My wife has been binge-rewatching To the Manor Born. (in Dura Ace’s absence someone needs to be actively enjoying old British sit coms).
The theme music is what AI would write if instructed to “compose a theme tune to a gentle English sit-com made in the early 1980s featuring Penelope Keith”. It’s remarkable. A pure expression of the genre.
It's OK as a sitcom but a bit wan. It's basically Keith reprising her Margot Leadbetter role in a new scenario, and The Good Life is a more entertaining watch imo.
I agree, the good life has more properly drawn characters (4 of them). This just has two, though I do think De Vere does a good turn.
How dare you! Brabinger gives a stellar performance throughout…
If the rumour is related to Starmer's legal career I really don't think it means much given cab rank rule
Does anyone have an example of The Truth, on any matter, first being revealed on Twatter?
As opposed to zillions of lies, bullshit, horseshit etc etc?
Yes, plenty
Otherwise the wokier powers-that-be would not be so exercised by Musk owning it: a social media site that spunked out nothing but misinformation would be quick disregarded. It would be like Russia Today, and everyone would look at it with skepticism and then probably ignore it entirely
However, the problem with TwiX is that the truth is mixed up with half truths and total lies - and that has always been the case
Twitter used to be a place where everyone, no matter what their political persuasion, hung out.
I think there is a very real chance now that it does end up fragmenting, following what has happened with broadcast and print media. In the last month, Bluesky really seems to have gotten awfully close to breakout.
Now, will it replace Twitter? Nope. But what looks entirely possible i that (for politics) left wingers will be on Bluesky, while right wingers on Twitter.
Twitter could lose its ubiquity.
Yes, I can see that happening, which means both sites will fail as "public squares" - which will be a damn shame, and a further silo-isation of discourse and polarisation of politics
However Blusky is still quite a long way from breakout and it is now encountering its own problems. The moderation there is as fierce as lefty Twitter back in the day. eg you get instantly silenced if not banned for anything deemed transphobic - say "there are only two genders" and it's bye bye
Nope - Bluesky just has an easy to use Block policy and a lot of people operate a block on first problem basis because life is too short...
Tired of debates, disagreements, or being challenged by "nuance"? Enter CircleJerk, the all-new platform where every take aligns perfectly with your worldview, and every "like" feels like a warm hug from your ideological twin.
Coming soon: the all-new 100% Agree Button: Replacing "like" with "obviously."
Because who needs approval when you already have consensus.
Have you used Twitter recently ? The effort required to keep it usable has grown considerably. You're arguing in favour of listening to unlimited trolling by a myriad shitheads.
Bluesky is not trying to recreate the madhouse. Which seems quite sensible.
I don't understand this tedious whining about Twitter, even from a relatively sensible centre-lefty like you
Or rather, I do understand it, but it doesn'r reflect well on lefties. The fact is rightwingers believe in free speech and are happy to accept that this means argument and discord, and it also means you will encounter opinions you do not like, and possibly opinions that outright enrage and offend you. That IS free speech, that is the essence, that is what it means, if it does not mean the freedom to offend and be offended, with divergent opinions, then it is nothing
Lefties are regressing into a childish state where they cannot cope with disagreement or anyone with a differing opinion, and they actively believe many opinions should be outlawed; moreover, virtually any opinion they do not like is "racist" or "transphobic" even if it is about lemon trees, cloudspotting or baseball
Look at that twat @bondegezou on here. He is that kind of pitiful, adolescent lefty, constantly trying to get opinions and opinionators silenced and banned. He IS bluesky
What happened to you guys, over there on the left? You used to ENJOY argument and different opinions, you used to cherish free speech, it was one of your things. Now you want to hide away from anything hurty and you want to silence 90% of voices that dare to disagree
It depends how thick the different sides are. Arguing with an idiot who keeps making the same points isn’t particularly stimulating and rewarding. Arguing with an intelligent and genuinely thought provoking individual who holds a different views to one’s own, is.
A friends child falls into the former category (understandable given her age). I ignore her
Yes, but a rightwinger simply ignores or mutes a tedious debater, lefties want debaters they dislike silenced, and by law, if necessary
That is a pretty enormous difference
We see it in stats on social attitudes. Rightwingers are happy to interact with or date or fuck or have a pint with lefties, lefties do not offer the same generous sociability to rightwingers. "Never kissed a Tory" is not just a meme, it is a behavioural phenomenon, and it is sad and somewhat pathetic
Ana Kasparian of the far left YouTube channel The Young Turks gave a great interview about this. She, during the election, basically came out and said she'd left the Democratic party because the policies were insane wrt crime and women's rights being eroded for blokes on dresses. She said she faced weeks of online abuse, people shouting at her irl while everyone on the right was very welcoming and even though she still disagreed with most of the Trump platform they were happy to have the debate with her and win her over.
The left has become a purity test and fundamentally exclusionary, especially in the US. Starmer mostly prevented that from happening here by adopting all of the cultural positions of the Tories in the year leading up to the election but I think that will be increasingly difficult as the pushback against woke continues and Kemi capitalises on it.
The left liberal from the 70s and 80s is now centre right even though their fundamental views have barely moved since then.
If the rumour is related to Starmer's legal career I really don't think it means much given cab rank rule
Does anyone have an example of The Truth, on any matter, first being revealed on Twatter?
As opposed to zillions of lies, bullshit, horseshit etc etc?
Yes, plenty
Otherwise the wokier powers-that-be would not be so exercised by Musk owning it: a social media site that spunked out nothing but misinformation would be quick disregarded. It would be like Russia Today, and everyone would look at it with skepticism and then probably ignore it entirely
However, the problem with TwiX is that the truth is mixed up with half truths and total lies - and that has always been the case
Twitter used to be a place where everyone, no matter what their political persuasion, hung out.
I think there is a very real chance now that it does end up fragmenting, following what has happened with broadcast and print media. In the last month, Bluesky really seems to have gotten awfully close to breakout.
Now, will it replace Twitter? Nope. But what looks entirely possible i that (for politics) left wingers will be on Bluesky, while right wingers on Twitter.
Twitter could lose its ubiquity.
Yes, I can see that happening, which means both sites will fail as "public squares" - which will be a damn shame, and a further silo-isation of discourse and polarisation of politics
However Blusky is still quite a long way from breakout and it is now encountering its own problems. The moderation there is as fierce as lefty Twitter back in the day. eg you get instantly silenced if not banned for anything deemed transphobic - say "there are only two genders" and it's bye bye
I think your second point is why bluesky won't work, you can't just have an arena where everyone agrees with each other all the time. It doesn't generate enough engagement so eventually people will go back to Twitter for the bants and arguments.
If there is nobody to disagree with on Bluesky and nobody left to disagree with on Twix, where will all the argumentative people go?
Both Badenoch and Farage now have Bluesky accounts, and Kemi has 3 600 followers in a couple of days.
There are now pretty much no social media sites I find appealing.
- TwiX: porn bots, Kremlin propaganda and its traditional ill temper - Bluesky: seems dull - Instagram: cringey vanity and vacuousness - LinkedIn: where do I start - Facebook: the online version of that circular Christmas letter, for OAPs - TikTok: brain rotting mental opioid - Telegram: stinking cesspit that makes X look high brow
Perhaps we have passed peak mass- media. Maybe people will retreat back into special interest forums like this.
Bluesky is getting more interesting as more join it, but it is certainly slower paced and more thoughtful. I like their feeds feature and the lack of pushed replies.
I have a soft spot for TikTok too.
LinkedIn is pretty dire but does have some utility for work.
I have Facebook still as its good for local news, but little else.
There is a fair case to be made that Social Media is killing itself, by turning into the Dead Internet, with bots and trolls talking to each other. I don't miss Twitter, though my account still exists in dead space.
Russia is developing a new Black Sea port in occupied Abhkazia. Since it's not sovereign Russian territory I would hope there wouldn't be restrictions on missile attacks there?
We seem to have forgotten that Russia invaded Georgia back in 2008.
I haven't. I went to Georgia 2 years back and yearned to go to Abkhazia, it is meant to be stunningly beautiful, and the reason Georgia is sometimes cited as the *original* Garden of Eden
But it is strictly off limits, the new frontier is firmly shut, and getting in is highly dangerous if not impossible
I looked into going into Abkhazia when I visited Georgia last year. It does have a beautiful reputation, though now totally falling apart. It is possible to get a visa to cross from Georgia, and people do, but you couldn’t bring a car across which made it impractical.
I was told that you can get a visa, but don't do it, because it is so dangerous
But that might have been biased Georgians with an agenda?
The FCDO guidance is they recommend not going, but blogs etc seem more positive. A bit like say Mauritania: FCDO says don’t go unless you want to be kidnapped and your throat slit; other sources say go, it’s fascinating and the kidnap risk is only if you’re there long term like an NGO worker.
My friend is going there for a week before meeting two of us in Senegal next month.
The experience of colleagues who have passed through there for work is far more along the FCDO advice. They say you can go there but you are taking a massive risk.
Yes, that's exactly what I heard, and it firmly dissuaded me from going (despite my intense curiosity). Sounds like I was right!
I think he was referring to Mauritania, though I stand to be corrected.
Ah, OK! Looks like you're right
Personally, I wouldn't risk Mauritania, and I was happy to go to Ukraine during the war, twice. The risk/reward ratio is all wrong. ie Mauritania is not very interesting and is extremely dangerous. Ukraine is amazingly interesting (especially now) and it is quite dangerous, so you need to be careful
I am also looking at a trip to West Africa this winter. Dakar down to Sierra Leone. I feel I should see it at least once in my lifetime, even if it has a bad rep. Where are you going in Senegal and what are you doing, if I may ask?
I’m doing just over a week there. Dakar, then the overnight ferry down to Ziguinchor, couple of nights in inland Casamance at a campement, a quick sojourn at Cap Skirring then an internal flight back up to Dakar for a couple more days.
Guinea Bissau looks quaint though falling apart. Crossing the border was too much of a faff to bother with on our short trip.
Thanks! Genuinely helpful. I am putting together a tentative itinerary for early Jan
I want to do five countries in West Africa. Why? Because so far in my life I have visited 95 countries, and I am desperate to reach 100
I know, how childish is that? But that is my thinking. I am like a nervous Test batsman nearing a century. Do I keep nudging singles, or do I swing for a six and reach my ton in one go?
I'm swinging for a six. I'll probably get clean bowled - ie shot - in the Gambia
My friend has the same addiction. He had part of his honeymoon in Timor Leste last year and has just done Comoros and Bhutan in a month, such is the determination to tick off the countries.
(And that’s why he’s calling in on Mauritania).
Hah! I'm glad I'm not alone. Once I've reached 100 (ins'allah) I will probably develop a freshly neurotic target, like doing ALL the countries in central America so I can say I've gone from top to bottom: Northern canada down to Patagonia
The other big gaps in my map are the eastern middle east (Iraq, Iran, Saudi), central Asia, and central Africa
After all that I will be done. Sort of. Apart from the Pacific islands
Jesus I'm being boring, Soz
More interestingly, I got ChatGPT to devise my itinerary last night as I lay awake jetlagged and insomniac, and it did so in an amusing way - it was deliberately trying to make me laugh - and it successfully made me laugh - and it was insane - and it was like talking to an extremely funny human. Fucking FREAKY as SHIT
Russia is developing a new Black Sea port in occupied Abhkazia. Since it's not sovereign Russian territory I would hope there wouldn't be restrictions on missile attacks there?
We seem to have forgotten that Russia invaded Georgia back in 2008.
I haven't. I went to Georgia 2 years back and yearned to go to Abkhazia, it is meant to be stunningly beautiful, and the reason Georgia is sometimes cited as the *original* Garden of Eden
But it is strictly off limits, the new frontier is firmly shut, and getting in is highly dangerous if not impossible
I looked into going into Abkhazia when I visited Georgia last year. It does have a beautiful reputation, though now totally falling apart. It is possible to get a visa to cross from Georgia, and people do, but you couldn’t bring a car across which made it impractical.
I was told that you can get a visa, but don't do it, because it is so dangerous
But that might have been biased Georgians with an agenda?
The FCDO guidance is they recommend not going, but blogs etc seem more positive. A bit like say Mauritania: FCDO says don’t go unless you want to be kidnapped and your throat slit; other sources say go, it’s fascinating and the kidnap risk is only if you’re there long term like an NGO worker.
My friend is going there for a week before meeting two of us in Senegal next month.
The experience of colleagues who have passed through there for work is far more along the FCDO advice. They say you can go there but you are taking a massive risk.
Yes, that's exactly what I heard, and it firmly dissuaded me from going (despite my intense curiosity). Sounds like I was right!
I think he was referring to Mauritania, though I stand to be corrected.
Ah, OK! Looks like you're right
Personally, I wouldn't risk Mauritania, and I was happy to go to Ukraine during the war, twice. The risk/reward ratio is all wrong. ie Mauritania is not very interesting and is extremely dangerous. Ukraine is amazingly interesting (especially now) and it is quite dangerous, so you need to be careful
I am also looking at a trip to West Africa this winter. Dakar down to Sierra Leone. I feel I should see it at least once in my lifetime, even if it has a bad rep. Where are you going in Senegal and what are you doing, if I may ask?
I’m doing just over a week there. Dakar, then the overnight ferry down to Ziguinchor, couple of nights in inland Casamance at a campement, a quick sojourn at Cap Skirring then an internal flight back up to Dakar for a couple more days.
Guinea Bissau looks quaint though falling apart. Crossing the border was too much of a faff to bother with on our short trip.
Thanks! Genuinely helpful. I am putting together a tentative itinerary for early Jan
I want to do five countries in West Africa. Why? Because so far in my life I have visited 95 countries, and I am desperate to reach 100
I know, how childish is that? But that is my thinking. I am like a nervous Test batsman nearing a century. Do I keep nudging singles, or do I swing for a six and reach my ton in one go?
I'm swinging for a six. I'll probably get clean bowled - ie shot - in the Gambia
My friend has the same addiction. He had part of his honeymoon in Timor Leste last year and has just done Comoros and Bhutan in a month, such is the determination to tick off the countries.
(And that’s why he’s calling in on Mauritania).
Hah! I'm glad I'm not alone. Once I've reached 100 (ins'allah) I will probably develop a freshly neurotic target, like doing ALL the countries in central America so I can say I've gone from top to bottom: Northern canada down to Patagonia
The other big gaps in my map are the eastern middle east (Iraq, Iran, Saudi), central Asia, and central Africa
After all that I will be done. Sort of. Apart from the Pacific islands
Jesus I'm being boring, Soz
More interestingly, I got ChatGPT to deviise my itinerary last night as I lay awake jetlagged and insomniac, and it did so in an amusing way - it was deliberately trying to make me laugh - and it successully made me laugh - and it was insane - and it was like talking to an extremely funny human. Fucking FREAKY as SHIT
You need to set your sights on getting to the Chagos archipelago. The ultimate challenge.
Russia is developing a new Black Sea port in occupied Abhkazia. Since it's not sovereign Russian territory I would hope there wouldn't be restrictions on missile attacks there?
We seem to have forgotten that Russia invaded Georgia back in 2008.
I haven't. I went to Georgia 2 years back and yearned to go to Abkhazia, it is meant to be stunningly beautiful, and the reason Georgia is sometimes cited as the *original* Garden of Eden
But it is strictly off limits, the new frontier is firmly shut, and getting in is highly dangerous if not impossible
I looked into going into Abkhazia when I visited Georgia last year. It does have a beautiful reputation, though now totally falling apart. It is possible to get a visa to cross from Georgia, and people do, but you couldn’t bring a car across which made it impractical.
I was told that you can get a visa, but don't do it, because it is so dangerous
But that might have been biased Georgians with an agenda?
The FCDO guidance is they recommend not going, but blogs etc seem more positive. A bit like say Mauritania: FCDO says don’t go unless you want to be kidnapped and your throat slit; other sources say go, it’s fascinating and the kidnap risk is only if you’re there long term like an NGO worker.
My friend is going there for a week before meeting two of us in Senegal next month.
The experience of colleagues who have passed through there for work is far more along the FCDO advice. They say you can go there but you are taking a massive risk.
Yes, that's exactly what I heard, and it firmly dissuaded me from going (despite my intense curiosity). Sounds like I was right!
I think he was referring to Mauritania, though I stand to be corrected.
Ah, OK! Looks like you're right
Personally, I wouldn't risk Mauritania, and I was happy to go to Ukraine during the war, twice. The risk/reward ratio is all wrong. ie Mauritania is not very interesting and is extremely dangerous. Ukraine is amazingly interesting (especially now) and it is quite dangerous, so you need to be careful
I am also looking at a trip to West Africa this winter. Dakar down to Sierra Leone. I feel I should see it at least once in my lifetime, even if it has a bad rep. Where are you going in Senegal and what are you doing, if I may ask?
I’m doing just over a week there. Dakar, then the overnight ferry down to Ziguinchor, couple of nights in inland Casamance at a campement, a quick sojourn at Cap Skirring then an internal flight back up to Dakar for a couple more days.
Guinea Bissau looks quaint though falling apart. Crossing the border was too much of a faff to bother with on our short trip.
Thanks! Genuinely helpful. I am putting together a tentative itinerary for early Jan
I want to do five countries in West Africa. Why? Because so far in my life I have visited 95 countries, and I am desperate to reach 100
I know, how childish is that? But that is my thinking. I am like a nervous Test batsman nearing a century. Do I keep nudging singles, or do I swing for a six and reach my ton in one go?
I'm swinging for a six. I'll probably get clean bowled - ie shot - in the Gambia
My friend has the same addiction. He had part of his honeymoon in Timor Leste last year and has just done Comoros and Bhutan in a month, such is the determination to tick off the countries.
(And that’s why he’s calling in on Mauritania).
Hah! I'm glad I'm not alone. Once I've reached 100 (ins'allah) I will probably develop a freshly neurotic target, like doing ALL the countries in central America so I can say I've gone from top to bottom: Northern canada down to Patagonia
The other big gaps in my map are the eastern middle east (Iraq, Iran, Saudi), central Asia, and central Africa
After all that I will be done. Sort of. Apart from the Pacific islands
Jesus I'm being boring, Soz
More interestingly, I got ChatGPT to deviise my itinerary last night as I lay awake jetlagged and insomniac, and it did so in an amusing way - it was deliberately trying to make me laugh - and it successully made me laugh - and it was insane - and it was like talking to an extremely funny human. Fucking FREAKY as SHIT
You need to set your sights on getting to the Chagos archipelago. The ultimate challenge.
Not really (I imagine you are joking)
My top five remaining targets in terms of countries are
North Korea (I mean, my God) Mongolia Congo Nicaragua Papua New Guinea
in terms of pure remoteness I would love to go to northeast Siberia, one of those insane hideous towns on the Yenesei river. I'd also like to experience total winter darkness, perhaps in Svalbard
And Socotra, the Cocos, Kerguelen, south Georgia, those mad Andaman fuckers, and Pitcairn, and....
Russia is developing a new Black Sea port in occupied Abhkazia. Since it's not sovereign Russian territory I would hope there wouldn't be restrictions on missile attacks there?
We seem to have forgotten that Russia invaded Georgia back in 2008.
I haven't. I went to Georgia 2 years back and yearned to go to Abkhazia, it is meant to be stunningly beautiful, and the reason Georgia is sometimes cited as the *original* Garden of Eden
But it is strictly off limits, the new frontier is firmly shut, and getting in is highly dangerous if not impossible
I looked into going into Abkhazia when I visited Georgia last year. It does have a beautiful reputation, though now totally falling apart. It is possible to get a visa to cross from Georgia, and people do, but you couldn’t bring a car across which made it impractical.
I was told that you can get a visa, but don't do it, because it is so dangerous
But that might have been biased Georgians with an agenda?
The FCDO guidance is they recommend not going, but blogs etc seem more positive. A bit like say Mauritania: FCDO says don’t go unless you want to be kidnapped and your throat slit; other sources say go, it’s fascinating and the kidnap risk is only if you’re there long term like an NGO worker.
My friend is going there for a week before meeting two of us in Senegal next month.
The experience of colleagues who have passed through there for work is far more along the FCDO advice. They say you can go there but you are taking a massive risk.
Yes, that's exactly what I heard, and it firmly dissuaded me from going (despite my intense curiosity). Sounds like I was right!
I think he was referring to Mauritania, though I stand to be corrected.
Ah, OK! Looks like you're right
Personally, I wouldn't risk Mauritania, and I was happy to go to Ukraine during the war, twice. The risk/reward ratio is all wrong. ie Mauritania is not very interesting and is extremely dangerous. Ukraine is amazingly interesting (especially now) and it is quite dangerous, so you need to be careful
I am also looking at a trip to West Africa this winter. Dakar down to Sierra Leone. I feel I should see it at least once in my lifetime, even if it has a bad rep. Where are you going in Senegal and what are you doing, if I may ask?
I’m doing just over a week there. Dakar, then the overnight ferry down to Ziguinchor, couple of nights in inland Casamance at a campement, a quick sojourn at Cap Skirring then an internal flight back up to Dakar for a couple more days.
Guinea Bissau looks quaint though falling apart. Crossing the border was too much of a faff to bother with on our short trip.
Thanks! Genuinely helpful. I am putting together a tentative itinerary for early Jan
I want to do five countries in West Africa. Why? Because so far in my life I have visited 95 countries, and I am desperate to reach 100
I know, how childish is that? But that is my thinking. I am like a nervous Test batsman nearing a century. Do I keep nudging singles, or do I swing for a six and reach my ton in one go?
I'm swinging for a six. I'll probably get clean bowled - ie shot - in the Gambia
My friend has the same addiction. He had part of his honeymoon in Timor Leste last year and has just done Comoros and Bhutan in a month, such is the determination to tick off the countries.
(And that’s why he’s calling in on Mauritania).
Hah! I'm glad I'm not alone. Once I've reached 100 (ins'allah) I will probably develop a freshly neurotic target, like doing ALL the countries in central America so I can say I've gone from top to bottom: Northern canada down to Patagonia
The other big gaps in my map are the eastern middle east (Iraq, Iran, Saudi), central Asia, and central Africa
After all that I will be done. Sort of. Apart from the Pacific islands
Jesus I'm being boring, Soz
More interestingly, I got ChatGPT to deviise my itinerary last night as I lay awake jetlagged and insomniac, and it did so in an amusing way - it was deliberately trying to make me laugh - and it successully made me laugh - and it was insane - and it was like talking to an extremely funny human. Fucking FREAKY as SHIT
You need to set your sights on getting to the Chagos archipelago. The ultimate challenge.
A little bit on the tricky side, given it's military personnel (or contractors) only.
Russia is developing a new Black Sea port in occupied Abhkazia. Since it's not sovereign Russian territory I would hope there wouldn't be restrictions on missile attacks there?
We seem to have forgotten that Russia invaded Georgia back in 2008.
I haven't. I went to Georgia 2 years back and yearned to go to Abkhazia, it is meant to be stunningly beautiful, and the reason Georgia is sometimes cited as the *original* Garden of Eden
But it is strictly off limits, the new frontier is firmly shut, and getting in is highly dangerous if not impossible
I looked into going into Abkhazia when I visited Georgia last year. It does have a beautiful reputation, though now totally falling apart. It is possible to get a visa to cross from Georgia, and people do, but you couldn’t bring a car across which made it impractical.
I was told that you can get a visa, but don't do it, because it is so dangerous
But that might have been biased Georgians with an agenda?
The FCDO guidance is they recommend not going, but blogs etc seem more positive. A bit like say Mauritania: FCDO says don’t go unless you want to be kidnapped and your throat slit; other sources say go, it’s fascinating and the kidnap risk is only if you’re there long term like an NGO worker.
My friend is going there for a week before meeting two of us in Senegal next month.
The experience of colleagues who have passed through there for work is far more along the FCDO advice. They say you can go there but you are taking a massive risk.
Yes, that's exactly what I heard, and it firmly dissuaded me from going (despite my intense curiosity). Sounds like I was right!
I think he was referring to Mauritania, though I stand to be corrected.
Ah, OK! Looks like you're right
Personally, I wouldn't risk Mauritania, and I was happy to go to Ukraine during the war, twice. The risk/reward ratio is all wrong. ie Mauritania is not very interesting and is extremely dangerous. Ukraine is amazingly interesting (especially now) and it is quite dangerous, so you need to be careful
I am also looking at a trip to West Africa this winter. Dakar down to Sierra Leone. I feel I should see it at least once in my lifetime, even if it has a bad rep. Where are you going in Senegal and what are you doing, if I may ask?
I’m doing just over a week there. Dakar, then the overnight ferry down to Ziguinchor, couple of nights in inland Casamance at a campement, a quick sojourn at Cap Skirring then an internal flight back up to Dakar for a couple more days.
Guinea Bissau looks quaint though falling apart. Crossing the border was too much of a faff to bother with on our short trip.
Thanks! Genuinely helpful. I am putting together a tentative itinerary for early Jan
I want to do five countries in West Africa. Why? Because so far in my life I have visited 95 countries, and I am desperate to reach 100
I know, how childish is that? But that is my thinking. I am like a nervous Test batsman nearing a century. Do I keep nudging singles, or do I swing for a six and reach my ton in one go?
I'm swinging for a six. I'll probably get clean bowled - ie shot - in the Gambia
My friend has the same addiction. He had part of his honeymoon in Timor Leste last year and has just done Comoros and Bhutan in a month, such is the determination to tick off the countries.
(And that’s why he’s calling in on Mauritania).
Hah! I'm glad I'm not alone. Once I've reached 100 (ins'allah) I will probably develop a freshly neurotic target, like doing ALL the countries in central America so I can say I've gone from top to bottom: Northern canada down to Patagonia
The other big gaps in my map are the eastern middle east (Iraq, Iran, Saudi), central Asia, and central Africa
After all that I will be done. Sort of. Apart from the Pacific islands
Jesus I'm being boring, Soz
More interestingly, I got ChatGPT to deviise my itinerary last night as I lay awake jetlagged and insomniac, and it did so in an amusing way - it was deliberately trying to make me laugh - and it successully made me laugh - and it was insane - and it was like talking to an extremely funny human. Fucking FREAKY as SHIT
You need to set your sights on getting to the Chagos archipelago. The ultimate challenge.
Not really (I imagine you are joking)
My top five remaining targets in terms of countries are
North Korea (I mean, my God) Mongolia Congo Nicaragua Papua New Guinea
in terms of pure remoteness I would love to go to northeast Siberia, one of those insane hideous towns on the Yenesei river. I'd also like to experience total winter darkness, perhaps in Svalbard
And Socotra, the Cocos, Kerguelen, south Georgia, those mad Andaman fuckers, and Pitcairn, and....
OK there's still a lot of places to go.
I'm sure PB could have a whip round to fund a trip to North Korea!!
Yes, but a rightwinger simply ignores or mutes a tedious debater, lefties want debaters they dislike silenced, and by law, if necessary
That is a pretty enormous difference
Not sure that the ‘in law’ part is particularly accurate, and is certainly not universal. And without that clause in your argument I can’t see the difference between muted and silenced from a listeners perspective.
We see it in stats on social attitudes. Rightwingers are happy to interact with or date or fuck or have a pint with lefties, lefties do not offer the same generous sociability to rightwingers. "Never kissed a Tory" is not just a meme, it is a behavioural phenomenon, and it is sad and somewhat pathetic
Some would say that the Trumpian attacks on Democrats as ‘communism’ are similar? I’m interested in the stats though. Do you have a link?
Russia is developing a new Black Sea port in occupied Abhkazia. Since it's not sovereign Russian territory I would hope there wouldn't be restrictions on missile attacks there?
We seem to have forgotten that Russia invaded Georgia back in 2008.
I haven't. I went to Georgia 2 years back and yearned to go to Abkhazia, it is meant to be stunningly beautiful, and the reason Georgia is sometimes cited as the *original* Garden of Eden
But it is strictly off limits, the new frontier is firmly shut, and getting in is highly dangerous if not impossible
I looked into going into Abkhazia when I visited Georgia last year. It does have a beautiful reputation, though now totally falling apart. It is possible to get a visa to cross from Georgia, and people do, but you couldn’t bring a car across which made it impractical.
I was told that you can get a visa, but don't do it, because it is so dangerous
But that might have been biased Georgians with an agenda?
The FCDO guidance is they recommend not going, but blogs etc seem more positive. A bit like say Mauritania: FCDO says don’t go unless you want to be kidnapped and your throat slit; other sources say go, it’s fascinating and the kidnap risk is only if you’re there long term like an NGO worker.
My friend is going there for a week before meeting two of us in Senegal next month.
The experience of colleagues who have passed through there for work is far more along the FCDO advice. They say you can go there but you are taking a massive risk.
Yes, that's exactly what I heard, and it firmly dissuaded me from going (despite my intense curiosity). Sounds like I was right!
I think he was referring to Mauritania, though I stand to be corrected.
Ah, OK! Looks like you're right
Personally, I wouldn't risk Mauritania, and I was happy to go to Ukraine during the war, twice. The risk/reward ratio is all wrong. ie Mauritania is not very interesting and is extremely dangerous. Ukraine is amazingly interesting (especially now) and it is quite dangerous, so you need to be careful
I am also looking at a trip to West Africa this winter. Dakar down to Sierra Leone. I feel I should see it at least once in my lifetime, even if it has a bad rep. Where are you going in Senegal and what are you doing, if I may ask?
I’m doing just over a week there. Dakar, then the overnight ferry down to Ziguinchor, couple of nights in inland Casamance at a campement, a quick sojourn at Cap Skirring then an internal flight back up to Dakar for a couple more days.
Guinea Bissau looks quaint though falling apart. Crossing the border was too much of a faff to bother with on our short trip.
Thanks! Genuinely helpful. I am putting together a tentative itinerary for early Jan
I want to do five countries in West Africa. Why? Because so far in my life I have visited 95 countries, and I am desperate to reach 100
I know, how childish is that? But that is my thinking. I am like a nervous Test batsman nearing a century. Do I keep nudging singles, or do I swing for a six and reach my ton in one go?
I'm swinging for a six. I'll probably get clean bowled - ie shot - in the Gambia
My friend has the same addiction. He had part of his honeymoon in Timor Leste last year and has just done Comoros and Bhutan in a month, such is the determination to tick off the countries.
(And that’s why he’s calling in on Mauritania).
Hah! I'm glad I'm not alone. Once I've reached 100 (ins'allah) I will probably develop a freshly neurotic target, like doing ALL the countries in central America so I can say I've gone from top to bottom: Northern canada down to Patagonia
The other big gaps in my map are the eastern middle east (Iraq, Iran, Saudi), central Asia, and central Africa
After all that I will be done. Sort of. Apart from the Pacific islands
Jesus I'm being boring, Soz
More interestingly, I got ChatGPT to deviise my itinerary last night as I lay awake jetlagged and insomniac, and it did so in an amusing way - it was deliberately trying to make me laugh - and it successully made me laugh - and it was insane - and it was like talking to an extremely funny human. Fucking FREAKY as SHIT
You need to set your sights on getting to the Chagos archipelago. The ultimate challenge.
A little bit on the tricky side, given it's military personnel (or contractors) only.
That’s Diego Garcia. The rest of the archipelago is almost but not completely impossible. Basically you can get there by your own yacht with a permit. Hence why it’s usually one of the final one or two places that country collectors manage to get to.
If the rumour is related to Starmer's legal career I really don't think it means much given cab rank rule
Does anyone have an example of The Truth, on any matter, first being revealed on Twatter?
As opposed to zillions of lies, bullshit, horseshit etc etc?
Yes, plenty
Otherwise the wokier powers-that-be would not be so exercised by Musk owning it: a social media site that spunked out nothing but misinformation would be quick disregarded. It would be like Russia Today, and everyone would look at it with skepticism and then probably ignore it entirely
However, the problem with TwiX is that the truth is mixed up with half truths and total lies - and that has always been the case
Twitter used to be a place where everyone, no matter what their political persuasion, hung out.
I think there is a very real chance now that it does end up fragmenting, following what has happened with broadcast and print media. In the last month, Bluesky really seems to have gotten awfully close to breakout.
Now, will it replace Twitter? Nope. But what looks entirely possible i that (for politics) left wingers will be on Bluesky, while right wingers on Twitter.
Twitter could lose its ubiquity.
Yes, I can see that happening, which means both sites will fail as "public squares" - which will be a damn shame, and a further silo-isation of discourse and polarisation of politics
However Blusky is still quite a long way from breakout and it is now encountering its own problems. The moderation there is as fierce as lefty Twitter back in the day. eg you get instantly silenced if not banned for anything deemed transphobic - say "there are only two genders" and it's bye bye
Try tweeting the word "cisgender" on Twitter and see what happens.
Apocryphally President Obama, on discovering that a thing was still happening, complained that he couldn't understand why it was still happening because he'd given a speech against it some weeks previously.
If SKS wants to stop the compilation of NHCI incidents, he's got a whole Government, Parliament and Civil Service to make them stop and over four years to do it in.
Russia is developing a new Black Sea port in occupied Abhkazia. Since it's not sovereign Russian territory I would hope there wouldn't be restrictions on missile attacks there?
We seem to have forgotten that Russia invaded Georgia back in 2008.
I haven't. I went to Georgia 2 years back and yearned to go to Abkhazia, it is meant to be stunningly beautiful, and the reason Georgia is sometimes cited as the *original* Garden of Eden
But it is strictly off limits, the new frontier is firmly shut, and getting in is highly dangerous if not impossible
I looked into going into Abkhazia when I visited Georgia last year. It does have a beautiful reputation, though now totally falling apart. It is possible to get a visa to cross from Georgia, and people do, but you couldn’t bring a car across which made it impractical.
I was told that you can get a visa, but don't do it, because it is so dangerous
But that might have been biased Georgians with an agenda?
The FCDO guidance is they recommend not going, but blogs etc seem more positive. A bit like say Mauritania: FCDO says don’t go unless you want to be kidnapped and your throat slit; other sources say go, it’s fascinating and the kidnap risk is only if you’re there long term like an NGO worker.
My friend is going there for a week before meeting two of us in Senegal next month.
The experience of colleagues who have passed through there for work is far more along the FCDO advice. They say you can go there but you are taking a massive risk.
Yes, that's exactly what I heard, and it firmly dissuaded me from going (despite my intense curiosity). Sounds like I was right!
I think he was referring to Mauritania, though I stand to be corrected.
Ah, OK! Looks like you're right
Personally, I wouldn't risk Mauritania, and I was happy to go to Ukraine during the war, twice. The risk/reward ratio is all wrong. ie Mauritania is not very interesting and is extremely dangerous. Ukraine is amazingly interesting (especially now) and it is quite dangerous, so you need to be careful
I am also looking at a trip to West Africa this winter. Dakar down to Sierra Leone. I feel I should see it at least once in my lifetime, even if it has a bad rep. Where are you going in Senegal and what are you doing, if I may ask?
I’m doing just over a week there. Dakar, then the overnight ferry down to Ziguinchor, couple of nights in inland Casamance at a campement, a quick sojourn at Cap Skirring then an internal flight back up to Dakar for a couple more days.
Guinea Bissau looks quaint though falling apart. Crossing the border was too much of a faff to bother with on our short trip.
Thanks! Genuinely helpful. I am putting together a tentative itinerary for early Jan
I want to do five countries in West Africa. Why? Because so far in my life I have visited 95 countries, and I am desperate to reach 100
I know, how childish is that? But that is my thinking. I am like a nervous Test batsman nearing a century. Do I keep nudging singles, or do I swing for a six and reach my ton in one go?
I'm swinging for a six. I'll probably get clean bowled - ie shot - in the Gambia
My friend has the same addiction. He had part of his honeymoon in Timor Leste last year and has just done Comoros and Bhutan in a month, such is the determination to tick off the countries.
(And that’s why he’s calling in on Mauritania).
Hah! I'm glad I'm not alone. Once I've reached 100 (ins'allah) I will probably develop a freshly neurotic target, like doing ALL the countries in central America so I can say I've gone from top to bottom: Northern canada down to Patagonia
The other big gaps in my map are the eastern middle east (Iraq, Iran, Saudi), central Asia, and central Africa
After all that I will be done. Sort of. Apart from the Pacific islands
Jesus I'm being boring, Soz
More interestingly, I got ChatGPT to deviise my itinerary last night as I lay awake jetlagged and insomniac, and it did so in an amusing way - it was deliberately trying to make me laugh - and it successully made me laugh - and it was insane - and it was like talking to an extremely funny human. Fucking FREAKY as SHIT
You need to set your sights on getting to the Chagos archipelago. The ultimate challenge.
Not really (I imagine you are joking)
My top five remaining targets in terms of countries are
North Korea (I mean, my God) Mongolia Congo Nicaragua Papua New Guinea
in terms of pure remoteness I would love to go to northeast Siberia, one of those insane hideous towns on the Yenesei river. I'd also like to experience total winter darkness, perhaps in Svalbard
And Socotra, the Cocos, Kerguelen, south Georgia, those mad Andaman fuckers, and Pitcairn, and....
OK there's still a lot of places to go.
I'm sure PB could have a whip round to fund a trip to North Korea!!
Please do! I keep asking my editor to send me to Pyongyang but he is less than keen (and he is normally amenable to my travel ideas)
I reckon a trip to North Korea would be mind blowing. I hear the women are stunning and the food is dire, and the whole experience is totally compelling
Russia is developing a new Black Sea port in occupied Abhkazia. Since it's not sovereign Russian territory I would hope there wouldn't be restrictions on missile attacks there?
We seem to have forgotten that Russia invaded Georgia back in 2008.
I haven't. I went to Georgia 2 years back and yearned to go to Abkhazia, it is meant to be stunningly beautiful, and the reason Georgia is sometimes cited as the *original* Garden of Eden
But it is strictly off limits, the new frontier is firmly shut, and getting in is highly dangerous if not impossible
I looked into going into Abkhazia when I visited Georgia last year. It does have a beautiful reputation, though now totally falling apart. It is possible to get a visa to cross from Georgia, and people do, but you couldn’t bring a car across which made it impractical.
I was told that you can get a visa, but don't do it, because it is so dangerous
But that might have been biased Georgians with an agenda?
The FCDO guidance is they recommend not going, but blogs etc seem more positive. A bit like say Mauritania: FCDO says don’t go unless you want to be kidnapped and your throat slit; other sources say go, it’s fascinating and the kidnap risk is only if you’re there long term like an NGO worker.
My friend is going there for a week before meeting two of us in Senegal next month.
The experience of colleagues who have passed through there for work is far more along the FCDO advice. They say you can go there but you are taking a massive risk.
Yes, that's exactly what I heard, and it firmly dissuaded me from going (despite my intense curiosity). Sounds like I was right!
I think he was referring to Mauritania, though I stand to be corrected.
Ah, OK! Looks like you're right
Personally, I wouldn't risk Mauritania, and I was happy to go to Ukraine during the war, twice. The risk/reward ratio is all wrong. ie Mauritania is not very interesting and is extremely dangerous. Ukraine is amazingly interesting (especially now) and it is quite dangerous, so you need to be careful
I am also looking at a trip to West Africa this winter. Dakar down to Sierra Leone. I feel I should see it at least once in my lifetime, even if it has a bad rep. Where are you going in Senegal and what are you doing, if I may ask?
I’m doing just over a week there. Dakar, then the overnight ferry down to Ziguinchor, couple of nights in inland Casamance at a campement, a quick sojourn at Cap Skirring then an internal flight back up to Dakar for a couple more days.
Guinea Bissau looks quaint though falling apart. Crossing the border was too much of a faff to bother with on our short trip.
Thanks! Genuinely helpful. I am putting together a tentative itinerary for early Jan
I want to do five countries in West Africa. Why? Because so far in my life I have visited 95 countries, and I am desperate to reach 100
I know, how childish is that? But that is my thinking. I am like a nervous Test batsman nearing a century. Do I keep nudging singles, or do I swing for a six and reach my ton in one go?
I'm swinging for a six. I'll probably get clean bowled - ie shot - in the Gambia
My friend has the same addiction. He had part of his honeymoon in Timor Leste last year and has just done Comoros and Bhutan in a month, such is the determination to tick off the countries.
(And that’s why he’s calling in on Mauritania).
Hah! I'm glad I'm not alone. Once I've reached 100 (ins'allah) I will probably develop a freshly neurotic target, like doing ALL the countries in central America so I can say I've gone from top to bottom: Northern canada down to Patagonia
The other big gaps in my map are the eastern middle east (Iraq, Iran, Saudi), central Asia, and central Africa
After all that I will be done. Sort of. Apart from the Pacific islands
Jesus I'm being boring, Soz
More interestingly, I got ChatGPT to deviise my itinerary last night as I lay awake jetlagged and insomniac, and it did so in an amusing way - it was deliberately trying to make me laugh - and it successully made me laugh - and it was insane - and it was like talking to an extremely funny human. Fucking FREAKY as SHIT
You need to set your sights on getting to the Chagos archipelago. The ultimate challenge.
Not really (I imagine you are joking)
My top five remaining targets in terms of countries are
North Korea (I mean, my God) Mongolia Congo Nicaragua Papua New Guinea
in terms of pure remoteness I would love to go to northeast Siberia, one of those insane hideous towns on the Yenesei river. I'd also like to experience total winter darkness, perhaps in Svalbard
And Socotra, the Cocos, Kerguelen, south Georgia, those mad Andaman fuckers, and Pitcairn, and....
OK there's still a lot of places to go.
A friend of mine did one of the NK trips. She said it was interesting but the novelty of the controlled experience ran out quite quickly, and then it was frustrating.
Yes, but a rightwinger simply ignores or mutes a tedious debater, lefties want debaters they dislike silenced, and by law, if necessary
That is a pretty enormous difference
Not sure that the ‘in law’ part is particularly accurate, and is certainly not universal. And without that clause in your argument I can’t see the difference between muted and silenced from a listeners perspective.
We see it in stats on social attitudes. Rightwingers are happy to interact with or date or fuck or have a pint with lefties, lefties do not offer the same generous sociability to rightwingers. "Never kissed a Tory" is not just a meme, it is a behavioural phenomenon, and it is sad and somewhat pathetic
Some would say that the Trumpian attacks on Democrats as ‘communism’ are similar? I’m interested in the stats though. Do you have a link?
Many studies have found this
"The more left-leaning someone is, the less likely he or she will accept others with a different worldview. That is the remarkable conclusion of a new study."
"Does the left have a problem with empathy? In our polarised political landscape, it's hard to love our enemies. New evidence suggests that the left find it especially challenging to empathise with the right."
The Biden decision on unleashing ATACAMS could have done with being a few days earlier (months or years, actually, but current circumstances are pressing).
Short Kursk update🧵
Russian 76 elite VDV division has arrived to Kursk area. And, unfortunately, at my flank. Right now 4000 men and approximately 100 AFV are ready for attack.
Russia is developing a new Black Sea port in occupied Abhkazia. Since it's not sovereign Russian territory I would hope there wouldn't be restrictions on missile attacks there?
We seem to have forgotten that Russia invaded Georgia back in 2008.
I haven't. I went to Georgia 2 years back and yearned to go to Abkhazia, it is meant to be stunningly beautiful, and the reason Georgia is sometimes cited as the *original* Garden of Eden
But it is strictly off limits, the new frontier is firmly shut, and getting in is highly dangerous if not impossible
I looked into going into Abkhazia when I visited Georgia last year. It does have a beautiful reputation, though now totally falling apart. It is possible to get a visa to cross from Georgia, and people do, but you couldn’t bring a car across which made it impractical.
I was told that you can get a visa, but don't do it, because it is so dangerous
But that might have been biased Georgians with an agenda?
The FCDO guidance is they recommend not going, but blogs etc seem more positive. A bit like say Mauritania: FCDO says don’t go unless you want to be kidnapped and your throat slit; other sources say go, it’s fascinating and the kidnap risk is only if you’re there long term like an NGO worker.
My friend is going there for a week before meeting two of us in Senegal next month.
The experience of colleagues who have passed through there for work is far more along the FCDO advice. They say you can go there but you are taking a massive risk.
Yes, that's exactly what I heard, and it firmly dissuaded me from going (despite my intense curiosity). Sounds like I was right!
I think he was referring to Mauritania, though I stand to be corrected.
Ah, OK! Looks like you're right
Personally, I wouldn't risk Mauritania, and I was happy to go to Ukraine during the war, twice. The risk/reward ratio is all wrong. ie Mauritania is not very interesting and is extremely dangerous. Ukraine is amazingly interesting (especially now) and it is quite dangerous, so you need to be careful
I am also looking at a trip to West Africa this winter. Dakar down to Sierra Leone. I feel I should see it at least once in my lifetime, even if it has a bad rep. Where are you going in Senegal and what are you doing, if I may ask?
I’m doing just over a week there. Dakar, then the overnight ferry down to Ziguinchor, couple of nights in inland Casamance at a campement, a quick sojourn at Cap Skirring then an internal flight back up to Dakar for a couple more days.
Guinea Bissau looks quaint though falling apart. Crossing the border was too much of a faff to bother with on our short trip.
Thanks! Genuinely helpful. I am putting together a tentative itinerary for early Jan
I want to do five countries in West Africa. Why? Because so far in my life I have visited 95 countries, and I am desperate to reach 100
I know, how childish is that? But that is my thinking. I am like a nervous Test batsman nearing a century. Do I keep nudging singles, or do I swing for a six and reach my ton in one go?
I'm swinging for a six. I'll probably get clean bowled - ie shot - in the Gambia
My friend has the same addiction. He had part of his honeymoon in Timor Leste last year and has just done Comoros and Bhutan in a month, such is the determination to tick off the countries.
(And that’s why he’s calling in on Mauritania).
Hah! I'm glad I'm not alone. Once I've reached 100 (ins'allah) I will probably develop a freshly neurotic target, like doing ALL the countries in central America so I can say I've gone from top to bottom: Northern canada down to Patagonia
The other big gaps in my map are the eastern middle east (Iraq, Iran, Saudi), central Asia, and central Africa
After all that I will be done. Sort of. Apart from the Pacific islands
Jesus I'm being boring, Soz
More interestingly, I got ChatGPT to deviise my itinerary last night as I lay awake jetlagged and insomniac, and it did so in an amusing way - it was deliberately trying to make me laugh - and it successully made me laugh - and it was insane - and it was like talking to an extremely funny human. Fucking FREAKY as SHIT
You need to set your sights on getting to the Chagos archipelago. The ultimate challenge.
A little bit on the tricky side, given it's military personnel (or contractors) only.
That’s Diego Garcia. The rest of the archipelago is almost but not completely impossible. Basically you can get there by your own yacht with a permit. Hence why it’s usually one of the final one or two places that country collectors manage to get to.
Renowned travel writer Simon Winchester went to Chagos when researching Outposts ('Journeys to the surviving relics of the British Empire'). He was, predictably, given the bum's rush by our American tenants.
Russia is developing a new Black Sea port in occupied Abhkazia. Since it's not sovereign Russian territory I would hope there wouldn't be restrictions on missile attacks there?
We seem to have forgotten that Russia invaded Georgia back in 2008.
I haven't. I went to Georgia 2 years back and yearned to go to Abkhazia, it is meant to be stunningly beautiful, and the reason Georgia is sometimes cited as the *original* Garden of Eden
But it is strictly off limits, the new frontier is firmly shut, and getting in is highly dangerous if not impossible
I looked into going into Abkhazia when I visited Georgia last year. It does have a beautiful reputation, though now totally falling apart. It is possible to get a visa to cross from Georgia, and people do, but you couldn’t bring a car across which made it impractical.
I was told that you can get a visa, but don't do it, because it is so dangerous
But that might have been biased Georgians with an agenda?
The FCDO guidance is they recommend not going, but blogs etc seem more positive. A bit like say Mauritania: FCDO says don’t go unless you want to be kidnapped and your throat slit; other sources say go, it’s fascinating and the kidnap risk is only if you’re there long term like an NGO worker.
My friend is going there for a week before meeting two of us in Senegal next month.
The experience of colleagues who have passed through there for work is far more along the FCDO advice. They say you can go there but you are taking a massive risk.
Yes, that's exactly what I heard, and it firmly dissuaded me from going (despite my intense curiosity). Sounds like I was right!
I think he was referring to Mauritania, though I stand to be corrected.
Ah, OK! Looks like you're right
Personally, I wouldn't risk Mauritania, and I was happy to go to Ukraine during the war, twice. The risk/reward ratio is all wrong. ie Mauritania is not very interesting and is extremely dangerous. Ukraine is amazingly interesting (especially now) and it is quite dangerous, so you need to be careful
I am also looking at a trip to West Africa this winter. Dakar down to Sierra Leone. I feel I should see it at least once in my lifetime, even if it has a bad rep. Where are you going in Senegal and what are you doing, if I may ask?
I’m doing just over a week there. Dakar, then the overnight ferry down to Ziguinchor, couple of nights in inland Casamance at a campement, a quick sojourn at Cap Skirring then an internal flight back up to Dakar for a couple more days.
Guinea Bissau looks quaint though falling apart. Crossing the border was too much of a faff to bother with on our short trip.
Thanks! Genuinely helpful. I am putting together a tentative itinerary for early Jan
I want to do five countries in West Africa. Why? Because so far in my life I have visited 95 countries, and I am desperate to reach 100
I know, how childish is that? But that is my thinking. I am like a nervous Test batsman nearing a century. Do I keep nudging singles, or do I swing for a six and reach my ton in one go?
I'm swinging for a six. I'll probably get clean bowled - ie shot - in the Gambia
My friend has the same addiction. He had part of his honeymoon in Timor Leste last year and has just done Comoros and Bhutan in a month, such is the determination to tick off the countries.
(And that’s why he’s calling in on Mauritania).
Hah! I'm glad I'm not alone. Once I've reached 100 (ins'allah) I will probably develop a freshly neurotic target, like doing ALL the countries in central America so I can say I've gone from top to bottom: Northern canada down to Patagonia
The other big gaps in my map are the eastern middle east (Iraq, Iran, Saudi), central Asia, and central Africa
After all that I will be done. Sort of. Apart from the Pacific islands
Jesus I'm being boring, Soz
More interestingly, I got ChatGPT to deviise my itinerary last night as I lay awake jetlagged and insomniac, and it did so in an amusing way - it was deliberately trying to make me laugh - and it successully made me laugh - and it was insane - and it was like talking to an extremely funny human. Fucking FREAKY as SHIT
You need to set your sights on getting to the Chagos archipelago. The ultimate challenge.
Not really (I imagine you are joking)
My top five remaining targets in terms of countries are
North Korea (I mean, my God) Mongolia Congo Nicaragua Papua New Guinea
in terms of pure remoteness I would love to go to northeast Siberia, one of those insane hideous towns on the Yenesei river. I'd also like to experience total winter darkness, perhaps in Svalbard
And Socotra, the Cocos, Kerguelen, south Georgia, those mad Andaman fuckers, and Pitcairn, and....
OK there's still a lot of places to go.
Nicaragua is a great place. Loads to see and do, good weather in the right season and gratifyingly cheap. Also I had a very odd and barely believable experience there once - one of my very few brushes with the secret world.
PNG is a crime-ridden, humid, mosquito-infested dump - Indonesia next door is way better and much better value generally. I really don't recommend it.
Russia is developing a new Black Sea port in occupied Abhkazia. Since it's not sovereign Russian territory I would hope there wouldn't be restrictions on missile attacks there?
We seem to have forgotten that Russia invaded Georgia back in 2008.
I haven't. I went to Georgia 2 years back and yearned to go to Abkhazia, it is meant to be stunningly beautiful, and the reason Georgia is sometimes cited as the *original* Garden of Eden
But it is strictly off limits, the new frontier is firmly shut, and getting in is highly dangerous if not impossible
I looked into going into Abkhazia when I visited Georgia last year. It does have a beautiful reputation, though now totally falling apart. It is possible to get a visa to cross from Georgia, and people do, but you couldn’t bring a car across which made it impractical.
I was told that you can get a visa, but don't do it, because it is so dangerous
But that might have been biased Georgians with an agenda?
The FCDO guidance is they recommend not going, but blogs etc seem more positive. A bit like say Mauritania: FCDO says don’t go unless you want to be kidnapped and your throat slit; other sources say go, it’s fascinating and the kidnap risk is only if you’re there long term like an NGO worker.
My friend is going there for a week before meeting two of us in Senegal next month.
The experience of colleagues who have passed through there for work is far more along the FCDO advice. They say you can go there but you are taking a massive risk.
Yes, that's exactly what I heard, and it firmly dissuaded me from going (despite my intense curiosity). Sounds like I was right!
I think he was referring to Mauritania, though I stand to be corrected.
Ah, OK! Looks like you're right
Personally, I wouldn't risk Mauritania, and I was happy to go to Ukraine during the war, twice. The risk/reward ratio is all wrong. ie Mauritania is not very interesting and is extremely dangerous. Ukraine is amazingly interesting (especially now) and it is quite dangerous, so you need to be careful
I am also looking at a trip to West Africa this winter. Dakar down to Sierra Leone. I feel I should see it at least once in my lifetime, even if it has a bad rep. Where are you going in Senegal and what are you doing, if I may ask?
I’m doing just over a week there. Dakar, then the overnight ferry down to Ziguinchor, couple of nights in inland Casamance at a campement, a quick sojourn at Cap Skirring then an internal flight back up to Dakar for a couple more days.
Guinea Bissau looks quaint though falling apart. Crossing the border was too much of a faff to bother with on our short trip.
Thanks! Genuinely helpful. I am putting together a tentative itinerary for early Jan
I want to do five countries in West Africa. Why? Because so far in my life I have visited 95 countries, and I am desperate to reach 100
I know, how childish is that? But that is my thinking. I am like a nervous Test batsman nearing a century. Do I keep nudging singles, or do I swing for a six and reach my ton in one go?
I'm swinging for a six. I'll probably get clean bowled - ie shot - in the Gambia
My friend has the same addiction. He had part of his honeymoon in Timor Leste last year and has just done Comoros and Bhutan in a month, such is the determination to tick off the countries.
(And that’s why he’s calling in on Mauritania).
Hah! I'm glad I'm not alone. Once I've reached 100 (ins'allah) I will probably develop a freshly neurotic target, like doing ALL the countries in central America so I can say I've gone from top to bottom: Northern canada down to Patagonia
The other big gaps in my map are the eastern middle east (Iraq, Iran, Saudi), central Asia, and central Africa
After all that I will be done. Sort of. Apart from the Pacific islands
Jesus I'm being boring, Soz
More interestingly, I got ChatGPT to deviise my itinerary last night as I lay awake jetlagged and insomniac, and it did so in an amusing way - it was deliberately trying to make me laugh - and it successully made me laugh - and it was insane - and it was like talking to an extremely funny human. Fucking FREAKY as SHIT
You need to set your sights on getting to the Chagos archipelago. The ultimate challenge.
Not really (I imagine you are joking)
My top five remaining targets in terms of countries are
North Korea (I mean, my God) Mongolia Congo Nicaragua Papua New Guinea
in terms of pure remoteness I would love to go to northeast Siberia, one of those insane hideous towns on the Yenesei river. I'd also like to experience total winter darkness, perhaps in Svalbard
And Socotra, the Cocos, Kerguelen, south Georgia, those mad Andaman fuckers, and Pitcairn, and....
OK there's still a lot of places to go.
I'm sure PB could have a whip round to fund a trip to North Korea!!
Please do! I keep asking my editor to send me to Pyongyang but he is less than keen (and he is normally amenable to my travel ideas)
I reckon a trip to North Korea would be mind blowing. I hear the women are stunning and the food is dire, and the whole experience is totally compelling
We did the North Korea tour they allow foreigners to do, it's very, very weird. You don't get to speak to any citizens, it's a Potemkin village you get to visit and from what I remember you don't get any food.
I've spoken to someone who went not as a tourist, I didn't ask him how because he didn't seem like he'd have told me but I assume as a spy, but his experience just struck me as depressing for the few months he was there. The people are malnourished, the reputation of women being very beautiful isn't true at least according to him, it's something that NK spread to make it seem like their way of life is superior to SK. He said the reality for NK women is backbreaking farm labour with 70% of the necessary calorie intake so they all look gaunt.
The women you see from the tourist bus we went on as you go through the Potemkin village are all stunningly beautiful but really that's not a surprise is it.
Russia is developing a new Black Sea port in occupied Abhkazia. Since it's not sovereign Russian territory I would hope there wouldn't be restrictions on missile attacks there?
We seem to have forgotten that Russia invaded Georgia back in 2008.
I haven't. I went to Georgia 2 years back and yearned to go to Abkhazia, it is meant to be stunningly beautiful, and the reason Georgia is sometimes cited as the *original* Garden of Eden
But it is strictly off limits, the new frontier is firmly shut, and getting in is highly dangerous if not impossible
I looked into going into Abkhazia when I visited Georgia last year. It does have a beautiful reputation, though now totally falling apart. It is possible to get a visa to cross from Georgia, and people do, but you couldn’t bring a car across which made it impractical.
I was told that you can get a visa, but don't do it, because it is so dangerous
But that might have been biased Georgians with an agenda?
The FCDO guidance is they recommend not going, but blogs etc seem more positive. A bit like say Mauritania: FCDO says don’t go unless you want to be kidnapped and your throat slit; other sources say go, it’s fascinating and the kidnap risk is only if you’re there long term like an NGO worker.
My friend is going there for a week before meeting two of us in Senegal next month.
The experience of colleagues who have passed through there for work is far more along the FCDO advice. They say you can go there but you are taking a massive risk.
Yes, that's exactly what I heard, and it firmly dissuaded me from going (despite my intense curiosity). Sounds like I was right!
I think he was referring to Mauritania, though I stand to be corrected.
Ah, OK! Looks like you're right
Personally, I wouldn't risk Mauritania, and I was happy to go to Ukraine during the war, twice. The risk/reward ratio is all wrong. ie Mauritania is not very interesting and is extremely dangerous. Ukraine is amazingly interesting (especially now) and it is quite dangerous, so you need to be careful
I am also looking at a trip to West Africa this winter. Dakar down to Sierra Leone. I feel I should see it at least once in my lifetime, even if it has a bad rep. Where are you going in Senegal and what are you doing, if I may ask?
I’m doing just over a week there. Dakar, then the overnight ferry down to Ziguinchor, couple of nights in inland Casamance at a campement, a quick sojourn at Cap Skirring then an internal flight back up to Dakar for a couple more days.
Guinea Bissau looks quaint though falling apart. Crossing the border was too much of a faff to bother with on our short trip.
Thanks! Genuinely helpful. I am putting together a tentative itinerary for early Jan
I want to do five countries in West Africa. Why? Because so far in my life I have visited 95 countries, and I am desperate to reach 100
I know, how childish is that? But that is my thinking. I am like a nervous Test batsman nearing a century. Do I keep nudging singles, or do I swing for a six and reach my ton in one go?
I'm swinging for a six. I'll probably get clean bowled - ie shot - in the Gambia
My friend has the same addiction. He had part of his honeymoon in Timor Leste last year and has just done Comoros and Bhutan in a month, such is the determination to tick off the countries.
(And that’s why he’s calling in on Mauritania).
Hah! I'm glad I'm not alone. Once I've reached 100 (ins'allah) I will probably develop a freshly neurotic target, like doing ALL the countries in central America so I can say I've gone from top to bottom: Northern canada down to Patagonia
The other big gaps in my map are the eastern middle east (Iraq, Iran, Saudi), central Asia, and central Africa
After all that I will be done. Sort of. Apart from the Pacific islands
Jesus I'm being boring, Soz
More interestingly, I got ChatGPT to deviise my itinerary last night as I lay awake jetlagged and insomniac, and it did so in an amusing way - it was deliberately trying to make me laugh - and it successully made me laugh - and it was insane - and it was like talking to an extremely funny human. Fucking FREAKY as SHIT
You need to set your sights on getting to the Chagos archipelago. The ultimate challenge.
Not really (I imagine you are joking)
My top five remaining targets in terms of countries are
North Korea (I mean, my God) Mongolia Congo Nicaragua Papua New Guinea
in terms of pure remoteness I would love to go to northeast Siberia, one of those insane hideous towns on the Yenesei river. I'd also like to experience total winter darkness, perhaps in Svalbard
And Socotra, the Cocos, Kerguelen, south Georgia, those mad Andaman fuckers, and Pitcairn, and....
OK there's still a lot of places to go.
I'm sure PB could have a whip round to fund a trip to North Korea!!
Please do! I keep asking my editor to send me to Pyongyang but he is less than keen (and he is normally amenable to my travel ideas)
I reckon a trip to North Korea would be mind blowing. I hear the women are stunning and the food is dire, and the whole experience is totally compelling
Presumably your editor is none to keen on trying to get you back once you've fallen for pure communism.
A left Bluesky/right X split would lead to a much lower combined value than a unified service. Plus choosing to use/share links for one would in itself be a signal of which side one is on, which doesn't strike me as a positive development.
Tend to agree. I'm puzzled by the sweeping judgments on X/Twitter - essentially you only get views from people you've signed up to hear from. That's quite selective enough, indeed arguably too selective. Maybe typical users read all kinds of stuff, and then get upset?
I just would have presumed that would be somebodies job to pre-programme all these into twitter bot to automatically send out the relevant tweets for all these kind of occasions.
A left Bluesky/right X split would lead to a much lower combined value than a unified service. Plus choosing to use/share links for one would in itself be a signal of which side one is on, which doesn't strike me as a positive development.
Tend to agree. I'm puzzled by the sweeping judgments on X/Twitter - essentially you only get views from people you've signed up to hear from. That's quite selective enough, indeed arguably too selective. Maybe typical users read all kinds of stuff, and then get upset?
Yes, but the replies underneath are dominated by people who have paid, not people who are interesting to hear from.
The Biden decision on unleashing ATACAMS could have done with being a few days earlier (months or years, actually, but current circumstances are pressing).
Short Kursk update🧵
Russian 76 elite VDV division has arrived to Kursk area. And, unfortunately, at my flank. Right now 4000 men and approximately 100 AFV are ready for attack.
The Biden decision on unleashing ATACAMS could have done with being a few days earlier (months or years, actually, but current circumstances are pressing).
Short Kursk update🧵
Russian 76 elite VDV division has arrived to Kursk area. And, unfortunately, at my flank. Right now 4000 men and approximately 100 AFV are ready for attack.
I just would have presumed that would be somebodies job to pre-programme all these into twitter bot to automatically send out the relevant tweets for all these kind of occasions.
Hmmm. Though I do remember a similar automated system getting KFC in a lot of trouble in Germany in 2022 because the bot didn't recognise the significance of Kristalnacht and sent out:
""It's memorial day for Kristallnacht! Treat yourself with more tender cheese on your crispy chicken. Now at KFCheese!"
You can see why organisations might be wary of using automated systems for this sort of thing.
Russia is developing a new Black Sea port in occupied Abhkazia. Since it's not sovereign Russian territory I would hope there wouldn't be restrictions on missile attacks there?
We seem to have forgotten that Russia invaded Georgia back in 2008.
I haven't. I went to Georgia 2 years back and yearned to go to Abkhazia, it is meant to be stunningly beautiful, and the reason Georgia is sometimes cited as the *original* Garden of Eden
But it is strictly off limits, the new frontier is firmly shut, and getting in is highly dangerous if not impossible
I looked into going into Abkhazia when I visited Georgia last year. It does have a beautiful reputation, though now totally falling apart. It is possible to get a visa to cross from Georgia, and people do, but you couldn’t bring a car across which made it impractical.
I was told that you can get a visa, but don't do it, because it is so dangerous
But that might have been biased Georgians with an agenda?
The FCDO guidance is they recommend not going, but blogs etc seem more positive. A bit like say Mauritania: FCDO says don’t go unless you want to be kidnapped and your throat slit; other sources say go, it’s fascinating and the kidnap risk is only if you’re there long term like an NGO worker.
My friend is going there for a week before meeting two of us in Senegal next month.
The experience of colleagues who have passed through there for work is far more along the FCDO advice. They say you can go there but you are taking a massive risk.
I’ll (not) tell my friend!
I would tell them to be very careful and not draw attention to themselves even in the Capital. Islamic terrorist groups are very active there.
I just would have presumed that would be somebodies job to pre-programme all these into twitter bot to automatically send out the relevant tweets for all these kind of occasions.
Hmmm. Though I do remember a similar automated system getting KFC in a lot of trouble in Germany in 2022 because the bot didn't recognise the significance of Kristalnacht and sent out:
""It's memorial day for Kristallnacht! Treat yourself with more tender cheese on your crispy chicken. Now at KFCheese!"
You can see why organisations might be wary of using automated systems for this sort of thing.
No, you misunderstood what I meant by a bot. I don't mean an AI LLM. There are tweet "bot" systems that allow you to queue up loads of pre made tweets and you set time / date you want them sending out. Its a standard way that businesses operate, where they look at optimal time for getting engagement and schedule their advertising tweets.
I presumed there were be a member of the #10 spin operation that sits down and goes through the calendar and looks at all the things that the PM will be expected to tweet about and queue up for example tweets for all these standard religious festivals.
Yes, but a rightwinger simply ignores or mutes a tedious debater, lefties want debaters they dislike silenced, and by law, if necessary
That is a pretty enormous difference
Not sure that the ‘in law’ part is particularly accurate, and is certainly not universal. And without that clause in your argument I can’t see the difference between muted and silenced from a listeners perspective.
We see it in stats on social attitudes. Rightwingers are happy to interact with or date or fuck or have a pint with lefties, lefties do not offer the same generous sociability to rightwingers. "Never kissed a Tory" is not just a meme, it is a behavioural phenomenon, and it is sad and somewhat pathetic
Some would say that the Trumpian attacks on Democrats as ‘communism’ are similar? I’m interested in the stats though. Do you have a link?
Many studies have found this
"The more left-leaning someone is, the less likely he or she will accept others with a different worldview. That is the remarkable conclusion of a new study."
"Does the left have a problem with empathy? In our polarised political landscape, it's hard to love our enemies. New evidence suggests that the left find it especially challenging to empathise with the right."
I don't find that remotely surprising. The essence of a left-wing worldview is cooperation and empathy with others, and you can't really empathise with someone whose beliefs are fundamentally at odds to your own. But right-wingers are individualists; empathy isn't so important to them, and friendships and relationships are more utilitarian. Because they don't care so much about the views of others, those views are less of a barrier to a relationship.
Yes, but a rightwinger simply ignores or mutes a tedious debater, lefties want debaters they dislike silenced, and by law, if necessary
That is a pretty enormous difference
Not sure that the ‘in law’ part is particularly accurate, and is certainly not universal. And without that clause in your argument I can’t see the difference between muted and silenced from a listeners perspective.
We see it in stats on social attitudes. Rightwingers are happy to interact with or date or fuck or have a pint with lefties, lefties do not offer the same generous sociability to rightwingers. "Never kissed a Tory" is not just a meme, it is a behavioural phenomenon, and it is sad and somewhat pathetic
Some would say that the Trumpian attacks on Democrats as ‘communism’ are similar? I’m interested in the stats though. Do you have a link?
Many studies have found this
"The more left-leaning someone is, the less likely he or she will accept others with a different worldview. That is the remarkable conclusion of a new study."
"Does the left have a problem with empathy? In our polarised political landscape, it's hard to love our enemies. New evidence suggests that the left find it especially challenging to empathise with the right."
I don't find that remotely surprising. The essence of a left-wing worldview is cooperation and empathy with others, and you can't really empathise with someone whose beliefs are fundamentally at odds to your own. But right-wingers are individualists; empathy isn't so important to them, and friendships and relationships are more utilitarian. Because they don't care so much about the views of others, those views are less of a barrier to a relationship.
That is literally the definition of empathy.
Personally I don't find it that hard to understand the motivation why people voted Corbyn. Nor those who voted Trump. When I don't agree with Corbyn or Trump.
Yes, but a rightwinger simply ignores or mutes a tedious debater, lefties want debaters they dislike silenced, and by law, if necessary
That is a pretty enormous difference
Not sure that the ‘in law’ part is particularly accurate, and is certainly not universal. And without that clause in your argument I can’t see the difference between muted and silenced from a listeners perspective.
We see it in stats on social attitudes. Rightwingers are happy to interact with or date or fuck or have a pint with lefties, lefties do not offer the same generous sociability to rightwingers. "Never kissed a Tory" is not just a meme, it is a behavioural phenomenon, and it is sad and somewhat pathetic
Some would say that the Trumpian attacks on Democrats as ‘communism’ are similar? I’m interested in the stats though. Do you have a link?
Many studies have found this
"The more left-leaning someone is, the less likely he or she will accept others with a different worldview. That is the remarkable conclusion of a new study."
"Does the left have a problem with empathy? In our polarised political landscape, it's hard to love our enemies. New evidence suggests that the left find it especially challenging to empathise with the right."
I don't find that remotely surprising. The essence of a left-wing worldview is cooperation and empathy with others, and you can't really empathise with someone whose beliefs are fundamentally at odds to your own. But right-wingers are individualists; empathy isn't so important to them, and friendships and relationships are more utilitarian. Because they don't care so much about the views of others, those views are less of a barrier to a relationship.
That is literally the definition of empathy.
Personally I don't find it that hard to understand the motivation why people voted Corbyn. Nor those who voted Trump. When I don't agree with Corbyn or Trump.
Understanding someone's motives isn't the same as empathising with them. The dictionary definition of empathy is "the ability to understand and share the feelings of another". The share bit is important to lefties.
Yes, but a rightwinger simply ignores or mutes a tedious debater, lefties want debaters they dislike silenced, and by law, if necessary
That is a pretty enormous difference
Not sure that the ‘in law’ part is particularly accurate, and is certainly not universal. And without that clause in your argument I can’t see the difference between muted and silenced from a listeners perspective.
We see it in stats on social attitudes. Rightwingers are happy to interact with or date or fuck or have a pint with lefties, lefties do not offer the same generous sociability to rightwingers. "Never kissed a Tory" is not just a meme, it is a behavioural phenomenon, and it is sad and somewhat pathetic
Some would say that the Trumpian attacks on Democrats as ‘communism’ are similar? I’m interested in the stats though. Do you have a link?
Many studies have found this
"The more left-leaning someone is, the less likely he or she will accept others with a different worldview. That is the remarkable conclusion of a new study."
"Does the left have a problem with empathy? In our polarised political landscape, it's hard to love our enemies. New evidence suggests that the left find it especially challenging to empathise with the right."
I don't find that remotely surprising. The essence of a left-wing worldview is cooperation and empathy with others, and you can't really empathise with someone whose beliefs are fundamentally at odds to your own. But right-wingers are individualists; empathy isn't so important to them, and friendships and relationships are more utilitarian. Because they don't care so much about the views of others, those views are less of a barrier to a relationship.
That is literally the definition of empathy.
Personally I don't find it that hard to understand the motivation why people voted Corbyn. Nor those who voted Trump. When I don't agree with Corbyn or Trump.
Understanding someone's motives isn't the same as empathising with them. The dictionary definition of empathy is "the ability to understand and share the feelings of another". The share bit is important to lefties.
"Possibly share" is the the common full definition...
"Empathy is generally described as the ability to take on other's perspective, to understand, feel, and possibly share and respond to their experience"
So what you are saying is because you must share this, you can never empathise with anybody who doesn't have a left wing world view. IMO, That is very closed view of the world.
I can empathise with Corbyn voters, I can see how the working man has had a raw deal, how they are struggling, how they aren't getting a fair shake. I can even share some part of that opinion. I just totally disagree with Corbyn's solution.
Unless they get better track access agreements than amtrak that's going to be for tourists only. Arrive 9am if you're lucky or 9pm if you're not. Nice to see new private trains though.
Brightline is doing rather well (though smashing up lots of cars at level crossings):
Yes, but a rightwinger simply ignores or mutes a tedious debater, lefties want debaters they dislike silenced, and by law, if necessary
That is a pretty enormous difference
Not sure that the ‘in law’ part is particularly accurate, and is certainly not universal. And without that clause in your argument I can’t see the difference between muted and silenced from a listeners perspective.
We see it in stats on social attitudes. Rightwingers are happy to interact with or date or fuck or have a pint with lefties, lefties do not offer the same generous sociability to rightwingers. "Never kissed a Tory" is not just a meme, it is a behavioural phenomenon, and it is sad and somewhat pathetic
Some would say that the Trumpian attacks on Democrats as ‘communism’ are similar? I’m interested in the stats though. Do you have a link?
Many studies have found this
"The more left-leaning someone is, the less likely he or she will accept others with a different worldview. That is the remarkable conclusion of a new study."
"Does the left have a problem with empathy? In our polarised political landscape, it's hard to love our enemies. New evidence suggests that the left find it especially challenging to empathise with the right."
I don't find that remotely surprising. The essence of a left-wing worldview is cooperation and empathy with others, and you can't really empathise with someone whose beliefs are fundamentally at odds to your own. But right-wingers are individualists; empathy isn't so important to them, and friendships and relationships are more utilitarian. Because they don't care so much about the views of others, those views are less of a barrier to a relationship.
That is literally the definition of empathy.
Personally I don't find it that hard to understand the motivation why people voted Corbyn. Nor those who voted Trump. When I don't agree with Corbyn or Trump.
Understanding someone's motives isn't the same as empathising with them. The dictionary definition of empathy is "the ability to understand and share the feelings of another". The share bit is important to lefties.
Only agreeing and sharing the views of those on your side of a particular argument is not empathy. That is where your definition of the Left/Right goes wrong. The whole point of empathy is that you don't have to agree with the person, only understand their feelings.
Yes, but a rightwinger simply ignores or mutes a tedious debater, lefties want debaters they dislike silenced, and by law, if necessary
That is a pretty enormous difference
Not sure that the ‘in law’ part is particularly accurate, and is certainly not universal. And without that clause in your argument I can’t see the difference between muted and silenced from a listeners perspective.
We see it in stats on social attitudes. Rightwingers are happy to interact with or date or fuck or have a pint with lefties, lefties do not offer the same generous sociability to rightwingers. "Never kissed a Tory" is not just a meme, it is a behavioural phenomenon, and it is sad and somewhat pathetic
Some would say that the Trumpian attacks on Democrats as ‘communism’ are similar? I’m interested in the stats though. Do you have a link?
Many studies have found this
"The more left-leaning someone is, the less likely he or she will accept others with a different worldview. That is the remarkable conclusion of a new study."
"Does the left have a problem with empathy? In our polarised political landscape, it's hard to love our enemies. New evidence suggests that the left find it especially challenging to empathise with the right."
I don't find that remotely surprising. The essence of a left-wing worldview is cooperation and empathy with others, and you can't really empathise with someone whose beliefs are fundamentally at odds to your own. But right-wingers are individualists; empathy isn't so important to them, and friendships and relationships are more utilitarian. Because they don't care so much about the views of others, those views are less of a barrier to a relationship.
That is literally the definition of empathy.
Personally I don't find it that hard to understand the motivation why people voted Corbyn. Nor those who voted Trump. When I don't agree with Corbyn or Trump.
Understanding someone's motives isn't the same as empathising with them. The dictionary definition of empathy is "the ability to understand and share the feelings of another". The share bit is important to lefties.
Only agreeing and sharing the views of those on your side of a particular argument is not empathy. That is where your definition of the Left/Right goes wrong. The whole point of empathy is that you don't have to agree with the person, only understand their feelings.
Definitions vary, but some people class that as sympathy not empathy.
Yes, but a rightwinger simply ignores or mutes a tedious debater, lefties want debaters they dislike silenced, and by law, if necessary
That is a pretty enormous difference
Not sure that the ‘in law’ part is particularly accurate, and is certainly not universal. And without that clause in your argument I can’t see the difference between muted and silenced from a listeners perspective.
We see it in stats on social attitudes. Rightwingers are happy to interact with or date or fuck or have a pint with lefties, lefties do not offer the same generous sociability to rightwingers. "Never kissed a Tory" is not just a meme, it is a behavioural phenomenon, and it is sad and somewhat pathetic
Some would say that the Trumpian attacks on Democrats as ‘communism’ are similar? I’m interested in the stats though. Do you have a link?
Many studies have found this
"The more left-leaning someone is, the less likely he or she will accept others with a different worldview. That is the remarkable conclusion of a new study."
"Does the left have a problem with empathy? In our polarised political landscape, it's hard to love our enemies. New evidence suggests that the left find it especially challenging to empathise with the right."
I don't find that remotely surprising. The essence of a left-wing worldview is cooperation and empathy with others, and you can't really empathise with someone whose beliefs are fundamentally at odds to your own. But right-wingers are individualists; empathy isn't so important to them, and friendships and relationships are more utilitarian. Because they don't care so much about the views of others, those views are less of a barrier to a relationship.
i think this comment is an example of a tautology. Or maybe an anti-tautology.
People who are prepared to have relationships with people they don't agree with are the nasty ones, and people who refuse to do so are the nice ones. Makes sense.
If the US government are serious about restricting the use of high fructose corn syrup they are going to have to provide massive subsidies for other crops otherwise loads of farmers will go bust. Also the cost of all the "sugary" products are going to go through the roof as cane sugar is far more expensive.
Be interesting to see all those who voted Trump because their egg prices had and a McDonalds had doubled / tripled in price, when they find all the items in the gas station shop go up another 2x.
Yes, but a rightwinger simply ignores or mutes a tedious debater, lefties want debaters they dislike silenced, and by law, if necessary
That is a pretty enormous difference
Not sure that the ‘in law’ part is particularly accurate, and is certainly not universal. And without that clause in your argument I can’t see the difference between muted and silenced from a listeners perspective.
We see it in stats on social attitudes. Rightwingers are happy to interact with or date or fuck or have a pint with lefties, lefties do not offer the same generous sociability to rightwingers. "Never kissed a Tory" is not just a meme, it is a behavioural phenomenon, and it is sad and somewhat pathetic
Some would say that the Trumpian attacks on Democrats as ‘communism’ are similar? I’m interested in the stats though. Do you have a link?
Many studies have found this
"The more left-leaning someone is, the less likely he or she will accept others with a different worldview. That is the remarkable conclusion of a new study."
"Does the left have a problem with empathy? In our polarised political landscape, it's hard to love our enemies. New evidence suggests that the left find it especially challenging to empathise with the right."
I don't find that remotely surprising. The essence of a left-wing worldview is cooperation and empathy with others, and you can't really empathise with someone whose beliefs are fundamentally at odds to your own. But right-wingers are individualists; empathy isn't so important to them, and friendships and relationships are more utilitarian. Because they don't care so much about the views of others, those views are less of a barrier to a relationship.
i think this comment is an example of a tautology. Or maybe an anti-tautology.
People who are prepared to have relationships with people they don't agree with are the nasty ones, and people who refuse to do so are the nice ones. Makes sense.
It's nothing to do with nice or nasty. It's simply that, for left-wingers, a similar worldview is more important requirement for a close relationship than it is for right-wingers, and that is to do with the essence of being left or right wing.
Yes, but a rightwinger simply ignores or mutes a tedious debater, lefties want debaters they dislike silenced, and by law, if necessary
That is a pretty enormous difference
Not sure that the ‘in law’ part is particularly accurate, and is certainly not universal. And without that clause in your argument I can’t see the difference between muted and silenced from a listeners perspective.
We see it in stats on social attitudes. Rightwingers are happy to interact with or date or fuck or have a pint with lefties, lefties do not offer the same generous sociability to rightwingers. "Never kissed a Tory" is not just a meme, it is a behavioural phenomenon, and it is sad and somewhat pathetic
Some would say that the Trumpian attacks on Democrats as ‘communism’ are similar? I’m interested in the stats though. Do you have a link?
Many studies have found this
"The more left-leaning someone is, the less likely he or she will accept others with a different worldview. That is the remarkable conclusion of a new study."
"Does the left have a problem with empathy? In our polarised political landscape, it's hard to love our enemies. New evidence suggests that the left find it especially challenging to empathise with the right."
I don't find that remotely surprising. The essence of a left-wing worldview is cooperation and empathy with others, and you can't really empathise with someone whose beliefs are fundamentally at odds to your own. But right-wingers are individualists; empathy isn't so important to them, and friendships and relationships are more utilitarian. Because they don't care so much about the views of others, those views are less of a barrier to a relationship.
i think this comment is an example of a tautology. Or maybe an anti-tautology.
People who are prepared to have relationships with people they don't agree with are the nasty ones, and people who refuse to do so are the nice ones. Makes sense.
It's nothing to do with nice or nasty. It's simply that, for left-wingers, a similar worldview is more important requirement for a close relationship than it is for right-wingers, and that is to do with the essence of being left or right wing.
That shows a lack of empathy and inability to see the world through the eyes of someone else.
Yes, but a rightwinger simply ignores or mutes a tedious debater, lefties want debaters they dislike silenced, and by law, if necessary
That is a pretty enormous difference
Not sure that the ‘in law’ part is particularly accurate, and is certainly not universal. And without that clause in your argument I can’t see the difference between muted and silenced from a listeners perspective.
We see it in stats on social attitudes. Rightwingers are happy to interact with or date or fuck or have a pint with lefties, lefties do not offer the same generous sociability to rightwingers. "Never kissed a Tory" is not just a meme, it is a behavioural phenomenon, and it is sad and somewhat pathetic
Some would say that the Trumpian attacks on Democrats as ‘communism’ are similar? I’m interested in the stats though. Do you have a link?
Many studies have found this
"The more left-leaning someone is, the less likely he or she will accept others with a different worldview. That is the remarkable conclusion of a new study."
"Does the left have a problem with empathy? In our polarised political landscape, it's hard to love our enemies. New evidence suggests that the left find it especially challenging to empathise with the right."
I don't find that remotely surprising. The essence of a left-wing worldview is cooperation and empathy with others, and you can't really empathise with someone whose beliefs are fundamentally at odds to your own. But right-wingers are individualists; empathy isn't so important to them, and friendships and relationships are more utilitarian. Because they don't care so much about the views of others, those views are less of a barrier to a relationship.
i think this comment is an example of a tautology. Or maybe an anti-tautology.
People who are prepared to have relationships with people they don't agree with are the nasty ones, and people who refuse to do so are the nice ones. Makes sense.
It's nothing to do with nice or nasty. It's simply that, for left-wingers, a similar worldview is more important requirement for a close relationship than it is for right-wingers, and that is to do with the essence of being left or right wing.
That shows a lack of empathy and inability to see the world through the eyes of someone else.
No, it doesn't. It's perfectly possible to have a good understanding of someone's feelings without sharing those feelings. That's not empathy. Empathy also requires a degree of sharing, and it is precisely because empathy is more important to lefties that they find it more difficult to be in a close relationship with someone who doesn't share their worldview.
I can understand the left not wanting to have a conversation with groups that have tiny support in the country, like the real far-right, but between 40% and 50% usually support centre-right and right-wing parties, and you can't decide not to have anything to do with such a large section of the population unless you want to live in a permanent echo chamber.
Yes, but a rightwinger simply ignores or mutes a tedious debater, lefties want debaters they dislike silenced, and by law, if necessary
That is a pretty enormous difference
Not sure that the ‘in law’ part is particularly accurate, and is certainly not universal. And without that clause in your argument I can’t see the difference between muted and silenced from a listeners perspective.
We see it in stats on social attitudes. Rightwingers are happy to interact with or date or fuck or have a pint with lefties, lefties do not offer the same generous sociability to rightwingers. "Never kissed a Tory" is not just a meme, it is a behavioural phenomenon, and it is sad and somewhat pathetic
Some would say that the Trumpian attacks on Democrats as ‘communism’ are similar? I’m interested in the stats though. Do you have a link?
Many studies have found this
"The more left-leaning someone is, the less likely he or she will accept others with a different worldview. That is the remarkable conclusion of a new study."
"Does the left have a problem with empathy? In our polarised political landscape, it's hard to love our enemies. New evidence suggests that the left find it especially challenging to empathise with the right."
I don't find that remotely surprising. The essence of a left-wing worldview is cooperation and empathy with others, and you can't really empathise with someone whose beliefs are fundamentally at odds to your own. But right-wingers are individualists; empathy isn't so important to them, and friendships and relationships are more utilitarian. Because they don't care so much about the views of others, those views are less of a barrier to a relationship.
i think this comment is an example of a tautology. Or maybe an anti-tautology.
People who are prepared to have relationships with people they don't agree with are the nasty ones, and people who refuse to do so are the nice ones. Makes sense.
It's nothing to do with nice or nasty. It's simply that, for left-wingers, a similar worldview is more important requirement for a close relationship than it is for right-wingers, and that is to do with the essence of being left or right wing.
That shows a lack of empathy and inability to see the world through the eyes of someone else.
No, it doesn't. It's perfectly possible to have a good understanding of someone's feelings without sharing those feelings. That's not empathy. Empathy also requires a degree of sharing, and it is precisely because empathy is more important to lefties that they find it more difficult to be in a close relationship with someone who desn't share their worldview.
So your definition of the left-wing worldview is fundamentally exclusionary and divisive?
I can understand the left not wanting to have a conversation with groups that have tiny support in the country, like the real far-right, but between 40% and 50% usually support centre-right and right-wing parties, and you can't decide not to have anything to do with such a large section of the population.
It's not about having nothing to do with them; it's about forming a close bond. Speaking personally, I'm happy enough to have friends and colleagues with political views that differ from mine, and I'm happy to talk politics and listen to and understand their point of view. But I don't think I could maintain a close, long-term ralationship with someone whose views differed fundamentally from my own. For me, a similar worldview is a prerequisite for a close relationship. YMMV.
I can understand the left not wanting to have a conversation with groups that have tiny support in the country, like the real far-right, but between 40% and 50% usually support centre-right and right-wing parties, and you can't decide not to have anything to do with such a large section of the population.
It's not about having nothing to do with them; it's about forming a close bond. Speaking personally, I'm happy enough to have friends and colleagues with political views that differ from mine, and I'm happy to talk politics and listen to and understand their point of view. But I don't think I could maintain a close, long-term ralationship with someone whose views differed fundamentally from my own. For me, a similar worldview is a prerequisite for a close relationship. YMMV.
That's perfectly understandable and legitimate, but you're grossly mistaken to think that this is because you have a higher level of empathy than someone who can maintain a close relationship with someone with a different worldview.
I can understand the left not wanting to have a conversation with groups that have tiny support in the country, like the real far-right, but between 40% and 50% usually support centre-right and right-wing parties, and you can't decide not to have anything to do with such a large section of the population.
It's not about having nothing to do with them; it's about forming a close bond. Speaking personally, I'm happy enough to have friends and colleagues with political views that differ from mine, and I'm happy to talk politics and listen to and understand their point of view. But I don't think I could maintain a close, long-term ralationship with someone whose views differed fundamentally from my own. For me, a similar worldview is a prerequisite for a close relationship. YMMV.
That's perfectly understandable and legitimate, but you're grossly mistaken to think that this is because you have a higher level of empathy than someone who can maintain a close relationship with someone with a different worldview.
I'm not saying it's because I have a higher level of empathy; I'm saying it's because empthy is important to me.
I don't drink any of them, but I think these days most UK frizzy drinks now contain a mix of fructose corn syrup and sugar cane / beet sugar.
Corn syrup is fairly rare in UK soft drinks, it's usually only found in US imports. UK produced drinks are almost always either pure sugar (usually a mix of cane and beet), sugar plus a sweetener to beat the sugar tax, or only a sweetener. Coke, for example, is pure sugar.
Russia is developing a new Black Sea port in occupied Abhkazia. Since it's not sovereign Russian territory I would hope there wouldn't be restrictions on missile attacks there?
We seem to have forgotten that Russia invaded Georgia back in 2008.
I haven't. I went to Georgia 2 years back and yearned to go to Abkhazia, it is meant to be stunningly beautiful, and the reason Georgia is sometimes cited as the *original* Garden of Eden
But it is strictly off limits, the new frontier is firmly shut, and getting in is highly dangerous if not impossible
I looked into going into Abkhazia when I visited Georgia last year. It does have a beautiful reputation, though now totally falling apart. It is possible to get a visa to cross from Georgia, and people do, but you couldn’t bring a car across which made it impractical.
I was told that you can get a visa, but don't do it, because it is so dangerous
But that might have been biased Georgians with an agenda?
The FCDO guidance is they recommend not going, but blogs etc seem more positive. A bit like say Mauritania: FCDO says don’t go unless you want to be kidnapped and your throat slit; other sources say go, it’s fascinating and the kidnap risk is only if you’re there long term like an NGO worker.
My friend is going there for a week before meeting two of us in Senegal next month.
The experience of colleagues who have passed through there for work is far more along the FCDO advice. They say you can go there but you are taking a massive risk.
Yes, that's exactly what I heard, and it firmly dissuaded me from going (despite my intense curiosity). Sounds like I was right!
I think he was referring to Mauritania, though I stand to be corrected.
Ah, OK! Looks like you're right
Personally, I wouldn't risk Mauritania, and I was happy to go to Ukraine during the war, twice. The risk/reward ratio is all wrong. ie Mauritania is not very interesting and is extremely dangerous. Ukraine is amazingly interesting (especially now) and it is quite dangerous, so you need to be careful
I am also looking at a trip to West Africa this winter. Dakar down to Sierra Leone. I feel I should see it at least once in my lifetime, even if it has a bad rep. Where are you going in Senegal and what are you doing, if I may ask?
I’m doing just over a week there. Dakar, then the overnight ferry down to Ziguinchor, couple of nights in inland Casamance at a campement, a quick sojourn at Cap Skirring then an internal flight back up to Dakar for a couple more days.
Guinea Bissau looks quaint though falling apart. Crossing the border was too much of a faff to bother with on our short trip.
Thanks! Genuinely helpful. I am putting together a tentative itinerary for early Jan
I want to do five countries in West Africa. Why? Because so far in my life I have visited 95 countries, and I am desperate to reach 100
I know, how childish is that? But that is my thinking. I am like a nervous Test batsman nearing a century. Do I keep nudging singles, or do I swing for a six and reach my ton in one go?
I'm swinging for a six. I'll probably get clean bowled - ie shot - in the Gambia
My friend has the same addiction. He had part of his honeymoon in Timor Leste last year and has just done Comoros and Bhutan in a month, such is the determination to tick off the countries.
(And that’s why he’s calling in on Mauritania).
Hah! I'm glad I'm not alone. Once I've reached 100 (ins'allah) I will probably develop a freshly neurotic target, like doing ALL the countries in central America so I can say I've gone from top to bottom: Northern canada down to Patagonia
The other big gaps in my map are the eastern middle east (Iraq, Iran, Saudi), central Asia, and central Africa
After all that I will be done. Sort of. Apart from the Pacific islands
Jesus I'm being boring, Soz
More interestingly, I got ChatGPT to deviise my itinerary last night as I lay awake jetlagged and insomniac, and it did so in an amusing way - it was deliberately trying to make me laugh - and it successully made me laugh - and it was insane - and it was like talking to an extremely funny human. Fucking FREAKY as SHIT
You need to set your sights on getting to the Chagos archipelago. The ultimate challenge.
Not really (I imagine you are joking)
My top five remaining targets in terms of countries are
North Korea (I mean, my God) Mongolia Congo Nicaragua Papua New Guinea
in terms of pure remoteness I would love to go to northeast Siberia, one of those insane hideous towns on the Yenesei river. I'd also like to experience total winter darkness, perhaps in Svalbard
And Socotra, the Cocos, Kerguelen, south Georgia, those mad Andaman fuckers, and Pitcairn, and....
OK there's still a lot of places to go.
That prompted me to look at a small tourist camp in Mongolia on Google Earth that I visited on a tour twenty years ago. Now it’s grown to 175+ yurts, 30+ lodges and a dozen or more bigger dining halls and eateries…and a basketball court. *Sigh* getting away from it all used to be much easier.
+1 for Nicaragua, the volcanoes and Ometepe island in particular.
I don't drink any of them, but I think these days most UK frizzy drinks now contain a mix of fructose corn syrup and sugar cane / beet sugar.
Corn syrup is fairly rare in UK soft drinks, it's usually only found in US imports. UK produced drinks are almost always either pure sugar (usually a mix of cane and beet), sugar plus a sweetener to beat the sugar tax, or only a sweetener. Coke, for example, is pure sugar.
I just checked, you are correct.
It seems that it is much more prevalent in Eastern Europe / Turkey food and drink production. I reckon I have seen them in a shop that has been dodgy importing them into the UK and that is where I have seen fizzy drinks with it in.
These days in the US though, its marketed as a "throw back" limited time special edition when they do production runs with real sugar.
Yes, but a rightwinger simply ignores or mutes a tedious debater, lefties want debaters they dislike silenced, and by law, if necessary
That is a pretty enormous difference
Not sure that the ‘in law’ part is particularly accurate, and is certainly not universal. And without that clause in your argument I can’t see the difference between muted and silenced from a listeners perspective.
We see it in stats on social attitudes. Rightwingers are happy to interact with or date or fuck or have a pint with lefties, lefties do not offer the same generous sociability to rightwingers. "Never kissed a Tory" is not just a meme, it is a behavioural phenomenon, and it is sad and somewhat pathetic
Some would say that the Trumpian attacks on Democrats as ‘communism’ are similar? I’m interested in the stats though. Do you have a link?
Many studies have found this
"The more left-leaning someone is, the less likely he or she will accept others with a different worldview. That is the remarkable conclusion of a new study."
"Does the left have a problem with empathy? In our polarised political landscape, it's hard to love our enemies. New evidence suggests that the left find it especially challenging to empathise with the right."
I don't find that remotely surprising. The essence of a left-wing worldview is cooperation and empathy with others, and you can't really empathise with someone whose beliefs are fundamentally at odds to your own. But right-wingers are individualists; empathy isn't so important to them, and friendships and relationships are more utilitarian. Because they don't care so much about the views of others, those views are less of a barrier to a relationship.
More work for the army of loft laggers....undoing their previous work.
Homeowners are struggling to sell or remortgage as some major lenders are rejecting properties with spray foam insulation, the BBC has found.
A quarter of the UK's biggest mortgage providers will not lend against homes with spray foam in the roof, our research suggests. It is estimated as many as 250,000 homes in the UK have this type of insulation, with much of it fitted under the previous government's Green Homes Grant scheme.
Shein, the Chinese-founded online fast-fashion giant, is targeting early next year for its £50 billion blockbuster float on the London Stock Exchange.
The Times has learnt that the Singapore-headquartered company is gearing up to launch its planned initial public offering (IPO) in the first quarter of 2025, subject to pending regulatory approvals.
I presume Xi might have something to say to Starmer about this, after the US banned their listing for the rampant use of slave labour of the Uyghurs to produce the cotton in their clothing.
Russia is developing a new Black Sea port in occupied Abhkazia. Since it's not sovereign Russian territory I would hope there wouldn't be restrictions on missile attacks there?
We seem to have forgotten that Russia invaded Georgia back in 2008.
I haven't. I went to Georgia 2 years back and yearned to go to Abkhazia, it is meant to be stunningly beautiful, and the reason Georgia is sometimes cited as the *original* Garden of Eden
But it is strictly off limits, the new frontier is firmly shut, and getting in is highly dangerous if not impossible
I looked into going into Abkhazia when I visited Georgia last year. It does have a beautiful reputation, though now totally falling apart. It is possible to get a visa to cross from Georgia, and people do, but you couldn’t bring a car across which made it impractical.
I was told that you can get a visa, but don't do it, because it is so dangerous
But that might have been biased Georgians with an agenda?
The FCDO guidance is they recommend not going, but blogs etc seem more positive. A bit like say Mauritania: FCDO says don’t go unless you want to be kidnapped and your throat slit; other sources say go, it’s fascinating and the kidnap risk is only if you’re there long term like an NGO worker.
My friend is going there for a week before meeting two of us in Senegal next month.
The experience of colleagues who have passed through there for work is far more along the FCDO advice. They say you can go there but you are taking a massive risk.
Yes, that's exactly what I heard, and it firmly dissuaded me from going (despite my intense curiosity). Sounds like I was right!
I think he was referring to Mauritania, though I stand to be corrected.
Ah, OK! Looks like you're right
Personally, I wouldn't risk Mauritania, and I was happy to go to Ukraine during the war, twice. The risk/reward ratio is all wrong. ie Mauritania is not very interesting and is extremely dangerous. Ukraine is amazingly interesting (especially now) and it is quite dangerous, so you need to be careful
I am also looking at a trip to West Africa this winter. Dakar down to Sierra Leone. I feel I should see it at least once in my lifetime, even if it has a bad rep. Where are you going in Senegal and what are you doing, if I may ask?
Mauretania, the last country to ban slavery, in 1981!
It only criminalised it in 2007 (yes, 2007) and according to Wiki about 2% (maybe more) of the population are still actually slaves, despite this.
Atheism is also punishable by death, as is any form of disrespect or non-compliance with Islam, with no recourse to clemency, and of course homosexuality is too - brutally, so I really wouldn't recommend many go there.
If the rumour is related to Starmer's legal career I really don't think it means much given cab rank rule
Does anyone have an example of The Truth, on any matter, first being revealed on Twatter?
As opposed to zillions of lies, bullshit, horseshit etc etc?
Yes, plenty
Otherwise the wokier powers-that-be would not be so exercised by Musk owning it: a social media site that spunked out nothing but misinformation would be quick disregarded. It would be like Russia Today, and everyone would look at it with skepticism and then probably ignore it entirely
However, the problem with TwiX is that the truth is mixed up with half truths and total lies - and that has always been the case
Twitter used to be a place where everyone, no matter what their political persuasion, hung out.
I think there is a very real chance now that it does end up fragmenting, following what has happened with broadcast and print media. In the last month, Bluesky really seems to have gotten awfully close to breakout.
Now, will it replace Twitter? Nope. But what looks entirely possible i that (for politics) left wingers will be on Bluesky, while right wingers on Twitter.
Twitter could lose its ubiquity.
Yes, I can see that happening, which means both sites will fail as "public squares" - which will be a damn shame, and a further silo-isation of discourse and polarisation of politics
However Blusky is still quite a long way from breakout and it is now encountering its own problems. The moderation there is as fierce as lefty Twitter back in the day. eg you get instantly silenced if not banned for anything deemed transphobic - say "there are only two genders" and it's bye bye
Nope - Bluesky just has an easy to use Block policy and a lot of people operate a block on first problem basis because life is too short...
Tired of debates, disagreements, or being challenged by "nuance"? Enter CircleJerk, the all-new platform where every take aligns perfectly with your worldview, and every "like" feels like a warm hug from your ideological twin.
Coming soon: the all-new 100% Agree Button: Replacing "like" with "obviously."
Because who needs approval when you already have consensus.
Have you used Twitter recently ? The effort required to keep it usable has grown considerably. You're arguing in favour of listening to unlimited trolling by a myriad shitheads.
Bluesky is not trying to recreate the madhouse. Which seems quite sensible.
No, I came off social media some time ago.
I have LinkedIn for professional networking (sadly, a necessity) and Facebook for keeping in touch with overseas relatives - and the occasional memy reel.
I just would have presumed that would be somebodies job to pre-programme all these into twitter bot to automatically send out the relevant tweets for all these kind of occasions.
Hmmm. Though I do remember a similar automated system getting KFC in a lot of trouble in Germany in 2022 because the bot didn't recognise the significance of Kristalnacht and sent out:
""It's memorial day for Kristallnacht! Treat yourself with more tender cheese on your crispy chicken. Now at KFCheese!"
You can see why organisations might be wary of using automated systems for this sort of thing.
Yes, but a rightwinger simply ignores or mutes a tedious debater, lefties want debaters they dislike silenced, and by law, if necessary
That is a pretty enormous difference
Not sure that the ‘in law’ part is particularly accurate, and is certainly not universal. And without that clause in your argument I can’t see the difference between muted and silenced from a listeners perspective.
We see it in stats on social attitudes. Rightwingers are happy to interact with or date or fuck or have a pint with lefties, lefties do not offer the same generous sociability to rightwingers. "Never kissed a Tory" is not just a meme, it is a behavioural phenomenon, and it is sad and somewhat pathetic
Some would say that the Trumpian attacks on Democrats as ‘communism’ are similar? I’m interested in the stats though. Do you have a link?
Many studies have found this
"The more left-leaning someone is, the less likely he or she will accept others with a different worldview. That is the remarkable conclusion of a new study."
"Does the left have a problem with empathy? In our polarised political landscape, it's hard to love our enemies. New evidence suggests that the left find it especially challenging to empathise with the right."
I don't find that remotely surprising. The essence of a left-wing worldview is cooperation and empathy with others, and you can't really empathise with someone whose beliefs are fundamentally at odds to your own. But right-wingers are individualists; empathy isn't so important to them, and friendships and relationships are more utilitarian. Because they don't care so much about the views of others, those views are less of a barrier to a relationship.
That is literally the definition of empathy.
Personally I don't find it that hard to understand the motivation why people voted Corbyn. Nor those who voted Trump. When I don't agree with Corbyn or Trump.
Understanding someone's motives isn't the same as empathising with them. The dictionary definition of empathy is "the ability to understand and share the feelings of another". The share bit is important to lefties.
Only agreeing and sharing the views of those on your side of a particular argument is not empathy. That is where your definition of the Left/Right goes wrong. The whole point of empathy is that you don't have to agree with the person, only understand their feelings.
Moreover, that's a basic life skill.
Business is filled with organisations and people who see things very differently to you.
I just would have presumed that would be somebodies job to pre-programme all these into twitter bot to automatically send out the relevant tweets for all these kind of occasions.
Hmmm. Though I do remember a similar automated system getting KFC in a lot of trouble in Germany in 2022 because the bot didn't recognise the significance of Kristalnacht and sent out:
""It's memorial day for Kristallnacht! Treat yourself with more tender cheese on your crispy chicken. Now at KFCheese!"
You can see why organisations might be wary of using automated systems for this sort of thing.
I totally agree.
I celebrate Kristallnacht with a Burger King.
It’s not as bad as BA’s (rapidly terminated), advertising campaign in Germany that offered “special treatment” to those who flew with them.
Russia is developing a new Black Sea port in occupied Abhkazia. Since it's not sovereign Russian territory I would hope there wouldn't be restrictions on missile attacks there?
We seem to have forgotten that Russia invaded Georgia back in 2008.
I haven't. I went to Georgia 2 years back and yearned to go to Abkhazia, it is meant to be stunningly beautiful, and the reason Georgia is sometimes cited as the *original* Garden of Eden
But it is strictly off limits, the new frontier is firmly shut, and getting in is highly dangerous if not impossible
I looked into going into Abkhazia when I visited Georgia last year. It does have a beautiful reputation, though now totally falling apart. It is possible to get a visa to cross from Georgia, and people do, but you couldn’t bring a car across which made it impractical.
I was told that you can get a visa, but don't do it, because it is so dangerous
But that might have been biased Georgians with an agenda?
The FCDO guidance is they recommend not going, but blogs etc seem more positive. A bit like say Mauritania: FCDO says don’t go unless you want to be kidnapped and your throat slit; other sources say go, it’s fascinating and the kidnap risk is only if you’re there long term like an NGO worker.
My friend is going there for a week before meeting two of us in Senegal next month.
The experience of colleagues who have passed through there for work is far more along the FCDO advice. They say you can go there but you are taking a massive risk.
Yes, that's exactly what I heard, and it firmly dissuaded me from going (despite my intense curiosity). Sounds like I was right!
I think he was referring to Mauritania, though I stand to be corrected.
Ah, OK! Looks like you're right
Personally, I wouldn't risk Mauritania, and I was happy to go to Ukraine during the war, twice. The risk/reward ratio is all wrong. ie Mauritania is not very interesting and is extremely dangerous. Ukraine is amazingly interesting (especially now) and it is quite dangerous, so you need to be careful
I am also looking at a trip to West Africa this winter. Dakar down to Sierra Leone. I feel I should see it at least once in my lifetime, even if it has a bad rep. Where are you going in Senegal and what are you doing, if I may ask?
I’m doing just over a week there. Dakar, then the overnight ferry down to Ziguinchor, couple of nights in inland Casamance at a campement, a quick sojourn at Cap Skirring then an internal flight back up to Dakar for a couple more days.
Guinea Bissau looks quaint though falling apart. Crossing the border was too much of a faff to bother with on our short trip.
Thanks! Genuinely helpful. I am putting together a tentative itinerary for early Jan
I want to do five countries in West Africa. Why? Because so far in my life I have visited 95 countries, and I am desperate to reach 100
I know, how childish is that? But that is my thinking. I am like a nervous Test batsman nearing a century. Do I keep nudging singles, or do I swing for a six and reach my ton in one go?
I'm swinging for a six. I'll probably get clean bowled - ie shot - in the Gambia
My friend has the same addiction. He had part of his honeymoon in Timor Leste last year and has just done Comoros and Bhutan in a month, such is the determination to tick off the countries.
(And that’s why he’s calling in on Mauritania).
Hah! I'm glad I'm not alone. Once I've reached 100 (ins'allah) I will probably develop a freshly neurotic target, like doing ALL the countries in central America so I can say I've gone from top to bottom: Northern canada down to Patagonia
The other big gaps in my map are the eastern middle east (Iraq, Iran, Saudi), central Asia, and central Africa
After all that I will be done. Sort of. Apart from the Pacific islands
Jesus I'm being boring, Soz
More interestingly, I got ChatGPT to deviise my itinerary last night as I lay awake jetlagged and insomniac, and it did so in an amusing way - it was deliberately trying to make me laugh - and it successully made me laugh - and it was insane - and it was like talking to an extremely funny human. Fucking FREAKY as SHIT
You need to set your sights on getting to the Chagos archipelago. The ultimate challenge.
Not really (I imagine you are joking)
My top five remaining targets in terms of countries are
North Korea (I mean, my God) Mongolia Congo Nicaragua Papua New Guinea
in terms of pure remoteness I would love to go to northeast Siberia, one of those insane hideous towns on the Yenesei river. I'd also like to experience total winter darkness, perhaps in Svalbard
And Socotra, the Cocos, Kerguelen, south Georgia, those mad Andaman fuckers, and Pitcairn, and....
OK there's still a lot of places to go.
Had colleagues who went out to Socotra Island. Was very envious - until they had an extremely hard landing in their helicopter and were stranded there until they could find a replacement.
I've been to the Republic of Congo, looking across the roiling rapids of the 5-mile wide river to Kinshasha in DRC. Great memories of people who were utterly unbothered about two white guys (one quite obviousy gay) wandering around Brazzaville. Strolled past the compound where de Gaulle spent much of WW2. Watched kids shooting down the rapids on the river, then getting out some way down the bank, then rushing back to repeat the experience (saluted one kid for his bravery - he gave me a very crisp salute back as he hurtled to what looked his certain doom). Went out on the Congo river in a dugout canoe with a guy in just a loincloth (don't tell health and safety back in London...), across to some rocks where clouds of pratincoles took off and the sky was thick with hirundines - an Egyptian Plover flying past almost in touching distance is still the only one I've seen on my travels. Then back to have drinks on the first floor of a bar, great African music playing as below us, an enormous crowd at what was probably normally a coach station watched a football match take place between a team of men versus a team of women. The women were allowed to wear boots, the guys were barefoot - but that was the only compromise. And - to the huge delight of the crowd, the women were whooping the men...
The joys of travel.
Oh, and I've done Senegal, Guinea Bissau and Equatorial Guinea.
Is everything that we're secretly not allowed to say untrue?
Importantly ETA - I haven't signed the OSA or any NDAs
The OSA applies whether you sign it or not.
If you think something is true, then say it. But if you think rumours on Twitter are likely to be true, maybe you should re-think your epistemology.
I don't think that I'm in any danger of breaching the OSA
But I do believe that I'm currently restricted from saying various things that would have been fine to say about Boris
People can now go to prison for a long time for posting the wrong thing
It's fine for me to say that Boris is serially unfaithful. I am restricted from saying BlancheLivermore is serially unfaithful. That's because one is true and one isn't.
To go to prison, you'd have to be inciting hatred, I think. Comments about an individual would, initially, be libel or slander. If you lost a case and faced a court order, and then breached that, you could go to prison.
But why are you so keen to repeat Twitter rumours?
No, you can now be arrested for false statements made online too thanks to the Online Safety Act 2023
'179 False communications offence
(1)A person commits an offence if—
(a)the person sends a message (see section 182),
(b)the message conveys information that the person knows to be false,
(c)at the time of sending it, the person intended the message, or the information in it, to cause non-trivial psychological or physical harm to a likely audience, and
(d)the person has no reasonable excuse for sending the message.
182Interpretation of sections 179 to 181 (1)This section applies for the purposes of sections 179 to 181, and references in this section to an offence are to an offence under section 179 or 181.
(2)A person “sends a message” if the person—
(a)sends, transmits or publishes a communication (including an oral communication) by electronic means, or
(b)sends, or gives to an individual, a letter or a thing of any other description,
and references to a message are to be read accordingly.'
The reason police knock on doors over tweets is because they're hoping you will incriminate yourself.
EDI "crimes" are easier to clear up and will win you far more brownie points in the force.
Is that actually true? If that is actually true my despair hardens into anger
When did the British police turn into,..... THIS?
About 1924?
No. After Macpherson, is my guess
In the National Archives, there is a file on night clubs dated from 1927 (I don't have the exact reference to hand).
In it, there is a cutting from the Daily Express, critical of government and police policy of closing down illegal nightclubs because the journalist argued they were harmless fun.
The Home Secretary of the time, William Joynson-Hicks, had written next to it in his own hand, 'Keep on the file with nightclubs and get the police to find out who and what Mr X is.'
I have said before, I would introduce American style sheriffs alongside the police. Tell them to have at it. If the police didn't sort their shit out, more and more of their funding would go to the sheriffs. They are a monopoly, and all monopolies have the same effect.
More work for the army of loft laggers....undoing their previous work.
Homeowners are struggling to sell or remortgage as some major lenders are rejecting properties with spray foam insulation, the BBC has found.
A quarter of the UK's biggest mortgage providers will not lend against homes with spray foam in the roof, our research suggests. It is estimated as many as 250,000 homes in the UK have this type of insulation, with much of it fitted under the previous government's Green Homes Grant scheme.
Russia is developing a new Black Sea port in occupied Abhkazia. Since it's not sovereign Russian territory I would hope there wouldn't be restrictions on missile attacks there?
We seem to have forgotten that Russia invaded Georgia back in 2008.
I haven't. I went to Georgia 2 years back and yearned to go to Abkhazia, it is meant to be stunningly beautiful, and the reason Georgia is sometimes cited as the *original* Garden of Eden
But it is strictly off limits, the new frontier is firmly shut, and getting in is highly dangerous if not impossible
I looked into going into Abkhazia when I visited Georgia last year. It does have a beautiful reputation, though now totally falling apart. It is possible to get a visa to cross from Georgia, and people do, but you couldn’t bring a car across which made it impractical.
I was told that you can get a visa, but don't do it, because it is so dangerous
But that might have been biased Georgians with an agenda?
The FCDO guidance is they recommend not going, but blogs etc seem more positive. A bit like say Mauritania: FCDO says don’t go unless you want to be kidnapped and your throat slit; other sources say go, it’s fascinating and the kidnap risk is only if you’re there long term like an NGO worker.
My friend is going there for a week before meeting two of us in Senegal next month.
The experience of colleagues who have passed through there for work is far more along the FCDO advice. They say you can go there but you are taking a massive risk.
Yes, that's exactly what I heard, and it firmly dissuaded me from going (despite my intense curiosity). Sounds like I was right!
I think he was referring to Mauritania, though I stand to be corrected.
Ah, OK! Looks like you're right
Personally, I wouldn't risk Mauritania, and I was happy to go to Ukraine during the war, twice. The risk/reward ratio is all wrong. ie Mauritania is not very interesting and is extremely dangerous. Ukraine is amazingly interesting (especially now) and it is quite dangerous, so you need to be careful
I am also looking at a trip to West Africa this winter. Dakar down to Sierra Leone. I feel I should see it at least once in my lifetime, even if it has a bad rep. Where are you going in Senegal and what are you doing, if I may ask?
I’m doing just over a week there. Dakar, then the overnight ferry down to Ziguinchor, couple of nights in inland Casamance at a campement, a quick sojourn at Cap Skirring then an internal flight back up to Dakar for a couple more days.
Guinea Bissau looks quaint though falling apart. Crossing the border was too much of a faff to bother with on our short trip.
Thanks! Genuinely helpful. I am putting together a tentative itinerary for early Jan
I want to do five countries in West Africa. Why? Because so far in my life I have visited 95 countries, and I am desperate to reach 100
I know, how childish is that? But that is my thinking. I am like a nervous Test batsman nearing a century. Do I keep nudging singles, or do I swing for a six and reach my ton in one go?
I'm swinging for a six. I'll probably get clean bowled - ie shot - in the Gambia
My friend has the same addiction. He had part of his honeymoon in Timor Leste last year and has just done Comoros and Bhutan in a month, such is the determination to tick off the countries.
(And that’s why he’s calling in on Mauritania).
Hah! I'm glad I'm not alone. Once I've reached 100 (ins'allah) I will probably develop a freshly neurotic target, like doing ALL the countries in central America so I can say I've gone from top to bottom: Northern canada down to Patagonia
The other big gaps in my map are the eastern middle east (Iraq, Iran, Saudi), central Asia, and central Africa
After all that I will be done. Sort of. Apart from the Pacific islands
Jesus I'm being boring, Soz
More interestingly, I got ChatGPT to deviise my itinerary last night as I lay awake jetlagged and insomniac, and it did so in an amusing way - it was deliberately trying to make me laugh - and it successully made me laugh - and it was insane - and it was like talking to an extremely funny human. Fucking FREAKY as SHIT
You need to set your sights on getting to the Chagos archipelago. The ultimate challenge.
Not really (I imagine you are joking)
My top five remaining targets in terms of countries are
North Korea (I mean, my God) Mongolia Congo Nicaragua Papua New Guinea
in terms of pure remoteness I would love to go to northeast Siberia, one of those insane hideous towns on the Yenesei river. I'd also like to experience total winter darkness, perhaps in Svalbard
And Socotra, the Cocos, Kerguelen, south Georgia, those mad Andaman fuckers, and Pitcairn, and....
OK there's still a lot of places to go.
Lake Baikal and Kamchatka have always appealed to me.
I can understand the left not wanting to have a conversation with groups that have tiny support in the country, like the real far-right, but between 40% and 50% usually support centre-right and right-wing parties, and you can't decide not to have anything to do with such a large section of the population unless you want to live in a permanent echo chamber.
Indeed. So, for example, it’s great having a range of views on PB, but you still want a bit of moderation to keep out the trolls, the Russian propagandists and the racists.
Comments
The effort required to keep it usable has grown considerably.
You're arguing in favour of listening to unlimited trolling by a myriad shitheads.
Bluesky is not trying to recreate the madhouse. Which seems quite sensible.
I have a soft spot for TikTok too.
LinkedIn is pretty dire but does have some utility for work.
I have Facebook still as its good for local news, but little else.
There is a fair case to be made that Social Media is killing itself, by turning into the Dead Internet, with bots and trolls talking to each other. I don't miss Twitter, though my account still exists in dead space.
The other big gaps in my map are the eastern middle east (Iraq, Iran, Saudi), central Asia, and central Africa
After all that I will be done. Sort of. Apart from the Pacific islands
Jesus I'm being boring, Soz
More interestingly, I got ChatGPT to devise my itinerary last night as I lay awake jetlagged and insomniac, and it did so in an amusing way - it was deliberately trying to make me laugh - and it successfully made me laugh - and it was insane - and it was like talking to an extremely funny human. Fucking FREAKY as SHIT
My top five remaining targets in terms of countries are
North Korea (I mean, my God)
Mongolia
Congo
Nicaragua
Papua New Guinea
in terms of pure remoteness I would love to go to northeast Siberia, one of those insane hideous towns on the Yenesei river. I'd also like to experience total winter darkness, perhaps in Svalbard
And Socotra, the Cocos, Kerguelen, south Georgia, those mad Andaman fuckers, and Pitcairn, and....
OK there's still a lot of places to go.
https://x.com/christopherhope/status/1858279154837274656
https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1858279670363345379
If SKS wants to stop the compilation of NHCI incidents, he's got a whole Government, Parliament and Civil Service to make them stop and over four years to do it in.
I reckon a trip to North Korea would be mind blowing. I hear the women are stunning and the food is dire, and the whole experience is totally compelling
"The more left-leaning someone is, the less likely he or she will accept others with a different worldview. That is the remarkable conclusion of a new study."
https://cne.news/article/3460-study-left-voting-people-are-more-intolerant-than-their-right-voting-counterparts
"Liberals have most difficulty getting along with opponents on 'culture war' issues"
https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/liberals-have-most-difficulty-getting-along-with-opponents-on-culture-war-issues
"Does the left have a problem with empathy?
In our polarised political landscape, it's hard to love our enemies. New evidence suggests that the left find it especially challenging to empathise with the right."
https://newhumanist.org.uk/articles/5726/does-the-left-have-a-problem-with-empathy
Short Kursk update🧵
Russian 76 elite VDV division has arrived to Kursk area. And, unfortunately, at my flank.
Right now 4000 men and approximately 100 AFV are ready for attack.
We fight against 155 marine br, 83 VDV br, 106 VDV division and 76 VDV division.
https://x.com/OSINTua/status/1858156160215298169
PNG is a crime-ridden, humid, mosquito-infested dump - Indonesia next door is way better and much better value generally. I really don't recommend it.
I've spoken to someone who went not as a tourist, I didn't ask him how because he didn't seem like he'd have told me but I assume as a spy, but his experience just struck me as depressing for the few months he was there. The people are malnourished, the reputation of women being very beautiful isn't true at least according to him, it's something that NK spread to make it seem like their way of life is superior to SK. He said the reality for NK women is backbreaking farm labour with 70% of the necessary calorie intake so they all look gaunt.
The women you see from the tourist bus we went on as you go through the Potemkin village are all stunningly beautiful but really that's not a surprise is it.
More than 300 Sikh groups have written to Sir Keir Starmer to express their “huge disappointment” that No 10 did not mark a Sikh festival.
On Sunday, the Sikh Federation criticised the Prime Minister for failing to wish more than one million British Sikhs a “Happy Gurpurb” on Nov 15.
While other world leaders’ social media accounts celebrated the 555th birthday of Guru Nanak, the founder of Sikhism, Downing Street did not.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/11/17/sikh-groups-accuse-starmer-failing-guru-nanak-message/
I just would have presumed that would be somebodies job to pre-programme all these into twitter bot to automatically send out the relevant tweets for all these kind of occasions.
Uts awful now, just bots and trolls pushing fash.
I hope it is more than a token gesture and not heavily restricted. On the track record of this administration I'm not getting my hopes up.
""It's memorial day for Kristallnacht! Treat yourself with more tender cheese on your crispy chicken. Now at KFCheese!"
You can see why organisations might be wary of using automated systems for this sort of thing.
I presumed there were be a member of the #10 spin operation that sits down and goes through the calendar and looks at all the things that the PM will be expected to tweet about and queue up for example tweets for all these standard religious festivals.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/luxury-sleeper-trains-set-connect-030000034.html
CEO of Elections 🇺🇸
@CEOElection
BREAKING: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. allegedly intends to require Coca-Cola to begin using Cane Sugar instead of High-Fructose Syrup as HHS Secretary.
Personally I don't find it that hard to understand the motivation why people voted Corbyn. Nor those who voted Trump. When I don't agree with Corbyn or Trump.
David Frum
@davidfrum
Why did Biden wait until Team Moscow had won power in the US to authorize Ukraine to strike back against Russia's air war?
https://x.com/davidfrum
I have no idea - i only drink the diet versions.
"Empathy is generally described as the ability to take on other's perspective, to understand, feel, and possibly share and respond to their experience"
So what you are saying is because you must share this, you can never empathise with anybody who doesn't have a left wing world view. IMO, That is very closed view of the world.
I can empathise with Corbyn voters, I can see how the working man has had a raw deal, how they are struggling, how they aren't getting a fair shake. I can even share some part of that opinion. I just totally disagree with Corbyn's solution.
Brightline is doing rather well (though smashing up lots of cars at level crossings):
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brightline
They are currently building a second line - from the outskirts of LA to Las Vegas.
People who are prepared to have relationships with people they don't agree with are the nasty ones, and people who refuse to do so are the nice ones. Makes sense.
Be interesting to see all those who voted Trump because their egg prices had and a McDonalds had doubled / tripled in price, when they find all the items in the gas station shop go up another 2x.
+1 for Nicaragua, the volcanoes and Ometepe island in particular.
It seems that it is much more prevalent in Eastern Europe / Turkey food and drink production. I reckon I have seen them in a shop that has been dodgy importing them into the UK and that is where I have seen fizzy drinks with it in.
These days in the US though, its marketed as a "throw back" limited time special edition when they do production runs with real sugar.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/nov/17/starmer-aims-to-build-pragmatic-and-serious-relationship-in-meeting-with-xi-at-g20
Winnie the Pooh is going to eat him for breakfast.
Homeowners are struggling to sell or remortgage as some major lenders are rejecting properties with spray foam insulation, the BBC has found.
A quarter of the UK's biggest mortgage providers will not lend against homes with spray foam in the roof, our research suggests. It is estimated as many as 250,000 homes in the UK have this type of insulation, with much of it fitted under the previous government's Green Homes Grant scheme.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqjrpv218r0o
The Times has learnt that the Singapore-headquartered company is gearing up to launch its planned initial public offering (IPO) in the first quarter of 2025, subject to pending regulatory approvals.
https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/companies/article/shein-plans-london-stock-market-float-in-2025-blbznmd37
I presume Xi might have something to say to Starmer about this, after the US banned their listing for the rampant use of slave labour of the Uyghurs to produce the cotton in their clothing.
Atheism is also punishable by death, as is any form of disrespect or non-compliance with Islam, with no recourse to clemency, and of course homosexuality is too - brutally, so I really wouldn't recommend many go there.
I have LinkedIn for professional networking (sadly, a necessity) and Facebook for keeping in touch with overseas relatives - and the occasional memy reel.
That's it.
I celebrate Kristallnacht with a Burger King.
Business is filled with organisations and people who see things very differently to you.
If you can't master that you won't get very far.
I've been to the Republic of Congo, looking across the roiling rapids of the 5-mile wide river to Kinshasha in DRC. Great memories of people who were utterly unbothered about two white guys (one quite obviousy gay) wandering around Brazzaville. Strolled past the compound where de Gaulle spent much of WW2. Watched kids shooting down the rapids on the river, then getting out some way down the bank, then rushing back to repeat the experience (saluted one kid for his bravery - he gave me a very crisp salute back as he hurtled to what looked his certain doom). Went out on the Congo river in a dugout canoe with a guy in just a loincloth (don't tell health and safety back in London...), across to some rocks where clouds of pratincoles took off and the sky was thick with hirundines - an Egyptian Plover flying past almost in touching distance is still the only one I've seen on my travels. Then back to have drinks on the first floor of a bar, great African music playing as below us, an enormous crowd at what was probably normally a coach station watched a football match take place between a team of men versus a team of women. The women were allowed to wear boots, the guys were barefoot - but that was the only compromise. And - to the huge delight of the crowd, the women were whooping the men...
The joys of travel.
Oh, and I've done Senegal, Guinea Bissau and Equatorial Guinea.
In it, there is a cutting from the Daily Express, critical of government and police policy of closing down illegal nightclubs because the journalist argued they were harmless fun.
The Home Secretary of the time, William Joynson-Hicks, had written next to it in his own hand, 'Keep on the file with nightclubs and get the police to find out who and what Mr X is.'
One day I’d love to go.
NEW THREAD