politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Going postal: Could a Democrat victory end up lost in the post

RobD said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

RobD said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Of course I don't agree with Guido's ideological slant either but they are not helped by their site.

The Times is pretty good on the UI front, even the Telegraph seems fine. Their annoying use of paywalls is a constant frustration but I can see they need to make money.

It's a blog, not a newspaper. I think it's supposed to be simple.

Simple doesn't mean crap. They could at least follow basic UX guidance.

There are plenty of decent blogging platforms or blogs that are well designed.

This is an insult to anyone that runs a blog quite frankly.

Isn't it the most popular blog in the UK? so I think they are doing just fine.

*political blog!

Not the most read one I gather..

CorrectHorseBattery said:

RobD said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

RobD said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Of course I don't agree with Guido's ideological slant either but they are not helped by their site.

The Times is pretty good on the UI front, even the Telegraph seems fine. Their annoying use of paywalls is a constant frustration but I can see they need to make money.

It's a blog, not a newspaper. I think it's supposed to be simple.

Simple doesn't mean crap. They could at least follow basic UX guidance.

There are plenty of decent blogging platforms or blogs that are well designed.

This is an insult to anyone that runs a blog quite frankly.

Isn't it the most popular blog in the UK? so I think they are doing just fine.

*political blog!

Look we're clearly looking at this from different points of view.

I am simply saying their site violates a whole load of UX guidelines and that annoys me because it's something I spend a lot of my time working with in my job.

It doesn't mean they are, or are not popular, I was simply raising it as I thought it was something interesting to discuss, perhaps I was wrong.

There are plenty of terribly designed websites that are popular, not disputing that. Doesn't mean they aren't terribly designed.

4Chan, is disgusting. The Guardian isn't very good either, Forbes is horrible, Buzzfeed rubbish. I could go on.

I don't particularly like the new Reddit design either but that's more because it's incredibly slow and inefficient.

Very true. I am always suspicious of the constant need/desire to redesign things. They are typically worse than the predecessor (reddit redesign, as you point out - so much more inefficient in terms of space). Guido's design has been more or less like that since it first started, and I think it's part of the charm. At the end of the day all you need is the stories to be clearly divided. People go for the tat in the stories, not the design.

Theuniondivvie said:

RobD said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

RobD said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Of course I don't agree with Guido's ideological slant either but they are not helped by their site.

The Times is pretty good on the UI front, even the Telegraph seems fine. Their annoying use of paywalls is a constant frustration but I can see they need to make money.

It's a blog, not a newspaper. I think it's supposed to be simple.

Simple doesn't mean crap. They could at least follow basic UX guidance.

There are plenty of decent blogging platforms or blogs that are well designed.

This is an insult to anyone that runs a blog quite frankly.

Isn't it the most popular blog in the UK? so I think they are doing just fine.

*political blog!

Not the most read one I gather..

Has he moved into palatial matters?

PHE

- All settings
- 28 days cut off
- by day of death

CorrectHorseBattery said:

RobD said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

RobD said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

RobD said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Of course I don't agree with Guido's ideological slant either but they are not helped by their site.

The Times is pretty good on the UI front, even the Telegraph seems fine. Their annoying use of paywalls is a constant frustration but I can see they need to make money.

It's a blog, not a newspaper. I think it's supposed to be simple.

Simple doesn't mean crap. They could at least follow basic UX guidance.

There are plenty of decent blogging platforms or blogs that are well designed.

This is an insult to anyone that runs a blog quite frankly.

Isn't it the most popular blog in the UK? so I think they are doing just fine.

*political blog!

Look we're clearly looking at this from different points of view.

I am simply saying their site violates a whole load of UX guidelines and that annoys me because it's something I spend a lot of my time working with in my job.

It doesn't mean they are, or are not popular, I was simply raising it as I thought it was something interesting to discuss, perhaps I was wrong.

There are plenty of terribly designed websites that are popular, not disputing that. Doesn't mean they aren't terribly designed.

4Chan, is disgusting. The Guardian isn't very good either, Forbes is horrible, Buzzfeed rubbish. I could go on.

I don't particularly like the new Reddit design either but that's more because it's incredibly slow and inefficient.

Very true. I am always suspicious of the constant need/desire to redesign things. They are typically worse than the predecessor (reddit redesign, as you point out - so much more inefficient in terms of space). Guido's design has been more or less like that since it first started, and I think it's part of the charm. At the end of the day all you need is the stories to be clearly divided. People go for the tat in the stories, not the design.

The new Reddit I could go on about all day, it's horrible to use.

I don't know who designed it but I really dislike how slow it is. In Safari especially it really bogs down the browser and I have to feel like they're doing too much, or the way their codebase is structured means they load everything at once which is not a good way to go about it.

Do a side by side comparison of old and new. Users on the new one must be suffering from RSI on their finger given how much bloody scrolling they have to do

Belarus

It appears state media (or whats left of it) are saying that Russia has agreed to help President Big Hat on request. That's a very broad statement. Russia will have no problem sending advisors, though whether its to help the President himself or a broader regime is an open question. The question is what else would they send on request? Unbadged forces or something a little more conventional?

There are notable numbers of Russian ground troops from Western Military district turning up in two locations c30km east and c10km North of the Russia/Belarus border that were not previously there. Both locations are on main transit routes.

This is not new, the repositioning has been happening for days and you'd have to assume some contingency work by Moscow for many reasons, not just rolling the tanks over.

There is an adage that sometimes the size and shape of a military force on a border gets beyond spillover protection or sabre rattling and can only mean one thing; the intention is to use it. Anything from 24-96 hours and we might just get clarity on whether the scale of deployment holds a message.

RobD said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

RobD said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Of course I don't agree with Guido's ideological slant either but they are not helped by their site.

The Times is pretty good on the UI front, even the Telegraph seems fine. Their annoying use of paywalls is a constant frustration but I can see they need to make money.

It's a blog, not a newspaper. I think it's supposed to be simple.

Simple doesn't mean crap. They could at least follow basic UX guidance.

There are plenty of decent blogging platforms or blogs that are well designed.

This is an insult to anyone that runs a blog quite frankly.

Isn't it the most popular blog in the UK? so I think they are doing just fine.

*political blog!

I’m surprised most guido bloggers are capable of logging on.

Yokes said:

Belarus

It appears state media (or whats left of it) are saying that Russia has agreed to help President Big Hat on request. That's a very broad statement. Russia will have no problem sending advisors, though whether its to help the President himself or a broader regime is an open question. The question is what else would they send on request? Unbadged forces or something a little more conventional?

There are notable numbers of Russian ground troops from Western Military district turning up in two locations c30km east and c10km North of the Russia/Belarus border that were not previously there. Both locations are on main transit routes.

This is not new, the repositioning has been happening for days and you'd have to assume some contingency work by Moscow for many reasons, not just rolling the tanks over.

There is an adage that sometimes the size and shape of a military force on a border gets beyond spillover protection or sabre rattling and can only mean one thing; the intention is to use it. Anything from 24-96 hours and we might just get clarity on whether the scale of deployment holds a message.

It's interesting that the Russian media have started presenting the protests very sympathetically and have been detailing some of the abuses of Lukashenko. It's nothing like the way Maidan was covered.

Update: Russian pronouncements on the Belarus/Russian understanding appear somewhat less committed.

This is a game of chicken between Big Hat & Moscow

RobD said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

RobD said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Of course I don't agree with Guido's ideological slant either but they are not helped by their site.

The Times is pretty good on the UI front, even the Telegraph seems fine. Their annoying use of paywalls is a constant frustration but I can see they need to make money.

It's a blog, not a newspaper. I think it's supposed to be simple.

Simple doesn't mean crap. They could at least follow basic UX guidance.

There are plenty of decent blogging platforms or blogs that are well designed.

This is an insult to anyone that runs a blog quite frankly.

Isn't it the most popular blog in the UK? so I think they are doing just fine.

*political blog!

Pah - we're the most popular Palatial blog in the WORLD!

Luckyguy1983 said:

RobD said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

RobD said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Of course I don't agree with Guido's ideological slant either but they are not helped by their site.

The Times is pretty good on the UI front, even the Telegraph seems fine. Their annoying use of paywalls is a constant frustration but I can see they need to make money.

It's a blog, not a newspaper. I think it's supposed to be simple.

Simple doesn't mean crap. They could at least follow basic UX guidance.

There are plenty of decent blogging platforms or blogs that are well designed.

This is an insult to anyone that runs a blog quite frankly.

Isn't it the most popular blog in the UK? so I think they are doing just fine.

*political blog!

Pah - we're the most popular Palatial blog in the WORLD!

On a point of pedantry, the best blog for betting on palatial issues.

Foxy said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

RobD said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

RobD said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Of course I don't agree with Guido's ideological slant either but they are not helped by their site.

The Times is pretty good on the UI front, even the Telegraph seems fine. Their annoying use of paywalls is a constant frustration but I can see they need to make money.

It's a blog, not a newspaper. I think it's supposed to be simple.

Simple doesn't mean crap. They could at least follow basic UX guidance.

There are plenty of decent blogging platforms or blogs that are well designed.

This is an insult to anyone that runs a blog quite frankly.

Isn't it the most popular blog in the UK? so I think they are doing just fine.

*political blog!

Pah - we're the most popular Palatial blog in the WORLD!

On a point of pedantry, the best blog for betting on palatial issues.

Yes, apologies I stand corrected.

Dangerous times for Putin: CSKA fans chanting "long live Belarus"

https://twitter.com/sportsru/status/1294670939431612417?s=19

williamglenn said:

Yokes said:

Belarus

It appears state media (or whats left of it) are saying that Russia has agreed to help President Big Hat on request. That's a very broad statement. Russia will have no problem sending advisors, though whether its to help the President himself or a broader regime is an open question. The question is what else would they send on request? Unbadged forces or something a little more conventional?

There are notable numbers of Russian ground troops from Western Military district turning up in two locations c30km east and c10km North of the Russia/Belarus border that were not previously there. Both locations are on main transit routes.

This is not new, the repositioning has been happening for days and you'd have to assume some contingency work by Moscow for many reasons, not just rolling the tanks over.

There is an adage that sometimes the size and shape of a military force on a border gets beyond spillover protection or sabre rattling and can only mean one thing; the intention is to use it. Anything from 24-96 hours and we might just get clarity on whether the scale of deployment holds a message.

It's interesting that the Russian media have started presenting the protests very sympathetically and have been detailing some of the abuses of Lukashenko. It's nothing like the way Maidan was covered.

That is an indication of Russian government views on Big Hat himself but they have no interest whatsoever in seeing something akin to a regular democratic regime take power therefore leaving any number of possibilities about the future direction of the country.

They may view him as a dead duck and will long game this. I have noted in previous posts that many many Belarussian's aren't exactly hostile to Russia and aren't all go to be part of the Western European sphere, as represented by the EU, either. What they are, and increasingly so, is forging their own national identity. Russia will need to make a judgement on whether AGL is just a side show, it doesn't matter if he goes and they can attempt to manage their own interests via other means no matter who is in power.

Its either that or a game of chicken. How desperate is Big Hat? Enough to acquiesce to some kind of greater federation or union? Russia has been agitating and pushing that line for ages but the stall has been on the Belarus side.

Black_Rook said:

From the Graun:

The French Health Ministry on Saturday reported 3,310 new coronavirus infections in France over the past 24 hours, setting a new post-lockdown high for the fourth day in a row and taking the country’s cumulative cases to 215,521.

France said on Saturday evening that 4,857 people are in hospital with Covid-19, including 376 people in intensive care units.

...and...

Ireland reported 200 new Covid-19 cases arising from multiple clusters across the country on Saturday, the highest daily amount since the beginning of May. The country’s chief medical officer described this as “deeply concerning”.

Ireland has reopened its economy at a slower pace than most European Union countries but that did not stop a rise in cases over the last two weeks that led to the first localised reimposition of some restrictions last week.

In terms of cases per capita, Ireland's new case load is nearly as high as France's. This second pulse, new outbreak, surge, however you describe it, seems to be spreading.

The UK seems to be on the cusp of it. Exponential growth can make a small uptick into a huge one in no time.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Fishing said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Fishing said:

Malmesbury said:

Reagan wasn't just an actor. He had a complex and surprisingly intellectual background - he wrote many of his own speeches over the years. The acting was just his career before he moved into politics full time. Where he became a popular and successful Governor of California for 2 terms.

As opposed to Trump. Who after a lifetime of staggering from one shitty business deal to another....

Reagan's Evil Empire speech, combined with Soviet paranoia, damn nearly caused World War 3.

Telling the truth does that sometimes.

Thank God for Gordievsky.

"Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" - Reagan in Berlin, 1987.

Your point being?

Far from causing WW3, he helped end the Cold War.

Nobody said he caused WW3, only that he nearly caused it. Once he realised what he was doing, he pulled back from the brink.

Do you really believe that calling on the Russians to do what the US and every government in Europe had been demanding they do for decades had any material effect on a system that was already crumbling?

The Soviet system was rotting from within. That was what ended the Cold War - not Reagan's demands.

Foxy said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Cyclefree said:

Sicily.

1. Don’t go in August. Far too hot. It can easily get over 40 degrees. And there are lots of crowds.
2. Palermo is well worth exploring.
3. Selinunte and Segesta are wonderful for their Greek temples, as is Agrigento.
4. Siracusa is a must especially if you can get tickets to the Greek theatre there. I saw a superb production of Antigone there.
5. Sciacca is lovely and Ragusa.
6. Taormina is the Amalfi of Sicily.
7. Try and visit one of the Aeolian Islands.
8. You must eat genuine Sicilian arancini di riso. Malvasia sweet wine is also delicious.

I remember first having arancini di riso in Sicily, and I agree wholeheartedly!

Foxy said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Foxy said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Foxy said:

MaxPB said:

Carnyx said:

MaxPB said:

Carnyx said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

Carnyx said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU

https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19

Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.

Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.

It is the Irish blaming the EU

Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.

Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?

Well, to make sure they don't make tyhe environmentqal situation even worse?

Off now to do my bit for the environment (saorting out charity shop stuff from the clutter). Have a nice weekend everyone.

Again, why get involved at all? If a country is happy to pursue reforestation or growing a new tree nursery then that in itself is worthwhile, why is he EU making this process unnecessarily complicated with regulations. The national government will know what's best for it's country, it isn't going to approve some kind of invasive species or something that will cause devastation to other forests in the country. It's just another example of EU regulatory overreach and now 400,000 trees are not going to exist that would otherwise have done.

A quick Google finds our own governments environmental assessment guidance. It all sounds pretty reasonable to me, and seems to be in line with EU regulations. Which bit of it do you think is surplus to requirements? The need to understand the human impacts? The fire risks? The preservation of cultural sites and protected species?


https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/706038/171024-EIA-Scoping-and-ES-Statement-Guidance-v.5.pdf

But why does the EU have to get involved? How does it help make sure that trade between the different members is on a level playing field?
This sort of thing, regulatory overreach, is one of the reasons I seriously considered voting leave.

The European Court ruled that an adequate environmental impact assessment was needed. Seems quite reasonable to me. It is not EU regs per se, just a requirement to assess impacts.

For example plantings near powerlines, railway lines, along some roads, on neolithic sites, on SSI's etc might be bad places to plant.

I not arguing that an environmental impact assessment isn’t a good idea; my argument is that this is something that the Irish state should be perfectly capable of working out for itself. If the Irish Supreme Court had made this decision it would be sad that so many trees were due to be pulped, but unremarkable otherwise. It is the fact that the European Court got involved because this was a European standard rather than an Irish one that I have a problem with.

Is there a compelling reason why this is a European competence rather than a national one? If there is, then I will have to admit that you are right.

It seems that it arises from this case:

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/ireland-fined-5m-euro-over-environmental-assessment-of-wind-farm-38684853.html

https://www.clientearth.org/court-of-justice-comes-down-hard-on-persistent-failures-to-assess-the-environmental-impacts-of-projects/

The Windfarm was built without an environmental impact, caused a massive landslide, hence the requirement to do so in the future. There also seems to be an issue of issuing retrospective approvals.

I am happy to accept that it is a European competence, my question is why is it a European competence.

Does it matter?

The point is that assessing the environmental impact of large projects is surely a good thing. None of the things being assessed seem unnecessary to me, and as we share a continent environmental impacts cross national borders.

It seems to me that this "red tape" is entirly right and appropriate. If Irish growers planted far too many saplings than there were places to plant them, it is tough but just a bad business decision on their part.

We constantly hear of over regulation by the EU, but when asked specifics the complaints rarely have substance.

In any case from 1st Jan there is no need to have Environmental assessments unless we carry on with the same rules. We can plant away, build widfarms wherever we please, build on floodplains or archaeological sites to our hearts content. It doesn't seem like progress to me though.

“Does it matter?” is really my question! I’m happy to accept that environmental rules are a good thing, my question remains why do they have to be European rather than letting different nations set their own. After all, a set of rules suitable for Finland might not be at all applicable in Malta (and vice versa).

I can see that if you have a project that crosses borders then they would be useful, but otherwise why not have them at the national level?
This may be the difference between those who think that the EU is an inherently good idea and those who think that it was the least worst option.

rcs1000 said:

RobD said:

Black_Rook said:

From the Graun:

The French Health Ministry on Saturday reported 3,310 new coronavirus infections in France over the past 24 hours, setting a new post-lockdown high for the fourth day in a row and taking the country’s cumulative cases to 215,521.

France said on Saturday evening that 4,857 people are in hospital with Covid-19, including 376 people in intensive care units.

...and...

Ireland reported 200 new Covid-19 cases arising from multiple clusters across the country on Saturday, the highest daily amount since the beginning of May. The country’s chief medical officer described this as “deeply concerning”.

Ireland has reopened its economy at a slower pace than most European Union countries but that did not stop a rise in cases over the last two weeks that led to the first localised reimposition of some restrictions last week.

In terms of cases per capita, Ireland's new case load is nearly as high as France's. This second pulse, new outbreak, surge, however you describe it, seems to be spreading.

The UK seems to be on the cusp of it. Exponential growth can make a small uptick into a huge one in no time.

The big problem with CV-19 is that the numbers you see now are probably for people infected 10 days to two weeks ago. It takes, therefore, a long time for policy measures to show up in numbers.

But it would show up in surveillance testing, wouldn't it? That's just people randomly tested without needing symptoms.

ydoethur said:

And the U-turn begins:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-53793583

It's bizarre, isn't it? My reading of the rules for appeals is that if it includes mocks or "other teacher assessments", then the original predicted teacher grades should stand as long as an appeal is made. Ofqual won't be able to dispute the evidence for an appeal, by the looks of it, without hiring an army of evidence-checkers. So pretty much like the Scottish u-turn, but with the added bureaucracy of an appeal.

rcs1000 said:

RobD said:

Black_Rook said:

From the Graun:

The French Health Ministry on Saturday reported 3,310 new coronavirus infections in France over the past 24 hours, setting a new post-lockdown high for the fourth day in a row and taking the country’s cumulative cases to 215,521.

France said on Saturday evening that 4,857 people are in hospital with Covid-19, including 376 people in intensive care units.

...and...

Ireland reported 200 new Covid-19 cases arising from multiple clusters across the country on Saturday, the highest daily amount since the beginning of May. The country’s chief medical officer described this as “deeply concerning”.

Ireland has reopened its economy at a slower pace than most European Union countries but that did not stop a rise in cases over the last two weeks that led to the first localised reimposition of some restrictions last week.

In terms of cases per capita, Ireland's new case load is nearly as high as France's. This second pulse, new outbreak, surge, however you describe it, seems to be spreading.

The UK seems to be on the cusp of it. Exponential growth can make a small uptick into a huge one in no time.

The big problem with CV-19 is that the numbers you see now are probably for people infected 10 days to two weeks ago. It takes, therefore, a long time for policy measures to show up in numbers.

We've already had more than enough time to see an effect from the last major unshuttering (including the gyms and pools) and there has been no sign of such a thing, any more than there has been from any previous tranche of easing. I see no particular reason why opening the theatres - hamstrung as they will be be social distancing - should make any more difference than did opening the cinemas, and I doubt that casinos and bowling alleys are great enough either in number or in terms of the customers that use them to suddenly tip us into a new wave of this thing, either.

I'm still concerned that the schools could muck everything up, but that would seem to be the only hurdle left to jump until the Winter.

Fysics_Teacher said:

Foxy said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Cyclefree said:

Sicily.

1. Don’t go in August. Far too hot. It can easily get over 40 degrees. And there are lots of crowds.
2. Palermo is well worth exploring.
3. Selinunte and Segesta are wonderful for their Greek temples, as is Agrigento.
4. Siracusa is a must especially if you can get tickets to the Greek theatre there. I saw a superb production of Antigone there.
5. Sciacca is lovely and Ragusa.
6. Taormina is the Amalfi of Sicily.
7. Try and visit one of the Aeolian Islands.
8. You must eat genuine Sicilian arancini di riso. Malvasia sweet wine is also delicious.

I remember first having arancini di riso in Sicily, and I agree wholeheartedly!

Foxy said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Foxy said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Foxy said:

MaxPB said:

Carnyx said:

MaxPB said:

Carnyx said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

Carnyx said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU

https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19

Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.

Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.

It is the Irish blaming the EU

Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.

Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?

Well, to make sure they don't make tyhe environmentqal situation even worse?

Off now to do my bit for the environment (saorting out charity shop stuff from the clutter). Have a nice weekend everyone.

Again, why get involved at all? If a country is happy to pursue reforestation or growing a new tree nursery then that in itself is worthwhile, why is he EU making this process unnecessarily complicated with regulations. The national government will know what's best for it's country, it isn't going to approve some kind of invasive species or something that will cause devastation to other forests in the country. It's just another example of EU regulatory overreach and now 400,000 trees are not going to exist that would otherwise have done.

A quick Google finds our own governments environmental assessment guidance. It all sounds pretty reasonable to me, and seems to be in line with EU regulations. Which bit of it do you think is surplus to requirements? The need to understand the human impacts? The fire risks? The preservation of cultural sites and protected species?


https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/706038/171024-EIA-Scoping-and-ES-Statement-Guidance-v.5.pdf

But why does the EU have to get involved? How does it help make sure that trade between the different members is on a level playing field?
This sort of thing, regulatory overreach, is one of the reasons I seriously considered voting leave.

The European Court ruled that an adequate environmental impact assessment was needed. Seems quite reasonable to me. It is not EU regs per se, just a requirement to assess impacts.

For example plantings near powerlines, railway lines, along some roads, on neolithic sites, on SSI's etc might be bad places to plant.

I not arguing that an environmental impact assessment isn’t a good idea; my argument is that this is something that the Irish state should be perfectly capable of working out for itself. If the Irish Supreme Court had made this decision it would be sad that so many trees were due to be pulped, but unremarkable otherwise. It is the fact that the European Court got involved because this was a European standard rather than an Irish one that I have a problem with.

Is there a compelling reason why this is a European competence rather than a national one? If there is, then I will have to admit that you are right.

It seems that it arises from this case:

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/ireland-fined-5m-euro-over-environmental-assessment-of-wind-farm-38684853.html

https://www.clientearth.org/court-of-justice-comes-down-hard-on-persistent-failures-to-assess-the-environmental-impacts-of-projects/

The Windfarm was built without an environmental impact, caused a massive landslide, hence the requirement to do so in the future. There also seems to be an issue of issuing retrospective approvals.

I am happy to accept that it is a European competence, my question is why is it a European competence.

Does it matter?

The point is that assessing the environmental impact of large projects is surely a good thing. None of the things being assessed seem unnecessary to me, and as we share a continent environmental impacts cross national borders.

It seems to me that this "red tape" is entirly right and appropriate. If Irish growers planted far too many saplings than there were places to plant them, it is tough but just a bad business decision on their part.

We constantly hear of over regulation by the EU, but when asked specifics the complaints rarely have substance.

In any case from 1st Jan there is no need to have Environmental assessments unless we carry on with the same rules. We can plant away, build widfarms wherever we please, build on floodplains or archaeological sites to our hearts content. It doesn't seem like progress to me though.

“Does it matter?” is really my question! I’m happy to accept that environmental rules are a good thing, my question remains why do they have to be European rather than letting different nations set their own. After all, a set of rules suitable for Finland might not be at all applicable in Malta (and vice versa).

I can see that if you have a project that crosses borders then they would be useful, but otherwise why not have them at the national level?
This may be the difference between those who think that the EU is an inherently good idea and those who think that it was the least worst option.

As I understand the ruling, the EU requires an adequate environmental assessment, but the content of that, and how it influences the planning decision is a national competence.

Yokes said:

williamglenn said:

Yokes said:

Belarus

It appears state media (or whats left of it) are saying that Russia has agreed to help President Big Hat on request. That's a very broad statement. Russia will have no problem sending advisors, though whether its to help the President himself or a broader regime is an open question. The question is what else would they send on request? Unbadged forces or something a little more conventional?

There are notable numbers of Russian ground troops from Western Military district turning up in two locations c30km east and c10km North of the Russia/Belarus border that were not previously there. Both locations are on main transit routes.

This is not new, the repositioning has been happening for days and you'd have to assume some contingency work by Moscow for many reasons, not just rolling the tanks over.

There is an adage that sometimes the size and shape of a military force on a border gets beyond spillover protection or sabre rattling and can only mean one thing; the intention is to use it. Anything from 24-96 hours and we might just get clarity on whether the scale of deployment holds a message.

It's interesting that the Russian media have started presenting the protests very sympathetically and have been detailing some of the abuses of Lukashenko. It's nothing like the way Maidan was covered.

That is an indication of Russian government views on Big Hat himself but they have no interest whatsoever in seeing something akin to a regular democratic regime take power therefore leaving any number of possibilities about the future direction of the country.

They may view him as a dead duck and will long game this. I have noted in previous posts that many many Belarussian's aren't exactly hostile to Russia and aren't all go to be part of the Western European sphere, as represented by the EU, either. What they are, and increasingly so, is forging their own national identity. Russia will need to make a judgement on whether AGL is just a side show, it doesn't matter if he goes and they can attempt to manage their own interests via other means no matter who is in power.

Its either that or a game of chicken. How desperate is Big Hat? Enough to acquiesce to some kind of greater federation or union? Russia has been agitating and pushing that line for ages but the stall has been on the Belarus side.

The bigger picture is the future of Putin within Russia. This could have more in common with 1989 than 2014.

justin124 said:

Any views on Matched Betting? I have never been into gambling per se beyond the stock market, but was introduced to this a month or so ago. Have made a small profit of a few hundred pounds.

You mean using intro bonuses? It works though it does end up being an exercise in administration. As a bit of extra money its alright but I suppose a lot of people on here see betting (and I am one) as a judgement exercise as well as playing with maths whilst matched betting is just..maths.

The 10 Scariest Election Scenarios, Ranked
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/08/election-nightmares-experts.html

The two most likely are the ones David outlined.

justin124 said:

Any views on Matched Betting? I have never been into gambling per se beyond the stock market, but was introduced to this a month or so ago. Have made a small profit of a few hundred pounds.

Are there still big money matched betting oppertunities?

I thought the big offers died off a decade ago.

My advice is always, always read the small print on the bookies offers and DO NOT GET greedy. Don't bet on a 7th division Latvian handball match as your first bet on the site.

Stick to big mainstream matches where you will not stick out.

A new record for Covid cases now also reported for Malta. I've read a little about what's been going on there - seems the authorities permitted a number of festivals to take place, and the Italians are also linking a lot of cases that they have had to young adults returning from parties in Malta.

It's no wonder that the UK Government have knocked it off the travel corridor list. Greece is apparently next in the crosshairs. Pretty soon, the only countries that people from the UK will be allowed to visit are remote British territories like Pitcairn and the Falkland Islands, and countries like Australia and New Zealand that will lock you in quarantine on the way in even if you don't need to self-isolate after you get back.

Why Johnson doesn't just cut to the chase and tell the population that holidays abroad are cancelled until further notice I don't know. An awful lot of voters, not least businesspeople and workers in the domestic tourist sector, would be delighted.

Northern_Al said:

ydoethur said:

And the U-turn begins:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-53793583

It's bizarre, isn't it? My reading of the rules for appeals is that if it includes mocks or "other teacher assessments", then the original predicted teacher grades should stand as long as an appeal is made. Ofqual won't be able to dispute the evidence for an appeal, by the looks of it, without hiring an army of evidence-checkers. So pretty much like the Scottish u-turn, but with the added bureaucracy of an appeal.

It looks like a U turn with plausible deniability. (Actually, quite a teacher thing. Sometimes, you have to let Tarquin and Jocasta climb down without them losing face. Downside in this case is that it's going to extend the anxiety for students and create extra work for schools, who have plenty of other things to get on with.)

The next interesting thing is what happens for GCSE results...

Foxy said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Foxy said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Cyclefree said:

Sicily.

1. Don’t go in August. Far too hot. It can easily get over 40 degrees. And there are lots of crowds.
2. Palermo is well worth exploring.
3. Selinunte and Segesta are wonderful for their Greek temples, as is Agrigento.
4. Siracusa is a must especially if you can get tickets to the Greek theatre there. I saw a superb production of Antigone there.
5. Sciacca is lovely and Ragusa.
6. Taormina is the Amalfi of Sicily.
7. Try and visit one of the Aeolian Islands.
8. You must eat genuine Sicilian arancini di riso. Malvasia sweet wine is also delicious.

I remember first having arancini di riso in Sicily, and I agree wholeheartedly!

Foxy said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Foxy said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Foxy said:

MaxPB said:

Carnyx said:

MaxPB said:

Carnyx said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

Carnyx said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU

https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19

Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.

Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.

It is the Irish blaming the EU

Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.

Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?

Well, to make sure they don't make tyhe environmentqal situation even worse?

Off now to do my bit for the environment (saorting out charity shop stuff from the clutter). Have a nice weekend everyone.

Again, why get involved at all? If a country is happy to pursue reforestation or growing a new tree nursery then that in itself is worthwhile, why is he EU making this process unnecessarily complicated with regulations. The national government will know what's best for it's country, it isn't going to approve some kind of invasive species or something that will cause devastation to other forests in the country. It's just another example of EU regulatory overreach and now 400,000 trees are not going to exist that would otherwise have done.

A quick Google finds our own governments environmental assessment guidance. It all sounds pretty reasonable to me, and seems to be in line with EU regulations. Which bit of it do you think is surplus to requirements? The need to understand the human impacts? The fire risks? The preservation of cultural sites and protected species?


https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/706038/171024-EIA-Scoping-and-ES-Statement-Guidance-v.5.pdf

But why does the EU have to get involved? How does it help make sure that trade between the different members is on a level playing field?
This sort of thing, regulatory overreach, is one of the reasons I seriously considered voting leave.

The European Court ruled that an adequate environmental impact assessment was needed. Seems quite reasonable to me. It is not EU regs per se, just a requirement to assess impacts.

For example plantings near powerlines, railway lines, along some roads, on neolithic sites, on SSI's etc might be bad places to plant.

I not arguing that an environmental impact assessment isn’t a good idea; my argument is that this is something that the Irish state should be perfectly capable of working out for itself. If the Irish Supreme Court had made this decision it would be sad that so many trees were due to be pulped, but unremarkable otherwise. It is the fact that the European Court got involved because this was a European standard rather than an Irish one that I have a problem with.

Is there a compelling reason why this is a European competence rather than a national one? If there is, then I will have to admit that you are right.

It seems that it arises from this case:

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/ireland-fined-5m-euro-over-environmental-assessment-of-wind-farm-38684853.html

https://www.clientearth.org/court-of-justice-comes-down-hard-on-persistent-failures-to-assess-the-environmental-impacts-of-projects/

The Windfarm was built without an environmental impact, caused a massive landslide, hence the requirement to do so in the future. There also seems to be an issue of issuing retrospective approvals.

I am happy to accept that it is a European competence, my question is why is it a European competence.

Does it matter?

The point is that assessing the environmental impact of large projects is surely a good thing. None of the things being assessed seem unnecessary to me, and as we share a continent environmental impacts cross national borders.

It seems to me that this "red tape" is entirly right and appropriate. If Irish growers planted far too many saplings than there were places to plant them, it is tough but just a bad business decision on their part.

We constantly hear of over regulation by the EU, but when asked specifics the complaints rarely have substance.

In any case from 1st Jan there is no need to have Environmental assessments unless we carry on with the same rules. We can plant away, build widfarms wherever we please, build on floodplains or archaeological sites to our hearts content. It doesn't seem like progress to me though.

“Does it matter?” is really my question! I’m happy to accept that environmental rules are a good thing, my question remains why do they have to be European rather than letting different nations set their own. After all, a set of rules suitable for Finland might not be at all applicable in Malta (and vice versa).

I can see that if you have a project that crosses borders then they would be useful, but otherwise why not have them at the national level?
This may be the difference between those who think that the EU is an inherently good idea and those who think that it was the least worst option.

As I understand the ruling, the EU requires an adequate environmental assessment, but the content of that, and how it influences the planning decision is a national competence.

Ah. That I can’t object to.

rcs1000 said:

Black_Rook said:

A new record for Covid cases now also reported for Malta. I've read a little about what's been going on there - seems the authorities permitted a number of festivals to take place, and the Italians are also linking a lot of cases that they have had to young adults returning from parties in Malta.

It's no wonder that the UK Government have knocked it off the travel corridor list. Greece is apparently next in the crosshairs. Pretty soon, the only countries that people from the UK will be allowed to visit are remote British territories like Pitcairn and the Falkland Islands, and countries like Australia and New Zealand that will lock you in quarantine on the way in even if you don't need to self-isolate after you get back.

Why Johnson doesn't just cut to the chase and tell the population that holidays abroad are cancelled until further notice I don't know. An awful lot of voters, not least businesspeople and workers in the domestic tourist sector, would be delighted.

Worth remembering, though, that the UK already has lots of infected people, they just aren't showing up in the numbers yet.

So whether people go abroad or to Blackpool, then cases are going to be spiking in the next couple of weeks.

Depends on your definition of "lots." UK cases have been trickling upwards for six weeks; however, there is still no sign of a sharp uptick, which continues to suggest that carpet bombing of the problem areas is at least largely responsible for bumping the numbers up.

It still looks like rather different things are going on in different countries in Europe. If we look at differences in behaviours - amongst them the range of social distancing measures and how well they are being adhered to; the proportion the of the population still voluntarily self-isolating; the numbers of people working from home; those businesses that have been permitted to open, and those that remain shuttered; and the amount of social activity taking place (where people are gathering, how frequently, in how great a number of density, and the age cohorts involved) - then we might begin to better understand the situation.

alex_ said:

Evening all. Has Williamson resigned yet?

No. He has all the qualities Boris looks for - total sychofancy

Fishing said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Fishing said:

another_richard said:

Trump was the perfect candidate for the twatter era. Or turn that around and say the twatter era was perfect for Trump.

Another aspect was that it was the failure of the GOP establishment which led to Trump.

There was a decade ago on PB an American GOP supporter called StarsAndStripes.

He was scornful of the idea that Trump could get nominated by the GOP and that if he did would suffer enormous defeat.

Yes, but there are other factors that make up Trump. He is best seen as the logical culmination of several trends that go back decades in western democracies, and America in particular:

- the devaluation of experience at the top of government, i.e. denying that you benefit from expertise
- identity politics and its associated fostering of grievance
- the dumbing down of debate through the shortening of attention spans through first TV, then social media
- the toleration of rampant back-scratching and corruption
- the relentless focus on personalities and not issues.

If you take those five trends together, you have President Trump.

And, for the record, we're on the same road on many of those trends over here. Hence that moron Corbyn.

Hence also Johnson.

I would agree that Johnson incorporates some of those trends to some extent. But I don't think he's particularly corrupt, nor directly into identity politics, though, like all politicians these days, he uses it when he has to. I agree that he could be said to incorporate 1, 3 and 5, though, albeit to a much lesser extent than Trump, and arguably not more than Blair.

Yes, there are obvious similarities between Trump and Johnson but our man is not in the same league.

nichomar said:

Black_Rook said:

A new record for Covid cases now also reported for Malta. I've read a little about what's been going on there - seems the authorities permitted a number of festivals to take place, and the Italians are also linking a lot of cases that they have had to young adults returning from parties in Malta.

It's no wonder that the UK Government have knocked it off the travel corridor list. Greece is apparently next in the crosshairs. Pretty soon, the only countries that people from the UK will be allowed to visit are remote British territories like Pitcairn and the Falkland Islands, and countries like Australia and New Zealand that will lock you in quarantine on the way in even if you don't need to self-isolate after you get back.

Why Johnson doesn't just cut to the chase and tell the population that holidays abroad are cancelled until further notice I don't know. An awful lot of voters, not least businesspeople and workers in the domestic tourist sector, would be delighted.

Where are the figures showing us that a large % of new cases are from returning holiday makers? It may help justifying quarantine and disruption but I haven’t seen any published.

It appears to be widely accepted that one of the principal reasons why the UK was hit as hard as it was back in March and April was because of mass importation of cases from holidaymakers. First there were the ski tourists from Northern Italy, and later sunbathers from Spain and France. We don't know yet how many new cases may have been imported this time around, but perhaps the Government didn't want to just let things carry on for another few weeks and treat overseas tourism as an exciting epidemiological experiment?

Shutting down foreign holidays would therefore appear to be largely a case of "once bitten, twice shy," although an awful lot of the public are still very frightened and new clampdowns like these will probably please a lot more people than they upset.

Black_Rook said:

rcs1000 said:

Black_Rook said:

A new record for Covid cases now also reported for Malta. I've read a little about what's been going on there - seems the authorities permitted a number of festivals to take place, and the Italians are also linking a lot of cases that they have had to young adults returning from parties in Malta.

It's no wonder that the UK Government have knocked it off the travel corridor list. Greece is apparently next in the crosshairs. Pretty soon, the only countries that people from the UK will be allowed to visit are remote British territories like Pitcairn and the Falkland Islands, and countries like Australia and New Zealand that will lock you in quarantine on the way in even if you don't need to self-isolate after you get back.

Why Johnson doesn't just cut to the chase and tell the population that holidays abroad are cancelled until further notice I don't know. An awful lot of voters, not least businesspeople and workers in the domestic tourist sector, would be delighted.

Worth remembering, though, that the UK already has lots of infected people, they just aren't showing up in the numbers yet.

So whether people go abroad or to Blackpool, then cases are going to be spiking in the next couple of weeks.

Depends on your definition of "lots." UK cases have been trickling upwards for six weeks; however, there is still no sign of a sharp uptick, which continues to suggest that carpet bombing of the problem areas is at least largely responsible for bumping the numbers up.

It still looks like rather different things are going on in different countries in Europe. If we look at differences in behaviours - amongst them the range of social distancing measures and how well they are being adhered to; the proportion the of the population still voluntarily self-isolating; the numbers of people working from home; those businesses that have been permitted to open, and those that remain shuttered; and the amount of social activity taking place (where people are gathering, how frequently, in how great a number of density, and the age cohorts involved) - then we might begin to better understand the situation.

Positivity rates for Pillar 2 have gone from 0.4 to 0.6 in the last couple of weeks.

ydoethur said:

And the U-turn begins:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-53793583

I`m not sure it has. In today`s announcement Ofqual mentions "non-exam assessment" - I didn`t read this as meaning the same as teacher assessed grades/ centre assessment grades.

See:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/appeals-based-on-mock-exams

Fysics_Teacher said:

Cyclefree said:

Sicily.

1. Don’t go in August. Far too hot. It can easily get over 40 degrees. And there are lots of crowds.
2. Palermo is well worth exploring.
3. Selinunte and Segesta are wonderful for their Greek temples, as is Agrigento.
4. Siracusa is a must especially if you can get tickets to the Greek theatre there. I saw a superb production of Antigone there.
5. Sciacca is lovely and Ragusa.
6. Taormina is the Amalfi of Sicily.
7. Try and visit one of the Aeolian Islands.
8. You must eat genuine Sicilian arancini di riso. Malvasia sweet wine is also delicious.

I remember first having arancini di riso in Sicily, and I agree wholeheartedly!

Foxy said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Foxy said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Foxy said:

MaxPB said:

Carnyx said:

MaxPB said:

Carnyx said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

Carnyx said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Utter madness and eco vandalism from the EU

https://twitter.com/GaiaFawkes/status/1294580050281533440?s=19

Not the EU but administrative incompetence within Ireland.

Always try to pin it on the EU, they will be stuffed in UK next year when they cannot blame everything on the EU. They will try to blame Labour instead.

It is the Irish blaming the EU

Really? It reads to me as if an organization in Ireland failed to follow widely known EU-wide administrative procedures and got taken to the ECJ. In no way did the EU specifically mandate the destruction of the saplings.

Surely the problem is that the EU has some minutia of regulation about planting trees. Why is it getting involved in this at all? Planting more trees and reforestation is a hugely important goal, it's one of the tools we have against climate change so why are he EU making it more difficult with regulations?

Well, to make sure they don't make tyhe environmentqal situation even worse?

Off now to do my bit for the environment (saorting out charity shop stuff from the clutter). Have a nice weekend everyone.

Again, why get involved at all? If a country is happy to pursue reforestation or growing a new tree nursery then that in itself is worthwhile, why is he EU making this process unnecessarily complicated with regulations. The national government will know what's best for it's country, it isn't going to approve some kind of invasive species or something that will cause devastation to other forests in the country. It's just another example of EU regulatory overreach and now 400,000 trees are not going to exist that would otherwise have done.

A quick Google finds our own governments environmental assessment guidance. It all sounds pretty reasonable to me, and seems to be in line with EU regulations. Which bit of it do you think is surplus to requirements? The need to understand the human impacts? The fire risks? The preservation of cultural sites and protected species?


https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/706038/171024-EIA-Scoping-and-ES-Statement-Guidance-v.5.pdf

But why does the EU have to get involved? How does it help make sure that trade between the different members is on a level playing field?
This sort of thing, regulatory overreach, is one of the reasons I seriously considered voting leave.

The European Court ruled that an adequate environmental impact assessment was needed. Seems quite reasonable to me. It is not EU regs per se, just a requirement to assess impacts.

For example plantings near powerlines, railway lines, along some roads, on neolithic sites, on SSI's etc might be bad places to plant.

I not arguing that an environmental impact assessment isn’t a good idea; my argument is that this is something that the Irish state should be perfectly capable of working out for itself. If the Irish Supreme Court had made this decision it would be sad that so many trees were due to be pulped, but unremarkable otherwise. It is the fact that the European Court got involved because this was a European standard rather than an Irish one that I have a problem with.

Is there a compelling reason why this is a European competence rather than a national one? If there is, then I will have to admit that you are right.

It seems that it arises from this case:

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/ireland-fined-5m-euro-over-environmental-assessment-of-wind-farm-38684853.html

https://www.clientearth.org/court-of-justice-comes-down-hard-on-persistent-failures-to-assess-the-environmental-impacts-of-projects/

The Windfarm was built without an environmental impact, caused a massive landslide, hence the requirement to do so in the future. There also seems to be an issue of issuing retrospective approvals.

I am happy to accept that it is a European competence, my question is why is it a European competence.

Mrs Flatlander is in this business to a small degree and is/was always moaning about EU legislation.

It is not that some environmental legislation isn't required, it is more that it is overly broad and not necessarily based on suitable local criteria.

For example - one of our local nature reserves is designated under EU legislation as part of a wetland landscape. However, it is also designated under EU legislation because Nightjar nest there on what has become dry heath.

So, do you try and completely re-wet the site as per one set of EU directives, or keep it dry as per the other?

Malmesbury said:

Black_Rook said:

rcs1000 said:

Black_Rook said:

A new record for Covid cases now also reported for Malta. I've read a little about what's been going on there - seems the authorities permitted a number of festivals to take place, and the Italians are also linking a lot of cases that they have had to young adults returning from parties in Malta.

It's no wonder that the UK Government have knocked it off the travel corridor list. Greece is apparently next in the crosshairs. Pretty soon, the only countries that people from the UK will be allowed to visit are remote British territories like Pitcairn and the Falkland Islands, and countries like Australia and New Zealand that will lock you in quarantine on the way in even if you don't need to self-isolate after you get back.

Why Johnson doesn't just cut to the chase and tell the population that holidays abroad are cancelled until further notice I don't know. An awful lot of voters, not least businesspeople and workers in the domestic tourist sector, would be delighted.

Worth remembering, though, that the UK already has lots of infected people, they just aren't showing up in the numbers yet.

So whether people go abroad or to Blackpool, then cases are going to be spiking in the next couple of weeks.

Depends on your definition of "lots." UK cases have been trickling upwards for six weeks; however, there is still no sign of a sharp uptick, which continues to suggest that carpet bombing of the problem areas is at least largely responsible for bumping the numbers up.

It still looks like rather different things are going on in different countries in Europe. If we look at differences in behaviours - amongst them the range of social distancing measures and how well they are being adhered to; the proportion the of the population still voluntarily self-isolating; the numbers of people working from home; those businesses that have been permitted to open, and those that remain shuttered; and the amount of social activity taking place (where people are gathering, how frequently, in how great a number of density, and the age cohorts involved) - then we might begin to better understand the situation.

Positivity rates for Pillar 2 have gone from 0.4 to 0.6 in the last couple of weeks.

Doesn't that link to the argument about better targeting?

Anyway, part of the big problem is that the figures from March and April are so differently compiled as to be uncomparable. We have almost no idea how the 1000 odd positive tests a day we are getting now compares to the positive tests we were getting at the end of March. We were testing 10s of thousands (tops) back then, almost all symptomatic, and mostly in hospitals.

We are now testing hundreds of thousands, many asymptomatic and largely in communities. It could well be that the numbers we are getting now are more indicative of the situation in early March or earlier. But this time the Care homes are better protected...

williamglenn said:

Yokes said:

williamglenn said:

Yokes said:

Belarus

It appears state media (or whats left of it) are saying that Russia has agreed to help President Big Hat on request. That's a very broad statement. Russia will have no problem sending advisors, though whether its to help the President himself or a broader regime is an open question. The question is what else would they send on request? Unbadged forces or something a little more conventional?

There are notable numbers of Russian ground troops from Western Military district turning up in two locations c30km east and c10km North of the Russia/Belarus border that were not previously there. Both locations are on main transit routes.

This is not new, the repositioning has been happening for days and you'd have to assume some contingency work by Moscow for many reasons, not just rolling the tanks over.

There is an adage that sometimes the size and shape of a military force on a border gets beyond spillover protection or sabre rattling and can only mean one thing; the intention is to use it. Anything from 24-96 hours and we might just get clarity on whether the scale of deployment holds a message.

It's interesting that the Russian media have started presenting the protests very sympathetically and have been detailing some of the abuses of Lukashenko. It's nothing like the way Maidan was covered.

That is an indication of Russian government views on Big Hat himself but they have no interest whatsoever in seeing something akin to a regular democratic regime take power therefore leaving any number of possibilities about the future direction of the country.

They may view him as a dead duck and will long game this. I have noted in previous posts that many many Belarussian's aren't exactly hostile to Russia and aren't all go to be part of the Western European sphere, as represented by the EU, either. What they are, and increasingly so, is forging their own national identity. Russia will need to make a judgement on whether AGL is just a side show, it doesn't matter if he goes and they can attempt to manage their own interests via other means no matter who is in power.

Its either that or a game of chicken. How desperate is Big Hat? Enough to acquiesce to some kind of greater federation or union? Russia has been agitating and pushing that line for ages but the stall has been on the Belarus side.

The bigger picture is the future of Putin within Russia. This could have more in common with 1989 than 2014.

Yes,

Black_Rook said:

A new record for Covid cases now also reported for Malta. I've read a little about what's been going on there - seems the authorities permitted a number of festivals to take place, and the Italians are also linking a lot of cases that they have had to young adults returning from parties in Malta.

It's no wonder that the UK Government have knocked it off the travel corridor list. Greece is apparently next in the crosshairs. Pretty soon, the only countries that people from the UK will be allowed to visit are remote British territories like Pitcairn and the Falkland Islands, and countries like Australia and New Zealand that will lock you in quarantine on the way in even if you don't need to self-isolate after you get back.

Why Johnson doesn't just cut to the chase and tell the population that holidays abroad are cancelled until further notice I don't know. An awful lot of voters, not least businesspeople and workers in the domestic tourist sector, would be delighted.

Italy and Greece look fine for now:

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-which-countries-could-the-uk-add-to-its-quarantine-list-next-12037240

One of my Italian colleagues is off to visit her aging parents, and to sell her flat tommprow. Trips to these places are not purely tourism.

Stocky said:

I hate it when posters disappear, @barnesian hasn`t posted for over two weeks.

Didn't he say he was quarantining in Ireland? Possibly in the middle of nowhere with no access to internet. Wasn't he still sorting out probate issues relating to his wife's death?

alex_ said:

Stocky said:

I hate it when posters disappear, @barnesian hasn`t posted for over two weeks.

Didn't he say he was quarantining in Ireland? Possibly in the middle of nowhere with no access to internet. Wasn't he still sorting out probate issues relating to his wife's death?

Oh, thanks - I didn`t know that. I`ll look back at his last posts.