Senior public health officials have made a last-minute plea for ministers to scrap Monday’s easing of the coronavirus lockdown in England, warning the country is unprepared to deal with any surge in infection and that public resolve to take steps to limit transmisson has been eroded.
The Association of Directors of Public Health (ADPH) said new rules, including allowing groups of up to six people to meet outdoors and in private gardens, were “not supported by the science” and that pictures of crowded beaches and beauty spots over the weekend showed “the public is not keeping to social distancing as it was”.
Stay at home as much as possible until we get a decent track and trace system in place with R being well below one, and the incident rate is a lot fewer than 8k per day is a good place to start.
It's too late for trying to wind back the clock. People will make their own decisions about what they do based on what they perceive the level of risk to be.
Nobody who's reasonably young, reasonably fit and not scared witless by the virus is going to "stay at home as much as possible," especially when the weather is as good as this. My own observations suggest that most (though not all) people are still observing the 2m rule when they're out and about, and I dare say that most people who are now out and about regularly would also take a different attitude to seeing elderly or vulnerable relatives (I've not visited or been visited by either parent since March,) but the SS Stay-at-Home has well and truly sailed. It's over the horizon and gone.
It may well come back, I'm certain Boris Johnson doesn't want to be known as the PM that needlessly oversaw the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Brits.
Same here - the reasoning is, why do we need to go in? A few people might need to be physically present every now and then...
In the longer run, yes, the issues about cross-pollination of ideas, meeting other groups, careers etc may have some effect. But in the 6 month range? No.
The only really issue is some people being sick of working from home.
The problem with WAH is you need to create the same distractions that are present in every office - conversations about work or more often not about work, the gossip, the banter, the social aspects of the working experience.
Many companies have tried to replicate that via "virtual cuppas" or the "virtual corridor" but you can't structure an unstructured activity and hope it has the same effect. Other companies think because their employees are at home they can and should work harder and longer.
WAH doesn't work for everyone - I have a colleague who has four school aged daughters. He is desperate to get back to the office.
Long term WFH here. You start out with a laptop on the kitchen table but all my colleagues end up devoting a spare room, garage or (very popular) a posh shed to be their office. (Handy tip: use an ironing board as a cheap standing desk.)
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
My source in the financial services sector (OK, my nephew) reckons that some companies in the sector aren't looking at reopening offices until next year. And even then, attendance will be optional. Providers of food and drink in the City and Docklands might as well give up now.
The Square Mile will never be the same. Feel a bit sad about this despite my dim view of it. Some of the best times of my life came with that 3rd bottle in some little courtyard as late afternoon turned to early evening.
... and then some clever dick shows up and says "you should have been in the office. Base Rate hit 15% this afternoon."
But don't we still have to fork out for this fund anyway if the transition period is extended, and all the stuff with Cummings is just a Remainer plot to ensure that happens? (I think I'm following this correctly.)
Yes, extending the transition period comes complete with our ‘share’ of the €750bn bill attached to it, as well as the usual £350m a week. Why do you think Barnier is so desparate for the extension?
Well the bill has already been split across all the payers and all the recpients and has been agreed in that form. Barnier has been explaining to the UK what its options are nothing more. Fortunately the UK government and the whisky salesman who is representing it are keen for the country's economy to get to the bottom of the cliff as quickly as possible.
The frugal states have been given what they wanted: EUR250BN has been added as loans with the original EUR500BN in grants retained. I anticipate that it will get to 1trn by the end. In any case the countries which need the money will get it and the countries that want a yield will get theirs.
You seem to ignore eadric explanation altogether
Because he hasn't explained anything and referred to an old article. The original plan was EUR500BN of grants. The frugals didn't like it and so the new proposal adds EUR250BN of loans. The end deal could be up at a EUR1TRN. The bottom line is that the two biggest members of the EU want this and so it is what is going to happen.
People tend to underestimate the political will underpinning the EU and the Euro. It's huge. So whatever fate throws at it Gloria Gaynor applies. There is much to be gained from realising this.
Yep. It's perfectly legitimate to question whether or not the Euro in particular is wise or worth the bother, but the determination to keep it going is immense (and nobody has left the single currency yet, despite regular predictions of collapse since at least 2008.)
It might yet fall apart, but I'll believe it when I see it and not before.
That's because of the law of "path of least resistance".
Imagine you are the Italian government. Now, you will almost certainly perform better economically if your country leaves the Euro. Just one small problem: tens of millions of pensioners with Euros in the bank (which are converted to Lira) will get absolutely destroyed. And the oldies vote, while the youngsters who'd benefit don't.
Untangling the Euro is an incredible complex, because it creates lots of losers. And even if it creates more winners than losers, then those who lost out will be incredibly angry.
The path of least resistance (for now) is to kick the can, and hope things improve.
(And, by the way, this is not as stupid as it looks. Fundamentally, the EU economy is in much better shape today, in terms of dramatically lower structural imbalances, than it was in 2007.)
Contrariwise, a lot of firms have spent the last decade downsizing by hotdesking and that will surely be a casualty of the coronavirus. That, together with social distancing, might mean the same office space is needed in order to house fewer people. Though if I can't get a Pret smoked salmon sandwich, is it worth going in?
Indeed - the days of hotdesking are over and that is pushing the capacity reductions. In theory, the same 100 desks could be used by 200 staff at times through the week and those firms with the most efficient space utilisation metrics run very tight desk booking systems.
Hotdesking as a way of maximising utilisation and reducing the cost of space has been in vogue for 20 years but no longer. It's back to 100 staff in 100 desks but those staff aren't always present and when they aren't the desk sits empty so the utilisation figures plummet.
I've worked at home a lot in the past decade so this has been nothing new but anecdotally the majority of those for whom this is a new experience have adapted it and I've had more than one colleague ask why they never did this before.
No one will miss the commute especially when the weather deteriorates and @NickPalmer makes the useful point that as social opportunities locally return the commute will seem even less attractive. 3 hours in a crowded train replaced by a short drive to a local pub or restaurant to meet friends for dinner - much less stressful and you don;t have to get up as early in the morning.
Same here - the reasoning is, why do we need to go in? A few people might need to be physically present every now and then...
In the longer run, yes, the issues about cross-pollination of ideas, meeting other groups, careers etc may have some effect. But in the 6 month range? No.
The only really issue is some people being sick of working from home.
The problem with WAH is you need to create the same distractions that are present in every office - conversations about work or more often not about work, the gossip, the banter, the social aspects of the working experience.
Many companies have tried to replicate that via "virtual cuppas" or the "virtual corridor" but you can't structure an unstructured activity and hope it has the same effect. Other companies think because their employees are at home they can and should work harder and longer.
WAH doesn't work for everyone - I have a colleague who has four school aged daughters. He is desperate to get back to the office.
Long term WFH here. You start out with a laptop on the kitchen table but all my colleagues end up devoting a spare room, garage or (very popular) a posh shed to be their office. (Handy tip: use an ironing board as a cheap standing desk.)
Not much else to use the ironing board for. Three months with no ironing is another benefit of WFH.
Long term WFH here. You start out with a laptop on the kitchen table but all my colleagues end up devoting a spare room, garage or (very popular) a posh shed to be their office. (Handy tip: use an ironing board as a cheap standing desk.)
I have the spare room as my office though I have worked on the dining room table - the problem with that it's too close to the kitchen and the biscuits !!
Senior public health officials have made a last-minute plea for ministers to scrap Monday’s easing of the coronavirus lockdown in England, warning the country is unprepared to deal with any surge in infection and that public resolve to take steps to limit transmisson has been eroded.
The Association of Directors of Public Health (ADPH) said new rules, including allowing groups of up to six people to meet outdoors and in private gardens, were “not supported by the science” and that pictures of crowded beaches and beauty spots over the weekend showed “the public is not keeping to social distancing as it was”.
Stay at home as much as possible until we get a decent track and trace system in place with R being well below one, and the incident rate is a lot fewer than 8k per day is a good place to start.
It's too late for trying to wind back the clock. People will make their own decisions about what they do based on what they perceive the level of risk to be.
Nobody who's reasonably young, reasonably fit and not scared witless by the virus is going to "stay at home as much as possible," especially when the weather is as good as this. My own observations suggest that most (though not all) people are still observing the 2m rule when they're out and about, and I dare say that most people who are now out and about regularly would also take a different attitude to seeing elderly or vulnerable relatives (I've not visited or been visited by either parent since March,) but the SS Stay-at-Home has well and truly sailed. It's over the horizon and gone.
It may well come back, I'm certain Boris Johnson doesn't want to be known as the PM that needlessly oversaw the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Brits.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
It may feel more inclined to do so if it is allowed to dream from time to time. By its nature (near)space exploits may help foster a sense of intra-humanity.
Senior public health officials have made a last-minute plea for ministers to scrap Monday’s easing of the coronavirus lockdown in England, warning the country is unprepared to deal with any surge in infection and that public resolve to take steps to limit transmisson has been eroded.
The Association of Directors of Public Health (ADPH) said new rules, including allowing groups of up to six people to meet outdoors and in private gardens, were “not supported by the science” and that pictures of crowded beaches and beauty spots over the weekend showed “the public is not keeping to social distancing as it was”.
Stay at home as much as possible until we get a decent track and trace system in place with R being well below one, and the incident rate is a lot fewer than 8k per day is a good place to start.
It's too late for trying to wind back the clock. People will make their own decisions about what they do based on what they perceive the level of risk to be.
Nobody who's reasonably young, reasonably fit and not scared witless by the virus is going to "stay at home as much as possible," especially when the weather is as good as this. My own observations suggest that most (though not all) people are still observing the 2m rule when they're out and about, and I dare say that most people who are now out and about regularly would also take a different attitude to seeing elderly or vulnerable relatives (I've not visited or been visited by either parent since March,) but the SS Stay-at-Home has well and truly sailed. It's over the horizon and gone.
It may well come back, I'm certain Boris Johnson doesn't want to be known as the PM that needlessly oversaw the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Brits.
That’s right. If the virus takes off again we will be locking down again.
Contrariwise, a lot of firms have spent the last decade downsizing by hotdesking and that will surely be a casualty of the coronavirus. That, together with social distancing, might mean the same office space is needed in order to house fewer people. Though if I can't get a Pret smoked salmon sandwich, is it worth going in?
Indeed - the days of hotdesking are over and that is pushing the capacity reductions. In theory, the same 100 desks could be used by 200 staff at times through the week and those firms with the most efficient space utilisation metrics run very tight desk booking systems.
Hotdesking as a way of maximising utilisation and reducing the cost of space has been in vogue for 20 years but no longer. It's back to 100 staff in 100 desks but those staff aren't always present and when they aren't the desk sits empty so the utilisation figures plummet.
I've worked at home a lot in the past decade so this has been nothing new but anecdotally the majority of those for whom this is a new experience have adapted it and I've had more than one colleague ask why they never did this before.
No one will miss the commute especially when the weather deteriorates and @NickPalmer makes the useful point that as social opportunities locally return the commute will seem even less attractive. 3 hours in a crowded train replaced by a short drive to a local pub or restaurant to meet friends for dinner - much less stressful and you don;t have to get up as early in the morning.
Well that's true. If I knock off at 5 and don't have to drive home, I get 3 hours to get personal stuff done before having to go out to meet friends. And then don't have to get up as early the next morning. And I will save money if I want to as if the destination is a pub I will have plenty of time to fix dinner and wont need to eat out
The Black Visions Collective Movement and Legal Fund, a Black, trans and queer-led organization, is helping lead the protests and advocating to defund the police in Minnesota.
Reclaim the Block, a Minnesota org that lobbies for defunding the police and re-routing funds to affordable housing, health, violence prevention, civil right and renter protections.
Defund the police will achieve what? Lower crime? What about better fund the police to be properly trained?
And paying the bail for "protesters". So these people are happy to bail people who you don't know what they were arrested for, and more than likely for looting and violence.
They are aided and abetted in this by an American President who does not regard himself as President of the whole country.
Sadly, the Democrats have put up an elderly and mentally infirm candidate, with no obvious ability to bring the country back together again.
Perhaps it's time for the US to split into three countries: Resourcia which would contain the inner states running down to the Gulf Coast and the South East, and which would be rich in natural resourcecs. Cascadia which would be the West Coast and would contain Silicon Valley and Seattle. And Yankee, which would be North Carolina or Virginia and up, crossing West into the Great Lakes and bringing in Illinois.
It seems that this might solve a lot of problems.
It is a very good point about the original Russian interference, it started way before Trump even announced. Lots of things like Facebook groups that would be targeted at particular demographics, that most of the time just posted run of the mill stuff, but they would throw in to the black Christian group news of a black man beaten on the way home from church, suspects white, while on the white Christian group would post similar story but ethnicity reversed.
But don't we still have to fork out for this fund anyway if the transition period is extended, and all the stuff with Cummings is just a Remainer plot to ensure that happens? (I think I'm following this correctly.)
It's part of the next EU budget which doesn't include the UK. I assume that if the UK extends then an interim bill for the benefit of Single Market access will be thrashed out - hence the 30 June deadline as these things can't be sorted out between 11pm
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
The limitless resources of the cosmos and the technological innovations accelerated by the rigours of exploring it don't hold any appeal? If we're currently using the resources of multiple Earths the best thing to do might be to find new Earths to supply us...
The Black Visions Collective Movement and Legal Fund, a Black, trans and queer-led organization, is helping lead the protests and advocating to defund the police in Minnesota.
Reclaim the Block, a Minnesota org that lobbies for defunding the police and re-routing funds to affordable housing, health, violence prevention, civil right and renter protections.
Defund the police will achieve what? Lower crime? What about better fund the police to be properly trained?
And paying the bail for "protesters". So these people are happy to bail people who you don't know what they were arrested for, and more than likely for looting and violence.
They are aided and abetted in this by an American President who does not regard himself as President of the whole country.
Sadly, the Democrats have put up an elderly and mentally infirm candidate, with no obvious ability to bring the country back together again.
Perhaps it's time for the US to split into three countries: Resourcia which would contain the inner states running down to the Gulf Coast and the South East, and which would be rich in natural resourcecs. Cascadia which would be the West Coast and would contain Silicon Valley and Seattle. And Yankee, which would be North Carolina or Virginia and up, crossing West into the Great Lakes and bringing in Illinois.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
The limitless resources of the cosmos and the technological innovations accelerated by the rigours of exploring it don't hold any appeal? If we're currently using the resources of multiple Earths the best thing to do might be to find new Earths to supply us...
Players always get booked for taking their shirt off, or for making any sort of political statement when celebrating. The shirt could have said "Congrats to NASA and SpaceX", he'd still have been booked.
Senior public health officials have made a last-minute plea for ministers to scrap Monday’s easing of the coronavirus lockdown in England, warning the country is unprepared to deal with any surge in infection and that public resolve to take steps to limit transmisson has been eroded.
The Association of Directors of Public Health (ADPH) said new rules, including allowing groups of up to six people to meet outdoors and in private gardens, were “not supported by the science” and that pictures of crowded beaches and beauty spots over the weekend showed “the public is not keeping to social distancing as it was”.
Stay at home as much as possible until we get a decent track and trace system in place with R being well below one, and the incident rate is a lot fewer than 8k per day is a good place to start.
It's too late for trying to wind back the clock. People will make their own decisions about what they do based on what they perceive the level of risk to be.
Nobody who's reasonably young, reasonably fit and not scared witless by the virus is going to "stay at home as much as possible," especially when the weather is as good as this. My own observations suggest that most (though not all) people are still observing the 2m rule when they're out and about, and I dare say that most people who are now out and about regularly would also take a different attitude to seeing elderly or vulnerable relatives (I've not visited or been visited by either parent since March,) but the SS Stay-at-Home has well and truly sailed. It's over the horizon and gone.
It may well come back, I'm certain Boris Johnson doesn't want to be known as the PM that needlessly oversaw the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Brits.
That’s right. If the virus takes off again we will be locking down again.
And hence destroy (and in many cases end) the lives of countless people in the country due to unemployment, financial problems, various health issues arising from isolation, domestic abuse and all the rest of it. Not that this will get even a thousandth of the coverage that Coronavirus deaths receive.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
But don't we still have to fork out for this fund anyway if the transition period is extended, and all the stuff with Cummings is just a Remainer plot to ensure that happens? (I think I'm following this correctly.)
It's part of the next EU budget which doesn't include the UK. I assume that if the UK extends then an interim bill for the benefit of Single Market access will be thrashed out - hence the 30 June deadline as these things can't be sorted out between 11pm and midnight on 31 December.
The UK will not extend the transistion and the 1st July looks near odds on for the end of negotiations and UK move to WTO
Barnier still does not seem to understand the transition extension has been legislated against by HMG and the WDA requires in EU law for an extension to be agreed on or before 30th June
We all need to hope that post the 1st July Barnier will realise he has run out of time and will then address the consequencies
Barnier definitely knows that; if you know it he knows it.
No one seems to understand; the EU has set out its stall and that is that ex-members don't get the benefits of existing ones and they certainly don't get preferential access without some commitments. Now you and I can argue about the definition of existing benefits and preferential access and LPF arrangements but the EU is a rules based organisation and what they've offered is is what will be given to the UK.
The UK is an adolescent based organisation that thinks that intermittently weeping or slamming doors will somehow get it what it wants.
It won't.
No weeping, no slamming of doors, just not being dictated to on tax rates, state subsidies, and laws ruled by the ECJ
I voted remain but since have supported brexit. I regret TM deal was not passed but we are now in a position, especially post covid, that we will be free to act to mitigate the economic damage and do it on our own terms
Interesting todays poll sees a move to leave and once it becomes clear the EU want 24 billion to keep us in a 2 year transition, and that we become responsible for contributions to Brussels to save the eurozone, that poll is likely to increase substantially
The idea that we’ll be able to fix the damage from COVID all by ourselves is laughable. There’s never been a better time to be part of a larger bloc.
Not with the EU economic armageddon
Why? If theid crist and in general aren't strengthened by Brexit and its influence in Europe will be at its lowest point in centuries.
Yes yes yes, fascinating.
Your analysis of the European situation would be more impactful if you hadn't just confirmed that you misunderstand the most basic facts about the EU.
eg The EU frugals don't want any covid grants, they only want loans. Instead the EU has proposed to do loans AND grants, so the frugals are mightily pissed off.
So you still aren't very articulate - its is twenty past five I suppose so its a downward slope from here - there are 27 different voices in the EU, they may all be coming from different positions and with a different shopping list but they will compromise to keep the project going. Thats the thing you don't seem to understand that people can have a larger understanding of the things that affect them.
Do you actually know any Europeans on a personal or a professional level? If you do maybe ask them whether they would support flouncing out of the EU over supporting the poorer countries and essentially tear up the project and their trading relationships.
I get the impression your quite tight - in both meanings of the word.
I get the impression you are an embittered Remoaner who hasn't had sex in several years.
You all sound the same: you all have that distinctive, reedy, effeminately pompous tone of voice: simultaneously shrill, strident, epicene, and petulant, and typically allied to a bizarre lack of fundamental knowledge, as here.
I suspect you personally have weirdly shrivelled genitals, giving the appearance of small pieces of coal, like the later Habsburgs.
So just to be clear, you don't actually know any Europeans?
Thank you for your concern regarding my genitalia but it is quite misplaced. If you could imagine a massively oversized aubergine and two grapefruits containing levels of energy that Space X would be jealous off you'd be closer to the mark.
I actually genuinely enjoyed that little snark so keep them coming; the banter at home is nothing on the office sadly!
I am happy to discourse with you, but can we please keep the focus on the tiny nature of your blackly wizened private parts.
Surely because of advanced age, Leavers are much more likely to have atrophic genitalia, with the young and virile Remainers quite priapic in contrast, or pneumatic in the case of the females.
You may very well think so but I couldn't possible comment.
"I cannot be alone in noticing the huge gulf between the sympathetic coverage given to the Black Lives Matter protests in the mainstream media and the almost universally hostile coverage of the anti-lockdown protests. Celebrities who were encouraging everyone to remain in their homes until last week are now rushing out to join the protests, including Emily Ratajkowski, Jaz Sinclair, Paris Jackson and Billie Eilish.
Senior public health officials have made a last-minute plea for ministers to scrap Monday’s easing of the coronavirus lockdown in England, warning the country is unprepared to deal with any surge in infection and that public resolve to take steps to limit transmisson has been eroded.
The Association of Directors of Public Health (ADPH) said new rules, including allowing groups of up to six people to meet outdoors and in private gardens, were “not supported by the science” and that pictures of crowded beaches and beauty spots over the weekend showed “the public is not keeping to social distancing as it was”.
Stay at home as much as possible until we get a decent track and trace system in place with R being well below one, and the incident rate is a lot fewer than 8k per day is a good place to start.
It's too late for trying to wind back the clock. People will make their own decisions about what they do based on what they perceive the level of risk to be.
Nobody who's reasonably young, reasonably fit and not scared witless by the virus is going to "stay at home as much as possible," especially when the weather is as good as this. My own observations suggest that most (though not all) people are still observing the 2m rule when they're out and about, and I dare say that most people who are now out and about regularly would also take a different attitude to seeing elderly or vulnerable relatives (I've not visited or been visited by either parent since March,) but the SS Stay-at-Home has well and truly sailed. It's over the horizon and gone.
It may well come back, I'm certain Boris Johnson doesn't want to be known as the PM that needlessly oversaw the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Brits.
It doesn't matter what Boris Johnson says, at least when it comes to trying to force people to sit in their little brick boxes. Businesses he can do something about, private individuals not so much.
A significant fraction of the population will be prepared to risk catching the virus because they know perfectly well that they're at incredibly low risk of falling seriously ill; or they won't be interested in listening to the Government because they have lost faith in its message and/or strategy (the Cummings debacle won't have helped with that); or they're simply fed up to the back teeth with the lockdown and would rather like to live a little before they perish; or some combination of the three. So they'll go out regardless - and who will stop them?
We're not a police state. The security forces rely on consent and don't have the numbers to deal with mass scale public disobedience. If a sufficient proportion of the nation has had it with the restrictions then they will therefore cease to operate. And if nothing else I suspect that there are rather a lot of people (particularly in the less vulnerable groups) who have been all too delighted to immolate the Stay at Home edict and enjoy going to parks and beaches and round each others houses and on dates and so on, and they're not going to be inclined to go back to prison again just because Boris and his ministers (who give the distinct impression that they're making it up as they go along, and that none of these rules apply to their mates anyway) say so.
If, after that, there's another major flare-up of this thing (and my suspicion, based on several different pieces of evidence, is that there won't be,) then the Government will just have to handle it as best it can.
Senior public health officials have made a last-minute plea for ministers to scrap Monday’s easing of the coronavirus lockdown in England, warning the country is unprepared to deal with any surge in infection and that public resolve to take steps to limit transmisson has been eroded.
The Association of Directors of Public Health (ADPH) said new rules, including allowing groups of up to six people to meet outdoors and in private gardens, were “not supported by the science” and that pictures of crowded beaches and beauty spots over the weekend showed “the public is not keeping to social distancing as it was”.
Stay at home as much as possible until we get a decent track and trace system in place with R being well below one, and the incident rate is a lot fewer than 8k per day is a good place to start.
It's too late for trying to wind back the clock. People will make their own decisions about what they do based on what they perceive the level of risk to be.
Nobody who's reasonably young, reasonably fit and not scared witless by the virus is going to "stay at home as much as possible," especially when the weather is as good as this. My own observations suggest that most (though not all) people are still observing the 2m rule when they're out and about, and I dare say that most people who are now out and about regularly would also take a different attitude to seeing elderly or vulnerable relatives (I've not visited or been visited by either parent since March,) but the SS Stay-at-Home has well and truly sailed. It's over the horizon and gone.
It may well come back, I'm certain Boris Johnson doesn't want to be known as the PM that needlessly oversaw the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Brits.
That’s right. If the virus takes off again we will be locking down again.
Regardless of one's views on lockdown, surely the issue is that the government is contradicting its own promises, and this could come back to haunt them. It was absolutely clear from the 5 tests and the risk assessment stuff that they would only ease lockdown if a) death and infection numbers were continuing to fall and low, and b) infection numbers were low enough to track/trace/isolate all those infected and their contacts. Looking at this week's European numbers, the UK's data on deaths and infections is pretty poor compared to others, so releasing lockdown should be commensurately slower. The conditions have not been met; we are still at level 4. The government should admit that this is a change of policy.
While I'm here. I think the whole testing thing will be exposed as a shambles. I deduce this from the fact that surely all we want to know is the number of people tested and the proportion of those people who are positive. Who cares what the number of tests is if some folk have had several, and who cares about numbers sent out or done but with results pending? But we have never had the simple data of people tested with results/% infected.
Same here - the reasoning is, why do we need to go in? A few people might need to be physically present every now and then...
In the longer run, yes, the issues about cross-pollination of ideas, meeting other groups, careers etc may have some effect. But in the 6 month range? No.
The only really issue is some people being sick of working from home.
The problem with WAH is you need to create the same distractions that are present in every office - conversations about work or more often not about work, the gossip, the banter, the social aspects of the working experience.
Many companies have tried to replicate that via "virtual cuppas" or the "virtual corridor" but you can't structure an unstructured activity and hope it has the same effect. Other companies think because their employees are at home they can and should work harder and longer.
WAH doesn't work for everyone - I have a colleague who has four school aged daughters. He is desperate to get back to the office.
Long term WFH here. You start out with a laptop on the kitchen table but all my colleagues end up devoting a spare room, garage or (very popular) a posh shed to be their office. (Handy tip: use an ironing board as a cheap standing desk.)
Not much else to use the ironing board for. Three months with no ironing is another benefit of WFH.
There are, in fact a small number of people where I work desperate to get back to the office. Apparently, the currently plan is to ration the return to the office at a maximum of 5% of staff - this is apparently common in the City, so as to avoid overloading transport/buildings/other.
Senior public health officials have made a last-minute plea for ministers to scrap Monday’s easing of the coronavirus lockdown in England, warning the country is unprepared to deal with any surge in infection and that public resolve to take steps to limit transmisson has been eroded.
The Association of Directors of Public Health (ADPH) said new rules, including allowing groups of up to six people to meet outdoors and in private gardens, were “not supported by the science” and that pictures of crowded beaches and beauty spots over the weekend showed “the public is not keeping to social distancing as it was”.
Stay at home as much as possible until we get a decent track and trace system in place with R being well below one, and the incident rate is a lot fewer than 8k per day is a good place to start.
It's too late for trying to wind back the clock. People will make their own decisions about what they do based on what they perceive the level of risk to be.
Nobody who's reasonably young, reasonably fit and not scared witless by the virus is going to "stay at home as much as possible," especially when the weather is as good as this. My own observations suggest that most (though not all) people are still observing the 2m rule when they're out and about, and I dare say that most people who are now out and about regularly would also take a different attitude to seeing elderly or vulnerable relatives (I've not visited or been visited by either parent since March,) but the SS Stay-at-Home has well and truly sailed. It's over the horizon and gone.
It may well come back, I'm certain Boris Johnson doesn't want to be known as the PM that needlessly oversaw the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Brits.
IIRC you're worried about a second wave this winter alongside a flu epidemic.
If that's a likely possibility then we should be removing all restrictions now and building as much herd immunity while we can.
The Black Visions Collective Movement and Legal Fund, a Black, trans and queer-led organization, is helping lead the protests and advocating to defund the police in Minnesota.
Reclaim the Block, a Minnesota org that lobbies for defunding the police and re-routing funds to affordable housing, health, violence prevention, civil right and renter protections.
Defund the police will achieve what? Lower crime? What about better fund the police to be properly trained?
And paying the bail for "protesters". So these people are happy to bail people who you don't know what they were arrested for, and more than likely for looting and violence.
They are aided and abetted in this by an American President who does not regard himself as President of the whole country.
Sadly, the Democrats have put up an elderly and mentally infirm candidate, with no obvious ability to bring the country back together again.
Perhaps it's time for the US to split into three countries: Resourcia which would contain the inner states running down to the Gulf Coast and the South East, and which would be rich in natural resourcecs. Cascadia which would be the West Coast and would contain Silicon Valley and Seattle. And Yankee, which would be North Carolina or Virginia and up, crossing West into the Great Lakes and bringing in Illinois.
It seems that this might solve a lot of problems.
Instinctively I thought good idea, then I thought about the partition of India - whatever problems exist now, it is not worth the risk.
The egg heads from the start said people wouldn't stick to a rigid lockdown for very long. Even before the Cummings story we all saw people were increasingly ignoring aspects of it.
One big thing one i think the government have made an error with this loosening, not putting a cap on distanced travel. You can't really enforce it, but the message is go as far as you like, and resulted people all heading to same places en masse.
Contrariwise, a lot of firms have spent the last decade downsizing by hotdesking and that will surely be a casualty of the coronavirus. That, together with social distancing, might mean the same office space is needed in order to house fewer people. Though if I can't get a Pret smoked salmon sandwich, is it worth going in?
Indeed - the days of hotdesking are over and that is pushing the capacity reductions. In theory, the same 100 desks could be used by 200 staff at times through the week and those firms with the most efficient space utilisation metrics run very tight desk booking systems.
Hotdesking as a way of maximising utilisation and reducing the cost of space has been in vogue for 20 years but no longer. It's back to 100 staff in 100 desks but those staff aren't always present and when they aren't the desk sits empty so the utilisation figures plummet.
I've worked at home a lot in the past decade so this has been nothing new but anecdotally the majority of those for whom this is a new experience have adapted it and I've had more than one colleague ask why they never did this before.
No one will miss the commute especially when the weather deteriorates and @NickPalmer makes the useful point that as social opportunities locally return the commute will seem even less attractive. 3 hours in a crowded train replaced by a short drive to a local pub or restaurant to meet friends for dinner - much less stressful and you don;t have to get up as early in the morning.
The company I work for was very much into hot desking
I worked in the London office most of the time and anyone who got to office after 9am wouldn't get a desk
The post lockdown plan seems to be having as few people in office as possible with a cap on occupancy of no one sitting opposite or next to another person and no using of desks adjacent to walkways.
I think about 15% pre CV19 occupancy then.
Lifts and printers will also be problems to be resolved
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Well you'll be pleased to know that's there's a massive amount of science being done on the ISS, including monitoring of this here big blue planet.
With this mission, the cost of that science just reduced dramatically, thanks to the unprecedented use of a privately-developed rocket from SpaceX by NASA.
It's also a great diplomatic tool, the one project in which the USA and Russia co-operate fully and share all their data. Much better that they put their resources into exploring the universe together, than in pointing thousands of nukes at each other.
Senior public health officials have made a last-minute plea for ministers to scrap Monday’s easing of the coronavirus lockdown in England, warning the country is unprepared to deal with any surge in infection and that public resolve to take steps to limit transmisson has been eroded.
The Association of Directors of Public Health (ADPH) said new rules, including allowing groups of up to six people to meet outdoors and in private gardens, were “not supported by the science” and that pictures of crowded beaches and beauty spots over the weekend showed “the public is not keeping to social distancing as it was”.
Stay at home as much as possible until we get a decent track and trace system in place with R being well below one, and the incident rate is a lot fewer than 8k per day is a good place to start.
It's too late for trying to wind back the clock. People will make their own decisions about what they do based on what they perceive the level of risk to be.
Nobody who's reasonably young, reasonably fit and not scared witless by the virus is going to "stay at home as much as possible," especially when the weather is as good as this. My own observations suggest that most (though not all) people are still observing the 2m rule when they're out and about, and I dare say that most people who are now out and about regularly would also take a different attitude to seeing elderly or vulnerable relatives (I've not visited or been visited by either parent since March,) but the SS Stay-at-Home has well and truly sailed. It's over the horizon and gone.
It may well come back, I'm certain Boris Johnson doesn't want to be known as the PM that needlessly oversaw the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Brits.
That’s right. If the virus takes off again we will be locking down again.
And hence destroy (and in many cases end) the lives of countless people in the country due to unemployment, financial problems, various health issues arising from isolation, domestic abuse and all the rest of it. Not that this will get even a thousandth of the coverage that Coronavirus deaths receive.
You get that anyway lockdown or not. I'm afraid this is a serious black swan event. Pray for a treatment or a vaccine within a year.
"I cannot be alone in noticing the huge gulf between the sympathetic coverage given to the Black Lives Matter protests in the mainstream media and the almost universally hostile coverage of the anti-lockdown protests. Celebrities who were encouraging everyone to remain in their homes until last week are now rushing out to join the protests, including Emily Ratajkowski, Jaz Sinclair, Paris Jackson and Billie Eilish.
Sweden the virus will probably push growth negative in Q2 but the overall effect will be a fraction that that the lock-downs are doing in the rest of Europe.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Well you'll be pleased to know that's there's a massive amount of science being done on the ISS, including monitoring of this here big blue planet.
With this mission, the cost of that science just reduced dramatically, thanks to the unprecedented use of a privately-developed rocket from SpaceX by NASA.
It's also a great diplomatic tool, the one project in which the USA and Russia co-operate fully and share all their data. Much better that they put their resources into exploring the universe together, than in pointing thousands of nukes at each other.
Science on the space station. Can we grow cress in zero gravity?
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
The company I work for was very much into hot desking
I worked in the London office most of the time and anyone who got to office after 9am wouldn't get a desk
The post lockdown plan seems to be having as few people in office as possible with a cap on occupancy of no one sitting opposite or next to another person and no using of desks adjacent to walkways.
I think about 15% pre CV19 occupancy then.
Lifts and printers will also be problems to be resolved
Yes, that's a model I've seen elsewhere. Other companies are putting in "one way systems" to restrict the numbers in corridors.
At 15% capacity lifts will be less of an issue - printers are different. Some organisations are now looking to allow employees to print documents at home but that'snot without its issues.
Others are looking at skeleton admin operations whose main responsibility would be post and printing. If I were looking at an office model for the future I'd be thinking about designing an organisation whose main purpose would be providing virtual admin for companies.
Senior public health officials have made a last-minute plea for ministers to scrap Monday’s easing of the coronavirus lockdown in England, warning the country is unprepared to deal with any surge in infection and that public resolve to take steps to limit transmisson has been eroded.
The Association of Directors of Public Health (ADPH) said new rules, including allowing groups of up to six people to meet outdoors and in private gardens, were “not supported by the science” and that pictures of crowded beaches and beauty spots over the weekend showed “the public is not keeping to social distancing as it was”.
Stay at home as much as possible until we get a decent track and trace system in place with R being well below one, and the incident rate is a lot fewer than 8k per day is a good place to start.
It's too late for trying to wind back the clock. People will make their own decisions about what they do based on what they perceive the level of risk to be.
Nobody who's reasonably young, reasonably fit and not scared witless by the virus is going to "stay at home as much as possible," especially when the weather is as good as this. My own observations suggest that most (though not all) people are still observing the 2m rule when they're out and about, and I dare say that most people who are now out and about regularly would also take a different attitude to seeing elderly or vulnerable relatives (I've not visited or been visited by either parent since March,) but the SS Stay-at-Home has well and truly sailed. It's over the horizon and gone.
Continuing the discussion about how many people are cowering in their homes or 'out and about'.
My experiences among the parks and woods of South Yorkshire is that the proportion of non-English speakers who are in them is far higher than their demographic numbers would predict.
Even taking account the differences in age groups and housing types.
Now could that be because non-English speakers are getting their information from different, and less fear-mongering, sources or perhaps because they are more likely to be employed in jobs where you cannot work from home and so more fatalistic about risks.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Well you'll be pleased to know that's there's a massive amount of science being done on the ISS, including monitoring of this here big blue planet.
With this mission, the cost of that science just reduced dramatically, thanks to the unprecedented use of a privately-developed rocket from SpaceX by NASA.
It's also a great diplomatic tool, the one project in which the USA and Russia co-operate fully and share all their data. Much better that they put their resources into exploring the universe together, than in pointing thousands of nukes at each other.
Actually, SpaceX just fucked the Russkis. Their launch business just became irrelevant.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Starlink is the most amazing project, imagine that anyone living outside a major city will be able to pay $50 for high-speed broadband that works anywhere on Earth. It will be massive for people in the rural West, and change the game completely in most of the rest of the world.
The real money, of course, will be if they can deliver on knocking 25% off the latency between offices in London and New York, and charge $10k a month for the privilege!
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Well you'll be pleased to know that's there's a massive amount of science being done on the ISS, including monitoring of this here big blue planet.
With this mission, the cost of that science just reduced dramatically, thanks to the unprecedented use of a privately-developed rocket from SpaceX by NASA.
It's also a great diplomatic tool, the one project in which the USA and Russia co-operate fully and share all their data. Much better that they put their resources into exploring the universe together, than in pointing thousands of nukes at each other.
Science on the space station. Can we grow cress in zero gravity?
The egg heads from the start said people wouldn't stick to a rigid lockdown for very long. Even before the Cummings story we all saw people were increasingly ignoring aspects of it.
One big thing one i think the government have made an error with this loosening, not putting a cap on distanced travel. You can't really enforce it, but the message is go as far as you like, and resulted people all heading to same places en masse.
This is what France rather sensibly did.
Bit of Darwin there.
The idiots will all drive off to the same spot and so increase their infection risk more.
The company I work for was very much into hot desking
I worked in the London office most of the time and anyone who got to office after 9am wouldn't get a desk
The post lockdown plan seems to be having as few people in office as possible with a cap on occupancy of no one sitting opposite or next to another person and no using of desks adjacent to walkways.
I think about 15% pre CV19 occupancy then.
Lifts and printers will also be problems to be resolved
Yes, that's a model I've seen elsewhere. Other companies are putting in "one way systems" to restrict the numbers in corridors.
At 15% capacity lifts will be less of an issue - printers are different. Some organisations are now looking to allow employees to print documents at home but that'snot without its issues.
Others are looking at skeleton admin operations whose main responsibility would be post and printing. If I were looking at an office model for the future I'd be thinking about designing an organisation whose main purpose would be providing virtual admin for companies.
More likely remaining paper-based companies will finally switch over to electronic documents - which is of course long overdue.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Well you'll be pleased to know that's there's a massive amount of science being done on the ISS, including monitoring of this here big blue planet.
With this mission, the cost of that science just reduced dramatically, thanks to the unprecedented use of a privately-developed rocket from SpaceX by NASA.
It's also a great diplomatic tool, the one project in which the USA and Russia co-operate fully and share all their data. Much better that they put their resources into exploring the universe together, than in pointing thousands of nukes at each other.
Actually, SpaceX just fucked the Russkis. Their launch business just became irrelevant.
They'll still use the 50-year-old Soyuz to fly their own, but having diversity of launch methods is definitely a good thing.
What has happened in the last few years with private space projects is quite amazing, with several companies involved in the technology. I still grin like a kid whenever I see a rocket land back to Earth, no-one could do that even four years ago - SpaceX have made it seem routine.
Dr. Michel Schmitt, from Albert Schweitzer Hospital in Colmar, northeastern France, and his team of researchers examined thousands of chest X-rays from late 2019 and were able to identify two scans that were 'consistent' with the symptoms of Covid-19.
The scans, which were identified between November 16 and November 18, now cast a new light on when the coronavirus crisis first hit Europe as scientists continue their search for 'patient zero'.
Senior public health officials have made a last-minute plea for ministers to scrap Monday’s easing of the coronavirus lockdown in England, warning the country is unprepared to deal with any surge in infection and that public resolve to take steps to limit transmisson has been eroded.
The Association of Directors of Public Health (ADPH) said new rules, including allowing groups of up to six people to meet outdoors and in private gardens, were “not supported by the science” and that pictures of crowded beaches and beauty spots over the weekend showed “the public is not keeping to social distancing as it was”.
Stay at home as much as possible until we get a decent track and trace system in place with R being well below one, and the incident rate is a lot fewer than 8k per day is a good place to start.
It's too late for trying to wind back the clock. People will make their own decisions about what they do based on what they perceive the level of risk to be.
Nobody who's reasonably young, reasonably fit and not scared witless by the virus is going to "stay at home as much as possible," especially when the weather is as good as this. My own observations suggest that most (though not all) people are still observing the 2m rule when they're out and about, and I dare say that most people who are now out and about regularly would also take a different attitude to seeing elderly or vulnerable relatives (I've not visited or been visited by either parent since March,) but the SS Stay-at-Home has well and truly sailed. It's over the horizon and gone.
Continuing the discussion about how many people are cowering in their homes or 'out and about'.
My experiences among the parks and woods of South Yorkshire is that the proportion of non-English speakers who are in them is far higher than their demographic numbers would predict.
Even taking account the differences in age groups and housing types.
Now could that be because non-English speakers are getting their information from different, and less fear-mongering, sources or perhaps because they are more likely to be employed in jobs where you cannot work from home and so more fatalistic about risks.
The racial difference I've noticed while out [which is pretty much only to go to the supermarket] is that at the supermarket minorities are much, much more likely to wear a mask.
Not just East Asian ethnicities whom it wouldn't be odd to see wearing masks before this even began. I'd estimate when I go to the supermarket that most minorities are wearing masks but probably fewer than 5% of white people are.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Starlink if it works will be utterly transformational.
Proposals to invest in Fibre etc seem utterly moot if Starlink works.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Starlink is the most amazing project, imagine that anyone living outside a major city will be able to pay $50 for high-speed broadband that works anywhere on Earth. It will be massive for people in the rural West, and change the game completely in most of the rest of the world.
The real money, of course, will be if they can deliver on knocking 25% off the latency between offices in London and New York, and charge $10k a month for the privilege!
The funding for the overhead will come from the US military. Everything else is gravy.
Same here - the reasoning is, why do we need to go in? A few people might need to be physically present every now and then...
In the longer run, yes, the issues about cross-pollination of ideas, meeting other groups, careers etc may have some effect. But in the 6 month range? No.
The only really issue is some people being sick of working from home.
The problem with WAH is you need to create the same distractions that are present in every office - conversations about work or more often not about work, the gossip, the banter, the social aspects of the working experience.
Many companies have tried to replicate that via "virtual cuppas" or the "virtual corridor" but you can't structure an unstructured activity and hope it has the same effect. Other companies think because their employees are at home they can and should work harder and longer.
WAH doesn't work for everyone - I have a colleague who has four school aged daughters. He is desperate to get back to the office.
Some call it working from home, others call it bringing your work into your home. If the office is dead it could, counterintuitively, be a massive setback for women’s equality in the workplace because...erm...there won’t be one. Women are to be asked to share their workspace with their childcare space and they will, in all likelihood, have to prioritise the latter. Men will not have that pressure. Being able to get out of the house was to half our population the liberating event of the twentieth century. If we pressure everyone to stay home the effects on that half will be quite different.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Question for the technical nerds: does star-link make 5G irreverent? That is if it happens and it works.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
The limitless resources of the cosmos and the technological innovations accelerated by the rigours of exploring it don't hold any appeal? If we're currently using the resources of multiple Earths the best thing to do might be to find new Earths to supply us...
Voyager 1 was launched in 1977. It is now 20 odd light hours away. The nearest possible planet is 4.2 light years away, and the chances of that planet being in any way human habitable are at least 1m to 1 against. We ain't going nowhere, and this is not a Yeah, but they said heavier then air flight was impossible kind of point. And if we were, the relative distances and levels of technology are such that you going upstairs in your house and saying Yay, I'm in space is about as useful for hypothetical extra solar system exploration as sending more bods to the iss.
Senior public health officials have made a last-minute plea for ministers to scrap Monday’s easing of the coronavirus lockdown in England, warning the country is unprepared to deal with any surge in infection and that public resolve to take steps to limit transmisson has been eroded.
The Association of Directors of Public Health (ADPH) said new rules, including allowing groups of up to six people to meet outdoors and in private gardens, were “not supported by the science” and that pictures of crowded beaches and beauty spots over the weekend showed “the public is not keeping to social distancing as it was”.
Stay at home as much as possible until we get a decent track and trace system in place with R being well below one, and the incident rate is a lot fewer than 8k per day is a good place to start.
It's too late for trying to wind back the clock. People will make their own decisions about what they do based on what they perceive the level of risk to be.
Nobody who's reasonably young, reasonably fit and not scared witless by the virus is going to "stay at home as much as possible," especially when the weather is as good as this. My own observations suggest that most (though not all) people are still observing the 2m rule when they're out and about, and I dare say that most people who are now out and about regularly would also take a different attitude to seeing elderly or vulnerable relatives (I've not visited or been visited by either parent since March,) but the SS Stay-at-Home has well and truly sailed. It's over the horizon and gone.
Continuing the discussion about how many people are cowering in their homes or 'out and about'.
My experiences among the parks and woods of South Yorkshire is that the proportion of non-English speakers who are in them is far higher than their demographic numbers would predict.
Even taking account the differences in age groups and housing types.
Now could that be because non-English speakers are getting their information from different, and less fear-mongering, sources or perhaps because they are more likely to be employed in jobs where you cannot work from home and so more fatalistic about risks.
The racial difference I've noticed while out [which is pretty much only to go to the supermarket] is that at the supermarket minorities are much, much more likely to wear a mask.
Not just East Asian ethnicities whom it wouldn't be odd to see wearing masks before this even began. I'd estimate when I go to the supermarket that most minorities are wearing masks but probably fewer than 5% of white people are.
From what I see neither Polish or Romanians are any more interested in wearing masks as British people.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Question for the technical nerds: does star-link make 5G irreverent? That is if it happens and it works.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Starlink if it works will be utterly transformational.
Proposals to invest in Fibre etc seem utterly moot if Starlink works.
Fibre in cities and towns, satellite in villages and remote areas. Will make working from home easy, even if you live in the middle of nowhere.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Starlink if it works will be utterly transformational.
Proposals to invest in Fibre etc seem utterly moot if Starlink works.
"Proposals to invest in Fibre etc seem utterly moot if Starlink works."
No, they won't.
The limiting factor with Starlink is a combination of throughput (Mb/s) through the satellites and a limit on how many receivers can be close to each other on the ground.
For built up areas, fibre wins easily.
Where Starlink wins, easily, is connecting up hamlets, villages and individual locations that are more than a few miles from the fibre grid.
So, you will be able to get 100s of Mbs up and down in the deep countryside, and your phone will be getting 5G with lots of bandwidth.
A big user will be the mobile phone companies - they are already testing cell towers which include a satellite receiver for the backhaul*. For really remote locations, you could have a cell tower, with solar cells and a storage battery as an all-in-one. Just plonk it down and fire it up. That will be big in Africa....
*Backhaul is the connect-to-the-rest-of-the-world-bit.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Question for the technical nerds: does star-link make 5G irreverent? That is if it happens and it works.
No I don't think so as I understand it, Starlink won't be compatible with mobile devices. It requires a satellite box (like Sky TV has) so won't work with mobiles.
However it certainly could help with the backend of 5G as perhaps masts could run their backend via the satellite potentially?
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
The limitless resources of the cosmos and the technological innovations accelerated by the rigours of exploring it don't hold any appeal? If we're currently using the resources of multiple Earths the best thing to do might be to find new Earths to supply us...
Voyager 1 was launched in 1977. It is now 20 odd light hours away. The nearest possible planet is 4.2 light years away, and the chances of that planet being in any way human habitable are at least 1m to 1 against. We ain't going nowhere, and this is not a Yeah, but they said heavier then air flight was impossible kind of point. And if we were, the relative distances and levels of technology are such that you going upstairs in your house and saying Yay, I'm in space is about as useful for hypothetical extra solar system exploration as sending more bods to the iss.
The potential resources of the solar system are quite enough for now, The stars will have to wait for our descendants.
But don't we still have to fork out for this fund anyway if the transition period is extended, and all the stuff with Cummings is just a Remainer plot to ensure that happens? (I think I'm following this correctly.)
Yes, extending the transition period comes complete with our ‘share’ of the €750bn bill attached to it, as well as the usual £350m a week. Why do you think Barnier is so desparate for the extension?
Well the bill has already been split across all the payers and all the recpients and has been agreed in that form. Barnier has been explaining to the UK what its options are nothing more. Fortunately the UK government and the whisky salesman who is representing it are keen for the country's economy to get to the bottom of the cliff as quickly as possible.
The frugal states have been given what they wanted: EUR250BN has been added as loans with the original EUR500BN in grants retained. I anticipate that it will get to 1trn by the end. In any case the countries which need the money will get it and the countries that want a yield will get theirs.
You seem to ignore eadric explanation altogether
Because he hasn't explained anything and referred to an old article. The original plan was EUR500BN of grants. The frugals didn't like it and so the new proposal adds EUR250BN of loans. The end deal could be up at a EUR1TRN. The bottom line is that the two biggest members of the EU want this and so it is what is going to happen.
People tend to underestimate the political will underpinning the EU and the Euro. It's huge. So whatever fate throws at it Gloria Gaynor applies. There is much to be gained from realising this.
Yep. It's perfectly legitimate to question whether or not the Euro in particular is wise or worth the bother, but the determination to keep it going is immense (and nobody has left the single currency yet, despite regular predictions of collapse since at least 2008.)
It might yet fall apart, but I'll believe it when I see it and not before.
That's because of the law of "path of least resistance".
Imagine you are the Italian government. Now, you will almost certainly perform better economically if your country leaves the Euro. Just one small problem: tens of millions of pensioners with Euros in the bank (which are converted to Lira) will get absolutely destroyed. And the oldies vote, while the youngsters who'd benefit don't.
Untangling the Euro is an incredible complex, because it creates lots of losers. And even if it creates more winners than losers, then those who lost out will be incredibly angry.
The path of least resistance (for now) is to kick the can, and hope things improve.
(And, by the way, this is not as stupid as it looks. Fundamentally, the EU economy is in much better shape today, in terms of dramatically lower structural imbalances, than it was in 2007.)
I'm not sure that's true at all. It depends what you count as "structural" imbalances, of course, but imho they are at least as bad, if not worse, now than in 2007.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Starlink if it works will be utterly transformational.
Proposals to invest in Fibre etc seem utterly moot if Starlink works.
Nah, you'll need fibre and cable to provide the backhaul for mobile networks.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Question for the technical nerds: does star-link make 5G irreverent? That is if it happens and it works.
No I don't think so as I understand it, Starlink won't be compatible with mobile devices. It requires a satellite box (like Sky TV has) so won't work with mobiles.
However it certainly could help with the backend of 5G as perhaps masts could run their backend via the satellite potentially?
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Invest in African telecoms..... My guess is that Starlink could cut (as a start) the cost of setting up and running a mobile network by half.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Question for the technical nerds: does star-link make 5G irreverent? That is if it happens and it works.
No I don't think so as I understand it, Starlink won't be compatible with mobile devices. It requires a satellite box (like Sky TV has) so won't work with mobiles.
However it certainly could help with the backend of 5G as perhaps masts could run their backend via the satellite potentially?
You really don't want to do that, if you have a Sky box, then you'll know how a bit of rain and snow can stop your box working.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Question for the technical nerds: does star-link make 5G irreverent? That is if it happens and it works.
Not really, they have different applications and are quite complementary.
5G will be good for very high speed data connections, and for connections between devices such as autonomous cars. It will roll out initially in cities, as the masts need to be closer together than current 4G masts.
Starlink will, with a few exceptions such as city traders, initially roll out in rural areas, and will give broadband connections to those who are still using slow ADSL over copper wires, or even dial-up. This is interesting if you're in the UK, but life-changing if you're in rural USA, Canada, Australia etc - which is *really* rural.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
The limitless resources of the cosmos and the technological innovations accelerated by the rigours of exploring it don't hold any appeal? If we're currently using the resources of multiple Earths the best thing to do might be to find new Earths to supply us...
Voyager 1 was launched in 1977. It is now 20 odd light hours away. The nearest possible planet is 4.2 light years away, and the chances of that planet being in any way human habitable are at least 1m to 1 against. We ain't going nowhere, and this is not a Yeah, but they said heavier then air flight was impossible kind of point. And if we were, the relative distances and levels of technology are such that you going upstairs in your house and saying Yay, I'm in space is about as useful for hypothetical extra solar system exploration as sending more bods to the iss.
Exploration is entirely possible within our solar system. Not only is space very useful for satellites (like Starlink etc) but its entirely probable our first proper offworld bases will be for mining purposes. Which matches a lot of why people moved to other continents etc too - looking for resources was a desire then.
A number of rare earth elements are available within our solar system in space. Asteroid mining certainly could be a real thing this century.
Same here - the reasoning is, why do we need to go in? A few people might need to be physically present every now and then...
In the longer run, yes, the issues about cross-pollination of ideas, meeting other groups, careers etc may have some effect. But in the 6 month range? No.
The only really issue is some people being sick of working from home.
The problem with WAH is you need to create the same distractions that are present in every office - conversations about work or more often not about work, the gossip, the banter, the social aspects of the working experience.
Many companies have tried to replicate that via "virtual cuppas" or the "virtual corridor" but you can't structure an unstructured activity and hope it has the same effect. Other companies think because their employees are at home they can and should work harder and longer.
WAH doesn't work for everyone - I have a colleague who has four school aged daughters. He is desperate to get back to the office.
Some call it working from home, others call it bringing your work into your home. If the office is dead it could, counterintuitively, be a massive setback for women’s equality in the workplace because...erm...there won’t be one. Women are to be asked to share their workspace with their childcare space and they will, in all likelihood, have to prioritise the latter. Men will not have that pressure. Being able to get out of the house was to half our population the liberating event of the twentieth century. If we pressure everyone to stay home the effects on that half will be quite different.
Well - yet again - it’s not going to be all or nothing is it? People will end up working at home 2-3 days a week and in the office 2-3 days a week, I should think.
Working in the office five days is daft - you need some time to focus without distractions, which is impossible in the crazy open plan offices of today.
But, some collaborative time is great. So be flexible, work 2-5 days a fortnight at home, and enjoy the best of all worlds.
Senior public health officials have made a last-minute plea for ministers to scrap Monday’s easing of the coronavirus lockdown in England, warning the country is unprepared to deal with any surge in infection and that public resolve to take steps to limit transmisson has been eroded.
The Association of Directors of Public Health (ADPH) said new rules, including allowing groups of up to six people to meet outdoors and in private gardens, were “not supported by the science” and that pictures of crowded beaches and beauty spots over the weekend showed “the public is not keeping to social distancing as it was”.
Stay at home as much as possible until we get a decent track and trace system in place with R being well below one, and the incident rate is a lot fewer than 8k per day is a good place to start.
It's too late for trying to wind back the clock. People will make their own decisions about what they do based on what they perceive the level of risk to be.
Nobody who's reasonably young, reasonably fit and not scared witless by the virus is going to "stay at home as much as possible," especially when the weather is as good as this. My own observations suggest that most (though not all) people are still observing the 2m rule when they're out and about, and I dare say that most people who are now out and about regularly would also take a different attitude to seeing elderly or vulnerable relatives (I've not visited or been visited by either parent since March,) but the SS Stay-at-Home has well and truly sailed. It's over the horizon and gone.
Continuing the discussion about how many people are cowering in their homes or 'out and about'.
My experiences among the parks and woods of South Yorkshire is that the proportion of non-English speakers who are in them is far higher than their demographic numbers would predict.
Even taking account the differences in age groups and housing types.
Now could that be because non-English speakers are getting their information from different, and less fear-mongering, sources or perhaps because they are more likely to be employed in jobs where you cannot work from home and so more fatalistic about risks.
The racial difference I've noticed while out [which is pretty much only to go to the supermarket] is that at the supermarket minorities are much, much more likely to wear a mask.
Not just East Asian ethnicities whom it wouldn't be odd to see wearing masks before this even began. I'd estimate when I go to the supermarket that most minorities are wearing masks but probably fewer than 5% of white people are.
In Leicester it is pretty even, as far as I see. Particularly in the hospital we get plenty of white people in masks.
Not outdoors in the parks or walking dogs, but with social distancing why would you?
The local teens were all on the football pitches earlier, but surprising to me, were keeping social distance, even when flirting.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
The limitless resources of the cosmos and the technological innovations accelerated by the rigours of exploring it don't hold any appeal? If we're currently using the resources of multiple Earths the best thing to do might be to find new Earths to supply us...
Voyager 1 was launched in 1977. It is now 20 odd light hours away. The nearest possible planet is 4.2 light years away, and the chances of that planet being in any way human habitable are at least 1m to 1 against. We ain't going nowhere, and this is not a Yeah, but they said heavier then air flight was impossible kind of point. And if we were, the relative distances and levels of technology are such that you going upstairs in your house and saying Yay, I'm in space is about as useful for hypothetical extra solar system exploration as sending more bods to the iss.
Indeed, interstellar travel is going to be hardest thing humanity's ever done, albeit not _quite_ impossible, if we manage to build something that can accelerate to a reasonable fraction of light speed and support several generations of humans as they travel. But exploring and exploiting the solar system is far more feasible, and there's an awful lot we could do with the resources it contains.
Good news that swimming polls may be able to open in July, according to the Sunday Times.
Swimming is one of the few things I've missed.
You're not trying hard enough, Richard. Just back from a delicious splash in the River Avon, near Pershore. Plenty of fresh water around if you look for it!
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Question for the technical nerds: does star-link make 5G irreverent? That is if it happens and it works.
No I don't think so as I understand it, Starlink won't be compatible with mobile devices. It requires a satellite box (like Sky TV has) so won't work with mobiles.
However it certainly could help with the backend of 5G as perhaps masts could run their backend via the satellite potentially?
You really don't want to do that, if you have a Sky box, then you'll know how a bit of rain and snow can stop your box working.
Starlink is already lined up to be a part of mobile networks - providing backhaul in remote areas. Prototype masts being built as we speak.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Starlink if it works will be utterly transformational.
Proposals to invest in Fibre etc seem utterly moot if Starlink works.
Nah, you'll need fibre and cable to provide the backhaul for mobile networks.
Fibre to masts is one thing.
The idea of fibre to every single house in the country no matter how remote (like Labour suggested last time) is another matter.
If it works it'd be cheaper to pay SpaceX for Starlink subscriptions than to roll out fibre to a lot of properties.
Same here - the reasoning is, why do we need to go in? A few people might need to be physically present every now and then...
In the longer run, yes, the issues about cross-pollination of ideas, meeting other groups, careers etc may have some effect. But in the 6 month range? No.
The only really issue is some people being sick of working from home.
The problem with WAH is you need to create the same distractions that are present in every office - conversations about work or more often not about work, the gossip, the banter, the social aspects of the working experience.
Many companies have tried to replicate that via "virtual cuppas" or the "virtual corridor" but you can't structure an unstructured activity and hope it has the same effect. Other companies think because their employees are at home they can and should work harder and longer.
WAH doesn't work for everyone - I have a colleague who has four school aged daughters. He is desperate to get back to the office.
Some call it working from home, others call it bringing your work into your home. If the office is dead it could, counterintuitively, be a massive setback for women’s equality in the workplace because...erm...there won’t be one. Women are to be asked to share their workspace with their childcare space and they will, in all likelihood, have to prioritise the latter. Men will not have that pressure. Being able to get out of the house was to half our population the liberating event of the twentieth century. If we pressure everyone to stay home the effects on that half will be quite different.
Well - yet again - it’s not going to be all or nothing is it? People will end up working at home 2-3 days a week and in the office 2-3 days a week, I should think.
Working in the office five days is daft - you need some time to focus without distractions, which is impossible in the crazy open plan offices of today.
But, some collaborative time is great. So be flexible, work 2-5 days a fortnight at home, and enjoy the best of all worlds.
I reckon I could do about half of my pre-Covid job from home. I worked from two offices, and often did one office's work from the other, so could obviously do that from anywhere really. Assuming in the post-Covid world we are less hung up on face to face meetings, and we do more by phone/email/Skype then probably a bit more than half. The only problem is the end of hotdesking which makes it more affordable for the employer to maintain office space for people who don't need to be there all the time.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Question for the technical nerds: does star-link make 5G irreverent? That is if it happens and it works.
Not really, they have different applications and are quite complementary.
5G will be good for very high speed data connections, and for connections between devices such as autonomous cars. It will roll out initially in cities, as the masts need to be closer together than current 4G masts.
Starlink will, with a few exceptions such as city traders, initially roll out in rural areas, and will give broadband connections to those who are still using slow ADSL over copper wires, or even dial-up. This is interesting if you're in the UK, but life-changing if you're in rural USA, Canada, Australia etc - which is *really* rural.
You don't have to go far in the UK, from the big cities, for broadband to be crap.
Same for much of Europe, really.
What Starlink will offer is that every remote, picturesque hamlet can have 1Gb symmetrical. Which means that a big hurdle to WFH is removed - 4K video conferencing plus the kids watching Netflix would be a doddle...
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Nope. Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
If Starlink works (and it's a big *if*), then for the cost of about $10bn 90% of the world's population will be able to fast (and relatively low latency) internet access.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
The limitless resources of the cosmos and the technological innovations accelerated by the rigours of exploring it don't hold any appeal? If we're currently using the resources of multiple Earths the best thing to do might be to find new Earths to supply us...
Voyager 1 was launched in 1977. It is now 20 odd light hours away. The nearest possible planet is 4.2 light years away, and the chances of that planet being in any way human habitable are at least 1m to 1 against. We ain't going nowhere, and this is not a Yeah, but they said heavier then air flight was impossible kind of point. And if we were, the relative distances and levels of technology are such that you going upstairs in your house and saying Yay, I'm in space is about as useful for hypothetical extra solar system exploration as sending more bods to the iss.
The potential resources of the solar system are quite enough for now, The stars will have to wait for our descendants.
Getting more stuff from elsewhere to be consumed on earth exacerbates rather than ameliorates our long term problems.
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
The limitless resources of the cosmos and the technological innovations accelerated by the rigours of exploring it don't hold any appeal? If we're currently using the resources of multiple Earths the best thing to do might be to find new Earths to supply us...
Voyager 1 was launched in 1977. It is now 20 odd light hours away. The nearest possible planet is 4.2 light years away, and the chances of that planet being in any way human habitable are at least 1m to 1 against. We ain't going nowhere, and this is not a Yeah, but they said heavier then air flight was impossible kind of point. And if we were, the relative distances and levels of technology are such that you going upstairs in your house and saying Yay, I'm in space is about as useful for hypothetical extra solar system exploration as sending more bods to the iss.
Indeed, interstellar travel is going to be hardest thing humanity's ever done, albeit not _quite_ impossible, if we manage to build something that can accelerate to a reasonable fraction of light speed and support several generations of humans as they travel. But exploring and exploiting the solar system is far more feasible, and there's an awful lot we could do with the resources it contains.
Here's a video on that, narrated by the immortal Carl Sagan. Not Peter
Hopefully a few newspaper picture editors can be persuaded to drop the usual partisanship and put this image on tomorrow’s front pages. A great day for humanity.
Pointless vanity project. Humankind needs to focus on undoing the shit it has caused on the planet.
Well you'll be pleased to know that's there's a massive amount of science being done on the ISS, including monitoring of this here big blue planet.
With this mission, the cost of that science just reduced dramatically, thanks to the unprecedented use of a privately-developed rocket from SpaceX by NASA.
It's also a great diplomatic tool, the one project in which the USA and Russia co-operate fully and share all their data. Much better that they put their resources into exploring the universe together, than in pointing thousands of nukes at each other.
Science on the space station. Can we grow cress in zero gravity?
And a complete misunderstanding of the value of research science.
From that article:
"Research on the ISS improves knowledge about the effects of long-term space exposure on the human body." Pointless. We live on earth, not in space.
"Researchers are investigating the effect of the station's near-weightless environment on the evolution, development, growth and internal processes of plants and animals." Like I said, growing cress. Pointless.
Comments
https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1267147006092419073
Imagine you are the Italian government. Now, you will almost certainly perform better economically if your country leaves the Euro. Just one small problem: tens of millions of pensioners with Euros in the bank (which are converted to Lira) will get absolutely destroyed. And the oldies vote, while the youngsters who'd benefit don't.
Untangling the Euro is an incredible complex, because it creates lots of losers. And even if it creates more winners than losers, then those who lost out will be incredibly angry.
The path of least resistance (for now) is to kick the can, and hope things improve.
(And, by the way, this is not as stupid as it looks. Fundamentally, the EU economy is in much better shape today, in terms of dramatically lower structural imbalances, than it was in 2007.)
Hotdesking as a way of maximising utilisation and reducing the cost of space has been in vogue for 20 years but no longer. It's back to 100 staff in 100 desks but those staff aren't always present and when they aren't the desk sits empty so the utilisation figures plummet.
I've worked at home a lot in the past decade so this has been nothing new but anecdotally the majority of those for whom this is a new experience have adapted it and I've had more than one colleague ask why they never did this before.
No one will miss the commute especially when the weather deteriorates and @NickPalmer makes the useful point that as social opportunities locally return the commute will seem even less attractive. 3 hours in a crowded train replaced by a short drive to a local pub or restaurant to meet friends for dinner - much less stressful and you don;t have to get up as early in the morning.
Thank you Boris and Dom
It's harmless at worst.
I am all in favour of kneecapping anyone who breaks lockdown and permanently denying them NHS treatment.
Edit - Also charge them with attempted murder and/or murder if they infect anyone who dies.
Cheap access to space is useful in all kinds of ways.
A significant fraction of the population will be prepared to risk catching the virus because they know perfectly well that they're at incredibly low risk of falling seriously ill; or they won't be interested in listening to the Government because they have lost faith in its message and/or strategy (the Cummings debacle won't have helped with that); or they're simply fed up to the back teeth with the lockdown and would rather like to live a little before they perish; or some combination of the three. So they'll go out regardless - and who will stop them?
We're not a police state. The security forces rely on consent and don't have the numbers to deal with mass scale public disobedience. If a sufficient proportion of the nation has had it with the restrictions then they will therefore cease to operate. And if nothing else I suspect that there are rather a lot of people (particularly in the less vulnerable groups) who have been all too delighted to immolate the Stay at Home edict and enjoy going to parks and beaches and round each others houses and on dates and so on, and they're not going to be inclined to go back to prison again just because Boris and his ministers (who give the distinct impression that they're making it up as they go along, and that none of these rules apply to their mates anyway) say so.
If, after that, there's another major flare-up of this thing (and my suspicion, based on several different pieces of evidence, is that there won't be,) then the Government will just have to handle it as best it can.
While I'm here. I think the whole testing thing will be exposed as a shambles. I deduce this from the fact that surely all we want to know is the number of people tested and the proportion of those people who are positive. Who cares what the number of tests is if some folk have had several, and who cares about numbers sent out or done but with results pending? But we have never had the simple data of people tested with results/% infected.
If that's a likely possibility then we should be removing all restrictions now and building as much herd immunity while we can.
One big thing one i think the government have made an error with this loosening, not putting a cap on distanced travel. You can't really enforce it, but the message is go as far as you like, and resulted people all heading to same places en masse.
This is what France rather sensibly did.
I worked in the London office most of the time and anyone who got to office after 9am wouldn't get a desk
The post lockdown plan seems to be having as few people in office as possible with a cap on occupancy of no one sitting opposite or next to another person and no using of desks adjacent to walkways.
I think about 15% pre CV19 occupancy then.
Lifts and printers will also be problems to be resolved
With this mission, the cost of that science just reduced dramatically, thanks to the unprecedented use of a privately-developed rocket from SpaceX by NASA.
It's also a great diplomatic tool, the one project in which the USA and Russia co-operate fully and share all their data. Much better that they put their resources into exploring the universe together, than in pointing thousands of nukes at each other.
The Swedish economy grow in Q1 all be it by an tiny 0.1% (0.4% at annualised rate)
For comparison, of other nations for which the Q1 number are out:
France - 5.8%
Spain - 5.2%
USA - 5.0%
Italy - 4.7%
https://fee.org/articles/sweden-sees-economic-growth-in-1st-quarter-despite-global-pandemic/
Sweden the virus will probably push growth negative in Q2 but the overall effect will be a fraction that that the lock-downs are doing in the rest of Europe.
Pointless.
That is utterly transformational. Think about that for a second: for less than half what AT&T spends on capital expenditure every year, you can bring broadband internet to the world.
At 15% capacity lifts will be less of an issue - printers are different. Some organisations are now looking to allow employees to print documents at home but that'snot without its issues.
Others are looking at skeleton admin operations whose main responsibility would be post and printing. If I were looking at an office model for the future I'd be thinking about designing an organisation whose main purpose would be providing virtual admin for companies.
My experiences among the parks and woods of South Yorkshire is that the proportion of non-English speakers who are in them is far higher than their demographic numbers would predict.
Even taking account the differences in age groups and housing types.
Now could that be because non-English speakers are getting their information from different, and less fear-mongering, sources or perhaps because they are more likely to be employed in jobs where you cannot work from home and so more fatalistic about risks.
Their launch business just became irrelevant.
No new fatalities were reported on Sunday, although there are often delays in reporting deaths over weekends."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-52866246
The real money, of course, will be if they can deliver on knocking 25% off the latency between offices in London and New York, and charge $10k a month for the privilege!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_research_on_the_International_Space_Station
And a complete misunderstanding of the value of research science.
The idiots will all drive off to the same spot and so increase their infection risk more.
And so herd immunity is built by idiots.
What has happened in the last few years with private space projects is quite amazing, with several companies involved in the technology. I still grin like a kid whenever I see a rocket land back to Earth, no-one could do that even four years ago - SpaceX have made it seem routine.
The scans, which were identified between November 16 and November 18, now cast a new light on when the coronavirus crisis first hit Europe as scientists continue their search for 'patient zero'.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8373559/Coronavirus-Europe-NOVEMBER.html
Not just East Asian ethnicities whom it wouldn't be odd to see wearing masks before this even began. I'd estimate when I go to the supermarket that most minorities are wearing masks but probably fewer than 5% of white people are.
I’m struggling to come up with an answer.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/31/joe-biden-vice-president-george-floyd-291063
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live:bbc_radio_fourfm
Proposals to invest in Fibre etc seem utterly moot if Starlink works.
Everything else is gravy.
An across Europe disdain for them.
Which is also shared by people of MENA origin.
No, they won't.
The limiting factor with Starlink is a combination of throughput (Mb/s) through the satellites and a limit on how many receivers can be close to each other on the ground.
For built up areas, fibre wins easily.
Where Starlink wins, easily, is connecting up hamlets, villages and individual locations that are more than a few miles from the fibre grid.
So, you will be able to get 100s of Mbs up and down in the deep countryside, and your phone will be getting 5G with lots of bandwidth.
A big user will be the mobile phone companies - they are already testing cell towers which include a satellite receiver for the backhaul*. For really remote locations, you could have a cell tower, with solar cells and a storage battery as an all-in-one. Just plonk it down and fire it up. That will be big in Africa....
*Backhaul is the connect-to-the-rest-of-the-world-bit.
However it certainly could help with the backend of 5G as perhaps masts could run their backend via the satellite potentially?
The stars will have to wait for our descendants.
5G will be good for very high speed data connections, and for connections between devices such as autonomous cars. It will roll out initially in cities, as the masts need to be closer together than current 4G masts.
Starlink will, with a few exceptions such as city traders, initially roll out in rural areas, and will give broadband connections to those who are still using slow ADSL over copper wires, or even dial-up. This is interesting if you're in the UK, but life-changing if you're in rural USA, Canada, Australia etc - which is *really* rural.
A number of rare earth elements are available within our solar system in space. Asteroid mining certainly could be a real thing this century.
Working in the office five days is daft - you need some time to focus without distractions, which is impossible in the crazy open plan offices of today.
But, some collaborative time is great. So be flexible, work 2-5 days a fortnight at home, and enjoy the best of all worlds.
Not outdoors in the parks or walking dogs, but with social distancing why would you?
The local teens were all on the football pitches earlier, but surprising to me, were keeping social distance, even when flirting.
Sweden's has recorded Sunday update figures of 2, 5,5 and 6 for example over the last month.
Recording a zero is not unexpected.
The idea of fibre to every single house in the country no matter how remote (like Labour suggested last time) is another matter.
If it works it'd be cheaper to pay SpaceX for Starlink subscriptions than to roll out fibre to a lot of properties.
Same for much of Europe, really.
What Starlink will offer is that every remote, picturesque hamlet can have 1Gb symmetrical. Which means that a big hurdle to WFH is removed - 4K video conferencing plus the kids watching Netflix would be a doddle...
Indeed, interstellar travel is going to be hardest thing humanity's ever done, albeit not _quite_ impossible, if we manage to build something that can accelerate to a reasonable fraction of light speed and support several generations of humans as they travel. But exploring and exploiting the solar system is far more feasible, and there's an awful lot we could do with the resources it contains.
Here's a video on that, narrated by the immortal Carl Sagan. Not Peter
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YH3c1QZzRK4
"Research on the ISS improves knowledge about the effects of long-term space exposure on the human body." Pointless. We live on earth, not in space.
"Researchers are investigating the effect of the station's near-weightless environment on the evolution, development, growth and internal processes of plants and animals." Like I said, growing cress. Pointless.