Telegraph journos (and by extension, their readers) are so astonishingly cretinous they actually believe that "TV detector vans" not only exist, but can tell if you're watching iPlayer over a secure Wifi connection.
"Oh, don't worry about it. It's another round of mysterious inexplicable technology to terrify you into paying. Which you should, by the way – it costs money, lots of money, to pay actors, writers, producers, directors, crews, lawyers and executives to make things that people enjoy.
Isn't the technology for this variant of detector vans proven though? I always wondered about how the old ones worked, something to do with detecting the EM signature of the electrons fired by the cathode ray tube.
The technology in theory has been shown in academic setting as potentially possible, but not exactly reliable & easily defeatable. The chances they are really going to deploy it is horses##t. At most they will do what they always do target addresses who don't have a licence & try and trick avoiders into making an incriminating reveal of their usage.
Telegraph journos (and by extension, their readers) are so astonishingly cretinous they actually believe that "TV detector vans" not only exist, but can tell if you're watching iPlayer over a secure Wifi connection.
"Oh, don't worry about it. It's another round of mysterious inexplicable technology to terrify you into paying. Which you should, by the way – it costs money, lots of money, to pay actors, writers, producers, directors, crews, lawyers and executives to make things that people enjoy.
The extra 200 miles can't add more than 20 minutes or so to the flight.
Lol, had forgotten about that. How much did it cost the taxpayer I wonder?
They could only do that flight because the plane was a half empty charter, would have been too heavy to do it full of people as well as the very full fuel tanks (144,000kg I think).
Yes, but the next gen of planes (787, A350) are significantly more efficient - both in terms of more modern engines, and being generally much lighter. (And having somewhat better aerodynamics.)
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Qantas and BA started non-stop London -> Sydney & Melbourne. If the flight took off at 10am UK time, it would land at 2pm the next day in Oz, which would be as good as it got for avoiding jet lag. Much better than the way most current flights work which involve you spending two nights on the plane, and then being deposited into the taxi rank blinking and startled at 6:30am.
Those timings might work, although if it's a 20 hour flight with 10 hours' time difference, it would take off around 14:00 from London and land in Sydney around 08:00 two days later!
You're right about the 787 and A350, not been on the latter but the former is impressive for the larger windows and lower cabin altitude. Much quieter than the 777 on which I usually travel too.
May must call Fox into her office now and order him to explain himself. If he fails to provide an adequate explanation then he must be dismissed. I'm worried. This could be the first disaster of May's premiership. If these allegations are true then the credibility of May's judgement will be in tatters. Moreover, Fox is Brexit's leading poster boy. It will look terrible for that particular cause if one of their leaders is exposed as an anti-democratic stooge. The Brexiteers have already embraced Trump and Putin; they can't afford to add another nasty to the list. Fox has already turned himself into a laughing stock with his ludicrous notion about striking unilateral trade deals with EU member states. It's clear that May only appointed him to appease the Tory hard-right. This is starting to look like a misguided appointment that will only do May harm.
Is it really that worrying?
It is a pretty weak piece of 'investigative' journalism with a lot of speculation and no evidence other than a bizarre publishing deal.
That is hardly damning evidence of any wrong-doing.
Ex minister trades his reputation for a few bob from very dodgy people. Hardly the scoop of the century. Fox's judgement about who he deals with has never been the best and I was dismayed to see him appointed to the Cabinet.
No doubt Fox would go on a la Blair/Mandelson/Hurd about how important it is to have a dialogue with the Kazakhs/Azeris/Serbs, whoever. They might even have a point. But until a law is passed so that no Parliamentarian, or ex Parliamentarian can ever take money from a foreign potentate then this will continue to happen. See one Hilary Clinton in this connection also. Personally, I would be in favour of such a law. But I'd also be in favour of getting rid of subsidised booze for our elected representatives.
The Azeri regime is very bad though. Imagine if a criminal gang took over a country.
Telegraph journos (and by extension, their readers) are so astonishingly cretinous they actually believe that "TV detector vans" not only exist, but can tell if you're watching iPlayer over a secure Wifi connection.
"Oh, don't worry about it. It's another round of mysterious inexplicable technology to terrify you into paying. Which you should, by the way – it costs money, lots of money, to pay actors, writers, producers, directors, crews, lawyers and executives to make things that people enjoy.
Isn't the technology for this variant of detector vans proven though? I always wondered about how the old ones worked, something to do with detecting the EM signature of the electrons fired by the cathode ray tube.
The technology in theory has been shown in academic setting as potentially possible, but not exactly reliable & easily defeatable. The chances they are really going to deploy it is horses##t. At most they will do what they always do target addresses who don't have a licence & try and trick avoiders into making an incriminating reveal of their usage.
Sounds like all you need is a directional antenna. Easily defeatable to you and me, perhaps.
Telegraph journos (and by extension, their readers) are so astonishingly cretinous they actually believe that "TV detector vans" not only exist, but can tell if you're watching iPlayer over a secure Wifi connection.
"Oh, don't worry about it. It's another round of mysterious inexplicable technology to terrify you into paying. Which you should, by the way – it costs money, lots of money, to pay actors, writers, producers, directors, crews, lawyers and executives to make things that people enjoy.
Would they be able to track you via your IP address? Including ISPs revealing who used dynamic IPs.
They already have a database of ip usage, but claim they won't use that. Also, ip address is unreliable as single source of proof of usage.
I could imagine a system that goes like this. To use iPlayer you have to give your name and importantly your address. The first check is that the address given has a valid licence. Then look for suspicious usage, eg iplayer being run at the same time with identical ID and different IP addresses. Then check both IPs and if one is linked to an address with no licence, time for a visit.
So an unknown former spook is planning to run as an unofficial alternative to Donald Trump.
It could damage Trump round the edges and even a few percent of GOP votrers peeling off from Trump will hurt him but....what if he attracts GOP votes that some would lend to Clinton because they can't have Trump?
Swings and roundabouts. As an annoyance he lacks weight but the CIA background is a curiosity.
May must call Fox into her office now and order him to explain himself. If he fails to provide an adequate explanation then he must be dismissed. I'm worried. This could be the first disaster of May's premiership. If these allegations are true then the credibility of May's judgement will be in tatters. Moreover, Fox is Brexit's leading poster boy. It will look terrible for that particular cause if one of their leaders is exposed as an anti-democratic stooge. The Brexiteers have already embraced Trump and Putin; they can't afford to add another nasty to the list. Fox has already turned himself into a laughing stock with his ludicrous notion about striking unilateral trade deals with EU member states. It's clear that May only appointed him to appease the Tory hard-right. This is starting to look like a misguided appointment that will only do May harm.
Is it really that worrying?
It is a pretty weak piece of 'investigative' journalism with a lot of speculation and no evidence other than a bizarre publishing deal.
That is hardly damning evidence of any wrong-doing.
Ex minister trades his reputation for a few bob from very dodgy people. Hardly the scoop of the century. Fox's judgement about who he deals with has never been the best and I was dismayed to see him appointed to the Cabinet.
No doubt Fox would go on a la Blair/Mandelson/Hurd about how important it is to have a dialogue with the Kazakhs/Azeris/Serbs, whoever. They might even have a point. But until a law is passed so that no Parliamentarian, or ex Parliamentarian can ever take money from a foreign potentate then this will continue to happen. See one Hilary Clinton in this connection also. Personally, I would be in favour of such a law. But I'd also be in favour of getting rid of subsidised booze for our elected representatives.
The Azeri regime is very bad though. Imagine if a criminal gang took over a country.
Actually, thinking about it, I wouldn't allow myself to be flattered by them or take their money. And I suspect that Fox has more money than I do.
Telegraph journos (and by extension, their readers) are so astonishingly cretinous they actually believe that "TV detector vans" not only exist, but can tell if you're watching iPlayer over a secure Wifi connection.
"Oh, don't worry about it. It's another round of mysterious inexplicable technology to terrify you into paying. Which you should, by the way – it costs money, lots of money, to pay actors, writers, producers, directors, crews, lawyers and executives to make things that people enjoy.
We used to do a demo of this as part of house training briefing incoming security ministers.
Tempest cracking works very well on CRT displays nobody uses any more. That are outdoors. And seperated from any other sources of electromagnetic radiation.
Telegraph journos (and by extension, their readers) are so astonishingly cretinous they actually believe that "TV detector vans" not only exist, but can tell if you're watching iPlayer over a secure Wifi connection.
"Oh, don't worry about it. It's another round of mysterious inexplicable technology to terrify you into paying. Which you should, by the way – it costs money, lots of money, to pay actors, writers, producers, directors, crews, lawyers and executives to make things that people enjoy.
Would they be able to track you via your IP address? Including ISPs revealing who used dynamic IPs.
They already have a database of ip usage, but claim they won't use that. Also, ip address is unreliable as single source of proof of usage.
I could imagine a system that goes like this. To use iPlayer you have to give your name and importantly your address. The first check is that the address given has a valid licence. Then look for suspicious usage, eg iplayer being run at the same time with identical ID and different IP addresses. Then check both IPs and if one is linked to an address with no licence, time for a visit.
Even that won't really work...they can't know ip -> address without court order to isp & isn't reliable in of itself & is to defeat...and they say that isn't how they will enforce it.
One thing to really nail the idea they are actually going to deploy this WiFi snooping...one of the biggest users of iPlayer without a licence (nobody knows if live or just catch-up) are students...good luck trying to work out who is using what by just external packet sniffing of a univerisity network.
The easiest solution is a logon system like Netflix / sky. Obviously it can be exploited, but locking it to 3 devices like Spotify make sharing etc more of a pain than worrying about mythical vans.
All this is why I have said for years funding model is broken.
Has any party ever had a more shambolic, drawn-out leadership election? I remember the Conservative elections that gave us both Hague and IDS were both needlessly drawn out and full of plotting and scheming, but it was all really rather good fun in retrospect - certainly by comparison with this - and didn't involve the courts. The only one which I can think of which comes close is the last Labour leadership election.
The extra 200 miles can't add more than 20 minutes or so to the flight.
Lol, had forgotten about that. How much did it cost the taxpayer I wonder?
They could only do that flight because the plane was a half empty charter, would have been too heavy to do it full of people as well as the very full fuel tanks (144,000kg I think).
Yes, but the next gen of planes (787, A350) are significantly more efficient - both in terms of more modern engines, and being generally much lighter. (And having somewhat better aerodynamics.)
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Qantas and BA started non-stop London -> Sydney & Melbourne. If the flight took off at 10am UK time, it would land at 2pm the next day in Oz, which would be as good as it got for avoiding jet lag. Much better than the way most current flights work which involve you spending two nights on the plane, and then being deposited into the taxi rank blinking and startled at 6:30am.
Those timings might work, although if it's a 20 hour flight with 10 hours' time difference, it would take off around 14:00 from London and land in Sydney around 08:00 two days later!
You're right about the 787 and A350, not been on the latter but the former is impressive for the larger windows and lower cabin altitude. Much quieter than the 777 on which I usually travel too.
Hmmm... I do the London -> Doha -> Melbourne route fairly regularly. You take off at 9:15 UK time, and land in Melbourne the following day at 5pm.
If you lost three hours due to not having to stop in Doha, that would mean taking off at 9:15, and landing at 2pm the following day, which sounds pretty awesome to me. I could go to the hotel, have a swim, unpack, have dinner, and be ready for work the next day.
Telegraph journos (and by extension, their readers) are so astonishingly cretinous they actually believe that "TV detector vans" not only exist, but can tell if you're watching iPlayer over a secure Wifi connection.
"Oh, don't worry about it. It's another round of mysterious inexplicable technology to terrify you into paying. Which you should, by the way – it costs money, lots of money, to pay actors, writers, producers, directors, crews, lawyers and executives to make things that people enjoy.
Would they be able to track you via your IP address? Including ISPs revealing who used dynamic IPs.
They already have a database of ip usage, but claim they won't use that. Also, ip address is unreliable as single source of proof of usage.
I could imagine a system that goes like this. To use iPlayer you have to give your name and importantly your address. The first check is that the address given has a valid licence. Then look for suspicious usage, eg iplayer being run at the same time with identical ID and different IP addresses. Then check both IPs and if one is linked to an address with no licence, time for a visit.
Even that won't really work...they can't know ip address with court order to isp & isn't reliable in of itself & is to defeat...and they say that isn't how they will enforce it.
One thing to really nail the idea they are actually going to deploy this WiFi snooping...one of the biggest users of iPlayer without a licence (nobody knows if live or just catch-up) are students...good luck trying to work out who is using what by just external packet sniffing of a univerisity network.
The easiest solution is a logon system like Netflix / sky. Obviously it can be exploited, but locking it to 3 devices like Spotify make sharing etc more of a pain than worrying about mythical vans.
All this is why I have said for years funding model is broken.
They'll have access to IP addresses from their logs, so they'll easily be able to identify which isn't associated with an account. Whether or not the court would instruct the ISP to hand over the address it was associated with it is another matter.
I doubt they'd bother with uni students in halls of residence, definitely not worth the hassle.
Telegraph journos (and by extension, their readers) are so astonishingly cretinous they actually believe that "TV detector vans" not only exist, but can tell if you're watching iPlayer over a secure Wifi connection.
"Oh, don't worry about it. It's another round of mysterious inexplicable technology to terrify you into paying. Which you should, by the way – it costs money, lots of money, to pay actors, writers, producers, directors, crews, lawyers and executives to make things that people enjoy.
Would they be able to track you via your IP address? Including ISPs revealing who used dynamic IPs.
They already have a database of ip usage, but claim they won't use that. Also, ip address is unreliable as single source of proof of usage.
I could imagine a system that goes like this. To use iPlayer you have to give your name and importantly your address. The first check is that the address given has a valid licence. Then look for suspicious usage, eg iplayer being run at the same time with identical ID and different IP addresses. Then check both IPs and if one is linked to an address with no licence, time for a visit.
Even that won't really work...they can't know ip address with court order to isp & isn't reliable in of itself & is to defeat...and they say that isn't how they will enforce it.
One thing to really nail the idea they are actually going to deploy this WiFi snooping...one of the biggest users of iPlayer without a licence (nobody knows if live or just catch-up) are students...good luck trying to work out who is using what by just external packet sniffing of a univerisity network.
When you have the law of the land behind you dont be so sure that a way cannot be found. The logical change is that streaming of any type of media broadcast in the last thirty days is covered, that to use streaming services such as netflix/amazon/nowtv require a license code (issued with tv license). In terms of universities, once again you legislate the enforcement to the accommodation provider. As part of accommodation a student automatically gets enrolled into a tv license, unless they ask otherwise. A small amount of revenue sharing with the University, with non compliance also falling onto the institution.
The extra 200 miles can't add more than 20 minutes or so to the flight.
Lol, had forgotten about that. How much did it cost the taxpayer I wonder?
They could only do that flight because the plane was a half empty charter, would have been too heavy to do it full of people as well as the very full fuel tanks (144,000kg I think).
Yes, but the next gen of planes (787, A350) are significantly more efficient - both in terms of more modern engines, and being generally much lighter. (And having somewhat better aerodynamics.)
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Qantas and BA started non-stop London -> Sydney & Melbourne. If the flight took off at 10am UK time, it would land at 2pm the next day in Oz, which would be as good as it got for avoiding jet lag. Much better than the way most current flights work which involve you spending two nights on the plane, and then being deposited into the taxi rank blinking and startled at 6:30am.
Those timings might work, although if it's a 20 hour flight with 10 hours' time difference, it would take off around 14:00 from London and land in Sydney around 08:00 two days later!
You're right about the 787 and A350, not been on the latter but the former is impressive for the larger windows and lower cabin altitude. Much quieter than the 777 on which I usually travel too.
Hmmm... I do the London -> Doha -> Melbourne route fairly regularly. You take off at 9:15 UK time, and land in Melbourne the following day at 5pm.
If you lost three hours due to not having to stop in Doha, that would mean taking off at 9:15, and landing at 2pm the following day, which sounds pretty awesome to me. I could go to the hotel, have a swim, unpack, have dinner, and be ready for work the next day.
You'd also have just spent 20 hours or so on a plane with dirty air and an uncomfortable business bed (unless you go first and get the suite, of course).
The three times I went to Australia I stayed overnight in Hong Kong, a nice way to break up the long journey. Though work was only a passing concern for two of those times.
The extra 200 miles can't add more than 20 minutes or so to the flight.
Lol, had forgotten about that. How much did it cost the taxpayer I wonder?
They could only do that flight because the plane was a half empty charter, would have been too heavy to do it full of people as well as the very full fuel tanks (144,000kg I think).
Yes, but the next gen of planes (787, A350) are significantly more efficient - both in terms of more modern engines, and being generally much lighter. (And having somewhat better aerodynamics.)
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Qantas and BA started non-stop London -> Sydney & Melbourne. If the flight took off at 10am UK time, it would land at 2pm the next day in Oz, which would be as good as it got for avoiding jet lag. Much better than the way most current flights work which involve you spending two nights on the plane, and then being deposited into the taxi rank blinking and startled at 6:30am.
Those timings might work, although if it's a 20 hour flight with 10 hours' time difference, it would take off around 14:00 from London and land in Sydney around 08:00 two days later!
You're right about the 787 and A350, not been on the latter but the former is impressive for the larger windows and lower cabin altitude. Much quieter than the 777 on which I usually travel too.
Hmmm... I do the London -> Doha -> Melbourne route fairly regularly. You take off at 9:15 UK time, and land in Melbourne the following day at 5pm.
If you lost three hours due to not having to stop in Doha, that would mean taking off at 9:15, and landing at 2pm the following day, which sounds pretty awesome to me. I could go to the hotel, have a swim, unpack, have dinner, and be ready for work the next day.
You'd also have just spent 20 hours or so on a plane with dirty air and an uncomfortable business bed (unless you go first and get the suite, of course).
The three times I went to Australia I stayed overnight in Hong Kong, a nice way to break up the long journey. Though work was only a passing concern for two of those times.
Typically, I'm in Australia for 24 to 72 hours. All I want to do is minimise the time away from home.
Telegraph journos (and by extension, their readers) are so astonishingly cretinous they actually believe that "TV detector vans" not only exist, but can tell if you're watching iPlayer over a secure Wifi connection.
"Oh, don't worry about it. It's another round of mysterious inexplicable technology to terrify you into paying. Which you should, by the way – it costs money, lots of money, to pay actors, writers, producers, directors, crews, lawyers and executives to make things that people enjoy.
We used to do a demo of this as part of house training briefing incoming security ministers.
Tempest cracking works very well on CRT displays nobody uses any more. That are outdoors. And seperated from any other sources of electromagnetic radiation.
According to the article it was demonstrated at a range of several hundred meters, and how many other sources of EM radiation would you expect a 1980s-90s househould to have on all the time. I can only think of the microwave.
The extra 200 miles can't add more than 20 minutes or so to the flight.
Lol, had forgotten about that. How much did it cost the taxpayer I wonder?
They could only do that flight because the plane was a half empty charter, would have been too heavy to do it full of people as well as the very full fuel tanks (144,000kg I think).
Yes, but the next gen of planes (787, A350) are significantly more efficient - both in terms of more modern engines, and being generally much lighter. (And having somewhat better aerodynamics.)
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Qantas and BA started non-stop London -> Sydney & Melbourne. If the flight took off at 10am UK time, it would land at 2pm the next day in Oz, which would be as good as it got for avoiding jet lag. Much better than the way most current flights work which involve you spending two nights on the plane, and then being deposited into the taxi rank blinking and startled at 6:30am.
Those timings might work, although if it's a 20 hour flight with 10 hours' time difference, it would take off around 14:00 from London and land in Sydney around 08:00 two days later!
You're right about the 787 and A350, not been on the latter but the former is impressive for the larger windows and lower cabin altitude. Much quieter than the 777 on which I usually travel too.
Hmmm... I do the London -> Doha -> Melbourne route fairly regularly. You take off at 9:15 UK time, and land in Melbourne the following day at 5pm.
If you lost three hours due to not having to stop in Doha, that would mean taking off at 9:15, and landing at 2pm the following day, which sounds pretty awesome to me. I could go to the hotel, have a swim, unpack, have dinner, and be ready for work the next day.
You'd also have just spent 20 hours or so on a plane with dirty air and an uncomfortable business bed (unless you go first and get the suite, of course).
The three times I went to Australia I stayed overnight in Hong Kong, a nice way to break up the long journey. Though work was only a passing concern for two of those times.
Typically, I'm in Australia for 24 to 72 hours. All I want to do is minimise the time away from home.
Fair enough, if you have actual work to do there and go often I could understand the appeal of the direct flight.
As an aside its amazing how often PB conversations veer into flying habits!
The extra 200 miles can't add more than 20 minutes or so to the flight.
Lol, had forgotten about that. How much did it cost the taxpayer I wonder?
They could only do that flight because the plane was a half empty charter, would have been too heavy to do it full of people as well as the very full fuel tanks (144,000kg I think).
Yes, but the next gen of planes (787, A350) are significantly more efficient - both in terms of more modern engines, and being generally much lighter. (And having somewhat better aerodynamics.)
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Qantas and BA started non-stop London -> Sydney & Melbourne. If the flight took off at 10am UK time, it would land at 2pm the next day in Oz, which would be as good as it got for avoiding jet lag. Much better than the way most current flights work which involve you spending two nights on the plane, and then being deposited into the taxi rank blinking and startled at 6:30am.
You're right about the 787 and A350, not been on the latter but the former is impressive for the larger windows and lower cabin altitude. Much quieter than the 777 on which I usually travel too.
Hmmm... I do the London -> Doha -> Melbourne route fairly regularly. You take off at 9:15 UK time, and land in Melbourne the following day at 5pm.
If you lost three hours due to not having to stop in Doha, that would mean taking off at 9:15, and landing at 2pm the following day, which sounds pretty awesome to me. I could go to the hotel, have a swim, unpack, have dinner, and be ready for work the next day.
You'd also have just spent 20 hours or so on a plane with dirty air and an uncomfortable business bed (unless you go first and get the suite, of course).
The three times I went to Australia I stayed overnight in Hong Kong, a nice way to break up the long journey. Though work was only a passing concern for two of those times.
Typically, I'm in Australia for 24 to 72 hours. All I want to do is minimise the time away from home.
Fair enough, if you have actual work to do there and go often I could understand the appeal of the direct flight.
As an aside its amazing how often PB conversations veer into flying habits!
Just the rich kids swanking in front of the hoi-polloi .
So an unknown former spook is planning to run as an unofficial alternative to Donald Trump.
It could damage Trump round the edges and even a few percent of GOP votrers peeling off from Trump will hurt him but....what if he attracts GOP votes that some would lend to Clinton because they can't have Trump?
Swings and roundabouts. As an annoyance he lacks weight but the CIA background is a curiosity.
If you are posting lots of gossip about the plans of Trump's enemies, I'm not surprised the CIA getting involved in that election.
But it's like kicking a dead horse.
The only thing that could destroy Trump is Trump, and he has done a very good job at that, convincing many that he is insane with his public comments.
Why would any care about stopping him, now that Trump has already self-destructed and has no chance ?
On the subject of flying, I read this morning that Qantas is thinking of introducing a London-Perth non-stop service using the new 787. It would take somewhere between 17 and 18 hours.
Are there enough people who would want to be stuck in a small metal tube for that length of time, and pay for the privilege? I'd be going off my rocker, especially with all these new booze restrictions that people are talking about. And what about the crew? OK, they will be Australians, but even so it would hardly be fair on them.
The Airbus A350 is capable of Sydney to London non stop for most of the year.
Sometimes you have to stop and think whether you should do something rather than whether you could do something. A non-stop flight to Sydney would be 22 hours. I don't know about you but that is my idea of hell, club class or not.
I've done 17 hours non-stop. It is soul-breaking to realize that you've already done 8 hours and it's not even halfway.
That was economy plus.
I once did London to Hong Kong, Kai Tak, trying to land ahead of a typhoon. We got to the interesting bit of the descent, looking into people's flats, when the pilot aborted the landing and took us to Taiwan to sit it out. We weren't allowed to disembark, so by the time the typhoon had blown through and we got to Hong Kong, we'd been stuck in the same plane for over 30 hours. Grim....
Bahrain to New York, landed in Montreal due to blizzard. 3 hours on ground in plane until we alit in the middle of the night into unheated busses taking us to hotels for the night. I was in linens, short sleeves for the 90 minutes or so on the bus. At least we got off the plane ...
Always dress for the destination
I dressed for Joburg in December - coat off at Newcastle and into my case. I didn't bargain on having to walk through the snow at Amsterdam in order to board because the airbridge was knackered!
Has any party ever had a more shambolic, drawn-out leadership election? I remember the Conservative elections that gave us both Hague and IDS were both needlessly drawn out and full of plotting and scheming, but it was all really rather good fun in retrospect - certainly by comparison with this - and didn't involve the courts. The only one which I can think of which comes close is the last Labour leadership election.
This farce has the added factor that the end result will be no change in the leadership.
As an aside its amazing how often PB conversations veer into flying habits!
My work colleague is going to Aus for an afternoon presentation...
A former colleague of mine had to travel to Australia for a job interview. He didn't have any annual leave remaining, so he phoned in sick while he was away. He got the job, btw.
As an aside its amazing how often PB conversations veer into flying habits!
My work colleague is going to Aus for an afternoon presentation...
A former colleague of mine had to travel to Australia for a job interview. He didn't have any annual leave remaining, so he phoned in sick while he was away. He got the job, btw.
Have just been YouGov'd as a Labour member, so presumably there will be an up to date poll by wednesday. Hoping the results will show how hopeless Smith's cause is and Labour will withdraw their appeal. Alternatively they might cause Smith to withdraw and end this farce altogether.
Have just been YouGov'd as a Labour member, so presumably there will be an up to date poll by wednesday. Hoping the results will show how hopeless Smith's cause is and Labour will withdraw their appeal. Alternatively they might cause Smith to withdraw and end this farce altogether.
Well Smith has called for the election to be extended, because he knows he's going to lose if the results are ever declared:
As an aside its amazing how often PB conversations veer into flying habits!
My work colleague is going to Aus for an afternoon presentation...
Have they not got Skype in Australia yet?
No idea why he can't do it over Skype - not up to us anyway, the customer is in Aus
To be fair, Skype really is shit these days...not sure it is that shit to justify 40hrs of flying though.
As a serious point, what is the best alternative to it these days?
We like Facetime, but one does need a good connection. It is to be hoped(!) that my new BT Smart Hub will prove to be our salvation.
Received my new Smart Hub last week. Streets ahead of the old one in terms of signal strength, particularly upstairs.
That’s my experience. So far, anyway. I always blamed the router for our poor service but BT insisted it wasn’t and made a couple of visits to check the wiring etc. Smart Hub went in Friday and that evening we had an iMac, a MacAir, several iPads and four iPhones all running satisfatorily. On the old router I had to do an “engineering reset” about every hour or so. However we have now lost most of the devices since my son and his family went home.
Have just been YouGov'd as a Labour member, so presumably there will be an up to date poll by wednesday. Hoping the results will show how hopeless Smith's cause is and Labour will withdraw their appeal. Alternatively they might cause Smith to withdraw and end this farce altogether.
Well Smith has called for the election to be extended, because he knows he's going to lose if the results are ever declared:
The interesting thing coming out of the High Court ruling is the sea change it has created in legal opinion.
Three weeks ago, there was a general consensus that Courts did not interfere in organisational unless laws were actually broken. Even Men only clubs were allowed many, many years after various sex equality laws were passed.
As an aside its amazing how often PB conversations veer into flying habits!
My work colleague is going to Aus for an afternoon presentation...
Have they not got Skype in Australia yet?
No idea why he can't do it over Skype - not up to us anyway, the customer is in Aus
To be fair, Skype really is shit these days...not sure it is that shit to justify 40hrs of flying though.
As a serious point, what is the best alternative to it these days?
I'd love to know the answer. I use Skype a lot with clients, because I know it will work with clients who use Windows, Mac, or iPad. But apparently Skype for Mac is going the way of the dodo (my weak understanding is that it will become a browser-based service so no standalone application).
The thing that matters for me is that I want to know that everyone can use it!
The gap is still widening day after day, the only change is that since Wednesday it grows at a smaller rate.
Looks like a repeat of 1996, so far, in both the vote share and the number of Electoral Votes (my estimate is Hillary 364 Trump 174).
But things are still getting worse everyday for Trump, I won't be surprised to see a 1964 style victory for Hillary by election day.
50 - 0
Well in theory Trump should have a core of around 45% of republicans, so he probably won't fall bellow 21%.
As to what the other 55% would do, I presume they will scatter in the wind. Some will vote Hillary, some will vote for a variety of 3rd parties, some will simply stay home and not bother to vote for a sure loser.
The only decent thing Trump can do is resign and retire, since the alternative is public humiliation and perhaps jail time.
The interesting thing coming out of the High Court ruling is the sea change it has created in legal opinion.
Three weeks ago, there was a general consensus that Courts did not interfere in organisational unless laws were actually broken. Even Men only clubs were allowed many, many years after various sex equality laws were passed.
The gap is still widening day after day, the only change is that since Wednesday it grows at a smaller rate.
Looks like a repeat of 1996, so far, in both the vote share and the number of Electoral Votes (my estimate is Hillary 364 Trump 174).
But things are still getting worse everyday for Trump, I won't be surprised to see a 1964 style victory for Hillary by election day.
50 - 0
Well in theory Trump should have a core of around 45% of republicans, so he probably won't fall bellow 21%.
As to what the other 55% would do, I presume they will scatter in the wind. Some will vote Hillary, some will vote for a variety of 3rd parties, some will simply stay home and not bother to vote for a sure loser.
The only decent thing Trump can do is resign and retire, since the alternative is public humiliation and perhaps jail time.
I don't see why the case would be dropped if he resigned, unless the case is politically motivated?
Oh wow. One of the US Olympic Fencing team is a hijab wearing Muslim woman. Took up fencing because it was, she felt, the only sport where she could compete “properly” clothed.
As an aside its amazing how often PB conversations veer into flying habits!
My work colleague is going to Aus for an afternoon presentation...
Have they not got Skype in Australia yet?
No idea why he can't do it over Skype - not up to us anyway, the customer is in Aus
To be fair, Skype really is shit these days...not sure it is that shit to justify 40hrs of flying though.
As a serious point, what is the best alternative to it these days?
We like Facetime, but one does need a good connection. It is to be hoped(!) that my new BT Smart Hub will prove to be our salvation.
Facetime saved Erdogan !
How'd you feel about his purge?
Terrible. But I would still back any democratically elected government over the military as the Turkish people and Opposition parties did. Erdogan, at the end of the day, is a Centre Right street fighter, a thug. But elected by the people.
The interesting thing coming out of the High Court ruling is the sea change it has created in legal opinion.
Three weeks ago, there was a general consensus that Courts did not interfere in organisational unless laws were actually broken. Even Men only clubs were allowed many, many years after various sex equality laws were passed.
Now they will delve into such matters.
Isnt this about breach of contract though?
Yes - the decision was all about the contract that existed between the members and the Labour Party
Oh wow. One of the US Olympic Fencing team is a hijab wearing Muslim woman. Took up fencing because it was, she felt, the only sport where she could compete “properly” clothed.
Lol, had forgotten about that. How much did it cost the taxpayer I wonder?
They could only do that flight because the plane was a half empty charter, would have been too heavy to do it full of people as well as the very full fuel tanks (144,000kg I think).
Yes, but the next gen of planes (787, A350) are significantly more efficient - both in terms of more modern engines, and being generally much lighter. (And having somewhat better aerodynamics.)
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Qantas and BA started non-stop London -> Sydney & Melbourne. If the flight took off at 10am UK time, it would land at 2pm the next day in Oz, which would be as good as it got for avoiding jet lag. Much better than the way most current flights work which involve you spending two nights on the plane, and then being deposited into the taxi rank blinking and startled at 6:30am.
Those timings might work, although if it's a 20 hour flight with 10 hours' time difference, it would take off around 14:00 from London and land in Sydney around 08:00 two days later!
You're right about the 787 and A350, not been on the latter but the former is impressive for the larger windows and lower cabin altitude. Much quieter than the 777 on which I usually travel too.
Hmmm... I do the London -> Doha -> Melbourne route fairly regularly. You take off at 9:15 UK time, and land in Melbourne the following day at 5pm.
If you lost three hours due to not having to stop in Doha, that would mean taking off at 9:15, and landing at 2pm the following day, which sounds pretty awesome to me. I could go to the hotel, have a swim, unpack, have dinner, and be ready for work the next day.
You'd also have just spent 20 hours or so on a plane with dirty air and an uncomfortable business bed (unless you go first and get the suite, of course).
The three times I went to Australia I stayed overnight in Hong Kong, a nice way to break up the long journey. Though work was only a passing concern for two of those times.
Typically, I'm in Australia for 24 to 72 hours. All I want to do is minimise the time away from home.
Fair enough, if you have actual work to do there and go often I could understand the appeal of the direct flight.
As an aside its amazing how often PB conversations veer into flying habits!
Do any of you frequent long-distance flyers have any sense of guilt about your outsized carbon footprints, or do you just assume that you're worth it?
As an aside its amazing how often PB conversations veer into flying habits!
My work colleague is going to Aus for an afternoon presentation...
Have they not got Skype in Australia yet?
No idea why he can't do it over Skype - not up to us anyway, the customer is in Aus
To be fair, Skype really is shit these days...not sure it is that shit to justify 40hrs of flying though.
As a serious point, what is the best alternative to it these days?
I'd love to know the answer. I use Skype a lot with clients, because I know it will work with clients who use Windows, Mac, or iPad. But apparently Skype for Mac is going the way of the dodo (my weak understanding is that it will become a browser-based service so no standalone application).
The thing that matters for me is that I want to know that everyone can use it!
That, AFAIK, is the big problem with Facetime. Both/all parties need Apple equipment.
As an aside its amazing how often PB conversations veer into flying habits!
My work colleague is going to Aus for an afternoon presentation...
Have they not got Skype in Australia yet?
No idea why he can't do it over Skype - not up to us anyway, the customer is in Aus
To be fair, Skype really is shit these days...not sure it is that shit to justify 40hrs of flying though.
As a serious point, what is the best alternative to it these days?
We like Facetime, but one does need a good connection. It is to be hoped(!) that my new BT Smart Hub will prove to be our salvation.
Facetime saved Erdogan !
How'd you feel about his purge?
Terrible. But I would still back any democratically elected government over the military as the Turkish people and Opposition parties did. Erdogan, at the end of the day, is a Centre Right street fighter, a thug. But elected by the people.
Have just been YouGov'd as a Labour member, so presumably there will be an up to date poll by wednesday. Hoping the results will show how hopeless Smith's cause is and Labour will withdraw their appeal. Alternatively they might cause Smith to withdraw and end this farce altogether.
Well Smith has called for the election to be extended, because he knows he's going to lose if the results are ever declared:
Oh wow. One of the US Olympic Fencing team is a hijab wearing Muslim woman. Took up fencing because it was, she felt, the only sport where she could compete “properly” clothed.
Oh wow. One of the US Olympic Fencing team is a hijab wearing Muslim woman. Took up fencing because it was, she felt, the only sport where she could compete “properly” clothed.
The interesting thing coming out of the High Court ruling is the sea change it has created in legal opinion.
Three weeks ago, there was a general consensus that Courts did not interfere in organisational unless laws were actually broken. Even Men only clubs were allowed many, many years after various sex equality laws were passed.
Now they will delve into such matters.
Isnt this about breach of contract though?
But I am not aware of any election where a line is not drawn. You cannot turn up and vote on Election day by producing your driving licence, can you ? Even if you were perfectly eligible to vote otherwise.
Oh wow. One of the US Olympic Fencing team is a hijab wearing Muslim woman. Took up fencing because it was, she felt, the only sport where she could compete “properly” clothed.
The interesting thing coming out of the High Court ruling is the sea change it has created in legal opinion.
Three weeks ago, there was a general consensus that Courts did not interfere in organisational unless laws were actually broken. Even Men only clubs were allowed many, many years after various sex equality laws were passed.
Now they will delve into such matters.
Isnt this about breach of contract though?
But I am not aware of any election where a line is not drawn. You cannot turn up and vote on Election day by producing your driving licence, can you ? Even if you were perfectly eligible to vote otherwise.
Wasn't the election announced after they had joined?
Let's not forget it took a hundred years' of jurisprudence to decide that unincorporated associations like political parties were even government primarily by the law of contract, not trust...
So an unknown former spook is planning to run as an unofficial alternative to Donald Trump.
It could damage Trump round the edges and even a few percent of GOP votrers peeling off from Trump will hurt him but....what if he attracts GOP votes that some would lend to Clinton because they can't have Trump?
Swings and roundabouts. As an annoyance he lacks weight but the CIA background is a curiosity.
If you are posting lots of gossip about the plans of Trump's enemies, I'm not surprised the CIA getting involved in that election.
But it's like kicking a dead horse.
The only thing that could destroy Trump is Trump, and he has done a very good job at that, convincing many that he is insane with his public comments.
Why would any care about stopping him, now that Trump has already self-destructed and has no chance ?
Why leave it to chance? If you go out to overwhelm, you overwhelm.
The gap is still widening day after day, the only change is that since Wednesday it grows at a smaller rate.
Looks like a repeat of 1996, so far, in both the vote share and the number of Electoral Votes (my estimate is Hillary 364 Trump 174).
But things are still getting worse everyday for Trump, I won't be surprised to see a 1964 style victory for Hillary by election day.
50 - 0
Well in theory Trump should have a core of around 45% of republicans, so he probably won't fall bellow 21%.
As to what the other 55% would do, I presume they will scatter in the wind. Some will vote Hillary, some will vote for a variety of 3rd parties, some will simply stay home and not bother to vote for a sure loser.
The only decent thing Trump can do is resign and retire, since the alternative is public humiliation and perhaps jail time.
I don't see why the case would be dropped if he resigned, unless the case is politically motivated?
Well I believe it partially is politically motivated.
In america if you want to fix a trial, you fix either the judge or the jury. (see OJ Simpson Trial for example)
In this case I think they are both fixed.
There is no way Trump will get a favourable hearing from the Judge due to his political statements, and the Jury has been packed with minorities from New York City that are sure to be 100% Hillary fans.
There is a chance that Trump will be convicted and thrown to Jail before election day, just from the make up of the Jury.
Lol, had forgotten about that. How much did it cost the taxpayer I wonder?
They could only do that flight because the plane was a half empty charter, would have been too heavy to do it full of people as well as the very full fuel tanks (144,000kg I think).
Yes, but the next gen of planes (787, A350) are significantly more efficient - both in terms of more modern engines, and being generally much lighter. (And having somewhat better aerodynamics.)
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Qantas and BA started non-stop London -> Sydney & Melbourne. If the flight took off at 10am UK time, it would land at 2pm the next day in Oz, which would be as good as it got for avoiding jet lag. Much better than the way most current flights work which involve you spending two nights on the plane, and then being deposited into the taxi rank blinking and startled at 6:30am.
Those timings might work, although if it's a 20 hour flight with 10 hours' time difference, it would take off around 14:00 from London and land in Sydney around 08:00 two days later!
You're right about the 787 and A350, not been on the latter but the former is impressive for the larger windows and lower cabin altitude. Much quieter than the 777 on which I usually travel too.
Hmmm... I do the London -> Doha -> Melbourne route fairly regularly. You take off at 9:15 UK time, and land in Melbourne the following day at 5pm.
If you lost three hours due to not having to stop in Doha, that would mean taking off at 9:15, and landing at 2pm the following day, which sounds pretty awesome to me. I could go to the hotel, have a swim, unpack, have dinner, and be ready for work the next day.
You'd also have just spent 20 hours or so on a plane with dirty air and an uncomfortable business bed (unless you go first and get the suite, of course).
The three times I went to Australia I stayed overnight in Hong Kong, a nice way to break up the long journey. Though work was only a passing concern for two of those times.
Typically, I'm in Australia for 24 to 72 hours. All I want to do is minimise the time away from home.
Fair enough, if you have actual work to do there and go often I could understand the appeal of the direct flight.
As an aside its amazing how often PB conversations veer into flying habits!
Do any of you frequent long-distance flyers have any sense of guilt about your outsized carbon footprints, or do you just assume that you're worth it?
Have just been YouGov'd as a Labour member, so presumably there will be an up to date poll by wednesday. Hoping the results will show how hopeless Smith's cause is and Labour will withdraw their appeal. Alternatively they might cause Smith to withdraw and end this farce altogether.
Well Smith has called for the election to be extended, because he knows he's going to lose if the results are ever declared:
The interesting thing coming out of the High Court ruling is the sea change it has created in legal opinion.
Three weeks ago, there was a general consensus that Courts did not interfere in organisational unless laws were actually broken. Even Men only clubs were allowed many, many years after various sex equality laws were passed.
Now they will delve into such matters.
Isnt this about breach of contract though?
But I am not aware of any election where a line is not drawn. You cannot turn up and vote on Election day by producing your driving licence, can you ? Even if you were perfectly eligible to vote otherwise.
The problem is that members signing up from January to July were signed up on a website which promised them that if they paid their membership and signed up, they would be able to vote in leadership elections. If they wanted to draw a line, then it cannot be drawn retrospectively. It is a clear breach of contract, although I thought the judge would have probably given the Labour Party the option of allowing those members to vote or offering them a refund of their membership fees, rather than get involved in whether the NEC were right to interpret their rules in the way in which they did.
So an unknown former spook is planning to run as an unofficial alternative to Donald Trump.
It could damage Trump round the edges and even a few percent of GOP votrers peeling off from Trump will hurt him but....what if he attracts GOP votes that some would lend to Clinton because they can't have Trump?
Swings and roundabouts. As an annoyance he lacks weight but the CIA background is a curiosity.
If you are posting lots of gossip about the plans of Trump's enemies, I'm not surprised the CIA getting involved in that election.
But it's like kicking a dead horse.
The only thing that could destroy Trump is Trump, and he has done a very good job at that, convincing many that he is insane with his public comments.
Why would any care about stopping him, now that Trump has already self-destructed and has no chance ?
Why leave it to chance? If you go out to overwhelm, you overwhelm.
But the CIA, and the other opponents and enemies of Trump failed to destroy him. (see all the useless plots of NeverTrump, including the latest one)
Trump himself destroyed himself with his mouth.
It's a case of someone being proven invincible against all others, but himself. ( a bit Shakespearean )
As an aside its amazing how often PB conversations veer into flying habits!
My work colleague is going to Aus for an afternoon presentation...
Have they not got Skype in Australia yet?
No idea why he can't do it over Skype - not up to us anyway, the customer is in Aus
To be fair, Skype really is shit these days...not sure it is that shit to justify 40hrs of flying though.
As a serious point, what is the best alternative to it these days?
We like Facetime, but one does need a good connection. It is to be hoped(!) that my new BT Smart Hub will prove to be our salvation.
Facetime saved Erdogan !
How'd you feel about his purge?
Terrible. But I would still back any democratically elected government over the military as the Turkish people and Opposition parties did. Erdogan, at the end of the day, is a Centre Right street fighter, a thug. But elected by the people.
If Theresa May were to behave like Erdogan, would you likewise defend her right to do so?
As an aside its amazing how often PB conversations veer into flying habits!
My work colleague is going to Aus for an afternoon presentation...
Have they not got Skype in Australia yet?
No idea why he can't do it over Skype - not up to us anyway, the customer is in Aus
To be fair, Skype really is shit these days...not sure it is that shit to justify 40hrs of flying though.
As a serious point, what is the best alternative to it these days?
We like Facetime, but one does need a good connection. It is to be hoped(!) that my new BT Smart Hub will prove to be our salvation.
Facetime saved Erdogan !
How'd you feel about his purge?
Terrible. But I would still back any democratically elected government over the military as the Turkish people and Opposition parties did. Erdogan, at the end of the day, is a Centre Right street fighter, a thug. But elected by the people.
If Theresa May were to behave like Erdogan, would you likewise defend her right to do so?
Erdogan pivoting to Russia and Iran is going to cause problems down the line.
@chrisshipitv: Corbyn/McDonnell now openly criticising Labour HQ for its decision to appeal High Court ruling. Leader criticises his own party. What a mess
As an aside its amazing how often PB conversations veer into flying habits!
My work colleague is going to Aus for an afternoon presentation...
Have they not got Skype in Australia yet?
No idea why he can't do it over Skype - not up to us anyway, the customer is in Aus
To be fair, Skype really is shit these days...not sure it is that shit to justify 40hrs of flying though.
As a serious point, what is the best alternative to it these days?
We like Facetime, but one does need a good connection. It is to be hoped(!) that my new BT Smart Hub will prove to be our salvation.
Received my new Smart Hub last week. Streets ahead of the old one in terms of signal strength, particularly upstairs.
If you don't mind spending some cash, the Ubiquiti wifi gear is amazeballs. It's as good as the Cisco kit, supports zero hand off, and is literally 95% cheaper. A single Unifi AC Access Point is 85 quid.
(The Ubiquiti Unifi line is probably the only thing on Amazon that gets universal give star ratings. I rate it VERY highly.)
The problem is that members signing up from January to July were signed up on a website which promised them that if they paid their membership and signed up, they would be able to vote in leadership elections. If they wanted to draw a line, then it cannot be drawn retrospectively. It is a clear breach of contract, although I thought the judge would have probably given the Labour Party the option of allowing those members to vote or offering them a refund of their membership fees, rather than get involved in whether the NEC were right to interpret their rules in the way in which they did.
The underlying loyalty to a political party of anyone who signed up just to be able to vote in a leadership election should be assumed to be pretty slim. Most would accept the refund.
The gap is still widening day after day, the only change is that since Wednesday it grows at a smaller rate.
Looks like a repeat of 1996, so far, in both the vote share and the number of Electoral Votes (my estimate is Hillary 364 Trump 174).
But things are still getting worse everyday for Trump, I won't be surprised to see a 1964 style victory for Hillary by election day.
How is ur average daily tracking poll different from RCP?
I'm using 7 daily and weekly tracking polls, that I have conformed to the earliest point where Trump and Hillary were tied in the RCP average (same thing I did in 2012) to get rid of any methodology differences.
So it should mirror the RCP average, but without having to wait a month for the occasional CNN, ABC ect poll.
It's faster than the RCP in that it uses only daily and weekly tracking polls, but as accurate in it's movements due to the large number of them used (7 in total).
@chrisshipitv: Corbyn/McDonnell now openly criticising Labour HQ for its decision to appeal High Court ruling. Leader criticises his own party. What a mess
Wouldn't this be an NEC decision? I thought Corbyn had a majority (he won the ballot issue and only lost on the membership because he left the room, I recall)?
As an aside its amazing how often PB conversations veer into flying habits!
My work colleague is going to Aus for an afternoon presentation...
Have they not got Skype in Australia yet?
No idea why he can't do it over Skype - not up to us anyway, the customer is in Aus
To be fair, Skype really is shit these days...not sure it is that shit to justify 40hrs of flying though.
As a serious point, what is the best alternative to it these days?
We like Facetime, but one does need a good connection. It is to be hoped(!) that my new BT Smart Hub will prove to be our salvation.
Facetime saved Erdogan !
How'd you feel about his purge?
Terrible. But I would still back any democratically elected government over the military as the Turkish people and Opposition parties did. Erdogan, at the end of the day, is a Centre Right street fighter, a thug. But elected by the people.
If Theresa May were to behave like Erdogan, would you likewise defend her right to do so?
My 'longest' trip was London to Las Vegas. Due to the company being in dire financial straits it involved a seven hour layover in Chicago, a three hour layover in L.A. and me not knowing my arse from my elbow for about 48 hours afterwards.
Worst trip was an unscheduled secret squirrel trip to Christchurch in 2007. Flew London-Brisbane-Auckland-Christchurch, spent the the day with the Kiwis and flew back. As the poet says, fuck that for a game of soldiers.
I remember sitting next to this very angry Irish man on a flight back from Miami a few year back...after a few hours he appeared to have calmed down a bit & I engaged with him. His anger related to the fact he had done back to back over 4 days... Dublin -> London (meeting) -> miami (meeting) -> la (meeting) -> Miami (meeting) -> heading home ... And had been told he would now be expected to do this once a month.
I can imagine how he felt. I once, briefly, had a boss who would send me off on trips with meetings in different cities and countries connected as far as possible by night flights (more efficient use of time and saved the cost of hotels). Fortunately he was posted before I killed him.
The problem is that members signing up from January to July were signed up on a website which promised them that if they paid their membership and signed up, they would be able to vote in leadership elections. If they wanted to draw a line, then it cannot be drawn retrospectively. It is a clear breach of contract, although I thought the judge would have probably given the Labour Party the option of allowing those members to vote or offering them a refund of their membership fees, rather than get involved in whether the NEC were right to interpret their rules in the way in which they did.
The underlying loyalty to a political party of anyone who signed up just to be able to vote in a leadership election should be assumed to be pretty slim. Most would accept the refund.
That's Labour's fault for not stating that there would be a cooling off period before you can vote.
@chrisshipitv: Corbyn/McDonnell now openly criticising Labour HQ for its decision to appeal High Court ruling. Leader criticises his own party. What a mess
Yes, Labour under Corbyn is a mess in every way you choose to name. Nothing to do with Corbyn's leadership of course.
As an aside its amazing how often PB conversations veer into flying habits!
My work colleague is going to Aus for an afternoon presentation...
Have they not got Skype in Australia yet?
No idea why he can't do it over Skype - not up to us anyway, the customer is in Aus
To be fair, Skype really is shit these days...not sure it is that shit to justify 40hrs of flying though.
As a serious point, what is the best alternative to it these days?
We like Facetime, but one does need a good connection. It is to be hoped(!) that my new BT Smart Hub will prove to be our salvation.
Received my new Smart Hub last week. Streets ahead of the old one in terms of signal strength, particularly upstairs.
If you don't mind spending some cash, the Ubiquiti wifi gear is amazeballs. It's as good as the Cisco kit, supports zero hand off, and is literally 95% cheaper. A single Unifi AC Access Point is 85 quid.
(The Ubiquiti Unifi line is probably the only thing on Amazon that gets universal give star ratings. I rate it VERY highly.)
Cheers, I've heard of them, but only vaguely. I'll check them out. I love widgets in general, just trained myself to frugality.
@chrisshipitv: Corbyn/McDonnell now openly criticising Labour HQ for its decision to appeal High Court ruling. Leader criticises his own party. What a mess
Armando Iannucci should make a claim for theft of intellectual property really just for the lolz.
an iMac, a MacAir, several iPads and four iPhones all running satisfatorily.
If I had to write one sentence to describe the most insufferable family in the world, this would be it.
There were a lot of us in the house at the time.
And there was me thinking it must have been a particularly tech savvy octopus.
Son’s consultancy work, in a teccie field, and based in the Asia-Pacific region, means he’s pretty well always on line, even on what are supposed to be holidays. And that on-line-ness rubs off on his children. Doesn’t help that his wife has sisters and friends all over the world, too.
Comments
You're right about the 787 and A350, not been on the latter but the former is impressive for the larger windows and lower cabin altitude. Much quieter than the 777 on which I usually travel too.
No doubt Fox would go on a la Blair/Mandelson/Hurd about how important it is to have a dialogue with the Kazakhs/Azeris/Serbs, whoever. They might even have a point. But until a law is passed so that no Parliamentarian, or ex Parliamentarian can ever take money from a foreign potentate then this will continue to happen. See one Hilary Clinton in this connection also. Personally, I would be in favour of such a law. But I'd also be in favour of getting rid of subsidised booze for our elected representatives.
The Azeri regime is very bad though. Imagine if a criminal gang took over a country.
It could damage Trump round the edges and even a few percent of GOP votrers peeling off from Trump will hurt him but....what if he attracts GOP votes that some would lend to Clinton because they can't have Trump?
Swings and roundabouts. As an annoyance he lacks weight but the CIA background is a curiosity.
One thing to really nail the idea they are actually going to deploy this WiFi snooping...one of the biggest users of iPlayer without a licence (nobody knows if live or just catch-up) are students...good luck trying to work out who is using what by just external packet sniffing of a univerisity network.
The easiest solution is a logon system like Netflix / sky. Obviously it can be exploited, but locking it to 3 devices like Spotify make sharing etc more of a pain than worrying about mythical vans.
All this is why I have said for years funding model is broken.
If you lost three hours due to not having to stop in Doha, that would mean taking off at 9:15, and landing at 2pm the following day, which sounds pretty awesome to me. I could go to the hotel, have a swim, unpack, have dinner, and be ready for work the next day.
I doubt they'd bother with uni students in halls of residence, definitely not worth the hassle.
The three times I went to Australia I stayed overnight in Hong Kong, a nice way to break up the long journey. Though work was only a passing concern for two of those times.
As an aside its amazing how often PB conversations veer into flying habits!
With car tax, just stick it on petrol & basically nobody can avoid it plus is relative to usage which seems far fairer.
https://www.youtube.com/user/SkippyAdventures
As a serious point, what is the best alternative to it these days?
But it's like kicking a dead horse.
The only thing that could destroy Trump is Trump, and he has done a very good job at that, convincing many that he is insane with his public comments.
Why would any care about stopping him, now that Trump has already self-destructed and has no chance ?
AustraliaNew Zealand.An update of my Average Daily Tracking poll:
Hillary 47 +3 since last week.
Trump 41 nc
The gap is still widening day after day, the only change is that since Wednesday it grows at a smaller rate.
Looks like a repeat of 1996, so far, in both the vote share and the number of Electoral Votes (my estimate is Hillary 364 Trump 174).
But things are still getting worse everyday for Trump, I won't be surprised to see a 1964 style victory for Hillary by election day.
https://twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/762654161632686080
Can he not think about political gamblers' time value of money ?
Three weeks ago, there was a general consensus that Courts did not interfere in organisational unless laws were actually broken. Even Men only clubs were allowed many, many years after various sex equality laws were passed.
Now they will delve into such matters.
The thing that matters for me is that I want to know that everyone can use it!
As to what the other 55% would do, I presume they will scatter in the wind.
Some will vote Hillary, some will vote for a variety of 3rd parties, some will simply stay home and not bother to vote for a sure loser.
The only decent thing Trump can do is resign and retire, since the alternative is public humiliation and perhaps jail time.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/36963954
Of course having a leadership election that lasts for an indefinite period is ridiculous.
In america if you want to fix a trial, you fix either the judge or the jury.
(see OJ Simpson Trial for example)
In this case I think they are both fixed.
There is no way Trump will get a favourable hearing from the Judge due to his political statements, and the Jury has been packed with minorities from New York City that are sure to be 100% Hillary fans.
There is a chance that Trump will be convicted and thrown to Jail before election day, just from the make up of the Jury.
(see all the useless plots of NeverTrump, including the latest one)
Trump himself destroyed himself with his mouth.
It's a case of someone being proven invincible against all others, but himself.
( a bit Shakespearean )
(The Ubiquiti Unifi line is probably the only thing on Amazon that gets universal give star ratings. I rate it VERY highly.)
So it should mirror the RCP average, but without having to wait a month for the occasional CNN, ABC ect poll.
It's faster than the RCP in that it uses only daily and weekly tracking polls, but as accurate in it's movements due to the large number of them used (7 in total).
They're making it hard for themselves, but seems lady luck is pissed off with them too.