Howdy, Stranger!

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

The Mid Beds betting remains very tight – politicalbetting.com

12357

Comments

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,364
    TimS said:

    Carnyx said:

    TimS said:

    Carnyx said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    'Plant-based' is a stupid shift in language because it reduces the amount of useful information.

    Vegetarian has a clear meaning. Vegan has a clear meaning. Plant-based also has a clear meaning by itself, but if you're a vegan you have no idea if something that's just 'plant-based' is ok or not.

    Just label and name stuff clearly so people can make an informed choice without having to read the tiny print on the back.

    Plant based is perfectly clear. If something is plant based, there ain't no animal bits in it, plus it doesn't trigger snow flake meat eaters like Vegan does. Also, you can have a plant based diet but not be Vegan. Great, innit?
    Beef is plant based, as is lamb, as is chick. All meat if based on the consumption of plants. Its just another wanky marketing idea that has caught on in the same way that business speak does. Retailers are using it because it has become the cool thing to use.
    PB pedantry alert! Some people eat dogs, so that’s meat based on the consumption of other animals. Deer occasionally eat baby birds, which brings us back to venison. Pigs eat truffles, so that’s meat based on the consumption of fungi.
    And add red deer to the fungivores and lichenivores (and algivores opportunistically, but I think most folk would call seaweed a 'plant').
    The red deer in the field above my vineyard are vineivores but mercifully haven't paid a visit since spring, either because the makeshift electric fence is working or because the gamekeeper is having a bumper season.

    The pheasants on the other hand...the bottoms of multiple grape bunches have been nibbled away. They hop along the rows then jump up to peck the bunches.
    I'd happily eat both for you if I lived near. I like to stew pheasant in red wine ...
    Perhaps I should insert some sleeping pills in a few of the grapes, with my son.
    Or simply leave some sherry -soaked grain out in bowls.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,832
    TimS said:

    Carnyx said:

    TimS said:

    Carnyx said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    'Plant-based' is a stupid shift in language because it reduces the amount of useful information.

    Vegetarian has a clear meaning. Vegan has a clear meaning. Plant-based also has a clear meaning by itself, but if you're a vegan you have no idea if something that's just 'plant-based' is ok or not.

    Just label and name stuff clearly so people can make an informed choice without having to read the tiny print on the back.

    Plant based is perfectly clear. If something is plant based, there ain't no animal bits in it, plus it doesn't trigger snow flake meat eaters like Vegan does. Also, you can have a plant based diet but not be Vegan. Great, innit?
    Beef is plant based, as is lamb, as is chick. All meat if based on the consumption of plants. Its just another wanky marketing idea that has caught on in the same way that business speak does. Retailers are using it because it has become the cool thing to use.
    PB pedantry alert! Some people eat dogs, so that’s meat based on the consumption of other animals. Deer occasionally eat baby birds, which brings us back to venison. Pigs eat truffles, so that’s meat based on the consumption of fungi.
    And add red deer to the fungivores and lichenivores (and algivores opportunistically, but I think most folk would call seaweed a 'plant').
    The red deer in the field above my vineyard are vineivores but mercifully haven't paid a visit since spring, either because the makeshift electric fence is working or because the gamekeeper is having a bumper season.

    The pheasants on the other hand...the bottoms of multiple grape bunches have been nibbled away. They hop along the rows then jump up to peck the bunches.
    I'd happily eat both for you if I lived near. I like to stew pheasant in red wine ...
    Perhaps I should insert some sleeping pills in a few of the grapes, with my son.
    Your son Danny?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    TimS said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A large minority of cyclists in London ignore lights almost completely. They slow down for reds but still sail through

    Then there’s the hardcore that whizz down pavements

    There's quite a difference between "the vast majority" and "a large minority" though. And I'd say it's a small minority, like maybe 5%. Most weeks I cycle 60km a week and almost all cyclists obey almost every red light on my commute. The big miscreants are food delivery e bikes and couriers, who you can sort of rationalise because they're trying to get their hourly pay rate at least close to the minimum wage.
    I’m making three distinctions

    The majority jump red lights
    A large minority ignores red lights - unless in danger of dying
    A small hardcore essentially obeys no laws at all: cycling on pavements, going the wrong way down one way streets, &c

    Central London cyclists are not a great advert for cyclists
    Yes I would say that was about right. I would say a majority jump red lights, a large minority always ignores red lights, a small minority ignores red lights even when at risk of dying.

    Funnily enough I don't come across/see pavement cycling all that much. You'd have to be an idiot to try to cycle along many London pavements, that said, at least in core central London.
    They also shout and do wanker signs at pedestrians and motorists if they do anything they consider remotely off. Cyclists in London are - perhaps as an evolutionary defence mechanism - wired up XL-Bully style and ready for a fight at all times. The middle aged male ones anyway. The youths are more placid, though defiantly dismissive of the ban on pavement cycling.

    Contrast with Denmark where I've several times stepped out into a cycle lane not realising it was one, almost caused an accident and got nothing worse than a chirpy bell ring from a suit wearing commuter sitting upright on their basketed bike.
    I’ve had the same experience from women cyclists. Screaming at me for daring to cross the road, as a pedestrian, because SHE was sailing straight through a red light. Stupid cow

    I wonder if this is all perspective tho. If I’m in a car pedestrians can be quite annoying. Also car drivers themselves are often arseholes

    But no. It’s cyclists. They are always the most annoying and aggressive road users. 90% of them are wankers
  • Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    'Plant-based' is a stupid shift in language because it reduces the amount of useful information.

    Vegetarian has a clear meaning. Vegan has a clear meaning. Plant-based also has a clear meaning by itself, but if you're a vegan you have no idea if something that's just 'plant-based' is ok or not.

    Just label and name stuff clearly so people can make an informed choice without having to read the tiny print on the back.

    Plant based is perfectly clear. If something is plant based, there ain't no animal bits in it, plus it doesn't trigger snow flake meat eaters like Vegan does. Also, you can have a plant based diet but not be Vegan. Great, innit?
    Beef is plant based, as is lamb, as is chick. All meat if based on the consumption of plants. Its just another wanky marketing idea that has caught on in the same way that business speak does. Retailers are using it because it has become the cool thing to use.
    PB pedantry alert! Some people eat dogs, so that’s meat based on the consumption of other animals. Deer occasionally eat baby birds, which brings us back to venison. Pigs eat truffles, so that’s meat based on the consumption of fungi.
    Sheep will happily eat birds, especially chicks. Shocking but true
    The crows tend to get their own back during lambing sadly. Nature!
    I remember standing in a house on the island of Foula watching the lady owner as she gazed at her fields through binoculars. She was intent on something I couldn’t see

    Then she turned to me and said, without context: “the ravens are eating the placenta”
    Fantastic beginning to a novel.
    You could be a pretty decent, middle-brow writer.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,155

    Porsche driver loses licence after hitting speeds of 162mph on Corby A road
    https://www.itv.com/news/anglia/2023-09-22/porsche-driver-loses-licence-after-travelling-at-162mph-on-a-road

    If anyone wants a second-hand car... One careful owner.

    Talking of Porsches, another holiday experience I had yesterday on the way to Merano driving the road toward Brunico - which is a long single carriageway road winding its way down through the mountains, with heavy traffic as a freight route between Italy and Austria….

    In front was a lorry, doing a reasonable speed but slowing up both me and the German Porsche in front of me, who had for a while been impatient to pass; but every time he nudged out there was oncoming traffic. We got to a long right hand bend and, sitting on the inside of the bend in my British car, I could see past the lorry and by luck the road was clear. For the Porsche driver in the front left seat the bend was blind. Waiting just a second to make sure there was nothing hidden in the blind spot behind the lorry, I pulled out and overlook them both, and by the time the road straightened out there was more traffic and I sailed off imagining the frustrated German in his fast car…

    Simple pleasures…. :)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,415
    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A large minority of cyclists in London ignore lights almost completely. They slow down for reds but still sail through

    Then there’s the hardcore that whizz down pavements

    There's quite a difference between "the vast majority" and "a large minority" though. And I'd say it's a small minority, like maybe 5%. Most weeks I cycle 60km a week and almost all cyclists obey almost every red light on my commute. The big miscreants are food delivery e bikes and couriers, who you can sort of rationalise because they're trying to get their hourly pay rate at least close to the minimum wage.
    I’m making three distinctions

    The majority jump red lights
    A large minority ignores red lights - unless in danger of dying
    A small hardcore essentially obeys no laws at all: cycling on pavements, going the wrong way down one way streets, &c

    Central London cyclists are not a great advert for cyclists
    Yes I would say that was about right. I would say a majority jump red lights, a large minority always ignores red lights, a small minority ignores red lights even when at risk of dying.

    Funnily enough I don't come across/see pavement cycling all that much. You'd have to be an idiot to try to cycle along many London pavements, that said, at least in core central London.
    You get a fair amount of pavement cycling in Camden. I’ve learned to be wary of them - because this is how thieves snatch phones: they cycle up on to the pavement from behind you and whisk it out of your hand. Happened to me about six months ago. Infuriating
    My better half thought she'd lost her phone today. Checked by phoning it from my phone - didn't seem to be either with me at the office or her at home.
    Google find my device from her desktop PC located it at the (regular) garage we'd left in the morning. Phoned garage but they couldn't hear it when I called.
    Drove round to garage and found it under another parked customer's car slightly away from the garage's office.
    Google "find my device" a bit of a life saver.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    I went to the wedding reception of one of the most famous people on earth, and sadly it was a vegan affair.

    Totally bland and depressing.

    the champagne was good though.

    I once went to a Rothschild wedding. Not any old Rothschilds, either. Main branch

    The food was good but the wine - as you might imagine - was SUPERB. £500 bottles of red on every table, and endless replacements when you drained the last (which happened frequently)
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,778

    Regarding cash vs electronic. I believe "try using your phone if systems go down" was the retort.

    OK, so I go into a shop. Power cut. They aren't taking cash payments either because their tills aren't working. BTW phone payment is not reliant on an internet connection anyway.

    Yes, and this point has now been made to the PB Cash Fetishists many times, yet still they persist in this nonsense.

    Moreover, I asked how they withdraw cash when 'electronic systems go down'. Answer, there came none.
    The wise reactionary keeps a supply of cowrie shells in their tweed bags for these situations.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A large minority of cyclists in London ignore lights almost completely. They slow down for reds but still sail through

    Then there’s the hardcore that whizz down pavements

    There's quite a difference between "the vast majority" and "a large minority" though. And I'd say it's a small minority, like maybe 5%. Most weeks I cycle 60km a week and almost all cyclists obey almost every red light on my commute. The big miscreants are food delivery e bikes and couriers, who you can sort of rationalise because they're trying to get their hourly pay rate at least close to the minimum wage.
    I’m making three distinctions

    The majority jump red lights
    A large minority ignores red lights - unless in danger of dying
    A small hardcore essentially obeys no laws at all: cycling on pavements, going the wrong way down one way streets, &c

    Central London cyclists are not a great advert for cyclists
    Yes I would say that was about right. I would say a majority jump red lights, a large minority always ignores red lights, a small minority ignores red lights even when at risk of dying.

    Funnily enough I don't come across/see pavement cycling all that much. You'd have to be an idiot to try to cycle along many London pavements, that said, at least in core central London.
    You get a fair amount of pavement cycling in Camden. I’ve learned to be wary of them - because this is how thieves snatch phones: they cycle up on to the pavement from behind you and whisk it out of your hand. Happened to me about six months ago. Infuriating
    My better half thought she'd lost her phone today. Checked by phoning it from my phone - didn't seem to be either with me at the office or her at home.
    Google find my device from her desktop PC located it at the (regular) garage we'd left in the morning. Phoned garage but they couldn't hear it when I called.
    Drove round to garage and found it under another parked customer's car slightly away from the garage's office.
    Google "find my device" a bit of a life saver.
    I was able, from here in Manhattan, to confirm that my wife had left her handbag - which for reasons contained my UK mobile phone - at Truro Railway Station, which was kind of cool.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,364
    Eabhal said:

    TimS said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A large minority of cyclists in London ignore lights almost completely. They slow down for reds but still sail through

    Then there’s the hardcore that whizz down pavements

    There's quite a difference between "the vast majority" and "a large minority" though. And I'd say it's a small minority, like maybe 5%. Most weeks I cycle 60km a week and almost all cyclists obey almost every red light on my commute. The big miscreants are food delivery e bikes and couriers, who you can sort of rationalise because they're trying to get their hourly pay rate at least close to the minimum wage.
    I’m making three distinctions

    The majority jump red lights
    A large minority ignores red lights - unless in danger of dying
    A small hardcore essentially obeys no laws at all: cycling on pavements, going the wrong way down one way streets, &c

    Central London cyclists are not a great advert for cyclists
    Yes I would say that was about right. I would say a majority jump red lights, a large minority always ignores red lights, a small minority ignores red lights even when at risk of dying.

    Funnily enough I don't come across/see pavement cycling all that much. You'd have to be an idiot to try to cycle along many London pavements, that said, at least in core central London.
    They also shout and do wanker signs at pedestrians and motorists if they do anything they consider remotely off. Cyclists in London are - perhaps as an evolutionary defence mechanism - wired up XL-Bully style and ready for a fight at all times. The middle aged male ones anyway. The youths are more placid, though defiantly dismissive of the ban on pavement cycling.

    Contrast with Denmark where I've several times stepped out into a cycle lane not realising it was one, almost caused an accident and got nothing worse than a chirpy bell ring from a suit wearing commuter sitting upright on their basketed bike.
    I think every PBer should cycle through a British town during rush hour.

    I'll buy them a pint if they don't swear/die/lose a leg/assault a driver/buy a GoPro.

    The aggro cyclist stereotype stems from the constant danger and adrenaline, and the fact your mate got knocked off a couple of weeks ago.
    Like that Edinburgh demo we discussed, where I was nearly killed by a bunch of cyclists who were doing a demo to campaign for road safety, and who went straight through a red when I was in the middle and the green man was on? Someone owes me a gallon of beer for that, and another for still remaining at least theoretically positive about cycling in the public transport realm.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,155

    IanB2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    Chris said:

    TOPPING said:

    Foxy said:

    TOPPING said:

    Oh and on the seven bins thing this is smart by Sunak because in many peoples' minds the feeling is "they're coming for my turkey twizzlers" and are going to tax me for watching Netflix unless I offset the carbon used while I do so.

    So this tells those people that the government is "on their side" and if the Hampstead champagne socialists want to forego one of their holidays - their flight to Costa Rica, perhaps, then that's fine by them.

    Sunak is offering imaginary cures for imaginary diseases. The oldest political snake oil known.
    It is creating mood music and will be well-understood by its target audience.

    See: £350m spent on the NHS.

    The more people say well meat tax was never a thing the more the govt can keep that issue in peoples' minds because there sure are going to be a lot of green taxes, ULEZ being a prime example.
    The more people say you are a liar the more people will keep that issue in their minds.
    The £350m was a masterstroke. It plonked down a number plucked from thin air and then the entire debate was hitched to whether it was £350m or £250 or some other huge number. That's politics.

    People often say that Remain were beaten by the side of a bus and we intelligent types might wail and gnash our teeth but it's not all wrong.

    So where of course does that leave politics. In the gutter is the obvious answer but we get the politicians we elect and deserve.
    Use the largest plausible number you can defend, and make your opponents suggest their own number instead.

    The massive rows about whether it was £250m or £350m per week that was given to the EU, was a total campaign masterstroke by Cummings.
    On the other hand, there are now a lot of very pissed off people who actually thought that the NHS would be rolling in cash as a result of Brexit and voted accordingly. People don't like being conned.
    I found a health service like the one we were promised in the Vote Leave video, where you walk in to an almost empty waiting room, there are more staff than patients, you get seen almost straight away even without an appointment, and are back on the street in less than hour having been examined, tested, and given a prescription for the medication you need.

    Unfortunately for us, it was in Norway.
    Who, to be fair, are not in the EU! (Although it does pay 447 Euros per year to them.)
    About £400? A bargain!
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,364
    Cyclefree said:

    I realise that this is a niche interest. But watching Counsel to the Post Office Inquiry gently take Richard Morgan, barrister for the Post Office in the case which bankrupted subpostmaster Lee Castleton, through his evidence to the point where Morgan, after a morning of sober, considered replies, brutally throws his ex-client and ex-instructing solicitors under the bus just before the lunch break was a joy to behold.

    Questioning as well as this is an art and seeing it done well a privilege.

    Oh. Is there a public transcript available?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    'Plant-based' is a stupid shift in language because it reduces the amount of useful information.

    Vegetarian has a clear meaning. Vegan has a clear meaning. Plant-based also has a clear meaning by itself, but if you're a vegan you have no idea if something that's just 'plant-based' is ok or not.

    Just label and name stuff clearly so people can make an informed choice without having to read the tiny print on the back.

    Plant based is perfectly clear. If something is plant based, there ain't no animal bits in it, plus it doesn't trigger snow flake meat eaters like Vegan does. Also, you can have a plant based diet but not be Vegan. Great, innit?
    Beef is plant based, as is lamb, as is chick. All meat if based on the consumption of plants. Its just another wanky marketing idea that has caught on in the same way that business speak does. Retailers are using it because it has become the cool thing to use.
    PB pedantry alert! Some people eat dogs, so that’s meat based on the consumption of other animals. Deer occasionally eat baby birds, which brings us back to venison. Pigs eat truffles, so that’s meat based on the consumption of fungi.
    Sheep will happily eat birds, especially chicks. Shocking but true
    The crows tend to get their own back during lambing sadly. Nature!
    I remember standing in a house on the island of Foula watching the lady owner as she gazed at her fields through binoculars. She was intent on something I couldn’t see

    Then she turned to me and said, without context: “the ravens are eating the placenta”
    Fantastic beginning to a novel.
    You could be a pretty decent, middle-brow writer.
    Thanks. May give it a go if I ever abandon the flints
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,364
    Dura_Ace said:

    Regarding cash vs electronic. I believe "try using your phone if systems go down" was the retort.

    OK, so I go into a shop. Power cut. They aren't taking cash payments either because their tills aren't working. BTW phone payment is not reliant on an internet connection anyway.

    Yes, and this point has now been made to the PB Cash Fetishists many times, yet still they persist in this nonsense.

    Moreover, I asked how they withdraw cash when 'electronic systems go down'. Answer, there came none.
    The wise reactionary keeps a supply of cowrie shells in their tweed bags for these situations.
    Or simply 10 new £20s neatly folded, ditto.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,489
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    Chris said:

    TOPPING said:

    Foxy said:

    TOPPING said:

    Oh and on the seven bins thing this is smart by Sunak because in many peoples' minds the feeling is "they're coming for my turkey twizzlers" and are going to tax me for watching Netflix unless I offset the carbon used while I do so.

    So this tells those people that the government is "on their side" and if the Hampstead champagne socialists want to forego one of their holidays - their flight to Costa Rica, perhaps, then that's fine by them.

    Sunak is offering imaginary cures for imaginary diseases. The oldest political snake oil known.
    It is creating mood music and will be well-understood by its target audience.

    See: £350m spent on the NHS.

    The more people say well meat tax was never a thing the more the govt can keep that issue in peoples' minds because there sure are going to be a lot of green taxes, ULEZ being a prime example.
    The more people say you are a liar the more people will keep that issue in their minds.
    The £350m was a masterstroke. It plonked down a number plucked from thin air and then the entire debate was hitched to whether it was £350m or £250 or some other huge number. That's politics.

    People often say that Remain were beaten by the side of a bus and we intelligent types might wail and gnash our teeth but it's not all wrong.

    So where of course does that leave politics. In the gutter is the obvious answer but we get the politicians we elect and deserve.
    Use the largest plausible number you can defend, and make your opponents suggest their own number instead.

    The massive rows about whether it was £250m or £350m per week that was given to the EU, was a total campaign masterstroke by Cummings.
    On the other hand, there are now a lot of very pissed off people who actually thought that the NHS would be rolling in cash as a result of Brexit and voted accordingly. People don't like being conned.
    I found a health service like the one we were promised in the Vote Leave video, where you walk in to an almost empty waiting room, there are more staff than patients, you get seen almost straight away even without an appointment, and are back on the street in less than hour having been examined, tested, and given a prescription for the medication you need.

    Unfortunately for us, it was in Norway.
    Who, to be fair, are not in the EU! (Although it does pay 447 Euros per year to them.)
    About £400? A bargain!
    Ooops. I may have omitted the word “million”…
  • Leon said:

    I went to the wedding reception of one of the most famous people on earth, and sadly it was a vegan affair.

    Totally bland and depressing.

    the champagne was good though.

    I once went to a Rothschild wedding. Not any old Rothschilds, either. Main branch

    The food was good but the wine - as you might imagine - was SUPERB. £500 bottles of red on every table, and endless replacements when you drained the last (which happened frequently)
    Hmmm. Sounds like a generally more fun experience.
    I was papped going in to my reception, which was exciting. I’ve never been papped before, and doubt I will again.
  • Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    'Plant-based' is a stupid shift in language because it reduces the amount of useful information.

    Vegetarian has a clear meaning. Vegan has a clear meaning. Plant-based also has a clear meaning by itself, but if you're a vegan you have no idea if something that's just 'plant-based' is ok or not.

    Just label and name stuff clearly so people can make an informed choice without having to read the tiny print on the back.

    Plant based is perfectly clear. If something is plant based, there ain't no animal bits in it, plus it doesn't trigger snow flake meat eaters like Vegan does. Also, you can have a plant based diet but not be Vegan. Great, innit?
    Beef is plant based, as is lamb, as is chick. All meat if based on the consumption of plants. Its just another wanky marketing idea that has caught on in the same way that business speak does. Retailers are using it because it has become the cool thing to use.
    PB pedantry alert! Some people eat dogs, so that’s meat based on the consumption of other animals. Deer occasionally eat baby birds, which brings us back to venison. Pigs eat truffles, so that’s meat based on the consumption of fungi.
    Sheep will happily eat birds, especially chicks. Shocking but true
    The crows tend to get their own back during lambing sadly. Nature!
    I remember standing in a house on the island of Foula watching the lady owner as she gazed at her fields through binoculars. She was intent on something I couldn’t see

    Then she turned to me and said, without context: “the ravens are eating the placenta”
    Placenta is very good for you apparently. Animal placenta is a very popular beauty food in Japan - dread to think how they go about getting it, but they tend to be a lot less sentimental about the animal kingdom than we are.

    Crows can peck the eyes out of newborn lambs, not very nice, don't know why I mentioned it really.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,415

    Pulpstar said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A large minority of cyclists in London ignore lights almost completely. They slow down for reds but still sail through

    Then there’s the hardcore that whizz down pavements

    There's quite a difference between "the vast majority" and "a large minority" though. And I'd say it's a small minority, like maybe 5%. Most weeks I cycle 60km a week and almost all cyclists obey almost every red light on my commute. The big miscreants are food delivery e bikes and couriers, who you can sort of rationalise because they're trying to get their hourly pay rate at least close to the minimum wage.
    I’m making three distinctions

    The majority jump red lights
    A large minority ignores red lights - unless in danger of dying
    A small hardcore essentially obeys no laws at all: cycling on pavements, going the wrong way down one way streets, &c

    Central London cyclists are not a great advert for cyclists
    Yes I would say that was about right. I would say a majority jump red lights, a large minority always ignores red lights, a small minority ignores red lights even when at risk of dying.

    Funnily enough I don't come across/see pavement cycling all that much. You'd have to be an idiot to try to cycle along many London pavements, that said, at least in core central London.
    You get a fair amount of pavement cycling in Camden. I’ve learned to be wary of them - because this is how thieves snatch phones: they cycle up on to the pavement from behind you and whisk it out of your hand. Happened to me about six months ago. Infuriating
    My better half thought she'd lost her phone today. Checked by phoning it from my phone - didn't seem to be either with me at the office or her at home.
    Google find my device from her desktop PC located it at the (regular) garage we'd left in the morning. Phoned garage but they couldn't hear it when I called.
    Drove round to garage and found it under another parked customer's car slightly away from the garage's office.
    Google "find my device" a bit of a life saver.
    I was able, from here in Manhattan, to confirm that my wife had left her handbag - which for reasons contained my UK mobile phone - at Truro Railway Station, which was kind of cool.
    Did you get your phone/bag back ?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,230

    TOPPING said:

    PJH said:

    TOPPING said:

    Andy_JS said:

    City police target ‘Lycra lout’ cyclists who jump red lights at Bank Junction

    More than 70 ‘Lycra lout’ cyclists face fines for jumping red lights during a police crackdown at one of the Square Mile’s busiest road junctions.

    City of London officers also issued bike riders with fixed penalty notices for near misses with pedestrians and vehicles during rush hour.

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/police-lycra-louts-jumping-red-lights-in-the-square-mile-b1108748.html

    Further down in the article, police nab other road users too.

    One of the first things one notices when visiting London is how a lot of cyclists jump red lights, which they don't in most of the rest of the country. How and when did that become a common thing to do?
    The vast majority of cyclists jump red lights it is just part of London, unfortunately.
    It's because of the light phasing. You spend too much time sitting stationary at red lights with no traffic coming the other way. It's the same reason that in London most pedestrians don't wait for the green man before crossing the road. There is usually a large gap long before the lights change.

    In fact I have worked out round my way that pressing the button on the pedestrian crossing control at road junctions makes no difference whatsoever, it never stops the traffic and the light will change to green at the same point in the cycle whether you press it or not. And I will usually have crossed long before then.

    Cyclists adopt the same principle.

    (Edited to remove vanilla nonsense and a schoolboy spelling error)
    That is true. I often sit, alone, at one of the several bike red lights around Birdcage Walk where a car couldn't hit you if it tried, and there are no pedestrians. That said, plenty of people on bikes blithely cycle across Ludgate Circus without slowing down at all.
    On my cycle commute to work there is a single red light that I sometimes ignore, at a junction where there is almost no traffic crossing in the other direction. I stop and if there's nothing coming I then cross carefully. I'm sorry if this upsets red light purists but I'm not going to wait for several minutes, frequently in the cold and rain, at a completely dead intersection just to obey the letter of the law. All the other red lights I obey because to do otherwise would place myself in danger and cause difficulty for other road users.
    S Korea has the great American institution of the right turn at a red light.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A large minority of cyclists in London ignore lights almost completely. They slow down for reds but still sail through

    Then there’s the hardcore that whizz down pavements

    There's quite a difference between "the vast majority" and "a large minority" though. And I'd say it's a small minority, like maybe 5%. Most weeks I cycle 60km a week and almost all cyclists obey almost every red light on my commute. The big miscreants are food delivery e bikes and couriers, who you can sort of rationalise because they're trying to get their hourly pay rate at least close to the minimum wage.
    I’m making three distinctions

    The majority jump red lights
    A large minority ignores red lights - unless in danger of dying
    A small hardcore essentially obeys no laws at all: cycling on pavements, going the wrong way down one way streets, &c

    Central London cyclists are not a great advert for cyclists
    Yes I would say that was about right. I would say a majority jump red lights, a large minority always ignores red lights, a small minority ignores red lights even when at risk of dying.

    Funnily enough I don't come across/see pavement cycling all that much. You'd have to be an idiot to try to cycle along many London pavements, that said, at least in core central London.
    You get a fair amount of pavement cycling in Camden. I’ve learned to be wary of them - because this is how thieves snatch phones: they cycle up on to the pavement from behind you and whisk it out of your hand. Happened to me about six months ago. Infuriating
    My better half thought she'd lost her phone today. Checked by phoning it from my phone - didn't seem to be either with me at the office or her at home.
    Google find my device from her desktop PC located it at the (regular) garage we'd left in the morning. Phoned garage but they couldn't hear it when I called.
    Drove round to garage and found it under another parked customer's car slightly away from the garage's office.
    Google "find my device" a bit of a life saver.
    I was able, from here in Manhattan, to confirm that my wife had left her handbag - which for reasons contained my UK mobile phone - at Truro Railway Station, which was kind of cool.
    Did you get your phone/bag back ?
    Yes!
    Very honest people, the Cornish.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,155
    edited September 2023
    Carnyx said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I realise that this is a niche interest. But watching Counsel to the Post Office Inquiry gently take Richard Morgan, barrister for the Post Office in the case which bankrupted subpostmaster Lee Castleton, through his evidence to the point where Morgan, after a morning of sober, considered replies, brutally throws his ex-client and ex-instructing solicitors under the bus just before the lunch break was a joy to behold.

    Questioning as well as this is an art and seeing it done well a privilege.

    Oh. Is there a public transcript available?
    The live feed is here and you can scroll back…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Av2lNqeZybM

    Edit/ although that looks like this afternoon’s session - have to wait until they post the morning video? Yesterdays are up, so it won’t be long?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,717
    Cyclefree said:

    I realise that this is a niche interest. But watching Counsel to the Post Office Inquiry gently take Richard Morgan, barrister for the Post Office in the case which bankrupted subpostmaster Lee Castleton, through his evidence to the point where Morgan, after a morning of sober, considered replies, brutally throws his ex-client and ex-instructing solicitors under the bus just before the lunch break was a joy to behold.

    Questioning as well as this is an art and seeing it done well a privilege.

    Mrs Rose, as reported in Nick Wallis’ blog on Tuesday, has to be among the most forgetful women on God’s green earth.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,945
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A large minority of cyclists in London ignore lights almost completely. They slow down for reds but still sail through

    Then there’s the hardcore that whizz down pavements

    There's quite a difference between "the vast majority" and "a large minority" though. And I'd say it's a small minority, like maybe 5%. Most weeks I cycle 60km a week and almost all cyclists obey almost every red light on my commute. The big miscreants are food delivery e bikes and couriers, who you can sort of rationalise because they're trying to get their hourly pay rate at least close to the minimum wage.
    I’m making three distinctions

    The majority jump red lights
    A large minority ignores red lights - unless in danger of dying
    A small hardcore essentially obeys no laws at all: cycling on pavements, going the wrong way down one way streets, &c

    Central London cyclists are not a great advert for cyclists
    Going the wrong way down a one way street on bike is extremely sensible albeit it still illegal in the UK. In France it is the law on roads with under 30 kph limits. It is an amazingly good idea. Everyone sees everyone. There is no overtaking of bikes, or cars in traffic jams which is the risky bit. There is normally a greater gap between car and bike. And it takes the bikes away from busier roads. Works a treat in Paris. Now the Place de la Concorde on the other hand!!! I get off my bike there
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,778

    Porsche driver loses licence after hitting speeds of 162mph on Corby A road
    https://www.itv.com/news/anglia/2023-09-22/porsche-driver-loses-licence-after-travelling-at-162mph-on-a-road

    If anyone wants a second-hand car... One careful owner.

    992 Carrera S. Intercoolers, radiators and rear brakes are the first things to check if anybody is thinking of buying it.

    I've just flipped my R8 and bought a 997 GT3 in Speedgelb (the fastest colour) so I can't afford another car ever.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A large minority of cyclists in London ignore lights almost completely. They slow down for reds but still sail through

    Then there’s the hardcore that whizz down pavements

    There's quite a difference between "the vast majority" and "a large minority" though. And I'd say it's a small minority, like maybe 5%. Most weeks I cycle 60km a week and almost all cyclists obey almost every red light on my commute. The big miscreants are food delivery e bikes and couriers, who you can sort of rationalise because they're trying to get their hourly pay rate at least close to the minimum wage.
    I’m making three distinctions

    The majority jump red lights
    A large minority ignores red lights - unless in danger of dying
    A small hardcore essentially obeys no laws at all: cycling on pavements, going the wrong way down one way streets, &c

    Central London cyclists are not a great advert for cyclists
    Yes I would say that was about right. I would say a majority jump red lights, a large minority always ignores red lights, a small minority ignores red lights even when at risk of dying.

    Funnily enough I don't come across/see pavement cycling all that much. You'd have to be an idiot to try to cycle along many London pavements, that said, at least in core central London.
    You get a fair amount of pavement cycling in Camden. I’ve learned to be wary of them - because this is how thieves snatch phones: they cycle up on to the pavement from behind you and whisk it out of your hand. Happened to me about six months ago. Infuriating
    My better half thought she'd lost her phone today. Checked by phoning it from my phone - didn't seem to be either with me at the office or her at home.
    Google find my device from her desktop PC located it at the (regular) garage we'd left in the morning. Phoned garage but they couldn't hear it when I called.
    Drove round to garage and found it under another parked customer's car slightly away from the garage's office.
    Google "find my device" a bit of a life saver.
    I was able, from here in Manhattan, to confirm that my wife had left her handbag - which for reasons contained my UK mobile phone - at Truro Railway Station, which was kind of cool.
    Did you get your phone/bag back ?
    Yes!
    Very honest people, the Cornish.
    I got my WALLET back six hours after leaving it on a bench at Camden Road station. Entirely untouched, handed in to the station staff by a “regular commuter”. Quite renewed my faith in humanity - and Londoners
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,230
    Dura_Ace said:

    Regarding cash vs electronic. I believe "try using your phone if systems go down" was the retort.

    OK, so I go into a shop. Power cut. They aren't taking cash payments either because their tills aren't working. BTW phone payment is not reliant on an internet connection anyway.

    Yes, and this point has now been made to the PB Cash Fetishists many times, yet still they persist in this nonsense.

    Moreover, I asked how they withdraw cash when 'electronic systems go down'. Answer, there came none.
    The wise reactionary keeps a supply of cowrie shells in their tweed bags for these situations.
    Surely a collection of small bike parts ?
  • Regarding cash vs electronic. I believe "try using your phone if systems go down" was the retort.

    OK, so I go into a shop. Power cut. They aren't taking cash payments either because their tills aren't working. BTW phone payment is not reliant on an internet connection anyway.

    Are you sure about that last point? My local Co-Op has lost Internet several times fur to scrotes nicking cables, and they can take cash perfectly well - but not card or phone.
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860
    Leon said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A large minority of cyclists in London ignore lights almost completely. They slow down for reds but still sail through

    Then there’s the hardcore that whizz down pavements

    There's quite a difference between "the vast majority" and "a large minority" though. And I'd say it's a small minority, like maybe 5%. Most weeks I cycle 60km a week and almost all cyclists obey almost every red light on my commute. The big miscreants are food delivery e bikes and couriers, who you can sort of rationalise because they're trying to get their hourly pay rate at least close to the minimum wage.
    I’m making three distinctions

    The majority jump red lights
    A large minority ignores red lights - unless in danger of dying
    A small hardcore essentially obeys no laws at all: cycling on pavements, going the wrong way down one way streets, &c

    Central London cyclists are not a great advert for cyclists
    Yes I would say that was about right. I would say a majority jump red lights, a large minority always ignores red lights, a small minority ignores red lights even when at risk of dying.

    Funnily enough I don't come across/see pavement cycling all that much. You'd have to be an idiot to try to cycle along many London pavements, that said, at least in core central London.
    You get a fair amount of pavement cycling in Camden. I’ve learned to be wary of them - because this is how thieves snatch phones: they cycle up on to the pavement from behind you and whisk it out of your hand. Happened to me about six months ago. Infuriating
    My better half thought she'd lost her phone today. Checked by phoning it from my phone - didn't seem to be either with me at the office or her at home.
    Google find my device from her desktop PC located it at the (regular) garage we'd left in the morning. Phoned garage but they couldn't hear it when I called.
    Drove round to garage and found it under another parked customer's car slightly away from the garage's office.
    Google "find my device" a bit of a life saver.
    I was able, from here in Manhattan, to confirm that my wife had left her handbag - which for reasons contained my UK mobile phone - at Truro Railway Station, which was kind of cool.
    Did you get your phone/bag back ?
    Yes!
    Very honest people, the Cornish.
    I got my WALLET back six hours after leaving it on a bench at Camden Road station. Entirely untouched, handed in to the station staff by a “regular commuter”. Quite renewed my faith in humanity - and Londoners
    Same happened to me after I left mine on the train from Manchester to Sheffield. Also felt faith renewed, especially as this was the day after the Brexit vote.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    I went to the wedding reception of one of the most famous people on earth, and sadly it was a vegan affair.

    Totally bland and depressing.

    the champagne was good though.

    I once went to a Rothschild wedding. Not any old Rothschilds, either. Main branch

    The food was good but the wine - as you might imagine - was SUPERB. £500 bottles of red on every table, and endless replacements when you drained the last (which happened frequently)
    What does "main branch" mean? How do I tell whether it is I or my cousin who is on the "main branch" of our* family?

    *we aren't Rothschilds. I expect I wouldn't have had to ask if we were.
    The main branch is the really really really rich branch

    The person who got married is personally worth north of $1bn

    Tho of course there are Rothschilds even richer than that
  • Leon said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A large minority of cyclists in London ignore lights almost completely. They slow down for reds but still sail through

    Then there’s the hardcore that whizz down pavements

    There's quite a difference between "the vast majority" and "a large minority" though. And I'd say it's a small minority, like maybe 5%. Most weeks I cycle 60km a week and almost all cyclists obey almost every red light on my commute. The big miscreants are food delivery e bikes and couriers, who you can sort of rationalise because they're trying to get their hourly pay rate at least close to the minimum wage.
    I’m making three distinctions

    The majority jump red lights
    A large minority ignores red lights - unless in danger of dying
    A small hardcore essentially obeys no laws at all: cycling on pavements, going the wrong way down one way streets, &c

    Central London cyclists are not a great advert for cyclists
    Yes I would say that was about right. I would say a majority jump red lights, a large minority always ignores red lights, a small minority ignores red lights even when at risk of dying.

    Funnily enough I don't come across/see pavement cycling all that much. You'd have to be an idiot to try to cycle along many London pavements, that said, at least in core central London.
    You get a fair amount of pavement cycling in Camden. I’ve learned to be wary of them - because this is how thieves snatch phones: they cycle up on to the pavement from behind you and whisk it out of your hand. Happened to me about six months ago. Infuriating
    My better half thought she'd lost her phone today. Checked by phoning it from my phone - didn't seem to be either with me at the office or her at home.
    Google find my device from her desktop PC located it at the (regular) garage we'd left in the morning. Phoned garage but they couldn't hear it when I called.
    Drove round to garage and found it under another parked customer's car slightly away from the garage's office.
    Google "find my device" a bit of a life saver.
    I was able, from here in Manhattan, to confirm that my wife had left her handbag - which for reasons contained my UK mobile phone - at Truro Railway Station, which was kind of cool.
    Did you get your phone/bag back ?
    Yes!
    Very honest people, the Cornish.
    I got my WALLET back six hours after leaving it on a bench at Camden Road station. Entirely untouched, handed in to the station staff by a “regular commuter”. Quite renewed my faith in humanity - and Londoners
    I left my wallet on a BUS at King’s Cross.
    It was handed into the driver, who finished his round and called me from the depot at the number listed on one of my business cards.

    I swear this would not happen in Paris.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,061

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    'Plant-based' is a stupid shift in language because it reduces the amount of useful information.

    Vegetarian has a clear meaning. Vegan has a clear meaning. Plant-based also has a clear meaning by itself, but if you're a vegan you have no idea if something that's just 'plant-based' is ok or not.

    Just label and name stuff clearly so people can make an informed choice without having to read the tiny print on the back.

    Plant based is perfectly clear. If something is plant based, there ain't no animal bits in it, plus it doesn't trigger snow flake meat eaters like Vegan does. Also, you can have a plant based diet but not be Vegan. Great, innit?
    Beef is plant based, as is lamb, as is chick. All meat if based on the consumption of plants. Its just another wanky marketing idea that has caught on in the same way that business speak does. Retailers are using it because it has become the cool thing to use.
    PB pedantry alert! Some people eat dogs, so that’s meat based on the consumption of other animals. Deer occasionally eat baby birds, which brings us back to venison. Pigs eat truffles, so that’s meat based on the consumption of fungi.
    Sheep will happily eat birds, especially chicks. Shocking but true
    The crows tend to get their own back during lambing sadly. Nature!
    I remember standing in a house on the island of Foula watching the lady owner as she gazed at her fields through binoculars. She was intent on something I couldn’t see

    Then she turned to me and said, without context: “the ravens are eating the placenta”
    Fantastic beginning to a novel.
    You could be a pretty decent, middle-brow writer.
    That could be the opening line of the next episode of Shetland.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A large minority of cyclists in London ignore lights almost completely. They slow down for reds but still sail through

    Then there’s the hardcore that whizz down pavements

    There's quite a difference between "the vast majority" and "a large minority" though. And I'd say it's a small minority, like maybe 5%. Most weeks I cycle 60km a week and almost all cyclists obey almost every red light on my commute. The big miscreants are food delivery e bikes and couriers, who you can sort of rationalise because they're trying to get their hourly pay rate at least close to the minimum wage.
    I’m making three distinctions

    The majority jump red lights
    A large minority ignores red lights - unless in danger of dying
    A small hardcore essentially obeys no laws at all: cycling on pavements, going the wrong way down one way streets, &c

    Central London cyclists are not a great advert for cyclists
    Going the wrong way down a one way street on bike is extremely sensible albeit it still illegal in the UK. In France it is the law on roads with under 30 kph limits. It is an amazingly good idea. Everyone sees everyone. There is no overtaking of bikes, or cars in traffic jams which is the risky bit. There is normally a greater gap between car and bike. And it takes the bikes away from busier roads. Works a treat in Paris. Now the Place de la Concorde on the other hand!!! I get off my bike there
    Fair enough. I hadn’t thought of it that way - makes sense. These guys don’t especially annoy me anyway

    The pavement cyclists ARE annoying
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,061

    Cyclefree said:

    I realise that this is a niche interest. But watching Counsel to the Post Office Inquiry gently take Richard Morgan, barrister for the Post Office in the case which bankrupted subpostmaster Lee Castleton, through his evidence to the point where Morgan, after a morning of sober, considered replies, brutally throws his ex-client and ex-instructing solicitors under the bus just before the lunch break was a joy to behold.

    Questioning as well as this is an art and seeing it done well a privilege.

    Mrs Rose, as reported in Nick Wallis’ blog on Tuesday, has to be among the most forgetful women on God’s green earth.
    Nicola Sturgeon says hello.
  • Rachel Reeves has made some suggestions at changing the OBR, which George Osborn has now welcomed.

    Part of a broader statement on fiscal rules which looks very promising from Labour.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,406
    edited September 2023
    Leon said:

    I went to the wedding reception of one of the most famous people on earth, and sadly it was a vegan affair.

    Totally bland and depressing.

    the champagne was good though.

    I once went to a Rothschild wedding. Not any old Rothschilds, either. Main branch...
    A PB pedant writes
    "The main branch is descended from the eldest child (son?). The cadet branch is descended from younger children. This is important in cases where the first-born inherits."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadet_branch

  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,953
    edited September 2023
    slade said:

    My suggestion that we would see changes in yesterday's by-elections proved to be pretty spot on. The Con gain in Ayrshire, the LD gains in Milton Keynes and Colchester were expected. Lab did hold its seat in Hull but there was a large swing to the Lib Dems.

    The Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock seat is a possible Tory gain at the next election.
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 1,156
    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A large minority of cyclists in London ignore lights almost completely. They slow down for reds but still sail through

    Then there’s the hardcore that whizz down pavements

    There's quite a difference between "the vast majority" and "a large minority" though. And I'd say it's a small minority, like maybe 5%. Most weeks I cycle 60km a week and almost all cyclists obey almost every red light on my commute. The big miscreants are food delivery e bikes and couriers, who you can sort of rationalise because they're trying to get their hourly pay rate at least close to the minimum wage.
    I’m making three distinctions

    The majority jump red lights
    A large minority ignores red lights - unless in danger of dying
    A small hardcore essentially obeys no laws at all: cycling on pavements, going the wrong way down one way streets, &c

    Central London cyclists are not a great advert for cyclists
    Going the wrong way down a one way street on bike is extremely sensible albeit it still illegal in the UK. In France it is the law on roads with under 30 kph limits. It is an amazingly good idea. Everyone sees everyone. There is no overtaking of bikes, or cars in traffic jams which is the risky bit. There is normally a greater gap between car and bike. And it takes the bikes away from busier roads. Works a treat in Paris. Now the Place de la Concorde on the other hand!!! I get off my bike there
    In the UK the council can make roads "one way, except for bikes" if they want to -- the road I live on is set up like that, as are most of the "one way because narrow victorian terraced streets" roads nearby.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,406
    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    I went to the wedding reception of one of the most famous people on earth, and sadly it was a vegan affair.

    Totally bland and depressing.

    the champagne was good though.

    I once went to a Rothschild wedding. Not any old Rothschilds, either. Main branch

    The food was good but the wine - as you might imagine - was SUPERB. £500 bottles of red on every table, and endless replacements when you drained the last (which happened frequently)
    What does "main branch" mean? How do I tell whether it is I or my cousin who is on the "main branch" of our* family?

    *we aren't Rothschilds. I expect I wouldn't have had to ask if we were.
    In the absence of @Charles, I have answered this point earlier
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    viewcode said:

    Leon said:

    I went to the wedding reception of one of the most famous people on earth, and sadly it was a vegan affair.

    Totally bland and depressing.

    the champagne was good though.

    I once went to a Rothschild wedding. Not any old Rothschilds, either. Main branch...
    A PB pedant writes
    "The main branch is descended from the eldest child (son?). The cadet branch is descended from younger children. This is important in cases where the first-born inherits."

    I was using it in the looser sense of “fuck me, look how loaded THEY are”

    Which, to be fair, is how the Rothschilds themselves use it. The main branch is much envied by the poorer cousins who are merely worth a few million
  • Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    'Plant-based' is a stupid shift in language because it reduces the amount of useful information.

    Vegetarian has a clear meaning. Vegan has a clear meaning. Plant-based also has a clear meaning by itself, but if you're a vegan you have no idea if something that's just 'plant-based' is ok or not.

    Just label and name stuff clearly so people can make an informed choice without having to read the tiny print on the back.

    Plant based is perfectly clear. If something is plant based, there ain't no animal bits in it, plus it doesn't trigger snow flake meat eaters like Vegan does. Also, you can have a plant based diet but not be Vegan. Great, innit?
    Beef is plant based, as is lamb, as is chick. All meat if based on the consumption of plants. Its just another wanky marketing idea that has caught on in the same way that business speak does. Retailers are using it because it has become the cool thing to use.
    PB pedantry alert! Some people eat dogs, so that’s meat based on the consumption of other animals. Deer occasionally eat baby birds, which brings us back to venison. Pigs eat truffles, so that’s meat based on the consumption of fungi.
    Sheep will happily eat birds, especially chicks. Shocking but true
    The crows tend to get their own back during lambing sadly. Nature!
    I remember standing in a house on the island of Foula watching the lady owner as she gazed at her fields through binoculars. She was intent on something I couldn’t see

    Then she turned to me and said, without context: “the ravens are eating the placenta”
    Placenta is very good for you apparently. Animal placenta is a very popular beauty food in Japan - dread to think how they go about getting it, but they tend to be a lot less sentimental about the animal kingdom than we are.

    Crows can peck the eyes out of newborn lambs, not very nice, don't know why I mentioned it really.
    Crows are among the cleverest animals on the planet. But ethics doesn't seem to be their thing.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,230

    Cyclefree said:

    I realise that this is a niche interest. But watching Counsel to the Post Office Inquiry gently take Richard Morgan, barrister for the Post Office in the case which bankrupted subpostmaster Lee Castleton, through his evidence to the point where Morgan, after a morning of sober, considered replies, brutally throws his ex-client and ex-instructing solicitors under the bus just before the lunch break was a joy to behold.

    Questioning as well as this is an art and seeing it done well a privilege.

    Mrs Rose, as reported in Nick Wallis’ blog on Tuesday, has to be among the most forgetful women on God’s green earth.
    "I don't recall" is a standard defence technique for all manner of wronguns.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,277
    This triple lock dance between the Tories and Labour goes on .

    Are we really to believe that either party is going to be stupid enough to piss off the grey vote if the other keeps the lock . If there was any sanity left all parties could agree to reduce it to a double lock so either inflation or 2.5% .

    That way it’s an agreed cross party position and doesn’t remain a political football .

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,230
    viewcode said:

    Leon said:

    I went to the wedding reception of one of the most famous people on earth, and sadly it was a vegan affair.

    Totally bland and depressing.

    the champagne was good though.

    I once went to a Rothschild wedding. Not any old Rothschilds, either. Main branch...
    A PB pedant writes
    "The main branch is descended from the eldest child (son?). The cadet branch is descended from younger children. This is important in cases where the first-born inherits."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadet_branch

    Isn't that the point ?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,326
    Carnyx said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I realise that this is a niche interest. But watching Counsel to the Post Office Inquiry gently take Richard Morgan, barrister for the Post Office in the case which bankrupted subpostmaster Lee Castleton, through his evidence to the point where Morgan, after a morning of sober, considered replies, brutally throws his ex-client and ex-instructing solicitors under the bus just before the lunch break was a joy to behold.

    Questioning as well as this is an art and seeing it done well a privilege.

    Oh. Is there a public transcript available?
    Not yet. But I can give you a summary of how he lays out each step to get him to where he wants, to where the only possible answer is the one Richard Morgan gave, albeit perhaps not quite in the colourful language used.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,230

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    'Plant-based' is a stupid shift in language because it reduces the amount of useful information.

    Vegetarian has a clear meaning. Vegan has a clear meaning. Plant-based also has a clear meaning by itself, but if you're a vegan you have no idea if something that's just 'plant-based' is ok or not.

    Just label and name stuff clearly so people can make an informed choice without having to read the tiny print on the back.

    Plant based is perfectly clear. If something is plant based, there ain't no animal bits in it, plus it doesn't trigger snow flake meat eaters like Vegan does. Also, you can have a plant based diet but not be Vegan. Great, innit?
    Beef is plant based, as is lamb, as is chick. All meat if based on the consumption of plants. Its just another wanky marketing idea that has caught on in the same way that business speak does. Retailers are using it because it has become the cool thing to use.
    PB pedantry alert! Some people eat dogs, so that’s meat based on the consumption of other animals. Deer occasionally eat baby birds, which brings us back to venison. Pigs eat truffles, so that’s meat based on the consumption of fungi.
    Sheep will happily eat birds, especially chicks. Shocking but true
    The crows tend to get their own back during lambing sadly. Nature!
    I remember standing in a house on the island of Foula watching the lady owner as she gazed at her fields through binoculars. She was intent on something I couldn’t see

    Then she turned to me and said, without context: “the ravens are eating the placenta”
    Placenta is very good for you apparently. Animal placenta is a very popular beauty food in Japan - dread to think how they go about getting it, but they tend to be a lot less sentimental about the animal kingdom than we are.

    Crows can peck the eyes out of newborn lambs, not very nice, don't know why I mentioned it really.
    Crows are among the cleverest animals on the planet. But ethics doesn't seem to be their thing.
    On the contrary - for example:
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inequity_aversion_in_animals

    They just have a rather different set of ethics.
  • AEP deeply unimpressed with Sunak's move on EV:

    "It is an odd form of statecraft to discourage the switch to electric vehicles at the very moment that Saudi Arabia and Opec are engaged in the naked manipulation of crude prices, cutting supply by one million barrels a day into a tight market."

    “For years people envied Britain’s almost miraculous consensus on climate policy. Just five Tories voted against the Climate Act in 2008. But now there is a feeling that Britain can no longer govern properly, and it is chilling everything.”

    "Research by RMI suggests that disruptive technology tends to go parabolic once penetration reaches 10pc. “It takes around six years for EVs to go from 1pc to 10pc of new car sales. The next stage is quicker still: In leading countries, it takes another six years to get to 80pc,” it said.

    This ‘S curve’ effect has already happened in Norway (88pc), Sweden (54pc), and is now happening across northern Europe. It is happening in China, where EVs took a 38pc share in June, on track for 10 million sales this year."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/09/22/rishi-sunak-betrayed-britain-clean-tech-economy/
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    'Plant-based' is a stupid shift in language because it reduces the amount of useful information.

    Vegetarian has a clear meaning. Vegan has a clear meaning. Plant-based also has a clear meaning by itself, but if you're a vegan you have no idea if something that's just 'plant-based' is ok or not.

    Just label and name stuff clearly so people can make an informed choice without having to read the tiny print on the back.

    Plant based is perfectly clear. If something is plant based, there ain't no animal bits in it, plus it doesn't trigger snow flake meat eaters like Vegan does. Also, you can have a plant based diet but not be Vegan. Great, innit?
    Beef is plant based, as is lamb, as is chick. All meat if based on the consumption of plants. Its just another wanky marketing idea that has caught on in the same way that business speak does. Retailers are using it because it has become the cool thing to use.
    PB pedantry alert! Some people eat dogs, so that’s meat based on the consumption of other animals. Deer occasionally eat baby birds, which brings us back to venison. Pigs eat truffles, so that’s meat based on the consumption of fungi.
    Sheep will happily eat birds, especially chicks. Shocking but true
    The crows tend to get their own back during lambing sadly. Nature!
    I remember standing in a house on the island of Foula watching the lady owner as she gazed at her fields through binoculars. She was intent on something I couldn’t see

    Then she turned to me and said, without context: “the ravens are eating the placenta”
    Placenta is very good for you apparently. Animal placenta is a very popular beauty food in Japan - dread to think how they go about getting it, but they tend to be a lot less sentimental about the animal kingdom than we are.

    Crows can peck the eyes out of newborn lambs, not very nice, don't know why I mentioned it really.
    Crows are among the cleverest animals on the planet. But ethics doesn't seem to be their thing.
    “‘the habits of birds are, in many points,
    contrary to the commandments of the church”

    - Saint Cornelius. 3rd century AD
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,792
    Just watched QT – it looked poor/very poor for the Tories, who seemed to get little support for anything they said bar one non-elite salt-of-the-earth type who chirped up in the audience.

    The show may well be unrepresentative, but it didn't look great for Fishy Rishi's Net Zero gambit.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,406

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    'Plant-based' is a stupid shift in language because it reduces the amount of useful information.

    Vegetarian has a clear meaning. Vegan has a clear meaning. Plant-based also has a clear meaning by itself, but if you're a vegan you have no idea if something that's just 'plant-based' is ok or not.

    Just label and name stuff clearly so people can make an informed choice without having to read the tiny print on the back.

    Plant based is perfectly clear. If something is plant based, there ain't no animal bits in it, plus it doesn't trigger snow flake meat eaters like Vegan does. Also, you can have a plant based diet but not be Vegan. Great, innit?
    Beef is plant based, as is lamb, as is chick. All meat if based on the consumption of plants. Its just another wanky marketing idea that has caught on in the same way that business speak does. Retailers are using it because it has become the cool thing to use.
    PB pedantry alert! Some people eat dogs, so that’s meat based on the consumption of other animals. Deer occasionally eat baby birds, which brings us back to venison. Pigs eat truffles, so that’s meat based on the consumption of fungi.
    Sheep will happily eat birds, especially chicks. Shocking but true
    The crows tend to get their own back during lambing sadly. Nature!
    I remember standing in a house on the island of Foula watching the lady owner as she gazed at her fields through binoculars. She was intent on something I couldn’t see

    Then she turned to me and said, without context: “the ravens are eating the placenta”
    Placenta is very good for you apparently. Animal placenta is a very popular beauty food in Japan - dread to think how they go about getting it, but they tend to be a lot less sentimental about the animal kingdom than we are.

    Crows can peck the eyes out of newborn lambs, not very nice, don't know why I mentioned it really.
    Crows are among the cleverest animals on the planet. But ethics doesn't seem to be their thing.
    Their system of governance and debate is outstanding, though.

    https://timesflowstemmed.com/2013/06/16/a-parliament-of-crows/
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,717
    Andy_JS said:

    edit

    Quite amazing, isn’t it. I retired in 2003, but I’m reasonably sure that if I was asked to give evidence to an inquiry on something or other I would have much better recollection.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,326
    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I realise that this is a niche interest. But watching Counsel to the Post Office Inquiry gently take Richard Morgan, barrister for the Post Office in the case which bankrupted subpostmaster Lee Castleton, through his evidence to the point where Morgan, after a morning of sober, considered replies, brutally throws his ex-client and ex-instructing solicitors under the bus just before the lunch break was a joy to behold.

    Questioning as well as this is an art and seeing it done well a privilege.

    Mrs Rose, as reported in Nick Wallis’ blog on Tuesday, has to be among the most forgetful women on God’s green earth.
    "I don't recall" is a standard defence technique for all manner of wronguns.
    It doesn't really help though where you have signed a witness statement saying that what it contains is true and then have to admit the opposite. You look either negligent or malicious, but either way a liar. "I can't remember why I lied" is a pretty tiny fig leaf.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    Leon said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A large minority of cyclists in London ignore lights almost completely. They slow down for reds but still sail through

    Then there’s the hardcore that whizz down pavements

    There's quite a difference between "the vast majority" and "a large minority" though. And I'd say it's a small minority, like maybe 5%. Most weeks I cycle 60km a week and almost all cyclists obey almost every red light on my commute. The big miscreants are food delivery e bikes and couriers, who you can sort of rationalise because they're trying to get their hourly pay rate at least close to the minimum wage.
    I’m making three distinctions

    The majority jump red lights
    A large minority ignores red lights - unless in danger of dying
    A small hardcore essentially obeys no laws at all: cycling on pavements, going the wrong way down one way streets, &c

    Central London cyclists are not a great advert for cyclists
    Yes I would say that was about right. I would say a majority jump red lights, a large minority always ignores red lights, a small minority ignores red lights even when at risk of dying.

    Funnily enough I don't come across/see pavement cycling all that much. You'd have to be an idiot to try to cycle along many London pavements, that said, at least in core central London.
    You get a fair amount of pavement cycling in Camden. I’ve learned to be wary of them - because this is how thieves snatch phones: they cycle up on to the pavement from behind you and whisk it out of your hand. Happened to me about six months ago. Infuriating
    My better half thought she'd lost her phone today. Checked by phoning it from my phone - didn't seem to be either with me at the office or her at home.
    Google find my device from her desktop PC located it at the (regular) garage we'd left in the morning. Phoned garage but they couldn't hear it when I called.
    Drove round to garage and found it under another parked customer's car slightly away from the garage's office.
    Google "find my device" a bit of a life saver.
    I was able, from here in Manhattan, to confirm that my wife had left her handbag - which for reasons contained my UK mobile phone - at Truro Railway Station, which was kind of cool.
    Did you get your phone/bag back ?
    Yes!
    Very honest people, the Cornish.
    I got my WALLET back six hours after leaving it on a bench at Camden Road station. Entirely untouched, handed in to the station staff by a “regular commuter”. Quite renewed my faith in humanity - and Londoners
    I left my wallet on a BUS at King’s Cross.
    It was handed into the driver, who finished his round and called me from the depot at the number listed on one of my business cards.

    I swear this would not happen in Paris.
    Three months after having that wallet returned IN LONDON, FROM A BUSY STATION I lost it again, this time in the Al fresco cafe of a medieval castle in provincial Ukraine - Kamanets Podolskiy

    This time it was not returned. Stolen

    Slightly jaundiced my view of the war, for a while
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,155
    Torrential rain all night, and still raining now…with this amount of water coming through the town there is surely flooding elsewhere in the Alps today


  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,778
    algarkirk said:

    Ukraine. Do I get a sense that the world's view is shifting? Wars used to have a beginning, a middle and an end. Winners and losers, and followed by a moral determination to make the world better and safer. Obvs what I have just said is mostly false but not entirely.

    In recent decades wars have done nothing like this. They have interminable middles, no proper end and the outcome is always worse than before. (Iraq, Syria, various bits of Africa, Afghanistan etc).

    Is Ukraine, in our minds, entering the phase of being just another of these? If so, the west is going to start losing its grip.

    Neither side can inflict an overwhelming defeat or even put together a major offensive that goes anywhere yet neither side is ready to sue for a white peace. So we'll see what happens in Season 3. Poland look like they are getting written out so Romania might have to step up to series regular.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,406
    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    I went to the wedding reception of one of the most famous people on earth, and sadly it was a vegan affair.

    Totally bland and depressing.

    the champagne was good though.

    I once went to a Rothschild wedding. Not any old Rothschilds, either. Main branch

    The food was good but the wine - as you might imagine - was SUPERB. £500 bottles of red on every table, and endless replacements when you drained the last (which happened frequently)
    What does "main branch" mean? How do I tell whether it is I or my cousin who is on the "main branch" of our* family?

    *we aren't Rothschilds. I expect I wouldn't have had to ask if we were.
    The main branch is the really really really rich branch

    The person who got married is personally worth north of $1bn

    Tho of course there are Rothschilds even richer than that
    I inherited a one-eleventh share of a terraced house, same as my sister and our nine cousins.
    Make sure that fact is registered with the Land Registry (or a solicitor?). One day that house will be sold and you and/or your descendants should be compensated. I looked at a house once that had passed down informally to the youngest daughter (the one left holding the parcel in Game Of Looking After Old Dad) three times and it was really difficult to ascertain who owned it.

  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,945
    Leon said:

    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A large minority of cyclists in London ignore lights almost completely. They slow down for reds but still sail through

    Then there’s the hardcore that whizz down pavements

    There's quite a difference between "the vast majority" and "a large minority" though. And I'd say it's a small minority, like maybe 5%. Most weeks I cycle 60km a week and almost all cyclists obey almost every red light on my commute. The big miscreants are food delivery e bikes and couriers, who you can sort of rationalise because they're trying to get their hourly pay rate at least close to the minimum wage.
    I’m making three distinctions

    The majority jump red lights
    A large minority ignores red lights - unless in danger of dying
    A small hardcore essentially obeys no laws at all: cycling on pavements, going the wrong way down one way streets, &c

    Central London cyclists are not a great advert for cyclists
    Going the wrong way down a one way street on bike is extremely sensible albeit it still illegal in the UK. In France it is the law on roads with under 30 kph limits. It is an amazingly good idea. Everyone sees everyone. There is no overtaking of bikes, or cars in traffic jams which is the risky bit. There is normally a greater gap between car and bike. And it takes the bikes away from busier roads. Works a treat in Paris. Now the Place de la Concorde on the other hand!!! I get off my bike there
    Fair enough. I hadn’t thought of it that way - makes sense. These guys don’t especially annoy me anyway

    The pavement cyclists ARE annoying
    In fairness though it is illegal here and if you are a pedestrian in London it will give you one hell of a scare if you are not expecting it. They shouldn't be doing it and they will be in the wrong. For one of my trips I cycled from Waterloo to St Pancras in the rush hour. The cyclists were the least tolerant I have come across, so I have sympathy for those annoyed at cyclists in London. I guess it is all a bit frantic for everyone.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,230
    Cyclefree said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I realise that this is a niche interest. But watching Counsel to the Post Office Inquiry gently take Richard Morgan, barrister for the Post Office in the case which bankrupted subpostmaster Lee Castleton, through his evidence to the point where Morgan, after a morning of sober, considered replies, brutally throws his ex-client and ex-instructing solicitors under the bus just before the lunch break was a joy to behold.

    Questioning as well as this is an art and seeing it done well a privilege.

    Mrs Rose, as reported in Nick Wallis’ blog on Tuesday, has to be among the most forgetful women on God’s green earth.
    "I don't recall" is a standard defence technique for all manner of wronguns.
    It doesn't really help though where you have signed a witness statement saying that what it contains is true and then have to admit the opposite. You look either negligent or malicious, but either way a liar. "I can't remember why I lied" is a pretty tiny fig leaf.
    She can always try the Ernest Saunders gambit.

    The really extraordinary thing is that she was ever employed as an auditor at all, having no experience or training.
    Who was responsible for appointing her ?
  • algarkirk said:

    Ukraine. Do I get a sense that the world's view is shifting? Wars used to have a beginning, a middle and an end. Winners and losers, and followed by a moral determination to make the world better and safer. Obvs what I have just said is mostly false but not entirely.

    In recent decades wars have done nothing like this. They have interminable middles, no proper end and the outcome is always worse than before. (Iraq, Syria, various bits of Africa, Afghanistan etc).

    Is Ukraine, in our minds, entering the phase of being just another of these? If so, the west is going to start losing its grip.

    "Wars used to have a beginning, a middle and an end."

    I think this is only *generally* the case with a historian's viewpoint. You can see the start, middle and end with hindsight only - and even then they can be fuzzy. When did WW2 start? Perhaps with Pearl harbour if you're American; September 1939 from a European viewpoint, and earlier if you're Japanese or Chinese?

    And it's only 'generally' the case because you have things like the Korean War, or the Cold War (which itself might perhaps be split into two warmer phases). Sometimes one conflict ends, but can lead directly into another later because the victory and defeat themselves are fuzzy (perhaps WW1 and WW2 are such a case).
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,079
    Ghedebrav said:

    Leon said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A large minority of cyclists in London ignore lights almost completely. They slow down for reds but still sail through

    Then there’s the hardcore that whizz down pavements

    There's quite a difference between "the vast majority" and "a large minority" though. And I'd say it's a small minority, like maybe 5%. Most weeks I cycle 60km a week and almost all cyclists obey almost every red light on my commute. The big miscreants are food delivery e bikes and couriers, who you can sort of rationalise because they're trying to get their hourly pay rate at least close to the minimum wage.
    I’m making three distinctions

    The majority jump red lights
    A large minority ignores red lights - unless in danger of dying
    A small hardcore essentially obeys no laws at all: cycling on pavements, going the wrong way down one way streets, &c

    Central London cyclists are not a great advert for cyclists
    Yes I would say that was about right. I would say a majority jump red lights, a large minority always ignores red lights, a small minority ignores red lights even when at risk of dying.

    Funnily enough I don't come across/see pavement cycling all that much. You'd have to be an idiot to try to cycle along many London pavements, that said, at least in core central London.
    You get a fair amount of pavement cycling in Camden. I’ve learned to be wary of them - because this is how thieves snatch phones: they cycle up on to the pavement from behind you and whisk it out of your hand. Happened to me about six months ago. Infuriating
    My better half thought she'd lost her phone today. Checked by phoning it from my phone - didn't seem to be either with me at the office or her at home.
    Google find my device from her desktop PC located it at the (regular) garage we'd left in the morning. Phoned garage but they couldn't hear it when I called.
    Drove round to garage and found it under another parked customer's car slightly away from the garage's office.
    Google "find my device" a bit of a life saver.
    I was able, from here in Manhattan, to confirm that my wife had left her handbag - which for reasons contained my UK mobile phone - at Truro Railway Station, which was kind of cool.
    Did you get your phone/bag back ?
    Yes!
    Very honest people, the Cornish.
    I got my WALLET back six hours after leaving it on a bench at Camden Road station. Entirely untouched, handed in to the station staff by a “regular commuter”. Quite renewed my faith in humanity - and Londoners
    Same happened to me after I left mine on the train from Manchester to Sheffield. Also felt faith renewed, especially as this was the day after the Brexit vote.
    I got my wallet back 16 hours after dropping it miles of empty nothingness on Dartmoor. The man who found it found an appointment card for my dentist and called them, who called me, who called him. He gave me a what three words for the layby at which to meet him.

    Conversely, I've just read Dave Grohl's autobiography. He left his wallet at a gas station in the American South West and only realised 300 miles later. 10 years later, he was in a shop and the cashier recognised him (or his name) - it was her parents' gas station and they still had it. He was very pleased to be reunited with it, but I thought it showed something of a lack of effort - he was fairly sure where he had left it (albeit he was 300 miles away by then), and he was a fairly well known famous person by then - you would have thought he would have either made the effort to call the gas station or they would have made the effort to call him. Still, he was happy with the outcome, even if he missed the chance to go to Pantera's strip club in Dallas as a result.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,230
    Dura_Ace said:

    algarkirk said:

    Ukraine. Do I get a sense that the world's view is shifting? Wars used to have a beginning, a middle and an end. Winners and losers, and followed by a moral determination to make the world better and safer. Obvs what I have just said is mostly false but not entirely.

    In recent decades wars have done nothing like this. They have interminable middles, no proper end and the outcome is always worse than before. (Iraq, Syria, various bits of Africa, Afghanistan etc).

    Is Ukraine, in our minds, entering the phase of being just another of these? If so, the west is going to start losing its grip.

    Neither side can inflict an overwhelming defeat or even put together a major offensive that goes anywhere yet neither side is ready to sue for a white peace. So we'll see what happens in Season 3. Poland look like they are getting written out so Romania might have to step up to series regular.
    Are they, or is that just a pre-election spat ?
    And who wins the election ?

    No clear answers to either of those for now.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,406
    Dura_Ace said:

    algarkirk said:

    Ukraine. Do I get a sense that the world's view is shifting? Wars used to have a beginning, a middle and an end. Winners and losers, and followed by a moral determination to make the world better and safer. Obvs what I have just said is mostly false but not entirely.

    In recent decades wars have done nothing like this. They have interminable middles, no proper end and the outcome is always worse than before. (Iraq, Syria, various bits of Africa, Afghanistan etc).

    Is Ukraine, in our minds, entering the phase of being just another of these? If so, the west is going to start losing its grip.

    Neither side can inflict an overwhelming defeat or even put together a major offensive that goes anywhere yet neither side is ready to sue for a white peace. So we'll see what happens in Season 3. Poland look like they are getting written out so Romania might have to step up to series regular.
    Allegedly the current tactic is pinprick raids by Ukraine to draw the Orcs out, then kill them, and continue until morale collapses or they run out of people. It's based on the presumption that for political reasons (2024 Russian Prez Elex) no reinforcements will be sent until after the election (March) or inauguration (May)
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,778
    viewcode said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    algarkirk said:

    Ukraine. Do I get a sense that the world's view is shifting? Wars used to have a beginning, a middle and an end. Winners and losers, and followed by a moral determination to make the world better and safer. Obvs what I have just said is mostly false but not entirely.

    In recent decades wars have done nothing like this. They have interminable middles, no proper end and the outcome is always worse than before. (Iraq, Syria, various bits of Africa, Afghanistan etc).

    Is Ukraine, in our minds, entering the phase of being just another of these? If so, the west is going to start losing its grip.

    Neither side can inflict an overwhelming defeat or even put together a major offensive that goes anywhere yet neither side is ready to sue for a white peace. So we'll see what happens in Season 3. Poland look like they are getting written out so Romania might have to step up to series regular.
    Allegedly the current tactic is pinprick raids by Ukraine to draw the Orcs out, then kill them, and continue until morale collapses or they run out of people. It's based on the presumption that for political reasons (2024 Russian Prez Elex) no reinforcements will be sent until after the election (March) or inauguration (May)
    This is exactly what Russian media says their tactics are. XAXA!
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,909
    edited September 2023
    viewcode said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    algarkirk said:

    Ukraine. Do I get a sense that the world's view is shifting? Wars used to have a beginning, a middle and an end. Winners and losers, and followed by a moral determination to make the world better and safer. Obvs what I have just said is mostly false but not entirely.

    In recent decades wars have done nothing like this. They have interminable middles, no proper end and the outcome is always worse than before. (Iraq, Syria, various bits of Africa, Afghanistan etc).

    Is Ukraine, in our minds, entering the phase of being just another of these? If so, the west is going to start losing its grip.

    Neither side can inflict an overwhelming defeat or even put together a major offensive that goes anywhere yet neither side is ready to sue for a white peace. So we'll see what happens in Season 3. Poland look like they are getting written out so Romania might have to step up to series regular.
    Allegedly the current tactic is pinprick raids by Ukraine to draw the Orcs out, then kill them, and continue until morale collapses or they run out of people. It's based on the presumption that for political reasons (2024 Russian Prez Elex) no reinforcements will be sent until after the election (March) or inauguration (May)
    The strategy is the same since the armoured assault in June failed. Use an advantage in ranged fires to destroy Russia's ability to defend against a future armoured assault, by destroying Russian artillery, logistics, air defence and air force.

    It's targeting equipment, not manpower.

    EDIT: Incidentally, this is why the British (and now French) supply of Storm Shadow is really important, and the failure by the US (ATACMS) and Germany (Taurus) to follow suit is really disappointing, though it's worth noting that Ukraine's own effort with drones is an increasingly important part of their advantage over Russia in this respect.

    Plus, of course, they are using their long range weapons to attack things like airfields, rather than civilian infrastructure, which increases their military advantage in the future.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,717
    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I realise that this is a niche interest. But watching Counsel to the Post Office Inquiry gently take Richard Morgan, barrister for the Post Office in the case which bankrupted subpostmaster Lee Castleton, through his evidence to the point where Morgan, after a morning of sober, considered replies, brutally throws his ex-client and ex-instructing solicitors under the bus just before the lunch break was a joy to behold.

    Questioning as well as this is an art and seeing it done well a privilege.

    Mrs Rose, as reported in Nick Wallis’ blog on Tuesday, has to be among the most forgetful women on God’s green earth.
    "I don't recall" is a standard defence technique for all manner of wronguns.
    It doesn't really help though where you have signed a witness statement saying that what it contains is true and then have to admit the opposite. You look either negligent or malicious, but either way a liar. "I can't remember why I lied" is a pretty tiny fig leaf.
    She can always try the Ernest Saunders gambit.

    The really extraordinary thing is that she was ever employed as an auditor at all, having no experience or training.
    Who was responsible for appointing her ?
    Doesn’t say a lot for the Post Office promotion systems, does it? I wouldn’t be too surprised if the judge had something to say about her.
    And the people who promoted her.
  • Dura_Ace said:

    viewcode said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    algarkirk said:

    Ukraine. Do I get a sense that the world's view is shifting? Wars used to have a beginning, a middle and an end. Winners and losers, and followed by a moral determination to make the world better and safer. Obvs what I have just said is mostly false but not entirely.

    In recent decades wars have done nothing like this. They have interminable middles, no proper end and the outcome is always worse than before. (Iraq, Syria, various bits of Africa, Afghanistan etc).

    Is Ukraine, in our minds, entering the phase of being just another of these? If so, the west is going to start losing its grip.

    Neither side can inflict an overwhelming defeat or even put together a major offensive that goes anywhere yet neither side is ready to sue for a white peace. So we'll see what happens in Season 3. Poland look like they are getting written out so Romania might have to step up to series regular.
    Allegedly the current tactic is pinprick raids by Ukraine to draw the Orcs out, then kill them, and continue until morale collapses or they run out of people. It's based on the presumption that for political reasons (2024 Russian Prez Elex) no reinforcements will be sent until after the election (March) or inauguration (May)
    This is exactly what Russian media says their tactics are. XAXA!
    I'd expect someone who watches 'Russian media' as closely as you do will understand that 'Russian media' says 1,001 different things concurrently. Few, if any, of which are true.

    But I'd love to see where there great plan includes having a nation with no navy sinking their submarines and warships, and to have had hundreds of thousands of casualties in a supposedly three=day war that has already lasted well over 500.
  • I am delighted to announce the Biggus Dickus, Seymour Cocks, and Angela White have all signed that Welsh petition.

    All with bona fide emails.
  • British Gas is being investigated for sending “marketing” emails to customers warning that their old meters urgently need replacing because they may catch fire.

    When one panicked customer asked for details, he was told it was just a new advertising strategy to persuade customers to switch to smart energy meters and he need not worry.

    A complaint has been lodged by another customer with the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), claiming that British Gas’s email was “misleading and irresponsible”. The ASA said it would not comment on an ongoing investigation.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/british-gas-smart-meter-fire-investigation-g7s7mzr3x
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,727
    edited September 2023
    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    I went to the wedding reception of one of the most famous people on earth, and sadly it was a vegan affair.

    Totally bland and depressing.

    the champagne was good though.

    I once went to a Rothschild wedding. Not any old Rothschilds, either. Main branch

    The food was good but the wine - as you might imagine - was SUPERB. £500 bottles of red on every table, and endless replacements when you drained the last (which happened frequently)
    What does "main branch" mean? How do I tell whether it is I or my cousin who is on the "main branch" of our* family?

    *we aren't Rothschilds. I expect I wouldn't have had to ask if we were.
    The main branch is the really really really rich branch

    The person who got married is personally worth north of $1bn

    Tho of course there are Rothschilds even richer than that
    To add to the occasional posts of 'where is this?', may I submit the following:


    Yes, there is a link...
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,155

    algarkirk said:

    Ukraine. Do I get a sense that the world's view is shifting? Wars used to have a beginning, a middle and an end. Winners and losers, and followed by a moral determination to make the world better and safer. Obvs what I have just said is mostly false but not entirely.

    In recent decades wars have done nothing like this. They have interminable middles, no proper end and the outcome is always worse than before. (Iraq, Syria, various bits of Africa, Afghanistan etc).

    Is Ukraine, in our minds, entering the phase of being just another of these? If so, the west is going to start losing its grip.

    "Wars used to have a beginning, a middle and an end."

    I think this is only *generally* the case with a historian's viewpoint. You can see the start, middle and end with hindsight only - and even then they can be fuzzy. When did WW2 start? Perhaps with Pearl harbour if you're American; September 1939 from a European viewpoint, and earlier if you're Japanese or Chinese?

    And it's only 'generally' the case because you have things like the Korean War, or the Cold War (which itself might perhaps be split into two warmer phases). Sometimes one conflict ends, but can lead directly into another later because the victory and defeat themselves are fuzzy (perhaps WW1 and WW2 are such a case).
    Yes, history does a lot of tidying up, but often the narrative is different in different countries. After what we see as World War One ending, fighting continued for some time in Poland and in Turkey, as just two examples.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,364
    Cyclefree said:

    Carnyx said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I realise that this is a niche interest. But watching Counsel to the Post Office Inquiry gently take Richard Morgan, barrister for the Post Office in the case which bankrupted subpostmaster Lee Castleton, through his evidence to the point where Morgan, after a morning of sober, considered replies, brutally throws his ex-client and ex-instructing solicitors under the bus just before the lunch break was a joy to behold.

    Questioning as well as this is an art and seeing it done well a privilege.

    Oh. Is there a public transcript available?
    Not yet. But I can give you a summary of how he lays out each step to get him to where he wants, to where the only possible answer is the one Richard Morgan gave, albeit perhaps not quite in the colourful language used.
    Thanks - the video will be fine.
  • Regarding cash vs electronic. I believe "try using your phone if systems go down" was the retort.

    OK, so I go into a shop. Power cut. They aren't taking cash payments either because their tills aren't working. BTW phone payment is not reliant on an internet connection anyway.

    Are you sure about that last point? My local Co-Op has lost Internet several times fur to scrotes nicking cables, and they can take cash perfectly well - but not card or phone.
    Internet? You don't need an active internet continuous internet connection for contactless payments. How do you think they work on trains and planes?

    Anyway, we are talking about very occasional scenarios. For the vast majority of the time contactless works flawlessly. Indeed, I can tap for any amount, whereas with the physical card I cannot.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    edited September 2023

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    I went to the wedding reception of one of the most famous people on earth, and sadly it was a vegan affair.

    Totally bland and depressing.

    the champagne was good though.

    I once went to a Rothschild wedding. Not any old Rothschilds, either. Main branch

    The food was good but the wine - as you might imagine - was SUPERB. £500 bottles of red on every table, and endless replacements when you drained the last (which happened frequently)
    What does "main branch" mean? How do I tell whether it is I or my cousin who is on the "main branch" of our* family?

    *we aren't Rothschilds. I expect I wouldn't have had to ask if we were.
    The main branch is the really really really rich branch

    The person who got married is personally worth north of $1bn

    Tho of course there are Rothschilds even richer than that
    To the occasional series of PB 'where is this?', may I submit the following:


    Yes, there is a link...
    Somewhere on the Rothschild estate in Buckinghamshire - either Waddesdon or Ascott?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,155

    British Gas is being investigated for sending “marketing” emails to customers warning that their old meters urgently need replacing because they may catch fire.

    When one panicked customer asked for details, he was told it was just a new advertising strategy to persuade customers to switch to smart energy meters and he need not worry.

    A complaint has been lodged by another customer with the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), claiming that British Gas’s email was “misleading and irresponsible”. The ASA said it would not comment on an ongoing investigation.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/british-gas-smart-meter-fire-investigation-g7s7mzr3x

    I met the guy who fits smart meters on the island, and he claimed that he spends more time now removing them than fitting them.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,230
    malcolmg said:

    algarkirk said:

    Ukraine. Do I get a sense that the world's view is shifting? Wars used to have a beginning, a middle and an end. Winners and losers, and followed by a moral determination to make the world better and safer. Obvs what I have just said is mostly false but not entirely.

    In recent decades wars have done nothing like this. They have interminable middles, no proper end and the outcome is always worse than before. (Iraq, Syria, various bits of Africa, Afghanistan etc).

    Is Ukraine, in our minds, entering the phase of being just another of these? If so, the west is going to start losing its grip.

    West will be well and truly F***ed if they do not ensure Ukraine "win". Otherwise Russia and China will know they can do what they want anywhere.
    Not just Russia and China.
    The impression that seizing territory by force is now a winning gambit, if it were to prevail, is quite a dangerous one everywhere.

    It will also encourage a wave of nuclear proliferation.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,832
    Eabhal said:

    TimS said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A large minority of cyclists in London ignore lights almost completely. They slow down for reds but still sail through

    Then there’s the hardcore that whizz down pavements

    There's quite a difference between "the vast majority" and "a large minority" though. And I'd say it's a small minority, like maybe 5%. Most weeks I cycle 60km a week and almost all cyclists obey almost every red light on my commute. The big miscreants are food delivery e bikes and couriers, who you can sort of rationalise because they're trying to get their hourly pay rate at least close to the minimum wage.
    I’m making three distinctions

    The majority jump red lights
    A large minority ignores red lights - unless in danger of dying
    A small hardcore essentially obeys no laws at all: cycling on pavements, going the wrong way down one way streets, &c

    Central London cyclists are not a great advert for cyclists
    Yes I would say that was about right. I would say a majority jump red lights, a large minority always ignores red lights, a small minority ignores red lights even when at risk of dying.

    Funnily enough I don't come across/see pavement cycling all that much. You'd have to be an idiot to try to cycle along many London pavements, that said, at least in core central London.
    They also shout and do wanker signs at pedestrians and motorists if they do anything they consider remotely off. Cyclists in London are - perhaps as an evolutionary defence mechanism - wired up XL-Bully style and ready for a fight at all times. The middle aged male ones anyway. The youths are more placid, though defiantly dismissive of the ban on pavement cycling.

    Contrast with Denmark where I've several times stepped out into a cycle lane not realising it was one, almost caused an accident and got nothing worse than a chirpy bell ring from a suit wearing commuter sitting upright on their basketed bike.
    I think every PBer should cycle through a British town during rush hour.

    I'll buy them a pint if they don't swear/die/lose a leg/assault a driver/buy a GoPro.

    The aggro cyclist stereotype stems from the constant danger and adrenaline, and the fact your mate got knocked off a couple of weeks ago.
    I'll claim my pint :smiley:


    Seriously though, in ~200 journeys there have been three incidents in town that have got my pulse up. One a stupid driver, one a stupid me and one a driver almost making an observation mistake (corrected and stopped in time). I've had more hairy incidents on a dedicated off-road track with dogs and deer and an owl almost taking me out once. Mind you, the two busiest/most potentially contentious sections of the nearest town are 20mph zones and that really does help when there's a lot going on :wink:
  • viewcode said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    algarkirk said:

    Ukraine. Do I get a sense that the world's view is shifting? Wars used to have a beginning, a middle and an end. Winners and losers, and followed by a moral determination to make the world better and safer. Obvs what I have just said is mostly false but not entirely.

    In recent decades wars have done nothing like this. They have interminable middles, no proper end and the outcome is always worse than before. (Iraq, Syria, various bits of Africa, Afghanistan etc).

    Is Ukraine, in our minds, entering the phase of being just another of these? If so, the west is going to start losing its grip.

    Neither side can inflict an overwhelming defeat or even put together a major offensive that goes anywhere yet neither side is ready to sue for a white peace. So we'll see what happens in Season 3. Poland look like they are getting written out so Romania might have to step up to series regular.
    Allegedly the current tactic is pinprick raids by Ukraine to draw the Orcs out, then kill them, and continue until morale collapses or they run out of people. It's based on the presumption that for political reasons (2024 Russian Prez Elex) no reinforcements will be sent until after the election (March) or inauguration (May)
    Calling any human being an 'orc', regardless of wicked deeds that they may have done, is the least Jesus-like phrase I could imagine anyone using.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    Nigelb said:

    malcolmg said:

    algarkirk said:

    Ukraine. Do I get a sense that the world's view is shifting? Wars used to have a beginning, a middle and an end. Winners and losers, and followed by a moral determination to make the world better and safer. Obvs what I have just said is mostly false but not entirely.

    In recent decades wars have done nothing like this. They have interminable middles, no proper end and the outcome is always worse than before. (Iraq, Syria, various bits of Africa, Afghanistan etc).

    Is Ukraine, in our minds, entering the phase of being just another of these? If so, the west is going to start losing its grip.

    West will be well and truly F***ed if they do not ensure Ukraine "win". Otherwise Russia and China will know they can do what they want anywhere.
    Not just Russia and China.
    The impression that seizing territory by force is now a winning gambit, if it were to prevail, is quite a dangerous one everywhere.

    It will also encourage a wave of nuclear proliferation.
    The latter is already in the post. You think South Korea and Taiwan aren't busily nuking up, as we speak? They won't announce it, they may not build an actual bomb, but they will have all the ingredients on the table ready to assemble in minutes

    Saudi, too - they have basically admitted it
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,832
    IanB2 said:

    British Gas is being investigated for sending “marketing” emails to customers warning that their old meters urgently need replacing because they may catch fire.

    When one panicked customer asked for details, he was told it was just a new advertising strategy to persuade customers to switch to smart energy meters and he need not worry.

    A complaint has been lodged by another customer with the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), claiming that British Gas’s email was “misleading and irresponsible”. The ASA said it would not comment on an ongoing investigation.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/british-gas-smart-meter-fire-investigation-g7s7mzr3x

    I met the guy who fits smart meters on the island, and he claimed that he spends more time now removing them than fitting them.
    Smart meters are a thing that irks people that I don't get. If you're not using the little in home display, then what's the difference, other than not being required to send meter readings/having someone knock on the door/read an external meter.

    I get that the initial version was a bit dumb, being tied to supplier, but otherwise... well, I wasn't bothered about getting one and, now I've got one, I'm not at all bothered about the fact that I have one. With solar it's handy to be able to check on a phone app or indeed the IHD, without using other kit, when you're exporting enough electicity to run something like a tumble dryer for free. Without solar I'd barely notice any difference either way.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,727
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    I went to the wedding reception of one of the most famous people on earth, and sadly it was a vegan affair.

    Totally bland and depressing.

    the champagne was good though.

    I once went to a Rothschild wedding. Not any old Rothschilds, either. Main branch

    The food was good but the wine - as you might imagine - was SUPERB. £500 bottles of red on every table, and endless replacements when you drained the last (which happened frequently)
    What does "main branch" mean? How do I tell whether it is I or my cousin who is on the "main branch" of our* family?

    *we aren't Rothschilds. I expect I wouldn't have had to ask if we were.
    The main branch is the really really really rich branch

    The person who got married is personally worth north of $1bn

    Tho of course there are Rothschilds even richer than that
    To the occasional series of PB 'where is this?', may I submit the following:


    Yes, there is a link...
    Somewhere on the Rothschild estate in Buckinghamshire - either Waddesdon or Ascott?
    No, a bit more obscure.

    This branch of the family was in to slightly esoteric hobbies but was definitely ahead of its time.
  • NEW: Britons are split on whether Sunak's announcement to delay/cancel #NetZero policies was right or wrong



    One in four (26%) trust the Conservatives to make the right decisions to protect the environment, two-thirds (66%) do not



    https://twitter.com/IpsosUK/status/1705210014065885557
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,879

    Rachel Reeves has made some suggestions at changing the OBR, which George Osborn has now welcomed.

    Part of a broader statement on fiscal rules which looks very promising from Labour.

    This is retrograde, even if inevitable. Politics is the place of hard choices. To govern is to choose, to govern well is to choose rightly. Every time a government sets up a sort of OFSTED to adjudicate its actions the real intention is to absolve itself of the responsibility of being the government.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,155
    edited September 2023
    Selebian said:

    IanB2 said:

    British Gas is being investigated for sending “marketing” emails to customers warning that their old meters urgently need replacing because they may catch fire.

    When one panicked customer asked for details, he was told it was just a new advertising strategy to persuade customers to switch to smart energy meters and he need not worry.

    A complaint has been lodged by another customer with the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), claiming that British Gas’s email was “misleading and irresponsible”. The ASA said it would not comment on an ongoing investigation.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/british-gas-smart-meter-fire-investigation-g7s7mzr3x

    I met the guy who fits smart meters on the island, and he claimed that he spends more time now removing them than fitting them.
    Smart meters are a thing that irks people that I don't get. If you're not using the little in home display, then what's the difference, other than not being required to send meter readings/having someone knock on the door/read an external meter.

    I get that the initial version was a bit dumb, being tied to supplier, but otherwise... well, I wasn't bothered about getting one and, now I've got one, I'm not at all bothered about the fact that I have one. With solar it's handy to be able to check on a phone app or indeed the IHD, without using other kit, when you're exporting enough electicity to run something like a tumble dryer for free. Without solar I'd barely notice any difference either way.
    So far despite a lot of pestering from the fuel company including unwanted phone calls, I have turned one down.

    My meters are outside the house, one in a wooden cabinet and the other in a plastic one, and the fitter (who happened to be calling about something else) told me that one definitely and one probably would need to be replaced if I got a smart meter, as it definitely wouldn’t fit in the plastic box that covers the gas meter. I asked if they’d do this as part of the job, and he said no, I’d have to do this myself. So work and expense for no real benefit. He then said there were problems with the internet connection in some parts of the island that shut the supply off if the meter lost contact, and told me some tales about people left in a real mess with no supply. This and various other problems people have had wasn’t selling it to me. He fits them and he told me I’d be better off as I am.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    I went to the wedding reception of one of the most famous people on earth, and sadly it was a vegan affair.

    Totally bland and depressing.

    the champagne was good though.

    I once went to a Rothschild wedding. Not any old Rothschilds, either. Main branch

    The food was good but the wine - as you might imagine - was SUPERB. £500 bottles of red on every table, and endless replacements when you drained the last (which happened frequently)
    What does "main branch" mean? How do I tell whether it is I or my cousin who is on the "main branch" of our* family?

    *we aren't Rothschilds. I expect I wouldn't have had to ask if we were.
    The main branch is the really really really rich branch

    The person who got married is personally worth north of $1bn

    Tho of course there are Rothschilds even richer than that
    To the occasional series of PB 'where is this?', may I submit the following:


    Yes, there is a link...
    Somewhere on the Rothschild estate in Buckinghamshire - either Waddesdon or Ascott?
    No, a bit more obscure.

    This branch of the family was in to slightly esoteric hobbies but was definitely ahead of its time.
    Oooh, I like a mystery. But this one has me stumped. I might know a Rothschild or two but I'm not THAT acquainted with their history - someone else will have to solve this
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,061

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    I went to the wedding reception of one of the most famous people on earth, and sadly it was a vegan affair.

    Totally bland and depressing.

    the champagne was good though.

    I once went to a Rothschild wedding. Not any old Rothschilds, either. Main branch

    The food was good but the wine - as you might imagine - was SUPERB. £500 bottles of red on every table, and endless replacements when you drained the last (which happened frequently)
    What does "main branch" mean? How do I tell whether it is I or my cousin who is on the "main branch" of our* family?

    *we aren't Rothschilds. I expect I wouldn't have had to ask if we were.
    The main branch is the really really really rich branch

    The person who got married is personally worth north of $1bn

    Tho of course there are Rothschilds even richer than that
    To the occasional series of PB 'where is this?', may I submit the following:


    Yes, there is a link...
    Somewhere on the Rothschild estate in Buckinghamshire - either Waddesdon or Ascott?
    No, a bit more obscure.

    This branch of the family was in to slightly esoteric hobbies but was definitely ahead of its time.
    Rothschild Bungalow, Wood Walton Fen.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,364

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    I went to the wedding reception of one of the most famous people on earth, and sadly it was a vegan affair.

    Totally bland and depressing.

    the champagne was good though.

    I once went to a Rothschild wedding. Not any old Rothschilds, either. Main branch

    The food was good but the wine - as you might imagine - was SUPERB. £500 bottles of red on every table, and endless replacements when you drained the last (which happened frequently)
    What does "main branch" mean? How do I tell whether it is I or my cousin who is on the "main branch" of our* family?

    *we aren't Rothschilds. I expect I wouldn't have had to ask if we were.
    The main branch is the really really really rich branch

    The person who got married is personally worth north of $1bn

    Tho of course there are Rothschilds even richer than that
    To the occasional series of PB 'where is this?', may I submit the following:


    Yes, there is a link...
    Somewhere on the Rothschild estate in Buckinghamshire - either Waddesdon or Ascott?
    No, a bit more obscure.

    This branch of the family was in to slightly esoteric hobbies but was definitely ahead of its time.
    Tring. Miranda Rotschild?
  • Rachel Reeves has made some suggestions at changing the OBR, which George Osborn has now welcomed.

    Part of a broader statement on fiscal rules which looks very promising from Labour.

    I read this and thought, "Oh, sensible, the OBR desperately needs change - they're fucking useless" - only to Google and find she's actually suggesting handing them MORE power. This is a good idea how, when they can't forecast for shit?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,155
    This guy leading the PO inquiry is a dead ringer for the German actor Waldemar Kobus, when he was a bit younger.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,832
    IanB2 said:

    Selebian said:

    IanB2 said:

    British Gas is being investigated for sending “marketing” emails to customers warning that their old meters urgently need replacing because they may catch fire.

    When one panicked customer asked for details, he was told it was just a new advertising strategy to persuade customers to switch to smart energy meters and he need not worry.

    A complaint has been lodged by another customer with the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), claiming that British Gas’s email was “misleading and irresponsible”. The ASA said it would not comment on an ongoing investigation.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/british-gas-smart-meter-fire-investigation-g7s7mzr3x

    I met the guy who fits smart meters on the island, and he claimed that he spends more time now removing them than fitting them.
    Smart meters are a thing that irks people that I don't get. If you're not using the little in home display, then what's the difference, other than not being required to send meter readings/having someone knock on the door/read an external meter.

    I get that the initial version was a bit dumb, being tied to supplier, but otherwise... well, I wasn't bothered about getting one and, now I've got one, I'm not at all bothered about the fact that I have one. With solar it's handy to be able to check on a phone app or indeed the IHD, without using other kit, when you're exporting enough electicity to run something like a tumble dryer for free. Without solar I'd barely notice any difference either way.
    So far despite a lot of pestering from the fuel company including unwanted phone calls, I have turned one down.

    My meters are outside the house, one in a wooden cabinet and the other in a plastic one, and the fitter (who happened to be calling about something else) told me that one definitely and one probably would need to be replaced if I got a smart meter, as it definitely wouldn’t fit in the plastic box that covers the gas meter. I asked if they’d do this as part of the job, and he said no, I’d have to do this myself. So work and expense for no real benefit. He then said there were problems with the internet connection in some parts of the island that shut the supply off if the meter lost contact, and told me some tales about people left in a real mess with no supply. This and various other problems people have had wasn’t selling it to me. He fits them and he told me I’d be better off as I am.
    Fair enough.

    FWIW, the smart gas meter we have is smaller than the dumb one it replaced. Smart electricity meter is substantially larger, but it looks to be a two-part thing - meter which interfaces to the smart gubbins box which also talks to the gas meter.

    Bizarre if the supply would be shut off for lack of communications, seems very odd except perhaps for a pre-payment meter, where I can see the logic, but it would still suck, obviously.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,921

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    I went to the wedding reception of one of the most famous people on earth, and sadly it was a vegan affair.

    Totally bland and depressing.

    the champagne was good though.

    I once went to a Rothschild wedding. Not any old Rothschilds, either. Main branch

    The food was good but the wine - as you might imagine - was SUPERB. £500 bottles of red on every table, and endless replacements when you drained the last (which happened frequently)
    What does "main branch" mean? How do I tell whether it is I or my cousin who is on the "main branch" of our* family?

    *we aren't Rothschilds. I expect I wouldn't have had to ask if we were.
    The main branch is the really really really rich branch

    The person who got married is personally worth north of $1bn

    Tho of course there are Rothschilds even richer than that
    To the occasional series of PB 'where is this?', may I submit the following:


    Yes, there is a link...
    Somewhere on the Rothschild estate in Buckinghamshire - either Waddesdon or Ascott?
    No, a bit more obscure.

    This branch of the family was in to slightly esoteric hobbies but was definitely ahead of its time.
    Rothschild Bungalow, Wood Walton Fen.
    Concrete stilts. It must be Brutalist :wink:
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,230
    .
    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    malcolmg said:

    algarkirk said:

    Ukraine. Do I get a sense that the world's view is shifting? Wars used to have a beginning, a middle and an end. Winners and losers, and followed by a moral determination to make the world better and safer. Obvs what I have just said is mostly false but not entirely.

    In recent decades wars have done nothing like this. They have interminable middles, no proper end and the outcome is always worse than before. (Iraq, Syria, various bits of Africa, Afghanistan etc).

    Is Ukraine, in our minds, entering the phase of being just another of these? If so, the west is going to start losing its grip.

    West will be well and truly F***ed if they do not ensure Ukraine "win". Otherwise Russia and China will know they can do what they want anywhere.
    Not just Russia and China.
    The impression that seizing territory by force is now a winning gambit, if it were to prevail, is quite a dangerous one everywhere.

    It will also encourage a wave of nuclear proliferation.
    The latter is already in the post. You think South Korea and Taiwan aren't busily nuking up, as we speak? They won't announce it, they may not build an actual bomb, but they will have all the ingredients on the table ready to assemble in minutes

    Saudi, too - they have basically admitted it
    Of course.
    But if those, one, perhaps two probably have no intention of going all the way, for now at least.
    And there'll be a load of others who will copy them should Russia prevail.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 13,215

    NEW: Britons are split on whether Sunak's announcement to delay/cancel #NetZero policies was right or wrong



    One in four (26%) trust the Conservatives to make the right decisions to protect the environment, two-thirds (66%) do not



    https://twitter.com/IpsosUK/status/1705210014065885557

    Given the very poor reporting on this - leaving a very strong impression that people were going to be forced to sell their cars, rip out their boilers and buy Tesla heat pumps in 2030 - this even split gives the opposition quite a lot of scope to spin things to their advantage in the next few weeks.

    Government announcements tend to have a honeymoon period followed by more critical analysis. This hasn't happened because the critical voices were there from the start, but there's a window for it now. The brief must be:

    - 2030 was a deadline for auto companies to make 100% EV or hybrid cars, not a deadline for the public
    - that deadline helped the UK secure some investment in EV and battery manufacture where previously we'd been lagging due to Chinese domination of the industry + not being a left hand drive market
    - Tory policy also meant a failed renewables auction this month because didn't listen to industry. Britain falling behind
    - Meanwhile not addressing the big issues like crumbling schools and hospitals
    - Labour have given industry helpful clarity on their position, which should mean they can continue to forge ahead with investment plans as everyone expects a Labour victory
    - Then a bunch of stuff about a new green deal and industrial strategy under a Labour government, jobs, factories etc.

    Meanwhile leave the Lib Dems to do the environmental stuff and stick the knife in on sewage and nitrate pollution
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,568
    viewcode said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    algarkirk said:

    Ukraine. Do I get a sense that the world's view is shifting? Wars used to have a beginning, a middle and an end. Winners and losers, and followed by a moral determination to make the world better and safer. Obvs what I have just said is mostly false but not entirely.

    In recent decades wars have done nothing like this. They have interminable middles, no proper end and the outcome is always worse than before. (Iraq, Syria, various bits of Africa, Afghanistan etc).

    Is Ukraine, in our minds, entering the phase of being just another of these? If so, the west is going to start losing its grip.

    Neither side can inflict an overwhelming defeat or even put together a major offensive that goes anywhere yet neither side is ready to sue for a white peace. So we'll see what happens in Season 3. Poland look like they are getting written out so Romania might have to step up to series regular.
    Allegedly the current tactic is pinprick raids by Ukraine to draw the Orcs out, then kill them, and continue until morale collapses or they run out of people. It's based on the presumption that for political reasons (2024 Russian Prez Elex) no reinforcements will be sent until after the election (March) or inauguration (May)
    I find it quite hard to fathom how Russian authoritarianism works. We generally assume that Putin can merely decide the result, noting the actual figures privately as useful info. If so, why would he care about the election? It's like the supposedly solid censorship, which periodically lets a liberal or a right-wing nutter say something "unhelpful" without consequences, while people can get arrested for trivia. Others here may know more, but my impression is that it has elements of half-functioning freedom which Putin can suspend at will but would probably be unwise to suspend too widely at once.

    But I still think it's unlikely that the election is a major factor in Putin's plans.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,953
    IanB2 said:

    This guy leading the PO inquiry is a dead ringer for the German actor Waldemar Kobus, when he was a bit younger.

    Jason Beer KC.
  • kjh said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A large minority of cyclists in London ignore lights almost completely. They slow down for reds but still sail through

    Then there’s the hardcore that whizz down pavements

    There's quite a difference between "the vast majority" and "a large minority" though. And I'd say it's a small minority, like maybe 5%. Most weeks I cycle 60km a week and almost all cyclists obey almost every red light on my commute. The big miscreants are food delivery e bikes and couriers, who you can sort of rationalise because they're trying to get their hourly pay rate at least close to the minimum wage.
    I’m making three distinctions

    The majority jump red lights
    A large minority ignores red lights - unless in danger of dying
    A small hardcore essentially obeys no laws at all: cycling on pavements, going the wrong way down one way streets, &c

    Central London cyclists are not a great advert for cyclists
    Going the wrong way down a one way street on bike is extremely sensible albeit it still illegal in the UK. In France it is the law on roads with under 30 kph limits. It is an amazingly good idea. Everyone sees everyone. There is no overtaking of bikes, or cars in traffic jams which is the risky bit. There is normally a greater gap between car and bike. And it takes the bikes away from busier roads. Works a treat in Paris. Now the Place de la Concorde on the other hand!!! I get off my bike there
    Going the wrong way down any street on a bike is a good idea. Its how I was taught and was the norm in Australia, where very sensibly wearing bike helmets is the law too.

    Unless you're cycling extremely fast, in which case go with the traffic, approaching the traffic is much more sensible, you can see the drivers and they can see you, rather than constantly being overtaken by vehicles you can't see.

    Of course more sensible yet would be to engage in a massive road building campaign, with associated dedicated off-road cycle paths so cyclists and cars don't intermingle.

    But that would require investment in infrastructure, something all parties seem to be allergic to.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,727
    edited September 2023

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    I went to the wedding reception of one of the most famous people on earth, and sadly it was a vegan affair.

    Totally bland and depressing.

    the champagne was good though.

    I once went to a Rothschild wedding. Not any old Rothschilds, either. Main branch

    The food was good but the wine - as you might imagine - was SUPERB. £500 bottles of red on every table, and endless replacements when you drained the last (which happened frequently)
    What does "main branch" mean? How do I tell whether it is I or my cousin who is on the "main branch" of our* family?

    *we aren't Rothschilds. I expect I wouldn't have had to ask if we were.
    The main branch is the really really really rich branch

    The person who got married is personally worth north of $1bn

    Tho of course there are Rothschilds even richer than that
    To the occasional series of PB 'where is this?', may I submit the following:


    Yes, there is a link...
    Somewhere on the Rothschild estate in Buckinghamshire - either Waddesdon or Ascott?
    No, a bit more obscure.

    This branch of the family was in to slightly esoteric hobbies but was definitely ahead of its time.
    Rothschild Bungalow, Wood Walton Fen.
    Got it in one.

    As an entomologist he [Charles Rothschild] wanted to save whole sites and not just individual species, so bought the fen as a nature reserve and built a bungalow there so he could stay. The National Trust didn't want it, so he founded what became the Wildlife Trusts.

    https://www.wildlifetrusts.org/about-us/our-history

    Sometimes you can do a lot of good with a lot of money...
This discussion has been closed.