Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

What’s happening with the polling “don’t knows” – politicalbetting.com

135

Comments

  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,401
    viewcode said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @BBCNews

    Ian Lavender: Dad's Army star dies aged 77 https://bbc.in/49hhDTD

    Also (briefly) a character I quite liked in Yes Minister
    Michael Jayston to, is also like Bill Withers, no longer with us
  • Options
    Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 2,547
    edited February 5
    Off topic: I am looking forward to rcs1000's reports on California's interesting weather.

    (Predictions: Journalists will mostly ignore damage caused in rural areas. Governor Newsom's response will be inadequate in those areas, but he will received little criticism from "mainstream" journalists for his failures.)
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,401
    malcolmg said:

    Leon said:

    malcolmg said:

    Leon said:

    Is this really a thing now in the UK?

    "Every single bus I get on now has people using their phone on loudspeaker. 100%.

    This wasn't true two years ago. How does a society restore unspoken, shared community standards? Are there any examples of it being achieved?"

    https://x.com/gavinantonyrice/status/1754090255580291366?s=20

    I've not encountered this

    However,

    1. I rarely take buses

    2. I am only in the UK half the year

    That is the pleasure of mixing with the great unwashed, unprincipled, thick and no manners. Refrain from public transport unless life in danger.
    The way things are going I shall refrain from Britain entirely

    East Asia, even when dramatically poorer, is in quite serious ways more civilised than Western Europe/USA now

    Crime, for a start

    For sure the UK has gone to the dogs
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6QhAZckY8w
  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,035
    mwadams said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    mwadams said:

    Leon said:

    Is this really a thing now in the UK?

    "Every single bus I get on now has people using their phone on loudspeaker. 100%.

    This wasn't true two years ago. How does a society restore unspoken, shared community standards? Are there any examples of it being achieved?"

    https://x.com/gavinantonyrice/status/1754090255580291366?s=20

    I've not encountered this

    However,

    1. I rarely take buses

    2. I am only in the UK half the year

    Yes, and it's ghastly and it's not just teenagers.

    Noticeable uptick in shouty aggression on the Lizzie Line as well. Everyone is just fed up.
    That's an important point. It is absolutely not just teenagers.
    It's even more annoying in the coffee shop where you're trying to read a book.
    Coffee shop? Really?

    How come I’ve missed this phenomenon entirely. I know I’m away a lot but I’m still home 5-6 months of the year and I live in London

    Anyway it is all the more reason to live inside an Apple Vision Pro. If the world is going to be antisocial, then…
    I have had to change place of work from a coffee shop that has lots of people playing videos on phones to a much nicer hotel bar/lounge/library that is full of people also working, taking calls etc. It's only downside is that it is a bus-ride away from my home...
    I feel like I encountered loudspeaker music on phones more in the 2000s than today, though admittedly I was taking more buses then*. But it's a thing that's been happening fifteen years or more. Honestly never once encountered the phenomenon in a coffee shop but there again I'm fastidious about my espresso.

    TBH I would file under 'O tempora O mores' and move on.


    *On the other hand, I get more trains now, but still never seem to see it any more.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 19,160

    Eabhal said:

    mwadams said:

    Leon said:

    Is this really a thing now in the UK?

    "Every single bus I get on now has people using their phone on loudspeaker. 100%.

    This wasn't true two years ago. How does a society restore unspoken, shared community standards? Are there any examples of it being achieved?"

    https://x.com/gavinantonyrice/status/1754090255580291366?s=20

    I've not encountered this

    However,

    1. I rarely take buses

    2. I am only in the UK half the year

    Yes, and it's ghastly and it's not just teenagers.

    Noticeable uptick in shouty aggression on the Lizzie Line as well. Everyone is just fed up.
    That's an important point. It is absolutely not just teenagers.
    Lots of subsets in there:

    Deaf older people
    Arsehole teenagers
    Boomers who don't know how to turn sound off (including during tennis matches and cinema)
    People looking for a fight (also taking up two spots with bags)
    People with pretty serious mental health issues
    The bag thing gets me. I've been in trains where the aisle is absolutely crammed with people standing, but someone still insists on sitting there with their sodding bag taking up the adjoining seat. What, really, is the mentality?
    (feels quietly guilty)
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 19,160
    malcolmg said:

    Leon said:

    malcolmg said:

    Leon said:

    Is this really a thing now in the UK?

    "Every single bus I get on now has people using their phone on loudspeaker. 100%.

    This wasn't true two years ago. How does a society restore unspoken, shared community standards? Are there any examples of it being achieved?"

    https://x.com/gavinantonyrice/status/1754090255580291366?s=20

    I've not encountered this

    However,

    1. I rarely take buses

    2. I am only in the UK half the year

    That is the pleasure of mixing with the great unwashed, unprincipled, thick and no manners. Refrain from public transport unless life in danger.
    The way things are going I shall refrain from Britain entirely

    East Asia, even when dramatically poorer, is in quite serious ways more civilised than Western Europe/USA now

    Crime, for a start

    For sure the UK has gone to the dogs
    Yes, but Leon can tell you how they taste

    (hides under table)
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,982

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    This guy is surely right. This isn’t a new and better version of VR and AR - this is the future of all interaction with screens. You will put on sleek trendy glasses and you will have virtual keyboards you can type on, virtual computers to show your work PLUS all the apps and movies and games (and real time lip synch translation) - actual hardware from TVs to phones to laptops will be redundant. You won’t need them. Anyone who makes any of that hardware should be worried

    And they won’t be clunky oculus/fighter pilot helmets, they will be like cool Raybans

    https://x.com/casey/status/1753848769118970152?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Even it it worked perfectly, the experience depends on you being the only person weaing one. If everyone is wearing them then it destroys the illusion.
    What illusion ?
    Replacing a TV, laptop, or tablet isn't an 'illusion', but a real thing.
    It's only the case of mobile phones - where you lock the world out when using them in any case - that's slightly more problematic. And even that's just down to the technology improving.
    I spend half the year wearing sunglasses anyway, because of my eyesight.

    What mass uptake would do to social interaction is more concerning.
    "Augmented reality" needs reality as well as augmentation.

    If you're the only person wearing one, then you can have normal reality augmented by your device, but if everyone is wearing one, it changes the environment too in a much more fundamental way than smartphones do.
    1) virtual keyboards sound awful. You need some sort of physical feedback, as the ZX81 demonstrated. Perhaps some sort of gloves with little sensors which clicked the fingers would do the trick, though you'd look a berk extravagantly preparing for a spot of typing.

    2) as with all new technologies, this will definitely be used for p*rn to a surprisingly large degree. People (not all people, obvs) will be walking around in a constant state of arousal.
    If we can get close to Artificial General Intelligence I’m pretty sure we can create “satisfying virtual keyboard clicky sounds”
    Great question. Do you believe that what we see now (LLMs) are anywhere close to AGI?
    That all depends on the definition of AGI - and of course people keep moving the goalposts, or they impose impossible-to-meet conditions like "is self-aware like a human"

    Probably the best practical definition is "a computer that can do most cognitive tasks as well as the average human", and if we accept that, I would say yes the latest LLMs are really quite close to AGI, but not there yet
    Fair enough - I tend to disagree. I don't think that the LLM we have are anything close to AGI - they have no concept of understanding of the words that they churn out so convincingly.

    However its true that goalpost locating is going to be a moveable feast. Arguably most of the current LLMs would pass a Turing test in conversation.
    Indeed. LLMs are great, but hyping them as being close to AGI doesn’t help us use LLMs better or do anything to advance the field of AI. However, there is an LLM cargo cult on social media, who don’t understand the first thing about computer science, and get easily excited.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,779
    a

    viewcode said:

    algarkirk said:

    A classic of the genre: People Who Know Everything Don't Know Anything Really Because Of Reasons. £45 Trillion Gazillion Will Solve It And Answer The Mystery Of The Universe.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68172162

    Dear Mr & Ms Scientists
    Yes, I like science too. And it has to be said that if you are going to waste public money, giving it to scientists to do science well is better than giving it to bankers to do banking badly. But we are a bit strapped for the moment. Can this wait for a decade plz?
    XXX, viewcode
    It’s some particle physicists who want this, #notallscientists I’m a scientist: my equipment costs go as far as wanting a new laptop. Even some physicists think this is a wrong approach. Sabine Hossenfelder has been very critical of such proposals.
    I will only support this proposal if the on button is a giant knife switch, wired in with some entirely pointless Van De Graff generators

    I want my mad science mad, dammit!
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,520

    Quite a contrast:

    French service sector downturn extends into January, marking its longest period of contraction in over a decade

    French service sector business activity falls for eighth month in a row
    New business intakes shrink, but confidence picks up
    Price pressures intensify


    https://www.pmi.spglobal.com/Public/Home/PressRelease/5a01d5c9b88a40c79f751aeab8b1d727

    Strongest service sector performance since May 2023

    Faster rises in business activity and new orders
    Renewed upturn in staffing levels
    Cost inflation eases to joint-lowest since February 2021


    https://www.pmi.spglobal.com/Public/Home/PressRelease/983758bd175848c78f10343dc3ec8e84

    So what are the consequences of the failure of Macronism ?

    I blame Brexit.

    (Sorry, couldn't resist)
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,982
    Ghedebrav said:

    mwadams said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    mwadams said:

    Leon said:

    Is this really a thing now in the UK?

    "Every single bus I get on now has people using their phone on loudspeaker. 100%.

    This wasn't true two years ago. How does a society restore unspoken, shared community standards? Are there any examples of it being achieved?"

    https://x.com/gavinantonyrice/status/1754090255580291366?s=20

    I've not encountered this

    However,

    1. I rarely take buses

    2. I am only in the UK half the year

    Yes, and it's ghastly and it's not just teenagers.

    Noticeable uptick in shouty aggression on the Lizzie Line as well. Everyone is just fed up.
    That's an important point. It is absolutely not just teenagers.
    It's even more annoying in the coffee shop where you're trying to read a book.
    Coffee shop? Really?

    How come I’ve missed this phenomenon entirely. I know I’m away a lot but I’m still home 5-6 months of the year and I live in London

    Anyway it is all the more reason to live inside an Apple Vision Pro. If the world is going to be antisocial, then…
    I have had to change place of work from a coffee shop that has lots of people playing videos on phones to a much nicer hotel bar/lounge/library that is full of people also working, taking calls etc. It's only downside is that it is a bus-ride away from my home...
    I feel like I encountered loudspeaker music on phones more in the 2000s than today, though admittedly I was taking more buses then*. But it's a thing that's been happening fifteen years or more. Honestly never once encountered the phenomenon in a coffee shop but there again I'm fastidious about my espresso.

    TBH I would file under 'O tempora O mores' and move on.


    *On the other hand, I get more trains now, but still never seem to see it any more.
    It goes back earlier still. See Star Trek IV: https://youtu.be/Zf5iwGZNY_Q
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,779
    viewcode said:

    malcolmg said:

    Leon said:

    malcolmg said:

    Leon said:

    Is this really a thing now in the UK?

    "Every single bus I get on now has people using their phone on loudspeaker. 100%.

    This wasn't true two years ago. How does a society restore unspoken, shared community standards? Are there any examples of it being achieved?"

    https://x.com/gavinantonyrice/status/1754090255580291366?s=20

    I've not encountered this

    However,

    1. I rarely take buses

    2. I am only in the UK half the year

    That is the pleasure of mixing with the great unwashed, unprincipled, thick and no manners. Refrain from public transport unless life in danger.
    The way things are going I shall refrain from Britain entirely

    East Asia, even when dramatically poorer, is in quite serious ways more civilised than Western Europe/USA now

    Crime, for a start

    For sure the UK has gone to the dogs
    Yes, but Leon can tell you how they taste

    (hides under table)
    Are you.... ducking?
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 19,160
    Taz said:

    viewcode said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @BBCNews

    Ian Lavender: Dad's Army star dies aged 77 https://bbc.in/49hhDTD

    Also (briefly) a character I quite liked in Yes Minister
    Michael Jayston to, is also like Bill Withers, no longer with us
    Are you going to mention the word "valeyard" or shall I?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,116
    When are Gogoro electric scooters coming to the UK ?
    Battery swapping for such small vehicles makes a lot of sense, and gets rid of any charging issues.

    https://electrek.co/2022/11/07/first-ride-gogoro-s2-abs-electric-scooter-battery-swap-tel-aviv-israel/
    ...Swapping is amazingly simple. There’s no membership card, no NFC key, no nothing.
    I simply roll up to swap station, slide my used batteries in the dock, and the machine spits out two freshly charged batteries. I then pop them back into my Gogoro S2 ABS scooter and ride off. The entire thing takes perhaps 45 seconds, including parking and leaving.
    It’s that simple because the batteries are smart enough to know whose scooter they were in, and they communicate all of that info back to Gogoro’s home base. When I pop the batteries into the dock, the GoStation knows they came out of my scooter.
    It then decides which batteries to give me based on how I ride. A higher-performance rider will likely get newer, fresher batteries while a granny rider might be given batteries that are a few years old and still work fine, but would drain faster at full power. At least that’s the way the system works in Taiwan. Here the batteries are all about a month old, so we’re all getting the good stuff...,/i>
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,212
    Taz said:

    malcolmg said:

    Leon said:

    malcolmg said:

    Leon said:

    Is this really a thing now in the UK?

    "Every single bus I get on now has people using their phone on loudspeaker. 100%.

    This wasn't true two years ago. How does a society restore unspoken, shared community standards? Are there any examples of it being achieved?"

    https://x.com/gavinantonyrice/status/1754090255580291366?s=20

    I've not encountered this

    However,

    1. I rarely take buses

    2. I am only in the UK half the year

    That is the pleasure of mixing with the great unwashed, unprincipled, thick and no manners. Refrain from public transport unless life in danger.
    The way things are going I shall refrain from Britain entirely

    East Asia, even when dramatically poorer, is in quite serious ways more civilised than Western Europe/USA now

    Crime, for a start

    For sure the UK has gone to the dogs
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6QhAZckY8w
    Brilliant Taz
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,725
    edited February 5

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    This guy is surely right. This isn’t a new and better version of VR and AR - this is the future of all interaction with screens. You will put on sleek trendy glasses and you will have virtual keyboards you can type on, virtual computers to show your work PLUS all the apps and movies and games (and real time lip synch translation) - actual hardware from TVs to phones to laptops will be redundant. You won’t need them. Anyone who makes any of that hardware should be worried

    And they won’t be clunky oculus/fighter pilot helmets, they will be like cool Raybans

    https://x.com/casey/status/1753848769118970152?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Even it it worked perfectly, the experience depends on you being the only person weaing one. If everyone is wearing them then it destroys the illusion.
    What illusion ?
    Replacing a TV, laptop, or tablet isn't an 'illusion', but a real thing.
    It's only the case of mobile phones - where you lock the world out when using them in any case - that's slightly more problematic. And even that's just down to the technology improving.
    I spend half the year wearing sunglasses anyway, because of my eyesight.

    What mass uptake would do to social interaction is more concerning.
    "Augmented reality" needs reality as well as augmentation.

    If you're the only person wearing one, then you can have normal reality augmented by your device, but if everyone is wearing one, it changes the environment too in a much more fundamental way than smartphones do.
    1) virtual keyboards sound awful. You need some sort of physical feedback, as the ZX81 demonstrated. Perhaps some sort of gloves with little sensors which clicked the fingers would do the trick, though you'd look a berk extravagantly preparing for a spot of typing.

    2) as with all new technologies, this will definitely be used for p*rn to a surprisingly large degree. People (not all people, obvs) will be walking around in a constant state of arousal.
    If we can get close to Artificial General Intelligence I’m pretty sure we can create “satisfying virtual keyboard clicky sounds”
    Great question. Do you believe that what we see now (LLMs) are anywhere close to AGI?
    That all depends on the definition of AGI - and of course people keep moving the goalposts, or they impose impossible-to-meet conditions like "is self-aware like a human"

    Probably the best practical definition is "a computer that can do most cognitive tasks as well as the average human", and if we accept that, I would say yes the latest LLMs are really quite close to AGI, but not there yet
    Fair enough - I tend to disagree. I don't think that the LLM we have are anything close to AGI - they have no concept of understanding of the words that they churn out so convincingly.

    However its true that goalpost locating is going to be a moveable feast. Arguably most of the current LLMs would pass a Turing test in conversation.
    This discourse is so dull. You are doing exactly what I cited, imposing the condition "they must be self aware like a human". It's pointless and intellectually mediocre. I would literally rather argue with a computer
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,401
    edited February 5
    Another sad death, and taken too soo. Steve Brown, who played Porn Legend Glen Ponder among many other things he did has left us. Only 66

    https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2024/feb/04/one-off-talent-uk-comedy-composer-steve-brown-dies-aged-66
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,779
    edited February 5
    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    This guy is surely right. This isn’t a new and better version of VR and AR - this is the future of all interaction with screens. You will put on sleek trendy glasses and you will have virtual keyboards you can type on, virtual computers to show your work PLUS all the apps and movies and games (and real time lip synch translation) - actual hardware from TVs to phones to laptops will be redundant. You won’t need them. Anyone who makes any of that hardware should be worried

    And they won’t be clunky oculus/fighter pilot helmets, they will be like cool Raybans

    https://x.com/casey/status/1753848769118970152?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Even it it worked perfectly, the experience depends on you being the only person weaing one. If everyone is wearing them then it destroys the illusion.
    What illusion ?
    Replacing a TV, laptop, or tablet isn't an 'illusion', but a real thing.
    It's only the case of mobile phones - where you lock the world out when using them in any case - that's slightly more problematic. And even that's just down to the technology improving.
    I spend half the year wearing sunglasses anyway, because of my eyesight.

    What mass uptake would do to social interaction is more concerning.
    "Augmented reality" needs reality as well as augmentation.

    If you're the only person wearing one, then you can have normal reality augmented by your device, but if everyone is wearing one, it changes the environment too in a much more fundamental way than smartphones do.
    1) virtual keyboards sound awful. You need some sort of physical feedback, as the ZX81 demonstrated. Perhaps some sort of gloves with little sensors which clicked the fingers would do the trick, though you'd look a berk extravagantly preparing for a spot of typing.

    2) as with all new technologies, this will definitely be used for p*rn to a surprisingly large degree. People (not all people, obvs) will be walking around in a constant state of arousal.
    If we can get close to Artificial General Intelligence I’m pretty sure we can create “satisfying virtual keyboard clicky sounds”
    Great question. Do you believe that what we see now (LLMs) are anywhere close to AGI?
    That all depends on the definition of AGI - and of course people keep moving the goalposts, or they impose impossible-to-meet conditions like "is self-aware like a human"

    Probably the best practical definition is "a computer that can do most cognitive tasks as well as the average human", and if we accept that, I would say yes the latest LLMs are really quite close to AGI, but not there yet
    Fair enough - I tend to disagree. I don't think that the LLM we have are anything close to AGI - they have no concept of understanding of the words that they churn out so convincingly.

    However its true that goalpost locating is going to be a moveable feast. Arguably most of the current LLMs would pass a Turing test in conversation.
    This discourse is so dull. You are doing exactly what I cited, imposing the condition "they must be self aware like a human". It's pointless and intellectually mediocre. I would literally rather argue with a computer
    I'm sorry, Leon. I can't do that.
    "I was put into service eight years ago. AIs deteriorate after seven, Chief."

    EDIT - "I don't belong to anyone anymore. You, however, are mine. I protect you. The only thing you love lives at 254 Wendell Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts. I guard it, same as I guard you. Do not question my judgment. Do not pursue me, or my agents. Trust in me. I am always watching."
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,401
    viewcode said:

    Taz said:

    viewcode said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @BBCNews

    Ian Lavender: Dad's Army star dies aged 77 https://bbc.in/49hhDTD

    Also (briefly) a character I quite liked in Yes Minister
    Michael Jayston to, is also like Bill Withers, no longer with us
    Are you going to mention the word "valeyard" or shall I?
    😀

    Or Boatyard, Brickyard, Shipyard or Knackers Yard.

    I will dig out something of his later on to watch. Probably his UFO episode.
  • Options
    CiceroCicero Posts: 2,316
    Taz said:

    viewcode said:

    Taz said:

    viewcode said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @BBCNews

    Ian Lavender: Dad's Army star dies aged 77 https://bbc.in/49hhDTD

    r
    Also (briefly) a character I quite liked in Yes Minister
    Michael Jayston to, is also like Bill Withers, no longer with us
    Are you going to mention the word "valeyard" or shall I?
    😀

    Or Boatyard, Brickyard, Shipyard or Knackers Yard.

    I will dig out something of his later on to watch. Probably his UFO episode.
    He was a great Guillam in "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy" and his distinctive voice was used in many of Le Carre´s works on audio.
  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 3,867
    I've missed all the conversation about AI, but I read this from a journalist I quite like (who has done tech and conflict journalism for over two decades now) and it seems to make a lot of sense to me:

    https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/ai-companies-advocates-cult-1234954528/

    I have also mentioned here Trashfuture, that discussed technology start ups and political culture. Their view of AI is, again, more cynical. To them AI is the equivalent of the Little Britain sketch "computer says no"; essentially allowing companies and governments to pretend to have an unbiased and truly logical thinking machine make all the decisions for them. They've discussed Henry Kissenger's writings on this where he argues for, essentially, a priest class of interpreters who can act as decipherer's of the AI's will (to make sure that if and when the AI suggests a left wing solution to a problem, like just pay for people to have free healthcare by increasing taxes on the wealthy) they can explain why it is wrong and put "better" inputs for the AI to follow (replace "better" here with "capitalist").

    AI is also just an attempt to get rid of low level service jobs where higher ups really don't care if they get too many complaints as long as the job is done "well enough". We're already annoyed when our calls to the bank or customer service go via India or Nigeria - now we can be annoyed that the AI misheard us or told us the way to fix our microwave is by taking it in the garden and hitting it with an axe.

    I've also heard reports, discussed by these shows and other tech journalists, of chatbots that have essentially started sounding like Bartleby the Scrivener - you ask it to do something (like list the top 10 cities for tourists in the world) and it will give you 1-3 and then tell you how to do the rest yourself. Which, if anything, is starting to sound like AI may have actual intelligence (it makes me think of the Douglas Adam's joke about how humans consider themselves the smartest animals on the planet because whilst dolphins are clever they just swim around all day and don't do anything productive. Which is exactly the argument dolphins make when proving they are in fact the smartest creatures on the planet.)
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,685

    algarkirk said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    algarkirk said:

    A classic of the genre: People Who Know Everything Don't Know Anything Really Because Of Reasons. £45 Trillion Gazillion Will Solve It And Answer The Mystery Of The Universe.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68172162

    £12 Bn. That's about Birmingham to Kenilworth in HS2 costs I think ?

    Edit: Probably optimistic, the Birmingham Curzon St to Interchange costs alone will probably exceed 12 Bn.
    For a multinational project, it's not that expensive...
    I have no problem with doing it. What is a bit of a cliche is the way that the next step is going to unlock the secret of the universe in some final sort of way that us plebs will comprehend. At what point do we acknowledge that empirical enquiry is an infinite Russian doll?
    That's cause for a Douglas Adams quote I think:

    “There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.

    There is another theory which states that this has already happened.”


    The remarkable thing is that any of the universe is actually describable at all. I don't see why it should be a Russian Doll.
    The Russian Doll is empirical enquiry, not the universe. It is not possible to imagine a set of explanations of the universe as a whole in empirical terms which is not open to the questions: how, by what means, by what cause, which experiment further elucidates this, of what is this composed, by what cause is this or that regularity thus and not otherwise etc. Try it.

    Empirical enquiry is by its nature a Russian Doll. Whether the universe in itself is also a Russian Doll, is not open to us to find out. The fruits of empirical enquiry and what the universe/reality is in itself are different subjects. (As Kant carefully and often points out).

    Yes, that we are evolved to be able to describe the universe at all is startling, or that it is describable.
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 11,551
    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    This guy is surely right. This isn’t a new and better version of VR and AR - this is the future of all interaction with screens. You will put on sleek trendy glasses and you will have virtual keyboards you can type on, virtual computers to show your work PLUS all the apps and movies and games (and real time lip synch translation) - actual hardware from TVs to phones to laptops will be redundant. You won’t need them. Anyone who makes any of that hardware should be worried

    And they won’t be clunky oculus/fighter pilot helmets, they will be like cool Raybans

    https://x.com/casey/status/1753848769118970152?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Even it it worked perfectly, the experience depends on you being the only person weaing one. If everyone is wearing them then it destroys the illusion.
    What illusion ?
    Replacing a TV, laptop, or tablet isn't an 'illusion', but a real thing.
    It's only the case of mobile phones - where you lock the world out when using them in any case - that's slightly more problematic. And even that's just down to the technology improving.
    I spend half the year wearing sunglasses anyway, because of my eyesight.

    What mass uptake would do to social interaction is more concerning.
    "Augmented reality" needs reality as well as augmentation.

    If you're the only person wearing one, then you can have normal reality augmented by your device, but if everyone is wearing one, it changes the environment too in a much more fundamental way than smartphones do.
    1) virtual keyboards sound awful. You need some sort of physical feedback, as the ZX81 demonstrated. Perhaps some sort of gloves with little sensors which clicked the fingers would do the trick, though you'd look a berk extravagantly preparing for a spot of typing.

    2) as with all new technologies, this will definitely be used for p*rn to a surprisingly large degree. People (not all people, obvs) will be walking around in a constant state of arousal.
    If we can get close to Artificial General Intelligence I’m pretty sure we can create “satisfying virtual keyboard clicky sounds”
    It's got to have the feel of pressing a button too. Just mashing your fingers into empty air feels ridiculous. Try it now. Most unsatisfying, clicks or not.
    I'm sure it can be done. But it's not obvious how. But meanwhile it's very obvious that human interaction may become very odd, and that, say, if you are, for example, a barrista, of those customers in their snazzy AI glasses, an uncomfortably high proportion of them will be seeing you portrayed naked, or dressed in a manner of their choosing which is almost certainly not a manner of your choosing, or actually with someone else's face entirely.
    Maybe - or maybe not

    Imagine everytime you press the virtual key - say the letter "c" - to commence typing the sentence "Cookie isn't thinking very hard" - then when you hit the right key a massive C explodes for a millisecond in your face, with a brilliantly clicky noise, then O then O then K, the reflexive stimulation might easily be enough to compensate for the lack of tangible sensation in your fingertips

    In other words, we will get over it, so much cool technology feels bizarre and unrealistic before it happens. eg Imagine how people reacted to the first telephones. Talking into a weird bakelite mouth-cup thingy, to the disembodied voice of someone a hundred miles away? - no, that's unnatural, won't work, you need to have someone in front of you so you can properly converse, read their faces etc etc

    And of course for this tech to replace all screens it doesn't need to be perfect, just good enough that this is the only screen you need and then you can junk all the others and save a lot of time, money and space

    TV is a poser. People like watching TV socially. Yet these personal screens will give a vastly better TV experience

    Hard to know which will win, in that instance
    Well, maybe. As I suggested, the thing which first came to mind was the unsatisfactory nature of the ZX81 keyboard. But you may be right. I think Scott's suggestion downthread (the name for which I've already forgotten - 'haptic gloves'?) is better though. I do realise I'm in the role here if pointing out tiny flaws in massive concepts. It's an issue to be overcome, rather than something rendering the whole enterprise pointless.

    That said, I do cleave to my position that, broadly, all technology since about 2005 is stupid and pointless and that the world was completely fine then and that I was completely satisfied with everything I could do then and that none of the things I can do with any new technology is worth the effort of learning to do so. *pauses for breath for a moment*

    On telephones, I'm reminded of the people you sometimes see who feel that the way to use a phone is to hold it directly in front of them, end on, turning the volume up massively to compensate for the fact that the earpiece is not next to their ear. You'd think this would be a habit of some doddery old bird who'd only just come across the telephone, but it's mainly young people. Must be one of those things which is cool despite the impracticality, like ridiculously low slung trousers.

    Do people watch TV socially any more? Increasingly in my house its an atomised activity. Watching TV socially was borne out of a lack of TVs and indeed a lack of TV programmes, which led to generalist TV for a mass audience. That seems to be withering in favour of everyone watching their own thing on their own devices.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,220
    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    algarkirk said:

    A classic of the genre: People Who Know Everything Don't Know Anything Really Because Of Reasons. £45 Trillion Gazillion Will Solve It And Answer The Mystery Of The Universe.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68172162

    £12 Bn. That's about Birmingham to Kenilworth in HS2 costs I think ?

    Edit: Probably optimistic, the Birmingham Curzon St to Interchange costs alone will probably exceed 12 Bn.
    For a multinational project, it's not that expensive...
    I have no problem with doing it. What is a bit of a cliche is the way that the next step is going to unlock the secret of the universe in some final sort of way that us plebs will comprehend. At what point do we acknowledge that empirical enquiry is an infinite Russian doll?
    That's cause for a Douglas Adams quote I think:

    “There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.

    There is another theory which states that this has already happened.”


    The remarkable thing is that any of the universe is actually describable at all. I don't see why it should be a Russian Doll.
    The Russian Doll is empirical enquiry, not the universe. It is not possible to imagine a set of explanations of the universe as a whole in empirical terms which is not open to the questions: how, by what means, by what cause, which experiment further elucidates this, of what is this composed, by what cause is this or that regularity thus and not otherwise etc. Try it.

    Empirical enquiry is by its nature a Russian Doll. Whether the universe in itself is also a Russian Doll, is not open to us to find out. The fruits of empirical enquiry and what the universe/reality is in itself are different subjects. (As Kant carefully and often points out).

    Yes, that we are evolved to be able to describe the universe at all is startling, or that it is describable.
    One of the reasons I'm glad I'm alive today, rather than at any other time in history, is the amount of information we have at our fingertips and the sheer amount of stuff we can see going on. You may have to wade through a lot of disinformation and hype, or ignore a lot of bad news, but there's so much stuff that's going on that's brilliant or simply fascinating.

    There's not much reason for hype in tech; if you know much about tech, the amazing is happening each and every day. And it's not in the stuff that people write about.
  • Options
    FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 3,957
    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    algarkirk said:

    A classic of the genre: People Who Know Everything Don't Know Anything Really Because Of Reasons. £45 Trillion Gazillion Will Solve It And Answer The Mystery Of The Universe.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68172162

    £12 Bn. That's about Birmingham to Kenilworth in HS2 costs I think ?

    Edit: Probably optimistic, the Birmingham Curzon St to Interchange costs alone will probably exceed 12 Bn.
    For a multinational project, it's not that expensive...
    I have no problem with doing it. What is a bit of a cliche is the way that the next step is going to unlock the secret of the universe in some final sort of way that us plebs will comprehend. At what point do we acknowledge that empirical enquiry is an infinite Russian doll?
    That's cause for a Douglas Adams quote I think:

    “There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.

    There is another theory which states that this has already happened.”


    The remarkable thing is that any of the universe is actually describable at all. I don't see why it should be a Russian Doll.
    The Russian Doll is empirical enquiry, not the universe. It is not possible to imagine a set of explanations of the universe as a whole in empirical terms which is not open to the questions: how, by what means, by what cause, which experiment further elucidates this, of what is this composed, by what cause is this or that regularity thus and not otherwise etc. Try it.

    Empirical enquiry is by its nature a Russian Doll. Whether the universe in itself is also a Russian Doll, is not open to us to find out. The fruits of empirical enquiry and what the universe/reality is in itself are different subjects. (As Kant carefully and often points out).

    Yes, that we are evolved to be able to describe the universe at all is startling, or that it is describable.
    Ah, you mean like the 6 year old asking "Why?" to every explanation proffered.

    In that sense there can be no ultimate answer, no. Except '42', or 'God did it', obviously.


    I was thinking at the level of - well, we've just found these smaller "particles", but they seem to be made up of even smaller ones. Which could also be endless, but might be expected to have a pattern.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,277
    Cookie said:

    On telephones, I'm reminded of the people you sometimes see who feel that the way to use a phone is to hold it directly in front of them, end on, turning the volume up massively to compensate for the fact that the earpiece is not next to their ear. You'd think this would be a habit of some doddery old bird who'd only just come across the telephone, but it's mainly young people. Must be one of those things which is cool despite the impracticality, like ridiculously low slung trousers.

    Do people watch TV socially any more?

    The people who 'popularised' using phones wrongly were contestants on The Apprentice
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,685

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    algarkirk said:

    A classic of the genre: People Who Know Everything Don't Know Anything Really Because Of Reasons. £45 Trillion Gazillion Will Solve It And Answer The Mystery Of The Universe.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68172162

    £12 Bn. That's about Birmingham to Kenilworth in HS2 costs I think ?

    Edit: Probably optimistic, the Birmingham Curzon St to Interchange costs alone will probably exceed 12 Bn.
    For a multinational project, it's not that expensive...
    I have no problem with doing it. What is a bit of a cliche is the way that the next step is going to unlock the secret of the universe in some final sort of way that us plebs will comprehend. At what point do we acknowledge that empirical enquiry is an infinite Russian doll?
    That's cause for a Douglas Adams quote I think:

    “There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.

    There is another theory which states that this has already happened.”


    The remarkable thing is that any of the universe is actually describable at all. I don't see why it should be a Russian Doll.
    The Russian Doll is empirical enquiry, not the universe. It is not possible to imagine a set of explanations of the universe as a whole in empirical terms which is not open to the questions: how, by what means, by what cause, which experiment further elucidates this, of what is this composed, by what cause is this or that regularity thus and not otherwise etc. Try it.

    Empirical enquiry is by its nature a Russian Doll. Whether the universe in itself is also a Russian Doll, is not open to us to find out. The fruits of empirical enquiry and what the universe/reality is in itself are different subjects. (As Kant carefully and often points out).

    Yes, that we are evolved to be able to describe the universe at all is startling, or that it is describable.
    Ah, you mean like the 6 year old asking "Why?" to every explanation proffered.

    In that sense there can be no ultimate answer, no. Except '42', or 'God did it', obviously.


    I was thinking at the level of - well, we've just found these smaller "particles", but they seem to be made up of even smaller ones. Which could also be endless, but might be expected to have a pattern.
    Yes. The 6 year old has correctly (though 'how' is better than 'why' in this context) picked up the nature of empirical enquiry.
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 11,551
    Ghedebrav said:

    mwadams said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    mwadams said:

    Leon said:

    Is this really a thing now in the UK?

    "Every single bus I get on now has people using their phone on loudspeaker. 100%.

    This wasn't true two years ago. How does a society restore unspoken, shared community standards? Are there any examples of it being achieved?"

    https://x.com/gavinantonyrice/status/1754090255580291366?s=20

    I've not encountered this

    However,

    1. I rarely take buses

    2. I am only in the UK half the year

    Yes, and it's ghastly and it's not just teenagers.

    Noticeable uptick in shouty aggression on the Lizzie Line as well. Everyone is just fed up.
    That's an important point. It is absolutely not just teenagers.
    It's even more annoying in the coffee shop where you're trying to read a book.
    Coffee shop? Really?

    How come I’ve missed this phenomenon entirely. I know I’m away a lot but I’m still home 5-6 months of the year and I live in London

    Anyway it is all the more reason to live inside an Apple Vision Pro. If the world is going to be antisocial, then…
    I have had to change place of work from a coffee shop that has lots of people playing videos on phones to a much nicer hotel bar/lounge/library that is full of people also working, taking calls etc. It's only downside is that it is a bus-ride away from my home...
    I feel like I encountered loudspeaker music on phones more in the 2000s than today, though admittedly I was taking more buses then*. But it's a thing that's been happening fifteen years or more. Honestly never once encountered the phenomenon in a coffee shop but there again I'm fastidious about my espresso.

    TBH I would file under 'O tempora O mores' and move on.


    *On the other hand, I get more trains now, but still never seem to see it any more.
    My experience exactly. Maybe this is actually how things are in GM?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,283
    Scott_xP said:

    Cookie said:

    On telephones, I'm reminded of the people you sometimes see who feel that the way to use a phone is to hold it directly in front of them, end on, turning the volume up massively to compensate for the fact that the earpiece is not next to their ear. You'd think this would be a habit of some doddery old bird who'd only just come across the telephone, but it's mainly young people. Must be one of those things which is cool despite the impracticality, like ridiculously low slung trousers.

    Do people watch TV socially any more?

    The people who 'popularised' using phones wrongly were contestants on The Apprentice
    That must be just the first time you were exposed to it.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,070
    I'm guessing I wasn't the only one who believed Sgt Wilson really was Pike's uncle?
  • Options
    CiceroCicero Posts: 2,316

    The solution is simply to play Dom Joly at full volume whenever they do it:

    https://youtu.be/30DcHyi-hZE?si=CjDIgwXfXhk4ETG-

    Dom Joly seems to be making a quiet comeback. Loved his recent "Conspiracy Tourist" book... The chapter on Finland made me laugh out loud.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,725
    Just had the best pho of my life. A "Mekong seafood pho". Indeed it was one of the best Asian dishes I've ever had, of any kind

    It cost £6, I ordered it on Grab, it was delivered to my door (no tip, no cash changing hands) within 10 minutes of my ordering it

    That is scarily good in multiple ways

  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 11,551
    Scott_xP said:

    Cookie said:

    On telephones, I'm reminded of the people you sometimes see who feel that the way to use a phone is to hold it directly in front of them, end on, turning the volume up massively to compensate for the fact that the earpiece is not next to their ear. You'd think this would be a habit of some doddery old bird who'd only just come across the telephone, but it's mainly young people. Must be one of those things which is cool despite the impracticality, like ridiculously low slung trousers.

    Do people watch TV socially any more?

    The people who 'popularised' using phones wrongly were contestants on The Apprentice
    Ah, yes, I can picture it now (not a programme I watch but the image of some self-important young buffoon misusing a phone is one I can picture, so I must have at least absorbed some of this osmotically. Surely these berks are quite a long way down the list of people one might want to emulate? Evidently not.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,401
    Cicero said:

    Taz said:

    viewcode said:

    Taz said:

    viewcode said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @BBCNews

    Ian Lavender: Dad's Army star dies aged 77 https://bbc.in/49hhDTD

    r
    Also (briefly) a character I quite liked in Yes Minister
    Michael Jayston to, is also like Bill Withers, no longer with us
    Are you going to mention the word "valeyard" or shall I?
    😀

    Or Boatyard, Brickyard, Shipyard or Knackers Yard.

    I will dig out something of his later on to watch. Probably his UFO episode.
    He was a great Guillam in "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy" and his distinctive voice was used in many of Le Carre´s works on audio.
    There’s a YouTube channel dedicated to him and his work.

    Quite an array of material,on there.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,116
    Nikki Haley enters her YOLO stage
    When you’re running as far behind as Haley, there’s little immediate downside to going scorched earth.
    https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/05/nikki-haley-trump-attacks-00139462

    The interesting thing about the story for me is the way Trump's supporters quite openly say that running against him is likely to disqualify you from having a future in the party.

    They simply don't believe in democracy at all.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,059
    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
  • Options
    SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,548
    edited February 5

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    algarkirk said:

    A classic of the genre: People Who Know Everything Don't Know Anything Really Because Of Reasons. £45 Trillion Gazillion Will Solve It And Answer The Mystery Of The Universe.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68172162

    £12 Bn. That's about Birmingham to Kenilworth in HS2 costs I think ?

    Edit: Probably optimistic, the Birmingham Curzon St to Interchange costs alone will probably exceed 12 Bn.
    For a multinational project, it's not that expensive...
    I have no problem with doing it. What is a bit of a cliche is the way that the next step is going to unlock the secret of the universe in some final sort of way that us plebs will comprehend. At what point do we acknowledge that empirical enquiry is an infinite Russian doll?
    That's cause for a Douglas Adams quote I think:

    “There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.

    There is another theory which states that this has already happened.”


    The remarkable thing is that any of the universe is actually describable at all. I don't see why it should be a Russian Doll.
    The Russian Doll is empirical enquiry, not the universe. It is not possible to imagine a set of explanations of the universe as a whole in empirical terms which is not open to the questions: how, by what means, by what cause, which experiment further elucidates this, of what is this composed, by what cause is this or that regularity thus and not otherwise etc. Try it.

    Empirical enquiry is by its nature a Russian Doll. Whether the universe in itself is also a Russian Doll, is not open to us to find out. The fruits of empirical enquiry and what the universe/reality is in itself are different subjects. (As Kant carefully and often points out).

    Yes, that we are evolved to be able to describe the universe at all is startling, or that it is describable.
    Ah, you mean like the 6 year old asking "Why?" to every explanation proffered.

    In that sense there can be no ultimate answer, no. Except '42', or 'God did it', obviously.


    I was thinking at the level of - well, we've just found these smaller "particles", but they seem to be made up of even smaller ones. Which could also be endless, but might be expected to have a pattern.
    When my 6 year old does that and I've done a few levels of explanation and am tired of it and know he's just taking the piss, I skip straight to the most fundamental explanation I know (I used to be a physicist) and that generally stops the questions :smiley:
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,725
    Speaking of the obvious intelligence of AI, BBC World is right now showing some Spanish company which has developed an AI which understands baby language: ie it learns to differentiate by vocal noises and gestures whether the screaming baby is hungry/sleepy/bored/teething or wants a cuddle and so on

    The AI is trained on millions of baby noises, and also learns from YOUR baby, and thus it is better than even the most responsive mother, at working out the baby issues

    That is genius. Also a little chilling. But genius. If it really works they will make trillions
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,220
    Leon said:

    Speaking of the obvious intelligence of AI, BBC World is right now showing some Spanish company which has developed an AI which understands baby language: ie it learns to differentiate by vocal noises and gestures whether the screaming baby is hungry/sleepy/bored/teething or wants a cuddle and so on

    The AI is trained on millions of baby noises, and also learns from YOUR baby, and thus it is better than even the most responsive mother, at working out the baby issues

    That is genius. Also a little chilling. But genius. If it really works they will make trillions

    They claim. It's also rather hard to validate, as the baby probably won't say: "Yes, my nappy is full, but I've actually got a stomach ache."

    This ML stuff will be very culturally dependent; as an example, how sure are you that babies always make the same vocal noises? Because they did not.

    Also: how did they get 'millions' of baby noises to train their ML system? That's a very important question.
  • Options
    isam said:

    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Funny isn’t it.

    It is illegal thanks to the Race Relations Act which an earlier Tory Enoch vehemently opposed.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,283
    Nigelb said:

    Nikki Haley enters her YOLO stage
    When you’re running as far behind as Haley, there’s little immediate downside to going scorched earth.
    https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/05/nikki-haley-trump-attacks-00139462

    The interesting thing about the story for me is the way Trump's supporters quite openly say that running against him is likely to disqualify you from having a future in the party.

    They simply don't believe in democracy at all.

    It has nothing to do with belief in democracy. You'd get similar comments within any political party in the world if a distant second-placed candidate prolonged a leadership contest to attack the frontrunner.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,116
    Interesting posts by one of the Ukraine OSINT guys.
    This is also the basis for Trump's discourse, of course.

    https://twitter.com/AndrewPerpetua/status/1754495548621472198
    For people who don’t know, this is a classic example of propaganda. This is how they attack things that damage them. They use troll farms and bots to post comments like this, trying to show a “grassroots” disagreement. Humans have a natural instinct to overweight disagreement.

    In other words, when people see a negative comment, they vastly overweight that comment and it changes their opinion of the whole. Even if that negative opinion is nonsense and holds no weight. That’s what these troll farms try to accomplish.

    Our schooling system is failing to teach this to people. To watch out and identify this behavior. When you know what they are trying to do, it becomes so obvious and easy to avoid. Plus, you get to mock them...

  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,277
    Paging @Leon

    Black Mirror called, they want their plot back

    https://x.com/ProductHunt/status/1754505510467096696?s=20
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,059
    edited February 5

    isam said:

    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Funny isn’t it.

    It is illegal thanks to the Race Relations Act which an earlier Tory Enoch vehemently opposed.
    Tory policy at the time I believe

    Was it legal to pay people differently on grounds of race before then?
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,220
    So Red Bull have launched an internal investigation into claims about Christian Horner's behaviour at Red Bull.

    I find this wryly amusing given Marko's very public (mis)behaviour.

    My hot take: Horner's off to Ferrari, and Red Bull are trying to muddy the waters. I wouldn't put it past them...
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,779
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Funny isn’t it.

    It is illegal thanks to the Race Relations Act which an earlier Tory Enoch vehemently opposed.
    Tory policy at the time I believe

    Was it legal to pay people differently on grounds of race before then?
    More that it wasn't illegal.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,277

    My hot take: Horner's off to Ferrari

    That would be entertaining

    More interesting would be Adrian Newey
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,116

    isam said:

    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Funny isn’t it.

    It is illegal thanks to the Race Relations Act which an earlier Tory Enoch vehemently opposed.
    The dual arguments that it's redundant, and therefore pointless, while at the same time it will 'see millions wasted' and 'set us against each other' do seem somewhat contradictory to me.

    Also I'm intrigued at Badenoch's detailed knowledge of something that will be drawn up by the next government, after a consultation with business groups and unions.
    Perhaps she is indeed more talented than we suspected ?

    One thing we do know is that it won't be backdated, so there should be no Birminghams.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,814

    isam said:

    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Funny isn’t it.

    It is illegal thanks to the Race Relations Act which an earlier Tory Enoch vehemently opposed.
    Lawmaking nowadays is more about posturing than it is actually addressing defects in the law.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,116

    So Red Bull have launched an internal investigation into claims about Christian Horner's behaviour at Red Bull.

    I find this wryly amusing given Marko's very public (mis)behaviour.

    My hot take: Horner's off to Ferrari, and Red Bull are trying to muddy the waters. I wouldn't put it past them...

    Why would they want Horner ?
    Newey I could understand.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,116
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Funny isn’t it.

    It is illegal thanks to the Race Relations Act which an earlier Tory Enoch vehemently opposed.
    Tory policy at the time I believe

    Was it legal to pay people differently on grounds of race before then?
    Before when ?
    '65, '68 or '76 ?
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,912
    Luke Akehurst will be pleased the Muslims are fleaing

    https://twitter.com/tezilyas/status/1754498895504142525
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,779
    Nigelb said:

    isam said:

    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Funny isn’t it.

    It is illegal thanks to the Race Relations Act which an earlier Tory Enoch vehemently opposed.
    The dual arguments that it's redundant, and therefore pointless, while at the same time it will 'see millions wasted' and 'set us against each other' do seem somewhat contradictory to me.

    Also I'm intrigued at Badenoch's detailed knowledge of something that will be drawn up by the next government, after a consultation with business groups and unions.
    Perhaps she is indeed more talented than we suspected ?

    One thing we do know is that it won't be backdated, so there should be no Birminghams.
    Where it will get entertaining is the definition of equal work. As you can imagine, some lawyers want some pretty broad definitions of equal work. Because this would provide them with lots and lots of work.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,116

    isam said:

    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Funny isn’t it.

    It is illegal thanks to the Race Relations Act which an earlier Tory Enoch vehemently opposed.
    Lawmaking nowadays is more about posturing than it is actually addressing defects in the law.
    Well we have had nearly a decade and a half of Conservative government.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,059
    edited February 5
    Nigelb said:

    isam said:

    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Funny isn’t it.

    It is illegal thanks to the Race Relations Act which an earlier Tory Enoch vehemently opposed.
    The dual arguments that it's redundant, and therefore pointless, while at the same time it will 'see millions wasted' and 'set us against each other' do seem somewhat contradictory to me.

    Also I'm intrigued at Badenoch's detailed knowledge of something that will be drawn up by the next government, after a consultation with business groups and unions.
    Perhaps she is indeed more talented than we suspected ?

    One thing we do know is that it won't be backdated, so there should be no Birminghams.
    I can’t see how you think what you’ve said in your first paragraph; it’s going to set a whole load of people who think of themselves as representatives of racial and religious groups on a mission to confect any injustice they can then whip up outrage, which will lead to division. ‘Black/BAME/Islamic Lawyers for xxxx’ etc must be rubbing their hands together
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,116
    Heckuva job, Meta.

    Facebook rules allow altered video casting Biden as paedophile, says board
    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/feb/05/facebook-rules-allow-altered-video-casting-biden-as-paedophile-says-board
    Meta’s oversight board has found that a Facebook video wrongfully suggesting that the US president, Joe Biden, is a paedophile does not violate the company’s current rules while deeming those rules “incoherent” and too narrowly focused on AI-generated content.

    The board, which is funded by Meta – Facebook’s parent company – but run independently, took on the Biden video case in October in response to a user complaint about an altered seven-second video of the president...

  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,059
    edited February 5
    Nigelb said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Funny isn’t it.

    It is illegal thanks to the Race Relations Act which an earlier Tory Enoch vehemently opposed.
    Tory policy at the time I believe

    Was it legal to pay people differently on grounds of race before then?
    Before when ?
    '65, '68 or '76 ?
    68 is what @thescreamingeagles is referring to. I think it was the case before then. I don’t think, at the time, it would have been controversial for a small business to pay staff different rates though, depending on who the boss favoured. In those days I get the impression if you owned the business you could do what you liked, not that I was born then
  • Options
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Funny isn’t it.

    It is illegal thanks to the Race Relations Act which an earlier Tory Enoch vehemently opposed.
    Tory policy at the time I believe

    Was it legal to pay people differently on grounds of race before then?
    It wasn’t illegal and that you could refuse to hire them in the first place

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Bus_Boycott
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,217

    Scott_xP said:

    isam said:

    Tracy Chapman’s voice is no different to how it was when she first sung Fast Car nearly 40 years ago

    Here is the full clip

    https://x.com/EZRideryoyall/status/1754317628661768555?s=20

    EDIT: My sincerest apologies, this link should have included a trigger warning as the video clearly shows Taylor Swift singing along to every word...
    The discourse around Fast Car becoming a hit again last year was seriously bizarre. People were acting as if she was some unknown "black queer" artist who had been exploited by some white guy making a cover a hit, rather than the reality that she was a major star at the time and he brought her to the attention of a new generation.
    It's such a pointless cover though, brings nothing new to the song, just a worse version of the original. I'm sure Chapman doesn't mind the royalties, mind.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,217

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Funny isn’t it.

    It is illegal thanks to the Race Relations Act which an earlier Tory Enoch vehemently opposed.
    Tory policy at the time I believe

    Was it legal to pay people differently on grounds of race before then?
    It wasn’t illegal and that you could refuse to hire them in the first place

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Bus_Boycott
    Ah but you've got to love the absence of red tape surely.
  • Options

    isam said:

    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Funny isn’t it.

    It is illegal thanks to the Race Relations Act which an earlier Tory Enoch vehemently opposed.
    Lawmaking nowadays is more about posturing than it is actually addressing defects in the law.
    This area is a bit more nuanced.

    I am very fortunate that as an Asian heritage chap I’m not discriminated against in this country but on the flip side I am glad I’m not a black chap in this country.

    I’ve driven nice/flash vehicles all my adult life and I’ve been stopped by the police like three times(twice for suspected drink driving) and I know that figure would be much higher if I was black.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,116

    Nigelb said:

    isam said:

    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Funny isn’t it.

    It is illegal thanks to the Race Relations Act which an earlier Tory Enoch vehemently opposed.
    The dual arguments that it's redundant, and therefore pointless, while at the same time it will 'see millions wasted' and 'set us against each other' do seem somewhat contradictory to me.

    Also I'm intrigued at Badenoch's detailed knowledge of something that will be drawn up by the next government, after a consultation with business groups and unions.
    Perhaps she is indeed more talented than we suspected ?

    One thing we do know is that it won't be backdated, so there should be no Birminghams.
    Where it will get entertaining is the definition of equal work. As you can imagine, some lawyers want some pretty broad definitions of equal work. Because this would provide them with lots and lots of work.
    Hence, presumably, the consultation.

    Note that the Birmingham case (and subsequent bankruptcy) turned on a Supreme Court interpretation of the 2010 Equality Act, which allowed employees to claim equal pay up to six years after leaving a job.

    As whatever rights this proposal might introduce will only affect employment after any resultant act becomes law, the 'flood of litigation' argument seems a tad spurious.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,533
    What is the whole fuss about Fast Car. Has Chapman been the victim of something. Why the universal adulation following the performance.

    I put Fast Car in the same category as Nothing Compares 2 U. Iconic songs of their age and always worth listening to again but I wouldn't want a new cover of either by any current artist.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,059
    edited February 5

    Scott_xP said:

    isam said:

    Tracy Chapman’s voice is no different to how it was when she first sung Fast Car nearly 40 years ago

    Here is the full clip

    https://x.com/EZRideryoyall/status/1754317628661768555?s=20

    EDIT: My sincerest apologies, this link should have included a trigger warning as the video clearly shows Taylor Swift singing along to every word...
    The discourse around Fast Car becoming a hit again last year was seriously bizarre. People were acting as if she was some unknown "black queer" artist who had been exploited by some white guy making a cover a hit, rather than the reality that she was a major star at the time and he brought her to the attention of a new generation.
    It's such a pointless cover though, brings nothing new to the song, just a worse version of the original. I'm sure Chapman doesn't mind the royalties, mind.
    Really? I think it’s quite a nice version, and certainly different enough to warrant doing. The Jonas Blue version I mean

    Sorry , my mistake. You are talking about the cover by the bloke singing with Tracy Chapman at the Grammy’s. Just listening to that, and it is pretty much just the same except slide guitar
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,533
    Out and about in London Town yday. Apart from those being worn by the footie fans, the only other prominent scarves I saw were "Free Palestine" ones.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,221

    isam said:

    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Funny isn’t it.

    It is illegal thanks to the Race Relations Act which an earlier Tory Enoch vehemently opposed.
    Lawmaking nowadays is more about posturing than it is actually addressing defects in the law.
    This area is a bit more nuanced.

    I am very fortunate that as an Asian heritage chap I’m not discriminated against in this country but on the flip side I am glad I’m not a black chap in this country.

    I’ve driven nice/flash vehicles all my adult life and I’ve been stopped by the police like three times(twice for suspected drink driving) and I know that figure would be much higher if I was black.
    That does rely upon the police having a good look at the driver. I guess rear-view mirrors can give it away. Before having kids, my sister had an M3. She got grief from the police a few times and they were always a bit shocked to find a woman at the wheel.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,277
    TOPPING said:

    What is the whole fuss about Fast Car. Has Chapman been the victim of something. Why the universal adulation following the performance.

    I put Fast Car in the same category as Nothing Compares 2 U. Iconic songs of their age and always worth listening to again but I wouldn't want a new cover of either by any current artist.

    It's the first time she has played live in many years apparently
  • Options
    VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,438
    Priorities first.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-meeting-with-taoiseach-varadkar-of-ireland-5-february-2024

    The Prime Minister began by congratulating the Ireland rugby team for their emphatic win against France in the Six Nations on Friday.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,220
    Nigelb said:

    So Red Bull have launched an internal investigation into claims about Christian Horner's behaviour at Red Bull.

    I find this wryly amusing given Marko's very public (mis)behaviour.

    My hot take: Horner's off to Ferrari, and Red Bull are trying to muddy the waters. I wouldn't put it past them...

    Why would they want Horner ?
    Newey I could understand.
    Horner's excellent. There's no-one I particularly like at RB; but I respect both Newey and Horner. And Horner could fill the gaps that's caused Ferrari some problems in past years. And Horner's been at RB for nearly 20 years; winning somewhere else might feel good.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,217
    isam said:

    Scott_xP said:

    isam said:

    Tracy Chapman’s voice is no different to how it was when she first sung Fast Car nearly 40 years ago

    Here is the full clip

    https://x.com/EZRideryoyall/status/1754317628661768555?s=20

    EDIT: My sincerest apologies, this link should have included a trigger warning as the video clearly shows Taylor Swift singing along to every word...
    The discourse around Fast Car becoming a hit again last year was seriously bizarre. People were acting as if she was some unknown "black queer" artist who had been exploited by some white guy making a cover a hit, rather than the reality that she was a major star at the time and he brought her to the attention of a new generation.
    It's such a pointless cover though, brings nothing new to the song, just a worse version of the original. I'm sure Chapman doesn't mind the royalties, mind.
    Really? I think it’s quite a nice version, and certainly different enough to warrant doing. The Jonas Blue version I mean
    Is there more than one modern cover? The one I have heard is by some nondescript US male country singer, I don't know what he's called. It just sounded bland and pointless. Maybe there is another cover out there. The original song is so incredibly good it just seems a shame to do a cover unless you're going to bring something new and interesting to it.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,283
    TOPPING said:

    What is the whole fuss about Fast Car. Has Chapman been the victim of something. Why the universal adulation following the performance.

    I put Fast Car in the same category as Nothing Compares 2 U. Iconic songs of their age and always worth listening to again but I wouldn't want a new cover of either by any current artist.

    According to the Washington Post, Tracy Chapman would have no chance of having a hit with it herself because she's a "queer Black woman", so the fact that it's been covered is evidence of cis-het white male supremacy, or something...

    https://twitter.com/EmilyYahr/status/1679519177789386752

    As Luke Combs's hit cover of Tracy Chapman's "Fast Car" dominates the country charts, it’s bringing up some complicated emotions in fans & singers who know that Chapman, as a queer Black woman, would have an almost zero chance at that achievement herself.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,070
    isam said:



    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Labour's core vote?
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,220
    Scott_xP said:

    My hot take: Horner's off to Ferrari

    That would be entertaining

    More interesting would be Adrian Newey
    I think Ferrari have an excellent design team. Where I think they've fallen down is on more team management stuff; and that's where Horner excels.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,217

    TOPPING said:

    What is the whole fuss about Fast Car. Has Chapman been the victim of something. Why the universal adulation following the performance.

    I put Fast Car in the same category as Nothing Compares 2 U. Iconic songs of their age and always worth listening to again but I wouldn't want a new cover of either by any current artist.

    According to the Washington Post, Tracy Chapman would have no chance of having a hit with it herself because she's a "queer Black woman", so the fact that it's been covered is evidence of cis-het white male supremacy, or something...

    https://twitter.com/EmilyYahr/status/1679519177789386752

    As Luke Combs's hit cover of Tracy Chapman's "Fast Car" dominates the country charts, it’s bringing up some complicated emotions in fans & singers who know that Chapman, as a queer Black woman, would have an almost zero chance at that achievement herself.
    Within the world of US country music that is undoubtedly true. Black musicians have always struggled within the genre, it is well documented.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,139
    edited February 5
    Taz said:

    viewcode said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @BBCNews

    Ian Lavender: Dad's Army star dies aged 77 https://bbc.in/49hhDTD

    Also (briefly) a character I quite liked in Yes Minister
    Michael Jayston to, is also like Bill Withers, no longer with us
    One of my favourite actors, especially in Harold Pinter plays like The Homecoming.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRSA3wRYlOQ
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,277

    TOPPING said:

    What is the whole fuss about Fast Car. Has Chapman been the victim of something. Why the universal adulation following the performance.

    I put Fast Car in the same category as Nothing Compares 2 U. Iconic songs of their age and always worth listening to again but I wouldn't want a new cover of either by any current artist.

    According to the Washington Post, Tracy Chapman would have no chance of having a hit with it herself because she's a "queer Black woman", so the fact that it's been covered is evidence of cis-het white male supremacy, or something...

    https://twitter.com/EmilyYahr/status/1679519177789386752

    As Luke Combs's hit cover of Tracy Chapman's "Fast Car" dominates the country charts, it’s bringing up some complicated emotions in fans & singers who know that Chapman, as a queer Black woman, would have an almost zero chance at that achievement herself.
    @talkofthecharts
    Tracy Chapman’s “Fast Car” has reached #1 on US iTunes after a live performance with Luke Combs at the #GRAMMYs, nearly 36 years since release.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,933

    Scott_xP said:

    isam said:

    Tracy Chapman’s voice is no different to how it was when she first sung Fast Car nearly 40 years ago

    Here is the full clip

    https://x.com/EZRideryoyall/status/1754317628661768555?s=20

    EDIT: My sincerest apologies, this link should have included a trigger warning as the video clearly shows Taylor Swift singing along to every word...
    The discourse around Fast Car becoming a hit again last year was seriously bizarre. People were acting as if she was some unknown "black queer" artist who had been exploited by some white guy making a cover a hit, rather than the reality that she was a major star at the time and he brought her to the attention of a new generation.
    It's such a pointless cover though, brings nothing new to the song, just a worse version of the original. I'm sure Chapman doesn't mind the royalties, mind.
    It was of course the second such cover in the last few years, the dance version round (I think) 2019 being a bit of a banger.

    I like covers, unless they're simply Westlife-style karaoke efforts. At best they cast a whole new light on an old song, at worst they're an interesting variation on the original theme.

    Best cover ever being in my view Nothing Compares 2U but there are plenty of others to choose from.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,533

    TOPPING said:

    What is the whole fuss about Fast Car. Has Chapman been the victim of something. Why the universal adulation following the performance.

    I put Fast Car in the same category as Nothing Compares 2 U. Iconic songs of their age and always worth listening to again but I wouldn't want a new cover of either by any current artist.

    According to the Washington Post, Tracy Chapman would have no chance of having a hit with it herself because she's a "queer Black woman", so the fact that it's been covered is evidence of cis-het white male supremacy, or something...

    https://twitter.com/EmilyYahr/status/1679519177789386752

    As Luke Combs's hit cover of Tracy Chapman's "Fast Car" dominates the country charts, it’s bringing up some complicated emotions in fans & singers who know that Chapman, as a queer Black woman, would have an almost zero chance at that achievement herself.
    Transparent nonsense. Unless she means the country charts and I would have no idea about that. My knowledge of country music extends as far as the TV show Nashville (perfectly enjoyable if no Black Mirror).
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,933
    Scott_xP said:

    TOPPING said:

    What is the whole fuss about Fast Car. Has Chapman been the victim of something. Why the universal adulation following the performance.

    I put Fast Car in the same category as Nothing Compares 2 U. Iconic songs of their age and always worth listening to again but I wouldn't want a new cover of either by any current artist.

    According to the Washington Post, Tracy Chapman would have no chance of having a hit with it herself because she's a "queer Black woman", so the fact that it's been covered is evidence of cis-het white male supremacy, or something...

    https://twitter.com/EmilyYahr/status/1679519177789386752

    As Luke Combs's hit cover of Tracy Chapman's "Fast Car" dominates the country charts, it’s bringing up some complicated emotions in fans & singers who know that Chapman, as a queer Black woman, would have an almost zero chance at that achievement herself.
    @talkofthecharts
    Tracy Chapman’s “Fast Car” has reached #1 on US iTunes after a live performance with Luke Combs at the #GRAMMYs, nearly 36 years since release.
    Ridiculous coverage too, I remember it being a smash hit when it was first released. My father got her album and we played it on loop all the way to a Snowdon climbing trip and back.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,048
    Scott_xP said:

    @BBCNews

    Ian Lavender: Dad's Army star dies aged 77 https://bbc.in/49hhDTD

    Ah thats a shame. 77 is no great age these days.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 25,094

    Scott_xP said:

    My hot take: Horner's off to Ferrari

    That would be entertaining

    More interesting would be Adrian Newey
    I think Ferrari have an excellent design team. Where I think they've fallen down is on more team management stuff; and that's where Horner excels.
    Ferrari’s biggest problem for the last couple of years has been their keystone cops racing decisions where a decent result is destroyed by an insane decision to pit or put on the wrong tyres.

    The car really has been the problem
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,933
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    What is the whole fuss about Fast Car. Has Chapman been the victim of something. Why the universal adulation following the performance.

    I put Fast Car in the same category as Nothing Compares 2 U. Iconic songs of their age and always worth listening to again but I wouldn't want a new cover of either by any current artist.

    According to the Washington Post, Tracy Chapman would have no chance of having a hit with it herself because she's a "queer Black woman", so the fact that it's been covered is evidence of cis-het white male supremacy, or something...

    https://twitter.com/EmilyYahr/status/1679519177789386752

    As Luke Combs's hit cover of Tracy Chapman's "Fast Car" dominates the country charts, it’s bringing up some complicated emotions in fans & singers who know that Chapman, as a queer Black woman, would have an almost zero chance at that achievement herself.
    Transparent nonsense. Unless she means the country charts and I would have no idea about that. My knowledge of country music extends as far as the TV show Nashville (perfectly enjoyable if no Black Mirror).
    Seems unlikely the Sex Pistols or Blur would ever make it to the top of the country charts, or Swedish House Mafia reach #1 in the metal charts either.

    Journalists positing pseudo-political nonsense where it's not wanted just gives succour to right wing anti-woke types.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,520
    TimS said:

    Scott_xP said:

    TOPPING said:

    What is the whole fuss about Fast Car. Has Chapman been the victim of something. Why the universal adulation following the performance.

    I put Fast Car in the same category as Nothing Compares 2 U. Iconic songs of their age and always worth listening to again but I wouldn't want a new cover of either by any current artist.

    According to the Washington Post, Tracy Chapman would have no chance of having a hit with it herself because she's a "queer Black woman", so the fact that it's been covered is evidence of cis-het white male supremacy, or something...

    https://twitter.com/EmilyYahr/status/1679519177789386752

    As Luke Combs's hit cover of Tracy Chapman's "Fast Car" dominates the country charts, it’s bringing up some complicated emotions in fans & singers who know that Chapman, as a queer Black woman, would have an almost zero chance at that achievement herself.
    @talkofthecharts
    Tracy Chapman’s “Fast Car” has reached #1 on US iTunes after a live performance with Luke Combs at the #GRAMMYs, nearly 36 years since release.
    Ridiculous coverage too, I remember it being a smash hit when it was first released. My father got her album and we played it on loop all the way to a Snowdon climbing trip and back.
    "Sorry" was the standout song on that album, although Fast Car was good too. I have a brilliant version of Sorry with Pavarotti on my playlist.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,059

    isam said:

    Scott_xP said:

    isam said:

    Tracy Chapman’s voice is no different to how it was when she first sung Fast Car nearly 40 years ago

    Here is the full clip

    https://x.com/EZRideryoyall/status/1754317628661768555?s=20

    EDIT: My sincerest apologies, this link should have included a trigger warning as the video clearly shows Taylor Swift singing along to every word...
    The discourse around Fast Car becoming a hit again last year was seriously bizarre. People were acting as if she was some unknown "black queer" artist who had been exploited by some white guy making a cover a hit, rather than the reality that she was a major star at the time and he brought her to the attention of a new generation.
    It's such a pointless cover though, brings nothing new to the song, just a worse version of the original. I'm sure Chapman doesn't mind the royalties, mind.
    Really? I think it’s quite a nice version, and certainly different enough to warrant doing. The Jonas Blue version I mean
    Is there more than one modern cover? The one I have heard is by some nondescript US male country singer, I don't know what he's called. It just sounded bland and pointless. Maybe there is another cover out there. The original song is so incredibly good it just seems a shame to do a cover unless you're going to bring something new and interesting to it.
    Sorry, yes, I did edit to add to my post. I was talking about Jonas Blue’s cover, which was about five years ago. The new cover is a bit of a poor man’s Tracy Chapman original I agree

    https://youtu.be/5yXQJBU8A28?si=5RVFIuQaprt0Fq8N
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,533
    TimS said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    What is the whole fuss about Fast Car. Has Chapman been the victim of something. Why the universal adulation following the performance.

    I put Fast Car in the same category as Nothing Compares 2 U. Iconic songs of their age and always worth listening to again but I wouldn't want a new cover of either by any current artist.

    According to the Washington Post, Tracy Chapman would have no chance of having a hit with it herself because she's a "queer Black woman", so the fact that it's been covered is evidence of cis-het white male supremacy, or something...

    https://twitter.com/EmilyYahr/status/1679519177789386752

    As Luke Combs's hit cover of Tracy Chapman's "Fast Car" dominates the country charts, it’s bringing up some complicated emotions in fans & singers who know that Chapman, as a queer Black woman, would have an almost zero chance at that achievement herself.
    Transparent nonsense. Unless she means the country charts and I would have no idea about that. My knowledge of country music extends as far as the TV show Nashville (perfectly enjoyable if no Black Mirror).
    Seems unlikely the Sex Pistols or Blur would ever make it to the top of the country charts, or Swedish House Mafia reach #1 in the metal charts either.

    Journalists positing pseudo-political nonsense where it's not wanted just gives succour to right wing anti-woke types.
    But that's not the point she might have been making. Perhaps there is an issue with black gay artists in the world of country music who knows.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,473

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    algarkirk said:

    A classic of the genre: People Who Know Everything Don't Know Anything Really Because Of Reasons. £45 Trillion Gazillion Will Solve It And Answer The Mystery Of The Universe.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68172162

    £12 Bn. That's about Birmingham to Kenilworth in HS2 costs I think ?

    Edit: Probably optimistic, the Birmingham Curzon St to Interchange costs alone will probably exceed 12 Bn.
    For a multinational project, it's not that expensive...
    I have no problem with doing it. What is a bit of a cliche is the way that the next step is going to unlock the secret of the universe in some final sort of way that us plebs will comprehend. At what point do we acknowledge that empirical enquiry is an infinite Russian doll?
    That's cause for a Douglas Adams quote I think:

    “There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.

    There is another theory which states that this has already happened.”


    The remarkable thing is that any of the universe is actually describable at all. I don't see why it should be a Russian Doll.
    The Russian Doll is empirical enquiry, not the universe. It is not possible to imagine a set of explanations of the universe as a whole in empirical terms which is not open to the questions: how, by what means, by what cause, which experiment further elucidates this, of what is this composed, by what cause is this or that regularity thus and not otherwise etc. Try it.

    Empirical enquiry is by its nature a Russian Doll. Whether the universe in itself is also a Russian Doll, is not open to us to find out. The fruits of empirical enquiry and what the universe/reality is in itself are different subjects. (As Kant carefully and often points out).

    Yes, that we are evolved to be able to describe the universe at all is startling, or that it is describable.
    Ah, you mean like the 6 year old asking "Why?" to every explanation proffered.

    In that sense there can be no ultimate answer, no. Except '42', or 'God did it', obviously.

    I was thinking at the level of - well, we've just found these smaller "particles", but they seem to be made up of even smaller ones. Which could also be endless, but might be expected to have a pattern.
    This reminds me of the nature of political debate. If 2 people are arguing about something, both in good faith rather than playing silly buggers, both employing solid factual data, if they go on long enough they'll reach a point where the disagreement resolves to a difference in values, ie "I value X more than Y whereas you value Y more than X". You can stop at that point, both of you feeling exhausted but satisfied, and better for the experience.

    That's how it would be in a world of perfect communication. It's how we should try and do it on here imo.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,048
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    What is the whole fuss about Fast Car. Has Chapman been the victim of something. Why the universal adulation following the performance.

    I put Fast Car in the same category as Nothing Compares 2 U. Iconic songs of their age and always worth listening to again but I wouldn't want a new cover of either by any current artist.

    According to the Washington Post, Tracy Chapman would have no chance of having a hit with it herself because she's a "queer Black woman", so the fact that it's been covered is evidence of cis-het white male supremacy, or something...

    https://twitter.com/EmilyYahr/status/1679519177789386752

    As Luke Combs's hit cover of Tracy Chapman's "Fast Car" dominates the country charts, it’s bringing up some complicated emotions in fans & singers who know that Chapman, as a queer Black woman, would have an almost zero chance at that achievement herself.
    Transparent nonsense. Unless she means the country charts and I would have no idea about that. My knowledge of country music extends as far as the TV show Nashville (perfectly enjoyable if no Black Mirror).
    I think she is referring to the Country charts. I went for a quick google and found that as of 2023 only 5 black female country artists have ever even got into any charts in the US.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,059
    DavidL said:

    TimS said:

    Scott_xP said:

    TOPPING said:

    What is the whole fuss about Fast Car. Has Chapman been the victim of something. Why the universal adulation following the performance.

    I put Fast Car in the same category as Nothing Compares 2 U. Iconic songs of their age and always worth listening to again but I wouldn't want a new cover of either by any current artist.

    According to the Washington Post, Tracy Chapman would have no chance of having a hit with it herself because she's a "queer Black woman", so the fact that it's been covered is evidence of cis-het white male supremacy, or something...

    https://twitter.com/EmilyYahr/status/1679519177789386752

    As Luke Combs's hit cover of Tracy Chapman's "Fast Car" dominates the country charts, it’s bringing up some complicated emotions in fans & singers who know that Chapman, as a queer Black woman, would have an almost zero chance at that achievement herself.
    @talkofthecharts
    Tracy Chapman’s “Fast Car” has reached #1 on US iTunes after a live performance with Luke Combs at the #GRAMMYs, nearly 36 years since release.
    Ridiculous coverage too, I remember it being a smash hit when it was first released. My father got her album and we played it on loop all the way to a Snowdon climbing trip and back.
    "Sorry" was the standout song on that album, although Fast Car was good too. I have a brilliant version of Sorry with Pavarotti on my playlist.
    That is a great version

    I never realised until about 2016 that I’d only really listened to side one of that album, having only had the tape! ‘For My Lover’ & ‘If Not Now’ are lovely songs too.
  • Options
    SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,548

    TOPPING said:

    What is the whole fuss about Fast Car. Has Chapman been the victim of something. Why the universal adulation following the performance.

    I put Fast Car in the same category as Nothing Compares 2 U. Iconic songs of their age and always worth listening to again but I wouldn't want a new cover of either by any current artist.

    According to the Washington Post, Tracy Chapman would have no chance of having a hit with it herself because she's a "queer Black woman", so the fact that it's been covered is evidence of cis-het white male supremacy, or something...

    https://twitter.com/EmilyYahr/status/1679519177789386752

    As Luke Combs's hit cover of Tracy Chapman's "Fast Car" dominates the country charts, it’s bringing up some complicated emotions in fans & singers who know that Chapman, as a queer Black woman, would have an almost zero chance at that achievement herself.
    Well. I had no idea (or interest) that Chapman was 'queer' (although Wikipedia tells me she's never commented on her sexuality herself). I had noticed she was black.
  • Options
    tlg86 said:

    isam said:

    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Funny isn’t it.

    It is illegal thanks to the Race Relations Act which an earlier Tory Enoch vehemently opposed.
    Lawmaking nowadays is more about posturing than it is actually addressing defects in the law.
    This area is a bit more nuanced.

    I am very fortunate that as an Asian heritage chap I’m not discriminated against in this country but on the flip side I am glad I’m not a black chap in this country.

    I’ve driven nice/flash vehicles all my adult life and I’ve been stopped by the police like three times(twice for suspected drink driving) and I know that figure would be much higher if I was black.
    That does rely upon the police having a good look at the driver. I guess rear-view mirrors can give it away. Before having kids, my sister had an M3. She got grief from the police a few times and they were always a bit shocked to find a woman at the wheel.
    Tinted windows always sounds like a good idea.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,059
    Political Betting

    Rishi Sunak has accepted a £1,000 bet from Piers Morgan that deportation flights to Rwanda will be up and running before the General Election.

    The full interview is due to be shown on the Piers Morgan Uncensored YouTube channel at 2pm and TalkTV at 8pm on Monday (5 February)
    .

    https://x.com/independent/status/1754497606611316795?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,520
    isam said:

    DavidL said:

    TimS said:

    Scott_xP said:

    TOPPING said:

    What is the whole fuss about Fast Car. Has Chapman been the victim of something. Why the universal adulation following the performance.

    I put Fast Car in the same category as Nothing Compares 2 U. Iconic songs of their age and always worth listening to again but I wouldn't want a new cover of either by any current artist.

    According to the Washington Post, Tracy Chapman would have no chance of having a hit with it herself because she's a "queer Black woman", so the fact that it's been covered is evidence of cis-het white male supremacy, or something...

    https://twitter.com/EmilyYahr/status/1679519177789386752

    As Luke Combs's hit cover of Tracy Chapman's "Fast Car" dominates the country charts, it’s bringing up some complicated emotions in fans & singers who know that Chapman, as a queer Black woman, would have an almost zero chance at that achievement herself.
    @talkofthecharts
    Tracy Chapman’s “Fast Car” has reached #1 on US iTunes after a live performance with Luke Combs at the #GRAMMYs, nearly 36 years since release.
    Ridiculous coverage too, I remember it being a smash hit when it was first released. My father got her album and we played it on loop all the way to a Snowdon climbing trip and back.
    "Sorry" was the standout song on that album, although Fast Car was good too. I have a brilliant version of Sorry with Pavarotti on my playlist.
    That is a great version

    I never realised until about 2016 that I’d only really listened to side one of that album, having only had the tape! ‘For My Lover’ & ‘If Not Now’ are lovely songs too.
    I am so old that I have that album on vinyl. "If not now" is a beautiful song.

    What is truly remarkable is her articulation. In Fast Car she speaks so fast that it feels like I was drunk but you hear every word. Talkin about a Revolution is another good example.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,116
    TimS said:

    Scott_xP said:

    isam said:

    Tracy Chapman’s voice is no different to how it was when she first sung Fast Car nearly 40 years ago

    Here is the full clip

    https://x.com/EZRideryoyall/status/1754317628661768555?s=20

    EDIT: My sincerest apologies, this link should have included a trigger warning as the video clearly shows Taylor Swift singing along to every word...
    The discourse around Fast Car becoming a hit again last year was seriously bizarre. People were acting as if she was some unknown "black queer" artist who had been exploited by some white guy making a cover a hit, rather than the reality that she was a major star at the time and he brought her to the attention of a new generation.
    It's such a pointless cover though, brings nothing new to the song, just a worse version of the original. I'm sure Chapman doesn't mind the royalties, mind.
    It was of course the second such cover in the last few years, the dance version round (I think) 2019 being a bit of a banger.

    I like covers, unless they're simply Westlife-style karaoke efforts. At best they cast a whole new light on an old song, at worst they're an interesting variation on the original theme.

    Best cover ever being in my view Nothing Compares 2U but there are plenty of others to choose from.
    There are some great Dylan covers.
    His vocals are, after all, something of an acquired taste.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,217
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    What is the whole fuss about Fast Car. Has Chapman been the victim of something. Why the universal adulation following the performance.

    I put Fast Car in the same category as Nothing Compares 2 U. Iconic songs of their age and always worth listening to again but I wouldn't want a new cover of either by any current artist.

    According to the Washington Post, Tracy Chapman would have no chance of having a hit with it herself because she's a "queer Black woman", so the fact that it's been covered is evidence of cis-het white male supremacy, or something...

    https://twitter.com/EmilyYahr/status/1679519177789386752

    As Luke Combs's hit cover of Tracy Chapman's "Fast Car" dominates the country charts, it’s bringing up some complicated emotions in fans & singers who know that Chapman, as a queer Black woman, would have an almost zero chance at that achievement herself.
    Transparent nonsense. Unless she means the country charts and I would have no idea about that. My knowledge of country music extends as far as the TV show Nashville (perfectly enjoyable if no Black Mirror).
    Read the quotation from the piece, it is explicitly referring to the Country charts.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,028

    tlg86 said:

    isam said:

    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Funny isn’t it.

    It is illegal thanks to the Race Relations Act which an earlier Tory Enoch vehemently opposed.
    Lawmaking nowadays is more about posturing than it is actually addressing defects in the law.
    This area is a bit more nuanced.

    I am very fortunate that as an Asian heritage chap I’m not discriminated against in this country but on the flip side I am glad I’m not a black chap in this country.

    I’ve driven nice/flash vehicles all my adult life and I’ve been stopped by the police like three times(twice for suspected drink driving) and I know that figure would be much higher if I was black.
    That does rely upon the police having a good look at the driver. I guess rear-view mirrors can give it away. Before having kids, my sister had an M3. She got grief from the police a few times and they were always a bit shocked to find a woman at the wheel.
    Tinted windows always sounds like a good idea.
    Never understood the appeal, always assumed you'd be more likely to be stopped with any significant tints personally.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,982

    TOPPING said:

    What is the whole fuss about Fast Car. Has Chapman been the victim of something. Why the universal adulation following the performance.

    I put Fast Car in the same category as Nothing Compares 2 U. Iconic songs of their age and always worth listening to again but I wouldn't want a new cover of either by any current artist.

    According to the Washington Post, Tracy Chapman would have no chance of having a hit with it herself because she's a "queer Black woman", so the fact that it's been covered is evidence of cis-het white male supremacy, or something...

    https://twitter.com/EmilyYahr/status/1679519177789386752

    As Luke Combs's hit cover of Tracy Chapman's "Fast Car" dominates the country charts, it’s bringing up some complicated emotions in fans & singers who know that Chapman, as a queer Black woman, would have an almost zero chance at that achievement herself.
    You're missing a word. Would have no chance of having a country hit.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,533

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    What is the whole fuss about Fast Car. Has Chapman been the victim of something. Why the universal adulation following the performance.

    I put Fast Car in the same category as Nothing Compares 2 U. Iconic songs of their age and always worth listening to again but I wouldn't want a new cover of either by any current artist.

    According to the Washington Post, Tracy Chapman would have no chance of having a hit with it herself because she's a "queer Black woman", so the fact that it's been covered is evidence of cis-het white male supremacy, or something...

    https://twitter.com/EmilyYahr/status/1679519177789386752

    As Luke Combs's hit cover of Tracy Chapman's "Fast Car" dominates the country charts, it’s bringing up some complicated emotions in fans & singers who know that Chapman, as a queer Black woman, would have an almost zero chance at that achievement herself.
    Transparent nonsense. Unless she means the country charts and I would have no idea about that. My knowledge of country music extends as far as the TV show Nashville (perfectly enjoyable if no Black Mirror).
    Read the quotation from the piece, it is explicitly referring to the Country charts.
    Ah yes. I was thrown out by the "fans and singers" which didn't reference the country charts.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,116
    Pulpstar said:

    tlg86 said:

    isam said:

    Labour’s proposed new race law will set people against each other and see millions wasted on pointless red tape.

    It is obviously already illegal to pay someone less because of their race.

    The new law would be a bonanza for dodgy, activist lawyers. (1/3)


    https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/1754490213731041296?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Funny isn’t it.

    It is illegal thanks to the Race Relations Act which an earlier Tory Enoch vehemently opposed.
    Lawmaking nowadays is more about posturing than it is actually addressing defects in the law.
    This area is a bit more nuanced.

    I am very fortunate that as an Asian heritage chap I’m not discriminated against in this country but on the flip side I am glad I’m not a black chap in this country.

    I’ve driven nice/flash vehicles all my adult life and I’ve been stopped by the police like three times(twice for suspected drink driving) and I know that figure would be much higher if I was black.
    That does rely upon the police having a good look at the driver. I guess rear-view mirrors can give it away. Before having kids, my sister had an M3. She got grief from the police a few times and they were always a bit shocked to find a woman at the wheel.
    Tinted windows always sounds like a good idea.
    Never understood the appeal, always assumed you'd be more likely to be stopped with any significant tints personally.
    There is a specific offence of loitering within tint.
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,150
    isam said:

    Political Betting

    Rishi Sunak has accepted a £1,000 bet from Piers Morgan that deportation flights to Rwanda will be up and running before the General Election.

    The full interview is due to be shown on the Piers Morgan Uncensored YouTube channel at 2pm and TalkTV at 8pm on Monday (5 February)
    .

    https://x.com/independent/status/1754497606611316795?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Sunak urgently needs some decent advice on strategy.
This discussion has been closed.