Three are a joke. They have a pole of wonder at the bottom of Market Street/The Arndale and you get over 1,000 Mbps, walk further up Market Street to Piccadilly Station and you are lucky to get 2 Mbps.
I'm not sure who came up with this "pole of wonder" nonsense but it's a silly term.
They may have several hundred poles around the country that have these gigabit speeds but they are so oddly spread out and in many cases supplementing coverage from hilltop or rooftop sites that as you say, are providing nothing like those speeds. So you end up on a two tier network.
Vodafone, O2 and EE have their problems but certainly have logical grid designs. Three's is just nonsensical to me. I am sure people that live next to one think their network is the greatest thing in the universe but travelling around, I am failing to see any evidence much has really changed.
No wonder they want to merge with Vodafone.
Just sign up for Starlink and be done.
Starlink is great for home Internet access, so long as you live in a rural area. But that's it.
Actually, Starlink directly connected to your phone is on the way. First satellites are up there, and several US networks have signed up “coverage gap filling” deals
Three are a joke. They have a pole of wonder at the bottom of Market Street/The Arndale and you get over 1,000 Mbps, walk further up Market Street to Piccadilly Station and you are lucky to get 2 Mbps.
I'm not sure who came up with this "pole of wonder" nonsense but it's a silly term.
They may have several hundred poles around the country that have these gigabit speeds but they are so oddly spread out and in many cases supplementing coverage from hilltop or rooftop sites that as you say, are providing nothing like those speeds. So you end up on a two tier network.
Vodafone, O2 and EE have their problems but certainly have logical grid designs. Three's is just nonsensical to me. I am sure people that live next to one think their network is the greatest thing in the universe but travelling around, I am failing to see any evidence much has really changed.
No wonder they want to merge with Vodafone.
Just sign up for Starlink and be done.
Starlink is great for home Internet access, so long as you live in a rural area. But that's it.
The estate agents who showed us round a home recently had it for their office (because the fibre cabinet in town was full) and they thought it was magic. They wouldn't use anything else now.
Hm. Would I follow any estate agent's recommendation? I think not.
Ok, since it's Easter I feel I should ruminate. For me Atheism is the refusal to believe in something for which there is not a shred of evidence. It's deeply rational. Whereas Religion is a leap of pure faith taken as a way of fending off the (literally) unthinkable horror of an eternal nothing, thus easing a person's passage through this one and only life that we have. This is irrational and rational at the same time. It's irrational, because faith can't be otherwise, and it's rational because it's a cost free solution to a problem that for many people cannot be solved in any other way.
There is no 'rational' evidence, in the sense in which you mean 'rational', for the existence of minds other than one's own. It is an empirical assumption, not an empirical conclusion.
But there are overwhelmingly strong grounds for thinking that other minds exist, for example in the heads of most if not all PB contributors.
Similarly there is no evidence for either the divine creation or the non-divine self-creation of the universe, but there are compelling grounds for both positions.
Theism/religion and atheism/non-religion are on a precisely equal footing.
Hmm, not sure about that. I'd say the existence of 'other similar minds' has such compelling circumstantial evidence in favour that it's pretty much a done deal.
As for 'divine' vs 'non-divine' creation of the universe itself, we can't conceive of either. It's beyond our ken and always will be because it isn't a matter of not knowing enough, the question itself is beyond our frame of reference. So, yes, an equal footing in that regard.
But this doesn't mean Religion and Atheism are equally rational. They are wholly different. One is refusal to believe without evidence. The other is irrational faith rationally embraced to solve a mental problem.
What are your thoughts on the apparent fine tuning of the universe? https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fine-tuning/ If we aren't part of a multiverse, then there's strong case it's the result of a designer.
Fascinating ideas there. The trouble is, I literally can't think about how the universe was created because it takes you to questions like "What was there before?" and "Without time what does *before* mean anyway?" and "What is Nothing?" etc etc - questions which are inherently unanswerable, regardless of how science progresses. It's not only above our heads, it's above what's above our heads.
Three are a joke. They have a pole of wonder at the bottom of Market Street/The Arndale and you get over 1,000 Mbps, walk further up Market Street to Piccadilly Station and you are lucky to get 2 Mbps.
I'm not sure who came up with this "pole of wonder" nonsense but it's a silly term.
They may have several hundred poles around the country that have these gigabit speeds but they are so oddly spread out and in many cases supplementing coverage from hilltop or rooftop sites that as you say, are providing nothing like those speeds. So you end up on a two tier network.
Vodafone, O2 and EE have their problems but certainly have logical grid designs. Three's is just nonsensical to me. I am sure people that live next to one think their network is the greatest thing in the universe but travelling around, I am failing to see any evidence much has really changed.
No wonder they want to merge with Vodafone.
Just sign up for Starlink and be done.
Starlink is great for home Internet access, so long as you live in a rural area. But that's it.
Actually, Starlink directly connected to your phone is on the way. First satellites are up there, and several US networks have signed up “coverage gap filling” deals
Three are a joke. They have a pole of wonder at the bottom of Market Street/The Arndale and you get over 1,000 Mbps, walk further up Market Street to Piccadilly Station and you are lucky to get 2 Mbps.
I'm not sure who came up with this "pole of wonder" nonsense but it's a silly term.
They may have several hundred poles around the country that have these gigabit speeds but they are so oddly spread out and in many cases supplementing coverage from hilltop or rooftop sites that as you say, are providing nothing like those speeds. So you end up on a two tier network.
Vodafone, O2 and EE have their problems but certainly have logical grid designs. Three's is just nonsensical to me. I am sure people that live next to one think their network is the greatest thing in the universe but travelling around, I am failing to see any evidence much has really changed.
No wonder they want to merge with Vodafone.
Just sign up for Starlink and be done.
Starlink is great for home Internet access, so long as you live in a rural area. But that's it.
The estate agents who showed us round a home recently had it for their office (because the fibre cabinet in town was full) and they thought it was magic. They wouldn't use anything else now.
Hm. Would I follow any estate agent's recommendation? I think not.
Is Jeffrey Donaldson doing his bit for a united Ireland with his own GUBU scandal?
Nope.
There seems to be a curious strain of hope (especially among Remainers) that everyone in NI will wake up in the morning and suddenly want to join the South.
The polls are solidly against this happening. As is the social structure. Which, by the way, is supported by the Good Friday Agreement. Which froze the communities in place.
Ok, since it's Easter I feel I should ruminate. For me Atheism is the refusal to believe in something for which there is not a shred of evidence. It's deeply rational. Whereas Religion is a leap of pure faith taken as a way of fending off the (literally) unthinkable horror of an eternal nothing, thus easing a person's passage through this one and only life that we have. This is irrational and rational at the same time. It's irrational, because faith can't be otherwise, and it's rational because it's a cost free solution to a problem that for many people cannot be solved in any other way.
There is no 'rational' evidence, in the sense in which you mean 'rational', for the existence of minds other than one's own. It is an empirical assumption, not an empirical conclusion.
But there are overwhelmingly strong grounds for thinking that other minds exist, for example in the heads of most if not all PB contributors.
Similarly there is no evidence for either the divine creation or the non-divine self-creation of the universe, but there are compelling grounds for both positions.
Theism/religion and atheism/non-religion are on a precisely equal footing.
Hmm, not sure about that. I'd say the existence of 'other similar minds' has such compelling circumstantial evidence in favour that it's pretty much a done deal.
As for 'divine' vs 'non-divine' creation of the universe itself, we can't conceive of either. It's beyond our ken and always will be because it isn't a matter of not knowing enough, the question itself is beyond our frame of reference. So, yes, an equal footing in that regard.
But this doesn't mean Religion and Atheism are equally rational. They are wholly different. One is refusal to believe without evidence. The other is irrational faith rationally embraced to solve a mental problem.
What are your thoughts on the apparent fine tuning of the universe? https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fine-tuning/ If we aren't part of a multiverse, then there's strong case it's the result of a designer.
Fascinating ideas there. The trouble is, I literally can't think about how the universe was created because it takes you to questions like "What was there before?" and "Without time what does *before* mean anyway?" and "What is Nothing?" etc etc - questions which are inherently unanswerable, regardless of how science progresses. It's not only above our heads, it's above what's above our heads.
If you admit you don't know and cannot know the answers to all these questions, how can you KNOW there is no God?
Three are a joke. They have a pole of wonder at the bottom of Market Street/The Arndale and you get over 1,000 Mbps, walk further up Market Street to Piccadilly Station and you are lucky to get 2 Mbps.
I'm not sure who came up with this "pole of wonder" nonsense but it's a silly term.
They may have several hundred poles around the country that have these gigabit speeds but they are so oddly spread out and in many cases supplementing coverage from hilltop or rooftop sites that as you say, are providing nothing like those speeds. So you end up on a two tier network.
Vodafone, O2 and EE have their problems but certainly have logical grid designs. Three's is just nonsensical to me. I am sure people that live next to one think their network is the greatest thing in the universe but travelling around, I am failing to see any evidence much has really changed.
No wonder they want to merge with Vodafone.
Just sign up for Starlink and be done.
Starlink is great for home Internet access, so long as you live in a rural area. But that's it.
The estate agents who showed us round a home recently had it for their office (because the fibre cabinet in town was full) and they thought it was magic. They wouldn't use anything else now.
Hm. Would I follow any estate agent's recommendation? I think not.
The issue is actually numbers of subscribers per square KM. Starlink has so much bandwidth it can share between users in the same satellite footprint. Though with each generation of satellite, they are making the spots smaller and increasing the data rate.
What this means is that if you are the only person within a km or 2 on Starlink, you will get fibre(ish) like speeds. If more, close to you join, it will go down.
I’ve had historic sex a couple of times. It is quite something, I’d hate to get arrested for it
Thoughts and prayers for Mr Donaldson
Thoughts and prayers for any alleged victims.
You're right. And actually historic sex is brilliant, and probably worth being arrested for, so I shall cease my sympathies
Is historic sex when one hasn't had sex for years?
No, it's when you have a "Kundalini orgasm" and it begins somewhere in your groin then surges up through your body, particularly your spine, and kind of explodes out of your head, taking several minutes to do this
I've had two. I never believed in them - thought it was hippy woowoo nonsense - until I had my first. OMFG. The second made my head wobble like an Indian shopkeeper in a racist sitcom
Three are a joke. They have a pole of wonder at the bottom of Market Street/The Arndale and you get over 1,000 Mbps, walk further up Market Street to Piccadilly Station and you are lucky to get 2 Mbps.
I'm not sure who came up with this "pole of wonder" nonsense but it's a silly term.
They may have several hundred poles around the country that have these gigabit speeds but they are so oddly spread out and in many cases supplementing coverage from hilltop or rooftop sites that as you say, are providing nothing like those speeds. So you end up on a two tier network.
Vodafone, O2 and EE have their problems but certainly have logical grid designs. Three's is just nonsensical to me. I am sure people that live next to one think their network is the greatest thing in the universe but travelling around, I am failing to see any evidence much has really changed.
No wonder they want to merge with Vodafone.
Just sign up for Starlink and be done.
Starlink is great for home Internet access, so long as you live in a rural area. But that's it.
Actually, Starlink directly connected to your phone is on the way. First satellites are up there, and several US networks have signed up “coverage gap filling” deals
I’ve had historic sex a couple of times. It is quite something, I’d hate to get arrested for it
Thoughts and prayers for Mr Donaldson
Thoughts and prayers for any alleged victims.
You're right. And actually historic sex is brilliant, and probably worth being arrested for, so I shall cease my sympathies
Is historic sex when one hasn't had sex for years?
No, it's when you have a "Kundalini orgasm" and it begins somewhere in your groin then surges up through your body, particularly your spine, and kind of explodes out of your head, taking several minutes to do this
I've had two. I never believed in them - thought it was hippy woowoo nonsense - until I had my first. OMFG. The second made my head wobble like an Indian shopkeeper in a racist sitcom
You mean there are other types of orgasms than Kundalini? Who knew...
Three are a joke. They have a pole of wonder at the bottom of Market Street/The Arndale and you get over 1,000 Mbps, walk further up Market Street to Piccadilly Station and you are lucky to get 2 Mbps.
I'm not sure who came up with this "pole of wonder" nonsense but it's a silly term.
They may have several hundred poles around the country that have these gigabit speeds but they are so oddly spread out and in many cases supplementing coverage from hilltop or rooftop sites that as you say, are providing nothing like those speeds. So you end up on a two tier network.
Vodafone, O2 and EE have their problems but certainly have logical grid designs. Three's is just nonsensical to me. I am sure people that live next to one think their network is the greatest thing in the universe but travelling around, I am failing to see any evidence much has really changed.
No wonder they want to merge with Vodafone.
Just sign up for Starlink and be done.
Starlink is great for home Internet access, so long as you live in a rural area. But that's it.
Actually, Starlink directly connected to your phone is on the way. First satellites are up there, and several US networks have signed up “coverage gap filling” deals
I’ve had historic sex a couple of times. It is quite something, I’d hate to get arrested for it
Thoughts and prayers for Mr Donaldson
Thoughts and prayers for any alleged victims.
You're right. And actually historic sex is brilliant, and probably worth being arrested for, so I shall cease my sympathies
Is historic sex when one hasn't had sex for years?
No, it's when you have a "Kundalini orgasm" and it begins somewhere in your groin then surges up through your body, particularly your spine, and kind of explodes out of your head, taking several minutes to do this
I've had two. I never believed in them - thought it was hippy woowoo nonsense - until I had my first. OMFG. The second made my head wobble like an Indian shopkeeper in a racist sitcom
I didn't know masturbation could be so productive.
Is Jeffrey Donaldson doing his bit for a united Ireland with his own GUBU scandal?
Nope.
There seems to be a curious strain of hope (especially among Remainers) that everyone in NI will wake up in the morning and suddenly want to join the South.
The polls are solidly against this happening. As is the social structure. Which, by the way, is supported by the Good Friday Agreement. Which froze the communities in place.
Yes, yes, killjoy. But I only added that in because the alternative was simply typing:
I’ve had historic sex a couple of times. It is quite something, I’d hate to get arrested for it
Thoughts and prayers for Mr Donaldson
Thoughts and prayers for any alleged victims.
You're right. And actually historic sex is brilliant, and probably worth being arrested for, so I shall cease my sympathies
Is historic sex when one hasn't had sex for years?
No, it's when you have a "Kundalini orgasm" and it begins somewhere in your groin then surges up through your body, particularly your spine, and kind of explodes out of your head, taking several minutes to do this
I've had two. I never believed in them - thought it was hippy woowoo nonsense - until I had my first. OMFG. The second made my head wobble like an Indian shopkeeper in a racist sitcom
I didn't know masturbation could be so productive.
Actually you can get reasonably close to it via wanking. Tantric wanking. It's a thing. Have a go. Knock yourself out!
Edit to add: my first kundalini was actually a wank, albeit via another. I went to a Tantric sex session with my then wife in a basement in Covent Garden. Again, I thought it was all hippy woo rubbish, but it turns out Tantra is real
Six couples naked in a big room. All doing Tantra on each other. She gave me a handjob which took about an hour and eventually I climaxed with a sort of frenzied shaking, left me gasping: true Kundalini orgasm
The second one was via actual sex and it was even better
Ok, since it's Easter I feel I should ruminate. For me Atheism is the refusal to believe in something for which there is not a shred of evidence. It's deeply rational. Whereas Religion is a leap of pure faith taken as a way of fending off the (literally) unthinkable horror of an eternal nothing, thus easing a person's passage through this one and only life that we have. This is irrational and rational at the same time. It's irrational, because faith can't be otherwise, and it's rational because it's a cost free solution to a problem that for many people cannot be solved in any other way.
There is no 'rational' evidence, in the sense in which you mean 'rational', for the existence of minds other than one's own. It is an empirical assumption, not an empirical conclusion.
But there are overwhelmingly strong grounds for thinking that other minds exist, for example in the heads of most if not all PB contributors.
Similarly there is no evidence for either the divine creation or the non-divine self-creation of the universe, but there are compelling grounds for both positions.
Theism/religion and atheism/non-religion are on a precisely equal footing.
Hmm, not sure about that. I'd say the existence of 'other similar minds' has such compelling circumstantial evidence in favour that it's pretty much a done deal.
As for 'divine' vs 'non-divine' creation of the universe itself, we can't conceive of either. It's beyond our ken and always will be because it isn't a matter of not knowing enough, the question itself is beyond our frame of reference. So, yes, an equal footing in that regard.
But this doesn't mean Religion and Atheism are equally rational. They are wholly different. One is refusal to believe without evidence. The other is irrational faith rationally embraced to solve a mental problem.
What are your thoughts on the apparent fine tuning of the universe? https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fine-tuning/ If we aren't part of a multiverse, then there's strong case it's the result of a designer.
Fascinating ideas there. The trouble is, I literally can't think about how the universe was created because it takes you to questions like "What was there before?" and "Without time what does *before* mean anyway?" and "What is Nothing?" etc etc - questions which are inherently unanswerable, regardless of how science progresses. It's not only above our heads, it's above what's above our heads.
If you admit you don't know and cannot know the answers to all these questions, how can you KNOW there is no God?
You might as well believe. Take Pascal's Wager
That's why I said Religion can be viewed as a rational embrace of irrationality. You just have to be able to exercise the required doublethink. I can't but I'm pleased for anybody who can. The absolute best, though, is if you don't need to believe in the first place. I'm even more pleased for those people.
Is Jeffrey Donaldson doing his bit for a united Ireland with his own GUBU scandal?
Nope.
There seems to be a curious strain of hope (especially among Remainers) that everyone in NI will wake up in the morning and suddenly want to join the South.
The polls are solidly against this happening. As is the social structure. Which, by the way, is supported by the Good Friday Agreement. Which froze the communities in place.
Perceived benefits of the Union among those from both Protestant and Catholic backgrounds used to include the NHS. That dates back to the day when people thought the NHS might eventually give them the treatment they needed, when GP creeps didn't mostly hide from their patients as they've been doing for the past four years, and when there was even reasonable dental treatment available in the state insurance system.
I wonder how many people from the 6C use British passports nowadays when they visit the continent.
Three are a joke. They have a pole of wonder at the bottom of Market Street/The Arndale and you get over 1,000 Mbps, walk further up Market Street to Piccadilly Station and you are lucky to get 2 Mbps.
I'm not sure who came up with this "pole of wonder" nonsense but it's a silly term.
They may have several hundred poles around the country that have these gigabit speeds but they are so oddly spread out and in many cases supplementing coverage from hilltop or rooftop sites that as you say, are providing nothing like those speeds. So you end up on a two tier network.
Vodafone, O2 and EE have their problems but certainly have logical grid designs. Three's is just nonsensical to me. I am sure people that live next to one think their network is the greatest thing in the universe but travelling around, I am failing to see any evidence much has really changed.
No wonder they want to merge with Vodafone.
Just sign up for Starlink and be done.
Starlink is great for home Internet access, so long as you live in a rural area. But that's it.
Actually, Starlink directly connected to your phone is on the way. First satellites are up there, and several US networks have signed up “coverage gap filling” deals
I've never actually researched kundalini orgasms before, I just got told that's what I was experiencing
Here is what it is supposed to feel like
"Kundalini & Full Body Orgasm
Kundalini is a Sanskrit term from ancient India that refers to the feminine primal energy that coils at the base of the spine (when lying dormant) in all people. It then runs up the spine and through the chakra system to the back of the head/neck when awakened or aroused. You may have seen images of a serpent coiled around the base of a spine, then running up through the seven chakras. It is otherwise known as Chi, Jing, sexual energy or Pranic energy."
Ok, since it's Easter I feel I should ruminate. For me Atheism is the refusal to believe in something for which there is not a shred of evidence. It's deeply rational. Whereas Religion is a leap of pure faith taken as a way of fending off the (literally) unthinkable horror of an eternal nothing, thus easing a person's passage through this one and only life that we have. This is irrational and rational at the same time. It's irrational, because faith can't be otherwise, and it's rational because it's a cost free solution to a problem that for many people cannot be solved in any other way.
There is no 'rational' evidence, in the sense in which you mean 'rational', for the existence of minds other than one's own. It is an empirical assumption, not an empirical conclusion.
But there are overwhelmingly strong grounds for thinking that other minds exist, for example in the heads of most if not all PB contributors.
Similarly there is no evidence for either the divine creation or the non-divine self-creation of the universe, but there are compelling grounds for both positions.
Theism/religion and atheism/non-religion are on a precisely equal footing.
Hmm, not sure about that. I'd say the existence of 'other similar minds' has such compelling circumstantial evidence in favour that it's pretty much a done deal.
As for 'divine' vs 'non-divine' creation of the universe itself, we can't conceive of either. It's beyond our ken and always will be because it isn't a matter of not knowing enough, the question itself is beyond our frame of reference. So, yes, an equal footing in that regard.
But this doesn't mean Religion and Atheism are equally rational. They are wholly different. One is refusal to believe without evidence. The other is irrational faith rationally embraced to solve a mental problem.
What are your thoughts on the apparent fine tuning of the universe? https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fine-tuning/ If we aren't part of a multiverse, then there's strong case it's the result of a designer.
Fascinating ideas there. The trouble is, I literally can't think about how the universe was created because it takes you to questions like "What was there before?" and "Without time what does *before* mean anyway?" and "What is Nothing?" etc etc - questions which are inherently unanswerable, regardless of how science progresses. It's not only above our heads, it's above what's above our heads.
If you admit you don't know and cannot know the answers to all these questions, how can you KNOW there is no God?
You might as well believe. Take Pascal's Wager
That's why I said Religion can be viewed as a rational embrace of irrationality. You just have to be able to exercise the required doublethink. I can't but I'm pleased for anybody who can. The absolute best, though, is if you don't need to believe in the first place. I'm even more pleased for those people.
When you come to believe, it does not spring from neediness, it is forced upon you, it more of an irruption, a brutal revelation, and you submit because you must (the Arabic word Islam = "submission to God")
I’ve had historic sex a couple of times. It is quite something, I’d hate to get arrested for it
Thoughts and prayers for Mr Donaldson
Thoughts and prayers for any alleged victims.
You're right. And actually historic sex is brilliant, and probably worth being arrested for, so I shall cease my sympathies
Is historic sex when one hasn't had sex for years?
No, it's when you have a "Kundalini orgasm" and it begins somewhere in your groin then surges up through your body, particularly your spine, and kind of explodes out of your head, taking several minutes to do this
I've had two. I never believed in them - thought it was hippy woowoo nonsense - until I had my first. OMFG. The second made my head wobble like an Indian shopkeeper in a racist sitcom
I didn't know masturbation could be so productive.
Actually you can get reasonably close to it via wanking. Tantric wanking. It's a thing. Have a go. Knock yourself out!
Edit to add: my first kundalini was actually a wank, albeit via another. I went to a Tantric sex session with my then wife in a basement in Covent Garden. Again, I thought it was all hippy woo rubbish, but it turns out Tantra is real
Six couples naked in a big room. All doing Tantra on each other. She gave me a handjob which took about an hour and eventually I climaxed with a sort of frenzied shaking, left me gasping: true Kundalini orgasm
The second one was via actual sex and it was even better
Well, you did ask
Is this your entry for the next "Bad Sex in Fiction" award? If so, it needs a little polish.
Ok, since it's Easter I feel I should ruminate. For me Atheism is the refusal to believe in something for which there is not a shred of evidence. It's deeply rational. Whereas Religion is a leap of pure faith taken as a way of fending off the (literally) unthinkable horror of an eternal nothing, thus easing a person's passage through this one and only life that we have. This is irrational and rational at the same time. It's irrational, because faith can't be otherwise, and it's rational because it's a cost free solution to a problem that for many people cannot be solved in any other way.
There is no 'rational' evidence, in the sense in which you mean 'rational', for the existence of minds other than one's own. It is an empirical assumption, not an empirical conclusion.
But there are overwhelmingly strong grounds for thinking that other minds exist, for example in the heads of most if not all PB contributors.
Similarly there is no evidence for either the divine creation or the non-divine self-creation of the universe, but there are compelling grounds for both positions.
Theism/religion and atheism/non-religion are on a precisely equal footing.
Hmm, not sure about that. I'd say the existence of 'other similar minds' has such compelling circumstantial evidence in favour that it's pretty much a done deal.
As for 'divine' vs 'non-divine' creation of the universe itself, we can't conceive of either. It's beyond our ken and always will be because it isn't a matter of not knowing enough, the question itself is beyond our frame of reference. So, yes, an equal footing in that regard.
But this doesn't mean Religion and Atheism are equally rational. They are wholly different. One is refusal to believe without evidence. The other is irrational faith rationally embraced to solve a mental problem.
What are your thoughts on the apparent fine tuning of the universe? https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fine-tuning/ If we aren't part of a multiverse, then there's strong case it's the result of a designer.
Fascinating ideas there. The trouble is, I literally can't think about how the universe was created because it takes you to questions like "What was there before?" and "Without time what does *before* mean anyway?" and "What is Nothing?" etc etc - questions which are inherently unanswerable, regardless of how science progresses. It's not only above our heads, it's above what's above our heads.
If you admit you don't know and cannot know the answers to all these questions, how can you KNOW there is no God?
You might as well believe. Take Pascal's Wager
That's why I said Religion can be viewed as a rational embrace of irrationality. You just have to be able to exercise the required doublethink. I can't but I'm pleased for anybody who can. The absolute best, though, is if you don't need to believe in the first place. I'm even more pleased for those people.
When you come to believe, it does not spring from neediness, it is forced upon you, it more of an irruption, a brutal revelation, and you submit because you must (the Arabic word Islam = "submission to God")
Well that's the Monkees take on it. And then I saw His face, now I'm a Believer. Not a trace of Doubt in my mind.
Be great, but I'm still waiting. Maybe this evening.
Ok, since it's Easter I feel I should ruminate. For me Atheism is the refusal to believe in something for which there is not a shred of evidence. It's deeply rational. Whereas Religion is a leap of pure faith taken as a way of fending off the (literally) unthinkable horror of an eternal nothing, thus easing a person's passage through this one and only life that we have. This is irrational and rational at the same time. It's irrational, because faith can't be otherwise, and it's rational because it's a cost free solution to a problem that for many people cannot be solved in any other way.
There is no 'rational' evidence, in the sense in which you mean 'rational', for the existence of minds other than one's own. It is an empirical assumption, not an empirical conclusion.
But there are overwhelmingly strong grounds for thinking that other minds exist, for example in the heads of most if not all PB contributors.
Similarly there is no evidence for either the divine creation or the non-divine self-creation of the universe, but there are compelling grounds for both positions.
Theism/religion and atheism/non-religion are on a precisely equal footing.
Hmm, not sure about that. I'd say the existence of 'other similar minds' has such compelling circumstantial evidence in favour that it's pretty much a done deal.
As for 'divine' vs 'non-divine' creation of the universe itself, we can't conceive of either. It's beyond our ken and always will be because it isn't a matter of not knowing enough, the question itself is beyond our frame of reference. So, yes, an equal footing in that regard.
But this doesn't mean Religion and Atheism are equally rational. They are wholly different. One is refusal to believe without evidence. The other is irrational faith rationally embraced to solve a mental problem.
What are your thoughts on the apparent fine tuning of the universe? https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fine-tuning/ If we aren't part of a multiverse, then there's strong case it's the result of a designer.
Fascinating ideas there. The trouble is, I literally can't think about how the universe was created because it takes you to questions like "What was there before?" and "Without time what does *before* mean anyway?" and "What is Nothing?" etc etc - questions which are inherently unanswerable, regardless of how science progresses. It's not only above our heads, it's above what's above our heads.
If you admit you don't know and cannot know the answers to all these questions, how can you KNOW there is no God?
You might as well believe. Take Pascal's Wager
You can approach it from the angle of sociology, looking at the huge range of religions and related belief-systems conjured up by humanity across the planet and millennia, and notice that it’s inherent in human nature to make up stories to explain things we don’t understand (something I am sure you can relate to), and then wonder how likely it is that all these religions are rubbish except one, compared to their all being 100% imagination.
Or you can put aside the question of the creator and consider whether, even if that were true, it makes any sense at all to worship it.
But fundamentally, the problem of who created the creator remains, with any answer you can give for the creator just as easily applied to the universe.
It's worse than you think. The fake photo is of a B29, but the text identifies it as a B52. What kind of fake journalist makes up a story with the wrong fake bomber?
Surely a B-32? Look at the position of the wings, and (i think) a stepped nose with discrete pilots' canopy.
I’ve had historic sex a couple of times. It is quite something, I’d hate to get arrested for it
Thoughts and prayers for Mr Donaldson
Thoughts and prayers for any alleged victims.
You're right. And actually historic sex is brilliant, and probably worth being arrested for, so I shall cease my sympathies
Is historic sex when one hasn't had sex for years?
No, it's when you have a "Kundalini orgasm" and it begins somewhere in your groin then surges up through your body, particularly your spine, and kind of explodes out of your head, taking several minutes to do this
I've had two. I never believed in them - thought it was hippy woowoo nonsense - until I had my first. OMFG. The second made my head wobble like an Indian shopkeeper in a racist sitcom
I didn't know masturbation could be so productive.
Actually you can get reasonably close to it via wanking. Tantric wanking. It's a thing. Have a go. Knock yourself out!
Edit to add: my first kundalini was actually a wank, albeit via another. I went to a Tantric sex session with my then wife in a basement in Covent Garden. Again, I thought it was all hippy woo rubbish, but it turns out Tantra is real
Six couples naked in a big room. All doing Tantra on each other. She gave me a handjob which took about an hour and eventually I climaxed with a sort of frenzied shaking, left me gasping: true Kundalini orgasm
The second one was via actual sex and it was even better
Well, you did ask
Is this your entry for the next "Bad Sex in Fiction" award? If so, it needs a little polish.
Ok, since it's Easter I feel I should ruminate. For me Atheism is the refusal to believe in something for which there is not a shred of evidence. It's deeply rational. Whereas Religion is a leap of pure faith taken as a way of fending off the (literally) unthinkable horror of an eternal nothing, thus easing a person's passage through this one and only life that we have. This is irrational and rational at the same time. It's irrational, because faith can't be otherwise, and it's rational because it's a cost free solution to a problem that for many people cannot be solved in any other way.
There is no 'rational' evidence, in the sense in which you mean 'rational', for the existence of minds other than one's own. It is an empirical assumption, not an empirical conclusion.
But there are overwhelmingly strong grounds for thinking that other minds exist, for example in the heads of most if not all PB contributors.
Similarly there is no evidence for either the divine creation or the non-divine self-creation of the universe, but there are compelling grounds for both positions.
Theism/religion and atheism/non-religion are on a precisely equal footing.
Hmm, not sure about that. I'd say the existence of 'other similar minds' has such compelling circumstantial evidence in favour that it's pretty much a done deal.
As for 'divine' vs 'non-divine' creation of the universe itself, we can't conceive of either. It's beyond our ken and always will be because it isn't a matter of not knowing enough, the question itself is beyond our frame of reference. So, yes, an equal footing in that regard.
But this doesn't mean Religion and Atheism are equally rational. They are wholly different. One is refusal to believe without evidence. The other is irrational faith rationally embraced to solve a mental problem.
What are your thoughts on the apparent fine tuning of the universe? https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fine-tuning/ If we aren't part of a multiverse, then there's strong case it's the result of a designer.
Fascinating ideas there. The trouble is, I literally can't think about how the universe was created because it takes you to questions like "What was there before?" and "Without time what does *before* mean anyway?" and "What is Nothing?" etc etc - questions which are inherently unanswerable, regardless of how science progresses. It's not only above our heads, it's above what's above our heads.
If you admit you don't know and cannot know the answers to all these questions, how can you KNOW there is no God?
You might as well believe. Take Pascal's Wager
That's why I said Religion can be viewed as a rational embrace of irrationality. You just have to be able to exercise the required doublethink. I can't but I'm pleased for anybody who can. The absolute best, though, is if you don't need to believe in the first place. I'm even more pleased for those people.
When you come to believe, it does not spring from neediness, it is forced upon you, it more of an irruption, a brutal revelation, and you submit because you must (the Arabic word Islam = "submission to God")
Well that's more the Monkees take on it - And then I saw His face, now I'm a Believer.
Be great, but I'm still waiting. Maybe this evening.
TURN ON THE WIFI
I'm serious. Think of it as a wifi signal, you're not gonna access the Net = find God - unless you turn on the wifi first
To do this, you must make yourself receptive (= turning on the wifi). As I say that can be chanting, yoga, ayahuasca, fasting, meditation, going to warzones, living as a hermit, praying intensely for three hundred days, there are many routes. You're not stupid, do a bit of research, press the button
THEN if you are lucky you will pick up a signal; of course you might not, as well. But that is the essential first step
I sense you are sitting there in Hampstead with your laptop saying "Pfff, there's no signal" - listen to yourself slurring religion as "double think" and "irrationality". That's the wifi turned off. You are not receptive. TURN ON THE WIFI
Ok, since it's Easter I feel I should ruminate. For me Atheism is the refusal to believe in something for which there is not a shred of evidence. It's deeply rational. Whereas Religion is a leap of pure faith taken as a way of fending off the (literally) unthinkable horror of an eternal nothing, thus easing a person's passage through this one and only life that we have. This is irrational and rational at the same time. It's irrational, because faith can't be otherwise, and it's rational because it's a cost free solution to a problem that for many people cannot be solved in any other way.
There is no 'rational' evidence, in the sense in which you mean 'rational', for the existence of minds other than one's own. It is an empirical assumption, not an empirical conclusion.
But there are overwhelmingly strong grounds for thinking that other minds exist, for example in the heads of most if not all PB contributors.
Similarly there is no evidence for either the divine creation or the non-divine self-creation of the universe, but there are compelling grounds for both positions.
Theism/religion and atheism/non-religion are on a precisely equal footing.
Hmm, not sure about that. I'd say the existence of 'other similar minds' has such compelling circumstantial evidence in favour that it's pretty much a done deal.
As for 'divine' vs 'non-divine' creation of the universe itself, we can't conceive of either. It's beyond our ken and always will be because it isn't a matter of not knowing enough, the question itself is beyond our frame of reference. So, yes, an equal footing in that regard.
But this doesn't mean Religion and Atheism are equally rational. They are wholly different. One is refusal to believe without evidence. The other is irrational faith rationally embraced to solve a mental problem.
What are your thoughts on the apparent fine tuning of the universe? https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fine-tuning/ If we aren't part of a multiverse, then there's strong case it's the result of a designer.
Fascinating ideas there. The trouble is, I literally can't think about how the universe was created because it takes you to questions like "What was there before?" and "Without time what does *before* mean anyway?" and "What is Nothing?" etc etc - questions which are inherently unanswerable, regardless of how science progresses. It's not only above our heads, it's above what's above our heads.
If you admit you don't know and cannot know the answers to all these questions, how can you KNOW there is no God?
You might as well believe. Take Pascal's Wager
You can approach it from the angle of sociology, looking at the huge range of religions and related belief-systems conjured up by humanity across the planet and millennia, and notice that it’s inherent in human nature to make up stories to explain things we don’t understand (something I am sure you can relate to), and then wonder how likely it is that all these religions are rubbish except one, compared to their all being 100% imagination.
Or you can put aside the question of the creator and consider whether, even if that were true, it makes any sense at all to worship it.
But fundamentally, the problem of who created the creator remains, with any answer you can give for the creator just as easily applied to the universe.
Yeah, no, I think I'll just ignore the thoughts of "IanB2 off of PB" when it comes to religion. Sorry
Shocking push notification from the FT, I am going to riot.
Miley Cyrus fan are we?
And Nothing Nowhere? I thought you were an O2 fan.
Flowers and her Heart of Glass cover are wonderful tracks.
I still have an o2 sim in the phone if you look closely, I also have a Three eSIM too.
o2 has been unusable in central Manchester for years.
This is what I get in central Manchester with EE and elsewhere.
EE has been unusable indoors for years.
Less of an issue with WiFi calling.
Edit. That Speedtest was taken indoors.
As a side point, I thought I'd try Three for a week as I'd been constantly told about how good their network apparently is now.
Well these poles of wonder only seem to be existing in random places, certainly not Central London where the performance was so poor outside Victoria that I had to go back to my O2 SIM.
I have no doubt at all Three can provide these amazing speeds - but their rollout plan seems to be providing them to random fields in the middle of nowhere. Certainly not a sustainable plan.
Three are a joke. They have a pole of wonder at the bottom of Market Street/The Arndale and you get over 1,000 Mbps, walk further up Market Street to Piccadilly Station and you are lucky to get 2 Mbps.
I was wondering for a moment what sort of 'speed' was relevant to lapdancing clubs and what this new unit was.
Three are a joke. They have a pole of wonder at the bottom of Market Street/The Arndale and you get over 1,000 Mbps, walk further up Market Street to Piccadilly Station and you are lucky to get 2 Mbps.
I'm not sure who came up with this "pole of wonder" nonsense but it's a silly term.
They may have several hundred poles around the country that have these gigabit speeds but they are so oddly spread out and in many cases supplementing coverage from hilltop or rooftop sites that as you say, are providing nothing like those speeds. So you end up on a two tier network.
Vodafone, O2 and EE have their problems but certainly have logical grid designs. Three's is just nonsensical to me. I am sure people that live next to one think their network is the greatest thing in the universe but travelling around, I am failing to see any evidence much has really changed.
No wonder they want to merge with Vodafone.
Just sign up for Starlink and be done.
Starlink is great for home Internet access, so long as you live in a rural area. But that's it.
Actually, Starlink directly connected to your phone is on the way. First satellites are up there, and several US networks have signed up “coverage gap filling” deals
Three are a joke. They have a pole of wonder at the bottom of Market Street/The Arndale and you get over 1,000 Mbps, walk further up Market Street to Piccadilly Station and you are lucky to get 2 Mbps.
I'm not sure who came up with this "pole of wonder" nonsense but it's a silly term.
They may have several hundred poles around the country that have these gigabit speeds but they are so oddly spread out and in many cases supplementing coverage from hilltop or rooftop sites that as you say, are providing nothing like those speeds. So you end up on a two tier network.
Vodafone, O2 and EE have their problems but certainly have logical grid designs. Three's is just nonsensical to me. I am sure people that live next to one think their network is the greatest thing in the universe but travelling around, I am failing to see any evidence much has really changed.
No wonder they want to merge with Vodafone.
Just sign up for Starlink and be done.
Starlink is great for home Internet access, so long as you live in a rural area. But that's it.
Actually, Starlink directly connected to your phone is on the way. First satellites are up there, and several US networks have signed up “coverage gap filling” deals
I found Starlink everywhere in Colombia, do the satellites sit above Bogota? Is that how it works?
I've never seen it appear on my phone's wifi systems before, not even in Ukraine. But in Colombia: ubiquitous
What you are seeing is Starlink being used for backhaul. Your phone connects to a phone mast normally, and that phone mast is connected to the world via Starlink. Similarly, public WiFi is being provided in some places using Starlink as the connection from the WiFi base station to the rest of the world.
This means not having to run miles of fibre optic cable to remote areas, repeaters etc.
Probably the biggest area for the LEO constellations is backhaul. It’s already ubiquitous on cruise ships. The passengers just get fast WiFi
OneWeb is, in fact, only selling backhaul. They do not offer direct connections to customers.
Starlink is in LEO. This means the satellites zip overhead every few minutes. You can access it pretty much anywhere, pole to pole.
It consists of more satellites than the rest of the world has. Full stop. Visualisation here
British weather is bracing, and it's becoming quite exciting
I've enjoyed hail, snow, heavy rain, fierce winds, long grey still periods, and beautiful sunshine in the last week
The next fortnight looks quite similar
I haven't stopped and won't stop smiling
Indeed, and to be fair it has brightened here in the rugged Primrose Hill borderlands. I am staring at a brisk and fractured sky with some piercing sunshine, if you actually get the sun on your face it feels positively warm, as it should, we are past the Vernal Equinox
Three are a joke. They have a pole of wonder at the bottom of Market Street/The Arndale and you get over 1,000 Mbps, walk further up Market Street to Piccadilly Station and you are lucky to get 2 Mbps.
I'm not sure who came up with this "pole of wonder" nonsense but it's a silly term.
They may have several hundred poles around the country that have these gigabit speeds but they are so oddly spread out and in many cases supplementing coverage from hilltop or rooftop sites that as you say, are providing nothing like those speeds. So you end up on a two tier network.
Vodafone, O2 and EE have their problems but certainly have logical grid designs. Three's is just nonsensical to me. I am sure people that live next to one think their network is the greatest thing in the universe but travelling around, I am failing to see any evidence much has really changed.
No wonder they want to merge with Vodafone.
Just sign up for Starlink and be done.
Starlink is great for home Internet access, so long as you live in a rural area. But that's it.
Actually, Starlink directly connected to your phone is on the way. First satellites are up there, and several US networks have signed up “coverage gap filling” deals
Three are a joke. They have a pole of wonder at the bottom of Market Street/The Arndale and you get over 1,000 Mbps, walk further up Market Street to Piccadilly Station and you are lucky to get 2 Mbps.
I'm not sure who came up with this "pole of wonder" nonsense but it's a silly term.
They may have several hundred poles around the country that have these gigabit speeds but they are so oddly spread out and in many cases supplementing coverage from hilltop or rooftop sites that as you say, are providing nothing like those speeds. So you end up on a two tier network.
Vodafone, O2 and EE have their problems but certainly have logical grid designs. Three's is just nonsensical to me. I am sure people that live next to one think their network is the greatest thing in the universe but travelling around, I am failing to see any evidence much has really changed.
No wonder they want to merge with Vodafone.
Just sign up for Starlink and be done.
Starlink is great for home Internet access, so long as you live in a rural area. But that's it.
The estate agents who showed us round a house recently had it for their office (because the fibre cabinet in town was full) and they thought it was magic. They wouldn't use anything else now.
I've used it in an Airbnb, and onboard JSX flights.
The latter is very interesting: when you are flying over LA, you get 3-4 mb/s, and it's terribly slow, because there are a whole bunch of people trying to share relatively little bandwidth. But once you cross the Sierra Nevada mountains, then you suddenly get a few hundred megabits a second, and it stays that way until you hit the Phoenix suburbs.
Three are a joke. They have a pole of wonder at the bottom of Market Street/The Arndale and you get over 1,000 Mbps, walk further up Market Street to Piccadilly Station and you are lucky to get 2 Mbps.
I'm not sure who came up with this "pole of wonder" nonsense but it's a silly term.
They may have several hundred poles around the country that have these gigabit speeds but they are so oddly spread out and in many cases supplementing coverage from hilltop or rooftop sites that as you say, are providing nothing like those speeds. So you end up on a two tier network.
Vodafone, O2 and EE have their problems but certainly have logical grid designs. Three's is just nonsensical to me. I am sure people that live next to one think their network is the greatest thing in the universe but travelling around, I am failing to see any evidence much has really changed.
No wonder they want to merge with Vodafone.
Just sign up for Starlink and be done.
Starlink is great for home Internet access, so long as you live in a rural area. But that's it.
Actually, Starlink directly connected to your phone is on the way. First satellites are up there, and several US networks have signed up “coverage gap filling” deals
I found Starlink everywhere in Colombia, do the satellites sit above Bogota? Is that how it works?
I've never seen it appear on my phone's wifi systems before, not even in Ukraine. But in Colombia: ubiquitous
What you are seeing is Starlink being used for backhaul. Your phone connects to a phone mast normally, and that phone mast is connected to the world via Starlink. Similarly, public WiFi is being provided in some places using Starlink as the connection from the WiFi base station to the rest of the world.
This means not having to run miles of fibre optic cable to remote areas, repeaters etc.
Probably the biggest area for the LEO constellations is backhaul. It’s already ubiquitous on cruise ships. The passengers just get fast WiFi
OneWeb is, in fact, only selling backhaul. They do not offer direct connections to customers.
Starlink is in LEO. This means the satellites zip overhead every few minutes. You can access it pretty much anywhere, pole to pole.
It consists of more satellites than the rest of the world has. Full stop. Visualisation here
Wow. That told me everything I need to know! Thankyou
People who diss Musk are ridiculous. His achievements are phenomenal, on the Lex Fridman/Sam Altman podcast Friedman said he thinks Musk is a "great maker, perhaps the greatest maker ever"
Seems about right to me. He's up there with people like Brunel, or even Tesla
Ok, since it's Easter I feel I should ruminate. For me Atheism is the refusal to believe in something for which there is not a shred of evidence. It's deeply rational. Whereas Religion is a leap of pure faith taken as a way of fending off the (literally) unthinkable horror of an eternal nothing, thus easing a person's passage through this one and only life that we have. This is irrational and rational at the same time. It's irrational, because faith can't be otherwise, and it's rational because it's a cost free solution to a problem that for many people cannot be solved in any other way.
There is no 'rational' evidence, in the sense in which you mean 'rational', for the existence of minds other than one's own. It is an empirical assumption, not an empirical conclusion.
But there are overwhelmingly strong grounds for thinking that other minds exist, for example in the heads of most if not all PB contributors.
Similarly there is no evidence for either the divine creation or the non-divine self-creation of the universe, but there are compelling grounds for both positions.
Theism/religion and atheism/non-religion are on a precisely equal footing.
Hmm, not sure about that. I'd say the existence of 'other similar minds' has such compelling circumstantial evidence in favour that it's pretty much a done deal.
As for 'divine' vs 'non-divine' creation of the universe itself, we can't conceive of either. It's beyond our ken and always will be because it isn't a matter of not knowing enough, the question itself is beyond our frame of reference. So, yes, an equal footing in that regard.
But this doesn't mean Religion and Atheism are equally rational. They are wholly different. One is refusal to believe without evidence. The other is irrational faith rationally embraced to solve a mental problem.
What are your thoughts on the apparent fine tuning of the universe? https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fine-tuning/ If we aren't part of a multiverse, then there's strong case it's the result of a designer.
Fascinating ideas there. The trouble is, I literally can't think about how the universe was created because it takes you to questions like "What was there before?" and "Without time what does *before* mean anyway?" and "What is Nothing?" etc etc - questions which are inherently unanswerable, regardless of how science progresses. It's not only above our heads, it's above what's above our heads.
If you admit you don't know and cannot know the answers to all these questions, how can you KNOW there is no God?
You might as well believe. Take Pascal's Wager
That's why I said Religion can be viewed as a rational embrace of irrationality. You just have to be able to exercise the required doublethink. I can't but I'm pleased for anybody who can. The absolute best, though, is if you don't need to believe in the first place. I'm even more pleased for those people.
When you come to believe, it does not spring from neediness, it is forced upon you, it more of an irruption, a brutal revelation, and you submit because you must (the Arabic word Islam = "submission to God")
Well that's more the Monkees take on it - And then I saw His face, now I'm a Believer.
Be great, but I'm still waiting. Maybe this evening.
TURN ON THE WIFI
I'm serious. Think of it as a wifi signal, you're not gonna access the Net = find God - unless you turn on the wifi first
To do this, you must make yourself receptive (= turning on the wifi). As I say that can be chanting, yoga, ayahuasca, fasting, meditation, going to warzones, living as a hermit, praying intensely for three hundred days, there are many routes. You're not stupid, do a bit of research, press the button
THEN if you are lucky you will pick up a signal; of course you might not, as well. But that is the essential first step
I sense you are sitting there in Hampstead with your laptop saying "Pfff, there's no signal" - listen to yourself slurring religion as "double think" and "irrationality". That's the wifi turned off. You are not receptive. TURN ON THE WIFI
I think I have made my metaphorical point, now
My sense is you don't actually believe but have decided to tell yourself that you do. Which is perfectly fine and not something I should mess with. This is an area where I have no wish to probe beyond the point of comfort.
I’ve been doing a lot of thinking about this and I’ve decided that’s the answer.
(My bolding)
If free will's an illusion, you didn't do any deciding, did you? Because a decision means there was the possibility of choosing the other way. Choice means there was free will.
So a decision that there is no free will proves that there is free will.
Here's an interesting question imo: if your self from around the year 2000 or late 90s could read the style of comments on PB (and other blogsites) today, what would they think: nothing out of the ordinary, or slightly bizarre?
Three are a joke. They have a pole of wonder at the bottom of Market Street/The Arndale and you get over 1,000 Mbps, walk further up Market Street to Piccadilly Station and you are lucky to get 2 Mbps.
I'm not sure who came up with this "pole of wonder" nonsense but it's a silly term.
They may have several hundred poles around the country that have these gigabit speeds but they are so oddly spread out and in many cases supplementing coverage from hilltop or rooftop sites that as you say, are providing nothing like those speeds. So you end up on a two tier network.
Vodafone, O2 and EE have their problems but certainly have logical grid designs. Three's is just nonsensical to me. I am sure people that live next to one think their network is the greatest thing in the universe but travelling around, I am failing to see any evidence much has really changed.
No wonder they want to merge with Vodafone.
Just sign up for Starlink and be done.
Starlink is great for home Internet access, so long as you live in a rural area. But that's it.
Actually, Starlink directly connected to your phone is on the way. First satellites are up there, and several US networks have signed up “coverage gap filling” deals
I found Starlink everywhere in Colombia, do the satellites sit above Bogota? Is that how it works?
I've never seen it appear on my phone's wifi systems before, not even in Ukraine. But in Colombia: ubiquitous
What you are seeing is Starlink being used for backhaul. Your phone connects to a phone mast normally, and that phone mast is connected to the world via Starlink. Similarly, public WiFi is being provided in some places using Starlink as the connection from the WiFi base station to the rest of the world.
This means not having to run miles of fibre optic cable to remote areas, repeaters etc.
Probably the biggest area for the LEO constellations is backhaul. It’s already ubiquitous on cruise ships. The passengers just get fast WiFi
OneWeb is, in fact, only selling backhaul. They do not offer direct connections to customers.
Starlink is in LEO. This means the satellites zip overhead every few minutes. You can access it pretty much anywhere, pole to pole.
It consists of more satellites than the rest of the world has. Full stop. Visualisation here
Ok, since it's Easter I feel I should ruminate. For me Atheism is the refusal to believe in something for which there is not a shred of evidence. It's deeply rational. Whereas Religion is a leap of pure faith taken as a way of fending off the (literally) unthinkable horror of an eternal nothing, thus easing a person's passage through this one and only life that we have. This is irrational and rational at the same time. It's irrational, because faith can't be otherwise, and it's rational because it's a cost free solution to a problem that for many people cannot be solved in any other way.
There is no 'rational' evidence, in the sense in which you mean 'rational', for the existence of minds other than one's own. It is an empirical assumption, not an empirical conclusion.
But there are overwhelmingly strong grounds for thinking that other minds exist, for example in the heads of most if not all PB contributors.
Similarly there is no evidence for either the divine creation or the non-divine self-creation of the universe, but there are compelling grounds for both positions.
Theism/religion and atheism/non-religion are on a precisely equal footing.
Hmm, not sure about that. I'd say the existence of 'other similar minds' has such compelling circumstantial evidence in favour that it's pretty much a done deal.
As for 'divine' vs 'non-divine' creation of the universe itself, we can't conceive of either. It's beyond our ken and always will be because it isn't a matter of not knowing enough, the question itself is beyond our frame of reference. So, yes, an equal footing in that regard.
But this doesn't mean Religion and Atheism are equally rational. They are wholly different. One is refusal to believe without evidence. The other is irrational faith rationally embraced to solve a mental problem.
What are your thoughts on the apparent fine tuning of the universe? https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fine-tuning/ If we aren't part of a multiverse, then there's strong case it's the result of a designer.
Fascinating ideas there. The trouble is, I literally can't think about how the universe was created because it takes you to questions like "What was there before?" and "Without time what does *before* mean anyway?" and "What is Nothing?" etc etc - questions which are inherently unanswerable, regardless of how science progresses. It's not only above our heads, it's above what's above our heads.
If you admit you don't know and cannot know the answers to all these questions, how can you KNOW there is no God?
You might as well believe. Take Pascal's Wager
That's why I said Religion can be viewed as a rational embrace of irrationality. You just have to be able to exercise the required doublethink. I can't but I'm pleased for anybody who can. The absolute best, though, is if you don't need to believe in the first place. I'm even more pleased for those people.
When you come to believe, it does not spring from neediness, it is forced upon you, it more of an irruption, a brutal revelation, and you submit because you must (the Arabic word Islam = "submission to God")
Well that's more the Monkees take on it - And then I saw His face, now I'm a Believer.
Be great, but I'm still waiting. Maybe this evening.
TURN ON THE WIFI
I'm serious. Think of it as a wifi signal, you're not gonna access the Net = find God - unless you turn on the wifi first
To do this, you must make yourself receptive (= turning on the wifi). As I say that can be chanting, yoga, ayahuasca, fasting, meditation, going to warzones, living as a hermit, praying intensely for three hundred days, there are many routes. You're not stupid, do a bit of research, press the button
THEN if you are lucky you will pick up a signal; of course you might not, as well. But that is the essential first step
I sense you are sitting there in Hampstead with your laptop saying "Pfff, there's no signal" - listen to yourself slurring religion as "double think" and "irrationality". That's the wifi turned off. You are not receptive. TURN ON THE WIFI
I think I have made my metaphorical point, now
My sense is you don't actually believe but have decided to tell yourself that you do. Which is perfectly fine and not something I should mess with. This is an area where I have no wish to probe beyond the point of comfort.
Tsk. I am genuinely trying to help you, because you sound like you would actually quite like to believe. But you respond with trolling. Tedious
I’ve been doing a lot of thinking about this and I’ve decided that’s the answer.
(My bolding)
If free will's an illusion, you didn't do any deciding, did you? Because a decision means there was the possibility of choosing the other way. Choice means there was free will.
So a decision that there is no free will proves that there is free will.
Although if it's a really compelling illusion he will genuinely think he's decided.
Ok, since it's Easter I feel I should ruminate. For me Atheism is the refusal to believe in something for which there is not a shred of evidence. It's deeply rational. Whereas Religion is a leap of pure faith taken as a way of fending off the (literally) unthinkable horror of an eternal nothing, thus easing a person's passage through this one and only life that we have. This is irrational and rational at the same time. It's irrational, because faith can't be otherwise, and it's rational because it's a cost free solution to a problem that for many people cannot be solved in any other way.
There is no 'rational' evidence, in the sense in which you mean 'rational', for the existence of minds other than one's own. It is an empirical assumption, not an empirical conclusion.
But there are overwhelmingly strong grounds for thinking that other minds exist, for example in the heads of most if not all PB contributors.
Similarly there is no evidence for either the divine creation or the non-divine self-creation of the universe, but there are compelling grounds for both positions.
Theism/religion and atheism/non-religion are on a precisely equal footing.
Hmm, not sure about that. I'd say the existence of 'other similar minds' has such compelling circumstantial evidence in favour that it's pretty much a done deal.
As for 'divine' vs 'non-divine' creation of the universe itself, we can't conceive of either. It's beyond our ken and always will be because it isn't a matter of not knowing enough, the question itself is beyond our frame of reference. So, yes, an equal footing in that regard.
But this doesn't mean Religion and Atheism are equally rational. They are wholly different. One is refusal to believe without evidence. The other is irrational faith rationally embraced to solve a mental problem.
What are your thoughts on the apparent fine tuning of the universe? https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fine-tuning/ If we aren't part of a multiverse, then there's strong case it's the result of a designer.
Fascinating ideas there. The trouble is, I literally can't think about how the universe was created because it takes you to questions like "What was there before?" and "Without time what does *before* mean anyway?" and "What is Nothing?" etc etc - questions which are inherently unanswerable, regardless of how science progresses. It's not only above our heads, it's above what's above our heads.
If you admit you don't know and cannot know the answers to all these questions, how can you KNOW there is no God?
You might as well believe. Take Pascal's Wager
That's why I said Religion can be viewed as a rational embrace of irrationality. You just have to be able to exercise the required doublethink. I can't but I'm pleased for anybody who can. The absolute best, though, is if you don't need to believe in the first place. I'm even more pleased for those people.
When you come to believe, it does not spring from neediness, it is forced upon you, it more of an irruption, a brutal revelation, and you submit because you must (the Arabic word Islam = "submission to God")
Well that's more the Monkees take on it - And then I saw His face, now I'm a Believer.
Be great, but I'm still waiting. Maybe this evening.
TURN ON THE WIFI
I'm serious. Think of it as a wifi signal, you're not gonna access the Net = find God - unless you turn on the wifi first
To do this, you must make yourself receptive (= turning on the wifi). As I say that can be chanting, yoga, ayahuasca, fasting, meditation, going to warzones, living as a hermit, praying intensely for three hundred days, there are many routes. You're not stupid, do a bit of research, press the button
THEN if you are lucky you will pick up a signal; of course you might not, as well. But that is the essential first step
I sense you are sitting there in Hampstead with your laptop saying "Pfff, there's no signal" - listen to yourself slurring religion as "double think" and "irrationality". That's the wifi turned off. You are not receptive. TURN ON THE WIFI
I think I have made my metaphorical point, now
My sense is you don't actually believe but have decided to tell yourself that you do. Which is perfectly fine and not something I should mess with. This is an area where I have no wish to probe beyond the point of comfort.
Tsk. I am genuinely trying to help you, because you sound like you would actually quite like to believe. But you respond with trolling. Tedious
I've never actually researched kundalini orgasms before, I just got told that's what I was experiencing
Here is what it is supposed to feel like
"Kundalini & Full Body Orgasm
Kundalini is a Sanskrit term from ancient India that refers to the feminine primal energy that coils at the base of the spine (when lying dormant) in all people. It then runs up the spine and through the chakra system to the back of the head/neck when awakened or aroused. You may have seen images of a serpent coiled around the base of a spine, then running up through the seven chakras. It is otherwise known as Chi, Jing, sexual energy or Pranic energy."
I've never actually researched kundalini orgasms before, I just got told that's what I was experiencing
Here is what it is supposed to feel like
"Kundalini & Full Body Orgasm
Kundalini is a Sanskrit term from ancient India that refers to the feminine primal energy that coils at the base of the spine (when lying dormant) in all people. It then runs up the spine and through the chakra system to the back of the head/neck when awakened or aroused. You may have seen images of a serpent coiled around the base of a spine, then running up through the seven chakras. It is otherwise known as Chi, Jing, sexual energy or Pranic energy."
Ok, since it's Easter I feel I should ruminate. For me Atheism is the refusal to believe in something for which there is not a shred of evidence. It's deeply rational. Whereas Religion is a leap of pure faith taken as a way of fending off the (literally) unthinkable horror of an eternal nothing, thus easing a person's passage through this one and only life that we have. This is irrational and rational at the same time. It's irrational, because faith can't be otherwise, and it's rational because it's a cost free solution to a problem that for many people cannot be solved in any other way.
There is no 'rational' evidence, in the sense in which you mean 'rational', for the existence of minds other than one's own. It is an empirical assumption, not an empirical conclusion.
But there are overwhelmingly strong grounds for thinking that other minds exist, for example in the heads of most if not all PB contributors.
Similarly there is no evidence for either the divine creation or the non-divine self-creation of the universe, but there are compelling grounds for both positions.
Theism/religion and atheism/non-religion are on a precisely equal footing.
Hmm, not sure about that. I'd say the existence of 'other similar minds' has such compelling circumstantial evidence in favour that it's pretty much a done deal.
As for 'divine' vs 'non-divine' creation of the universe itself, we can't conceive of either. It's beyond our ken and always will be because it isn't a matter of not knowing enough, the question itself is beyond our frame of reference. So, yes, an equal footing in that regard.
But this doesn't mean Religion and Atheism are equally rational. They are wholly different. One is refusal to believe without evidence. The other is irrational faith rationally embraced to solve a mental problem.
What are your thoughts on the apparent fine tuning of the universe? https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fine-tuning/ If we aren't part of a multiverse, then there's strong case it's the result of a designer.
Fascinating ideas there. The trouble is, I literally can't think about how the universe was created because it takes you to questions like "What was there before?" and "Without time what does *before* mean anyway?" and "What is Nothing?" etc etc - questions which are inherently unanswerable, regardless of how science progresses. It's not only above our heads, it's above what's above our heads.
If you admit you don't know and cannot know the answers to all these questions, how can you KNOW there is no God?
You might as well believe. Take Pascal's Wager
That's why I said Religion can be viewed as a rational embrace of irrationality. You just have to be able to exercise the required doublethink. I can't but I'm pleased for anybody who can. The absolute best, though, is if you don't need to believe in the first place. I'm even more pleased for those people.
When you come to believe, it does not spring from neediness, it is forced upon you, it more of an irruption, a brutal revelation, and you submit because you must (the Arabic word Islam = "submission to God")
Well that's more the Monkees take on it - And then I saw His face, now I'm a Believer.
Be great, but I'm still waiting. Maybe this evening.
TURN ON THE WIFI
I'm serious. Think of it as a wifi signal, you're not gonna access the Net = find God - unless you turn on the wifi first
To do this, you must make yourself receptive (= turning on the wifi). As I say that can be chanting, yoga, ayahuasca, fasting, meditation, going to warzones, living as a hermit, praying intensely for three hundred days, there are many routes. You're not stupid, do a bit of research, press the button
THEN if you are lucky you will pick up a signal; of course you might not, as well. But that is the essential first step
I sense you are sitting there in Hampstead with your laptop saying "Pfff, there's no signal" - listen to yourself slurring religion as "double think" and "irrationality". That's the wifi turned off. You are not receptive. TURN ON THE WIFI
I think I have made my metaphorical point, now
My sense is you don't actually believe but have decided to tell yourself that you do. Which is perfectly fine and not something I should mess with. This is an area where I have no wish to probe beyond the point of comfort.
Tsk. I am genuinely trying to help you, because you sound like you would actually quite like to believe. But you respond with trolling. Tedious
Nope. I'm being serious, you are trolling.
I'm absolutely not. You can believe me or otherwise, why should I care? But, also, why should I lie? About this?
I do have a religious faith, nor is it some recent thing, I've discussed it occasionally for a loooooooong time. Generally I don't mention it because its very personal, and often quite dull (like other people's dreams, as someone here said). But we are discussing God on this Good Friday and I am giving you sincere advice, I believe in this wifi metaphor, to the extent it's the best way I can eff the ineffable. You will never achieve faith as long as you are so sternly resistant, veging on contemptuous, you are switched off
Turn yourself on. Is my honest advice. Then spiritual Starlink might suddenly appear on your mental phone. I can do no more than tell you that. Good luck
I've never actually researched kundalini orgasms before, I just got told that's what I was experiencing
Here is what it is supposed to feel like
"Kundalini & Full Body Orgasm
Kundalini is a Sanskrit term from ancient India that refers to the feminine primal energy that coils at the base of the spine (when lying dormant) in all people. It then runs up the spine and through the chakra system to the back of the head/neck when awakened or aroused. You may have seen images of a serpent coiled around the base of a spine, then running up through the seven chakras. It is otherwise known as Chi, Jing, sexual energy or Pranic energy."
I've never actually researched kundalini orgasms before, I just got told that's what I was experiencing
Here is what it is supposed to feel like
"Kundalini & Full Body Orgasm
Kundalini is a Sanskrit term from ancient India that refers to the feminine primal energy that coils at the base of the spine (when lying dormant) in all people. It then runs up the spine and through the chakra system to the back of the head/neck when awakened or aroused. You may have seen images of a serpent coiled around the base of a spine, then running up through the seven chakras. It is otherwise known as Chi, Jing, sexual energy or Pranic energy."
I've never actually researched kundalini orgasms before, I just got told that's what I was experiencing
Here is what it is supposed to feel like
"Kundalini & Full Body Orgasm
Kundalini is a Sanskrit term from ancient India that refers to the feminine primal energy that coils at the base of the spine (when lying dormant) in all people. It then runs up the spine and through the chakra system to the back of the head/neck when awakened or aroused. You may have seen images of a serpent coiled around the base of a spine, then running up through the seven chakras. It is otherwise known as Chi, Jing, sexual energy or Pranic energy."
I've never actually researched kundalini orgasms before, I just got told that's what I was experiencing
Here is what it is supposed to feel like
"Kundalini & Full Body Orgasm
Kundalini is a Sanskrit term from ancient India that refers to the feminine primal energy that coils at the base of the spine (when lying dormant) in all people. It then runs up the spine and through the chakra system to the back of the head/neck when awakened or aroused. You may have seen images of a serpent coiled around the base of a spine, then running up through the seven chakras. It is otherwise known as Chi, Jing, sexual energy or Pranic energy."
I never thought I'd see the day when the individuals in Britain who have enough backbone to criticise the horrors of current conditions seem mostly to come from the hereditary aristocracy - Charles Spencer being a current example. Another they are currently trying to lock up. A third is a friend who is being atrociously dragged through it.
Doubtless some see Spencer as a terrible egg who has let the side down, horsewhipping is too good for the bedwetter, etc.
Something is going on here.
This drift is probably of a kind with what you get when what used to be the social-democratic or socialist contingent in the public-sector middle class has basically disappeared, leaving e.g. elements in the church to take up the slack. I don't see e.g. the Labour Party running soup kitchens or food "banks". Practically nobody in the middle class gives a fuck about any section of the proles whatsoever, with the exception of some in the church and some of the other religious organisations, to whom respect is due. It's mostly Thatcherite "fuck you - I'm all right Jack", dressed up in extreme objectifying behaviourist truth-dentist language at the interface, from those who are employed to be anywhere near the interface.
Anyway, 👍 to Charles Spencer.
I think you're mistaken. I know at least four Labour councillors who help in food banks, and three Liberal Democrats and a Green as well. I'm sure some Tories do too. They just don't talk about it as part of politics - I suspect it feels all wrong to say "Vote for me, I help in a food bank". It comes under the general "helping out in the community" heading, and quite a lot of councillors are genuinely keen on that.
A gentle reminder that Trump also claims to have faith. Which rather devalues any public declarations - though perhaps not faith itself.
Lots of horrible people have proclaimed their faith, through history. In a range of religions. Several of which emphasise kindness and empathy.
Of all the many many arguments I have heard against the Existence of God, and there have been millions, some made by very smart people, absolutely the worst is "Trump also says he believes in God"
In response to a query FPT - I've stood down from the cross-party council Executive in Surrey and will be resigning my council seat before long. My employer is still in the area (though I'm wfh) so technically I could stay on, but it makes sense to concentrate my political work in one place.
Surely this is one good thing we can expect from Starmer and Labour. The Tories are pathetically enslaved by the landlords and builders, the parasitic rentiers and leeching freeholders
Labour is not thus encumbered. It needs to sort this out immediately. Reform the lease/freehold system and stop these insane service charges
Piquantly, by forcing the Tories to scupper their reforms of the Freehold system, the pension funds/landlords/wankers have probably ensured they will now face much more hostile and punitive legislation from Labour
GOOD
I might even vote Labour just because of this. I hope that doesn't upset @kinabalu too much
A gentle reminder that Trump also claims to have faith. Which rather devalues any public declarations - though perhaps not faith itself.
Keep wondering - how many eager buyers of Trump's Bible, are expecting to see HIS words printed in red?
Is anyone allowed to print a Bible? I believe at one time, at least in the UK, the printing of Bibles was restricted to one or two printers. Caused, I believe, difficulties in Wales because the ‘permitted’ printers weren’t keen on producing them in the Welsh language.
A gentle reminder that Trump also claims to have faith. Which rather devalues any public declarations - though perhaps not faith itself.
Keep wondering - how many eager buyers of Trump's Bible, are expecting to see HIS words printed in red?
Is anyone allowed to print a Bible? I believe at one time, at least in the UK, the printing of Bibles was restricted to one or two printers. Caused, I believe, difficulties in Wales because the ‘permitted’ printers weren’t keen on producing them in the Welsh language.
Depends on the translation - the old ones, like the King James are out of copyright. Tons of ebook versions out there…
I never thought I'd see the day when the individuals in Britain who have enough backbone to criticise the horrors of current conditions seem mostly to come from the hereditary aristocracy - Charles Spencer being a current example. Another they are currently trying to lock up. A third is a friend who is being atrociously dragged through it.
Doubtless some see Spencer as a terrible egg who has let the side down, horsewhipping is too good for the bedwetter, etc.
Something is going on here.
This drift is probably of a kind with what you get when what used to be the social-democratic or socialist contingent in the public-sector middle class has basically disappeared, leaving e.g. elements in the church to take up the slack. I don't see e.g. the Labour Party running soup kitchens or food "banks". Practically nobody in the middle class gives a fuck about any section of the proles whatsoever, with the exception of some in the church and some of the other religious organisations, to whom respect is due. It's mostly Thatcherite "fuck you - I'm all right Jack", dressed up in extreme objectifying behaviourist truth-dentist language at the interface, from those who are employed to be anywhere near the interface.
Anyway, 👍 to Charles Spencer.
I think you're mistaken. I know at least four Labour councillors who help in food banks, and three Liberal Democrats and a Green as well. I'm sure some Tories do too. They just don't talk about it as part of politics - I suspect it feels all wrong to say "Vote for me, I help in a food bank". It comes under the general "helping out in the community" heading, and quite a lot of councillors are genuinely keen on that.
I would not be surprised if there was not much difference between the amount of do-gooding (for want of a better term) and political affiliation. It may not be food banks, but there are lots of Conservatives who give their time to help out various charities and causes.
IMV devils and angels do not split on party affiliation.
A gentle reminder that Trump also claims to have faith. Which rather devalues any public declarations - though perhaps not faith itself.
Keep wondering - how many eager buyers of Trump's Bible, are expecting to see HIS words printed in red?
Is anyone allowed to print a Bible? I believe at one time, at least in the UK, the printing of Bibles was restricted to one or two printers. Caused, I believe, difficulties in Wales because the ‘permitted’ printers weren’t keen on producing them in the Welsh language.
It used to be Royal Printers (after Elizabeth first) and the Oxford and Cambridge uni presses that had the right to print the authorised Bible, but there were loopholes- printing it with annotations for example
A gentle reminder that Trump also claims to have faith. Which rather devalues any public declarations - though perhaps not faith itself.
Keep wondering - how many eager buyers of Trump's Bible, are expecting to see HIS words printed in red?
Is anyone allowed to print a Bible? I believe at one time, at least in the UK, the printing of Bibles was restricted to one or two printers. Caused, I believe, difficulties in Wales because the ‘permitted’ printers weren’t keen on producing them in the Welsh language.
It used to be Royal Printers (after Elizabeth first) and the Oxford and Cambridge uni presses that had the right to print the authorised Bible, but there were loopholes- printing it with annotations for example
A gentle reminder that Trump also claims to have faith. Which rather devalues any public declarations - though perhaps not faith itself.
Keep wondering - how many eager buyers of Trump's Bible, are expecting to see HIS words printed in red?
Is anyone allowed to print a Bible? I believe at one time, at least in the UK, the printing of Bibles was restricted to one or two printers. Caused, I believe, difficulties in Wales because the ‘permitted’ printers weren’t keen on producing them in the Welsh language.
It used to be Royal Printers (after Elizabeth first) and the Oxford and Cambridge uni presses that had the right to print the authorised Bible, but there were loopholes- printing it with annotations for example
Three are a joke. They have a pole of wonder at the bottom of Market Street/The Arndale and you get over 1,000 Mbps, walk further up Market Street to Piccadilly Station and you are lucky to get 2 Mbps.
I'm not sure who came up with this "pole of wonder" nonsense but it's a silly term.
They may have several hundred poles around the country that have these gigabit speeds but they are so oddly spread out and in many cases supplementing coverage from hilltop or rooftop sites that as you say, are providing nothing like those speeds. So you end up on a two tier network.
Vodafone, O2 and EE have their problems but certainly have logical grid designs. Three's is just nonsensical to me. I am sure people that live next to one think their network is the greatest thing in the universe but travelling around, I am failing to see any evidence much has really changed.
No wonder they want to merge with Vodafone.
Just sign up for Starlink and be done.
Starlink is great for home Internet access, so long as you live in a rural area. But that's it.
Actually, Starlink directly connected to your phone is on the way. First satellites are up there, and several US networks have signed up “coverage gap filling” deals
I found Starlink everywhere in Colombia, do the satellites sit above Bogota? Is that how it works?
I've never seen it appear on my phone's wifi systems before, not even in Ukraine. But in Colombia: ubiquitous
What you are seeing is Starlink being used for backhaul. Your phone connects to a phone mast normally, and that phone mast is connected to the world via Starlink. Similarly, public WiFi is being provided in some places using Starlink as the connection from the WiFi base station to the rest of the world.
This means not having to run miles of fibre optic cable to remote areas, repeaters etc.
Probably the biggest area for the LEO constellations is backhaul. It’s already ubiquitous on cruise ships. The passengers just get fast WiFi
OneWeb is, in fact, only selling backhaul. They do not offer direct connections to customers.
Starlink is in LEO. This means the satellites zip overhead every few minutes. You can access it pretty much anywhere, pole to pole.
It consists of more satellites than the rest of the world has. Full stop. Visualisation here
The crane they've brought in to tackle the Baltimore Bridge isn't going to be beefy enough to do the job quickly. Only 1,000 tonne life capability. Someone's going to have to do a lot of cutting, given that weight will go down due to positioning/reach and safety factors.
I really don't like the conclusion that the few known facts and his Wikipedia personal life bio lead towards on the possible nature of the allegations.
Spent my 49th Good Friday on the planet pootling around Cheshire on my bike. On the way back into Manchester aling the Bridgewater Canal, a pedestrian I was approaching from behind reacted to my bell and my 'excuse me please' not by looking round to see which side I was passing on but by guessing and steppung directly in frint of me at the critical moment. Now the Bridgewater Canal towpath is a good quality cycle path, but nit particularly good for sliding along on the palms of your hands trying to prevent an unscheduled dip in the canal.
Ouch. However, I did have a better day than this fella.
Spent my 49th Good Friday on the planet pootling around Cheshire on my bike. On the way back into Manchester aling the Bridgewater Canal, a pedestrian I was approaching from behind reacted to my bell and my 'excuse me please' not by looking round to see which side I was passing on but by guessing and steppung directly in frint of me at the critical moment. Now the Bridgewater Canal towpath is a good quality cycle path, but nit particularly good for sliding along on the palms of your hands trying to prevent an unscheduled dip in the canal.
Ouch. However, I did have a better day than this fella.
Anyway, that aside, I had a perfectly nice time. Let me further soam the thread with thw view from Alderley Edge (which is the nearest proper hill one can cycle to from here, about an hour away at my pace - that flatness of South Manchester is my one major lament about the place) and a nice picture of a rainbow.
I’ve been doing a lot of thinking about this and I’ve decided that’s the answer. It’s an illusion. We are autocomplete machines but we are part of a wider mechanism - the glittering matrix of consciousness, sewn into the dark fabric of the multiverse, in silver filaments of divine fire - which DOES have purpose, meaning, teleological beauty
Also it’s gonna be overcast til Tuesday
I have of late But wherefore I know not Lost all my mirth This goodly frame The earth Seems to me a sterile promontory This most excellent canopy The air-- look you! This brave o'erhanging firmament This majestical roof Fretted with golden fire Why it appears no other thing to me Than a foul and pestilent congregation Of vapors
Surely this is one good thing we can expect from Starmer and Labour. The Tories are pathetically enslaved by the landlords and builders, the parasitic rentiers and leeching freeholders
Labour is not thus encumbered. It needs to sort this out immediately. Reform the lease/freehold system and stop these insane service charges
I fear you are getting triggered by these clickbait articles in to 'autocomplete outrage'.
From what I understand the service charges simply represent the cost of maintaining a property - but in the case of new build flats are inflated by intermediaries (managing agents), greater regulation (particularly the building safety act 2022 re buildings more than 7 storeys high), the risk averse approach to commissioning work, the need for work to unavoidably comply with health and safety legislation (no short cuts with white van builders), surveyors fees on top of everything else, etc. And then, there is rapid inflation due to the general cost of building work post Covid with material price increases, labour shortages etc, wage increases etc. With new build you have a particular problem of regulatory requirements including maintenance being loaded on at planning stage.
I don't think this is freeholders scamming the system. This may be a very small part of the system and there are probably commissions and kickbacks but it is unjustified to present the situation as this being the fundamental cause of the problem. The problem is a) people don't believe to pay similar levels to what people pay for flat maintenance in other comparable countries and b) regulation, build costs, case law etc.
The flats in the barbican are expecting a bill of £85k each for replacement windows.
Labour can (and should) legislate for more transparency over charges, review the legislation regarding Right to Manage , look at making freehold purchase easier, remove forfeiture; but in all probability that is all that can be achieved.
Spent my 49th Good Friday on the planet pootling around Cheshire on my bike. On the way back into Manchester aling the Bridgewater Canal, a pedestrian I was approaching from behind reacted to my bell and my 'excuse me please' not by looking round to see which side I was passing on but by guessing and steppung directly in frint of me at the critical moment. Now the Bridgewater Canal towpath is a good quality cycle path, but nit particularly good for sliding along on the palms of your hands trying to prevent an unscheduled dip in the canal.
Ouch. However, I did have a better day than this fella.
Anyway, that aside, I had a perfectly nice time. Let me further soam the thread with thw view from Alderley Edge (which is the nearest proper hill one can cycle to from here, about an hour away at my pace - that flatness of South Manchester is my one major lament about the place) and a nice picture of a rainbow.
Wonderful picture of the rainbow over the canal.
As for your hands, reckon that pic is good advertising, for wearing gloves when bicycling?
A gentle reminder that Trump also claims to have faith. Which rather devalues any public declarations - though perhaps not faith itself.
Keep wondering - how many eager buyers of Trump's Bible, are expecting to see HIS words printed in red?
Is anyone allowed to print a Bible? I believe at one time, at least in the UK, the printing of Bibles was restricted to one or two printers. Caused, I believe, difficulties in Wales because the ‘permitted’ printers weren’t keen on producing them in the Welsh language.
It used to be Royal Printers (after Elizabeth first) and the Oxford and Cambridge uni presses that had the right to print the authorised Bible, but there were loopholes- printing it with annotations for example
I’ve got one of the annotated versions, printed by a firm in Scotland. Must have brought on a cough or two at the printers as it’s in Welsh. Belonged to my grandmother, who inherited it from her father. Both were bilingual, although as Grandma ended her days in Essex she didn’t use Yr hen iaith (sp) much in her later years.
Surely this is one good thing we can expect from Starmer and Labour. The Tories are pathetically enslaved by the landlords and builders, the parasitic rentiers and leeching freeholders
Labour is not thus encumbered. It needs to sort this out immediately. Reform the lease/freehold system and stop these insane service charges
I fear you are getting triggered by these clickbait articles in to 'autocomplete outrage'.
From what I understand the service charges simply represent the cost of maintaining a property - but in the case of new build flats are inflated by intermediaries (managing agents), greater regulation (particularly the building safety act 2022 re buildings more than 7 storeys high), the risk averse approach to commissioning work, the need for work to unavoidably comply with health and safety legislation (no short cuts with white van builders), surveyors fees on top of everything else, etc. And then, there is rapid inflation due to the general cost of building work post Covid with material price increases, labour shortages etc, wage increases etc. With new build you have a particular problem of regulatory requirements including maintenance being loaded on at planning stage.
I don't think this is freeholders scamming the system. This may be a very small part of the system and there are probably commissions and kickbacks but it is unjustified to present the situation as this being the fundamental cause of the problem. The problem is a) people don't believe to pay similar levels to what people pay for flat maintenance in other comparable countries and b) regulation, build costs, case law etc.
The flats in the barbican are expecting a bill of £85k each for replacement windows.
Labour can (and should) legislate for more transparency over charges, review the legislation regarding Right to Manage , look at making freehold purchase easier, remove forfeiture; but in all probability that is all that can be achieved.
No, I'm getting triggered by the fact that the managers of my freehold recently landed the leaseholders, including me, with a whopping four figure bill - each - simply to unblock a drain. Literally. One afternoon, with one man, unblocking a drain
So they inflated the cost outrageously, and I am sure it is a scam, it is so easy to do - and we leaseholders just have to lump it. As that is the law, as things stand, well done the Tory party, stupid greedy dorks
Previously the management has generally been fine, but now this?? Pffffffgrrr
Reform the system from top to bottom, get rid of leasehold entirely, and if the profiteers squeal, fuck em
Spent my 49th Good Friday on the planet pootling around Cheshire on my bike. On the way back into Manchester aling the Bridgewater Canal, a pedestrian I was approaching from behind reacted to my bell and my 'excuse me please' not by looking round to see which side I was passing on but by guessing and steppung directly in frint of me at the critical moment. Now the Bridgewater Canal towpath is a good quality cycle path, but nit particularly good for sliding along on the palms of your hands trying to prevent an unscheduled dip in the canal.
Ouch. However, I did have a better day than this fella.
Anyway, that aside, I had a perfectly nice time. Let me further soam the thread with thw view from Alderley Edge (which is the nearest proper hill one can cycle to from here, about an hour away at my pace - that flatness of South Manchester is my one major lament about the place) and a nice picture of a rainbow.
Wonderful picture of the rainbow over the canal.
As for your hands, reckon that pic is good advertising, for wearing gloves when bicycling?
Indeed! I WAS wearinga helmet. But my head was unscathed.
Three are a joke. They have a pole of wonder at the bottom of Market Street/The Arndale and you get over 1,000 Mbps, walk further up Market Street to Piccadilly Station and you are lucky to get 2 Mbps.
I'm not sure who came up with this "pole of wonder" nonsense but it's a silly term.
They may have several hundred poles around the country that have these gigabit speeds but they are so oddly spread out and in many cases supplementing coverage from hilltop or rooftop sites that as you say, are providing nothing like those speeds. So you end up on a two tier network.
Vodafone, O2 and EE have their problems but certainly have logical grid designs. Three's is just nonsensical to me. I am sure people that live next to one think their network is the greatest thing in the universe but travelling around, I am failing to see any evidence much has really changed.
No wonder they want to merge with Vodafone.
Just sign up for Starlink and be done.
Starlink is great for home Internet access, so long as you live in a rural area. But that's it.
Actually, Starlink directly connected to your phone is on the way. First satellites are up there, and several US networks have signed up “coverage gap filling” deals
Surely this is one good thing we can expect from Starmer and Labour. The Tories are pathetically enslaved by the landlords and builders, the parasitic rentiers and leeching freeholders
Labour is not thus encumbered. It needs to sort this out immediately. Reform the lease/freehold system and stop these insane service charges
I fear you are getting triggered by these clickbait articles in to 'autocomplete outrage'.
From what I understand the service charges simply represent the cost of maintaining a property - but in the case of new build flats are inflated by intermediaries (managing agents), greater regulation (particularly the building safety act 2022 re buildings more than 7 storeys high), the risk averse approach to commissioning work, the need for work to unavoidably comply with health and safety legislation (no short cuts with white van builders), surveyors fees on top of everything else, etc. And then, there is rapid inflation due to the general cost of building work post Covid with material price increases, labour shortages etc, wage increases etc. With new build you have a particular problem of regulatory requirements including maintenance being loaded on at planning stage.
I don't think this is freeholders scamming the system. This may be a very small part of the system and there are probably commissions and kickbacks but it is unjustified to present the situation as this being the fundamental cause of the problem. The problem is a) people don't believe to pay similar levels to what people pay for flat maintenance in other comparable countries and b) regulation, build costs, case law etc.
The flats in the barbican are expecting a bill of £85k each for replacement windows.
Labour can (and should) legislate for more transparency over charges, review the legislation regarding Right to Manage , look at making freehold purchase easier, remove forfeiture; but in all probability that is all that can be achieved.
No, I'm getting triggered by the fact that the managers of my freehold recently landed the leaseholders, including me, with a whopping four figure bill - each - simply to unblock a drain. Literally. One afternoon, with one man, unblocking a drain
So they inflated the cost outrageously, and I am sure it is a scam, it is so easy to do - and we leaseholders just have to lump it. As that is the law, as things stand, well done the Tory party, stupid greedy dorks
Previously the management has generally been fine, but now this?? Pffffffgrrr
Reform the system from top to bottom, get rid of leasehold entirely, and if the profiteers squeal, fuck em
Yeah that is what I am saying though - they can legislate about transparency over charges, that is about as far as they can go. The drain situation doesn't sound good but I don't think these local authorities/housing associations referred to in the article are part of a great scam, they are just no good at keeping costs down.
I've been self managing a block and it has been a total ballache but at least you have control over the situation. For instance we had a quote from a contractor of £2000 to paint two windows, the scaffold etc was already in place. We just painted the windows ourselves, unpaid in our free time, it took two of us a few hours. There was no scam in the £2000 quote but I can see how it would look like this to others were we to have proceeded with it.
Ok, since it's Easter I feel I should ruminate. For me Atheism is the refusal to believe in something for which there is not a shred of evidence. It's deeply rational. Whereas Religion is a leap of pure faith taken as a way of fending off the (literally) unthinkable horror of an eternal nothing, thus easing a person's passage through this one and only life that we have. This is irrational and rational at the same time. It's irrational, because faith can't be otherwise, and it's rational because it's a cost free solution to a problem that for many people cannot be solved in any other way.
There is no 'rational' evidence, in the sense in which you mean 'rational', for the existence of minds other than one's own. It is an empirical assumption, not an empirical conclusion.
But there are overwhelmingly strong grounds for thinking that other minds exist, for example in the heads of most if not all PB contributors.
Similarly there is no evidence for either the divine creation or the non-divine self-creation of the universe, but there are compelling grounds for both positions.
Theism/religion and atheism/non-religion are on a precisely equal footing.
Hmm, not sure about that. I'd say the existence of 'other similar minds' has such compelling circumstantial evidence in favour that it's pretty much a done deal.
As for 'divine' vs 'non-divine' creation of the universe itself, we can't conceive of either. It's beyond our ken and always will be because it isn't a matter of not knowing enough, the question itself is beyond our frame of reference. So, yes, an equal footing in that regard.
But this doesn't mean Religion and Atheism are equally rational. They are wholly different. One is refusal to believe without evidence. The other is irrational faith rationally embraced to solve a mental problem.
No time for a full response - it's Good Friday, but my theism is based on the 'compelling circumstantial evidence' too.
No probs. I've made a note in my little green book. You owe me 'compelling circumstantial evidence' that the universe was created by a divine being. To say I'm looking forward to it is the understatement of deep time since it would rock my world.
Recall that I said there was compelling circumstantial evidence for both divine creation and for non-divine self creation of the universe.
In brief, 'divine' (meaning for this purpose that behind the universe as a whole lies intention and will) creation.Top 10 points, none of which prove in the strict sense anything at all:
1) Fine tuning of the universe 2) The apparent objectivity of values 3) Design 4) The emergence of the non-material (mental events) in the material 5) Freewill 6) The regularity of physical law 7) The problem of the big bang 8) Why is there something rather than nothing 9) The abstract capacities of maths 10) Altruism
Surely this is one good thing we can expect from Starmer and Labour. The Tories are pathetically enslaved by the landlords and builders, the parasitic rentiers and leeching freeholders
Labour is not thus encumbered. It needs to sort this out immediately. Reform the lease/freehold system and stop these insane service charges
Wow some people dont earn much more than that in a year.
Comments
https://www.starlink.com/business/direct-to-cell
I've never seen it appear on my phone's wifi systems before, not even in Ukraine. But in Colombia: ubiquitous
There seems to be a curious strain of hope (especially among Remainers) that everyone in NI will wake up in the morning and suddenly want to join the South.
The polls are solidly against this happening. As is the social structure. Which, by the way, is supported by the Good Friday Agreement. Which froze the communities in place.
You might as well believe. Take Pascal's Wager
What this means is that if you are the only person within a km or 2 on Starlink, you will get fibre(ish) like speeds. If more, close to you join, it will go down.
I've had two. I never believed in them - thought it was hippy woowoo nonsense - until I had my first. OMFG. The second made my head wobble like an Indian shopkeeper in a racist sitcom
Crackers. How do they survive? It's so violent it makes Colombian cities look like Newent
I'm heading back to Colombia tho. Gotta do Mompos for the Gazette
GUBU!
Edit to add: my first kundalini was actually a wank, albeit via another. I went to a Tantric sex session with my then wife in a basement in Covent Garden. Again, I thought it was all hippy woo rubbish, but it turns out Tantra is real
Six couples naked in a big room. All doing Tantra on each other. She gave me a handjob which took about an hour and eventually I climaxed with a sort of frenzied shaking, left me gasping: true Kundalini orgasm
The second one was via actual sex and it was even better
Well, you did ask
I wonder how many people from the 6C use British passports nowadays when they visit the continent.
I've never actually researched kundalini orgasms before, I just got told that's what I was experiencing
Here is what it is supposed to feel like
"Kundalini & Full Body Orgasm
Kundalini is a Sanskrit term from ancient India that refers to the feminine primal energy that coils at the base of the spine (when lying dormant) in all people. It then runs up the spine and through the chakra system to the back of the head/neck when awakened or aroused. You may have seen images of a serpent coiled around the base of a spine, then running up through the seven chakras. It is otherwise known as Chi, Jing, sexual energy or Pranic energy."
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/kundalini-full-body-orgasm-catherine-lyell
Jiminy Cricket. That is EXACTLY what I experienced. Twice. So it really really really is a thing
Hard recommend
Be great, but I'm still waiting. Maybe this evening.
Or you can put aside the question of the creator and consider whether, even if that were true, it makes any sense at all to worship it.
But fundamentally, the problem of who created the creator remains, with any answer you can give for the creator just as easily applied to the universe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consolidated_B-32_Dominator#/media/File:B32.jpg
But that doesn't change your point.
I'm serious. Think of it as a wifi signal, you're not gonna access the Net = find God - unless you turn on the wifi first
To do this, you must make yourself receptive (= turning on the wifi). As I say that can be chanting, yoga, ayahuasca, fasting, meditation, going to warzones, living as a hermit, praying intensely for three hundred days, there are many routes. You're not stupid, do a bit of research, press the button
THEN if you are lucky you will pick up a signal; of course you might not, as well. But that is the essential first step
I sense you are sitting there in Hampstead with your laptop saying "Pfff, there's no signal" - listen to yourself slurring religion as "double think" and "irrationality". That's the wifi turned off. You are not receptive. TURN ON THE WIFI
I think I have made my metaphorical point, now
British weather is bracing, and it's becoming quite exciting
I've enjoyed hail, snow, heavy rain, fierce winds, long grey still periods, and beautiful sunshine in the last week
The next fortnight looks quite similar
I haven't stopped and won't stop smiling
This means not having to run miles of fibre optic cable to remote areas, repeaters etc.
Probably the biggest area for the LEO constellations is backhaul. It’s already ubiquitous on cruise ships. The passengers just get fast WiFi
OneWeb is, in fact, only selling backhaul. They do not offer direct connections to customers.
Starlink is in LEO. This means the satellites zip overhead every few minutes. You can access it pretty much anywhere, pole to pole.
It consists of more satellites than the rest of the world has. Full stop. Visualisation here
https://www.reddit.com/r/EngineeringPorn/s/Mo01bXgh2w
The latter is very interesting: when you are flying over LA, you get 3-4 mb/s, and it's terribly slow, because there are a whole bunch of people trying to share relatively little bandwidth. But once you cross the Sierra Nevada mountains, then you suddenly get a few hundred megabits a second, and it stays that way until you hit the Phoenix suburbs.
People who diss Musk are ridiculous. His achievements are phenomenal, on the Lex Fridman/Sam Altman podcast Friedman said he thinks Musk is a "great maker, perhaps the greatest maker ever"
Seems about right to me. He's up there with people like Brunel, or even Tesla
If free will's an illusion, you didn't do any deciding, did you?
Because a decision means there was the possibility of choosing the other way.
Choice means there was free will.
So a decision that there is no free will proves that there is free will.
Exactly!
4500 satellites!!! All around the world. Phenomenal
TBH this probably knocks What3Words into a cocked hat, and I don't say that lightly
I do have a religious faith, nor is it some recent thing, I've discussed it occasionally for a loooooooong time. Generally I don't mention it because its very personal, and often quite dull (like other people's dreams, as someone here said). But we are discussing God on this Good Friday and I am giving you sincere advice, I believe in this wifi metaphor, to the extent it's the best way I can eff the ineffable. You will never achieve faith as long as you are so sternly resistant, veging on contemptuous, you are switched off
Turn yourself on. Is my honest advice. Then spiritual Starlink might suddenly appear on your mental phone. I can do no more than tell you that. Good luck
https://youtube.com/shorts/NlkZ4-2ThsM?si=TrYx_ecrwNGUniuN
Which rather devalues any public declarations - though perhaps not faith itself.
That's like the smokers who say Hitler was anti-smoking, nerr nerr
All kinds of evil people have been public believers, all kinds of evil people have been avowed non believers
"My one-bed flat's service charge is now £16K a year"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c884m42lvk8o
Surely this is one good thing we can expect from Starmer and Labour. The Tories are pathetically enslaved by the landlords and builders, the parasitic rentiers and leeching freeholders
Labour is not thus encumbered. It needs to sort this out immediately. Reform the lease/freehold system and stop these insane service charges
Self criticism IS good for PB's own Soul of the Newest Machine.
GOOD
I might even vote Labour just because of this. I hope that doesn't upset @kinabalu too much
The aptly named Guttenberg Project has it -
https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/10/pg10-images.html
IMV devils and angels do not split on party affiliation.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68693499
Ouch.
However, I did have a better day than this fella.
But wherefore I know not
Lost all my mirth
This goodly frame
The earth
Seems to me a sterile promontory
This most excellent canopy
The air-- look you!
This brave o'erhanging firmament
This majestical roof
Fretted with golden fire
Why it appears no other thing to me
Than a foul and pestilent congregation
Of vapors
From what I understand the service charges simply represent the cost of maintaining a property - but in the case of new build flats are inflated by intermediaries (managing agents), greater regulation (particularly the building safety act 2022 re buildings more than 7 storeys high), the risk averse approach to commissioning work, the need for work to unavoidably comply with health and safety legislation (no short cuts with white van builders), surveyors fees on top of everything else, etc. And then, there is rapid inflation due to the general cost of building work post Covid with material price increases, labour shortages etc, wage increases etc. With new build you have a particular problem of regulatory requirements including maintenance being loaded on at planning stage.
I don't think this is freeholders scamming the system. This may be a very small part of the system and there are probably commissions and kickbacks but it is unjustified to present the situation as this being the fundamental cause of the problem. The problem is a) people don't believe to pay similar levels to what people pay for flat maintenance in other comparable countries and b) regulation, build costs, case law etc.
The flats in the barbican are expecting a bill of £85k each for replacement windows.
https://www.mylondon.news/news/zone-1-news/barbican-flat-owners-could-charged-26474162
Labour can (and should) legislate for more transparency over charges, review the legislation regarding Right to Manage , look at making freehold purchase easier, remove forfeiture; but in all probability that is all that can be achieved.
As for your hands, reckon that pic is good advertising, for wearing gloves when bicycling?
So they inflated the cost outrageously, and I am sure it is a scam, it is so easy to do - and we leaseholders just have to lump it. As that is the law, as things stand, well done the Tory party, stupid greedy dorks
Previously the management has generally been fine, but now this?? Pffffffgrrr
Reform the system from top to bottom, get rid of leasehold entirely, and if the profiteers squeal, fuck em
I've been self managing a block and it has been a total ballache but at least you have control over the situation. For instance we had a quote from a contractor of £2000 to paint two windows, the scaffold etc was already in place. We just painted the windows ourselves, unpaid in our free time, it took two of us a few hours. There was no scam in the £2000 quote but I can see how it would look like this to others were we to have proceeded with it.
In brief, 'divine' (meaning for this purpose that behind the universe as a whole lies intention and will) creation.Top 10 points, none of which prove in the strict sense anything at all:
1) Fine tuning of the universe
2) The apparent objectivity of values
3) Design
4) The emergence of the non-material (mental events) in the material
5) Freewill
6) The regularity of physical law
7) The problem of the big bang
8) Why is there something rather than nothing
9) The abstract capacities of maths
10) Altruism
Sorry it's brief. each of these 10 is a book.
Congratulations to Humza Yousaf on his first anniversary as First Minister.
A 🧵 of his most significant achievements to date.
He is the only SNP First Minister not to have been arrested.
Ends.
Mind, Mr Murphy is obviously still feeling sour.