Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

David Davis slams the voter ID requirement – politicalbetting.com

1234689

Comments

  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,843
    Where is PtP when you need him?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827
    DavidL said:

    Stocky said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    algarkirk said:

    On race horses enjoying racing:
    I once had a conversation with a biologist after a book signing which got on to the subject of athletes, and I asked him why humans have massively increased their running records over the past century but horses have managed only minuscule improvements.
    As he pointed out, horses have evolved running at speed over millions of years, whereas we haven't. He went on to say that for horses, running is about escaping predators, so when horses run together - for example, in a horse race - those millions of years of evolution are telling each horse not to be last, or they'll get eaten. And, in his words, every physiological thing that jockeys and trainers say is a sign a horse enjoys it, is actually a sign of stress. They're basically terrified.
    The only time a horse enjoys running is alone, at not much more than a canter.


    Do memories plague their ears like flies?
    They shake their heads. Dusk brims the shadows.
    Summer by summer all stole away,
    The starting-gates, the crowd and cries -
    All but the unmolesting meadows.
    Almanacked, their names live; they

    Have slipped their names, and stand at ease,
    Or gallop for what must be joy,
    And not a fieldglass sees them home,
    Or curious stop-watch prophesies :
    Only the grooms, and the grooms boy,
    With bridles in the evening come.


    Larkin of course.
    Larkin is so strangely brilliant

    ‘Dusk brims the shadows’ doesn’t actually make that much sense, but it is so powerfully evocative of a warm rural twilight - and of the slow contented end of life
    Stunning enjambment between the two stanzas as well. Suggests the speed of the race, and then the line literally comes to a standstill. This is Larkin at his very best.
    One of THE great English poets, to my mind. Up there with Keats and Byron and Milton
    Also vividly demonstrates why betting on the nags is a mugs game unless you have inside information from the stables.
    Yep. I used to be in a syndicate (via Sporting Index) and a few of us used to watch the horses before the race being paraded by the stable hand - we'd shout ""this one the winner then?" or similar. Surprising the information you can get that way - sometimes ruling out the horse they are parading.
    If anyone did that with shares they would be prosecuted.
    I think you may have an issue with your keyboard where "should" gets transposed to "would".
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,344
    DavidL said:

    Stocky said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    algarkirk said:

    On race horses enjoying racing:
    I once had a conversation with a biologist after a book signing which got on to the subject of athletes, and I asked him why humans have massively increased their running records over the past century but horses have managed only minuscule improvements.
    As he pointed out, horses have evolved running at speed over millions of years, whereas we haven't. He went on to say that for horses, running is about escaping predators, so when horses run together - for example, in a horse race - those millions of years of evolution are telling each horse not to be last, or they'll get eaten. And, in his words, every physiological thing that jockeys and trainers say is a sign a horse enjoys it, is actually a sign of stress. They're basically terrified.
    The only time a horse enjoys running is alone, at not much more than a canter.


    Do memories plague their ears like flies?
    They shake their heads. Dusk brims the shadows.
    Summer by summer all stole away,
    The starting-gates, the crowd and cries -
    All but the unmolesting meadows.
    Almanacked, their names live; they

    Have slipped their names, and stand at ease,
    Or gallop for what must be joy,
    And not a fieldglass sees them home,
    Or curious stop-watch prophesies :
    Only the grooms, and the grooms boy,
    With bridles in the evening come.


    Larkin of course.
    Larkin is so strangely brilliant

    ‘Dusk brims the shadows’ doesn’t actually make that much sense, but it is so powerfully evocative of a warm rural twilight - and of the slow contented end of life
    Stunning enjambment between the two stanzas as well. Suggests the speed of the race, and then the line literally comes to a standstill. This is Larkin at his very best.
    One of THE great English poets, to my mind. Up there with Keats and Byron and Milton
    Also vividly demonstrates why betting on the nags is a mugs game unless you have inside information from the stables.
    Yep. I used to be in a syndicate (via Sporting Index) and a few of us used to watch the horses before the race being paraded by the stable hand - we'd shout ""this one the winner then?" or similar. Surprising the information you can get that way - sometimes ruling out the horse they are parading.
    If anyone did that with shares they would be prosecuted.
    With the greyhounds they just used to give them a couple of pies half an hour before the race.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,344
    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    algarkirk said:

    On race horses enjoying racing:
    I once had a conversation with a biologist after a book signing which got on to the subject of athletes, and I asked him why humans have massively increased their running records over the past century but horses have managed only minuscule improvements.
    As he pointed out, horses have evolved running at speed over millions of years, whereas we haven't. He went on to say that for horses, running is about escaping predators, so when horses run together - for example, in a horse race - those millions of years of evolution are telling each horse not to be last, or they'll get eaten. And, in his words, every physiological thing that jockeys and trainers say is a sign a horse enjoys it, is actually a sign of stress. They're basically terrified.
    The only time a horse enjoys running is alone, at not much more than a canter.


    Do memories plague their ears like flies?
    They shake their heads. Dusk brims the shadows.
    Summer by summer all stole away,
    The starting-gates, the crowd and cries -
    All but the unmolesting meadows.
    Almanacked, their names live; they

    Have slipped their names, and stand at ease,
    Or gallop for what must be joy,
    And not a fieldglass sees them home,
    Or curious stop-watch prophesies :
    Only the grooms, and the grooms boy,
    With bridles in the evening come.


    Larkin of course.
    Larkin is so strangely brilliant

    ‘Dusk brims the shadows’ doesn’t actually make that much sense, but it is so powerfully evocative of a warm rural twilight - and of the slow contented end of life
    Stunning enjambment between the two stanzas as well. Suggests the speed of the race, and then the line literally comes to a standstill. This is Larkin at his very best.
    One of THE great English poets, to my mind. Up there with Keats and Byron and Milton
    Also vividly demonstrates why betting on the nags is a mugs game unless you have inside information from the stables.
    If you are doing it for fun it is no issue David. I don't bet heavy and am actually using the bookies money now and been years since I had to use my own.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,577

    ydoethur said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    eek said:

    Boardwalk said:

    Peyer Cardwell on talttv now saying we are being lied to and Ukraine is losing the war. And this from Tucker Carlson

    Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing"

    https://twitter.com/Sinnaig/status/1646959620538220544?s=20

    Greetings to this week's Russian spammer.

    For reference in future weeks start it's best to start by replying to a few other comments instead of talking about Ukraine when we are talking about other things - the year's big (but pointless for betting) horse race and random bits of ancient history.
    We have lost interest in the SMO though. This time last year was all breathless analysis of truck tyres and furious googling of desant tactics. Now it's just sporadic and half-hearted C&P of Ukrainian psyop tweets.
    At the moment there isn't much happening. The Russians clearly can't advance and the Ukrainians haven't, maybe because they can't, maybe because they're waiting on something (or both). The war therefore is less interesting in a news sense.

    If the Ukrainians and the Russians are both stuck, we have a stalemate. We don't know where that would lead - whether a negotiated peace could be managed (seems unlikely, bluntly) that would allow the lifting of sanctions, or whether sanctions will persist and eventually Russia will suffer enough to offer meaningful concessions. Or, indeed, whether changes of government in the West might weaken support for Ukraine and allow Russia to consolidate their hold on the east bank.

    There isn't really a lot to say until we have more data.
    As much as anyone can tell (those tasked with gathering the data are prone to falling out of high windows), the Russian economy is going to have a disastrous 2023. The extent to which Russia can just "tough it out" will be tested to destruction.
    The other point is that we are waiting for the expected spring offensives. From both sides.
    I think we had the Russian offensive:

    https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-russia-battle-vuhledar/32276547.html#:~:text=Damaged Russian tanks are seen,the city earlier this month.&text=By one account, nearly three,troops may have been killed.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,624
    Stocky said:

    More information regarding that awful cyclist accident that generated a lot of chatter on here:

    https://www.huntspost.co.uk/news/23416133.auriol-grey-family-say-disabled-pedestrian-shouldnt-jail/

    "A Change.org petition also suggests that Grey was "excessively" jailed and that, because of her cerebral palsy, partial blindness and the fact she was a pedestrian on a footpath, "a suspended sentence would be more appropriate". It adds: "I can’t see any signs nor are there markings on the footpath stating it’s shared."
    Disability Rights UK, meanwhile, called the sentence "extremely harsh." "

    "Another uncertainty surrounding the case is whether or not the road on which the incident happened is a shared footpath.

    Cambridgeshire County Council say there are no legal records to show it was a shared path, nor signage to suggest it was a cyclepath.

    Cambridgeshire police, meanwhile, confirmed they could not “categorically” state it was a shared cycleway."

    It's not a shared path; that should be obvious to anyone with eyes and a brain.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,197
    Ok, the tense few hours of waiting to hear my nap is over. CAPODANNO @ 25s. A vibrant young horse ready to shine on the biggest stage.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,263
    boulay said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    boulay said:

    Carnyx said:

    Coronation row over hundreds of peers forbidden from wearing robes
    ...
    the decision was made by the King on advice from the Government

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2023/04/14/coronets-robes-peers-aristocracy-banned-king-coronation/ (£££)

    The plight of dukes unable to wear the coronation robes their families have stored for generations and not worn since 1953 might not make the next Labour campaign poster but does call into question what the coronation is for, if not for OTT pageantry. After all, Charles is already King.

    *slicing onions*

    I wonder how many peers had new ones made or the old ones refurbished in the last few months?

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/coronation-robes-banned-king-charles-29716823

    'Viscount Torrington, joint chairman of the Hereditary Peerage Association, who has not been invited to the Coronation, said: “It’’s a great shame. Ironically the coronation robes are in a way less gaudy than the parliamentary robes, and I thought the idea was to make the ceremony less gaudy, so coronation robes might have been better.”'

    BUT

    "Some crimson robes will allowed to be donned by sitting members of the House of Lords, but these are parliamentary cloaks, traditionally worn at the State opening of Parliament every year.

    Less lavish than coronation robes, they do not include coronets, swords, court shoes, breeches or an under-jacket."
    I was looking forward to seeing Baroness Mone’s robe made from puppies’ ears, lace and silk but it’s not to be.
    Reminds me of the ‘ermine colostomy bag’ quip from TTOI
    On more coronation news with Dukes being omitted I saw the following under the headline in the mail in my morning papers catch up which I’m not sure is a spelling error or there is a story behind it.


    They are notorious party girls
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827
    kinabalu said:

    Ok, the tense few hours of waiting to hear my nap is over. CAPODANNO @ 25s. A vibrant young horse ready to shine on the biggest stage.

    I assume this tip is for Republican nominee although judging by recent contests quite possibly either the next SNP or Tory leader instead?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,624

    Sandpit said:

    On the Labour poll leads - it seems obvious, to me, that vaguely competent government, some international agreements etc would be more popular than the ChaosOfTheWeek style.

    For @JosiasJessop - https://www.faa.gov/media/27236 - the FAA documentation associated with the launch license for Starship/Super Heavy. Confirms that the first three launches will be completely expendable.

    Really looking forward to the Starship launch. It’s the biggest and heaviest rocket ever to leave the Earth, more than 50% heavier than Saturn V.

    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3e/60/a3/3e60a30524e2bf3656e8e567ff88b3e8.jpg
    Yet unlike Saturn V, it cannot get man to the moon and back in one launch. ;)

    (Yes, I know that's because SS has not been optimised for that particular mission.)
    Orbital refuelling is required to get anywhere.

    May Senator Shelby suffer a plague of boils......
    Being a pedant, we've got to the Moon without orbital refuelling; and sent probes to all the planets. But yes, for sensible solar system manned travel we need refuelling. And hydrolox. ;)

    Incidentally, have you seen ULA's second stage Centaur test boom?

    https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1646572389193625600
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,748
    Now that Finland are safely within NATO’s nuclear umbrella and Sanna is on her way out, does the rest of us get to find out what that dastardly Finland Rumour was all about?
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,416
    moonshine said:

    Now that Finland are safely within NATO’s nuclear umbrella and Sanna is on her way out, does the rest of us get to find out what that dastardly Finland Rumour was all about?

    Nope, we just get to read people who claim to be in the know hinting they knew what it was.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,344
    kinabalu said:

    Ok, the tense few hours of waiting to hear my nap is over. CAPODANNO @ 25s. A vibrant young horse ready to shine on the biggest stage.

    good luck
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,586

    Sandpit said:

    On the Labour poll leads - it seems obvious, to me, that vaguely competent government, some international agreements etc would be more popular than the ChaosOfTheWeek style.

    For @JosiasJessop - https://www.faa.gov/media/27236 - the FAA documentation associated with the launch license for Starship/Super Heavy. Confirms that the first three launches will be completely expendable.

    Really looking forward to the Starship launch. It’s the biggest and heaviest rocket ever to leave the Earth, more than 50% heavier than Saturn V.

    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3e/60/a3/3e60a30524e2bf3656e8e567ff88b3e8.jpg
    Yet unlike Saturn V, it cannot get man to the moon and back in one launch. ;)

    (Yes, I know that's because SS has not been optimised for that particular mission.)
    Orbital refuelling is required to get anywhere.

    May Senator Shelby suffer a plague of boils......
    Being a pedant, we've got to the Moon without orbital refuelling; and sent probes to all the planets. But yes, for sensible solar system manned travel we need refuelling. And hydrolox. ;)

    Incidentally, have you seen ULA's second stage Centaur test boom?

    https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1646572389193625600
    That’s a big boom!

    Reading through the Starship regulatory document posted earlier, they’ve gone to quite some length to calculate the exact size of the boom, should the vehicle experience a rapid and unscheduled disassembly at various points during the launch cycle. :D
  • kicorsekicorse Posts: 434

    Stocky said:

    More information regarding that awful cyclist accident that generated a lot of chatter on here:

    https://www.huntspost.co.uk/news/23416133.auriol-grey-family-say-disabled-pedestrian-shouldnt-jail/

    "A Change.org petition also suggests that Grey was "excessively" jailed and that, because of her cerebral palsy, partial blindness and the fact she was a pedestrian on a footpath, "a suspended sentence would be more appropriate". It adds: "I can’t see any signs nor are there markings on the footpath stating it’s shared."
    Disability Rights UK, meanwhile, called the sentence "extremely harsh." "

    "Another uncertainty surrounding the case is whether or not the road on which the incident happened is a shared footpath.

    Cambridgeshire County Council say there are no legal records to show it was a shared path, nor signage to suggest it was a cyclepath.

    Cambridgeshire police, meanwhile, confirmed they could not “categorically” state it was a shared cycleway."

    It's not a shared path; that should be obvious to anyone with eyes and a brain.
    The facts are that a human being died as a result of an intentional aggressive act that predictably sent that person into the path of an oncoming car. The criminal's disability, and question of whether the victim should have been cycling there, are arguably mitigating factors that justify the shortness of the jail term she received, though the fact that the criminal left the scene is a much clearer aggravating factor. Anyone suggesting she shouldn't face jail at all is delusional.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827
    kicorse said:

    Stocky said:

    More information regarding that awful cyclist accident that generated a lot of chatter on here:

    https://www.huntspost.co.uk/news/23416133.auriol-grey-family-say-disabled-pedestrian-shouldnt-jail/

    "A Change.org petition also suggests that Grey was "excessively" jailed and that, because of her cerebral palsy, partial blindness and the fact she was a pedestrian on a footpath, "a suspended sentence would be more appropriate". It adds: "I can’t see any signs nor are there markings on the footpath stating it’s shared."
    Disability Rights UK, meanwhile, called the sentence "extremely harsh." "

    "Another uncertainty surrounding the case is whether or not the road on which the incident happened is a shared footpath.

    Cambridgeshire County Council say there are no legal records to show it was a shared path, nor signage to suggest it was a cyclepath.

    Cambridgeshire police, meanwhile, confirmed they could not “categorically” state it was a shared cycleway."

    It's not a shared path; that should be obvious to anyone with eyes and a brain.
    The facts are that a human being died as a result of an intentional aggressive act that predictably sent that person into the path of an oncoming car. The criminal's disability, and question of whether the victim should have been cycling there, are arguably mitigating factors that justify the shortness of the jail term she received, though the fact that the criminal left the scene is a much clearer aggravating factor. Anyone suggesting she shouldn't face jail at all is delusional.
    Opinion seems to be about 50-50. Delusional is pretty arrogant - its a difference of opinion about a number of factors.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,219
    edited April 2023

    Stocky said:

    More information regarding that awful cyclist accident that generated a lot of chatter on here:

    https://www.huntspost.co.uk/news/23416133.auriol-grey-family-say-disabled-pedestrian-shouldnt-jail/

    "A Change.org petition also suggests that Grey was "excessively" jailed and that, because of her cerebral palsy, partial blindness and the fact she was a pedestrian on a footpath, "a suspended sentence would be more appropriate". It adds: "I can’t see any signs nor are there markings on the footpath stating it’s shared."
    Disability Rights UK, meanwhile, called the sentence "extremely harsh." "

    "Another uncertainty surrounding the case is whether or not the road on which the incident happened is a shared footpath.

    Cambridgeshire County Council say there are no legal records to show it was a shared path, nor signage to suggest it was a cyclepath.

    Cambridgeshire police, meanwhile, confirmed they could not “categorically” state it was a shared cycleway."

    It's not a shared path; that should be obvious to anyone with eyes and a brain.
    Sure - and the council has questions to answer - but what turns on it?

    For me, whether or not it was a shared path holds little relevance. I'm not interested in shifting blame towards the poor cyclist who died. The whole thing was a tragic accident with no intent and Grey IMO is also now a victim here as of course is the poor car driver. Why do we have to seek blame all the time? The police should not have prosecuted IMO - certainly not for manslaughter.

    If there were no CCTV footage what would have happened? I very much doubt Grey would have been prosecuted - people would have blamed the driver.
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860
    moonshine said:

    Now that Finland are safely within NATO’s nuclear umbrella and Sanna is on her way out, does the rest of us get to find out what that dastardly Finland Rumour was all about?

    Been asking this for a bit; I can’t find hide nor hair of it on Twitter or elsewhere and I don’t even know really who or what it was about in the first place. Obvs don’t want to bring any legal bother here, but a roundabout sense of what the bloody thing was would be nice!
  • WestieWestie Posts: 426
    edited April 2023
    Other news: word from Paris is that "the Finland rumour" looks set to blow in coronation week 🍿
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,219
    edited April 2023
    kicorse said:

    Stocky said:

    More information regarding that awful cyclist accident that generated a lot of chatter on here:

    https://www.huntspost.co.uk/news/23416133.auriol-grey-family-say-disabled-pedestrian-shouldnt-jail/

    "A Change.org petition also suggests that Grey was "excessively" jailed and that, because of her cerebral palsy, partial blindness and the fact she was a pedestrian on a footpath, "a suspended sentence would be more appropriate". It adds: "I can’t see any signs nor are there markings on the footpath stating it’s shared."
    Disability Rights UK, meanwhile, called the sentence "extremely harsh." "

    "Another uncertainty surrounding the case is whether or not the road on which the incident happened is a shared footpath.

    Cambridgeshire County Council say there are no legal records to show it was a shared path, nor signage to suggest it was a cyclepath.

    Cambridgeshire police, meanwhile, confirmed they could not “categorically” state it was a shared cycleway."

    It's not a shared path; that should be obvious to anyone with eyes and a brain.
    The facts are that a human being died as a result of an intentional aggressive act that predictably sent that person into the path of an oncoming car. The criminal's disability, and question of whether the victim should have been cycling there, are arguably mitigating factors that justify the shortness of the jail term she received, though the fact that the criminal left the scene is a much clearer aggravating factor. Anyone suggesting she shouldn't face jail at all is delusional.
    She didn't leave the scene - at least not immediately - and in any case this justifies prosecution for leaving the scene of an accident (if that is a crime) not manslaughter.
  • WestieWestie Posts: 426

    kicorse said:

    Stocky said:

    More information regarding that awful cyclist accident that generated a lot of chatter on here:

    https://www.huntspost.co.uk/news/23416133.auriol-grey-family-say-disabled-pedestrian-shouldnt-jail/

    "A Change.org petition also suggests that Grey was "excessively" jailed and that, because of her cerebral palsy, partial blindness and the fact she was a pedestrian on a footpath, "a suspended sentence would be more appropriate". It adds: "I can’t see any signs nor are there markings on the footpath stating it’s shared."
    Disability Rights UK, meanwhile, called the sentence "extremely harsh." "

    "Another uncertainty surrounding the case is whether or not the road on which the incident happened is a shared footpath.

    Cambridgeshire County Council say there are no legal records to show it was a shared path, nor signage to suggest it was a cyclepath.

    Cambridgeshire police, meanwhile, confirmed they could not “categorically” state it was a shared cycleway."

    It's not a shared path; that should be obvious to anyone with eyes and a brain.
    The facts are that a human being died as a result of an intentional aggressive act that predictably sent that person into the path of an oncoming car. The criminal's disability, and question of whether the victim should have been cycling there, are arguably mitigating factors that justify the shortness of the jail term she received, though the fact that the criminal left the scene is a much clearer aggravating factor. Anyone suggesting she shouldn't face jail at all is delusional.
    Opinion seems to be about 50-50. Delusional is pretty arrogant - its a difference of opinion about a number of factors.
    Not delusional but a bloody idiot or piss-taker. Of course a custodial sentence is called for.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,586
    Tres said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    On race horses enjoying racing:
    I once had a conversation with a biologist after a book signing which got on to the subject of athletes, and I asked him why humans have massively increased their running records over the past century but horses have managed only minuscule improvements.
    As he pointed out, horses have evolved running at speed over millions of years, whereas we haven't. He went on to say that for horses, running is about escaping predators, so when horses run together - for example, in a horse race - those millions of years of evolution are telling each horse not to be last, or they'll get eaten. And, in his words, every physiological thing that jockeys and trainers say is a sign a horse enjoys it, is actually a sign of stress. They're basically terrified.
    The only time a horse enjoys running is alone, at not much more than a canter.

    Would the same not apply to Usain Bolt too then?
    Somewhat astonishingly, Bolt’s records, especialy in the 200m, are looking increasingly under threat. Bolt’s own Junior (U20) record at that distance, was beaten by nearly half a second last year, by an 18-year-old American called Kerryion Knighton. He’s not the only one either, there’s 4 or 5 men now under 19.50.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=icQfSz7ukx4

    If I wanted tickets to one event at the Olympics in Paris next year, it would be the 200m final.
    Partly (mostly?) super shoes.
    Partly shoes, partly tracks, partly advances in sports science and training, and partly picking out kids really early and getting them into training programmes.

    I genuinely thought Bolt’s 100m and 200m records would be like Bob Beamon’s long jump, there for nearly three decades. Now, only 14 years later, I think the 200m could definitely go at the Olympics.

    The longest-standing, and most controversial, athletics record, the women’s 100m, might finally be consigned to the bin as well. Good riddance to that one.
    Isn't this because they all wearing go faster shoes these days?
    The really fancy-pants shoes are actually those for the road runners, Kipchoge’s famous two-hour marathon featured some prototype footwear from Nike.

    For track races, the track itself has a bigger effect, and organisers of the major championships obviously want to make the track as fast as possible so that records get broken.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827
    Westie said:

    kicorse said:

    Stocky said:

    More information regarding that awful cyclist accident that generated a lot of chatter on here:

    https://www.huntspost.co.uk/news/23416133.auriol-grey-family-say-disabled-pedestrian-shouldnt-jail/

    "A Change.org petition also suggests that Grey was "excessively" jailed and that, because of her cerebral palsy, partial blindness and the fact she was a pedestrian on a footpath, "a suspended sentence would be more appropriate". It adds: "I can’t see any signs nor are there markings on the footpath stating it’s shared."
    Disability Rights UK, meanwhile, called the sentence "extremely harsh." "

    "Another uncertainty surrounding the case is whether or not the road on which the incident happened is a shared footpath.

    Cambridgeshire County Council say there are no legal records to show it was a shared path, nor signage to suggest it was a cyclepath.

    Cambridgeshire police, meanwhile, confirmed they could not “categorically” state it was a shared cycleway."

    It's not a shared path; that should be obvious to anyone with eyes and a brain.
    The facts are that a human being died as a result of an intentional aggressive act that predictably sent that person into the path of an oncoming car. The criminal's disability, and question of whether the victim should have been cycling there, are arguably mitigating factors that justify the shortness of the jail term she received, though the fact that the criminal left the scene is a much clearer aggravating factor. Anyone suggesting she shouldn't face jail at all is delusional.
    Opinion seems to be about 50-50. Delusional is pretty arrogant - its a difference of opinion about a number of factors.
    Not delusional but a bloody idiot or piss-taker. Of course a custodial sentence is called for.
    About half would agree with you and half disagree. It does not seem likely that intelligence or piss taking is the dividing line here rather than differing perspectives on both exactly what happened and how much the law should depend on outcomes (person died or person did not even hit car) rather than actions (waving hand in front of cyclist and shouting at them).
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,624
    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    More information regarding that awful cyclist accident that generated a lot of chatter on here:

    https://www.huntspost.co.uk/news/23416133.auriol-grey-family-say-disabled-pedestrian-shouldnt-jail/

    "A Change.org petition also suggests that Grey was "excessively" jailed and that, because of her cerebral palsy, partial blindness and the fact she was a pedestrian on a footpath, "a suspended sentence would be more appropriate". It adds: "I can’t see any signs nor are there markings on the footpath stating it’s shared."
    Disability Rights UK, meanwhile, called the sentence "extremely harsh." "

    "Another uncertainty surrounding the case is whether or not the road on which the incident happened is a shared footpath.

    Cambridgeshire County Council say there are no legal records to show it was a shared path, nor signage to suggest it was a cyclepath.

    Cambridgeshire police, meanwhile, confirmed they could not “categorically” state it was a shared cycleway."

    It's not a shared path; that should be obvious to anyone with eyes and a brain.
    Sure - and the council has questions to answer - but what turns on it?

    For me, whether or not it was a shared path holds little relevance. I'm not interested in shifting blame towards the poor cyclist who died. The whole thing was a tragic accident with no intent and Grey IMO is also now a victim here as of course is the poor car driver. Why do we have to seek blame all the time? The police should not have prosecuted IMO - certainly not for manslaughter.

    If there were no CCTV footage what would have happened? I very much doubt Grey would have been prosecuted - people would have blamed the driver.
    I agree with that. IMV no-one was to blame; it was just a tragic accident.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,996
    edited April 2023
    On my way back from France where my neighbours were desperately trying to convince me their country is going to the dogs and falling apart (it looked fine to me), and I see the Rishi comeback narrative continues strong.

    If the polls are indeed massively out then I assume it’s the undecideds who are really (shy) Tories, as that YG poll seems to suggest.

    But is the Tory hive mind now settling into one of its 2 quasi-equilibrium states of complacency after a couple of years of panic? A handful of polls showing a little tightening and a few weeks without a major disaster and that’s enough to flip from one state to another.

    Funny when you’re in one of these uncertain periods in history, where what seems up in the air will, you know, seem obvious and predestined in hindsight. Of course this was going to be another 1992, Starmer hadn’t sealed the deal, the pensioner vote turned out in numbers etc, or of course it was a 1997, the mood of the country had shifted decisively.

    Rather like the Ukraine war: in 2 years’ time it will seem all too obvious that either a. Russia was always going to bludgeon its way to a victory, just like in Chechnya, just like WW2, Napoleon’s flight from Moscow etc etc or b. The Russian regime was teetering on the edge of collapse and would crumble in the face of a Ukrainian counteroffensive with its superior Western weaponry.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,996
    Sandpit said:

    Tres said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    On race horses enjoying racing:
    I once had a conversation with a biologist after a book signing which got on to the subject of athletes, and I asked him why humans have massively increased their running records over the past century but horses have managed only minuscule improvements.
    As he pointed out, horses have evolved running at speed over millions of years, whereas we haven't. He went on to say that for horses, running is about escaping predators, so when horses run together - for example, in a horse race - those millions of years of evolution are telling each horse not to be last, or they'll get eaten. And, in his words, every physiological thing that jockeys and trainers say is a sign a horse enjoys it, is actually a sign of stress. They're basically terrified.
    The only time a horse enjoys running is alone, at not much more than a canter.

    Would the same not apply to Usain Bolt too then?
    Somewhat astonishingly, Bolt’s records, especialy in the 200m, are looking increasingly under threat. Bolt’s own Junior (U20) record at that distance, was beaten by nearly half a second last year, by an 18-year-old American called Kerryion Knighton. He’s not the only one either, there’s 4 or 5 men now under 19.50.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=icQfSz7ukx4

    If I wanted tickets to one event at the Olympics in Paris next year, it would be the 200m final.
    Partly (mostly?) super shoes.
    Partly shoes, partly tracks, partly advances in sports science and training, and partly picking out kids really early and getting them into training programmes.

    I genuinely thought Bolt’s 100m and 200m records would be like Bob Beamon’s long jump, there for nearly three decades. Now, only 14 years later, I think the 200m could definitely go at the Olympics.

    The longest-standing, and most controversial, athletics record, the women’s 100m, might finally be consigned to the bin as well. Good riddance to that one.
    Isn't this because they all wearing go faster shoes these days?
    The really fancy-pants shoes are actually those for the road runners, Kipchoge’s famous two-hour marathon featured some prototype footwear from Nike.

    For track races, the track itself has a bigger effect, and organisers of the major championships obviously want to make the track as fast as possible so that records get broken.
    What do they do, make it springy?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,577
    edited April 2023
    TimS said:

    Sandpit said:

    Tres said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    On race horses enjoying racing:
    I once had a conversation with a biologist after a book signing which got on to the subject of athletes, and I asked him why humans have massively increased their running records over the past century but horses have managed only minuscule improvements.
    As he pointed out, horses have evolved running at speed over millions of years, whereas we haven't. He went on to say that for horses, running is about escaping predators, so when horses run together - for example, in a horse race - those millions of years of evolution are telling each horse not to be last, or they'll get eaten. And, in his words, every physiological thing that jockeys and trainers say is a sign a horse enjoys it, is actually a sign of stress. They're basically terrified.
    The only time a horse enjoys running is alone, at not much more than a canter.

    Would the same not apply to Usain Bolt too then?
    Somewhat astonishingly, Bolt’s records, especialy in the 200m, are looking increasingly under threat. Bolt’s own Junior (U20) record at that distance, was beaten by nearly half a second last year, by an 18-year-old American called Kerryion Knighton. He’s not the only one either, there’s 4 or 5 men now under 19.50.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=icQfSz7ukx4

    If I wanted tickets to one event at the Olympics in Paris next year, it would be the 200m final.
    Partly (mostly?) super shoes.
    Partly shoes, partly tracks, partly advances in sports science and training, and partly picking out kids really early and getting them into training programmes.

    I genuinely thought Bolt’s 100m and 200m records would be like Bob Beamon’s long jump, there for nearly three decades. Now, only 14 years later, I think the 200m could definitely go at the Olympics.

    The longest-standing, and most controversial, athletics record, the women’s 100m, might finally be consigned to the bin as well. Good riddance to that one.
    Isn't this because they all wearing go faster shoes these days?
    The really fancy-pants shoes are actually those for the road runners, Kipchoge’s famous two-hour marathon featured some prototype footwear from Nike.

    For track races, the track itself has a bigger effect, and organisers of the major championships obviously want to make the track as fast as possible so that records get broken.
    What do they do, make it springy?
    Borrow gravity from the moon....
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,624
    kicorse said:

    Stocky said:

    More information regarding that awful cyclist accident that generated a lot of chatter on here:

    https://www.huntspost.co.uk/news/23416133.auriol-grey-family-say-disabled-pedestrian-shouldnt-jail/

    "A Change.org petition also suggests that Grey was "excessively" jailed and that, because of her cerebral palsy, partial blindness and the fact she was a pedestrian on a footpath, "a suspended sentence would be more appropriate". It adds: "I can’t see any signs nor are there markings on the footpath stating it’s shared."
    Disability Rights UK, meanwhile, called the sentence "extremely harsh." "

    "Another uncertainty surrounding the case is whether or not the road on which the incident happened is a shared footpath.

    Cambridgeshire County Council say there are no legal records to show it was a shared path, nor signage to suggest it was a cyclepath.

    Cambridgeshire police, meanwhile, confirmed they could not “categorically” state it was a shared cycleway."

    It's not a shared path; that should be obvious to anyone with eyes and a brain.
    The facts are that a human being died as a result of an intentional aggressive act that predictably sent that person into the path of an oncoming car. The criminal's disability, and question of whether the victim should have been cycling there, are arguably mitigating factors that justify the shortness of the jail term she received, though the fact that the criminal left the scene is a much clearer aggravating factor. Anyone suggesting she shouldn't face jail at all is delusional.
    "intentional aggressive act"

    I think that's putting it far too strongly.

    And if I wanted to be troublesome, I'd point out that cycling along a narrow pavement could be seen as an 'intentional aggressive act' to people who have poor mobility.

    It was an accident. My original point in the post are that there is no way that is a shared path. The council state it is not, and that there is no signage.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,103
    Foolproof

    @alexwickham
    NEW: @BloombergUK Saturday read

    Rishi Sunak is considering cutting inheritance tax at the next election, according to people familiar

    Senior Tories think this could be the secret weapon to close the polls

    @Samfr
    A bunch of incredibly wealthy people going into an election on a promise to help rich families become even richer as public services crumble around them. Can't see any downsides.


    https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1647150161771081728?cxt=HHwWgMC9wYuW7dstAAAA
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,103

    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    More information regarding that awful cyclist accident that generated a lot of chatter on here:

    https://www.huntspost.co.uk/news/23416133.auriol-grey-family-say-disabled-pedestrian-shouldnt-jail/

    "A Change.org petition also suggests that Grey was "excessively" jailed and that, because of her cerebral palsy, partial blindness and the fact she was a pedestrian on a footpath, "a suspended sentence would be more appropriate". It adds: "I can’t see any signs nor are there markings on the footpath stating it’s shared."
    Disability Rights UK, meanwhile, called the sentence "extremely harsh." "

    "Another uncertainty surrounding the case is whether or not the road on which the incident happened is a shared footpath.

    Cambridgeshire County Council say there are no legal records to show it was a shared path, nor signage to suggest it was a cyclepath.

    Cambridgeshire police, meanwhile, confirmed they could not “categorically” state it was a shared cycleway."

    It's not a shared path; that should be obvious to anyone with eyes and a brain.
    Sure - and the council has questions to answer - but what turns on it?

    For me, whether or not it was a shared path holds little relevance. I'm not interested in shifting blame towards the poor cyclist who died. The whole thing was a tragic accident with no intent and Grey IMO is also now a victim here as of course is the poor car driver. Why do we have to seek blame all the time? The police should not have prosecuted IMO - certainly not for manslaughter.

    If there were no CCTV footage what would have happened? I very much doubt Grey would have been prosecuted - people would have blamed the driver.
    I agree with that. IMV no-one was to blame; it was just a tragic accident.
    Unfortunately that is the case more often than our yearning for justice would like. At the least people may be to blame to some degree, without reasonably being criminally liable.

    That's part of the problem with public inquiries of course, since a lot of people want them set up specifically to blame someone, which is setting up for disappointment if it is not really as clear cut as they think.
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366
    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827

    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    More information regarding that awful cyclist accident that generated a lot of chatter on here:

    https://www.huntspost.co.uk/news/23416133.auriol-grey-family-say-disabled-pedestrian-shouldnt-jail/

    "A Change.org petition also suggests that Grey was "excessively" jailed and that, because of her cerebral palsy, partial blindness and the fact she was a pedestrian on a footpath, "a suspended sentence would be more appropriate". It adds: "I can’t see any signs nor are there markings on the footpath stating it’s shared."
    Disability Rights UK, meanwhile, called the sentence "extremely harsh." "

    "Another uncertainty surrounding the case is whether or not the road on which the incident happened is a shared footpath.

    Cambridgeshire County Council say there are no legal records to show it was a shared path, nor signage to suggest it was a cyclepath.

    Cambridgeshire police, meanwhile, confirmed they could not “categorically” state it was a shared cycleway."

    It's not a shared path; that should be obvious to anyone with eyes and a brain.
    Sure - and the council has questions to answer - but what turns on it?

    For me, whether or not it was a shared path holds little relevance. I'm not interested in shifting blame towards the poor cyclist who died. The whole thing was a tragic accident with no intent and Grey IMO is also now a victim here as of course is the poor car driver. Why do we have to seek blame all the time? The police should not have prosecuted IMO - certainly not for manslaughter.

    If there were no CCTV footage what would have happened? I very much doubt Grey would have been prosecuted - people would have blamed the driver.
    I agree with that. IMV no-one was to blame; it was just a tragic accident.
    Mostly accident but some blame too. Not enough for the sentence given though.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,103
    Sandpit said:

    Tres said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    On race horses enjoying racing:
    I once had a conversation with a biologist after a book signing which got on to the subject of athletes, and I asked him why humans have massively increased their running records over the past century but horses have managed only minuscule improvements.
    As he pointed out, horses have evolved running at speed over millions of years, whereas we haven't. He went on to say that for horses, running is about escaping predators, so when horses run together - for example, in a horse race - those millions of years of evolution are telling each horse not to be last, or they'll get eaten. And, in his words, every physiological thing that jockeys and trainers say is a sign a horse enjoys it, is actually a sign of stress. They're basically terrified.
    The only time a horse enjoys running is alone, at not much more than a canter.

    Would the same not apply to Usain Bolt too then?
    Somewhat astonishingly, Bolt’s records, especialy in the 200m, are looking increasingly under threat. Bolt’s own Junior (U20) record at that distance, was beaten by nearly half a second last year, by an 18-year-old American called Kerryion Knighton. He’s not the only one either, there’s 4 or 5 men now under 19.50.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=icQfSz7ukx4

    If I wanted tickets to one event at the Olympics in Paris next year, it would be the 200m final.
    Partly (mostly?) super shoes.
    Partly shoes, partly tracks, partly advances in sports science and training, and partly picking out kids really early and getting them into training programmes.

    I genuinely thought Bolt’s 100m and 200m records would be like Bob Beamon’s long jump, there for nearly three decades. Now, only 14 years later, I think the 200m could definitely go at the Olympics.

    The longest-standing, and most controversial, athletics record, the women’s 100m, might finally be consigned to the bin as well. Good riddance to that one.
    Isn't this because they all wearing go faster shoes these days?
    The really fancy-pants shoes are actually those for the road runners, Kipchoge’s famous two-hour marathon featured some prototype footwear from Nike.

    For track races, the track itself has a bigger effect, and organisers of the major championships obviously want to make the track as fast as possible so that records get broken.
    If the shoes can make a big difference (at least at the margins of top athletes), then do we need to enforce some sort of uniformity to prevent unfair advantage, or make everyone go back to being barefoot?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,310
    Betting tips

    16.15 – Beauport. Another one you might fancy is Coconut Splash with a lovely low racing weight.

    17.15 – The Grand National.

    A few suggestions:-

    - Corach Rambler (11-1) has a fantastic chance. A good racing weight.
    - Velvet Elvis (33-1) A stayer and a good each way bet.
    - Gabby’s Cross (50-1)
    - Sam Brown (66-1)

    Good luck!
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827
    kle4 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Tres said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    On race horses enjoying racing:
    I once had a conversation with a biologist after a book signing which got on to the subject of athletes, and I asked him why humans have massively increased their running records over the past century but horses have managed only minuscule improvements.
    As he pointed out, horses have evolved running at speed over millions of years, whereas we haven't. He went on to say that for horses, running is about escaping predators, so when horses run together - for example, in a horse race - those millions of years of evolution are telling each horse not to be last, or they'll get eaten. And, in his words, every physiological thing that jockeys and trainers say is a sign a horse enjoys it, is actually a sign of stress. They're basically terrified.
    The only time a horse enjoys running is alone, at not much more than a canter.

    Would the same not apply to Usain Bolt too then?
    Somewhat astonishingly, Bolt’s records, especialy in the 200m, are looking increasingly under threat. Bolt’s own Junior (U20) record at that distance, was beaten by nearly half a second last year, by an 18-year-old American called Kerryion Knighton. He’s not the only one either, there’s 4 or 5 men now under 19.50.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=icQfSz7ukx4

    If I wanted tickets to one event at the Olympics in Paris next year, it would be the 200m final.
    Partly (mostly?) super shoes.
    Partly shoes, partly tracks, partly advances in sports science and training, and partly picking out kids really early and getting them into training programmes.

    I genuinely thought Bolt’s 100m and 200m records would be like Bob Beamon’s long jump, there for nearly three decades. Now, only 14 years later, I think the 200m could definitely go at the Olympics.

    The longest-standing, and most controversial, athletics record, the women’s 100m, might finally be consigned to the bin as well. Good riddance to that one.
    Isn't this because they all wearing go faster shoes these days?
    The really fancy-pants shoes are actually those for the road runners, Kipchoge’s famous two-hour marathon featured some prototype footwear from Nike.

    For track races, the track itself has a bigger effect, and organisers of the major championships obviously want to make the track as fast as possible so that records get broken.
    If the shoes can make a big difference (at least at the margins of top athletes), then do we need to enforce some sort of uniformity to prevent unfair advantage, or make everyone go back to being barefoot?
    Its really an issue about comparing to historic records rather than comparing within current elite competitors.
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860
    kicorse said:

    Stocky said:

    More information regarding that awful cyclist accident that generated a lot of chatter on here:

    https://www.huntspost.co.uk/news/23416133.auriol-grey-family-say-disabled-pedestrian-shouldnt-jail/

    "A Change.org petition also suggests that Grey was "excessively" jailed and that, because of her cerebral palsy, partial blindness and the fact she was a pedestrian on a footpath, "a suspended sentence would be more appropriate". It adds: "I can’t see any signs nor are there markings on the footpath stating it’s shared."
    Disability Rights UK, meanwhile, called the sentence "extremely harsh." "

    "Another uncertainty surrounding the case is whether or not the road on which the incident happened is a shared footpath.

    Cambridgeshire County Council say there are no legal records to show it was a shared path, nor signage to suggest it was a cyclepath.

    Cambridgeshire police, meanwhile, confirmed they could not “categorically” state it was a shared cycleway."

    It's not a shared path; that should be obvious to anyone with eyes and a brain.
    The facts are that a human being died as a result of an intentional aggressive act that predictably sent that person into the path of an oncoming car. The criminal's disability, and question of whether the victim should have been cycling there, are arguably mitigating factors that justify the shortness of the jail term she received, though the fact that the criminal left the scene is a much clearer aggravating factor. Anyone suggesting she shouldn't face jail at all is delusional.
    You forget that as soon as a hitherto normal human boards a bicycle, they become Hated In The Nation and we can all guiltlessly will death upon them.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,303

    Sandpit said:

    On the Labour poll leads - it seems obvious, to me, that vaguely competent government, some international agreements etc would be more popular than the ChaosOfTheWeek style.

    For @JosiasJessop - https://www.faa.gov/media/27236 - the FAA documentation associated with the launch license for Starship/Super Heavy. Confirms that the first three launches will be completely expendable.

    Really looking forward to the Starship launch. It’s the biggest and heaviest rocket ever to leave the Earth, more than 50% heavier than Saturn V.

    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3e/60/a3/3e60a30524e2bf3656e8e567ff88b3e8.jpg
    Yet unlike Saturn V, it cannot get man to the moon and back in one launch. ;)

    (Yes, I know that's because SS has not been optimised for that particular mission.)
    Orbital refuelling is required to get anywhere.

    May Senator Shelby suffer a plague of boils......
    Being a pedant, we've got to the Moon without orbital refuelling; and sent probes to all the planets. But yes, for sensible solar system manned travel we need refuelling. And hydrolox. ;)

    Incidentally, have you seen ULA's second stage Centaur test boom?

    https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1646572389193625600
    We only got to the moon in single launches by NASA throwing away the safety rule book for the Lunar Lander. The walls were tin foil in places.

    For the Ares/Artemis program, the original lander (junked on cost grounds) would have required a second launch, since it was too heavy for a combined launch.

    Hence the comedy of meeting Starship in Lunar orbit. The astronauts will leave their Mini Cooper sized Orion and land on the moon in a vehicle the size of a building….

    Saw the boom - Tory has my best wishes. Can’t help feeling that he deserves a job with better people to answer to.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,103
    WillG said:

    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.

    Yes. The policy, in my opinion, is unnecessary and disproportionate enough on its own, it doesn't need this point which comes up constantly and actually has some justification being presented without context. Now, people may still argue it's not a good enough reason for the distinction, but the reason can still be given.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    malcolmg said:

    Anyway, I've only peppered a few quids on longshots so far, including Minella Trump and Back on the Lash, but the one serious contender I like is Noble Yeats, so I've had a tenner on him.

    Yeats is one of my wife's choices, lot more weight than last year but still a chance though unusual to win carrying that amount.
    Realize that you are quite candid, and occasionally crude.

    HOWEVER do believe you have CROSSED THE LINE, sir, re: way you are referring to your good wife AND her body issues?

    ESPECIALLY as it's hard to see, what HER weight has to do with the HORSE'S performance???
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,586
    TimS said:

    Sandpit said:

    Tres said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    On race horses enjoying racing:
    I once had a conversation with a biologist after a book signing which got on to the subject of athletes, and I asked him why humans have massively increased their running records over the past century but horses have managed only minuscule improvements.
    As he pointed out, horses have evolved running at speed over millions of years, whereas we haven't. He went on to say that for horses, running is about escaping predators, so when horses run together - for example, in a horse race - those millions of years of evolution are telling each horse not to be last, or they'll get eaten. And, in his words, every physiological thing that jockeys and trainers say is a sign a horse enjoys it, is actually a sign of stress. They're basically terrified.
    The only time a horse enjoys running is alone, at not much more than a canter.

    Would the same not apply to Usain Bolt too then?
    Somewhat astonishingly, Bolt’s records, especialy in the 200m, are looking increasingly under threat. Bolt’s own Junior (U20) record at that distance, was beaten by nearly half a second last year, by an 18-year-old American called Kerryion Knighton. He’s not the only one either, there’s 4 or 5 men now under 19.50.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=icQfSz7ukx4

    If I wanted tickets to one event at the Olympics in Paris next year, it would be the 200m final.
    Partly (mostly?) super shoes.
    Partly shoes, partly tracks, partly advances in sports science and training, and partly picking out kids really early and getting them into training programmes.

    I genuinely thought Bolt’s 100m and 200m records would be like Bob Beamon’s long jump, there for nearly three decades. Now, only 14 years later, I think the 200m could definitely go at the Olympics.

    The longest-standing, and most controversial, athletics record, the women’s 100m, might finally be consigned to the bin as well. Good riddance to that one.
    Isn't this because they all wearing go faster shoes these days?
    The really fancy-pants shoes are actually those for the road runners, Kipchoge’s famous two-hour marathon featured some prototype footwear from Nike.

    For track races, the track itself has a bigger effect, and organisers of the major championships obviously want to make the track as fast as possible so that records get broken.
    What do they do, make it springy?
    Springy, but not too springy. There’s a fine line between the springiness helping the athlete, and sapping energy from them instead. The companies who make the surface come up with better formulations over time.
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366
    TimS said:

    On my way back from France where my neighbours were desperately trying to convince me their country is going to the dogs and falling apart (it looked fine to me), and I see the Rishi comeback narrative continues strong.

    If the polls are indeed massively out then I assume it’s the undecideds who are really (shy) Tories, as that YG poll seems to suggest.

    But is the Tory hive mind now settling into one of its 2 quasi-equilibrium states of complacency after a couple of years of panic? A handful of polls showing a little tightening and a few weeks without a major disaster and that’s enough to flip from one state to another.

    Funny when you’re in one of these uncertain periods in history, where what seems up in the air will, you know, seem obvious and predestined in hindsight. Of course this was going to be another 1992, Starmer hadn’t sealed the deal, the pensioner vote turned out in numbers etc, or of course it was a 1997, the mood of the country had shifted decisively.

    Rather like the Ukraine war: in 2 years’ time it will seem all too obvious that either a. Russia was always going to bludgeon its way to a victory, just like in Chechnya, just like WW2, Napoleon’s flight from Moscow etc etc or b. The Russian regime was teetering on the edge of collapse and would crumble in the face of a Ukrainian counteroffensive with its superior Western weaponry.

    Chechnya is a population under two million surrounded by Russia with no foreign support in sight and a leader that could be bought off. Ukraine is a country of 44 million on the border of the EU, with full backing from the West and a leaderdship that will never back down. Even if Russia turned the tide in the war, they will never be able to maintain an occupation.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,103

    Sandpit said:

    On the Labour poll leads - it seems obvious, to me, that vaguely competent government, some international agreements etc would be more popular than the ChaosOfTheWeek style.

    For @JosiasJessop - https://www.faa.gov/media/27236 - the FAA documentation associated with the launch license for Starship/Super Heavy. Confirms that the first three launches will be completely expendable.

    Really looking forward to the Starship launch. It’s the biggest and heaviest rocket ever to leave the Earth, more than 50% heavier than Saturn V.

    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3e/60/a3/3e60a30524e2bf3656e8e567ff88b3e8.jpg
    Yet unlike Saturn V, it cannot get man to the moon and back in one launch. ;)

    (Yes, I know that's because SS has not been optimised for that particular mission.)
    Orbital refuelling is required to get anywhere.

    May Senator Shelby suffer a plague of boils......
    Being a pedant, we've got to the Moon without orbital refuelling; and sent probes to all the planets. But yes, for sensible solar system manned travel we need refuelling. And hydrolox. ;)

    Incidentally, have you seen ULA's second stage Centaur test boom?

    https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1646572389193625600
    We only got to the moon in single launches by NASA throwing away the safety rule book for the Lunar Lander. The walls were tin foil in places.

    For the Ares/Artemis program, the original lander (junked on cost grounds) would have required a second launch, since it was too heavy for a combined launch.

    Hence the comedy of meeting Starship in Lunar orbit. The astronauts will leave their Mini Cooper sized Orion and land on the moon in a vehicle the size of a building….

    Saw the boom - Tory has my best wishes. Can’t help feeling that he deserves a job with better people to answer to.
    If NASA was throwing away the safety rule book what was the Soviet programme like by comparison?!
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827
    WillG said:

    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.

    It will still skew voting further to over 60s and against youngsters, so at least partly cynical as well as some logic.....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,103
    WillG said:

    TimS said:

    On my way back from France where my neighbours were desperately trying to convince me their country is going to the dogs and falling apart (it looked fine to me), and I see the Rishi comeback narrative continues strong.

    If the polls are indeed massively out then I assume it’s the undecideds who are really (shy) Tories, as that YG poll seems to suggest.

    But is the Tory hive mind now settling into one of its 2 quasi-equilibrium states of complacency after a couple of years of panic? A handful of polls showing a little tightening and a few weeks without a major disaster and that’s enough to flip from one state to another.

    Funny when you’re in one of these uncertain periods in history, where what seems up in the air will, you know, seem obvious and predestined in hindsight. Of course this was going to be another 1992, Starmer hadn’t sealed the deal, the pensioner vote turned out in numbers etc, or of course it was a 1997, the mood of the country had shifted decisively.

    Rather like the Ukraine war: in 2 years’ time it will seem all too obvious that either a. Russia was always going to bludgeon its way to a victory, just like in Chechnya, just like WW2, Napoleon’s flight from Moscow etc etc or b. The Russian regime was teetering on the edge of collapse and would crumble in the face of a Ukrainian counteroffensive with its superior Western weaponry.

    Chechnya is a population under two million surrounded by Russia with no foreign support in sight and a leader that could be bought off. Ukraine is a country of 44 million on the border of the EU, with full backing from the West and a leaderdship that will never back down. Even if Russia turned the tide in the war, they will never be able to maintain an occupation.
    No, but they will hope for a Crimea Mark II - slow it down enough that people forget all about it.

    So far Western leaders appear to have learned the lesson that doing so last time was a ghastly error, but fingers crossed they sustain that (which requires Trump to lose for a start).
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,303
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the Labour poll leads - it seems obvious, to me, that vaguely competent government, some international agreements etc would be more popular than the ChaosOfTheWeek style.

    For @JosiasJessop - https://www.faa.gov/media/27236 - the FAA documentation associated with the launch license for Starship/Super Heavy. Confirms that the first three launches will be completely expendable.

    Really looking forward to the Starship launch. It’s the biggest and heaviest rocket ever to leave the Earth, more than 50% heavier than Saturn V.

    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3e/60/a3/3e60a30524e2bf3656e8e567ff88b3e8.jpg
    Yet unlike Saturn V, it cannot get man to the moon and back in one launch. ;)

    (Yes, I know that's because SS has not been optimised for that particular mission.)
    Orbital refuelling is required to get anywhere.

    May Senator Shelby suffer a plague of boils......
    Being a pedant, we've got to the Moon without orbital refuelling; and sent probes to all the planets. But yes, for sensible solar system manned travel we need refuelling. And hydrolox. ;)

    Incidentally, have you seen ULA's second stage Centaur test boom?

    https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1646572389193625600
    That’s a big boom!

    Reading through the Starship regulatory document posted earlier, they’ve gone to quite some length to calculate the exact size of the boom, should the vehicle experience a rapid and unscheduled disassembly at various points during the launch cycle. :D
    Reminds me of the good old days in LNG world.

    Where spilling LNG on the sea and conducting experiments on nominal yield were a thing.

    There’s some fascinating physics there. It seems that a liquid cryogen (LNG) boiling off, on the sea, can generate static electricity and self ignite. Not sure whether they ever worked out why it did that….
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,465
    Cyclefree said:

    Betting tips

    16.15 – Beauport. Another one you might fancy is Coconut Splash with a lovely low racing weight.

    17.15 – The Grand National.

    A few suggestions:-

    - Corach Rambler (11-1) has a fantastic chance. A good racing weight.
    - Velvet Elvis (33-1) A stayer and a good each way bet.
    - Gabby’s Cross (50-1)
    - Sam Brown (66-1)

    Good luck!

    Great tips. Thanks!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,577
    kle4 said:

    WillG said:

    TimS said:

    On my way back from France where my neighbours were desperately trying to convince me their country is going to the dogs and falling apart (it looked fine to me), and I see the Rishi comeback narrative continues strong.

    If the polls are indeed massively out then I assume it’s the undecideds who are really (shy) Tories, as that YG poll seems to suggest.

    But is the Tory hive mind now settling into one of its 2 quasi-equilibrium states of complacency after a couple of years of panic? A handful of polls showing a little tightening and a few weeks without a major disaster and that’s enough to flip from one state to another.

    Funny when you’re in one of these uncertain periods in history, where what seems up in the air will, you know, seem obvious and predestined in hindsight. Of course this was going to be another 1992, Starmer hadn’t sealed the deal, the pensioner vote turned out in numbers etc, or of course it was a 1997, the mood of the country had shifted decisively.

    Rather like the Ukraine war: in 2 years’ time it will seem all too obvious that either a. Russia was always going to bludgeon its way to a victory, just like in Chechnya, just like WW2, Napoleon’s flight from Moscow etc etc or b. The Russian regime was teetering on the edge of collapse and would crumble in the face of a Ukrainian counteroffensive with its superior Western weaponry.

    Chechnya is a population under two million surrounded by Russia with no foreign support in sight and a leader that could be bought off. Ukraine is a country of 44 million on the border of the EU, with full backing from the West and a leaderdship that will never back down. Even if Russia turned the tide in the war, they will never be able to maintain an occupation.
    No, but they will hope for a Crimea Mark II - slow it down enough that people forget all about it.

    So far Western leaders appear to have learned the lesson that doing so last time was a ghastly error, but fingers crossed they sustain that (which requires Trump to lose for a start).
    Trump "winning" is going to need the biggest vote rigging operation ever. By Putin.

    I think he would over-reach - and end up showing us all how the trick is done.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,586
    edited April 2023

    kle4 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Tres said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    On race horses enjoying racing:
    I once had a conversation with a biologist after a book signing which got on to the subject of athletes, and I asked him why humans have massively increased their running records over the past century but horses have managed only minuscule improvements.
    As he pointed out, horses have evolved running at speed over millions of years, whereas we haven't. He went on to say that for horses, running is about escaping predators, so when horses run together - for example, in a horse race - those millions of years of evolution are telling each horse not to be last, or they'll get eaten. And, in his words, every physiological thing that jockeys and trainers say is a sign a horse enjoys it, is actually a sign of stress. They're basically terrified.
    The only time a horse enjoys running is alone, at not much more than a canter.

    Would the same not apply to Usain Bolt too then?
    Somewhat astonishingly, Bolt’s records, especialy in the 200m, are looking increasingly under threat. Bolt’s own Junior (U20) record at that distance, was beaten by nearly half a second last year, by an 18-year-old American called Kerryion Knighton. He’s not the only one either, there’s 4 or 5 men now under 19.50.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=icQfSz7ukx4

    If I wanted tickets to one event at the Olympics in Paris next year, it would be the 200m final.
    Partly (mostly?) super shoes.
    Partly shoes, partly tracks, partly advances in sports science and training, and partly picking out kids really early and getting them into training programmes.

    I genuinely thought Bolt’s 100m and 200m records would be like Bob Beamon’s long jump, there for nearly three decades. Now, only 14 years later, I think the 200m could definitely go at the Olympics.

    The longest-standing, and most controversial, athletics record, the women’s 100m, might finally be consigned to the bin as well. Good riddance to that one.
    Isn't this because they all wearing go faster shoes these days?
    The really fancy-pants shoes are actually those for the road runners, Kipchoge’s famous two-hour marathon featured some prototype footwear from Nike.

    For track races, the track itself has a bigger effect, and organisers of the major championships obviously want to make the track as fast as possible so that records get broken.
    If the shoes can make a big difference (at least at the margins of top athletes), then do we need to enforce some sort of uniformity to prevent unfair advantage, or make everyone go back to being barefoot?
    Its really an issue about comparing to historic records rather than comparing within current elite competitors.
    Yes, the shoes are not a barrier to entry, costing a few hundred bucks, and everyone runs the same course.

    IIRC, some elite marathon runners buy whatever is the current ‘fastest’ shoe, and have them painted to look like the shoes they’re being sponsored to wear!

    All sports suffer to some extent from the change in technology over time, the most obvious being F1 where they have to change the rules every so often, to stop the cars going too fast for the tracks. In althletes, the javelin and I think the discus have been redesigned to reduce performance, and the pole vault has benefitted hugely from improvements in materials science.
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366

    WillG said:

    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.

    It will still skew voting further to over 60s and against youngsters, so at least partly cynical as well as some logic.....
    Youngsters have other forms of ID they can use. Driving license rates will be higher with them.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,664
    edited April 2023
    WillG said:

    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.

    That's rubbish though.

    According to, for example, the Dorset Council site for an Older Persons Bus Pass:
    "Your application MUST include:
    • the completed original application form
    • one copy of a proof of age document from: Birth certificate, VALID Driving licence, Proof of Pension entitlement, or Medical Card;
    • one copy of a proof of address document from: VALID Driving licence, Recent utility bill,
    Most recent Council Tax bill, or Proof of Pension entitlement;
    • one passport style/sized colour photograph of your head and shoulders."


    No one checks that photo. I could easily put in an application using someone else's details. No one would check.

    For a 16-25 Railcard you need to provide:
    "Proof of eligibility (UK Driving License, Passport, EEA national identity card);
    A passport-style photo (it can even be taken with your phone)"


    Big difference, not.

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,624

    Sandpit said:

    On the Labour poll leads - it seems obvious, to me, that vaguely competent government, some international agreements etc would be more popular than the ChaosOfTheWeek style.

    For @JosiasJessop - https://www.faa.gov/media/27236 - the FAA documentation associated with the launch license for Starship/Super Heavy. Confirms that the first three launches will be completely expendable.

    Really looking forward to the Starship launch. It’s the biggest and heaviest rocket ever to leave the Earth, more than 50% heavier than Saturn V.

    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3e/60/a3/3e60a30524e2bf3656e8e567ff88b3e8.jpg
    Yet unlike Saturn V, it cannot get man to the moon and back in one launch. ;)

    (Yes, I know that's because SS has not been optimised for that particular mission.)
    Orbital refuelling is required to get anywhere.

    May Senator Shelby suffer a plague of boils......
    Being a pedant, we've got to the Moon without orbital refuelling; and sent probes to all the planets. But yes, for sensible solar system manned travel we need refuelling. And hydrolox. ;)

    Incidentally, have you seen ULA's second stage Centaur test boom?

    https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1646572389193625600
    We only got to the moon in single launches by NASA throwing away the safety rule book for the Lunar Lander. The walls were tin foil in places.

    For the Ares/Artemis program, the original lander (junked on cost grounds) would have required a second launch, since it was too heavy for a combined launch.

    Hence the comedy of meeting Starship in Lunar orbit. The astronauts will leave their Mini Cooper sized Orion and land on the moon in a vehicle the size of a building….

    Saw the boom - Tory has my best wishes. Can’t help feeling that he deserves a job with better people to answer to.
    Yes, I know all that. But my point still stands: we got to the Moon without refuelling. ;)

    I still think it's a shame that Nova C8 wasn't built.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,303
    kle4 said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the Labour poll leads - it seems obvious, to me, that vaguely competent government, some international agreements etc would be more popular than the ChaosOfTheWeek style.

    For @JosiasJessop - https://www.faa.gov/media/27236 - the FAA documentation associated with the launch license for Starship/Super Heavy. Confirms that the first three launches will be completely expendable.

    Really looking forward to the Starship launch. It’s the biggest and heaviest rocket ever to leave the Earth, more than 50% heavier than Saturn V.

    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3e/60/a3/3e60a30524e2bf3656e8e567ff88b3e8.jpg
    Yet unlike Saturn V, it cannot get man to the moon and back in one launch. ;)

    (Yes, I know that's because SS has not been optimised for that particular mission.)
    Orbital refuelling is required to get anywhere.

    May Senator Shelby suffer a plague of boils......
    Being a pedant, we've got to the Moon without orbital refuelling; and sent probes to all the planets. But yes, for sensible solar system manned travel we need refuelling. And hydrolox. ;)

    Incidentally, have you seen ULA's second stage Centaur test boom?

    https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1646572389193625600
    We only got to the moon in single launches by NASA throwing away the safety rule book for the Lunar Lander. The walls were tin foil in places.

    For the Ares/Artemis program, the original lander (junked on cost grounds) would have required a second launch, since it was too heavy for a combined launch.

    Hence the comedy of meeting Starship in Lunar orbit. The astronauts will leave their Mini Cooper sized Orion and land on the moon in a vehicle the size of a building….

    Saw the boom - Tory has my best wishes. Can’t help feeling that he deserves a job with better people to answer to.
    If NASA was throwing away the safety rule book what was the Soviet programme like by comparison?!
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LK_(spacecraft)

    Neil Armstrong was said to have had a look at it, when it was revealed, then refused to say what he thought.

    It was death trap.

    The launch vehicle - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N1_(rocket) was also fun.

    Imagine that you have engines that can only be fired once. No testing. So the only way to test is to actually launch it.....

    It did achieve one record - the largest yield for an exploding rocket in history.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,624

    kle4 said:

    WillG said:

    TimS said:

    On my way back from France where my neighbours were desperately trying to convince me their country is going to the dogs and falling apart (it looked fine to me), and I see the Rishi comeback narrative continues strong.

    If the polls are indeed massively out then I assume it’s the undecideds who are really (shy) Tories, as that YG poll seems to suggest.

    But is the Tory hive mind now settling into one of its 2 quasi-equilibrium states of complacency after a couple of years of panic? A handful of polls showing a little tightening and a few weeks without a major disaster and that’s enough to flip from one state to another.

    Funny when you’re in one of these uncertain periods in history, where what seems up in the air will, you know, seem obvious and predestined in hindsight. Of course this was going to be another 1992, Starmer hadn’t sealed the deal, the pensioner vote turned out in numbers etc, or of course it was a 1997, the mood of the country had shifted decisively.

    Rather like the Ukraine war: in 2 years’ time it will seem all too obvious that either a. Russia was always going to bludgeon its way to a victory, just like in Chechnya, just like WW2, Napoleon’s flight from Moscow etc etc or b. The Russian regime was teetering on the edge of collapse and would crumble in the face of a Ukrainian counteroffensive with its superior Western weaponry.

    Chechnya is a population under two million surrounded by Russia with no foreign support in sight and a leader that could be bought off. Ukraine is a country of 44 million on the border of the EU, with full backing from the West and a leaderdship that will never back down. Even if Russia turned the tide in the war, they will never be able to maintain an occupation.
    No, but they will hope for a Crimea Mark II - slow it down enough that people forget all about it.

    So far Western leaders appear to have learned the lesson that doing so last time was a ghastly error, but fingers crossed they sustain that (which requires Trump to lose for a start).
    Trump "winning" is going to need the biggest vote rigging operation ever. By Putin.

    I think he would over-reach - and end up showing us all how the trick is done.
    I wonder who China (i.e. Xi) would prefer to win in 2024? Biden or Trump?

    Trump would damage America, China's biggest competitor. But Trump is not necessarily a friend of China, and is notoriously unpredictable.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827
    WillG said:

    WillG said:

    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.

    It will still skew voting further to over 60s and against youngsters, so at least partly cynical as well as some logic.....
    Youngsters have other forms of ID they can use. Driving license rates will be higher with them.
    Thats just not true.

    17-20 21%
    21-29 67%
    60-69 85%
    70+ 75%

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/nts02-driving-licence-holders
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,303

    Sandpit said:

    On the Labour poll leads - it seems obvious, to me, that vaguely competent government, some international agreements etc would be more popular than the ChaosOfTheWeek style.

    For @JosiasJessop - https://www.faa.gov/media/27236 - the FAA documentation associated with the launch license for Starship/Super Heavy. Confirms that the first three launches will be completely expendable.

    Really looking forward to the Starship launch. It’s the biggest and heaviest rocket ever to leave the Earth, more than 50% heavier than Saturn V.

    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3e/60/a3/3e60a30524e2bf3656e8e567ff88b3e8.jpg
    Yet unlike Saturn V, it cannot get man to the moon and back in one launch. ;)

    (Yes, I know that's because SS has not been optimised for that particular mission.)
    Orbital refuelling is required to get anywhere.

    May Senator Shelby suffer a plague of boils......
    Being a pedant, we've got to the Moon without orbital refuelling; and sent probes to all the planets. But yes, for sensible solar system manned travel we need refuelling. And hydrolox. ;)

    Incidentally, have you seen ULA's second stage Centaur test boom?

    https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1646572389193625600
    We only got to the moon in single launches by NASA throwing away the safety rule book for the Lunar Lander. The walls were tin foil in places.

    For the Ares/Artemis program, the original lander (junked on cost grounds) would have required a second launch, since it was too heavy for a combined launch.

    Hence the comedy of meeting Starship in Lunar orbit. The astronauts will leave their Mini Cooper sized Orion and land on the moon in a vehicle the size of a building….

    Saw the boom - Tory has my best wishes. Can’t help feeling that he deserves a job with better people to answer to.
    Yes, I know all that. But my point still stands: we got to the Moon without refuelling. ;)

    I still think it's a shame that Nova C8 wasn't built.
    Completely unsustainable though. As pointed out by the Apollo Applications team (and Von Braun before them) - refuelling in LEO massively multiplies the throw weight to TLI.

    Orion would have been far more fun, SSTO to Saturn and back….
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,094
    FPT

    Last night’s Picard.

    There’s that one scene.

    You know the one I’m talking about.

    That scene was better than sex.

    Oh, now we can talk about it :smile:

    The spoilers were out earlier in the week and the episode recaps since Thursday (it's shown earlier in the States). I have mixed emotions: yes it's very satisfying, but it's memberberry soup and the tonal whiplash between the earlier and later scenes is very jarring. Given the in-universe circs, the tone of the latter scenes should have been grim and determined, not wistful.

    But yes, great fun. :smiley:
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,454

    WillG said:

    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.

    That's rubbish though.

    According to, for example, the Dorset Council site for an Older Persons Bus Pass:
    "Your application MUST include:
    • the completed original application form
    • one copy of a proof of age document from: Birth certificate, VALID Driving licence, Proof of Pension entitlement, or Medical Card;
    • one copy of a proof of address document from: VALID Driving licence, Recent utility bill,
    Most recent Council Tax bill, or Proof of Pension entitlement;
    • one passport style/sized colour photograph of your head and shoulders."


    No one checks that photo. I could easily put in an application using someone else's details. No one would check.

    For a 16-25 Railcard you need to provide:
    "Proof of eligibility (UK Driving License, Passport, EEA national identity card);
    A passport-style photo (it can even be taken with your phone)"


    Big difference, not.

    Isn't the difference proof of address?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827

    WillG said:

    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.

    That's rubbish though.

    According to, for example, the Dorset Council site for an Older Persons Bus Pass:
    "Your application MUST include:
    • the completed original application form
    • one copy of a proof of age document from: Birth certificate, VALID Driving licence, Proof of Pension entitlement, or Medical Card;
    • one copy of a proof of address document from: VALID Driving licence, Recent utility bill,
    Most recent Council Tax bill, or Proof of Pension entitlement;
    • one passport style/sized colour photograph of your head and shoulders."


    No one checks that photo. I could easily put in an application using someone else's details. No one would check.

    For a 16-25 Railcard you need to provide:
    "Proof of eligibility (UK Driving License, Passport, EEA national identity card);
    A passport-style photo (it can even be taken with your phone)"


    Big difference, not.

    Isn't the difference proof of address?
    Lots of youngsters also don't have council tax or utility bills in their names as they are flat sharing or lodgers.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,664

    WillG said:

    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.

    That's rubbish though.

    According to, for example, the Dorset Council site for an Older Persons Bus Pass:
    "Your application MUST include:
    • the completed original application form
    • one copy of a proof of age document from: Birth certificate, VALID Driving licence, Proof of Pension entitlement, or Medical Card;
    • one copy of a proof of address document from: VALID Driving licence, Recent utility bill,
    Most recent Council Tax bill, or Proof of Pension entitlement;
    • one passport style/sized colour photograph of your head and shoulders."


    No one checks that photo. I could easily put in an application using someone else's details. No one would check.

    For a 16-25 Railcard you need to provide:
    "Proof of eligibility (UK Driving License, Passport, EEA national identity card);
    A passport-style photo (it can even be taken with your phone)"


    Big difference, not.

    Isn't the difference proof of address?
    Homeless people not allowed to vote now?
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,904
    WillG said:

    WillG said:

    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.

    It will still skew voting further to over 60s and against youngsters, so at least partly cynical as well as some logic.....
    Youngsters have other forms of ID they can use. Driving license rates will be higher with them.
    Young people's driving licences will surely skew to the more affluent, and therefore Tory voters.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,842

    WillG said:

    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.

    That's rubbish though.

    According to, for example, the Dorset Council site for an Older Persons Bus Pass:
    "Your application MUST include:
    • the completed original application form
    • one copy of a proof of age document from: Birth certificate, VALID Driving licence, Proof of Pension entitlement, or Medical Card;
    • one copy of a proof of address document from: VALID Driving licence, Recent utility bill,
    Most recent Council Tax bill, or Proof of Pension entitlement;
    • one passport style/sized colour photograph of your head and shoulders."


    No one checks that photo. I could easily put in an application using someone else's details. No one would check.

    For a 16-25 Railcard you need to provide:
    "Proof of eligibility (UK Driving License, Passport, EEA national identity card);
    A passport-style photo (it can even be taken with your phone)"


    Big difference, not.

    Isn't the difference proof of address?
    Homeless people not allowed to vote now?
    You can't get on the electoral register without an address, can you?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827

    WillG said:

    WillG said:

    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.

    It will still skew voting further to over 60s and against youngsters, so at least partly cynical as well as some logic.....
    Youngsters have other forms of ID they can use. Driving license rates will be higher with them.
    Young people's driving licences will surely skew to the more affluent, and therefore Tory voters.
    I thought the rich kids were all greens these days?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,664
    MaxPB said:

    WillG said:

    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.

    That's rubbish though.

    According to, for example, the Dorset Council site for an Older Persons Bus Pass:
    "Your application MUST include:
    • the completed original application form
    • one copy of a proof of age document from: Birth certificate, VALID Driving licence, Proof of Pension entitlement, or Medical Card;
    • one copy of a proof of address document from: VALID Driving licence, Recent utility bill,
    Most recent Council Tax bill, or Proof of Pension entitlement;
    • one passport style/sized colour photograph of your head and shoulders."


    No one checks that photo. I could easily put in an application using someone else's details. No one would check.

    For a 16-25 Railcard you need to provide:
    "Proof of eligibility (UK Driving License, Passport, EEA national identity card);
    A passport-style photo (it can even be taken with your phone)"


    Big difference, not.

    Isn't the difference proof of address?
    Homeless people not allowed to vote now?
    You can't get on the electoral register without an address, can you?
    You can:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/register-to-vote-if-you-havent-got-a-fixed-or-permanent-address
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827
    Cost of driving licenses:

    Youngsters getting a first license - £34 or £43
    Renewals - £14 or £17
    Over 70s - free
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,664

    WillG said:

    WillG said:

    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.

    It will still skew voting further to over 60s and against youngsters, so at least partly cynical as well as some logic.....
    Youngsters have other forms of ID they can use. Driving license rates will be higher with them.
    Young people's driving licences will surely skew to the more affluent, and therefore Tory voters.
    I thought the rich kids were all greens these days?
    Not when they are stood at the ballot box considering their likely inheritance.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827
    edited April 2023

    WillG said:

    WillG said:

    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.

    It will still skew voting further to over 60s and against youngsters, so at least partly cynical as well as some logic.....
    Youngsters have other forms of ID they can use. Driving license rates will be higher with them.
    Young people's driving licences will surely skew to the more affluent, and therefore Tory voters.
    I thought the rich kids were all greens these days?
    Not when they are stood at the ballot box considering their likely inheritance.
    Average age of inheritance in the UK is 61.......why do you think the boomer party focus on it so much?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,197

    kinabalu said:

    Ok, the tense few hours of waiting to hear my nap is over. CAPODANNO @ 25s. A vibrant young horse ready to shine on the biggest stage.

    I assume this tip is for Republican nominee although judging by recent contests quite possibly either the next SNP or Tory leader instead?
    Does sound like a MAGA hood, doesn't it.

    'Capodanno eyes up a run if Trump is incarcerated'.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,342
    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    algarkirk said:

    On race horses enjoying racing:
    I once had a conversation with a biologist after a book signing which got on to the subject of athletes, and I asked him why humans have massively increased their running records over the past century but horses have managed only minuscule improvements.
    As he pointed out, horses have evolved running at speed over millions of years, whereas we haven't. He went on to say that for horses, running is about escaping predators, so when horses run together - for example, in a horse race - those millions of years of evolution are telling each horse not to be last, or they'll get eaten. And, in his words, every physiological thing that jockeys and trainers say is a sign a horse enjoys it, is actually a sign of stress. They're basically terrified.
    The only time a horse enjoys running is alone, at not much more than a canter.


    Do memories plague their ears like flies?
    They shake their heads. Dusk brims the shadows.
    Summer by summer all stole away,
    The starting-gates, the crowd and cries -
    All but the unmolesting meadows.
    Almanacked, their names live; they

    Have slipped their names, and stand at ease,
    Or gallop for what must be joy,
    And not a fieldglass sees them home,
    Or curious stop-watch prophesies :
    Only the grooms, and the grooms boy,
    With bridles in the evening come.


    Larkin of course.
    Larkin is so strangely brilliant

    ‘Dusk brims the shadows’ doesn’t actually make that much sense, but it is so powerfully evocative of a warm rural twilight - and of the slow contented end of life
    Stunning enjambment between the two stanzas as well. Suggests the speed of the race, and then the line literally comes to a standstill. This is Larkin at his very best.
    One of THE great English poets, to my mind. Up there with Keats and Byron and Milton
    Yes. Astonishing. The last of of tradition of great poetry for the ordinary reader (not academics) about actual real stuff, written with scrupulous care and genius - even more than Keats is. Clare, Hardy, Edward Thomas, Betjeman (despite weaknesses) and Larkin. And the death of Larkin ended a tradition as surely as the death of Shostakovich.

    Larkin renders so many poets unreadable for their imprecision, lack of anything to say and inattention to form.
    Poetry is also ultra-WOKE now. What gets you published is your level of intersectional oppression, not whether you are any good. Which is the death of any art (tho poetry probably died with Larkin and Plath, anyway)
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Ok, the tense few hours of waiting to hear my nap is over. CAPODANNO @ 25s. A vibrant young horse ready to shine on the biggest stage.

    I assume this tip is for Republican nominee although judging by recent contests quite possibly either the next SNP or Tory leader instead?
    Does sound like a MAGA hood, doesn't it.

    'Capodanno eyes up a run if Trump is incarcerated'.
    And remember they have already trialled the talking horse by sending Mr Ed to this very forum.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,416

    MaxPB said:

    WillG said:

    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.

    That's rubbish though.

    According to, for example, the Dorset Council site for an Older Persons Bus Pass:
    "Your application MUST include:
    • the completed original application form
    • one copy of a proof of age document from: Birth certificate, VALID Driving licence, Proof of Pension entitlement, or Medical Card;
    • one copy of a proof of address document from: VALID Driving licence, Recent utility bill,
    Most recent Council Tax bill, or Proof of Pension entitlement;
    • one passport style/sized colour photograph of your head and shoulders."


    No one checks that photo. I could easily put in an application using someone else's details. No one would check.

    For a 16-25 Railcard you need to provide:
    "Proof of eligibility (UK Driving License, Passport, EEA national identity card);
    A passport-style photo (it can even be taken with your phone)"


    Big difference, not.

    Isn't the difference proof of address?
    Homeless people not allowed to vote now?
    You can't get on the electoral register without an address, can you?
    You can:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/register-to-vote-if-you-havent-got-a-fixed-or-permanent-address
    You do actually still need an address for that.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,586
    .

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    On the Labour poll leads - it seems obvious, to me, that vaguely competent government, some international agreements etc would be more popular than the ChaosOfTheWeek style.

    For @JosiasJessop - https://www.faa.gov/media/27236 - the FAA documentation associated with the launch license for Starship/Super Heavy. Confirms that the first three launches will be completely expendable.

    Really looking forward to the Starship launch. It’s the biggest and heaviest rocket ever to leave the Earth, more than 50% heavier than Saturn V.

    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3e/60/a3/3e60a30524e2bf3656e8e567ff88b3e8.jpg
    Yet unlike Saturn V, it cannot get man to the moon and back in one launch. ;)

    (Yes, I know that's because SS has not been optimised for that particular mission.)
    Orbital refuelling is required to get anywhere.

    May Senator Shelby suffer a plague of boils......
    Being a pedant, we've got to the Moon without orbital refuelling; and sent probes to all the planets. But yes, for sensible solar system manned travel we need refuelling. And hydrolox. ;)

    Incidentally, have you seen ULA's second stage Centaur test boom?

    https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1646572389193625600
    That’s a big boom!

    Reading through the Starship regulatory document posted earlier, they’ve gone to quite some length to calculate the exact size of the boom, should the vehicle experience a rapid and unscheduled disassembly at various points during the launch cycle. :D
    Reminds me of the good old days in LNG world.

    Where spilling LNG on the sea and conducting experiments on nominal yield were a thing.

    There’s some fascinating physics there. It seems that a liquid cryogen (LNG) boiling off, on the sea, can generate static electricity and self ignite. Not sure whether they ever worked out why it did that….
    Presumably some sort of reaction with the salt and other minerals in the sea, that wouldn’t be present in fresh water?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,161
    Leon said:

    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    algarkirk said:

    On race horses enjoying racing:
    I once had a conversation with a biologist after a book signing which got on to the subject of athletes, and I asked him why humans have massively increased their running records over the past century but horses have managed only minuscule improvements.
    As he pointed out, horses have evolved running at speed over millions of years, whereas we haven't. He went on to say that for horses, running is about escaping predators, so when horses run together - for example, in a horse race - those millions of years of evolution are telling each horse not to be last, or they'll get eaten. And, in his words, every physiological thing that jockeys and trainers say is a sign a horse enjoys it, is actually a sign of stress. They're basically terrified.
    The only time a horse enjoys running is alone, at not much more than a canter.


    Do memories plague their ears like flies?
    They shake their heads. Dusk brims the shadows.
    Summer by summer all stole away,
    The starting-gates, the crowd and cries -
    All but the unmolesting meadows.
    Almanacked, their names live; they

    Have slipped their names, and stand at ease,
    Or gallop for what must be joy,
    And not a fieldglass sees them home,
    Or curious stop-watch prophesies :
    Only the grooms, and the grooms boy,
    With bridles in the evening come.


    Larkin of course.
    Larkin is so strangely brilliant

    ‘Dusk brims the shadows’ doesn’t actually make that much sense, but it is so powerfully evocative of a warm rural twilight - and of the slow contented end of life
    Stunning enjambment between the two stanzas as well. Suggests the speed of the race, and then the line literally comes to a standstill. This is Larkin at his very best.
    One of THE great English poets, to my mind. Up there with Keats and Byron and Milton
    Yes. Astonishing. The last of of tradition of great poetry for the ordinary reader (not academics) about actual real stuff, written with scrupulous care and genius - even more than Keats is. Clare, Hardy, Edward Thomas, Betjeman (despite weaknesses) and Larkin. And the death of Larkin ended a tradition as surely as the death of Shostakovich.

    Larkin renders so many poets unreadable for their imprecision, lack of anything to say and inattention to form.
    Poetry is also ultra-WOKE now. What gets you published is your level of intersectional oppression, not whether you are any good. Which is the death of any art (tho poetry probably died with Larkin and Plath, anyway)
    There haven't been professional poets in 25 years.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,586
    MaxPB said:

    A Hollywood friend has suggested far from being excluded from the new Harry Potter series, JK Rowling is going to have a very large influence on the setting, casting and ensuring that the show runners don't stray too far from the original plot. HBO are said to be comfortable with it after their success with The Last Of Us which followed the same template with Neil Druckmann taking the a lead role in bringing the series to life.

    2025 seems like the the date when the first season will be released and the main roles will be filled by the end of this year with British actors and actresses being preferred as they were for the movies. There was a rumour that WB wanted to shift the setting to a US high school rather than wizard Eton and that's what was holding up the announcement because Rowling was adamant that any new series would have to stick to the original story or not be done at all.

    It was an interesting lunch!

    It was a surprising announcement, given all the recent controversies around the author. I guess that either HBO have been talking to Rowling for years to get this project off the ground, or they judge that the controversy will pass, and if they don’t do it now then someone else will.

    The Budweiser boycott in the States, is an indication that perhaps the tide is starting to turn on companies bending over backwards to support the woke activism of their younger employees.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,586
    Leon said:

    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    algarkirk said:

    On race horses enjoying racing:
    I once had a conversation with a biologist after a book signing which got on to the subject of athletes, and I asked him why humans have massively increased their running records over the past century but horses have managed only minuscule improvements.
    As he pointed out, horses have evolved running at speed over millions of years, whereas we haven't. He went on to say that for horses, running is about escaping predators, so when horses run together - for example, in a horse race - those millions of years of evolution are telling each horse not to be last, or they'll get eaten. And, in his words, every physiological thing that jockeys and trainers say is a sign a horse enjoys it, is actually a sign of stress. They're basically terrified.
    The only time a horse enjoys running is alone, at not much more than a canter.


    Do memories plague their ears like flies?
    They shake their heads. Dusk brims the shadows.
    Summer by summer all stole away,
    The starting-gates, the crowd and cries -
    All but the unmolesting meadows.
    Almanacked, their names live; they

    Have slipped their names, and stand at ease,
    Or gallop for what must be joy,
    And not a fieldglass sees them home,
    Or curious stop-watch prophesies :
    Only the grooms, and the grooms boy,
    With bridles in the evening come.


    Larkin of course.
    Larkin is so strangely brilliant

    ‘Dusk brims the shadows’ doesn’t actually make that much sense, but it is so powerfully evocative of a warm rural twilight - and of the slow contented end of life
    Stunning enjambment between the two stanzas as well. Suggests the speed of the race, and then the line literally comes to a standstill. This is Larkin at his very best.
    One of THE great English poets, to my mind. Up there with Keats and Byron and Milton
    Yes. Astonishing. The last of of tradition of great poetry for the ordinary reader (not academics) about actual real stuff, written with scrupulous care and genius - even more than Keats is. Clare, Hardy, Edward Thomas, Betjeman (despite weaknesses) and Larkin. And the death of Larkin ended a tradition as surely as the death of Shostakovich.

    Larkin renders so many poets unreadable for their imprecision, lack of anything to say and inattention to form.
    Poetry is also ultra-WOKE now. What gets you published is your level of intersectional oppression, not whether you are any good. Which is the death of any art (tho poetry probably died with Larkin and Plath, anyway)
    Surely ultra-woke poetry, is something that ChatGPT would have no problem churning out, volumes at a time?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,286
    edited April 2023
    MaxPB said:

    A Hollywood friend has suggested far from being excluded from the new Harry Potter series, JK Rowling is going to have a very large influence on the setting, casting and ensuring that the show runners don't stray too far from the original plot. HBO are said to be comfortable with it after their success with The Last Of Us which followed the same template with Neil Druckmann taking the a lead role in bringing the series to life.

    2025 seems like the the date when the first season will be released and the main roles will be filled by the end of this year with British actors and actresses being preferred as they were for the movies. There was a rumour that WB wanted to shift the setting to a US high school rather than wizard Eton and that's what was holding up the announcement because Rowling was adamant that any new series would have to stick to the original story or not be done at all.

    It was an interesting lunch!

    "Hollywood friend" eh? Someone famous? :D
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,664
    edited April 2023
    ydoethur said:

    MaxPB said:

    WillG said:

    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.

    That's rubbish though.

    According to, for example, the Dorset Council site for an Older Persons Bus Pass:
    "Your application MUST include:
    • the completed original application form
    • one copy of a proof of age document from: Birth certificate, VALID Driving licence, Proof of Pension entitlement, or Medical Card;
    • one copy of a proof of address document from: VALID Driving licence, Recent utility bill,
    Most recent Council Tax bill, or Proof of Pension entitlement;
    • one passport style/sized colour photograph of your head and shoulders."


    No one checks that photo. I could easily put in an application using someone else's details. No one would check.

    For a 16-25 Railcard you need to provide:
    "Proof of eligibility (UK Driving License, Passport, EEA national identity card);
    A passport-style photo (it can even be taken with your phone)"


    Big difference, not.

    Isn't the difference proof of address?
    Homeless people not allowed to vote now?
    You can't get on the electoral register without an address, can you?
    You can:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/register-to-vote-if-you-havent-got-a-fixed-or-permanent-address
    You do actually still need an address for that.
    True, but it could be building or place you spend a lot of time in, e.g. a support centre, a warm hub, etc.

    "If you are homeless, you can give details of where you spend a substantial part of your time."

    I suspect you could even provide the address of a Jobcentre, carpark, barn, field, or wood but I have not seen it tried. On what basis would they turn you down?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,342
    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    algarkirk said:

    On race horses enjoying racing:
    I once had a conversation with a biologist after a book signing which got on to the subject of athletes, and I asked him why humans have massively increased their running records over the past century but horses have managed only minuscule improvements.
    As he pointed out, horses have evolved running at speed over millions of years, whereas we haven't. He went on to say that for horses, running is about escaping predators, so when horses run together - for example, in a horse race - those millions of years of evolution are telling each horse not to be last, or they'll get eaten. And, in his words, every physiological thing that jockeys and trainers say is a sign a horse enjoys it, is actually a sign of stress. They're basically terrified.
    The only time a horse enjoys running is alone, at not much more than a canter.


    Do memories plague their ears like flies?
    They shake their heads. Dusk brims the shadows.
    Summer by summer all stole away,
    The starting-gates, the crowd and cries -
    All but the unmolesting meadows.
    Almanacked, their names live; they

    Have slipped their names, and stand at ease,
    Or gallop for what must be joy,
    And not a fieldglass sees them home,
    Or curious stop-watch prophesies :
    Only the grooms, and the grooms boy,
    With bridles in the evening come.


    Larkin of course.
    Larkin is so strangely brilliant

    ‘Dusk brims the shadows’ doesn’t actually make that much sense, but it is so powerfully evocative of a warm rural twilight - and of the slow contented end of life
    Stunning enjambment between the two stanzas as well. Suggests the speed of the race, and then the line literally comes to a standstill. This is Larkin at his very best.
    One of THE great English poets, to my mind. Up there with Keats and Byron and Milton
    Yes. Astonishing. The last of of tradition of great poetry for the ordinary reader (not academics) about actual real stuff, written with scrupulous care and genius - even more than Keats is. Clare, Hardy, Edward Thomas, Betjeman (despite weaknesses) and Larkin. And the death of Larkin ended a tradition as surely as the death of Shostakovich.

    Larkin renders so many poets unreadable for their imprecision, lack of anything to say and inattention to form.
    Poetry is also ultra-WOKE now. What gets you published is your level of intersectional oppression, not whether you are any good. Which is the death of any art (tho poetry probably died with Larkin and Plath, anyway)
    Surely ultra-woke poetry, is something that ChatGPT would have no problem churning out, volumes at a time?
    Oooh good idea. I'll give it a spin
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,226
    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    WillG said:

    WillG said:

    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.

    It will still skew voting further to over 60s and against youngsters, so at least partly cynical as well as some logic.....
    Youngsters have other forms of ID they can use. Driving license rates will be higher with them.
    Thats just not true.

    17-20 21%
    21-29 67%
    60-69 85%
    70+ 75%

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/nts02-driving-licence-holders
    So provisional licences not count? If they aren't then it's absolutely wrong. I'm still unsure of the necessity of this but not actually bothering to properly police postal voting which is where fraud actually occurs and has been well documented.
    There are also gazillions of ways to ensure that people who turn up without ID are not disenfranchised: provisional ballots, photos of people who turn up without ID, etc.

    But, as you say, the fact that we know there is postal vote fraud, and the fact that nothing at all is being done about it, leads one to a rather cynical interpretation of BJs motives.
    And given that the government has ploughed on with this under nice Mr Sunak, it's hard to resist the temptation to assume the worst of him as well.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,342
    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    algarkirk said:

    On race horses enjoying racing:
    I once had a conversation with a biologist after a book signing which got on to the subject of athletes, and I asked him why humans have massively increased their running records over the past century but horses have managed only minuscule improvements.
    As he pointed out, horses have evolved running at speed over millions of years, whereas we haven't. He went on to say that for horses, running is about escaping predators, so when horses run together - for example, in a horse race - those millions of years of evolution are telling each horse not to be last, or they'll get eaten. And, in his words, every physiological thing that jockeys and trainers say is a sign a horse enjoys it, is actually a sign of stress. They're basically terrified.
    The only time a horse enjoys running is alone, at not much more than a canter.


    Do memories plague their ears like flies?
    They shake their heads. Dusk brims the shadows.
    Summer by summer all stole away,
    The starting-gates, the crowd and cries -
    All but the unmolesting meadows.
    Almanacked, their names live; they

    Have slipped their names, and stand at ease,
    Or gallop for what must be joy,
    And not a fieldglass sees them home,
    Or curious stop-watch prophesies :
    Only the grooms, and the grooms boy,
    With bridles in the evening come.


    Larkin of course.
    Larkin is so strangely brilliant

    ‘Dusk brims the shadows’ doesn’t actually make that much sense, but it is so powerfully evocative of a warm rural twilight - and of the slow contented end of life
    Stunning enjambment between the two stanzas as well. Suggests the speed of the race, and then the line literally comes to a standstill. This is Larkin at his very best.
    One of THE great English poets, to my mind. Up there with Keats and Byron and Milton
    Yes. Astonishing. The last of of tradition of great poetry for the ordinary reader (not academics) about actual real stuff, written with scrupulous care and genius - even more than Keats is. Clare, Hardy, Edward Thomas, Betjeman (despite weaknesses) and Larkin. And the death of Larkin ended a tradition as surely as the death of Shostakovich.

    Larkin renders so many poets unreadable for their imprecision, lack of anything to say and inattention to form.
    Poetry is also ultra-WOKE now. What gets you published is your level of intersectional oppression, not whether you are any good. Which is the death of any art (tho poetry probably died with Larkin and Plath, anyway)
    Surely ultra-woke poetry, is something that ChatGPT would have no problem churning out, volumes at a time?
    Et voila



    In a world that paints a single hue,
    A vibrant voice seeks to break through,
    A truth that's birthed from life's embrace,
    Trans, disabled, and African race.

    Each stanza weaves a tale untold,
    Of struggles faced, both young and old,
    A trans identity that defines,
    The beauty that within it shines.

    The body knows a boundless dance,
    Defying norms in its advance,
    Disability may shape the stride,
    Yet cannot quell the fire inside.

    A heart that sings a rhythmic beat,
    Of African roots and spirit's fleet,
    Each word a note that blends the soul,
    Of race and ancestry, stories untold.

    Through every line, the poet speaks,
    Of intersectional peaks,
    Race, disability, and trans life,
    Entwined within a world of strife.

    The publishing world, often blind,
    To voices that seek to redefine,
    The spectrum of stories we need to share,
    Of lives unseen and tales laid bare.

    The industry may turn its gaze,
    Away from those who walk new ways,
    But the poet's voice, strong and clear,
    Will not be silenced, will not adhere.

    Transgender truth, in verses bold,
    Disability's power, tales untold,
    African heritage, proudly worn,
    In every word, a new dawn's born.

    Listen well, you publishing gate,
    For these voices will not wait,
    Trans, disabled, African grace,
    Shall rise above and claim their space.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,342
    This one actually made me cry, it was so poignant



    In the shadow of oppression's hand,
    Where judgment reigned upon Scotland's land,
    A valiant soul dared to make a stand,
    A blind gay midget, in fate's command.

    As politicians spoke with barbed tongue,
    The labels cast, the judgments flung,
    He sought a haven from the cruel fray,
    In a campervan, his heart could sway.

    Nestled 'mongst the hills and heather,
    A shelter in the stormy weather,
    This humble home on wheels did prove,
    A sanctuary where dreams could move.

    Forced to flee from heartless scorn,
    In Scotland's wild, a life reborn,
    In rolling glens, a refuge found,
    A campervan, where love's unbound.

    Though hardships weighed like stones so cold,
    His spirit burned with courage bold,
    A blind gay midget, heart aflame,
    In Scottish politics, would stake his claim.

    And from the campervan's embrace,
    He spoke of love, of hope, and grace,
    A voice that echoed through the land,
    A call for change, a just demand.

    The campervan, his fortress strong,
    A symbol of the battles long,
    For every soul who's known despair,
    A testament that love and care.

    In Scotland's heart, his tale resounds,
    A blind gay midget, breaking bounds,
    For in the end, love conquers all,
    And even giants, at times, stand small.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,843
    Taz said:

    moonshine said:

    Now that Finland are safely within NATO’s nuclear umbrella and Sanna is on her way out, does the rest of us get to find out what that dastardly Finland Rumour was all about?

    Nope, we just get to read people who claim to be in the know hinting they knew what it was.
    There was nothing about it in the US intelligence leaks which means it must be b*******, whatever it is.

    True story: the first Grand National I watched was in 1993. My only interest will be in seeing which pber gave the right tip.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,342
    In Scotland's land, a tale anew,
    Of a blind gay midget, bold and true,
    Within a campervan, he'd dwell,
    And challenge fate with each rebel.

    The campervan, his haven, home,
    On winding roads, he'd freely roam,
    With Sturgeon's words and Murray's gaze,
    A fire inside, his spirit ablaze.

    A French ambassador, intrigued,
    Witnessed the courage that he'd need,
    To face the world and stake his claim,
    In politics, a brand-new name.

    In blindness, thistles he embraced,
    Six hundred thousand spent in haste,
    A sea of purple, sharp and wild,
    A testament to dreams beguiled.

    But still, within that campervan,
    The fight for justice, love began,
    A blind gay midget dared to dream,
    And through his tale, saw brightness gleam.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,303
    Sandpit said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Hollywood friend has suggested far from being excluded from the new Harry Potter series, JK Rowling is going to have a very large influence on the setting, casting and ensuring that the show runners don't stray too far from the original plot. HBO are said to be comfortable with it after their success with The Last Of Us which followed the same template with Neil Druckmann taking the a lead role in bringing the series to life.

    2025 seems like the the date when the first season will be released and the main roles will be filled by the end of this year with British actors and actresses being preferred as they were for the movies. There was a rumour that WB wanted to shift the setting to a US high school rather than wizard Eton and that's what was holding up the announcement because Rowling was adamant that any new series would have to stick to the original story or not be done at all.

    It was an interesting lunch!

    It was a surprising announcement, given all the recent controversies around the author. I guess that either HBO have been talking to Rowling for years to get this project off the ground, or they judge that the controversy will pass, and if they don’t do it now then someone else will.

    The Budweiser boycott in the States, is an indication that perhaps the tide is starting to turn on companies bending over backwards to support the woke activism of their younger employees.
    As I understand it, JKR has either been extremely well advised or is very business savvy.

    It is apparently somewhere between difficult and impossible to make Harry Potter universe products without her OK, due to the rights she retained
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,842
    Sandpit said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Hollywood friend has suggested far from being excluded from the new Harry Potter series, JK Rowling is going to have a very large influence on the setting, casting and ensuring that the show runners don't stray too far from the original plot. HBO are said to be comfortable with it after their success with The Last Of Us which followed the same template with Neil Druckmann taking the a lead role in bringing the series to life.

    2025 seems like the the date when the first season will be released and the main roles will be filled by the end of this year with British actors and actresses being preferred as they were for the movies. There was a rumour that WB wanted to shift the setting to a US high school rather than wizard Eton and that's what was holding up the announcement because Rowling was adamant that any new series would have to stick to the original story or not be done at all.

    It was an interesting lunch!

    It was a surprising announcement, given all the recent controversies around the author. I guess that either HBO have been talking to Rowling for years to get this project off the ground, or they judge that the controversy will pass, and if they don’t do it now then someone else will.

    The Budweiser boycott in the States, is an indication that perhaps the tide is starting to turn on companies bending over backwards to support the woke activism of their younger employees.
    I doubt any boycott will make a difference to their bottom line just as the Hogwarts Legacy one didn't. I think what companies are finally realising is that fucking politics off completely makes the most sense.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,342
    I believe we have invented a genre
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,416
    edited April 2023
    Only watching the national for the animal rights cranks. They’re delivering too 😂😂😂😂
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,843

    Sandpit said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Hollywood friend has suggested far from being excluded from the new Harry Potter series, JK Rowling is going to have a very large influence on the setting, casting and ensuring that the show runners don't stray too far from the original plot. HBO are said to be comfortable with it after their success with The Last Of Us which followed the same template with Neil Druckmann taking the a lead role in bringing the series to life.

    2025 seems like the the date when the first season will be released and the main roles will be filled by the end of this year with British actors and actresses being preferred as they were for the movies. There was a rumour that WB wanted to shift the setting to a US high school rather than wizard Eton and that's what was holding up the announcement because Rowling was adamant that any new series would have to stick to the original story or not be done at all.

    It was an interesting lunch!

    It was a surprising announcement, given all the recent controversies around the author. I guess that either HBO have been talking to Rowling for years to get this project off the ground, or they judge that the controversy will pass, and if they don’t do it now then someone else will.

    The Budweiser boycott in the States, is an indication that perhaps the tide is starting to turn on companies bending over backwards to support the woke activism of their younger employees.
    As I understand it, JKR has either been extremely well advised or is very business savvy.

    It is apparently somewhere between difficult and impossible to make Harry Potter universe products without her OK, due to the rights she retained
    Most 'creators' are not that wealthy and will sell the rights to their work. In her case she'd already made bucketloads of cash so why not maintain control?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,957
    Is that @Dura_Ace with the grey hair and saggy tits glued to the open ditch?
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,805
    Sandpit said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Hollywood friend has suggested far from being excluded from the new Harry Potter series, JK Rowling is going to have a very large influence on the setting, casting and ensuring that the show runners don't stray too far from the original plot. HBO are said to be comfortable with it after their success with The Last Of Us which followed the same template with Neil Druckmann taking the a lead role in bringing the series to life.

    2025 seems like the the date when the first season will be released and the main roles will be filled by the end of this year with British actors and actresses being preferred as they were for the movies. There was a rumour that WB wanted to shift the setting to a US high school rather than wizard Eton and that's what was holding up the announcement because Rowling was adamant that any new series would have to stick to the original story or not be done at all.

    It was an interesting lunch!

    It was a surprising announcement, given all the recent controversies around the author. I guess that either HBO have been talking to Rowling for years to get this project off the ground, or they judge that the controversy will pass, and if they don’t do it now then someone else will.

    The Budweiser boycott in the States, is an indication that perhaps the tide is starting to turn on companies bending over backwards to support the woke activism of their younger employees.
    A pedant notes: JKR has almost certainly never said anything that anyonr but a fringe lunatic would find controversial. She's onoy controversial because fringe lunatics have declared her so
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,416
    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    WillG said:

    WillG said:

    Some of the rules are just plain daft. Those over 60 will be able to use their travel passes while that will not be an acceptable form of ID for those younger

    Because you need to prove your ID to get a travel pass over 60, but don't for a regular one. So entirely logical.

    It will still skew voting further to over 60s and against youngsters, so at least partly cynical as well as some logic.....
    Youngsters have other forms of ID they can use. Driving license rates will be higher with them.
    Thats just not true.

    17-20 21%
    21-29 67%
    60-69 85%
    70+ 75%

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/nts02-driving-licence-holders
    So provisional licences not count? If they aren't then it's absolutely wrong. I'm still unsure of the necessity of this but not actually bothering to properly police postal voting which is where fraud actually occurs and has been well documented.
    There are also gazillions of ways to ensure that people who turn up without ID are not disenfranchised: provisional ballots, photos of people who turn up without ID, etc.

    But, as you say, the fact that we know there is postal vote fraud, and the fact that nothing at all is being done about it, leads one to a rather cynical interpretation of BJs motives.
    I don't need a reason for that. I just need to look at his previous career.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,586

    Sandpit said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Hollywood friend has suggested far from being excluded from the new Harry Potter series, JK Rowling is going to have a very large influence on the setting, casting and ensuring that the show runners don't stray too far from the original plot. HBO are said to be comfortable with it after their success with The Last Of Us which followed the same template with Neil Druckmann taking the a lead role in bringing the series to life.

    2025 seems like the the date when the first season will be released and the main roles will be filled by the end of this year with British actors and actresses being preferred as they were for the movies. There was a rumour that WB wanted to shift the setting to a US high school rather than wizard Eton and that's what was holding up the announcement because Rowling was adamant that any new series would have to stick to the original story or not be done at all.

    It was an interesting lunch!

    It was a surprising announcement, given all the recent controversies around the author. I guess that either HBO have been talking to Rowling for years to get this project off the ground, or they judge that the controversy will pass, and if they don’t do it now then someone else will.

    The Budweiser boycott in the States, is an indication that perhaps the tide is starting to turn on companies bending over backwards to support the woke activism of their younger employees.
    As I understand it, JKR has either been extremely well advised or is very business savvy.

    It is apparently somewhere between difficult and impossible to make Harry Potter universe products without her OK, due to the rights she retained
    It’s something to do with how the book publishing industry works, as opposed to the movie and TV industries. The starting point for a book is the author, whereas for film or TV it’s a production company, which is where the rights end up.

    So a book author owns the rights to their characters and ‘universe’, whereas a movie ‘universe’ is usually owned by the studio.

    See also the Tolkien Estate, and Lord of the Rings.

    If only we had a published author hanging around on here, who could explain this better?
  • TOPPING said:

    Is that @Dura_Ace with the grey hair and saggy tits glued to the open ditch?

    I can't watch it, I don't pay theTV licence, but if the grey haired saggy titted one is in a porsche doing donuts around The Chair then it's definitely DA.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,957

    TOPPING said:

    Is that @Dura_Ace with the grey hair and saggy tits glued to the open ditch?

    I can't watch it, I don't pay theTV licence, but if the grey haired saggy titted one is in a porsche doing donuts around The Chair then it's definitely DA.
    Ford Corsair so that's a yes.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,705
    Taz said:

    Only watching the national for the animal rights cranks. They’re delivering too 😂😂😂😂

    I don't normally watch the Grand National but I thought I'd tune in when I read that post. All publicity is good publicity as Bernie Ecclestone used to say, or soemthing.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,957
    Classic from Scu. Let's live forever and I wish cake didn't make you fat but there you go.
  • Cookie said:

    Sandpit said:

    MaxPB said:

    A Hollywood friend has suggested far from being excluded from the new Harry Potter series, JK Rowling is going to have a very large influence on the setting, casting and ensuring that the show runners don't stray too far from the original plot. HBO are said to be comfortable with it after their success with The Last Of Us which followed the same template with Neil Druckmann taking the a lead role in bringing the series to life.

    2025 seems like the the date when the first season will be released and the main roles will be filled by the end of this year with British actors and actresses being preferred as they were for the movies. There was a rumour that WB wanted to shift the setting to a US high school rather than wizard Eton and that's what was holding up the announcement because Rowling was adamant that any new series would have to stick to the original story or not be done at all.

    It was an interesting lunch!

    It was a surprising announcement, given all the recent controversies around the author. I guess that either HBO have been talking to Rowling for years to get this project off the ground, or they judge that the controversy will pass, and if they don’t do it now then someone else will.

    The Budweiser boycott in the States, is an indication that perhaps the tide is starting to turn on companies bending over backwards to support the woke activism of their younger employees.
    A pedant notes: JKR has almost certainly never said anything that anyonr but a fringe lunatic would find controversial. She's onoy controversial because fringe lunatics have declared her so
    And the entire young cast of now superstar actors who got rich because of her stories.
This discussion has been closed.