Just give the Serb majority areas back to Serbia. It's not rocket science.
And India give its Muslim majority areas to Pakistan? I think that might just lead to a lot more science about rockets...
Isn’t this what the “realists” are arguing for with respect to Ukraine? Just give up all the bits that they (the realists) say should be Russian.
Fact on the ground…
"Realists" take the view that Eastern Europe needs a gendarme, and that gendarme is Russia.
Realists take the view that potential Russian aggression (never mind actual action) needs defending against, or else the impulse to go west has no natural border (Russian realists would say the same the other way); and that agreements only work if there are hard facts on the ground balancing power and stopping a further advance.
The importance of drones and the speed with which they have been developed in the Ukraine means we really need to re-equip our armed forces from scratch. Oh, and the warriors of the future are more likely to have spent their childhood on Call of Duty than the playing fields of Eton.
Is the result of the “not proper weapons” people getting to lash stuff together. The heavy carrying drone in question is in use in Ukraine, I believe.
One thing that wars like Ukraine does is to let the “not proper weapons” types loose. For example, a number of missile launching systems (ground, but often launching ordinarily air launches) have shown up in Ukraine, which bear a resemblance to test rigs that have been around for years, in the U.K., weaponised.
It actually takes a war (often more than one) to reveal obsolescence.
In August 1914, the armies of France and Germany were using tactics that were hardly changed from the Napoleonic era, despite the fact that rifles could now shoot accurately up to 1,000 yards. Generals still believed that massed cavalry charges could be decisive. Casualty rates were off the scale, during the first three months of the fighting, and it was only the adoption of trench warfare that cut death rates substantially.
We believe The Somme is the worst today, in this country, or possibly Verdun, but the fluid battles of 1914 were truly horrendous for casualties.
Just give the Serb majority areas back to Serbia. It's not rocket science.
From Lord Grey's memoirs,
A friend came to see me on one of the evenings of the last week — he thinks it was on Monday, August 3rd 1914. We were standing at a window of my room in the Foreign Office. It was getting dusk, and the lamps were being lit in the space below on which we were looking. My friend recalls that I remarked on this with the words: "The lamps are going out all over Europe, we shall not see them lit again in our life-time."
Just give the Serb majority areas back to Serbia. It's not rocket science.
And India give its Muslim majority areas to Pakistan? I think that might just lead to a lot more science about rockets...
Isn’t this what the “realists” are arguing for with respect to Ukraine? Just give up all the bits that they (the realists) say should be Russian.
Fact on the ground…
"Realists" take the view that Eastern Europe needs a gendarme, and that gendarme is Russia.
Realists take the view that potential Russian aggression (never mind actual action) needs defending against, or else the impulse to go west has no natural border (Russian realists would say the same the other way); and that agreements only work if there are hard facts on the ground balancing power and stopping a further advance.
That's the difference between Realists and "Realists".
The importance of drones and the speed with which they have been developed in the Ukraine means we really need to re-equip our armed forces from scratch. Oh, and the warriors of the future are more likely to have spent their childhood on Call of Duty than the playing fields of Eton.
Only 5% of tanks lost by either side have been lost to other tanks. This isn't Operation Citadel revisited
On a battlefield where £500m tanks are being taken out by £50k drones there won't be any tanks. They are pointless.
The importance of drones and the speed with which they have been developed in the Ukraine means we really need to re-equip our armed forces from scratch. Oh, and the warriors of the future are more likely to have spent their childhood on Call of Duty than the playing fields of Eton.
Only 5% of tanks lost by either side have been lost to other tanks. This isn't Operation Citadel revisited
On a battlefield where £500m tanks are being taken out by £50k drones there won't be any tanks. They are pointless.
The Royal Navy needs to notice that Ukraines naval drones are looking like a naval victory in the Black Sea for a country without a single functioning ship.
China and Taiwan probably taking notes too.
China in particular, would be appalled to learn that just about everything it intended to use against Taiwan was now obsolescent.
Happily the Royal Navy in recent years hasn't bothered too much with spending money on functioning ships.
Functioning ships are soooo 19th century. Correct pronouns are apparently far more important ....
The importance of drones and the speed with which they have been developed in the Ukraine means we really need to re-equip our armed forces from scratch. Oh, and the warriors of the future are more likely to have spent their childhood on Call of Duty than the playing fields of Eton.
Is the result of the “not proper weapons” people getting to lash stuff together. The heavy carrying drone in question is in use in Ukraine, I believe.
One thing that wars like Ukraine does is to let the “not proper weapons” types loose. For example, a number of missile launching systems (ground, but often launching ordinarily air launches) have shown up in Ukraine, which bear a resemblance to test rigs that have been around for years, in the U.K., weaponised.
It actually takes a war (often more than one) to reveal obsolescence.
In August 1914, the armies of France and Germany were using tactics that were hardly changed from the Napoleonic era, despite the fact that rifles could now shoot accurately up to 1,000 yards. Generals still believed that massed cavalry charges could be decisive. Casualty rates were off the scale, during the first three months of the fighting, and it was only the adoption of trench warfare that cut death rates substantially.
We believe The Somme is the worst today, in this country, or possibly Verdun, but the fluid battles of 1914 were truly horrendous for casualties.
1918 was the worst year of WWI for British casualties; also a year of fluid battles (and in only a little over 10 months of fighting).
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
Yep - like HS2, being able to walk to the shops or the GP surgery in 15 minutes is now woke.
Anyone who walks anywhere is basically now a traitor.
I'm probably in trouble..
I've walked fifteen miles so far today, and still have a couple left before I get home. I've been to Avebury (and Silbury Hill and West Kennett Longbarrow)
The importance of drones and the speed with which they have been developed in the Ukraine means we really need to re-equip our armed forces from scratch. Oh, and the warriors of the future are more likely to have spent their childhood on Call of Duty than the playing fields of Eton.
Is the result of the “not proper weapons” people getting to lash stuff together. The heavy carrying drone in question is in use in Ukraine, I believe.
One thing that wars like Ukraine does is to let the “not proper weapons” types loose. For example, a number of missile launching systems (ground, but often launching ordinarily air launches) have shown up in Ukraine, which bear a resemblance to test rigs that have been around for years, in the U.K., weaponised.
It actually takes a war (often more than one) to reveal obsolescence.
In August 1914, the armies of France and Germany were using tactics that were hardly changed from the Napoleonic era, despite the fact that rifles could now shoot accurately up to 1,000 yards. Generals still believed that massed cavalry charges could be decisive. Casualty rates were off the scale, during the first three months of the fighting, and it was only the adoption of trench warfare that cut death rates substantially.
Indeed. 1914-18 went from Napoleonic cavalry charges and open cannon, through to blitzkreig in four years. WW2 went from trenches to the atom bomb in six (the trenches never really got used but they were dug). Ironically, trenches are back again now that tanks, which played a meaningful part in breaking the trenches in WW1, are again more vulnerable and defence has the upper hand.
The Russians are only able to (partly) get away using trenches because we haven’t fully equipped Ukraine with all the required toys at the required volumes. A static trench wouldn’t last five mins vs a U.S. backed NATO.
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
The conspiracy is a pretty much Covid grifters looking for a new angle.
Some of the 15 minute City plans involve restrictions on where you can drive. I think Oxford had it that you could drive through the centre of town a couple of hundred times a year, but after that you'd be fined. They wanted people going from one outer zone to another to use ring roads and avoid the centre to cut down congestion.
The conspiracy is that this is a precursor to a "stay in your zone" plan. If we have everything within 15 minutes, they will then stop anyone leaving the zone at all, so the state knows where we are at all times.
It's obviously bollocks, but so many people are down the rabbit hole already, that it's taken a real hold in the post-covid conspiracy theory community.
It's embarrassing that the PM is latching onto it, as it's clearly a dog whistle for conspiracy theorists.
I think you are describing an LTN, not a 15-minute neighbourhood.
For example, modern housing developments are always LTNs, but very much NOT 15-minute neighbourhoods because the developers never invest in local GPs, dentists, pubs, schools, corner shops...
IMO that's not true.
Just looking at one of our smallish local developments which has got PP recently:
"... more than £850,000 in developer contributions – including £481,114 for primary school places – will be provided to shore up local services" ... “Countryside Properties will be making contributions towards primary school education, open space, healthcare, libraries and improvements to footpaths. https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/110-new-homes-built-sutton-5688170
Interesting from Zadrozny, in a huff: Cllr Zadrozny, the leader of the council, said: “I can promise in future that developers won’t get a greased sausage through my planning committee without building a better relationship [with the council].
Developers are famous for promising that there will be facilities, bit not so good about actually ensuring they exist. In fact, one might go as far as saying that they indulge in the time-honoured technique of "fibbing"
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
We have a chronic housing shortage, developers should be building houses.
Healthcare, education etc should be coming from taxes, not developments.
Insisting on perfection is just an excuse for NIMBYs. Houses should be built one house at a time, or as many houses are needed. If schools are built, then build them as needed and so on.
Okay, so how many houses would you allow to be built before reluctantly conceding that a surgery should be opened? 499? And that's only the start of construction. Think how long it takes to do that and to staff a GPs.
The importance of drones and the speed with which they have been developed in the Ukraine means we really need to re-equip our armed forces from scratch. Oh, and the warriors of the future are more likely to have spent their childhood on Call of Duty than the playing fields of Eton.
Only 5% of tanks lost by either side have been lost to other tanks. This isn't Operation Citadel revisited
On a battlefield where £500m tanks are being taken out by £50k drones there won't be any tanks. They are pointless.
£500m? Where are you buying your tanks???
You have to procure it from the approved supplier list even if you can buy it for £5m from your local Challenger 2 dealer.
It's a little like the NHS buying 16 paracetamol for a tenner when you can buy them yourself for 50p at Aldi.
Nick from TanksALot was selling live Chieftains for £20k a few years back….
The importance of drones and the speed with which they have been developed in the Ukraine means we really need to re-equip our armed forces from scratch. Oh, and the warriors of the future are more likely to have spent their childhood on Call of Duty than the playing fields of Eton.
Is the result of the “not proper weapons” people getting to lash stuff together. The heavy carrying drone in question is in use in Ukraine, I believe.
One thing that wars like Ukraine does is to let the “not proper weapons” types loose. For example, a number of missile launching systems (ground, but often launching ordinarily air launches) have shown up in Ukraine, which bear a resemblance to test rigs that have been around for years, in the U.K., weaponised.
It actually takes a war (often more than one) to reveal obsolescence.
In August 1914, the armies of France and Germany were using tactics that were hardly changed from the Napoleonic era, despite the fact that rifles could now shoot accurately up to 1,000 yards. Generals still believed that massed cavalry charges could be decisive. Casualty rates were off the scale, during the first three months of the fighting, and it was only the adoption of trench warfare that cut death rates substantially.
Indeed. 1914-18 went from Napoleonic cavalry charges and open cannon, through to blitzkreig in four years. WW2 went from trenches to the atom bomb in six (the trenches never really got used but they were dug). Ironically, trenches are back again now that tanks, which played a meaningful part in breaking the trenches in WW1, are again more vulnerable and defence has the upper hand.
Trenches got used a great deal in WW2, though you might think of them as foxholes and strongpoints rather than continuous linear trenches. Plenty of static or relatively static periods, or attacks on complex defensive positions - think of Alamein, or the Rhineland in 1944-45.
The importance of drones and the speed with which they have been developed in the Ukraine means we really need to re-equip our armed forces from scratch. Oh, and the warriors of the future are more likely to have spent their childhood on Call of Duty than the playing fields of Eton.
Is the result of the “not proper weapons” people getting to lash stuff together. The heavy carrying drone in question is in use in Ukraine, I believe.
One thing that wars like Ukraine does is to let the “not proper weapons” types loose. For example, a number of missile launching systems (ground, but often launching ordinarily air launches) have shown up in Ukraine, which bear a resemblance to test rigs that have been around for years, in the U.K., weaponised.
It actually takes a war (often more than one) to reveal obsolescence.
In August 1914, the armies of France and Germany were using tactics that were hardly changed from the Napoleonic era, despite the fact that rifles could now shoot accurately up to 1,000 yards. Generals still believed that massed cavalry charges could be decisive. Casualty rates were off the scale, during the first three months of the fighting, and it was only the adoption of trench warfare that cut death rates substantially.
We learnt that lesson in the Boer War.
Pretty well any Boer could shoot accurately, and their marksmen were outstanding. Their marksmen would shoot down British officers and couriers from a distance, which was considered most unsporting.
The French and Germans learned the wrong lesson from the Boer War, and the Russo-Japanese war (Russian defensive rifle war was devastating). Because the British and Japanese won, narrowly, and at high cost, they took the view that given sufficient will, and readiness to take casualties, an attacker would overrun defensive positions. The British learned the right lesson, that defensive rifle fire was deadly.
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
The conspiracy is a pretty much Covid grifters looking for a new angle.
Some of the 15 minute City plans involve restrictions on where you can drive. I think Oxford had it that you could drive through the centre of town a couple of hundred times a year, but after that you'd be fined. They wanted people going from one outer zone to another to use ring roads and avoid the centre to cut down congestion.
The conspiracy is that this is a precursor to a "stay in your zone" plan. If we have everything within 15 minutes, they will then stop anyone leaving the zone at all, so the state knows where we are at all times.
It's obviously bollocks, but so many people are down the rabbit hole already, that it's taken a real hold in the post-covid conspiracy theory community.
It's embarrassing that the PM is latching onto it, as it's clearly a dog whistle for conspiracy theorists.
I think you are describing an LTN, not a 15-minute neighbourhood.
For example, modern housing developments are always LTNs, but very much NOT 15-minute neighbourhoods because the developers never invest in local GPs, dentists, pubs, schools, corner shops...
IMO that's not true.
Just looking at one of our smallish local developments which has got PP recently:
"... more than £850,000 in developer contributions – including £481,114 for primary school places – will be provided to shore up local services" ... “Countryside Properties will be making contributions towards primary school education, open space, healthcare, libraries and improvements to footpaths. https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/110-new-homes-built-sutton-5688170
Interesting from Zadrozny, in a huff: Cllr Zadrozny, the leader of the council, said: “I can promise in future that developers won’t get a greased sausage through my planning committee without building a better relationship [with the council].
Developers are famous for promising that there will be facilities, bit not so good about actually ensuring they exist. In fact, one might go as far as saying that they indulge in the time-honoured technique of "fibbing"
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
We have a chronic housing shortage, developers should be building houses.
Healthcare, education etc should be coming from taxes, not developments.
Insisting on perfection is just an excuse for NIMBYs. Houses should be built one house at a time, or as many houses are needed. If schools are built, then build them as needed and so on.
Okay, so how many houses would you allow to be built before reluctantly conceding that a surgery should be opened? 499? And that's only the start of construction. Think how long it takes to do that and to staff a GPs.
Yup. The scandal in this country is the health centres and similar that never seem to get built despite section 106 being in place. A cynical man might wonder about construction companies, local councils, and brown envelopes. Another tick in my “abolish local government” box.
We need to double down on those requirements, not relax them.
The importance of drones and the speed with which they have been developed in the Ukraine means we really need to re-equip our armed forces from scratch. Oh, and the warriors of the future are more likely to have spent their childhood on Call of Duty than the playing fields of Eton.
Is the result of the “not proper weapons” people getting to lash stuff together. The heavy carrying drone in question is in use in Ukraine, I believe.
One thing that wars like Ukraine does is to let the “not proper weapons” types loose. For example, a number of missile launching systems (ground, but often launching ordinarily air launches) have shown up in Ukraine, which bear a resemblance to test rigs that have been around for years, in the U.K., weaponised.
It actually takes a war (often more than one) to reveal obsolescence.
In August 1914, the armies of France and Germany were using tactics that were hardly changed from the Napoleonic era, despite the fact that rifles could now shoot accurately up to 1,000 yards. Generals still believed that massed cavalry charges could be decisive. Casualty rates were off the scale, during the first three months of the fighting, and it was only the adoption of trench warfare that cut death rates substantially.
Indeed. 1914-18 went from Napoleonic cavalry charges and open cannon, through to blitzkreig in four years. WW2 went from trenches to the atom bomb in six (the trenches never really got used but they were dug). Ironically, trenches are back again now that tanks, which played a meaningful part in breaking the trenches in WW1, are again more vulnerable and defence has the upper hand.
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
Yep - like HS2, being able to walk to the shops or the GP surgery in 15 minutes is now woke.
Anyone who walks anywhere is basically now a traitor.
I'm probably in trouble..
I've walked fifteen miles so far today, and still have a couple left before I get home. I've been to Avebury (and Silbury Hill and West Kennett Longbarrow)
Judging by the left hand side of the first photo Leon got there before you with some of his less subtle work.
The importance of drones and the speed with which they have been developed in the Ukraine means we really need to re-equip our armed forces from scratch. Oh, and the warriors of the future are more likely to have spent their childhood on Call of Duty than the playing fields of Eton.
Only 5% of tanks lost by either side have been lost to other tanks. This isn't Operation Citadel revisited
On a battlefield where £500m tanks are being taken out by £50k drones there won't be any tanks. They are pointless.
£500m? Where are you buying your tanks???
You have to procure it from the approved supplier list even if you can buy it for £5m from your local Challenger 2 dealer.
It's a little like the NHS buying 16 paracetamol for a tenner when you can buy them yourself for 50p at Aldi.
Nick from TanksALot was selling live Chieftains for £20k a few years back….
Joe from Washington DC is giving away brand new M1A2 Abrams if you promise to kill Russians with them.
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
The conspiracy is a pretty much Covid grifters looking for a new angle.
Some of the 15 minute City plans involve restrictions on where you can drive. I think Oxford had it that you could drive through the centre of town a couple of hundred times a year, but after that you'd be fined. They wanted people going from one outer zone to another to use ring roads and avoid the centre to cut down congestion.
The conspiracy is that this is a precursor to a "stay in your zone" plan. If we have everything within 15 minutes, they will then stop anyone leaving the zone at all, so the state knows where we are at all times.
It's obviously bollocks, but so many people are down the rabbit hole already, that it's taken a real hold in the post-covid conspiracy theory community.
It's embarrassing that the PM is latching onto it, as it's clearly a dog whistle for conspiracy theorists.
I think you are describing an LTN, not a 15-minute neighbourhood.
For example, modern housing developments are always LTNs, but very much NOT 15-minute neighbourhoods because the developers never invest in local GPs, dentists, pubs, schools, corner shops...
IMO that's not true.
Just looking at one of our smallish local developments which has got PP recently:
"... more than £850,000 in developer contributions – including £481,114 for primary school places – will be provided to shore up local services" ... “Countryside Properties will be making contributions towards primary school education, open space, healthcare, libraries and improvements to footpaths. https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/110-new-homes-built-sutton-5688170
Interesting from Zadrozny, in a huff: Cllr Zadrozny, the leader of the council, said: “I can promise in future that developers won’t get a greased sausage through my planning committee without building a better relationship [with the council].
Developers are famous for promising that there will be facilities, bit not so good about actually ensuring they exist. In fact, one might go as far as saying that they indulge in the time-honoured technique of "fibbing"
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
We have a chronic housing shortage, developers should be building houses.
Healthcare, education etc should be coming from taxes, not developments.
Insisting on perfection is just an excuse for NIMBYs. Houses should be built one house at a time, or as many houses are needed. If schools are built, then build them as needed and so on.
Okay, so how many houses would you allow to be built before reluctantly conceding that a surgery should be opened? 499? And that's only the start of construction. Think how long it takes to do that and to staff a GPs.
Do it the other way round. The Victorians and Edwardians did -
- Build the school, the surgery, the pub and town hall. - Lay out the streets with water and gas. - Then sell the plots to lots of different developers.
The importance of drones and the speed with which they have been developed in the Ukraine means we really need to re-equip our armed forces from scratch. Oh, and the warriors of the future are more likely to have spent their childhood on Call of Duty than the playing fields of Eton.
Is the result of the “not proper weapons” people getting to lash stuff together. The heavy carrying drone in question is in use in Ukraine, I believe.
One thing that wars like Ukraine does is to let the “not proper weapons” types loose. For example, a number of missile launching systems (ground, but often launching ordinarily air launches) have shown up in Ukraine, which bear a resemblance to test rigs that have been around for years, in the U.K., weaponised.
It actually takes a war (often more than one) to reveal obsolescence.
In August 1914, the armies of France and Germany were using tactics that were hardly changed from the Napoleonic era, despite the fact that rifles could now shoot accurately up to 1,000 yards. Generals still believed that massed cavalry charges could be decisive. Casualty rates were off the scale, during the first three months of the fighting, and it was only the adoption of trench warfare that cut death rates substantially.
We learnt that lesson in the Boer War.
Pretty well any Boer could shoot accurately, and their marksmen were outstanding. Their marksmen would shoot down British officers and couriers from a distance, which was considered most unsporting.
The French and Germans learned the wrong lesson from the Boer War, and the Russo-Japanese war (Russian defensive rifle war was devastating). Because the British and Japanese won, narrowly, and at high cost, they took the view that given sufficient will, and readiness to take casualties, an attacker would overrun defensive positions. The British learned the right lesson, that defensive rifle fire was deadly.
Though we also failed to realise the intensity of fire mattered more than accuracy, hence emphasis on rifle marksmanship rather than machine guns. We had only two per battalion in 1914.
Our generals were quick learners though, and by 1916 we had a specialised Machine Gun Corps 100 000 strong.
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
The conspiracy is a pretty much Covid grifters looking for a new angle.
Some of the 15 minute City plans involve restrictions on where you can drive. I think Oxford had it that you could drive through the centre of town a couple of hundred times a year, but after that you'd be fined. They wanted people going from one outer zone to another to use ring roads and avoid the centre to cut down congestion.
The conspiracy is that this is a precursor to a "stay in your zone" plan. If we have everything within 15 minutes, they will then stop anyone leaving the zone at all, so the state knows where we are at all times.
It's obviously bollocks, but so many people are down the rabbit hole already, that it's taken a real hold in the post-covid conspiracy theory community.
It's embarrassing that the PM is latching onto it, as it's clearly a dog whistle for conspiracy theorists.
I think you are describing an LTN, not a 15-minute neighbourhood.
For example, modern housing developments are always LTNs, but very much NOT 15-minute neighbourhoods because the developers never invest in local GPs, dentists, pubs, schools, corner shops...
IMO that's not true.
Just looking at one of our smallish local developments which has got PP recently:
"... more than £850,000 in developer contributions – including £481,114 for primary school places – will be provided to shore up local services" ... “Countryside Properties will be making contributions towards primary school education, open space, healthcare, libraries and improvements to footpaths. https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/110-new-homes-built-sutton-5688170
Interesting from Zadrozny, in a huff: Cllr Zadrozny, the leader of the council, said: “I can promise in future that developers won’t get a greased sausage through my planning committee without building a better relationship [with the council].
Developers are famous for promising that there will be facilities, bit not so good about actually ensuring they exist. In fact, one might go as far as saying that they indulge in the time-honoured technique of "fibbing"
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
We have a chronic housing shortage, developers should be building houses.
Healthcare, education etc should be coming from taxes, not developments.
Insisting on perfection is just an excuse for NIMBYs. Houses should be built one house at a time, or as many houses are needed. If schools are built, then build them as needed and so on.
Okay, so how many houses would you allow to be built before reluctantly conceding that a surgery should be opened? 499? And that's only the start of construction. Think how long it takes to do that and to staff a GPs.
Do it the other way round. The Victorians and Edwardians did -
- Build the school, the surgery, the pub and town hall. - Lay out the streets with water and gas. - Then sell the plots to lots of different developers.
Obviously the way to do it. But in Sunakland, that leaves the impossible problem that the services will all run horribly inefficiently below capacity for years.
Unless the local laird is benevolent and willing to carry those short term costs, it's not going to happen. And s106 isn't delivering what it should.
The importance of drones and the speed with which they have been developed in the Ukraine means we really need to re-equip our armed forces from scratch. Oh, and the warriors of the future are more likely to have spent their childhood on Call of Duty than the playing fields of Eton.
Only 5% of tanks lost by either side have been lost to other tanks. This isn't Operation Citadel revisited
On a battlefield where £500m tanks are being taken out by £50k drones there won't be any tanks. They are pointless.
The Royal Navy needs to notice that Ukraines naval drones are looking like a naval victory in the Black Sea for a country without a single functioning ship.
China and Taiwan probably taking notes too.
China in particular, would be appalled to learn that just about everything it intended to use against Taiwan was now obsolescent.
Happily the Royal Navy in recent years hasn't bothered too much with spending money on functioning ships.
Functioning ships are soooo 19th century. Correct pronouns are apparently far more important ....
The importance of drones and the speed with which they have been developed in the Ukraine means we really need to re-equip our armed forces from scratch. Oh, and the warriors of the future are more likely to have spent their childhood on Call of Duty than the playing fields of Eton.
Only 5% of tanks lost by either side have been lost to other tanks. This isn't Operation Citadel revisited
On a battlefield where £500m tanks are being taken out by £50k drones there won't be any tanks. They are pointless.
The Royal Navy needs to notice that Ukraines naval drones are looking like a naval victory in the Black Sea for a country without a single functioning ship.
China and Taiwan probably taking notes too.
China in particular, would be appalled to learn that just about everything it intended to use against Taiwan was now obsolescent.
Happily the Royal Navy in recent years hasn't bothered too much with spending money on functioning ships.
Functioning ships are soooo 19th century. Correct pronouns are apparently far more important ....
Fiji so good against Wales and Australia are incredibly mediocre so far against Georgia
Fiji have been abysmal so far - their line out is non functioning and they are knocking on everything. I think they have overtrained - they all look like they are carrying invisible rolls of carpet..... losing flexibility and ball handling skills.
At this rate Eddie Jones will be back in the QFs...
Fiji so good against Wales and Australia are incredibly mediocre so far against Georgia
Fiji have been abysmal so far - their line out is non functioning and they are knocking on everything. I think they have overtrained - they all look like they are carrying invisible rolls of carpet..... losing flexibility and ball handling skills.
At this rate Eddie Jones will be back in the QFs...
Don't forget Georgia eased past Wales this time last year. I was there and they deserved the win.
Sunak will look back and deeply regret how he has allowed his premiership to spiral into such obvious signs of desperation and ultrashort term stupidities.
He could have had an honourable place in the history books. Steadied the ship, governed sensibly in the national interest for a couple of years, enacted one or two long term policies that have stood the test of time etc etc. Then defeated with honour and handed over without rancor.
Now...
I think you're talking him up. Ostensibly he seems a very clever and rather nice guy. The sort of person that you'd trust to be PM. However his actions since becoming PM are unintelligent, weak and feeble. Obviously he's better than Truss (who is the absolute zero of political wisdom), but he's not even managed the slightest political glimmer.
Sunak was touted as a future leader to the donor class and met people in finance, and those who met him seem to have come away impressed, from what I heard. I think he has underwhelmed in government, though - he seems smart but lacking in judgement. I suppose his support for Brexit should have been a clue, there.
Fiji so good against Wales and Australia are incredibly mediocre so far against Georgia
Fiji have been abysmal so far - their line out is non functioning and they are knocking on everything. I think they have overtrained - they all look like they are carrying invisible rolls of carpet..... losing flexibility and ball handling skills.
At this rate Eddie Jones will be back in the QFs...
Don't forget Georgia eased past Wales this time last year. I was there and they deserved the win.
Georgia are managing their defence very well - but I think Fiji will shake themselves up now. They just scored a good try and I think we will now see a few more. England should feel a bit more comfortable for their likely QF now.
That can't be right. These people need to be taught a short harsh lesson and given the chance to reform themselves. It can't be in society's or their interests to let them get away with it, or think they can, and progress to greater crimes. But it can't be right to shoot people indiscriminately for a minor crime, it could be our children who stray from the staight and narrow. For pity's sake this man is not fit to run a whelk stall.
Sunak will look back and deeply regret how he has allowed his premiership to spiral into such obvious signs of desperation and ultrashort term stupidities.
He could have had an honourable place in the history books. Steadied the ship, governed sensibly in the national interest for a couple of years, enacted one or two long term policies that have stood the test of time etc etc. Then defeated with honour and handed over without rancor.
Now...
I think you're talking him up. Ostensibly he seems a very clever and rather nice guy. The sort of person that you'd trust to be PM. However his actions since becoming PM are unintelligent, weak and feeble. Obviously he's better than Truss (who is the absolute zero of political wisdom), but he's not even managed the slightest political glimmer.
Sunak was touted as a future leader to the donor class and met people in finance, and those who met him seem to have come away impressed, from what I heard. I think he has underwhelmed in government, though - he seems smart but lacking in judgement. I suppose his support for Brexit should have been a clue, there.
Yeah.
Sunak is clearly not an idiot, though I suspect plenty here would fancy their chances against him in a maths-off. And you don't get into Parliament, let alone Cabinet, let alone No 10 without talent.
But his judgement seems awful and he has an alarming lack of bottom, as Tories of a certain generation put it.
And his political vision, Californian Libertarianism, seems to have been formed as a teenager and not updated in response to subsequent events. We've had a run of that (see also Truss, Corbyn...) recently.
The one about my letter recommending safeguarding be transferred from the current officer to one who isn't infamously drunk all the time is apparently nearly the size of Gibbs' brain.
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
Yep - like HS2, being able to walk to the shops or the GP surgery in 15 minutes is now woke.
Anyone who walks anywhere is basically now a traitor.
I'm probably in trouble..
I've walked fifteen miles so far today, and still have a couple left before I get home. I've been to Avebury (and Silbury Hill and West Kennett Longbarrow)
Judging by the left hand side of the first photo Leon got there before you with some of his less subtle work.
Fiji so good against Wales and Australia are incredibly mediocre so far against Georgia
Fiji have been abysmal so far - their line out is non functioning and they are knocking on everything. I think they have overtrained - they all look like they are carrying invisible rolls of carpet..... losing flexibility and ball handling skills.
At this rate Eddie Jones will be back in the QFs...
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
The conspiracy is a pretty much Covid grifters looking for a new angle.
Some of the 15 minute City plans involve restrictions on where you can drive. I think Oxford had it that you could drive through the centre of town a couple of hundred times a year, but after that you'd be fined. They wanted people going from one outer zone to another to use ring roads and avoid the centre to cut down congestion.
The conspiracy is that this is a precursor to a "stay in your zone" plan. If we have everything within 15 minutes, they will then stop anyone leaving the zone at all, so the state knows where we are at all times.
It's obviously bollocks, but so many people are down the rabbit hole already, that it's taken a real hold in the post-covid conspiracy theory community.
It's embarrassing that the PM is latching onto it, as it's clearly a dog whistle for conspiracy theorists.
I think you are describing an LTN, not a 15-minute neighbourhood.
For example, modern housing developments are always LTNs, but very much NOT 15-minute neighbourhoods because the developers never invest in local GPs, dentists, pubs, schools, corner shops...
IMO that's not true.
Just looking at one of our smallish local developments which has got PP recently:
"... more than £850,000 in developer contributions – including £481,114 for primary school places – will be provided to shore up local services" ... “Countryside Properties will be making contributions towards primary school education, open space, healthcare, libraries and improvements to footpaths. https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/110-new-homes-built-sutton-5688170
Interesting from Zadrozny, in a huff: Cllr Zadrozny, the leader of the council, said: “I can promise in future that developers won’t get a greased sausage through my planning committee without building a better relationship [with the council].
Developers are famous for promising that there will be facilities, bit not so good about actually ensuring they exist. In fact, one might go as far as saying that they indulge in the time-honoured technique of "fibbing"
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
We have a chronic housing shortage, developers should be building houses.
Healthcare, education etc should be coming from taxes, not developments.
Insisting on perfection is just an excuse for NIMBYs. Houses should be built one house at a time, or as many houses are needed. If schools are built, then build them as needed and so on.
As mentioned in last week's cycleways/roads comments... I've been cycling in the Netherlands for the past few days. Been thinking about what they have to teach us in terms of transport and development.
I'm still not entirely sure, to be honest, but one lesson I think stands out: build dense towns, not the Barratt-style sprawl we seem to specialise in. The more sprawly estates you build, the more load you put on the transport infrastructure. If you build dense towns like the Dutch, people can walk and cycle rather than having to get in the car for everything. The cars and the motorways are still there - but the dense urban form gives you genuine choice rather than necessitating car journeys for everything.
Incidentally @DecrepiterJohnL could you please clarify what you mean by this comment? Because it makes no sense to me. Are you saying I'm so good I'm wasted in the classroom, or is there some subtext I've missed?
OT history fans. David Mitchell interview about his book on kings and queens. If he makes things this clear, no wonder @ydoethur has had to give up his interactive whiteboard and marker pen. I studied Richard II in both history and English yet no-one ever mentioned its wider significance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INabb1VL8qg
(Incidentally one of the many frustrating things about the new History curriculum is how tunnel visioned it is. I've tutored students studying America in the 1920s and Germany in the 1920s and the link between loans to Germany and the Wall Street Crash has never been explained to them.)
The importance of drones and the speed with which they have been developed in the Ukraine means we really need to re-equip our armed forces from scratch. Oh, and the warriors of the future are more likely to have spent their childhood on Call of Duty than the playing fields of Eton.
Is the result of the “not proper weapons” people getting to lash stuff together. The heavy carrying drone in question is in use in Ukraine, I believe.
One thing that wars like Ukraine does is to let the “not proper weapons” types loose. For example, a number of missile launching systems (ground, but often launching ordinarily air launches) have shown up in Ukraine, which bear a resemblance to test rigs that have been around for years, in the U.K., weaponised.
It actually takes a war (often more than one) to reveal obsolescence.
In August 1914, the armies of France and Germany were using tactics that were hardly changed from the Napoleonic era, despite the fact that rifles could now shoot accurately up to 1,000 yards. Generals still believed that massed cavalry charges could be decisive. Casualty rates were off the scale, during the first three months of the fighting, and it was only the adoption of trench warfare that cut death rates substantially.
We learnt that lesson in the Boer War.
Pretty well any Boer could shoot accurately, and their marksmen were outstanding. Their marksmen would shoot down British officers and couriers from a distance, which was considered most unsporting.
The French and Germans learned the wrong lesson from the Boer War, and the Russo-Japanese war (Russian defensive rifle war was devastating). Because the British and Japanese won, narrowly, and at high cost, they took the view that given sufficient will, and readiness to take casualties, an attacker would overrun defensive positions. The British learned the right lesson, that defensive rifle fire was deadly.
Though we also failed to realise the intensity of fire mattered more than accuracy, hence emphasis on rifle marksmanship rather than machine guns. We had only two per battalion in 1914.
Our generals were quick learners though, and by 1916 we had a specialised Machine Gun Corps 100 000 strong.
Yes, mainly Vickers (still in use until 1968 in the British Army). But also light Lewis guns within the infantry itself. My grandfather was a Lewis gunner with one of the Scots infantry battalions.
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
Yep - like HS2, being able to walk to the shops or the GP surgery in 15 minutes is now woke.
Anyone who walks anywhere is basically now a traitor.
I'm probably in trouble..
I've walked fifteen miles so far today, and still have a couple left before I get home. I've been to Avebury (and Silbury Hill and West Kennett Longbarrow)
Judging by the left hand side of the first photo Leon got there before you with some of his less subtle work.
You're not the only one. I seem to recall that some archaeologists see the male/female gender division in the alternating tall and narrow/broad morphs of the Avenury stones.
BTW I hope that Blanche saw the eastern Avenue from the woodhenge at Overton to Avebury (hardly anything of the western one survives as I recall, at least to see above ground). Happy memories of student beer and megalith crawls (just as well pubs closed in the mornings and afternoons).
Incidentally @DecrepiterJohnL could you please clarify what you mean by this comment? Because it makes no sense to me. Are you saying I'm so good I'm wasted in the classroom, or is there some subtext I've missed?
OT history fans. David Mitchell interview about his book on kings and queens. If he makes things this clear, no wonder @ydoethur has had to give up his interactive whiteboard and marker pen. I studied Richard II in both history and English yet no-one ever mentioned its wider significance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INabb1VL8qg
(Incidentally one of the many frustrating things about the new History curriculum is how tunnel visioned it is. I've tutored students studying America in the 1920s and Germany in the 1920s and the link between loans to Germany and the Wall Street Crash has never been explained to them.)
I'm recommending it as a surprisingly interesting interview about history.
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
The conspiracy is a pretty much Covid grifters looking for a new angle.
Some of the 15 minute City plans involve restrictions on where you can drive. I think Oxford had it that you could drive through the centre of town a couple of hundred times a year, but after that you'd be fined. They wanted people going from one outer zone to another to use ring roads and avoid the centre to cut down congestion.
The conspiracy is that this is a precursor to a "stay in your zone" plan. If we have everything within 15 minutes, they will then stop anyone leaving the zone at all, so the state knows where we are at all times.
It's obviously bollocks, but so many people are down the rabbit hole already, that it's taken a real hold in the post-covid conspiracy theory community.
It's embarrassing that the PM is latching onto it, as it's clearly a dog whistle for conspiracy theorists.
I think you are describing an LTN, not a 15-minute neighbourhood.
For example, modern housing developments are always LTNs, but very much NOT 15-minute neighbourhoods because the developers never invest in local GPs, dentists, pubs, schools, corner shops...
IMO that's not true.
Just looking at one of our smallish local developments which has got PP recently:
"... more than £850,000 in developer contributions – including £481,114 for primary school places – will be provided to shore up local services" ... “Countryside Properties will be making contributions towards primary school education, open space, healthcare, libraries and improvements to footpaths. https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/110-new-homes-built-sutton-5688170
Interesting from Zadrozny, in a huff: Cllr Zadrozny, the leader of the council, said: “I can promise in future that developers won’t get a greased sausage through my planning committee without building a better relationship [with the council].
Developers are famous for promising that there will be facilities, bit not so good about actually ensuring they exist. In fact, one might go as far as saying that they indulge in the time-honoured technique of "fibbing"
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
We have a chronic housing shortage, developers should be building houses.
Healthcare, education etc should be coming from taxes, not developments.
Insisting on perfection is just an excuse for NIMBYs. Houses should be built one house at a time, or as many houses are needed. If schools are built, then build them as needed and so on.
As mentioned in last week's cycleways/roads comments... I've been cycling in the Netherlands for the past few days. Been thinking about what they have to teach us in terms of transport and development.
I'm still not entirely sure, to be honest, but one lesson I think stands out: build dense towns, not the Barratt-style sprawl we seem to specialise in. The more sprawly estates you build, the more load you put on the transport infrastructure. If you build dense towns like the Dutch, people can walk and cycle rather than having to get in the car for everything. The cars and the motorways are still there - but the dense urban form gives you genuine choice rather than necessitating car journeys for everything.
And if houses are taller and narrower, you don't need to build so many miles of street, because most streets are there to stick houses onto. And so you can look after the streets you do have better...
A bit like urban car use, a lot of the costs of sprawl are hidden, but real, and definitely not paid by the person benefitting from it.
Fiji so good against Wales and Australia are incredibly mediocre so far against Georgia
Fiji have been abysmal so far - their line out is non functioning and they are knocking on everything. I think they have overtrained - they all look like they are carrying invisible rolls of carpet..... losing flexibility and ball handling skills.
At this rate Eddie Jones will be back in the QFs...
Their kicking game has been incredibly poor too.
I think Fiji have done enough to survive...in which case they have 2 weeks to rest and correct some of their problrms before they play England - who have the small matter of Samoa to deal with first.
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
The conspiracy is a pretty much Covid grifters looking for a new angle.
Some of the 15 minute City plans involve restrictions on where you can drive. I think Oxford had it that you could drive through the centre of town a couple of hundred times a year, but after that you'd be fined. They wanted people going from one outer zone to another to use ring roads and avoid the centre to cut down congestion.
The conspiracy is that this is a precursor to a "stay in your zone" plan. If we have everything within 15 minutes, they will then stop anyone leaving the zone at all, so the state knows where we are at all times.
It's obviously bollocks, but so many people are down the rabbit hole already, that it's taken a real hold in the post-covid conspiracy theory community.
It's embarrassing that the PM is latching onto it, as it's clearly a dog whistle for conspiracy theorists.
I think you are describing an LTN, not a 15-minute neighbourhood.
For example, modern housing developments are always LTNs, but very much NOT 15-minute neighbourhoods because the developers never invest in local GPs, dentists, pubs, schools, corner shops...
IMO that's not true.
Just looking at one of our smallish local developments which has got PP recently:
"... more than £850,000 in developer contributions – including £481,114 for primary school places – will be provided to shore up local services" ... “Countryside Properties will be making contributions towards primary school education, open space, healthcare, libraries and improvements to footpaths. https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/110-new-homes-built-sutton-5688170
Interesting from Zadrozny, in a huff: Cllr Zadrozny, the leader of the council, said: “I can promise in future that developers won’t get a greased sausage through my planning committee without building a better relationship [with the council].
Developers are famous for promising that there will be facilities, bit not so good about actually ensuring they exist. In fact, one might go as far as saying that they indulge in the time-honoured technique of "fibbing"
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
We have a chronic housing shortage, developers should be building houses.
Healthcare, education etc should be coming from taxes, not developments.
Insisting on perfection is just an excuse for NIMBYs. Houses should be built one house at a time, or as many houses are needed. If schools are built, then build them as needed and so on.
As mentioned in last week's cycleways/roads comments... I've been cycling in the Netherlands for the past few days. Been thinking about what they have to teach us in terms of transport and development.
I'm still not entirely sure, to be honest, but one lesson I think stands out: build dense towns, not the Barratt-style sprawl we seem to specialise in. The more sprawly estates you build, the more load you put on the transport infrastructure. If you build dense towns like the Dutch, people can walk and cycle rather than having to get in the car for everything. The cars and the motorways are still there - but the dense urban form gives you genuine choice rather than necessitating car journeys for everything.
And if houses are taller and narrower, you don't need to build so many miles of street, because most streets are there to stick houses onto. And so you can look after the streets you do have better...
A bit like urban car use, a lot of the costs of sprawl are hidden, but real, and definitely not paid by the person benefitting from it.
The importance of drones and the speed with which they have been developed in the Ukraine means we really need to re-equip our armed forces from scratch. Oh, and the warriors of the future are more likely to have spent their childhood on Call of Duty than the playing fields of Eton.
Is the result of the “not proper weapons” people getting to lash stuff together. The heavy carrying drone in question is in use in Ukraine, I believe.
One thing that wars like Ukraine does is to let the “not proper weapons” types loose. For example, a number of missile launching systems (ground, but often launching ordinarily air launches) have shown up in Ukraine, which bear a resemblance to test rigs that have been around for years, in the U.K., weaponised.
It actually takes a war (often more than one) to reveal obsolescence.
In August 1914, the armies of France and Germany were using tactics that were hardly changed from the Napoleonic era, despite the fact that rifles could now shoot accurately up to 1,000 yards. Generals still believed that massed cavalry charges could be decisive. Casualty rates were off the scale, during the first three months of the fighting, and it was only the adoption of trench warfare that cut death rates substantially.
We learnt that lesson in the Boer War.
Pretty well any Boer could shoot accurately, and their marksmen were outstanding. Their marksmen would shoot down British officers and couriers from a distance, which was considered most unsporting.
The French and Germans learned the wrong lesson from the Boer War, and the Russo-Japanese war (Russian defensive rifle war was devastating). Because the British and Japanese won, narrowly, and at high cost, they took the view that given sufficient will, and readiness to take casualties, an attacker would overrun defensive positions. The British learned the right lesson, that defensive rifle fire was deadly.
Though we also failed to realise the intensity of fire mattered more than accuracy, hence emphasis on rifle marksmanship rather than machine guns. We had only two per battalion in 1914.
Our generals were quick learners though, and by 1916 we had a specialised Machine Gun Corps 100 000 strong.
Yes, mainly Vickers (still in use until 1968 in the British Army). But also light Lewis guns within the infantry itself. My grandfather was a Lewis gunner with one of the Scots infantry battalions.
Mademoiselle from Armentières, parlez vous? Mademoiselle from Armentières, parlez vous? When in her bed she sure was fun Working her arse like a Maxim gun
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
Yep - like HS2, being able to walk to the shops or the GP surgery in 15 minutes is now woke.
Anyone who walks anywhere is basically now a traitor.
I'm probably in trouble..
I've walked fifteen miles so far today, and still have a couple left before I get home. I've been to Avebury (and Silbury Hill and West Kennett Longbarrow)
Judging by the left hand side of the first photo Leon got there before you with some of his less subtle work.
You're not the only one. I seem to recall that some archaeologists see the male/female gender division in the alternating tall and narrow/broad morphs of the Avenury stones.
BTW I hope that Blanche saw the eastern Avenue from the woodhenge at Overton to Avebury (hardly anything of the western one survives as I recall, at least to see above ground). Happy memories of student beer and megalith crawls (just as well pubs closed in the mornings and afternoons).
We have a lot of Dolmens and menhirs here, one in particular looking out to the Atlantic in a dunes system where I want my ashes scattered. There is however a dolmen that was given to some general or governor a couple of centuries ago who transported it to his home in Henley. There are talks to get it back however it turns out the house it resides at now is owned by James Corden and he hasn’t seemed particularly receptive to returning it sadly.
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
The conspiracy is a pretty much Covid grifters looking for a new angle.
Some of the 15 minute City plans involve restrictions on where you can drive. I think Oxford had it that you could drive through the centre of town a couple of hundred times a year, but after that you'd be fined. They wanted people going from one outer zone to another to use ring roads and avoid the centre to cut down congestion.
The conspiracy is that this is a precursor to a "stay in your zone" plan. If we have everything within 15 minutes, they will then stop anyone leaving the zone at all, so the state knows where we are at all times.
It's obviously bollocks, but so many people are down the rabbit hole already, that it's taken a real hold in the post-covid conspiracy theory community.
It's embarrassing that the PM is latching onto it, as it's clearly a dog whistle for conspiracy theorists.
I think you are describing an LTN, not a 15-minute neighbourhood.
For example, modern housing developments are always LTNs, but very much NOT 15-minute neighbourhoods because the developers never invest in local GPs, dentists, pubs, schools, corner shops...
IMO that's not true.
Just looking at one of our smallish local developments which has got PP recently:
"... more than £850,000 in developer contributions – including £481,114 for primary school places – will be provided to shore up local services" ... “Countryside Properties will be making contributions towards primary school education, open space, healthcare, libraries and improvements to footpaths. https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/110-new-homes-built-sutton-5688170
Interesting from Zadrozny, in a huff: Cllr Zadrozny, the leader of the council, said: “I can promise in future that developers won’t get a greased sausage through my planning committee without building a better relationship [with the council].
Developers are famous for promising that there will be facilities, bit not so good about actually ensuring they exist. In fact, one might go as far as saying that they indulge in the time-honoured technique of "fibbing"
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
We have a chronic housing shortage, developers should be building houses.
Healthcare, education etc should be coming from taxes, not developments.
Insisting on perfection is just an excuse for NIMBYs. Houses should be built one house at a time, or as many houses are needed. If schools are built, then build them as needed and so on.
As mentioned in last week's cycleways/roads comments... I've been cycling in the Netherlands for the past few days. Been thinking about what they have to teach us in terms of transport and development.
I'm still not entirely sure, to be honest, but one lesson I think stands out: build dense towns, not the Barratt-style sprawl we seem to specialise in. The more sprawly estates you build, the more load you put on the transport infrastructure. If you build dense towns like the Dutch, people can walk and cycle rather than having to get in the car for everything. The cars and the motorways are still there - but the dense urban form gives you genuine choice rather than necessitating car journeys for everything.
And if houses are taller and narrower, you don't need to build so many miles of street, because most streets are there to stick houses onto. And so you can look after the streets you do have better...
A bit like urban car use, a lot of the costs of sprawl are hidden, but real, and definitely not paid by the person benefitting from it.
Erm.. gardens?
Should not be an expectation in an urban setting - at least, the sort that is in a private space just for you to maintain (or not). The amount of garden space not used for its notional best purpose must be staggering.
Incidentally @DecrepiterJohnL could you please clarify what you mean by this comment? Because it makes no sense to me. Are you saying I'm so good I'm wasted in the classroom, or is there some subtext I've missed?
OT history fans. David Mitchell interview about his book on kings and queens. If he makes things this clear, no wonder @ydoethur has had to give up his interactive whiteboard and marker pen. I studied Richard II in both history and English yet no-one ever mentioned its wider significance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INabb1VL8qg
(Incidentally one of the many frustrating things about the new History curriculum is how tunnel visioned it is. I've tutored students studying America in the 1920s and Germany in the 1920s and the link between loans to Germany and the Wall Street Crash has never been explained to them.)
I'm recommending it as a surprisingly interesting interview about history.
Incidentally @DecrepiterJohnL could you please clarify what you mean by this comment? Because it makes no sense to me. Are you saying I'm so good I'm wasted in the classroom, or is there some subtext I've missed?
OT history fans. David Mitchell interview about his book on kings and queens. If he makes things this clear, no wonder @ydoethur has had to give up his interactive whiteboard and marker pen. I studied Richard II in both history and English yet no-one ever mentioned its wider significance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INabb1VL8qg
(Incidentally one of the many frustrating things about the new History curriculum is how tunnel visioned it is. I've tutored students studying America in the 1920s and Germany in the 1920s and the link between loans to Germany and the Wall Street Crash has never been explained to them.)
I'm recommending it as a surprisingly interesting interview about history.
Incidentally @DecrepiterJohnL could you please clarify what you mean by this comment? Because it makes no sense to me. Are you saying I'm so good I'm wasted in the classroom, or is there some subtext I've missed?
OT history fans. David Mitchell interview about his book on kings and queens. If he makes things this clear, no wonder @ydoethur has had to give up his interactive whiteboard and marker pen. I studied Richard II in both history and English yet no-one ever mentioned its wider significance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INabb1VL8qg
(Incidentally one of the many frustrating things about the new History curriculum is how tunnel visioned it is. I've tutored students studying America in the 1920s and Germany in the 1920s and the link between loans to Germany and the Wall Street Crash has never been explained to them.)
I'm recommending it as a surprisingly interesting interview about history.
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
The conspiracy is a pretty much Covid grifters looking for a new angle.
Some of the 15 minute City plans involve restrictions on where you can drive. I think Oxford had it that you could drive through the centre of town a couple of hundred times a year, but after that you'd be fined. They wanted people going from one outer zone to another to use ring roads and avoid the centre to cut down congestion.
The conspiracy is that this is a precursor to a "stay in your zone" plan. If we have everything within 15 minutes, they will then stop anyone leaving the zone at all, so the state knows where we are at all times.
It's obviously bollocks, but so many people are down the rabbit hole already, that it's taken a real hold in the post-covid conspiracy theory community.
It's embarrassing that the PM is latching onto it, as it's clearly a dog whistle for conspiracy theorists.
I think you are describing an LTN, not a 15-minute neighbourhood.
For example, modern housing developments are always LTNs, but very much NOT 15-minute neighbourhoods because the developers never invest in local GPs, dentists, pubs, schools, corner shops...
IMO that's not true.
Just looking at one of our smallish local developments which has got PP recently:
"... more than £850,000 in developer contributions – including £481,114 for primary school places – will be provided to shore up local services" ... “Countryside Properties will be making contributions towards primary school education, open space, healthcare, libraries and improvements to footpaths. https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/110-new-homes-built-sutton-5688170
Interesting from Zadrozny, in a huff: Cllr Zadrozny, the leader of the council, said: “I can promise in future that developers won’t get a greased sausage through my planning committee without building a better relationship [with the council].
Developers are famous for promising that there will be facilities, bit not so good about actually ensuring they exist. In fact, one might go as far as saying that they indulge in the time-honoured technique of "fibbing"
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
We have a chronic housing shortage, developers should be building houses.
Healthcare, education etc should be coming from taxes, not developments.
Insisting on perfection is just an excuse for NIMBYs. Houses should be built one house at a time, or as many houses are needed. If schools are built, then build them as needed and so on.
As mentioned in last week's cycleways/roads comments... I've been cycling in the Netherlands for the past few days. Been thinking about what they have to teach us in terms of transport and development.
I'm still not entirely sure, to be honest, but one lesson I think stands out: build dense towns, not the Barratt-style sprawl we seem to specialise in. The more sprawly estates you build, the more load you put on the transport infrastructure. If you build dense towns like the Dutch, people can walk and cycle rather than having to get in the car for everything. The cars and the motorways are still there - but the dense urban form gives you genuine choice rather than necessitating car journeys for everything.
And if houses are taller and narrower, you don't need to build so many miles of street, because most streets are there to stick houses onto. And so you can look after the streets you do have better...
A bit like urban car use, a lot of the costs of sprawl are hidden, but real, and definitely not paid by the person benefitting from it.
Erm.. gardens?
Should not be an expectation in an urban setting - at least, the sort that is in a private space just for you to maintain (or not). The amount of garden space not used for its notional best purpose must be staggering.
Best purpose = wildlife habitat
Worst purpose = concreted over to make a car park big enough for eight vehicles
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
The conspiracy is a pretty much Covid grifters looking for a new angle.
Some of the 15 minute City plans involve restrictions on where you can drive. I think Oxford had it that you could drive through the centre of town a couple of hundred times a year, but after that you'd be fined. They wanted people going from one outer zone to another to use ring roads and avoid the centre to cut down congestion.
The conspiracy is that this is a precursor to a "stay in your zone" plan. If we have everything within 15 minutes, they will then stop anyone leaving the zone at all, so the state knows where we are at all times.
It's obviously bollocks, but so many people are down the rabbit hole already, that it's taken a real hold in the post-covid conspiracy theory community.
It's embarrassing that the PM is latching onto it, as it's clearly a dog whistle for conspiracy theorists.
I think you are describing an LTN, not a 15-minute neighbourhood.
For example, modern housing developments are always LTNs, but very much NOT 15-minute neighbourhoods because the developers never invest in local GPs, dentists, pubs, schools, corner shops...
IMO that's not true.
Just looking at one of our smallish local developments which has got PP recently:
"... more than £850,000 in developer contributions – including £481,114 for primary school places – will be provided to shore up local services" ... “Countryside Properties will be making contributions towards primary school education, open space, healthcare, libraries and improvements to footpaths. https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/110-new-homes-built-sutton-5688170
Interesting from Zadrozny, in a huff: Cllr Zadrozny, the leader of the council, said: “I can promise in future that developers won’t get a greased sausage through my planning committee without building a better relationship [with the council].
Developers are famous for promising that there will be facilities, bit not so good about actually ensuring they exist. In fact, one might go as far as saying that they indulge in the time-honoured technique of "fibbing"
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
We have a chronic housing shortage, developers should be building houses.
Healthcare, education etc should be coming from taxes, not developments.
Insisting on perfection is just an excuse for NIMBYs. Houses should be built one house at a time, or as many houses are needed. If schools are built, then build them as needed and so on.
As mentioned in last week's cycleways/roads comments... I've been cycling in the Netherlands for the past few days. Been thinking about what they have to teach us in terms of transport and development.
I'm still not entirely sure, to be honest, but one lesson I think stands out: build dense towns, not the Barratt-style sprawl we seem to specialise in. The more sprawly estates you build, the more load you put on the transport infrastructure. If you build dense towns like the Dutch, people can walk and cycle rather than having to get in the car for everything. The cars and the motorways are still there - but the dense urban form gives you genuine choice rather than necessitating car journeys for everything.
And if houses are taller and narrower, you don't need to build so many miles of street, because most streets are there to stick houses onto. And so you can look after the streets you do have better...
A bit like urban car use, a lot of the costs of sprawl are hidden, but real, and definitely not paid by the person benefitting from it.
Erm.. gardens?
Should not be an expectation in an urban setting - at least, the sort that is in a private space just for you to maintain (or not). The amount of garden space not used for its notional best purpose must be staggering.
But it’s a market. If people want houses with gardens, those are the ones they will buy. How are your going to make them buy the other houses?
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
The conspiracy is a pretty much Covid grifters looking for a new angle.
Some of the 15 minute City plans involve restrictions on where you can drive. I think Oxford had it that you could drive through the centre of town a couple of hundred times a year, but after that you'd be fined. They wanted people going from one outer zone to another to use ring roads and avoid the centre to cut down congestion.
The conspiracy is that this is a precursor to a "stay in your zone" plan. If we have everything within 15 minutes, they will then stop anyone leaving the zone at all, so the state knows where we are at all times.
It's obviously bollocks, but so many people are down the rabbit hole already, that it's taken a real hold in the post-covid conspiracy theory community.
It's embarrassing that the PM is latching onto it, as it's clearly a dog whistle for conspiracy theorists.
I think you are describing an LTN, not a 15-minute neighbourhood.
For example, modern housing developments are always LTNs, but very much NOT 15-minute neighbourhoods because the developers never invest in local GPs, dentists, pubs, schools, corner shops...
IMO that's not true.
Just looking at one of our smallish local developments which has got PP recently:
"... more than £850,000 in developer contributions – including £481,114 for primary school places – will be provided to shore up local services" ... “Countryside Properties will be making contributions towards primary school education, open space, healthcare, libraries and improvements to footpaths. https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/110-new-homes-built-sutton-5688170
Interesting from Zadrozny, in a huff: Cllr Zadrozny, the leader of the council, said: “I can promise in future that developers won’t get a greased sausage through my planning committee without building a better relationship [with the council].
Developers are famous for promising that there will be facilities, bit not so good about actually ensuring they exist. In fact, one might go as far as saying that they indulge in the time-honoured technique of "fibbing"
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
We have a chronic housing shortage, developers should be building houses.
Healthcare, education etc should be coming from taxes, not developments.
Insisting on perfection is just an excuse for NIMBYs. Houses should be built one house at a time, or as many houses are needed. If schools are built, then build them as needed and so on.
As mentioned in last week's cycleways/roads comments... I've been cycling in the Netherlands for the past few days. Been thinking about what they have to teach us in terms of transport and development.
I'm still not entirely sure, to be honest, but one lesson I think stands out: build dense towns, not the Barratt-style sprawl we seem to specialise in. The more sprawly estates you build, the more load you put on the transport infrastructure. If you build dense towns like the Dutch, people can walk and cycle rather than having to get in the car for everything. The cars and the motorways are still there - but the dense urban form gives you genuine choice rather than necessitating car journeys for everything.
And if houses are taller and narrower, you don't need to build so many miles of street, because most streets are there to stick houses onto. And so you can look after the streets you do have better...
A bit like urban car use, a lot of the costs of sprawl are hidden, but real, and definitely not paid by the person benefitting from it.
Erm.. gardens?
Should not be an expectation in an urban setting - at least, the sort that is in a private space just for you to maintain (or not). The amount of garden space not used for its notional best purpose must be staggering.
I wouldn't go that far- though it's very revealing how few front gardens remain in this bit of Romford. But most of the things I like about my back garden would fit in a plot about half its current size.
About the only pang I have about not becoming a city number nerd type is not being rich enough to live in one of those squares with a communal but private garden in the middle. The sort Hugh Grant broke into in Notting Hill.
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
The conspiracy is a pretty much Covid grifters looking for a new angle.
Some of the 15 minute City plans involve restrictions on where you can drive. I think Oxford had it that you could drive through the centre of town a couple of hundred times a year, but after that you'd be fined. They wanted people going from one outer zone to another to use ring roads and avoid the centre to cut down congestion.
The conspiracy is that this is a precursor to a "stay in your zone" plan. If we have everything within 15 minutes, they will then stop anyone leaving the zone at all, so the state knows where we are at all times.
It's obviously bollocks, but so many people are down the rabbit hole already, that it's taken a real hold in the post-covid conspiracy theory community.
It's embarrassing that the PM is latching onto it, as it's clearly a dog whistle for conspiracy theorists.
I think you are describing an LTN, not a 15-minute neighbourhood.
For example, modern housing developments are always LTNs, but very much NOT 15-minute neighbourhoods because the developers never invest in local GPs, dentists, pubs, schools, corner shops...
IMO that's not true.
Just looking at one of our smallish local developments which has got PP recently:
"... more than £850,000 in developer contributions – including £481,114 for primary school places – will be provided to shore up local services" ... “Countryside Properties will be making contributions towards primary school education, open space, healthcare, libraries and improvements to footpaths. https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/110-new-homes-built-sutton-5688170
Interesting from Zadrozny, in a huff: Cllr Zadrozny, the leader of the council, said: “I can promise in future that developers won’t get a greased sausage through my planning committee without building a better relationship [with the council].
Developers are famous for promising that there will be facilities, bit not so good about actually ensuring they exist. In fact, one might go as far as saying that they indulge in the time-honoured technique of "fibbing"
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
We have a chronic housing shortage, developers should be building houses.
Healthcare, education etc should be coming from taxes, not developments.
Insisting on perfection is just an excuse for NIMBYs. Houses should be built one house at a time, or as many houses are needed. If schools are built, then build them as needed and so on.
As mentioned in last week's cycleways/roads comments... I've been cycling in the Netherlands for the past few days. Been thinking about what they have to teach us in terms of transport and development.
I'm still not entirely sure, to be honest, but one lesson I think stands out: build dense towns, not the Barratt-style sprawl we seem to specialise in. The more sprawly estates you build, the more load you put on the transport infrastructure. If you build dense towns like the Dutch, people can walk and cycle rather than having to get in the car for everything. The cars and the motorways are still there - but the dense urban form gives you genuine choice rather than necessitating car journeys for everything.
And if houses are taller and narrower, you don't need to build so many miles of street, because most streets are there to stick houses onto. And so you can look after the streets you do have better...
A bit like urban car use, a lot of the costs of sprawl are hidden, but real, and definitely not paid by the person benefitting from it.
Erm.. gardens?
Should not be an expectation in an urban setting - at least, the sort that is in a private space just for you to maintain (or not). The amount of garden space not used for its notional best purpose must be staggering.
I wouldn't go that far- though it's very revealing how few front gardens remain in this bit of Romford. But most of the things I like about my back garden would fit in a plot about half its current size.
About the only pang I have about not becoming a city number nerd type is not being rich enough to live in one of those squares with a communal but private garden in the middle. The sort Hugh Grant broke into in Notting Hill.
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
The conspiracy is a pretty much Covid grifters looking for a new angle.
Some of the 15 minute City plans involve restrictions on where you can drive. I think Oxford had it that you could drive through the centre of town a couple of hundred times a year, but after that you'd be fined. They wanted people going from one outer zone to another to use ring roads and avoid the centre to cut down congestion.
The conspiracy is that this is a precursor to a "stay in your zone" plan. If we have everything within 15 minutes, they will then stop anyone leaving the zone at all, so the state knows where we are at all times.
It's obviously bollocks, but so many people are down the rabbit hole already, that it's taken a real hold in the post-covid conspiracy theory community.
It's embarrassing that the PM is latching onto it, as it's clearly a dog whistle for conspiracy theorists.
I think you are describing an LTN, not a 15-minute neighbourhood.
For example, modern housing developments are always LTNs, but very much NOT 15-minute neighbourhoods because the developers never invest in local GPs, dentists, pubs, schools, corner shops...
IMO that's not true.
Just looking at one of our smallish local developments which has got PP recently:
"... more than £850,000 in developer contributions – including £481,114 for primary school places – will be provided to shore up local services" ... “Countryside Properties will be making contributions towards primary school education, open space, healthcare, libraries and improvements to footpaths. https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/110-new-homes-built-sutton-5688170
Interesting from Zadrozny, in a huff: Cllr Zadrozny, the leader of the council, said: “I can promise in future that developers won’t get a greased sausage through my planning committee without building a better relationship [with the council].
Developers are famous for promising that there will be facilities, bit not so good about actually ensuring they exist. In fact, one might go as far as saying that they indulge in the time-honoured technique of "fibbing"
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
We have a chronic housing shortage, developers should be building houses.
Healthcare, education etc should be coming from taxes, not developments.
Insisting on perfection is just an excuse for NIMBYs. Houses should be built one house at a time, or as many houses are needed. If schools are built, then build them as needed and so on.
As mentioned in last week's cycleways/roads comments... I've been cycling in the Netherlands for the past few days. Been thinking about what they have to teach us in terms of transport and development.
I'm still not entirely sure, to be honest, but one lesson I think stands out: build dense towns, not the Barratt-style sprawl we seem to specialise in. The more sprawly estates you build, the more load you put on the transport infrastructure. If you build dense towns like the Dutch, people can walk and cycle rather than having to get in the car for everything. The cars and the motorways are still there - but the dense urban form gives you genuine choice rather than necessitating car journeys for everything.
And if houses are taller and narrower, you don't need to build so many miles of street, because most streets are there to stick houses onto. And so you can look after the streets you do have better...
A bit like urban car use, a lot of the costs of sprawl are hidden, but real, and definitely not paid by the person benefitting from it.
Erm.. gardens?
Should not be an expectation in an urban setting - at least, the sort that is in a private space just for you to maintain (or not). The amount of garden space not used for its notional best purpose must be staggering.
I wouldn't go that far- though it's very revealing how few front gardens remain in this bit of Romford. But most of the things I like about my back garden would fit in a plot about half its current size.
About the only pang I have about not becoming a city number nerd type is not being rich enough to live in one of those squares with a communal but private garden in the middle. The sort Hugh Grant broke into in Notting Hill.
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
The conspiracy is a pretty much Covid grifters looking for a new angle.
Some of the 15 minute City plans involve restrictions on where you can drive. I think Oxford had it that you could drive through the centre of town a couple of hundred times a year, but after that you'd be fined. They wanted people going from one outer zone to another to use ring roads and avoid the centre to cut down congestion.
The conspiracy is that this is a precursor to a "stay in your zone" plan. If we have everything within 15 minutes, they will then stop anyone leaving the zone at all, so the state knows where we are at all times.
It's obviously bollocks, but so many people are down the rabbit hole already, that it's taken a real hold in the post-covid conspiracy theory community.
It's embarrassing that the PM is latching onto it, as it's clearly a dog whistle for conspiracy theorists.
I think you are describing an LTN, not a 15-minute neighbourhood.
For example, modern housing developments are always LTNs, but very much NOT 15-minute neighbourhoods because the developers never invest in local GPs, dentists, pubs, schools, corner shops...
IMO that's not true.
Just looking at one of our smallish local developments which has got PP recently:
"... more than £850,000 in developer contributions – including £481,114 for primary school places – will be provided to shore up local services" ... “Countryside Properties will be making contributions towards primary school education, open space, healthcare, libraries and improvements to footpaths. https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/110-new-homes-built-sutton-5688170
Interesting from Zadrozny, in a huff: Cllr Zadrozny, the leader of the council, said: “I can promise in future that developers won’t get a greased sausage through my planning committee without building a better relationship [with the council].
Developers are famous for promising that there will be facilities, bit not so good about actually ensuring they exist. In fact, one might go as far as saying that they indulge in the time-honoured technique of "fibbing"
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
We have a chronic housing shortage, developers should be building houses.
Healthcare, education etc should be coming from taxes, not developments.
Insisting on perfection is just an excuse for NIMBYs. Houses should be built one house at a time, or as many houses are needed. If schools are built, then build them as needed and so on.
As mentioned in last week's cycleways/roads comments... I've been cycling in the Netherlands for the past few days. Been thinking about what they have to teach us in terms of transport and development.
I'm still not entirely sure, to be honest, but one lesson I think stands out: build dense towns, not the Barratt-style sprawl we seem to specialise in. The more sprawly estates you build, the more load you put on the transport infrastructure. If you build dense towns like the Dutch, people can walk and cycle rather than having to get in the car for everything. The cars and the motorways are still there - but the dense urban form gives you genuine choice rather than necessitating car journeys for everything.
And if houses are taller and narrower, you don't need to build so many miles of street, because most streets are there to stick houses onto. And so you can look after the streets you do have better...
A bit like urban car use, a lot of the costs of sprawl are hidden, but real, and definitely not paid by the person benefitting from it.
Erm.. gardens?
Should not be an expectation in an urban setting - at least, the sort that is in a private space just for you to maintain (or not). The amount of garden space not used for its notional best purpose must be staggering.
It's an interesting question. Our "garden" is a very small yard really - swinging a cat would probably result in permanent brain damage to the cat as it ricocheted off next door's fence. But we don't miss it at all, because the communal green space in our town is so good. Junior would far rather go to the park with a full array of slides/climbing walls/swings, where he can meet his friends, than be restricted to one individual garden with a single swing in it. And it's much more space-efficient.
There are absolutely those who love a big garden, and that's fine. But it's kind of weird that it's become part of the standard new house design.
(That's before getting into the whole "front garden" thing... how many of those are ever actually used for anything?)
About 6 months ago I was having arguments with 'professionals' who sought to characterise all opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as 'conspiracy theorists' peddeling 'misinformation'. They tried to do the familiar thing where they characterise anyone they disagree with as being abusive with the idea that they should be shut down on the basis of hate speech. In this context it is quite interesting to now see opposition to 15 minute neighbourhoods as forming government policy. Some people just cannot come to terms with democracy.
Er. As I understand it, a 15 minute city is one in which there's a GP surgery, a bus stop, a supermarket, and a pub or cafe within about 15 minutes walk - like a traditional British city. And not building American-style super suburbs without any element of commercial or retail mixed in.
So... why would that be subject to conspiracy theories?
Have I missed something obvious here?
ETA: Oh, obviously I have - the BBC are reporting that Dogshit Rishi is going to 'Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk'. WTF?
The conspiracy is a pretty much Covid grifters looking for a new angle.
Some of the 15 minute City plans involve restrictions on where you can drive. I think Oxford had it that you could drive through the centre of town a couple of hundred times a year, but after that you'd be fined. They wanted people going from one outer zone to another to use ring roads and avoid the centre to cut down congestion.
The conspiracy is that this is a precursor to a "stay in your zone" plan. If we have everything within 15 minutes, they will then stop anyone leaving the zone at all, so the state knows where we are at all times.
It's obviously bollocks, but so many people are down the rabbit hole already, that it's taken a real hold in the post-covid conspiracy theory community.
It's embarrassing that the PM is latching onto it, as it's clearly a dog whistle for conspiracy theorists.
I think you are describing an LTN, not a 15-minute neighbourhood.
For example, modern housing developments are always LTNs, but very much NOT 15-minute neighbourhoods because the developers never invest in local GPs, dentists, pubs, schools, corner shops...
IMO that's not true.
Just looking at one of our smallish local developments which has got PP recently:
"... more than £850,000 in developer contributions – including £481,114 for primary school places – will be provided to shore up local services" ... “Countryside Properties will be making contributions towards primary school education, open space, healthcare, libraries and improvements to footpaths. https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/110-new-homes-built-sutton-5688170
Interesting from Zadrozny, in a huff: Cllr Zadrozny, the leader of the council, said: “I can promise in future that developers won’t get a greased sausage through my planning committee without building a better relationship [with the council].
Developers are famous for promising that there will be facilities, bit not so good about actually ensuring they exist. In fact, one might go as far as saying that they indulge in the time-honoured technique of "fibbing"
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
We have a chronic housing shortage, developers should be building houses.
Healthcare, education etc should be coming from taxes, not developments.
Insisting on perfection is just an excuse for NIMBYs. Houses should be built one house at a time, or as many houses are needed. If schools are built, then build them as needed and so on.
As mentioned in last week's cycleways/roads comments... I've been cycling in the Netherlands for the past few days. Been thinking about what they have to teach us in terms of transport and development.
I'm still not entirely sure, to be honest, but one lesson I think stands out: build dense towns, not the Barratt-style sprawl we seem to specialise in. The more sprawly estates you build, the more load you put on the transport infrastructure. If you build dense towns like the Dutch, people can walk and cycle rather than having to get in the car for everything. The cars and the motorways are still there - but the dense urban form gives you genuine choice rather than necessitating car journeys for everything.
And if houses are taller and narrower, you don't need to build so many miles of street, because most streets are there to stick houses onto. And so you can look after the streets you do have better...
A bit like urban car use, a lot of the costs of sprawl are hidden, but real, and definitely not paid by the person benefitting from it.
Erm.. gardens?
Should not be an expectation in an urban setting - at least, the sort that is in a private space just for you to maintain (or not). The amount of garden space not used for its notional best purpose must be staggering.
But it’s a market. If people want houses with gardens, those are the ones they will buy. How are your going to make them buy the other houses?
At the moment, many people can't buy anything. That's an obvious market failure, but those driving it are able to do so pretty much cost-free.
My worry isn't so much about him trying to ban me from walking to the shops, it's more about whether he's going to lean more heavily on conspiracy theories in the future. If he goes full QAnon in a desperate attempt to save his skin, he could risk poisoning our politics for a generation.
I think this is true. He falls into the trap that so many clever people (and those who think they are clever) fall into, namely they "did their research" (trans: googled a thing) and found something which they believe. This is particularly true of those who use Twitter. He's not appealing to conspiracy theories. He is a conspiracy theorist. He's too clever to realise he's being stupid.
See also Sunak's championing of the "we might already be at herd immunity" theory in autumn 2020.
Comments
A friend came to see me on one of the evenings of the last week — he thinks it was on Monday, August 3rd 1914. We were standing at a window of my room in the Foreign Office. It was getting dusk, and the lamps were being lit in the space below on which we were looking. My friend recalls that I remarked on this with the words: "The lamps are going out all over Europe, we shall not see them lit again in our life-time."
The French and Germans learned the wrong lesson from the Boer War, and the Russo-Japanese war (Russian defensive rifle war was devastating). Because the British and Japanese won, narrowly, and at high cost, they took the view that given sufficient will, and readiness to take casualties, an attacker would overrun defensive positions. The British learned the right lesson, that defensive rifle fire was deadly.
We need to double down on those requirements, not relax them.
It just wasn’t static for years.
- Build the school, the surgery, the pub and town hall.
- Lay out the streets with water and gas.
- Then sell the plots to lots of different developers.
Our generals were quick learners though, and by 1916 we had a specialised Machine Gun Corps 100 000 strong.
I see a dozen very close passes allowed every 6 nations match, but that looked ok from the angle shown. Shows how cameras distort..
Unless the local laird is benevolent and willing to carry those short term costs, it's not going to happen. And s106 isn't delivering what it should.
https://x.com/citizenfreepres/status/1707882352246935824
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2023/sep/30/revealed-uk-government-keeping-files-on-education-critics-social-media-activity
At this rate Eddie Jones will be back in the QFs...
Shouldn't we??
Sunak is clearly not an idiot, though I suspect plenty here would fancy their chances against him in a maths-off. And you don't get into Parliament, let alone Cabinet, let alone No 10 without talent.
But his judgement seems awful and he has an alarming lack of bottom, as Tories of a certain generation put it.
And his political vision, Californian Libertarianism, seems to have been formed as a teenager and not updated in response to subsequent events. We've had a run of that (see also Truss, Corbyn...) recently.
It weighed in at 2.5oz.
Well, guilty of a phallus see.
I'm still not entirely sure, to be honest, but one lesson I think stands out: build dense towns, not the Barratt-style sprawl we seem to specialise in. The more sprawly estates you build, the more load you put on the transport infrastructure. If you build dense towns like the Dutch, people can walk and cycle rather than having to get in the car for everything. The cars and the motorways are still there - but the dense urban form gives you genuine choice rather than necessitating car journeys for everything.
BTW I hope that Blanche saw the eastern Avenue from the woodhenge at Overton to Avebury (hardly anything of the western one survives as I recall, at least to see above ground). Happy memories of student beer and megalith crawls (just as well pubs closed in the mornings and afternoons).
A bit like urban car use, a lot of the costs of sprawl are hidden, but real, and definitely not paid by the person benefitting from it.
I am loving this world cup...
https://twitter.com/disappoptimism/status/1708117866392776907?t=nFqbvdWHTKhLy34jQF3Lig&s=19
Mademoiselle from Armentières, parlez vous?
When in her bed she sure was fun
Working her arse like a Maxim gun
Oral history!
http://www.prehistoricjersey.net/Le_Mont_de_la_Ville.shtml
Worst purpose = concreted over to make a car park big enough for eight vehicles
About the only pang I have about not becoming a city number nerd type is not being rich enough to live in one of those squares with a communal but private garden in the middle. The sort Hugh Grant broke into in Notting Hill.
There are absolutely those who love a big garden, and that's fine. But it's kind of weird that it's become part of the standard new house design.
(That's before getting into the whole "front garden" thing... how many of those are ever actually used for anything?)