Spectre has smashed another box office record and become the biggest UK debut in history.
The James Bond film took $63.8m in its first seven days of release in the UK, overtaking previous record holder Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Variety reports.
Hardly a surprise given the publicity it's received. I'll probably get round to seeing it, but I think it's interesting that the journalists universally gave it a good review yet many people seem to think that it wasn't that good.
Not all journalists, it had a mixed review in the Sunday Times and the Guardian although the Telegraph gave it five stars. On rotten tomatoes it has a lower rating than Casino Royale and Skyfall although a higher rating than Quantum of Solace
Fair enough. I don't go to the cinema very often - but you sort of feel you should go and see bond. I didn't bother with Skyfall after QoS, but was thinking of going to see this one.
Spectre has smashed another box office record and become the biggest UK debut in history.
The James Bond film took $63.8m in its first seven days of release in the UK, overtaking previous record holder Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Variety reports.
Hardly a surprise given the publicity it's received. I'll probably get round to seeing it, but I think it's interesting that the journalists universally gave it a good review yet many people seem to think that it wasn't that good.
Well, many big earning, and thus popular with the public, movies tend to get middling to poor reviews from critics, so the reverse is bound to happen sometimes. Or that so many people saw it that there are numerically more who disliked it than generally might be case.
Even as a Labour MP I got bored with grumbling about the Lords. Governments should either reform it or put up with it in good grace. Leaving it unchanged and whinging is an unattractive combination of indolence with bad temper.
BTW, forgot to congratulate Richard N on the very informative Irish thread lead - told me lots I didn't know and I suspect I'm not alone. Considering how close we are to Ireland, geographically and culturally, it's odd how little coverage their affairs get - I see more about Turkish or Brazilian politics!
Both fair points. Given sinn feins presence you'd think we'd at least keep one eye on their elections.
Mr. Sandpit, I'm just a poor boy from a poor family.
I had a fairly standard stake on Bottas. Incidentally, this race was one hundred times more profitable than the last (on a bet-and-forget basis)
Good on you, that was a great tip! Alas, I was a victim of what happens when governments are allowed too much power over Internet access, so couldn't get on myself.
The Nasr bet was just plain wrong, and the Bottas bet has some fair old luck (as I detail in my almost finished post-race piece), but I'll not complain about good luck.
Surely nothing dramatically blocking can be done in HoLs without the cross-benchers, who are unlikely to go against Salisbury, if for no other reason than they don't want to attract reform and lose their precious place.
A critic of Jeremy Corbyn has been blocked from running for Labour in the first by-election under his leadership after trade unions allegedly “vetoed” her candidacy.
Kate Godfrey, who was a parliamentary candidate at the last election and has attacked Mr Corbyn’s choice of aides, was rejected within hours of applying to run in Oldham West and Royton. The revelation will increase concerns that Mr Corbyn and his hard-Left backers are attempting to rig the selection process to ensure a supporter wins the safe Labour seat.
Interviewed on BBC's Radio 5 Live, the Tory MP James Cleverly answers questions about drug usage and internet porn, along with saying he would "snog" Theresa May
Even as a Labour MP I got bored with grumbling about the Lords. Governments should either reform it or put up with it in good grace. Leaving it unchanged and whinging is an unattractive combination of indolence with bad temper.
BTW, forgot to congratulate Richard N on the very informative Irish thread lead - told me lots I didn't know and I suspect I'm not alone. Considering how close we are to Ireland, geographically and culturally, it's odd how little coverage their affairs get - I see more about Turkish or Brazilian politics!
Surely the Lords in this recent case have done the government a massive favour? Unelected - yes; did something unconstitutional - well certainly tested the edge of the envelope. But saved Osborne from months or even years of drip-drip about the disaster that is tax credit changes. He now has an excuse to come up with something that is not so obviously draconian.
An aside about the crashed plane. It was registered in Ireland, so that country along with France and Germany are now involved in the investigation.
It's not that I don't trust Russia and Egypt to come up with an impartial report, but...
Also, this is a recent picture of the plane. Note the interesting looking marks at the base of the rudder. The pilots on the PPRuNe forum don't like the look of it. http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=1369447
I am not sure I understand the government here, it passes laws to restrict the gather of intelligence by non-security related agencies when it modified RIPA under the coalition, and now seems determined to give that same access back to people that patently don't need it except to go on fishing expedition, rather than say good old fashioned detective work to find some evidence of a crime, then obtaining a warrent from a judge.
An easy point to answer, Mr Indigo. The first government was a coalition with the Liberal Democrats. The second (the present one) is made up of hard-line authoritarian Tories.
Put in place by hard-line authoritarian voters, fed up of the Coalition.
I love that you are making the case that the LibDems stand for the democratic rights of the 35% of the population that don't vote. Maybe you should propose a full merger with the Can't Be Arsed Party?
The Labour party is “in the shit” and risks turning into a sect, the former shadow education secretary Tristram Hunt has reportedly told students at Cambridge University.
Speaking to Cambridge University’s Labour club in an event entitled Principles, Politics and Pathway to Power, Hunt said: “My fear is algorithmic politics [where because] everyone shares the same views as you on social media and in your social circles you become a sect rather than a party.”
It's slightly amusing, as the Sabre engine is based on British Aerospace's HOTOL program, which was scrapped in the late 1980's. The engineers - mainly Bond, Alan Bond - started Reaction Engines to continue developing the technology.
Now BAE have bought into the program they abandoned nearly thirty years ago.
As an aside, I wish the BBC wouldn't mention Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic in the same breath as SpaceX or Blue Origin. Virgin Galactic is a dead-end project that (I think I'm right in saying) has killed more people than have flown in it. All for unambitious and pointless sub-orbital flight.
A good analysis Mr. Dancer. We were both wrong about the attrition levels, your Bottas tip was based on sound judgement and spotted the value at 15/2 what should have been maybe 3/1.
Also a useful exercise in looking at the varying affects of 7,500' altitude on a car that's engineered to within 25.4mm of its life at more normal air pressures!!
Spectre has smashed another box office record and become the biggest UK debut in history.
The James Bond film took $63.8m in its first seven days of release in the UK, overtaking previous record holder Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Variety reports.
Mr. Sandpit, what made me think of it was checking the qualifying times and seeing the tiny gap between Bottas and the Red Bulls, but the wide gap between them in the betting (I think Kvyat was something like 3.25 for a podium).
First time in a while I happened to closely check the qualifying times, so maybe I should try that more often.
I think the few number of podium finishes (2, including Mexico) Bottas has had was the reason his odds were so long, perhaps coupled with Williams' somewhat dodgy/over-cautious approach to strategy.
Spectre has smashed another box office record and become the biggest UK debut in history.
The James Bond film took $63.8m in its first seven days of release in the UK, overtaking previous record holder Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Variety reports.
Hardly a surprise given the publicity it's received. I'll probably get round to seeing it, but I think it's interesting that the journalists universally gave it a good review yet many people seem to think that it wasn't that good.
Not all journalists, it had a mixed review in the Sunday Times and the Guardian although the Telegraph gave it five stars. On rotten tomatoes it has a lower rating than Casino Royale and Skyfall although a higher rating than Quantum of Solace
Fair enough. I don't go to the cinema very often - but you sort of feel you should go and see bond. I didn't bother with Skyfall after QoS, but was thinking of going to see this one.
PClipp..but they were not elected..so have no legitimacy in that respect..
Indeed, Mr Dodd. Tory Government and House of Lords - both with power legally derived, but neither with moral legitimacy.
Sure the Tories have moral legitimacy they won legally and fairly. Besides if you want to play silly anf start counting non voters as voters then why count them for the opposition? After all if you can't be bothered to vote you can't oppose. In which case we could say that 60% backed the government by either voting for it or not voting against it.
It's slightly amusing, as the Sabre engine is based on British Aerospace's HOTOL program, which was scrapped in the late 1980's. The engineers - mainly Bond, Alan Bond - started Reaction Engines to continue developing the technology.
Now BAE have bought into the program they abandoned nearly thirty years ago.
As an aside, I wish the BBC wouldn't mention Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic in the same breath as SpaceX or Blue Origin. Virgin Galactic is a dead-end project that (I think I'm right in saying) has killed more people than have flown in it. All for unambitious and pointless sub-orbital flight.
"could propel aircraft into space"
In space, remarkably enough there is no air. And there is nowhere that humans are going in the next hundred+ years that has anything like 'air' outside earth (Doubt a wing will work on Mars, though they would work very well on Titan). NASA had the shuttle for ~ 35 years or so, and has now gone back to fundamentally the design used for Apollo. Designing wings for spaceflight (An enviroment where there is by definition no air) adds hugely to complexity, and is a waste of time, money and lives. The propulsive landing/take-off system being developed by SpaceX (And introduced by Apollo) looks the way to go for me. As for proven tech on earth landing, parachutes work well.
You're right, Branson lacks ambition compared to Bezos and especially Musk.
Also sticking your module on top of the rocket, not on the side. Far safer !
PClipp..but they were not elected..so have no legitimacy in that respect..
Indeed, Mr Dodd. Tory Government and House of Lords - both with power legally derived, but neither with moral legitimacy.
Sure the Tories have moral legitimacy they won legally and fairly. Besides if you want to play silly anf start counting non voters as voters then why count them for the opposition? After all if you can't be bothered to vote you can't oppose. In which case we could say that 60% backed the government by either voting for it or not voting against it.
A terrible argument Mr. T, but one with just as much validity as the hilarious make believe coming from the '76%ers'.
What sort of legitimacy do LD peers reckon 7.9% of the vote confers on a party to block legislation?
Now, Tory peers have never blocked legislation in the aftermath of a lost election, have they?
I don't think the Tories have ever been as low as 7.9% of the vote, or anywhere near.
If various whiners are whinging that the Tory vote was too low to be 'legitimate', on that level the Lib Dems have no right to be in politics at all, and should resign en masse, including those in the House of Lords.
The Ferrari record of over nine years since they last had two non-finishers in a race is utterly remarkable, especially as there have been two major rule and engine changes in that time. Their reliability helped Schumacher to many of his championships, and they've still apparently got an undefinable something when it comes to reliability. Especially as yesterday's two non-finishers were down to crashes rather than machinery failures.
When I was mentoring graduates, I used to tell them to get their code working reliably, and then optimise. The temptation is to heavily optimise as you create an initial version, which more often than not ends up with things not working and delays to the project. Optimisation can also be better targeted once you have something working reliably and you can see the parts that most need optimisation.
McLaren appear to take the opposite view: they get something highly optimised at first, without checking whether it works well or is reliable. Which may be why they've sometimes had the fastest cars at the start of a season, but fail to get championships due to unreliability.
I'm not a Ferrari fan, but their engineering is utterly remarkable.
The Starship Enterprise doesn't have wings either but always seems to operate well on interplanetary journeys. The evidence was there in front our scientists for years if only they could be bothered to get out of the Lab once in a while and gone to a Cineworld
In 2012, McLaren's speed but poor reliability was at its most obvious. They won races at the start, middle and end of the season, but the title was between Vettel and Alonso.
Mercedes are also highly reliable, and I think Bottas' retirement in the US was his first for quite a long time too.
Lotus have been pretty poor this year, although better in the last couple of races (Grosjean's retirement in the US, I think, was due to a driver error rather than the car failing).
Honda really need to sort their engine out quickly. It's becoming laughable. McLaren's a big name in the sport, but Williams went through years of weak results and McLaren may be at risk of the same. They need to return to at least regular points finishes next year.
In 2013, I think, they radically altered their car from the excellent form of 2012, and went backwards. Last year wasn't a classic either. Now their engine's dreadful.
It's slightly amusing, as the Sabre engine is based on British Aerospace's HOTOL program, which was scrapped in the late 1980's. The engineers - mainly Bond, Alan Bond - started Reaction Engines to continue developing the technology.
Now BAE have bought into the program they abandoned nearly thirty years ago.
As an aside, I wish the BBC wouldn't mention Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic in the same breath as SpaceX or Blue Origin. Virgin Galactic is a dead-end project that (I think I'm right in saying) has killed more people than have flown in it. All for unambitious and pointless sub-orbital flight.
"could propel aircraft into space"
In space, remarkably enough there is no air. And there is nowhere that humans are going in the next hundred+ years that has anything like 'air' outside earth (Doubt a wing will work on Mars, though they would work very well on Titan). NASA had the shuttle for ~ 35 years or so, and has now gone back to fundamentally the design used for Apollo. Designing wings for spaceflight (An enviroment where there is by definition no air) adds hugely to complexity, and is a waste of time, money and lives. The propulsive landing/take-off system being developed by SpaceX (And introduced by Apollo) looks the way to go for me. As for proven tech on earth landing, parachutes work well.
You're right, Branson lacks ambition compared to Bezos and especially Musk.
Also sticking your module on top of the rocket, not on the side. Far safer !
Actually, there are several bodies in the solar system where aircraft could potentially fly, at least if you believe XKCD: https://what-if.xkcd.com/30/
As for Skylon, it is both a plane and a rocket. It uses a conventional jet engine up to certain speeds and altitudes, and then converts those engines to rocket mode to use an on-board oxygen supply. ISTR their main progress in the last few years has been proving their intercooler technology that cools the hypersonic air entering the intakes to a temperature the engines can withstand (from memory - it's been some time since I read up on it).
It's about the only practical approach to single-stage to orbit reusable spacecraft we have at the moment. If it works ...
(SpaceX are going for two-stage to orbit, with a reusable first stage - if they ever actually manage to recover one).
Funny I recall Clegg wanting the Lords reforms dropped because the Commons wanted to debate them longer and possibly have a referendum on them. Not Cameron dropping the proposals.
Maybe if the proposals were better they could have passed scrutiny and a plebiscite.
The Labour party is “in the shit” and risks turning into a sect, the former shadow education secretary Tristram Hunt has reportedly told students at Cambridge University.
Speaking to Cambridge University’s Labour club in an event entitled Principles, Politics and Pathway to Power, Hunt said: “My fear is algorithmic politics [where because] everyone shares the same views as you on social media and in your social circles you become a sect rather than a party.”
McLaren appear to take the opposite view: they get something highly optimised at first, without checking whether it works well or is reliable. Which may be why they've sometimes had the fastest cars at the start of a season, but fail to get championships due to unreliability.
I'm not a Ferrari fan, but their engineering is utterly remarkable.
That was very true in the Newey era at McLaren. He would insist on packaging the car as tightly as possible and invariably things would go wrong - 2005 was particularly frustrating. That said, I think McLaren (and Williams) were particularly unlucky in 2003 when Ferrari went crying to the FIA over the Michelins.
Funny I recall Clegg wanting the Lords reforms dropped because the Commons wanted to debate them longer and possibly have a referendum on them. Not Cameron dropping the proposals.
Maybe if the proposals were better they could have passed scrutiny and a plebiscite.
It's always everyone else's fault isn't it? Funny how the Lib Dems never accept any blame.
Mr. 86, I have vague memories of Raikkonen being unlucky not to take titles with McLaren because his car was unreliable.
Edited extra bit: worth noting that Schumacher should've had another title, perhaps in 2006, but didn't because his car let him down. So, Ferrari's good for reliability, but nobody's bulletproof.
"These Lib Dem peers have been radicalised by the general election result. They feel that their party was taken for a ride by the Tories, who lured them into government and then destroyed them, and are determined to have their vengeance by whatever means possible."
And yes SpaceX has had delays to schedule, some "anomolies" - but space is a very tough engineering proposition, and that's what attracts Musk I think !
Mr. Royale, fair point. Those evil Tories. Forming a coalition with a party that agreed to it, then selfishly trying to get more votes in the subsequent democratic election. Bastards.
[That line is reminiscent of the AV referendum, when foot-stomping and dummy-spitting occurred when the Conservatives had the temerity to neither be silent nor agree with Clegg, but actually campaigned against the voting system they oppose].
"These Lib Dem peers have been radicalised by the general election result. They feel that their party was taken for a ride by the Tories, who lured them into government and then destroyed them, and are determined to have their vengeance by whatever means possible."
The electorate destroyed them. Didn't like what they saw when the Lib Dems had a chance in government, and gave them them the 7.9% finger. Quite why they feel they have any legitimacy to interfere from the Lords is a mystery.
They didn't. Cameron kept his promise*. The HoC voted against a timetabling measure and Clegg threw his toys out of the pram.
Lib Dems - No fact is sacred.
* As an aside, the proposal from Clegg was so dreadful it would have been worth throwing out on its merits. I'm in favour of reforming the Lords, but want to see it done properly.
Funny I recall Clegg wanting the Lords reforms dropped because the Commons wanted to debate them longer and possibly have a referendum on them. Not Cameron dropping the proposals.
Maybe if the proposals were better they could have passed scrutiny and a plebiscite.
Bollocks.
The plans that was put forward was agreed by the entire cabinet - 5 LDs & 18 CON. Tory backbench rebels used a timetable motion to impede its progress. Cameron then abandoned the plan.
Mr. 86, I have vague memories of Raikkonen being unlucky not to take titles with McLaren because his car was unreliable.
Edited extra bit: worth noting that Schumacher should've had another title, perhaps in 2006, but didn't because his car let him down. So, Ferrari's good for reliability, but nobody's bulletproof.
Certainly in 2005 Kimi had the beating of Alonso as the MP4-20 was quick but unreliable. I also think that car is one the best looking F1 cars of all time - but I am biased as a McLaren fan. 2003 was a three horse race and by Hungary the Michelins had the beating of the Bridgestones and Ferrari knew they couldn't win without a change in the rules.
I seem to remember Renault being hurt by the FIA changing the rules on the mass damper halfway through 2006 which allowed Ferrari back into the race.
McLaren appear to take the opposite view: they get something highly optimised at first, without checking whether it works well or is reliable. Which may be why they've sometimes had the fastest cars at the start of a season, but fail to get championships due to unreliability.
I'm not a Ferrari fan, but their engineering is utterly remarkable.
That was very true in the Newey era at McLaren. He would insist on packaging the car as tightly as possible and invariably things would go wrong - 2005 was particularly frustrating. That said, I think McLaren (and Williams) were particularly unlucky in 2003 when Ferrari went crying to the FIA over the Michelins.
Funny I recall Clegg wanting the Lords reforms dropped because the Commons wanted to debate them longer and possibly have a referendum on them. Not Cameron dropping the proposals.
Maybe if the proposals were better they could have passed scrutiny and a plebiscite.
Bollocks. The plans that was put forward was agreed by the entire cabinet - 5 LDs & 18 CON. Tory backbench rebels used a timetable motion to impede its progress. Cameron then abandoned the plan.
The Lords is a ridiculous anomaly, but if we are to have a FPTP system we surely need a second chamber of some kind. An unchecked government voted in by a minority of voters is not a good thing - especially when there is no meaningful opposition in the Commons.
Of course, what this country actually needs is a new constitutional settlement dealing with national and local devolution, as well as EV4EL. A new second chamber could be part of that too.
The cars now are much more reliable than they were some years ago. That said, the grid's smaller too, and points go down to 10th not 6th (or 8th), so reliability matters more than speed, compared to the past.
The Lords is a ridiculous anomaly, but if we are to have a FPTP system we surely need a second chamber of some kind. An unchecked government voted in by a minority of voters is not a good thing - especially when there is no meaningful opposition in the Commons.
Of course, what this country actually needs is a new constitutional settlement dealing with national and local devolution, as well as EV4EL. A new second chamber could be part of that too.
We need to go further than that.
Give Scotland independence, leave the EU, get rid of county councils, cut MPs to around 320, elect a similar number of Lords every 5 years on PR.
We are governed by too many people in an awful way, rip it up and start again.
And yes SpaceX has had delays to schedule, some "anomolies" - but space is a very tough engineering proposition, and that's what attracts Musk I think !
Yes, it does. Sorry, I didn't mean it to sound as if I was disagreeing.
Musk really needs congratulating over SpaceX. They're showing how poorly the current suppliers (aside perhaps from Russia) are serving their customers.
What amazes me is how they've located the part that failed in their recent crash: they used infrasound (I think) detected in accelerometers to triangulate to a strut that failed. Ground tests on other struts from the same supplier than showed that some were far weaker than specified.
McLaren appear to take the opposite view: they get something highly optimised at first, without checking whether it works well or is reliable. Which may be why they've sometimes had the fastest cars at the start of a season, but fail to get championships due to unreliability.
I'm not a Ferrari fan, but their engineering is utterly remarkable.
That was very true in the Newey era at McLaren. He would insist on packaging the car as tightly as possible and invariably things would go wrong - 2005 was particularly frustrating. That said, I think McLaren (and Williams) were particularly unlucky in 2003 when Ferrari went crying to the FIA over the Michelins.
Mr. Pulpstar, but it's foggy in London, you know. Gasp!
It's those horrible BBC producers who live in fashionable West London and want to highlight why a new runway should direct planes over poor people in East London rather than over their homes.
Even as a Labour MP I got bored with grumbling about the Lords. Governments should either reform it or put up with it in good grace. Leaving it unchanged and whinging is an unattractive combination of indolence with bad temper.
BTW, forgot to congratulate Richard N on the very informative Irish thread lead - told me lots I didn't know and I suspect I'm not alone. Considering how close we are to Ireland, geographically and culturally, it's odd how little coverage their affairs get - I see more about Turkish or Brazilian politics!
That I think may be what infuriates our neighbours - the English attitude to Scots, Irish, etc is ok yeah you're fine but when push comes to shove 'we're just not that into you' And long may that approach continue.
Eamonn on Sky was very funny earlier - he's stuck in Belfast and couldn't get a flight over to do his anchor slot - so Sarah Jane and another presenter were ribbing him on Skype.
Mr. Pulpstar, but it's foggy in London, you know. Gasp!
It's those horrible BBC producers who live in fashionable West London and want to highlight why a new runway should direct planes over poor people in East London rather than over their homes.
McLaren appear to take the opposite view: they get something highly optimised at first, without checking whether it works well or is reliable. Which may be why they've sometimes had the fastest cars at the start of a season, but fail to get championships due to unreliability.
I'm not a Ferrari fan, but their engineering is utterly remarkable.
That was very true in the Newey era at McLaren. He would insist on packaging the car as tightly as possible and invariably things would go wrong - 2005 was particularly frustrating. That said, I think McLaren (and Williams) were particularly unlucky in 2003 when Ferrari went crying to the FIA over the Michelins.
Not that I have any proof whatsoever, but I did wonder at the time if Newey was using STR as a test bed for new parts for RedBull.
I think it's utterly horrible of you to imply that Red Bull used to use their sister team Torro Rosso to test parts against the spirit and letter of the regulations.
OT I'm amazed that the morning being foggy was in the news. It is quite a regular occurance in late autumn/winter in North East Derbyshire.
Does it not happen elsewhere ?
Yep common in Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire this time of year. Must be a Midlands thing. We are strange round these parts!!
At school in the East Midlands, we used to get sent home if the goal posts weren't visible on the football pitch. Which was fine, but the school buses stopped running too, so a bunch of us ended up with a five or six mile walk home in dense fog.
Why don't we hear much about Irish politics? Because Irish politics are now a matter of almost complete indifference to us. For practical purposes we have about as much reason to hear about Irish politics as Norwegian politics. Indeed, Norwegian politics at least follow a traditional left-right divide while Irish politics are still overlaid with arcane historical references from nearly 100 years ago. Why bother making the effort when it doesn't really affect us in practice?
Apart from for betting purposes, obviously. Richard Nabavi's summary yesterday was excellent (and many thanks to him for this). I'm very much looking forward to part 2.
Eamonn on Sky was very funny earlier - he's stuck in Belfast and couldn't get a flight over to do his anchor slot - so Sarah Jane and another presenter were ribbing him on Skype.
Mr. Pulpstar, but it's foggy in London, you know. Gasp!
It's those horrible BBC producers who live in fashionable West London and want to highlight why a new runway should direct planes over poor people in East London rather than over their homes.
Or something.
That's very odd. I was on a flight from Belfast last night. It was delayed about half an hour by the fog, but no more.
Even as a Labour MP I got bored with grumbling about the Lords. Governments should either reform it or put up with it in good grace. Leaving it unchanged and whinging is an unattractive combination of indolence with bad temper.
BTW, forgot to congratulate Richard N on the very informative Irish thread lead - told me lots I didn't know and I suspect I'm not alone. Considering how close we are to Ireland, geographically and culturally, it's odd how little coverage their affairs get - I see more about Turkish or Brazilian politics!
That I think may be what infuriates our neighbours - the English attitude to Scots, Irish, etc is ok yeah you're fine but when push comes to shove 'we're just not that into you' And long may that approach continue.
It works both ways. The Irish cover events in the north, but their media is hardly awash with reporting of events on the mainland.
Even as a Labour MP I got bored with grumbling about the Lords. Governments should either reform it or put up with it in good grace. Leaving it unchanged and whinging is an unattractive combination of indolence with bad temper.
BTW, forgot to congratulate Richard N on the very informative Irish thread lead - told me lots I didn't know and I suspect I'm not alone. Considering how close we are to Ireland, geographically and culturally, it's odd how little coverage their affairs get - I see more about Turkish or Brazilian politics!
That I think may be what infuriates our neighbours - the English attitude to Scots, Irish, etc is ok yeah you're fine but when push comes to shove 'we're just not that into you' And long may that approach continue.
It works both ways. The Irish cover events in the north, but their media is hardly awash with reporting of events on the mainland.
Even as a Labour MP I got bored with grumbling about the Lords. Governments should either reform it or put up with it in good grace. Leaving it unchanged and whinging is an unattractive combination of indolence with bad temper.
BTW, forgot to congratulate Richard N on the very informative Irish thread lead - told me lots I didn't know and I suspect I'm not alone. Considering how close we are to Ireland, geographically and culturally, it's odd how little coverage their affairs get - I see more about Turkish or Brazilian politics!
That I think may be what infuriates our neighbours - the English attitude to Scots, Irish, etc is ok yeah you're fine but when push comes to shove 'we're just not that into you' And long may that approach continue.
It works both ways. The Irish cover events in the north, but their media is hardly awash with reporting of events on the mainland.
Nice try but not true.
I must have been watching the wrong channels on my 30 weeks in the Republic over the last 2 years!
On topic, for Lib Dems peers of all people to claim some kind of mandate to block the government is the height of brass neck. Peers always need to tread carefully given their unelected nature and Lib Dem peers, representing as they are a party on the verge of extinction, should be doubly careful. Clearly, their innate moral superiority over lesser creatures could be considered to override such petty concerns as a democratic mandate (a consideration which the august peers themselves no doubt regard as self evident and unassailable).
As it is, if a coalition of the losers in the Lords wants to act as the opposition that Corbyn can't be, to throw constitutional convention in the bin and to take their powers well beyond their natural role as a check, then let us be rid it. I have no problem with an upper chamber elected by PR, though the Commons should still have the final say. But such an upper chamber would produce a Con-UKIP deal; perhaps not what the likes of Shirley Williams would approve of.
Town halls were granted permission to access private communications data 2,110 times last year, more than GCHQ and MI6 combined.
It's noticeable the one of the main recipients of this new invasion into our privacy is HMRC, not the public body that springs immediately to mind when you consider supposed counter-terrorism legislation. I am not too sure how this trawl sits with emails to ones accountant, lawyer or priest and the right to privacy granted by those relationships.
I am not sure I understand the government here, it passes laws to restrict the gather of intelligence by non-security related agencies when it modified RIPA under the coalition, and now seems determined to give that same access back to people that patently don't need it except to go on fishing expedition, rather than say good old fashioned detective work to find some evidence of a crime, then obtaining a warrent from a judge.
Its going to be a good day for VPN providers when that law comes into force!
I would imagine tax evasion and welfare fraud are fairly common reasons for checking internet habits.
A combination of e-commerce and social media providing both opportunity and evidence.
Which is a disgraceful abuse of power. If you think someone is cooking the books, launch an investigation, find some evidence, put it infront of judge, get a warrent, and examine his email (excepting those with a lawyer, accountant or priest or other priviledged channel).
Intelligence and terrorism powers should not be there for the tax authorities to go on fishing expeditions to see who they don't like the look of. Its effectively resurrecting 'sus' laws again.
I once walked home from school with inches of snow, ice everywhere, no buses running (waited for one that never showed up).
I used to dream of walking through dense fog.
Bah. You had it lucky.
My school was at the top of a hill. Most day pupils had their parents picking them up in expensive cars: Range Rovers, Rollers, BMWs etc (*). My dad picked me up in a lorry on a few occasions, so I'd have to put my satchel into the cab then clamber up in my tweed jacket.
I got a certain amount of piss taken out of me over that. Until it snowed heavily one winter's day and no-one could get up Coll hill to college. My dad turned up in a JCB, cleared the road, and picked me up.
It was (and is) illegal to ride pillion in a JCB. It's fun though.
(*) The school had a number of children from China and Hong Kong. Once an embassy Rolls Royce turned up to pick one of the children up, and we were amused to see fluffy dice hanging off the mirror and a Garfield in a rear window ...
On topic, for Lib Dems peers of all people to claim some kind of mandate to block the government is the height of brass neck. Peers always need to tread carefully given their unelected nature and Lib Dem peers, representing as they are a party on the verge of extinction, should be doubly careful. Clearly, their innate moral superiority over lesser creatures could be considered to override such petty concerns as a democratic mandate (a consideration which the august peers themselves no doubt regard as self evident and unassailable).
As it is, if a coalition of the losers in the Lords wants to act as the opposition that Corbyn can't be, to throw constitutional convention in the bin and to take their powers well beyond their natural role as a check, then let us be rid it. I have no problem with an upper chamber elected by PR, though the Commons should still have the final say. But such an upper chamber would produce a Con-UKIP deal; perhaps not what the likes of Shirley Williams would approve of.
A girl at my school used to get picked by her mum - in her own liveried horse box. Seeing a classmate jumping into a wagon emblazoned with her name painted in flowers, was quite a I Want One moment.
I once walked home from school with inches of snow, ice everywhere, no buses running (waited for one that never showed up).
I used to dream of walking through dense fog.
Bah. You had it lucky.
My school was at the top of a hill. Most day pupils had their parents picking them up in expensive cars: Range Rovers, Rollers, BMWs etc (*). My dad picked me up in a lorry on a few occasions, so I'd have to put my satchel into the cab then clamber up in my tweed jacket.
I got a certain amount of piss taken out of me over that. Until it snowed heavily one winter's day and no-one could get up Coll hill to college. My dad turned up in a JCB, cleared the road, and picked me up.
It was (and is) illegal to ride pillion in a JCB. It's fun though.
(*) The school had a number of children from China and Hong Kong. Once an embassy Rolls Royce turned up to pick one of the children up, and we were amused to see fluffy dice hanging off the mirror and a Garfield in a rear window ...
''As it is, if a coalition of the losers in the Lords wants to act as the opposition that Corbyn can't be, to throw constitutional convention in the bin and to take their powers well beyond their natural role as a check, then let us be rid it. ''
You don;t understand Mr Herdson. They only lost because the bl**dy electorate stupidly decided to vote for the wrong policies. They'll come around to the losers' correct way of thinking in 2020, you'll see.
On topic, for Lib Dems peers of all people to claim some kind of mandate to block the government is the height of brass neck. Peers always need to tread carefully given their unelected nature and Lib Dem peers, representing as they are a party on the verge of extinction, should be doubly careful. Clearly, their innate moral superiority over lesser creatures could be considered to override such petty concerns as a democratic mandate (a consideration which the august peers themselves no doubt regard as self evident and unassailable).
As it is, if a coalition of the losers in the Lords wants to act as the opposition that Corbyn can't be, to throw constitutional convention in the bin and to take their powers well beyond their natural role as a check, then let us be rid it. I have no problem with an upper chamber elected by PR, though the Commons should still have the final say. But such an upper chamber would produce a Con-UKIP deal; perhaps not what the likes of Shirley Williams would approve of.
david_herdson sums up the growing stench around the sanctimonius LD peers. "Clearly, their innate moral superiority over lesser creatures could be considered to override such petty concerns as a democratic mandate"
'But such an upper chamber would produce a Con-UKIP deal; perhaps not what the likes of Shirley Williams would approve of'
I am sure the Lib Dems would argue a majority of that sort in the upper chamber was somehow illegitimate as well, no matter how it came about.
The 'winning here' mentality is still with us, notwithstanding the resounding 'losing here' message the voters gave this miserable party in May.
The Lib Dems are morally superior to all other parties, whatever tactics they adopt are always justifiable no matter how dishonest or underhand and the only kinds of elections or electoral systems that are 'fair' are those which increase the number of Lib Dems.
Why don't we hear much about Irish politics? Because Irish politics are now a matter of almost complete indifference to us. For practical purposes we have about as much reason to hear about Irish politics as Norwegian politics. Indeed, Norwegian politics at least follow a traditional left-right divide while Irish politics are still overlaid with arcane historical references from nearly 100 years ago. Why bother making the effort when it doesn't really affect us in practice?
Apart from for betting purposes, obviously. Richard Nabavi's summary yesterday was excellent (and many thanks to him for this). I'm very much looking forward to part 2.
Indeed. It is likely that the UK EU referendum of 2016/2017 is far more likely to affect Eire than their own GE the other way round.
'On topic, for Lib Dems peers of all people to claim some kind of mandate to block the government is the height of brass neck. Peers always need to tread carefully given their unelected nature and Lib Dem peers, representing as they are a party on the verge of extinction, should be doubly careful. Clearly, their innate moral superiority over lesser creatures could be considered to override such petty concerns as a democratic mandate (a consideration which the august peers themselves no doubt regard as self evident and unassailable).'
The Lib Dems need to get over their total rejection by the electorate, focus on council elections and stop trying to block the will of the electorate by undemocratic means.
Why don't we hear much about Irish politics? Because Irish politics are now a matter of almost complete indifference to us. For practical purposes we have about as much reason to hear about Irish politics as Norwegian politics. Indeed, Norwegian politics at least follow a traditional left-right divide while Irish politics are still overlaid with arcane historical references from nearly 100 years ago. Why bother making the effort when it doesn't really affect us in practice?
Apart from for betting purposes, obviously. Richard Nabavi's summary yesterday was excellent (and many thanks to him for this). I'm very much looking forward to part 2.
Indeed. It is likely that the UK EU referendum of 2016/2017 is far more likely to affect Eire than their own GE the other way round.
On topic, for Lib Dems peers of all people to claim some kind of mandate to block the government is the height of brass neck. Peers always need to tread carefully given their unelected nature and Lib Dem peers, representing as they are a party on the verge of extinction, should be doubly careful. Clearly, their innate moral superiority over lesser creatures could be considered to override such petty concerns as a democratic mandate (a consideration which the august peers themselves no doubt regard as self evident and unassailable).
As it is, if a coalition of the losers in the Lords wants to act as the opposition that Corbyn can't be, to throw constitutional convention in the bin and to take their powers well beyond their natural role as a check, then let us be rid it. I have no problem with an upper chamber elected by PR, though the Commons should still have the final say. But such an upper chamber would produce a Con-UKIP deal; perhaps not what the likes of Shirley Williams would approve of.
If that's the only game in town, bring it on.
I'd be delighted for a Con-UKIP Lords to reject a Commons immigration bill on the grounds it *wasn't* tough enough, in line with public opinion.
Comments
https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/29968541/women-and-children-caged-used-as-human-shields/
The Nasr bet was just plain wrong, and the Bottas bet has some fair old luck (as I detail in my almost finished post-race piece), but I'll not complain about good luck.
Surely nothing dramatically blocking can be done in HoLs without the cross-benchers, who are unlikely to go against Salisbury, if for no other reason than they don't want to attract reform and lose their precious place.
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/mexico-post-race-analysis.html
Edited extra bit: post-race*, as well...
It's not that I don't trust Russia and Egypt to come up with an impartial report, but...
Also, this is a recent picture of the plane. Note the interesting looking marks at the base of the rudder. The pilots on the PPRuNe forum don't like the look of it.
http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=1369447
I love that you are making the case that the LibDems stand for the democratic rights of the 35% of the population that don't vote. Maybe you should propose a full merger with the Can't Be Arsed Party?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34694935
It's slightly amusing, as the Sabre engine is based on British Aerospace's HOTOL program, which was scrapped in the late 1980's. The engineers - mainly Bond, Alan Bond - started Reaction Engines to continue developing the technology.
Now BAE have bought into the program they abandoned nearly thirty years ago.
As an aside, I wish the BBC wouldn't mention Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic in the same breath as SpaceX or Blue Origin. Virgin Galactic is a dead-end project that (I think I'm right in saying) has killed more people than have flown in it. All for unambitious and pointless sub-orbital flight.
Also a useful exercise in looking at the varying affects of 7,500' altitude on a car that's engineered to within 25.4mm of its life at more normal air pressures!!
Whilst Osborne is over "negotiating" in Europe, his party members are lining up against him.
"Over two thirds of Party members ready to vote to leave the EU"
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/11/our-poll-over-two-third-of-party-members-ready-to-vote-to-leave-the-eu.html
How does Osborne hope to become Leader of the Conservative party when he lines up against the majority's view on the EU?
First time in a while I happened to closely check the qualifying times, so maybe I should try that more often.
I think the few number of podium finishes (2, including Mexico) Bottas has had was the reason his odds were so long, perhaps coupled with Williams' somewhat dodgy/over-cautious approach to strategy.
Edited extra bit:, and thanks
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Lord-Ashcroft-The-Unexpected-Mandate.pdf
In space, remarkably enough there is no air. And there is nowhere that humans are going in the next hundred+ years that has anything like 'air' outside earth (Doubt a wing will work on Mars, though they would work very well on Titan). NASA had the shuttle for ~ 35 years or so, and has now gone back to fundamentally the design used for Apollo. Designing wings for spaceflight (An enviroment where there is by definition no air) adds hugely to complexity, and is a waste of time, money and lives. The propulsive landing/take-off system being developed by SpaceX (And introduced by Apollo) looks the way to go for me. As for proven tech on earth landing, parachutes work well.
You're right, Branson lacks ambition compared to Bezos and especially Musk.
Also sticking your module on top of the rocket, not on the side. Far safer !
The electorate spoke.
Then don't watch it...
The Ferrari record of over nine years since they last had two non-finishers in a race is utterly remarkable, especially as there have been two major rule and engine changes in that time. Their reliability helped Schumacher to many of his championships, and they've still apparently got an undefinable something when it comes to reliability. Especially as yesterday's two non-finishers were down to crashes rather than machinery failures.
When I was mentoring graduates, I used to tell them to get their code working reliably, and then optimise. The temptation is to heavily optimise as you create an initial version, which more often than not ends up with things not working and delays to the project. Optimisation can also be better targeted once you have something working reliably and you can see the parts that most need optimisation.
McLaren appear to take the opposite view: they get something highly optimised at first, without checking whether it works well or is reliable. Which may be why they've sometimes had the fastest cars at the start of a season, but fail to get championships due to unreliability.
I'm not a Ferrari fan, but their engineering is utterly remarkable.
The Starship Enterprise doesn't have wings either but always seems to operate well on interplanetary journeys.
The evidence was there in front our scientists for years if only they could be bothered to get out of the Lab once in a while and gone to a Cineworld
ConHome readers != party members.
Manufacturing regains momentum.
Markit tend to to be ahead of the game compared to ONS.
That's enough cricket for me, work to do now - so expect 300 runs and 12 wickets in the second half of the day!
In 2012, McLaren's speed but poor reliability was at its most obvious. They won races at the start, middle and end of the season, but the title was between Vettel and Alonso.
Mercedes are also highly reliable, and I think Bottas' retirement in the US was his first for quite a long time too.
Lotus have been pretty poor this year, although better in the last couple of races (Grosjean's retirement in the US, I think, was due to a driver error rather than the car failing).
Honda really need to sort their engine out quickly. It's becoming laughable. McLaren's a big name in the sport, but Williams went through years of weak results and McLaren may be at risk of the same. They need to return to at least regular points finishes next year.
In 2013, I think, they radically altered their car from the excellent form of 2012, and went backwards. Last year wasn't a classic either. Now their engine's dreadful.
https://what-if.xkcd.com/30/
As for Skylon, it is both a plane and a rocket. It uses a conventional jet engine up to certain speeds and altitudes, and then converts those engines to rocket mode to use an on-board oxygen supply. ISTR their main progress in the last few years has been proving their intercooler technology that cools the hypersonic air entering the intakes to a temperature the engines can withstand (from memory - it's been some time since I read up on it).
It's about the only practical approach to single-stage to orbit reusable spacecraft we have at the moment. If it works ...
(SpaceX are going for two-stage to orbit, with a reusable first stage - if they ever actually manage to recover one).
Maybe if the proposals were better they could have passed scrutiny and a plebiscite.
I doubt anyone is listening though
Hunt told students: “You are the top 1%. The Labour party is in the shit. It is your job and your responsibility to take leadership going forward.”
Up the workers!
http://tinyurl.com/nasuxlp
Edited extra bit: worth noting that Schumacher should've had another title, perhaps in 2006, but didn't because his car let him down. So, Ferrari's good for reliability, but nobody's bulletproof.
There's no shame in stopping stupid changes.
"These Lib Dem peers have been radicalised by the general election result. They feel that their party was taken for a ride by the Tories, who lured them into government and then destroyed them, and are determined to have their vengeance by whatever means possible."
http://new.spectator.co.uk/2015/10/lords-of-misrule-block-the-tories-at-every-turn/
I think XKCD backs up my point quite well
And yes SpaceX has had delays to schedule, some "anomolies" - but space is a very tough engineering proposition, and that's what attracts Musk I think !
[That line is reminiscent of the AV referendum, when foot-stomping and dummy-spitting occurred when the Conservatives had the temerity to neither be silent nor agree with Clegg, but actually campaigned against the voting system they oppose].
And I'm certainly laying him.
They didn't. Cameron kept his promise*. The HoC voted against a timetabling measure and Clegg threw his toys out of the pram.
Lib Dems - No fact is sacred.
* As an aside, the proposal from Clegg was so dreadful it would have been worth throwing out on its merits. I'm in favour of reforming the Lords, but want to see it done properly.
The plans that was put forward was agreed by the entire cabinet - 5 LDs & 18 CON. Tory backbench rebels used a timetable motion to impede its progress. Cameron then abandoned the plan.
I seem to remember Renault being hurt by the FIA changing the rules on the mass damper halfway through 2006 which allowed Ferrari back into the race.
Still, that's not as bad as this from their sister team:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgRNYuFewS4
"The peer, a former leader of the Liberal party, claimed Clegg's radical reforms were a distraction from the evolutionary changes that needed to be made to the second chamber."
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/jun/05/david-steel-attacks-cleggs-lord-reform-bill
Of course, what this country actually needs is a new constitutional settlement dealing with national and local devolution, as well as EV4EL. A new second chamber could be part of that too.
Does it not happen elsewhere ?
The cars now are much more reliable than they were some years ago. That said, the grid's smaller too, and points go down to 10th not 6th (or 8th), so reliability matters more than speed, compared to the past.
Give Scotland independence, leave the EU, get rid of county councils, cut MPs to around 320, elect a similar number of Lords every 5 years on PR.
We are governed by too many people in an awful way, rip it up and start again.
Musk really needs congratulating over SpaceX. They're showing how poorly the current suppliers (aside perhaps from Russia) are serving their customers.
What amazes me is how they've located the part that failed in their recent crash: they used infrasound (I think) detected in accelerometers to triangulate to a strut that failed. Ground tests on other struts from the same supplier than showed that some were far weaker than specified.
The excellent Scott Manley covers it well:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1i8hfpLNAIo
Or something.
@BBCJLandale: Evel deeds on All Souls' Day. Order paper confirms Speaker has certified parts of Housing Bill "relate exclusively to England and Wales"
They'd never do it.
Apart from for betting purposes, obviously. Richard Nabavi's summary yesterday was excellent (and many thanks to him for this). I'm very much looking forward to part 2.
I once walked home from school with inches of snow, ice everywhere, no buses running (waited for one that never showed up).
I used to dream of walking through dense fog.
Presumably that also includes the LibDems with their 8 seats.
Taxi! ..... in fact make that two taxis.
Paint it yellow.
As it is, if a coalition of the losers in the Lords wants to act as the opposition that Corbyn can't be, to throw constitutional convention in the bin and to take their powers well beyond their natural role as a check, then let us be rid it. I have no problem with an upper chamber elected by PR, though the Commons should still have the final say. But such an upper chamber would produce a Con-UKIP deal; perhaps not what the likes of Shirley Williams would approve of.
A combination of e-commerce and social media providing both opportunity and evidence.
Which is a disgraceful abuse of power. If you think someone is cooking the books, launch an investigation, find some evidence, put it infront of judge, get a warrent, and examine his email (excepting those with a lawyer, accountant or priest or other priviledged channel).
Intelligence and terrorism powers should not be there for the tax authorities to go on fishing expeditions to see who they don't like the look of. Its effectively resurrecting 'sus' laws again.
My school was at the top of a hill. Most day pupils had their parents picking them up in expensive cars: Range Rovers, Rollers, BMWs etc (*). My dad picked me up in a lorry on a few occasions, so I'd have to put my satchel into the cab then clamber up in my tweed jacket.
I got a certain amount of piss taken out of me over that. Until it snowed heavily one winter's day and no-one could get up Coll hill to college. My dad turned up in a JCB, cleared the road, and picked me up.
It was (and is) illegal to ride pillion in a JCB. It's fun though.
(*) The school had a number of children from China and Hong Kong. Once an embassy Rolls Royce turned up to pick one of the children up, and we were amused to see fluffy dice hanging off the mirror and a Garfield in a rear window ...
You don;t understand Mr Herdson. They only lost because the bl**dy electorate stupidly decided to vote for the wrong policies. They'll come around to the losers' correct way of thinking in 2020, you'll see.
I am sure the Lib Dems would argue a majority of that sort in the upper chamber was somehow illegitimate as well, no matter how it came about.
The 'winning here' mentality is still with us, notwithstanding the resounding 'losing here' message the voters gave this miserable party in May.
The Lib Dems are morally superior to all other parties, whatever tactics they adopt are always justifiable no matter how dishonest or underhand and the only kinds of elections or electoral systems that are 'fair' are those which increase the number of Lib Dems.
'On topic, for Lib Dems peers of all people to claim some kind of mandate to block the government is the height of brass neck. Peers always need to tread carefully given their unelected nature and Lib Dem peers, representing as they are a party on the verge of extinction, should be doubly careful. Clearly, their innate moral superiority over lesser creatures could be considered to override such petty concerns as a democratic mandate (a consideration which the august peers themselves no doubt regard as self evident and unassailable).'
The Lib Dems need to get over their total rejection by the electorate, focus on council elections and stop trying to block the will of the electorate by undemocratic means.
I'd be delighted for a Con-UKIP Lords to reject a Commons immigration bill on the grounds it *wasn't* tough enough, in line with public opinion.