Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Cyclefree suggests that Smith and Corbyn go back to Labour’

13

Comments

  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
  • Options
    ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    edited August 2016
    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    If they really cared about privacy, they should have just mandated self-destructing cookie extensions for all the major browsers. Most consumers only benefit from cookies on a few sites.

    What we have is just an inconvenient figleaf.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,018
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    They can't do now provided the contract is sound and why would I want to live in government housing unless I have to? In London a majority of the population now rent, most privately. Most people now do not buy until their mid thirties because of the high level of house prices

    At the end of every six months, two years at most (rare) they can evict you for walking on the cracks on the pavement at a month or twos notice if they want to which is a barrel of laughs if you are a family with kids, elderly or disabled.
    That is a matter of tightening the rental laws, not making most rentals government owned. Switzerland and Germany manage to do it and about half the population rent there
    I did actually call for that and condemn the well paid public sector housing leeches and hangers on further up thread
    Good to see we are both agreed then
    Yes, what is needed is a private rented sector that is obliged to provide the same quality as social housing associations with rents regulated like water charges are and an OFRENT who would do unannounced inspections (with right of entry), also decent length (5, 10 or 20 year leases)

    Ideally be attractive enough that renting would become a preferred choice for many.

    This sector would only be able to ourpose build or buy a whole estate/block of flats, not individual houses in owner occupier estates, and once established with limited companies running them the council housing/housing association stock would be privatised in a similar manner.
    My landlord normally arranges inspections every couple of months and lends anything which needs doing. I agree with a lot of that though am not sure about privatising all council housing and housing association stock until we have seen how the limited companies work and ensured they are effectively regulated
    Every few months? My landlord has been round once in just over two years :p
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,971
    tlg86 said:

    2-1 England.

    A great result, well done Cook and team - even if they did declare a few overs too late!
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    EU ePrivacy directive – more specifically Article 5(3) - requires prior informed consent for storage or for access to information stored on a user's terminal equipment.
  • Options
    ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    I appreciate that this may be a stupid question to some, but what precisely are the privacy issues that cookies prejudice?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,018
    edited August 2016

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    EU ePrivacy directive – more specifically Article 5(3) - requires prior informed consent for storage or for access to information stored on a user's terminal equipment.
    According to Chrome, PB has set 7 cookies on my computer, but I don't remember giving permission when I was back in the UK. tut tut, OGH!! :p
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,018

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    I appreciate that this may be a stupid question to some, but what precisely are the privacy issues that cookies prejudice?
    Advertisers can track a user's activity from site to site with them, effectively making a profile of one user's browsing activity.
  • Options
    ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    EU ePrivacy directive – more specifically Article 5(3) - requires prior informed consent for storage or for access to information stored on a user's terminal equipment.
    all information?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,171
    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    We'll place import tariffs on them and use it to pay off the national debt.
  • Options
    old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    edited August 2016
    Thanks for the article @Cyclefree

    I am not convinced there is little difference on policy between Corbyn and Smith. Oily Owen is spouting what he imagines people want to hear.

    One major difference is that Corbyn will accept the result of the referendum whereas Smith was to overturn or diminish the result as much as possible.

    How that sees off the threat of UKIP is a mystery to me.
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    EU ePrivacy directive – more specifically Article 5(3) - requires prior informed consent for storage or for access to information stored on a user's terminal equipment.
    all information?
    No Mr Cide, nor all cookies apparently - sites must ask users if they agree to most cookies and similar technologies (e.g. web beacons, Flash cookies, etc.) before the site starts to use them.

    For consent to be valid, it must be informed, specific, freely given and must constitute a real indication of the individual's wishes.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Nate Silver's latest forecasts :

    Clinton 83.4 .. Trump 16.5 - Polls Only
    Clinton 76.1 .. Trump 23.9 - Polls Plus
    Clinton 91.0 .. Trump 9.0 - Nowcast

    http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo#now
  • Options
    old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    These.
    :cookie::cookie::cookie::cookie:
  • Options
    ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    RobD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    I appreciate that this may be a stupid question to some, but what precisely are the privacy issues that cookies prejudice?
    Advertisers can track a user's activity from site to site with them, effectively making a profile of one user's browsing activity.
    I tend to clear out cookies when I think about it. I shall do it more frequently now.
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    EU ePrivacy directive – more specifically Article 5(3) - requires prior informed consent for storage or for access to information stored on a user's terminal equipment.
    all information?
    No Mr Cide, nor all cookies apparently - sites must ask users if they agree to most cookies and similar technologies (e.g. web beacons, Flash cookies, etc.) before the site starts to use them.

    For consent to be valid, it must be informed, specific, freely given and must constitute a real indication of the individual's wishes.
    So the current system fails.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    I appreciate that this may be a stupid question to some, but what precisely are the privacy issues that cookies prejudice?
    I am by no means an IT expert, but my understanding was they communicate data on what the PC user is doing to the website owner.

  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    RobD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    I appreciate that this may be a stupid question to some, but what precisely are the privacy issues that cookies prejudice?
    Advertisers can track a user's activity from site to site with them, effectively making a profile of one user's browsing activity.
    I tend to clear out cookies when I think about it. I shall do it more frequently now.
    If you use firefox you can set it so that it deletes browser history and erases all cookies automatically on shut down :)
  • Options
    old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    Charles said:

    RobD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    I appreciate that this may be a stupid question to some, but what precisely are the privacy issues that cookies prejudice?
    Advertisers can track a user's activity from site to site with them, effectively making a profile of one user's browsing activity.
    I tend to clear out cookies when I think about it. I shall do it more frequently now.
    If you use firefox you can set it so that it deletes browser history and erases all cookies automatically on shut down :)
    That's what I do.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    Just back after a delayed and rather long luncheon and astonished by some of the posts. For example one of PB's most ardent free marketeer capitalists demanding that people should not be allowed to make money from one form of investment. Others that taxing companies on anywhere near a fair basis in comparison with individuals would be wrong, harmful and, by extension allowing people to offshore profits, with the sole intention of avoiding tax, is a good thing. An astonishing afternoon on PB and I am sorry I missed it.

    However, the Bridge table calls, so bid you adieu.
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    Charles said:

    RobD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    I appreciate that this may be a stupid question to some, but what precisely are the privacy issues that cookies prejudice?
    Advertisers can track a user's activity from site to site with them, effectively making a profile of one user's browsing activity.
    I tend to clear out cookies when I think about it. I shall do it more frequently now.
    If you use firefox you can set it so that it deletes browser history and erases all cookies automatically on shut down :)
    I use an extension that allows me to whitelist sites where cookies are actually useful, like autofilling in my infeasibly long customer number on my bank's website. All other cookies (including zombies) are auto-nuked after a couple of minutes. Nobody must know how much time I waste on http://poodogs.co.uk.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,118

    Just back after a delayed and rather long luncheon and astonished by some of the posts. For example one of PB's most ardent free marketeer capitalists demanding that people should not be allowed to make money from one form of investment. Others that taxing companies on anywhere near a fair basis in comparison with individuals would be wrong, harmful and, by extension allowing people to offshore profits, with the sole intention of avoiding tax, is a good thing. An astonishing afternoon on PB and I am sorry I missed it.

    However, the Bridge table calls, so bid you adieu.

    My point about sales taxes is that they don't work, because they encourage inefficient vertical integration.
  • Options
    ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    Charles said:

    RobD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    I appreciate that this may be a stupid question to some, but what precisely are the privacy issues that cookies prejudice?
    Advertisers can track a user's activity from site to site with them, effectively making a profile of one user's browsing activity.
    I tend to clear out cookies when I think about it. I shall do it more frequently now.
    If you use firefox you can set it so that it deletes browser history and erases all cookies automatically on shut down :)
    Thanks for this. I do use CCleaner to tidy up periodically and use my history quite a lot. I shall dig around to see what suits me. Thanks everyone for input.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,118
    Charles said:

    RobD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    I appreciate that this may be a stupid question to some, but what precisely are the privacy issues that cookies prejudice?
    Advertisers can track a user's activity from site to site with them, effectively making a profile of one user's browsing activity.
    I tend to clear out cookies when I think about it. I shall do it more frequently now.
    If you use firefox you can set it so that it deletes browser history and erases all cookies automatically on shut down :)
    So, you can visit certain sites and your wife won't know?

    Like pb.com. The dirty little secret of all of us
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503

    Just back after a delayed and rather long luncheon and astonished by some of the posts. For example one of PB's most ardent free marketeer capitalists demanding that people should not be allowed to make money from one form of investment. Others that taxing companies on anywhere near a fair basis in comparison with individuals would be wrong, harmful and, by extension allowing people to offshore profits, with the sole intention of avoiding tax, is a good thing. An astonishing afternoon on PB and I am sorry I missed it.

    However, the Bridge table calls, so bid you adieu.

    This evening we're mapping out a constitution for a truly British Soviet Republic, pity you're going to miss it. Enjoy your bridge!
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,971

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    EU ePrivacy directive – more specifically Article 5(3) - requires prior informed consent for storage or for access to information stored on a user's terminal equipment.
    all information?
    No Mr Cide, nor all cookies apparently - sites must ask users if they agree to most cookies and similar technologies (e.g. web beacons, Flash cookies, etc.) before the site starts to use them.

    For consent to be valid, it must be informed, specific, freely given and must constitute a real indication of the individual's wishes.
    So the current system fails.
    Most websites don't give you a "Yes or No" choice about cookies, they just pop up a box saying that by using the site you accept this. Hardly an informed choice. As others have said, browser extensions and settings on Firefox can do a lot of the cookie cleaning for you - it's especially useful on sites like the Telegraph, where they have tried badly to implement a paywall based on cookies.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:

    RobD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    I appreciate that this may be a stupid question to some, but what precisely are the privacy issues that cookies prejudice?
    Advertisers can track a user's activity from site to site with them, effectively making a profile of one user's browsing activity.
    I tend to clear out cookies when I think about it. I shall do it more frequently now.
    If you use firefox you can set it so that it deletes browser history and erases all cookies automatically on shut down :)
    So, you can visit certain sites and your wife won't know?

    Like pb.com. The dirty little secret of all of us
    My wife told me off last night for posting 10,000 times on pb...
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,211
    Nasty fall in the women's road race.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,018
    Charles said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:

    RobD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    I appreciate that this may be a stupid question to some, but what precisely are the privacy issues that cookies prejudice?
    Advertisers can track a user's activity from site to site with them, effectively making a profile of one user's browsing activity.
    I tend to clear out cookies when I think about it. I shall do it more frequently now.
    If you use firefox you can set it so that it deletes browser history and erases all cookies automatically on shut down :)
    So, you can visit certain sites and your wife won't know?

    Like pb.com. The dirty little secret of all of us
    My wife told me off last night for posting 10,000 times on pb...
    If she reads one of TSE's AV threads she'll quickly change her tune :D
  • Options
    PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    Alistair said:



    Levy council tax on rented properties on the owner not the tenant and double it.

    Hint, rents go up.
    Scrap public subsidies on sky-high rents.....
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    SeanT said:

    Perfect summer evening here on the disputed frontier of Primrose Hill Borders. Renegade playwrights come and go, in the lengthening shadows.

    It's hell on the front line .... :smile:
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    edited August 2016
    SeanT said:

    Perfect summer evening here on the disputed frontier of Primrose Hill Borders. Renegade playwrights come and go, in the lengthening shadows.

    World feels very mellow this evening. Watching the house martins and swallows stooping over the Kingswood. Lovely. There is no pressing need to talk about politics.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,118
    SeanT said:

    Perfect summer evening here on the disputed frontier of Primrose Hill Borders. Renegade playwrights come and go, in the lengthening shadows.

    Dude. You're in Camden. Get used to it.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,118
    Charles said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:

    RobD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    I appreciate that this may be a stupid question to some, but what precisely are the privacy issues that cookies prejudice?
    Advertisers can track a user's activity from site to site with them, effectively making a profile of one user's browsing activity.
    I tend to clear out cookies when I think about it. I shall do it more frequently now.
    If you use firefox you can set it so that it deletes browser history and erases all cookies automatically on shut down :)
    So, you can visit certain sites and your wife won't know?

    Like pb.com. The dirty little secret of all of us
    My wife told me off last night for posting 10,000 times on pb...
    Did you explain you were trying to get PBGL?

    (Pb guest list)
  • Options
    tysontyson Posts: 6,051
    edited August 2016
    Sandpit said:

    tlg86 said:

    2-1 England.

    A great result, well done Cook and team - even if they did declare a few overs too late!
    Well done. A remarkable sporting achievement. We beat at home a team beset by corruption, from a third world, impoverished, quasi failed state that cannot play inside it's own borders. If we had the misfortune to play them away, we would be trashed.

    A great result indeed.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,171
    edited August 2016
    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:

    RobD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    I appreciate that this may be a stupid question to some, but what precisely are the privacy issues that cookies prejudice?
    Advertisers can track a user's activity from site to site with them, effectively making a profile of one user's browsing activity.
    I tend to clear out cookies when I think about it. I shall do it more frequently now.
    If you use firefox you can set it so that it deletes browser history and erases all cookies automatically on shut down :)
    So, you can visit certain sites and your wife won't know?

    Like pb.com. The dirty little secret of all of us
    My wife told me off last night for posting 10,000 times on pb...
    Did you explain you were trying to get PBGL?

    (Pb guest list)
    She might prefer him to get on the PBBL.

    (Pb banned list)
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,971
    tyson said:

    Sandpit said:

    tlg86 said:

    2-1 England.

    A great result, well done Cook and team - even if they did declare a few overs too late!
    Well done. A remarkable sporting achievement. We beat at home a team beset by corruption, from a third world, impoverished, quasi failed state that cannot play inside it's own borders. If we had the misfortune to play them away, we would be trashed.

    A great result indeed.
    A win is always a great result, a team can only beat the team in front of them - which is more than we did at Lords a couple of weeks back.

    We don't need to go there to lose either, we got beaten soundly when we played them in the UAE last winter. I watched most of it!
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @ruudkok: Chef de Mission of The Netherlands just confirmed on Dutch TV that Van Vleuten is concious again and heading for hospital. #Rio2016
  • Options
    MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584

    Cookies: store a small piece of information on your computer. Essential for remembering that you are signed in somewhere, e.g. PB / Vanilla.

    They can also be used for passing around advertising networks, so they know where else you've been.

    They are not used for auto-filling usernames/passwords, that is done by your browser separately.

    My cookies are set to delete at the end of every session.

    But... there are lots of other ways to track individual computers, e.g. testing for which fonts are installed in your browser (unique fingerprint). So utterly pointless law.

    And annoying.

  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,634
    tyson said:

    Sandpit said:

    tlg86 said:

    2-1 England.

    A great result, well done Cook and team - even if they did declare a few overs too late!
    Well done. A remarkable sporting achievement. We beat at home a team beset by corruption, from a third world, impoverished, quasi failed state that cannot play inside it's own borders. If we had the misfortune to play them away, we would be trashed.

    A great result indeed.
    You can only beat what's in front of you.
  • Options
    tyson said:

    a team beset by corruption, from a third world, impoverished, quasi failed state that cannot play inside it's own borders.

    Casual Racism from tyson!

  • Options
    Scott_P said:

    @ruudkok: Chef de Mission of The Netherlands just confirmed on Dutch TV that Van Vleuten is concious again and heading for hospital. #Rio2016

    I saw the crash live, looked pretty nasty - glad she's regained consciousness.
  • Options
    John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503

    tyson said:

    a team beset by corruption, from a third world, impoverished, quasi failed state that cannot play inside it's own borders.

    Casual Racism from tyson!

    He does live in the most racist country in Europe, I suppose it rubs off on one after a while.
  • Options

    Speedy said:

    rcs1000 said:



    The logical consequence of a sales tax on companies is that you end up with massively vertically integrated firms.

    Company A buys iron ore and turns it into steel. They then sell this to a machining shop. (Kerching: sales tax!)

    The machining shop then turns it into useful components, and sells it to a car gearbox maker. (Kerching: sales tax!)

    The car gearbox maker then sells to a car manufacturer. (Kerching: sales tax!)

    The car manufacturer then sells to a car dealership. (Kerching: sales tax!)

    The dealership then sells to you. (Kerching: sales tax!)

    On the other hand, a vertically integrated firm would mine to ore, smelt the ore, machine the parts, assemble them, and sell them to the consumer, and thus would only pay tax once.

    Massively vertically integrated firms are horribly inefficient.

    Lets say that the above companies (5 in total) each pay 1% tax on their book income.

    If you add all the taxes from their income the total amount would be the same as if they where the same single company.

    The only difference might come if they where a single company would they have the same total income as 5 different smaller ones?

    That is debatable, is the production cost inside a single conglomerate more or less than it's constituent parts as individual companies.

    Only if it's less would companies go the road of mergers, since only then they would need a smaller income to pay fewer production costs.
    I would dispute that in house is very efficient.
    Network Rail bought most functions in house because partly it made things more flexible (you can just say Do That) but mainly because they got fed up with a 15% or more markup at every step of the supply chain and bringing in house meant all the high paid contract lawyers, sales executives and the like could be fired saving a fortune
    (Network Rail) The NAO "estimating that maintenance and renewal activities were 34 per cent to 40 per cent less efficient than the most efficient European rail infrastructure managers"
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,187
    edited August 2016
    RobD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    They can't do now provided the contract is sound and why would I want to live in government housing unless I have to? In London a majority of the population now rent, most privately. Most people now do not buy until their mid thirties because of the high level of house prices

    At the end of every six months, two years at most (rare) they can evict you for walking on the cracks on the pavement at a month or twos notice if they want to which is a barrel of laughs if you are a family with kids, elderly or disabled.
    That is a matter of tightening the rental laws, not making most rentals government owned. Switzerland and Germany manage to do it and about half the population rent there
    I did actually call for that and condemn the well paid public sector housing leeches and hangers on further up thread
    Good to see we are both agreed then
    Yes, what is needed is a private rented sector that is obliged to provide the same quality as social housing associations with rents regulated like water charges are and an OFRENT who would do unannounced inspections (with right of entry), also decent length (5, 10 or 20 year leases)

    Ideally be attractive enough that renting would become a preferred choice for many.

    This sector would only be able to ourpose build or buy a whole estate/block of flats, not individual houses in owner occupier estates, and once established with limited companies running them the council housing/housing association stock would be privatised in a similar manner.
    My landlord normally arranges inspections every couple of months and lends anything which needs doing. I agree with a lot of that though am not sure about privatising all council housing and housing association stock until we have seen how the limited companies work and ensured they are effectively regulated
    Every few months? My landlord has been round once in just over two years :p
    My landlady lives in South Africa which may have something to do with it
  • Options
    tysontyson Posts: 6,051

    tyson said:

    a team beset by corruption, from a third world, impoverished, quasi failed state that cannot play inside it's own borders.

    Casual Racism from tyson!

    No actually you are soooooo wrong. Wasim Akram, and Imran Khan and Waqar Younis, the magician Asif Iqbal are amongst my sporting heroes. I wish Pakistan could play cricket on a level playing field. Watching a strong Pakistani team demolish England has been one of my greatest sporting memories, as too the West Indies.

    I went to Lords for the 3rd and 4th days of the recent test and was probably the most gutted person in the crowd.

    I am amazed Pakistan can put a team together given present circumstances.

    Come on Pakistan for the fourth test. Tyson is rooting for them.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,211
    tyson said:

    tyson said:

    a team beset by corruption, from a third world, impoverished, quasi failed state that cannot play inside it's own borders.

    Casual Racism from tyson!

    No actually you are soooooo wrong. Wasim Akram, and Imran Khan and Waqar Younis, the magician Asif Iqbal are amongst my sporting heroes. I wish Pakistan could play cricket on a level playing field. Watching a strong Pakistani team demolish England has been one of my greatest sporting memories, as too the West Indies.

    I went to Lords for the 3rd and 4th days of the recent test and was probably the most gutted person in the crowd.

    I am amazed Pakistan can put a team together given present circumstances.

    Come on Pakistan for the fourth test. Tyson is rooting for them.
    Presumably domestic cricket continues in Pakistan or is that prohibited by the ruling class? The international team seem to have made the best of a bad situation.
  • Options
    Charles said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:

    RobD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Freggles said:

    I have a question.

    When we leave the EU does that mean I will stop having to click a button to accept cookies every time I visit a new website?

    No, but it means you can sack the politicians who introduced such a stupid rule ;)
    Is there a "rule"? If so who did introduce it?
    I thought it was to do with EU privacy rules?

    But my assumption was that our politicians won't drop it...
    I appreciate that this may be a stupid question to some, but what precisely are the privacy issues that cookies prejudice?
    Advertisers can track a user's activity from site to site with them, effectively making a profile of one user's browsing activity.
    I tend to clear out cookies when I think about it. I shall do it more frequently now.
    If you use firefox you can set it so that it deletes browser history and erases all cookies automatically on shut down :)
    So, you can visit certain sites and your wife won't know?

    Like pb.com. The dirty little secret of all of us
    My wife told me off last night for posting 10,000 times on pb...
    Hmmm.... It's been a while since my mum shouted at me for reading PB at the dinner table...
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    tyson said:

    I went to Lords for the 3rd and 4th days of the recent test ....

    You should have worn your "PB Lords Members Tie and Blazer" and shared a bottle of bubbly with me .... :smile:



  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,971
    edited August 2016
    tlg86 said:

    tyson said:

    tyson said:

    a team beset by corruption, from a third world, impoverished, quasi failed state that cannot play inside it's own borders.

    Casual Racism from tyson!

    No actually you are soooooo wrong. Wasim Akram, and Imran Khan and Waqar Younis, the magician Asif Iqbal are amongst my sporting heroes. I wish Pakistan could play cricket on a level playing field. Watching a strong Pakistani team demolish England has been one of my greatest sporting memories, as too the West Indies.

    I went to Lords for the 3rd and 4th days of the recent test and was probably the most gutted person in the crowd.

    I am amazed Pakistan can put a team together given present circumstances.

    Come on Pakistan for the fourth test. Tyson is rooting for them.
    Presumably domestic cricket continues in Pakistan or is that prohibited by the ruling class? The international team seem to have made the best of a bad situation.
    Yes, their domestic cricket is still on. The problem is that no international teams will tour there as they have been specifically targeted by terrorists and the Pakistan security services have failed more than once to stop attacks on visiting cricketers.

    Pakistan are currently playing international "home" games in the UAE, where there are three international standard grounds and many thousands of Pakistani expatriates. Last winter the Tests were pretty empty, the 50 over matches were pretty much full and the 20 over matches sold out in advance - tickets were as cheap as $6.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,211
    JackW said:

    tyson said:

    I went to Lords for the 3rd and 4th days of the recent test ....

    You should have worn your "PB Lords Members Tie and Blazer" and shared a bottle of bubbly with me .... :smile:



    Oh no, you're not part of the egg and bacon brigade are you? :|
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,187
    I see George W Bush criticised "isolationism, nativism and protectionism" in an indirect attack on Donald Trump at a GOP fundraiser in Ohio last week
    http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-08-03/george-w-bush-takes-on-trump-at-ohio-fundraiser
  • Options
    tysontyson Posts: 6,051
    JackW said:

    tyson said:

    I went to Lords for the 3rd and 4th days of the recent test ....

    You should have worn your "PB Lords Members Tie and Blazer" and shared a bottle of bubbly with me .... :smile:




    Why am I not surprised Jack W you are one of those rather endearing characters!!!!!

    I love Lords, but unless we play Australia or South Africa, I never root for England. The West Indies, Pakistan, India, New Zealand and Sri Lanka, England in that order.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    I see George W Bush criticised "isolationism, nativism and protectionism" in an indirect attack on the EU at a GOP fundraiser in Ohio last week


    :lol:
  • Options
    EPGEPG Posts: 6,055
    Apologies for briefly strafing the thread earlier without suggesting the constructive alternative case. I was detained. In fact, I think it addresses a non-problem. Whatever their problem is, it is not uncertainty about what they stand for.

    Rightly or wrongly, the Labour Party has decided that its role is to introduce democratic control of the economy. This role is facilitated - enabled, in all senses of the word - by Brexit. Jez's Army know what they are fighting for, God help us!
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,971
    tlg86 said:

    JackW said:

    tyson said:

    I went to Lords for the 3rd and 4th days of the recent test ....

    You should have worn your "PB Lords Members Tie and Blazer" and shared a bottle of bubbly with me .... :smile:



    Oh no, you're not part of the egg and bacon brigade are you? :|
    The reason they're all so old, is the length of the waiting list to become a member!
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    tlg86 said:

    JackW said:

    tyson said:

    I went to Lords for the 3rd and 4th days of the recent test ....

    You should have worn your "PB Lords Members Tie and Blazer" and shared a bottle of bubbly with me .... :smile:



    Oh no, you're not part of the egg and bacon brigade are you? :|
    Certainly not .... vulgar arrivistes .... if you have to show it, you haven't got it .... :smile:
  • Options
    FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    JackW said:

    tyson said:

    I went to Lords for the 3rd and 4th days of the recent test ....

    You should have worn your "PB Lords Members Tie and Blazer" and shared a bottle of bubbly with me .... :smile:



    ???

    Is this something to do with rich people and horses?
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Freggles said:

    JackW said:

    tyson said:

    I went to Lords for the 3rd and 4th days of the recent test ....

    You should have worn your "PB Lords Members Tie and Blazer" and shared a bottle of bubbly with me .... :smile:



    ???

    Is this something to do with rich people and horses?
    Neigh ....
  • Options
    FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Freggles said:
    How very dare you .... Mrs JackW does not possess lorgnettes !!
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    edited August 2016
    Breaking News

    "A male rail passenger in his 20s has been 'decapitated' by a speeding train after he stuck his head out of the window."

    "The man was on board the Gatwick Express from the busy airport to London Victoria station and suffered a head injury when he was struck by an oncoming train.

    Police and ambulance crews rushed to Wandsworth Common station in south west London after reports suggested a person had been struck by a train. Horrified witnesses claimed the person, who has not been identified, died after being beheaded while looking out of a window"

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3728301/Horror-person-decapitated-speeding-train-sticking-head-window.html#ixzz4GgLpsvxa


    How far would he have to have lent out to achieve that? Not sure beheaded is correct either
  • Options
    Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    Just after 5 I posted regarding the names that would keep coming up to haunt Donald Trump. One of them was Felix Sater.

    Just after 7pm the Telegraph posted this:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/07/trump-may-go-before-court-over-deal-that-deprived-us-treasury-of/

    This isn't going to improve in a hurry.
  • Options
    Moses_ said:

    Breaking News

    "A male rail passenger in his 20s has been 'decapitated' by a speeding train after he stuck his head out of the window."

    "The man was on board the Gatwick Express from the busy airport to London Victoria station and suffered a head injury when he was struck by an oncoming train.

    Police and ambulance crews rushed to Wandsworth Common station in south west London after reports suggested a person had been struck by a train. Horrified witnesses claimed the person, who has not been identified, died after being beheaded while looking out of a window"

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3728301/Horror-person-decapitated-speeding-train-sticking-head-window.html#ixzz4GgLpsvxa


    How far would he have to have lent out to achieve that? Not sure beheaded is correct either

    "Decaffeinated?" - Simon Pegg in Hot Fuzz.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,018
    Moses_ said:

    Breaking News

    "A male rail passenger in his 20s has been 'decapitated' by a speeding train after he stuck his head out of the window."

    "The man was on board the Gatwick Express from the busy airport to London Victoria station and suffered a head injury when he was struck by an oncoming train.

    Police and ambulance crews rushed to Wandsworth Common station in south west London after reports suggested a person had been struck by a train. Horrified witnesses claimed the person, who has not been identified, died after being beheaded while looking out of a window"

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3728301/Horror-person-decapitated-speeding-train-sticking-head-window.html#ixzz4GgLpsvxa


    How far would he have to have lent out to achieve that? Not sure beheaded is correct either

    Probably not too far, given all it would take is a glancing blow to the top of his head. Given they tried to revive him I doubt he was completely decapitated (otherwise why bother!). Gone right off my lunch now....
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    Actually something very odd about this beheading story. Not sure what distance trains pass but got to be at least 6 foot. The person would have to have been toes on one train to get hit by another. Just seems very difficult to achieve.

    Odd
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    edited August 2016
    RobD said:

    Moses_ said:

    Breaking News

    "A male rail passenger in his 20s has been 'decapitated' by a speeding train after he stuck his head out of the window."

    "The man was on board the Gatwick Express from the busy airport to London Victoria station and suffered a head injury when he was struck by an oncoming train.

    Police and ambulance crews rushed to Wandsworth Common station in south west London after reports suggested a person had been struck by a train. Horrified witnesses claimed the person, who has not been identified, died after being beheaded while looking out of a window"

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3728301/Horror-person-decapitated-speeding-train-sticking-head-window.html#ixzz4GgLpsvxa


    How far would he have to have lent out to achieve that? Not sure beheaded is correct either

    Probably not too far, given all it would take is a glancing blow to the top of his head. Given they tried to revive him I doubt he was completely decapitated (otherwise why bother!). Gone right off my lunch now....
    Sorry 'bout that.
  • Options
    Moses_ said:

    Actually something very odd about this beheading story. Not sure what distance trains pass but got to be at least 6 foot. The person would have to have been toes on one train to get hit by another. Just seems very difficult to achieve.

    Odd

    Way less than 6 feet. On UK loading gauge if vehicles are maximum width and the distance between the tracks is at the minimum the clearance will be between 2ft 3in and 2ft 7in. The minimum space between the inner rails of the two tracks is 6 feet but the vehicles overhang the track.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,971
    edited August 2016

    Moses_ said:

    Breaking News

    "A male rail passenger in his 20s has been 'decapitated' by a speeding train after he stuck his head out of the window."

    "The man was on board the Gatwick Express from the busy airport to London Victoria station and suffered a head injury when he was struck by an oncoming train.

    Police and ambulance crews rushed to Wandsworth Common station in south west London after reports suggested a person had been struck by a train. Horrified witnesses claimed the person, who has not been identified, died after being beheaded while looking out of a window"

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3728301/Horror-person-decapitated-speeding-train-sticking-head-window.html#ixzz4GgLpsvxa


    How far would he have to have lent out to achieve that? Not sure beheaded is correct either

    "Decaffeinated?" - Simon Pegg in Hot Fuzz.
    Dr Prasannan, you're our resident train expert here - what's the lateral distance between two trains passing each other in opposite directions in the UK, is there even a standard distance between opposing tracks?

    Edit: I see Mr @prh47bridge is giving you competition in the rail nerd stakes!
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865

    Moses_ said:

    Actually something very odd about this beheading story. Not sure what distance trains pass but got to be at least 6 foot. The person would have to have been toes on one train to get hit by another. Just seems very difficult to achieve.

    Odd

    Way less than 6 feet. On UK loading gauge if vehicles are maximum width and the distance between the tracks is at the minimum the clearance will be between 2ft 3in and 2ft 7in. The minimum space between the inner rails of the two tracks is 6 feet but the vehicles overhang the track.
    Ahh ok, forgot the overhang. Didn't realise they were quite so close even so...
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Sandpit said:

    Dr Prasannan, you're our resident train expert here - what's the lateral distance between two trains passing each other in opposite directions in the UK, is there even a standard distance between opposing tracks?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-track_railway

    It is not safe to stand in the gap between the tracks when trains pass by on both lines
  • Options
    I notice that the latest locally known as Dave in Belgium is yet another Algerian with a long criminal record. My question would be why are they not being sent back to Algeria if they are known criminals?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,018

    I notice that the latest locally known as Dave in Belgium is yet another Algerian with a long criminal record. My question would be why are they not being sent back to Algeria if they are known criminals?

    Something about a right to a family life?
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    Moses_ said:

    Breaking News

    "A male rail passenger in his 20s has been 'decapitated' by a speeding train after he stuck his head out of the window."

    "The man was on board the Gatwick Express from the busy airport to London Victoria station and suffered a head injury when he was struck by an oncoming train.

    Police and ambulance crews rushed to Wandsworth Common station in south west London after reports suggested a person had been struck by a train. Horrified witnesses claimed the person, who has not been identified, died after being beheaded while looking out of a window"

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3728301/Horror-person-decapitated-speeding-train-sticking-head-window.html#ixzz4GgLpsvxa


    How far would he have to have lent out to achieve that? Not sure beheaded is correct either

    "Decaffeinated?" - Simon Pegg in Hot Fuzz.
    Dr Prasannan, you're our resident train expert here - what's the lateral distance between two trains passing each other in opposite directions in the UK, is there even a standard distance between opposing tracks?

    Edit: I see Mr @prh47bridge is giving you competition in the rail nerd stakes!
    The 'Loading Gauge' is the maximum size for rolling stock to allow clearance under bridges and between tracks, especially on corners. It was established quite early on that the maximum width allowable for high speed running was in the region of 2.5 times the distance between the rails, on narrow gauge lines this is often exceeded but speeds tend to be slower. The British loading gauge reflects the basic motivation of the original railway builders, namely to shift coal and ores in bulk from place to place. In the UK the standard clearance was therefore defined with relatively small wagons in mind. To refer to 'the' loading gauge is however misleading as it is only since the advent of British Railways that a national standard has been defined, and this cannot easily be.

    Looks like the maximum width for UK rail vehicles is 9ft.

    http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/gansg/2-track/02track3.htm
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,126
    edited August 2016
    Moses_ said:

    Moses_ said:

    Actually something very odd about this beheading story. Not sure what distance trains pass but got to be at least 6 foot. The person would have to have been toes on one train to get hit by another. Just seems very difficult to achieve.

    Odd

    Way less than 6 feet. On UK loading gauge if vehicles are maximum width and the distance between the tracks is at the minimum the clearance will be between 2ft 3in and 2ft 7in. The minimum space between the inner rails of the two tracks is 6 feet but the vehicles overhang the track.
    Ahh ok, forgot the overhang. Didn't realise they were quite so close even so...
    It's sadly not unheard of, although very rare nowadays. According to RAIB (the investigating authority) one of the reasons for the push for all-sealed windows and air-conned trains.

    Contact with passing lineside equipment is also possible. An old acquaintance claimed to have suffered whiplash when hit by a tree branch whilst looking out of the window of a train on the Matlock branch in the 1990s. Fortunately at relatively low speed.

    The kinematics of the trains also needs to be considered, especially when caused by track cant/superelevation, body roll, etc.
  • Options
    Speedy said:



    Company A has 100 in income, is taxed 1% on it's income, tax revenue 1.
    B has 200, is taxed 1%, tax revenue 2.
    C 300, revenue 3
    D 400, revenue 4
    E 500, revenue 5

    Total tax revenue 15.

    Total income of all 5 companies 1500, if taxed by 1%, that gives you 15 in revenue.

    Only if a single conglomerate had income less than the sum of each part on their own, would tax revenue be less.

    Would a single conglomerate have less production costs than if it where 5 different companies, and therefore could afford to sell at lower prices and record lower income ?

    If Yes then the 5 companies would merge regardless of any tax, just from the production cost limiting point of view.

    If No then the 5 companies would not merge.

    It's all part of a risk analysis involving the Conglomerate Discount.

    Sorry but, in terms of the scenario I proposed, this is wrong.

    If a conglomerate consists of companies that do most of their trading with third parties their income will, broadly, be the sum of each party on its own. However, in this scenario all of company A's income comes from company B, all of company B's income comes from company C and so on. If you integrate this supply chain into a single business the income will be the income of the final company in the chain - company E in this case. Everything else was trading between the companies involved in the merger and therefore will not add to the total revenue of the combined company.

    Before the merger they are selling gearboxes at £500. After the merger they are still selling gearboxes at £500. Their revenue per gearbox will be £500 whereas the sum of the revenue of the individual companies per gearbox was £1500. They can't charge more per gearbox just because they have integrated the supply chain. Their revenue per doesn't go up just because they have integrated the supply chain. Their profits should go up but a sales tax isn't interested in that. A sales tax is only concerned with revenue.

    If a conglomerate consists entirely of companies trading with third parties a merger will make no difference in sales tax terms and the revenue will indeed be the sum of the revenues of the individual companies. However, if those companies trade with each other prior to the merger their revenue after the merger will be the sum of their individual revenue LESS the amount of inter-company trades. The total amount of sales tax paid by the conglomerate will therefore be less than the total paid by independent companies.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,126

    Sandpit said:

    Moses_ said:

    Breaking News

    "A male rail passenger in his 20s has been 'decapitated' by a speeding train after he stuck his head out of the window."

    "The man was on board the Gatwick Express from the busy airport to London Victoria station and suffered a head injury when he was struck by an oncoming train.

    Police and ambulance crews rushed to Wandsworth Common station in south west London after reports suggested a person had been struck by a train. Horrified witnesses claimed the person, who has not been identified, died after being beheaded while looking out of a window"

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3728301/Horror-person-decapitated-speeding-train-sticking-head-window.html#ixzz4GgLpsvxa


    How far would he have to have lent out to achieve that? Not sure beheaded is correct either

    "Decaffeinated?" - Simon Pegg in Hot Fuzz.
    Dr Prasannan, you're our resident train expert here - what's the lateral distance between two trains passing each other in opposite directions in the UK, is there even a standard distance between opposing tracks?

    Edit: I see Mr @prh47bridge is giving you competition in the rail nerd stakes!
    The 'Loading Gauge' is the maximum size for rolling stock to allow clearance under bridges and between tracks, especially on corners. It was established quite early on that the maximum width allowable for high speed running was in the region of 2.5 times the distance between the rails, on narrow gauge lines this is often exceeded but speeds tend to be slower. The British loading gauge reflects the basic motivation of the original railway builders, namely to shift coal and ores in bulk from place to place. In the UK the standard clearance was therefore defined with relatively small wagons in mind. To refer to 'the' loading gauge is however misleading as it is only since the advent of British Railways that a national standard has been defined, and this cannot easily be.

    Looks like the maximum width for UK rail vehicles is 9ft.

    http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/gansg/2-track/02track3.htm
    Thanks for that link - I'd not seen it before. A mention of 'Jessops fish-belly rails' on another page refers to my namesake's father.

    Page 59 of the following might be of relevance:
    http://www.rssb.co.uk/Library/groups-and-committees/2013-guide-vehicle-structure-sic-guide-to-british-gauging-t926.pdf
  • Options
    Scott_P said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dr Prasannan, you're our resident train expert here - what's the lateral distance between two trains passing each other in opposite directions in the UK, is there even a standard distance between opposing tracks?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-track_railway

    It is not safe to stand in the gap between the tracks when trains pass by on both lines
    Thanks for that link:

    On British lines, the space between the two running rails of a single railway track is called the "four foot" (owing to it being 'four foot something' in width), while the space between the different tracks is called the "six foot". It is not safe to stand in the gap between the tracks when trains pass by on both lines, as happened in the Bere Ferrers accident of 1917.

    * Narrow track centres on the Liverpool and Manchester Railway contributed to a fatal accident on opening day.
    * A US naval scientist and submarine pioneer, Captain Jacques, was killed getting out of the wrong side of a train at Hadley Wood in 1916.[2]
    * Narrow track centres contribute to "Second Train Coming" accidents at level crossings since it is harder to see the second train – for example, the accident at Elsenham level crossing in 2005.
  • Options
    nunununu Posts: 6,024
    JackW said:

    Freggles said:
    How very dare you .... Mrs JackW does not possess lorgnettes !!
    Looks like you've been hit for six at lords....
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,300
    edited August 2016
    Sandpit - saw you comment earlier...

    Had a cracking day. Was in the newish "sky Terrance" right behind the bowlers arm next to the media centre, so perfect view....only occasionally obstructed by a rather excitable older Pakistani gentleman where each 4 resulted in him leaping to his feet in a rather spritely manner of somebody his age followed by a 2 minute chant Urdu at the top of his lungs.

    He apparently is a bit of a celebrity...

    http://www.dreamcricket.com/dreamcricket/news.hspl?nid=962
  • Options

    Sandpit said:

    Moses_ said:

    Breaking News

    "A male rail passenger in his 20s has been 'decapitated' by a speeding train after he stuck his head out of the window."

    "The man was on board the Gatwick Express from the busy airport to London Victoria station and suffered a head injury when he was struck by an oncoming train.

    Police and ambulance crews rushed to Wandsworth Common station in south west London after reports suggested a person had been struck by a train. Horrified witnesses claimed the person, who has not been identified, died after being beheaded while looking out of a window"

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3728301/Horror-person-decapitated-speeding-train-sticking-head-window.html#ixzz4GgLpsvxa


    How far would he have to have lent out to achieve that? Not sure beheaded is correct either

    "Decaffeinated?" - Simon Pegg in Hot Fuzz.
    Dr Prasannan, you're our resident train expert here - what's the lateral distance between two trains passing each other in opposite directions in the UK, is there even a standard distance between opposing tracks?

    Edit: I see Mr @prh47bridge is giving you competition in the rail nerd stakes!
    The 'Loading Gauge' is the maximum size for rolling stock to allow clearance under bridges and between tracks, especially on corners. It was established quite early on that the maximum width allowable for high speed running was in the region of 2.5 times the distance between the rails, on narrow gauge lines this is often exceeded but speeds tend to be slower. The British loading gauge reflects the basic motivation of the original railway builders, namely to shift coal and ores in bulk from place to place. In the UK the standard clearance was therefore defined with relatively small wagons in mind. To refer to 'the' loading gauge is however misleading as it is only since the advent of British Railways that a national standard has been defined, and this cannot easily be.

    Looks like the maximum width for UK rail vehicles is 9ft.

    http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/gansg/2-track/02track3.htm
    Apologies. I used the maximum container width allowed on freight trains which is a little less than 9ft. On passenger trains with coaches built to maximum width the gap will be 1ft 8.5in plus or minus a little for kinetic effects. In essence carriages are built so that they won't hit each other as trains pass. As soon as you start sticking your head (or any other part of your body) out of the window you risk getting hit.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,300
    edited August 2016
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,971
    Glad you had a great day, was surprised to see so many empty seats for a Sunday day 5 though.

    I remember sitting rather too close to him and a number of his followers at the Sharjah Test last year. Certainly a personality, I guess if I were a Pakistan supporter sitting next to the Barmy Army I'd probably think the same though!
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,154
    SeanT said:

    John_M said:

    SeanT said:

    Perfect summer evening here on the disputed frontier of Primrose Hill Borders. Renegade playwrights come and go, in the lengthening shadows.

    World feels very mellow this evening. Watching the house martins and swallows stooping over the Kingswood. Lovely. There is no pressing need to talk about politics.
    Indeed. I am sure the weather affects the national mood, more in the UK than elsewhere. Suddenly Brexit seems less alarming, we're winning at the cricket, have a banana sandwich and chillax in the sun. Interest rates meh.

    Certainly, I have learned over the years that perfect summer weekends - like this one - are rare WHEREVER you live.

    Yesterday I took my older daughter to Hever Castle. It was sublime. The home of Anne Boleyn, HQ of Brexit 1.0. Then I drove home from Kent through the City, gilded by the summer twilight. Today my Experimental Physicist Squeeze came over, and we had a picnic in Regents Park, and then - you know - "let the dew wash the plates".

    Now I am on PB with a bottle of nice Rioja.

    Tomorrow, troubles doubtless arise, in their multitudes, but tonight.... Tonight....
    Tonight there is a fantastic show of stars in south Devon. A really superb Milky Way, in all its wondrous glory....
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    Evening all. What an excellent article from Ms Cyclefree.

    I've been off gallivanting in France for the last week with somewhat intermittent WiFi access. Has anything much happened, other than UKIP deciding that the best way to go for the traditional Labour vote is to try to be as dysfunctional as Labour?
  • Options

    Sandpit said:

    Moses_ said:

    Breaking News

    "A male rail passenger in his 20s has been 'decapitated' by a speeding train after he stuck his head out of the window."

    "The man was on board the Gatwick Express from the busy airport to London Victoria station and suffered a head injury when he was struck by an oncoming train.

    Police and ambulance crews rushed to Wandsworth Common station in south west London after reports suggested a person had been struck by a train. Horrified witnesses claimed the person, who has not been identified, died after being beheaded while looking out of a window"

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3728301/Horror-person-decapitated-speeding-train-sticking-head-window.html#ixzz4GgLpsvxa


    How far would he have to have lent out to achieve that? Not sure beheaded is correct either

    "Decaffeinated?" - Simon Pegg in Hot Fuzz.
    Dr Prasannan, you're our resident train expert here - what's the lateral distance between two trains passing each other in opposite directions in the UK, is there even a standard distance between opposing tracks?

    Edit: I see Mr @prh47bridge is giving you competition in the rail nerd stakes!
    The 'Loading Gauge' is the maximum size for rolling stock to allow clearance under bridges and between tracks, especially on corners. It was established quite early on that the maximum width allowable for high speed running was in the region of 2.5 times the distance between the rails, on narrow gauge lines this is often exceeded but speeds tend to be slower. The British loading gauge reflects the basic motivation of the original railway builders, namely to shift coal and ores in bulk from place to place. In the UK the standard clearance was therefore defined with relatively small wagons in mind. To refer to 'the' loading gauge is however misleading as it is only since the advent of British Railways that a national standard has been defined, and this cannot easily be.

    Looks like the maximum width for UK rail vehicles is 9ft.

    http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/gansg/2-track/02track3.htm
    Apologies. I used the maximum container width allowed on freight trains which is a little less than 9ft. On passenger trains with coaches built to maximum width the gap will be 1ft 8.5in plus or minus a little for kinetic effects. In essence carriages are built so that they won't hit each other as trains pass. As soon as you start sticking your head (or any other part of your body) out of the window you risk getting hit.
    The Class 442 units on the Gatwick Express have a width of 2.74 m (1/8 of an inch less than 9 ft).
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,300
    edited August 2016
    Sandpit said:

    Glad you had a great day, was surprised to see so many empty seats for a Sunday day 5 though.

    I remember sitting rather too close to him and a number of his followers at the Sharjah Test last year. Certainly a personality, I guess if I were a Pakistan supporter sitting next to the Barmy Army I'd probably think the same though!
    Yes lots and lots of empty seats. Rather surprising, lovely day, exciting potential day & obviously Birmingham has a lot of Asians so you would think that would bolster things. I don't think they have sold fine for the other matches.

    Him & his followers were quite fun, and spent a lot of time doing photos for both Pakistani & English supporters...I could have done with him perhaps a few more seats away, although it did drown out his woman a few seats away who between reading heat magazine kept asking her boyfriend how long until they could go home...this started 4 overs into the day.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    Nothing like a large corporate scandal to pass the day:

    https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/762371501219782656
  • Options
    nunununu Posts: 6,024

    Evening all. What an excellent article from Ms Cyclefree.

    I've been off gallivanting in France for the last week with somewhat intermittent WiFi access. Has anything much happened, other than UKIP deciding that the best way to go for the traditional Labour vote is to try to be as dysfunctional as Labour?

    Trump is acting a fool, so no nothing new.....
  • Options
    scotslassscotslass Posts: 912
    According to Owen Smith the Prime Minister's flirtation with a return of grammar schools is all Corbyn's fault! What a repellent and creepy candidate this man is. I hope Jeremy knocks him back on his heels!
  • Options
    Mean to say i think they sold fine for the other tests.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,018
    scotslass said:

    According to Owen Smith the Prime Minister's flirtation with a return of grammar schools is all Corbyn's fault! What a repellent and creepy candidate this man is. I hope Jeremy knocks him back on his heels!

    To be fair, he is right that Labour is an ineffective opposition. Whether that's because of the PLP or Corbyn is another matter.
  • Options
    PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,274
    RobD said:

    scotslass said:

    According to Owen Smith the Prime Minister's flirtation with a return of grammar schools is all Corbyn's fault! What a repellent and creepy candidate this man is. I hope Jeremy knocks him back on his heels!

    To be fair, he is right that Labour is an ineffective opposition. Whether that's because of the PLP or Corbyn is another matter.
    You do have to feel for the liberal elte though. First Brexit, now grammar schools. Will it ever end?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,300
    edited August 2016
    While looking up uncle cricket, I found this gem from 10 years ago.....

    Any England fan who meets him will draw an immediate comparison with the Barmy Army cheerleader nicknamed Jimmy Saville

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2005/nov/20/cricket.englandinpakistan2005062
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,971

    Mean to say i think they sold fine for the other tests.

    I guess a day 5 issue then. Probably too many women like the one you described won the argument last night over going at all!! ;)
  • Options
    old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    scotslass said:

    According to Owen Smith the Prime Minister's flirtation with a return of grammar schools is all Corbyn's fault! What a repellent and creepy candidate this man is. I hope Jeremy knocks him back on his heels!

    :+1:
  • Options
    nunununu Posts: 6,024
    This is not like Leave, demographics too different:
    Overall, Trump leads Clinton among whites by 52 percent to 40 percent. Romney led Obama among whites by 59 to 39.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-after-conventions-clinton-leads-trump-by-8-points/2016/08/06/517999c0-5b33-11e6-9aee-8075993d73a2_story.html
This discussion has been closed.