Has Slalom blocked discussion of Nick Brown, his former Chief Whip, because I don't remember his disappearance being mentioned here?
As far as I can tell from his wiki page, he was disappeared from government for no given reason
Is this remotely normal?
He resigned from Labour over a disciplinary process.
He is no longer an MP.
A Slalom style silent systematic process
I would have thought you would have learned your lesson from a few weeks ago when you were desperate to discuss a story about Starmer that was utter bollocks, but no.
We're not even allowed to know what Starmer's secrets are, which makes posting about anything rather treacherous
Beeb journos and editors will be the first to burst into tears when Farage populist nationalist government ends the licence fee on day one and make the BBC into a less well funded version of PBS.
Meh. The BBC is doomed anyway. We might as well face it, even tho it saddens me as a Brit
Probably true but symptomatic of the decline of the country. We have allowed our great institutions to shrivel or be sold off in the name of competition and the 'free market'.
Don't give a toss anymore. Britain as we knew it is gone. Just go into your town centre
We need a revolution, if the BBC dies - well, that was gonna happen anyway. They even killed off Mastechef and Gregg Wallace
Beeb journos and editors will be the first to burst into tears when Farage populist nationalist government ends the licence fee on day one and make the BBC into a less well funded version of PBS.
Meh. The BBC is doomed anyway. We might as well face it, even tho it saddens me as a Brit
Could mean the end of Strictly and the modern Dr Who though.
That would be a travesty.
If we had joined up thinking... keep the rights for world wide broadcast on new programs. The license fee becomes an online account available to anyone on the planet.
There are enough people in the USA who would sign up for BBC branded content, alone, to pay for the whole thing. Especially with no adverts.
So you could make subscriptions free to UK citizens.
"The BBC - free for you. Paid for by furriners." - one hell of a pitch.
And since no revenue from the UK, total independence from government. No license fee negotiations.
We are heading into Weimar if things continue at this hysterical level.
Neil Henderson @hendopolis · 21m MAIL ON SUNDAY: Poll: Starmer will be out of No10 in a year #TomorrowsPapersToday
It is nonsense and there is a Deltapoll in there with a 7% Labour lead
Labour 30% Cons 23% Reform 22% Lib Dems 12%
Though Starmer is -42% Badenoch - 21%
Supplementary questions
Is UK heading in right direction 69%/18% no How worried are you for those no longer receiving the WFA 78%/15% worried Do you back IHT on farms 53%/25% no Should there be more or less immigrants coming into UK 62%/11% less Should Musk be allowed to donate £80 million to Reform 54%/30% no
I am confident that if Starmer or Reeves had thought the abolition of tge WFA would be so unpopular they would have done it
link?
WFA axe is one of the greatest unforced political errors in decades.
It is all anyone remembers of Reeves budget even though it wasn't even in the budget but dropped out of the sky for no reason anyone sane can understand back in July.
We are heading into Weimar if things continue at this hysterical level.
Neil Henderson @hendopolis · 21m MAIL ON SUNDAY: Poll: Starmer will be out of No10 in a year #TomorrowsPapersToday
It is nonsense and there is a Deltapoll in there with a 7% Labour lead
Labour 30% Cons 23% Reform 22% Lib Dems 12%
Though Starmer is -42% Badenoch - 21%
Supplementary questions
Is UK heading in right direction 69%/18% no How worried are you for those no longer receiving the WFA 78%/15% worried Do you back IHT on farms 53%/25% no Should there be more or less immigrants coming into UK 62%/11% less Should Musk be allowed to donate £80 million to Reform 54%/30% no
I am confident that if Starmer or Reeves had thought the abolition of tge WFA would be so unpopular they would have done it
link?
It is in the Mail on Sunday but I think it is pay walled
Has Slalom blocked discussion of Nick Brown, his former Chief Whip, because I don't remember his disappearance being mentioned here?
As far as I can tell from his wiki page, he was disappeared from government for no given reason
Is this remotely normal?
He resigned from Labour over a disciplinary process.
He is no longer an MP.
A Slalom style silent systematic process
I would have thought you would have learned your lesson from a few weeks ago when you were desperate to discuss a story about Starmer that was utter bollocks, but no.
We're not even allowed to know what Starmer's secrets are, which makes posting about anything rather treacherous
Utter bollocks from Twatter isn't "Secrets"
Its utter bollocks multiplied by utter bollocks.
Utter bollocks squared.
Another one that’s been radicalised.
No one more radical than me. You should see my ideas for reducing headcount in government.,....
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Beeb journos and editors will be the first to burst into tears when Farage populist nationalist government ends the licence fee on day one and make the BBC into a less well funded version of PBS.
Meh. The BBC is doomed anyway. We might as well face it, even tho it saddens me as a Brit
Probably true but symptomatic of the decline of the country. We have allowed our great institutions to shrivel or be sold off in the name of competition and the 'free market'.
Don't give a toss anymore. Britain as we knew it is gone. Just go into your town centre
We need a revolution, if the BBC dies - well, that was gonna happen anyway. They even killed off MasterChef and Gregg Wallace
Twats
My town centre has improved vastly over recent years. Back in the day it was the setting of the notorious "Toilet Sale" TV advert for s1jobs.
Has Slalom blocked discussion of Nick Brown, his former Chief Whip, because I don't remember his disappearance being mentioned here?
As far as I can tell from his wiki page, he was disappeared from government for no given reason
Is this remotely normal?
He resigned from Labour over a disciplinary process.
He is no longer an MP.
A Slalom style silent systematic process
I would have thought you would have learned your lesson from a few weeks ago when you were desperate to discuss a story about Starmer that was utter bollocks, but no.
We're not even allowed to know what Starmer's secrets are, which makes posting about anything rather treacherous
Utter bollocks from Twatter isn't "Secrets"
Its utter bollocks multiplied by utter bollocks.
Utter bollocks squared.
Is that the approved way to say no superinjunctions?
Has Slalom blocked discussion of Nick Brown, his former Chief Whip, because I don't remember his disappearance being mentioned here?
As far as I can tell from his wiki page, he was disappeared from government for no given reason
Is this remotely normal?
He resigned from Labour over a disciplinary process.
He is no longer an MP.
A Slalom style silent systematic process
I would have thought you would have learned your lesson from a few weeks ago when you were desperate to discuss a story about Starmer that was utter bollocks, but no.
We're not even allowed to know what Starmer's secrets are, which makes posting about anything rather treacherous
Utter bollocks from Twatter isn't "Secrets"
Its utter bollocks multiplied by utter bollocks.
Utter bollocks squared.
Is that the approved way to say no superinjunctions?
The only times that I've been banned by dictat from discussing certain topics are all under Slalom
Beeb journos and editors will be the first to burst into tears when Farage populist nationalist government ends the licence fee on day one and make the BBC into a less well funded version of PBS.
Meh. The BBC is doomed anyway. We might as well face it, even tho it saddens me as a Brit
Could mean the end of Strictly and the modern Dr Who though.
That would be a travesty.
Not only that - but the end of Red Button "Strictly Xtra" and the entire podcast series "Behind Strictly". And the whole team who write pieces for the 'news' website about who's possibly or not flirting with who on Strictly.
I truly do have huge affection for the BBC, what they were. And have an understanding for how various governments have f**ked them over at the behest of Murdoch and his ilk. But they really do themselves no favours.
I think the last flicker of favour I had for them faded when an amateur website I was a member of which tried to transfer old home-made cassette recordings of BBC radio drama's that were "lost" got a cease and desist from the Beeb. No amount of pleading would persuade them as to the national, cultural good - no offers of free time by license fee payers who wanted to help. Just shut the f**k up and stop or we'll send you to jail.
Sorry for being so cynical tonight. But after reading this story https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0lg6151p32o and thinking "Oh, that sounds interesting", then finding no links to how to actually listen to it (I'd assumed R4 as they normally only promote their own audio stuff) have found it on Audible.
To write 4-5 pages of content bigging up an audio drama, but not be able to even mention where you might listen to it says a lot about the current BBC, their snobbery, and also that they didn't commission it themselves.
Highest share of the vote in 2025 with a BPC registered pollster in a GB wide poll for each of Lab, Con, LD, Reform. 30/30/25/15 Lowest share of the vote in 2025 with a BPC registered pollster in a GB wide poll for each of Lab, Con, LD, Reform. 23/23/10/11 Number of Reform MPs on 31/12/2025. 5 Number of Tory MP defectors to Reform in 2025. 0 Number of Westminster by-elections held in 2025. 3 Number of ministers to leave the Westminster cabinet during 2025. 2 Number of seats won by the AfD in the 2025 German Federal Election. 130 UK CPI figure for November 2025 (Nov 2024 = 2.6%). 2.5% UK borrowing in the financial year-to-November 2025 (Year to Nov 2024 = £113.2bn). £100 Bn UK GDP growth in the 12 months to October 2025 (Oct 23 to Oct 24 = 1.3%). 0.5% US growth annualised rate in Q3 2025 (Q3 2024 = 3.1%). 3% EU growth Q3 2024 to Q3 2025 (2024 = 1.0%). 1% USD/Ruble exchange rate at London FOREX close on 31/12/2025 (31/12/2024 = 114 USD/RUB). 114 The result of the 2025-2026 Ashes series (2023 series: Drawn 2–2) 3-2 (Aus win)
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
Has Slalom blocked discussion of Nick Brown, his former Chief Whip, because I don't remember his disappearance being mentioned here?
As far as I can tell from his wiki page, he was disappeared from government for no given reason
Is this remotely normal?
He resigned from Labour over a disciplinary process.
He is no longer an MP.
A Slalom style silent systematic process
I would have thought you would have learned your lesson from a few weeks ago when you were desperate to discuss a story about Starmer that was utter bollocks, but no.
We're not even allowed to know what Starmer's secrets are, which makes posting about anything rather treacherous
Utter bollocks from Twatter isn't "Secrets"
Its utter bollocks multiplied by utter bollocks.
Utter bollocks squared.
Is that the approved way to say no superinjunctions?
No, it's a way of saying that stuff off Twatter is always assumed to be bollocks. By rational people. Because it is a place where people post bollocks and other people post more bollocks in reply.
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
Has Slalom blocked discussion of Nick Brown, his former Chief Whip, because I don't remember his disappearance being mentioned here?
As far as I can tell from his wiki page, he was disappeared from government for no given reason
Is this remotely normal?
He resigned from Labour over a disciplinary process.
He is no longer an MP.
A Slalom style silent systematic process
I would have thought you would have learned your lesson from a few weeks ago when you were desperate to discuss a story about Starmer that was utter bollocks, but no.
We're not even allowed to know what Starmer's secrets are, which makes posting about anything rather treacherous
Utter bollocks from Twatter isn't "Secrets"
Its utter bollocks multiplied by utter bollocks.
Utter bollocks squared.
Is that the approved way to say no superinjunctions?
No, it's a way of saying that stuff off Twatter is always assumed to be bollocks. By rational people. Because it is a place where people post bollocks and other people post more bollocks in reply.
Are you not even remotely interested why Nick didn't even get a "thank you for your 50ish years service to the party" from Labour?
Beeb journos and editors will be the first to burst into tears when Farage populist nationalist government ends the licence fee on day one and make the BBC into a less well funded version of PBS.
Meh. The BBC is doomed anyway. We might as well face it, even tho it saddens me as a Brit
Could mean the end of Strictly and the modern Dr Who though.
That would be a travesty.
Disney will probably buy Who and have it run by LucasFilm. Fans moaning about RTD and Moffatt tell them all is forgiven and beg them to come back.
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
.... Private comments?
Vanilla allows a commenter to make comments private or public. @TheScreamingEagles earlier turned off this facility, precisely for me - it is alleged - without telling me. He then claimed he did it for the good of the site, just forgot to tell me. Perhaps this is true, TSE works for the site without payment, and I acknowledge that sterling effort, without @TSE and @rcs1000 the whole oif PB would not exist, and likewise OGH before them
Fair play, and gratitude to them
But I need clarity. I need to know if this facility is gonna be available or not, and whether it will be switched on or off at the whim of moderators. I accept that there are tech-geek ways around this, anyway, nonetheless for some of us it is a valued functionality. All we want is the situation elucidated
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
I can't see anything in settings that allows me to make my comment history private.
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
Your comments are visible to and searchable by Google.
The "private" thing has absolutely no effect. Either way.
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
.... Private comments?
Vanilla allows a commenter to make comments private or public. @TheScreamingEagles earlier turned off this facility, precisely for me - it is alleged - without telling me. He then claimed he did it for the good of the site, just forgot to tell me. Perhaps this is true, TSE works for the site without payment, and I acknowledge that sterling effort, without @TSE and @rcs1000 the whole oif PB would not exist, and likewise OGH before them
Fair play, and gratitude to them
But I need clarity. I need to know if this facility is gonna be available or not, and whether it will be switched on or off at the whim of moderators. I accept that there are tech-geek ways around this, anyway, nonetheless for some of us it is a valued functionality. All we want is the situation elucidated
All comments will be public for all posters.
The default status is for all comments to be public.
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
.... Private comments?
Vanilla allows a commenter to make comments private or public. @TheScreamingEagles earlier turned off this facility, precisely for me - it is alleged - without telling me. He then claimed he did it for the good of the site, just forgot to tell me. Perhaps this is true, TSE works for the site without payment, and I acknowledge that sterling effort, without @TSE and @rcs1000 the whole oif PB would not exist, and likewise OGH before them
Fair play, and gratitude to them
But I need clarity. I need to know if this facility is gonna be available or not, and whether it will be switched on or off at the whim of moderators. I accept that there are tech-geek ways around this, anyway, nonetheless for some of us it is a valued functionality. All we want is the situation elucidated
All comments will be public for all posters.
The default status is for all comments to be public.
Thanks. Is this the agreed position between you and @rcs1000, for final confirmation?
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
.... Private comments?
Vanilla allows a commenter to make comments private or public. @TheScreamingEagles earlier turned off this facility, precisely for me - it is alleged - without telling me. He then claimed he did it for the good of the site, just forgot to tell me. Perhaps this is true, TSE works for the site without payment, and I acknowledge that sterling effort, without @TSE and @rcs1000 the whole oif PB would not exist, and likewise OGH before them
Fair play, and gratitude to them
But I need clarity. I need to know if this facility is gonna be available or not, and whether it will be switched on or off at the whim of moderators. I accept that there are tech-geek ways around this, anyway, nonetheless for some of us it is a valued functionality. All we want is the situation elucidated
All comments will be public for all posters.
The default status is for all comments to be public.
I could trivially write a site scrapper that would download all comments and their context and index them by author, thread etc. Going back to 2013, at least.
Has Slalom blocked discussion of Nick Brown, his former Chief Whip, because I don't remember his disappearance being mentioned here?
As far as I can tell from his wiki page, he was disappeared from government for no given reason
Is this remotely normal?
He resigned from Labour over a disciplinary process.
He is no longer an MP.
A Slalom style silent systematic process
I would have thought you would have learned your lesson from a few weeks ago when you were desperate to discuss a story about Starmer that was utter bollocks, but no.
We're not even allowed to know what Starmer's secrets are, which makes posting about anything rather treacherous
Utter bollocks from Twatter isn't "Secrets"
Its utter bollocks multiplied by utter bollocks.
Utter bollocks squared.
Is that the approved way to say no superinjunctions?
The only times that I've been banned by dictat from discussing certain topics are all under Slalom
He has fucked up freedom of speech
No, PB has operated under this approach long before Starmer.
Inter alia the private lives of David Cameron, George Osborne, and Boris Johnson, Alex Salmond’s trial, and the phone hacking story/trials are examples of this approach.
In short if you want to post about stuff that the mainstream media aren’t picking up stuff from social media then PB isn’t the place for that, post elsewhere.
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
The forecast is unsettled with light outbreaks of flouncing.
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
.... Private comments?
Vanilla allows a commenter to make comments private or public. @TheScreamingEagles earlier turned off this facility, precisely for me - it is alleged - without telling me. He then claimed he did it for the good of the site, just forgot to tell me. Perhaps this is true, TSE works for the site without payment, and I acknowledge that sterling effort, without @TSE and @rcs1000 the whole oif PB would not exist, and likewise OGH before them
Fair play, and gratitude to them
But I need clarity. I need to know if this facility is gonna be available or not, and whether it will be switched on or off at the whim of moderators. I accept that there are tech-geek ways around this, anyway, nonetheless for some of us it is a valued functionality. All we want is the situation elucidated
All comments will be public for all posters.
The default status is for all comments to be public.
Thanks. Is this the agreed position between you and @rcs1000, for final confirmation?
I am formulating this as part of the wider changes PB needs to enact for the Online Safety Bill.
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
.... Private comments?
Vanilla allows a commenter to make comments private or public. @TheScreamingEagles earlier turned off this facility, precisely for me - it is alleged - without telling me. He then claimed he did it for the good of the site, just forgot to tell me. Perhaps this is true, TSE works for the site without payment, and I acknowledge that sterling effort, without @TSE and @rcs1000 the whole oif PB would not exist, and likewise OGH before them
Fair play, and gratitude to them
But I need clarity. I need to know if this facility is gonna be available or not, and whether it will be switched on or off at the whim of moderators. I accept that there are tech-geek ways around this, anyway, nonetheless for some of us it is a valued functionality. All we want is the situation elucidated
All comments will be public for all posters.
The default status is for all comments to be public.
Thanks. Is this the agreed position between you and @rcs1000, for final confirmation?
I am formulating this as part of the wider changes PB needs to enact for the Online Safety Bill.
Thanks. Is this the agreed position between you and @rcs1000, for final confirmation?
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
.... Private comments?
Vanilla allows a commenter to make comments private or public. @TheScreamingEagles earlier turned off this facility, precisely for me - it is alleged - without telling me. He then claimed he did it for the good of the site, just forgot to tell me. Perhaps this is true, TSE works for the site without payment, and I acknowledge that sterling effort, without @TSE and @rcs1000 the whole oif PB would not exist, and likewise OGH before them
Fair play, and gratitude to them
But I need clarity. I need to know if this facility is gonna be available or not, and whether it will be switched on or off at the whim of moderators. I accept that there are tech-geek ways around this, anyway, nonetheless for some of us it is a valued functionality. All we want is the situation elucidated
All comments will be public for all posters.
The default status is for all comments to be public.
I could trivially write a site scrapper that would download all comments and their context and index them by author, thread etc. Going back to 2013, at least.
Please. I would like to write an AI bot that mimics certain posters.
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
.... Private comments?
Vanilla allows a commenter to make comments private or public. @TheScreamingEagles earlier turned off this facility, precisely for me - it is alleged - without telling me. He then claimed he did it for the good of the site, just forgot to tell me. Perhaps this is true, TSE works for the site without payment, and I acknowledge that sterling effort, without @TSE and @rcs1000 the whole oif PB would not exist, and likewise OGH before them
Fair play, and gratitude to them
But I need clarity. I need to know if this facility is gonna be available or not, and whether it will be switched on or off at the whim of moderators. I accept that there are tech-geek ways around this, anyway, nonetheless for some of us it is a valued functionality. All we want is the situation elucidated
All comments will be public for all posters.
The default status is for all comments to be public.
I could trivially write a site scrapper that would download all comments and their context and index them by author, thread etc. Going back to 2013, at least.
Please. I would like to write an AI bot that mimics certain posters.
No.
If I do it, it will be to train zillions of bots who will advance my cause to be President of Ze Vurld.
A tough front page for Starmer, without any need to invoke Musk.
Hysterical nonsense.
Is he as guilty as the actual rapists? Why?
Utterly absurd.
Talking of hysteria, have you seen PB this evening? You'd never guess Leon is back and on fire!
It was a sewer last night. PB is getting as bad as Twitter at times.
It's going to kill the site as a place for polite and respectful political debate.
It's time to check out for a bit.
Astute as always @Foxy. This site really has gone down a lot of levels since Labour won. It wasn’t at all like this after Johnson won in 2019 which is a shame as there are a lot of good people still here - but I note posting less - from both sides of the aisle.
It was, and it was filled with people calling Johnson a Clown, unethical, reprehensible and saying they'd quit the Conservatives/ never vote Conservative again and the fanatics had won etc. I remember it all.
Much of it is that left-leaning posters don't like it up 'em, and this government is directionless, weak, appallingly bad, somewhat vindictive and either gets angry at criticism or hides from it.
Utter nonsense I’m afraid Casino. I remember posting about Johnson’s inevitable downfall and having nothing but abuse and laughter in response. “Grow up, you lost” was a common refrain. But nothing like what we have now. And the difference is the left/non-Johnson contingent stayed and argued in good faith.
And it’s sad you’re joining in occasionally as you post some interesting views albeit I disagree with mostly every single one.
I’ve got no issue with anyone disagreeing with Starmer. In fact I welcome it. But just posting how bad Starmer is repeatedly isn’t interesting to read.
You think Starmer is bad because you don’t support Labour. That’s fine as it goes but it somewhat loosens the thrust by which many say “this government is rubbish and hated”.
As I keep saying, I’ve yet to meet anyone here who has actually swapped from Starmer to another party. And this is basically backed up I the focus groups and polling. In two years we can talk.
Are you not at all concerned by Musk calling one of our MPs a rape gang apologist? Would it be different if he’d said that about a Tory?
Starmer is definitely hated in a way that Blair and Brown never were (I'm not old enough to remember Callaghan). Just yesterday I saw some graffiti - in a Labour seat no less, which was most uncomplimentary about "2 Tier Keir".
Do you honestly think Starmer is more hated than Blair was after Iraq?
Sorry, got called away earlier than expected before lunch and never made it back, but just in case you're still here:
Actually, yes I do. Post-Iraq Blair was mostly despised by the left. Starmer is currently hated by both left and right. Perhaps not at the same intensity, but I'm not sure that's relevant, beyond a certain point, deeper hatred doesn't matter electorally.
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
.... Private comments?
Vanilla allows a commenter to make comments private or public. @TheScreamingEagles earlier turned off this facility, precisely for me - it is alleged - without telling me. He then claimed he did it for the good of the site, just forgot to tell me. Perhaps this is true, TSE works for the site without payment, and I acknowledge that sterling effort, without @TSE and @rcs1000 the whole oif PB would not exist, and likewise OGH before them
Fair play, and gratitude to them
But I need clarity. I need to know if this facility is gonna be available or not, and whether it will be switched on or off at the whim of moderators. I accept that there are tech-geek ways around this, anyway, nonetheless for some of us it is a valued functionality. All we want is the situation elucidated
All comments will be public for all posters.
The default status is for all comments to be public.
Can someone explain what a "private" comment means in the context of this site? Because I just don't get it.
A tough front page for Starmer, without any need to invoke Musk.
Hysterical nonsense.
Is he as guilty as the actual rapists? Why?
Utterly absurd.
Talking of hysteria, have you seen PB this evening? You'd never guess Leon is back and on fire!
It was a sewer last night. PB is getting as bad as Twitter at times.
It's going to kill the site as a place for polite and respectful political debate.
It's time to check out for a bit.
Astute as always @Foxy. This site really has gone down a lot of levels since Labour won. It wasn’t at all like this after Johnson won in 2019 which is a shame as there are a lot of good people still here - but I note posting less - from both sides of the aisle.
It was, and it was filled with people calling Johnson a Clown, unethical, reprehensible and saying they'd quit the Conservatives/ never vote Conservative again and the fanatics had won etc. I remember it all.
Much of it is that left-leaning posters don't like it up 'em, and this government is directionless, weak, appallingly bad, somewhat vindictive and either gets angry at criticism or hides from it.
Utter nonsense I’m afraid Casino. I remember posting about Johnson’s inevitable downfall and having nothing but abuse and laughter in response. “Grow up, you lost” was a common refrain. But nothing like what we have now. And the difference is the left/non-Johnson contingent stayed and argued in good faith.
And it’s sad you’re joining in occasionally as you post some interesting views albeit I disagree with mostly every single one.
I’ve got no issue with anyone disagreeing with Starmer. In fact I welcome it. But just posting how bad Starmer is repeatedly isn’t interesting to read.
You think Starmer is bad because you don’t support Labour. That’s fine as it goes but it somewhat loosens the thrust by which many say “this government is rubbish and hated”.
As I keep saying, I’ve yet to meet anyone here who has actually swapped from Starmer to another party. And this is basically backed up I the focus groups and polling. In two years we can talk.
Are you not at all concerned by Musk calling one of our MPs a rape gang apologist? Would it be different if he’d said that about a Tory?
Starmer is definitely hated in a way that Blair and Brown never were (I'm not old enough to remember Callaghan). Just yesterday I saw some graffiti - in a Labour seat no less, which was most uncomplimentary about "2 Tier Keir".
Do you honestly think Starmer is more hated than Blair was after Iraq?
Sorry, got called away earlier than expected before lunch and never made it back, but just in case you're still here:
Actually, yes I do. Post-Iraq Blair was mostly despised by the left. Starmer is currently hated by both left and right. Perhaps not at the same intensity, but I'm not sure that's relevant, beyond a certain point, deeper hatred doesn't matter electorally.
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
.... Private comments?
Vanilla allows a commenter to make comments private or public. @TheScreamingEagles earlier turned off this facility, precisely for me - it is alleged - without telling me. He then claimed he did it for the good of the site, just forgot to tell me. Perhaps this is true, TSE works for the site without payment, and I acknowledge that sterling effort, without @TSE and @rcs1000 the whole oif PB would not exist, and likewise OGH before them
Fair play, and gratitude to them
But I need clarity. I need to know if this facility is gonna be available or not, and whether it will be switched on or off at the whim of moderators. I accept that there are tech-geek ways around this, anyway, nonetheless for some of us it is a valued functionality. All we want is the situation elucidated
All comments will be public for all posters.
The default status is for all comments to be public.
Can someone explain what a "private" comment means in the context of this site? Because I just don't get it.
So if you go to someone’s profile you can see all their comments, changing the profile to public hides the comments from the profile.
She was also responsible for dragging this country back to being a country where you could do business rather than being ruled by unelected union barons, and where even removal services were run by unionised nationalised loss making industries.
Sadly the current bunch of incompetent economically illiterate numpties would like to take us back there.
She did some good things which I acknowledge. She was a strong and principled leader which I admire.
But she also did a lot of very bad things that have caused the problems we now face. Surely that can be acknowledged.
Like her policy on council housing.
The problem is that we have no counter-factuals. If she had not done these things, what state would the country been in?
Take rail privatisation: it gave us the safest and busiest rail network ever. Passenger numbers doubled. It's hard to call that an absolute failure, and I also find it hard to believe that the railways would have attracted the same investment if they had remained nationalised.
Also, sometimes people can do things that appear positive in the short- and medium-term, only for the problems to appear in the long-term - and sometimes those problems are not necessarily due to the initial action, but subsequent inaction.
The subsidies the railways receive are higher than they ever were when they were nationalised. So my view is the improvements were from spending a lot more money, not because the private sector did a load of innovating.
To give a counterfactual, the NI trains were never privatised. They run fine. Same as London Underground.
Not massively higher. I'd have to check, but I *think*, once you take network enhancements out of the picture, that subsidy per passenger is down - at least pre-covid. (*)
"18. This work shows that the railway has been a victim of its own success. Increased demand for rail has led to new capital projects, increasing Network Rail's level of borrowing and the annual charges it must meet to pay for that borrowing. Increased passenger numbers have also fuelled demand for more, better quality rolling stock, which comes at a cost. Better facilities, and more reliable rail services, have generated more demand for rail travel. What in many ways is a virtuous circle has a vicious element - escalating cost."
(*) It can sometimes be hard to compare figures, as some charts and tables show things like HS2 and Crossrail included in the subsidy, whilst others do not.
But why is debt a bad thing when it's funding infrastructure improvements that result in productivity and economic boosts for the wider economy? A public service doesn't need to make money. .
Because it crowds out investment that would deliver much higher productivity and boosts for the wider economy.
The cost benefit ratio of many rail projects is extremely low (partial exceptions are London commuter rail and mass transit improvements). HS2 is now heavy negative.
The debt would be much better accumulated on corporate tax or payroll cuts, which generate the best productivity boost for each pound spent. Or, if we still want to spend it on infrastructure, road improvements around London do best I understand - some return £7 for each £ invested, compared to £2.50 for Crossrail 2 and about 60p for HS2.
The idea that we should spend money on roads over railways is absolutely laughable.
HS2 is heavy negative because we didn't get on build it. It got completely stuck by endless red tape and inquiries.
As usual, stop delaying, start building.
Eh? Roads don't get stuck in endless red tape and inquiries too?
She was also responsible for dragging this country back to being a country where you could do business rather than being ruled by unelected union barons, and where even removal services were run by unionised nationalised loss making industries.
Sadly the current bunch of incompetent economically illiterate numpties would like to take us back there.
She did some good things which I acknowledge. She was a strong and principled leader which I admire.
But she also did a lot of very bad things that have caused the problems we now face. Surely that can be acknowledged.
Like her policy on council housing.
The problem is that we have no counter-factuals. If she had not done these things, what state would the country been in?
Take rail privatisation: it gave us the safest and busiest rail network ever. Passenger numbers doubled. It's hard to call that an absolute failure, and I also find it hard to believe that the railways would have attracted the same investment if they had remained nationalised.
Also, sometimes people can do things that appear positive in the short- and medium-term, only for the problems to appear in the long-term - and sometimes those problems are not necessarily due to the initial action, but subsequent inaction.
The subsidies the railways receive are higher than they ever were when they were nationalised. So my view is the improvements were from spending a lot more money, not because the private sector did a load of innovating.
To give a counterfactual, the NI trains were never privatised. They run fine. Same as London Underground.
Not massively higher. I'd have to check, but I *think*, once you take network enhancements out of the picture, that subsidy per passenger is down - at least pre-covid. (*)
"18. This work shows that the railway has been a victim of its own success. Increased demand for rail has led to new capital projects, increasing Network Rail's level of borrowing and the annual charges it must meet to pay for that borrowing. Increased passenger numbers have also fuelled demand for more, better quality rolling stock, which comes at a cost. Better facilities, and more reliable rail services, have generated more demand for rail travel. What in many ways is a virtuous circle has a vicious element - escalating cost."
(*) It can sometimes be hard to compare figures, as some charts and tables show things like HS2 and Crossrail included in the subsidy, whilst others do not.
But why is debt a bad thing when it's funding infrastructure improvements that result in productivity and economic boosts for the wider economy? A public service doesn't need to make money. .
Because it crowds out investment that would deliver much higher productivity and boosts for the wider economy.
The cost benefit ratio of many rail projects is extremely low (partial exceptions are London commuter rail and mass transit improvements). HS2 is now heavy negative.
The debt would be much better accumulated on corporate or payroll tax cuts, which generate the best productivity boost for each pound spent. Or, if we still want to spend it on infrastructure, road improvements around London do best I understand - some return £7 for each £ invested, compared to £2.50 for Crossrail 2 and about 60p for HS2.
Any regional investment looks terrible on a spreadsheet when it takes account of the opportunity cost of not investing in London/SE. So we keep on piling money into the capital, and the gap widens.
Spreadsheet models exist for a reason. I have spent most of my career developing them and I'm well aware of their strengths and weaknesses. If you want to argue that, as applied by the government, they don't capture some economic or financial benefits of investing in the north for some reason, fine. I don't see any myself, but I'm happy to be convinced. But until that happens, it's pretty obvious where the best opportunities for transport infrastructure investment are in this country, which was sort of the original post I responded to.
Our real failure is not failing to invest (waste money on) the unproductive north, it's not allowing the south-east to flourish, but strangling it with ridiculous green belts so that people from hopeless, drug and alcohol infested welfare ghettos in the north can't afford to move south where they would be much more productive, lumbering it with ridiculously high taxes to fund those ghettos and wasting money on garbage like HS2 instead of road and mass transit projects where they are most productive.
I'm sure northern England would love for all its addicts, criminals, layabouts and other unproductive people to move to south-eastern England.
Why you think they would suddenly become productive people or why the south-east would want them is a mystery to me.
Are you aware that London already has the highest unemployment rate of any region of the UK ?
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
.... Private comments?
Vanilla allows a commenter to make comments private or public. @TheScreamingEagles earlier turned off this facility, precisely for me - it is alleged - without telling me. He then claimed he did it for the good of the site, just forgot to tell me. Perhaps this is true, TSE works for the site without payment, and I acknowledge that sterling effort, without @TSE and @rcs1000 the whole oif PB would not exist, and likewise OGH before them
Fair play, and gratitude to them
But I need clarity. I need to know if this facility is gonna be available or not, and whether it will be switched on or off at the whim of moderators. I accept that there are tech-geek ways around this, anyway, nonetheless for some of us it is a valued functionality. All we want is the situation elucidated
All comments will be public for all posters.
The default status is for all comments to be public.
Can someone explain what a "private" comment means in the context of this site? Because I just don't get it.
Al ir means is when you click on someone’s handle it gives you an error page saying the profile is private.
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
.... Private comments?
Vanilla allows a commenter to make comments private or public. @TheScreamingEagles earlier turned off this facility, precisely for me - it is alleged - without telling me. He then claimed he did it for the good of the site, just forgot to tell me. Perhaps this is true, TSE works for the site without payment, and I acknowledge that sterling effort, without @TSE and @rcs1000 the whole oif PB would not exist, and likewise OGH before them
Fair play, and gratitude to them
But I need clarity. I need to know if this facility is gonna be available or not, and whether it will be switched on or off at the whim of moderators. I accept that there are tech-geek ways around this, anyway, nonetheless for some of us it is a valued functionality. All we want is the situation elucidated
All comments will be public for all posters.
The default status is for all comments to be public.
Can someone explain what a "private" comment means in the context of this site? Because I just don't get it.
So if you go to someone’s profile you can see all their comments, changing the profile to public hides the comments from the profile.
But doesn't hide the comments from a Google search, say
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
.... Private comments?
Vanilla allows a commenter to make comments private or public. @TheScreamingEagles earlier turned off this facility, precisely for me - it is alleged - without telling me. He then claimed he did it for the good of the site, just forgot to tell me. Perhaps this is true, TSE works for the site without payment, and I acknowledge that sterling effort, without @TSE and @rcs1000 the whole oif PB would not exist, and likewise OGH before them
Fair play, and gratitude to them
But I need clarity. I need to know if this facility is gonna be available or not, and whether it will be switched on or off at the whim of moderators. I accept that there are tech-geek ways around this, anyway, nonetheless for some of us it is a valued functionality. All we want is the situation elucidated
All comments will be public for all posters.
The default status is for all comments to be public.
I could trivially write a site scrapper that would download all comments and their context and index them by author, thread etc. Going back to 2013, at least.
If you use VF.politicalbetting.com it does an even better job of finding old comments
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
.... Private comments?
Vanilla allows a commenter to make comments private or public. @TheScreamingEagles earlier turned off this facility, precisely for me - it is alleged - without telling me. He then claimed he did it for the good of the site, just forgot to tell me. Perhaps this is true, TSE works for the site without payment, and I acknowledge that sterling effort, without @TSE and @rcs1000 the whole oif PB would not exist, and likewise OGH before them
Fair play, and gratitude to them
But I need clarity. I need to know if this facility is gonna be available or not, and whether it will be switched on or off at the whim of moderators. I accept that there are tech-geek ways around this, anyway, nonetheless for some of us it is a valued functionality. All we want is the situation elucidated
All comments will be public for all posters.
The default status is for all comments to be public.
Can someone explain what a "private" comment means in the context of this site? Because I just don't get it.
Al ir means is when you click on someone’s handle it gives you an error page saying the profile is private.
Thanks. The comments are not 'private' then - they are on the site for all the world to see in the context of the threads they were posted in. Just not in one handy place under a profile.
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
.... Private comments?
Vanilla allows a commenter to make comments private or public. @TheScreamingEagles earlier turned off this facility, precisely for me - it is alleged - without telling me. He then claimed he did it for the good of the site, just forgot to tell me. Perhaps this is true, TSE works for the site without payment, and I acknowledge that sterling effort, without @TSE and @rcs1000 the whole oif PB would not exist, and likewise OGH before them
Fair play, and gratitude to them
But I need clarity. I need to know if this facility is gonna be available or not, and whether it will be switched on or off at the whim of moderators. I accept that there are tech-geek ways around this, anyway, nonetheless for some of us it is a valued functionality. All we want is the situation elucidated
All comments will be public for all posters.
The default status is for all comments to be public.
I could trivially write a site scrapper that would download all comments and their context and index them by author, thread etc. Going back to 2013, at least.
If you use VF.politicalbetting.com it does an even better job of finding old comments
Beeb journos and editors will be the first to burst into tears when Farage populist nationalist government ends the licence fee on day one and make the BBC into a less well funded version of PBS.
Meh. The BBC is doomed anyway. We might as well face it, even tho it saddens me as a Brit
Probably true but symptomatic of the decline of the country. We have allowed our great institutions to shrivel or be sold off in the name of competition and the 'free market'.
Don't give a toss anymore. Britain as we knew it is gone. Just go into your town centre
We need a revolution, if the BBC dies - well, that was gonna happen anyway. They even killed off Mastechef and Gregg Wallace
Twats
The BBC has brought about its own denise with primary school level inanity and mediocrity. It hasn't been destroyed by outside forces.
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
.... Private comments?
Vanilla allows a commenter to make comments private or public. @TheScreamingEagles earlier turned off this facility, precisely for me - it is alleged - without telling me. He then claimed he did it for the good of the site, just forgot to tell me. Perhaps this is true, TSE works for the site without payment, and I acknowledge that sterling effort, without @TSE and @rcs1000 the whole oif PB would not exist, and likewise OGH before them
Fair play, and gratitude to them
But I need clarity. I need to know if this facility is gonna be available or not, and whether it will be switched on or off at the whim of moderators. I accept that there are tech-geek ways around this, anyway, nonetheless for some of us it is a valued functionality. All we want is the situation elucidated
All comments will be public for all posters.
The default status is for all comments to be public.
I could trivially write a site scrapper that would download all comments and their context and index them by author, thread etc. Going back to 2013, at least.
If you use VF.politicalbetting.com it does an even better job of finding old comments
So, can we have an answer, Enuff. Are we allowed public or private. If you and @TSE are agreed, so be it
Absolutely amazing advance in laser design, which will make them smaller, cheaper, more powerful, and more controllable. One thing this article doesn’t mention is directed energy weapons, but they will certainly be in planning.
THE TINY ULTRABRIGHT LASER THAT CAN MELT STEEL
https://spectrum.ieee.org/pcsel … Although it will be challenging, we eventually hope to make 3-cm lasers with output powers exceeding 10 kilowatts and beams shining up to 1,000 GW/cm2/sr—brighter than any laser that exists today. At such extreme brightness, PCSELs could replace the huge, electricity-hungry CO2 lasers used to generate plasma pulses for extreme ultraviolet lithography machines, making chip manufacturing much more efficient. They could similarly advance efforts to realize nuclear fusion, a process that involves firing trillions of watts of laser power at a pea-size fuel capsule. Exceptionally bright lasers also raise the possibility of light propulsion for spaceflight. Instead of taking thousands of years to reach faraway stars, a probe boosted by light could make the journey in only a few decades.…
And is of course likely to make the LIDAR used in self driving cars massively cheaper.
Can help reduce traffic jams too, by reducing other vehicles to melted piles of metal.
Can you please confirm, as @TSE seems oddly unwilling
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
.... Private comments?
Vanilla allows a commenter to make comments private or public. @TheScreamingEagles earlier turned off this facility, precisely for me - it is alleged - without telling me. He then claimed he did it for the good of the site, just forgot to tell me. Perhaps this is true, TSE works for the site without payment, and I acknowledge that sterling effort, without @TSE and @rcs1000 the whole oif PB would not exist, and likewise OGH before them
Fair play, and gratitude to them
But I need clarity. I need to know if this facility is gonna be available or not, and whether it will be switched on or off at the whim of moderators. I accept that there are tech-geek ways around this, anyway, nonetheless for some of us it is a valued functionality. All we want is the situation elucidated
All comments will be public for all posters.
The default status is for all comments to be public.
I could trivially write a site scrapper that would download all comments and their context and index them by author, thread etc. Going back to 2013, at least.
If you use VF.politicalbetting.com it does an even better job of finding old comments
So, can we have an answer, Enuff. Are we allowed public or private. If you and @TSE are agreed, so be it
I’ll keep saying it - it makes no practical difference. The comments are publicly available and searchable either way.
I recall at least one user saying they would not be happy if private profiles were removed. But I can’t really see the issue except trying to hide what comments you’ve made before.
Labour polling 30%. Apparently the most unpopular government ever.
All I can say, is sorry Elon.
Very complacent, especially it you read the Supplementaries
And 30% back Musk giving £80 million to Farage
It’s hardly complacency if “most unpopular ever” incendiary headlines are derived only from the polling right now of numerous partys with good percentages, being compared to a mountain of polling history that was two party or three at a push.
Reform are little more than “none of the above” and “none of the above” only so high because of cost of living squeeze in recent years.
There should be some great books written about the post covid years shredding of incomes. How did it happen? Were politicians doing the wrong things and asacerbating the problem? If so, was that because economists were no where quick enough to see it coming?
There’s a polling bottom line here, polling on one hand, voting blocks on the other - because this is what FPTP actually does the seat generators won’t tell you. How and why? some saluting pollsters with a party happy to help install MP from another party, others telling pollster a party name will in no way going to lend that vote to another party, even though on policy and rhetoric there is hardly a millimetre between them! Block 1 Lab 33.7% - 412 seats; LibDem 12.2% - 72 seats; Green 6.7% - 4 seats. Block 2 Conservatives 23.7% - 121 seats. Block 3 Reform 14.3% - 5 seats.
So we expect a shit stirring front page from MoS, but “polling shows Starmer out within a year” is a laughably weak effort. For Starmer not to lead Labour into the next election, Labour will have to poll an awful lot lower than they currently are, and even then it will be called traditional mid term blues with Swingback just around the corner.
I think the actual complacency is coming from those who don’t believe Labour will do anything over four and a half years to build an impression of experience and competency, that will be an advantage over the opposition parties on May 3rd 2029. So it’s “Who would make the best PM” and “who do you trust most with the economy questions” that’s the only indicative polling we have in the coming years - unless all we are interested in using polling for is MoS style wind ups. 😇
Has Slalom blocked discussion of Nick Brown, his former Chief Whip, because I don't remember his disappearance being mentioned here?
As far as I can tell from his wiki page, he was disappeared from government for no given reason
Is this remotely normal?
He resigned from Labour over a disciplinary process.
He is no longer an MP.
A Slalom style silent systematic process
I would have thought you would have learned your lesson from a few weeks ago when you were desperate to discuss a story about Starmer that was utter bollocks, but no.
We're not even allowed to know what Starmer's secrets are, which makes posting about anything rather treacherous
Utter bollocks from Twatter isn't "Secrets"
Its utter bollocks multiplied by utter bollocks.
Utter bollocks squared.
Is that the approved way to say no superinjunctions?
The only times that I've been banned by dictat from discussing certain topics are all under Slalom
He has fucked up freedom of speech
The Online Safety Bill happened under the Tories. May mainly afaicr.
I recall at least one user saying they would not be happy if private profiles were removed. But I can’t really see the issue except trying to hide what comments you’ve made before.
That ship has sailed. The comments are public and on the web. They have been assimilated into all the AIs and other databases out there. And most of all into all the search engines.
I recall at least one user saying they would not be happy if private profiles were removed. But I can’t really see the issue except trying to hide what comments you’ve made before.
That ship has sailed. The comments are public and on the web. They have been assimilated into all the AIs and other databases out there. And most of all into all the search engines.
If you post anything on the internet you must expect it to remain out there pretty much forever in one form or another.
Unless you have _very_ deep pockets. And even then.
I recall at least one user saying they would not be happy if private profiles were removed. But I can’t really see the issue except trying to hide what comments you’ve made before.
That ship has sailed. The comments are public and on the web. They have been assimilated into all the AIs and other databases out there. And most of all into all the search engines.
You’re right but it’s slightly more trivial to find them on this site, only slightly.
"The cabinet is also inexperienced. "The only minister who really knows how to work the system and get officials delivering what he wants is Ed Miliband, who has been there before," a colleague said of the climate-crusading energy secretary. "And Ed is the one minister we don't want to be a success if we want to win the next election."
I recall at least one user saying they would not be happy if private profiles were removed. But I can’t really see the issue except trying to hide what comments you’ve made before.
That ship has sailed. The comments are public and on the web. They have been assimilated into all the AIs and other databases out there. And most of all into all the search engines.
If you post anything on the internet you must expect it to remain out there pretty much forever in one form or another.
Unless you have _very_ deep pockets. And even then.
Its amazing how many people don't get this.
It's a thing to think of - the search engine databases will be updated, transferred and kept. Forever.
10,000 years from now all the @SeanT's will squeak about AI. Under strange suns, in cathedrals of adamant and titanium in the darkness between the stars.
I recall at least one user saying they would not be happy if private profiles were removed. But I can’t really see the issue except trying to hide what comments you’ve made before.
That ship has sailed. The comments are public and on the web. They have been assimilated into all the AIs and other databases out there. And most of all into all the search engines.
If you post anything on the internet you must expect it to remain out there pretty much forever in one form or another.
Unless you have _very_ deep pockets. And even then.
Its amazing how many people don't get this.
Look I was drunk ok, and I genuinely didn’t think the tights could be seen through in that light.
I recall at least one user saying they would not be happy if private profiles were removed. But I can’t really see the issue except trying to hide what comments you’ve made before.
That ship has sailed. The comments are public and on the web. They have been assimilated into all the AIs and other databases out there. And most of all into all the search engines.
If you post anything on the internet you must expect it to remain out there pretty much forever in one form or another.
Unless you have _very_ deep pockets. And even then.
Its amazing how many people don't get this.
Look I was drunk ok, and I genuinely didn’t think the tights could be seen through in that light.
"The pics are all AI fakes" - dude, get with the 2020s....
I recall at least one user saying they would not be happy if private profiles were removed. But I can’t really see the issue except trying to hide what comments you’ve made before.
That ship has sailed. The comments are public and on the web. They have been assimilated into all the AIs and other databases out there. And most of all into all the search engines.
If you post anything on the internet you must expect it to remain out there pretty much forever in one form or another.
Unless you have _very_ deep pockets. And even then.
Its amazing how many people don't get this.
It's a thing to think of - the search engine databases will be updated, transferred and kept. Forever.
10,000 years from now all the @SeanT's will squeak about AI. Under strange suns, in cathedrals of adamant and titanium in the darkness between the stars.
PB is certainly crawled by the Internet Archive and probably by the British Library’s own archiving project. At one point there was also a rumour that google kept everything forever.
We are heading into Weimar if things continue at this hysterical level.
Neil Henderson @hendopolis · 21m MAIL ON SUNDAY: Poll: Starmer will be out of No10 in a year #TomorrowsPapersToday
It is nonsense and there is a Deltapoll in there with a 7% Labour lead
Labour 30% Cons 23% Reform 22% Lib Dems 12%
Though Starmer is -42% Badenoch - 21%
Supplementary questions
Is UK heading in right direction 69%/18% no How worried are you for those no longer receiving the WFA 78%/15% worried Do you back IHT on farms 53%/25% no Should there be more or less immigrants coming into UK 62%/11% less Should Musk be allowed to donate £80 million to Reform 54%/30% no
I am confident that if Starmer or Reeves had thought the abolition of tge WFA would be so unpopular they would have done it
link?
WFA axe is one of the greatest unforced political errors in decades.
It is all anyone remembers of Reeves budget even though it wasn't even in the budget but dropped out of the sky for no reason anyone sane can understand back in July.
The Winter Fuel Allowance cut is the reason that Labour were able to have a budget that borrowed lots of extra money to spend on the NHS, and the financial market reaction wasn't, "oh, no, not a-fucking-gain," but a more measured, "well, if you're sure."
The point being that it signals a willingness to court unpopularity to balance the budget, should that be necessary in the future. The financial markets are thus confident, for now, that they will get back the huge sums of money being leant to the government. This is quite the contrast with Truss, who told all and sundry that she would buck the market, to which the obvious reaction was, "lol, no."
I recall at least one user saying they would not be happy if private profiles were removed. But I can’t really see the issue except trying to hide what comments you’ve made before.
That ship has sailed. The comments are public and on the web. They have been assimilated into all the AIs and other databases out there. And most of all into all the search engines.
If you post anything on the internet you must expect it to remain out there pretty much forever in one form or another.
Unless you have _very_ deep pockets. And even then.
Its amazing how many people don't get this.
It's a thing to think of - the search engine databases will be updated, transferred and kept. Forever.
10,000 years from now all the @SeanT's will squeak about AI. Under strange suns, in cathedrals of adamant and titanium in the darkness between the stars.
PB is certainly crawled by the Internet Archive and probably by the British Library’s own archiving project. At one point there was also a rumour that google kept everything forever.
Unfortunately the BL's archive is still offline after a hacking attack a few months ago.
I recall at least one user saying they would not be happy if private profiles were removed. But I can’t really see the issue except trying to hide what comments you’ve made before.
That ship has sailed. The comments are public and on the web. They have been assimilated into all the AIs and other databases out there. And most of all into all the search engines.
If you post anything on the internet you must expect it to remain out there pretty much forever in one form or another.
Unless you have _very_ deep pockets. And even then.
Its amazing how many people don't get this.
It's a thing to think of - the search engine databases will be updated, transferred and kept. Forever.
10,000 years from now all the @SeanT's will squeak about AI. Under strange suns, in cathedrals of adamant and titanium in the darkness between the stars.
PB is certainly crawled by the Internet Archive and probably by the British Library’s own archiving project. At one point there was also a rumour that google kept everything forever.
Unfortunately the BL's archive is still offline after a hacking attack a few months ago.
Beeb journos and editors will be the first to burst into tears when Farage populist nationalist government ends the licence fee on day one and make the BBC into a less well funded version of PBS.
Meh. The BBC is doomed anyway. We might as well face it, even tho it saddens me as a Brit
Probably true but symptomatic of the decline of the country. We have allowed our great institutions to shrivel or be sold off in the name of competition and the 'free market'.
A lot of people dont think the bbc is a great institution however, its the channel you never bother with. Sort of like the shipping forecast, only of interest to a tiny few
As I believe I pointed out more than once during the election campaign, "they don't know how to fly the plane". Boris had a glimmering. Truss had a plan, but it did not work. Sunak had no destination nor underlying theory. Neither does Starmer nor Badenoch. Farage may, though I doubt it's one I like nor want.
Has Slalom blocked discussion of Nick Brown, his former Chief Whip, because I don't remember his disappearance being mentioned here?
As far as I can tell from his wiki page, he was disappeared from government for no given reason
Is this remotely normal?
He resigned from Labour over a disciplinary process.
He is no longer an MP.
A Slalom style silent systematic process
I would have thought you would have learned your lesson from a few weeks ago when you were desperate to discuss a story about Starmer that was utter bollocks, but no.
We're not even allowed to know what Starmer's secrets are, which makes posting about anything rather treacherous
Utter bollocks from Twatter isn't "Secrets"
Its utter bollocks multiplied by utter bollocks.
Utter bollocks squared.
Is that the approved way to say no superinjunctions?
The only times that I've been banned by dictat from discussing certain topics are all under Slalom
He has fucked up freedom of speech
No, PB has operated under this approach long before Starmer.
Inter alia the private lives of David Cameron, George Osborne, and Boris Johnson, Alex Salmond’s trial, and the phone hacking story/trials are examples of this approach.
In short if you want to post about stuff that the mainstream media aren’t picking up stuff from social media then PB isn’t the place for that, post elsewhere.
Edit - See also Lord McAlpine.
So if I have had a threesome with Kier starmer and angela rayner with photographic proof you don't want me to post about it unless the bbc etc find out?
Has Slalom blocked discussion of Nick Brown, his former Chief Whip, because I don't remember his disappearance being mentioned here?
As far as I can tell from his wiki page, he was disappeared from government for no given reason
Is this remotely normal?
He resigned from Labour over a disciplinary process.
He is no longer an MP.
A Slalom style silent systematic process
I would have thought you would have learned your lesson from a few weeks ago when you were desperate to discuss a story about Starmer that was utter bollocks, but no.
We're not even allowed to know what Starmer's secrets are, which makes posting about anything rather treacherous
Utter bollocks from Twatter isn't "Secrets"
Its utter bollocks multiplied by utter bollocks.
Utter bollocks squared.
Is that the approved way to say no superinjunctions?
The only times that I've been banned by dictat from discussing certain topics are all under Slalom
Has Slalom blocked discussion of Nick Brown, his former Chief Whip, because I don't remember his disappearance being mentioned here?
As far as I can tell from his wiki page, he was disappeared from government for no given reason
Is this remotely normal?
He resigned from Labour over a disciplinary process.
He is no longer an MP.
A Slalom style silent systematic process
I would have thought you would have learned your lesson from a few weeks ago when you were desperate to discuss a story about Starmer that was utter bollocks, but no.
We're not even allowed to know what Starmer's secrets are, which makes posting about anything rather treacherous
Utter bollocks from Twatter isn't "Secrets"
Its utter bollocks multiplied by utter bollocks.
Utter bollocks squared.
Is that the approved way to say no superinjunctions?
The only times that I've been banned by dictat from discussing certain topics are all under Slalom
Has Slalom blocked discussion of Nick Brown, his former Chief Whip, because I don't remember his disappearance being mentioned here?
As far as I can tell from his wiki page, he was disappeared from government for no given reason
Is this remotely normal?
He resigned from Labour over a disciplinary process.
He is no longer an MP.
A Slalom style silent systematic process
I would have thought you would have learned your lesson from a few weeks ago when you were desperate to discuss a story about Starmer that was utter bollocks, but no.
We're not even allowed to know what Starmer's secrets are, which makes posting about anything rather treacherous
Utter bollocks from Twatter isn't "Secrets"
Its utter bollocks multiplied by utter bollocks.
Utter bollocks squared.
Is that the approved way to say no superinjunctions?
The only times that I've been banned by dictat from discussing certain topics are all under Slalom
He has fucked up freedom of speech
No, PB has operated under this approach long before Starmer.
Inter alia the private lives of David Cameron, George Osborne, and Boris Johnson, Alex Salmond’s trial, and the phone hacking story/trials are examples of this approach.
In short if you want to post about stuff that the mainstream media aren’t picking up stuff from social media then PB isn’t the place for that, post elsewhere.
Edit - See also Lord McAlpine.
So if I have had a threesome with Kier starmer and angela rayner with photographic proof you don't want me to post about it unless the bbc etc find out?
Has Slalom blocked discussion of Nick Brown, his former Chief Whip, because I don't remember his disappearance being mentioned here?
As far as I can tell from his wiki page, he was disappeared from government for no given reason
Is this remotely normal?
He resigned from Labour over a disciplinary process.
He is no longer an MP.
A Slalom style silent systematic process
I would have thought you would have learned your lesson from a few weeks ago when you were desperate to discuss a story about Starmer that was utter bollocks, but no.
We're not even allowed to know what Starmer's secrets are, which makes posting about anything rather treacherous
Utter bollocks from Twatter isn't "Secrets"
Its utter bollocks multiplied by utter bollocks.
Utter bollocks squared.
Is that the approved way to say no superinjunctions?
The only times that I've been banned by dictat from discussing certain topics are all under Slalom
He has fucked up freedom of speech
No, PB has operated under this approach long before Starmer.
Inter alia the private lives of David Cameron, George Osborne, and Boris Johnson, Alex Salmond’s trial, and the phone hacking story/trials are examples of this approach.
In short if you want to post about stuff that the mainstream media aren’t picking up stuff from social media then PB isn’t the place for that, post elsewhere.
Edit - See also Lord McAlpine.
So if I have had a threesome with Kier starmer and angela rayner with photographic proof you don't want me to post about it unless the bbc etc find out?
Has Slalom blocked discussion of Nick Brown, his former Chief Whip, because I don't remember his disappearance being mentioned here?
As far as I can tell from his wiki page, he was disappeared from government for no given reason
Is this remotely normal?
He resigned from Labour over a disciplinary process.
He is no longer an MP.
A Slalom style silent systematic process
I would have thought you would have learned your lesson from a few weeks ago when you were desperate to discuss a story about Starmer that was utter bollocks, but no.
We're not even allowed to know what Starmer's secrets are, which makes posting about anything rather treacherous
Utter bollocks from Twatter isn't "Secrets"
Its utter bollocks multiplied by utter bollocks.
Utter bollocks squared.
Is that the approved way to say no superinjunctions?
The only times that I've been banned by dictat from discussing certain topics are all under Slalom
He has fucked up freedom of speech
No, PB has operated under this approach long before Starmer.
Inter alia the private lives of David Cameron, George Osborne, and Boris Johnson, Alex Salmond’s trial, and the phone hacking story/trials are examples of this approach.
In short if you want to post about stuff that the mainstream media aren’t picking up stuff from social media then PB isn’t the place for that, post elsewhere.
Edit - See also Lord McAlpine.
So if I have had a threesome with Kier starmer and angela rayner with photographic proof you don't want me to post about it unless the bbc etc find out?
Labour polling 30%. Apparently the most unpopular government ever.
All I can say, is sorry Elon.
Labour at Ed Miliband 2015 levels less than a year after winning a general election is not much to shout about
The Tories are 7 points BEHIND! So what does that make them? The worst opposition in history?
Only because Reform are on 22%, combined the Tories and Reform are on 45%
So the RefCon Party is fifteen points ahead of Labour and not far behind their GE winning total? Who becomes leader? Farage or Badenoch or are we looking at an SDP/ Liberal arrangement?
There are obvious parallels between the rise of Reform and the SDP experience of 1981-82 though like most analogies it doesn’t stand up to close inspection.
People desperate for something “different” latch on to anything new and project their desires onto it. Three quarters of those who joined the SDP in the first six months had never belonged to any political party, I suspect the figures for Reform will be higher.
Many of those who joined the SDP had little or no idea as to its policies or aims - whether that’s true of those signing up to Reform I have no clue.
What will Reform become? Will it become a genuine bottom-up political movement finding a niche in the British political scene possibly as the most culturally conservative of the main parties or, like the SDP, will it fail but its ideas suffuse and take over other parties?
Labour polling 30%. Apparently the most unpopular government ever.
All I can say, is sorry Elon.
Labour at Ed Miliband 2015 levels less than a year after winning a general election is not much to shout about
The Tories are 7 points BEHIND! So what does that make them? The worst opposition in history?
Only because Reform are on 22%, combined the Tories and Reform are on 45%
So the RefCon Party is fifteen points ahead of Labour and not far behind their GE winning total? Who becomes leader? Farage or Badenoch or are we looking at an SDP/ Liberal arrangement?
@HYUFD continues in his ludicrous assumption all Reform voters are basically Conservatives when plenty of evidence suggests they aren’t.
I can’t somehow see the once great Conservative Party agreeing to become the junior partner in a Reform-led coalition. The Tories have plenty of experience as to how that can turn out.
Beeb journos and editors will be the first to burst into tears when Farage populist nationalist government ends the licence fee on day one and make the BBC into a less well funded version of PBS.
Meh. The BBC is doomed anyway. We might as well face it, even tho it saddens me as a Brit
Could mean the end of Strictly and the modern Dr Who though.
That would be a travesty.
If we had joined up thinking... keep the rights for world wide broadcast on new programs. The license fee becomes an online account available to anyone on the planet.
There are enough people in the USA who would sign up for BBC branded content, alone, to pay for the whole thing. Especially with no adverts.
So you could make subscriptions free to UK citizens.
"The BBC - free for you. Paid for by furriners." - one hell of a pitch.
And since no revenue from the UK, total independence from government. No license fee negotiations.
Not just the US either, the whole English-speaking world and plenty of other places that want to be English-speaking.
10m people paying $10/mo is $1.2bn/year, with almost infinite upside.
They should have a big team of people working on the rights issues for as much of the archive as possible.
Has Slalom blocked discussion of Nick Brown, his former Chief Whip, because I don't remember his disappearance being mentioned here?
As far as I can tell from his wiki page, he was disappeared from government for no given reason
Is this remotely normal?
He resigned from Labour over a disciplinary process.
He is no longer an MP.
A Slalom style silent systematic process
I would have thought you would have learned your lesson from a few weeks ago when you were desperate to discuss a story about Starmer that was utter bollocks, but no.
We're not even allowed to know what Starmer's secrets are, which makes posting about anything rather treacherous
Utter bollocks from Twatter isn't "Secrets"
Its utter bollocks multiplied by utter bollocks.
Utter bollocks squared.
Is that the approved way to say no superinjunctions?
The only times that I've been banned by dictat from discussing certain topics are all under Slalom
He has fucked up freedom of speech
No, PB has operated under this approach long before Starmer.
Inter alia the private lives of David Cameron, George Osborne, and Boris Johnson, Alex Salmond’s trial, and the phone hacking story/trials are examples of this approach.
In short if you want to post about stuff that the mainstream media aren’t picking up stuff from social media then PB isn’t the place for that, post elsewhere.
Edit - See also Lord McAlpine.
So if I have had a threesome with Kier starmer and angela rayner with photographic proof you don't want me to post about it unless the bbc etc find out?
Comments
We need a revolution, if the BBC dies - well, that was gonna happen anyway. They even killed off Mastechef and Gregg Wallace
Twats
There are enough people in the USA who would sign up for BBC branded content, alone, to pay for the whole thing. Especially with no adverts.
So you could make subscriptions free to UK citizens.
"The BBC - free for you. Paid for by furriners." - one hell of a pitch.
And since no revenue from the UK, total independence from government. No license fee negotiations.
It is all anyone remembers of Reeves budget even though it wasn't even in the budget but dropped out of the sky for no reason anyone sane can understand back in July.
It rather suggests that if Sir Keir were replaced, they might do quite well next time around.
Genuinely laughing.
It needs to be 8 inches overnight. Gone by teatime. A day off school. And work. Then fuck off.
And 30% back Musk giving £80 million to Farage
Back in the day it was the setting of the notorious "Toilet Sale" TV advert for s1jobs.
I want my money back.
He has fucked up freedom of speech
I truly do have huge affection for the BBC, what they were. And have an understanding for how various governments have f**ked them over at the behest of Murdoch and his ilk. But they really do themselves no favours.
I think the last flicker of favour I had for them faded when an amateur website I was a member of which tried to transfer old home-made cassette recordings of BBC radio drama's that were "lost" got a cease and desist from the Beeb. No amount of pleading would persuade them as to the national, cultural good - no offers of free time by license fee payers who wanted to help. Just shut the f**k up and stop or we'll send you to jail.
Sorry for being so cynical tonight. But after reading this story https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0lg6151p32o and thinking "Oh, that sounds interesting", then finding no links to how to actually listen to it (I'd assumed R4 as they normally only promote their own audio stuff) have found it on Audible.
To write 4-5 pages of content bigging up an audio drama, but not be able to even mention where you might listen to it says a lot about the current BBC, their snobbery, and also that they didn't commission it themselves.
30/30/25/15
Lowest share of the vote in 2025 with a BPC registered pollster in a GB wide poll for each of Lab, Con, LD, Reform.
23/23/10/11
Number of Reform MPs on 31/12/2025.
5
Number of Tory MP defectors to Reform in 2025.
0
Number of Westminster by-elections held in 2025.
3
Number of ministers to leave the Westminster cabinet during 2025.
2
Number of seats won by the AfD in the 2025 German Federal Election.
130
UK CPI figure for November 2025 (Nov 2024 = 2.6%).
2.5%
UK borrowing in the financial year-to-November 2025 (Year to Nov 2024 = £113.2bn).
£100 Bn
UK GDP growth in the 12 months to October 2025 (Oct 23 to Oct 24 = 1.3%).
0.5%
US growth annualised rate in Q3 2025 (Q3 2024 = 3.1%).
3%
EU growth Q3 2024 to Q3 2025 (2024 = 1.0%).
1%
USD/Ruble exchange rate at London FOREX close on 31/12/2025 (31/12/2024 = 114 USD/RUB).
114
The result of the 2025-2026 Ashes series (2023 series: Drawn 2–2)
3-2 (Aus win)
It melted this morning and have refrozen as ice. More snow forecast tonight
Tomorrows going to be fun…
1. What is the situation re comments. Are we allowed to make them private, or not?
2. If not, is that for everyone or just for a few of us, eg me, as @CorrectHorseBattery alleges?
Thanks, because our membership of PB depends on these answers
He went from Chief Whip to nothing in a second
With absolutely no announcement
Is that not extremely weird?
Fair play, and gratitude to them
But I need clarity. I need to know if this facility is gonna be available or not, and whether it will be switched on or off at the whim of moderators. I accept that there are tech-geek ways around this, anyway, nonetheless for some of us it is a valued functionality. All we want is the situation elucidated
The "private" thing has absolutely no effect. Either way.
The default status is for all comments to be public.
The private feature has little or no meaning.
I could trivially write a site scrapper that would download all comments and their context and index them by author, thread etc. Going back to 2013, at least.
Inter alia the private lives of David Cameron, George Osborne, and Boris Johnson, Alex Salmond’s trial, and the phone hacking story/trials are examples of this approach.
In short if you want to post about stuff that the mainstream media aren’t picking up stuff from social media then PB isn’t the place for that, post elsewhere.
Edit - See also Lord McAlpine.
Although o try not to drink my calories
If I do it, it will be to train zillions of bots who will advance my cause to be President of Ze Vurld.
Yes, I read Enders Game.
Actually, yes I do. Post-Iraq Blair was mostly despised by the left. Starmer is currently hated by both left and right. Perhaps not at the same intensity, but I'm not sure that's relevant, beyond a certain point, deeper hatred doesn't matter electorally.
Why you think they would suddenly become productive people or why the south-east would want them is a mystery to me.
Are you aware that London already has the highest unemployment rate of any region of the UK ?
https://www.google.com/search?q=site:politicalbetting.com+"leon"
Reform are little more than “none of the above” and “none of the above” only so high because of cost of living squeeze in recent years.
There should be some great books written about the post covid years shredding of incomes. How did it happen? Were politicians doing the wrong things and asacerbating the problem? If so, was that because economists were no where quick enough to see it coming?
There’s a polling bottom line here, polling on one hand, voting blocks on the other - because this is what FPTP actually does the seat generators won’t tell you. How and why? some saluting pollsters with a party happy to help install MP from another party, others telling pollster a party name will in no way going to lend that vote to another party, even though on policy and rhetoric there is hardly a millimetre between them!
Block 1 Lab 33.7% - 412 seats; LibDem 12.2% - 72 seats; Green 6.7% - 4 seats.
Block 2 Conservatives 23.7% - 121 seats.
Block 3 Reform 14.3% - 5 seats.
So we expect a shit stirring front page from MoS, but “polling shows Starmer out within a year” is a laughably weak effort. For Starmer not to lead Labour into the next election, Labour will have to poll an awful lot lower than they currently are, and even then it will be called traditional mid term blues with Swingback just around the corner.
I think the actual complacency is coming from those who don’t believe Labour will do anything over four and a half years to build an impression of experience and competency, that will be an advantage over the opposition parties on May 3rd 2029. So it’s “Who would make the best PM” and “who do you trust most with the economy questions” that’s the only indicative polling we have in the coming years - unless all we are interested in using polling for is MoS style wind ups. 😇
Unless you have _very_ deep pockets. And even then.
Its amazing how many people don't get this.
"The cabinet is also inexperienced. "The only minister who really knows how to work the system and get officials delivering what he wants is Ed Miliband, who has been there before," a colleague said of the climate-crusading energy secretary. "And Ed is the one minister we don't want to be a success if we want to win the next election."
10,000 years from now all the @SeanT's will squeak about AI. Under strange suns, in cathedrals of adamant and titanium in the darkness between the stars.
https://x.com/robinson_ip/status/1875666011250413814
The point being that it signals a willingness to court unpopularity to balance the budget, should that be necessary in the future. The financial markets are thus confident, for now, that they will get back the huge sums of money being leant to the government. This is quite the contrast with Truss, who told all and sundry that she would buck the market, to which the obvious reaction was, "lol, no."
PB web addresses take the form:
https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/YYYY/MM/DD/
Threads and comments for any particular date can be read by substituting the appropriate digits for the year, month and day.
For example,
https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2025/01/04/
He could have had a cunning plan.
There are obvious parallels between the rise of Reform and the SDP experience of 1981-82 though like most analogies it doesn’t stand up to close inspection.
People desperate for something “different” latch on to anything new and project their desires onto it. Three quarters of those who joined the SDP in the first six months had never belonged to any political party, I suspect the figures for Reform will be higher.
Many of those who joined the SDP had little or no idea as to its policies or aims - whether that’s true of those signing up to Reform I have no clue.
What will Reform become? Will it become a genuine bottom-up political movement finding a niche in the British political scene possibly as the most culturally conservative of the main parties or, like the SDP, will it fail but its ideas suffuse and take over other parties?
I can’t somehow see the once great Conservative Party agreeing to become the junior partner in a Reform-led coalition. The Tories have plenty of experience as to how that can turn out.
Good luck to everyone in the UK and US with the winter weather today, reports and pictures don’t look too good. Stay safe.
How long before she resigns?
10m people paying $10/mo is $1.2bn/year, with almost infinite upside.
They should have a big team of people working on the rights issues for as much of the archive as possible.