So. Is the BBC biased politically (forget Huw Edwards) or not and if it is, which way?
I saw an old mate of mine last night. To the left, shall we say, and he was fuming that eg The Today Programme might as well be an arm of government.
Whereas from my right-leaning, civilised, thoughtful perspective I think the BBC leans left.
I dislike the fact that they always have to so maniacally strive for "balance" and "inclusivity" but I understand it also.
As they say if we're both convinced of our view then perhaps it is therefore doing something right.
Although annoying both left and right does not mean that the BBC is balanced.
FWIW I think the BBC tries very hard to be balanced on most things (not all - there is now no hint of skepticism left when reporting climate science, for instance, when some of the more out there claims/predictions ought to be at best queried). It does, however, tend to skew urban, metropolitan. I don't think it has a clue about the countryside and rural affairs, as shown by Countryfile, which is a programme about the countryside made by city dwellers, for city dwellers.
Yes there's plenty wrong with it.
And as for climate, my point to my friend was that they would never dare have someone from "the other side" to argue a different position on climate change.
When they ever did get someone from ‘the other side’, it would be a flat Earth fanatic rather than another scientist.
That may have been only partly their fault. FEFs so not have careers which they would endanger by voicing private doubts.
Which is actually a large part of the problem, that all the scientific research funding is on one side.
Balderdash. There’s research funding on the phenomenon, there’s also money for how to reduce CO2 production (either through technology and more efficiency, or through behaviour change), then there’s some on other approaches like carbon capture, and there’s some on how to mitigate the effects of climate change. So, all sorts of different positions on climate change are represented.
Yep. It's either going to be really bad or it's going to be catastrophic.
Or various points in between. It's mostly a continuous function.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Conversely he may just be lying. I know. 'Mazing. Who knew?
He is probably lying but as a lie it is so compellingly likely to be true. Quite the dilemma.
There's someone famous and dead (I think Robert Maxwell) of whom it was said that they lied so compulsively that they were actually pretty easy to navigate. Just ask them something and believe the exact opposite. (Like the character in those logic puzzles where the answer is to say "what would the other guard say if I asked them...")
Johnson manages the tick of lying in such a baroque way, including telling the truth if he thinks this will make you want to sleep with him, that you can't even do that.
80% of lies are simply about telling the audience what they want to hear. The other 30% are generally derived from dodgy stats.
Not much change on this week's Techne poll - Labour down one, LDs up one so basically MoE.
Just skimming the Techne tables, 2016 LEAVE voters vote Conservative 44%, Labour 29%, Reform 11% - this was the group which delivered the Conservative majority in 2019 when they split 73-15 for Boris Johnson.
Now, if you add the Reform numbers to the Conservative numbers the split becomes 55-29 which is a 16% swing and matches the swing in the top line figures.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
The Chrome browser has a new password-checker that Boris and everyone else should use.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Conversely he may just be lying. I know. 'Mazing. Who knew?
He is probably lying but as a lie it is so compellingly likely to be true. Quite the dilemma.
There's someone famous and dead (I think Robert Maxwell) of whom it was said that they lied so compulsively that they were actually pretty easy to navigate. Just ask them something and believe the exact opposite. (Like the character in those logic puzzles where the answer is to say "what would the other guard say if I asked them...")
Johnson manages the tick of lying in such a baroque way, including telling the truth if he thinks this will make you want to sleep with him, that you can't even do that.
I think it's worse than that. I think he's uncoupled words from the concept of facts. That's why his speech includes non-words ("Harrumph") or non-English words (eg Latin). He's not trying to communicate a concept, he's just moving wind thru his larynx in such a way to make you go away so he can get back to the sex and money thing. He may not even be conscious during this process, or not engaging his conscious mind to monitor his speech.
It's a bit worrying when you think about it. Has anybody tested him to see if he can remember what he said ten minutes after he said it?
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Conversely he may just be lying. I know. 'Mazing. Who knew?
He is probably lying but as a lie it is so compellingly likely to be true. Quite the dilemma.
If anyone had had the wit to give the police a false lead about illegal porn on Boris's phone, they could have jailed him for forgetting the password.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
The Chrome browser has a new password-checker that Boris and everyone else should use.
Would allowing Chrome to choose your password be a breach of terms of service on lots of sites including banking and reduce your consumer protection?
So. Is the BBC biased politically (forget Huw Edwards) or not and if it is, which way?
I saw an old mate of mine last night. To the left, shall we say, and he was fuming that eg The Today Programme might as well be an arm of government.
Whereas from my right-leaning, civilised, thoughtful perspective I think the BBC leans left.
I dislike the fact that they always have to so maniacally strive for "balance" and "inclusivity" but I understand it also.
As they say if we're both convinced of our view then perhaps it is therefore doing something right.
Although annoying both left and right does not mean that the BBC is balanced.
FWIW I think the BBC tries very hard to be balanced on most things (not all - there is now no hint of skepticism left when reporting climate science, for instance, when some of the more out there claims/predictions ought to be at best queried). It does, however, tend to skew urban, metropolitan. I don't think it has a clue about the countryside and rural affairs, as shown by Countryfile, which is a programme about the countryside made by city dwellers, for city dwellers.
Yes there's plenty wrong with it.
And as for climate, my point to my friend was that they would never dare have someone from "the other side" to argue a different position on climate change.
When they ever did get someone from ‘the other side’, it would be a flat Earth fanatic rather than another scientist.
That may have been only partly their fault. FEFs so not have careers which they would endanger by voicing private doubts.
Which is actually a large part of the problem, that all the scientific research funding is on one side.
Balderdash. There’s research funding on the phenomenon, there’s also money for how to reduce CO2 production (either through technology and more efficiency, or through behaviour change), then there’s some on other approaches like carbon capture, and there’s some on how to mitigate the effects of climate change. So, all sorts of different positions on climate change are represented.
Yep. It's either going to be really bad or it's going to be catastrophic.
Or, it will just be different. There's a case to be made that we net gain cultivable land and grow supercrops on it because of all that lovely CO2, hurrah. Personally I miss proper winters, but that's first world boomer regret for deterioration of skiing hols as much as anything.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Conversely he may just be lying. I know. 'Mazing. Who knew?
He is probably lying but as a lie it is so compellingly likely to be true. Quite the dilemma.
There's someone famous and dead (I think Robert Maxwell) of whom it was said that they lied so compulsively that they were actually pretty easy to navigate. Just ask them something and believe the exact opposite. (Like the character in those logic puzzles where the answer is to say "what would the other guard say if I asked them...")
Johnson manages the tick of lying in such a baroque way, including telling the truth if he thinks this will make you want to sleep with him, that you can't even do that.
I think it's worse than that. I think he's uncoupled words from the concept of facts. That's why his speech includes non-words ("Harrumph") or non-English words (eg Latin). He's not trying to communicate a concept, he's just moving wind thru his larynx in such a way to make you go away so he can get back to the sex and money thing. He may not even be conscious during this process, or not engaging his conscious mind to monitor his speech.
It's a bit worrying when you think about it. Has anybody tested him to see if he can remember what he said ten minutes after he said it?
There was a Covid lockdown presser where Boris told us all to stay at home, then added he was looking forward to visiting his mum. So no, Boris can't remember what he said even 10 seconds after he has said it. I'd agree Boris's lies are not really lies as conventionally understood.
Otoh here is Rory: Johnson is after all the most accomplished liar in public life. He has mastered the use of error, omission, exaggeration, diminution, equivocation and flat denial. He has perfected casuistry, circumlocution, false equivalence and false analogy. He is equally adept at the ironic jest, the fib and the grand lie; the weasel word and the half-truth; the hyperbolic lie, the obvious lie, and the bullshit lie – which may inadvertently be true.
So. Is the BBC biased politically (forget Huw Edwards) or not and if it is, which way?
I saw an old mate of mine last night. To the left, shall we say, and he was fuming that eg The Today Programme might as well be an arm of government.
Whereas from my right-leaning, civilised, thoughtful perspective I think the BBC leans left.
I dislike the fact that they always have to so maniacally strive for "balance" and "inclusivity" but I understand it also.
As they say if we're both convinced of our view then perhaps it is therefore doing something right.
Although annoying both left and right does not mean that the BBC is balanced.
FWIW I think the BBC tries very hard to be balanced on most things (not all - there is now no hint of skepticism left when reporting climate science, for instance, when some of the more out there claims/predictions ought to be at best queried). It does, however, tend to skew urban, metropolitan. I don't think it has a clue about the countryside and rural affairs, as shown by Countryfile, which is a programme about the countryside made by city dwellers, for city dwellers.
Yes there's plenty wrong with it.
And as for climate, my point to my friend was that they would never dare have someone from "the other side" to argue a different position on climate change.
When they ever did get someone from ‘the other side’, it would be a flat Earth fanatic rather than another scientist.
That may have been only partly their fault. FEFs so not have careers which they would endanger by voicing private doubts.
Which is actually a large part of the problem, that all the scientific research funding is on one side.
The scientific research funding follows the scientific evidence.
The vested interest funding, well there's been plenty of that for climate 'sceptics'. And probably much more lucrative for those involved.
(I do find the idea of funding bias bizarre. It's in no government's interest to fund only one side of climate science, if there were really two sides. Climate science as it stands is a massive headache for governments - it means taxing/regulating things that people like, in really unpopular areas. There's a massive incentive for governments to fund any science that would question the IPCC conclusions - making it all go away would solve a whole load of political problems. Unfortunately, science doesn't work like that - you can't just get the answers you want because if you do other people are going to point out what you've done and it's easy* for other groups to check)
*in most areas. Far less so in my field of epidemiology where we cannot share or publish the patient-level data for others to verify, due to entirely legitimate data protection concerns. Other groups could request the same data, but I'm not sure you'd get that far on public interest grounds to simply verify pre-existing research. We need more like openSAFELY where anyone can run their own code to check conclusions. This would be possible if e.g. NHS Digital had a service to hold copies of supplied data and run, on demand (at low fee) code on it and provide the results (there would still be a need to ensure no sensitive disclosure in analysis results, which is probably why this hasn't happened).
"Points" from someone whose head is obviously completely up the system.
The points about funding are definetely valid, even if they don't resolve the 'groupthink amongst academics' problem.
Yep, there's definite scope for problems there. One thing becomes accepted and everyone else takes it as read. We've seen that often enough - but we've seen that often enough because eventually someone shows that's not how things work afterall.
Again, I'm long out of this field and wasn't that closely involved to start with, but I saw a lot of disagreement among climate scientists on how the feedbacks worked and interacted. Plenty of 'out there' ideas being presented where if thing A works differently to the general perception then thing B will happen and we can test that witthin 5-10 years etc. I think there are enough people with different backgrounds in different centres studying data from different sources with different designs to reduce the risk of too much groupthink here.
I may be wrong, of course and maybe there are more people training in 'climate science' at a lower level and being taught 'truths'. The nice thing 15 years ago, which may or may not still be the case, was that climate research was brining together people from a lot of disparate disciplines with different ideas and, in most cases, not a great deal of formal training in any accepted truth of the field. The main danger was that most people on the modelling side were working on a limited number of base models, so a fundamental error in one base model could lead to errors in many people's research. But, if so, there would be a whole lot of research that quickly diverged from new observations, unless you were really unlucky. There are also, of course, a lot of people not working on models at all, but working on comparing model predictions, forwards or backwards with observations on the ground and finding better ways of doing those observations.
My concern with it all is that right now, dissent is not allowed. We are at a stage whereby no one would put their heads above the parapet. Well that means that the overwhelming majority - thousands upon thousands - of climate scientists agree hence it is settled. But without going all Galileo about it is that we are in a period of absolute orthodoxy whereby dissenting views are simply not entertained.
No one disputes that the temperatures are rising but it is modelling that is telling us what happens next. Is it like cigarettes where a link has been shown to exist? Not being a climate scientist I have no idea.
I just feel uncomfortable that there is no Jeremy Paxman ("why is this lying bastard lying to me") to question it all. Are all those on here, for example, comfortable not wanting to question what is, in the end, a prediction based upon modelling and hence originates in the human mind.
This is a fantasy put around by right-wing commentators. As you say, no one disputes that temperatures are rising: the evidence there is unavoidable. That this is largely caused by human activity producing greenhouse gases is also very clear. But what happens next, however, is very much discussed and argued over. There is plenty of dissent. How different factors interact, how we should model future change, what’s the best approach to deal with the problem, all extensively debated.
However, the point is that temperatures are already up a worrying amount, so when that’s your starting point, whether things will get much worse or just slightly worse doesn’t change that they are already bad.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
ATM machines (just for @Selebian) I agree, but PINs I have all over the place.
I took an ATM card with me on my cycling trip, just in case. I have just employed a gardener and didn't know how he wanted to be paid so I used the card to get some cash, in case that was what he wanted (he doesn't). The card is a year out of date so it was lucky he was happy with a bank transfer and that I didn't need it on my trip.
Kommersant is owned by Alisher Usmanov, who for many years was president of the world fencing organisation. Interesting, that, on his CV. Cf. Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, one-time dictator of Kalmykia who believes he encountered alien life forms, who was head of the world chess organisation for years - a position that was very important to him.
There may well be some PBers who are genned-up on the international politics of fencing and what's been happening in it since the increase in hostilities in 2022.
Sacked general Ivan Popov seems narked and who can blame him?
So much seems to revolve around Sergei Shoigu. What many people don't realise is that Shoigu has his own army, called Patriot, which may not be mentioned in his Wikipedia article but is active in Ukraine. The defence minister, with his own army. Welcome to Russia.
Hats off to Owen Matthews at the Spectator, though, for noticing the existence of various "PMCs" other than Wagner even though his actual analysis is rubbish:
Don't doubt that Shoigu (whose collection of Aztec sacrificial daggers surely exceeds @Leon's) is good in emergency situations. That's been his forte for a long time.
Putin says the Russian populace realise it's all very simple... Sure. I haven't been to Russia in a while, but what much of the populace probably think, and this is especially true of the intelligentsia, is that the whole mutiny business was an FSB stitch-up on both sides.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
The Chrome browser has a new password-checker that Boris and everyone else should use.
Would allowing Chrome to choose your password be a breach of terms of service on lots of sites including banking and reduce your consumer protection?
Dunno but we have banking lawyers on pb. I doubt it or we'd have heard by now. (Come to think of it, I'd be more concerned about browser password managers syncing to easily stolen phones and laptops.) But I think this checking function (for weak, reused or compromised/hacked passwords) is new:-
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
You seem to be being an even more obnoxious turd than usual today - what's upset you poppet?
RIP John Nettleton. Best known I suspect in PB circles for playing Sir Humphry's predecessor Sir Arnold in Yes Minister (and later head of the Campaign for Freedom of Information in Yes PM). Great deadpan comic actor.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
RIP John Nettleton. Best known I suspect in PB circles for playing Sir Humphry's predecessor Sir Arnold in Yes Minister (and later head of the Campaign for Freedom of Information in Yes PM). Great deadpan comic actor.
"How are things going at the Campaign for Freedom of Information?"
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
So. Is the BBC biased politically (forget Huw Edwards) or not and if it is, which way?
I saw an old mate of mine last night. To the left, shall we say, and he was fuming that eg The Today Programme might as well be an arm of government.
Whereas from my right-leaning, civilised, thoughtful perspective I think the BBC leans left.
I dislike the fact that they always have to so maniacally strive for "balance" and "inclusivity" but I understand it also.
As they say if we're both convinced of our view then perhaps it is therefore doing something right.
Although annoying both left and right does not mean that the BBC is balanced.
FWIW I think the BBC tries very hard to be balanced on most things (not all - there is now no hint of skepticism left when reporting climate science, for instance, when some of the more out there claims/predictions ought to be at best queried). It does, however, tend to skew urban, metropolitan. I don't think it has a clue about the countryside and rural affairs, as shown by Countryfile, which is a programme about the countryside made by city dwellers, for city dwellers.
Yes there's plenty wrong with it.
And as for climate, my point to my friend was that they would never dare have someone from "the other side" to argue a different position on climate change.
When they ever did get someone from ‘the other side’, it would be a flat Earth fanatic rather than another scientist.
That may have been only partly their fault. FEFs so not have careers which they would endanger by voicing private doubts.
Which is actually a large part of the problem, that all the scientific research funding is on one side.
The scientific research funding follows the scientific evidence.
The vested interest funding, well there's been plenty of that for climate 'sceptics'. And probably much more lucrative for those involved.
(I do find the idea of funding bias bizarre. It's in no government's interest to fund only one side of climate science, if there were really two sides. Climate science as it stands is a massive headache for governments - it means taxing/regulating things that people like, in really unpopular areas. There's a massive incentive for governments to fund any science that would question the IPCC conclusions - making it all go away would solve a whole load of political problems. Unfortunately, science doesn't work like that - you can't just get the answers you want because if you do other people are going to point out what you've done and it's easy* for other groups to check)
*in most areas. Far less so in my field of epidemiology where we cannot share or publish the patient-level data for others to verify, due to entirely legitimate data protection concerns. Other groups could request the same data, but I'm not sure you'd get that far on public interest grounds to simply verify pre-existing research. We need more like openSAFELY where anyone can run their own code to check conclusions. This would be possible if e.g. NHS Digital had a service to hold copies of supplied data and run, on demand (at low fee) code on it and provide the results (there would still be a need to ensure no sensitive disclosure in analysis results, which is probably why this hasn't happened).
"Points" from someone whose head is obviously completely up the system.
The points about funding are definetely valid, even if they don't resolve the 'groupthink amongst academics' problem.
Yep, there's definite scope for problems there. One thing becomes accepted and everyone else takes it as read. We've seen that often enough - but we've seen that often enough because eventually someone shows that's not how things work afterall.
Again, I'm long out of this field and wasn't that closely involved to start with, but I saw a lot of disagreement among climate scientists on how the feedbacks worked and interacted. Plenty of 'out there' ideas being presented where if thing A works differently to the general perception then thing B will happen and we can test that witthin 5-10 years etc. I think there are enough people with different backgrounds in different centres studying data from different sources with different designs to reduce the risk of too much groupthink here.
I may be wrong, of course and maybe there are more people training in 'climate science' at a lower level and being taught 'truths'. The nice thing 15 years ago, which may or may not still be the case, was that climate research was brining together people from a lot of disparate disciplines with different ideas and, in most cases, not a great deal of formal training in any accepted truth of the field. The main danger was that most people on the modelling side were working on a limited number of base models, so a fundamental error in one base model could lead to errors in many people's research. But, if so, there would be a whole lot of research that quickly diverged from new observations, unless you were really unlucky. There are also, of course, a lot of people not working on models at all, but working on comparing model predictions, forwards or backwards with observations on the ground and finding better ways of doing those observations.
My concern with it all is that right now, dissent is not allowed. We are at a stage whereby no one would put their heads above the parapet. Well that means that the overwhelming majority - thousands upon thousands - of climate scientists agree hence it is settled. But without going all Galileo about it is that we are in a period of absolute orthodoxy whereby dissenting views are simply not entertained.
No one disputes that the temperatures are rising but it is modelling that is telling us what happens next. Is it like cigarettes where a link has been shown to exist? Not being a climate scientist I have no idea.
I just feel uncomfortable that there is no Jeremy Paxman ("why is this lying bastard lying to me") to question it all. Are all those on here, for example, comfortable not wanting to question what is, in the end, a prediction based upon modelling and hence originates in the human mind.
This is a fantasy put around by right-wing commentators. As you say, no one disputes that temperatures are rising: the evidence there is unavoidable. That this is largely caused by human activity producing greenhouse gases is also very clear. But what happens next, however, is very much discussed and argued over. There is plenty of dissent. How different factors interact, how we should model future change, what’s the best approach to deal with the problem, all extensively debated.
However, the point is that temperatures are already up a worrying amount, so when that’s your starting point, whether things will get much worse or just slightly worse doesn’t change that they are already bad.
The options for the future seem to vary massively; this is where dogmatic politico/science doesn't help.
Unless I have misunderstood the whole thing, we continue to pour vast, even increasing, amounts of CO2 etc into the atmosphere. This isn't changing soon. The future in that sense is already fixed, unless we can remove the stuff on a global scale (which in turn requires decisions).
'Just stop' and all that is actually yesterday's argument in this sense: we have to face the reality of what we have said for 30 years must not happen, happening.
The real question is: Given its happened - the doom future is already fixed - what are the best courses of action. Stopping putting CO2 out isn't an option because it isn't going to happen in the next 2 or three decades. And even when you do, you still have the adaptation problem.
CO2 is getting too much attention, and options for living in a new world getting too little.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Some of the things being said about Boris Johnson are at risk of making me feel some sympathy for him.
Can't we just say he's a braying career liar who signed off on the imposition of draconian restrictions, such as not allowing us to socialise properly or go within 2 metres of each other, while he himself thought the rules didn't apply to him and kept having pissups? What high-quality leadership skills the man has!
Kommersant is owned by Alisher Usmanov, who for many years was president of the world fencing organisation. Interesting, that, on his CV. Cf. Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, one-time dictator of Kalmykia who believes he encountered alien life forms, who was head of the world chess organisation for years - a position that was very important to him.
There may well be some PBers who are genned-up on the international politics of fencing and what's been happening in it since the increase in hostilities in 2022.
Sacked general Ivan Popov seems narked and who can blame him?
So much seems to revolve around Sergei Shoigu. What many people don't realise is that Shoigu has his own army, called Patriot, which may not be mentioned in his Wikipedia article but is active in Ukraine. The defence minister, with his own army. Welcome to Russia.
Hats off to Owen Matthews at the Spectator, though, for noticing the existence of various "PMCs" other than Wagner even though his actual analysis is rubbish:
Don't doubt that Shoigu (whose collection of Aztec sacrificial daggers surely exceeds @Leon's) is good in emergency situations. That's been his forte for a long time.
Putin says the Russian populace realise it's all very simple... Sure. I haven't been to Russia in a while, but what much of the populace probably think, and this is especially true of the intelligentsia, is that the whole mutiny business was an FSB stitch-up on both sides.
My step-mother - Russian, with interesting links to the Good Olde Days of communism - thinks that the “mutiny” was layers of people betraying each/waiting to see what happened. And that many of those involved were making it up as they went along. An argument among thieves.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
So the answer is practically everyone.
Not for Android or Apple pay
Apple Pay demands my phone passcode when I use it, which I think of as a PIN. Is that unusual?
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
The Chrome browser has a new password-checker that Boris and everyone else should use.
Would allowing Chrome to choose your password be a breach of terms of service on lots of sites including banking and reduce your consumer protection?
Dunno but we have banking lawyers on pb. I doubt it or we'd have heard by now. (Come to think of it, I'd be more concerned about browser password managers syncing to easily stolen phones and laptops.) But I think this checking function (for weak, reused or compromised/hacked passwords) is new:-
For that to work it must be at least arguable that the user has shared the password with google and therefore has less protection as t&c say dont share password at all?
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
The Chrome browser has a new password-checker that Boris and everyone else should use.
Would allowing Chrome to choose your password be a breach of terms of service on lots of sites including banking and reduce your consumer protection?
Dunno but we have banking lawyers on pb. I doubt it or we'd have heard by now. (Come to think of it, I'd be more concerned about browser password managers syncing to easily stolen phones and laptops.) But I think this checking function (for weak, reused or compromised/hacked passwords) is new:-
That’s been around for a long while on various password stores.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
So the answer is practically everyone.
Not for Android or Apple pay
Apple Pay demands my phone passcode when I use it, which I think of as a PIN. Is that unusual?
(Not that I mind, btw.)
Android the phone has to be unlocked, but that can be by fingerprint or face or passcode
So. Is the BBC biased politically (forget Huw Edwards) or not and if it is, which way?
I saw an old mate of mine last night. To the left, shall we say, and he was fuming that eg The Today Programme might as well be an arm of government.
Whereas from my right-leaning, civilised, thoughtful perspective I think the BBC leans left.
I dislike the fact that they always have to so maniacally strive for "balance" and "inclusivity" but I understand it also.
As they say if we're both convinced of our view then perhaps it is therefore doing something right.
Although annoying both left and right does not mean that the BBC is balanced.
FWIW I think the BBC tries very hard to be balanced on most things (not all - there is now no hint of skepticism left when reporting climate science, for instance, when some of the more out there claims/predictions ought to be at best queried). It does, however, tend to skew urban, metropolitan. I don't think it has a clue about the countryside and rural affairs, as shown by Countryfile, which is a programme about the countryside made by city dwellers, for city dwellers.
Yes there's plenty wrong with it.
And as for climate, my point to my friend was that they would never dare have someone from "the other side" to argue a different position on climate change.
When they ever did get someone from ‘the other side’, it would be a flat Earth fanatic rather than another scientist.
That may have been only partly their fault. FEFs so not have careers which they would endanger by voicing private doubts.
Which is actually a large part of the problem, that all the scientific research funding is on one side.
Balderdash. There’s research funding on the phenomenon, there’s also money for how to reduce CO2 production (either through technology and more efficiency, or through behaviour change), then there’s some on other approaches like carbon capture, and there’s some on how to mitigate the effects of climate change. So, all sorts of different positions on climate change are represented.
Yep. It's either going to be really bad or it's going to be catastrophic.
Or various points in between. It's mostly a continuous function.
Looking a way ahead,
Odds against we break the dinosaurs 150 odd million years of global dominance right now.
So. Is the BBC biased politically (forget Huw Edwards) or not and if it is, which way?
I saw an old mate of mine last night. To the left, shall we say, and he was fuming that eg The Today Programme might as well be an arm of government.
Whereas from my right-leaning, civilised, thoughtful perspective I think the BBC leans left.
I dislike the fact that they always have to so maniacally strive for "balance" and "inclusivity" but I understand it also.
As they say if we're both convinced of our view then perhaps it is therefore doing something right.
Although annoying both left and right does not mean that the BBC is balanced.
FWIW I think the BBC tries very hard to be balanced on most things (not all - there is now no hint of skepticism left when reporting climate science, for instance, when some of the more out there claims/predictions ought to be at best queried). It does, however, tend to skew urban, metropolitan. I don't think it has a clue about the countryside and rural affairs, as shown by Countryfile, which is a programme about the countryside made by city dwellers, for city dwellers.
Yes there's plenty wrong with it.
And as for climate, my point to my friend was that they would never dare have someone from "the other side" to argue a different position on climate change.
When they ever did get someone from ‘the other side’, it would be a flat Earth fanatic rather than another scientist.
That may have been only partly their fault. FEFs so not have careers which they would endanger by voicing private doubts.
Which is actually a large part of the problem, that all the scientific research funding is on one side.
The scientific research funding follows the scientific evidence.
The vested interest funding, well there's been plenty of that for climate 'sceptics'. And probably much more lucrative for those involved.
(I do find the idea of funding bias bizarre. It's in no government's interest to fund only one side of climate science, if there were really two sides. Climate science as it stands is a massive headache for governments - it means taxing/regulating things that people like, in really unpopular areas. There's a massive incentive for governments to fund any science that would question the IPCC conclusions - making it all go away would solve a whole load of political problems. Unfortunately, science doesn't work like that - you can't just get the answers you want because if you do other people are going to point out what you've done and it's easy* for other groups to check)
*in most areas. Far less so in my field of epidemiology where we cannot share or publish the patient-level data for others to verify, due to entirely legitimate data protection concerns. Other groups could request the same data, but I'm not sure you'd get that far on public interest grounds to simply verify pre-existing research. We need more like openSAFELY where anyone can run their own code to check conclusions. This would be possible if e.g. NHS Digital had a service to hold copies of supplied data and run, on demand (at low fee) code on it and provide the results (there would still be a need to ensure no sensitive disclosure in analysis results, which is probably why this hasn't happened).
"Points" from someone whose head is obviously completely up the system.
The points about funding are definetely valid, even if they don't resolve the 'groupthink amongst academics' problem.
Yep, there's definite scope for problems there. One thing becomes accepted and everyone else takes it as read. We've seen that often enough - but we've seen that often enough because eventually someone shows that's not how things work afterall.
Again, I'm long out of this field and wasn't that closely involved to start with, but I saw a lot of disagreement among climate scientists on how the feedbacks worked and interacted. Plenty of 'out there' ideas being presented where if thing A works differently to the general perception then thing B will happen and we can test that witthin 5-10 years etc. I think there are enough people with different backgrounds in different centres studying data from different sources with different designs to reduce the risk of too much groupthink here.
I may be wrong, of course and maybe there are more people training in 'climate science' at a lower level and being taught 'truths'. The nice thing 15 years ago, which may or may not still be the case, was that climate research was brining together people from a lot of disparate disciplines with different ideas and, in most cases, not a great deal of formal training in any accepted truth of the field. The main danger was that most people on the modelling side were working on a limited number of base models, so a fundamental error in one base model could lead to errors in many people's research. But, if so, there would be a whole lot of research that quickly diverged from new observations, unless you were really unlucky. There are also, of course, a lot of people not working on models at all, but working on comparing model predictions, forwards or backwards with observations on the ground and finding better ways of doing those observations.
My concern with it all is that right now, dissent is not allowed. We are at a stage whereby no one would put their heads above the parapet. Well that means that the overwhelming majority - thousands upon thousands - of climate scientists agree hence it is settled. But without going all Galileo about it is that we are in a period of absolute orthodoxy whereby dissenting views are simply not entertained.
No one disputes that the temperatures are rising but it is modelling that is telling us what happens next. Is it like cigarettes where a link has been shown to exist? Not being a climate scientist I have no idea.
I just feel uncomfortable that there is no Jeremy Paxman ("why is this lying bastard lying to me") to question it all. Are all those on here, for example, comfortable not wanting to question what is, in the end, a prediction based upon modelling and hence originates in the human mind.
This is a fantasy put around by right-wing commentators. As you say, no one disputes that temperatures are rising: the evidence there is unavoidable. That this is largely caused by human activity producing greenhouse gases is also very clear. But what happens next, however, is very much discussed and argued over. There is plenty of dissent. How different factors interact, how we should model future change, what’s the best approach to deal with the problem, all extensively debated.
However, the point is that temperatures are already up a worrying amount, so when that’s your starting point, whether things will get much worse or just slightly worse doesn’t change that they are already bad.
"The fantasy put about..."
LOL & QED
The world has warmed previously when presumably it wasn't on account of human activity. It is warming again now and that is coinciding with us pumping huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere. And it may well be that the current warming is due to us. But we don't know how much, nor exactly what effect it is having in total when other factors are taken into account.
For example, does warming lead to more evaporation and more cloud cover, reflecting more incident energy from the sun back into space? Does warming kill vegetation and increase desertification, which is also a better reflector of incident energy back into space than plants are?
We don't know the future, we model it. And we model it extremely diligently. But it is only a model and any model is only as good as its inputs. If I model a balance sheet for example I know that I can fiddle faddle, say, working capital requirements and associated fundraising requirements. All my own work.
And the thing which you are illustrating is how sad it is that today we all are supposed to accept the orthodoxy with dissenters chastised and ridiculed. We have of course been here before in history but let's not over-dramatise things, right, I mean we are only talking about extinction of the human race. Something that you, by your actions, btw, aren't all *that* bothered about.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
The Chrome browser has a new password-checker that Boris and everyone else should use.
Would allowing Chrome to choose your password be a breach of terms of service on lots of sites including banking and reduce your consumer protection?
Dunno but we have banking lawyers on pb. I doubt it or we'd have heard by now. (Come to think of it, I'd be more concerned about browser password managers syncing to easily stolen phones and laptops.) But I think this checking function (for weak, reused or compromised/hacked passwords) is new:-
For that to work it must be at least arguable that the user has shared the password with google and therefore has less protection as t&c say dont share password at all?
In theory, this should be done by downloading data and performing the check locally. Certainly this is how it is done on good quality password stores, with the feature
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
So the answer is practically everyone.
Not for Android or Apple pay
Apple Pay demands my phone passcode when I use it, which I think of as a PIN. Is that unusual?
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
So the answer is practically everyone.
Not for Android or Apple pay
Apple Pay demands my phone passcode when I use it, which I think of as a PIN. Is that unusual?
I liked Johnson's proposal of a big roundabout under the Isle of Man with roads to England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Much better than Cummings's nutty desire for a lunar base.
This is my periodic reminder that the UK space programme currently consists of a Virgin plane that doesn't work and that Top Gear Robin Reliant.
(punches wall in irritation)
Cost was £70 million apparently. I expect £70M wouldn't go as far in any potential space program of ours.
Falcon 9 has an estimated marginal cost in the £20-25 million pound range.
Development, according to a NASA investigation of development process, was a billion or 2.
Big And Expensive always like to quote £25 Billion+ to develop a medium lift rocket - whenever the politicians want an independent space program.
£25bn, on a “cost plus” basis, index-linked, subject to annual review and additional milestone payments, with an expected timeline of 10-15 years.
And they wonder why a fresh startup run by a mad guy, is eating their lunch and then some.
And the overrun would be 100%
Some time back, the US Airforce wanted a demo of rapid availability space launch. Hilariously, they gave the contract to Boeing, who bid…. A spaceplane first stage, with an RS-25 as the engine. Stop laughing in the back, there.
After spending several hundred million dollars, Boeing announced it was too difficult and cancelled the contract. Literally nothing for the money.
Alternatively, the American government bailed out an American aircraft manufacturer.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
So the answer is practically everyone.
Not for Android or Apple pay
Apple Pay demands my phone passcode when I use it, which I think of as a PIN. Is that unusual?
(Not that I mind, btw.)
It's a setting right?
Ah, it's under ID and passcode. I thought it would be under Wallet.
Although it doesn't matter a lot because I don't actually use it much.
I mean you can pay upwards of £100 to go to the theatre in the West End while the jurors get to see one of the leading actors of his generation for free in court today.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
ATM machines (just for @Selebian) I agree, but PINs I have all over the place.
I took an ATM card with me on my cycling trip, just in case. I have just employed a gardener and didn't know how he wanted to be paid so I used the card to get some cash, in case that was what he wanted (he doesn't). The card is a year out of date so it was lucky he was happy with a bank transfer and that I didn't need it on my trip.
Talking about cash (and @Anabobazina TRIGGER WARNING) I hadn't realised that HMG had had to change their bill to provide a little more protection for cash users.
"Previously the Bill did not specify whether withdrawal and deposit facilities should be free, or whether consumers might have to pay a charge.
But through a late amendment to the Bill, called for by Which?, it will now ensure that people across the country can withdraw and deposit cash for free.
This means the FCA will have greater power over major banks and building societies to ensure reasonable free access to cash is preserved for those who need it."
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
The Chrome browser has a new password-checker that Boris and everyone else should use.
Would allowing Chrome to choose your password be a breach of terms of service on lots of sites including banking and reduce your consumer protection?
Dunno but we have banking lawyers on pb. I doubt it or we'd have heard by now. (Come to think of it, I'd be more concerned about browser password managers syncing to easily stolen phones and laptops.) But I think this checking function (for weak, reused or compromised/hacked passwords) is new:-
For that to work it must be at least arguable that the user has shared the password with google and therefore has less protection as t&c say dont share password at all?
In theory, this should be done by downloading data and performing the check locally. Certainly this is how it is done on good quality password stores, with the feature
Most people use their chrome (or other browser) password manager even if they do not realise it, if they have ever accepted the browser's offer to remember a website's login details. These might be stored locally or in the cloud depending what buttons you pressed without thinking some years back. Password checks will be against hashes and not the passwords themselves.
Climate Change Activists: It doesn't matter that the UK only produces less than 1% of CO2 emissions we must all change our lifestyles here in order to avoid catastrophe.
Also Climate Change Activists: My use of devices which have a carbon cost is tiny in the scheme of things so I'm going to carry on posting on PB and going on holiday and using my car (even though it's electric, as if that changes anything) as I see fit.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
So. Is the BBC biased politically (forget Huw Edwards) or not and if it is, which way?
I saw an old mate of mine last night. To the left, shall we say, and he was fuming that eg The Today Programme might as well be an arm of government.
Whereas from my right-leaning, civilised, thoughtful perspective I think the BBC leans left.
I dislike the fact that they always have to so maniacally strive for "balance" and "inclusivity" but I understand it also.
As they say if we're both convinced of our view then perhaps it is therefore doing something right.
Although annoying both left and right does not mean that the BBC is balanced.
FWIW I think the BBC tries very hard to be balanced on most things (not all - there is now no hint of skepticism left when reporting climate science, for instance, when some of the more out there claims/predictions ought to be at best queried). It does, however, tend to skew urban, metropolitan. I don't think it has a clue about the countryside and rural affairs, as shown by Countryfile, which is a programme about the countryside made by city dwellers, for city dwellers.
Yes there's plenty wrong with it.
And as for climate, my point to my friend was that they would never dare have someone from "the other side" to argue a different position on climate change.
When they ever did get someone from ‘the other side’, it would be a flat Earth fanatic rather than another scientist.
That may have been only partly their fault. FEFs so not have careers which they would endanger by voicing private doubts.
Which is actually a large part of the problem, that all the scientific research funding is on one side.
The scientific research funding follows the scientific evidence.
The vested interest funding, well there's been plenty of that for climate 'sceptics'. And probably much more lucrative for those involved.
(I do find the idea of funding bias bizarre. It's in no government's interest to fund only one side of climate science, if there were really two sides. Climate science as it stands is a massive headache for governments - it means taxing/regulating things that people like, in really unpopular areas. There's a massive incentive for governments to fund any science that would question the IPCC conclusions - making it all go away would solve a whole load of political problems. Unfortunately, science doesn't work like that - you can't just get the answers you want because if you do other people are going to point out what you've done and it's easy* for other groups to check)
*in most areas. Far less so in my field of epidemiology where we cannot share or publish the patient-level data for others to verify, due to entirely legitimate data protection concerns. Other groups could request the same data, but I'm not sure you'd get that far on public interest grounds to simply verify pre-existing research. We need more like openSAFELY where anyone can run their own code to check conclusions. This would be possible if e.g. NHS Digital had a service to hold copies of supplied data and run, on demand (at low fee) code on it and provide the results (there would still be a need to ensure no sensitive disclosure in analysis results, which is probably why this hasn't happened).
"Points" from someone whose head is obviously completely up the system.
The points about funding are definetely valid, even if they don't resolve the 'groupthink amongst academics' problem.
Yep, there's definite scope for problems there. One thing becomes accepted and everyone else takes it as read. We've seen that often enough - but we've seen that often enough because eventually someone shows that's not how things work afterall.
Again, I'm long out of this field and wasn't that closely involved to start with, but I saw a lot of disagreement among climate scientists on how the feedbacks worked and interacted. Plenty of 'out there' ideas being presented where if thing A works differently to the general perception then thing B will happen and we can test that witthin 5-10 years etc. I think there are enough people with different backgrounds in different centres studying data from different sources with different designs to reduce the risk of too much groupthink here.
I may be wrong, of course and maybe there are more people training in 'climate science' at a lower level and being taught 'truths'. The nice thing 15 years ago, which may or may not still be the case, was that climate research was brining together people from a lot of disparate disciplines with different ideas and, in most cases, not a great deal of formal training in any accepted truth of the field. The main danger was that most people on the modelling side were working on a limited number of base models, so a fundamental error in one base model could lead to errors in many people's research. But, if so, there would be a whole lot of research that quickly diverged from new observations, unless you were really unlucky. There are also, of course, a lot of people not working on models at all, but working on comparing model predictions, forwards or backwards with observations on the ground and finding better ways of doing those observations.
My concern with it all is that right now, dissent is not allowed. We are at a stage whereby no one would put their heads above the parapet. Well that means that the overwhelming majority - thousands upon thousands - of climate scientists agree hence it is settled. But without going all Galileo about it is that we are in a period of absolute orthodoxy whereby dissenting views are simply not entertained.
No one disputes that the temperatures are rising but it is modelling that is telling us what happens next. Is it like cigarettes where a link has been shown to exist? Not being a climate scientist I have no idea.
I just feel uncomfortable that there is no Jeremy Paxman ("why is this lying bastard lying to me") to question it all. Are all those on here, for example, comfortable not wanting to question what is, in the end, a prediction based upon modelling and hence originates in the human mind.
This is a fantasy put around by right-wing commentators. As you say, no one disputes that temperatures are rising: the evidence there is unavoidable. That this is largely caused by human activity producing greenhouse gases is also very clear. But what happens next, however, is very much discussed and argued over. There is plenty of dissent. How different factors interact, how we should model future change, what’s the best approach to deal with the problem, all extensively debated.
However, the point is that temperatures are already up a worrying amount, so when that’s your starting point, whether things will get much worse or just slightly worse doesn’t change that they are already bad.
"The fantasy put about..."
LOL & QED
The world has warmed previously when presumably it wasn't on account of human activity. It is warming again now and that is coinciding with us pumping huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere. And it may well be that the current warming is due to us. But we don't know how much, nor exactly what effect it is having in total when other factors are taken into account.
For example, does warming lead to more evaporation and more cloud cover, reflecting more incident energy from the sun back into space? Does warming kill vegetation and increase desertification, which is also a better reflector of incident energy back into space than plants are?
We don't know the future, we model it. And we model it extremely diligently. But it is only a model and any model is only as good as its inputs. If I model a balance sheet for example I know that I can fiddle faddle, say, working capital requirements and associated fundraising requirements. All my own work.
And the thing which you are illustrating is how sad it is that today we all are supposed to accept the orthodoxy with dissenters chastised and ridiculed. We have of course been here before in history but let's not over-dramatise things, right, I mean we are only talking about extinction of the human race. Something that you, by your actions, btw, aren't all *that* bothered about.
I am baffled as to what you are trying to say. Best I can tell, you want to deny climate change is happening, but you know that doing so is untenable, so you have this vague rant about an orthodoxy and the uncertainties of modelling.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
So the answer is practically everyone.
Not for Android or Apple pay
Indeed. Amazes me that people don't even grasp this. Haven't taken a card out with me for years – they are utterly pointless nowadays.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
So the answer is practically everyone.
Not stupid at all. There's no limit on NFC transactions – Apple or Google etc.
So. Is the BBC biased politically (forget Huw Edwards) or not and if it is, which way?
I saw an old mate of mine last night. To the left, shall we say, and he was fuming that eg The Today Programme might as well be an arm of government.
Whereas from my right-leaning, civilised, thoughtful perspective I think the BBC leans left.
I dislike the fact that they always have to so maniacally strive for "balance" and "inclusivity" but I understand it also.
As they say if we're both convinced of our view then perhaps it is therefore doing something right.
Although annoying both left and right does not mean that the BBC is balanced.
FWIW I think the BBC tries very hard to be balanced on most things (not all - there is now no hint of skepticism left when reporting climate science, for instance, when some of the more out there claims/predictions ought to be at best queried). It does, however, tend to skew urban, metropolitan. I don't think it has a clue about the countryside and rural affairs, as shown by Countryfile, which is a programme about the countryside made by city dwellers, for city dwellers.
Yes there's plenty wrong with it.
And as for climate, my point to my friend was that they would never dare have someone from "the other side" to argue a different position on climate change.
When they ever did get someone from ‘the other side’, it would be a flat Earth fanatic rather than another scientist.
That may have been only partly their fault. FEFs so not have careers which they would endanger by voicing private doubts.
Which is actually a large part of the problem, that all the scientific research funding is on one side.
The scientific research funding follows the scientific evidence.
The vested interest funding, well there's been plenty of that for climate 'sceptics'. And probably much more lucrative for those involved.
(I do find the idea of funding bias bizarre. It's in no government's interest to fund only one side of climate science, if there were really two sides. Climate science as it stands is a massive headache for governments - it means taxing/regulating things that people like, in really unpopular areas. There's a massive incentive for governments to fund any science that would question the IPCC conclusions - making it all go away would solve a whole load of political problems. Unfortunately, science doesn't work like that - you can't just get the answers you want because if you do other people are going to point out what you've done and it's easy* for other groups to check)
*in most areas. Far less so in my field of epidemiology where we cannot share or publish the patient-level data for others to verify, due to entirely legitimate data protection concerns. Other groups could request the same data, but I'm not sure you'd get that far on public interest grounds to simply verify pre-existing research. We need more like openSAFELY where anyone can run their own code to check conclusions. This would be possible if e.g. NHS Digital had a service to hold copies of supplied data and run, on demand (at low fee) code on it and provide the results (there would still be a need to ensure no sensitive disclosure in analysis results, which is probably why this hasn't happened).
"Points" from someone whose head is obviously completely up the system.
The points about funding are definetely valid, even if they don't resolve the 'groupthink amongst academics' problem.
Yep, there's definite scope for problems there. One thing becomes accepted and everyone else takes it as read. We've seen that often enough - but we've seen that often enough because eventually someone shows that's not how things work afterall.
Again, I'm long out of this field and wasn't that closely involved to start with, but I saw a lot of disagreement among climate scientists on how the feedbacks worked and interacted. Plenty of 'out there' ideas being presented where if thing A works differently to the general perception then thing B will happen and we can test that witthin 5-10 years etc. I think there are enough people with different backgrounds in different centres studying data from different sources with different designs to reduce the risk of too much groupthink here.
I may be wrong, of course and maybe there are more people training in 'climate science' at a lower level and being taught 'truths'. The nice thing 15 years ago, which may or may not still be the case, was that climate research was brining together people from a lot of disparate disciplines with different ideas and, in most cases, not a great deal of formal training in any accepted truth of the field. The main danger was that most people on the modelling side were working on a limited number of base models, so a fundamental error in one base model could lead to errors in many people's research. But, if so, there would be a whole lot of research that quickly diverged from new observations, unless you were really unlucky. There are also, of course, a lot of people not working on models at all, but working on comparing model predictions, forwards or backwards with observations on the ground and finding better ways of doing those observations.
My concern with it all is that right now, dissent is not allowed. We are at a stage whereby no one would put their heads above the parapet. Well that means that the overwhelming majority - thousands upon thousands - of climate scientists agree hence it is settled. But without going all Galileo about it is that we are in a period of absolute orthodoxy whereby dissenting views are simply not entertained.
No one disputes that the temperatures are rising but it is modelling that is telling us what happens next. Is it like cigarettes where a link has been shown to exist? Not being a climate scientist I have no idea.
I just feel uncomfortable that there is no Jeremy Paxman ("why is this lying bastard lying to me") to question it all. Are all those on here, for example, comfortable not wanting to question what is, in the end, a prediction based upon modelling and hence originates in the human mind.
This is a fantasy put around by right-wing commentators. As you say, no one disputes that temperatures are rising: the evidence there is unavoidable. That this is largely caused by human activity producing greenhouse gases is also very clear. But what happens next, however, is very much discussed and argued over. There is plenty of dissent. How different factors interact, how we should model future change, what’s the best approach to deal with the problem, all extensively debated.
However, the point is that temperatures are already up a worrying amount, so when that’s your starting point, whether things will get much worse or just slightly worse doesn’t change that they are already bad.
"The fantasy put about..."
LOL & QED
The world has warmed previously when presumably it wasn't on account of human activity. It is warming again now and that is coinciding with us pumping huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere. And it may well be that the current warming is due to us. But we don't know how much, nor exactly what effect it is having in total when other factors are taken into account.
For example, does warming lead to more evaporation and more cloud cover, reflecting more incident energy from the sun back into space? Does warming kill vegetation and increase desertification, which is also a better reflector of incident energy back into space than plants are?
We don't know the future, we model it. And we model it extremely diligently. But it is only a model and any model is only as good as its inputs. If I model a balance sheet for example I know that I can fiddle faddle, say, working capital requirements and associated fundraising requirements. All my own work.
And the thing which you are illustrating is how sad it is that today we all are supposed to accept the orthodoxy with dissenters chastised and ridiculed. We have of course been here before in history but let's not over-dramatise things, right, I mean we are only talking about extinction of the human race. Something that you, by your actions, btw, aren't all *that* bothered about.
I am baffled as to what you are trying to say. Best I can tell, you want to deny climate change is happening, but you know that doing so is untenable, so you have this vague rant about an orthodoxy and the uncertainties of modelling.
Nah not at all. Climate change is happening. Look at the measurements. Look how much the earth has warmed over the past 200 years. I mean I know that the measurements weren't quiet as accurate 200 years ago but still.
I am saying that there is plenty we don't know about climate change, both its causes and its effects (well we do know historically what a huge amount of climate change has done to the planet, but not right now).
Meanwhile there is a catastrophising/the end of the world is nigh orthodoxy that no one is allowed to question which is reminiscent of other movements throughout history.
I am just disappointed that people like you accept it all and become part of the mass movement.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
The Chrome browser has a new password-checker that Boris and everyone else should use.
Would allowing Chrome to choose your password be a breach of terms of service on lots of sites including banking and reduce your consumer protection?
Dunno but we have banking lawyers on pb. I doubt it or we'd have heard by now. (Come to think of it, I'd be more concerned about browser password managers syncing to easily stolen phones and laptops.) But I think this checking function (for weak, reused or compromised/hacked passwords) is new:-
That’s been around for a long while on various password stores.
Oh yes, but the difference is it is free and available to everyone and not just folk who downloaded and installed Lastpass or Keepass or bookmarked 'Have I been pwned?'.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
So the answer is practically everyone.
Not for Android or Apple pay
Indeed. Amazes me that people don't even grasp this. Haven't taken a card out with me for years – they are utterly pointless nowadays.
I'm getting a distinct feeling of déjà vu reading this.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
ATM machines (just for @Selebian) I agree, but PINs I have all over the place.
I took an ATM card with me on my cycling trip, just in case. I have just employed a gardener and didn't know how he wanted to be paid so I used the card to get some cash, in case that was what he wanted (he doesn't). The card is a year out of date so it was lucky he was happy with a bank transfer and that I didn't need it on my trip.
Talking about cash (and @Anabobazina TRIGGER WARNING) I hadn't realised that HMG had had to change their bill to provide a little more protection for cash users.
"Previously the Bill did not specify whether withdrawal and deposit facilities should be free, or whether consumers might have to pay a charge.
But through a late amendment to the Bill, called for by Which?, it will now ensure that people across the country can withdraw and deposit cash for free.
This means the FCA will have greater power over major banks and building societies to ensure reasonable free access to cash is preserved for those who need it."
Good, I don't want to be charged when I have to trudge to the bank to deposit cash for those rude idiots who insist on transferring money they owe to me in stupid paper tokens.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
As with your anti-cash crusade, you're assuming that everyone has adopted the tech that you've embraced. You err, I fear.
As a chronic late adopter, I'm still resisting using my phone more than I have to, mostly for people's irritating two-factor authorisations (and to make phone calls! Remember them?). I accept that most people have moved onto using smartphones, but paying by card, with PIN if necessary, is still the default for many (most?) people, and there's nearly always a queue at my nearest ATM with people wanting cash (probably just to annoy you).
I wonder what proportion of people still use landline phones? Wifi is weak where I live, so I prefer it where possible (the handset is more comfortable than a mobile too), though the unlimited free calls on my mobile contract tempt me away when signal isn't an issue.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
So the answer is practically everyone.
Not for Android or Apple pay
Indeed. Amazes me that people don't even grasp this. Haven't taken a card out with me for years – they are utterly pointless nowadays.
I'm getting a distinct feeling of déjà vu reading this.
Indeed, it's stunning how the rank ignorance of established technologies continues on PB, among people who really ought to know better.
So. Is the BBC biased politically (forget Huw Edwards) or not and if it is, which way?
I saw an old mate of mine last night. To the left, shall we say, and he was fuming that eg The Today Programme might as well be an arm of government.
Whereas from my right-leaning, civilised, thoughtful perspective I think the BBC leans left.
I dislike the fact that they always have to so maniacally strive for "balance" and "inclusivity" but I understand it also.
As they say if we're both convinced of our view then perhaps it is therefore doing something right.
Although annoying both left and right does not mean that the BBC is balanced.
FWIW I think the BBC tries very hard to be balanced on most things (not all - there is now no hint of skepticism left when reporting climate science, for instance, when some of the more out there claims/predictions ought to be at best queried). It does, however, tend to skew urban, metropolitan. I don't think it has a clue about the countryside and rural affairs, as shown by Countryfile, which is a programme about the countryside made by city dwellers, for city dwellers.
Yes there's plenty wrong with it.
And as for climate, my point to my friend was that they would never dare have someone from "the other side" to argue a different position on climate change.
When they ever did get someone from ‘the other side’, it would be a flat Earth fanatic rather than another scientist.
That may have been only partly their fault. FEFs so not have careers which they would endanger by voicing private doubts.
Which is actually a large part of the problem, that all the scientific research funding is on one side.
The scientific research funding follows the scientific evidence.
The vested interest funding, well there's been plenty of that for climate 'sceptics'. And probably much more lucrative for those involved.
(I do find the idea of funding bias bizarre. It's in no government's interest to fund only one side of climate science, if there were really two sides. Climate science as it stands is a massive headache for governments - it means taxing/regulating things that people like, in really unpopular areas. There's a massive incentive for governments to fund any science that would question the IPCC conclusions - making it all go away would solve a whole load of political problems. Unfortunately, science doesn't work like that - you can't just get the answers you want because if you do other people are going to point out what you've done and it's easy* for other groups to check)
*in most areas. Far less so in my field of epidemiology where we cannot share or publish the patient-level data for others to verify, due to entirely legitimate data protection concerns. Other groups could request the same data, but I'm not sure you'd get that far on public interest grounds to simply verify pre-existing research. We need more like openSAFELY where anyone can run their own code to check conclusions. This would be possible if e.g. NHS Digital had a service to hold copies of supplied data and run, on demand (at low fee) code on it and provide the results (there would still be a need to ensure no sensitive disclosure in analysis results, which is probably why this hasn't happened).
"Points" from someone whose head is obviously completely up the system.
The points about funding are definetely valid, even if they don't resolve the 'groupthink amongst academics' problem.
Yep, there's definite scope for problems there. One thing becomes accepted and everyone else takes it as read. We've seen that often enough - but we've seen that often enough because eventually someone shows that's not how things work afterall.
Again, I'm long out of this field and wasn't that closely involved to start with, but I saw a lot of disagreement among climate scientists on how the feedbacks worked and interacted. Plenty of 'out there' ideas being presented where if thing A works differently to the general perception then thing B will happen and we can test that witthin 5-10 years etc. I think there are enough people with different backgrounds in different centres studying data from different sources with different designs to reduce the risk of too much groupthink here.
I may be wrong, of course and maybe there are more people training in 'climate science' at a lower level and being taught 'truths'. The nice thing 15 years ago, which may or may not still be the case, was that climate research was brining together people from a lot of disparate disciplines with different ideas and, in most cases, not a great deal of formal training in any accepted truth of the field. The main danger was that most people on the modelling side were working on a limited number of base models, so a fundamental error in one base model could lead to errors in many people's research. But, if so, there would be a whole lot of research that quickly diverged from new observations, unless you were really unlucky. There are also, of course, a lot of people not working on models at all, but working on comparing model predictions, forwards or backwards with observations on the ground and finding better ways of doing those observations.
My concern with it all is that right now, dissent is not allowed. We are at a stage whereby no one would put their heads above the parapet. Well that means that the overwhelming majority - thousands upon thousands - of climate scientists agree hence it is settled. But without going all Galileo about it is that we are in a period of absolute orthodoxy whereby dissenting views are simply not entertained.
No one disputes that the temperatures are rising but it is modelling that is telling us what happens next. Is it like cigarettes where a link has been shown to exist? Not being a climate scientist I have no idea.
I just feel uncomfortable that there is no Jeremy Paxman ("why is this lying bastard lying to me") to question it all. Are all those on here, for example, comfortable not wanting to question what is, in the end, a prediction based upon modelling and hence originates in the human mind.
This is a fantasy put around by right-wing commentators. As you say, no one disputes that temperatures are rising: the evidence there is unavoidable. That this is largely caused by human activity producing greenhouse gases is also very clear. But what happens next, however, is very much discussed and argued over. There is plenty of dissent. How different factors interact, how we should model future change, what’s the best approach to deal with the problem, all extensively debated.
However, the point is that temperatures are already up a worrying amount, so when that’s your starting point, whether things will get much worse or just slightly worse doesn’t change that they are already bad.
"The fantasy put about..."
LOL & QED
The world has warmed previously when presumably it wasn't on account of human activity. It is warming again now and that is coinciding with us pumping huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere. And it may well be that the current warming is due to us. But we don't know how much, nor exactly what effect it is having in total when other factors are taken into account.
For example, does warming lead to more evaporation and more cloud cover, reflecting more incident energy from the sun back into space? Does warming kill vegetation and increase desertification, which is also a better reflector of incident energy back into space than plants are?
We don't know the future, we model it. And we model it extremely diligently. But it is only a model and any model is only as good as its inputs. If I model a balance sheet for example I know that I can fiddle faddle, say, working capital requirements and associated fundraising requirements. All my own work.
And the thing which you are illustrating is how sad it is that today we all are supposed to accept the orthodoxy with dissenters chastised and ridiculed. We have of course been here before in history but let's not over-dramatise things, right, I mean we are only talking about extinction of the human race. Something that you, by your actions, btw, aren't all *that* bothered about.
All scientists can ever do is make predictions and see how well they turn out.
The predictions of the 1990 models didn't play out perfectly (+0.4 degrees compared with +0.55 degrees) but they are not far off. Close enough to be able to say that the big picture story is right and everything else is sorting out details.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
ATM machines (just for @Selebian) I agree, but PINs I have all over the place.
I took an ATM card with me on my cycling trip, just in case. I have just employed a gardener and didn't know how he wanted to be paid so I used the card to get some cash, in case that was what he wanted (he doesn't). The card is a year out of date so it was lucky he was happy with a bank transfer and that I didn't need it on my trip.
Talking about cash (and @Anabobazina TRIGGER WARNING) I hadn't realised that HMG had had to change their bill to provide a little more protection for cash users.
"Previously the Bill did not specify whether withdrawal and deposit facilities should be free, or whether consumers might have to pay a charge.
But through a late amendment to the Bill, called for by Which?, it will now ensure that people across the country can withdraw and deposit cash for free.
This means the FCA will have greater power over major banks and building societies to ensure reasonable free access to cash is preserved for those who need it."
Do we have a view on cheques? I very rarely receive them, but have recently received quite a few (HMRC, TV licence, British Gas, Virgin, etc) in the settling my fathers estate. Don't know why that should be different to normal particularly as some organisations who had to pay me were happy with me providing my bank details. Very odd.
My wife commented that her last stub in her cheque book was dated 2016. I had to look for my cheque book and the last cheque I wrote was 2010.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
As with your anti-cash crusade, you're assuming that everyone has adopted the tech that you've embraced. You err, I fear.
As a chronic late adopter, I'm still resisting using my phone more than I have to, mostly for people's irritating two-factor authorisations (and to make phone calls! Remember them?). I accept that most people have moved onto using smartphones, but paying by card, with PIN if necessary, is still the default for many (most?) people, and there's nearly always a queue at my nearest ATM with people wanting cash (probably just to annoy you).
I wonder what proportion of people still use landline phones? Wifi is weak where I live, so I prefer it where possible (the handset is more comfortable than a mobile too), though the unlimited free calls on my mobile contract tempt me away when signal isn't an issue.
but paying by card, with PIN if necessary, is still the default for many (most?) people
Not sure whether that's true, but if it is, then why?
Apple Pay is far easier and more convenient, and negates the need to keep track of multiple cards.
I wouldn't ban cash or card use, I just know it is an utter and complete waste of time and space.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
ATM machines (just for @Selebian) I agree, but PINs I have all over the place.
I took an ATM card with me on my cycling trip, just in case. I have just employed a gardener and didn't know how he wanted to be paid so I used the card to get some cash, in case that was what he wanted (he doesn't). The card is a year out of date so it was lucky he was happy with a bank transfer and that I didn't need it on my trip.
Talking about cash (and @Anabobazina TRIGGER WARNING) I hadn't realised that HMG had had to change their bill to provide a little more protection for cash users.
"Previously the Bill did not specify whether withdrawal and deposit facilities should be free, or whether consumers might have to pay a charge.
But through a late amendment to the Bill, called for by Which?, it will now ensure that people across the country can withdraw and deposit cash for free.
This means the FCA will have greater power over major banks and building societies to ensure reasonable free access to cash is preserved for those who need it."
Do we have a view on cheques? I very rarely receive them, but have recently received quite a few (HMRC, TV licence, British Gas, Virgin, etc) in the settling my fathers estate. Don't know why that should be different to normal particularly as some organisations who had to pay me were happy with me providing my bank details. Very odd.
My wife commented that her last stub in her cheque book was dated 2016. I had to look for my cheque book and the last cheque I wrote was 2010.
Possibly even sillier than cash, were that possible.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
So the answer is practically everyone.
Not for Android or Apple pay
Indeed. Amazes me that people don't even grasp this. Haven't taken a card out with me for years – they are utterly pointless nowadays.
I'm getting a distinct feeling of déjà vu reading this.
Indeed, it's stunning how the rank ignorance of established technologies continues on PB, among people who really ought to know better.
Oh, that's a bit harsh. I think you have a reasonable grasp of the technologies, just not of how most people use them.
I encountered an ice cream van in the middle of nowhere the other day when on a long, warm walk.
Aha, I thought – finally I am done for...
"Do you take Apple Pay?" I said, expecting a firm no.
"Of course," said the ice cream man.
Cash is dead.
I've had a couple of places recently that could only accept cash - one being my local Co-Op, after the **** scrotes took out BT's cables - again.
OTOH, a play centre is now card only. Except for all the games inside, that still take pound coins...
Edit: another being a care near the pier in Southwold at the weekend, where there Internet connection seemed to depend on where seagulls were in the sky. Sometimes they could accept cards, other times it was cash-only
Edit2: and a church I went into on Sunday had a tap-in donations screen, which was cool (and given thefts from cashboes in churches, probably a good idea). First time I'd seen that outside cathedrals.
I encountered an ice cream van in the middle of nowhere the other day when on a long, warm walk.
Aha, I thought – finally I am done for...
"Do you take Apple Pay?" I said, expecting a firm no.
"Of course," said the ice cream man.
Cash is dead.
There is a very funny advert on the telly at the moment with some bloke running a fruit stall on an island beach which has a sign saying "Crypto Only".
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
ATM machines (just for @Selebian) I agree, but PINs I have all over the place.
I took an ATM card with me on my cycling trip, just in case. I have just employed a gardener and didn't know how he wanted to be paid so I used the card to get some cash, in case that was what he wanted (he doesn't). The card is a year out of date so it was lucky he was happy with a bank transfer and that I didn't need it on my trip.
Talking about cash (and @Anabobazina TRIGGER WARNING) I hadn't realised that HMG had had to change their bill to provide a little more protection for cash users.
"Previously the Bill did not specify whether withdrawal and deposit facilities should be free, or whether consumers might have to pay a charge.
But through a late amendment to the Bill, called for by Which?, it will now ensure that people across the country can withdraw and deposit cash for free.
This means the FCA will have greater power over major banks and building societies to ensure reasonable free access to cash is preserved for those who need it."
Do we have a view on cheques? I very rarely receive them, but have recently received quite a few (HMRC, TV licence, British Gas, Virgin, etc) in the settling my fathers estate. Don't know why that should be different to normal particularly as some organisations who had to pay me were happy with me providing my bank details. Very odd.
My wife commented that her last stub in her cheque book was dated 2016. I had to look for my cheque book and the last cheque I wrote was 2010.
Me too, when I was recentlu an executor. I think it is partly because: why bother setting up an account and security for someone who by definition is no good as a long term customer??
Another issue may for all I know be the technical legal problems of paying to a non-existent person, or rather a person existing only as a trust account, ie executry account. It's not as if the deceased can provide a PIN or iris scan when required.
I actually liked using cheques and printed paying in slips because there was no argument about whose fault it was (e.g. any allegation that I'd written the wrong nuymber) if a large sum went walkies. This does happen - we had a 23K sum vanish in transit but because we had done it in branch and had printed documentation of the transfer, the bank didn't query our complaint for a moment.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
So the answer is practically everyone.
Not for Android or Apple pay
Indeed. Amazes me that people don't even grasp this. Haven't taken a card out with me for years – they are utterly pointless nowadays.
I'm getting a distinct feeling of déjà vu reading this.
Indeed, it's stunning how the rank ignorance of established technologies continues on PB, among people who really ought to know better.
Oh, that's a bit harsh. I think you have a reasonable grasp of the technologies, just not of how most people use them.
Think you need to apply that comment to yourself TBH.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
ATM machines (just for @Selebian) I agree, but PINs I have all over the place.
I took an ATM card with me on my cycling trip, just in case. I have just employed a gardener and didn't know how he wanted to be paid so I used the card to get some cash, in case that was what he wanted (he doesn't). The card is a year out of date so it was lucky he was happy with a bank transfer and that I didn't need it on my trip.
Talking about cash (and @Anabobazina TRIGGER WARNING) I hadn't realised that HMG had had to change their bill to provide a little more protection for cash users.
"Previously the Bill did not specify whether withdrawal and deposit facilities should be free, or whether consumers might have to pay a charge.
But through a late amendment to the Bill, called for by Which?, it will now ensure that people across the country can withdraw and deposit cash for free.
This means the FCA will have greater power over major banks and building societies to ensure reasonable free access to cash is preserved for those who need it."
Do we have a view on cheques? I very rarely receive them, but have recently received quite a few (HMRC, TV licence, British Gas, Virgin, etc) in the settling my fathers estate. Don't know why that should be different to normal particularly as some organisations who had to pay me were happy with me providing my bank details. Very odd.
My wife commented that her last stub in her cheque book was dated 2016. I had to look for my cheque book and the last cheque I wrote was 2010.
Possibly even sillier than cash, were that possible.
Opportunity cost of cash = negligible.
Apple Pay = cost of one Apple phone, deed signed in blood to the Devil, insurance, buggeration when stolen ...
This is my periodic reminder that the UK space programme currently consists of a Virgin plane that doesn't work and that Top Gear Robin Reliant.
(punches wall in irritation)
Cost was £70 million apparently. I expect £70M wouldn't go as far in any potential space program of ours.
Falcon 9 has an estimated marginal cost in the £20-25 million pound range.
Development, according to a NASA investigation of development process, was a billion or 2.
Big And Expensive always like to quote £25 Billion+ to develop a medium lift rocket - whenever the politicians want an independent space program.
£25bn, on a “cost plus” basis, index-linked, subject to annual review and additional milestone payments, with an expected timeline of 10-15 years.
And they wonder why a fresh startup run by a mad guy, is eating their lunch and then some.
And the overrun would be 100%
Some time back, the US Airforce wanted a demo of rapid availability space launch. Hilariously, they gave the contract to Boeing, who bid…. A spaceplane first stage, with an RS-25 as the engine. Stop laughing in the back, there.
After spending several hundred million dollars, Boeing announced it was too difficult and cancelled the contract. Literally nothing for the money.
Alternatively, the American government bailed out an American aircraft manufacturer.
No, the Air force wanted the capability.
The politicians wanted to give Boeing a chance to catch-up with all those New Space companies. Boeing fucked up.
For those who don’t know - the RS-25 (The Space Shuttle Main Engine) couldn’t be used for a rapid response launch vehicle. You can’t just pull it to a launch pad and go within a hour.
You could build a kind of cousin of it that shared nearly nothing with the original. But Boeing didn’t plan on doing that.
So. Is the BBC biased politically (forget Huw Edwards) or not and if it is, which way?
I saw an old mate of mine last night. To the left, shall we say, and he was fuming that eg The Today Programme might as well be an arm of government.
Whereas from my right-leaning, civilised, thoughtful perspective I think the BBC leans left.
I dislike the fact that they always have to so maniacally strive for "balance" and "inclusivity" but I understand it also.
As they say if we're both convinced of our view then perhaps it is therefore doing something right.
Although annoying both left and right does not mean that the BBC is balanced.
FWIW I think the BBC tries very hard to be balanced on most things (not all - there is now no hint of skepticism left when reporting climate science, for instance, when some of the more out there claims/predictions ought to be at best queried). It does, however, tend to skew urban, metropolitan. I don't think it has a clue about the countryside and rural affairs, as shown by Countryfile, which is a programme about the countryside made by city dwellers, for city dwellers.
Yes there's plenty wrong with it.
And as for climate, my point to my friend was that they would never dare have someone from "the other side" to argue a different position on climate change.
When they ever did get someone from ‘the other side’, it would be a flat Earth fanatic rather than another scientist.
That may have been only partly their fault. FEFs so not have careers which they would endanger by voicing private doubts.
Which is actually a large part of the problem, that all the scientific research funding is on one side.
Balderdash. There’s research funding on the phenomenon, there’s also money for how to reduce CO2 production (either through technology and more efficiency, or through behaviour change), then there’s some on other approaches like carbon capture, and there’s some on how to mitigate the effects of climate change. So, all sorts of different positions on climate change are represented.
Yep. It's either going to be really bad or it's going to be catastrophic.
Or various points in between. It's mostly a continuous function.
Looking a way ahead,
Odds against we break the dinosaurs 150 odd million years of global dominance right now.
At heart I'm a techno-optimist. It's one reason I find it so frustrating when we balls it up and don't use the technology we already have available to fix our problems.
So I'm still hopeful we'll escape the gravity well and give ourselves the security of an additional basket for our eggs.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
So the answer is practically everyone.
Not for Android or Apple pay
Indeed. Amazes me that people don't even grasp this. Haven't taken a card out with me for years – they are utterly pointless nowadays.
I'm getting a distinct feeling of déjà vu reading this.
Indeed, it's stunning how the rank ignorance of established technologies continues on PB, among people who really ought to know better.
That is very honest of you but to be fair we do make allowances for your ignorance so don't be too hard on yourself.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
ATM machines (just for @Selebian) I agree, but PINs I have all over the place.
I took an ATM card with me on my cycling trip, just in case. I have just employed a gardener and didn't know how he wanted to be paid so I used the card to get some cash, in case that was what he wanted (he doesn't). The card is a year out of date so it was lucky he was happy with a bank transfer and that I didn't need it on my trip.
Talking about cash (and @Anabobazina TRIGGER WARNING) I hadn't realised that HMG had had to change their bill to provide a little more protection for cash users.
"Previously the Bill did not specify whether withdrawal and deposit facilities should be free, or whether consumers might have to pay a charge.
But through a late amendment to the Bill, called for by Which?, it will now ensure that people across the country can withdraw and deposit cash for free.
This means the FCA will have greater power over major banks and building societies to ensure reasonable free access to cash is preserved for those who need it."
Do we have a view on cheques? I very rarely receive them, but have recently received quite a few (HMRC, TV licence, British Gas, Virgin, etc) in the settling my fathers estate. Don't know why that should be different to normal particularly as some organisations who had to pay me were happy with me providing my bank details. Very odd.
My wife commented that her last stub in her cheque book was dated 2016. I had to look for my cheque book and the last cheque I wrote was 2010.
Possibly even sillier than cash, were that possible.
Opportunity cost of cash = negligible.
Apple Pay = cost of one Apple phone, deed signed in blood to the Devil, insurance, buggeration when stolen ...
Er, most/all smartphones have NFC payments these days, not just Apple.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
ATM machines (just for @Selebian) I agree, but PINs I have all over the place.
I took an ATM card with me on my cycling trip, just in case. I have just employed a gardener and didn't know how he wanted to be paid so I used the card to get some cash, in case that was what he wanted (he doesn't). The card is a year out of date so it was lucky he was happy with a bank transfer and that I didn't need it on my trip.
Talking about cash (and @Anabobazina TRIGGER WARNING) I hadn't realised that HMG had had to change their bill to provide a little more protection for cash users.
"Previously the Bill did not specify whether withdrawal and deposit facilities should be free, or whether consumers might have to pay a charge.
But through a late amendment to the Bill, called for by Which?, it will now ensure that people across the country can withdraw and deposit cash for free.
This means the FCA will have greater power over major banks and building societies to ensure reasonable free access to cash is preserved for those who need it."
Do we have a view on cheques? I very rarely receive them, but have recently received quite a few (HMRC, TV licence, British Gas, Virgin, etc) in the settling my fathers estate. Don't know why that should be different to normal particularly as some organisations who had to pay me were happy with me providing my bank details. Very odd.
My wife commented that her last stub in her cheque book was dated 2016. I had to look for my cheque book and the last cheque I wrote was 2010.
I'm guessing for security reasons. They will send the cheque to the address they have on file.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
So the answer is practically everyone.
Not for Android or Apple pay
Indeed. Amazes me that people don't even grasp this. Haven't taken a card out with me for years – they are utterly pointless nowadays.
I'm getting a distinct feeling of déjà vu reading this.
Indeed, it's stunning how the rank ignorance of established technologies continues on PB, among people who really ought to know better.
Oh, that's a bit harsh. I think you have a reasonable grasp of the technologies, just not of how most people use them.
Think you need to apply that comment to yourself TBH.
Well, duh. How could I apply it to myself when I've just revealed I didn't know how to set up Touch ID on Apple Pay?
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
As with your anti-cash crusade, you're assuming that everyone has adopted the tech that you've embraced. You err, I fear.
As a chronic late adopter, I'm still resisting using my phone more than I have to, mostly for people's irritating two-factor authorisations (and to make phone calls! Remember them?). I accept that most people have moved onto using smartphones, but paying by card, with PIN if necessary, is still the default for many (most?) people, and there's nearly always a queue at my nearest ATM with people wanting cash (probably just to annoy you).
I wonder what proportion of people still use landline phones? Wifi is weak where I live, so I prefer it where possible (the handset is more comfortable than a mobile too), though the unlimited free calls on my mobile contract tempt me away when signal isn't an issue.
Must be a roaring illegal drugs trade in Godalming!
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
ATM machines (just for @Selebian) I agree, but PINs I have all over the place.
I took an ATM card with me on my cycling trip, just in case. I have just employed a gardener and didn't know how he wanted to be paid so I used the card to get some cash, in case that was what he wanted (he doesn't). The card is a year out of date so it was lucky he was happy with a bank transfer and that I didn't need it on my trip.
Talking about cash (and @Anabobazina TRIGGER WARNING) I hadn't realised that HMG had had to change their bill to provide a little more protection for cash users.
"Previously the Bill did not specify whether withdrawal and deposit facilities should be free, or whether consumers might have to pay a charge.
But through a late amendment to the Bill, called for by Which?, it will now ensure that people across the country can withdraw and deposit cash for free.
This means the FCA will have greater power over major banks and building societies to ensure reasonable free access to cash is preserved for those who need it."
Do we have a view on cheques? I very rarely receive them, but have recently received quite a few (HMRC, TV licence, British Gas, Virgin, etc) in the settling my fathers estate. Don't know why that should be different to normal particularly as some organisations who had to pay me were happy with me providing my bank details. Very odd.
My wife commented that her last stub in her cheque book was dated 2016. I had to look for my cheque book and the last cheque I wrote was 2010.
One further thought. After my first experiences, I'd always have a separate executry account - not just for the obvious reason of not muddling money with mine, but also because some of the cheques were to 'Executors of A B Carnyx Decd" or various wordings.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
ATM machines (just for @Selebian) I agree, but PINs I have all over the place.
I took an ATM card with me on my cycling trip, just in case. I have just employed a gardener and didn't know how he wanted to be paid so I used the card to get some cash, in case that was what he wanted (he doesn't). The card is a year out of date so it was lucky he was happy with a bank transfer and that I didn't need it on my trip.
Talking about cash (and @Anabobazina TRIGGER WARNING) I hadn't realised that HMG had had to change their bill to provide a little more protection for cash users.
"Previously the Bill did not specify whether withdrawal and deposit facilities should be free, or whether consumers might have to pay a charge.
But through a late amendment to the Bill, called for by Which?, it will now ensure that people across the country can withdraw and deposit cash for free.
This means the FCA will have greater power over major banks and building societies to ensure reasonable free access to cash is preserved for those who need it."
Good, I don't want to be charged when I have to trudge to the bank to deposit cash for those rude idiots who insist on transferring money they owe to me in stupid paper tokens.
That seems an odd thing to say. The only times I get given cash are on the vanishingly rare occasions I pay with it and get change. If you are not a retailer, your problem with sums of cash large enough to require banking is not going to be trudging, it's going to be the plod (money-laundering division). If you are a retailer, you are surely at liberty to stipulate card-only?
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
ATM machines (just for @Selebian) I agree, but PINs I have all over the place.
I took an ATM card with me on my cycling trip, just in case. I have just employed a gardener and didn't know how he wanted to be paid so I used the card to get some cash, in case that was what he wanted (he doesn't). The card is a year out of date so it was lucky he was happy with a bank transfer and that I didn't need it on my trip.
Talking about cash (and @Anabobazina TRIGGER WARNING) I hadn't realised that HMG had had to change their bill to provide a little more protection for cash users.
"Previously the Bill did not specify whether withdrawal and deposit facilities should be free, or whether consumers might have to pay a charge.
But through a late amendment to the Bill, called for by Which?, it will now ensure that people across the country can withdraw and deposit cash for free.
This means the FCA will have greater power over major banks and building societies to ensure reasonable free access to cash is preserved for those who need it."
Do we have a view on cheques? I very rarely receive them, but have recently received quite a few (HMRC, TV licence, British Gas, Virgin, etc) in the settling my fathers estate. Don't know why that should be different to normal particularly as some organisations who had to pay me were happy with me providing my bank details. Very odd.
My wife commented that her last stub in her cheque book was dated 2016. I had to look for my cheque book and the last cheque I wrote was 2010.
I've been getting a lot for my father's estate too. The size of some of them has been causing complications although fortunately the other executor trusts me to pay them into my personal bank account and then forward the money.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
As with your anti-cash crusade, you're assuming that everyone has adopted the tech that you've embraced. You err, I fear.
As a chronic late adopter, I'm still resisting using my phone more than I have to, mostly for people's irritating two-factor authorisations (and to make phone calls! Remember them?). I accept that most people have moved onto using smartphones, but paying by card, with PIN if necessary, is still the default for many (most?) people, and there's nearly always a queue at my nearest ATM with people wanting cash (probably just to annoy you).
I wonder what proportion of people still use landline phones? Wifi is weak where I live, so I prefer it where possible (the handset is more comfortable than a mobile too), though the unlimited free calls on my mobile contract tempt me away when signal isn't an issue.
but paying by card, with PIN if necessary, is still the default for many (most?) people
Not sure whether that's true, but if it is, then why?
Apple Pay is far easier and more convenient, and negates the need to keep track of multiple cards.
I wouldn't ban cash or card use, I just know it is an utter and complete waste of time and space.
Well it necessitates you buying into apple technology, for one, doesn't it?
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
ATM machines (just for @Selebian) I agree, but PINs I have all over the place.
I took an ATM card with me on my cycling trip, just in case. I have just employed a gardener and didn't know how he wanted to be paid so I used the card to get some cash, in case that was what he wanted (he doesn't). The card is a year out of date so it was lucky he was happy with a bank transfer and that I didn't need it on my trip.
Talking about cash (and @Anabobazina TRIGGER WARNING) I hadn't realised that HMG had had to change their bill to provide a little more protection for cash users.
"Previously the Bill did not specify whether withdrawal and deposit facilities should be free, or whether consumers might have to pay a charge.
But through a late amendment to the Bill, called for by Which?, it will now ensure that people across the country can withdraw and deposit cash for free.
This means the FCA will have greater power over major banks and building societies to ensure reasonable free access to cash is preserved for those who need it."
Good, I don't want to be charged when I have to trudge to the bank to deposit cash for those rude idiots who insist on transferring money they owe to me in stupid paper tokens.
That seems an odd thing to say. The only times I get given cash are on the vanishingly rare occasions I pay with it and get change. If you are not a retailer, your problem with sums of cash large enough to require banking is not going to be trudging, it's going to be the plod (money-laundering division). If you are a retailer, you are surely at liberty to stipulate card-only?
It's mainly transfers when I have bankrolled community stuff etc. Some old school elements at local clubs/parish councils seem to insist on paying me back in cash despite my heartfelt requests for them not to.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
ATM machines (just for @Selebian) I agree, but PINs I have all over the place.
I took an ATM card with me on my cycling trip, just in case. I have just employed a gardener and didn't know how he wanted to be paid so I used the card to get some cash, in case that was what he wanted (he doesn't). The card is a year out of date so it was lucky he was happy with a bank transfer and that I didn't need it on my trip.
Talking about cash (and @Anabobazina TRIGGER WARNING) I hadn't realised that HMG had had to change their bill to provide a little more protection for cash users.
"Previously the Bill did not specify whether withdrawal and deposit facilities should be free, or whether consumers might have to pay a charge.
But through a late amendment to the Bill, called for by Which?, it will now ensure that people across the country can withdraw and deposit cash for free.
This means the FCA will have greater power over major banks and building societies to ensure reasonable free access to cash is preserved for those who need it."
Do we have a view on cheques? I very rarely receive them, but have recently received quite a few (HMRC, TV licence, British Gas, Virgin, etc) in the settling my fathers estate. Don't know why that should be different to normal particularly as some organisations who had to pay me were happy with me providing my bank details. Very odd.
My wife commented that her last stub in her cheque book was dated 2016. I had to look for my cheque book and the last cheque I wrote was 2010.
I'm guessing for security reasons. They will send the cheque to the address they have on file.
That'll be the deceased - but actually you have a point as the stamped bit of paper* they give you at the probate office to get each asset says, in effect, "Yes, it's OK to cough up the goodies to D E Carnyx, The Bothy, Auchenshuggle, who is the authorised ececutor". So, yes, basically right.
So. Is the BBC biased politically (forget Huw Edwards) or not and if it is, which way?
I saw an old mate of mine last night. To the left, shall we say, and he was fuming that eg The Today Programme might as well be an arm of government.
Whereas from my right-leaning, civilised, thoughtful perspective I think the BBC leans left.
I dislike the fact that they always have to so maniacally strive for "balance" and "inclusivity" but I understand it also.
As they say if we're both convinced of our view then perhaps it is therefore doing something right.
Although annoying both left and right does not mean that the BBC is balanced.
FWIW I think the BBC tries very hard to be balanced on most things (not all - there is now no hint of skepticism left when reporting climate science, for instance, when some of the more out there claims/predictions ought to be at best queried). It does, however, tend to skew urban, metropolitan. I don't think it has a clue about the countryside and rural affairs, as shown by Countryfile, which is a programme about the countryside made by city dwellers, for city dwellers.
Yes there's plenty wrong with it.
And as for climate, my point to my friend was that they would never dare have someone from "the other side" to argue a different position on climate change.
When they ever did get someone from ‘the other side’, it would be a flat Earth fanatic rather than another scientist.
That may have been only partly their fault. FEFs so not have careers which they would endanger by voicing private doubts.
Which is actually a large part of the problem, that all the scientific research funding is on one side.
The scientific research funding follows the scientific evidence.
The vested interest funding, well there's been plenty of that for climate 'sceptics'. And probably much more lucrative for those involved.
(I do find the idea of funding bias bizarre. It's in no government's interest to fund only one side of climate science, if there were really two sides. Climate science as it stands is a massive headache for governments - it means taxing/regulating things that people like, in really unpopular areas. There's a massive incentive for governments to fund any science that would question the IPCC conclusions - making it all go away would solve a whole load of political problems. Unfortunately, science doesn't work like that - you can't just get the answers you want because if you do other people are going to point out what you've done and it's easy* for other groups to check)
*in most areas. Far less so in my field of epidemiology where we cannot share or publish the patient-level data for others to verify, due to entirely legitimate data protection concerns. Other groups could request the same data, but I'm not sure you'd get that far on public interest grounds to simply verify pre-existing research. We need more like openSAFELY where anyone can run their own code to check conclusions. This would be possible if e.g. NHS Digital had a service to hold copies of supplied data and run, on demand (at low fee) code on it and provide the results (there would still be a need to ensure no sensitive disclosure in analysis results, which is probably why this hasn't happened).
"Points" from someone whose head is obviously completely up the system.
The points about funding are definetely valid, even if they don't resolve the 'groupthink amongst academics' problem.
Yep, there's definite scope for problems there. One thing becomes accepted and everyone else takes it as read. We've seen that often enough - but we've seen that often enough because eventually someone shows that's not how things work afterall.
Again, I'm long out of this field and wasn't that closely involved to start with, but I saw a lot of disagreement among climate scientists on how the feedbacks worked and interacted. Plenty of 'out there' ideas being presented where if thing A works differently to the general perception then thing B will happen and we can test that witthin 5-10 years etc. I think there are enough people with different backgrounds in different centres studying data from different sources with different designs to reduce the risk of too much groupthink here.
I may be wrong, of course and maybe there are more people training in 'climate science' at a lower level and being taught 'truths'. The nice thing 15 years ago, which may or may not still be the case, was that climate research was brining together people from a lot of disparate disciplines with different ideas and, in most cases, not a great deal of formal training in any accepted truth of the field. The main danger was that most people on the modelling side were working on a limited number of base models, so a fundamental error in one base model could lead to errors in many people's research. But, if so, there would be a whole lot of research that quickly diverged from new observations, unless you were really unlucky. There are also, of course, a lot of people not working on models at all, but working on comparing model predictions, forwards or backwards with observations on the ground and finding better ways of doing those observations.
My concern with it all is that right now, dissent is not allowed. We are at a stage whereby no one would put their heads above the parapet. Well that means that the overwhelming majority - thousands upon thousands - of climate scientists agree hence it is settled. But without going all Galileo about it is that we are in a period of absolute orthodoxy whereby dissenting views are simply not entertained.
No one disputes that the temperatures are rising but it is modelling that is telling us what happens next. Is it like cigarettes where a link has been shown to exist? Not being a climate scientist I have no idea.
I just feel uncomfortable that there is no Jeremy Paxman ("why is this lying bastard lying to me") to question it all. Are all those on here, for example, comfortable not wanting to question what is, in the end, a prediction based upon modelling and hence originates in the human mind.
This is a fantasy put around by right-wing commentators. As you say, no one disputes that temperatures are rising: the evidence there is unavoidable. That this is largely caused by human activity producing greenhouse gases is also very clear. But what happens next, however, is very much discussed and argued over. There is plenty of dissent. How different factors interact, how we should model future change, what’s the best approach to deal with the problem, all extensively debated.
However, the point is that temperatures are already up a worrying amount, so when that’s your starting point, whether things will get much worse or just slightly worse doesn’t change that they are already bad.
"The fantasy put about..."
LOL & QED
The world has warmed previously when presumably it wasn't on account of human activity. It is warming again now and that is coinciding with us pumping huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere. And it may well be that the current warming is due to us. But we don't know how much, nor exactly what effect it is having in total when other factors are taken into account.
For example, does warming lead to more evaporation and more cloud cover, reflecting more incident energy from the sun back into space? Does warming kill vegetation and increase desertification, which is also a better reflector of incident energy back into space than plants are?
We don't know the future, we model it. And we model it extremely diligently. But it is only a model and any model is only as good as its inputs. If I model a balance sheet for example I know that I can fiddle faddle, say, working capital requirements and associated fundraising requirements. All my own work.
And the thing which you are illustrating is how sad it is that today we all are supposed to accept the orthodoxy with dissenters chastised and ridiculed. We have of course been here before in history but let's not over-dramatise things, right, I mean we are only talking about extinction of the human race. Something that you, by your actions, btw, aren't all *that* bothered about.
All scientists can ever do is make predictions and see how well they turn out.
The predictions of the 1990 models didn't play out perfectly (+0.4 degrees compared with +0.55 degrees) but they are not far off. Close enough to be able to say that the big picture story is right and everything else is sorting out details.
How right do the scientists have to be for how long?
Yep good question. I don't know. In climate/geological terms of course 30 years is tiny but let's say that there was "natural" warming. (And cooling, such as the planet has seen for the past XXXXXXX years). What if the scientists are imposing their models on an existing trajectory ie making observations not predictions.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
The Chrome browser has a new password-checker that Boris and everyone else should use.
Would allowing Chrome to choose your password be a breach of terms of service on lots of sites including banking and reduce your consumer protection?
Dunno but we have banking lawyers on pb. I doubt it or we'd have heard by now. (Come to think of it, I'd be more concerned about browser password managers syncing to easily stolen phones and laptops.) But I think this checking function (for weak, reused or compromised/hacked passwords) is new:-
What could potentially get you in trouble with the bank, is using the browser to *save* your online passwords, either on your computer or in the cloud. Computer generated passwords are generally excellent and random, but you have to remember them.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
So the answer is practically everyone.
Not for Android or Apple pay
Indeed. Amazes me that people don't even grasp this. Haven't taken a card out with me for years – they are utterly pointless nowadays.
I'm getting a distinct feeling of déjà vu reading this.
Indeed, it's stunning how the rank ignorance of established technologies continues on PB, among people who really ought to know better.
That is very honest of you but to be fair we do make allowances for your ignorance so don't be too hard on yourself.
I'm not the one who still carries scraps of paper and shards of metal around in my pocket everyday as a weird form of barter.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
So the answer is practically everyone.
Not for Android or Apple pay
Indeed. Amazes me that people don't even grasp this. Haven't taken a card out with me for years – they are utterly pointless nowadays.
I'm getting a distinct feeling of déjà vu reading this.
Indeed, it's stunning how the rank ignorance of established technologies continues on PB, among people who really ought to know better.
Oh, that's a bit harsh. I think you have a reasonable grasp of the technologies, just not of how most people use them.
Think you need to apply that comment to yourself TBH.
Well, duh. How could I apply it to myself when I've just revealed I didn't know how to set up Touch ID on Apple Pay?
Indeed.
The number of people who can’t spin up their own VPN, using a Docker container on their NAS box….
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
As with your anti-cash crusade, you're assuming that everyone has adopted the tech that you've embraced. You err, I fear.
As a chronic late adopter, I'm still resisting using my phone more than I have to, mostly for people's irritating two-factor authorisations (and to make phone calls! Remember them?). I accept that most people have moved onto using smartphones, but paying by card, with PIN if necessary, is still the default for many (most?) people, and there's nearly always a queue at my nearest ATM with people wanting cash (probably just to annoy you).
I wonder what proportion of people still use landline phones? Wifi is weak where I live, so I prefer it where possible (the handset is more comfortable than a mobile too), though the unlimited free calls on my mobile contract tempt me away when signal isn't an issue.
Must be a roaring illegal drugs trade in Godalming!
You still pay for drugs with cash? Most people are on to NFTs for that these days.
Er - so I'm told anyway. I obviously don't have direct personal experience. And if I did I wouldn't say anything, so...I'm not digging myself out of this accidental hole I've put myself in very convincingly, am I?
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
As with your anti-cash crusade, you're assuming that everyone has adopted the tech that you've embraced. You err, I fear.
As a chronic late adopter, I'm still resisting using my phone more than I have to, mostly for people's irritating two-factor authorisations (and to make phone calls! Remember them?). I accept that most people have moved onto using smartphones, but paying by card, with PIN if necessary, is still the default for many (most?) people, and there's nearly always a queue at my nearest ATM with people wanting cash (probably just to annoy you).
I wonder what proportion of people still use landline phones? Wifi is weak where I live, so I prefer it where possible (the handset is more comfortable than a mobile too), though the unlimited free calls on my mobile contract tempt me away when signal isn't an issue.
Must be a roaring illegal drugs trade in Godalming!
Well, I wasn't going to come out and say it, but also in Anabobazinaville. I genuinely can't imagine what your problem with cash is, unless it is that, or a protection racket.
I do longer how long it will take to go from 97% cashless to 100%.
I use cash for:
1. My cleaner (although the agency is DD) 2. My fish and chips 3. My barbers.
but that's been the case for 3 years now, no sign of changing.
I use my debit card for said cash and I occasionally take a card out if 'm going on a hike, should my phone run out of power and there is an issue with the backup.
So I'd say I'm now 92% cardless as well and you could pose the same question.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
ATM machines (just for @Selebian) I agree, but PINs I have all over the place.
I took an ATM card with me on my cycling trip, just in case. I have just employed a gardener and didn't know how he wanted to be paid so I used the card to get some cash, in case that was what he wanted (he doesn't). The card is a year out of date so it was lucky he was happy with a bank transfer and that I didn't need it on my trip.
Talking about cash (and @Anabobazina TRIGGER WARNING) I hadn't realised that HMG had had to change their bill to provide a little more protection for cash users.
"Previously the Bill did not specify whether withdrawal and deposit facilities should be free, or whether consumers might have to pay a charge.
But through a late amendment to the Bill, called for by Which?, it will now ensure that people across the country can withdraw and deposit cash for free.
This means the FCA will have greater power over major banks and building societies to ensure reasonable free access to cash is preserved for those who need it."
Do we have a view on cheques? I very rarely receive them, but have recently received quite a few (HMRC, TV licence, British Gas, Virgin, etc) in the settling my fathers estate. Don't know why that should be different to normal particularly as some organisations who had to pay me were happy with me providing my bank details. Very odd.
My wife commented that her last stub in her cheque book was dated 2016. I had to look for my cheque book and the last cheque I wrote was 2010.
I'm guessing for security reasons. They will send the cheque to the address they have on file.
That'll be the deceased - but actually you have a point as the stamped bit of paper* they give you at the probate office to get each asset says, in effect, "Yes, it's OK to cough up the goodies to D E Carnyx, The Bothy, Auchenshuggle, who is the authorised ececutor". So, yes, basically right.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
As with your anti-cash crusade, you're assuming that everyone has adopted the tech that you've embraced. You err, I fear.
As a chronic late adopter, I'm still resisting using my phone more than I have to, mostly for people's irritating two-factor authorisations (and to make phone calls! Remember them?). I accept that most people have moved onto using smartphones, but paying by card, with PIN if necessary, is still the default for many (most?) people, and there's nearly always a queue at my nearest ATM with people wanting cash (probably just to annoy you).
I wonder what proportion of people still use landline phones? Wifi is weak where I live, so I prefer it where possible (the handset is more comfortable than a mobile too), though the unlimited free calls on my mobile contract tempt me away when signal isn't an issue.
but paying by card, with PIN if necessary, is still the default for many (most?) people
Not sure whether that's true, but if it is, then why?
Apple Pay is far easier and more convenient, and negates the need to keep track of multiple cards.
I wouldn't ban cash or card use, I just know it is an utter and complete waste of time and space.
Well it necessitates you buying into apple technology, for one, doesn't it?
I do longer how long it will take to go from 97% cashless to 100%.
I use cash for:
1. My cleaner (although the agency is DD) 2. My fish and chips 3. My barbers.
but that's been the case for 3 years now, no sign of changing.
I use my debit card for said cash and I occasionally take a card out if 'm going on a hike, should my phone run out of power and there is an issue with the backup.
So I'd say I'm now 92% cardless as well and you could pose the same question.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Well that is a genuinely stupid comment since if you use contactless with a card you have to put it in and use your pin after a certain number of transactions or if the value is over £100.
So the answer is practically everyone.
Not for Android or Apple pay
Indeed. Amazes me that people don't even grasp this. Haven't taken a card out with me for years – they are utterly pointless nowadays.
I'm getting a distinct feeling of déjà vu reading this.
Indeed, it's stunning how the rank ignorance of established technologies continues on PB, among people who really ought to know better.
Oh, that's a bit harsh. I think you have a reasonable grasp of the technologies, just not of how most people use them.
Think you need to apply that comment to yourself TBH.
Well, duh. How could I apply it to myself when I've just revealed I didn't know how to set up Touch ID on Apple Pay?
Indeed.
The number of people who can’t spin up their own VPN, using a Docker container on their NAS box….
The annoying thing is, I can do most things with computers.
The point was, I seldom use Apple Pay (only really when I'm doing a shop on the way home from the gym) so I never bothered to find out if I could change it via another setting.
Climate Change Activists: It doesn't matter that the UK only produces less than 1% of CO2 emissions we must all change our lifestyles here in order to avoid catastrophe.
Also Climate Change Activists: My use of devices which have a carbon cost is tiny in the scheme of things so I'm going to carry on posting on PB and going on holiday and using my car (even though it's electric, as if that changes anything) as I see fit.
Some solutions you can only implement at the scale of the nation state, because that's how our economy and politics are organised.
Writing down you passcode, top level security.....the Chinese & Russians must piss themselves how moronic our officials are when it comes to basic op-sec.
All those claiming Boris Johnson to be a risk to national security wash your mouths out.
After 24 hours of waterboarding, the f***** wouldn't divulge his mobile phone PIN. Not least because he couldn't. Make him Foreign Secretary, and now!
Boris is definitely one of those people who uses the same password for every account and his phone pin is the same as credit card pin...with the failed thinking is ok because the password is some obscure latin or greek so nobody could guess it...
If all his accounts including credit cards are on one PIN and he's forgotten it, is that why he had to go to Richard Sharp to get some money?
Got to wonder where the Johnson story will go next. Thoughts of his running in a near-future by-election are nuts IMO, but the story's clearly not at an end yet.
Who even uses a PIN or ATM anymore for transactions? Both are obsolete. Use Apple Pay on phone or watch.
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
Comments
Give it a rest.
He ain’t coming back.
Yesterday’s man.
He’s done.
Ergo, meaningless.
Why do you insist on ignoring that key fact?
Boris must be a complete idiot if he persists in using cards.
It's a bit worrying when you think about it. Has anybody tested him to see if he can remember what he said ten minutes after he said it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQq8M88s3BU
Otoh here is Rory: Johnson is after all the most accomplished liar in public life. He has mastered the use of error, omission, exaggeration, diminution, equivocation and flat denial. He has perfected casuistry, circumlocution, false equivalence and false analogy. He is equally adept at the ironic jest, the fib and the grand lie; the weasel word and the half-truth; the hyperbolic lie, the obvious lie, and the bullshit lie – which may inadvertently be true.
However, the point is that temperatures are already up a worrying amount, so when that’s your starting point, whether things will get much worse or just slightly worse doesn’t change that they are already bad.
I took an ATM card with me on my cycling trip, just in case. I have just employed a gardener and didn't know how he wanted to be paid so I used the card to get some cash, in case that was what he wanted (he doesn't). The card is a year out of date so it was lucky he was happy with a bank transfer and that I didn't need it on my trip.
Kommersant is owned by Alisher Usmanov, who for many years was president of the world fencing organisation. Interesting, that, on his CV. Cf. Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, one-time dictator of Kalmykia who believes he encountered alien life forms, who was head of the world chess organisation for years - a position that was very important to him.
There may well be some PBers who are genned-up on the international politics of fencing and what's been happening in it since the increase in hostilities in 2022.
Sacked general Ivan Popov seems narked and who can blame him?
So much seems to revolve around Sergei Shoigu. What many people don't realise is that Shoigu has his own army, called Patriot, which may not be mentioned in his Wikipedia article but is active in Ukraine. The defence minister, with his own army. Welcome to Russia.
Hats off to Owen Matthews at the Spectator, though, for noticing the existence of various "PMCs" other than Wagner even though his actual analysis is rubbish:
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-wagner-group-isnt-russias-only-private-army/
Don't doubt that Shoigu (whose collection of Aztec sacrificial daggers surely exceeds @Leon's) is good in emergency situations. That's been his forte for a long time.
Putin says the Russian populace realise it's all very simple... Sure. I haven't been to Russia in a while, but what much of the populace probably think, and this is especially true of the intelligentsia, is that the whole mutiny business was an FSB stitch-up on both sides.
So the answer is practically everyone.
The typical rate for MPs is 17 times the national average - and over 22 [times] higher than the minimum hourly wage.
The highest hourly rate for a current MP goes to Liz Truss, who got £15,770 per hour.
https://news.sky.com/story/westminster-accounts-hourly-rate-of-past-pms-revealed-as-well-as-how-much-time-mps-spend-on-their-second-jobs-12920530
We are all in it together!
"I'm sorry, I can't talk about that."
Unless I have misunderstood the whole thing, we continue to pour vast, even increasing, amounts of CO2 etc into the atmosphere. This isn't changing soon. The future in that sense is already fixed, unless we can remove the stuff on a global scale (which in turn requires decisions).
'Just stop' and all that is actually yesterday's argument in this sense: we have to face the reality of what we have said for 30 years must not happen, happening.
The real question is: Given its happened - the doom future is already fixed - what are the best courses of action. Stopping putting CO2 out isn't an option because it isn't going to happen in the next 2 or three decades. And even when you do, you still have the adaptation problem.
CO2 is getting too much attention, and options for living in a new world getting too little.
Can't we just say he's a braying career liar who signed off on the imposition of draconian restrictions, such as not allowing us to socialise properly or go within 2 metres of each other, while he himself thought the rules didn't apply to him and kept having pissups? What high-quality leadership skills the man has!
(Not that I mind, btw.)
Odds against we break the dinosaurs 150 odd million years of global dominance right now.
LOL & QED
The world has warmed previously when presumably it wasn't on account of human activity. It is warming again now and that is coinciding with us pumping huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere. And it may well be that the current warming is due to us. But we don't know how much, nor exactly what effect it is having in total when other factors are taken into account.
For example, does warming lead to more evaporation and more cloud cover, reflecting more incident energy from the sun back into space? Does warming kill vegetation and increase desertification, which is also a better reflector of incident energy back into space than plants are?
We don't know the future, we model it. And we model it extremely diligently. But it is only a model and any model is only as good as its inputs. If I model a balance sheet for example I know that I can fiddle faddle, say, working capital requirements and associated fundraising requirements. All my own work.
And the thing which you are illustrating is how sad it is that today we all are supposed to accept the orthodoxy with dissenters chastised and ridiculed. We have of course been here before in history but let's not over-dramatise things, right, I mean we are only talking about extinction of the human race. Something that you, by your actions, btw, aren't all *that* bothered about.
Although it doesn't matter a lot because I don't actually use it much.
https://www.which.co.uk/news/article/new-rules-to-protect-cash-access-and-scam-victims-become-law-am2Qk6S6FavR?utm_medium=Email&utm_source=ExactTarget&utm_campaign=4258415-C_WS_EM_140723_Test&mi_u=213048458&mi_ecmp=C_WS_EM_140723_Test
"Previously the Bill did not specify whether withdrawal and deposit facilities should be free, or whether consumers might have to pay a charge.
But through a late amendment to the Bill, called for by Which?, it will now ensure that people across the country can withdraw and deposit cash for free.
This means the FCA will have greater power over major banks and building societies to ensure reasonable free access to cash is preserved for those who need it."
Athens so hot they are shutting the Acropolis noon-5 pm.
Also Climate Change Activists: My use of devices which have a carbon cost is tiny in the scheme of things so I'm going to carry on posting on PB and going on holiday and using my car (even though it's electric, as if that changes anything) as I see fit.
Cards are almost a pointless as cash.
A total waste of space.
I am saying that there is plenty we don't know about climate change, both its causes and its effects (well we do know historically what a huge amount of climate change has done to the planet, but not right now).
Meanwhile there is a catastrophising/the end of the world is nigh orthodoxy that no one is allowed to question which is reminiscent of other movements throughout history.
I am just disappointed that people like you accept it all and become part of the mass movement.
As a chronic late adopter, I'm still resisting using my phone more than I have to, mostly for people's irritating two-factor authorisations (and to make phone calls! Remember them?). I accept that most people have moved onto using smartphones, but paying by card, with PIN if necessary, is still the default for many (most?) people, and there's nearly always a queue at my nearest ATM with people wanting cash (probably just to annoy you).
I wonder what proportion of people still use landline phones? Wifi is weak where I live, so I prefer it where possible (the handset is more comfortable than a mobile too), though the unlimited free calls on my mobile contract tempt me away when signal isn't an issue.
Aha, I thought – finally I am done for...
"Do you take Apple Pay?" I said, expecting a firm no.
"Of course," said the ice cream man.
Cash is dead.
Here's a report from 2013;
https://theconversation.com/20-years-on-climate-change-projections-have-come-true-11245
The predictions of the 1990 models didn't play out perfectly (+0.4 degrees compared with +0.55 degrees) but they are not far off. Close enough to be able to say that the big picture story is right and everything else is sorting out details.
Here's one from 2020;
https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2943/study-confirms-climate-models-are-getting-future-warming-projections-right/
How right do the scientists have to be for how long?
My wife commented that her last stub in her cheque book was dated 2016. I had to look for my cheque book and the last cheque I wrote was 2010.
Not sure whether that's true, but if it is, then why?
Apple Pay is far easier and more convenient, and negates the need to keep track of multiple cards.
I wouldn't ban cash or card use, I just know it is an utter and complete waste of time and space.
OTOH, a play centre is now card only. Except for all the games inside, that still take pound coins...
Edit: another being a care near the pier in Southwold at the weekend, where there Internet connection seemed to depend on where seagulls were in the sky. Sometimes they could accept cards, other times it was cash-only
Edit2: and a church I went into on Sunday had a tap-in donations screen, which was cool (and given thefts from cashboes in churches, probably a good idea). First time I'd seen that outside cathedrals.
Another issue may for all I know be the technical legal problems of paying to a non-existent person, or rather a person existing only as a trust account, ie executry account. It's not as if the deceased can provide a PIN or iris scan when required.
I actually liked using cheques and printed paying in slips because there was no argument about whose fault it was (e.g. any allegation that I'd written the wrong nuymber) if a large sum went walkies. This does happen - we had a 23K sum vanish in transit but because we had done it in branch and had printed documentation of the transfer, the bank didn't query our complaint for a moment.
Apple Pay = cost of one Apple phone, deed signed in blood to the Devil, insurance, buggeration when stolen ...
The politicians wanted to give Boeing a chance to catch-up with all those New Space companies. Boeing fucked up.
For those who don’t know - the RS-25 (The Space Shuttle Main Engine) couldn’t be used for a rapid response launch vehicle. You can’t just pull it to a launch pad and go within a hour.
You could build a kind of cousin of it that shared nearly nothing with the original. But Boeing didn’t plan on doing that.
So I'm still hopeful we'll escape the gravity well and give ourselves the security of an additional basket for our eggs.
It's extremely annoying.
*no idea what it is called in England.
The number of people who can’t spin up their own VPN, using a Docker container on their NAS box….
Er - so I'm told anyway. I obviously don't have direct personal experience. And if I did I wouldn't say anything, so...I'm not digging myself out of this accidental hole I've put myself in very convincingly, am I?
I use cash for:
1. My cleaner (although the agency is DD)
2. My fish and chips
3. My barbers.
but that's been the case for 3 years now, no sign of changing.
I use my debit card for said cash and I occasionally take a card out if 'm going on a hike, should my phone run out of power and there is an issue with the backup.
So I'd say I'm now 92% cardless as well and you could pose the same question.
The point was, I seldom use Apple Pay (only really when I'm doing a shop on the way home from the gym) so I never bothered to find out if I could change it via another setting.
That isn't hypocrisy.