Driverless cars are genuinely useless in rural areas. I can only imagine a lot of people advocating them here have never actually tried to use one in the countryside.
Why? They wouldn't have to anticipate as many pedestrians and cyclists as in an urban environment. GPS is much better away from tall buildings too, not as may signposts, lights etc etc
I guess the occasional stray sheep might cause some bother, but for my standard rural drive into the Highlands they will be an absolute dream. Jump in the car at 6am, on the hill by 8.30pm with a couple of hours napping/consulting the OS map.
Try using one on a road with poor mobile phone coverage/impeded GPS/no white lines, I promise you, it will stop working and hand back control to the driver.
I've used one, they are utterly useless.
These seem like very minor issues to overcome, in the grand scheme of things. Why would phone signal have anything to do with it?
I'm desperate for it. We do about 16,000 miles a year (mainly on busy rural roads, the A1 to England, A96, A9, A82), and it would immeasurably improve my life. I understand why on some minor unclassified roads it might not work, but the vast majority of rural driving is on big A roads between the towns - and the B roads are the fun ones!.
For walking and cycling round the cities, we know that the vast majority of collisions are caused by human error or "injudicious action". Eliminating all of those will will make life much less worrisome. No more close passes, no more concern at zebra crossings.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
They could already do that and use taxis if they wanted to. Already nothing is preventing them from doing that.
People like to have their own vehicles for a multitude of reasons. A shortage of taxis is not one of them.
The cost advantage of not owning a car will grow until - for all but the mad or massively rich - it will outweigh any benefits
It will be like the horse. Once everyone aspired to own a horse. They were the hegemonic form of transport
Now only eccentric gypsies and rich people in the country own horses. So it shall be for cars
That will take some time. But then will happen very quickly.
When I lived in London I gave up the car, as public transport was so good and finding somewhere to park was so expensive. Living in rural Oxfordshire as I do now it feels impossible.
Driverless cars are genuinely useless in rural areas. I can only imagine a lot of people advocating them here have never actually tried to use one in the countryside.
Why? They wouldn't have to anticipate as many pedestrians and cyclists as in an urban environment. GPS is much better away from tall buildings too, not as may signposts, lights etc etc
I guess the occasional stray sheep might cause some bother, but for my standard rural drive into the Highlands they will be an absolute dream. Jump in the car at 6am, on the hill by 8.30pm with a couple of hours napping/consulting the OS map.
Try using one on a road with poor mobile phone coverage/impeded GPS/no white lines, I promise you, it will stop working and hand back control to the driver.
I've used one, they are utterly useless.
Musk's will no doubt find Starlink. So pretty much universal coverage.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
They’re ugly af
New build estates vary.
They are often more visually pleasing than the new build estates of the 20th century.
Where? I wish it were so, I hate the uglification of the country, but the vast majority of new build estates either look mediocre or downright hideous
There are a few pleasing exceptions. The king’s stuff down in Cornwall is proper job
There seems much more variance in size and style in modern new build estates than those long lines of 1900s terraces, 1930s semis or the new estate Bob Ferris moved to in the 1970s.
Modern new builds also seem to have more open landscaped space than those of earlier generations.
Maybe this is just a regional difference - I can imagine new build estates in southern England are more crammed in than those in cheaper areas.
I still am not convinced by the PB consensus that Sir Keir Starmer is a dud.
They seem to be quietly doing a lot. The last lot didn’t seem to actually do anything in the end.
I think this Labour government will end up being too right wing for me, because it’s full of atheists and not Christian enough. All Around the world people are falling foul of gangs who control their neighbourhoods or fall foul of undemocratic state regime, so they are left with no choice but to walk away from their hometown in search of refuge and kind people who will help them. But this Labour government is boastful about the sign it’s put in the window: go away you are not welcome, we’re full - and boastful about how many more they’ve deported than the previous government.
It’s unrealistic and childish 😡
They should be filling boats with them and taking any new arrivals straight back where they came from. Time to get real.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
They’re ugly af
New build estates vary.
They are often more visually pleasing than the new build estates of the 20th century.
Not convinced that most people care about the aesthetic attraction of their home, compared with say 25% on the rent/mortgage. If they did, new build would adjust accordingly.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
They’re ugly af
New build estates vary.
They are often more visually pleasing than the new build estates of the 20th century.
Where? I wish it were so, I hate the uglification of the country, but the vast majority of new build estates either look mediocre or downright hideous
There are a few pleasing exceptions. The king’s stuff down in Cornwall is proper job
There seems much more variance in size and style in modern new build estates than those long lines of 1900s terraces, 1930s semis or the new estate Bob Ferris moved to in the 1970s.
Modern new builds also seem to have more open landscaped space than those of earlier generations.
Maybe this is just a regional difference - I can imagine new build estates in southern England are more crammed in than those in cheaper areas.
The new builds in my hometown are identical to ones 50 miles away. You don't have to ask anyone where the dishwasher is, or the toilet. Or indeed a plug to charge the phone.
I don't think this is bad thing - it's an efficiency to be welcomed, and in Edinburgh's New Town, Bath, bits of London, granite Aberdeenshire, part of the beauty is the harmony across the urban environment. The difference is those styles are actually quite interesting and nice to look at.
Labour need to develop a few templates of beautiful medium-density housing with solar panels, EV chargers and solid cycle infrastructure. Then take bidders.
Of course there is not an insignificant chance that the concept of freedom of movement is going down the pan with the EU likely to reform it anyhow.
So I wonder if we will end up rejoining the single market in that case and just restricting non-EU immigration very heavily.
“the concept of freedom of movement is going down the pan with the EU likely to reform it anyhow.”
I reckon you might be spectacular wrong on that.
Firstly why freedom of people movement can’t be tightened in EU is because it means factory built there not there. This is Rumania and Bulgaria argument to be allowed into Shengen, it was costing them factories - and once refugees slowed to trickle this year EU had no choice but to tear the land border down for fairness.
Secondly, The statisticians have been calling the Channel Crossing correctly for years, The extent EU fills up one year predicts the extent channel crossings invading UK happen from July the following year, 2023 was big fill up year so everyone knew what would happen from July this year, its one of the reasons the Tories called election for July 4th and now ludicrously trying to blame labour for what’s been happening since July 🤣 But what’s been happening this year is Europe not filling up this year, to the extent this rug pulled from under Austria and Dutch in having to allow open land borders in EU with Rumania and Bulgaria! It’s arguably going the opposite way other than tightening. It could be sad Syria situation was a large driver of the channel crossings, and it’s never going to be so bad ever again under Labour - certainly easy to predict Labour boast their policies are working 12 months from now even if they do nothing! as it was always tied in as delayed reaction to EU filling up.
I am in pub eating but hope this update of facts helps you.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
As always it’s trade off between cost and convenience.
As a single man of a certain age, it’s doesn’t really matter when the car arrives. You can order it at the last minute and if it falls through you can use a different provider (really thinking about uber as an analogy) or an alternative mode of transport
If you have a family with 3 kids under 8, organised chaos is the best description. It’s easier to pack the car the night before and then you go whenever everyone is ready and lined up and hadn’t forgotten teddy. You need that car but you don’t know when you are going to need it.
They will be self drive for the reasons adduced: safety above all (esp with kids)
A news report this minute flashed on my phone: 2 year old child killed in London in hit and run with a Porsche. Imagine a world where that does not happen, indeed cannot happen. Vastly superior
So self drive will take over. Once that is accepted then the need to own a car becomes much less imperative. Families could rent a self drive e-car for the night before so they have plenty of time to prep. The money saved in fuel, insurance, parking, maintenance, depreciation, will be enormous - and most people are not rich like some on here. The rich will still probably possess their own glamorous autonomous e-cars, the way the rich still stable horses
I predict this will happen within 5-10 years, as this is one of predictions, it will probably be 10-20 years
Possibly because they’re expecting retaliation for their assistance in Assad’s atrocities ?
"“I don’t know why [the Russians] so scared,” one of the HTS guards at the naval base said. “We’re treating them better than our people. We don’t even search them. Anyway, inshallah, give it a couple of days.” https://x.com/michaeldweiss/status/1868001135233241449
I still am not convinced by the PB consensus that Sir Keir Starmer is a dud.
They seem to be quietly doing a lot. The last lot didn’t seem to actually do anything in the end.
I think this Labour government will end up being too right wing for me, because it’s full of atheists and not Christian enough. All Around the world people are falling foul of gangs who control their neighbourhoods or fall foul of undemocratic state regime, so they are left with no choice but to walk away from their hometown in search of refuge and kind people who will help them. But this Labour government is boastful about the sign it’s put in the window: go away you are not welcome, we’re full - and boastful about how many more they’ve deported than the previous government.
It’s unrealistic and childish 😡
They should be filling boats with them and taking any new arrivals straight back where they came from. Time to get real.
“Real” is asylum is always needed for some people in this world, and decent governments have no choice but to be in agreements helping look after people who had no choice but walk away from home or have death and persecution!
The single best thing we could do for growth of course, is rejoining the single market. But Labour can’t go there, yet.
We could get the same growth rates as France and Germany.
Plus another half million Roma to live in the poorer parts of northern England.
Citation needed.
About what ?
Its what could happen if we re-join the single market and have freedom of movement with the EU.
If you don't think there are any Roma in the poorer parts of northern England then have a look around the poorer parts of northern England.
(There seems to have been pretty free movement into the UK since Brexit. Not so easy for would be ex-pats to leave under the circumstances we could before.)
As a point of order your comment on Roma with specific reference to Northern England.
I know its a common claim to say that we have free movement with Brexit but we don't.
Immigrants have been dominated by:
Students Health and social care workers Ukrainian and Hong Kong refugees Various unwanted 'asylum seekers' / economic refugees from failed states
A return of free movement with the EU would allow millions more economic migrants either for work (there are lots of job vacancies and the UK minimum wage has increased significantly) or benefits (which would be as attractive to some immigrants as they are to some British people).
As to the Roma - given the increasing tendency for Eastern European countries to elect ever more right wing authoritarian governments - they might be more incentivised than most to migrate to another country.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
As always it’s trade off between cost and convenience.
As a single man of a certain age, it’s doesn’t really matter when the car arrives. You can order it at the last minute and if it falls through you can use a different provider (really thinking about uber as an analogy) or an alternative mode of transport
If you have a family with 3 kids under 8, organised chaos is the best description. It’s easier to pack the car the night before and then you go whenever everyone is ready and lined up and hadn’t forgotten teddy. You need that car but you don’t know when you are going to need it.
They will be self drive for the reasons adduced: safety above all (esp with kids)
A news report this minute flashed on my phone: 2 year old child killed in London in hit and run with a Porsche. Imagine a world where that does not happen, indeed cannot happen. Vastly superior
So self drive will take over. Once that is accepted then the need to own a car becomes much less imperative. Families could rent a self drive e-car for the night before so they have plenty of time to prep. The money saved in fuel, insurance, parking, maintenance, depreciation, will be enormous - and most people are not rich like some on here. The rich will still probably possess their own glamorous autonomous e-cars, the way the rich still stable horses
I predict this will happen within 5-10 years, as this is one of predictions, it will probably be 10-20 years
There is no money saved for fuel, since fuel-wise you need to pay either way. If you hire a vehicle then that costs more to fuel up in fact than a vehicle you own that you can charge at home if you have a driveway.
Ditto parking etc, etc - we already have that, there's no cost there.
You are approaching this with the narrow closed-mind of a city dwelling single individual. Open your mind up, other people are different.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
As always it’s trade off between cost and convenience.
As a single man of a certain age, it’s doesn’t really matter when the car arrives. You can order it at the last minute and if it falls through you can use a different provider (really thinking about uber as an analogy) or an alternative mode of transport
If you have a family with 3 kids under 8, organised chaos is the best description. It’s easier to pack the car the night before and then you go whenever everyone is ready and lined up and hadn’t forgotten teddy. You need that car but you don’t know when you are going to need it.
They will be self drive for the reasons adduced: safety above all (esp with kids)
A news report this minute flashed on my phone: 2 year old child killed in London in hit and run with a Porsche. Imagine a world where that does not happen, indeed cannot happen. Vastly superior
So self drive will take over. Once that is accepted then the need to own a car becomes much less imperative. Families could rent a self drive e-car for the night before so they have plenty of time to prep. The money saved in fuel, insurance, parking, maintenance, depreciation, will be enormous - and most people are not rich like some on here. The rich will still probably possess their own glamorous autonomous e-cars, the way the rich still stable horses
I predict this will happen within 5-10 years, as this is one of predictions, it will probably be 10-20 years
They could all be stored and serviced in big multi-storeys on the edge of town, popping down to pick you up when you need a ride. I think a car spends more than 95% of it's life cluttering up the streets rather than actually moving around; you'll have about 1,000,000 more acres of road, garden, housing...
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
As always it’s trade off between cost and convenience.
As a single man of a certain age, it’s doesn’t really matter when the car arrives. You can order it at the last minute and if it falls through you can use a different provider (really thinking about uber as an analogy) or an alternative mode of transport
If you have a family with 3 kids under 8, organised chaos is the best description. It’s easier to pack the car the night before and then you go whenever everyone is ready and lined up and hadn’t forgotten teddy. You need that car but you don’t know when you are going to need it.
They will be self drive for the reasons adduced: safety above all (esp with kids)
A news report this minute flashed on my phone: 2 year old child killed in London in hit and run with a Porsche. Imagine a world where that does not happen, indeed cannot happen. Vastly superior
So self drive will take over. Once that is accepted then the need to own a car becomes much less imperative. Families could rent a self drive e-car for the night before so they have plenty of time to prep. The money saved in fuel, insurance, parking, maintenance, depreciation, will be enormous - and most people are not rich like some on here. The rich will still probably possess their own glamorous autonomous e-cars, the way the rich still stable horses
I predict this will happen within 5-10 years, as this is one of predictions, it will probably be 10-20 years
There is no money saved for fuel, since fuel-wise you need to pay either way. If you hire a vehicle then that costs more to fuel up in fact than a vehicle you own that you can charge at home if you have a driveway.
Ditto parking etc, etc - we already have that, there's no cost there.
You are approaching this with the narrow closed-mind of a city dwelling single individual. Open your mind up, other people are different.
You're approaching it with the dogmatic narrow mind of someone who has bought a house with a drive and a garage and who loves his car. Enjoy it while it lasts, it is on the way out (but probably more slowly than I predict)
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
They’re ugly af
New build estates vary.
They are often more visually pleasing than the new build estates of the 20th century.
Where? I wish it were so, I hate the uglification of the country, but the vast majority of new build estates either look mediocre or downright hideous
There are a few pleasing exceptions. The king’s stuff down in Cornwall is proper job
There seems much more variance in size and style in modern new build estates than those long lines of 1900s terraces, 1930s semis or the new estate Bob Ferris moved to in the 1970s.
Modern new builds also seem to have more open landscaped space than those of earlier generations.
Maybe this is just a regional difference - I can imagine new build estates in southern England are more crammed in than those in cheaper areas.
The new builds in my hometown are identical to ones 50 miles away. You don't have to ask anyone where the dishwasher is, or the toilet. Or indeed a plug to charge the phone.
I don't think this is bad thing - it's an efficiency to be welcomed, and in Edinburgh's New Town, Bath, bits of London, granite Aberdeenshire, part of the beauty is the harmony across the urban environment. The difference is those styles are actually quite interesting and nice to look at.
Labour need to develop a few templates of beautiful medium-density housing with solar panels, EV chargers and solid cycle infrastructure. Then take bidders.
To an extent, we have the templates already. Metroland suburbia (either the authentic version or knock-offs like Romford) are agreeable enough for people to want to live there, dense enough to support civic life, and the necessary updates (solar roofs, decent insulation) would be fairly easy to incorporate.
Repeat for every other city- identify the nice vernacular old suburbs and copy them everywhere within walking distance of a decent train service.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
They’re ugly af
New build estates vary.
They are often more visually pleasing than the new build estates of the 20th century.
Not convinced that most people care about the aesthetic attraction of their home, compared with say 25% on the rent/mortgage. If they did, new build would adjust accordingly.
Some people do, to varying amounts, which is why country cottages and Georgian terraces have a price premium.
Likewise you can see some houses of previous generations which have 'fancy' exterior features either for the more affluent or the 'Hyacinth Bouquet' types. For example Corrie style terraces but with tiny front gardens and bay windows.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
As always it’s trade off between cost and convenience.
As a single man of a certain age, it’s doesn’t really matter when the car arrives. You can order it at the last minute and if it falls through you can use a different provider (really thinking about uber as an analogy) or an alternative mode of transport
If you have a family with 3 kids under 8, organised chaos is the best description. It’s easier to pack the car the night before and then you go whenever everyone is ready and lined up and hadn’t forgotten teddy. You need that car but you don’t know when you are going to need it.
They will be self drive for the reasons adduced: safety above all (esp with kids)
A news report this minute flashed on my phone: 2 year old child killed in London in hit and run with a Porsche. Imagine a world where that does not happen, indeed cannot happen. Vastly superior
So self drive will take over. Once that is accepted then the need to own a car becomes much less imperative. Families could rent a self drive e-car for the night before so they have plenty of time to prep. The money saved in fuel, insurance, parking, maintenance, depreciation, will be enormous - and most people are not rich like some on here. The rich will still probably possess their own glamorous autonomous e-cars, the way the rich still stable horses
I predict this will happen within 5-10 years, as this is one of predictions, it will probably be 10-20 years
They could all be stored and serviced in big multi-storeys on the edge of town, popping down to pick you up when you need a ride. I think a car spends more than 95% of it's life cluttering up the streets rather than actually moving around; you'll have about 1,000,000 more acres of road, garden, housing...
My Playstation spends 99% of its life just lying there idle, I still want it available when I want to use it.
Apart from our mobile phones, I can't think of much we own that is with us all the time. We still like to own things.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
They’re ugly af
New build estates vary.
They are often more visually pleasing than the new build estates of the 20th century.
Where? I wish it were so, I hate the uglification of the country, but the vast majority of new build estates either look mediocre or downright hideous
There are a few pleasing exceptions. The king’s stuff down in Cornwall is proper job
Horrible to live in too. Small rooms and windows, no storage space, overinsulated ugh.
Also can someone explain to me why the elites want us all to have double glazing but never have it themselves. They tend to live in airy old style city or country properties. If its so good why dont they have it.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
As always it’s trade off between cost and convenience.
As a single man of a certain age, it’s doesn’t really matter when the car arrives. You can order it at the last minute and if it falls through you can use a different provider (really thinking about uber as an analogy) or an alternative mode of transport
If you have a family with 3 kids under 8, organised chaos is the best description. It’s easier to pack the car the night before and then you go whenever everyone is ready and lined up and hadn’t forgotten teddy. You need that car but you don’t know when you are going to need it.
They will be self drive for the reasons adduced: safety above all (esp with kids)
A news report this minute flashed on my phone: 2 year old child killed in London in hit and run with a Porsche. Imagine a world where that does not happen, indeed cannot happen. Vastly superior
So self drive will take over. Once that is accepted then the need to own a car becomes much less imperative. Families could rent a self drive e-car for the night before so they have plenty of time to prep. The money saved in fuel, insurance, parking, maintenance, depreciation, will be enormous - and most people are not rich like some on here. The rich will still probably possess their own glamorous autonomous e-cars, the way the rich still stable horses
I predict this will happen within 5-10 years, as this is one of predictions, it will probably be 10-20 years
There is no money saved for fuel, since fuel-wise you need to pay either way. If you hire a vehicle then that costs more to fuel up in fact than a vehicle you own that you can charge at home if you have a driveway.
Ditto parking etc, etc - we already have that, there's no cost there.
You are approaching this with the narrow closed-mind of a city dwelling single individual. Open your mind up, other people are different.
You're approaching it with the dogmatic narrow mind of someone who has bought a house with a drive and a garage and who loves his car. Enjoy it while it lasts, it is on the way out (but probably more slowly than I predict)
If self-driving cars are programmed to avoid hitting people what's to stop pedestrians wandering across the street at will? We are constrained at present by the fear that a driver may be too stupid, callous or angry to stop. A robot programmed to 'do no evil' will never get anywhere.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
They’re ugly af
New build estates vary.
They are often more visually pleasing than the new build estates of the 20th century.
Where? I wish it were so, I hate the uglification of the country, but the vast majority of new build estates either look mediocre or downright hideous
There are a few pleasing exceptions. The king’s stuff down in Cornwall is proper job
Horrible to live in too. Small rooms and windows, no storage space, overinsulated ugh.
Yes, they look so fucking POKY. Rabbit hutches with no natural light. UGH
They don't build this shit on the continent, why have we imposed this on ourselves?
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
As always it’s trade off between cost and convenience.
As a single man of a certain age, it’s doesn’t really matter when the car arrives. You can order it at the last minute and if it falls through you can use a different provider (really thinking about uber as an analogy) or an alternative mode of transport
If you have a family with 3 kids under 8, organised chaos is the best description. It’s easier to pack the car the night before and then you go whenever everyone is ready and lined up and hadn’t forgotten teddy. You need that car but you don’t know when you are going to need it.
They will be self drive for the reasons adduced: safety above all (esp with kids)
A news report this minute flashed on my phone: 2 year old child killed in London in hit and run with a Porsche. Imagine a world where that does not happen, indeed cannot happen. Vastly superior
So self drive will take over. Once that is accepted then the need to own a car becomes much less imperative. Families could rent a self drive e-car for the night before so they have plenty of time to prep. The money saved in fuel, insurance, parking, maintenance, depreciation, will be enormous - and most people are not rich like some on here. The rich will still probably possess their own glamorous autonomous e-cars, the way the rich still stable horses
I predict this will happen within 5-10 years, as this is one of predictions, it will probably be 10-20 years
There is no money saved for fuel, since fuel-wise you need to pay either way. If you hire a vehicle then that costs more to fuel up in fact than a vehicle you own that you can charge at home if you have a driveway.
Ditto parking etc, etc - we already have that, there's no cost there.
You are approaching this with the narrow closed-mind of a city dwelling single individual. Open your mind up, other people are different.
You're approaching it with the dogmatic narrow mind of someone who has bought a house with a drive and a garage and who loves his car. Enjoy it while it lasts, it is on the way out (but probably more slowly than I predict)
If self-driving cars are programmed to avoid hitting people what's to stop pedestrians wandering across the street at will? We are constrained at present by the fear that a driver may be too stupid, callous or angry to stop. A robot programmed to 'do no evil' will never get anywhere.
That is a great point. And I don't think you would be able to update the Highway Code for a jaywalking law because ultimately, the car will always be programmed to stop in case the pedestrian is having a medical episode or something.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
They’re ugly af
New build estates vary.
They are often more visually pleasing than the new build estates of the 20th century.
Where? I wish it were so, I hate the uglification of the country, but the vast majority of new build estates either look mediocre or downright hideous
There are a few pleasing exceptions. The king’s stuff down in Cornwall is proper job
Horrible to live in too. Small rooms and windows, no storage space, overinsulated ugh.
Yes, they look so fucking POKY. Rabbit hutches with no natural light. UGH
They don't build this shit on the continent, why have we imposed this on ourselves?
Yes and people (mugs) spend 25 years of their life working to buy the things. Incredible.
Here's an idea wrt speed limits in built-up areas. Have a sign saying "recommended speed 25mph" while keeping the official speed limit at 30mph. It might remind people that the speed limit is in fact a maximum speed limit not the speed they should aim for. Even if only a minority of people reduce their speed slightly, it'll force a lot of other drivers to go more slowly since you shouldn't be overtaking in most of those areas (although some people do).
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
As always it’s trade off between cost and convenience.
As a single man of a certain age, it’s doesn’t really matter when the car arrives. You can order it at the last minute and if it falls through you can use a different provider (really thinking about uber as an analogy) or an alternative mode of transport
If you have a family with 3 kids under 8, organised chaos is the best description. It’s easier to pack the car the night before and then you go whenever everyone is ready and lined up and hadn’t forgotten teddy. You need that car but you don’t know when you are going to need it.
They will be self drive for the reasons adduced: safety above all (esp with kids)
A news report this minute flashed on my phone: 2 year old child killed in London in hit and run with a Porsche. Imagine a world where that does not happen, indeed cannot happen. Vastly superior
So self drive will take over. Once that is accepted then the need to own a car becomes much less imperative. Families could rent a self drive e-car for the night before so they have plenty of time to prep. The money saved in fuel, insurance, parking, maintenance, depreciation, will be enormous - and most people are not rich like some on here. The rich will still probably possess their own glamorous autonomous e-cars, the way the rich still stable horses
I predict this will happen within 5-10 years, as this is one of predictions, it will probably be 10-20 years
There is no money saved for fuel, since fuel-wise you need to pay either way. If you hire a vehicle then that costs more to fuel up in fact than a vehicle you own that you can charge at home if you have a driveway.
Ditto parking etc, etc - we already have that, there's no cost there.
You are approaching this with the narrow closed-mind of a city dwelling single individual. Open your mind up, other people are different.
You're approaching it with the dogmatic narrow mind of someone who has bought a house with a drive and a garage and who loves his car. Enjoy it while it lasts, it is on the way out (but probably more slowly than I predict)
If self-driving cars are programmed to avoid hitting people what's to stop pedestrians wandering across the street at will? We are constrained at present by the fear that a driver may be too stupid, callous or angry to stop. A robot programmed to 'do no evil' will never get anywhere.
That is a great point. And I don't think you would be able to update the Highway Code for a jaywalking law because ultimately, the car will always be programmed to stop in case the pedestrian is having a medical episode or something.
Hmmm.
And yet they are clearly doing fine in SF, Phoenix, LA and some Chinese cities
Of course you can argue that these cities were BUILT for the car so they are the easiest to automate. And that is absolutely true. But remember the tech we see now is as bad as it will ever be, and the speed of progress is probably accelerating, if anything
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
They’re ugly af
New build estates vary.
They are often more visually pleasing than the new build estates of the 20th century.
Where? I wish it were so, I hate the uglification of the country, but the vast majority of new build estates either look mediocre or downright hideous
There are a few pleasing exceptions. The king’s stuff down in Cornwall is proper job
Horrible to live in too. Small rooms and windows, no storage space, overinsulated ugh.
Yes, they look so fucking POKY. Rabbit hutches with no natural light. UGH
They don't build this shit on the continent, why have we imposed this on ourselves?
That is a self-deprecating assertion which is readily repeated by the chattering classes. It is not based upon fact. It is true that we build houses that are too small - so small that they would be illegal per se in Germany. But the places I know best, Besancon, and even more so Montbeliard have some social housing which is truly more vile than anything being built in England. But, there as here a bit of money and private sector can build some modern, interesting flats which are a pleasure to occupy - I stayed in one, admittedly the nicest one in the block for a week in September.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
As always it’s trade off between cost and convenience.
As a single man of a certain age, it’s doesn’t really matter when the car arrives. You can order it at the last minute and if it falls through you can use a different provider (really thinking about uber as an analogy) or an alternative mode of transport
If you have a family with 3 kids under 8, organised chaos is the best description. It’s easier to pack the car the night before and then you go whenever everyone is ready and lined up and hadn’t forgotten teddy. You need that car but you don’t know when you are going to need it.
They will be self drive for the reasons adduced: safety above all (esp with kids)
A news report this minute flashed on my phone: 2 year old child killed in London in hit and run with a Porsche. Imagine a world where that does not happen, indeed cannot happen. Vastly superior
So self drive will take over. Once that is accepted then the need to own a car becomes much less imperative. Families could rent a self drive e-car for the night before so they have plenty of time to prep. The money saved in fuel, insurance, parking, maintenance, depreciation, will be enormous - and most people are not rich like some on here. The rich will still probably possess their own glamorous autonomous e-cars, the way the rich still stable horses
I predict this will happen within 5-10 years, as this is one of predictions, it will probably be 10-20 years
There is no money saved for fuel, since fuel-wise you need to pay either way. If you hire a vehicle then that costs more to fuel up in fact than a vehicle you own that you can charge at home if you have a driveway.
Ditto parking etc, etc - we already have that, there's no cost there.
You are approaching this with the narrow closed-mind of a city dwelling single individual. Open your mind up, other people are different.
You're approaching it with the dogmatic narrow mind of someone who has bought a house with a drive and a garage and who loves his car. Enjoy it while it lasts, it is on the way out (but probably more slowly than I predict)
If self-driving cars are programmed to avoid hitting people what's to stop pedestrians wandering across the street at will? We are constrained at present by the fear that a driver may be too stupid, callous or angry to stop. A robot programmed to 'do no evil' will never get anywhere.
That is a great point. And I don't think you would be able to update the Highway Code for a jaywalking law because ultimately, the car will always be programmed to stop in case the pedestrian is having a medical episode or something.
Hmmm.
And yet they are clearly doing fine in SF, Phoenix, LA and some Chinese cities
Of course you can argue that these cities were BUILT for the car so they are the easiest to automate. And that is absolutely true. But remember the tech we see now is as bad as it will ever be, and the speed of progress is probably accelerating, if anything
Maybe because in a lot of those places it isn't normal for pedestrians to cross roads outside of strictly-defined locations.
I still am not convinced by the PB consensus that Sir Keir Starmer is a dud.
They seem to be quietly doing a lot. The last lot didn’t seem to actually do anything in the end.
I think this Labour government will end up being too right wing for me, because it’s full of atheists and not Christian enough. All Around the world people are falling foul of gangs who control their neighbourhoods or fall foul of undemocratic state regime, so they are left with no choice but to walk away from their hometown in search of refuge and kind people who will help them. But this Labour government is boastful about the sign it’s put in the window: go away you are not welcome, we’re full - and boastful about how many more they’ve deported than the previous government.
It’s unrealistic and childish 😡
They should be filling boats with them and taking any new arrivals straight back where they came from. Time to get real.
“Real” is asylum is always needed for some people in this world, and decent governments have no choice but to be in agreements helping look after people who had no choice but walk away from home or have death and persecution!
We cannot take them all, it has to be controlled. Been far too many over last 30 or so years and it shows, the country is now a skint craphole and getting worse by the day. Not nice if you are bottom of the pile getiing shat on unlike the bleeding hearts on here who sit on high pretending it is great when they are not in any way affected.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
They’re ugly af
New build estates vary.
They are often more visually pleasing than the new build estates of the 20th century.
Where? I wish it were so, I hate the uglification of the country, but the vast majority of new build estates either look mediocre or downright hideous
There are a few pleasing exceptions. The king’s stuff down in Cornwall is proper job
Horrible to live in too. Small rooms and windows, no storage space, overinsulated ugh.
Yes, they look so fucking POKY. Rabbit hutches with no natural light. UGH
They don't build this shit on the continent, why have we imposed this on ourselves?
Take a walk down any 1900s street of terraced houses - poky, rabbit hutches with no natural light.
And remember that the worst of them have since been demolished.
I doubt its much different in most of Europe, its more that middle class tourists don't tend to walk around working class areas.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
They’re ugly af
New build estates vary.
They are often more visually pleasing than the new build estates of the 20th century.
Where? I wish it were so, I hate the uglification of the country, but the vast majority of new build estates either look mediocre or downright hideous
There are a few pleasing exceptions. The king’s stuff down in Cornwall is proper job
Horrible to live in too. Small rooms and windows, no storage space, overinsulated ugh.
Yes, they look so fucking POKY. Rabbit hutches with no natural light. UGH
They don't build this shit on the continent, why have we imposed this on ourselves?
Yes and people (mugs) spend 25 years of their life working to buy the things. Incredible.
Alternatively they can spend 50 years of their life working to rent the things.
Supply and demand meets location, location, location.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
As always it’s trade off between cost and convenience.
As a single man of a certain age, it’s doesn’t really matter when the car arrives. You can order it at the last minute and if it falls through you can use a different provider (really thinking about uber as an analogy) or an alternative mode of transport
If you have a family with 3 kids under 8, organised chaos is the best description. It’s easier to pack the car the night before and then you go whenever everyone is ready and lined up and hadn’t forgotten teddy. You need that car but you don’t know when you are going to need it.
They will be self drive for the reasons adduced: safety above all (esp with kids)
A news report this minute flashed on my phone: 2 year old child killed in London in hit and run with a Porsche. Imagine a world where that does not happen, indeed cannot happen. Vastly superior
So self drive will take over. Once that is accepted then the need to own a car becomes much less imperative. Families could rent a self drive e-car for the night before so they have plenty of time to prep. The money saved in fuel, insurance, parking, maintenance, depreciation, will be enormous - and most people are not rich like some on here. The rich will still probably possess their own glamorous autonomous e-cars, the way the rich still stable horses
I predict this will happen within 5-10 years, as this is one of predictions, it will probably be 10-20 years
There is no money saved for fuel, since fuel-wise you need to pay either way. If you hire a vehicle then that costs more to fuel up in fact than a vehicle you own that you can charge at home if you have a driveway.
Ditto parking etc, etc - we already have that, there's no cost there.
You are approaching this with the narrow closed-mind of a city dwelling single individual. Open your mind up, other people are different.
You're approaching it with the dogmatic narrow mind of someone who has bought a house with a drive and a garage and who loves his car. Enjoy it while it lasts, it is on the way out (but probably more slowly than I predict)
If self-driving cars are programmed to avoid hitting people what's to stop pedestrians wandering across the street at will? We are constrained at present by the fear that a driver may be too stupid, callous or angry to stop. A robot programmed to 'do no evil' will never get anywhere.
They will always have to stop for bikes too. With no risk of hurt, many more cyclists will take the position they have primacy on urban roads. If the cars always slow/stop when they see a bike, then cars will be barely faster than walking.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
As always it’s trade off between cost and convenience.
As a single man of a certain age, it’s doesn’t really matter when the car arrives. You can order it at the last minute and if it falls through you can use a different provider (really thinking about uber as an analogy) or an alternative mode of transport
If you have a family with 3 kids under 8, organised chaos is the best description. It’s easier to pack the car the night before and then you go whenever everyone is ready and lined up and hadn’t forgotten teddy. You need that car but you don’t know when you are going to need it.
They will be self drive for the reasons adduced: safety above all (esp with kids)
A news report this minute flashed on my phone: 2 year old child killed in London in hit and run with a Porsche. Imagine a world where that does not happen, indeed cannot happen. Vastly superior
So self drive will take over. Once that is accepted then the need to own a car becomes much less imperative. Families could rent a self drive e-car for the night before so they have plenty of time to prep. The money saved in fuel, insurance, parking, maintenance, depreciation, will be enormous - and most people are not rich like some on here. The rich will still probably possess their own glamorous autonomous e-cars, the way the rich still stable horses
I predict this will happen within 5-10 years, as this is one of predictions, it will probably be 10-20 years
There is no money saved for fuel, since fuel-wise you need to pay either way. If you hire a vehicle then that costs more to fuel up in fact than a vehicle you own that you can charge at home if you have a driveway.
Ditto parking etc, etc - we already have that, there's no cost there.
You are approaching this with the narrow closed-mind of a city dwelling single individual. Open your mind up, other people are different.
You're approaching it with the dogmatic narrow mind of someone who has bought a house with a drive and a garage and who loves his car. Enjoy it while it lasts, it is on the way out (but probably more slowly than I predict)
If self-driving cars are programmed to avoid hitting people what's to stop pedestrians wandering across the street at will? We are constrained at present by the fear that a driver may be too stupid, callous or angry to stop. A robot programmed to 'do no evil' will never get anywhere.
That is a great point. And I don't think you would be able to update the Highway Code for a jaywalking law because ultimately, the car will always be programmed to stop in case the pedestrian is having a medical episode or something.
Hmmm.
And yet they are clearly doing fine in SF, Phoenix, LA and some Chinese cities
Of course you can argue that these cities were BUILT for the car so they are the easiest to automate. And that is absolutely true. But remember the tech we see now is as bad as it will ever be, and the speed of progress is probably accelerating, if anything
Maybe because in a lot of those places it isn't normal for pedestrians to cross roads outside of strictly-defined locations.
That's the motor-normativity in the US. In our pedestrian-heavy cities, this is already a big issue because the number of crossings (and the time afforded to pedestrians during light phases) is wildly insufficient, so people like me just wander across whenever we feel like it. So there will be likely be a behavioural response.
Stuff like this is why I think the biggest gains will be found for long distances in rural areas. The journey up to Inverness, or down to York, or across to Aberdeen etc etc
The more you think about it, the more self-drive vehicles in the UK seems like a bad idea which just won't work in practice. It might be okay for lorries driving on motorways.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
They’re ugly af
New build estates vary.
They are often more visually pleasing than the new build estates of the 20th century.
Where? I wish it were so, I hate the uglification of the country, but the vast majority of new build estates either look mediocre or downright hideous
There are a few pleasing exceptions. The king’s stuff down in Cornwall is proper job
Horrible to live in too. Small rooms and windows, no storage space, overinsulated ugh.
Yes, they look so fucking POKY. Rabbit hutches with no natural light. UGH
They don't build this shit on the continent, why have we imposed this on ourselves?
Take a walk down any 1900s street of terraced houses - poky, rabbit hutches with no natural light.
And remember that the worst of them have since been demolished.
I doubt its much different in most of Europe, its more that middle class tourists don't tend to walk around working class areas.
Absolutely right. When you drive over the border out of Geneva you aren’t in pretty touristy France (unless sticking to the lakeside for Evian and Yvoire) - it’s working towns like Annemasse and then all the small industrial towns that pepper the landscape up to the alps.
The houses are not pretty and all have messy shitty yards and gardens where they just dump anything with low wire fences. The apartment blocks are also pretty grim.
As you said, tourists don’t see these areas which comprise the majority of countries’ built up areas.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
They’re ugly af
New build estates vary.
They are often more visually pleasing than the new build estates of the 20th century.
Where? I wish it were so, I hate the uglification of the country, but the vast majority of new build estates either look mediocre or downright hideous
There are a few pleasing exceptions. The king’s stuff down in Cornwall is proper job
Horrible to live in too. Small rooms and windows, no storage space, overinsulated ugh.
Yes, they look so fucking POKY. Rabbit hutches with no natural light. UGH
They don't build this shit on the continent, why have we imposed this on ourselves?
That is a self-deprecating assertion which is readily repeated by the chattering classes. It is not based upon fact. It is true that we build houses that are too small - so small that they would be illegal per se in Germany. But the places I know best, Besancon, and even more so Montbeliard have some social housing which is truly more vile than anything being built in England. But, there as here a bit of money and private sector can build some modern, interesting flats which are a pleasure to occupy - I stayed in one, admittedly the nicest one in the block for a week in September.
But I travel all the time around Europe. This year I spent ten solid weeks in France, driving around continuously. I don't believe I saw one new build estate as ugly as the average new estate in the UK, let alone the worst of ours
And I really wasn't just "visiting the tourist areas". I went through some seriously depressed towns of inland Britanny, near Vichy, etc
This bloke is on the wrong list. However, if true there is something enlightening about it (crops up most years, and it's always a vicar) as he is in deep deep trouble for noting the probable non-existence of Santa Claus - he will have been doing a Bayesian analysis I should think - but he was addressing a post graduate seminar of 10-11 year olds.
Can anyone confirm there really are 10-11 year olds who haven't worked this out?
I think 10-11 years olds believe they are humouring their parents by pretending to believe he's real!
And Good Morning to everyone. Not sunny here today, but only a very light grey sky.
Hm. Definitely a grey area with my three. My youngest, who has just turned ten, still believes. So do most of her friends. They are also all fully invested in the elves. This does seem a weirdly credulous chohort though. My oldest was definitely wise to it by this age. Middle daughter we thought was wise to it at 11, but then we had a trip to Lapland (we should have done it two years previously, but covid) and she definitely doubted her doubts. In any case, telling 11 year olds - including many who know - that there is no Father Christmas us just brutal. There is a period in which they know, but wish they didn't.
How would he feel if I told his kids there is no God?
10?
Surely you grow out of that by the time you learn your multiplication tables.
Not sure what to make of this letter to Rachel Reeves in the Telegraph.
"Before your Budget, I’d have paid £200,000 inheritance tax, which is a huge amount of money in any working man’s book, but it’s arguably “fair”. However, after your Budget it’s £640,000, which is gut-wrenchingly unjust. The increase of £440,000 reflects your raid on pension funds, which doesn’t end there, as my children could pay £360,000 income tax on the balance they inherit."
Have we noted that "Israel will close its embassy in Dublin over "the extreme anti-Israel policies of the Irish government", its foreign minister has said."
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
They could already do that and use taxis if they wanted to. Already nothing is preventing them from doing that.
People like to have their own vehicles for a multitude of reasons. A shortage of taxis is not one of them.
The cost advantage of not owning a car will grow until - for all but the mad or massively rich - it will outweigh any benefits
It will be like the horse. Once everyone aspired to own a horse. They were the hegemonic form of transport
Now only eccentric gypsies and rich people in the country own horses. So it shall be for cars
I have a car which other than taking me places to do fun stuff can also be used to store stuff while I am out doing various activities. Can't do that with a taxi.
The single best thing we could do for growth of course, is rejoining the single market. But Labour can’t go there, yet.
We could get the same growth rates as France and Germany.
Plus another half million Roma to live in the poorer parts of northern England.
Citation needed.
About what ?
Its what could happen if we re-join the single market and have freedom of movement with the EU.
If you don't think there are any Roma in the poorer parts of northern England then have a look around the poorer parts of northern England.
(There seems to have been pretty free movement into the UK since Brexit. Not so easy for would be ex-pats to leave under the circumstances we could before.)
As a point of order your comment on Roma with specific reference to Northern England.
I know its a common claim to say that we have free movement with Brexit but we don't.
Immigrants have been dominated by:
Students Health and social care workers Ukrainian and Hong Kong refugees Various unwanted 'asylum seekers' / economic refugees from failed states
A return of free movement with the EU would allow millions more economic migrants either for work (there are lots of job vacancies and the UK minimum wage has increased significantly) or benefits (which would be as attractive to some immigrants as they are to some British people).
As to the Roma - given the increasing tendency for Eastern European countries to elect ever more right wing authoritarian governments - they might be more incentivised than most to migrate to another country.
I was hoping for evidence rather than a list of right wing tropes.
Not sure what to make of this letter to Rachel Reeves in the Telegraph.
"Before your Budget, I’d have paid £200,000 inheritance tax, which is a huge amount of money in any working man’s book, but it’s arguably “fair”. However, after your Budget it’s £640,000, which is gut-wrenchingly unjust. The increase of £440,000 reflects your raid on pension funds, which doesn’t end there, as my children could pay £360,000 income tax on the balance they inherit."
I don't like the current Russian regime, and LOL at any ships they lose. But it can't be nice to be on a ship and to see even your bow is giving you the finger.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
They’re ugly af
New build estates vary.
They are often more visually pleasing than the new build estates of the 20th century.
Where? I wish it were so, I hate the uglification of the country, but the vast majority of new build estates either look mediocre or downright hideous
There are a few pleasing exceptions. The king’s stuff down in Cornwall is proper job
Horrible to live in too. Small rooms and windows, no storage space, overinsulated ugh.
Yes, they look so fucking POKY. Rabbit hutches with no natural light. UGH
They don't build this shit on the continent, why have we imposed this on ourselves?
Take a walk down any 1900s street of terraced houses - poky, rabbit hutches with no natural light.
And remember that the worst of them have since been demolished.
I doubt its much different in most of Europe, its more that middle class tourists don't tend to walk around working class areas.
Absolutely right. When you drive over the border out of Geneva you aren’t in pretty touristy France (unless sticking to the lakeside for Evian and Yvoire) - it’s working towns like Annemasse and then all the small industrial towns that pepper the landscape up to the alps.
The houses are not pretty and all have messy shitty yards and gardens where they just dump anything with low wire fences. The apartment blocks are also pretty grim.
As you said, tourists don’t see these areas which comprise the majority of countries’ built up areas.
The problem with Barratt houses is not the size. It is that the build quality is utter shit. It is utter shit compared to similar houses 40 years ago and it is utter shit compared to similar houses in the rest of Europe. They are thrown up and fited out by semi-skilled labourers who are paid the modern equivalent of piece work and who are concerned only with getting as many jobs done as possible in the alloted time. They quality control is non-existent and there is a whole new industry that has developed around correcting the mistakes and ommisions and making the properties fit to live in. Snagging doesn't even begin to cover it. There are building firms who do a far better job but the main developers are getting away withg building houses that, at the time of sale, are unfit to live in.
Would have been best to stay largely in the single market and leave the customs union, like Switzerland. My view on this has never shifted.
Daniel Hannan is a liar.
Not true. Hannan's view on the single market never changed. He was always on favour of membership. It was just the EU he objected to. Indeed during the Referendum camapign he was sidelined for much of the time because of his refusal to toe the Out line on Single Market membership.
That will be the same Daniel Hannan that supported Johnson's deal?
He supported it as a means of ending the deadlock. But he was always clear - as he is now - that he would go further than Johnson and prefer an EFTA type arrangement.
The single best thing we could do for growth of course, is rejoining the single market. But Labour can’t go there, yet.
We could get the same growth rates as France and Germany.
Plus another half million Roma to live in the poorer parts of northern England.
Citation needed.
About what ?
Its what could happen if we re-join the single market and have freedom of movement with the EU.
If you don't think there are any Roma in the poorer parts of northern England then have a look around the poorer parts of northern England.
(There seems to have been pretty free movement into the UK since Brexit. Not so easy for would be ex-pats to leave under the circumstances we could before.)
As a point of order your comment on Roma with specific reference to Northern England.
I know its a common claim to say that we have free movement with Brexit but we don't.
Immigrants have been dominated by:
Students Health and social care workers Ukrainian and Hong Kong refugees Various unwanted 'asylum seekers' / economic refugees from failed states
A return of free movement with the EU would allow millions more economic migrants either for work (there are lots of job vacancies and the UK minimum wage has increased significantly) or benefits (which would be as attractive to some immigrants as they are to some British people).
As to the Roma - given the increasing tendency for Eastern European countries to elect ever more right wing authoritarian governments - they might be more incentivised than most to migrate to another country.
I was hoping for evidence rather than a list of right wing tropes.
I'm not sure what your point is.
You seem to think we have lots of immigrants now but wouldn't get more if we actually had free movement.
The pattern of recent decades is that there tends to be more immigration than expected.
I see no reason why having free movement with the EU again would not lead to higher immigration than expected.
The single best thing we could do for growth of course, is rejoining the single market. But Labour can’t go there, yet.
We could get the same growth rates as France and Germany.
Plus another half million Roma to live in the poorer parts of northern England.
Citation needed.
About what ?
Its what could happen if we re-join the single market and have freedom of movement with the EU.
If you don't think there are any Roma in the poorer parts of northern England then have a look around the poorer parts of northern England.
(There seems to have been pretty free movement into the UK since Brexit. Not so easy for would be ex-pats to leave under the circumstances we could before.)
As a point of order your comment on Roma with specific reference to Northern England.
I know its a common claim to say that we have free movement with Brexit but we don't.
Immigrants have been dominated by:
Students Health and social care workers Ukrainian and Hong Kong refugees Various unwanted 'asylum seekers' / economic refugees from failed states
A return of free movement with the EU would allow millions more economic migrants either for work (there are lots of job vacancies and the UK minimum wage has increased significantly) or benefits (which would be as attractive to some immigrants as they are to some British people).
As to the Roma - given the increasing tendency for Eastern European countries to elect ever more right wing authoritarian governments - they might be more incentivised than most to migrate to another country.
I was hoping for evidence rather than a list of right wing tropes.
I'm not sure what your point is.
You seem to think we have lots of immigrants now but wouldn't get more if we actually had free movement.
The pattern of recent decades is that there tends to be more immigration than expected.
I see no reason why having free movement with the EU again would not lead to higher immigration than expected.
Expecially given the economic issues on the continent. The pre-Brexit wave of immigration from the EU wasn't just from the accession countries but also from people in "old Europe" fleeing unemployment.
Not sure what to make of this letter to Rachel Reeves in the Telegraph.
"Before your Budget, I’d have paid £200,000 inheritance tax, which is a huge amount of money in any working man’s book, but it’s arguably “fair”. However, after your Budget it’s £640,000, which is gut-wrenchingly unjust. The increase of £440,000 reflects your raid on pension funds, which doesn’t end there, as my children could pay £360,000 income tax on the balance they inherit."
I am not totally comfortable with some lazy bastard getting tax free money from his hard working and wealthy parent to squander on teenage semi- call girls.
Take that idle feckless friend to Chinese chancers Andrew Windsor. That f***** should be paying death duties before he gets free stuff off his poor late mum. We need a little bit of wealth redistribution where people like him are concerned.
Add Royals to your list of people who should pay inheritance tax.
Also can someone explain to me why the elites want us all to have double glazing but never have it themselves. They tend to live in airy old style city or country properties. If its so good why dont they have it.
Because they are listed buildings in many cases. Personally I prefer secondary glazing anyway because double glazing goes foggy and needs to be replaced
Not sure what to make of this letter to Rachel Reeves in the Telegraph.
"Before your Budget, I’d have paid £200,000 inheritance tax, which is a huge amount of money in any working man’s book, but it’s arguably “fair”. However, after your Budget it’s £640,000, which is gut-wrenchingly unjust. The increase of £440,000 reflects your raid on pension funds, which doesn’t end there, as my children could pay £360,000 income tax on the balance they inherit."
I don't like the current Russian regime, and LOL at any ships they lose. But it can't be nice to be on a ship and to see even your bow is giving you the finger.
Also can someone explain to me why the elites want us all to have double glazing but never have it themselves. They tend to live in airy old style city or country properties. If its so good why dont they have it.
Wanting us to pay less to heat our homes. The bastards.
The single best thing we could do for growth of course, is rejoining the single market. But Labour can’t go there, yet.
We could get the same growth rates as France and Germany.
Plus another half million Roma to live in the poorer parts of northern England.
Citation needed.
About what ?
Its what could happen if we re-join the single market and have freedom of movement with the EU.
If you don't think there are any Roma in the poorer parts of northern England then have a look around the poorer parts of northern England.
(There seems to have been pretty free movement into the UK since Brexit. Not so easy for would be ex-pats to leave under the circumstances we could before.)
As a point of order your comment on Roma with specific reference to Northern England.
I know its a common claim to say that we have free movement with Brexit but we don't.
Immigrants have been dominated by:
Students Health and social care workers Ukrainian and Hong Kong refugees Various unwanted 'asylum seekers' / economic refugees from failed states
A return of free movement with the EU would allow millions more economic migrants either for work (there are lots of job vacancies and the UK minimum wage has increased significantly) or benefits (which would be as attractive to some immigrants as they are to some British people).
As to the Roma - given the increasing tendency for Eastern European countries to elect ever more right wing authoritarian governments - they might be more incentivised than most to migrate to another country.
I was hoping for evidence rather than a list of right wing tropes.
I'm not sure what your point is.
You seem to think we have lots of immigrants now but wouldn't get more if we actually had free movement.
The pattern of recent decades is that there tends to be more immigration than expected.
I see no reason why having free movement with the EU again would not lead to higher immigration than expected.
We've always had economic migrants. From the Irish digging the canals to post war school teachers from Wales. Also in the other direction North East English miners to the Carmarthenshire coal fields. These people assimilate into society despite the NE miners families being referred to as the Durham's for three generations. Same with the EU. We had the Windrush generation. The World goes around..
In order to manipulate the figures the Sunak Government sold the Higher Education industry down the river.
Boris Johnson told us after Brexit that when Eastern Europeans whom he didn't like went home we could welcome " our friends from South East Asia" which was nice of him. Now it doesn't bother me but you Johnsonians are barking on about Johnny Foreigner yet Alexander Johnson said it would be fine. And of course he was famous for getting all the big calls right.
Not sure what to make of this letter to Rachel Reeves in the Telegraph.
"Before your Budget, I’d have paid £200,000 inheritance tax, which is a huge amount of money in any working man’s book, but it’s arguably “fair”. However, after your Budget it’s £640,000, which is gut-wrenchingly unjust. The increase of £440,000 reflects your raid on pension funds, which doesn’t end there, as my children could pay £360,000 income tax on the balance they inherit."
Pensioner who faces £1m tax bill on his modest savings urges the Chancellor to think again
£10k would be my idea of modest savings.
modest savings my arse
First of all the chap himself won't pay it. Secondly I don't understand the calculations. Is he saying that the inheritance tax his children will pay has gone from £200,000 to £640,000 AND that the children will have to pay a further £360,000? I have to say I find that surprising.
The more you think about it, the more self-drive vehicles in the UK seems like a bad idea which just won't work in practice. It might be okay for lorries driving on motorways.
It depends. If the self driving cars were statistically twice as safe as humans, would you say that they were a good idea? How about ten times as safe? How will insurance companies react when humans are the risky option? I'm not saying that they are there yet in the US, let alone here, However, Tesla FSD 13 does seem much better than previous versions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9Q5EPweZu0 My worry is that currently the FSD occasionally gives up and hands back to the human driver and as it gets better this happens less often. Supposing it gets so good it only does this once a year - the human driver will be so complacent that they won't expect or be ready for this rare event. FSD has to have a fail safe way to handle this.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
They’re ugly af
New build estates vary.
They are often more visually pleasing than the new build estates of the 20th century.
Where? I wish it were so, I hate the uglification of the country, but the vast majority of new build estates either look mediocre or downright hideous
There are a few pleasing exceptions. The king’s stuff down in Cornwall is proper job
Horrible to live in too. Small rooms and windows, no storage space, overinsulated ugh.
Yes, they look so fucking POKY. Rabbit hutches with no natural light. UGH
They don't build this shit on the continent, why have we imposed this on ourselves?
Take a walk down any 1900s street of terraced houses - poky, rabbit hutches with no natural light.
And remember that the worst of them have since been demolished.
I doubt its much different in most of Europe, its more that middle class tourists don't tend to walk around working class areas.
Absolutely right. When you drive over the border out of Geneva you aren’t in pretty touristy France (unless sticking to the lakeside for Evian and Yvoire) - it’s working towns like Annemasse and then all the small industrial towns that pepper the landscape up to the alps.
The houses are not pretty and all have messy shitty yards and gardens where they just dump anything with low wire fences. The apartment blocks are also pretty grim.
As you said, tourists don’t see these areas which comprise the majority of countries’ built up areas.
The problem with Barratt houses is not the size. It is that the build quality is utter shit. It is utter shit compared to similar houses 40 years ago and it is utter shit compared to similar houses in the rest of Europe. They are thrown up and fited out by semi-skilled labourers who are paid the modern equivalent of piece work and who are concerned only with getting as many jobs done as possible in the alloted time. They quality control is non-existent and there is a whole new industry that has developed around correcting the mistakes and ommisions and making the properties fit to live in. Snagging doesn't even begin to cover it. There are building firms who do a far better job but the main developers are getting away withg building houses that, at the time of sale, are unfit to live in.
I don't like the current Russian regime, and LOL at any ships they lose. But it can't be nice to be on a ship and to see even your bow is giving you the finger.
Not sure what to make of this letter to Rachel Reeves in the Telegraph.
"Before your Budget, I’d have paid £200,000 inheritance tax, which is a huge amount of money in any working man’s book, but it’s arguably “fair”. However, after your Budget it’s £640,000, which is gut-wrenchingly unjust. The increase of £440,000 reflects your raid on pension funds, which doesn’t end there, as my children could pay £360,000 income tax on the balance they inherit."
The change* is that inheritance tax is now payable on pension pots passed on before you are 75. Perhaps hard to argue it's unfair as this money previously likely was outside both income tax and IHT when other savings would have attracted both.
We can be completely confident a future Conservative government won't revert the change.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
As always it’s trade off between cost and convenience.
As a single man of a certain age, it’s doesn’t really matter when the car arrives. You can order it at the last minute and if it falls through you can use a different provider (really thinking about uber as an analogy) or an alternative mode of transport
If you have a family with 3 kids under 8, organised chaos is the best description. It’s easier to pack the car the night before and then you go whenever everyone is ready and lined up and hadn’t forgotten teddy. You need that car but you don’t know when you are going to need it.
They will be self drive for the reasons adduced: safety above all (esp with kids)
A news report this minute flashed on my phone: 2 year old child killed in London in hit and run with a Porsche. Imagine a world where that does not happen, indeed cannot happen. Vastly superior
So self drive will take over. Once that is accepted then the need to own a car becomes much less imperative. Families could rent a self drive e-car for the night before so they have plenty of time to prep. The money saved in fuel, insurance, parking, maintenance, depreciation, will be enormous - and most people are not rich like some on here. The rich will still probably possess their own glamorous autonomous e-cars, the way the rich still stable horses
I predict this will happen within 5-10 years, as this is one of predictions, it will probably be 10-20 years
There is no money saved for fuel, since fuel-wise you need to pay either way. If you hire a vehicle then that costs more to fuel up in fact than a vehicle you own that you can charge at home if you have a driveway.
Ditto parking etc, etc - we already have that, there's no cost there.
You are approaching this with the narrow closed-mind of a city dwelling single individual. Open your mind up, other people are different.
You're approaching it with the dogmatic narrow mind of someone who has bought a house with a drive and a garage and who loves his car. Enjoy it while it lasts, it is on the way out (but probably more slowly than I predict)
If self-driving cars are programmed to avoid hitting people what's to stop pedestrians wandering across the street at will? We are constrained at present by the fear that a driver may be too stupid, callous or angry to stop. A robot programmed to 'do no evil' will never get anywhere.
Drivers are already required to avoid hitting people and being alert to pedestrians who could step onto the road has for a long time now been part of the test of hazard awareness.
While the US has strict jaywalking laws, Canada goes the extreme opposite direction and says that any accident between a vehicle and a pedestrian is always the drivers fault. Even if the pedestrian just steps into the road, the driver is obliged to stop.
The UKs Highway Code has repeatedly evolved in that direction too.
People don't just step into the road for no good reason, because people are sensible, but if they do cross the road (outside of eg Motorways) then drivers or automated vehicles both have the same obligation to avoid an accident already.
Not sure what to make of this letter to Rachel Reeves in the Telegraph.
"Before your Budget, I’d have paid £200,000 inheritance tax, which is a huge amount of money in any working man’s book, but it’s arguably “fair”. However, after your Budget it’s £640,000, which is gut-wrenchingly unjust. The increase of £440,000 reflects your raid on pension funds, which doesn’t end there, as my children could pay £360,000 income tax on the balance they inherit."
Pensioner who faces £1m tax bill on his modest savings urges the Chancellor to think again
£10k would be my idea of modest savings.
modest savings my arse
First of all the chap himself won't pay it. Secondly I don't understand the calculations. Is he saying that the inheritance tax his children will pay has gone from £200,000 to £640,000 AND that the children will have to pay a further £360,000? I have to say I find that surprising.
This bloke is on the wrong list. However, if true there is something enlightening about it (crops up most years, and it's always a vicar) as he is in deep deep trouble for noting the probable non-existence of Santa Claus - he will have been doing a Bayesian analysis I should think - but he was addressing a post graduate seminar of 10-11 year olds.
Can anyone confirm there really are 10-11 year olds who haven't worked this out?
I think the break point is when kids go to senior school. At infant/Junior school there is a general acceptance that no one mentions the reality even if there is a nod and a wink amongst the oldest children. Once they are going up to senior school the aim is to ensure that, even if they are still pretending to believe, they don't expose themselves to ridicule or a hard landing from the bigger kids.
But the bottom line is the vicar was being a complete arse. Particularly for someone who believes in another non existent mythical being.
That’s the idea of Santa; softening up the kids on the entry level so that they’re later ready to redeploy their credulity onto the hard stuff.
Driverless cars are genuinely useless in rural areas. I can only imagine a lot of people advocating them here have never actually tried to use one in the countryside.
Why? They wouldn't have to anticipate as many pedestrians and cyclists as in an urban environment. GPS is much better away from tall buildings too, not as may signposts, lights etc etc
I guess the occasional stray sheep might cause some bother, but for my standard rural drive into the Highlands they will be an absolute dream. Jump in the car at 6am, on the hill by 8.30pm with a couple of hours napping/consulting the OS map.
Try using one on a road with poor mobile phone coverage/impeded GPS/no white lines, I promise you, it will stop working and hand back control to the driver.
I've used one, they are utterly useless.
Musk's will no doubt find Starlink. So pretty much universal coverage.
Starlink is not universal and in any case moving is very different to stationary. It still is impeded by trees etc.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
As always it’s trade off between cost and convenience.
As a single man of a certain age, it’s doesn’t really matter when the car arrives. You can order it at the last minute and if it falls through you can use a different provider (really thinking about uber as an analogy) or an alternative mode of transport
If you have a family with 3 kids under 8, organised chaos is the best description. It’s easier to pack the car the night before and then you go whenever everyone is ready and lined up and hadn’t forgotten teddy. You need that car but you don’t know when you are going to need it.
They will be self drive for the reasons adduced: safety above all (esp with kids)
A news report this minute flashed on my phone: 2 year old child killed in London in hit and run with a Porsche. Imagine a world where that does not happen, indeed cannot happen. Vastly superior
So self drive will take over. Once that is accepted then the need to own a car becomes much less imperative. Families could rent a self drive e-car for the night before so they have plenty of time to prep. The money saved in fuel, insurance, parking, maintenance, depreciation, will be enormous - and most people are not rich like some on here. The rich will still probably possess their own glamorous autonomous e-cars, the way the rich still stable horses
I predict this will happen within 5-10 years, as this is one of predictions, it will probably be 10-20 years
There is no money saved for fuel, since fuel-wise you need to pay either way. If you hire a vehicle then that costs more to fuel up in fact than a vehicle you own that you can charge at home if you have a driveway.
Ditto parking etc, etc - we already have that, there's no cost there.
You are approaching this with the narrow closed-mind of a city dwelling single individual. Open your mind up, other people are different.
You're approaching it with the dogmatic narrow mind of someone who has bought a house with a drive and a garage and who loves his car. Enjoy it while it lasts, it is on the way out (but probably more slowly than I predict)
If self-driving cars are programmed to avoid hitting people what's to stop pedestrians wandering across the street at will? We are constrained at present by the fear that a driver may be too stupid, callous or angry to stop. A robot programmed to 'do no evil' will never get anywhere.
Drivers are already required to avoid hitting people and being alert to pedestrians who could step onto the road has for a long time now been part of the test of hazard awareness.
While the US has strict jaywalking laws, Canada goes the extreme opposite direction and says that any accident between a vehicle and a pedestrian is always the drivers fault. Even if the pedestrian just steps into the road, the driver is obliged to stop.
The UKs Highway Code has repeatedly evolved in that direction too.
People don't just step into the road for no good reason, because people are sensible, but if they do cross the road (outside of eg Motorways) then drivers or automated vehicles both have the same obligation to avoid an accident already.
The experience with (often unmanned, or at least undriven) trams is that people are more rather than less cautious about stepping out in front of them, and drivers more cautious about pulling out ahead of them, because of an assumption they won’t stop.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
Whats wrong with redbrick Barratt homes. We cant all live in Primrose Hill.
They’re ugly af
New build estates vary.
They are often more visually pleasing than the new build estates of the 20th century.
Where? I wish it were so, I hate the uglification of the country, but the vast majority of new build estates either look mediocre or downright hideous
There are a few pleasing exceptions. The king’s stuff down in Cornwall is proper job
Horrible to live in too. Small rooms and windows, no storage space, overinsulated ugh.
Yes, they look so fucking POKY. Rabbit hutches with no natural light. UGH
They don't build this shit on the continent, why have we imposed this on ourselves?
Take a walk down any 1900s street of terraced houses - poky, rabbit hutches with no natural light.
And remember that the worst of them have since been demolished.
I doubt its much different in most of Europe, its more that middle class tourists don't tend to walk around working class areas.
Absolutely right. When you drive over the border out of Geneva you aren’t in pretty touristy France (unless sticking to the lakeside for Evian and Yvoire) - it’s working towns like Annemasse and then all the small industrial towns that pepper the landscape up to the alps.
The houses are not pretty and all have messy shitty yards and gardens where they just dump anything with low wire fences. The apartment blocks are also pretty grim.
As you said, tourists don’t see these areas which comprise the majority of countries’ built up areas.
The problem with Barratt houses is not the size. It is that the build quality is utter shit. It is utter shit compared to similar houses 40 years ago and it is utter shit compared to similar houses in the rest of Europe. They are thrown up and fited out by semi-skilled labourers who are paid the modern equivalent of piece work and who are concerned only with getting as many jobs done as possible in the alloted time. They quality control is non-existent and there is a whole new industry that has developed around correcting the mistakes and ommisions and making the properties fit to live in. Snagging doesn't even begin to cover it. There are building firms who do a far better job but the main developers are getting away withg building houses that, at the time of sale, are unfit to live in.
Unfortunately our planning system gives permission to these developers to develop large estates, while denying permission to small developments by independent could-be developers.
In Japan where permission is not required to build most development happens on demand, when and where it is needed, one house at a time.
In the UK, where permission can be got by the developers who can game the system while nonody else can, we get entire estates or nothing with no real competition.
I note the Tories have also not put a target on what immigration should be or when they’d cut the boat crossings by. Presumably, wisely learning from their past mistakes.
Pleased to see Cooper avoiding that. Promising things that are to a large extent outside your control is a mug's game.
By definition, immigration is in the controlling hands of the government. It can issue 0 visas or 1m. What is this ludicrous idea that Britain is the passive victim of global migration flows?! It’s pathetic. We have the choice
Leon we only have the choice if we can increase our birthrate. Yet mention anything that might increase our birthrate such as horror lower property prices or horror perhaps not prioritising females in the workplace and you get massive pushback. So we are where we are. If we reduced immigration massively our economy would basically collapse.
No it wouldn’t. The robots are coming
I’ve heard of two jobs in my social circle being replaced by machines this last month
It’s begun
To be fair we are a way off robots being able to work in care homes.
Depends on the task. Most people are unaware of the huge strides in robotics
Oh ive seen the tesla robots. But driverless cars were promised by now and outside certain niches still hasnt materialised.
We just had a big PB debate on this
Driverless cars are finally taking off. In SF, Waymo are now equal with Lyft and are beginning to eat Uber’s lunch. Soon they will dominate
Dominating the taxi sector is different to dominating the vehicular sector altogether.
Even if they dominate, there is no reason why taxis will replace ownership.
There's no reason why people can't or won't own their own driverless car. Having your own automated vehicle rather than relying upon other people's still enables all the creature comforts that allows people to adapt their own vehicle as they like it rather than relying upon other people's.
Sure, but it will just be you. With your very own driverless car proudly parked outside your redbrick Barratt home semi in Newent
Everyone else will think Fuck it I can save £1000s by just ordering up an autonomous electric car as and when - to use for an hour or a day or a month - why do I need this stupid thing cluttering up my drive when I can have flowers and stuff, and half the time it just sits there, depreciating
As always it’s trade off between cost and convenience.
As a single man of a certain age, it’s doesn’t really matter when the car arrives. You can order it at the last minute and if it falls through you can use a different provider (really thinking about uber as an analogy) or an alternative mode of transport
If you have a family with 3 kids under 8, organised chaos is the best description. It’s easier to pack the car the night before and then you go whenever everyone is ready and lined up and hadn’t forgotten teddy. You need that car but you don’t know when you are going to need it.
They will be self drive for the reasons adduced: safety above all (esp with kids)
A news report this minute flashed on my phone: 2 year old child killed in London in hit and run with a Porsche. Imagine a world where that does not happen, indeed cannot happen. Vastly superior
So self drive will take over. Once that is accepted then the need to own a car becomes much less imperative. Families could rent a self drive e-car for the night before so they have plenty of time to prep. The money saved in fuel, insurance, parking, maintenance, depreciation, will be enormous - and most people are not rich like some on here. The rich will still probably possess their own glamorous autonomous e-cars, the way the rich still stable horses
I predict this will happen within 5-10 years, as this is one of predictions, it will probably be 10-20 years
There is no money saved for fuel, since fuel-wise you need to pay either way. If you hire a vehicle then that costs more to fuel up in fact than a vehicle you own that you can charge at home if you have a driveway.
Ditto parking etc, etc - we already have that, there's no cost there.
You are approaching this with the narrow closed-mind of a city dwelling single individual. Open your mind up, other people are different.
You're approaching it with the dogmatic narrow mind of someone who has bought a house with a drive and a garage and who loves his car. Enjoy it while it lasts, it is on the way out (but probably more slowly than I predict)
If self-driving cars are programmed to avoid hitting people what's to stop pedestrians wandering across the street at will? We are constrained at present by the fear that a driver may be too stupid, callous or angry to stop. A robot programmed to 'do no evil' will never get anywhere.
Tesla FSD versions up to 11 were 'programmed' like that. From version 12 and now 13 they have been end to end AI, so learning from millions of miles driven by humans. Although they have the advantage of more cameras (eyes) all around the car and probably quicker reactions. So, I think that FSD will eventually get as good or probably much better than a human driver, but if someone runs into traffic FSD will behave in a similar way to a standard human.
This bloke is on the wrong list. However, if true there is something enlightening about it (crops up most years, and it's always a vicar) as he is in deep deep trouble for noting the probable non-existence of Santa Claus - he will have been doing a Bayesian analysis I should think - but he was addressing a post graduate seminar of 10-11 year olds.
Can anyone confirm there really are 10-11 year olds who haven't worked this out?
I think the break point is when kids go to senior school. At infant/Junior school there is a general acceptance that no one mentions the reality even if there is a nod and a wink amongst the oldest children. Once they are going up to senior school the aim is to ensure that, even if they are still pretending to believe, they don't expose themselves to ridicule or a hard landing from the bigger kids.
But the bottom line is the vicar was being a complete arse. Particularly for someone who believes in another non existent mythical being.
That’s the idea of Santa; softening up the kids on the entry level so that they’re later ready to redeploy their credulity onto the hard stuff.
Not much choice about the hard stuff except for those refusing to take any side. It's all hard.
Either the universe is self made and without purpose and the origin of life itself is self assembled, both utterly unfathomable; or they occur as the somehow result of the intention of an pre existing entity, let us give it the traditional name of 'the one god'. Just as unfathomable.
Not sure what to make of this letter to Rachel Reeves in the Telegraph.
"Before your Budget, I’d have paid £200,000 inheritance tax, which is a huge amount of money in any working man’s book, but it’s arguably “fair”. However, after your Budget it’s £640,000, which is gut-wrenchingly unjust. The increase of £440,000 reflects your raid on pension funds, which doesn’t end there, as my children could pay £360,000 income tax on the balance they inherit."
Pensioner who faces £1m tax bill on his modest savings urges the Chancellor to think again
£10k would be my idea of modest savings.
modest savings my arse
First of all the chap himself won't pay it. Secondly I don't understand the calculations. Is he saying that the inheritance tax his children will pay has gone from £200,000 to £640,000 AND that the children will have to pay a further £360,000? I have to say I find that surprising.
The previous deal was no IHT on pensions but income tax was payable by the beneficiary if the death happened after 75. The new government has signalled it will include pensions in the estates for IHT after 2027 but hasn't said anything about the income tax requirement after 75. In theory this money could be taxed twice for IHT and IT. But the arrangements are still to be worked out, and I would expect potential double taxation to be excluded.
This bloke is on the wrong list. However, if true there is something enlightening about it (crops up most years, and it's always a vicar) as he is in deep deep trouble for noting the probable non-existence of Santa Claus - he will have been doing a Bayesian analysis I should think - but he was addressing a post graduate seminar of 10-11 year olds.
Can anyone confirm there really are 10-11 year olds who haven't worked this out?
I think the break point is when kids go to senior school. At infant/Junior school there is a general acceptance that no one mentions the reality even if there is a nod and a wink amongst the oldest children. Once they are going up to senior school the aim is to ensure that, even if they are still pretending to believe, they don't expose themselves to ridicule or a hard landing from the bigger kids.
But the bottom line is the vicar was being a complete arse. Particularly for someone who believes in another non existent mythical being.
That’s the idea of Santa; softening up the kids on the entry level so that they’re later ready to redeploy their credulity onto the hard stuff.
Not much choice about the hard stuff except for those refusing to take any side. It's all hard.
Either the universe is self made and without purpose and the origin of life itself is self assembled, both utterly unfathomable; or they occur as the somehow result of the intention of an pre existing entity, let us give it the traditional name of 'the one god'. Just as unfathomable.
All hard stuff. Yes, Santa is a soft entry level.
Can I be picky here and say that if there is a god then there's likely to be lots of them. "The one god" is pretty unlikely.
It hallucinated and started telling me £4500 is actually LESS than £3500.
Sounds like an excellent recruit for the marketing department of that railway company ProRata was moaning about. Absolutely perfect fit for the corporate strategy.
This bloke is on the wrong list. However, if true there is something enlightening about it (crops up most years, and it's always a vicar) as he is in deep deep trouble for noting the probable non-existence of Santa Claus - he will have been doing a Bayesian analysis I should think - but he was addressing a post graduate seminar of 10-11 year olds.
Can anyone confirm there really are 10-11 year olds who haven't worked this out?
I think the break point is when kids go to senior school. At infant/Junior school there is a general acceptance that no one mentions the reality even if there is a nod and a wink amongst the oldest children. Once they are going up to senior school the aim is to ensure that, even if they are still pretending to believe, they don't expose themselves to ridicule or a hard landing from the bigger kids.
But the bottom line is the vicar was being a complete arse. Particularly for someone who believes in another non existent mythical being.
That’s the idea of Santa; softening up the kids on the entry level so that they’re later ready to redeploy their credulity onto the hard stuff.
Not much choice about the hard stuff except for those refusing to take any side. It's all hard.
Either the universe is self made and without purpose and the origin of life itself is self assembled, both utterly unfathomable; or they occur as the somehow result of the intention of an pre existing entity, let us give it the traditional name of 'the one god'. Just as unfathomable.
All hard stuff. Yes, Santa is a soft entry level.
Can I be picky here and say that if there is a god then there's likely to be lots of them. "The one god" is pretty unlikely.
I think the likelihood of a single spiritual force behind the universe (described as God) is far greater than a series of separately intentioned beings, Mount Olympus style.
This bloke is on the wrong list. However, if true there is something enlightening about it (crops up most years, and it's always a vicar) as he is in deep deep trouble for noting the probable non-existence of Santa Claus - he will have been doing a Bayesian analysis I should think - but he was addressing a post graduate seminar of 10-11 year olds.
Can anyone confirm there really are 10-11 year olds who haven't worked this out?
I think the break point is when kids go to senior school. At infant/Junior school there is a general acceptance that no one mentions the reality even if there is a nod and a wink amongst the oldest children. Once they are going up to senior school the aim is to ensure that, even if they are still pretending to believe, they don't expose themselves to ridicule or a hard landing from the bigger kids.
But the bottom line is the vicar was being a complete arse. Particularly for someone who believes in another non existent mythical being.
That’s the idea of Santa; softening up the kids on the entry level so that they’re later ready to redeploy their credulity onto the hard stuff.
Not much choice about the hard stuff except for those refusing to take any side. It's all hard.
Either the universe is self made and without purpose and the origin of life itself is self assembled, both utterly unfathomable; or they occur as the somehow result of the intention of an pre existing entity, let us give it the traditional name of 'the one god'. Just as unfathomable.
All hard stuff. Yes, Santa is a soft entry level.
A priori, the former is no less credible than the latter; hence all that time spent sitting around inventing religions in ancient times was wasted, assuming you actually expect them to explain anything.
Even in the latter case, there’s no evidence nor logic for worshipping such an entity, who might very credibly be malign, or indifferent, as the evidence of history strongly suggests.
Not sure what to make of this letter to Rachel Reeves in the Telegraph.
"Before your Budget, I’d have paid £200,000 inheritance tax, which is a huge amount of money in any working man’s book, but it’s arguably “fair”. However, after your Budget it’s £640,000, which is gut-wrenchingly unjust. The increase of £440,000 reflects your raid on pension funds, which doesn’t end there, as my children could pay £360,000 income tax on the balance they inherit."
The change* is that inheritance tax is now payable on pension pots passed on before you are 75. Perhaps hard to argue it's unfair as this money previously likely was outside both income tax and IHT when other savings would have attracted both.
We can be completely confident a future Conservative government won't revert the change.
* I assume as I haven't read past the paywall.
I *think* death in service benefits are now liable for IHT. That would be a concern as they are a form of life assurance.
This bloke is on the wrong list. However, if true there is something enlightening about it (crops up most years, and it's always a vicar) as he is in deep deep trouble for noting the probable non-existence of Santa Claus - he will have been doing a Bayesian analysis I should think - but he was addressing a post graduate seminar of 10-11 year olds.
Can anyone confirm there really are 10-11 year olds who haven't worked this out?
I think the break point is when kids go to senior school. At infant/Junior school there is a general acceptance that no one mentions the reality even if there is a nod and a wink amongst the oldest children. Once they are going up to senior school the aim is to ensure that, even if they are still pretending to believe, they don't expose themselves to ridicule or a hard landing from the bigger kids.
But the bottom line is the vicar was being a complete arse. Particularly for someone who believes in another non existent mythical being.
The way this works is that your common or garden loboto-journalist has has about 6 or 8 "vicar" stories in his head or on a function key, of which this 'inapproriate honesty' item is one. Four of the others are "vicar has sexy time with church member", "vicar in massively rich church wants to steal your money to mend roof", "vicar commits (crime of various sorts)" and "eccentric vicar something something something" *.
* This might be something like "builds a model of the Eiffel Tower from matchsticks", "is a spare time dominatrix" (applies to Lib Dem vicars), "rides Harley Davidson", or "does sponsored roller skate along the Pennine Way" etc.
If it is not used every so many years, he forgets.
Not sure what to make of this letter to Rachel Reeves in the Telegraph.
"Before your Budget, I’d have paid £200,000 inheritance tax, which is a huge amount of money in any working man’s book, but it’s arguably “fair”. However, after your Budget it’s £640,000, which is gut-wrenchingly unjust. The increase of £440,000 reflects your raid on pension funds, which doesn’t end there, as my children could pay £360,000 income tax on the balance they inherit."
Pensioner who faces £1m tax bill on his modest savings urges the Chancellor to think again
£10k would be my idea of modest savings.
modest savings my arse
First of all the chap himself won't pay it. Secondly I don't understand the calculations. Is he saying that the inheritance tax his children will pay has gone from £200,000 to £640,000 AND that the children will have to pay a further £360,000? I have to say I find that surprising.
The previous deal was no IHT on pensions but income tax was payable by the beneficiary if the death happened after 75. The new government has signalled it will include pensions in the estates for IHT after 2027 but hasn't said anything about the income tax requirement after 75. In theory this money could be taxed twice for IHT and IT. But the arrangements are still to be worked out, and I would expect potential double taxation to be excluded.
Well the solution seems fairly clear, he needs to die before 2027 for tax reasons. Where do I send the invoice?
Not sure what to make of this letter to Rachel Reeves in the Telegraph.
"Before your Budget, I’d have paid £200,000 inheritance tax, which is a huge amount of money in any working man’s book, but it’s arguably “fair”. However, after your Budget it’s £640,000, which is gut-wrenchingly unjust. The increase of £440,000 reflects your raid on pension funds, which doesn’t end there, as my children could pay £360,000 income tax on the balance they inherit."
Pensioner who faces £1m tax bill on his modest savings urges the Chancellor to think again
£10k would be my idea of modest savings.
modest savings my arse
First of all the chap himself won't pay it. Secondly I don't understand the calculations. Is he saying that the inheritance tax his children will pay has gone from £200,000 to £640,000 AND that the children will have to pay a further £360,000? I have to say I find that surprising.
The previous deal was no IHT on pensions but income tax was payable by the beneficiary if the death happened after 75. The new government has signalled it will include pensions in the estates for IHT after 2027 but hasn't said anything about the income tax requirement after 75. In theory this money could be taxed twice for IHT and IT. But the arrangements are still to be worked out, and I would expect potential double taxation to be excluded.
if you are treating pension money the same as money paid from the pension then the both income tax and inheritance tax is due.
If the pensioner had the money in his savings account income tax would have been when the money was paid out from the pension pot. Inheritance tax would then be due afterwards when his children inherited the monry.
if the pension is still in the pension pot for it to be treated identically to the money that had been withdrawn then it both inheritance tax and income tax needs to be paid - its just the order has changed.
And yes that does mean it looks like an awfully high percentage of tax but that should tell pensioners to withdraw up to the 20% limit every year so that the end result doesn't end up in the 40% or even 45% band...
This bloke is on the wrong list. However, if true there is something enlightening about it (crops up most years, and it's always a vicar) as he is in deep deep trouble for noting the probable non-existence of Santa Claus - he will have been doing a Bayesian analysis I should think - but he was addressing a post graduate seminar of 10-11 year olds.
Can anyone confirm there really are 10-11 year olds who haven't worked this out?
I think the break point is when kids go to senior school. At infant/Junior school there is a general acceptance that no one mentions the reality even if there is a nod and a wink amongst the oldest children. Once they are going up to senior school the aim is to ensure that, even if they are still pretending to believe, they don't expose themselves to ridicule or a hard landing from the bigger kids.
But the bottom line is the vicar was being a complete arse. Particularly for someone who believes in another non existent mythical being.
That’s the idea of Santa; softening up the kids on the entry level so that they’re later ready to redeploy their credulity onto the hard stuff.
Not much choice about the hard stuff except for those refusing to take any side. It's all hard.
Either the universe is self made and without purpose and the origin of life itself is self assembled, both utterly unfathomable; or they occur as the somehow result of the intention of an pre existing entity, let us give it the traditional name of 'the one god'. Just as unfathomable.
All hard stuff. Yes, Santa is a soft entry level.
Can I be picky here and say that if there is a god then there's likely to be lots of them. "The one god" is pretty unlikely.
I can believe in the omniscient and omnipotent property but the benevolent property is what concerns me.
I think we are creating an omniscient and omnipotent entity in the combination of internet, AI and connected smartphones, each with a camera and microphone. If it were benevolent it would deserve the title of God. But that's a big IF.
PS I think that dogs believe that we are gods. It's all in the eye of the beholder.
Driverless cars are genuinely useless in rural areas. I can only imagine a lot of people advocating them here have never actually tried to use one in the countryside.
Why? They wouldn't have to anticipate as many pedestrians and cyclists as in an urban environment. GPS is much better away from tall buildings too, not as may signposts, lights etc etc
I guess the occasional stray sheep might cause some bother, but for my standard rural drive into the Highlands they will be an absolute dream. Jump in the car at 6am, on the hill by 8.30pm with a couple of hours napping/consulting the OS map.
Try using one on a road with poor mobile phone coverage/impeded GPS/no white lines, I promise you, it will stop working and hand back control to the driver.
I've used one, they are utterly useless.
Musk's will no doubt find Starlink. So pretty much universal coverage.
Starlink is not universal and in any case moving is very different to stationary. It still is impeded by trees etc.
It's quite funny how we are increasingly relying on a massive pyramid of tech to achieve something that humans have managed to do fairly well for well over a century.
Just wait for a cyberattack (or for MuskyBaby to decide he doesn't like you and deny the service to you....
Also can someone explain to me why the elites want us all to have double glazing but never have it themselves. They tend to live in airy old style city or country properties. If its so good why dont they have it.
Wanting us to pay less to heat our homes. The bastards.
Ok so why dont they have it if its so good. Ill tell you why. Double glazing creates an unhealthy living environment which is a breeding ground for mold. And they use the listed building exemption as a workaround so they dont have to install it
You'd probably have to introduce American-style "no jaywalking" rules on British roads to make self-driving cars a sensible proposition, and nobody wants that.
Not sure what to make of this letter to Rachel Reeves in the Telegraph.
"Before your Budget, I’d have paid £200,000 inheritance tax, which is a huge amount of money in any working man’s book, but it’s arguably “fair”. However, after your Budget it’s £640,000, which is gut-wrenchingly unjust. The increase of £440,000 reflects your raid on pension funds, which doesn’t end there, as my children could pay £360,000 income tax on the balance they inherit."
The change* is that inheritance tax is now payable on pension pots passed on before you are 75. Perhaps hard to argue it's unfair as this money previously likely was outside both income tax and IHT when other savings would have attracted both.
We can be completely confident a future Conservative government won't revert the change.
* I assume as I haven't read past the paywall.
I *think* death in service benefits are now liable for IHT. That would be a concern as they are a form of life assurance.
If they are assigned outwith the estate, then they don't fall into the estate for IHT. The problem is when someone CBA to fill in a little form. It's one of the simplest and easiest ways of avoiding IHT.
However as you say tghere are changes. Full details apparently not through yet, though. And there are a few years yet, plus a possible letout:
You'd probably have to introduce American-style "no jaywalking" rules on British roads to make self-driving cars a sensible proposition, and nobody wants that.
Why? People look before they cross. It doesn't make any difference if the car is driven by a computer.
This bloke is on the wrong list. However, if true there is something enlightening about it (crops up most years, and it's always a vicar) as he is in deep deep trouble for noting the probable non-existence of Santa Claus - he will have been doing a Bayesian analysis I should think - but he was addressing a post graduate seminar of 10-11 year olds.
Can anyone confirm there really are 10-11 year olds who haven't worked this out?
I think the break point is when kids go to senior school. At infant/Junior school there is a general acceptance that no one mentions the reality even if there is a nod and a wink amongst the oldest children. Once they are going up to senior school the aim is to ensure that, even if they are still pretending to believe, they don't expose themselves to ridicule or a hard landing from the bigger kids.
But the bottom line is the vicar was being a complete arse. Particularly for someone who believes in another non existent mythical being.
That’s the idea of Santa; softening up the kids on the entry level so that they’re later ready to redeploy their credulity onto the hard stuff.
Not much choice about the hard stuff except for those refusing to take any side. It's all hard.
Either the universe is self made and without purpose and the origin of life itself is self assembled, both utterly unfathomable; or they occur as the somehow result of the intention of an pre existing entity, let us give it the traditional name of 'the one god'. Just as unfathomable.
All hard stuff. Yes, Santa is a soft entry level.
Can I be picky here and say that if there is a god then there's likely to be lots of them. "The one god" is pretty unlikely.
I can believe in the omniscient and omnipotent property but the benevolent property is what concerns me.
I think we are creating an omniscient and omnipotent entity in the combination of internet, AI and connected smartphones, each with a camera and microphone. If it were benevolent it would deserve the title of God. But that's a big IF.
PS I think that dogs believe that we are gods. It's all in the eye of the beholder.
To combine all the themes, a thinker on TwiX (yes yes) recently asked the best ChatGPT model (the $200 a month one) a sequence of questions designed to get it to think as deeply as possible about the structure of the universe. So this is a computer arguably smarter than any human who has ever lived
All of its answers were fascinating, and about half tended clearly towards a spiritual explanation of life, the universe, everything
When asked explicitly the chances of "God existing" it said "a high chance"
This bloke is on the wrong list. However, if true there is something enlightening about it (crops up most years, and it's always a vicar) as he is in deep deep trouble for noting the probable non-existence of Santa Claus - he will have been doing a Bayesian analysis I should think - but he was addressing a post graduate seminar of 10-11 year olds.
Can anyone confirm there really are 10-11 year olds who haven't worked this out?
I think the break point is when kids go to senior school. At infant/Junior school there is a general acceptance that no one mentions the reality even if there is a nod and a wink amongst the oldest children. Once they are going up to senior school the aim is to ensure that, even if they are still pretending to believe, they don't expose themselves to ridicule or a hard landing from the bigger kids.
But the bottom line is the vicar was being a complete arse. Particularly for someone who believes in another non existent mythical being.
That’s the idea of Santa; softening up the kids on the entry level so that they’re later ready to redeploy their credulity onto the hard stuff.
Not much choice about the hard stuff except for those refusing to take any side. It's all hard.
Either the universe is self made and without purpose and the origin of life itself is self assembled, both utterly unfathomable; or they occur as the somehow result of the intention of an pre existing entity, let us give it the traditional name of 'the one god'. Just as unfathomable.
All hard stuff. Yes, Santa is a soft entry level.
Can I be picky here and say that if there is a god then there's likely to be lots of them. "The one god" is pretty unlikely.
I can believe in the omniscient and omnipotent property but the benevolent property is what concerns me.
I think we are creating an omniscient and omnipotent entity in the combination of internet, AI and connected smartphones, each with a camera and microphone. If it were benevolent it would deserve the title of God. But that's a big IF.
PS I think that dogs believe that we are gods. It's all in the eye of the beholder.
This bloke is on the wrong list. However, if true there is something enlightening about it (crops up most years, and it's always a vicar) as he is in deep deep trouble for noting the probable non-existence of Santa Claus - he will have been doing a Bayesian analysis I should think - but he was addressing a post graduate seminar of 10-11 year olds.
Can anyone confirm there really are 10-11 year olds who haven't worked this out?
I think the break point is when kids go to senior school. At infant/Junior school there is a general acceptance that no one mentions the reality even if there is a nod and a wink amongst the oldest children. Once they are going up to senior school the aim is to ensure that, even if they are still pretending to believe, they don't expose themselves to ridicule or a hard landing from the bigger kids.
But the bottom line is the vicar was being a complete arse. Particularly for someone who believes in another non existent mythical being.
That’s the idea of Santa; softening up the kids on the entry level so that they’re later ready to redeploy their credulity onto the hard stuff.
Not much choice about the hard stuff except for those refusing to take any side. It's all hard.
Either the universe is self made and without purpose and the origin of life itself is self assembled, both utterly unfathomable; or they occur as the somehow result of the intention of an pre existing entity, let us give it the traditional name of 'the one god'. Just as unfathomable.
All hard stuff. Yes, Santa is a soft entry level.
Can I be picky here and say that if there is a god then there's likely to be lots of them. "The one god" is pretty unlikely.
I can believe in the omniscient and omnipotent property but the benevolent property is what concerns me.
I think we are creating an omniscient and omnipotent entity in the combination of internet, AI and connected smartphones, each with a camera and microphone. If it were benevolent it would deserve the title of God. But that's a big IF.
PS I think that dogs believe that we are gods. It's all in the eye of the beholder.
To combine all the themes, a thinker on TwiX (yes yes) recently asked the best ChatGPT model (the $200 a month one) a sequence of questions designed to get it to think as deeply as possible about the structure of the universe. So this is a computer arguably smarter than any human who has ever lived
All of its answers were fascinating, and about half tended clearly towards a spiritual explanation of life, the universe, everything
When asked explicitly the chances of "God existing" it said "a high chance"
Also can someone explain to me why the elites want us all to have double glazing but never have it themselves. They tend to live in airy old style city or country properties. If its so good why dont they have it.
Wanting us to pay less to heat our homes. The bastards.
Ok so why dont they have it if its so good. Ill tell you why. Double glazing creates an unhealthy living environment which is a breeding ground for mold. And they use the listed building exemption as a workaround so they dont have to install it
This weekend's trolling is weird.
I do have double glazing and it's great to keep homes warm, dry, a consistent temperature and prevent damp and mold.
Cold, wet, poorly insulated homes are far more of a concern for damp and mold than well insulated ones.
This bloke is on the wrong list. However, if true there is something enlightening about it (crops up most years, and it's always a vicar) as he is in deep deep trouble for noting the probable non-existence of Santa Claus - he will have been doing a Bayesian analysis I should think - but he was addressing a post graduate seminar of 10-11 year olds.
Can anyone confirm there really are 10-11 year olds who haven't worked this out?
I think the break point is when kids go to senior school. At infant/Junior school there is a general acceptance that no one mentions the reality even if there is a nod and a wink amongst the oldest children. Once they are going up to senior school the aim is to ensure that, even if they are still pretending to believe, they don't expose themselves to ridicule or a hard landing from the bigger kids.
But the bottom line is the vicar was being a complete arse. Particularly for someone who believes in another non existent mythical being.
That’s the idea of Santa; softening up the kids on the entry level so that they’re later ready to redeploy their credulity onto the hard stuff.
Not much choice about the hard stuff except for those refusing to take any side. It's all hard.
Either the universe is self made and without purpose and the origin of life itself is self assembled, both utterly unfathomable; or they occur as the somehow result of the intention of an pre existing entity, let us give it the traditional name of 'the one god'. Just as unfathomable.
All hard stuff. Yes, Santa is a soft entry level.
Can I be picky here and say that if there is a god then there's likely to be lots of them. "The one god" is pretty unlikely.
I can believe in the omniscient and omnipotent property but the benevolent property is what concerns me.
I think we are creating an omniscient and omnipotent entity in the combination of internet, AI and connected smartphones, each with a camera and microphone. If it were benevolent it would deserve the title of God. But that's a big IF.
PS I think that dogs believe that we are gods. It's all in the eye of the beholder.
To combine all the themes, a thinker on TwiX (yes yes) recently asked the best ChatGPT model (the $200 a month one) a sequence of questions designed to get it to think as deeply as possible about the structure of the universe. So this is a computer arguably smarter than any human who has ever lived
All of its answers were fascinating, and about half tended clearly towards a spiritual explanation of life, the universe, everything
When asked explicitly the chances of "God existing" it said "a high chance"
Did it wink?
It would have been funny if it had said "42", but perhaps not as interesting
You'd probably have to introduce American-style "no jaywalking" rules on British roads to make self-driving cars a sensible proposition, and nobody wants that.
This bloke is on the wrong list. However, if true there is something enlightening about it (crops up most years, and it's always a vicar) as he is in deep deep trouble for noting the probable non-existence of Santa Claus - he will have been doing a Bayesian analysis I should think - but he was addressing a post graduate seminar of 10-11 year olds.
Can anyone confirm there really are 10-11 year olds who haven't worked this out?
I think the break point is when kids go to senior school. At infant/Junior school there is a general acceptance that no one mentions the reality even if there is a nod and a wink amongst the oldest children. Once they are going up to senior school the aim is to ensure that, even if they are still pretending to believe, they don't expose themselves to ridicule or a hard landing from the bigger kids.
But the bottom line is the vicar was being a complete arse. Particularly for someone who believes in another non existent mythical being.
That’s the idea of Santa; softening up the kids on the entry level so that they’re later ready to redeploy their credulity onto the hard stuff.
Not much choice about the hard stuff except for those refusing to take any side. It's all hard.
Either the universe is self made and without purpose and the origin of life itself is self assembled, both utterly unfathomable; or they occur as the somehow result of the intention of an pre existing entity, let us give it the traditional name of 'the one god'. Just as unfathomable.
All hard stuff. Yes, Santa is a soft entry level.
Can I be picky here and say that if there is a god then there's likely to be lots of them. "The one god" is pretty unlikely.
I can believe in the omniscient and omnipotent property but the benevolent property is what concerns me.
I think we are creating an omniscient and omnipotent entity in the combination of internet, AI and connected smartphones, each with a camera and microphone. If it were benevolent it would deserve the title of God. But that's a big IF.
PS I think that dogs believe that we are gods. It's all in the eye of the beholder.
To combine all the themes, a thinker on TwiX (yes yes) recently asked the best ChatGPT model (the $200 a month one) a sequence of questions designed to get it to think as deeply as possible about the structure of the universe. So this is a computer arguably smarter than any human who has ever lived
All of its answers were fascinating, and about half tended clearly towards a spiritual explanation of life, the universe, everything
When asked explicitly the chances of "God existing" it said "a high chance"
Comments
I'm desperate for it. We do about 16,000 miles a year (mainly on busy rural roads, the A1 to England, A96, A9, A82), and it would immeasurably improve my life. I understand why on some minor unclassified roads it might not work, but the vast majority of rural driving is on big A roads between the towns - and the B roads are the fun ones!.
For walking and cycling round the cities, we know that the vast majority of collisions are caused by human error or "injudicious action". Eliminating all of those will will make life much less worrisome. No more close passes, no more concern at zebra crossings.
Modern new builds also seem to have more open landscaped space than those of earlier generations.
Maybe this is just a regional difference - I can imagine new build estates in southern England are more crammed in than those in cheaper areas.
I don't think this is bad thing - it's an efficiency to be welcomed, and in Edinburgh's New Town, Bath, bits of London, granite Aberdeenshire, part of the beauty is the harmony across the urban environment. The difference is those styles are actually quite interesting and nice to look at.
Labour need to develop a few templates of beautiful medium-density housing with solar panels, EV chargers and solid cycle infrastructure. Then take bidders.
I reckon you might be spectacular wrong on that.
Firstly why freedom of people movement can’t be tightened in EU is because it means factory built there not there. This is Rumania and Bulgaria argument to be allowed into Shengen, it was costing them factories - and once refugees slowed to trickle this year EU had no choice but to tear the land border down for fairness.
Secondly, The statisticians have been calling the Channel Crossing correctly for years, The extent EU fills up one year predicts the extent channel crossings invading UK happen from July the following year, 2023 was big fill up year so everyone knew what would happen from July this year, its one of the reasons the Tories called election for July 4th and now ludicrously trying to blame labour for what’s been happening since July 🤣
But what’s been happening this year is Europe not filling up this year, to the extent this rug pulled from under Austria and Dutch in having to allow open land borders in EU with Rumania and Bulgaria! It’s arguably going the opposite way other than tightening. It could be sad Syria situation was a large driver of the channel crossings, and it’s never going to be so bad ever again under Labour - certainly easy to predict Labour boast their policies are working 12 months from now even if they do nothing! as it was always tied in as delayed reaction to EU filling up.
I am in pub eating but hope this update of facts helps you.
A news report this minute flashed on my phone: 2 year old child killed in London in hit and run with a Porsche. Imagine a world where that does not happen, indeed cannot happen. Vastly superior
So self drive will take over. Once that is accepted then the need to own a car becomes much less imperative. Families could rent a self drive e-car for the night before so they have plenty of time to prep. The money saved in fuel, insurance, parking, maintenance, depreciation, will be enormous - and most people are not rich like some on here. The rich will still probably possess their own glamorous autonomous e-cars, the way the rich still stable horses
I predict this will happen within 5-10 years, as this is one of predictions, it will probably be 10-20 years
"“I don’t know why [the Russians] so scared,” one of the HTS guards at the naval base said. “We’re treating them better than our people. We don’t even search them. Anyway, inshallah, give it a couple of days.”
https://x.com/michaeldweiss/status/1868001135233241449
Immigrants have been dominated by:
Students
Health and social care workers
Ukrainian and Hong Kong refugees
Various unwanted 'asylum seekers' / economic refugees from failed states
A return of free movement with the EU would allow millions more economic migrants either for work (there are lots of job vacancies and the UK minimum wage has increased significantly) or benefits (which would be as attractive to some immigrants as they are to some British people).
As to the Roma - given the increasing tendency for Eastern European countries to elect ever more right wing authoritarian governments - they might be more incentivised than most to migrate to another country.
Ditto parking etc, etc - we already have that, there's no cost there.
You are approaching this with the narrow closed-mind of a city dwelling single individual. Open your mind up, other people are different.
Repeat for every other city- identify the nice vernacular old suburbs and copy them everywhere within walking distance of a decent train service.
He’s always been a fan of the single market (and not fussed about immigration). But he supported Brexit as the best compromise available.
Likewise you can see some houses of previous generations which have 'fancy' exterior features either for the more affluent or the 'Hyacinth Bouquet' types. For example Corrie style terraces but with tiny front gardens and bay windows.
Apart from our mobile phones, I can't think of much we own that is with us all the time. We still like to own things.
They don't build this shit on the continent, why have we imposed this on ourselves?
Hmmm.
Of course you can argue that these cities were BUILT for the car so they are the easiest to automate. And that is absolutely true. But remember the tech we see now is as bad as it will ever be, and the speed of progress is probably accelerating, if anything
And remember that the worst of them have since been demolished.
I doubt its much different in most of Europe, its more that middle class tourists don't tend to walk around working class areas.
Supply and demand meets location, location, location.
Stuff like this is why I think the biggest gains will be found for long distances in rural areas. The journey up to Inverness, or down to York, or across to Aberdeen etc etc
The houses are not pretty and all have messy shitty yards and gardens where they just dump anything with low wire fences. The apartment blocks are also pretty grim.
As you said, tourists don’t see these areas which comprise the majority of countries’ built up areas.
And I really wasn't just "visiting the tourist areas". I went through some seriously depressed towns of inland Britanny, near Vichy, etc
Surely you grow out of that by the time you learn your multiplication tables.
"Before your Budget, I’d have paid £200,000 inheritance tax, which is a huge amount of money in any working man’s book, but it’s arguably “fair”. However, after your Budget it’s £640,000, which is gut-wrenchingly unjust. The increase of £440,000 reflects your raid on pension funds, which doesn’t end there, as my children could pay £360,000 income tax on the balance they inherit."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/inheritance/stolen-my-happy-retirement-letter-shames-rachel-reeves/
£10k would be my idea of modest savings.
https://x.com/AussieSteve64/status/1868266436734726647/video/2
(Apparently two Russian ships broke up this morning in the Kerch Strait.)
https://x.com/georgegalloway/status/1867902358312681883
You seem to think we have lots of immigrants now but wouldn't get more if we actually had free movement.
The pattern of recent decades is that there tends to be more immigration than expected.
I see no reason why having free movement with the EU again would not lead to higher immigration than expected.
Take that idle feckless friend to Chinese chancers Andrew Windsor. That f***** should be paying death duties before he gets free stuff off his poor late mum. We need a little bit of wealth redistribution where people like him are concerned.
Add Royals to your list of people who should pay inheritance tax.
To lose two smacks of carelessness.
(Or unacknowledged Ukrainian mischief...)
In order to manipulate the figures the Sunak Government sold the Higher Education industry down the river.
Boris Johnson told us after Brexit that when Eastern Europeans whom he didn't like went home we could welcome " our friends from South East Asia" which was nice of him. Now it doesn't bother me but you Johnsonians are barking on about Johnny Foreigner yet Alexander Johnson said it would be fine. And of course he was famous for getting all the big calls right.
I have to say I find that surprising.
I'm not saying that they are there yet in the US, let alone here, However, Tesla FSD 13 does seem much better than previous versions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9Q5EPweZu0
My worry is that currently the FSD occasionally gives up and hands back to the human driver and as it gets better this happens less often. Supposing it gets so good it only does this once a year - the human driver will be so complacent that they won't expect or be ready for this rare event. FSD has to have a fail safe way to handle this.
https://youtu.be/UtKn3YgpKDs?si=Y0TsXicqxmfZDPNP
I’d never touch new build.
A third vessel, a non-tanker, is also believed to have gone down.
We can be completely confident a future Conservative government won't revert the change.
* I assume as I haven't read past the paywall.
While the US has strict jaywalking laws, Canada goes the extreme opposite direction and says that any accident between a vehicle and a pedestrian is always the drivers fault. Even if the pedestrian just steps into the road, the driver is obliged to stop.
The UKs Highway Code has repeatedly evolved in that direction too.
People don't just step into the road for no good reason, because people are sensible, but if they do cross the road (outside of eg Motorways) then drivers or automated vehicles both have the same obligation to avoid an accident already.
https://archive.is/20241215143514/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/inheritance/stolen-my-happy-retirement-letter-shames-rachel-reeves/
It says he retired at 60 10 years ago.
I can't make head nor tail of it, and the Telegrunt does not - for some reason - have one of their pensions experts commenting on it.
I'd say " confused Bar Room Bullshitter" , but I wonder if I am missing something?
It has 3681 comments on it, which fortunately I can't read not respond to.
It hallucinated and started telling me £4500 is actually LESS than £3500.
In Japan where permission is not required to build most development happens on demand, when and where it is needed, one house at a time.
In the UK, where permission can be got by the developers who can game the system while nonody else can, we get entire estates or nothing with no real competition.
So, I think that FSD will eventually get as good or probably much better than a human driver, but if someone runs into traffic FSD will behave in a similar way to a standard human.
Either the universe is self made and without purpose and the origin of life itself is self assembled, both utterly unfathomable; or they occur as the somehow result of the intention of an pre existing entity, let us give it the traditional name of 'the one god'. Just as unfathomable.
All hard stuff. Yes, Santa is a soft entry level.
Even in the latter case, there’s no evidence nor logic for worshipping such an entity, who might very credibly be malign, or indifferent, as the evidence of history strongly suggests.
So I blame @Foxy .
The way this works is that your common or garden loboto-journalist has has about 6 or 8 "vicar" stories in his head or on a function key, of which this 'inapproriate honesty' item is one. Four of the others are "vicar has sexy time with church member", "vicar in massively rich church wants to steal your money to mend roof", "vicar commits (crime of various sorts)" and "eccentric vicar something something something" *.
* This might be something like "builds a model of the Eiffel Tower from matchsticks", "is a spare time dominatrix" (applies to Lib Dem vicars), "rides Harley Davidson", or "does sponsored roller skate along the Pennine Way" etc.
If it is not used every so many years, he forgets.
So it is used.
Where's Winterval when you need it?
Where do I send the invoice?
If the pensioner had the money in his savings account income tax would have been when the money was paid out from the pension pot. Inheritance tax would then be due afterwards when his children inherited the monry.
if the pension is still in the pension pot for it to be treated identically to the money that had been withdrawn then it both inheritance tax and income tax needs to be paid - its just the order has changed.
And yes that does mean it looks like an awfully high percentage of tax but that should tell pensioners to withdraw up to the 20% limit every year so that the end result doesn't end up in the 40% or even 45% band...
I think we are creating an omniscient and omnipotent entity in the combination of internet, AI and connected smartphones, each with a camera and microphone. If it were benevolent it would deserve the title of God. But that's a big IF.
PS I think that dogs believe that we are gods. It's all in the eye of the beholder.
Just wait for a cyberattack (or for MuskyBaby to decide he doesn't like you and deny the service to you....
However as you say tghere are changes. Full details apparently not through yet, though. And there are a few years yet, plus a possible letout:
https://www.herbertsmithfreehills.com/notes/pensions/2024-posts/changes-to-pensions-and-inheritance-tax-more-than-meets-the-eye
All of its answers were fascinating, and about half tended clearly towards a spiritual explanation of life, the universe, everything
When asked explicitly the chances of "God existing" it said "a high chance"
I do have double glazing and it's great to keep homes warm, dry, a consistent temperature and prevent damp and mold.
Cold, wet, poorly insulated homes are far more of a concern for damp and mold than well insulated ones.
"Denmark offers €27,000 to Syrian refugees for voluntary return, plus €6,700 per child, under a repatriation program.
Source: Bild"
https://x.com/clashreport/status/1868211741819392329
Are their asylum claims still valid? No? Well toodleoo then.