely two likes to tweets. Most of the people I follow would be classed as left-wing (mainly because many are into trains).
So why am I getting American right-wingers on my twitter feed?
(*) Is that the correct word?
(Emphasis added by me) Is that a typo for 'trans' or are train enthusiasts known for being left-wing? Thinking of PB, the out* train enthusiasts do seem to be more left-leaning.
* of the... goods shed? I allow that we may still have some closet goods shed train enthusiasts
Anyone into trains is a good egg in my book. These algorithms are quite powerful, they seem to have figured out my proclivities and push Deltics, Westerns, Hoovers and Tractors on me quite aggressively on FB. Not that I'm complaining - nothing makes me happier than seeing some diesel in rail blue powering through the 1970s British countryside. It is my own harmless form of nostalgia.
Good algorithm. Keeps the Sulzer stuff out of your feed!
I gave you a like, but really, how can you not love a 45?
Though we apparently have Deltic heretics on PB...
Well, since the thread has been somewhat derailed, I might as well promote the third series of Tim Dunn's "The architecture that railways built", which is now available on UKTVPlay
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
The problem with things like YouTube, Facebook and especially Twitter, is that the content delivered is individually curated (*) for you. I see what I see on my feed, but have no idea if my experience is common to others. If I'm seeing an increase in right-wing content, is that because I've liked someone who themselves likes right-wing content, or is it a bias in the algorithms?
But given Musk's recent shenanigans, I'm fairly happy calling out Twitter as becoming increasingly a right-wing cesspool. I have an account, but have never tweeted, and follow just 26 accounts. I've given precisely two likes to tweets. Most of the people I follow would be classed as left-wing (mainly because many are into trains).
So why am I getting American right-wingers on my twitter feed?
(*) Is that the correct word?
(Emphasis added by me) Is that a typo for 'trans' or are train enthusiasts known for being left-wing? Thinking of PB, the out* train enthusiasts do seem to be more left-leaning.
* of the... goods shed? I allow that we may still have some closet goods shed train enthusiasts
IME most rail enthusiasts tend to be more left-wing than right-wing, though as always there are often exceptions, and it does tend to be a spectrum.
There are actually quite a few 'hidden' rail enthusiasts, people who are famous and are quite into trains. Rod Stewart and Pete Waterman are just the start. One or two are even known to get their elbows mucky at weekends at preserved railways, or on railtours...
And yes, I know of at least two trans trains fans.
I can imagine Rod singing about it ... Interrailing Interrailing
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
When I've made pro-Ukraine replies to other tweets about Ukraine recently - returning after having a break - I notice that I now receive a lot more pro-Russian replies, which themselves receive a lot more likes than my comments.
So it's not just the algorithm making anti-Ukraine tweets more prominent, it's an actual change in the userbase. Given the tenor of the replies I think it's doubtful that it's people changing their mind. Much more likely to be bots and trolls that would previously have been banned but are now unconstrained.
What's also particularly noticeable is that NAFO seems to have disappeared. That might be anti-Ukraine algorithm tweaking, or they might have got themselves banned when criticising Musk's so-called peace plan.
The West long ago accepted China’s invasion, occupation, then ethnic cleansing and mass plantation of Tibet.
If the bully is big enough they eventually get away with it.
Luckily, som bullies are not as big as they like to think they are anymore.
I oppose the Chinese occupation of Tibet, the oppression of its people, and the forced settlement by ethnic Han Chinese.
However, it is wrong to compare the Chinese occupation of Tibet with the Russian attempt to conquer Ukraine. While both countries were once largely part of their respective neighbour's Empires, the independence of Ukraine was internationally recognised, including by Russia itself. This was never the case for Tibet in relation to China.
While I am perfectly willing to criticise the West's conduct in relation to China and Tibet, it is unfair to juxtapose that with the response to Ukraine in some sort of attempt to criticise the West's failure to defend Tibet in the same way that it is helping to defend Ukraine.
It's also nonsensical, because the West was willing to fight a war against China to defend South Korea against Chinese aggression at the same time, which strongly suggests that fear of China was not a determining factor in the decision not to directly oppose the Chinese occupation of Tibet.
"The Armed Forces of Transnistria has announced that beginning on March 1st they will be holding a 3-Month Military Exercise that will include any Military Aged Male who wishes to sign up; during the Exercise volunteers will be taught how to conduct “Peacekeeping Operations.”"
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
The problem with things like YouTube, Facebook and especially Twitter, is that the content delivered is individually curated (*) for you. I see what I see on my feed, but have no idea if my experience is common to others. If I'm seeing an increase in right-wing content, is that because I've liked someone who themselves likes right-wing content, or is it a bias in the algorithms?
But given Musk's recent shenanigans, I'm fairly happy calling out Twitter as becoming increasingly a right-wing cesspool. I have an account, but have never tweeted, and follow just 26 accounts. I've given precisely two likes to tweets. Most of the people I follow would be classed as left-wing (mainly because many are into trains).
So why am I getting American right-wingers on my twitter feed?
(*) Is that the correct word?
(Emphasis added by me) Is that a typo for 'trans' or are train enthusiasts known for being left-wing? Thinking of PB, the out* train enthusiasts do seem to be more left-leaning.
* of the... goods shed? I allow that we may still have some closet goods shed train enthusiasts
Anyone into trains is a good egg in my book. These algorithms are quite powerful, they seem to have figured out my proclivities and push Deltics, Westerns, Hoovers and Tractors on me quite aggressively on FB. Not that I'm complaining - nothing makes me happier than seeing some diesel in rail blue powering through the 1970s British countryside. It is my own harmless form of nostalgia.
Good algorithm. Keeps the Sulzer stuff out of your feed!
I gave you a like, but really, how can you not love a 45?
Though we apparently have Deltic heretics on PB...
Deltics were pants.
(Runs for cover)
Just so wrong. 3300hp of British engineering prowess powering up the East Coast main line, its twin Napier Deltic marine diesel engines belching out plumes of blue smoke, and that unmistakable sound... Damn, there's something in my eye.
"The Armed Forces of Transnistria has announced that beginning on March 1st they will be holding a 3-Month Military Exercise that will include any Military Aged Male who wishes to sign up; during the Exercise volunteers will be taught how to conduct “Peacekeeping Operations.”"
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
The problem with things like YouTube, Facebook and especially Twitter, is that the content delivered is individually curated (*) for you. I see what I see on my feed, but have no idea if my experience is common to others. If I'm seeing an increase in right-wing content, is that because I've liked someone who themselves likes right-wing content, or is it a bias in the algorithms?
But given Musk's recent shenanigans, I'm fairly happy calling out Twitter as becoming increasingly a right-wing cesspool. I have an account, but have never tweeted, and follow just 26 accounts. I've given precisely two likes to tweets. Most of the people I follow would be classed as left-wing (mainly because many are into trains).
So why am I getting American right-wingers on my twitter feed?
(*) Is that the correct word?
(Emphasis added by me) Is that a typo for 'trans' or are train enthusiasts known for being left-wing? Thinking of PB, the out* train enthusiasts do seem to be more left-leaning.
* of the... goods shed? I allow that we may still have some closet goods shed train enthusiasts
Anyone into trains is a good egg in my book. These algorithms are quite powerful, they seem to have figured out my proclivities and push Deltics, Westerns, Hoovers and Tractors on me quite aggressively on FB. Not that I'm complaining - nothing makes me happier than seeing some diesel in rail blue powering through the 1970s British countryside. It is my own harmless form of nostalgia.
Good algorithm. Keeps the Sulzer stuff out of your feed!
I gave you a like, but really, how can you not love a 45?
Though we apparently have Deltic heretics on PB...
Deltics were pants.
(Runs for cover)
Just so wrong. 3300hp of British engineering prowess powering up the East Coast main line, its twin Napier Deltic marine diesel engines belching out plumes of blue smoke, and that unmistakable sound... Damn, there's something in my eye.
The dust in your eye is probably from one of the Deltic engines that has blown a gasket.
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
The problem with things like YouTube, Facebook and especially Twitter, is that the content delivered is individually curated (*) for you. I see what I see on my feed, but have no idea if my experience is common to others. If I'm seeing an increase in right-wing content, is that because I've liked someone who themselves likes right-wing content, or is it a bias in the algorithms?
But given Musk's recent shenanigans, I'm fairly happy calling out Twitter as becoming increasingly a right-wing cesspool. I have an account, but have never tweeted, and follow just 26 accounts. I've given precisely two likes to tweets. Most of the people I follow would be classed as left-wing (mainly because many are into trains).
So why am I getting American right-wingers on my twitter feed?
(*) Is that the correct word?
(Emphasis added by me) Is that a typo for 'trans' or are train enthusiasts known for being left-wing? Thinking of PB, the out* train enthusiasts do seem to be more left-leaning.
* of the... goods shed? I allow that we may still have some closet goods shed train enthusiasts
Anyone into trains is a good egg in my book. These algorithms are quite powerful, they seem to have figured out my proclivities and push Deltics, Westerns, Hoovers and Tractors on me quite aggressively on FB. Not that I'm complaining - nothing makes me happier than seeing some diesel in rail blue powering through the 1970s British countryside. It is my own harmless form of nostalgia.
Good algorithm. Keeps the Sulzer stuff out of your feed!
I gave you a like, but really, how can you not love a 45?
Though we apparently have Deltic heretics on PB...
Deltics were pants.
(Runs for cover)
Just so wrong. 3300hp of British engineering prowess powering up the East Coast main line, its twin Napier Deltic marine diesel engines belching out plumes of blue smoke, and that unmistakable sound... Damn, there's something in my eye.
The dust in your eye is probably from one of the Deltic engines that has blown a gasket.
In Dorothy L Sayers masterpiece 'The Nine Tailors' her detective, Peter Wimsey, avoids walking round a church anticlockwise for this very reason.
The only problem with that book was that her knowledge of campanology was a bit ropey.
Well that, and DLS's invasive snobbishness & pretentiousness.
Wimsey is one of the most irritating detectives in fiction.
Having come late in life to the books, I think Rex Stout's Nero Wolfe is my all-time favourite now.
The real hero of Rex Stout's wonderful series is Archie Goodwin, not Nero Wolfe, which is what makes it so special. That and the orchids.
BTW PG Wodehouse was a huge Rex Stout fan - which shows just how good he was.
And, finally, yes, Wimsey is annoying. The Nine Tailors sees him at his best, and his presence is muted by the greatness of the picture of fen life in 1930 somewhere on the borders of Lincs, Cambs and Norfolk. Not all that far from Algarkirk.
I agree with you -- the most interesting portions of 'The Nine Tailors' are the descriptions of Fenland life.
Harriet Vane is more interesting than the absurd Wimsey & the feudal Bunter. The best of DLS's books is Gaudy Night where Vane (& female education) is centre stage.
I was on the side of the bedder who attacks all the dons and I was heartbroken when she was caught by the wretched monocled Wimsey.
Goodwin & Wolfe are an incredible combo. I prefer Wolfe to Goodwin. Both Aunt Dahlia and Bertie Wooster were big fans, as was their creator.
I think the Nero Wolfe novels are stylistically very close to PG Wodehouse -- in that they create a highly artificial, yet enchanting & somehow believable, Universe in the brownstone on West 35th Street.
I mean, there is no-one who ever lived who was anything like Nero Wolfe. Or Archie Goodwin.
Just like there was no-one who ever lived who was anything like Jeeves. Or Bertie Wooster.
Sorry: just to make sure that there's no mistake here.
You supported the "bedder" who attacked the dons because she was opposed to female education?
I want to make absolutely sure there's no misunderstanding here.
I am always on the side of the degraded in the gutter because they have been thrown there.
The bedder's final speech is deranged and magnificent. The dons are shocked to silence by its emotional power.
Nevertheless, her reign of terror was because she was opposed to female education.
Motivated by an injustice -- which even the perpetrator accepted was unjust by the end of the novel.
The dons were too stupid to catch her.
I am on the side of anyone who can organise a reign of terror within the sedate confines of an Oxford College.
She did not go far enough -- assassination of the Senior Tutor & burning down the Chapel are necessary for a true reign of terror.
The injustice was that her husband was sacked and stripped of his degree for forging a historical thesis.
Which is unjust only in the sense it doesn't happen today which is why the likes of Richard Carrier, Robert Price and Naomi Wolfe continue to boast of their doctorates. Even though they should have them withdrawn.
But it wasn't acknowledged to be unjust. Anything but. The only thing they felt was wrong was neglecting him afterwards. 'Miss Lydgate would have acted as I did: but she would also have made it her business to enquire into what became of that unhappy man.'
Yup. For a modern version…
IIRC a journalist ran a plagiarism detector against theses of a number of prominent German politicians.
The resulting efforts to *not* find them guilty of plagiarism are quite inspiring. In a way.
Does paying someone else to write the thesis count as plagiarism? I knew of a case where an Iranian emigré who'd been close to the Shah did that. He had so much money he didn't know what to do with it, and he felt like getting a PhD the way he might buy a block of flats or a yacht... Nothing happened to him, despite at least one member of the Higher Degrees Committee being fully aware of what he'd done.
Would be reasonably hard to do that here with viva voce examinations for PhD - you'd need to at least understand what the other person had written for you (and reasons behind it) to be able to defend it.
ETA: Definitely against University Ethics. Might get away with it at Kent
It was at one of Scotland's Russell Group universities. I won't narrow it down any further. This was about 30 years ago. At the viva there would have been his supervisor (who was no fool and must surely have known), the head of the ~department who didn't know his arsehole from his elbow and would have been a cinch to con (and almost certainly didn't read the thesis anyway), one internal examiner (I don't know who that was), and an external examiner whose identity I also didn't know but most of the time in most British universities the external examiner is chosen in practice (although not in theory) by the candidate.
When one of Ghaddafi’s sons published some stuff about more-democratic-than-democracy, though LSE, LSE praised it.
Someone commented that he hoped that they had been bribed, since the alternative was much worse.
It's amazing how little damage that did to LSE. Howard Davies was then asked to look into Heathrow expansion.
Yes. But was 'woke' ever not derogatory? I always understood it as a term of the social conservative* to diss the socially progressive*, the modern day equivalent of 'political correctness'
*for want of better terms - I'm aware that 'progressive' in itself is loaded (who wants to be regressive?) but can't think of a better term
ETA: To some extent it's regression to the mean, or regression to the centre to become electable. People have other issues, so a party obsessed with wokeness (on either side) is unlikely to command wide enough support to win.
“Woke” originates within the Black activist community in the US back in the 1930s. If you were woke, you had become truly aware of the persistent nature of white supremacy & the work done by the state to prevent black people from prospering.
I’m not sure when it took on a wider social justice meaning, sometime post 2000 I think - I certainly never heard it as a teenager at university, but maybe I didn’t move in the right activist circles?
Like many social justice terms it then hopped over to the right as a prejudicial term, a route that echoes that took by “politically correct” in earlier times.
Only problem is the majority of white Americans have never supported "white supremacy", even in the 1930s.
Self-pitying Brexiters, whose vicious depictions of ‘Remainers’ were as dishonest as they were dangerous, are now pathetically seeking sympathy for the consequences of Brexit! This, I confess, is a plot twist I did not foresee. The narcissism of these saboteurs is off the charts.
Just catching up, via the recently-discovered "notifications" on a week-old thread. About whether having military experience gives any insight into geopolitical conflicts the like of which we are seeing now.
Of course it doesn't. It does mean that I can look at an area weapon strike and cast my eyes to the ceiling as everyone pronounces that the damage came from hand held anti-tank weapons yes sure, but more broadly at theatre level then not at all.
My inestimable expertise comes from studying the bleedin' obvious, from historical geopolitical conflicts, and from accepting that the fog of war is real and this one won't be resolved in 24-hr rolling news time.
I also call out comments which display absurd historical determinism or say, one way or another, that we will win because we must win, these latter usually made by scared idiots on here who hope that if they shout something loud enough the bad man will go away.
A Labour Party spokesperson said: "Thanks to Keir Starmer's leadership, Labour is now a serious, credible government in waiting and our candidates reflect that. Robust due diligence processes have been put in place to make sure everyone selected is of the highest calibre and for that we’ll make no apologies.
“Labour has changed. Keir believes that politics can be a force for good, and that his government can restore the faith in it that 13 years of Tory government has carelessly eroded. The public rightly expect anyone asking to hold office is of the highest standard, and with Labour they can. We're really pleased that outstanding Labour candidates have already been selected in constituencies across Britain, and that work continues."
Rejected candidate had previously stood for Labour in 2017 and 2019. In 2017 Anna Soubry’s majority cut to 863 from over 4,000.
... and in 2019, it was back up to ~3,800 with the same Labour candidate.
It's an interesting one; the candidate failed twice, in 2017 and 2019. Do you try him on the constituency's electorate for a third time, and if so, why?
Why not? Nicola Sturgeon lost 2 parliamentary election contests and 3 council wards before she was first elected in 1999. I’m sure other SNP politicians lost a lot more than that before finally being elected.
Stamina pays off.
Sometimes. It shouldn't automatically exclude someone. But equally if a party wants to go in a different direction tough shit.
Sarah Vine writes a pathetic whiny article over how Brexit ruined her social life and effected her marriage.
Failing at anytime to say it was worth all the drama to get Brexit , no benefits of Brexit listed . It’s all poor me !
And we should care why ? She jumped on the Brexit bandwagon robbing people of their freedom of movement rights so she can keep her pathetic whining to herself .
Given it was Gove it must be one of the only brexit benefits
In Dorothy L Sayers masterpiece 'The Nine Tailors' her detective, Peter Wimsey, avoids walking round a church anticlockwise for this very reason.
The only problem with that book was that her knowledge of campanology was a bit ropey.
Well that, and DLS's invasive snobbishness & pretentiousness.
Wimsey is one of the most irritating detectives in fiction.
Having come late in life to the books, I think Rex Stout's Nero Wolfe is my all-time favourite now.
The real hero of Rex Stout's wonderful series is Archie Goodwin, not Nero Wolfe, which is what makes it so special. That and the orchids.
BTW PG Wodehouse was a huge Rex Stout fan - which shows just how good he was.
And, finally, yes, Wimsey is annoying. The Nine Tailors sees him at his best, and his presence is muted by the greatness of the picture of fen life in 1930 somewhere on the borders of Lincs, Cambs and Norfolk. Not all that far from Algarkirk.
I agree with you -- the most interesting portions of 'The Nine Tailors' are the descriptions of Fenland life.
Harriet Vane is more interesting than the absurd Wimsey & the feudal Bunter. The best of DLS's books is Gaudy Night where Vane (& female education) is centre stage.
I was on the side of the bedder who attacks all the dons and I was heartbroken when she was caught by the wretched monocled Wimsey.
Goodwin & Wolfe are an incredible combo. I prefer Wolfe to Goodwin. Both Aunt Dahlia and Bertie Wooster were big fans, as was their creator.
I think the Nero Wolfe novels are stylistically very close to PG Wodehouse -- in that they create a highly artificial, yet enchanting & somehow believable, Universe in the brownstone on West 35th Street.
I mean, there is no-one who ever lived who was anything like Nero Wolfe. Or Archie Goodwin.
Just like there was no-one who ever lived who was anything like Jeeves. Or Bertie Wooster.
Sorry: just to make sure that there's no mistake here.
You supported the "bedder" who attacked the dons because she was opposed to female education?
I want to make absolutely sure there's no misunderstanding here.
I am always on the side of the degraded in the gutter because they have been thrown there.
The bedder's final speech is deranged and magnificent. The dons are shocked to silence by its emotional power.
Nevertheless, her reign of terror was because she was opposed to female education.
Motivated by an injustice -- which even the perpetrator accepted was unjust by the end of the novel.
The dons were too stupid to catch her.
I am on the side of anyone who can organise a reign of terror within the sedate confines of an Oxford College.
She did not go far enough -- assassination of the Senior Tutor & burning down the Chapel are necessary for a true reign of terror.
The injustice was that her husband was sacked and stripped of his degree for forging a historical thesis.
Which is unjust only in the sense it doesn't happen today which is why the likes of Richard Carrier, Robert Price and Naomi Wolfe continue to boast of their doctorates. Even though they should have them withdrawn.
But it wasn't acknowledged to be unjust. Anything but. The only thing they felt was wrong was neglecting him afterwards. 'Miss Lydgate would have acted as I did: but she would also have made it her business to enquire into what became of that unhappy man.'
Yup. For a modern version…
IIRC a journalist ran a plagiarism detector against theses of a number of prominent German politicians.
The resulting efforts to *not* find them guilty of plagiarism are quite inspiring. In a way.
As several German politicians have resigned over this issue, I'm not sure what inspiring efforts you are referring to.
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
The problem with things like YouTube, Facebook and especially Twitter, is that the content delivered is individually curated (*) for you. I see what I see on my feed, but have no idea if my experience is common to others. If I'm seeing an increase in right-wing content, is that because I've liked someone who themselves likes right-wing content, or is it a bias in the algorithms?
But given Musk's recent shenanigans, I'm fairly happy calling out Twitter as becoming increasingly a right-wing cesspool. I have an account, but have never tweeted, and follow just 26 accounts. I've given precisely two likes to tweets. Most of the people I follow would be classed as left-wing (mainly because many are into trains).
So why am I getting American right-wingers on my twitter feed?
(*) Is that the correct word?
Because the algorithm wants you to argue with them.
That's an assumption. In which case I'd expect right-wingers to get lots of leftists.
And that's the problem: as everyone's experience is individual on these platforms, and are ruled by the Holy RNGorithm, it's hard to know if what I see is typical or not.
That’s exactly what happens.
And if you express opinions, the algorithms tend to serve up “similar but harder line views” for you to agree with as well.
Just catching up, via the recently-discovered "notifications" on a week-old thread. About whether having military experience gives any insight into geopolitical conflicts the like of which we are seeing now.
Of course it doesn't. It does mean that I can look at an area weapon strike and cast my eyes to the ceiling as everyone pronounces that the damage came from hand held anti-tank weapons yes sure, but more broadly at theatre level then not at all.
My inestimable expertise comes from studying the bleedin' obvious, from historical geopolitical conflicts, and from accepting that the fog of war is real and this one won't be resolved in 24-hr rolling news time.
I also call out comments which display absurd historical determinism or say, one way or another, that we will win because we must win, these latter usually made by scared idiots on here who hope that if they shout something loud enough the bad man will go away.
Anyway, good weekend everyone, I trust.
Oooh, fight! Fight!
I can't think of many posts that don't accept the 'fog of war' is real; indeed, I think many people on here thoroughly accept that. But that doesn't mean we can't link to things we see, even if they are partly fog-covered.
I also don't see anyone who expects it to be "resolved in 24-hr rolling news time".
"that we will win because we must win"
My own view is slightly different: we must give Ukraine all the help they need to win, because letting Russia win will create even more problems down the line. Now, that might be because I'm a 'scared idiot', or it might be because I've studied the bleedin' obvious from historical geopolitical conflicts.
In Dorothy L Sayers masterpiece 'The Nine Tailors' her detective, Peter Wimsey, avoids walking round a church anticlockwise for this very reason.
The only problem with that book was that her knowledge of campanology was a bit ropey.
Well that, and DLS's invasive snobbishness & pretentiousness.
Wimsey is one of the most irritating detectives in fiction.
Having come late in life to the books, I think Rex Stout's Nero Wolfe is my all-time favourite now.
The real hero of Rex Stout's wonderful series is Archie Goodwin, not Nero Wolfe, which is what makes it so special. That and the orchids.
BTW PG Wodehouse was a huge Rex Stout fan - which shows just how good he was.
And, finally, yes, Wimsey is annoying. The Nine Tailors sees him at his best, and his presence is muted by the greatness of the picture of fen life in 1930 somewhere on the borders of Lincs, Cambs and Norfolk. Not all that far from Algarkirk.
I agree with you -- the most interesting portions of 'The Nine Tailors' are the descriptions of Fenland life.
Harriet Vane is more interesting than the absurd Wimsey & the feudal Bunter. The best of DLS's books is Gaudy Night where Vane (& female education) is centre stage.
I was on the side of the bedder who attacks all the dons and I was heartbroken when she was caught by the wretched monocled Wimsey.
Goodwin & Wolfe are an incredible combo. I prefer Wolfe to Goodwin. Both Aunt Dahlia and Bertie Wooster were big fans, as was their creator.
I think the Nero Wolfe novels are stylistically very close to PG Wodehouse -- in that they create a highly artificial, yet enchanting & somehow believable, Universe in the brownstone on West 35th Street.
I mean, there is no-one who ever lived who was anything like Nero Wolfe. Or Archie Goodwin.
Just like there was no-one who ever lived who was anything like Jeeves. Or Bertie Wooster.
Sorry: just to make sure that there's no mistake here.
You supported the "bedder" who attacked the dons because she was opposed to female education?
I want to make absolutely sure there's no misunderstanding here.
I am always on the side of the degraded in the gutter because they have been thrown there.
The bedder's final speech is deranged and magnificent. The dons are shocked to silence by its emotional power.
Nevertheless, her reign of terror was because she was opposed to female education.
Motivated by an injustice -- which even the perpetrator accepted was unjust by the end of the novel.
The dons were too stupid to catch her.
I am on the side of anyone who can organise a reign of terror within the sedate confines of an Oxford College.
She did not go far enough -- assassination of the Senior Tutor & burning down the Chapel are necessary for a true reign of terror.
The injustice was that her husband was sacked and stripped of his degree for forging a historical thesis.
Which is unjust only in the sense it doesn't happen today which is why the likes of Richard Carrier, Robert Price and Naomi Wolfe continue to boast of their doctorates. Even though they should have them withdrawn.
But it wasn't acknowledged to be unjust. Anything but. The only thing they felt was wrong was neglecting him afterwards. 'Miss Lydgate would have acted as I did: but she would also have made it her business to enquire into what became of that unhappy man.'
Yup. For a modern version…
IIRC a journalist ran a plagiarism detector against theses of a number of prominent German politicians.
The resulting efforts to *not* find them guilty of plagiarism are quite inspiring. In a way.
Does paying someone else to write the thesis count as plagiarism? I knew of a case where an Iranian emigré who'd been close to the Shah did that. He had so much money he didn't know what to do with it, and he felt like getting a PhD the way he might buy a block of flats or a yacht... Nothing happened to him, despite at least one member of the Higher Degrees Committee being fully aware of what he'd done.
Judging from this week's Economist academia (it has 3 pages on science papers) is a corrupt and corrupting mess.
Just catching up, via the recently-discovered "notifications" on a week-old thread. About whether having military experience gives any insight into geopolitical conflicts the like of which we are seeing now.
Of course it doesn't. It does mean that I can look at an area weapon strike and cast my eyes to the ceiling as everyone pronounces that the damage came from hand held anti-tank weapons yes sure, but more broadly at theatre level then not at all.
My inestimable expertise comes from studying the bleedin' obvious, from historical geopolitical conflicts, and from accepting that the fog of war is real and this one won't be resolved in 24-hr rolling news time.
I also call out comments which display absurd historical determinism or say, one way or another, that we will win because we must win, these latter usually made by scared idiots on here who hope that if they shout something loud enough the bad man will go away.
Anyway, good weekend everyone, I trust.
Oooh, fight! Fight!
I can't think of many posts that don't accept the 'fog of war' is real; indeed, I think many people on here thoroughly accept that. But that doesn't mean we can't link to things we see, even if they are partly fog-covered.
I also don't see anyone who expects it to be "resolved in 24-hr rolling news time".
"that we will win because we must win"
My own view is slightly different: we must give Ukraine all the help they need to win, because letting Russia win will create even more problems down the line. Now, that might be because I'm a 'scared idiot', or it might be because I've studied the bleedin' obvious from historical geopolitical conflicts.
Source close to Hancock claims Oakeshott broke an NDA to publish the trove of WhatsApps. She publishes a long public interest defence. Quite extraordinary he chose the journalist who had campaigned most vigorously against his most significant political policy…
Later today, we find out Theresa May has handed over all her private government emails to Nigel Farage in order for him to write a favourable memoir. Boris Johnson currently deciding between James O’Brien and Ian Dunt.
A few years ago my mother had a flood at her home and at the same time (rather fittingly) suffered from water on the brain. Water on the brain renders you dementia-like and incapable mentally.
I was in the absurd position of having to tell Direct Line on my mother's behalf that she needed to claim and them not accepting my authority as at that time we didn't have any lasting powers of attorney in place (there are medical and financial ones). It was going to be the worst of all nightmares albeit my mother had a moment of clarity midway through and could confirm that she was who I had been saying she was.
Lasting Power of Attorney is an absolute essential for just about everyone.
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
The problem with things like YouTube, Facebook and especially Twitter, is that the content delivered is individually curated (*) for you. I see what I see on my feed, but have no idea if my experience is common to others. If I'm seeing an increase in right-wing content, is that because I've liked someone who themselves likes right-wing content, or is it a bias in the algorithms?
But given Musk's recent shenanigans, I'm fairly happy calling out Twitter as becoming increasingly a right-wing cesspool. I have an account, but have never tweeted, and follow just 26 accounts. I've given precisely two likes to tweets. Most of the people I follow would be classed as left-wing (mainly because many are into trains).
So why am I getting American right-wingers on my twitter feed?
(*) Is that the correct word?
(Emphasis added by me) Is that a typo for 'trans' or are train enthusiasts known for being left-wing? Thinking of PB, the out* train enthusiasts do seem to be more left-leaning.
* of the... goods shed? I allow that we may still have some closet goods shed train enthusiasts
Anyone into trains is a good egg in my book. These algorithms are quite powerful, they seem to have figured out my proclivities and push Deltics, Westerns, Hoovers and Tractors on me quite aggressively on FB. Not that I'm complaining - nothing makes me happier than seeing some diesel in rail blue powering through the 1970s British countryside. It is my own harmless form of nostalgia.
Good algorithm. Keeps the Sulzer stuff out of your feed!
I gave you a like, but really, how can you not love a 45?
Probably best not to launch into that debate, but by way of looking for common ground, I do have a soft spot for Rats, MacRats and Cromptons. And Cromptons are my wife's favourites.
Your wife has a 'favourite' loco??? My goodness, you've got a keeper there! Mrs J's eyes glaze over when I try to inform her about the difference between a 44, 45 and 46.
Then again, I'm more likely to witter on about different types of track and rail "oooh look, 95lb a yard bullhead on early concrete sleepers!"
It's a hobby, I suppose...
I still remember identifying a piece of original Brunel style broad gauge track at Oxford station, when I was a kid in the 80s - it was being used to brace some rotten timber, at the end of that end-of-line platform. I identified it from the description in Rolt...
I pointed it out to my parents who were very polite. IIRC it is in a railway museum now.
Is Twitter down or has Musk just disabled it for anyone not yet paying him money ?
I've noticed a lot more pro-Russian material (or at least Ukraine-sceptic) appearing on my timeline recently. Really noticeable. That must be either because a. Western commentators are turning against Ukraine, b. the Twitter algorithm has been tweaked to bring me more pro-Kremlin material, or c. the algorithm has been tweaked to give more prominence to right wing US content, which has a side-effect of containing pro-Kremlin messaging.
The problem with things like YouTube, Facebook and especially Twitter, is that the content delivered is individually curated (*) for you. I see what I see on my feed, but have no idea if my experience is common to others. If I'm seeing an increase in right-wing content, is that because I've liked someone who themselves likes right-wing content, or is it a bias in the algorithms?
But given Musk's recent shenanigans, I'm fairly happy calling out Twitter as becoming increasingly a right-wing cesspool. I have an account, but have never tweeted, and follow just 26 accounts. I've given precisely two likes to tweets. Most of the people I follow would be classed as left-wing (mainly because many are into trains).
So why am I getting American right-wingers on my twitter feed?
(*) Is that the correct word?
(Emphasis added by me) Is that a typo for 'trans' or are train enthusiasts known for being left-wing? Thinking of PB, the out* train enthusiasts do seem to be more left-leaning.
* of the... goods shed? I allow that we may still have some closet goods shed train enthusiasts
Anyone into trains is a good egg in my book. These algorithms are quite powerful, they seem to have figured out my proclivities and push Deltics, Westerns, Hoovers and Tractors on me quite aggressively on FB. Not that I'm complaining - nothing makes me happier than seeing some diesel in rail blue powering through the 1970s British countryside. It is my own harmless form of nostalgia.
Just catching up, via the recently-discovered "notifications" on a week-old thread. About whether having military experience gives any insight into geopolitical conflicts the like of which we are seeing now.
Of course it doesn't. It does mean that I can look at an area weapon strike and cast my eyes to the ceiling as everyone pronounces that the damage came from hand held anti-tank weapons yes sure, but more broadly at theatre level then not at all.
My inestimable expertise comes from studying the bleedin' obvious, from historical geopolitical conflicts, and from accepting that the fog of war is real and this one won't be resolved in 24-hr rolling news time.
I also call out comments which display absurd historical determinism or say, one way or another, that we will win because we must win, these latter usually made by scared idiots on here who hope that if they shout something loud enough the bad man will go away.
Anyway, good weekend everyone, I trust.
Oooh, fight! Fight!
I can't think of many posts that don't accept the 'fog of war' is real; indeed, I think many people on here thoroughly accept that. But that doesn't mean we can't link to things we see, even if they are partly fog-covered.
I also don't see anyone who expects it to be "resolved in 24-hr rolling news time".
"that we will win because we must win"
My own view is slightly different: we must give Ukraine all the help they need to win, because letting Russia win will create even more problems down the line. Now, that might be because I'm a 'scared idiot', or it might be because I've studied the bleedin' obvious from historical geopolitical conflicts.
Define "all the help they need to win".
If I was to say: "F16 block XV jets, ATACMS type 76 and Type XX destroyers," we'd both know I was bullshitting. firstly because we both know I don't have that sort of in-depth knowledge, and secondly because I don't think they exist.
But exactly that: whatever it takes, short of nukes, to help Ukraine to win.
Now, I know you're going to nitpick on that, but as a broad principle I think it's sound. If Ukraine don't 'win' (*) now, then we're going to have to do more elsewhere in the future. Do you disagree with that?
Just catching up, via the recently-discovered "notifications" on a week-old thread. About whether having military experience gives any insight into geopolitical conflicts the like of which we are seeing now.
Of course it doesn't. It does mean that I can look at an area weapon strike and cast my eyes to the ceiling as everyone pronounces that the damage came from hand held anti-tank weapons yes sure, but more broadly at theatre level then not at all.
My inestimable expertise comes from studying the bleedin' obvious, from historical geopolitical conflicts, and from accepting that the fog of war is real and this one won't be resolved in 24-hr rolling news time.
I also call out comments which display absurd historical determinism or say, one way or another, that we will win because we must win, these latter usually made by scared idiots on here who hope that if they shout something loud enough the bad man will go away.
Anyway, good weekend everyone, I trust.
Oooh, fight! Fight!
I can't think of many posts that don't accept the 'fog of war' is real; indeed, I think many people on here thoroughly accept that. But that doesn't mean we can't link to things we see, even if they are partly fog-covered.
I also don't see anyone who expects it to be "resolved in 24-hr rolling news time".
"that we will win because we must win"
My own view is slightly different: we must give Ukraine all the help they need to win, because letting Russia win will create even more problems down the line. Now, that might be because I'm a 'scared idiot', or it might be because I've studied the bleedin' obvious from historical geopolitical conflicts.
Define "all the help they need to win".
I would say something like, "as much help as possible to maximise their chances of defeating the Russian invasion, liberating the occupied territories same reducing the suffering of Ukrainian civilians to a minimum."
NATO have had more than a year's worth of arguments over what is possible and will continue to do so as long as the war continues.
That corresponds with my surveyor friend who says his workload went from brisk to tumbleweed overnight following the Truss reign/interest rate rise.
Hopefully a long-overdue price correction is coming.
As someone who bought his home in December, I couldn't give less of a shit if I end up in negative equity and bought at the top of the market. I have a home, that's more than many other people, and if I was renting it'd be dead money anyway so who cares if a theoretical number goes negative.
If people who "invested" in property portfolios end up in negative equity on the other hand, then caveat emptor applies. If they lose everything, they deserve no more sympathy than those who invested in Woolworths or any other failed investment.
Now we all accept it “came from the lab“ we can focus on the nuances of this question. Because it is nuanced
In order of ascending outrageousness
1. They collected a bat - maybe even in Yunnan, where the caves are - and it pissed on some poor lab worker, who brought the virus to the Wuhan wet market (surely the superspreader event)
2. They had bats in the lab and one bit a worker and etc etc
3. They passed the virus through humanized mice and a mouse bit etc etc
4. They added gain of function - for the best of reasons (improved vaccines) to the virus and the new nastier virus somehow infected a worker who went to the market
5. They added gain of function for generally good reasons but there were lurking bioweapons motivations as well - create nasty coronaviruses that can cripple economies - we know China is interested in this, Wuhan researchers are linked to Chinese military scientists who have openly talked about this, and written about it. The GOF’d virus got out, and etc etc
6. The evil scientists created a GOF’d coronavirus and DELIBERATELY released it as a bio weapon
There are probably more scenarios I’ve missed, but I am drinking a G&T
Of these my hunch is 1-4 as the most likely. Equally likely. 3 or 4 if I had to wager money
But 5 is still quite possible, even 6 at a pinch, tho it seems highly improbable. Why release a virus bio-weapon before your have a vaccine for your people? Fairly mad
What happened without any shadow of a doubt is that there was a shameful cover-up of much of this, and an attempt to blame the wet market, thus exonerating China and science entirely - and people should go to prison for this, for many years
I am happy to be vindicated and pleased with my prescience. But that Sean guy is just a fucking genius. It’s so on point it is spooky
An interesting question is: why did so many Democrats in the USA find the possibility of a lab leak so offensive?
Because it became part of the political battle over COVID - Fauci et al said that it couldn't be a lab leak. So saying it was a lab leak aligned you, in the American context, with the anti-vaxxers etc.
That corresponds with my surveyor friend who says his workload went from brisk to tumbleweed overnight following the Truss reign/interest rate rise.
Hopefully a long-overdue price correction is coming.
As someone who bought his home in December, I couldn't give less of a shit if I end up in negative equity and bought at the top of the market. I have a home,
Safe job hopefully otherwise you will definitely give a shit
Older, grumpier, more socially conservative and more impatient, her people represent a side of Scottish nationalism kept from public view in recent years. It has little in common with the bright-eyed, environmentalist, cosmopolitan, progressive SNP which has enjoyed its moment in the sun under Sturgeon.
If Regan’s rag-tag coalition finds its voice in this leadership election, Scottish politics will become unrecognisable. Apart, that is, from one well-kent face that is all too familiar.
That corresponds with my surveyor friend who says his workload went from brisk to tumbleweed overnight following the Truss reign/interest rate rise.
Hopefully a long-overdue price correction is coming.
As someone who bought his home in December, I couldn't give less of a shit if I end up in negative equity and bought at the top of the market. I have a home,
Safe job hopefully otherwise you will definitely give a shit
Same applies if you're renting though. Not being able to afford your rent, or a home of your own, isn't any better.
The squeals of "negative equity" typically come from those more bothered by property portfolios than poor people struggling to pay for a roof over their head. Everyone should be able to afford their own home, and homes becoming more affordable is a good thing not a bad one.
Now we all accept it “came from the lab“ we can focus on the nuances of this question. Because it is nuanced
In order of ascending outrageousness
1. They collected a bat - maybe even in Yunnan, where the caves are - and it pissed on some poor lab worker, who brought the virus to the Wuhan wet market (surely the superspreader event)
2. They had bats in the lab and one bit a worker and etc etc
3. They passed the virus through humanized mice and a mouse bit etc etc
4. They added gain of function - for the best of reasons (improved vaccines) to the virus and the new nastier virus somehow infected a worker who went to the market
5. They added gain of function for generally good reasons but there were lurking bioweapons motivations as well - create nasty coronaviruses that can cripple economies - we know China is interested in this, Wuhan researchers are linked to Chinese military scientists who have openly talked about this, and written about it. The GOF’d virus got out, and etc etc
6. The evil scientists created a GOF’d coronavirus and DELIBERATELY released it as a bio weapon
There are probably more scenarios I’ve missed, but I am drinking a G&T
Of these my hunch is 1-4 as the most likely. Equally likely. 3 or 4 if I had to wager money
But 5 is still quite possible, even 6 at a pinch, tho it seems highly improbable. Why release a virus bio-weapon before your have a vaccine for your people? Fairly mad
What happened without any shadow of a doubt is that there was a shameful cover-up of much of this, and an attempt to blame the wet market, thus exonerating China and science entirely - and people should go to prison for this, for many years
I know this will bring your usual childish insults down on my head, but I don't *accept* it “came from the lab“
I accept it *may* have come from a lab, which I believe I have said all along. It is now looking slightly more likely (although have the FBI released the evidence on which they based their comments?) But it's far from certain.
Now we all accept it “came from the lab“ we can focus on the nuances of this question. Because it is nuanced
In order of ascending outrageousness
1. They collected a bat - maybe even in Yunnan, where the caves are - and it pissed on some poor lab worker, who brought the virus to the Wuhan wet market (surely the superspreader event)
2. They had bats in the lab and one bit a worker and etc etc
3. They passed the virus through humanized mice and a mouse bit etc etc
4. They added gain of function - for the best of reasons (improved vaccines) to the virus and the new nastier virus somehow infected a worker who went to the market
5. They added gain of function for generally good reasons but there were lurking bioweapons motivations as well - create nasty coronaviruses that can cripple economies - we know China is interested in this, Wuhan researchers are linked to Chinese military scientists who have openly talked about this, and written about it. The GOF’d virus got out, and etc etc
6. The evil scientists created a GOF’d coronavirus and DELIBERATELY released it as a bio weapon
There are probably more scenarios I’ve missed, but I am drinking a G&T
Of these my hunch is 1-4 as the most likely. Equally likely. 3 or 4 if I had to wager money
But 5 is still quite possible, even 6 at a pinch, tho it seems highly improbable. Why release a virus bio-weapon before your have a vaccine for your people? Fairly mad
What happened without any shadow of a doubt is that there was a shameful cover-up of much of this, and an attempt to blame the wet market, thus exonerating China and science entirely - and people should go to prison for this, for many years
I know this will bring your usual childish insults down on my head, but I don't *accept* it “came from the lab“
I accept it *may* have come from a lab, which I believe I have said all along. It is now looking slightly more likely (although have the FBI released the evidence on which they based their comments?) But it's far from certain.
(Yawns, as he awaits the insults...)
At this point you’re just too dull to insult, it’s like bitch-slapping a donkey
Now we all accept it “came from the lab“ we can focus on the nuances of this question. Because it is nuanced
In order of ascending outrageousness
1. They collected a bat - maybe even in Yunnan, where the caves are - and it pissed on some poor lab worker, who brought the virus to the Wuhan wet market (surely the superspreader event)
2. They had bats in the lab and one bit a worker and etc etc
3. They passed the virus through humanized mice and a mouse bit etc etc
4. They added gain of function - for the best of reasons (improved vaccines) to the virus and the new nastier virus somehow infected a worker who went to the market
5. They added gain of function for generally good reasons but there were lurking bioweapons motivations as well - create nasty coronaviruses that can cripple economies - we know China is interested in this, Wuhan researchers are linked to Chinese military scientists who have openly talked about this, and written about it. The GOF’d virus got out, and etc etc
6. The evil scientists created a GOF’d coronavirus and DELIBERATELY released it as a bio weapon
There are probably more scenarios I’ve missed, but I am drinking a G&T
Of these my hunch is 1-4 as the most likely. Equally likely. 3 or 4 if I had to wager money
But 5 is still quite possible, even 6 at a pinch, tho it seems highly improbable. Why release a virus bio-weapon before your have a vaccine for your people? Fairly mad
What happened without any shadow of a doubt is that there was a shameful cover-up of much of this, and an attempt to blame the wet market, thus exonerating China and science entirely - and people should go to prison for this, for many years
I don't accept that it is proven to have been lab leak - its one of the possibiliities.
That said, I will concede that the cover up and attempts to quash the story is shameful at best and criminal at worst, and clearly if crimes have been committed (such as misleading the house etc) then there should be repercussions.
My issue is the lack of nuance of - (1) Lab leak proven! to (2) Trials and execution.
Scenario 1 is entirely possible - who are you putting on trial in that scenario?
Now we all accept it “came from the lab“ we can focus on the nuances of this question. Because it is nuanced
In order of ascending outrageousness
1. They collected a bat - maybe even in Yunnan, where the caves are - and it pissed on some poor lab worker, who brought the virus to the Wuhan wet market (surely the superspreader event)
2. They had bats in the lab and one bit a worker and etc etc
3. They passed the virus through humanized mice and a mouse bit etc etc
4. They added gain of function - for the best of reasons (improved vaccines) to the virus and the new nastier virus somehow infected a worker who went to the market
5. They added gain of function for generally good reasons but there were lurking bioweapons motivations as well - create nasty coronaviruses that can cripple economies - we know China is interested in this, Wuhan researchers are linked to Chinese military scientists who have openly talked about this, and written about it. The GOF’d virus got out, and etc etc
6. The evil scientists created a GOF’d coronavirus and DELIBERATELY released it as a bio weapon
There are probably more scenarios I’ve missed, but I am drinking a G&T
Of these my hunch is 1-4 as the most likely. Equally likely. 3 or 4 if I had to wager money
But 5 is still quite possible, even 6 at a pinch, tho it seems highly improbable. Why release a virus bio-weapon before your have a vaccine for your people? Fairly mad
What happened without any shadow of a doubt is that there was a shameful cover-up of much of this, and an attempt to blame the wet market, thus exonerating China and science entirely - and people should go to prison for this, for many years
I know this will bring your usual childish insults down on my head, but I don't *accept* it “came from the lab“
I accept it *may* have come from a lab, which I believe I have said all along. It is now looking slightly more likely (although have the FBI released the evidence on which they based their comments?) But it's far from certain.
(Yawns, as he awaits the insults...)
You are not one of PB's elite until you have been thoroughly insuted by Leon.
Yes. But was 'woke' ever not derogatory? I always understood it as a term of the social conservative* to diss the socially progressive*, the modern day equivalent of 'political correctness'
*for want of better terms - I'm aware that 'progressive' in itself is loaded (who wants to be regressive?) but can't think of a better term
ETA: To some extent it's regression to the mean, or regression to the centre to become electable. People have other issues, so a party obsessed with wokeness (on either side) is unlikely to command wide enough support to win.
“Woke” originates within the Black activist community in the US back in the 1930s. If you were woke, you had become truly aware of the persistent nature of white supremacy & the work done by the state to prevent black people from prospering.
I’m not sure when it took on a wider social justice meaning, sometime post 2000 I think - I certainly never heard it as a teenager at university, but maybe I didn’t move in the right activist circles?
Like many social justice terms it then hopped over to the right as a prejudicial term, a route that echoes that took by “politically correct” in earlier times.
Only problem is the majority of white Americans have never supported "white supremacy", even in the 1930s.
Yes, Jim Crow was the antithesis of white supremacy.
I'm on my mobile, but I'll dig up the Gallup polling from that era that showed majority support for things like anti-miscegenation laws.
Edit - An overwhelmingly a majority of Americans supported The original constitution, you know the one that valued a negro at three-fifths of a white man.
A few years ago my mother had a flood at her home and at the same time (rather fittingly) suffered from water on the brain. Water on the brain renders you dementia-like and incapable mentally.
I was in the absurd position of having to tell Direct Line on my mother's behalf that she needed to claim and them not accepting my authority as at that time we didn't have any lasting powers of attorney in place (there are medical and financial ones). It was going to be the worst of all nightmares albeit my mother had a moment of clarity midway through and could confirm that she was who I had been saying she was.
Lasting Power of Attorney is an absolute essential for just about everyone.
Source close to Hancock claims Oakeshott broke an NDA to publish the trove of WhatsApps. She publishes a long public interest defence. Quite extraordinary he chose the journalist who had campaigned most vigorously against his most significant political policy…
Later today, we find out Theresa May has handed over all her private government emails to Nigel Farage in order for him to write a favourable memoir. Boris Johnson currently deciding between James O’Brien and Ian Dunt.
I am happy to be vindicated and pleased with my prescience. But that Sean guy is just a fucking genius. It’s so on point it is spooky
BBC investigator’s report say two US agencies now believe it was and four believe it wasn’t, with scientists still divided and with no-one knowing for sure. Sounds way too early to be celebrating a lonely example of not being wrong, to me.
Now we all accept it “came from the lab“ we can focus on the nuances of this question. Because it is nuanced
In order of ascending outrageousness
1. They collected a bat - maybe even in Yunnan, where the caves are - and it pissed on some poor lab worker, who brought the virus to the Wuhan wet market (surely the superspreader event)
2. They had bats in the lab and one bit a worker and etc etc
3. They passed the virus through humanized mice and a mouse bit etc etc
4. They added gain of function - for the best of reasons (improved vaccines) to the virus and the new nastier virus somehow infected a worker who went to the market
5. They added gain of function for generally good reasons but there were lurking bioweapons motivations as well - create nasty coronaviruses that can cripple economies - we know China is interested in this, Wuhan researchers are linked to Chinese military scientists who have openly talked about this, and written about it. The GOF’d virus got out, and etc etc
6. The evil scientists created a GOF’d coronavirus and DELIBERATELY released it as a bio weapon
There are probably more scenarios I’ve missed, but I am drinking a G&T
Of these my hunch is 1-4 as the most likely. Equally likely. 3 or 4 if I had to wager money
But 5 is still quite possible, even 6 at a pinch, tho it seems highly improbable. Why release a virus bio-weapon before your have a vaccine for your people? Fairly mad
What happened without any shadow of a doubt is that there was a shameful cover-up of much of this, and an attempt to blame the wet market, thus exonerating China and science entirely - and people should go to prison for this, for many years
I know this will bring your usual childish insults down on my head, but I don't *accept* it “came from the lab“
I accept it *may* have come from a lab, which I believe I have said all along. It is now looking slightly more likely (although have the FBI released the evidence on which they based their comments?) But it's far from certain.
(Yawns, as he awaits the insults...)
At this point you’re just too dull to insult, it’s like bitch-slapping a donkey
Comments
https://www.lrb.co.uk/podcasts-and-videos/podcasts/the-lrb-podcast/the-reaction-economy
So it's not just the algorithm making anti-Ukraine tweets more prominent, it's an actual change in the userbase. Given the tenor of the replies I think it's doubtful that it's people changing their mind. Much more likely to be bots and trolls that would previously have been banned but are now unconstrained.
What's also particularly noticeable is that NAFO seems to have disappeared. That might be anti-Ukraine algorithm tweaking, or they might have got themselves banned when criticising Musk's so-called peace plan.
There are actually quite a few 'hidden' rail enthusiasts, people who are famous and are quite into trains. Rod Stewart and Pete Waterman are just the start. One or two are even known to get their elbows mucky at weekends at preserved railways, or on railtours...
And yes, I know of at least two trans trains fans.
In 2001 with Somerset five down for not many against Warwickshire in the C&G semi final, Rob Turner did some rapid sums and realised all he and Keith Dutch needed to do was bat out the overs and they would win.
So the two knocked the ball safely into gaps for singles, then with five overs left Dutch opened his shoulders, hit a few fours and the match was won.
And then they won the trophy.
Where's Rob Turner when we need him?
https://youtu.be/B6gd1OECL_8
If the bully is big enough they eventually get away with it.
Luckily, som bullies are not as big as they like to think they are anymore.
Someone commented that he hoped that they had been bribed, since the alternative was much worse.
Typical now is one internal and one external, sometimes one or more supervisor may observe (when I did mine my supervisor was not present; I've not been present for any of my students'). In my experience the supervisor leads on suggesting at least external examiners.
I do believe the degree to which a student is really tested varies very widely.
Best thing isn't that he has the IQ of 95% fat free mince. Its that he asks the questions like Vic Reeves Bra Man. I know there are plenty of shitkickers in Conisborough, but did they really vote for *that*? What an advert for their community!
Is "my schools can't afford to turn their heating on" something he should be proud of as an MP for the party responsible? And why didn't he suggest they just burn the Lady Cock propaganda materials for warmth?
Ms Regan, who is the self-confessed outsider in the leadership race, said she does not support setting tests before a currency is introduced.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/snp-leadership-contest-ash-regan-pledges-to-immediately-explore-setting-up-new-currency-infrastructure-4044308
Kinda feel short changed. Not least as the external said he had read the thesis on a flight to Spain (from Bristol). Assuming a bit of faffing with drinks and take off and landing, I reckon he gave it about 55 minutes of reading too...
Then again, I'm more likely to witter on about different types of track and rail "oooh look, 95lb a yard bullhead on early concrete sleepers!"
It's a hobby, I suppose...
(Runs for cover)
His being visited by Ursula von der Leyen in connection with the Windsor Framework (!) didn't please Nigel Farage at all. Is it possible the king will have the rightwing press against him by the time of his coronation? He's got to pull a few positives out of the hat or else have a utility-scheme crowning job - and the latter's not happening.
https://twitter.com/hashtag/TheArchitectureTheRailwaysBuilt
I'm so happy that such a niche topic has proven successful enough to have three series.
Interrailing
Interrailing
However, it is wrong to compare the Chinese occupation of Tibet with the Russian attempt to conquer Ukraine. While both countries were once largely part of their respective neighbour's Empires, the independence of Ukraine was internationally recognised, including by Russia itself. This was never the case for Tibet in relation to China.
While I am perfectly willing to criticise the West's conduct in relation to China and Tibet, it is unfair to juxtapose that with the response to Ukraine in some sort of attempt to criticise the West's failure to defend Tibet in the same way that it is helping to defend Ukraine.
It's also nonsensical, because the West was willing to fight a war against China to defend South Korea against Chinese aggression at the same time, which strongly suggests that fear of China was not a determining factor in the decision not to directly oppose the Chinese occupation of Tibet.
https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1630724524969803778
Two birds, one stone question from Stephen Flynn, Westminster leader of the SNP.
“Does it hurt the PM to know that the Labour leader believes in Brexit more than he does?”
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/mar/01/twitter-down-for-more-than-an-hour-around-world
https://twitter.com/mrjamesob/status/1630864340944404483?s=46
Of course it doesn't. It does mean that I can look at an area weapon strike and cast my eyes to the ceiling as everyone pronounces that the damage came from hand held anti-tank weapons yes sure, but more broadly at theatre level then not at all.
My inestimable expertise comes from studying the bleedin' obvious, from historical geopolitical conflicts, and from accepting that the fog of war is real and this one won't be resolved in 24-hr rolling news time.
I also call out comments which display absurd historical determinism or say, one way or another, that we will win because we must win, these latter usually made by scared idiots on here who hope that if they shout something loud enough the bad man will go away.
Anyway, good weekend everyone, I trust.
Tho I am not hopeful about what3words, TBH
brings you directly to here
Explains a lot!
I can't think of many posts that don't accept the 'fog of war' is real; indeed, I think many people on here thoroughly accept that. But that doesn't mean we can't link to things we see, even if they are partly fog-covered.
I also don't see anyone who expects it to be "resolved in 24-hr rolling news time".
"that we will win because we must win"
My own view is slightly different: we must give Ukraine all the help they need to win, because letting Russia win will create even more problems down the line. Now, that might be because I'm a 'scared idiot', or it might be because I've studied the bleedin' obvious from historical geopolitical conflicts.
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/statistics/money-and-credit/2023/january-2023
Later today, we find out Theresa May has handed over all her private government emails to Nigel Farage in order for him to write a favourable memoir. Boris Johnson currently deciding between James O’Brien and Ian Dunt.
https://twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/1630843103895605248
I was in the absurd position of having to tell Direct Line on my mother's behalf that she needed to claim and them not accepting my authority as at that time we didn't have any lasting powers of attorney in place (there are medical and financial ones). It was going to be the worst of all nightmares albeit my mother had a moment of clarity midway through and could confirm that she was who I had been saying she was.
Lasting Power of Attorney is an absolute essential for just about everyone.
SNP leadership candidate @AshReganSNP
says Scotland would only need to rely on pound sterling 'for a couple of months'.
Report: https://itv.com/news/border/2023-03-01/snp-candidate-scotland-would-have-own-currency-within-months-of-independence…
https://twitter.com/ITVBorderRB/status/1630921237999263746?s=20
“In conversation with Tim Rideout” explains a lot…
I pointed it out to my parents who were very polite. IIRC it is in a railway museum now.
TBF, and to put this in context, the late great PB-er @SeanT was calling this as early as March 2021. TWO YEARS AGO
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-id-write-covid-the-thriller/
I am happy to be vindicated and pleased with my prescience. But that Sean guy is just a fucking genius. It’s so on point it is spooky
But exactly that: whatever it takes, short of nukes, to help Ukraine to win.
Now, I know you're going to nitpick on that, but as a broad principle I think it's sound. If Ukraine don't 'win' (*) now, then we're going to have to do more elsewhere in the future. Do you disagree with that?
(*) For however you define 'win'.
It isn't pleasant...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanny_Adams
NATO have had more than a year's worth of arguments over what is possible and will continue to do so as long as the war continues.
As someone who bought his home in December, I couldn't give less of a shit if I end up in negative equity and bought at the top of the market. I have a home, that's more than many other people, and if I was renting it'd be dead money anyway so who cares if a theoretical number goes negative.
If people who "invested" in property portfolios end up in negative equity on the other hand, then caveat emptor applies. If they lose everything, they deserve no more sympathy than those who invested in Woolworths or any other failed investment.
Far more sane than "we will use Sterling but have a seat on the Bank of England" gibberish they tried last time.
In order of ascending outrageousness
1. They collected a bat - maybe even in Yunnan, where the caves are - and it pissed on some poor lab worker, who brought the virus to the Wuhan wet market (surely the superspreader event)
2. They had bats in the lab and one bit a worker and etc etc
3. They passed the virus through humanized mice and a mouse bit etc etc
4. They added gain of function - for the best of reasons (improved vaccines) to the virus and the new nastier virus somehow infected a worker who went to the market
5. They added gain of function for generally good reasons but there were lurking bioweapons motivations as well - create nasty coronaviruses that can cripple economies - we know China is interested in this, Wuhan researchers are linked to Chinese military scientists who have openly talked about this, and written about it. The GOF’d virus got out, and etc etc
6. The evil scientists created a GOF’d coronavirus and DELIBERATELY released it as a bio weapon
There are probably more scenarios I’ve missed, but I am drinking a G&T
Of these my hunch is 1-4 as the most likely. Equally likely. 3 or 4 if I had to wager money
But 5 is still quite possible, even 6 at a pinch, tho it seems highly improbable. Why release a virus bio-weapon before your have a vaccine for your people? Fairly mad
What happened without any shadow of a doubt is that there was a shameful cover-up of much of this, and an attempt to blame the wet market, thus exonerating China and science entirely - and people should go to prison for this, for many years
Hurrah for Dawid Malan.
Who will be iScotland's lender of last resort?
If Regan’s rag-tag coalition finds its voice in this leadership election, Scottish politics will become unrecognisable. Apart, that is, from one well-kent face that is all too familiar.
https://archive.ph/H9lSz
The squeals of "negative equity" typically come from those more bothered by property portfolios than poor people struggling to pay for a roof over their head. Everyone should be able to afford their own home, and homes becoming more affordable is a good thing not a bad one.
I accept it *may* have come from a lab, which I believe I have said all along. It is now looking slightly more likely (although have the FBI released the evidence on which they based their comments?) But it's far from certain.
(Yawns, as he awaits the insults...)
Read up on the Ruble Zone.
That said, I will concede that the cover up and attempts to quash the story is shameful at best and criminal at worst, and clearly if crimes have been committed (such as misleading the house etc) then there should be repercussions.
My issue is the lack of nuance of - (1) Lab leak proven! to (2) Trials and execution.
Scenario 1 is entirely possible - who are you putting on trial in that scenario?
Who was lender of last resort for the Estonian Kroon?
I'm on my mobile, but I'll dig up the Gallup polling from that era that showed majority support for things like anti-miscegenation laws.
Edit - An overwhelmingly a majority of Americans supported The original constitution, you know the one that valued a negro at three-fifths of a white man.
Still, that doesn't excuse her behaviour. She is a disgrace to her profession.