Round-up – how punters see the next general election – politicalbetting.com

System

Round-up – how punters see the next general election – politicalbetting.com

Read the full story here

DavidL

Wow: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/65051900

MarqueeMark

DavidL said:

Wow: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/65051900

But inevitable.

MarqueeMark

The SNP implosion does not seem to have maintained its pace of a week ago.

Therefore Labour's chances of a majority have greatly reduced unless and until the SNP resume shooting their feet off with high-calibre weaponry.

Or McPlod arrests them all.

Malmesbury

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

biggles said:

Starmer says he has declared £14 of bank interest. Someone should tell him Toynbee not bother at de minimis levels. Ang accountants in or are they all at parties?

£14 bank interest? Wow! He must have hundreds of thousands in the account...

Based on how much my bank gave me in interest last year, he must have approximately infinity pounds in his bank account.

I tried to use the banks grid to retro-compute the amount he must have in his account.

This seems to have exceed the size of BigDecimal in Java.

Which in turn has set off a chain reaction of IT collapse through The City.

My advice is to start running now.

Richard_Nabavi

MarqueeMark said:

The SNP implosion does not seem to have maintained its pace of a week ago.

Therefore Labour's chances of a majority have greatly reduced unless and until the SNP resume shooting their feet off with high-calibre weaponry.

Or McPlod arrests them all.

They might still go for Hamza, though. Of course you might have already covered that eventuality under the heading 'shooting their feet off with high-calibre weaponry.'

And if they don't, the foot-shooting will no doubt resume in a different form under Kate, who would make a very good leader, just not of the SNP.

Malmesbury

MarqueeMark said:

The SNP implosion does not seem to have maintained its pace of a week ago.

Therefore Labour's chances of a majority have greatly reduced unless and until the SNP resume shooting their feet off with high-calibre weaponry.

Or McPlod arrests them all.

We are really in the waiting period to see what drops next, there, I think.

Given the amount of astroturfing I am seeing on behalf of Peter Murrell, the Old Guard will not surrender easily.

rcs1000

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

Jim_Miller

Just to follow up on my previous comment, there is a good chance that the Supreme Court will soon find the Elizabeth Warren's Consumer Financial Protection Bureau unconstitutional:
'The CFPB is unlike any federal law enforcement agency ever created. Floating above the Constitution’s tripartite design of government, it is uniquely sovereign:

Independent of congressional appropriations, it funds itself by acquiring, in perpetuity, up to 12 percent of the Federal Reserve’s annual operating expenses (the CFPB’s cut might soon be $1 billion), rolling over and investing any year’s surplus. The president or either chamber of Congress can veto any attempt by legislators to gain control of the CFPB. Its director could not be removed for policy reasons, until this provision was declared a violation of the separation of powers because it reduced the president’s authority to direct the executive branch.'
source$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/02/15/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-unconstitutional/

If the Court kills the CFPB -- as it should -- that might have an effect on banks, and consumers. And our regulators, and risk managers, ought to be thinking about the liekly consequences, now.

FrancisUrquhart

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

TheScreamingEagles

Wherever Charles goes disorder follows.

rcs1000

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

GPT means the demand for the semi-skilled drops further.

malcolmg

Malmesbury said:

MarqueeMark said:

The SNP implosion does not seem to have maintained its pace of a week ago.

Therefore Labour's chances of a majority have greatly reduced unless and until the SNP resume shooting their feet off with high-calibre weaponry.

Or McPlod arrests them all.

We are really in the waiting period to see what drops next, there, I think.

Given the amount of astroturfing I am seeing on behalf of Peter Murrell, the Old Guard will not surrender easily.

Some wild stuff on twitter today re him and a certain person etc which I would not repeat here, wild allegations.

SeaShantyIrish2

MarqueeMark said:

The SNP implosion does not seem to have maintained its pace of a week ago.

Therefore Labour's chances of a majority have greatly reduced unless and until the SNP resume shooting their feet off with high-calibre weaponry.

Or McPlod arrests them all.

BUT is the real X-factor here, NOT whether Scottish National Party meltdown proceeds at same rapid clip as over past week, but instead where the SNP ends up and what kind of shape it's in, when the next UK GE finally rolls around?

Malmesbury

malcolmg said:

Malmesbury said:

MarqueeMark said:

The SNP implosion does not seem to have maintained its pace of a week ago.

Therefore Labour's chances of a majority have greatly reduced unless and until the SNP resume shooting their feet off with high-calibre weaponry.

Or McPlod arrests them all.

We are really in the waiting period to see what drops next, there, I think.

Given the amount of astroturfing I am seeing on behalf of Peter Murrell, the Old Guard will not surrender easily.

Some wild stuff on twitter today re him and a certain person etc which I would not repeat here, wild allegations.

I mean people coming up with variations of "Peter Murrell was walking down the road, and saved my cat from being run over. He is awesome. This is witch-hunt."

dixiedean

rcs1000 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

GPT means the demand for the semi-skilled drops further.

Or maybe we'll simply have to re define "skilled" and "unskilled"?
The TA's who work in my special school are quite remarkably highly skilled. Most folk with a degree wouldn't last a morning. Chat GPT couldn't do it.
But they are minimum wage. Because you can't get a GCSE in it. So they aren't valued.

SeaShantyIrish2

Malmesbury said:

MarqueeMark said:

The SNP implosion does not seem to have maintained its pace of a week ago.

Therefore Labour's chances of a majority have greatly reduced unless and until the SNP resume shooting their feet off with high-calibre weaponry.

Or McPlod arrests them all.

We are really in the waiting period to see what drops next, there, I think.

Given the amount of astroturfing I am seeing on behalf of Peter Murrell, the Old Guard will not surrender easily.

"La Garde meurt mais ne se rend pas!"

Foxy

TheScreamingEagles said:

Wherever Charles goes disorder follows.

Let them eat brioche!

CatMan

Yet another Simpsons prediction comes true:

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/the-simpsons-predictions-michelangelo-b2306758.html#Echobox=1679593638

"The Simpsons eerily predicts parents’ demands to censor Michelangelo’s David in school

Current Florida charter school fiasco uncannily reflects early season two episode"

SeaShantyIrish2

Re: Scotland and Westminster, one thing that I noted re: yesterday's HoC vote on Windsor Framework, was that both Alba MPs were recorded as not voting.

Does anyone know why?

Of course, all parties had some no-shows, also independents as a group (or rather gaggle). But only Alba 100%.

Malmesbury

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Malmesbury said:

MarqueeMark said:

The SNP implosion does not seem to have maintained its pace of a week ago.

Therefore Labour's chances of a majority have greatly reduced unless and until the SNP resume shooting their feet off with high-calibre weaponry.

Or McPlod arrests them all.

We are really in the waiting period to see what drops next, there, I think.

Given the amount of astroturfing I am seeing on behalf of Peter Murrell, the Old Guard will not surrender easily.

"La Garde meurt mais ne se rend pas!"

10 minutes before he did.

Mind you, that’s the long version you are quoting.

SeaShantyIrish2

dixiedean said:

rcs1000 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

GPT means the demand for the semi-skilled drops further.

Or maybe we'll simply have to re define "skilled" and "unskilled"?
The TA's who work in my special school are quite remarkably highly skilled. Most folk with a degree wouldn't last a morning. Chat GPT couldn't do it.
But they are minimum wage. Because you can't get a GCSE in it. So they aren't valued.

Quasi-correction: it's the children who aren't valued. Same as with USA.

Carnyx

Hmm, SKS seems to be paying twice as much tax on his income than Mr Sunak does, pound for pound.

And one can't accuse him of voting in the Commons for an act to save himself tax.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/mar/23/rishi-sunak-saved-tax-capital-gains-cut-voted-for-in-2016

TimS

dixiedean said:

rcs1000 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

GPT means the demand for the semi-skilled drops further.

Or maybe we'll simply have to re define "skilled" and "unskilled"?
The TA's who work in my special school are quite remarkably highly skilled. Most folk with a degree wouldn't last a morning. Chat GPT couldn't do it.
But they are minimum wage. Because you can't get a GCSE in it. So they aren't valued.

This is exactly right. ChatGPT threatens clerical jobs where human interaction isn't key: semi-skilled, or early career white collar where there is a focus on technical output rather than soft skills or making judgment calls.

I have worked out GPT3.5 is currently at the level of our assistant managers, give or take. Not so good at organising team socials but otherwise pretty good - would be getting a highish year end grading.

Luckyguy1983

TheScreamingEagles said:

Wherever Charles goes disorder follows.

A banquet at Versailles seems a little tin-eared anyway. Though unfair on Charles, as he won't have been the one making decisions on the programme.

Carnyx

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

dixiedean said:

rcs1000 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

GPT means the demand for the semi-skilled drops further.

Or maybe we'll simply have to re define "skilled" and "unskilled"?
The TA's who work in my special school are quite remarkably highly skilled. Most folk with a degree wouldn't last a morning. Chat GPT couldn't do it.
But they are minimum wage. Because you can't get a GCSE in it. So they aren't valued.

Quasi-correction: it's the children who aren't valued. Same as with USA.

TAs *and* weans, surely ...

HYUFD

TheScreamingEagles said:

Wherever Charles goes disorder follows.

It isn't the King's fault President Macron and his party have tried to push through a deeply unpopular rise in the French pension age to 64 just before his visit

kle4

SandyRentool said:

Off topic...

The other day I had a post deleted on another site because it "added nothing to the topic".

Such a rule here, and we'd need a dozen more moderators.

(I apologise that this post has added nothing to the topic.)

It adds to the general gaity of life!

I'm even missing certain holiday snaps right now.

HYUFD

Luckyguy1983 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Wherever Charles goes disorder follows.

A banquet at Versailles seems a little tin-eared anyway. Though unfair on Charles, as he won't have been the one making decisions on the programme.

I am sure it suits Macron's Louis XIV desires admirably

kle4

Luckyguy1983 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Wherever Charles goes disorder follows.

A banquet at Versailles seems a little tin-eared anyway. Though unfair on Charles, as he won't have been the one making decisions on the programme.

French Presidents generally are pretty grand, I think? I wonder if the public there complain about him taking a plane to Marseilles or whereever.

HYUFD

MarqueeMark said:

The SNP implosion does not seem to have maintained its pace of a week ago.

Therefore Labour's chances of a majority have greatly reduced unless and until the SNP resume shooting their feet off with high-calibre weaponry.

Or McPlod arrests them all.

It will be back on again once the leadership result comes through next week

DougSeal

MarqueeMark said:

The SNP implosion does not seem to have maintained its pace of a week ago.

Therefore Labour's chances of a majority have greatly reduced unless and until the SNP resume shooting their feet off with high-calibre weaponry.

Or McPlod arrests them all.

I thought Partygate ended in July.

kle4

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

I think this is a very good point. In some ways it just extends time without 'responsibility', but it also gives time to grow up a bit.

SeaShantyIrish2

Carnyx said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

dixiedean said:

rcs1000 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

GPT means the demand for the semi-skilled drops further.

Or maybe we'll simply have to re define "skilled" and "unskilled"?
The TA's who work in my special school are quite remarkably highly skilled. Most folk with a degree wouldn't last a morning. Chat GPT couldn't do it.
But they are minimum wage. Because you can't get a GCSE in it. So they aren't valued.

Quasi-correction: it's the children who aren't valued. Same as with USA.

TAs *and* weans, surely ...

TAs ain't of any account precisely BECAUSE they work with & for children. Same as teachers.

HYUFD

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

In that case there won't be much demand for full time workers full stop and a UBI funded by a tax on AI would be inevitable

HYUFD

Labour most seats but no majority remains my prediction

Foxy

HYUFD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

In that case there won't be much demand for full time workers full stop and a UBI funded by a tax on AI would be inevitable

Why would AI pay that tax? It isn't dumb!

TimS

kle4 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Wherever Charles goes disorder follows.

A banquet at Versailles seems a little tin-eared anyway. Though unfair on Charles, as he won't have been the one making decisions on the programme.

French Presidents generally are pretty grand, I think? I wonder if the public there complain about him taking a plane to Marseilles or whereever.

It would be much more fun to be a French president than British PM. You're head of state for a start. Pay much better, domestic accommodation leagues ahead. People hate you but they hate British PMs too.

Sunil_Prasannan

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Malmesbury said:

MarqueeMark said:

The SNP implosion does not seem to have maintained its pace of a week ago.

Therefore Labour's chances of a majority have greatly reduced unless and until the SNP resume shooting their feet off with high-calibre weaponry.

Or McPlod arrests them all.

We are really in the waiting period to see what drops next, there, I think.

Given the amount of astroturfing I am seeing on behalf of Peter Murrell, the Old Guard will not surrender easily.

"La Garde meurt mais ne se rend pas!"

Unfortunatement, je ne comprends pas le français!

TimS

Foxy said:

HYUFD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

In that case there won't be much demand for full time workers full stop and a UBI funded by a tax on AI would be inevitable

Why would AI pay that tax? It isn't dumb!

Making AI pay their fair share by shutting down all the loopholes they spotted would become an ongoing challenge.

Foxy

TimS said:

kle4 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Wherever Charles goes disorder follows.

A banquet at Versailles seems a little tin-eared anyway. Though unfair on Charles, as he won't have been the one making decisions on the programme.

French Presidents generally are pretty grand, I think? I wonder if the public there complain about him taking a plane to Marseilles or whereever.

It would be much more fun to be a French president than British PM. You're head of state for a start. Pay much better, domestic accommodation leagues ahead. People hate you but they hate British PMs too.

Though how is this for a man of the people:

https://twitter.com/maksymeristavi/status/1638595142549479452?t=de_OnM_TXuTcSUmvzlTAow&s=19

Nigelb

Not a breakthrough after all.
The General Staff issued a refutation of its statement: "The occupiers are still temporarily in Nova Kakhovka. Information about the alleged withdrawal of the enemy from this settlement was made public as a result of incorrect use of available data."
https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1638964504636555264

algarkirk

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

No so I suggest. As sectors of work diminish (as has happened throughout the industrial revolution) so sectors of work of all kinds advance to take their place. Look at total employment figures.

The western world is a vast job creation scheme. This is not going to stop. Many of the jobs replaced by automation of all sorts are pretty dull anyway. Subsistence economies don't have enough time, money or people for Wagner, ballet, social care, nail shops and Ibiza.

Omnium

TimS said:

Foxy said:

HYUFD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

In that case there won't be much demand for full time workers full stop and a UBI funded by a tax on AI would be inevitable

Why would AI pay that tax? It isn't dumb!

Making AI pay their fair share by shutting down all the loopholes they spotted would become an ongoing challenge.

And anyway you could just shut off Nigel #1 and reinstate yourself as Nigel #2. I wonder if a universal money movement tax could work? It could replace all other taxes.

RochdalePioneers

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

Wow: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/65051900

But inevitable.

The right decision!

Malmesbury

TimS said:

Foxy said:

HYUFD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

In that case there won't be much demand for full time workers full stop and a UBI funded by a tax on AI would be inevitable

Why would AI pay that tax? It isn't dumb!

Making AI pay their fair share by shutting down all the loopholes they spotted would become an ongoing challenge.

We could create a group of AIs to police the AIs

Code named - Edge Sprinters?

TheScreamingEagles

What a pathetic people the French are. We are the language of Shakespeare and we let it evolve. IIRC French is from the Old English meaning a nation of eunuchs.

Excessive use of English by Notre Dame and the French post office have prompted legal action in defence of the French language.

The cathedral and La Poste are among the targets in a series of lawsuits filed by language defence groups who are particularly outraged by the way that businesses, public institutions and figures including President Macron are adopting English despite decades of state efforts to stem the invasion.

The most egregious case, in the eyes of the plaintiffs, is “Ma French Bank”, the online bank recently opened by La Poste. Other flagrant abuses include hybrid coinages such as Ouigo, (“We go”) the SNCF railways’ low-cost high-speed trains, and Sarthe Me Up, a punning slogan invented in Le Mans to promote the département of le Sarthe.

The authority in charge of reconstruction after the Notre Dame fire of 2019 is accused of breaching a 1994 law that requires any translation on public signs to be in two foreign languages. The aim was to avoid giving precedence to English. “If there’s only one foreign language, it’s always Anglo-American,” said Louis Maisonneuve, head of the Observatoire des Libertés, a coalition of groups including his own French Language Defence Association. The association has already scored a victory over the management of the Eiffel Tower, forcing it to add Spanish to its signs in English.

The campaigners have turned their sights on the organisers of next year’s Paris Olympic Games, who this week advertised for thousands of volunteers with the condition that they must speak French, English or both. No other language was specified.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/defenders-of-french-go-on-le-attack-against-english-kxl2mgpqf

Malmesbury

Omnium said:

TimS said:

Foxy said:

HYUFD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

In that case there won't be much demand for full time workers full stop and a UBI funded by a tax on AI would be inevitable

Why would AI pay that tax? It isn't dumb!

Making AI pay their fair share by shutting down all the loopholes they spotted would become an ongoing challenge.

And anyway you could just shut off Nigel #1 and reinstate yourself as Nigel #2. I wonder if a universal money movement tax could work? It could replace all other taxes.

All these questions were asked by a great man..


‘Wait a sec,' Case said. `Are you sentient, or not?'
‘Well, it _feels_ like I am, kid, but I'm really just a bunch of ROM. It's one of them, ah, philosophical questions, I guess...' The ugly laughter sensation rattled down Case's spine. `But I ain't likely to write you no poem, if you follow me. Your AI, it just might. But it ain't no way _human.'_
‘So you figure we can't get on to its motive?'
‘It own itself?'
‘Swiss citizen, but T-A own the basic software and the mainframe.'
‘That's a good one,' the construct said. ‘Like, I own your brain and what you know, but your thoughts have Swiss citizenship. Sure. Lotsa luck, AI.'

TheScreamingEagles

DavidL said:

Wow: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/65051900

It was inevitable the World Athletics would follow Starmer's lead today.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/03/23/sir-keir-starmer-signals-climbdown-labours-transgender-stance/

Omnium

Malmesbury said:

Omnium said:

TimS said:

Foxy said:

HYUFD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

In that case there won't be much demand for full time workers full stop and a UBI funded by a tax on AI would be inevitable

Why would AI pay that tax? It isn't dumb!

Making AI pay their fair share by shutting down all the loopholes they spotted would become an ongoing challenge.

And anyway you could just shut off Nigel #1 and reinstate yourself as Nigel #2. I wonder if a universal money movement tax could work? It could replace all other taxes.

All these questions were asked by a great man..


‘Wait a sec,' Case said. `Are you sentient, or not?'
‘Well, it _feels_ like I am, kid, but I'm really just a bunch of ROM. It's one of them, ah, philosophical questions, I guess...' The ugly laughter sensation rattled down Case's spine. `But I ain't likely to write you no poem, if you follow me. Your AI, it just might. But it ain't no way _human.'_
‘So you figure we can't get on to its motive?'
‘It own itself?'
‘Swiss citizen, but T-A own the basic software and the mainframe.'
‘That's a good one,' the construct said. ‘Like, I own your brain and what you know, but your thoughts have Swiss citizenship. Sure. Lotsa luck, AI.'

I'll not be shamed by merely following the shadows of the great. I'm sort of imagining that what you quote might be Asimov, but I'm not sure.

malcolmg

Malmesbury said:

malcolmg said:

Malmesbury said:

MarqueeMark said:

The SNP implosion does not seem to have maintained its pace of a week ago.

Therefore Labour's chances of a majority have greatly reduced unless and until the SNP resume shooting their feet off with high-calibre weaponry.

Or McPlod arrests them all.

We are really in the waiting period to see what drops next, there, I think.

Given the amount of astroturfing I am seeing on behalf of Peter Murrell, the Old Guard will not surrender easily.

Some wild stuff on twitter today re him and a certain person etc which I would not repeat here, wild allegations.

I mean people coming up with variations of "Peter Murrell was walking down the road, and saved my cat from being run over. He is awesome. This is witch-hunt."

Given what went on and the players it is very believable

malcolmg

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Re: Scotland and Westminster, one thing that I noted re: yesterday's HoC vote on Windsor Framework, was that both Alba MPs were recorded as not voting.

Does anyone know why?

Of course, all parties had some no-shows, also independents as a group (or rather gaggle). But only Alba 100%.

Nothing to do with Scotland

Malmesbury

Omnium said:

Malmesbury said:

Omnium said:

TimS said:

Foxy said:

HYUFD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

In that case there won't be much demand for full time workers full stop and a UBI funded by a tax on AI would be inevitable

Why would AI pay that tax? It isn't dumb!

Making AI pay their fair share by shutting down all the loopholes they spotted would become an ongoing challenge.

And anyway you could just shut off Nigel #1 and reinstate yourself as Nigel #2. I wonder if a universal money movement tax could work? It could replace all other taxes.

All these questions were asked by a great man..


‘Wait a sec,' Case said. `Are you sentient, or not?'
‘Well, it _feels_ like I am, kid, but I'm really just a bunch of ROM. It's one of them, ah, philosophical questions, I guess...' The ugly laughter sensation rattled down Case's spine. `But I ain't likely to write you no poem, if you follow me. Your AI, it just might. But it ain't no way _human.'_
‘So you figure we can't get on to its motive?'
‘It own itself?'
‘Swiss citizen, but T-A own the basic software and the mainframe.'
‘That's a good one,' the construct said. ‘Like, I own your brain and what you know, but your thoughts have Swiss citizenship. Sure. Lotsa luck, AI.'

I'll not be shamed by merely following the shadows of the great. I'm sort of imagining that what you quote might be Asimov, but I'm not sure.

William Gibson - Neuromancer.

Read it. Just read it.

Luckyguy1983

kle4 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Wherever Charles goes disorder follows.

A banquet at Versailles seems a little tin-eared anyway. Though unfair on Charles, as he won't have been the one making decisions on the programme.

French Presidents generally are pretty grand, I think? I wonder if the public there complain about him taking a plane to Marseilles or whereever.

Indeed, it was the venue I was referring to rather than the event.

Malmesbury

malcolmg said:

Malmesbury said:

malcolmg said:

Malmesbury said:

MarqueeMark said:

The SNP implosion does not seem to have maintained its pace of a week ago.

Therefore Labour's chances of a majority have greatly reduced unless and until the SNP resume shooting their feet off with high-calibre weaponry.

Or McPlod arrests them all.

We are really in the waiting period to see what drops next, there, I think.

Given the amount of astroturfing I am seeing on behalf of Peter Murrell, the Old Guard will not surrender easily.

Some wild stuff on twitter today re him and a certain person etc which I would not repeat here, wild allegations.

I mean people coming up with variations of "Peter Murrell was walking down the road, and saved my cat from being run over. He is awesome. This is witch-hunt."

Given what went on and the players it is very believable

The wild allegations or the cat saving?

StillWaters

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

I thought you went to Cambridge?

mickydroy

HYUFD said:

Labour most seats but no majority remains my prediction

As much as I would love to see the Tories decimated, I think this is the sensible call, I don't see either party having an overall majority

HYUFD

TimS said:

kle4 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Wherever Charles goes disorder follows.

A banquet at Versailles seems a little tin-eared anyway. Though unfair on Charles, as he won't have been the one making decisions on the programme.

French Presidents generally are pretty grand, I think? I wonder if the public there complain about him taking a plane to Marseilles or whereever.

It would be much more fun to be a French president than British PM. You're head of state for a start. Pay much better, domestic accommodation leagues ahead. People hate you but they hate British PMs too.

Though being French PM is much worse, all the responsibility and hassle, as she is facing this week, over domestic policy but no control over foreign policy like the UK PM which is in the hands of the President and no Elysee Palace or Chequers to live in like Macron and Sunak

DavidL

TheScreamingEagles said:

What a pathetic people the French are. We are the language of Shakespeare and we let it evolve. IIRC French is from the Old English meaning a nation of eunuchs.

Excessive use of English by Notre Dame and the French post office have prompted legal action in defence of the French language.

The cathedral and La Poste are among the targets in a series of lawsuits filed by language defence groups who are particularly outraged by the way that businesses, public institutions and figures including President Macron are adopting English despite decades of state efforts to stem the invasion.

The most egregious case, in the eyes of the plaintiffs, is “Ma French Bank”, the online bank recently opened by La Poste. Other flagrant abuses include hybrid coinages such as Ouigo, (“We go”) the SNCF railways’ low-cost high-speed trains, and Sarthe Me Up, a punning slogan invented in Le Mans to promote the département of le Sarthe.

The authority in charge of reconstruction after the Notre Dame fire of 2019 is accused of breaching a 1994 law that requires any translation on public signs to be in two foreign languages. The aim was to avoid giving precedence to English. “If there’s only one foreign language, it’s always Anglo-American,” said Louis Maisonneuve, head of the Observatoire des Libertés, a coalition of groups including his own French Language Defence Association. The association has already scored a victory over the management of the Eiffel Tower, forcing it to add Spanish to its signs in English.

The campaigners have turned their sights on the organisers of next year’s Paris Olympic Games, who this week advertised for thousands of volunteers with the condition that they must speak French, English or both. No other language was specified.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/defenders-of-french-go-on-le-attack-against-english-kxl2mgpqf

They should just give up and start speaking English. Then everyone else would not find them so annoying.

HYUFD

Foxy said:

HYUFD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

In that case there won't be much demand for full time workers full stop and a UBI funded by a tax on AI would be inevitable

Why would AI pay that tax? It isn't dumb!

AI does what it is programmed to do, the tax would be imposed on all corporations using AI systems which see a net loss of jobs

RochdalePioneers

Anyone know what this is about?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/mar/23/labour-tells-19-leicester-councillors-they-cannot-stand-in-may-election

carnforth

TheScreamingEagles said:

What a pathetic people the French are. We are the language of Shakespeare and we let it evolve. IIRC French is from the Old English meaning a nation of eunuchs.

Excessive use of English by Notre Dame and the French post office have prompted legal action in defence of the French language.

The cathedral and La Poste are among the targets in a series of lawsuits filed by language defence groups who are particularly outraged by the way that businesses, public institutions and figures including President Macron are adopting English despite decades of state efforts to stem the invasion.

The most egregious case, in the eyes of the plaintiffs, is “Ma French Bank”, the online bank recently opened by La Poste. Other flagrant abuses include hybrid coinages such as Ouigo, (“We go”) the SNCF railways’ low-cost high-speed trains, and Sarthe Me Up, a punning slogan invented in Le Mans to promote the département of le Sarthe.

The authority in charge of reconstruction after the Notre Dame fire of 2019 is accused of breaching a 1994 law that requires any translation on public signs to be in two foreign languages. The aim was to avoid giving precedence to English. “If there’s only one foreign language, it’s always Anglo-American,” said Louis Maisonneuve, head of the Observatoire des Libertés, a coalition of groups including his own French Language Defence Association. The association has already scored a victory over the management of the Eiffel Tower, forcing it to add Spanish to its signs in English.

The campaigners have turned their sights on the organisers of next year’s Paris Olympic Games, who this week advertised for thousands of volunteers with the condition that they must speak French, English or both. No other language was specified.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/defenders-of-french-go-on-le-attack-against-english-kxl2mgpqf

These people are laughable, but I almost agree with them about La Poste starting an online bank called "Ma French Bank". Imagine if the post office here opened "My banque anglais" here.

Pagan2

algarkirk said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

No so I suggest. As sectors of work diminish (as has happened throughout the industrial revolution) so sectors of work of all kinds advance to take their place. Look at total employment figures.

The western world is a vast job creation scheme. This is not going to stop. Many of the jobs replaced by automation of all sorts are pretty dull anyway. Subsistence economies don't have enough time, money or people for Wagner, ballet, social care, nail shops and Ibiza.

In the industrial revolution machines replaced a lot of manual workers, manual workers became service workers or knowledge workers or creative workers to keep employed. Now if AI replaces knowledge workers then all thats left is service workers and creative workers. Service workers are also being replaced by machines hence self checkouts etc.

You really think we are going to keep full employment if the only work left is creative? Just because it happened in the industrial revolution doesn't mean it will be that way again as machines take over ever more roles that humans can do. You sir are complacent

Driver

TheScreamingEagles said:

What a pathetic people the French are. We are the language of Shakespeare and we let it evolve. IIRC French is from the Old English meaning a nation of eunuchs.

Excessive use of English by Notre Dame and the French post office have prompted legal action in defence of the French language.

The cathedral and La Poste are among the targets in a series of lawsuits filed by language defence groups who are particularly outraged by the way that businesses, public institutions and figures including President Macron are adopting English despite decades of state efforts to stem the invasion.

The most egregious case, in the eyes of the plaintiffs, is “Ma French Bank”, the online bank recently opened by La Poste. Other flagrant abuses include hybrid coinages such as Ouigo, (“We go”) the SNCF railways’ low-cost high-speed trains, and Sarthe Me Up, a punning slogan invented in Le Mans to promote the département of le Sarthe.

The authority in charge of reconstruction after the Notre Dame fire of 2019 is accused of breaching a 1994 law that requires any translation on public signs to be in two foreign languages. The aim was to avoid giving precedence to English. “If there’s only one foreign language, it’s always Anglo-American,” said Louis Maisonneuve, head of the Observatoire des Libertés, a coalition of groups including his own French Language Defence Association. The association has already scored a victory over the management of the Eiffel Tower, forcing it to add Spanish to its signs in English.

The campaigners have turned their sights on the organisers of next year’s Paris Olympic Games, who this week advertised for thousands of volunteers with the condition that they must speak French, English or both. No other language was specified.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/defenders-of-french-go-on-le-attack-against-english-kxl2mgpqf

On that last point, they need to be reminded what are the official languages of the Olympic movement.

Driver

malcolmg said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Re: Scotland and Westminster, one thing that I noted re: yesterday's HoC vote on Windsor Framework, was that both Alba MPs were recorded as not voting.

Does anyone know why?

Of course, all parties had some no-shows, also independents as a group (or rather gaggle). But only Alba 100%.

Nothing to do with Scotland

Nor is England's Sunday trading hours.

StillWaters

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

What a pathetic people the French are. We are the language of Shakespeare and we let it evolve. IIRC French is from the Old English meaning a nation of eunuchs.

Excessive use of English by Notre Dame and the French post office have prompted legal action in defence of the French language.

The cathedral and La Poste are among the targets in a series of lawsuits filed by language defence groups who are particularly outraged by the way that businesses, public institutions and figures including President Macron are adopting English despite decades of state efforts to stem the invasion.

The most egregious case, in the eyes of the plaintiffs, is “Ma French Bank”, the online bank recently opened by La Poste. Other flagrant abuses include hybrid coinages such as Ouigo, (“We go”) the SNCF railways’ low-cost high-speed trains, and Sarthe Me Up, a punning slogan invented in Le Mans to promote the département of le Sarthe.

The authority in charge of reconstruction after the Notre Dame fire of 2019 is accused of breaching a 1994 law that requires any translation on public signs to be in two foreign languages. The aim was to avoid giving precedence to English. “If there’s only one foreign language, it’s always Anglo-American,” said Louis Maisonneuve, head of the Observatoire des Libertés, a coalition of groups including his own French Language Defence Association. The association has already scored a victory over the management of the Eiffel Tower, forcing it to add Spanish to its signs in English.

The campaigners have turned their sights on the organisers of next year’s Paris Olympic Games, who this week advertised for thousands of volunteers with the condition that they must speak French, English or both. No other language was specified.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/defenders-of-french-go-on-le-attack-against-english-kxl2mgpqf

They should just give up and start speaking English. Then everyone else would not find them so annoying.

It is the lingua franca after all

kle4

RochdalePioneers said:

Anyone know what this is about?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/mar/23/labour-tells-19-leicester-councillors-they-cannot-stand-in-may-election

Only that when a party is as dominant as 47/54 seats in an area it does not surprise if said party becomes riven with factional infighting and dodgy behaviour might arise - clearly the national party must think something seriously bad is going on, since much as they might want to they don't normally intervene so dramatically just because they don't like some councillors - it's not worth the trouble since many will, as the article says, stand as Indys, and their influence is, well, local, so it's not normally worth bothering.

DavidL

Malmesbury said:

Omnium said:

Malmesbury said:

Omnium said:

TimS said:

Foxy said:

HYUFD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

In that case there won't be much demand for full time workers full stop and a UBI funded by a tax on AI would be inevitable

Why would AI pay that tax? It isn't dumb!

Making AI pay their fair share by shutting down all the loopholes they spotted would become an ongoing challenge.

And anyway you could just shut off Nigel #1 and reinstate yourself as Nigel #2. I wonder if a universal money movement tax could work? It could replace all other taxes.

All these questions were asked by a great man..


‘Wait a sec,' Case said. `Are you sentient, or not?'
‘Well, it _feels_ like I am, kid, but I'm really just a bunch of ROM. It's one of them, ah, philosophical questions, I guess...' The ugly laughter sensation rattled down Case's spine. `But I ain't likely to write you no poem, if you follow me. Your AI, it just might. But it ain't no way _human.'_
‘So you figure we can't get on to its motive?'
‘It own itself?'
‘Swiss citizen, but T-A own the basic software and the mainframe.'
‘That's a good one,' the construct said. ‘Like, I own your brain and what you know, but your thoughts have Swiss citizenship. Sure. Lotsa luck, AI.'

I'll not be shamed by merely following the shadows of the great. I'm sort of imagining that what you quote might be Asimov, but I'm not sure.

William Gibson - Neuromancer.

Read it. Just read it.

Gibson is a brilliant writer. Love all his books. Although the TV series of the Peripheral was even better than the book. Probably the best series I saw last year.

Driver

carnforth said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

What a pathetic people the French are. We are the language of Shakespeare and we let it evolve. IIRC French is from the Old English meaning a nation of eunuchs.

Excessive use of English by Notre Dame and the French post office have prompted legal action in defence of the French language.

The cathedral and La Poste are among the targets in a series of lawsuits filed by language defence groups who are particularly outraged by the way that businesses, public institutions and figures including President Macron are adopting English despite decades of state efforts to stem the invasion.

The most egregious case, in the eyes of the plaintiffs, is “Ma French Bank”, the online bank recently opened by La Poste. Other flagrant abuses include hybrid coinages such as Ouigo, (“We go”) the SNCF railways’ low-cost high-speed trains, and Sarthe Me Up, a punning slogan invented in Le Mans to promote the département of le Sarthe.

The authority in charge of reconstruction after the Notre Dame fire of 2019 is accused of breaching a 1994 law that requires any translation on public signs to be in two foreign languages. The aim was to avoid giving precedence to English. “If there’s only one foreign language, it’s always Anglo-American,” said Louis Maisonneuve, head of the Observatoire des Libertés, a coalition of groups including his own French Language Defence Association. The association has already scored a victory over the management of the Eiffel Tower, forcing it to add Spanish to its signs in English.

The campaigners have turned their sights on the organisers of next year’s Paris Olympic Games, who this week advertised for thousands of volunteers with the condition that they must speak French, English or both. No other language was specified.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/defenders-of-french-go-on-le-attack-against-english-kxl2mgpqf

These people are laughable, but I almost agree with them about La Poste starting an online bank called "Ma French Bank". Imagine if the post office here opened "My banque anglais" here.

Or "Credit Suisse".

FrancisUrquhart

I see the French are engaging in their national sport again today.....

carnforth

Driver said:

carnforth said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

What a pathetic people the French are. We are the language of Shakespeare and we let it evolve. IIRC French is from the Old English meaning a nation of eunuchs.

Excessive use of English by Notre Dame and the French post office have prompted legal action in defence of the French language.

The cathedral and La Poste are among the targets in a series of lawsuits filed by language defence groups who are particularly outraged by the way that businesses, public institutions and figures including President Macron are adopting English despite decades of state efforts to stem the invasion.

The most egregious case, in the eyes of the plaintiffs, is “Ma French Bank”, the online bank recently opened by La Poste. Other flagrant abuses include hybrid coinages such as Ouigo, (“We go”) the SNCF railways’ low-cost high-speed trains, and Sarthe Me Up, a punning slogan invented in Le Mans to promote the département of le Sarthe.

The authority in charge of reconstruction after the Notre Dame fire of 2019 is accused of breaching a 1994 law that requires any translation on public signs to be in two foreign languages. The aim was to avoid giving precedence to English. “If there’s only one foreign language, it’s always Anglo-American,” said Louis Maisonneuve, head of the Observatoire des Libertés, a coalition of groups including his own French Language Defence Association. The association has already scored a victory over the management of the Eiffel Tower, forcing it to add Spanish to its signs in English.

The campaigners have turned their sights on the organisers of next year’s Paris Olympic Games, who this week advertised for thousands of volunteers with the condition that they must speak French, English or both. No other language was specified.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/defenders-of-french-go-on-le-attack-against-english-kxl2mgpqf

These people are laughable, but I almost agree with them about La Poste starting an online bank called "Ma French Bank". Imagine if the post office here opened "My banque anglais" here.

Or "Credit Suisse".

Sounds less threatening than Schweizer Kredit

Omnium

HYUFD said:

Foxy said:

HYUFD said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

In that case there won't be much demand for full time workers full stop and a UBI funded by a tax on AI would be inevitable

Why would AI pay that tax? It isn't dumb!

AI does what it is programmed to do, the tax would be imposed on all corporations using AI systems which see a net loss of jobs

AI doesn't exist, but should it do so then the whole point would be that it did much more than it was programmed to do. That doesn't have to be grand stuff, just the everyday stuff like remembering birthdays. I'm not sure what I would make of an AI that congratulated one day late and said it had forgotten mind you.

Andy_JS

Average last 10 polls.

Lab 45.7%
Con 28.3%

Includes the poll putting the Tories on 20%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election

FrancisUrquhart

I don't know what Foden has done or said to Gareth Waistcoast, but doesn't matter if he is England's most gifted and creative player against a team where you need that, bench warming duties again tonight.

HYUFD

Pagan2 said:

algarkirk said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

No so I suggest. As sectors of work diminish (as has happened throughout the industrial revolution) so sectors of work of all kinds advance to take their place. Look at total employment figures.

The western world is a vast job creation scheme. This is not going to stop. Many of the jobs replaced by automation of all sorts are pretty dull anyway. Subsistence economies don't have enough time, money or people for Wagner, ballet, social care, nail shops and Ibiza.

In the industrial revolution machines replaced a lot of manual workers, manual workers became service workers or knowledge workers or creative workers to keep employed. Now if AI replaces knowledge workers then all thats left is service workers and creative workers. Service workers are also being replaced by machines hence self checkouts etc.

You really think we are going to keep full employment if the only work left is creative? Just because it happened in the industrial revolution doesn't mean it will be that way again as machines take over ever more roles that humans can do. You sir are complacent

Indeed and only about the top third by IQ are able to do very creative roles

JosiasJessop

StillWaters said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

I thought you went to Cambridge?

Anglia Ruskin is quite decent.

Luckyguy1983

FrancisUrquhart said:

I see the French are engaging in their national sport again today.....

Who have they surrendered to?

FrancisUrquhart

Luckyguy1983 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

I see the French are engaging in their national sport again today.....

Who have they surrendered to?

Strange lot....quick to surrender to foreign powers, but will never accept any decision from their own without a fight.

turbotubbs

Driver said:

malcolmg said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Re: Scotland and Westminster, one thing that I noted re: yesterday's HoC vote on Windsor Framework, was that both Alba MPs were recorded as not voting.

Does anyone know why?

Of course, all parties had some no-shows, also independents as a group (or rather gaggle). But only Alba 100%.

Nothing to do with Scotland

Nor is England's Sunday trading hours.

Arguably it is as Scottish shops near the border can be affected.

FrancisUrquhart

Nobody signed Babar Azam, are the people running the Hundred teams mental?

williamglenn

FrancisUrquhart said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

I see the French are engaging in their national sport again today.....

Who have they surrendered to?

Strange lot....quick to surrender to foreign powers, but will never accept any decision from their own without a fight.

Perhaps that's how Macron can get his reforms through. Maybe a restoration of the monarchy using a cadet branch of the Windsors.

IanB2

HYUFD said:

Pagan2 said:

algarkirk said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

No so I suggest. As sectors of work diminish (as has happened throughout the industrial revolution) so sectors of work of all kinds advance to take their place. Look at total employment figures.

The western world is a vast job creation scheme. This is not going to stop. Many of the jobs replaced by automation of all sorts are pretty dull anyway. Subsistence economies don't have enough time, money or people for Wagner, ballet, social care, nail shops and Ibiza.

In the industrial revolution machines replaced a lot of manual workers, manual workers became service workers or knowledge workers or creative workers to keep employed. Now if AI replaces knowledge workers then all thats left is service workers and creative workers. Service workers are also being replaced by machines hence self checkouts etc.

You really think we are going to keep full employment if the only work left is creative? Just because it happened in the industrial revolution doesn't mean it will be that way again as machines take over ever more roles that humans can do. You sir are complacent

Indeed and only about the top third by IQ are able to do very creative roles

Best stick to grunt work, then?

Driver

FrancisUrquhart said:

Nobody signed Babar Azam, are the people running the Hundred teams mental?

They run teams in the Hundred.

tlg86

FrancisUrquhart said:

I don't know what Foden has done or said to Gareth Waistcoast, but doesn't matter if he is England's most gifted and creative player against a team where you need that, bench warming duties again tonight.

To be fair to Southgate, Foden doesn't always get into the City team and Saka is at least as good as Mahrez.

DavidL

FrancisUrquhart said:

Nobody signed Babar Azam, are the people running the Hundred teams mental?

Extraordinary.

Sunil_Prasannan

The Italians are trolling us by holding the footy at the Maradona Stadium, Naples?

FrancisUrquhart

tlg86 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

I don't know what Foden has done or said to Gareth Waistcoast, but doesn't matter if he is England's most gifted and creative player against a team where you need that, bench warming duties again tonight.

To be fair to Southgate, Foden doesn't always get into the City team and Saka is at least as good as Mahrez.

Foden form dipped after WC / he had an injury, but has past few weeks been absolutely brilliant. At the same time, Phillips is in the starting lineup, who has played about 20s for Man City in past 18 months....while England is also playing Rice / Bellingham to cover the defensive part of the midfield.

Its consistent with Southgate, he picked everybody but Foden in the WC to start with, despite Foden having an amazing season for Man City.

HYUFD

IanB2 said:

HYUFD said:

Pagan2 said:

algarkirk said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

WillG said:

kinabalu said:

Stocky said:

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

kinabalu said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

MoonRabbit said:

Nigelb said:

MoonRabbit said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

MoonRabbit said:

It’s 2025! and we are washing up, with benefit of hindsight, what happened in 2024 election and why. What did we miss?

Did the 1992 scenario repeated in 2024 simply boil down to Tory’s having a lot more money to spend on it than Labour?

When do you actually start general election campaign expenditure, and campaigning - about six weeks to go?

From early 2023 the Tories were clearly up and running with the stronger election unit - aggressive, busy, working effectively together with mainstream media, getting results, whilst Labour’s was non existent until the bill boards appeared about five weeks to go, followed by the now “notorious” mass balloon release.

So it wasn’t how clever for Tories to sack, disown and politically bury Boris, to already give the voters a government change before the election what won it, as much as it now appears it utterly negated Labours “time for change” campaign - that Sunak was thought of on election day as The NHS. The economy. Stability. Fairness, equality, good, honesty. Reducing immigration. Lower taxes. Helping the country/people. A better Britain. The poor. Hope. whilst Starmer and Labour thought of as Wokeness, higher taxes, Dishonesty, Chaos, Disaster, greed, Bad Money, was actually perceptions engineered, fake and created, cultivated over a long period of time, spending lots of money on it.

And we should have realised this in advance, from those early 2023 heat maps. 🤷‍♀️

You appear not to realise that the frequency of the responses is related to the size of print. If you did you would have drawn the opposite conclusions.

That’s a pointless post, I do know how a word cloud works.

You don’t actually, as you seem to think the most important ones are the big ones that jump out...

I hate to break it to you, but...

I hate to break it to you, but the power of them is how they help to measure trend, the fools gold is getting hung up on each individual one and how pretty they look. Rather like bad excitement over one opinion poll, look at the trend.

Secondly you need to strip out the more meaningless words. You need it to paint a meaningful picture for you.

And in this particular case, the meaningful picture - the big take out from todays which I have correctly spotted - is how these Tory clouds are getting strikingly better under Sunak, and the Labour one full of so many bad associations for that party. Of course with so much raw data you can spin it however you like as Wulf has done, but on trend he has got it utterly wrong hasn’t he? And all those words I have used that help paint that full picture are actually there on both charts, the sheer weight of them help fill in a fuller picture.

You are speaking in tongues again Rabbit. I have not a ScoobyDoo, I'm afraid.

I shouldn’t pander to you and your special needs, but as you have cried for help, some people here are clearly oblivious to the issues with word clouds and can’t use them properly like I can.

Do word clouds help you capture complex themes from the data, or in fact distract you if all you do is glance at the biggest words? For example my analysis would try to pick up context. Where you are trying to imply the little words are meaningless, I argue Sunak launches war on the dingy people and suddenly gets little words like tough, leadership, and Starmer gets little words like weak, pro immigration appear. This is important.

You have a way with words, to coin a phrase.

I reckon that saying might catch on, you know

I particularly like the idea of a war on dingy people - accountants to be concerned?

No. Chartered Accountants are cool and interesting people.

Of course they are. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM

Dated that though. Accountancy (Chartered) went through a revolution in the 80s. It started to attract lots of 21 year old graduates from top unis who were both smart and directionless.

My youngest wants to go into finance. Perhaps accountancy.

So given the horrendous student loan system (9% graduate tax for 40 years anyone?) and poor value for money given by university courses (some, perhaps most); does my daughter:

1) go to a Russell Group university (if she gets the grades and is accepted) 2) go to a non-Russell Group university (if she fails to get the grades) or 3) leave school at 18 and join a large accountancy firm with an apprentice degree-equivalent option (the equivalent being accountancy exams).

I don't know what to advise her (though she doesn't listen to me anyway).

With the obvious caveat that I don't know her my advice is for her to study a subject she really likes at the best uni she can get into. Then see how things develop.

17 year olds choosing degrees based on what they like, without considering employability, is a terrible life decision.

To an extent, sure. But a 2:1 or better in any course from a half-decent university is at least reasonably employable and if you enjoy the subject you're surely more likely to get a better grade.

As a man with a Philosophy Degree from a decent University, I don't regret my time there at all. I was not mature enough to enter the workforce at 18. I'm not even sure I was mature enough at 21.

If someone gets into a third tier University to do a subject without strong obvious job prospects, then - yes - it's probably a waste of money.

But there simply isn't that much demand for quite bright 18 year olds out there. Employers prefer people who are a little older and a little more mature. University shows that you are able to self manage yourself over a substantial period of time. That's an incredibly important signal to an employer.

When we get GPT-27, there won't be much demand for "quite" bright people of any age ;-)

No so I suggest. As sectors of work diminish (as has happened throughout the industrial revolution) so sectors of work of all kinds advance to take their place. Look at total employment figures.

The western world is a vast job creation scheme. This is not going to stop. Many of the jobs replaced by automation of all sorts are pretty dull anyway. Subsistence economies don't have enough time, money or people for Wagner, ballet, social care, nail shops and Ibiza.

In the industrial revolution machines replaced a lot of manual workers, manual workers became service workers or knowledge workers or creative workers to keep employed. Now if AI replaces knowledge workers then all thats left is service workers and creative workers. Service workers are also being replaced by machines hence self checkouts etc.

You really think we are going to keep full employment if the only work left is creative? Just because it happened in the industrial revolution doesn't mean it will be that way again as machines take over ever more roles that humans can do. You sir are complacent

Indeed and only about the top third by IQ are able to do very creative roles

Best stick to grunt work, then?

Which there won't be any of if AI replaces it all and knowledge workers, hence an inevitable UBI in that case

Richard_Nabavi

carnforth said:

These people are laughable, but I almost agree with them about La Poste starting an online bank called "Ma French Bank". Imagine if the post office here opened "My banque anglais" here.

We have Pret A Manger, although I suppose that's mitigated by everyone mispronouncing the first word.

Sunil_Prasannan

Andy_JS said:

Average last 10 polls.

Lab 45.7%
Con 28.3%

Includes the poll putting the Tories on 20%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election

And the one putting the Blues on 35%?

Theuniondivvie

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

What a pathetic people the French are. We are the language of Shakespeare and we let it evolve. IIRC French is from the Old English meaning a nation of eunuchs.

Excessive use of English by Notre Dame and the French post office have prompted legal action in defence of the French language.

The cathedral and La Poste are among the targets in a series of lawsuits filed by language defence groups who are particularly outraged by the way that businesses, public institutions and figures including President Macron are adopting English despite decades of state efforts to stem the invasion.

The most egregious case, in the eyes of the plaintiffs, is “Ma French Bank”, the online bank recently opened by La Poste. Other flagrant abuses include hybrid coinages such as Ouigo, (“We go”) the SNCF railways’ low-cost high-speed trains, and Sarthe Me Up, a punning slogan invented in Le Mans to promote the département of le Sarthe.

The authority in charge of reconstruction after the Notre Dame fire of 2019 is accused of breaching a 1994 law that requires any translation on public signs to be in two foreign languages. The aim was to avoid giving precedence to English. “If there’s only one foreign language, it’s always Anglo-American,” said Louis Maisonneuve, head of the Observatoire des Libertés, a coalition of groups including his own French Language Defence Association. The association has already scored a victory over the management of the Eiffel Tower, forcing it to add Spanish to its signs in English.

The campaigners have turned their sights on the organisers of next year’s Paris Olympic Games, who this week advertised for thousands of volunteers with the condition that they must speak French, English or both. No other language was specified.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/defenders-of-french-go-on-le-attack-against-english-kxl2mgpqf

They should just give up and start speaking English. Then everyone else would not find them so annoying.

Appears not to have worked for the English.

OnlyLivingBoy

Richard_Nabavi said:

carnforth said:

These people are laughable, but I almost agree with them about La Poste starting an online bank called "Ma French Bank". Imagine if the post office here opened "My banque anglais" here.

We have Pret A Manger, although I suppose that's mitigated by everyone mispronouncing the first word.

It's not pronounced "pret"? This is messing with my mind.

Anabobazina

Test

Anabobazina

Ah, seems it’s working now. Thanks to @TheScreamingEagles @LostPassword @bondegezou and @Carnyx for helping liberate me from the spam trap!

GIN1138

Anabobazina said:

Test

You're out of Mike's sin bin

kle4

Theuniondivvie said:

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

What a pathetic people the French are. We are the language of Shakespeare and we let it evolve. IIRC French is from the Old English meaning a nation of eunuchs.

Excessive use of English by Notre Dame and the French post office have prompted legal action in defence of the French language.

The cathedral and La Poste are among the targets in a series of lawsuits filed by language defence groups who are particularly outraged by the way that businesses, public institutions and figures including President Macron are adopting English despite decades of state efforts to stem the invasion.

The most egregious case, in the eyes of the plaintiffs, is “Ma French Bank”, the online bank recently opened by La Poste. Other flagrant abuses include hybrid coinages such as Ouigo, (“We go”) the SNCF railways’ low-cost high-speed trains, and Sarthe Me Up, a punning slogan invented in Le Mans to promote the département of le Sarthe.

The authority in charge of reconstruction after the Notre Dame fire of 2019 is accused of breaching a 1994 law that requires any translation on public signs to be in two foreign languages. The aim was to avoid giving precedence to English. “If there’s only one foreign language, it’s always Anglo-American,” said Louis Maisonneuve, head of the Observatoire des Libertés, a coalition of groups including his own French Language Defence Association. The association has already scored a victory over the management of the Eiffel Tower, forcing it to add Spanish to its signs in English.

The campaigners have turned their sights on the organisers of next year’s Paris Olympic Games, who this week advertised for thousands of volunteers with the condition that they must speak French, English or both. No other language was specified.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/defenders-of-french-go-on-le-attack-against-english-kxl2mgpqf

They should just give up and start speaking English. Then everyone else would not find them so annoying.

Appears not to have worked for the English.

Yes, but that's for other reasons than our speaking English.

FrancisUrquhart

Anabobazina said:

Ah, seems it’s working now. Thanks to @TheScreamingEagles @LostPassword @bondegezou and @Carnyx for helping liberate me from the spam trap!

Did you make a comment about Radiohead?

kle4

Whilst I don't think this is true in every instance - some people do just try to magnify grievances - it is a thought I have when people quibble over whether culture wars are 'real'. It's semantic at the end of the day.

If you want to shift cultural norms, you're fighting a culture war! And that's OK - some wars are just! Own it. Argue for it. Don't just dismiss any opposition as beneath you. Gobsmacking arrogance.
https://twitter.com/mrianleslie/status/1638891094997086208?cxt=HHwWgMDR7ZCxwb4tAAAA

Northern_Al

Richard_Nabavi said:

carnforth said:

These people are laughable, but I almost agree with them about La Poste starting an online bank called "Ma French Bank". Imagine if the post office here opened "My banque anglais" here.

We have Pret A Manger, although I suppose that's mitigated by everyone mispronouncing the first word.

And fancy the French nicking the more generic 'café' from us Brits. Honestly.

boulay

Richard_Nabavi said:

carnforth said:

These people are laughable, but I almost agree with them about La Poste starting an online bank called "Ma French Bank". Imagine if the post office here opened "My banque anglais" here.

We have Pret A Manger, although I suppose that's mitigated by everyone mispronouncing the first word.

How is it being mispronounced? Have never heard anyone do so personally.

tlg86

FrancisUrquhart said:

tlg86 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

I don't know what Foden has done or said to Gareth Waistcoast, but doesn't matter if he is England's most gifted and creative player against a team where you need that, bench warming duties again tonight.

To be fair to Southgate, Foden doesn't always get into the City team and Saka is at least as good as Mahrez.

Foden form dipped after WC / he had an injury, but has past few weeks been absolutely brilliant. At the same time, Phillips is in the starting lineup, who has played about 20s for Man City in past 18 months....while England is also playing Rice / Bellingham to cover the defensive part of the midfield.

Its consistent with Southgate, he picked everybody but Foden in the WC to start with, despite Foden having an amazing season for Man City.

Saka’s not been too shabby either and I guess there’s only room for him or Foden in Southgate’s formation.

Phillips is a good example of why the minimum number of homegrown or English players rule needs scrapping. City only signed him because he’s English and he helps get their numbers up.