"Pumping water out of the ground for drinking and farming redistributed such a large mass that the Earth’s tilt moved by 31.5 inches to the east, toward Iceland, between 1993 and 2010."
'toward Iceland'? What the hell does that mean - is Iceland defined as the East Pole or something? I haven't looked up the paper (which sounds interesting) but I suspect this must be Telegraphese! I mean, there's the whole issue with 'tilting to the East' where east and west are only defined on the rotating body and depend even there on point of reference, but the Iceland thing is something else. Surely 'the axis has moved away from the poles' (while itselft also problematic as that only refers to where the axis crosses the surface) would be simple enough and better?
I'd question this somewhat - how on earth can such a degree of accuracy be determined? Thats less than a yard.
I haven't read any of the papers, but GPS is more accurate than that and the tilt of the satellite orbits won't be affected (to a first order approximation, anyway). The position of the stars and sun relative to the earth are also very accurately known.
Remember that the geographic coordinate systems we use are referenced to individual continental plates, so there is clearly enough accuracy to see the US drifting relative to European coordinates in fairly short timescales.
The weird "moved east" is I think a reference to the fact that the Earth's rotational pole moves all the time and its movement is modelled and predicted. The pole moved towards Iceland but ended up a bit east of what was expected. The discrepancy was 31.5 inches (rather than the entire change) , so the text is a bit misleading. This idea of water movement causing a tilt has been proposed as the cause of the discrepancy.
There is of course no east at the North Pole.
Your name (while of course of different origin entirely) reminded me that this is all academic anyway. The Earth, as all fools know, is flat, with turtles all the way down. All this shifting of the pole means is that the choreography of the elephants is slightly out.
Incidentally, I only just discovered why the Nautical Mile is a massively brilliant thing, and far better than the standard 'mile' or the mamby-pamby metric system.
Fears are growing for four more water firms as Thames Water teeters on the brink of collapse with contingency plans reportedly being made to nationalise swathes of Britain's water industry.
Ministers have looked to allay fears around the impact of Thames Water potentially going under as the regulator vowed to work with the sector to deal with its debt levels.
Work and Pensions Secretary Mel Stride said there were 'contingency plans in place for any eventuality' as Thames Water battles to finance the £14 billion of debt on its books following interest rate rises.
It comes as several reports suggested concerns about Thames Water's finances had now broadened to other firms in the industry.
The financial health of up to four other English water companies is being monitored, according to reports.
These include Southern Water which serves 2.6million people and Yorkshire Water with 5million customers, it is understood.
The Times cited a Whitehall source as saying: 'A lot of these companies are highly geared and struggling.
'There is a worst case scenario where other companies end up in the same place as Thames Water.'
It's not particularly easy to get a good picture of the extent of the problems as the most recent published Ofwat financial stability report is for 2021/22, before the interest rate hit.
Presumably the water utilities are not the only zombie companies loaded with debt that they will struggle to finance at higher interest rates.
This zombie government too, for that matter.
There’s going to be an awful lot of companies and organisations who are over-leveraged or over-indebted, and are going to be screwed by rising interest rates. The only real surprise, is that it’s taken so long for them to come into view.
Yes, this very much includes the £2trn national debt, as governments of all colours havn’t run a budget surplus for more than two decades. If government ends up paying say 5% average on that £2trn, that’s £100bn a year in debt interest!
As for Thames Water, if they can’t refinance their debts for a sensible amount, then the bondholders will have no choice but to enforce a bankruptcy and take over management themselves, wiping out the existing shareholders.
Let’s not forget also, that many of these shareholders are pension funds, who saw utilities as a stable source of dividend payments over the years, and didn’t necessarily pay a lot of attention to the management of the companies.
I'd put Universities in that too. I think we're going to see a Post-92 hit the wall in the short-medium term.
Although TBF that is as much as anything due to regulatory failure.
Post 92s are struggling because Russell Group unis are essentially taking every undergraduate going, due to the mad idea that they are the best place to do an undergraduate degree because they are better at research. Nobody disputes the latter as a general point (although some research focused unis, e.g. Bath, are outside) but that doesn't mean they're any good at teaching. A lot of them are not, pushing it on to their PhD students while the lecturers write books.
In a sane world, it would have been the other way around - post 92 unis have no cap, and could therefore charge whatever fee they wanted. Russell Group fees could be regulated for undergraduates and therefore they had a cap on numbers.
And that would have meant people going to post 92 unis for undergrad, which could actually have worked quite well given their focus on teaching, and the ablest would have done postgrad at Russell Group.
But - Gove was in hock to the VCs and didn't understand they were out to line their own pockets.
Oxbridge and Russell Group unis should have no cap on fees, certainly for STEM subjects and medicine and economics and MBAs and law which will earn the highest in the workplace on average post grauation, even if a cap on numbers.
Post 92s should have a cap on fees, ideally to half the amount they currently charge given the debts their graduates end up with but yes could be allowed unlimited students, at least in theory if they can run cheap courses with lots of demand
Given how crap Russell Groiup and Oxbridge can be in some subjects, and how good the redbricks and post-polys in some, how on earth do you think that helps improve the quality of educastion and teaching? Your proposed solution serves only to cement poshness and elitism still further.
Given the (big generalisation, but I think to some extent true) newer universities tend to employ people who can teach while the RG tend to employ people who can bring in research funding, it's quite possible that the better education, in general, at UG level is to be had in the newer unis. Some researchers are very bad teachers.
If you want to make a really big generalisation, you could argue that what the Russell Group are actually selling to undergraduates isn’t the education itself, but the scarcity and the networking opportunities that come with admission.
It's not even that - it's the fact that coming from a Russell Group university you may have slightly more chance of getting on a Graduate scheme as many companies are biased against post 92 unis...
Got to say that in the case of English at Leeds Uni it's remarkable how similar next years course is to the one Beckett was teaching 2 years ago...
And Beckett has permanent English lecturers, At Uni they all seem to be on temporary contracts...
That's right about employment. Employers' bias towards Oxbridge, Russell Group and the hiring manager's alma mater needs to be addressed for all our sakes.
True. But in the exception to the rule, I worked with a professor (an oxbridge graduate) whose experiences of students at her alma mater/the college itself were such that she took a pretty dim view of anyone who had gone there. Still very willing to interview if good on paper, but she assumed they'd be tossers. On the interviews I was involved with, she was right.
I academia, I've seen a clear bias towards applicants who have worked with the 'right people' - e.g. "X did PhD/pot-doc under Y, must be pretty good" - but not biased towards institutions as a whole.
In postgraduate medical training we don't look at or score where they trained, so Lincoln medical school counts the same as Oxford or Imperial. In our national appointments process we are rarely appointing for our own region.
At Consultant level we are much more interested in their postgraduate experience and aptitude, so once again doesn't matter.
The national appointments system has its flaws, but the process is pretty effective at snuffing out prejudice, snobbery and patronage. Quite different to my day 3 decades ago when these were key to medical careers.
Yep. For most of our hiring it's post-PhD experience, except for the most junior roles where we care about PhD (topic/publications more than where) and, possibly, Masters. I doubt I've remembered, by interview, where anyone did their undergrad. Certainly doesn't come in to shortlisting - we normally work off a spreadsheet with the essential and desirable criteria, plus notes - there's nowhere to record undergrad degree location (or, indeed, postgrad degree location).
Presumably there is room in the notes for the "Attended Balliol and was Pres of the Union" bit? If not, then the sky will fall in.
We normally just put in either JGC or NOU in the notes (Jolly Good Chap or Not One of Us). That covers such important details
Fears are growing for four more water firms as Thames Water teeters on the brink of collapse with contingency plans reportedly being made to nationalise swathes of Britain's water industry.
Ministers have looked to allay fears around the impact of Thames Water potentially going under as the regulator vowed to work with the sector to deal with its debt levels.
Work and Pensions Secretary Mel Stride said there were 'contingency plans in place for any eventuality' as Thames Water battles to finance the £14 billion of debt on its books following interest rate rises.
It comes as several reports suggested concerns about Thames Water's finances had now broadened to other firms in the industry.
The financial health of up to four other English water companies is being monitored, according to reports.
These include Southern Water which serves 2.6million people and Yorkshire Water with 5million customers, it is understood.
The Times cited a Whitehall source as saying: 'A lot of these companies are highly geared and struggling.
'There is a worst case scenario where other companies end up in the same place as Thames Water.'
It's not particularly easy to get a good picture of the extent of the problems as the most recent published Ofwat financial stability report is for 2021/22, before the interest rate hit.
Presumably the water utilities are not the only zombie companies loaded with debt that they will struggle to finance at higher interest rates.
This zombie government too, for that matter.
There’s going to be an awful lot of companies and organisations who are over-leveraged or over-indebted, and are going to be screwed by rising interest rates. The only real surprise, is that it’s taken so long for them to come into view.
Yes, this very much includes the £2trn national debt, as governments of all colours havn’t run a budget surplus for more than two decades. If government ends up paying say 5% average on that £2trn, that’s £100bn a year in debt interest!
As for Thames Water, if they can’t refinance their debts for a sensible amount, then the bondholders will have no choice but to enforce a bankruptcy and take over management themselves, wiping out the existing shareholders.
Let’s not forget also, that many of these shareholders are pension funds, who saw utilities as a stable source of dividend payments over the years, and didn’t necessarily pay a lot of attention to the management of the companies.
I'd put Universities in that too. I think we're going to see a Post-92 hit the wall in the short-medium term.
Although TBF that is as much as anything due to regulatory failure.
Post 92s are struggling because Russell Group unis are essentially taking every undergraduate going, due to the mad idea that they are the best place to do an undergraduate degree because they are better at research. Nobody disputes the latter as a general point (although some research focused unis, e.g. Bath, are outside) but that doesn't mean they're any good at teaching. A lot of them are not, pushing it on to their PhD students while the lecturers write books.
In a sane world, it would have been the other way around - post 92 unis have no cap, and could therefore charge whatever fee they wanted. Russell Group fees could be regulated for undergraduates and therefore they had a cap on numbers.
And that would have meant people going to post 92 unis for undergrad, which could actually have worked quite well given their focus on teaching, and the ablest would have done postgrad at Russell Group.
But - Gove was in hock to the VCs and didn't understand they were out to line their own pockets.
Oxbridge and Russell Group unis should have no cap on fees, certainly for STEM subjects and medicine and economics and MBAs and law which will earn the highest in the workplace on average post grauation, even if a cap on numbers.
Post 92s should have a cap on fees, ideally to half the amount they currently charge given the debts their graduates end up with but yes could be allowed unlimited students, at least in theory if they can run cheap courses with lots of demand
Given how crap Russell Groiup and Oxbridge can be in some subjects, and how good the redbricks and post-polys in some, how on earth do you think that helps improve the quality of educastion and teaching? Your proposed solution serves only to cement poshness and elitism still further.
Given the (big generalisation, but I think to some extent true) newer universities tend to employ people who can teach while the RG tend to employ people who can bring in research funding, it's quite possible that the better education, in general, at UG level is to be had in the newer unis. Some researchers are very bad teachers.
If you want to make a really big generalisation, you could argue that what the Russell Group are actually selling to undergraduates isn’t the education itself, but the scarcity and the networking opportunities that come with admission.
It's not even that - it's the fact that coming from a Russell Group university you may have slightly more chance of getting on a Graduate scheme as many companies are biased against post 92 unis...
Got to say that in the case of English at Leeds Uni it's remarkable how similar next years course is to the one Beckett was teaching 2 years ago...
And Beckett has permanent English lecturers, At Uni they all seem to be on temporary contracts...
That's right about employment. Employers' bias towards Oxbridge, Russell Group and the hiring manager's alma mater needs to be addressed for all our sakes.
True. But in the exception to the rule, I worked with a professor (an oxbridge graduate) whose experiences of students at her alma mater/the college itself were such that she took a pretty dim view of anyone who had gone there. Still very willing to interview if good on paper, but she assumed they'd be tossers. On the interviews I was involved with, she was right.
I academia, I've seen a clear bias towards applicants who have worked with the 'right people' - e.g. "X did PhD/pot-doc under Y, must be pretty good" - but not biased towards institutions as a whole.
In postgraduate medical training we don't look at or score where they trained, so Lincoln medical school counts the same as Oxford or Imperial. In our national appointments process we are rarely appointing for our own region.
At Consultant level we are much more interested in their postgraduate experience and aptitude, so once again doesn't matter.
The national appointments system has its flaws, but the process is pretty effective at snuffing out prejudice, snobbery and patronage. Quite different to my day 3 decades ago when these were key to medical careers.
Yep. For most of our hiring it's post-PhD experience, except for the most junior roles where we care about PhD (topic/publications more than where) and, possibly, Masters. I doubt I've remembered, by interview, where anyone did their undergrad. Certainly doesn't come in to shortlisting - we normally work off a spreadsheet with the essential and desirable criteria, plus notes - there's nowhere to record undergrad degree location (or, indeed, postgrad degree location).
The logic goes GCSEs matter until you have A levels A levels matter until you've got a degree Your degree and where you did it matters up to the point that you have x years experience / a PhD After that just the PhD or experience matters and if the degree still matters then the job is probably 1 to avoid...
As a recruiting lawyer, when it gets to a certain level in a career, the only number I'm interested in is what they're likely to be billing. Couldn't give a monkeys what their exam grades were.
Incidentally, I only just discovered why the Nautical Mile is a massively brilliant thing, and far better than the standard 'mile' or the mamby-pamby metric system.
Oooh, a narrative hook!
OK, explain. [draws up seat, gets out notepad]
Sure, 10 cables. But it's only about 1010 fathoms!
yeah I don't think it's funny. Asian bloke, short Asian bloke. Yes hugely privileged, wykehamist, etc. But a misstep for PB to keep thinking it's funny.
Bah Humbug Topping
Yeah I know Malc I don't know what came over me. Big night last night perhaps. A decent St Veran.
How many people being involuntarily ‘de-banked’, is an acceptable number to deal with the perceived problem?
Surely the focus should be on problematic transactions, rather than problematic people? With obvious exceptions, such as foreign nationals subject to sanctions.
PEPs and sanctions are a category of risk that precedes risky transactions. In some cases it's internal risk appetite of the bank, in other cases it's regulatory. There are other risk factors that banks will look at, like shared addresses, known familial, business, and personal relationships between other high-risk entities.
I have no knowledge of the specifics of this case, these are only general statements.
Thanks. It’s something that worries the hell out of me, that one day my life, or that of someone close to me, gets made Hell because of a weird transaction from a middle-eastern country.
That’s before the freedom-of-speech or political arguments, it’s easy for 95% of us to laugh at Nigel Farage, but what happens when more mainstream political views suddenly become unacceptable to banks? The Triggernometry podcast had their bank account shut down the other week, and the bank wouldn’t give a reason, but eventually reinstated it after they went public and got a campaign going.
It’s the social media “town square” problem on steriods, where someone can be “un-personed” for their words, as Youtube are currently demonstrating with RF Kennedy Jr, who’s actually running to be president of the US. As life becomes more dependent on interaction with organisations who can choose not to deal with individuals, that’s very worrying.
Some state universities in the US may have lower standards for out-of-state students, than for students from their own state. Why? Because they can charge out-of-state students much higher tuition fees.
(I don't know how common this is. American journalists are reluctant to give our colleges and universities the critical attention they deserve.
Fears are growing for four more water firms as Thames Water teeters on the brink of collapse with contingency plans reportedly being made to nationalise swathes of Britain's water industry.
Ministers have looked to allay fears around the impact of Thames Water potentially going under as the regulator vowed to work with the sector to deal with its debt levels.
Work and Pensions Secretary Mel Stride said there were 'contingency plans in place for any eventuality' as Thames Water battles to finance the £14 billion of debt on its books following interest rate rises.
It comes as several reports suggested concerns about Thames Water's finances had now broadened to other firms in the industry.
The financial health of up to four other English water companies is being monitored, according to reports.
These include Southern Water which serves 2.6million people and Yorkshire Water with 5million customers, it is understood.
The Times cited a Whitehall source as saying: 'A lot of these companies are highly geared and struggling.
'There is a worst case scenario where other companies end up in the same place as Thames Water.'
It's not particularly easy to get a good picture of the extent of the problems as the most recent published Ofwat financial stability report is for 2021/22, before the interest rate hit.
Presumably the water utilities are not the only zombie companies loaded with debt that they will struggle to finance at higher interest rates.
This zombie government too, for that matter.
There’s going to be an awful lot of companies and organisations who are over-leveraged or over-indebted, and are going to be screwed by rising interest rates. The only real surprise, is that it’s taken so long for them to come into view.
Yes, this very much includes the £2trn national debt, as governments of all colours havn’t run a budget surplus for more than two decades. If government ends up paying say 5% average on that £2trn, that’s £100bn a year in debt interest!
As for Thames Water, if they can’t refinance their debts for a sensible amount, then the bondholders will have no choice but to enforce a bankruptcy and take over management themselves, wiping out the existing shareholders.
Let’s not forget also, that many of these shareholders are pension funds, who saw utilities as a stable source of dividend payments over the years, and didn’t necessarily pay a lot of attention to the management of the companies.
I'd put Universities in that too. I think we're going to see a Post-92 hit the wall in the short-medium term.
Although TBF that is as much as anything due to regulatory failure.
Post 92s are struggling because Russell Group unis are essentially taking every undergraduate going, due to the mad idea that they are the best place to do an undergraduate degree because they are better at research. Nobody disputes the latter as a general point (although some research focused unis, e.g. Bath, are outside) but that doesn't mean they're any good at teaching. A lot of them are not, pushing it on to their PhD students while the lecturers write books.
In a sane world, it would have been the other way around - post 92 unis have no cap, and could therefore charge whatever fee they wanted. Russell Group fees could be regulated for undergraduates and therefore they had a cap on numbers.
And that would have meant people going to post 92 unis for undergrad, which could actually have worked quite well given their focus on teaching, and the ablest would have done postgrad at Russell Group.
But - Gove was in hock to the VCs and didn't understand they were out to line their own pockets.
Oxbridge and Russell Group unis should have no cap on fees, certainly for STEM subjects and medicine and economics and MBAs and law which will earn the highest in the workplace on average post grauation, even if a cap on numbers.
Post 92s should have a cap on fees, ideally to half the amount they currently charge given the debts their graduates end up with but yes could be allowed unlimited students, at least in theory if they can run cheap courses with lots of demand
Given how crap Russell Groiup and Oxbridge can be in some subjects, and how good the redbricks and post-polys in some, how on earth do you think that helps improve the quality of educastion and teaching? Your proposed solution serves only to cement poshness and elitism still further.
Given the (big generalisation, but I think to some extent true) newer universities tend to employ people who can teach while the RG tend to employ people who can bring in research funding, it's quite possible that the better education, in general, at UG level is to be had in the newer unis. Some researchers are very bad teachers.
If you want to make a really big generalisation, you could argue that what the Russell Group are actually selling to undergraduates isn’t the education itself, but the scarcity and the networking opportunities that come with admission.
It's not even that - it's the fact that coming from a Russell Group university you may have slightly more chance of getting on a Graduate scheme as many companies are biased against post 92 unis...
Got to say that in the case of English at Leeds Uni it's remarkable how similar next years course is to the one Beckett was teaching 2 years ago...
And Beckett has permanent English lecturers, At Uni they all seem to be on temporary contracts...
That's right about employment. Employers' bias towards Oxbridge, Russell Group and the hiring manager's alma mater needs to be addressed for all our sakes.
True. But in the exception to the rule, I worked with a professor (an oxbridge graduate) whose experiences of students at her alma mater/the college itself were such that she took a pretty dim view of anyone who had gone there. Still very willing to interview if good on paper, but she assumed they'd be tossers. On the interviews I was involved with, she was right.
I academia, I've seen a clear bias towards applicants who have worked with the 'right people' - e.g. "X did PhD/pot-doc under Y, must be pretty good" - but not biased towards institutions as a whole.
In postgraduate medical training we don't look at or score where they trained, so Lincoln medical school counts the same as Oxford or Imperial. In our national appointments process we are rarely appointing for our own region.
At Consultant level we are much more interested in their postgraduate experience and aptitude, so once again doesn't matter.
The national appointments system has its flaws, but the process is pretty effective at snuffing out prejudice, snobbery and patronage. Quite different to my day 3 decades ago when these were key to medical careers.
Yep. For most of our hiring it's post-PhD experience, except for the most junior roles where we care about PhD (topic/publications more than where) and, possibly, Masters. I doubt I've remembered, by interview, where anyone did their undergrad. Certainly doesn't come in to shortlisting - we normally work off a spreadsheet with the essential and desirable criteria, plus notes - there's nowhere to record undergrad degree location (or, indeed, postgrad degree location).
The logic goes GCSEs matter until you have A levels A levels matter until you've got a degree Your degree and where you did it matters up to the point that you have x years experience / a PhD After that just the PhD or experience matters and if the degree still matters then the job is probably 1 to avoid...
As a recruiting lawyer, when it gets to a certain level in a career, the only number I'm interested in is what they're likely to be billing. Couldn't give a monkeys what their exam grades were.
Though it's nice also to know (see discussions in recent times) if they can convey land without missing a few acres out, whether they can say if cattle taken in withernam are replevisable, how to conduct ordeal by battle and the history of market overt.
"Pumping water out of the ground for drinking and farming redistributed such a large mass that the Earth’s tilt moved by 31.5 inches to the east, toward Iceland, between 1993 and 2010."
'toward Iceland'? What the hell does that mean - is Iceland defined as the East Pole or something? I haven't looked up the paper (which sounds interesting) but I suspect this must be Telegraphese! I mean, there's the whole issue with 'tilting to the East' where east and west are only defined on the rotating body and depend even there on point of reference, but the Iceland thing is something else. Surely 'the axis has moved away from the poles' (while itselft also problematic as that only refers to where the axis crosses the surface) would be simple enough and better?
I'd question this somewhat - how on earth can such a degree of accuracy be determined? Thats less than a yard.
I haven't read any of the papers, but GPS is more accurate than that and the tilt of the satellite orbits won't be affected (to a first order approximation, anyway). The position of the stars and sun relative to the earth are also very accurately known.
Remember that the geographic coordinate systems we use are referenced to individual continental plates, so there is clearly enough accuracy to see the US drifting relative to European coordinates in fairly short timescales.
The weird "moved east" is I think a reference to the fact that the Earth's rotational pole moves all the time and its movement is modelled and predicted. The pole moved towards Iceland but ended up a bit east of what was expected. The discrepancy was 31.5 inches (rather than the entire change) , so the text is a bit misleading. This idea of water movement causing a tilt has been proposed as the cause of the discrepancy.
There is of course no east at the North Pole.
One thing that amazes me is that even the USA cannot survey itself properly. Until recently they used the 'Survey foot', which is different from the 'international foot'. The difference is only 1/100 of a foot per mile, but that can make a massive difference over a vast difference. Such as a continental country.
Incidentally, I only just discovered why the Nautical Mile is a massively brilliant thing, and far better than the standard 'mile' or the mamby-pamby metric system.
Nautical mile = one minute of latitude. It’s a brilliant unit!
How many people being involuntarily ‘de-banked’, is an acceptable number to deal with the perceived problem?
Surely the focus should be on problematic transactions, rather than problematic people? With obvious exceptions, such as foreign nationals subject to sanctions.
PEPs and sanctions are a category of risk that precedes risky transactions. In some cases it's internal risk appetite of the bank, in other cases it's regulatory. There are other risk factors that banks will look at, like shared addresses, known familial, business, and personal relationships between other high-risk entities.
I have no knowledge of the specifics of this case, these are only general statements.
Thanks. It’s something that worries the hell out of me, that one day my life, or that of someone close to me, gets made Hell because of a weird transaction from a middle-eastern country.
That’s before the freedom-of-speech or political arguments, it’s easy for 95% of us to laugh at Nigel Farage, but what happens when more mainstream political views suddenly become unacceptable to banks? The Triggernometry podcast had their bank account shut down the other week, and the bank wouldn’t give a reason, but eventually reinstated it after they went public and got a campaign going.
It’s the social media “town square” problem on steriods, where someone can be “un-personed” for their words, as Youtube are currently demonstrating with RF Kennedy Jr, who’s actually running to be president of the US. As life becomes more dependent on interaction with organisations who can choose not to deal with individuals, that’s very worrying.
I - oddly - share this concern, albeit from a different direction. Pure free speech is impossible, as each person has their own boundary on the unsayable. So the only question becomes: where is the boundary, and who draws it?
Over the past 10-20 years institutions have sprung up that obey only the rule of the mob or the proprietor, and unlike newspaper barons are not held to account by states. Given that, is there a case for nationalising them?
If there was a British Twitter Corporation, or BritBook, or InstaBrit, would that help? There would still be free speech restrictions but they would be transparent and accountable, and as British society changed they would change also.
I realise this is ridiculous, but if we (the British) do not control it, we will be controlled by others, who may not be as nice. Musk turned off Twitter to Turkey for profit: what do we do when he does it to us?
The thing about dealing with heightism, is that as I've mentioned many times in the past, too many people have an interest in it.
Both taller and average height men tend to enjoy making fun of smaller men just for their height, as it boosts their own ego in turn, and many - but not all - women tend to find taller men more attractive. Hence the prejudice continues, as one of the last acceptable, and rarely challenged ones. HIGNIFY had a picture of him wearing giant shoes, on their last episode, for ionstance.
It's only a couple of 100k to have your legs broken and a 4" extension patched in. Very popular apparently.
It's not unusual for short rich children to be put on growth hormone before puberty, so that they can gain a few extra inches. It is quite expensive but in view of heightism in society possibly a good investment.
yeah I don't think it's funny. Asian bloke, short Asian bloke. Yes hugely privileged, wykehamist, etc. But a misstep for PB to keep thinking it's funny.
Technically, 5ft6 is not short. I think it starts around Al Pacino at 5ft4. Yes, he is that short
Incidentally, I only just discovered why the Nautical Mile is a massively brilliant thing, and far better than the standard 'mile' or the mamby-pamby metric system.
Oooh, a narrative hook!
OK, explain. [draws up seat, gets out notepad]
Why, AIUI (and I hope I don't embarass myself):
A standard mile is 1,280 feet, or 1,760 yards. A nautical mile is one minute of latitude, or a smidgen more than 2,000 yards. Or 6,000 feet.
Which means if you get a speed in nautical miles per hour - knots - you know that one knot is about 6,000 feet, or 100 feet per minute.
It makes rough approximation in mental maths much easier - as was often necessary on ships.
yeah I don't think it's funny. Asian bloke, short Asian bloke. Yes hugely privileged, wykehamist, etc. But a misstep for PB to keep thinking it's funny.
Technically, 5ft6 is not short. I think it starts around Al Pacino at 5ft4. Yes, he is that short
Average height is around 5ft8 or 5ft9.
When does "short" end and "average" start? I know where my head starts. I know where my neck starts. When does my neck become my head?
"Pumping water out of the ground for drinking and farming redistributed such a large mass that the Earth’s tilt moved by 31.5 inches to the east, toward Iceland, between 1993 and 2010."
'toward Iceland'? What the hell does that mean - is Iceland defined as the East Pole or something? I haven't looked up the paper (which sounds interesting) but I suspect this must be Telegraphese! I mean, there's the whole issue with 'tilting to the East' where east and west are only defined on the rotating body and depend even there on point of reference, but the Iceland thing is something else. Surely 'the axis has moved away from the poles' (while itselft also problematic as that only refers to where the axis crosses the surface) would be simple enough and better?
I'd question this somewhat - how on earth can such a degree of accuracy be determined? Thats less than a yard.
I haven't read any of the papers, but GPS is more accurate than that and the tilt of the satellite orbits won't be affected (to a first order approximation, anyway). The position of the stars and sun relative to the earth are also very accurately known.
Remember that the geographic coordinate systems we use are referenced to individual continental plates, so there is clearly enough accuracy to see the US drifting relative to European coordinates in fairly short timescales.
The weird "moved east" is I think a reference to the fact that the Earth's rotational pole moves all the time and its movement is modelled and predicted. The pole moved towards Iceland but ended up a bit east of what was expected. The discrepancy was 31.5 inches (rather than the entire change) , so the text is a bit misleading. This idea of water movement causing a tilt has been proposed as the cause of the discrepancy.
There is of course no east at the North Pole.
One thing that amazes me is that even the USA cannot survey itself properly. Until recently they used the 'Survey foot', which is different from the 'international foot'. The difference is only 1/100 of a foot per mile, but that can make a massive difference over a vast difference. Such as a continental country.
Incidentally, I only just discovered why the Nautical Mile is a massively brilliant thing, and far better than the standard 'mile' or the mamby-pamby metric system.
Nautical mile = one minute of latitude. It’s a brilliant unit!
Actually it's even more useful than that - see above.
yeah I don't think it's funny. Asian bloke, short Asian bloke. Yes hugely privileged, wykehamist, etc. But a misstep for PB to keep thinking it's funny.
Technically, 5ft6 is not short. I think it starts around Al Pacino at 5ft4. Yes, he is that short
Sunak is not just small in height, but in perfect proportion, and usually well dressed. I wouldn't mock him for that.
It's his puppy dog enthusiasm and patronising manner that makes me think of him as head boy rather than his size.
Heightism is definitely a thing, especially when it comes to choosing a leader. The primitive part of our brains tell us we need the biggest toughest silverback to fight off the other groups of apes on the savannah. It's stupid, but it will be a factor at the next election and Sunak's people should keep him away from any situations (like standing next to tall people) that accentuate his relatively short stature. Is there some kind of racial element bundled up in all of this somewhere? Possibly, albeit not really explicitly. I'd say it's like Ed Miliband and his bacon sandwich - was there a bit of antisemitism bundled up in that somewhere? Probably, but it wasn't explicit. We have all absorbed all kinds of biases and messages over the years, and one could spend years trying to decode them all.
"Pumping water out of the ground for drinking and farming redistributed such a large mass that the Earth’s tilt moved by 31.5 inches to the east, toward Iceland, between 1993 and 2010."
'toward Iceland'? What the hell does that mean - is Iceland defined as the East Pole or something? I haven't looked up the paper (which sounds interesting) but I suspect this must be Telegraphese! I mean, there's the whole issue with 'tilting to the East' where east and west are only defined on the rotating body and depend even there on point of reference, but the Iceland thing is something else. Surely 'the axis has moved away from the poles' (while itselft also problematic as that only refers to where the axis crosses the surface) would be simple enough and better?
I'd question this somewhat - how on earth can such a degree of accuracy be determined? Thats less than a yard.
I haven't read any of the papers, but GPS is more accurate than that and the tilt of the satellite orbits won't be affected (to a first order approximation, anyway). The position of the stars and sun relative to the earth are also very accurately known.
Remember that the geographic coordinate systems we use are referenced to individual continental plates, so there is clearly enough accuracy to see the US drifting relative to European coordinates in fairly short timescales.
The weird "moved east" is I think a reference to the fact that the Earth's rotational pole moves all the time and its movement is modelled and predicted. The pole moved towards Iceland but ended up a bit east of what was expected. The discrepancy was 31.5 inches (rather than the entire change) , so the text is a bit misleading. This idea of water movement causing a tilt has been proposed as the cause of the discrepancy.
There is of course no east at the North Pole.
One thing that amazes me is that even the USA cannot survey itself properly. Until recently they used the 'Survey foot', which is different from the 'international foot'. The difference is only 1/100 of a foot per mile, but that can make a massive difference over a vast difference. Such as a continental country.
Incidentally, I only just discovered why the Nautical Mile is a massively brilliant thing, and far better than the standard 'mile' or the mamby-pamby metric system.
Nautical mile = one minute of latitude. It’s a brilliant unit!
Yeah, fine for Earth, but what about when we become an interplanetary species? It'll look a bit shortsighted then, won't it?
"Pumping water out of the ground for drinking and farming redistributed such a large mass that the Earth’s tilt moved by 31.5 inches to the east, toward Iceland, between 1993 and 2010."
'toward Iceland'? What the hell does that mean - is Iceland defined as the East Pole or something? I haven't looked up the paper (which sounds interesting) but I suspect this must be Telegraphese! I mean, there's the whole issue with 'tilting to the East' where east and west are only defined on the rotating body and depend even there on point of reference, but the Iceland thing is something else. Surely 'the axis has moved away from the poles' (while itselft also problematic as that only refers to where the axis crosses the surface) would be simple enough and better?
I'd question this somewhat - how on earth can such a degree of accuracy be determined? Thats less than a yard.
I haven't read any of the papers, but GPS is more accurate than that and the tilt of the satellite orbits won't be affected (to a first order approximation, anyway). The position of the stars and sun relative to the earth are also very accurately known.
Remember that the geographic coordinate systems we use are referenced to individual continental plates, so there is clearly enough accuracy to see the US drifting relative to European coordinates in fairly short timescales.
The weird "moved east" is I think a reference to the fact that the Earth's rotational pole moves all the time and its movement is modelled and predicted. The pole moved towards Iceland but ended up a bit east of what was expected. The discrepancy was 31.5 inches (rather than the entire change) , so the text is a bit misleading. This idea of water movement causing a tilt has been proposed as the cause of the discrepancy.
There is of course no east at the North Pole.
One thing that amazes me is that even the USA cannot survey itself properly. Until recently they used the 'Survey foot', which is different from the 'international foot'. The difference is only 1/100 of a foot per mile, but that can make a massive difference over a vast difference. Such as a continental country.
Incidentally, I only just discovered why the Nautical Mile is a massively brilliant thing, and far better than the standard 'mile' or the mamby-pamby metric system.
Nautical mile = one minute of latitude. It’s a brilliant unit!
Yeah, fine for Earth, but what about when we become an interplanetary species? It'll look a bit shortsighted then, won't it?
/Pedant Mode/
It doesn't really work perfectly on the Earth's surface either, because you are further from the Earth's centre at the equator than at the poles, so a minute of latitude varies in length according to where you are.
"Pumping water out of the ground for drinking and farming redistributed such a large mass that the Earth’s tilt moved by 31.5 inches to the east, toward Iceland, between 1993 and 2010."
'toward Iceland'? What the hell does that mean - is Iceland defined as the East Pole or something? I haven't looked up the paper (which sounds interesting) but I suspect this must be Telegraphese! I mean, there's the whole issue with 'tilting to the East' where east and west are only defined on the rotating body and depend even there on point of reference, but the Iceland thing is something else. Surely 'the axis has moved away from the poles' (while itselft also problematic as that only refers to where the axis crosses the surface) would be simple enough and better?
I'd question this somewhat - how on earth can such a degree of accuracy be determined? Thats less than a yard.
I haven't read any of the papers, but GPS is more accurate than that and the tilt of the satellite orbits won't be affected (to a first order approximation, anyway). The position of the stars and sun relative to the earth are also very accurately known.
Remember that the geographic coordinate systems we use are referenced to individual continental plates, so there is clearly enough accuracy to see the US drifting relative to European coordinates in fairly short timescales.
The weird "moved east" is I think a reference to the fact that the Earth's rotational pole moves all the time and its movement is modelled and predicted. The pole moved towards Iceland but ended up a bit east of what was expected. The discrepancy was 31.5 inches (rather than the entire change) , so the text is a bit misleading. This idea of water movement causing a tilt has been proposed as the cause of the discrepancy.
There is of course no east at the North Pole.
One thing that amazes me is that even the USA cannot survey itself properly. Until recently they used the 'Survey foot', which is different from the 'international foot'. The difference is only 1/100 of a foot per mile, but that can make a massive difference over a vast difference. Such as a continental country.
Incidentally, I only just discovered why the Nautical Mile is a massively brilliant thing, and far better than the standard 'mile' or the mamby-pamby metric system.
Nautical mile = one minute of latitude. It’s a brilliant unit!
Yeah, fine for Earth, but what about when we become an interplanetary species? It'll look a bit shortsighted then, won't it?
Also only works for Babylonian maths. Everything to base 6 or 60 or whatever it was, 360 degrees around the globe.
Incidentally, I only just discovered why the Nautical Mile is a massively brilliant thing, and far better than the standard 'mile' or the mamby-pamby metric system.
Oooh, a narrative hook!
OK, explain. [draws up seat, gets out notepad]
Sure, 10 cables. But it's only about 1010 fathoms!
Incidentally, I only just discovered why the Nautical Mile is a massively brilliant thing, and far better than the standard 'mile' or the mamby-pamby metric system.
Oooh, a narrative hook!
OK, explain. [draws up seat, gets out notepad]
Sure, 10 cables. But it's only about 1010 fathoms!
10 cables, not four candles.
Yes, sorry, had tooth out this am so mental arithmetic not up to scratch.
The primitive part of our brains tell us we need the biggest toughest silverback to fight off the other groups of apes on the savannah.
I'm happy to believe this, but I think it's a retcon. When people see a phenomenon they get frustrated, and don't believe it until you tell them a plausible story. So "one person shorter than another" is a puzzle, and isn't resolved until another says "well, we were hunted on the savannah...". People believe the story, not the fact.
"Pumping water out of the ground for drinking and farming redistributed such a large mass that the Earth’s tilt moved by 31.5 inches to the east, toward Iceland, between 1993 and 2010."
'toward Iceland'? What the hell does that mean - is Iceland defined as the East Pole or something? I haven't looked up the paper (which sounds interesting) but I suspect this must be Telegraphese! I mean, there's the whole issue with 'tilting to the East' where east and west are only defined on the rotating body and depend even there on point of reference, but the Iceland thing is something else. Surely 'the axis has moved away from the poles' (while itselft also problematic as that only refers to where the axis crosses the surface) would be simple enough and better?
I'd question this somewhat - how on earth can such a degree of accuracy be determined? Thats less than a yard.
I haven't read any of the papers, but GPS is more accurate than that and the tilt of the satellite orbits won't be affected (to a first order approximation, anyway). The position of the stars and sun relative to the earth are also very accurately known.
Remember that the geographic coordinate systems we use are referenced to individual continental plates, so there is clearly enough accuracy to see the US drifting relative to European coordinates in fairly short timescales.
The weird "moved east" is I think a reference to the fact that the Earth's rotational pole moves all the time and its movement is modelled and predicted. The pole moved towards Iceland but ended up a bit east of what was expected. The discrepancy was 31.5 inches (rather than the entire change) , so the text is a bit misleading. This idea of water movement causing a tilt has been proposed as the cause of the discrepancy.
There is of course no east at the North Pole.
One thing that amazes me is that even the USA cannot survey itself properly. Until recently they used the 'Survey foot', which is different from the 'international foot'. The difference is only 1/100 of a foot per mile, but that can make a massive difference over a vast difference. Such as a continental country.
Incidentally, I only just discovered why the Nautical Mile is a massively brilliant thing, and far better than the standard 'mile' or the mamby-pamby metric system.
Nautical mile = one minute of latitude. It’s a brilliant unit!
Yeah, fine for Earth, but what about when we become an interplanetary species? It'll look a bit shortsighted then, won't it?
Will still work. The definition 1 nm = 1 deg lat is entirely valid for any spherical planet etc. from Mercury to the Tannhauser Gate. Just that the log line might need its length adjusting if it doesn't freeze or dissolve first. And sorting out where the sea surface is might be tricky in some.
On the 'shortness' debate: perhaps it's not just about height; it's about proportion and bulk.
I knew someone who was much shorter than me, but was built like a brick sh*thouse. He was powerful and strong. Even though he was short, he 'appeared' tall.
Whereas thin and tall people often look almost shorter, weedier, as if they are out of proportion and stretched.
Will still work. The definition 1 nm = 1 deg lat is entirely valid for any spherical planet etc. from Mercury to the Tannhauser Gate. Just that the log line might need its length adjusting if it doesn't freeze or dissolve first. And sorting out where the sea surface is might be tricky in some.
How many people being involuntarily ‘de-banked’, is an acceptable number to deal with the perceived problem?
Surely the focus should be on problematic transactions, rather than problematic people? With obvious exceptions, such as foreign nationals subject to sanctions.
PEPs and sanctions are a category of risk that precedes risky transactions. In some cases it's internal risk appetite of the bank, in other cases it's regulatory. There are other risk factors that banks will look at, like shared addresses, known familial, business, and personal relationships between other high-risk entities.
I have no knowledge of the specifics of this case, these are only general statements.
Thanks. It’s something that worries the hell out of me, that one day my life, or that of someone close to me, gets made Hell because of a weird transaction from a middle-eastern country.
That’s before the freedom-of-speech or political arguments, it’s easy for 95% of us to laugh at Nigel Farage, but what happens when more mainstream political views suddenly become unacceptable to banks? The Triggernometry podcast had their bank account shut down the other week, and the bank wouldn’t give a reason, but eventually reinstated it after they went public and got a campaign going.
It’s the social media “town square” problem on steriods, where someone can be “un-personed” for their words, as Youtube are currently demonstrating with RF Kennedy Jr, who’s actually running to be president of the US. As life becomes more dependent on interaction with organisations who can choose not to deal with individuals, that’s very worrying.
Gambling another risky one for banking that is relevant to many of us.
There is the fact, ofcourse, that Churchill was roughly the same height as Sunak, as we've mentioned a few times before.
Height is also about the perception whether one looks big or small. Zelensky is partcularly notable as a leader figure on this topic, because he looks a bit smaller, too, without this seeming to have affected his leadership stature or national or international impact, in any way at all.
Muslim majority nations condemn burning of Koran in Sweden.
'Turkey, a Nato member with a say over whether Sweden gains membership, called it a "despicable act".
Turkey - which was also angered by a Quran burning protest earlier this year - said it was "unacceptable" to allow such "anti-Islamic actions" to take place "under the pretext of freedom of expression".'
Morocco and Jordan have recalled the Ambassadors to Sweden and Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Egypt also condemned the act.
Will still work. The definition 1 nm = 1 deg lat is entirely valid for any spherical planet etc. from Mercury to the Tannhauser Gate. Just that the log line might need its length adjusting if it doesn't freeze or dissolve first. And sorting out where the sea surface is might be tricky in some.
Most government spending is pretty popular. Most government taxes are not very popular.
Opinion pollster responders have no requirement to balance up the two.
Yes, that's why I'm wary of polls about tax and spending in general - e.g. HYUFD frequently notes that polls show that most people would like IHT abolished, but I've never seen a poll that offered choices - would you rather have IHT abolished, VAT reduced by X% or NHS waiting times reduced by N weeks?
We'll never be fully metric until we get rid of the 60 seconds/60 minutes/24hours/~365 days timing scheme - as Napoleon tried.
But the weirdest time scheme was the traditional Japanese one, where the length of the hour varied, depending on the length of the day and night, with both being split into six hours. So the length of an hour would depend on the time of year and whether it was light or dark outside...
Will still work. The definition 1 nm = 1 deg lat is entirely valid for any spherical planet etc. from Mercury to the Tannhauser Gate. Just that the log line might need its length adjusting if it doesn't freeze or dissolve first. And sorting out where the sea surface is might be tricky in some.
Earth isn't spherical
Okay, more or less spherical.
I am now compelled to ask, is Earth more spherical or less spherical?
Will still work. The definition 1 nm = 1 deg lat is entirely valid for any spherical planet etc. from Mercury to the Tannhauser Gate. Just that the log line might need its length adjusting if it doesn't freeze or dissolve first. And sorting out where the sea surface is might be tricky in some.
Earth isn't spherical
Okay, more or less spherical.
I am now compelled to ask, is Earth more spherical or less spherical?
Most government spending is pretty popular. Most government taxes are not very popular.
Opinion pollster responders have no requirement to balance up the two.
Yes, that's why I'm wary of polls about tax and spending in general - e.g. HYUFD frequently notes that polls show that most people would like IHT abolished, but I've never seen a poll that offered choices - would you rather have IHT abolished, VAT reduced by X% or NHS waiting times reduced by N weeks?
Boris and Corbyn would happily offer all the magic beans available, another reason the 2019 choice was such a poisoned chalice. The next GE will be contested a fair bit closer to reality, but of course neither Sunak or Starmer are stupid enough to be completely honest about the state of public finances.
Incidentally, I only just discovered why the Nautical Mile is a massively brilliant thing, and far better than the standard 'mile' or the mamby-pamby metric system.
Oooh, a narrative hook!
OK, explain. [draws up seat, gets out notepad]
Sure, 10 cables. But it's only about 1010 fathoms!
10 cables, not four candles.
Yes, sorry, had tooth out this am so mental arithmetic not up to scratch.
Hope you’re okay 👍
I was just making a lame Two Ronnies gag/reference.
Will still work. The definition 1 nm = 1 deg lat is entirely valid for any spherical planet etc. from Mercury to the Tannhauser Gate. Just that the log line might need its length adjusting if it doesn't freeze or dissolve first. And sorting out where the sea surface is might be tricky in some.
Earth isn't spherical
Okay, more or less spherical.
I am now compelled to ask, is Earth more spherical or less spherical?
Will still work. The definition 1 nm = 1 deg lat is entirely valid for any spherical planet etc. from Mercury to the Tannhauser Gate. Just that the log line might need its length adjusting if it doesn't freeze or dissolve first. And sorting out where the sea surface is might be tricky in some.
Earth isn't spherical
Okay, more or less spherical.
I am now compelled to ask, is Earth more spherical or less spherical?
Earth is an oblate spheroid, obviously.
ONe of the minor treasures of the Shetlands is this memorial from when they were working out just how oblate it was:
Muslim majority nations condemn burning of Koran in Sweden.
'Turkey, a Nato member with a say over whether Sweden gains membership, called it a "despicable act".
Turkey - which was also angered by a Quran burning protest earlier this year - said it was "unacceptable" to allow such "anti-Islamic actions" to take place "under the pretext of freedom of expression".'
Morocco and Jordan have recalled the Ambassadors to Sweden and Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Egypt also condemned the act.
Will still work. The definition 1 nm = 1 deg lat is entirely valid for any spherical planet etc. from Mercury to the Tannhauser Gate. Just that the log line might need its length adjusting if it doesn't freeze or dissolve first. And sorting out where the sea surface is might be tricky in some.
Earth isn't spherical
Okay, more or less spherical.
I am now compelled to ask, is Earth more spherical or less spherical?
Earth is an oblate spheroid, obviously.
Heightism again. People are all to keen to point out how short and fat the Earth is compared to a 'perfect' sphere
How many people being involuntarily ‘de-banked’, is an acceptable number to deal with the perceived problem?
Surely the focus should be on problematic transactions, rather than problematic people? With obvious exceptions, such as foreign nationals subject to sanctions.
PEPs and sanctions are a category of risk that precedes risky transactions. In some cases it's internal risk appetite of the bank, in other cases it's regulatory. There are other risk factors that banks will look at, like shared addresses, known familial, business, and personal relationships between other high-risk entities.
I have no knowledge of the specifics of this case, these are only general statements.
Thanks. It’s something that worries the hell out of me, that one day my life, or that of someone close to me, gets made Hell because of a weird transaction from a middle-eastern country.
That’s before the freedom-of-speech or political arguments, it’s easy for 95% of us to laugh at Nigel Farage, but what happens when more mainstream political views suddenly become unacceptable to banks? The Triggernometry podcast had their bank account shut down the other week, and the bank wouldn’t give a reason, but eventually reinstated it after they went public and got a campaign going.
It’s the social media “town square” problem on steriods, where someone can be “un-personed” for their words, as Youtube are currently demonstrating with RF Kennedy Jr, who’s actually running to be president of the US. As life becomes more dependent on interaction with organisations who can choose not to deal with individuals, that’s very worrying.
I - oddly - share this concern, albeit from a different direction. Pure free speech is impossible, as each person has their own boundary on the unsayable. So the only question becomes: where is the boundary, and who draws it?
Over the past 10-20 years institutions have sprung up that obey only the rule of the mob or the proprietor, and unlike newspaper barons are not held to account by states. Given that, is there a case for nationalising them?
If there was a British Twitter Corporation, or BritBook, or InstaBrit, would that help? There would still be free speech restrictions but they would be transparent and accountable, and as British society changed they would change also.
I realise this is ridiculous, but if we (the British) do not control it, we will be controlled by others, who may not be as nice. Musk turned off Twitter to Turkey for profit: what do we do when he does it to us?
I think there’s several different issues.
With personal banks and other such services that are vital to existence, there needs to be adequate regulation. Now, the banks will telll you that they’re closing accounts with no notice and no discussion, *because* of the regulation, which is another issue. IMO there needs to be a process involving an authority such as a court, where the person has an opportunity to make representation. There should also be a last resort, such as a Post Office basic account opened to anyone, that will allow them to receive their salary or benefits, and to pay their bills.
Business accounts, and payment services, are a different issue again, where you have more unaccountable bureaucrats in organisations such as Visa and PayPal, as well as content services such as Patreon and Youtube, who can shut down a successful business seemingly at will, for any reason or none. This is where a lot of the speech issues come in, and as with the social media companies there are international and jurisdictional issues at play, as well as activists groups trying to silence people.
Social media companies are not so worrying, but the issue is again one of accountability, where a mob of users can deny someone a platform, and jurisdictional issues that will arise from these companies often based in different countries from the users. The classic is American users complaining about American companies operating in China and having to comply with Chinese law, because the American users disagree politically with Chinese law. How a country such as the UK fits into that, is an interesting question. I think that, above a certain size, companies in media should be required to have a company, and office and a named executive in charge of a company, which can be regulated, and dragged before a court if necessary.
We'll never be fully metric until we get rid of the 60 seconds/60 minutes/24hours/~365 days timing scheme - as Napoleon tried.
But the weirdest time scheme was the traditional Japanese one, where the length of the hour varied, depending on the length of the day and night, with both being split into six hours. So the length of an hour would depend on the time of year and whether it was light or dark outside...
Romans too, though 12 hours of day and of night. So when Pliny remarked that it was 'about the seventh hour' that Vesuvius blew its top, it was about 1pm local time, a bit later actually as it was late August.
We'll never be fully metric until we get rid of the 60 seconds/60 minutes/24hours/~365 days timing scheme - as Napoleon tried.
But the weirdest time scheme was the traditional Japanese one, where the length of the hour varied, depending on the length of the day and night, with both being split into six hours. So the length of an hour would depend on the time of year and whether it was light or dark outside...
Ands of course the traditional sailors used 32 points of the compass, not 360 degrees. That, and knots, could be summed and integrated easily on a traverse board of holes with pegs.
There is the fact, ofcourse, that Churchill was roughly the same height as Sunak, as we've mentioned a few times before.
Height is also about the perception whether one looks big or small. Zelensky is partcularly notable as a leader figure on this topic, because he looks a bit smaller, too, without this seeming to have affected his leadership stature or national or international impact, in any way at all.
I suspect Zelensky is also pretty careful not to stand next to colleagues who are 6 feet 9.
Will still work. The definition 1 nm = 1 deg lat is entirely valid for any spherical planet etc. from Mercury to the Tannhauser Gate. Just that the log line might need its length adjusting if it doesn't freeze or dissolve first. And sorting out where the sea surface is might be tricky in some.
Earth isn't spherical
Okay, more or less spherical.
I am now compelled to ask, is Earth more spherical or less spherical?
How many people being involuntarily ‘de-banked’, is an acceptable number to deal with the perceived problem?
Surely the focus should be on problematic transactions, rather than problematic people? With obvious exceptions, such as foreign nationals subject to sanctions.
PEPs and sanctions are a category of risk that precedes risky transactions. In some cases it's internal risk appetite of the bank, in other cases it's regulatory. There are other risk factors that banks will look at, like shared addresses, known familial, business, and personal relationships between other high-risk entities.
I have no knowledge of the specifics of this case, these are only general statements.
Thanks. It’s something that worries the hell out of me, that one day my life, or that of someone close to me, gets made Hell because of a weird transaction from a middle-eastern country.
That’s before the freedom-of-speech or political arguments, it’s easy for 95% of us to laugh at Nigel Farage, but what happens when more mainstream political views suddenly become unacceptable to banks? The Triggernometry podcast had their bank account shut down the other week, and the bank wouldn’t give a reason, but eventually reinstated it after they went public and got a campaign going.
It’s the social media “town square” problem on steriods, where someone can be “un-personed” for their words, as Youtube are currently demonstrating with RF Kennedy Jr, who’s actually running to be president of the US. As life becomes more dependent on interaction with organisations who can choose not to deal with individuals, that’s very worrying.
Gambling another risky one for banking that is relevant to many of us.
Oh yes, I really should have remembered that one.
I moved abroad a decade ago, and eventually had a number of gambling accounts binned. That was fair to be honest, they don’t have a licence to operate where I was was living!
Online bookies should not be allowed to profile users, they should make their offer available to anyone who wants the bet, as would be the case in a shop.
Will still work. The definition 1 nm = 1 deg lat is entirely valid for any spherical planet etc. from Mercury to the Tannhauser Gate. Just that the log line might need its length adjusting if it doesn't freeze or dissolve first. And sorting out where the sea surface is might be tricky in some.
Earth isn't spherical
Okay, more or less spherical.
I am now compelled to ask, is Earth more spherical or less spherical?
There is the fact, ofcourse, that Churchill was roughly the same height as Sunak, as we've mentioned a few times before.
Height is also about the perception whether one looks big or small. Zelensky is partcularly notable as a leader figure on this topic, because he looks a bit smaller, too, without this seeming to have affected his leadership stature or national or international impact, in any way at all.
I suspect Zelensky is also pretty careful not to stand next to colleagues who are 6 feet 9.
yeah I don't think it's funny. Asian bloke, short Asian bloke. Yes hugely privileged, wykehamist, etc. But a misstep for PB to keep thinking it's funny.
Technically, 5ft6 is not short. I think it starts around Al Pacino at 5ft4. Yes, he is that short
Average height is around 5ft8 or 5ft9.
When does "short" end and "average" start? I know where my head starts. I know where my neck starts. When does my neck become my head?
We'll never be fully metric until we get rid of the 60 seconds/60 minutes/24hours/~365 days timing scheme - as Napoleon tried.
But the weirdest time scheme was the traditional Japanese one, where the length of the hour varied, depending on the length of the day and night, with both being split into six hours. So the length of an hour would depend on the time of year and whether it was light or dark outside...
Ands of course the traditional sailors used 32 points of the compass, not 360 degrees. That, and knots, could be summed and integrated easily on a traverse board of holes with pegs.
Most government spending is pretty popular. Most government taxes are not very popular.
Opinion pollster responders have no requirement to balance up the two.
Yes, that's why I'm wary of polls about tax and spending in general - e.g. HYUFD frequently notes that polls show that most people would like IHT abolished, but I've never seen a poll that offered choices - would you rather have IHT abolished, VAT reduced by X% or NHS waiting times reduced by N weeks?
The thing about dealing with heightism, is that as I've mentioned many times in the past, too many people have an interest in it.
Both taller and average height men tend to enjoy making fun of smaller men just for their height, as it boosts their own ego in turn, and many - but not all - women tend to find taller men more attractive. Hence the prejudice continues, as one of the last acceptable, and rarely challenged ones. HIGNIFY had a picture of him wearing giant shoes, on their last episode, for ionstance.
It's only a couple of 100k to have your legs broken and a 4" extension patched in. Very popular apparently.
It's not unusual for short rich children to be put on growth hormone before puberty, so that they can gain a few extra inches. It is quite expensive but in view of heightism in society possibly a good investment.
I was in Mexico last week, and people kept trying to sell me Human Growth Hormone. Did I miss out?
Most government spending is pretty popular. Most government taxes are not very popular.
Opinion pollster responders have no requirement to balance up the two.
Yes, that's why I'm wary of polls about tax and spending in general - e.g. HYUFD frequently notes that polls show that most people would like IHT abolished, but I've never seen a poll that offered choices - would you rather have IHT abolished, VAT reduced by X% or NHS waiting times reduced by N weeks?
yeah I don't think it's funny. Asian bloke, short Asian bloke. Yes hugely privileged, wykehamist, etc. But a misstep for PB to keep thinking it's funny.
Technically, 5ft6 is not short. I think it starts around Al Pacino at 5ft4. Yes, he is that short
Average height is around 5ft8 or 5ft9.
When does "short" end and "average" start? I know where my head starts. I know where my neck starts. When does my neck become my head?
Never like to see a player injured but Lyon is a hell of a loss for Australia. Their quicks will now have a serious workload, especially if they can’t think of a different tactic to banging it in short. The implications of this may extend beyond this test match with the next back to back.
Never like to see a player injured but Lyon is a hell of a loss for Australia. Their quicks will now have a serious workload, especially if they can’t think of a different tactic to banging it in short. The implications of this may extend beyond this test match with the next back to back.
Comments
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatland
OK, explain. [draws up seat, gets out notepad]
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66020767
I read a book on this recently. Shocking behaviour and a shocking waste of public money to fund it all.
That’s before the freedom-of-speech or political arguments, it’s easy for 95% of us to laugh at Nigel Farage, but what happens when more mainstream political views suddenly become unacceptable to banks? The Triggernometry podcast had their bank account shut down the other week, and the bank wouldn’t give a reason, but eventually reinstated it after they went public and got a campaign going.
It’s the social media “town square” problem on steriods, where someone can be “un-personed” for their words, as Youtube are currently demonstrating with RF Kennedy Jr, who’s actually running to be president of the US. As life becomes more dependent on interaction with organisations who can choose not to deal with individuals, that’s very worrying.
(I don't know how common this is. American journalists are reluctant to give our colleges and universities the critical attention they deserve.
For example, Derek Bok's 2006 book received far less attention than it deserved. https://www.amazon.com/Our-Underachieving-Colleges-Students-Learning/dp/0691136181 (If anything, matters are now worse than when he wrote that book.)
That lack of attention is true even for public colleges and universities, except, of course, for athletics.)
Caveat it was a 2021 poll
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1674406530802765826?t=0kyuZEQYwVzU0jp9HvsyGg&s=19
*including breach of the purportedly contractual** link between NI and the State Pension
** I know it isn't, but it sure *sounds* like that to the ordinary decent viewer, so don't hassle me about it, please
Opinion pollster responders have no requirement to balance up the two.
Over the past 10-20 years institutions have sprung up that obey only the rule of the mob or the proprietor, and unlike newspaper barons are not held to account by states. Given that, is there a case for nationalising them?
If there was a British Twitter Corporation, or BritBook, or InstaBrit, would that help? There would still be free speech restrictions but they would be transparent and accountable, and as British society changed they would change also.
I realise this is ridiculous, but if we (the British) do not control it, we will be controlled by others, who may not be as nice. Musk turned off Twitter to Turkey for profit: what do we do when he does it to us?
A standard mile is 1,280 feet, or 1,760 yards.
A nautical mile is one minute of latitude, or a smidgen more than 2,000 yards. Or 6,000 feet.
Which means if you get a speed in nautical miles per hour - knots - you know that one knot is about 6,000 feet, or 100 feet per minute.
It makes rough approximation in mental maths much easier - as was often necessary on ships.
It doesn't really work perfectly on the Earth's surface either, because you are further from the Earth's centre at the equator than at the poles, so a minute of latitude varies in length according to where you are.
I knew someone who was much shorter than me, but was built like a brick sh*thouse. He was powerful and strong. Even though he was short, he 'appeared' tall.
Whereas thin and tall people often look almost shorter, weedier, as if they are out of proportion and stretched.
Height is also about the perception whether one looks big or small. Zelensky is partcularly notable as a leader figure on this topic, because he looks a bit smaller, too, without this seeming to have affected his leadership stature or national or international impact, in any way at all.
'Turkey, a Nato member with a say over whether Sweden gains membership, called it a "despicable act".
Turkey - which was also angered by a Quran burning protest earlier this year - said it was "unacceptable" to allow such "anti-Islamic actions" to take place "under the pretext of freedom of expression".'
Morocco and Jordan have recalled the Ambassadors to Sweden and Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Egypt also condemned the act.
'Sweden's Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said the Quran burning was "legal but not appropriate".'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-66052670
But the weirdest time scheme was the traditional Japanese one, where the length of the hour varied, depending on the length of the day and night, with both being split into six hours. So the length of an hour would depend on the time of year and whether it was light or dark outside...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_clock#Temporal_hours
I am now compelled to ask, is Earth more spherical or less spherical?
I was just making a lame Two Ronnies gag/reference.
https://canmore.org.uk/collection/1402565
https://canmore.org.uk/site/203253/unst-baltasound-buness-memorial-stone
With personal banks and other such services that are vital to existence, there needs to be adequate regulation. Now, the banks will telll you that they’re closing accounts with no notice and no discussion, *because* of the regulation, which is another issue. IMO there needs to be a process involving an authority such as a court, where the person has an opportunity to make representation. There should also be a last resort, such as a Post Office basic account opened to anyone, that will allow them to receive their salary or benefits, and to pay their bills.
Business accounts, and payment services, are a different issue again, where you have more unaccountable bureaucrats in organisations such as Visa and PayPal, as well as content services such as Patreon and Youtube, who can shut down a successful business seemingly at will, for any reason or none. This is where a lot of the speech issues come in, and as with the social media companies there are international and jurisdictional issues at play, as well as activists groups trying to silence people.
Social media companies are not so worrying, but the issue is again one of accountability, where a mob of users can deny someone a platform, and jurisdictional issues that will arise from these companies often based in different countries from the users. The classic is American users complaining about American companies operating in China and having to comply with Chinese law, because the American users disagree politically with Chinese law. How a country such as the UK fits into that, is an interesting question. I think that, above a certain size, companies in media should be required to have a company, and office and a named executive in charge of a company, which can be regulated, and dragged before a court if necessary.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traverse_board
I moved abroad a decade ago, and eventually had a number of gambling accounts binned. That was fair to be honest, they don’t have a licence to operate where I was was living!
Online bookies should not be allowed to profile users, they should make their offer available to anyone who wants the bet, as would be the case in a shop.
(My navigation training was air-based, rather than sea-based)
https://www.kingsleynapley.co.uk/our-news/press-releases/yougov-poll-shows-majority-support-raising-iht-threshold-above-325k-despite-eyewatering-public-finance-decisions-ahead
Not being aware of Feargal Sharkey's campaigning work in this area I found this headline a bit bizarre.
Ba-doom-tish !