The idea of bazball is that when it comes you take the game away within a few hours, also that technically a lot of the England batsman are flawed and so they aren't able to stay in (even if they are trying). So the thought is might as well get 30 really quickly (and potentially spin that into a big score), rather than batting for 3hrs, score few runs and get a good ball which gets them out.
England wouldn't have got 331 just prodding around for hours. It would for starters require them to bat 4-5 sessions (if they play defensive) and they just can't do it.
Quite. In a more conventional Test style, they’d be looking for a total around 450, heading towards tea tomorrow. Getting close to that score in one day opens the match up a lot more.
Giving the C******s (are we still allowed to call them that?) three overs tonight, might not be the worst idea.
It is, but the logic I struggle with - its not like giving Australia 20 minutes under fading light and a tricky pitch, it's fine out there. They just hit 20 in one over, so could thrash it about and maybe add 50 more to the total before getting out.
The idea of bazball is that when it comes you take the game away within a few hours, also that technically a lot of the England batsman are flawed and so they aren't able to stay in (even if they are trying). So the thought is might as well get 30 really quickly (and potentially spin that into a big score), rather than batting for 3hrs, score few runs and get a good ball which gets them out.
England wouldn't have got 331 just prodding around for hours. It would for starters require them to bat 4-5 sessions (if they play defensive) and they just can't do it.
Quite. In a more conventional Test style, they’d be looking for a total around 450, heading towards tea tomorrow. Getting close to that score in one day opens the match up a lot more.
Giving the C******s (are we still allowed to call them that?) three overs tonight, might not be the worst idea.
It’s not even a diseased orchard, is it? More a poisonous species.
Our police forces are sick. So, so sick. I just don’t know what we do about it.
We have the same problem in education.
My solution - and I mean it quite seriously - is abolish the DfE and its associated quangos, and ban anyone who has worked directly for them for working in either public service or with children again.
Yes, it will cause chaos in many ways. It is unlikely however that the chaos will be worse than what we have now. And it will clear the big stumbling block to genuine reform out of the way.
I wonder if the same might work for the police. The issue is where do you get new ones from? I doubt if criminals would hesitate to take advantage of more freedom…
No, that won’t work. They would find their way back in.
Hence sending them on the first manned landing on the Sun.
So we have Parliament on Pluto, DfE on the Sun, the Police on Neptune, maybe?
It is, but the logic I struggle with - its not like giving Australia 20 minutes under fading light and a tricky pitch, it's fine out there. They just hit 20 in one over, so could thrash it about and maybe add 50 more to the total before getting out.
They could, but its playing mind games and putting pressure on them.
With a new ball Australia aren't likely to smash it around for lots, so they go into this final part of the session with a negative mindset of something to lose but not much to gain.
It’s not even a diseased orchard, is it? More a poisonous species.
Our police forces are sick. So, so sick. I just don’t know what we do about it.
We have the same problem in education.
My solution - and I mean it quite seriously - is abolish the DfE and its associated quangos, and ban anyone who has worked directly for them for working in either public service or with children again.
Yes, it will cause chaos in many ways. It is unlikely however that the chaos will be worse than what we have now. And it will clear the big stumbling block to genuine reform out of the way.
I wonder if the same might work for the police. The issue is where do you get new ones from? I doubt if criminals would hesitate to take advantage of more freedom…
No, that won’t work. They would find their way back in.
Hence sending them on the first manned landing on the Sun.
So we have Parliament on Pluto, DfE on the Sun, the Police on Neptune, maybe?
It’s not even a diseased orchard, is it? More a poisonous species.
Our police forces are sick. So, so sick. I just don’t know what we do about it.
We have the same problem in education.
My solution - and I mean it quite seriously - is abolish the DfE and its associated quangos, and ban anyone who has worked directly for them for working in either public service or with children again.
Yes, it will cause chaos in many ways. It is unlikely however that the chaos will be worse than what we have now. And it will clear the big stumbling block to genuine reform out of the way.
I wonder if the same might work for the police. The issue is where do you get new ones from? I doubt if criminals would hesitate to take advantage of more freedom…
No, that won’t work. They would find their way back in.
Hence sending them on the first manned landing on the Sun.
So we have Parliament on Pluto, DfE on the Sun, the Police on Neptune, maybe?
As the police are arseholes, put them on Uranus.
Seriously, it will take breaking The First Rule Of Upper 10k Club
How much do we reckon Bozza is getting for spaffing out 500-1000 words a week for the Daily Mail?
£100-200k
He used to get £250k from Telegraph, I imagine its more than that, especially as Mail has a massive online footprint and I imagine they hope to get the likes of US clicking to read the "Eccentric" British posh bloke ramblings.
If they hope for that, they are deluded.
Boris’s “writing” really doesn’t travel beyond a certain niche of British society, one that is largely ageing and provincial.
He makes sense for the Telegraph, and perhaps even for the Mail, in terms of appealing to their existing audience, but not in attracting new ones and certainly none outside a rather claustrophobic culture which finds the word, “japes”, inherently amusing.
I suspect someone will tell him about ChatGPT, he will change a word or two and put his name to it.
"ChatGPT, write me an article in the style of Boris Johnson on why Brexit is good for Britain and why Boris Johnson is a genius"
"ChatGPT, write me an article in the style of Boris Johnson on why Brexit is good for Britain and why Boris Johnson is a genius" View other drafts
Sure, here is an article in the style of Boris Johnson on why Brexit is good for Britain and why Boris Johnson is a genius:
Boris Johnson: Why Brexit is Good for Britain and Why I'm a Genius
I've been called a lot of things in my life, but I'm most proud of being called a genius. And I'm not just saying that because I'm me. It's because I'm the one who saw Brexit for what it was: a once-in-a-generation opportunity to take back control of our country and make Britain great again.
I know that some people are still skeptical about Brexit. They worry that it will damage our economy or isolate us from the rest of the world. But I'm here to tell you that they're wrong. Brexit is going to be good for Britain. It's going to give us the freedom to trade with the world on our own terms, and it's going to allow us to control our own borders.
And I'm not just talking about the economic benefits of Brexit. I'm also talking about the cultural benefits. Britain is a great country, but we've been held back by the EU for too long. We've had to follow their rules, even when they didn't make sense for us. But now that we're out, we can start to make our own rules. We can be the country we were always meant to be.
So there you have it. Brexit is good for Britain, and I'm a genius for seeing it. But don't just take my word for it. Look at the evidence. The UK economy is already growing faster than the EU's. And we're starting to strike new trade deals with countries all over the world.
So if you're still not convinced about Brexit, I urge you to open your mind. The future of Britain is bright, and I'm the man to lead us there.
Just finished the Final Fantasy XVI demo. I like it a lot, the influences of God of War/Game of Thrones are clear. But a starting price of £70 is not a thing I like very much (and Baldur's Gate 3 isn't that far off).
F1: I probably won't be able to watch qualifying live so the pre-race ramble may well be later than usual.
How much do we reckon Bozza is getting for spaffing out 500-1000 words a week for the Daily Mail?
£100-200k
He used to get £250k from Telegraph, I imagine its more than that, especially as Mail has a massive online footprint and I imagine they hope to get the likes of US clicking to read the "Eccentric" British posh bloke ramblings.
If they hope for that, they are deluded.
Boris’s “writing” really doesn’t travel beyond a certain niche of British society, one that is largely ageing and provincial.
He makes sense for the Telegraph, and perhaps even for the Mail, in terms of appealing to their existing audience, but not in attracting new ones and certainly none outside a rather claustrophobic culture which finds the word, “japes”, inherently amusing.
I suspect someone will tell him about ChatGPT, he will change a word or two and put his name to it.
"ChatGPT, write me an article in the style of Boris Johnson on why Brexit is good for Britain and why Boris Johnson is a genius"
"ChatGPT, write me an article in the style of Boris Johnson on why Brexit is good for Britain and why Boris Johnson is a genius" View other drafts
Sure, here is an article in the style of Boris Johnson on why Brexit is good for Britain and why Boris Johnson is a genius:
Boris Johnson: Why Brexit is Good for Britain and Why I'm a Genius
I've been called a lot of things in my life, but I'm most proud of being called a genius. And I'm not just saying that because I'm me. It's because I'm the one who saw Brexit for what it was: a once-in-a-generation opportunity to take back control of our country and make Britain great again.
I know that some people are still skeptical about Brexit. They worry that it will damage our economy or isolate us from the rest of the world. But I'm here to tell you that they're wrong. Brexit is going to be good for Britain. It's going to give us the freedom to trade with the world on our own terms, and it's going to allow us to control our own borders.
And I'm not just talking about the economic benefits of Brexit. I'm also talking about the cultural benefits. Britain is a great country, but we've been held back by the EU for too long. We've had to follow their rules, even when they didn't make sense for us. But now that we're out, we can start to make our own rules. We can be the country we were always meant to be.
So there you have it. Brexit is good for Britain, and I'm a genius for seeing it. But don't just take my word for it. Look at the evidence. The UK economy is already growing faster than the EU's. And we're starting to strike new trade deals with countries all over the world.
So if you're still not convinced about Brexit, I urge you to open your mind. The future of Britain is bright, and I'm the man to lead us there.
Donald Trump: 42% (+1) Joe Biden: 39% (-6) Don't Know: 12% (+4)
Changes +/- 31 May
Might trade out my Biden bets when & if he is declared the nominee. I had counted on Trump being a busted flush.
Looks like we could end up with the first US President elected and governing from jail, if Trump's current criminal court case sees him convicted
He believes (and is probably right, bizarre though it is) that he can pardon himself as President. So even if he were in jail (he won't be), he'll be inaugurated and then pardon himself.
It's almost as if there is a real problem of abuse intrinsic to hierarchical organisations.
Yeah, but not just there. Our society is sick. So many of the rape cases I deal with are just horrible. Selfish, cruel, monstrous behaviour. It makes me furious. Some of it is driven by immaturity, some by self obsession, some by genuine evil.
Donald Trump: 42% (+1) Joe Biden: 39% (-6) Don't Know: 12% (+4)
Changes +/- 31 May
Might trade out my Biden bets when & if he is declared the nominee. I had counted on Trump being a busted flush.
Looks like we could end up with the first US President elected and governing from jail, if Trump's current criminal court case sees him convicted
Could he pardon himself?
For Federal offences only. Some of the trials are Federal offences.
Isn’t the general idea that Presidents can’t pardon themselves? Else Nixon could just have issued a blanket pardon for Watergate and not had to resign.
Donald Trump: 42% (+1) Joe Biden: 39% (-6) Don't Know: 12% (+4)
Changes +/- 31 May
Might trade out my Biden bets when & if he is declared the nominee. I had counted on Trump being a busted flush.
Looks like we could end up with the first US President elected and governing from jail, if Trump's current criminal court case sees him convicted
Could he pardon himself?
For Federal offences only. Some of the trials are Federal offences.
Isn’t the general idea that Presidents can’t pardon themselves? Else Nixon could just have issued a blanket pardon for Watergate and not had to resign.
Not that the current SC would care, of course.
Nixon might not have thought a President could do that. Trump definitely does, and IIRC the limits (if any) on the pardon power have not been legally tested that much.
I find it crazy there are people who believe an elected Leader has unfettered power, when it's all about checks and balances there, but hey ho.
How much do we reckon Bozza is getting for spaffing out 500-1000 words a week for the Daily Mail?
£100-200k
He used to get £250k from Telegraph, I imagine its more than that, especially as Mail has a massive online footprint and I imagine they hope to get the likes of US clicking to read the "Eccentric" British posh bloke ramblings.
If they hope for that, they are deluded.
Boris’s “writing” really doesn’t travel beyond a certain niche of British society, one that is largely ageing and provincial.
He makes sense for the Telegraph, and perhaps even for the Mail, in terms of appealing to their existing audience, but not in attracting new ones and certainly none outside a rather claustrophobic culture which finds the word, “japes”, inherently amusing.
I suspect someone will tell him about ChatGPT, he will change a word or two and put his name to it.
"ChatGPT, write me an article in the style of Boris Johnson on why Brexit is good for Britain and why Boris Johnson is a genius"
"ChatGPT, write me an article in the style of Boris Johnson on why Brexit is good for Britain and why Boris Johnson is a genius" View other drafts
Sure, here is an article in the style of Boris Johnson on why Brexit is good for Britain and why Boris Johnson is a genius:
Boris Johnson: Why Brexit is Good for Britain and Why I'm a Genius
I've been called a lot of things in my life, but I'm most proud of being called a genius. And I'm not just saying that because I'm me. It's because I'm the one who saw Brexit for what it was: a once-in-a-generation opportunity to take back control of our country and make Britain great again.
I know that some people are still skeptical about Brexit. They worry that it will damage our economy or isolate us from the rest of the world. But I'm here to tell you that they're wrong. Brexit is going to be good for Britain. It's going to give us the freedom to trade with the world on our own terms, and it's going to allow us to control our own borders.
And I'm not just talking about the economic benefits of Brexit. I'm also talking about the cultural benefits. Britain is a great country, but we've been held back by the EU for too long. We've had to follow their rules, even when they didn't make sense for us. But now that we're out, we can start to make our own rules. We can be the country we were always meant to be.
So there you have it. Brexit is good for Britain, and I'm a genius for seeing it. But don't just take my word for it. Look at the evidence. The UK economy is already growing faster than the EU's. And we're starting to strike new trade deals with countries all over the world.
So if you're still not convinced about Brexit, I urge you to open your mind. The future of Britain is bright, and I'm the man to lead us there.
Further back in the feed I asked ChatGPT to write the first page of an historical novel in the style of British author Sean Thomas. Leon didn't comment lol.
It's almost as if there is a real problem of abuse intrinsic to hierarchical organisations.
Yeah, but not just there. Our society is sick. So many of the rape cases I deal with are just horrible. Selfish, cruel, monstrous behaviour. It makes me furious. Some of it is driven by immaturity, some by self obsession, some by genuine evil.
It is both infuriating and depressing.
I think anyone who does your line of work, or who works in police or prisons runs the risk of seeing everyone as cynical, manipulative and brutal. People can lose their moral bearings in that environment and it is important to spend some time with normal, kind, altruistic and honest people in order to retain perspective on the human condition.
I am glad that others do this essential work of prosecuting rapists, and hope you have the psychological support and resilience to survive the stresses.
Donald Trump: 42% (+1) Joe Biden: 39% (-6) Don't Know: 12% (+4)
Changes +/- 31 May
Might trade out my Biden bets when & if he is declared the nominee. I had counted on Trump being a busted flush.
Looks like we could end up with the first US President elected and governing from jail, if Trump's current criminal court case sees him convicted
Could he pardon himself?
For Federal offences only. Some of the trials are Federal offences.
Isn’t the general idea that Presidents can’t pardon themselves? Else Nixon could just have issued a blanket pardon for Watergate and not had to resign.
Not that the current SC would care, of course.
The likes of Trump and Johnson make Nixon look like a man of integrity and dignity
It's almost as if there is a real problem of abuse intrinsic to hierarchical organisations.
Yeah, but not just there. Our society is sick. So many of the rape cases I deal with are just horrible. Selfish, cruel, monstrous behaviour. It makes me furious. Some of it is driven by immaturity, some by self obsession, some by genuine evil.
It is both infuriating and depressing.
I think anyone who does your line of work, or who works in police or prisons runs the risk of seeing everyone as cynical, manipulative and brutal. People can lose their moral bearings in that environment and it is important to spend some time with normal, kind, altruistic and honest people in order to retain perspective on the human condition.
I am glad that others do this essential work of prosecuting rapists, and hope you have the psychological support and resilience to survive the stresses.
Thanks. It’s got better but it’s not without cost. Even my own sex life struggled. The wickedness and cruelty taints the act. Thankfully I have the most wonderful wife who has shown me the difference.
Did we cover Savanta showing Labour close to over-taking the SNP in Scotland?
Not the way I read it. Seemed to me that the SNP had stabilised a bit. As had independence. Remarkably.
Swing 11.5% SNP to Labour, almost as big as the Tory to Labour swing in England and almost certainly means a Unionist majority at Holyrood in 2026
Yes, I am not knocking it. And an extra 20 seats for Labour may very well be the majority. But the SNP collapse seems to have stopped.
There'll be a SNP to Labour swing during the GE campaign IHMO. Sunak vs Starmer will dominate the coverage and Humsa will struggle to make himself relevant.
Privatisation has been a complete and utter waste of time.
Of course it has lol. Tell that to every other European country that has also followed it. Did you know that even Pickfords used to be nationalised? Yes you used to have to book your move with the union brotherhood months in advance in the desperate hope that they didn't go on strike when you were due to move house.
Privatisation is not perfect, but it is a fucking massive improvement on nationalised industries.
Privatisation of utility monopolies has been disastrous. Where faux markets could be set up they have and then operated as a cartel.
Where competition was difficult shareholder profits {sometimes foreign utility corporations) have taken precedence over infrastructure investment.
Did we cover Savanta showing Labour close to over-taking the SNP in Scotland?
Not the way I read it. Seemed to me that the SNP had stabilised a bit. As had independence. Remarkably.
Swing 11.5% SNP to Labour, almost as big as the Tory to Labour swing in England and almost certainly means a Unionist majority at Holyrood in 2026
Yes, I am not knocking it. And an extra 20 seats for Labour may very well be the majority. But the SNP collapse seems to have stopped.
There'll be a SNP to Labour swing during the GE campaign IHMO. Sunak vs Starmer will dominate the coverage and Humsa will struggle to make himself relevant.
If Labour get a UK majority it will be gains from the SNP in Scotland that do it in my view as well as Labour winning an even bigger majority in Wales. In England the local elections last month suggested the Tories would lose their majority but with the LDs would have more MPs than Labour (albeit in either scenario Starmer becomes PM)
It’s not even a diseased orchard, is it? More a poisonous species.
Our police forces are sick. So, so sick. I just don’t know what we do about it.
Perhaps it is somehow possible to create equivalent processes to those of scientific endeavour. The systems of peer review, publication and reproduction used in science aren't perfect by any stretch, but they do provide a means of self-correction. Is there no analogue that could be used to guide the design of more resilient ways of operating public services, to accept that individual humans are prone to all the failings that go with being human and formulate our systems to properly take this into account and so minimise the damage that can be done by malevolent individuals?
Did we cover Savanta showing Labour close to over-taking the SNP in Scotland?
Not the way I read it. Seemed to me that the SNP had stabilised a bit. As had independence. Remarkably.
Swing 11.5% SNP to Labour, almost as big as the Tory to Labour swing in England and almost certainly means a Unionist majority at Holyrood in 2026
Yes, I am not knocking it. And an extra 20 seats for Labour may very well be the majority. But the SNP collapse seems to have stopped.
There'll be a SNP to Labour swing during the GE campaign IHMO. Sunak vs Starmer will dominate the coverage and Humsa will struggle to make himself relevant.
Hope so but the Scottish election is becoming increasingly detached from the UK election. Different issues, different characters, different considerations. Would I dream of a tactical vote for Labour in England? Not a chance. But it’s different up here.
Mr. L, the political divergence is a natural consequence of embedding a permanent political division of powers.
Labour were simply concerned with getting themselves an eternal fiefdom (ahem). They didn't consider, or didn't understand, that fiddling about with the political settlement might have consequences beyond perpetual electoral glory for Labour.
The first in the series of new columns by The Great Bozo is about obesity drugs That's not going to be too much of a threat to Sunak, at this rate. Maybe he's just going to go back to the niche he had as marginally relevant Telegraph journalist, and which he certainly shouldn't have left for the good of us all .
The Spectator The Times The New York Times The FT The Economist The Telegraph
And get the guardian and BBC for free
That sounds a lot but I get them all with stupidly cheap special offers - digital only. Eg the NYT costs me 50p a week and they throw in The Athletic. It’s mad
Are you saying you don't pay your telly tax? And you manage to put up with the Guardian begging letter on every article?
The Guardian’s begging gets increasingly annoying. Just go behind a paywall already. Enough
I think Peak Guardian was a piece in Comment is Free a few weeks ago urging Man Utd and Man City to remove the ships from their logos because slaves were transported in ships .
Mr. L, the political divergence is a natural consequence of embedding a permanent political division of powers.
Labour were simply concerned with getting themselves an eternal fiefdom (ahem). They didn't consider, or didn't understand, that fiddling about with the political settlement might have consequences beyond perpetual electoral glory for Labour.
Not just the fact of devolution itself, but the asymmetry of devoloution, leads to different issues being relevant for a UK GE in England and Scotland. This wouldn’t be the case if there was an English Parliament.
It's almost as if there is a real problem of abuse intrinsic to hierarchical organisations.
Yeah, but not just there. Our society is sick. So many of the rape cases I deal with are just horrible. Selfish, cruel, monstrous behaviour. It makes me furious. Some of it is driven by immaturity, some by self obsession, some by genuine evil.
It is both infuriating and depressing.
We discussed slavery last night, and the prevalence of rape and sexual assault equally demonstrate that a lot of people are either evil, or unbothered by evil.
Privatisation has been a complete and utter waste of time.
Of course it has lol. Tell that to every other European country that has also followed it. Did you know that even Pickfords used to be nationalised? Yes you used to have to book your move with the union brotherhood months in advance in the desperate hope that they didn't go on strike when you were due to move house.
Privatisation is not perfect, but it is a fucking massive improvement on nationalised industries.
Privatisation of utility monopolies has been disastrous. Where faux markets could be set up they have and then operated as a cartel.
Where competition was difficult shareholder profits {sometimes foreign utility corporations) have taken precedence over infrastructure investment.
Load of b*******!
Privatisation of the telephone system certainly wasn't disastrous. It was transformative in a positive way.
Privatisation has been a complete and utter waste of time.
Of course it has lol. Tell that to every other European country that has also followed it. Did you know that even Pickfords used to be nationalised? Yes you used to have to book your move with the union brotherhood months in advance in the desperate hope that they didn't go on strike when you were due to move house.
Privatisation is not perfect, but it is a fucking massive improvement on nationalised industries.
Privatisation of utility monopolies has been disastrous. Where faux markets could be set up they have and then operated as a cartel.
Where competition was difficult shareholder profits {sometimes foreign utility corporations) have taken precedence over infrastructure investment.
Load of b*******!
Privatisation of the telephone system certainly wasn't disastrous. It was transformative in a positive way.
Until Ofcom regulated BT into action, Openreach and BT's infrastructure plans were an absolute joke.
Privatisation has been a complete and utter waste of time.
Of course it has lol. Tell that to every other European country that has also followed it. Did you know that even Pickfords used to be nationalised? Yes you used to have to book your move with the union brotherhood months in advance in the desperate hope that they didn't go on strike when you were due to move house.
Privatisation is not perfect, but it is a fucking massive improvement on nationalised industries.
Privatisation of utility monopolies has been disastrous. Where faux markets could be set up they have and then operated as a cartel.
Where competition was difficult shareholder profits {sometimes foreign utility corporations) have taken precedence over infrastructure investment.
Load of b*******!
Privsation of the telephone system certainly wasn't disastrous. It was transformative in a positive way.
Until Ofcom regulated BT into action, Openreach and BT's infrastructure plans were an absolute joke.
Indeed. But most of the privatised utilities have had no regulation even vaguely as strong as that, nor as in our European peers, because of ultra-market ideology.
That's actually also a misnomer, because most of these are not markets, with neither the competition or regulation that should define them. It's really a kind of piratical, or ultra-"privateer" ideology, suggesting private ownership is always better than public, even with neither competition, nor effective regulation.
Mr. L, the political divergence is a natural consequence of embedding a permanent political division of powers.
Labour were simply concerned with getting themselves an eternal fiefdom (ahem). They didn't consider, or didn't understand, that fiddling about with the political settlement might have consequences beyond perpetual electoral glory for Labour.
I think that's a very English interpretation of events, which ignores completely the fact that devolution was the settled will of the Scottish people and something that Labour had to deliver on whether they wanted to or not (and plenty of English Labour politicians have always been rather lukewarm on it). The real problem that the UK has, from a constitutional point of view, is that England is so much bigger than the other constituent countries. Our lopsided, asymmetrical, kind of devolution is quite common in states with this kind of asymmetry of size. A proper federal set-up would require splitting up England, but that's not something that English people seem to want to do, which is fair enough.
Privatisation has been a complete and utter waste of time.
Of course it has lol. Tell that to every other European country that has also followed it. Did you know that even Pickfords used to be nationalised? Yes you used to have to book your move with the union brotherhood months in advance in the desperate hope that they didn't go on strike when you were due to move house.
Privatisation is not perfect, but it is a fucking massive improvement on nationalised industries.
Privatisation of utility monopolies has been disastrous. Where faux markets could be set up they have and then operated as a cartel.
Where competition was difficult shareholder profits {sometimes foreign utility corporations) have taken precedence over infrastructure investment.
Load of b*******!
Privatisation of the telephone system certainly wasn't disastrous. It was transformative in a positive way.
Until Ofcom regulated BT into action, Openreach and BT's infrastructure plans were an absolute joke.
The important bit is preventing monopolies and quasi monopolies. Hence I pay zero money* to BT for anything.
*my broadband provider is probably paying them something for infrastructure usage.
On my way home from the Glasgow Real Ale Festival, so please excuse any mince I post this evening. However, the important question is - would you have declared?
It’s not even a diseased orchard, is it? More a poisonous species.
Our police forces are sick. So, so sick. I just don’t know what we do about it.
Perhaps it is somehow possible to create equivalent processes to those of scientific endeavour. The systems of peer review, publication and reproduction used in science aren't perfect by any stretch, but they do provide a means of self-correction. Is there no analogue that could be used to guide the design of more resilient ways of operating public services, to accept that individual humans are prone to all the failings that go with being human and formulate our systems to properly take this into account and so minimise the damage that can be done by malevolent individuals?
As @Cyclefree has said many times, far more articulatory than me, it is a culture thing. You see a colleague do something dodgy or out of line: what do you do? Do you think I might need his 100% support in the next pub brawl to stop myself from getting seriously hurt and turn your head or do you hunt it down like you would for anyone else?
Scientific method seems to me to be one way you are encouraged not to turn your head but even there the pressure can be immense. For a lot of police forces it is them against the world and they stick together.
Privatisation has been a complete and utter waste of time.
Of course it has lol. Tell that to every other European country that has also followed it. Did you know that even Pickfords used to be nationalised? Yes you used to have to book your move with the union brotherhood months in advance in the desperate hope that they didn't go on strike when you were due to move house.
Privatisation is not perfect, but it is a fucking massive improvement on nationalised industries.
Privatisation of utility monopolies has been disastrous. Where faux markets could be set up they have and then operated as a cartel.
Where competition was difficult shareholder profits {sometimes foreign utility corporations) have taken precedence over infrastructure investment.
Load of b*******!
Privatisation of the telephone system certainly wasn't disastrous. It was transformative in a positive way.
Until Ofcom regulated BT into action, Openreach and BT's infrastructure plans were an absolute joke.
You clearly don't remember the stalinist system that existed when it was run by the Post Office. You want a new phone line. Make sure you are at home in the afternoon in 4 months time. Oh and we will probably cancel without telling you.
And you cannot judge it simply on the performance of BT. All the other companies that were part of the telecoms revolution could not have come into existence under what was, until the planned privatisation, a public monopoly. That monopoly was only dissolved in 1982 as part of the plans for privatisation.
Mr. L, the political divergence is a natural consequence of embedding a permanent political division of powers.
Labour were simply concerned with getting themselves an eternal fiefdom (ahem). They didn't consider, or didn't understand, that fiddling about with the political settlement might have consequences beyond perpetual electoral glory for Labour.
Not just the fact of devolution itself, but the asymmetry of devoloution, leads to different issues being relevant for a UK GE in England and Scotland. This wouldn’t be the case if there was an English Parliament.
Privatisation has been a complete and utter waste of time.
Of course it has lol. Tell that to every other European country that has also followed it. Did you know that even Pickfords used to be nationalised? Yes you used to have to book your move with the union brotherhood months in advance in the desperate hope that they didn't go on strike when you were due to move house.
Privatisation is not perfect, but it is a fucking massive improvement on nationalised industries.
Privatisation of utility monopolies has been disastrous. Where faux markets could be set up they have and then operated as a cartel.
Where competition was difficult shareholder profits {sometimes foreign utility corporations) have taken precedence over infrastructure investment.
Load of b*******!
Privatisation of the telephone system certainly wasn't disastrous. It was transformative in a positive way.
Until Ofcom regulated BT into action, Openreach and BT's infrastructure plans were an absolute joke.
The important bit is preventing monopolies and quasi monopolies. Hence I pay zero money* to BT for anything.
*my broadband provider is probably paying them something for infrastructure usage.
Except their FTTP rollout under BDUK, which you are paying for with your taxes
The first in the series of new columns by The Great Bozo is about obesity drugs That's not going to be too much of a threat to Sunak, at this rate. Maybe he's just going to go back to the niche he had as marginally relevant Telegraph journalist, and which he certainly shouldn't have left for the good of us all .
Privatisation has been a complete and utter waste of time.
Of course it has lol. Tell that to every other European country that has also followed it. Did you know that even Pickfords used to be nationalised? Yes you used to have to book your move with the union brotherhood months in advance in the desperate hope that they didn't go on strike when you were due to move house.
Privatisation is not perfect, but it is a fucking massive improvement on nationalised industries.
Privatisation of utility monopolies has been disastrous. Where faux markets could be set up they have and then operated as a cartel.
Where competition was difficult shareholder profits {sometimes foreign utility corporations) have taken precedence over infrastructure investment.
Load of b*******!
Privatisation of the telephone system certainly wasn't disastrous. It was transformative in a positive way.
Until Ofcom regulated BT into action, Openreach and BT's infrastructure plans were an absolute joke.
You clearly don't remember the stalinist system that existed when it was run by the Post Office. You want a new phone line. Make sure you are at home in the afternoon in 4 months time. Oh and we will probably cancel without telling you.
And you cannot judge it simply on the performance of BT. All the other companies that were part of the telecoms revolution could not have come into eixtence uder what was, until the planned privatisation, a public monopoly. That monopoly was only dissolved in 1982 as part of the plans for privatisation.
I am speaking about now, not in the past.
Until Openreach was to be split off by Ofcom, BT's ambition was to use copper until 2030 and to have FTTP reach 5% of the country. It was horrifically unambitious, ridiculously expensive, completely out of date when it was introduced and would have ensured we had the worst broadband system in the world other than North Korea.
It was regulation that fixed that. And bloody good job too, Openreach is motoring. They always could, they just chose not to.
Stats for Lefties 🏳️⚧️ @LeftieStats · 1h MPs from the Socialist Campaign Group will make up less than 8% of the parliamentary party if current polling is repeated in 2024 (it points to 384 Labour MPs).
Following the 2019 election, this figure was just over 16%.
Short of Labour MP's idiotically nominating someone they don't want as leader again, whoever succeeds Starmer is not going to be a Corbynite. You need 20% of MPs to nominate you to get on the ballot.
On my way home from the Glasgow Real Ale Festival, so please excuse any mince I post this evening. However, the important question is - would you have declared?
Thanks for the warning. Though to be fair you drunk postings will probably still make more sense than some of the contributions we get here.
If BT was still nationalised, I doubt people would still be waiting months for a phone line.
As OldKingCole mentioned recently, it would also be important not to conflate ownership with technological changes, because, and particularly in the case of telecoms, these both happened around at a similar time.
Twenty-five or so years ago, there used to be a website called something like 'PrisonBrides'. It had women in prison (all in the US) who wanted to meet someone. Some of them seemed quite tragic, and there was one very pleasant-looking lady whose page said something like: "Crime: murder. Sentence: life. Marital status: widower".
Which read like a novel in seven words.
(The reason I went on the website? We were developing Internet devices, and someone complained the website did not load properly in our browser. Muggins here had to go and find why.)
Mr. Boy, the fiction that England 'must' be split up rather than have its own Parliament is the view of those who have no idea that English identity exists. The sort of politicians who are content to be British but rather wary of ever being English.
Mr. L, the political divergence is a natural consequence of embedding a permanent political division of powers.
Labour were simply concerned with getting themselves an eternal fiefdom (ahem). They didn't consider, or didn't understand, that fiddling about with the political settlement might have consequences beyond perpetual electoral glory for Labour.
Not just the fact of devolution itself, but the asymmetry of devoloution, leads to different issues being relevant for a UK GE in England and Scotland. This wouldn’t be the case if there was an English Parliament.
Or if we still had EVEL
You should! As long as you’re happy for the DUP not to prop up the Tories in extremists.
Stats for Lefties 🏳️⚧️ @LeftieStats · 1h MPs from the Socialist Campaign Group will make up less than 8% of the parliamentary party if current polling is repeated in 2024 (it points to 384 Labour MPs).
Following the 2019 election, this figure was just over 16%.
Short of Labour MP's idiotically nominating someone they don't want as leader again, whoever succeeds Starmer is not going to be a Corbynite. You need 20% of MPs to nominate you to get on the ballot.
Communism for Morons to give that Twitter account its proper name, as usual has a self-own. The country is celebrating at this idea.
If BT was still nationalised, I doubt people would still be waiting months for a phone line.
As OldKingCole mentioned recently, it would also be important not to conflate ownership with technological changes, because, and particularly in the case of telecoms, these both happened around at a similar time.
One helped galvanise the other. The idea that BT would be better now if it were still in public hands - particularly if it still had the telecoms monopoly as it did until pivatisation, is for the birds. There would simply have been no pressure for improvement.
If BT was still nationalised, I doubt people would still be waiting months for a phone line.
As OldKingCole mentioned recently, it would also be important not to conflate ownership with technological changes, because, and particularly in the case of telecoms, these both happened around at a similar time.
One helped galvanise the other. The idea that BT would be better now if it were still in public hands - particularly if it still had the telecoms monopoly as it did until pivatisation, is for the birds. There would simply have been no pressure for improvement.
The only reason they improved was because of Government regulation. What is the point in arguing with you about this when you don't respond to any of the points I made?
Before my current job, I worked in the telecoms sector. I can tell you for a categorical fact that BT was an absolute basket case.
Privatisation has been a complete and utter waste of time.
Of course it has lol. Tell that to every other European country that has also followed it. Did you know that even Pickfords used to be nationalised? Yes you used to have to book your move with the union brotherhood months in advance in the desperate hope that they didn't go on strike when you were due to move house.
Privatisation is not perfect, but it is a fucking massive improvement on nationalised industries.
Privatisation of utility monopolies has been disastrous. Where faux markets could be set up they have and then operated as a cartel.
Where competition was difficult shareholder profits {sometimes foreign utility corporations) have taken precedence over infrastructure investment.
Load of b*******!
Privatisation of the telephone system certainly wasn't disastrous. It was transformative in a positive way.
Until Ofcom regulated BT into action, Openreach and BT's infrastructure plans were an absolute joke.
You clearly don't remember the stalinist system that existed when it was run by the Post Office. You want a new phone line. Make sure you are at home in the afternoon in 4 months time. Oh and we will probably cancel without telling you.
And you cannot judge it simply on the performance of BT. All the other companies that were part of the telecoms revolution could not have come into eixtence uder what was, until the planned privatisation, a public monopoly. That monopoly was only dissolved in 1982 as part of the plans for privatisation.
I am speaking about now, not in the past.
Until Openreach was to be split off by Ofcom, BT's ambition was to use copper until 2030 and to have FTTP reach 5% of the country. It was horrifically unambitious, ridiculously expensive, completely out of date when it was introduced and would have ensured we had the worst broadband system in the world other than North Korea.
It was regulation that fixed that. And bloody good job too, Openreach is motoring. They always could, they just chose not to.
Except of course thanks to privatisation you didn't have to use BT. The vast majority of the early fibre development was done by Mercury who were only able to come into exitence as part of the process of privatisation.
Stats for Lefties 🏳️⚧️ @LeftieStats · 1h MPs from the Socialist Campaign Group will make up less than 8% of the parliamentary party if current polling is repeated in 2024 (it points to 384 Labour MPs).
Following the 2019 election, this figure was just over 16%.
Short of Labour MP's idiotically nominating someone they don't want as leader again, whoever succeeds Starmer is not going to be a Corbynite. You need 20% of MPs to nominate you to get on the ballot.
Communism for Morons to give that Twitter account its proper name, as usual has a self-own. The country is celebrating at this idea.
Can't say I'm surprised they've omitted the fact that Whitley, along with Sam Tarry and Claudia Webbe, was parachuted into his seat by Corbyn's office.
If BT was still nationalised, I doubt people would still be waiting months for a phone line.
As OldKingCole mentioned recently, it would also be important not to conflate ownership with technological changes, because, and particularly in the case of telecoms, these both happened around at a similar time.
One helped galvanise the other. The idea that BT would be better now if it were still in public hands - particularly if it still had the telecoms monopoly as it did until pivatisation, is for the birds. There would simply have been no pressure for improvement.
The only reason they improved was because of Government regulation. What is the point in arguing with you about this when you don't respond to any of the points I made?
Before my current job, I worked in the telecoms sector. I can tell you for a categorical fact that BT was an absolute basket case.
Because your points are - as usual - pointless. It doesn't matter how much of a basket case BT were or are. Privatisation gave us choice. Something that you continue to exhibit a warped hatred for.
Mr. L, the political divergence is a natural consequence of embedding a permanent political division of powers.
Labour were simply concerned with getting themselves an eternal fiefdom (ahem). They didn't consider, or didn't understand, that fiddling about with the political settlement might have consequences beyond perpetual electoral glory for Labour.
Not just the fact of devolution itself, but the asymmetry of devoloution, leads to different issues being relevant for a UK GE in England and Scotland. This wouldn’t be the case if there was an English Parliament.
Or if we still had EVEL
You should! As long as you’re happy for the DUP not to prop up the Tories in extremists.
In 2017 and 2010 the Tories won a majority in England, so would have needed neither LD or DUP support to get most English domestic policy through
Mr. Boy, the fiction that England 'must' be split up rather than have its own Parliament is the view of those who have no idea that English identity exists. The sort of politicians who are content to be British but rather wary of ever being English.
Even the strongest English regional identity wouldn't support local parliaments and the like, for another absurdity.
Mr. Boy, the fiction that England 'must' be split up rather than have its own Parliament is the view of those who have no idea that English identity exists. The sort of politicians who are content to be British but rather wary of ever being English.
Whether England's regions should have their own representation in a federal set up is a question for the English, I'm not expressing a normative view here. I'm simply pointing out that a federal set up where one part is 90% of the population of the whole is going to run into problems pretty quickly. But ignoring Scotland's desire to run much of its own affairs simply wasn't, and still isn't, an option, sorry.
The Spectator The Times The New York Times The FT The Economist The Telegraph
And get the guardian and BBC for free
That sounds a lot but I get them all with stupidly cheap special offers - digital only. Eg the NYT costs me 50p a week and they throw in The Athletic. It’s mad
Are you saying you don't pay your telly tax? And you manage to put up with the Guardian begging letter on every article?
The Guardian’s begging gets increasingly annoying. Just go behind a paywall already. Enough
I think Peak Guardian was a piece in Comment is Free a few weeks ago urging Man Utd and Man City to remove the ships from their logos because slaves were transported in ships .
Privatisation has been a complete and utter waste of time.
Of course it has lol. Tell that to every other European country that has also followed it. Did you know that even Pickfords used to be nationalised? Yes you used to have to book your move with the union brotherhood months in advance in the desperate hope that they didn't go on strike when you were due to move house.
Privatisation is not perfect, but it is a fucking massive improvement on nationalised industries.
Privatisation of utility monopolies has been disastrous. Where faux markets could be set up they have and then operated as a cartel.
Where competition was difficult shareholder profits {sometimes foreign utility corporations) have taken precedence over infrastructure investment.
Load of b*******!
Privatisation of the telephone system certainly wasn't disastrous. It was transformative in a positive way.
Until Ofcom regulated BT into action, Openreach and BT's infrastructure plans were an absolute joke.
You clearly don't remember the stalinist system that existed when it was run by the Post Office. You want a new phone line. Make sure you are at home in the afternoon in 4 months time. Oh and we will probably cancel without telling you.
And you cannot judge it simply on the performance of BT. All the other companies that were part of the telecoms revolution could not have come into eixtence uder what was, until the planned privatisation, a public monopoly. That monopoly was only dissolved in 1982 as part of the plans for privatisation.
I am speaking about now, not in the past.
Until Openreach was to be split off by Ofcom, BT's ambition was to use copper until 2030 and to have FTTP reach 5% of the country. It was horrifically unambitious, ridiculously expensive, completely out of date when it was introduced and would have ensured we had the worst broadband system in the world other than North Korea.
It was regulation that fixed that. And bloody good job too, Openreach is motoring. They always could, they just chose not to.
Except of course thanks to privatisation you didn't have to use BT. The vast majority of the early fibre development was done by Mercury who were only able to come into exitence as part of the process of privatisation.
If BT was still nationalised, I doubt people would still be waiting months for a phone line.
As OldKingCole mentioned recently, it would also be important not to conflate ownership with technological changes, because, and particularly in the case of telecoms, these both happened around at a similar time.
One helped galvanise the other. The idea that BT would be better now if it were still in public hands - particularly if it still had the telecoms monopoly as it did until pivatisation, is for the birds. There would simply have been no pressure for improvement.
The only reason they improved was because of Government regulation. What is the point in arguing with you about this when you don't respond to any of the points I made?
Before my current job, I worked in the telecoms sector. I can tell you for a categorical fact that BT was an absolute basket case.
Because your points are - as usual - pointless. It doesn't matter how much of a basket case BT were or are. Privatisation gave us choice. Something that you continue to exhibit a warped hatred for.
Privatisation doesn't give us choice, you're talking out of your arse.
The majority of homes have one choice of infrastructure provider and that is Openreach/BT. Yes you can have a different ISP but the cables and the technology connecting you are owned by one company.
That technology is so valuable BT planned to sweat it as long as possible. When Ofcom stepped in they changed their mind.
My points are not pointless, you just don't like them.
I worked in telecoms for 5 years, my points would be agreed with by 99% of my colleagues, BT was an absolute shitshow to work with, work for and they had no strategy or interest in pursuing one, just sit on the asset.
I'm happy to support free choice, just people need to accept that the only reason we are having good outcomes now in FTTP rollout is because of regulation, not because of the market working. The Government and Ofcom concluded the market had failed.
It’s not even a diseased orchard, is it? More a poisonous species.
Our police forces are sick. So, so sick. I just don’t know what we do about it.
We have the same problem in education.
My solution - and I mean it quite seriously - is abolish the DfE and its associated quangos, and ban anyone who has worked directly for them for working in either public service or with children again…
The first part of that isn’t entirely ridiculous. The second would be an abuse of power, and legally impossible anyway.
British Telecom literally wrote the book on FTTP, in fact they were so good at it other countries paid us for advice. Many of the patents, innovations and technology were invented here in the UK.
When St Margaret stopped BT's FTTP rollout because of fears it would damage competition, we sold all our expertise and knowledge, to South Korea.
Who leads the world in broadband now? South Korea.
I will not be argued with by people that have no actual knowledge of working in this sector, as is manifestly clear from some of the absolute rubbish I see written on here about BT.
Mr. L, the political divergence is a natural consequence of embedding a permanent political division of powers.
Labour were simply concerned with getting themselves an eternal fiefdom (ahem). They didn't consider, or didn't understand, that fiddling about with the political settlement might have consequences beyond perpetual electoral glory for Labour.
Not just the fact of devolution itself, but the asymmetry of devoloution, leads to different issues being relevant for a UK GE in England and Scotland. This wouldn’t be the case if there was an English Parliament.
Or if we still had EVEL
You should! As long as you’re happy for the DUP not to prop up the Tories in extremists.
In 2017 and 2010 the Tories won a majority in England, so would have needed neither LD or DUP support to get most English domestic policy through
If BT was still nationalised, I doubt people would still be waiting months for a phone line.
As OldKingCole mentioned recently, it would also be important not to conflate ownership with technological changes, because, and particularly in the case of telecoms, these both happened around at a similar time.
One helped galvanise the other. The idea that BT would be better now if it were still in public hands - particularly if it still had the telecoms monopoly as it did until pivatisation, is for the birds. There would simply have been no pressure for improvement.
The only reason they improved was because of Government regulation. What is the point in arguing with you about this when you don't respond to any of the points I made?
Before my current job, I worked in the telecoms sector. I can tell you for a categorical fact that BT was an absolute basket case.
Because your points are - as usual - pointless. It doesn't matter how much of a basket case BT were or are. Privatisation gave us choice. Something that you continue to exhibit a warped hatred for.
Privatisation doesn't give us choice, you're talking out of your arse.
The majority of homes have one choice of infrastructure provider and that is Openreach/BT. Yes you can have a different ISP but the cables and the technology connecting you are owned by one company.
That technology is so valuable BT planned to sweat it as long as possible. When Ofcom stepped in they changed their mind.
My points are not pointless, you just don't like them.
I worked in telecoms for 5 years, my points would be agreed with by 99% of my colleagues, BT was an absolute shitshow to work with, work for and they had no strategy or interest in pursuing one, just sit on the asset.
The point being they were an even bigger shit show when they were in public hands. Privatisation gave us the ability to move away from them. I had Mercury and then Virgin (and a hugely better service) as soon as possible in the 90s while BT were still no where in sight. Something that was actually illegal prior to 1982.
Using the continued failings of the formally public company as an argument against the ability to choose other, better service providers is, frankly, perverse.
And once again, I am not advocating the return of BT in state hands.
But this constant doing down of our history which in many cases achieved some pretty remarkable and good things, is as bad as people saying nationalisation is the answer to every question.
Not everything BT, or British Rail, or British Airways, or Royal Mail did, was bad. But that's not what the privatisation nut-jobs will tell you.
As I said earlier, London Underground is overall an excellent product and service, entirely publicly owned and until recently properly funded. They were responsible for popularising and implementing an NFC-based payment system years before any of the private banks did.
Comments
And they might have got 450 but for that collapse you triggered.
Hence sending them on the first manned landing on the Sun.
So we have Parliament on Pluto, DfE on the Sun, the Police on Neptune, maybe?
With a new ball Australia aren't likely to smash it around for lots, so they go into this final part of the session with a negative mindset of something to lose but not much to gain.
That may be a factor, of course.
I love Stokes.
View other drafts
Sure, here is an article in the style of Boris Johnson on why Brexit is good for Britain and why Boris Johnson is a genius:
Boris Johnson: Why Brexit is Good for Britain and Why I'm a Genius
I've been called a lot of things in my life, but I'm most proud of being called a genius. And I'm not just saying that because I'm me. It's because I'm the one who saw Brexit for what it was: a once-in-a-generation opportunity to take back control of our country and make Britain great again.
I know that some people are still skeptical about Brexit. They worry that it will damage our economy or isolate us from the rest of the world. But I'm here to tell you that they're wrong. Brexit is going to be good for Britain. It's going to give us the freedom to trade with the world on our own terms, and it's going to allow us to control our own borders.
And I'm not just talking about the economic benefits of Brexit. I'm also talking about the cultural benefits. Britain is a great country, but we've been held back by the EU for too long. We've had to follow their rules, even when they didn't make sense for us. But now that we're out, we can start to make our own rules. We can be the country we were always meant to be.
So there you have it. Brexit is good for Britain, and I'm a genius for seeing it. But don't just take my word for it. Look at the evidence. The UK economy is already growing faster than the EU's. And we're starting to strike new trade deals with countries all over the world.
So if you're still not convinced about Brexit, I urge you to open your mind. The future of Britain is bright, and I'm the man to lead us there.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-65908444
It's almost as if there is a real problem of abuse intrinsic to hierarchical organisations.
Just finished the Final Fantasy XVI demo. I like it a lot, the influences of God of War/Game of Thrones are clear. But a starting price of £70 is not a thing I like very much (and Baldur's Gate 3 isn't that far off).
F1: I probably won't be able to watch qualifying live so the pre-race ramble may well be later than usual.
Bloody hypocrite, Stokes.
Some of it is driven by immaturity, some by self obsession, some by genuine evil.
It is both infuriating and depressing.
Not that the current SC would care, of course.
https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/joe-biden-administration-approval-ratings-and-hypothetical-voting-intention-10-11-june-2023/
I find it crazy there are people who believe an elected Leader has unfettered power, when it's all about checks and balances there, but hey ho.
I’d rather be watching the cricket
I am glad that others do this essential work of prosecuting rapists, and hope you have the psychological support and resilience to survive the stresses.
You will have to tell us what the mood is there
Where competition was difficult shareholder profits {sometimes foreign utility corporations) have taken precedence over infrastructure investment.
Load of b*******!
We'll wait another 60,000 for that.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65927538
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12203407/BORIS-JOHNSON-Wonder-drug-hoped-stop-raids-cheddar-chorizo-didnt-work-me.html
Labour were simply concerned with getting themselves an eternal fiefdom (ahem). They didn't consider, or didn't understand, that fiddling about with the political settlement might have consequences beyond perpetual electoral glory for Labour.
Patrick Maguire
@patrickkmaguire
Alison McGovern has beaten Mick Whitley to the Labour selection in Birkenhead
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12203407/BORIS-JOHNSON-Wonder-drug-hoped-stop-raids-cheddar-chorizo-didnt-work-me.html
That's actually also a misnomer, because most of these are not markets, with neither the competition or regulation that should define them. It's really a kind of piratical, or ultra-"privateer" ideology, suggesting private ownership is always better than public, even with neither competition, nor effective regulation.
*my broadband provider is probably paying them something for infrastructure usage.
As @Cyclefree has said many times, far more articulatory than me, it is a culture thing. You see a colleague do something dodgy or out of line: what do you do? Do you think I might need his 100% support in the next pub brawl to stop myself from getting seriously hurt and turn your head or do you hunt it down like you would for anyone else?
Scientific method seems to me to be one way you are encouraged not to turn your head but even there the pressure can be immense. For a lot of police forces it is them against the world and they stick together.
And you cannot judge it simply on the performance of BT. All the other companies that were part of the telecoms revolution could not have come into existence under what was, until the planned privatisation, a public monopoly. That monopoly was only dissolved in 1982 as part of the plans for privatisation.
"After 40 years of moral failure"
Until Openreach was to be split off by Ofcom, BT's ambition was to use copper until 2030 and to have FTTP reach 5% of the country. It was horrifically unambitious, ridiculously expensive, completely out of date when it was introduced and would have ensured we had the worst broadband system in the world other than North Korea.
It was regulation that fixed that. And bloody good job too, Openreach is motoring. They always could, they just chose not to.
@LeftieStats
·
1h
MPs from the Socialist Campaign Group will make up less than 8% of the parliamentary party if current polling is repeated in 2024 (it points to 384 Labour MPs).
Following the 2019 election, this figure was just over 16%.
Short of Labour MP's idiotically nominating someone they don't want as leader again, whoever succeeds Starmer is not going to be a Corbynite. You need 20% of MPs to nominate you to get on the ballot.
As OldKingCole mentioned recently, it would also be important not to conflate ownership with technological changes, because, and particularly in the case of telecoms, these both happened around at a similar time.
Which read like a novel in seven words.
(The reason I went on the website? We were developing Internet devices, and someone complained the website did not load properly in our browser. Muggins here had to go and find why.)
Edit: an article about it : https://www.wired.com/1998/08/jail-order-brides/
Before my current job, I worked in the telecoms sector. I can tell you for a categorical fact that BT was an absolute basket case.
?
The majority of homes have one choice of infrastructure provider and that is Openreach/BT. Yes you can have a different ISP but the cables and the technology connecting you are owned by one company.
That technology is so valuable BT planned to sweat it as long as possible. When Ofcom stepped in they changed their mind.
My points are not pointless, you just don't like them.
I worked in telecoms for 5 years, my points would be agreed with by 99% of my colleagues, BT was an absolute shitshow to work with, work for and they had no strategy or interest in pursuing one, just sit on the asset.
The second would be an abuse of power, and legally impossible anyway.
When St Margaret stopped BT's FTTP rollout because of fears it would damage competition, we sold all our expertise and knowledge, to South Korea.
Who leads the world in broadband now? South Korea.
I will not be argued with by people that have no actual knowledge of working in this sector, as is manifestly clear from some of the absolute rubbish I see written on here about BT.
Using the continued failings of the formally public company as an argument against the ability to choose other, better service providers is, frankly, perverse.
So you are, as usual, talking bollocks
But this constant doing down of our history which in many cases achieved some pretty remarkable and good things, is as bad as people saying nationalisation is the answer to every question.
Not everything BT, or British Rail, or British Airways, or Royal Mail did, was bad. But that's not what the privatisation nut-jobs will tell you.
As I said earlier, London Underground is overall an excellent product and service, entirely publicly owned and until recently properly funded. They were responsible for popularising and implementing an NFC-based payment system years before any of the private banks did.