Spending has becomes investment. Cuts may become consolidation.
Hilarious stuff. I cannot wait for what will come after consolidation.
On Supernatural, I was really enjoying it but just sort of stopped watching in S4, now I don't know whether to bother - they were taking on Satan back then, and am pretty sure God has been taken on as well since then, perhaps more than once, what sort of ground can they possibly be covering now?
Plato.. I never eat roast beef here mainly because there is never a cow seen in in a field..they spend their lives locked up in sheds..
I seem to bump into cows whenever I wander the local fields down my way - they often follow people around, and it makes me nervous I must say, coward that I am.
Cows are actually very curious and very dangerous. If you are used to animals, the bluff and courage is enough to get them to do what you want without causing panic.
Cows with calves are very defensive and will stampede if they perceive you as a threat, while everyone knows about older bulls, and why they arent allowed on public walkways, the same isnt for young bulls up to a certain age. They get very aggressive and territorial.
I often run along a river, with cows to the other side of the path. You have to be very careful and aware with them.
Jogging past some geese daily when I stay with one of my friends is truly a terrifying ordeal. At one point I was chased to a farm gate which I vaulted, inexpertly, to escape.
Have we increduled here (in which case apologies) about the pathetic Cam "four musts" (as though he is living in 1970s PRC) yet and at sufficient length?
Re "Cam musts".. of course not! Though the lack of comment from Cameroons may be enogh evidence that theyre not all that impressed...
A few Kippers + SeanT laughed at the futility, I am sure Richard Nabavi will be along soon with a confused look on his face wondering why we haven't all noticed how brilliant they are
The hypocrisy of Abbott wanting unswerving loyalty to a party leader is breathtaking in its audacity.
The obvious answer for any Labour MP with balls is to say that they will provide Corbyn with exactly the same level of loyalty he showed the leader of the Labour party when he was a backbench MP.
If they are accurate then they're entirely right. If UK pilots are "endangered" then they should have the right to engage. It's hard to judge as everything is quoted anonymously but I can't disagree with the rules of engagement that if a British pilot is fired upon then he can defend himself.
Of course like a nuclear deterrent that is something that should hopefully never come to pass. But if you were to do a Corbyn and say that even if our pilots are fired upon they must not retaliate then what is to prevent other states from firing at our planes and our pilots?
I have no truck with anyone put into battle with one arm or both arms tied. However the article mentions the RAF firing long range anti plane missiles from ambush, and thats an entirely different matter.
Spending has becomes investment. Cuts may become consolidation.
Hilarious stuff. I cannot wait for what will come after consolidation.
On Supernatural, I was really enjoying it but just sort of stopped watching in S4, now I don't know whether to bother - they were taking on Satan back then, and am pretty sure God has been taken on as well since then, perhaps more than once, what sort of ground can they possibly be covering now?
It doesn't even matter any more.
It's the third highest rated show on the CW, it's the only CW show with a syndication deal and has fairly solid overseas sales. Until at least two of those go, it will keep churning out any content it can.
I love Mr Robot, but thought it got a bit lost around E7, then recovered. E1 is just perfectly perfect - watched it 5x.
Good Wife fall season looking strong, ditto Homeland. Not impressed by Vampire Diaries E1 S6 but love all the rest so hoping for better things. Continuum next half of season is pretty good, Lost Girl final half okay, have Haven fall to watch next.
OT: Just watched the first two episodes of The Last Kingdom. Not a bad effort, but it looks poorly compared to the History Channels Vikings. As a stand alone show, its fairly good. It just looks like a poor mans Viking though.
snip
Maybe its down to budget. Perhaps Vikings has had more money thrown at it.
Narcos is on my "to do" list
Outlander (series not film) on Amazon prime is in my opinion stunning tv. The best I have seen bar none.
Feels a bit weird saying that as it's not my usual viewing :-)
Can't wait for series two.
If you have not yet seen it, Mr Robot is the best show this year (new or returning). It is quite phenomenal television.
It's a travesty Continuum will end its run with barely 40 episodes. Tremendous TV.
Oh right, politics - With both not super well known yet, I'm surprised the likability of the two mayoral candidates is pretty close.
Pretty sure it's just a play on the main character being doubly an outsider - in time as being from the 40s sent back to the 18th century, and as an Englishwoman finding herself amidst the Scots. I'd never heard the word Sassanach before.
It only got the shortened fourth season to wrap up (I haven't seen any of S4 yet) I had thought - I figure any problems will be like a Babylon5 type situation. That show had a very well planned series of story arcs, but thought it was getting cancelled in S4 so wrapped up the biggest ones in a bit of a rush, then got its final season and didn't have enough plot to go around. So I expect Continuum to have had to jettison plans and rework things for the final bunch of episodes
If the Washington Beltway find it hard to grasp him, as they say, he's close to another planet for Europeans - he seems an inarticulate man with zero experience whose religion dominates his intellect. But he's of course highly skilled in his field and does seem a nice, polite chap, and perhaps politeness is a quality whose appeal we underestimate. Do our US experts think he actually has any chance at all?
Inarticulate with zero experience? He is a retired neurosurgeon with a degree from Yale, he is probably better qualified and brighter than most European leaders at the moment with the exception of maybe Merkel. I would not vote for him but he looks the best bet of the present GOP field and could certainly beat Hillary, Sanders or Biden, though luckily for the Democrats it still looks like they will pick Trump
Since when was a neurosurgeon something impressive?
If he'd never spat at a Tory then he clearly can't articulate. Unless he's worn a Never Kissed A Tory tshirt at a protest rally he has zero experience.
Yes, I think the left does sometimes verge on the self parody. Had Carson studied politics and sociology and then spent his life as a researcher and professional politician he would be better qualified I suppose!
To answer Nick's question, no I don't think Carson has a realistic chance for the nomination. His off the cuff remarks will continue to get him into trouble, the more so if he remains a front runner.
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
Caught up on i-player to watch Question Time. Priti Patel used the phrase "£12 billion of consolidation". I do hope that "consolidation" is not going to be used often in place of "cuts"...I really do
The left got away with calling a reduction in benefit a tax, so why not?
The hypocrisy of Abbott wanting unswerving loyalty to a party leader is breathtaking in its audacity.
The obvious answer for any Labour MP with balls is to say that they will provide Corbyn with exactly the same level of loyalty he showed the leader of the Labour party when he was a backbench MP.
Thanks for pm Reply in your in box.
Have replied just now.
Thanks.
I'll reply properly when I have a computer to hand. Difficult to see on a phone without longer arms!
Caught up on i-player to watch Question Time. Priti Patel used the phrase "£12 billion of consolidation". I do hope that "consolidation" is not going to be used often in place of "cuts"...I really do
I always liked investment, for pissing money against the wall in a desperate attempt to buy votes.
Which I am absolutely certain is now killing them. No-one expects them to stick by new genre shows, this is actually a thing. It's called the Firefly Effect.
Fox's ratings are currently in the toilet and the Firefly Effect is almost certainly the main reason for this, No-one trusts them enough to even dip into what might be good shows.
However. They are now looking at revivals with X-Files upcoming and 24 run last summer. If Castle ends this year, well, there just might be scope for them to do a revival of Firefly. Baldwin only has a summer gig, Glau is free, Torres is free, Maher is free, Glass is free.
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
You do come across in your posts here as not very confident !
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
I certainly agree that we want our leaders to have confidence, and if the privately educated are more likely to have that confidence then it has to be accepted that they are more likely to make it to the top.
But! We should ask, why are those from more humble backgrounds less likely to have the confidence to put themselves forward even if they are more talented? And, what can be done about it?
I disagree - Firefly fans are like Corbynistas. If you look at Fringe which is an excellent example of sticking with show to conclusion by Fox. I think Fringe is superb. The special features on the boxsets just how massive the crew/SFX were.
Oh and Sleepy Hollow's going rather well too. I take each show as it comes and not the popular trope memes to caricature any network
Which I am absolutely certain is now killing them. No-one expects them to stick by new genre shows, this is actually a thing. It's called the Firefly Effect.
Fox's ratings are currently in the toilet and the Firefly Effect is almost certainly the main reason for this, No-one trusts them enough to even dip into what might be good shows.
However. They are now looking at revivals with X-Files upcoming and 24 run last summer. If Castle ends this year, well, there just might be scope for them to do a revival of Firefly. Baldwin only has a summer gig, Glau is free, Torres is free, Maher is free, Glass is free.
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
I certainly agree that we want our leaders to have confidence, and if the privately educated are more likely to have that confidence then it has to be accepted that they are more likely to make it to the top.
But! We should ask, why are those from more humble backgrounds less likely to have the confidence to put themselves forward even if they are more talented? And, what can be done about it?
Generally that is true, though not always the case. For example, I would say the grammar school educated Margaret Thatcher was much more confident as a PM than the Eton educated Anthony Eden. Harold Wilson and Ted Heath and Jim Callaghan certainly did not lack confidence despite their relatively humble origins. Major and Brown did, but that was also partly following Thatcher and Blair
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
You do come across in your posts here as not very confident !
Mr. Dair, I saw the Firefly film, but not the series.
Does Whedon have time, with the Marvel Universe stuff, or would another person have to run it?
I don't think Whedon would have to write it himself or even necessarily showrun it. There's enough wider universe to find someone else to showrun it without much difficult.
If the Washington Beltway find it hard to grasp him, as they say, he's close to another planet for Europeans - he seems an inarticulate man with zero experience whose religion dominates his intellect. But he's of course highly skilled in his field and does seem a nice, polite chap, and perhaps politeness is a quality whose appeal we underestimate. Do our US experts think he actually has any chance at all?
Inarticulate with zero experience? He is a retired neurosurgeon with a degree from Yale, he is probably better qualified and brighter than most European leaders at the moment with the exception of maybe Merkel. I would not vote for him but he looks the best bet of the present GOP field and could certainly beat Hillary, Sanders or Biden, though luckily for the Democrats it still looks like they will pick Trump
Since when was a neurosurgeon something impressive?
If he'd never spat at a Tory then he clearly can't articulate. Unless he's worn a Never Kissed A Tory tshirt at a protest rally he has zero experience.
Yes, I think the left does sometimes verge on the self parody. Had Carson studied politics and sociology and then spent his life as a researcher and professional politician he would be better qualified I suppose!
To answer Nick's question, no I don't think Carson has a realistic chance for the nomination. His off the cuff remarks will continue to get him into trouble, the more so if he remains a front runner.
Yes and he lacks the money of Trump to sustain him to the end, however he still looks the most impressive of the GOP field
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
I certainly agree that we want our leaders to have confidence, and if the privately educated are more likely to have that confidence then it has to be accepted that they are more likely to make it to the top.
But! We should ask, why are those from more humble backgrounds less likely to have the confidence to put themselves forward even if they are more talented? And, what can be done about it?
Well yes I guess that is a question.. I don't have the answer.. Grammar schools???
I played football yesterday vs a right bunch of thugs from a poor part of our neighbourhood, and got kicked to bits, not to mention a load of verbal
It almost made me want to vote for Conservatives or Labour so that foreigners would come and take their jobs!
Mr. Eagles, you think he'd herald the end of the Conservatives?
Alexander was the last Argead king [puppets don't count, and they didn't last much longer].
Anyway, I'm off to watch Homeland.
With Corbynism taking over the Labour party and the Lib Dems being shellacked like Hannibal at Zama, there's an opportunity for the Conservative Party to reshape itself to fit the current political climate.
Some showrunners have a single vision that they execute incredibly well.
Kripke topped out with Supernatural which was his baby for years before it met celluloid, then failed on Revolution - a notion that was good in germination and failed in plot.
It also used a huge % of ex X-Files backroomers. Having an established production team makes a huge difference too
Mr. Dair, I saw the Firefly film, but not the series.
Does Whedon have time, with the Marvel Universe stuff, or would another person have to run it?
I don't think Whedon would have to write it himself or even necessarily showrun it. There's enough wider universe to find someone else to showrun it without much difficult.
If the Washington Beltway find it hard to grasp him, as they say, he's close to another planet for Europeans - he seems an inarticulate man with zero experience whose religion dominates his intellect. But he's of course highly skilled in his field and does seem a nice, polite chap, and perhaps politeness is a quality whose appeal we underestimate. Do our US experts think he actually has any chance at all?
Inarticulate with zero experience? He is a retired neurosurgeon with a degree from Yale, he is probably better qualified and brighter than most European leaders at the moment with the exception of maybe Merkel. I would not vote for him but he looks the best bet of the present GOP field and could certainly beat Hillary, Sanders or Biden, though luckily for the Democrats it still looks like they will pick Trump
Since when was a neurosurgeon something impressive?
If he'd never spat at a Tory then he clearly can't articulate. Unless he's worn a Never Kissed A Tory tshirt at a protest rally he has zero experience.
Yes, I think the left does sometimes verge on the self parody. Had Carson studied politics and sociology and then spent his life as a researcher and professional politician he would be better qualified I suppose!
To answer Nick's question, no I don't think Carson has a realistic chance for the nomination. His off the cuff remarks will continue to get him into trouble, the more so if he remains a front runner.
Yes and he lacks the money of Trump to sustain him to the end, however he still looks the most impressive of the GOP field
Trump is doing this for the publicity. He makes money selling his name. His value is rising.
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
I certainly agree that we want our leaders to have confidence, and if the privately educated are more likely to have that confidence then it has to be accepted that they are more likely to make it to the top.
But! We should ask, why are those from more humble backgrounds less likely to have the confidence to put themselves forward even if they are more talented? And, what can be done about it?
Generally that is true, though not always the case. For example, I would say the grammar school educated Margaret Thatcher was much more confident as a PM than the Eton educated Anthony Eden. Harold Wilson and Ted Heath and Jim Callaghan certainly did not lack confidence despite their relatively humble origins. Major and Brown did, but that was also partly following Thatcher and Blair
I think what I'm talking about is the confidence to try something like politics. I don't know how true to life The Long Walk to Finchley was but Thatcher must have had serious confidence and determination to make it.
On a side note, is it me or do kids that grow up abroad with parents stationed overseas have a greater propensity to make it big? I see Stuart Rose has an interesting background which included going to a school in Dar es Salaam.
I disagree - Firefly fans are like Corbynistas. If you look at Fringe which is an excellent example of sticking with show to conclusion by Fox. I think Fringe is superb. The special features on the boxsets just how massive the crew/SFX were.
Oh and Sleepy Hollow's going rather well too. I take each show as it comes and not the popular trope memes to caricature any network
How do you mean like Corbynistas?
In terms of the wider point, once a network has lost the viewers trust it will take more than a few Comfort Renewals like Sleepy Hollow to get the viewers trust back. At the same time they renewed Sleepy Hollow they cancelled Almost Human without a conclusion.
The show came in as a mid season replacement and had a double hiatus. Despite this, it was performing between 1.8 and 2.0 rating before the second hiatus at which point, it was clear Fox had no faith in renewal and it tailed off. It still finished at a 1.5 which Fox would quite like in a lot of timeslots this year. It was also a top end performer in L+3 and L+7. Cancelling it was not smart on its own. As another message to genre fans it was a slap in the face.
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
I certainly agree that we want our leaders to have confidence, and if the privately educated are more likely to have that confidence then it has to be accepted that they are more likely to make it to the top.
But! We should ask, why are those from more humble backgrounds less likely to have the confidence to put themselves forward even if they are more talented? And, what can be done about it?
Generally that is true, though not always the case. For example, I would say the grammar school educated Margaret Thatcher was much more confident as a PM than the Eton educated Anthony Eden. Harold Wilson and Ted Heath and Jim Callaghan certainly did not lack confidence despite their relatively humble origins. Major and Brown did, but that was also partly following Thatcher and Blair
If the Washington Beltway find it hard to grasp him, as they say, he's close to another planet for Europeans - he seems an inarticulate man with zero experience whose religion dominates his intellect. But he's of course highly skilled in his field and does seem a nice, polite chap, and perhaps politeness is a quality whose appeal we underestimate. Do our US experts think he actually has any chance at all?
Inarticulate with zero experience? He is a retired neurosurgeon with a degree from Yale, he is probably better qualified and brighter than most European leaders at the moment with the exception of maybe Merkel. I would not vote for him but he looks the best bet of the present GOP field and could certainly beat Hillary, Sanders or Biden, though luckily for the Democrats it still looks like they will pick Trump
Since when was a neurosurgeon something impressive?
If he'd never spat at a Tory then he clearly can't articulate. Unless he's worn a Never Kissed A Tory tshirt at a protest rally he has zero experience.
Yes, I think the left does sometimes verge on the self parody. Had Carson studied politics and sociology and then spent his life as a researcher and professional politician he would be better qualified I suppose!
To answer Nick's question, no I don't think Carson has a realistic chance for the nomination. His off the cuff remarks will continue to get him into trouble, the more so if he remains a front runner.
Yes and he lacks the money of Trump to sustain him to the end, however he still looks the most impressive of the GOP field
Trump is doing this for the publicity. He makes money selling his name. His value is rising.
Well publicity or not on present polling he will be the GOP nominee
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
There is a difference between confidence and bullshit. I see a lot of the latter in the City. I think often what we need to teach children - and adults, come to that - is courage and the fearlessness to ask questions. "Why" is the most lethal word in the English language. And it doesn't get asked often enough.
There is a surprising amount of cowardice around, even amongst the most confident and best educated and the relatively powerful.
Curiosity and scepticism and courage. Those are the qualities I would encourage. Otherwise you get people who know nothing talking loudly and confidently and saying the square root of sod all. All "sound and fury signifying nothing".
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
If your 'dinner' was 6pm or later then you are the posh one.
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
I certainly agree that we want our leaders to have confidence, and if the privately educated are more likely to have that confidence then it has to be accepted that they are more likely to make it to the top.
But! We should ask, why are those from more humble backgrounds less likely to have the confidence to put themselves forward even if they are more talented? And, what can be done about it?
Generally that is true, though not always the case. For example, I would say the grammar school educated Margaret Thatcher was much more confident as a PM than the Eton educated Anthony Eden. Harold Wilson and Ted Heath and Jim Callaghan certainly did not lack confidence despite their relatively humble origins. Major and Brown did, but that was also partly following Thatcher and Blair
I think what I'm talking about is the confidence to try something like politics. I don't know how true to life The Long Walk to Finchley was but Thatcher must have had serious confidence and determination to make it.
On a side note, is it me or do kids that grow up abroad with parents stationed overseas have a greater propensity to make it big? I see Stuart Rose has an interesting background which included going to a school in Dar es Salaam.
I think that children who move around during childhood and are exposed to different countries/cultures often have quite a lonely time and therefore need to build up their inner resources and resilience, which may explain some of it.
Firefly fans are like a cult. It was a good show, but not the zenith of TV.
And I think you're overthinking this. Most viewers expect to see their favourite shows renewed - sometimes they aren't.
Network bosses don't cancel things viewers watch. It's not hard. If a network boss has a favourite hobby horse - it gets a better sign off which I think Fringe had.
I've seen predictions that Sleepy Hollow will be cancelled as click bait - the showrunner took notice of fan complaints about it all getting a bit too navel gazing so skipped ahead 9 months to reset the Witnesses plot. Smart move IMO. Oh and Agent Carter was another clickbait canellation prediction.
I disagree - Firefly fans are like Corbynistas. If you look at Fringe which is an excellent example of sticking with show to conclusion by Fox. I think Fringe is superb. The special features on the boxsets just how massive the crew/SFX were.
Oh and Sleepy Hollow's going rather well too. I take each show as it comes and not the popular trope memes to caricature any network
How do you mean like Corbynistas?
In terms of the wider point, once a network has lost the viewers trust it will take more than a few Comfort Renewals like Sleepy Hollow to get the viewers trust back. At the same time they renewed Sleepy Hollow they cancelled Almost Human without a back end order.
The show came in as a mid season replacement and had a double hiatus. Despite this, it was performing between 1.8 and 2.0 rating before the second hiatus at which point, it was clear Fox had no faith in renewal and it tailed off. It still finished at a 1.5 which Fox would quite like in a lot of timeslots this year. It was also a top end performer in L+3 and L+7. Cancelling it was not smart on its own. As another message to genre fans it was a slap in the face.
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
There is a difference between confidence and bullshit. I see a lot of the latter in the City. I think often what we need to teach children - and adults, come to that - is courage and the fearlessness to ask questions. "Why" is the most lethal word in the English language. And it doesn't get asked often enough.
There is a surprising amount of cowardice around, even amongst the most confident and best educated and the relatively powerful.
Curiosity and scepticism and courage. Those are the qualities I would encourage. Otherwise you get people who know nothing talking loudly and confidently and saying the square root of sod all. All "sound and fury signifying nothing".
Oh definitely more people need to ask "why?".. I think truly successful people are the ones that question the norms, but unfortunately it is usually easier and less risky to perpetuate a lie.. and that is what the majority of people do in bloated corporations and institutions
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
There is a difference between confidence and bullshit. I see a lot of the latter in the City. I think often what we need to teach children - and adults, come to that - is courage and the fearlessness to ask questions. "Why" is the most lethal word in the English language. And it doesn't get asked often enough.
There is a surprising amount of cowardice around, even amongst the most confident and best educated and the relatively powerful.
Curiosity and scepticism and courage. Those are the qualities I would encourage. Otherwise you get people who know nothing talking loudly and confidently and saying the square root of sod all. All "sound and fury signifying nothing".
Hear, hear Cyclefree. Never assume that those in power know what they are doing. Certainly not because they when to X school, Y college or Z university.
Respect for education? Always! Unquestioning deference? Never!
If they are accurate then they're entirely right. If UK pilots are "endangered" then they should have the right to engage. It's hard to judge as everything is quoted anonymously but I can't disagree with the rules of engagement that if a British pilot is fired upon then he can defend himself.
Of course like a nuclear deterrent that is something that should hopefully never come to pass. But if you were to do a Corbyn and say that even if our pilots are fired upon they must not retaliate then what is to prevent other states from firing at our planes and our pilots?
I have no truck with anyone put into battle with one arm or both arms tied. However the article mentions the RAF firing long range anti plane missiles from ambush, and thats an entirely different matter.
If they are accurate then they're entirely right. If UK pilots are "endangered" then they should have the right to engage. It's hard to judge as everything is quoted anonymously but I can't disagree with the rules of engagement that if a British pilot is fired upon then he can defend himself.
Of course like a nuclear deterrent that is something that should hopefully never come to pass. But if you were to do a Corbyn and say that even if our pilots are fired upon they must not retaliate then what is to prevent other states from firing at our planes and our pilots?
I have no truck with anyone put into battle with one arm or both arms tied. However the article mentions the RAF firing long range anti plane missiles from ambush, and thats an entirely different matter.
Well I for one do not see reference to firing from ambush.
The witcher 3 just ramps everything up- the stories, the graphics, the world. Honestly, hands down, the best game I've ever played. Part of me would say just forget the witcher 2 and jump right into 3, they are just not comparable in terms of quality.
I upgraded to a new PC a few months ago and now I'm not dashing up to Broxtowe every weekend I've been enjoying catching up with games. I'm through most of the satisfying Pillars of Eternity (Baldur's Gate tripled with knobs on), and was thinking of working my way through the Witcher series next. Would you recommend skipping installment 1 and maybe 2, then?
In general I like strategy and RPG games with lots of decisions and conversations, and dislike games dependent on fast fingers or tiresome "where is the crowbar hidden?" puzzles. I used to play a lot of Hearts of Iron so I like Paradox's style too. Another candidate is the new Civ expansion. Advice welcome!
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
If your 'dinner' was 6pm or later then you are the posh one.
Oh really?!
It was 4.30pm ish.. what does that say about me?!
Are you getting the answers from a multiple choice quiz in Take-a-Break?
I don't think anyone is surprised to see the hotspots in the Middle East or North Africa.
But Canada: 10-20% of marriages are to cousins.
What the Fuck?
One cousin to cousin marriage in a generation now and again is probably fine. But I'd have thought there was a good case for banning cousin marriages where either the parents or grandparents on either side have also married cousins. I'm no geneticist but surely if you have generations of cousin marriages the chances of health issues must increase substantially?
There are good cultural reasons for clamping down on it as well. But the health ones seem unarguable to me.
I don't think anyone is surprised to see the hotspots in the Middle East or North Africa.
But Canada: 10-20% of marriages are to cousins.
What the Fuck?
One cousin to cousin marriage in a generation now and again is probably fine. But I'd have thought there was a good case for banning cousin marriages where either the parents or grandparents on either side have also married cousins. I'm no geneticist but surely if you have generations of cousin marriages the chances of health issues must increase substantially?
There are good cultural reasons for clamping down on it as well. But the health ones seem unarguable to me.
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
I certainly agree that we want our leaders to have confidence, and if the privately educated are more likely to have that confidence then it has to be accepted that they are more likely to make it to the top.
But! We should ask, why are those from more humble backgrounds less likely to have the confidence to put themselves forward even if they are more talented? And, what can be done about it?
Generally that is true, though not always the case. For example, I would say the grammar school educated Margaret Thatcher was much more confident as a PM than the Eton educated Anthony Eden. Harold Wilson and Ted Heath and Jim Callaghan certainly did not lack confidence despite their relatively humble origins. Major and Brown did, but that was also partly following Thatcher and Blair
I think what I'm talking about is the confidence to try something like politics. I don't know how true to life The Long Walk to Finchley was but Thatcher must have had serious confidence and determination to make it.
On a side note, is it me or do kids that grow up abroad with parents stationed overseas have a greater propensity to make it big? I see Stuart Rose has an interesting background which included going to a school in Dar es Salaam.
They are rarer but as Thatcher showed not an impossibility. Living abroad when younger probably makes you more open and self-reliant
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
I certainly agree that we want our leaders to have confidence, and if the privately educated are more likely to have that confidence then it has to be accepted that they are more likely to make it to the top.
But! We should ask, why are those from more humble backgrounds less likely to have the confidence to put themselves forward even if they are more talented? And, what can be done about it?
Generally that is true, though not always the case. For example, I would say the grammar school educated Margaret Thatcher was much more confident as a PM than the Eton educated Anthony Eden. Harold Wilson and Ted Heath and Jim Callaghan certainly did not lack confidence despite their relatively humble origins. Major and Brown did, but that was also partly following Thatcher and Blair
Corbyn went to private school...
Whether he has confidence or not is debateable, a large chip on his shoulder certainly..
Firefly fans are like a cult. It was a good show, but not the zenith of TV.
And I think you're overthinking this. Most viewers expect to see their favourite shows renewed - sometimes they aren't.
Network bosses don't cancel things viewers watch. It's not hard. If a network boss has a favourite hobby horse - it gets a better sign off which I think Fringe had.
I'm sure hardcore fans of any property end up being somewhat cultish.
In general, I think over the last decade, the networks have been very slow to understand and recognise changes in viewing habits. There seems to have been a misunderstanding or a pressure from higher up executives who had a misunderstanding that the decline in ratings was the result of unpopular shows and not the change in viewing habits.
Only Pedowicz at the CW seems to really have a grasp on the current position of the networks (which is slightly bizarre given the networks history and its position in the hierarchy). Fox aren't alone in cancelling shows which had the potential to be solid rated shows in the current market but, perhaps because they were actually most supporting of genre shows, they have built a reputation which I genuinely do think is hurting new shows before they even air.
I understand not everyone will agree with me here.
I don't think anyone is surprised to see the hotspots in the Middle East or North Africa.
But Canada: 10-20% of marriages are to cousins.
What the Fuck?
One cousin to cousin marriage in a generation now and again is probably fine. But I'd have thought there was a good case for banning cousin marriages where either the parents or grandparents on either side have also married cousins. I'm no geneticist but surely if you have generations of cousin marriages the chances of health issues must increase substantially?
There are good cultural reasons for clamping down on it as well. But the health ones seem unarguable to me.
I went to a wedding a year or two ago of a family friend to his French second cousin, they have just had a baby who seems to be doing well
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
I certainly agree that we want our leaders to have confidence, and if the privately educated are more likely to have that confidence then it has to be accepted that they are more likely to make it to the top.
But! We should ask, why are those from more humble backgrounds less likely to have the confidence to put themselves forward even if they are more talented? And, what can be done about it?
Generally that is true, though not always the case. For example, I would say the grammar school educated Margaret Thatcher was much more confident as a PM than the Eton educated Anthony Eden. Harold Wilson and Ted Heath and Jim Callaghan certainly did not lack confidence despite their relatively humble origins. Major and Brown did, but that was also partly following Thatcher and Blair
I think what I'm talking about is the confidence to try something like politics. I don't know how true to life The Long Walk to Finchley was but Thatcher must have had serious confidence and determination to make it.
On a side note, is it me or do kids that grow up abroad with parents stationed overseas have a greater propensity to make it big? I see Stuart Rose has an interesting background which included going to a school in Dar es Salaam.
Stuart Rose has no background, didn't you know, and is worse than a joke. Move along there nothing to see here.
The witcher 3 just ramps everything up- the stories, the graphics, the world. Honestly, hands down, the best game I've ever played. Part of me would say just forget the witcher 2 and jump right into 3, they are just not comparable in terms of quality.
I upgraded to a new PC a few months ago and now I'm not dashing up to Broxtowe every weekend I've been enjoying catching up with games. I'm through most of the satisfying Pillars of Eternity (Baldur's Gate tripled with knobs on), and was thinking of working my way through the Witcher series next. Would you recommend skipping installment 1 and maybe 2, then?
I believe the first expansion to PoE is out, I've not got around to playing it yet to check its quality though.
On the Witcher, honestly I would skip the first. Not having played the third I cannot say whether one should skip straight to that, but even only 12 hours in to the second one The Witcher 1 is a far lesser experience - even for the time it was released it looks pretty bland and poor, the gameplay is pretty annoying, and narratively and in its characters its, well, I don't quite know how to describe it. Ok for most of it, it kept me engaged well enough, but odd, just something peculiar about how it was all put together that is offputting and took me out out of the experience. It clearly had promise, but I'm almost surprised it did well enough to get what looks like a lot more time, money and effort put into the sequel.
So far into the second there hasn't been so much that I feel I would have been missing out if I'd skipped the first one - particularly as the starting point for Geralt in it is mostly arising from an event that happened essentially in the end credits of the first, rather than within its main story itself.
Firefly fans are like a cult. It was a good show, but not the zenith of TV.
And I think you're overthinking this. Most viewers expect to see their favourite shows renewed - sometimes they aren't.
Network bosses don't cancel things viewers watch. It's not hard. If a network boss has a favourite hobby horse - it gets a better sign off which I think Fringe had.
I'm sure hardcore fans of any property end up being somewhat cultish.
In general, I think over the last decade, the networks have been very slow to understand and recognise changes in viewing habits. There seems to have been a misunderstanding or a pressure from higher up executives who had a misunderstanding that the decline in ratings was the result of unpopular shows and not the change in viewing habits.
Only Pedowicz at the CW seems to really have a grasp on the current position of the networks (which is slightly bizarre given the networks history and its position in the hierarchy). Fox aren't alone in cancelling shows which had the potential to be solid rated shows in the current market but, perhaps because they were actually most supporting of genre shows, they have built a reputation which I genuinely do think is hurting new shows before they even air.
I understand not everyone will agree with me here.
I think networks need to give more shows a chance - there's some really popular shows that started out pretty small.
Game I'm most excited for is Stellaris. 4x space games have frankly been a disappointment for a long time but I'm a big fan of Paradox grand strategy games. If you can get past the learning curve (and don't need the prettiest graphics) they're great fun. Although they've never done a space game before I hope this one can live up to its potential.
Paradox do indeed have some good games - I am a fan of strategy games so will be on look out for Stellaris - Anyone remember the old SSG game "reach for the stars" I think it was called?
IMO the networks are VERY aware of fans in a way that they've never been before - fansites, fanfic, Twitter, Tumblr et al.
I've been very plugged into a few shows and seen the fan mobbing behaviour influence. I don't always agree with it as it's like Corbynistas in Labour - having a show run by purists isn't a good either. Trying to work out what's mainstream opinion feedback and cultists is very hard.
If I use Supernatural on CW as an example - there's a hard core of very vocal shippers who want a male lead to have a gay relationship with another male lead, they get very angry that it hasn't really happened and moan about gay baiting when the showrunners go halfway.
Firefly fans are like a cult. It was a good show, but not the zenith of TV.
And I think you're overthinking this. Most viewers expect to see their favourite shows renewed - sometimes they aren't.
Network bosses don't cancel things viewers watch. It's not hard. If a network boss has a favourite hobby horse - it gets a better sign off which I think Fringe had.
I'm sure hardcore fans of any property end up being somewhat cultish.
In general, I think over the last decade, the networks have been very slow to understand and recognise changes in viewing habits. There seems to have been a misunderstanding or a pressure from higher up executives who had a misunderstanding that the decline in ratings was the result of unpopular shows and not the change in viewing habits.
Only Pedowicz at the CW seems to really have a grasp on the current position of the networks (which is slightly bizarre given the networks history and its position in the hierarchy). Fox aren't alone in cancelling shows which had the potential to be solid rated shows in the current market but, perhaps because they were actually most supporting of genre shows, they have built a reputation which I genuinely do think is hurting new shows before they even air.
I understand not everyone will agree with me here.
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
There is a difference between confidence and bullshit. I see a lot of the latter in the City. I think often what we need to teach children - and adults, come to that - is courage and the fearlessness to ask questions. "Why" is the most lethal word in the English language. And it doesn't get asked often enough.
There is a surprising amount of cowardice around, even amongst the most confident and best educated and the relatively powerful.
Curiosity and scepticism and courage. Those are the qualities I would encourage. Otherwise you get people who know nothing talking loudly and confidently and saying the square root of sod all. All "sound and fury signifying nothing".
Hear, hear Cyclefree. Never assume that those in power know what they are doing. Certainly not because they when to X school, Y college or Z university.
Respect for education? Always! Unquestioning deference? Never!
Never ever accept an explanation that you don't understand. There is absolutely nothing in this world that someone who really understands it cannot explain simply. And if they can't, the chances are that either they don't understand it or they're trying to pull the wool over your eyes.
Pretty much all the problems in the financial world over the last decade could have been avoided if a few more people had, when so-called experts talked balls about CDOs and CDSs and "new paradigms" and algorithms which eliminated risk and all the rest of it, had said "What the hell are you talking about?" and kept on asking until they got proper clear answers that they understood. Instead, everyone nodded and assumed that the other guy must know what he was talking about because he used all these fancy words and went along with it because everyone else was too and too late people realised that fancy words were a substitute for understanding. And by then the world was knee deep in the brown stuff which we are still clearing up.
"Mummy. Why is that man wearing no clothes?" If only all these clever people had remembered what they had had read to them when little. If only.
The truly educated know how much they still have to learn. And keep on learning all their lives. And they are willing to share their learning. Those who parade their education as a brand and boast about it reveal only their lack of true education.
Miss Plato, first series of Heroes? I quite liked it, but the subsequent ones were disappointing. Heard a rumour it might be coming back.
To mix games and TV, Until Dawn (videogame) stars numerous TV stars [both voice and face], such as Brett Dalton (Grant Ward from Supermodels of SHIELD) and Hayden Panettiere [cheerleader from Heroes]. It's a horror flick style game, where you make certain choices to try and keep as many people alive as possible. It's not so much playing as the characters, as the director.
It's perhaps one thing to stumble on a good idea but then to sustain it beyond its first inevitable dénouement is more tricky. Before you know it its leading you off the edge of a cliff.
Miss Plato, first series of Heroes? I quite liked it, but the subsequent ones were disappointing. Heard a rumour it might be coming back.
To mix games and TV, Until Dawn (videogame) stars numerous TV stars [both voice and face], such as Brett Dalton (Grant Ward from Supermodels of SHIELD) and Hayden Panettiere [cheerleader from Heroes]. It's a horror flick style game, where you make certain choices to try and keep as many people alive as possible. It's not so much playing as the characters, as the director.
It's perhaps one thing to stumble on a good idea but then to sustain it beyond its first inevitable dénouement is more tricky. Before you know it its leading you off the edge of a cliff.
A warning to the Tories on sneaking a few ideas from Labour?
OT: Just watched the first two episodes of The Last Kingdom. Not a bad effort, but it looks poorly compared to the History Channels Vikings. As a stand alone show, its fairly good. It just looks like a poor mans Viking though.
Vikings is exceptional drama, considering it's History Channels first live drama, it has *substantially* higher production values than The Last Kingdom, which from the BBC, you would expect a bit of experienced polish.
Maybe its down to budget. Perhaps Vikings has had more money thrown at it.
Narcos is on my "to do" list
Outlander (series not film) on Amazon prime is in my opinion stunning tv. The best I have seen bar none.
Feels a bit weird saying that as it's not my usual viewing :-)
Can't wait for series two.
If you have not yet seen it, Mr Robot is the best show this year (new or returning). It is quite phenomenal television.
I think networks need to give more shows a chance - there's some really popular shows that started out pretty small.
The problem for the networks is that on top of being slow to accept the general reduction in ratings, they don't appear to be doing much to adjust to the new revenue model. It is pretty clear that the big money in television lies in Streaming deals while the big four networks are still obsessed by Syndication.
Syndication biases towards Procedurals where episodes are predominantly stand alone with no or limited season arcs. Streaming wants increasingly serialised stories which create an appetite for binge watching.
The trouble here is that once you get past the first season, Serialised stories have much more limited opportunities for growth. There is a high barrier to entry for any potential new viewers, either thinking they need or actually needing to spend 20 hours watching the previous Season before they can dive in. Procedurals don't have that, which is why there was a really strong symbiotic relationship between the Networks and building shows for Syndication.
For Serialised shows the beneficial relationship is with shorter run, serialised shows which are the feature of cable, and why some of the biggest shows around today are now cable show, which work on the bases of what the Yanks call Limited Series.
The networks should be looking to do that. The CW is making indications that it might and I can see them switching to run at least part of their slate where shows run for 16 episodes per season and share a time slot over the standard October to March TV Season.
But the other four networks seem completely oblivious to this and keep making the same mistakes, aiming to an audience that probably doesn't exist any more for an increasingly diminishing Syndication revenue off the back of their shows.
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
I certainly agree that we want our leaders to have confidence, and if the privately educated are more likely to have that confidence then it has to be accepted that they are more likely to make it to the top.
But! We should ask, why are those from more humble backgrounds less likely to have the confidence to put themselves forward even if they are more talented? And, what can be done about it?
Generally that is true, though not always the case. For example, I would say the grammar school educated Margaret Thatcher was much more confident as a PM than the Eton educated Anthony Eden. Harold Wilson and Ted Heath and Jim Callaghan certainly did not lack confidence despite their relatively humble origins. Major and Brown did, but that was also partly following Thatcher and Blair
Corbyn went to private school...
Whether he has confidence or not is debateable, a large chip on his shoulder certainly..
I read in the Sunday Times that (as I suggested yesterday) HMQ is not fussed about all this kneeling and kissing ring stuff if it upsets him. I suggest that like her people should make no big deal about Corbyn's inadequacies. All this holiday to the misty Glenn's rubbish is just him and his oiks playing to the cultist gallery. He will have to step through the portals of Buckingham Palace though and wipe his feet first.
IMO the networks are VERY aware of fans in a way that they've never been before - fansites, fanfic, Twitter, Tumblr et al.
I've been very plugged into a few shows and seen the fan mobbing behaviour influence. I don't always agree with it as it's like Corbynistas in Labour - having a show run by purists isn't a good either. Trying to work out what's mainstream opinion feedback and cultists is very hard.
If I use Supernatural on CW as an example - there's a hard core of very vocal shippers who want a male lead to have a gay relationship with another male lead, they get very angry that it hasn't really happened and moan about gay baiting when the showrunners go halfway.
It's nonsense pandering.
Ah. I see.
I'm not really talking about the hardest of the hard core of fans. To an extent, given the average person is going to watch 40 hours of television a week, if someone has an strong interest in genre shows or a particular type of genre, they'll give any show that fits that a chance.
I mean the wider viewership who might have some interest in genre or mystery shows, for example but won't invest the time in them if they think they will get shortchanged with a show being cancelled with no satisfactory pay off. This wider viewership is also the difference between a niche show and an acceptable network rating.
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
I certainly agree that we want our leaders to have confidence, and if the privately educated are more likely to have that confidence then it has to be accepted that they are more likely to make it to the top.
But! We should ask, why are those from more humble backgrounds less likely to have the confidence to put themselves forward even if they are more talented? And, what can be done about it?
Generally that is true, though not always the case. For example, I would say the grammar school educated Margaret Thatcher was much more confident as a PM than the Eton educated Anthony Eden. Harold Wilson and Ted Heath and Jim Callaghan certainly did not lack confidence despite their relatively humble origins. Major and Brown did, but that was also partly following Thatcher and Blair
Corbyn went to private school...
Whether he has confidence or not is debateable, a large chip on his shoulder certainly..
I read in the Sunday Times that (as I suggested yesterday) HMQ is not fussed about all this kneeling and kissing ring stuff if it upsets him. I suggest that like her people should make no big deal about Corbyn's inadequacies. All this holiday to the misty Glenn's rubbish is just him and his oiks playing to the cultist gallery. He will have to step through the portals of Buckingham Palace though and wipe his feet first.
OT: Just watched the first two episodes of The Last Kingdom. Not a bad effort, but it looks poorly compared to the History Channels Vikings. As a stand alone show, its fairly good. It just looks like a poor mans Viking though.
Vikings is exceptional drama, considering it's History Channels first live drama, it has *substantially* higher production values than The Last Kingdom, which from the BBC, you would expect a bit of experienced polish.
Maybe its down to budget. Perhaps Vikings has had more money thrown at it.
Narcos is on my "to do" list
Outlander (series not film) on Amazon prime is in my opinion stunning tv. The best I have seen bar none.
Feels a bit weird saying that as it's not my usual viewing :-)
Can't wait for series two.
If you have not yet seen it, Mr Robot is the best show this year (new or returning). It is quite phenomenal television.
Not seen it but I will now look for it.
Thanks to you and Plato for mentioning it.
Don't read anything about it. Don't risk any spoilers. Just watch the pilot, if that works for you, watch the rest and stay as far away from potential spoilers as you can.
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
If your 'dinner' was 6pm or later then you are the posh one.
I think dinner is still at lunchtime for a lot of people. What does that make them?
I don't think anyone is surprised to see the hotspots in the Middle East or North Africa.
But Canada: 10-20% of marriages are to cousins.
What the Fuck?
Surely 50% of people breeding with their cousins would result in Hapsburgs levels of genetic degradation fairly quickly? Does this explain some of the issues around the old north west frontier?
Using your criteria - I assume anything shown over the Summer will be a single season. I've been pleasantly surprised by Suits, White Collar, Haven and others.
This years summer shows have been universally crap - Zoo, Proof, Complications, Dark Matter are just awful. They've got filler written all over them.
IMO the networks are VERY aware of fans in a way that they've never been before - fansites, fanfic, Twitter, Tumblr et al.
I've been very plugged into a few shows and seen the fan mobbing behaviour influence. I don't always agree with it as it's like Corbynistas in Labour - having a show run by purists isn't a good either. Trying to work out what's mainstream opinion feedback and cultists is very hard.
If I use Supernatural on CW as an example - there's a hard core of very vocal shippers who want a male lead to have a gay relationship with another male lead, they get very angry that it hasn't really happened and moan about gay baiting when the showrunners go halfway.
It's nonsense pandering.
Ah. I see.
I'm not really talking about the hardest of the hard core of fans. To an extent, given the average person is going to watch 40 hours of television a week, if someone has an strong interest in genre shows or a particular type of genre, they'll give any show that fits that a chance.
I mean the wider viewership who might have some interest in genre or mystery shows, for example but won't invest the time in them if they think they will get shortchanged with a show being cancelled with no satisfactory pay off. This wider viewership is also the difference between a niche show and an acceptable network rating.
The witcher 3 just ramps everything up- the stories, the graphics, the world. Honestly, hands down, the best game I've ever played. Part of me would say just forget the witcher 2 and jump right into 3, they are just not comparable in terms of quality.
I upgraded to a new PC a few months ago and now I'm not dashing up to Broxtowe every weekend I've been enjoying catching up with games. I'm through most of the satisfying Pillars of Eternity (Baldur's Gate tripled with knobs on), and was thinking of working my way through the Witcher series next. Would you recommend skipping installment 1 and maybe 2, then?
In general I like strategy and RPG games with lots of decisions and conversations, and dislike games dependent on fast fingers or tiresome "where is the crowbar hidden?" puzzles. I used to play a lot of Hearts of Iron so I like Paradox's style too. Another candidate is the new Civ expansion. Advice welcome!
How reassuring that you've found something useful to occupy you now.
Pretty much all the problems in the financial world over the last decade could have been avoided if a few more people had, when so-called experts talked balls about CDOs and CDSs and "new paradigms" and algorithms which eliminated risk and all the rest of it, had said "What the hell are you talking about?" and kept on asking until they got proper clear answers that they understood. Instead, everyone nodded and assumed that the other guy must know what he was talking about because he used all these fancy words and went along with it because everyone else was too and too late people realised that fancy words were a substitute for understanding. And by then the world was knee deep in the brown stuff which we are still clearing up.
I think a lot of financial services products - and I include the CDOs/CDSs - are effectively just "selling out of the money put options".
In 99 months out of a 100, they earn you 1%, but in month 100, you lose everything. Of course, you can produce a spreadsheet that shows your strategy/prodcut/etc. makes 1% every month, and then you can talk about the tail risk being a "once in a thousand year event", or somesuch.
The question to me is: does the person selling you this know what they are selling, or are they blinded by Excel too?
I don't think anyone is surprised to see the hotspots in the Middle East or North Africa.
But Canada: 10-20% of marriages are to cousins.
What the Fuck?
Surely 50% of people breeding with their cousins would result in Hapsburgs levels of genetic degradation fairly quickly? Does this explain some of the issues around the old north west frontier?
That would be my interpretation too.
Of course, from a purely cynical point of view, I can't help notice that a great many of the countries with high levels of cousin marriage (not Canada) are ones which - to put it simply - don't like us very much. Maybe we should just let them get on which their cousin love.
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
If your 'dinner' was 6pm or later then you are the posh one.
I think dinner is still at lunchtime for a lot of people. What does that make them?
:-) I try to get round these awkward social faux pas by eating all day breakfasts ( I was brought up with an outside toilet and sometimes compromised by having a packed lunch for my dinner at school)
Never ever accept an explanation that you don't understand. There is absolutely nothing in this world that someone who really understands it cannot explain simply. And if they can't, the chances are that either they don't understand it or they're trying to pull the wool over your eyes.
Pretty much all the problems in the financial world over the last decade could have been avoided if a few more people had, when so-called experts talked balls about CDOs and CDSs and "new paradigms" and algorithms which eliminated risk and all the rest of it, had said "What the hell are you talking about?" and kept on asking until they got proper clear answers that they understood. Instead, everyone nodded and assumed that the other guy must know what he was talking about because he used all these fancy words and went along with it because everyone else was too and too late people realised that fancy words were a substitute for understanding. And by then the world was knee deep in the brown stuff which we are still clearing up.
"Mummy. Why is that man wearing no clothes?" If only all these clever people had remembered what they had had read to them when little. If only.
The truly educated know how much they still have to learn. And keep on learning all their lives. And they are willing to share their learning. Those who parade their education as a brand and boast about it reveal only their lack of true education.
I agree (which is rather nice since we often disagree). Life is too short and the world is far too interesting to pretend you know it all.
The failures of the financial world were very similar to the failures of Soviet planning.
Using your criteria - I assume anything shown over the Summer will be a single season. I've been pleasantly surprised by Suits, White Collar, Haven and others.
This years summer shows have been universally crap - Zoo, Proof, Complications, Dark Matter are just awful. They've got filler written all over them.
Not sure what you mean, Suits, White Collar and Haven are all cable shows and I'm talking about problems for the networks.
While Zoo and Complications were dire and I haven't seen Proof, I'm wondering if you didn't watch Dark Matter for its full run. If you didn't you missed a very good show, where any weakness in some of the earlier episodes paid off really well in the final three episodes.
The witcher 3 just ramps everything up- the stories, the graphics, the world. Honestly, hands down, the best game I've ever played. Part of me would say just forget the witcher 2 and jump right into 3, they are just not comparable in terms of quality.
I upgraded to a new PC a few months ago and now I'm not dashing up to Broxtowe every weekend I've been enjoying catching up with games. I'm through most of the satisfying Pillars of Eternity (Baldur's Gate tripled with knobs on), and was thinking of working my way through the Witcher series next. Would you recommend skipping installment 1 and maybe 2, then?
In general I like strategy and RPG games with lots of decisions and conversations, and dislike games dependent on fast fingers or tiresome "where is the crowbar hidden?" puzzles. I used to play a lot of Hearts of Iron so I like Paradox's style too. Another candidate is the new Civ expansion. Advice welcome!
Nick, Crusader Kings 2 an Europa Universalis IV should both be right up your street., especially the first though be prepared for a steep learning curve (not the game play but the decision effects) and to wave farewell to sleep.
I don't think anyone is surprised to see the hotspots in the Middle East or North Africa.
But Canada: 10-20% of marriages are to cousins.
What the Fuck?
One cousin to cousin marriage in a generation now and again is probably fine. But I'd have thought there was a good case for banning cousin marriages where either the parents or grandparents on either side have also married cousins. I'm no geneticist but surely if you have generations of cousin marriages the chances of health issues must increase substantially?
There are good cultural reasons for clamping down on it as well. But the health ones seem unarguable to me.
What you say is true but this is very dangerous ground It's like eugenics in reverse but with the same ethical issues. What can you do about it? Darwin of course latterly struggled with this issue, being married to a very devout cousin.
I don't differentiate between broadcasters, I just watch.
Proof was painful and a poor version of Forever which got cancelled at S1. That had much more potential and think it was a shame to bin.
I stopped Dark Matter at E4 - it was dire. I'm quite forgiving generally until midway = S2 of Murder in the First was disappointing after a cracking S1 which I stuck with to the end. Wayward Pines I gave in at about E5.
Using your criteria - I assume anything shown over the Summer will be a single season. I've been pleasantly surprised by Suits, White Collar, Haven and others.
This years summer shows have been universally crap - Zoo, Proof, Complications, Dark Matter are just awful. They've got filler written all over them.
Not sure what you mean, Suits, White Collar and Haven are all cable shows and I'm talking about problems for the networks.
While Zoo and Complications were dire and I haven't seen Proof, I'm wondering if you didn't watch Dark Matter for its full run. If you didn't you missed a very good show, where any weakness in some of the earlier episodes paid off really well in the final three episodes.
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
I certainly agree that we want our leaders to have confidence, and if the privately educated are more likely to have that confidence then it has to be accepted that they are more likely to make it to the top.
But! We should ask, why are those from more humble backgrounds less likely to have the confidence to put themselves forward even if they are more talented? And, what can be done about it?
Generally that is true, though not always the case. For example, I would say the grammar school educated Margaret Thatcher was much more confident as a PM than the Eton educated Anthony Eden. Harold Wilson and Ted Heath and Jim Callaghan certainly did not lack confidence despite their relatively humble origins. Major and Brown did, but that was also partly following Thatcher and Blair
Corbyn went to private school...
Whether he has confidence or not is debateable, a large chip on his shoulder certainly..
I read in the Sunday Times that (as I suggested yesterday) HMQ is not fussed about all this kneeling and kissing ring stuff if it upsets him. I suggest that like her people should make no big deal about Corbyn's inadequacies. All this holiday to the misty Glenn's rubbish is just him and his oiks playing to the cultist gallery. He will have to step through the portals of Buckingham Palace though and wipe his feet first.
Yes but HMQ has manners and style, unlike JC
That's true. But there was never going to be this big issue of protocol. It remains to be seen if there is any real point to Corbyn being in the PC. I strongly suspect Corbyn will not want the burden of being privy to information which might embarrass him to keep confidential.
On the topic of "too posh".. I had dinner w my parents today, and my Dad is firmly of the belief that we proles need to be represented by someone with a top education rather than a comprehensive kid/bus drivers son... I tend to agree actually, maybe it is lack of confidence on our part?
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
I certainly agree that we want our leaders to have confidence, and if the privately educated are more likely to have that confidence then it has to be accepted that they are more likely to make it to the top.
But! We should ask, why are those from more humble backgrounds less likely to have the confidence to put themselves forward even if they are more talented? And, what can be done about it?
Generally that is true, though not always the case. For example, I would say the grammar school educated Margaret Thatcher was much more confident as a PM than the Eton educated Anthony Eden. Harold Wilson and Ted Heath and Jim Callaghan certainly did not lack confidence despite their relatively humble origins. Major and Brown did, but that was also partly following Thatcher and Blair
Corbyn went to private school...
Whether he has confidence or not is debateable, a large chip on his shoulder certainly..
I read in the Sunday Times that (as I suggested yesterday) HMQ is not fussed about all this kneeling and kissing ring stuff if it upsets him. I suggest that like her people should make no big deal about Corbyn's inadequacies. All this holiday to the misty Glenn's rubbish is just him and his oiks playing to the cultist gallery. He will have to step through the portals of Buckingham Palace though and wipe his feet first.
Yes but HMQ has manners and style, unlike JC
That's true. But there was never going to be this big issue of protocol. It remains to be seen if there is any real point to Corbyn being in the PC. I strongly suspect Corbyn will not want the burden of being privy to information which might embarrass him to keep confidential.
Indeed and I suspect MI5 and MI6 will not be pressing too hard for his inclusion
I don't think anyone is surprised to see the hotspots in the Middle East or North Africa.
But Canada: 10-20% of marriages are to cousins.
What the Fuck?
One cousin to cousin marriage in a generation now and again is probably fine. But I'd have thought there was a good case for banning cousin marriages where either the parents or grandparents on either side have also married cousins. I'm no geneticist but surely if you have generations of cousin marriages the chances of health issues must increase substantially?
There are good cultural reasons for clamping down on it as well. But the health ones seem unarguable to me.
I went to a wedding a year or two ago of a family friend to his French second cousin, they have just had a baby who seems to be doing well
Never ever accept an explanation that you don't understand. There is absolutely nothing in this world that someone who really understands it cannot explain simply. And if they can't, the chances are that either they don't understand it or they're trying to pull the wool over your eyes.
Pretty much all the problems in the financial world over the last decade could have been avoided if a few more people had, when so-called experts talked balls about CDOs and CDSs and "new paradigms" and algorithms which eliminated risk and all the rest of it, had said "What the hell are you talking about?" and kept on asking until they got proper clear answers that they understood. Instead, everyone nodded and assumed that the other guy must know what he was talking about because he used all these fancy words and went along with it because everyone else was too and too late people realised that fancy words were a substitute for understanding. And by then the world was knee deep in the brown stuff which we are still clearing up.
"Mummy. Why is that man wearing no clothes?" If only all these clever people had remembered what they had had read to them when little. If only.
The truly educated know how much they still have to learn. And keep on learning all their lives. And they are willing to share their learning. Those who parade their education as a brand and boast about it reveal only their lack of true education.
I don't think anyone is surprised to see the hotspots in the Middle East or North Africa.
But Canada: 10-20% of marriages are to cousins.
What the Fuck?
Surely 50% of people breeding with their cousins would result in Hapsburgs levels of genetic degradation fairly quickly? Does this explain some of the issues around the old north west frontier?
That would be my interpretation too.
Of course, from a purely cynical point of view, I can't help notice that a great many of the countries with high levels of cousin marriage (not Canada) are ones which - to put it simply - don't like us very much. Maybe we should just let them get on which their cousin love.
It causes a lot of issues for the NHS too apparently, with diseases caused by cousin marriage within certain communities.
The witcher 3 just ramps everything up- the stories, the graphics, the world. Honestly, hands down, the best game I've ever played. Part of me would say just forget the witcher 2 and jump right into 3, they are just not comparable in terms of quality.
I upgraded to a new PC a few months ago and now I'm not dashing up to Broxtowe every weekend I've been enjoying catching up with games. I'm through most of the satisfying Pillars of Eternity (Baldur's Gate tripled with knobs on), and was thinking of working my way through the Witcher series next. Would you recommend skipping installment 1 and maybe 2, then?
In general I like strategy and RPG games with lots of decisions and conversations, and dislike games dependent on fast fingers or tiresome "where is the crowbar hidden?" puzzles. I used to play a lot of Hearts of Iron so I like Paradox's style too. Another candidate is the new Civ expansion. Advice welcome!
Nick, Crusader Kings 2 an Europa Universalis IV should both be right up your street., especially the first though be prepared for a steep learning curve (not the game play but the decision effects) and to wave farewell to sleep.
Not sure the implication that Europa Universalis (hours played: thousands) does not have a steep learning curve can be quite right... Paradox's finest in my opinion although I know some big fans of Crusader Kings II.
Equally, had this come from a Tory MP, you would be (rightly) bemoaning any leftie criticism of it as "political correctness gone mad".
It's a valid point: the UK does have a better quality of life than China, which just shows why the Chinese approach of pursuing immaculate economic statistics at the expense of everything else is not the road we as a country should want to go down, despite Hunt's comment.
I don't differentiate between broadcasters, I just watch.
Proof was painful and a poor version of Forever which got cancelled at S1. That had much more potential and think it was a shame to bin.
I stopped Dark Matter at E4 - it was dire. I'm quite forgiving generally until midway = S2 of Murder in the First was disappointing after a cracking S1 which I stuck with to the end. Wayward Pines I gave in at about E5.
The first five episodes of Dark Matter have a number of criticisms which I understand because I shared many of them. However, almost all off these are not actually failures of writing they are plot points that lead to a significant pay off at the end of the series. As a whole the season works really well and sets up a pretty interesting place to go into season two.
Agree with your completely about Forever. IIRC it stabilised about a 1.4 rating which when you look at what ABC have in the 10pm slot this year - Castle at 1.2 on Monday and Nashville at 1.1 on Wednesday and a pretty negative outlook on Wicked City which is taking over Forever's slot. If Wicked City opens in the low 1s and goes fractional then ABC will be looking pretty dumb. Wicked City could actually open fractional.
I suspect Forever would have been similar to Elementary and get a very healthy Syndication deal, which these days is pretty rare.
What a horrible thing to say. Labour are quickly turning into a truly disgusting party.
I would guess the individual concerned would probably find that really hurtful. My OH is from a different country, and while general comments are water off a ducks back, a specific comment earned at her Mrs Notme, would be a bit upsetting for the place she has called home for the last fifteen years.
Equally, had this come from a Tory MP, you would be (rightly) bemoaning any leftie criticism of it as "political correctness gone mad".
It's a valid point: the UK does have a better quality of life than China, which just shows why the Chinese approach of pursuing immaculate economic statistics at the expense of everything else is not the road we as a country should want to go down, despite Hunt's comment.
I am neither labour or tory, and a borderline racist to boot.... And I think it's a bit crass
Equally, had this come from a Tory MP, you would be (rightly) bemoaning any leftie criticism of it as "political correctness gone mad".
It's a valid point: the UK does have a better quality of life than China, which just shows why the Chinese approach of pursuing immaculate economic statistics at the expense of everything else is not the road we as a country should want to go down, despite Hunt's comment.
Maybe, just maybe, she is in the UK to be with her husband?
Tim Farron ✔ @timfarron Terrible tweet from @HelenGoodmanMP. Never attack politicians families. I hope she apologises.Clearly she missed the 'Kinder Politics' memo
Tim Farron ✔ @timfarron Terrible tweet from @HelenGoodmanMP. Never attack politicians families. I hope she apologises.Clearly she missed the 'Kinder Politics' memo
Mark Ferguson @Markfergusonuk Holy shit twitter.com/HelenGoodmanMP/status/653303286062284800 …
Is all very reminiscent of the language of the EDL.
Tim Farron ✔ @timfarron Terrible tweet from @HelenGoodmanMP. Never attack politicians families. I hope she apologises.Clearly she missed the 'Kinder Politics' memo
Equally, had this come from a Tory MP, you would be (rightly) bemoaning any leftie criticism of it as "political correctness gone mad".
It's a valid point: the UK does have a better quality of life than China, which just shows why the Chinese approach of pursuing immaculate economic statistics at the expense of everything else is not the road we as a country should want to go down, despite Hunt's comment.
Maybe, just maybe, she is in the UK to be with her husband?
Sure, she probably shouldn't've personalised it, especially since his wife isn't a politician herself. But I don't understand the argument that her comment is racist/xenophobic/whatever. Since when it is offensive to say the UK is (in some ways) better than other countries?
Comments
On Supernatural, I was really enjoying it but just sort of stopped watching in S4, now I don't know whether to bother - they were taking on Satan back then, and am pretty sure God has been taken on as well since then, perhaps more than once, what sort of ground can they possibly be covering now?
A few Kippers + SeanT laughed at the futility, I am sure Richard Nabavi will be along soon with a confused look on his face wondering why we haven't all noticed how brilliant they are
It's the third highest rated show on the CW, it's the only CW show with a syndication deal and has fairly solid overseas sales. Until at least two of those go, it will keep churning out any content it can.
So many shows get cancelled before wrap up.
As I say, public schoolboys are known round here as "Confident wallys"... but I think that's not a bad thing for a PM
I'll reply properly when I have a computer to hand. Difficult to see on a phone without longer arms!
Which I am absolutely certain is now killing them. No-one expects them to stick by new genre shows, this is actually a thing. It's called the Firefly Effect.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheFireflyEffect
Fox's ratings are currently in the toilet and the Firefly Effect is almost certainly the main reason for this, No-one trusts them enough to even dip into what might be good shows.
However. They are now looking at revivals with X-Files upcoming and 24 run last summer. If Castle ends this year, well, there just might be scope for them to do a revival of Firefly. Baldwin only has a summer gig, Glau is free, Torres is free, Maher is free, Glass is free.
I'd buy that for a dollar.
Does Whedon have time, with the Marvel Universe stuff, or would another person have to run it?
But! We should ask, why are those from more humble backgrounds less likely to have the confidence to put themselves forward even if they are more talented? And, what can be done about it?
Oh and Sleepy Hollow's going rather well too. I take each show as it comes and not the popular trope memes to caricature any network
I played football yesterday vs a right bunch of thugs from a poor part of our neighbourhood, and got kicked to bits, not to mention a load of verbal
It almost made me want to vote for Conservatives or Labour so that foreigners would come and take their jobs!
Alexander was the last Argead king [puppets don't count, and they didn't last much longer].
Anyway, I'm off to watch Homeland.
Kripke topped out with Supernatural which was his baby for years before it met celluloid, then failed on Revolution - a notion that was good in germination and failed in plot.
It also used a huge % of ex X-Files backroomers. Having an established production team makes a huge difference too
On a side note, is it me or do kids that grow up abroad with parents stationed overseas have a greater propensity to make it big? I see Stuart Rose has an interesting background which included going to a school in Dar es Salaam.
In terms of the wider point, once a network has lost the viewers trust it will take more than a few Comfort Renewals like Sleepy Hollow to get the viewers trust back. At the same time they renewed Sleepy Hollow they cancelled Almost Human without a conclusion.
The show came in as a mid season replacement and had a double hiatus. Despite this, it was performing between 1.8 and 2.0 rating before the second hiatus at which point, it was clear Fox had no faith in renewal and it tailed off. It still finished at a 1.5 which Fox would quite like in a lot of timeslots this year. It was also a top end performer in L+3 and L+7. Cancelling it was not smart on its own. As another message to genre fans it was a slap in the face.
Fox just do it to themselves.
There is a surprising amount of cowardice around, even amongst the most confident and best educated and the relatively powerful.
Curiosity and scepticism and courage. Those are the qualities I would encourage. Otherwise you get people who know nothing talking loudly and confidently and saying the square root of sod all. All "sound and fury signifying nothing".
But Canada: 10-20% of marriages are to cousins.
What the Fuck?
@jonsnowC4 I find that in life one reaps what one sows
And I think you're overthinking this. Most viewers expect to see their favourite shows renewed - sometimes they aren't.
Network bosses don't cancel things viewers watch. It's not hard. If a network boss has a favourite hobby horse - it gets a better sign off which I think Fringe had.
I've seen predictions that Sleepy Hollow will be cancelled as click bait - the showrunner took notice of fan complaints about it all getting a bit too navel gazing so skipped ahead 9 months to reset the Witnesses plot. Smart move IMO. Oh and Agent Carter was another clickbait canellation prediction.
I ignore the whole lot - like EU negotiations.
Respect for education? Always!
Unquestioning deference? Never!
In general I like strategy and RPG games with lots of decisions and conversations, and dislike games dependent on fast fingers or tiresome "where is the crowbar hidden?" puzzles. I used to play a lot of Hearts of Iron so I like Paradox's style too. Another candidate is the new Civ expansion. Advice welcome!
It was 4.30pm ish.. what does that say about me?!
Are you getting the answers from a multiple choice quiz in Take-a-Break?
There are good cultural reasons for clamping down on it as well. But the health ones seem unarguable to me.
In general, I think over the last decade, the networks have been very slow to understand and recognise changes in viewing habits. There seems to have been a misunderstanding or a pressure from higher up executives who had a misunderstanding that the decline in ratings was the result of unpopular shows and not the change in viewing habits.
Only Pedowicz at the CW seems to really have a grasp on the current position of the networks (which is slightly bizarre given the networks history and its position in the hierarchy). Fox aren't alone in cancelling shows which had the potential to be solid rated shows in the current market but, perhaps because they were actually most supporting of genre shows, they have built a reputation which I genuinely do think is hurting new shows before they even air.
I understand not everyone will agree with me here.
On the Witcher, honestly I would skip the first. Not having played the third I cannot say whether one should skip straight to that, but even only 12 hours in to the second one The Witcher 1 is a far lesser experience - even for the time it was released it looks pretty bland and poor, the gameplay is pretty annoying, and narratively and in its characters its, well, I don't quite know how to describe it. Ok for most of it, it kept me engaged well enough, but odd, just something peculiar about how it was all put together that is offputting and took me out out of the experience. It clearly had promise, but I'm almost surprised it did well enough to get what looks like a lot more time, money and effort put into the sequel.
So far into the second there hasn't been so much that I feel I would have been missing out if I'd skipped the first one - particularly as the starting point for Geralt in it is mostly arising from an event that happened essentially in the end credits of the first, rather than within its main story itself.
I've been very plugged into a few shows and seen the fan mobbing behaviour influence. I don't always agree with it as it's like Corbynistas in Labour - having a show run by purists isn't a good either. Trying to work out what's mainstream opinion feedback and cultists is very hard.
If I use Supernatural on CW as an example - there's a hard core of very vocal shippers who want a male lead to have a gay relationship with another male lead, they get very angry that it hasn't really happened and moan about gay baiting when the showrunners go halfway.
It's nonsense pandering.
Pretty much all the problems in the financial world over the last decade could have been avoided if a few more people had, when so-called experts talked balls about CDOs and CDSs and "new paradigms" and algorithms which eliminated risk and all the rest of it, had said "What the hell are you talking about?" and kept on asking until they got proper clear answers that they understood. Instead, everyone nodded and assumed that the other guy must know what he was talking about because he used all these fancy words and went along with it because everyone else was too and too late people realised that fancy words were a substitute for understanding. And by then the world was knee deep in the brown stuff which we are still clearing up.
"Mummy. Why is that man wearing no clothes?" If only all these clever people had remembered what they had had read to them when little. If only.
The truly educated know how much they still have to learn. And keep on learning all their lives. And they are willing to share their learning. Those who parade their education as a brand and boast about it reveal only their lack of true education.
Thanks to you and Plato for mentioning it.
But the same figures for Iberia seem a bit dubious.
Syndication biases towards Procedurals where episodes are predominantly stand alone with no or limited season arcs. Streaming wants increasingly serialised stories which create an appetite for binge watching.
The trouble here is that once you get past the first season, Serialised stories have much more limited opportunities for growth. There is a high barrier to entry for any potential new viewers, either thinking they need or actually needing to spend 20 hours watching the previous Season before they can dive in. Procedurals don't have that, which is why there was a really strong symbiotic relationship between the Networks and building shows for Syndication.
For Serialised shows the beneficial relationship is with shorter run, serialised shows which are the feature of cable, and why some of the biggest shows around today are now cable show, which work on the bases of what the Yanks call Limited Series.
The networks should be looking to do that. The CW is making indications that it might and I can see them switching to run at least part of their slate where shows run for 16 episodes per season and share a time slot over the standard October to March TV Season.
But the other four networks seem completely oblivious to this and keep making the same mistakes, aiming to an audience that probably doesn't exist any more for an increasingly diminishing Syndication revenue off the back of their shows.
All this holiday to the misty Glenn's rubbish is just him and his oiks playing to the cultist gallery.
He will have to step through the portals of Buckingham Palace though and wipe his feet first.
I'm not really talking about the hardest of the hard core of fans. To an extent, given the average person is going to watch 40 hours of television a week, if someone has an strong interest in genre shows or a particular type of genre, they'll give any show that fits that a chance.
I mean the wider viewership who might have some interest in genre or mystery shows, for example but won't invest the time in them if they think they will get shortchanged with a show being cancelled with no satisfactory pay off. This wider viewership is also the difference between a niche show and an acceptable network rating.
This years summer shows have been universally crap - Zoo, Proof, Complications, Dark Matter are just awful. They've got filler written all over them.
In 99 months out of a 100, they earn you 1%, but in month 100, you lose everything. Of course, you can produce a spreadsheet that shows your strategy/prodcut/etc. makes 1% every month, and then you can talk about the tail risk being a "once in a thousand year event", or somesuch.
The question to me is: does the person selling you this know what they are selling, or are they blinded by Excel too?
Of course, from a purely cynical point of view, I can't help notice that a great many of the countries with high levels of cousin marriage (not Canada) are ones which - to put it simply - don't like us very much. Maybe we should just let them get on which their cousin love.
I try to get round these awkward social faux pas by eating all day breakfasts ( I was brought up with an outside toilet and sometimes compromised by having a packed lunch for my dinner at school)
The failures of the financial world were very similar to the failures of Soviet planning.
While Zoo and Complications were dire and I haven't seen Proof, I'm wondering if you didn't watch Dark Matter for its full run. If you didn't you missed a very good show, where any weakness in some of the earlier episodes paid off really well in the final three episodes.
Dark Matter was great.
Proof was painful and a poor version of Forever which got cancelled at S1. That had much more potential and think it was a shame to bin.
I stopped Dark Matter at E4 - it was dire. I'm quite forgiving generally until midway = S2 of Murder in the First was disappointing after a cracking S1 which I stuck with to the end. Wayward Pines I gave in at about E5.
https://twitter.com/HelenGoodmanMP/status/653303286062284800
Not sure the implication that Europa Universalis (hours played: thousands) does not have a steep learning curve can be quite right... Paradox's finest in my opinion although I know some big fans of Crusader Kings II.
It's a valid point: the UK does have a better quality of life than China, which just shows why the Chinese approach of pursuing immaculate economic statistics at the expense of everything else is not the road we as a country should want to go down, despite Hunt's comment.
The first five episodes of Dark Matter have a number of criticisms which I understand because I shared many of them. However, almost all off these are not actually failures of writing they are plot points that lead to a significant pay off at the end of the series. As a whole the season works really well and sets up a pretty interesting place to go into season two.
Agree with your completely about Forever. IIRC it stabilised about a 1.4 rating which when you look at what ABC have in the 10pm slot this year - Castle at 1.2 on Monday and Nashville at 1.1 on Wednesday and a pretty negative outlook on Wicked City which is taking over Forever's slot. If Wicked City opens in the low 1s and goes fractional then ABC will be looking pretty dumb. Wicked City could actually open fractional.
I suspect Forever would have been similar to Elementary and get a very healthy Syndication deal, which these days is pretty rare.
I've never seen anything like it.
Hunt should just say 'a gentleman never tells'
Terrible tweet from @HelenGoodmanMP. Never attack politicians families. I hope she apologises.Clearly she missed the 'Kinder Politics' memo
Mark Ferguson @Markfergusonuk
Holy shit https://twitter.com/HelenGoodmanMP/status/653303286062284800
Michael Cashman @mcashmanCBE 31m31 minutes ago
@HelenGoodmanMP Helen this is not an acceptable tweet. As politicians we are fair game, not our partners nor their origins.