politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The helter-skelter world of WH2020 Democratic nomination betti

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The helter-skelter world of WH2020 Democratic nomination betting

!function(){"use strict";window.addEventListener("message",function(a){if(void 0!==a.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var e in a.data["datawrapper-height"]){var t=document.getElementById("datawrapper-chart-"+e)||document.querySelector("iframe[src*='"+e+"']");t&&(t.style.height=a.data["datawrapper-height"][e]+"px")}})}();

Read the full story here

DavidL

Hopefully this is Sanders turn in the sun, Icarus style.

Quincel

No polls in the US since Friday. I know Nevada is tough to poll, but come on...

Sandpit

3rd, like, umm, Klobuchar, or maybe Buttigeig?

ydoethur

DavidL said:

Hopefully this is Sanders turn in the sun, Icarus style.

What peevish fool was that of Vermont who taught his son the office of President?

BigRich

Quincel said:

No polls in the US since Friday. I know Nevada is tough to poll, but come on...

Why is Navada tough to poll? because its a caucus? or is there other factors?

BluestBlue

Bloomberg has no realistic chance. At some point he's going to have to actually debate against Sanders, and much as I disdain his schtick about how 'the muhllionaires and the buhllionaires are buying elections and taking over the world', Bloomberg is literally a billionaire trying to buy the election and take over the world...

Nigelb

ydoethur said:

DavidL said:

Hopefully this is Sanders turn in the sun, Icarus style.

What peevish fool was that of Vermont who taught his son the office of President?

What a peevish fool, surely ?

geoffw

BigRich said:

Quincel said:

No polls in the US since Friday. I know Nevada is tough to poll, but come on...

Why is Navada tough to poll? because its a caucus? or is there other factors?

As the header says, "anything could happen with its Caucasus".

DavidL

eadric said:

fpt for Morris

It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.

It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).

How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?

The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).

I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.

1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.

2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very

3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack

4. Fuck.

https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20

The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.

Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.

Casino_Royale

BluestBlue said:

Bloomberg has no realistic chance. At some point he's going to have to actually debate against Sanders, and much as I disdain his schtick about how 'the muhllionaires and the buhllionaires are buying elections and taking over the world', Bloomberg is literally a billionaire trying to buy the election and take over the world...

There is that.

The trouble is that he might also be seen to be the best of a bad lot.

viewcode

Sandpit said:

TOPPING said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Oh well..

https://twitter.com/JPonpolitics/status/1229350893138608128?s=20

That imo is a huge shame. I think the writing was on the wall when they rescheduled so that Broadcasting House and Pienaar clashed. You may dislike BH (I do) but it is quite clear who the BBC preferred.

I hope he continues with the political stuff.

The rumours are that Times Radio has a very large 'talent' budget, and is offering large pay rises and editorial freedom to a lot of well-known broadcasters to jump ship.

They are trying to kill the BBC.
This is one of the prongs of attack.
It's working.

ydoethur

Nigelb said:

ydoethur said:

DavidL said:

Hopefully this is Sanders turn in the sun, Icarus style.

What peevish fool was that of Vermont who taught his son the office of President?

What a peevish fool, surely ?

The exact quotation (HVI PIII, act V Sc VI) is:

‘Why, what a peevish fool was that of Crete,
That taught his son the office of a fowl!
An yet, for all his wings, the fool was drown'd.’

I was taking poetic licence to make it match the comment better.

BluestBlue

Casino_Royale said:

BluestBlue said:

Bloomberg has no realistic chance. At some point he's going to have to actually debate against Sanders, and much as I disdain his schtick about how 'the muhllionaires and the buhllionaires are buying elections and taking over the world', Bloomberg is literally a billionaire trying to buy the election and take over the world...

There is that.

The trouble is that he might also be seen to be the best of a bad lot.

I think the only way for Bloomberg to get it would be some epic stitch-up at the convention. The Dem base won't accept him, not just because he's a plutocrat - and a former Republican! - but because of all the -ism stories about him that are now in full flow.

geoffw

@eadric is right, there is no bigger concern or story than corvid-19.
Btw if it's not bird flue as they say, then why is it named after a bird?

Richard_Nabavi

This is quite funny (or maybe I just have a strange sense of humour):

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2020/feb/17/british-ecj-could-sue-eu-eleanor-sharpston

IanB2

Third like Eadric?

IanB2

eadric said:

fpt for Morris

It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.

It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).

How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?

The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).

I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.

1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.

2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very

3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack

4. Fuck.

https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20

So now take a sell betting position on the world’s principal stock markets?

IanB2

Casino_Royale said:

BluestBlue said:

Bloomberg has no realistic chance. At some point he's going to have to actually debate against Sanders, and much as I disdain his schtick about how 'the muhllionaires and the buhllionaires are buying elections and taking over the world', Bloomberg is literally a billionaire trying to buy the election and take over the world...

There is that.

The trouble is that he might also be seen to be the best of a bad lot.

The issue is that none of the others can currently credibly claim to be able to beat Trump

Casino_Royale

DavidL said:

eadric said:

fpt for Morris

It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.

It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).

How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?

The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).

I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.

1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.

2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very

3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack

4. Fuck.

https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20

The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.

Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.

I suspect it’s cock-up rather than conspiracy. China muzzled the doctor because it didn’t want the headlines or embarrassment of another virus outbreak it thought was hugely exaggerated. Not because it manufactured it.

Now it isn’t a secret anymore it will use all measures it believes it needs to in order to contain its spread, and human rights won’t even feature.

The images of medical kidnap vans - and welded apartments where we have no idea who’s still inside - are chilling.

logical_song

eadric said:

fpt for Morris

It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.

It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).

How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?

The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).

I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.

1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.

2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very

3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack

4. Fuck.

https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20

The idea that the virus is man made is being promoted by InfoWars, I think you'll find it is a conspiracy theory.

Nigelb

DavidL said:

The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.

Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.

Assumptions 2 - 4 are based on very little evidence, as it simply hasn't been loose for long enough outside of China to give us much in the way of hard data. We'll have a far better idea in two to three weeks' time.
What's for sure is that Japan is starting to think that the infection is outside of their control now...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/Japan-seized-with-anxiety-over-homegrown-outbreak
This is nothing like SARS, which was far easier to identify and contain.
Having a vaccine available in quantity might take up to eighteen months.

matt

DavidL said:

eadric said:

fpt for Morris

It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.

It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).

How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?

The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).

I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.

1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.

2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very

3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack

4. Fuck.

https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20

The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.

Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.

A. It’s difficult to report from within China generally and certainly from Hubei.

B. Media knows that the Chinese are lying but struggle to report that while still maintaining access.

C. As your (1) to (5) suggests, it’s complicated and the media struggles with complicated. Whining Britons on cruises provide human interest (but no depth).

D. The British public is not interested in the potential liquidity issues for Chinese SMEs and the follow-on possibilities for that.

IshmaelZ

geoffw said:

@eadric is right, there is no bigger concern or story than corvid-19.
Btw if it's not bird flue as they say, then why is it named after a bird?

COVID

DavidL

eadric said:

DavidL said:

eadric said:

fpt for Morris

It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.

It could break China. Thend their health systems crack

4. Fuck.

https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20

The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.

Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.

Agreed. This may all disappear. Inshallah. But to address your points..

1. This implies that all countries will have to do what China is doing. Massive and oppressive quarantine. Will they be able, or willing?

2. Yes. But it could also be optimistic, we still don't even know the incubation period. It was thought to be 14 days. Now some say it could be a month.

3. Let's hope so

4. I read an estimate that a vaccine is 18 months away. Too long

5. Who knows?

ALSO, is the death toll accurate? Look at this video. I have no idea if it is "true". It purports to show the streets of Wuhan, with bodies in bags just lying on the pavement. If it IS real it is horrifying. And even if it isn't, there are enough scary videos out there to make anyone quail. They can't all be fake.

https://twitter.com/Amy78404357/status/1229404854084407303?s=20

My guess that these are people who cannot get back to their houses because of the lock down (and possibly fear that they have the virus). Whether they are alive or dead or a bit of both is hard to tell.

matt

Casino_Royale said:

DavidL said:

eadric said:

fpt for Morris

It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.

It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).

How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?

The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).

I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.

1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.

2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very

3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack

4. Fuck.

https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20

The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.

Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.

I suspect it’s cock-up rather than conspiracy. China muzzled the doctor because it didn’t want the headlines or embarrassment of another virus outbreak it thought was hugely exaggerated. Not because it manufactured it.

Now it isn’t a secret anymore it will use all measures it believes it needs to in order to contain its spread, and human rights won’t even feature.

The images of medical kidnap vans - and welded apartments where we have no idea who’s still inside - are chilling.

The doctor was muzzled because that’s what the Communist Party does. It’s the parable of the scorpion and the frog.

geoffw

IshmaelZ said:

geoffw said:

@eadric is right, there is no bigger concern or story than corvid-19.
Btw if it's not bird flue as they say, then why is it named after a bird?

COVID

Ha! Much obliged.

Nigelb

ydoethur said:

Nigelb said:

ydoethur said:

DavidL said:

Hopefully this is Sanders turn in the sun, Icarus style.

What peevish fool was that of Vermont who taught his son the office of President?

What a peevish fool, surely ?

The exact quotation (HVI PIII, act V Sc VI) is:

‘Why, what a peevish fool was that of Crete,
That taught his son the office of a fowl!
An yet, for all his wings, the fool was drown'd.’

I was taking poetic licence to make it match the comment better.

Of course. I'm just relieved it wasn't my defective memory.

Luckyguy1983

I will laugh if the answer turns out to be miracle mineral solution.

I take it inoculation is also being experimented on as an option.

DavidL

Nigelb said:

DavidL said:

The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.

Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.

Assumptions 2 - 4 are based on very little evidence, as it simply hasn't been loose for long enough outside of China to give us much in the way of hard data. We'll have a far better idea in two to three weeks' time.
What's for sure is that Japan is starting to think that the infection is outside of their control now...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/Japan-seized-with-anxiety-over-homegrown-outbreak
This is nothing like SARS, which was far easier to identify and contain.
Having a vaccine available in quantity might take up to eighteen months.

According to our pension fund managers the view in London seems to be that this is a Q1 story. I increasingly have my doubts.

Richard_Nabavi

On topic: A nice illustration of why it's usually a good idea to lay the favourite in markets like this. Of course this means lay the temporary over-hyped favourite in an unstable market, get out of your position when sentiment changes, rinse and repeat to build up a position over time; it doesn't mean (as some have interpreted it) as lay the favourite once the shape of the market becomes clear.

So should we be laying Sanders and Bloomberg now? As I write the best lay prices for Dem nominee on BF are 2.54 and 3.75, implying that you can bet against the nominee being one of those two at around 3.0 (2/1). Is there a 67% chance of one of these two getting the gig? I'd say not, but DYOR.

Nigelb

DavidL said:

Nigelb said:

DavidL said:

The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.

Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.

Assumptions 2 - 4 are based on very little evidence, as it simply hasn't been loose for long enough outside of China to give us much in the way of hard data. We'll have a far better idea in two to three weeks' time.
What's for sure is that Japan is starting to think that the infection is outside of their control now...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/Japan-seized-with-anxiety-over-homegrown-outbreak
This is nothing like SARS, which was far easier to identify and contain.
Having a vaccine available in quantity might take up to eighteen months.

According to our pension fund managers the view in London seems to be that this is a Q1 story. I increasingly have my doubts.

As do I.

BluestBlue

eadric said:

IanB2 said:

eadric said:

fpt for Morris

It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.

It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).

How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?

The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).

I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.

1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.

2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very

3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack

4. Fuck.

https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20

So now take a sell betting position on the world’s principal stock markets?

As a betting site we should certainly be looking at the implications of corona for upcoming elections etc

eg I reckon coronavirus makes a Trump re-election more likely, just because he is seen as being "against open borders", "tough on migrants", and so on.

These will be increasingly popular opinions.

Research has found that stimulation of the brain centres responsible for fear and disgust causes a marked (temporary!) shift towards right-wing political positions. E.g. showing someone a video of wriggling maggots will lead them to express harsher views on border control. If coronavirus is the main story of 2020, then the right should benefit.

On the other hand, so might the candidate proposing a free universal healthcare system...

SandyRentool

Apparently supplies of homeopathic medicines are running so low in China that patients have resorted to diluting them down so that they last longer.


Oh, and I made a gag about 19 crows days ago!

DavidL

Singapore certainly seems to be one country up to the fight: https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/health/coronavirus-under-new-stay-home-notice-all-returning-from-china-not-allowed-to

SirNorfolkPassmore

viewcode said:

Sandpit said:

TOPPING said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Oh well..

https://twitter.com/JPonpolitics/status/1229350893138608128?s=20

That imo is a huge shame. I think the writing was on the wall when they rescheduled so that Broadcasting House and Pienaar clashed. You may dislike BH (I do) but it is quite clear who the BBC preferred.

I hope he continues with the political stuff.

The rumours are that Times Radio has a very large 'talent' budget, and is offering large pay rises and editorial freedom to a lot of well-known broadcasters to jump ship.

They are trying to kill the BBC.
This is one of the prongs of attack.
It's working.

I think Times Radio are doing the BBC a big favour taking "talent" off their hands.

The scarcity of on-air "talent" is grossly overstated, leading the BBC (and others) to overpay, in my view. When "top stars" are poached (e.g. Lynam), or retire (e.g. Humphreys), or fall from grace (e.g. Deayton), what is remarkable is how easily they are normally replaced and how quickly forgotten. The key issues are format and content rather than personality - which is why top show formats are such hot property.

I'm not saying "anyone could do it" just that in most cases someone can be found. The ratings for QI barely changed when Toksvig replaced Fry for example, Jack Dee ensure I'm Sorry... survived Lyttleton's sad passing.

Top Gear is an obvious counterexample where the chemistry proved hard to recreate, and I have little doubt Attenborough will be hard to replace in due course (although the programme making is so good that I suspect they'll deal with it okay).

Radio One took a ratings hit back in the day with the clear out of the dinosaurs, but was entirely right to do as the station was no longer fulfilling its age remit - the listeners had grown old with the DJs.

Richard_Nabavi

Shares in Anglo-French biotechnology group Novacyt have surged by over 50% today, after the company launched a molecular test to clinically detect the coronavirus.

Novacyt believes this is the first such test to be certified in the EU, following its earlier launch of a ‘research only’ [RUO] test on 31 January.

This new test can be used directly by laboratories and hospitals for the testing of patients, without needing to be validated by clinician, the company says.
...
"As with our research use only test, it can produce a result in less than two hours, with the added efficiency of being able to transport the test at ambient temperatures eliminating the need for cold chain shipping."

https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2020/feb/17/japans-economy-shrinks-at-fastest-pace-since-2014-fuelling-recession-fears-business-live

RobD

SandyRentool said:

Apparently supplies of homeopathic medicines are running so low in China that patients have resorted to diluting them down so that they last longer.


Oh, and I made a gag about 19 crows days ago!

Aren't they running the risk of overdosing?

rkrkrk

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

viewcode said:

Sandpit said:

TOPPING said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Oh well..

https://twitter.com/JPonpolitics/status/1229350893138608128?s=20

That imo is a huge shame. I think the writing was on the wall when they rescheduled so that Broadcasting House and Pienaar clashed. You may dislike BH (I do) but it is quite clear who the BBC preferred.

I hope he continues with the political stuff.

The rumours are that Times Radio has a very large 'talent' budget, and is offering large pay rises and editorial freedom to a lot of well-known broadcasters to jump ship.

They are trying to kill the BBC.
This is one of the prongs of attack.
It's working.

I think Times Radio are doing the BBC a big favour taking "talent" off their hands.

The scarcity of on-air "talent" is grossly overstated, leading the BBC (and others) to overpay, in my view. When "top stars" are poached (e.g. Lynam), or retire (e.g. Humphreys), or fall from grace (e.g. Deayton), what is remarkable is how easily they are normally replaced and how quickly forgotten. The key issues are format and content rather than personality - which is why top show formats are such hot property.

I'm not saying "anyone could do it" just that in most cases someone can be found. The ratings for QI barely changed when Toksvig replaced Fry for example, Jack Dee ensure I'm Sorry... survived Lyttleton's sad passing.

Top Gear is an obvious counterexample where the chemistry proved hard to recreate, and I have little doubt Attenborough will be hard to replace in due course (although the programme making is so good that I suspect they'll deal with it okay).

Radio One took a ratings hit back in the day with the clear out of the dinosaurs, but was entirely right to do as the station was no longer fulfilling its age remit - the listeners had grown old with the DJs.

Yes I suspect this might be the case too.
The strength of the BBC is much more than the talent in front of camera/behind microphone.

kinabalu

eadric said:

As a betting site we should certainly be looking at the implications of corona for upcoming elections etc

eg I reckon coronavirus makes a Trump re-election more likely, just because he is seen as being "against open borders", "tough on migrants", and so on.

These will be increasingly popular opinions.

I have a gene which compels me - and I mean that, there is no choice involved - to counter any comment arguing a Trump win is likely with one that argues the opposite, i.e. he is toast.

So here, yes, I see that, closed borders could look attractive to many in a world ravaged by a new and aggressive disease, but OTOH, the US economy taking a dive due to global China COVID induced slowdown - this might not be so great for an incumbent.

FrancisUrquhart

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

viewcode said:

Sandpit said:

TOPPING said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Oh well..

https://twitter.com/JPonpolitics/status/1229350893138608128?s=20

That imo is a huge shame. I think the writing was on the wall when they rescheduled so that Broadcasting House and Pienaar clashed. You may dislike BH (I do) but it is quite clear who the BBC preferred.

I hope he continues with the political stuff.

The rumours are that Times Radio has a very large 'talent' budget, and is offering large pay rises and editorial freedom to a lot of well-known broadcasters to jump ship.

They are trying to kill the BBC.
This is one of the prongs of attack.
It's working.

I think Times Radio are doing the BBC a big favour taking "talent" off their hands.

The scarcity of on-air "talent" is grossly overstated, leading the BBC (and others) to overpay, in my view. When "top stars" are poached (e.g. Lynam), or retire (e.g. Humphreys), or fall from grace (e.g. Deayton), what is remarkable is how easily they are normally replaced and how quickly forgotten. The key issues are format and content rather than personality - which is why top show formats are such hot property.

I'm not saying "anyone could do it" just that in most cases someone can be found. The ratings for QI barely changed when Toksvig replaced Fry for example, Jack Dee ensure I'm Sorry... survived Lyttleton's sad passing.

Top Gear is an obvious counterexample where the chemistry proved hard to recreate, and I have little doubt Attenborough will be hard to replace in due course (although the programme making is so good that I suspect they'll deal with it okay).

Radio One took a ratings hit back in the day with the clear out of the dinosaurs, but was entirely right to do as the station was no longer fulfilling its age remit - the listeners had grown old with the DJs.

And some of that BBC Radio talent in on crazy money e.g. Nolan on the graveyard shift on R5 is on stupid money, £400k I believe. Jeremy Vine was on a similar before he took a pay cut, down to £300k.

DavidL

RobD said:

SandyRentool said:

Apparently supplies of homeopathic medicines are running so low in China that patients have resorted to diluting them down so that they last longer.


Oh, and I made a gag about 19 crows days ago!

Aren't they running the risk of overdosing?

Just love Tim Minchin's Storm

"'It's a miracle! Take physics and bin it!
Water has memory! And while it's memory of a long lost drop of onion juice seems Infinite
It somehow forgets all the poo it's had in it!'

logical_song

eadric said:

logical_song said:

eadric said:

fpt for Morris

It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.

It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).

How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?

The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).

I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.

1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.

2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very

3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack

4. Fuck.

https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20

The idea that the virus is man made is being promoted by InfoWars, I think you'll find it is a conspiracy theory.

Maybe, or maybe not?

Here's a Hong Kong based New York Times reporter taking it seriously

https://twitter.com/ezracheungtoto/status/1228637753941753857?s=20

There is so much vagueness surrounding this nightmare it is difficult to sort the madness from reality

There's also a theory that the US developed it or that China stole it from Canada.
Howver I think not.
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/01/social-media-posts-spread-bogus-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory/

Sandpit

eadric said:

kinabalu said:

eadric said:

As a betting site we should certainly be looking at the implications of corona for upcoming elections etc

eg I reckon coronavirus makes a Trump re-election more likely, just because he is seen as being "against open borders", "tough on migrants", and so on.

These will be increasingly popular opinions.

I have a gene which compels me - and I mean that, there is no choice involved - to counter any comment arguing a Trump win is likely with one that argues the opposite, i.e. he is toast.

So here, yes, I see that, closed borders could look attractive to many in a world ravaged by a new and aggressive disease, but OTOH, the US economy takes a dive due to global China COVID induced slowdown - this might not be so great for an incumbent.

A global slowdown seems inevitable now

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1229407958683000833?s=20

How will that play out in elex? Dunno

It’s the Japan story that’s by far the most worrying - it confirms that the virus has made it out of China, and the rest of the world is going to struggle to contain it without resort to the sort of methods used by the Chinese authorities.

TOPPING

eadric said:

As a betting site...How will that play out in elex? Dunno

Thanks for the insight and guidance - thank goodness there's some cash in my bf account.

DavidL

Japan really struggling:

"The guidelines urge people to stay home if they have symptoms. If symptoms grow serious, they are advised to call a special consultation center set up by the government.

“How patients go see a doctor is a crucial factor,” Takaji Wakita, the head of the National Institute of Infectious Diseases, said Sunday. “What we’ve come to know so far is there are many who only went through mild symptoms. … Those with mild symptoms are advised not to visit an outpatient doctor but call the consultation center.”

The guidelines advise that people seek a consultation if they have a fever of 37.5 degrees or above for four days or more, experience difficulty breathing or feel severe drowsiness. Medical staff at the center will then advise which hospitals a caller should visit for treatment."

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/02/17/national/japan-covid19-guidelines/#.Xkqm43v7TIU

Sounds more like a focus on treatment than containment to me.

MrEd

logical_song said:

eadric said:

logical_song said:

eadric said:

fpt for Morris

It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.

It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).

How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?

The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).

I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.

1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.

2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very

3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack

4. Fuck.

https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20

The idea that the virus is man made is being promoted by InfoWars, I think you'll find it is a conspiracy theory.

Maybe, or maybe not?

Here's a Hong Kong based New York Times reporter taking it seriously

https://twitter.com/ezracheungtoto/status/1228637753941753857?s=20

There is so much vagueness surrounding this nightmare it is difficult to sort the madness from reality

There's also a theory that the US developed it or that China stole it from Canada.
Howver I think not.
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/01/social-media-posts-spread-bogus-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory/

Not sure I believe that video showing allegedly dead people in the street in China. You would expect a lot more rats, animals etc to be swarming around etc etc. Looks like, as somebody said, people sleeping in the streets.

However, I think it is almost 100% certain the Chinese government is lying about the numbers. It is in their interests.

What does worry me is the comment this was developed in a state-run lab, which is also possible. If so, there has to be a (fair) chance it was designed as a biological warfare weapon designed to inflict maximum casualties.

DavidL

MrEd said:

logical_song said:

eadric said:

logical_song said:

eadric said:

fpt for Morris

The idea that the virus is man made is being promoted by InfoWars, I think you'll find it is a conspiracy theory.

Maybe, or maybe not?

Here's a Hong Kong based New York Times reporter taking it seriously

https://twitter.com/ezracheungtoto/status/1228637753941753857?s=20

There is so much vagueness surrounding this nightmare it is difficult to sort the madness from reality

There's also a theory that the US developed it or that China stole it from Canada.
Howver I think not.
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/01/social-media-posts-spread-bogus-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory/

Not sure I believe that video showing allegedly dead people in the street in China. You would expect a lot more rats, animals etc to be swarming around etc etc. Looks like, as somebody said, people sleeping in the streets.

However, I think it is almost 100% certain the Chinese government is lying about the numbers. It is in their interests.

What does worry me is the comment this was developed in a state-run lab, which is also possible. If so, there has to be a (fair) chance it was designed as a biological warfare weapon designed to inflict maximum casualties.

Nah. If it was designed for that purpose it would be far, far more lethal. Most of those in the UK diagnosed are now home. Cured.

DecrepiterJohnL

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

viewcode said:

Sandpit said:

TOPPING said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Oh well..

https://twitter.com/JPonpolitics/status/1229350893138608128?s=20

That imo is a huge shame. I think the writing was on the wall when they rescheduled so that Broadcasting House and Pienaar clashed. You may dislike BH (I do) but it is quite clear who the BBC preferred.

I hope he continues with the political stuff.

The rumours are that Times Radio has a very large 'talent' budget, and is offering large pay rises and editorial freedom to a lot of well-known broadcasters to jump ship.

They are trying to kill the BBC.
This is one of the prongs of attack.
It's working.

I think Times Radio are doing the BBC a big favour taking "talent" off their hands.

The scarcity of on-air "talent" is grossly overstated, leading the BBC (and others) to overpay, in my view. When "top stars" are poached (e.g. Lynam), or retire (e.g. Humphreys), or fall from grace (e.g. Deayton), what is remarkable is how easily they are normally replaced and how quickly forgotten. The key issues are format and content rather than personality - which is why top show formats are such hot property.

I'm not saying "anyone could do it" just that in most cases someone can be found. The ratings for QI barely changed when Toksvig replaced Fry for example, Jack Dee ensure I'm Sorry... survived Lyttleton's sad passing.

Top Gear is an obvious counterexample where the chemistry proved hard to recreate, and I have little doubt Attenborough will be hard to replace in due course (although the programme making is so good that I suspect they'll deal with it okay).

Radio One took a ratings hit back in the day with the clear out of the dinosaurs, but was entirely right to do as the station was no longer fulfilling its age remit - the listeners had grown old with the DJs.

Chris Evans seems to have taken a fair chunk of Radio 2's breakfast audience with him. In principle it is easier to measure the worh of radio presenters (at least of the DJ sort) because it is just them, and audience figures can easily be compared with their rivals broadcasting at the same time and also with their holiday stand-ins.

Sandpit

FrancisUrquhart said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

viewcode said:

Sandpit said:

TOPPING said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Oh well..

https://twitter.com/JPonpolitics/status/1229350893138608128?s=20

That imo is a huge shame. I think the writing was on the wall when they rescheduled so that Broadcasting House and Pienaar clashed. You may dislike BH (I do) but it is quite clear who the BBC preferred.

I hope he continues with the political stuff.

The rumours are that Times Radio has a very large 'talent' budget, and is offering large pay rises and editorial freedom to a lot of well-known broadcasters to jump ship.

They are trying to kill the BBC.
This is one of the prongs of attack.
It's working.

I think Times Radio are doing the BBC a big favour taking "talent" off their hands.

The scarcity of on-air "talent" is grossly overstated, leading the BBC (and others) to overpay, in my view. When "top stars" are poached (e.g. Lynam), or retire (e.g. Humphreys), or fall from grace (e.g. Deayton), what is remarkable is how easily they are normally replaced and how quickly forgotten. The key issues are format and content rather than personality - which is why top show formats are such hot property.

I'm not saying "anyone could do it" just that in most cases someone can be found. The ratings for QI barely changed when Toksvig replaced Fry for example, Jack Dee ensure I'm Sorry... survived Lyttleton's sad passing.

Top Gear is an obvious counterexample where the chemistry proved hard to recreate, and I have little doubt Attenborough will be hard to replace in due course (although the programme making is so good that I suspect they'll deal with it okay).

Radio One took a ratings hit back in the day with the clear out of the dinosaurs, but was entirely right to do as the station was no longer fulfilling its age remit - the listeners had grown old with the DJs.

And some of that BBC Radio talent in on crazy money e.g. Nolan on the graveyard shift on R5 is on stupid money, £400k I believe. Jeremy Vine was on a similar before he took a pay cut, down to £300k.

The salaries at Radio were the standout story from the publication of pay levels, in an area in which the Beeb had little competition for presenters they were paying way over the odds.

I can see both sides to the ‘talent’ debate, I think that there are very few true ‘talents’, and most of the rest are easily replaceable and don’t need to be on £300k or more. I’d single out the likes of Andrew Neil, and Mark Kermode from radio.

Richard_Nabavi

https://twitter.com/margarethodge/status/1229367694958395392

eristdoof

RobD said:

SandyRentool said:

Apparently supplies of homeopathic medicines are running so low in China that patients have resorted to diluting them down so that they last longer.


Oh, and I made a gag about 19 crows days ago!

Aren't they running the risk of overdosing?

Yes, it's called the nocebo effect.

DavidL

eadric said:

DavidL said:

MrEd said:

logical_song said:

eadric said:

logical_song said:

eadric said:

fpt for Morris

The idea that the virus is man made is being promoted by InfoWars, I think you'll find it is a conspiracy theory.

Maybe, or maybe not?

Here's a Hong Kong based New York Times reporter taking it seriously

https://twitter.com/ezracheungtoto/status/1228637753941753857?s=20

There is so much vagueness surrounding this nightmare it is difficult to sort the madness from reality

There's also a theory that the US developed it or that China stole it from Canada.
Howver I think not.
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/01/social-media-posts-spread-bogus-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory/

Not sure I believe that video showing allegedly dead people in the street in China. You would expect a lot more rats, animals etc to be swarming around etc etc. Looks like, as somebody said, people sleeping in the streets.

However, I think it is almost 100% certain the Chinese government is lying about the numbers. It is in their interests.

What does worry me is the comment this was developed in a state-run lab, which is also possible. If so, there has to be a (fair) chance it was designed as a biological warfare weapon designed to inflict maximum casualties.

Nah. If it was designed for that purpose it would be far, far more lethal. Most of those in the UK diagnosed are now home. Cured.

Yes, as flu goes it actually isn't that bad. Almost certainly nowhere near as lethal as SARS, MERS or avian flu.

It's the extreme infectiousness which is the worry, and the chaos and fear that causes.

I realise I am spreading fear here, btw, but we are all grown up and I believe we can cope.

I'm just not going to bother doing that Opinion this afternoon. What's the point?

ydoethur

eristdoof said:

RobD said:

SandyRentool said:

Apparently supplies of homeopathic medicines are running so low in China that patients have resorted to diluting them down so that they last longer.


Oh, and I made a gag about 19 crows days ago!

Aren't they running the risk of overdosing?

Yes, it's called the nocebo effect.

Ba boom Tish!

kinabalu

BluestBlue said:

Research has found that stimulation of the brain centres responsible for fear and disgust causes a marked (temporary!) shift towards right-wing political positions. E.g. showing someone a video of wriggling maggots will lead them to express harsher views on border control. If coronavirus is the main story of 2020, then the right should benefit.

On the other hand, so might the candidate proposing a free universal healthcare system...

I thought the Right was about "aspiration" not fear of maggots?

ydoethur

Richard_Nabavi said:

https://twitter.com/margarethodge/status/1229367694958395392

It looks to me, and you can call me Dr Suspicious if you like, as though Lady Hodge is not altogether enthused with the idea of Corbyn remaining at the top of the Labour Party.

Sandpit

Richard_Nabavi said:

https://twitter.com/margarethodge/status/1229367694958395392

The Islingtonites definitely think that their very unusual and specific version of a foreign policy agenda is anything but loathed outside north London and a couple of universities.

DecrepiterJohnL

Richard_Nabavi said:

https://twitter.com/margarethodge/status/1229367694958395392

Probably all this is dog-whistling on both sides. It seems unlikely that Corbyn wants any frontbench role given he was reported as hating being leader and that is without illness and old age.

squareroot2

From a BBc report into a stage collapse in Pakistan

"[The stage] was almost 7ft [3m] " …. No wonder we have such appalling school results in maths.

rcs1000

eadric said:

fpt for Morris

It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.

It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).

How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?

The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).

I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.

1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.

2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very

3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack

4. Fuck.

https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20

I think 2 is the key. Indeed, I think the way it's spreading across Japan suggests that there are many people with only very mild symptoms, or who are perhaps completely asymptomatic.

This is both a positive and a negative. It suggests it will be extremely hard to stop via traditional containment, as many more people have the virus than we think. On the other hand, it suggests that fatality rates are probably dramatically lower than the 1-3% reported so far.

BluestBlue

kinabalu said:

BluestBlue said:

Research has found that stimulation of the brain centres responsible for fear and disgust causes a marked (temporary!) shift towards right-wing political positions. E.g. showing someone a video of wriggling maggots will lead them to express harsher views on border control. If coronavirus is the main story of 2020, then the right should benefit.

On the other hand, so might the candidate proposing a free universal healthcare system...

I thought the Right was about "aspiration" not fear of maggots?

Personally, I aspire to avoid maggots...

eristdoof

eadric said:

logical_song said:

eadric said:

logical_song said:

eadric said:

fpt for Morris

It's potentially transformative, and almost all of the changes will be negative.

It could break China. There is a strong rumour now that the flu was man made in a lab in Wuhan and accidentally got out (this is not conspiracy theory rubbish, it is being taken seriously).

How will the Chinese people react if this is confirmed?

The economic and political repercussions around the world will be momentous (setting aside the potential for civil disorder, riots, health system breakdowns in poorer countries).

I believe we have been lulled into a false complacency by the "slow" spread of the disease outside China, and the apparent slowing in China.

1. It isn't slow. If you look at a graph the rest of the world is almost exactly following the early pattern IN China. So if this continues we can expect the world to experience what China is experiencing now. A total lockdown of entire cities/regions (if we want to contain it), martial law to enforce quarantine, rising death toll.

2. There could be many thousands already infected, mildly, who have not been tested. So it may have already spread much wider than we think. eg Indonesia is reporting zero cases. How likely is that to be true? Not very

3. The death rate could be less than we fear, but it could also be worse, esp when it hits poor disorganised countries, and their health systems crack

4. Fuck.

https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1229385857892831233?s=20

The idea that the virus is man made is being promoted by InfoWars, I think you'll find it is a conspiracy theory.

Maybe, or maybe not?

Here's a Hong Kong based New York Times reporter taking it seriously

https://twitter.com/ezracheungtoto/status/1228637753941753857?s=20

There is so much vagueness surrounding this nightmare it is difficult to sort the madness from reality

There's also a theory that the US developed it or that China stole it from Canada.
Howver I think not.
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/01/social-media-posts-spread-bogus-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory/

I find it hard to believe that the Chinese were developing a biotoxic super-weapon which went rogue. That DOES sound like total bullshit.

But can I believe that a medical lab, researching animal viruses (after SARS and MERS) accidentally allowed inter-species transfer? Yes. Why not. It's just as likely as the idea it came from people in Wuhan market eating bat soup.

It is possible but it is nowhere near as likely as the Occam's Razor explanation, that COVID 19 originated in a mammal species (causing only minor symptoms) and infected one or a few humans who work closely with animals.

Big_G_NorthWales

I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.

Thousands of ordinary folks are fighting against the weather, flooded properties, and closed businesses, the virus is causing serious worries to many people and is in danger of devastating the worlds economies and yet we have to listen to second rate celebrities going on about the wicked way of the press and media, even resurrecting hacked off, when in truth no one makes them go on social media and controlling social media is now virtually impossible

I am not saying both Scholfield and Caroline Flack are not stories but that they do not merit the wall to wall coverage. All suicides are sad and some of our children's peers have sadly committed suicide over the years and long before social media but moderation in all things please

FrancisUrquhart

Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change

If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.

Philip_Thompson

Big_G_NorthWales said:

I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.

Thousands of ordinary folks are fighting against the weather, flooded properties, and closed businesses, the virus is causing serious worries to many people and is in danger of devastating the worlds economies and yet we have to listen to second rate celebrities going on about the wicked way of the press and media, even resurrecting hacked off, when in truth no one makes them go on social media and controlling social media is now virtually impossible

I am not saying both Scholfield and Caroline Flack are not stories but that they do not merit the wall to wall coverage. All suicides are sad and some of our children's peers have sadly committed suicide over the years and long before social media but moderation in all things please

Depends what coverage you're watching I suppose. Most coverage I've seen regarding Flack has been coverage talking about mental health issues, support groups that are available like the Samaritans, symptoms, how to cope etc - giving advice and support to people that have issues rather than paying overly much attention to Flack herself.

I don't see that as a bad thing. If the coverage you're seeing is just about Flack herself then switch over to something less trashy.

eristdoof

FrancisUrquhart said:

...

If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.

Cue robust rebuttal from ydoethur.

Nigel_Foremain

Big_G_NorthWales said:

I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.

Thousands of ordinary folks are fighting against the weather, flooded properties, and closed businesses, the virus is causing serious worries to many people and is in danger of devastating the worlds economies and yet we have to listen to second rate celebrities going on about the wicked way of the press and media, even resurrecting hacked off, when in truth no one makes them go on social media and controlling social media is now virtually impossible

I am not saying both Scholfield and Caroline Flack are not stories but that they do not merit the wall to wall coverage. All suicides are sad and some of our children's peers have sadly committed suicide over the years and long before social media but moderation in all things please

I am not sure I had heard of Caroline Flack before hearing the tragic news of her suicide. I think it should be a big story, but not for the reasons that it is.

The sad fact is that no-one ever thinks of the psychological pressure of the accused, whether they are guilty or innocent, but particularly for the innocent. Processes drag on for months and months. Everyone thinks of the "victim", though the pressure on the accused, particularly the wrongly accused can be horrendous. Imagine what it must have been like for those accused by Carl Beech! Horrendous.

DavidL

kinabalu said:

BluestBlue said:

Research has found that stimulation of the brain centres responsible for fear and disgust causes a marked (temporary!) shift towards right-wing political positions. E.g. showing someone a video of wriggling maggots will lead them to express harsher views on border control. If coronavirus is the main story of 2020, then the right should benefit.

On the other hand, so might the candidate proposing a free universal healthcare system...

I thought the Right was about "aspiration" not fear of maggots?

We're really flexible.

Richard_Nabavi

I think it would be fair to say that Glen O'Hara isn't exactly a fan of the current government, and not much more of a fan of the alternatives:

https://publicpolicypast.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-crookedness-of-crooked.html

FrancisUrquhart

Big_G_NorthWales said:

I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.

I am not saying both Scholfield and Caroline Flack are not stories but that they do not merit the wall to wall coverage. All suicides are sad and some of our children's peers have sadly committed suicide over the years and long before social media but moderation in all things please

I don't remember anywhere near such a response when the likes of Andrew Adonis and Crispin Blunt followed a similar path to Schofield. I am not sure it got more than the briefest of mentions in the press.

TOPPING

Big_G_NorthWales said:

I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.

Thousands of ordinary folks are fighting against the weather, flooded properties, and closed businesses, the virus is causing serious worries to many people and is in danger of devastating the worlds economies and yet we have to listen to second rate celebrities going on about the wicked way of the press and media, even resurrecting hacked off, when in truth no one makes them go on social media and controlling social media is now virtually impossible

I am not saying both Scholfield and Caroline Flack are not stories but that they do not merit the wall to wall coverage. All suicides are sad and some of our children's peers have sadly committed suicide over the years and long before social media but moderation in all things please

If you, and the other many millions, stop reading the Mail Online, the Express and even the Guardian has two stories on its online front page, then I'm pretty sure the problem goes away.

Sandpit

eristdoof said:

eadric said:

logical_song said:

eadric said:

logical_song said:

eadric said:

fpt for Morris?s=20

The idea that the virus is man made is being promoted by InfoWars, I think you'll find it is a conspiracy theory.

Maybe, or maybe not?

Here's a Hong Kong based New York Times reporter taking it seriously

https://twitter.com/ezracheungtoto/status/1228637753941753857?s=20

There is so much vagueness surrounding this nightmare it is difficult to sort the madness from reality

There's also a theory that the US developed it or that China stole it from Canada.
Howver I think not.
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/01/social-media-posts-spread-bogus-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory/

I find it hard to believe that the Chinese were developing a biotoxic super-weapon which went rogue. That DOES sound like total bullshit.

But can I believe that a medical lab, researching animal viruses (after SARS and MERS) accidentally allowed inter-species transfer? Yes. Why not. It's just as likely as the idea it came from people in Wuhan market eating bat soup.

It is possible but it is nowhere near as likely as the Occam's Razor explanation, that COVID 19 originated in a mammal species (causing only minor symptoms) and infected one or a few humans who work closely with animals.

Indeed. That said, if you wanted something to spread quickly and engulf the world, a virus that is highly infectious but shows no symptoms for a couple of weeks or more, before presenting itself with a high mortality rate, would be one good way to do it.

rcs1000

DavidL said:

Nigelb said:

DavidL said:

The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.

Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.

Assumptions 2 - 4 are based on very little evidence, as it simply hasn't been loose for long enough outside of China to give us much in the way of hard data. We'll have a far better idea in two to three weeks' time.
What's for sure is that Japan is starting to think that the infection is outside of their control now...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/Japan-seized-with-anxiety-over-homegrown-outbreak
This is nothing like SARS, which was far easier to identify and contain.
Having a vaccine available in quantity might take up to eighteen months.

According to our pension fund managers the view in London seems to be that this is a Q1 story. I increasingly have my doubts.

If you believe pension fund managers, you'll believe anyone. They are masters at sounding plausible and informed.

DavidL

Big_G_NorthWales said:

I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.

Can't say that I have really noticed.

TheWhiteRabbit

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

viewcode said:

Sandpit said:

TOPPING said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Oh well..

https://twitter.com/JPonpolitics/status/1229350893138608128?s=20

[...]

I hope he continues with the political stuff.

The rumours are that Times Radio has a very large 'talent' budget, and is offering large pay rises and editorial freedom to a lot of well-known broadcasters to jump ship.

They are trying to kill the BBC.
This is one of the prongs of attack.
It's working.

I think Times Radio are doing the BBC a big favour taking "talent" off their hands.

The scarcity of on-air "talent" is grossly overstated, leading the BBC (and others) to overpay, in my view. When "top stars" are poached (e.g. Lynam), or retire (e.g. Humphreys), or fall from grace (e.g. Deayton), what is remarkable is how easily they are normally replaced and how quickly forgotten. The key issues are format and content rather than personality - which is why top show formats are such hot property.

I'm not saying "anyone could do it" just that in most cases someone can be found. The ratings for QI barely changed when Toksvig replaced Fry for example, Jack Dee ensure I'm Sorry... survived Lyttleton's sad passing.

Top Gear is an obvious counterexample where the chemistry proved hard to recreate, and I have little doubt Attenborough will be hard to replace in due course (although the programme making is so good that I suspect they'll deal with it okay).

Radio One took a ratings hit back in the day with the clear out of the dinosaurs, but was entirely right to do as the station was no longer fulfilling its age remit - the listeners had grown old with the DJs.

And some of that BBC Radio talent in on crazy money e.g. Nolan on the graveyard shift on R5 is on stupid money, £400k I believe. Jeremy Vine was on a similar before he took a pay cut, down to £300k.

The salaries at Radio were the standout story from the publication of pay levels, in an area in which the Beeb had little competition for presenters they were paying way over the odds.

I can see both sides to the ‘talent’ debate, I think that there are very few true ‘talents’, and most of the rest are easily replaceable and don’t need to be on £300k or more. I’d single out the likes of Andrew Neil, and Mark Kermode from radio.

SirNorfolk had it absoltely right.

It was impossible to picture QI with Stephen Fry... until it wasn't.

MOTD should get rid of Lineker and watch as viewing figures plummet... maybe 10%?

Fysics_Teacher

FrancisUrquhart said:

Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change

If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.

If some students don’t understand the offer making system then I would politely suggest that perhaps university is not the correct route for them.

More seriously, what are their teachers telling them? It is no more complicated than some PR voting systems.
Post exam entry would be great for schools as they wouldn’t be our responsibility any more. I’m not sure that would help disadvantaged students, although that might be offset by the elimination of state schools tendency to under predict grades compared to the fee paying sector.

Nigelb

rcs1000 said:

DavidL said:

Nigelb said:

DavidL said:

The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.

Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.

Assumptions 2 - 4 are based on very little evidence, as it simply hasn't been loose for long enough outside of China to give us much in the way of hard data. We'll have a far better idea in two to three weeks' time.
What's for sure is that Japan is starting to think that the infection is outside of their control now...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/Japan-seized-with-anxiety-over-homegrown-outbreak
This is nothing like SARS, which was far easier to identify and contain.
Having a vaccine available in quantity might take up to eighteen months.

According to our pension fund managers the view in London seems to be that this is a Q1 story. I increasingly have my doubts.

If you believe pension fund managers, you'll believe anyone. They are masters at sounding plausible and informed.

That does not follow - if they are indeed so exceptionally good at appearing plausible, then believing them does not imply you would believe anyone.

DavidL

rcs1000 said:

DavidL said:

Nigelb said:

DavidL said:

The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.

Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.

Assumptions 2 - 4 are based on very little evidence, as it simply hasn't been loose for long enough outside of China to give us much in the way of hard data. We'll have a far better idea in two to three weeks' time.
What's for sure is that Japan is starting to think that the infection is outside of their control now...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/Japan-seized-with-anxiety-over-homegrown-outbreak
This is nothing like SARS, which was far easier to identify and contain.
Having a vaccine available in quantity might take up to eighteen months.

According to our pension fund managers the view in London seems to be that this is a Q1 story. I increasingly have my doubts.

If you believe pension fund managers, you'll believe anyone. They are masters at sounding plausible and informed.

16% capital growth last year on moderate/low risk. #justsaying

FrancisUrquhart

Big_G_NorthWales said:

I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.

Some are using the death of Flack as an opportunity to push their agenda against certain media outlets, following on from accusing them of them being racist and causing Meghan Markle to leave the UK.

Gallowgate

FrancisUrquhart said:

Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change

If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.

How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?

Nigelb

FrancisUrquhart said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.

I am not saying both Scholfield and Caroline Flack are not stories but that they do not merit the wall to wall coverage. All suicides are sad and some of our children's peers have sadly committed suicide over the years and long before social media but moderation in all things please

I don't remember anywhere near such a response when the likes of Andrew Adonis and Crispin Blunt followed a similar path to Schofield. I am not sure it got more than the briefest of mentions in the press.

Because most people have no idea who they are.

FrancisUrquhart

Gallowgate said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change

If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.

How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?

Yes. This has been floated a number of times before, including by Gove / Big Dom, but many universities hate it as it messes with their summer vacations.

Basically you adjust when A-Levels are taken to be earlier in the year, then get results back to kids early summer and they then apply.

DecrepiterJohnL

FrancisUrquhart said:

Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change

If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.

Abolish interviews, personal statements and all that biased, time-consuming, labour-intensive, and subjective malarkey and then randomly assign applicants who pass the exams to places. It would take a few seconds on the Met Office's new computer from the last thread.

matt

Richard_Nabavi said:

I think it would be fair to say that Glen O'Hara isn't exactly a fan of the current government, and not much more of a fan of the alternatives:

https://publicpolicypast.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-crookedness-of-crooked.html

His writing is all tinged with, “things would be marvellous if that Blair chap was with us still”. He and John Rentoul have the same, minority interest, obsession.

logical_song

Gallowgate said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change

If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.

How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?

When I went they made a provisional offer depending on the A level results.
If you got the resukts you were in, otherwise there was clearing.

rcs1000

DavidL said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidL said:

Nigelb said:

DavidL said:

The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.

Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.

Assumptions 2 - 4 are based on very little evidence, as it simply hasn't been loose for long enough outside of China to give us much in the way of hard data. We'll have a far better idea in two to three weeks' time.
What's for sure is that Japan is starting to think that the infection is outside of their control now...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/Japan-seized-with-anxiety-over-homegrown-outbreak
This is nothing like SARS, which was far easier to identify and contain.
Having a vaccine available in quantity might take up to eighteen months.

According to our pension fund managers the view in London seems to be that this is a Q1 story. I increasingly have my doubts.

If you believe pension fund managers, you'll believe anyone. They are masters at sounding plausible and informed.

16% capital growth last year on moderate/low risk. #justsaying

I was just poking fun at my old profession.

The reality is that as a PM you get hired for two reasons: (1) you produce decent investment returns, and (2) you can talk plausibly about pretty much anything going on in the world economy, and can relate it to how incredibly well positioned the fund is.

My only advice for anyone investing money is this: most portfolio managers have a style bias. They may not know it themselves, but they will prefer tech stocks, or oil stocks, or growth stock, or emerging market exposed stocks, or whatever. When their style is in favour, they'll perform well. When their style goes out of favour, they'll perform poorly. The number of PMs who can spin on a sixpence, and hate social media stocks one meeting and love them the next is pretty small. And the number of investment committees that realise that the ability to change one's mind is an asset and not a liability is close to zero.

DecrepiterJohnL

matt said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

I think it would be fair to say that Glen O'Hara isn't exactly a fan of the current government, and not much more of a fan of the alternatives:

https://publicpolicypast.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-crookedness-of-crooked.html

His writing is all tinged with, “things would be marvellous if that Blair chap was with us still”. He and John Rentoul have the same, minority interest, obsession.

More interesting perhaps is that Boris's spiritual home, the Telegraph, seems to be having doubts.

Philip_Thompson

TheWhiteRabbit said:

SirNorfolk had it absoltely right.

It was impossible to picture QI with Stephen Fry... until it wasn't.

MOTD should get rid of Lineker and watch as viewing figures plummet... maybe 10%?

Considering the Beeb doesn't bother to charge its viewers or raise ad revenue from its viewers etc what difference does it make whether the viewing figures go up or down?

If the Beeb is producing MOTD because its "culturally significant" or something like that despite the fact that all highlights are available for free on YouTube anyway then what difference does it make how many viewers its getting? How is it less culturally significant just because it has a different presenter?

OldKingCole

FrancisUrquhart said:

Gallowgate said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change

If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.

How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?

Yes. This has been floated a number of times before, including by Gove / Big Dom, but many universities hate it as it messes with their summer vacations.

Basically you adjust when A-Levels are taken to be earlier in the year, then get results back to kids early summer and they then apply.

And very few other countries do that. The way we do it is the norm.

Gallowgate

logical_song said:

Gallowgate said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change

If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.

How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?

When I went they made a provisional offer depending on the A level results.
If you got the resukts you were in, otherwise there was clearing.

Yep, same for me back in 2010. I assume it’s still the same system now.

I don’t see any downsides in applying after results, if anything it gives more perspective in considering your options.

IshmaelZ

DavidL said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidL said:

Nigelb said:

DavidL said:

The current assumptions are:
(1) that the draconian steps taken in China are working as shown by the 4 day trend in the reducing number of diagnosed cases.
(2) that the death rate outside China suggests 1% mortality way well prove to be pessimistic.
(3) that this will calm down in the summer months in the same way as SARS did.
(4) At the current rate of spread outside China we are likely to have a vaccine before this gets too serious.
(5) The Chinese economy has the capacity to bounce back very strongly once the panic is over.

Some or all of these assumptions may prove to be optimistic. I agree that it is surprising that it is not getting more attention.

Assumptions 2 - 4 are based on very little evidence, as it simply hasn't been loose for long enough outside of China to give us much in the way of hard data. We'll have a far better idea in two to three weeks' time.
What's for sure is that Japan is starting to think that the infection is outside of their control now...
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus/Japan-seized-with-anxiety-over-homegrown-outbreak
This is nothing like SARS, which was far easier to identify and contain.
Having a vaccine available in quantity might take up to eighteen months.

According to our pension fund managers the view in London seems to be that this is a Q1 story. I increasingly have my doubts.

If you believe pension fund managers, you'll believe anyone. They are masters at sounding plausible and informed.

16% capital growth last year on moderate/low risk. #justsaying

Benchmark?

Fysics_Teacher

logical_song said:

Gallowgate said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change

If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.

How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?

When I went they made a provisional offer depending on the A level results.
If you got the resukts you were in, otherwise there was clearing.

That is still the basic system. Some universities are making “unconditional“ offers on the condition that students accept them as their first and only choice rather than their reserve. This simplified things all round, but has a side effect of producing students who don’t do any work for a term...

FrancisUrquhart

Philip_Thompson said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

SirNorfolk had it absoltely right.

It was impossible to picture QI with Stephen Fry... until it wasn't.

MOTD should get rid of Lineker and watch as viewing figures plummet... maybe 10%?

Considering the Beeb doesn't bother to charge its viewers or raise ad revenue from its viewers etc what difference does it make whether the viewing figures go up or down?

If the Beeb is producing MOTD because its "culturally significant" or something like that despite the fact that all highlights are available for free on YouTube anyway then what difference does it make how many viewers its getting? How is it less culturally significant just because it has a different presenter?

I am not sure what MOTD USP is these days. Highlights are available for free hours before (and full game if you subscribe to Sky) , the analysis provided isn't particularly insightful i.e. it isn't TIFO football, StatsBomb or even Gary Neville.

Long gone are the days when it was THE only place you could see footage of a match.

And after the next lot of rights, I wouldn't be surprised if we start to see even more real time coverage / barely delayed video. The idea of 3pm tv black-out again is going to go the way of the dodo.

Seeing how successful Red-Zone is for NFL, they EPL would be idiots not to operate its own version of that. They have already basically tested it with the Amazon deal.

Gallowgate

Fysics_Teacher said:

logical_song said:

Gallowgate said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change

If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.

How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?

When I went they made a provisional offer depending on the A level results.
If you got the resukts you were in, otherwise there was clearing.

That is still the basic system. Some universities are making “unconditional“ offers on the condition that students accept them as their first and only choice rather than their reserve. This simplified things all round, but has a side effect of producing students who don’t do any work for a term...

What kind of universities do that? Oxbridge? Russel Group? Former polys?

Sandpit

FrancisUrquhart said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

SirNorfolk had it absoltely right.

It was impossible to picture QI with Stephen Fry... until it wasn't.

MOTD should get rid of Lineker and watch as viewing figures plummet... maybe 10%?

Considering the Beeb doesn't bother to charge its viewers or raise ad revenue from its viewers etc what difference does it make whether the viewing figures go up or down?

If the Beeb is producing MOTD because its "culturally significant" or something like that despite the fact that all highlights are available for free on YouTube anyway then what difference does it make how many viewers its getting? How is it less culturally significant just because it has a different presenter?

I am not sure what MOTD USP is these days. Highlights are available for free hours before (and full game if you subscribe to Sky) , the analysis provided isn't particularly insightful i.e. it isn't TIFO football, StatsBomb or even Gary Neville.

Long gone are the days when it was THE only place you could see footage of a match.

Indeed, and it’s only a matter of time until the 3pm blackout rule goes away too, as the war against the internet is only going to end in the internet winning.

Fysics_Teacher

Gallowgate said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

logical_song said:

Gallowgate said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change

If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.

How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?

When I went they made a provisional offer depending on the A level results.
If you got the resukts you were in, otherwise there was clearing.

That is still the basic system. Some universities are making “unconditional“ offers on the condition that students accept them as their first and only choice rather than their reserve. This simplified things all round, but has a side effect of producing students who don’t do any work for a term...

What kind of universities do that? Oxbridge? Russel Group? Former polys?

Mostly the last.

30 odd years ago Oxford had fourth term entry where you took three entrance papers and had a interview: if they liked you you got a two E offer.

They don’t do that any more.

OldKingCole

Fysics_Teacher said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change

If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.

If some students don’t understand the offer making system then I would politely suggest that perhaps university is not the correct route for them.

More seriously, what are their teachers telling them? It is no more complicated than some PR voting systems.
Post exam entry would be great for schools as they wouldn’t be our responsibility any more. I’m not sure that would help disadvantaged students, although that might be offset by the elimination of state schools tendency to under predict grades compared to the fee paying sector.

Choosing which Uni's to apply to is dependent upon more than academic grounds. Going back 60 years my sister had the choice of London or Nottingham. Nottingham was the choice, because, as my mother said, she'd have to live away from home and learn to cope with world.
Both my sons did what I did; went to the first place which accepted them. Granddaughter One is currently applying to do a taught PhD and her choice is likely to be made on ease of travel from where she and her beloved are living.

eristdoof

FrancisUrquhart said:

Gallowgate said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change

If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.

How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?

Yes. This has been floated a number of times before, including by Gove / Big Dom, but many universities hate it as it messes with their summer vacations.

Basically you adjust when A-Levels are taken to be earlier in the year, then get results back to kids early summer and they then apply.

In Germany, only the admin deals with the university admissions not the Lecturers/Profs, so actually the academic staff in the UK could benefit, and the admin staff are not really bound by term/holidays like the teaching staff are.

It's not a big problem to organise a change at the HE level, it is at the school/college/exam level that the whole system would need to be totally overhauled.

The German system works because the Abutur (equivalent to A-level) results are out sometime in May. The major difference that allows this quick turnaround, is that the teachers mark the exams themselves, with random checking by other schools to make sure the teachers aren't just giving out undeserved As.

OldKingCole

Fysics_Teacher said:

Gallowgate said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

logical_song said:

Gallowgate said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change

If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.

How would that work in practice? You apply after you get your A Level results?

When I went they made a provisional offer depending on the A level results.
If you got the resukts you were in, otherwise there was clearing.

That is still the basic system. Some universities are making “unconditional“ offers on the condition that students accept them as their first and only choice rather than their reserve. This simplified things all round, but has a side effect of producing students who don’t do any work for a term...

What kind of universities do that? Oxbridge? Russel Group? Former polys?

Mostly the last.

30 odd years ago Oxford had fourth term entry where you took three entrance papers and had a interview: if they liked you you got a two E offer.

They don’t do that any more.

The Toby Young method?

Big_G_NorthWales

TOPPING said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

I just have to say the media orgy over Scholfield and Caroline Flack is out of control.

Thousands of ordinary folks are fighting against the weather, flooded properties, and closed businesses, the virus is causing serious worries to many people and is in danger of devastating the worlds economies and yet we have to listen to second rate celebrities going on about the wicked way of the press and media, even resurrecting hacked off, when in truth no one makes them go on social media and controlling social media is now virtually impossible

I am not saying both Scholfield and Caroline Flack are not stories but that they do not merit the wall to wall coverage. All suicides are sad and some of our children's peers have sadly committed suicide over the years and long before social media but moderation in all things please

If you, and the other many millions, stop reading the Mail Online, the Express and even the Guardian has two stories on its online front page, then I'm pretty sure the problem goes away.

The main source of this is Sky and BBC news on an hourly repeat cycle

I am not saying it should not be covered, just that it is excessive

I am not referring to print media by the way

Fysics_Teacher

OldKingCole said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Students say they don't understand university offer-making. This must change

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/17/students-say-they-dont-understand-university-offer-making-this-must-change

If Boris / Big Dom want to level the playing field, post-exam entry is the easiest and fairest policy to push.

If some students don’t understand the offer making system then I would politely suggest that perhaps university is not the correct route for them.

More seriously, what are their teachers telling them? It is no more complicated than some PR voting systems.
Post exam entry would be great for schools as they wouldn’t be our responsibility any more. I’m not sure that would help disadvantaged students, although that might be offset by the elimination of state schools tendency to under predict grades compared to the fee paying sector.

Choosing which Uni's to apply to is dependent upon more than academic grounds. Going back 60 years my sister had the choice of London or Nottingham. Nottingham was the choice, because, as my mother said, she'd have to live away from home and learn to cope with world.
Both my sons did what I did; went to the first place which accepted them. Granddaughter One is currently applying to do a taught PhD and her choice is likely to be made on ease of travel from where she and her beloved are living.

I’ve seen a lot of students decide based on the quality of the night life they were expecting.