Howdy, Stranger!

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

Punters think recent events help Labour and the Tories – politicalbetting.com

1246

Comments

  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 550
    a

    Musk is not a fascist. He’s high as a kite and I believe mentally ill.

    From the lab experiments a family member undertook on rat brains and K, there is a high probability of damage from the long term use of K. (See PhD research into this area at Leeds Uni)
  • If what you want is fewer masts, the solution is to allow them to be built even taller.

    Having a few masts next door to an ANOB is hardly going to destroy the landscape and is important for safety among other things. This has already been covered by the ESN which has built masts in these places already.

    This is why we are in such trouble. Companies want to build but are prevented because of NIMBYs many of which seem to come on this board.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 29,508

    I think that’s unfair. I am very glad Starlink works for you. My point was simply that the latency is not reliable and not comparable to other solutions. If it works for you then great.

    I am not trying to deny your lived experience, what I am denying is that it is a solution that can work for the vast majority. That is all.

    Once again, this is purely a technical argument. I’d make the same arguments about OneWeb.

    As I’ve said repeatedly: use Starlink as you wish. The fact you’re being told not to by a bunch of virtue signallers is becoming very boring.
    There is a problem though. Your industry take is pro cellular. Great - we all want faster and more reliable service.

    You went way beyond that. You've insisted that Starlink's latency is so horrible as to ask "How do you use Starlink for meetings"

    I'm not sure what industrial uses you are considering it unsuitable for. For small business and consumer?

    Again again. It is Fast. It is reliable. It has low latency. It does the things you say it can't do.

    Whereas the things you are advocating cannot. But you've repeatedly and stridently insisted you're right on this subject. Yes - from your perspective with your chosen bias and your chosen selective usage model.

    This is precisely the point I am making about politics. You cannot tell someone they are wrong when they're describing how things in their lives work for them - with the exception of someone insisting we're all controlled by aliens or something. For the rest, its qui bono?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,990
    HYUFD said:

    Trump says Greenlanders have a choice whether to join the US or not

    https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1898985197363724539

    Bet he doesn't give them a choice to leave afterwards though.
  • BatteryCorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorse Posts: 4,664
    edited March 10

    There is a problem though. Your industry take is pro cellular. Great - we all want faster and more reliable service.

    You went way beyond that. You've insisted that Starlink's latency is so horrible as to ask "How do you use Starlink for meetings"

    I'm not sure what industrial uses you are considering it unsuitable for. For small business and consumer?

    Again again. It is Fast. It is reliable. It has low latency. It does the things you say it can't do.

    Whereas the things you are advocating cannot. But you've repeatedly and stridently insisted you're right on this subject. Yes - from your perspective with your chosen bias and your chosen selective usage model.

    This is precisely the point I am making about politics. You cannot tell someone they are wrong when they're describing how things in their lives work for them - with the exception of someone insisting we're all controlled by aliens or something. For the rest, its qui bono?
    I’ve already explained to you. It’s not usable at scale. It cannot in any way replace a mast with a 10Gb fibre running to it. That would be one the largest industrial applications for it. I suspect with a full train you’d run into capacity issues very quickly but that’s only a guess.

    I don’t think you are wrong to use it. I am happy it works for you. I think you are wrong to advocate for it as something that can replace 4G/5G or FTTP for more than a few hundred people.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,142
    1000 USAID programmes to be maintained.

    https://x.com/marcorubio/status/1899021361797816325

    After a 6 week review we are officially cancelling 83% of the programs at USAID.

    The 5200 contracts that are now cancelled spent tens of billions of dollars in ways that did not serve, (and in some cases even harmed), the core national interests of the United States.

    In consultation with Congress, we intend for the remaining 18% of programs we are keeping (approximately 1000) to now be administered more effectively under the State Department.

    Thank you to DOGE and our hardworking staff who worked very long hours to achieve this overdue and historic reform.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 29,508

    Incidentally, as Tesla cars are highly connected, how easy would it be for them or another actor to get mad at a country or individual and either disallow the car's use, or brick them via an over-the-air update?

    I'm not saying they would do this; just asking if it is a reasonable attack vector.

    I can fix that. Disable the eSim and disable WIFI. Make the car dumb, so it can't be remotely instructed to do anything.
  • eekeek Posts: 29,397
    edited March 10

    If what you want is fewer masts, the solution is to allow them to be built even taller.

    Having a few masts next door to an ANOB is hardly going to destroy the landscape and is important for safety among other things. This has already been covered by the ESN which has built masts in these places already.

    This is why we are in such trouble. Companies want to build but are prevented because of NIMBYs many of which seem to come on this board.

    Slightly problem - the application you wanted approved was in the AONB

    Why else would a national park planning officer be dealing with a planning application

    And other options were available the other option was 2 masts both outside the national park but that cost more money
  • eek said:

    Slightly problem - the application you wanted approved was in the AONB

    Why else would a national park planning officer be dealing with a planning application
    I am saying it should have been approved. They shouldn’t be able to reject masts being built even in an ANOB.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,148

    May I know why? Do you not think better coverage is important?
    In the early days of broadband, the cable companies were able to use an opt out from planning to be able to lay cable in towns without planning permission or consultation. They simply had to register the work they were going to do and go out and dig the trenches and lay the cables. The result was a complete fucking disaster. In Newark, with lack of reference to the planning offices, they cut through existing service cables and pipes, cut through tree roots along roadsides resulting in trees dying and in a number of cases dug into the cellars of properties that extended out beneath the pavement. Eventually one of the worst companies was banned from any further broadband work in the town.

    Planning has a purpose. It is not, in spite of what you might think, to thwart development. It is to ensure that things are built in the right place for the right reasons rather than the cheapest and easiest place for the company concerned.

    I do think revisions to planning are necessary. The proposals to reduce the number of statutory consultees to just those involved in safety, environment and heritage seems sensible to me. Removing planning or reducing the power of councils to prevent unsustainable development/construction is not sensible. Go to any country that does have lax planning controls and you will see what that is.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,990

    I have always thought the Trump-Mussolini similarities were uncanny. Particularly that 'head tilt stare into the distance whilst sticking out the bottom lip' thing.
    Perhap a similar fate awaits...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,197
    So much for Trump's pressure on Putin.

    "A new round of talks between Russia and the United States in Saudi Arabia is NOT planned this week," — Zakharova
    https://x.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/1899018586502377672
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,148

    I am saying it should have been approved. They shouldn’t be able to reject masts being built even in an ANOB.
    Just confirming my previous comment about your understanding the value of nothing.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,197
    ASML will build a “reuse and repair” center in 🇨🇳 Beijing this year, showing its commitment to the world’s second-largest economy despite pressure from Washington.

    The Dutch firm disclosed the plan for the facility in Beijing in its annual report published on Mar 5.

    It is the only major project in the report’s “circular economy” section about parts and tools. The repair center mentioned in the plan is “an upgrade to our existing repair center in China. It is not an addition, it replaces the older repair center.”..

    https://x.com/Byron_Wan/status/1898329491342278750
  • In the early days of broadband, the cable companies were able to use an opt out from planning to be able to lay cable in towns without planning permission or consultation. They simply had to register the work they were going to do and go out and dig the trenches and lay the cables. The result was a complete fucking disaster. In Newark, with lack of reference to the planning offices, they cut through existing service cables and pipes, cut through tree roots along roadsides resulting in trees dying and in a number of cases dug into the cellars of properties that extended out beneath the pavement. Eventually one of the worst companies was banned from any further broadband work in the town.

    Planning has a purpose. It is not, in spite of what you might think, to thwart development. It is to ensure that things are built in the right place for the right reasons rather than the cheapest and easiest place for the company concerned.

    I do think revisions to planning are necessary. The proposals to reduce the number of statutory consultees to just those involved in safety, environment and heritage seems sensible to me. Removing planning or reducing the power of councils to prevent unsustainable development/construction is not sensible. Go to any country that does have lax planning controls and you will see what that is.
    What you are saying is nice in principle but complete nonsense in practice. If the principle was reality I would support planning. But it isn’t.

    Recently a site was rejected in Tooting - TOOTING! - on an existing building with infrastructure on it because they didn’t like the colour of the panels. How on earth can you say that is planning working as expected?
  • Just confirming my previous comment about your understanding the value of nothing.
    If you want coverage in an ANOB you need to build a mast. You obviously don’t want coverage there. I do. Mainly for safety reasons but also because in 2025 your phone should work anywhere.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 29,508

    I’ve already explained to you. It’s not usable at scale. It cannot in any way replace a mast with a 10Gb fibre running to it.

    I don’t think you are wrong to use it. I am happy it works for you. I think you are wrong to advocate for it as something that can replace 4G/5G or FTTP for more than a few hundred people.
    That's not what you said. I am not using it at scale. I am using a single terminal. "How do you use Starlink for meetings" because "the latency is horrible"

    But it isn't. If you are suggesting that it *might* be horrible and usable in the future if it scaled to millions of UK users then ok. But you didn't say that. You said it isn't usable today and proceeded to sell 4G/5G which as you just said it can't replace.

    But it can replace. I have no 5G to replace, only 4G. And Starlink is waaaaay faster and more reliable.

    Can it replace a mast with 10Gb fibre? No! Am I ever likely to get a mast with 10Gb fibre? No!

    Starlink is not supposed to be a replacement for other systems. It's a supplement to those systems where they don't exist. And at no point have I suggested that someone like my Lincolnshire mate bin his 5G router for Starlink - that would be stupid.

    Do you get it yet? "FTTP will cover 99% of households by 2030". OK, lets assume that's true. I can't wait until 2030. And neither can most people without it. And the alternatives you prefer don't exist here, and in all likelihood won't come here.

    You are literally denying lived reality today to sell a future that is vapourware.
  • The reality is that planning doesn’t work in this country. It holds us back and prevents us from competing.

    There is no way anyone non-biased could look at our planning system and conclude that it is working.

    I speak to masts because it is what I know well. It doesn’t work there.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,148

    What you are saying is nice in principle but complete nonsense in practice. If the principle was reality I would support planning. But it isn’t.

    Recently a site was rejected in Tooting - TOOTING! - on an existing building with infrastructure on it because they didn’t like the colour of the panels. How on earth can you say that is planning working as expected?
    What I 'said' was fact. It is exctly what happened in the way it happened. Now you might consider that acceptable but the vast majority of people - certainly not all NIMBYs - would not. You are an extremist on this.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,961
    Battlebus said:

    a

    From the lab experiments a family member undertook on rat brains and K, there is a high probability of damage from the long term use of K. (See PhD research into this area at Leeds Uni)
    And damage to the bladder & urethra, causing incontinence.
    Interesting whiff coming off the Trump cabinet.
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,860
    Andy_JS said:

    It's interesting how the internet has undoubtedly made the "living in their own bubble" problem worse than it was before, which is the opposite of what nearly everyone expected to happen.
    Yes, broadcasting has been replaced by narrowcasting.
  • That's not what you said. I am not using it at scale. I am using a single terminal. "How do you use Starlink for meetings" because "the latency is horrible"

    But it isn't. If you are suggesting that it *might* be horrible and usable in the future if it scaled to millions of UK users then ok. But you didn't say that. You said it isn't usable today and proceeded to sell 4G/5G which as you just said it can't replace.

    But it can replace. I have no 5G to replace, only 4G. And Starlink is waaaaay faster and more reliable.

    Can it replace a mast with 10Gb fibre? No! Am I ever likely to get a mast with 10Gb fibre? No!

    Starlink is not supposed to be a replacement for other systems. It's a supplement to those systems where they don't exist. And at no point have I suggested that someone like my Lincolnshire mate bin his 5G router for Starlink - that would be stupid.

    Do you get it yet? "FTTP will cover 99% of households by 2030". OK, lets assume that's true. I can't wait until 2030. And neither can most people without it. And the alternatives you prefer don't exist here, and in all likelihood won't come here.

    You are literally denying lived reality today to sell a future that is vapourware.
    Okay, I was wrong when I said you can’t use it for meetings. You can. Good for you.

    Do I think you will be able to use it long term. No. I think you will run into contention very quickly if as many people use it as you suggest they will.

    Does it work for you. Yes.

    Will it work for most, no. I really stand by that.

    As a backup or last resort, yes.

    Will the alternatives come to you. Almost certainly. The SRN should see to that and as you said you have FTTC already you already have a fibre headend so you will get FTTP. I’d bet on it.
  • eekeek Posts: 29,397
    edited March 10

    If you want coverage in an ANOB you need to build a mast. You obviously don’t want coverage there. I do. Mainly for safety reasons but also because in 2025 your phone should work anywhere.
    No what you actually have said is screw the countryside build things wherever you want in the cheapest way possible.

    Remember in my example - signal already existed - it could be improved by 2 masts in sane locations or 1 mast in an unsuitable location and you went for the cheap solution that would upset people
  • What I 'said' was fact. It is exctly what happened in the way it happened. Now you might consider that acceptable but the vast majority of people - certainly not all NIMBYs - would not. You are an extremist on this.
    I am absolutely an extremist on this but it is because of lived experience. What you advocate for doesn’t work.

    Or perhaps you can justify why a site gets rejected because it’s the wrong colour.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,672
    Nigelb said:

    ASML will build a “reuse and repair” center in 🇨🇳 Beijing this year, showing its commitment to the world’s second-largest economy despite pressure from Washington.

    The Dutch firm disclosed the plan for the facility in Beijing in its annual report published on Mar 5.

    It is the only major project in the report’s “circular economy” section about parts and tools. The repair center mentioned in the plan is “an upgrade to our existing repair center in China. It is not an addition, it replaces the older repair center.”..

    https://x.com/Byron_Wan/status/1898329491342278750

    That's absolutely shocking for the US. They are literally handing over their economic leadership to China and companies are adjusting to the new reality wrt Trump/MAGA.
  • eek said:

    No what you actually have said is screw the countryside build things wherever you want in the cheapest way possible.
    Essentially yes. I accept it’s not a popular policy but it’s the right one. You aren’t going to get good coverage without putting masts up. There literally aren’t alternatives.

    I am afraid masts look like masts.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,003

    The reality is that planning doesn’t work in this country. It holds us back and prevents us from competing.

    There is no way anyone non-biased could look at our planning system and conclude that it is working.

    I speak to masts because it is what I know well. It doesn’t work there.

    Is it possible to attach a 5G bondoogle at the top of a tree ? Other half tried to phone me at Clumber Park yesterday and virtually no signal.
  • eekeek Posts: 29,397

    I am absolutely an extremist on this but it is because of lived experience. What you advocate for doesn’t work.

    Or perhaps you can justify why a site gets rejected because it’s the wrong colour.
    Nope you’ve actually said you are a cheap stale willing to trash the countryside to save your employers a few quid
  • eek said:

    Nope you’ve actually said you are a cheap stale willing to trash the countryside to save your employers a few quid
    Then feel free to propose a solution that doesn’t involve putting up a mast.

    We can build a taller one and build it further away. Currently not allowed by the planning system.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Is it possible to attach a 5G bondoogle at the top of a tree ? Other half tried to phone me at Clumber Park yesterday and virtually no signal.
    There are things called COWs that would be used for large events. Otherwise they could enquire about a local DAS.

    Realistically it’s probably in need of a new site near by.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,461
    a

    Then feel free to propose a solution that doesn’t involve putting up a mast.

    We can build a taller one and build it further away. Currently not allowed by the planning system.
    Or invest in a LEO satellite constellation that can handle mobile phone calls.....

    (For those who don't know - already on the way. You can send/receive texts on certain phones already).

    Yes, a lesser service. But if you block the alternatives....
  • BatteryCorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorse Posts: 4,664
    edited March 10

    a

    Or invest in a LEO satellite constellation that can handle mobile phone calls.....

    (For those who don't know - already on the way. You can send/receive texts on certain phones already).

    Yes, a lesser service. But if you block the alternatives....
    That would only be considered as a last resort. The latency is not guaranteed and not particularly reliable for phone calls at any scale. There is a reason they are only used to cover black holes.

    They are used for data because it’s not latency sensitive.

    I agree, if we block the alternatives that is what we will end up with. It will be crap but I suppose technically you will have “coverage”.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,283

    Essentially yes. I accept it’s not a popular policy but it’s the right one. You aren’t going to get good coverage without putting masts up. There literally aren’t alternatives.

    I am afraid masts look like masts.
    Sometimes they're built to look like trees, I believe.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,461

    There are things called COWs that would be used for large events. Otherwise they could enquire about a local DAS.

    Realistically it’s probably in need of a new site near by.
    Why not



    For those who don't know - the tree the solider is looking at is a fake. It was actually a British army observation post.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,707

    What you are saying is nice in principle but complete nonsense in practice. If the principle was reality I would support planning. But it isn’t.

    Recently a site was rejected in Tooting - TOOTING! - on an existing building with infrastructure on it because they didn’t like the colour of the panels. How on earth can you say that is planning working as expected?
    So presumably they offered to change the colour of the panels and received approval?
  • eekeek Posts: 29,397

    Then feel free to propose a solution that doesn’t involve putting up a mast.

    We can build a taller one and build it further away. Currently not allowed by the planning system.
    Um as I’ve posted 3 times now - spend the extra money and put up 2 masts in locations where people dont object to them.

    The fact you can’t grasp that idea tells me that all you care about is saving your employers a few quid
  • eek said:

    Um as I’ve posted 3 times now - spend the extra money and put up 2 masts in locations where people dont object to them.

    The fact you can’t grasp that idea tells me that all you care about is saving your employers a few quid
    People object to them wherever they are placed. That’s literally the point I am making.
  • BatteryCorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorse Posts: 4,664
    edited March 10
    MattW said:

    So presumably they offered to change the colour of the panels and received approval?
    They did not.

    Why is one of the criteria even that the colour can be wrong. It’s a load of nonsense. It’s an urban area for goodness sake.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,990
    MaxPB said:

    That's absolutely shocking for the US. They are literally handing over their economic leadership to China and companies are adjusting to the new reality wrt Trump/MAGA.
    China currently has about 1% of its assets owned by the private sector. Their aim is to make that 10% within 5 years. Despite a reluctance to call it privatization, it is going to open up huge opportunities to those prepared to invest within China. It looks like that will not in large part be the US. But there will be much closer ties between Europe and China and the Middle East and China. (Abu Dhabi alone is currently buying top brands and assets around the world at the rate of $5 billion A DAY.)

  • AnneJGP said:

    Sometimes they're built to look like trees, I believe.
    There are a few handfuls. But they are more expensive to build and maintain and the coverage from them is reduced and they support fewer bands so not good for long term usage.
  • eekeek Posts: 29,397

    People object to them wherever they are placed. That’s literally the point I am making.
    No it wasn’t - but it also shows the problem. Planners will often better locations where approval would be granted but those suggestions are ignored - in the case above a combination of planners and a retired engineer did provide that details, the engineers calculations were confirm but the network still spent another year trying to save a few quidz

    I would suggest pick an argument with someone who doesn’t have evidence to back up his statement
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,197
    edited March 10
    MaxPB said:

    That's absolutely shocking for the US. They are literally handing over their economic leadership to China and companies are adjusting to the new reality wrt Trump/MAGA.
    As the MAGAs I keep blocking on X tell me, FAFO.

    And Curtis Yarvin has told JD that, as the US has a trade deficit with both China and Europe, ceasing to trade with them is by definition good for US economic growth...
  • eek said:

    No it wasn’t - but it also shows the problem. Planners will often better locations where approval would be granted but those suggestions are ignored - in the case above a combination of planners and a retired engineer did provide that details, the engineers calculations were confirm but the network still spent another year trying to save a few quidz

    I would suggest pick an argument with someone who doesn’t have evidence to back up his statement
    They might occasionally do what you are saying but it’s certainly not wholesale how it works.

    Can you provide some citations for the particular case so I can read up.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 29,508
    Where I agree with @BatteryCorrectHorse is that we need further investment into superfast fibre and mobile cellular connectivity. Too many places struggle for connection speeds - whether that is remote places or increasingly in city centres surrounded by masts.

    There is a basic truth though about return on investment. When I lived on Teesside our estate (which ballooned to 900 houses in different phases) was denied fast broadband as Openreach refused to accept that we existed. Their fibre rollout survey being done before the estate was built, thus not enough demand for FTTC to our cabinet.

    After years of waiting we got FTTP. But even then the roll-out was patchy. If you lived on the main street as we did you got it. On one of the little 2 or 3 house mini cul-de-sacs? No fibre for you.

    This is the challenge for the vision that Horse advocates. I have a cabinet literally metres away from my house, but that was installed later and our house is connected to the other cabinet 1.5km away. We enquired about getting FTTP installed commercially and the cost was close to £10k. Reinstate the existing fixed line to the exchange? Close to £1k a month line rental.

    The vision Horse insists will happen here by 2030 is this. Someone is going to come and dig up the whole village and install new connections. Not just along the roads, up every side lane between houses to reach the houses built at the back or could be built at the back.

    And that's just my village. For the people at the edges of the village or on stand-alone farms a few kilometres outside - are they getting FTTP as well? Paid for by whom?

    I've seen big holes in the roll-out plan in busy suburban areas. The "just build it without planning" proposal absolutely guarantees that lots of places are missed out because there is literally no roll-out plan.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,707

    They did not.

    Why is one of the criteria even that the colour can be wrong. It’s a load of nonsense. It’s an urban area for goodness sake.
    Because fitting in with the locality (may not be phrased like that) is a material planning consideration in law, and has been forever.

    It does seem like punching themselves in the face for the sake of punching themselves in the face.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,852
    AnneJGP said:

    Sometimes they're built to look like trees, I believe.
    Psuedopinus telephonensis

    https://maps.app.goo.gl/KZXRym3eBfeYrgtd9
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,558
    Nigelb said:

    Tends to confirm what I long suspected about oenophiles.
    Mind you, I have a fairly high opinion of rats.

    Rats can distinguish (and generalize) among two white wine varieties
    https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10071-025-01937-2

    And they can then convert the wine into lager.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,054

    There is a problem though. Your industry take is pro cellular. Great - we all want faster and more reliable service.

    You went way beyond that. You've insisted that Starlink's latency is so horrible as to ask "How do you use Starlink for meetings"

    I'm not sure what industrial uses you are considering it unsuitable for. For small business and consumer?

    Again again. It is Fast. It is reliable. It has low latency. It does the things you say it can't do.

    Whereas the things you are advocating cannot. But you've repeatedly and stridently insisted you're right on this subject. Yes - from your perspective with your chosen bias and your chosen selective usage model.

    This is precisely the point I am making about politics. You cannot tell someone they are wrong when they're describing how things in their lives work for them - with the exception of someone insisting we're all controlled by aliens or something. For the rest, its qui bono?
    Cui bono
  • MattW said:

    Because fitting in with the locality (may not be phrased like that) is a material planning consideration in law, and has been forever.

    It does seem like punching themselves in the face for the sake of punching themselves in the face.
    I’d argue though that a mast is never going to fit in with the locality perfectly. Because it’s a structure with a load of panels.

    This is why they do try and use things that are already there. But I have driven past the site in question and it’s weird because it’s surrounded by all sorts of dodgy looking wiring, ugly buildings, satellite dishes, litter, etc. It was frankly a very odd refusal.
  • BatteryCorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorse Posts: 4,664
    edited March 10
    @eek perhaps you’d like to justify why a site in a railway yard in Wandsworth Common was rejected for being unsightly? I don’t doubt it is unsightly but then so is the railway that runs through it…
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 29,508

    That would only be considered as a last resort. The latency is not guaranteed and not particularly reliable for phone calls at any scale. There is a reason they are only used to cover black holes.

    They are used for data because it’s not latency sensitive.

    I agree, if we block the alternatives that is what we will end up with. It will be crap but I suppose technically you will have “coverage”.
    You're still making this absolutist argument. Lets reverse it. 4G and 5G is great apparently. Is latency guaranteed with that? How about reliability for phone calls?

    Problem with cellular coverage in the UK is that it's still got massive holes in it. The only way to get reliable coverage is to have eSIMs from every network on your handset - and even then you can drop out of everything. Was better when 2G was everywhere...
  • eekeek Posts: 29,397

    They might occasionally do what you are saying but it’s certainly not wholesale how it works.

    Can you provide some citations for the particular case so I can read up.
    It was a case my wife worked on that we’ve discussed in the past.

    I was just careful to drip feed the information bit by bit as you dug your argument into a bigger and bigger hole.

    What I’ve picked out is that you want infrastructure above (screw) everything else at the cheapest cost possible.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,142
    The Americans are apparently dismantling transport infrastructure at Rzeszow near the border with Ukraine.

    https://x.com/dana916/status/1898487780369412255
  • BatteryCorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorse Posts: 4,664
    edited March 10
    eek said:

    It was a case my wife worked on that we’ve discussed in the past.

    I was just careful to drip feed the information bit by bit as you dug your argument into a bigger and bigger hole.

    What I’ve picked out is that you want infrastructure above (screw) everything else at the cheapest cost possible.
    So no citations and a one off case. Okay then.

    I do think we should build everywhere and it should be as cheap as possible yes. I’ve not exactly hidden that argument. The company would have identified a suitable site and explained why they rejected the alternatives. So I suspect it’s not as clear cut as you are saying.

    Your wife I am sure is very good at her job but in general the planning system obstructs development of masts. It does not support them.
  • eekeek Posts: 29,397
    edited March 10

    @eek perhaps you’d like to justify why a site in a railway yard in Wandsworth Common was rejected for being unsightly? I don’t doubt it is unsightly but then so is the railway that runs through it…

    Is it a national park or AONB? It’s not so Meh that’s up to local councilors

    My problem is

    1) you are a cheapskate
    2) you put everyone else into the same boat as either for or against you

    Some locations are very visible - the example I picked was one they would be visible from a 30 mile radius given its location
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,779
    edited March 10

    Then feel free to propose a solution that doesn’t involve putting up a mast.

    We can build a taller one and build it further away. Currently not allowed by the planning system.
    Being society is obsessed with mobile phones and social media, it would be rather good to have areas where there is no signal so people could be people again, children could play in the great outdoors and enjoy nature enriching their lives

    On Saturday I was driving down Mostyn Street in Llandudno approaching a crossing on green when a young woman appeared fron nowhere immediately in front of my car, with her head glued to her phone oblivious to her surrondings

    She jumped out of her skin, and I was able just about to stop, and in front of astonished onlookers she fled into a local shop

    The world would be a lot better and our young people very much so if they got off their mobiles and looked around them
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,445
    Okay so how about flying a series of drones equipped as telecoms relay stations, at high altitude over or on the edge of remote areas. Each stays up in the air until its battery runs low at which point it flies back to a base station where it recharges, while the others in the air continue to send the signal.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 29,508

    The Americans are apparently dismantling transport infrastructure at Rzeszow near the border with Ukraine.

    https://x.com/dana916/status/1898487780369412255

    Allied with the Russians hoping that Putin defeats Ukraine.
  • TimS said:

    Okay so how about flying a series of drones equipped as telecoms relay stations, at high altitude over or on the edge of remote areas. Each stays up in the air until its battery runs low at which point it flies back to a base station where it recharges, while the others in the air continue to send the signal.

    Actually this was something EE was looking into as part of its “5G for all guarantee”. It was mostly for use by first responders.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,990

    Psuedopinus telephonensis

    https://maps.app.goo.gl/KZXRym3eBfeYrgtd9
    There's one on the outskirts of Torquay.
  • After years of waiting we got FTTP. But even then the roll-out was patchy. If you lived on the main street as we did you got it. On one of the little 2 or 3 house mini cul-de-sacs? No fibre for you.

    Yes, that's a major issue. Openreach's network is very patchy. I live in a cul-de-sac with about 20 properties. Right now the best Openreach offers here is ADSL2 which gives about 14Mb down and 0.8Mb up.

    Fortunately I have a relative living round the corner where VDSL is available, with 80Mb down and 20Mbit up, and I share their connection via a wireless link.

  • eek said:

    Is it a national park or AONB? It’s not so Meh that’s up to local councilors

    My problem is

    1) you are a cheapskate
    2) you put everyone else into the same boat as either for or against you
    I don’t think Wandsworth Common is an AONB. They rejected it because of visual impacts on the landscape.

    But as I have pointed out, there’s a railway line running through it. That should be taken into account when they reject these things but nope.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,907
    "David Amess’s family ‘in disbelief’ as Yvette Cooper rejects inquiry
    The ‘heartbroken’ daughter of the murdered MP will plead her case to the prime minister" (£)

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/crime/article/david-amess-yvette-cooper-inquiry-murder-h8dlcsvdp
  • eek said:

    Is it a national park or AONB? It’s not so Meh that’s up to local councilors

    My problem is

    1) you are a cheapskate
    2) you put everyone else into the same boat as either for or against you

    Some locations are very visible - the example I picked was one they would be visible from a 30 mile radius given its location
    I want infrastructure built cheaply. So yes, I make no bones about it.

    Whether a site is visible or not is frankly irrelevant. If you want coverage a site is going to be visible. If you can’t accept that we need to tear down every mast in the country.
  • You are either for infrastructure or you aren’t. People pretend they are until it’s built near them and suddenly they are up in arms.

    Despite all the economic boosts a new site will deliver, people can’t see the wood for the trees.

    Build one on my roof. I’d love it.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,505
    Oil tanker and cargo ship collision near Hull reported. Very early for details.
  • eekeek Posts: 29,397

    I want infrastructure built cheaply. So yes, I make no bones about it.

    Whether a site is visible or not is frankly irrelevant. If you want coverage a site is going to be visible. If you can’t accept that we need to tear down every mast in the country.
    So I talk about 1 poorly situated planned mast where alternative are available and you leap from that to - I don’t want any masts anywhere
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,257

    Being society is obsessed with mobile phones and social media, it would be rather good to have areas where there is no signal so people could be people again, children could play in the great outdoors and enjoy nature enriching their lives

    On Saturday I was driving down Mostyn Street in Llandudno approaching a crossing on green when a young woman appeared fron nowhere immediately in front of my car, with her head glued to her phone oblivious to her surrondings

    She jumped out of her skin, and I was able just about to stop, and in front of astonished onlookers she fled into a local shop

    The world would be a lot better and our young people very much so if they got off their mobiles and looked around them
    It's also a lot easier to steal a mobile phone if the user is a) outside and b) oblivious to the world around them.

    And Good Morning everyone!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,197
    Battlebus said:

    a

    From the lab experiments a family member undertook on rat brains and K, there is a high probability of damage from the long term use of K. (See PhD research into this area at Leeds Uni)
    I'd rather be a rat doing the wine tasting.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,740

    You are either for infrastructure or you aren’t. People pretend they are until it’s built near them and suddenly they are up in arms.

    Despite all the economic boosts a new site will deliver, people can’t see the wood for the trees.

    Build one on my roof. I’d love it.

    Only a Sith...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,197
    Based..

    Ohio - "Which right is guaranteed by the first amendment?"

    Freedom of religion: 62%
    Right to bear arms: 11%
    Right to remain silent: 10%
    Right to privacy: 5%

    Unsure: 11%

    YouGov/Bowling Green / Feb 21, 2025 / n=800

    https://x.com/USA_Polling/status/1898806604536975443
  • BatteryCorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorse Posts: 4,664
    edited March 10
    eek said:

    So I talk about 1 poorly situated planned mast where alternative are available and you leap from that to - I don’t want any masts anywhere
    You say it’s poorly situated but I don’t recall that it was? When you say poorly situated, you mean too visible?

    Let’s ask a slightly different question then, how visible should a site be? What are the parameters by which you judge a site to be poorly sited?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,197
    Nigelb said:

    Based..

    Ohio - "Which right is guaranteed by the first amendment?"

    Freedom of religion: 62%
    Right to bear arms: 11%
    Right to remain silent: 10%
    Right to privacy: 5%

    Unsure: 11%

    YouGov/Bowling Green / Feb 21, 2025 / n=800

    https://x.com/USA_Polling/status/1898806604536975443

    Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry (R) signs state law requiring the public display of the Ten Commandments in state public schools:

    “If you want to respect the rule of law, you’ve got to start from the original lawgiver, which was Moses." (2024)

    https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1898775528623989255
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,871
    There's another reason that Starmer will be very careful about Trump.

    Musk could try and bring him down again via Twitter, and as he tried to last year by promoting the riots.

    Time would be needed to organise defence arrangements with France and Germany, and to make sure X can. Be blocked in the UK, if it came to that.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,054
    Andy_JS said:

    "David Amess’s family ‘in disbelief’ as Yvette Cooper rejects inquiry
    The ‘heartbroken’ daughter of the murdered MP will plead her case to the prime minister" (£)

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/crime/article/david-amess-yvette-cooper-inquiry-murder-h8dlcsvdp

    To quote the BBC article:

    In a letter addressed to Lady Julia Amess and Katie Amess, Yvette Cooper said it was "hard to see how an inquiry would be able to go beyond" killer Ali Harbi Ali's trial and recently published Prevent learning review.

    I rather agree with Cooper. His death was a tragedy, but what would an inquiry do?
  • To quote the BBC article:

    In a letter addressed to Lady Julia Amess and Katie Amess, Yvette Cooper said it was "hard to see how an inquiry would be able to go beyond" killer Ali Harbi Ali's trial and recently published Prevent learning review.

    I rather agree with Cooper. His death was a tragedy, but what would an inquiry do?
    Did the Tories reject one too?
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,871
    *Can be*, that should have said below, before autocorrect
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,505
    Pro_Rata said:

    Oil tanker and cargo ship collision near Hull reported. Very early for details.

    Reported on X to be between Solong and Stella Immaculate, in North Sea off Humber estuary, both ships being abandoned. Tanker said to be well ablaze.

    https://x.com/NAVSkandalen/status/1899062444640678080?t=k1PU0G_UEE3wonD6_uCajQ&s=19
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,461

    To quote the BBC article:

    In a letter addressed to Lady Julia Amess and Katie Amess, Yvette Cooper said it was "hard to see how an inquiry would be able to go beyond" killer Ali Harbi Ali's trial and recently published Prevent learning review.

    I rather agree with Cooper. His death was a tragedy, but what would an inquiry do?
    "What difference, at this point, does it make?"

    AKA "Further enquiries would just upset senior people. Look, all the blame has been placed on some expendable people - what do you want?"
  • CleitophonCleitophon Posts: 561
    edited March 10
    The decline of reform requires a multicausal analysis. Sure internal strife is unpleasant to voters, but voters are also looking at the consequences of the reform style policies in the US and finding that it would not actually appeal to them (their old favourite Truss was at cpac just in time to associate herself brand with yet another economic meltdown and sellout of the working class... remember when the express described her fiscal event as the first true brexit budget. Reality is hammering home the lack of redibility in that fiscal stance). Also, the strong Putin ties are beginning to sit wrong with some populist voters, their cultural heritage just doesnt sit well with aggressors. Finally brexiteerism will have lost 1/6 of its voters to old age by 2029.

    All in all there are multiple structural reasons why the future is bad for right wing populism in the UK.


    https://www.newstatesman.com/comment/2025/03/americans-arent-loving-trump-2-0
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,189

    When the immigration figures come down some voters will return to Labour. Whether it will be enough remains to be seen.
    Nah, I don't think they will. Not in any appreciable numbers. Labour won't be getting credit for any good thing they do from here on in I don't think. The die is cast. Even if 'immigration goes down' that won't mean less migrants, just like 'inflation going down' doesn't mean prices fall.
  • eekeek Posts: 29,397

    You say it’s poorly situated but I don’t recall that it was? When you say poorly situated, you mean too visible?

    Let’s ask a slightly different question then, how visible should a site be? What are the parameters by which you judge a site to be poorly sited?
    Not my job to decide that.

    But I note that you can’t grasp the difference between something horizontal where it’s hidden from view due to existing buildings and something vertical which would be visible over the existing buildings so it’s not going to be worth arguing the issue.

    I’m curious to see how much your keep things as cheap as possible and screw every other consideration applies to other items though
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,831

    Bet he doesn't give them a choice to leave afterwards though.
    They tested that one out in the 1860s
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,257
    Nigelb said:

    Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry (R) signs state law requiring the public display of the Ten Commandments in state public schools:

    “If you want to respect the rule of law, you’ve got to start from the original lawgiver, which was Moses." (2024)

    https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1898775528623989255
    Has he told his leader, the 47th President? He seems to miss out on quite a few.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,505
    Pro_Rata said:

    Reported on X to be between Solong and Stella Immaculate, in North Sea off Humber estuary, both ships being abandoned. Tanker said to be well ablaze.

    https://x.com/NAVSkandalen/status/1899062444640678080?t=k1PU0G_UEE3wonD6_uCajQ&s=19
    Vessel finder locates both vessels about 10 (nautical) miles east of Withernsea.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,142
    edited March 10

    To quote the BBC article:

    In a letter addressed to Lady Julia Amess and Katie Amess, Yvette Cooper said it was "hard to see how an inquiry would be able to go beyond" killer Ali Harbi Ali's trial and recently published Prevent learning review.

    I rather agree with Cooper. His death was a tragedy, but what would an inquiry do?
    The "Prevent learning" review (unfortunate name) doesn't seem very comprehensive. An enquiry with a broader scope would make sense to examine other questions beyond procedural issues.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/prevent-learning-review-sir-david-amess-attack/prevent-learning-review-ali-harbi-ali-accessible
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 5,376
    https://x.com/X0824497343468/status/1899070676058673523

    Tanker carrying Jet A. Less of a problem environmentally than crude?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,257

    The decline of reform requires a multicausal analysis. Sure internal strife is unpleasant to voters, but voters are also looking at the consequences of the reform style policies in the US and finding that it would not actually appeal to them (their old favourite Truss was at cpac just in time to associate herself brand with yet another economic meltdown and sellout of the working class... remember when the express described her fiscal event as the first true brexit budget. Reality is hammering home the lack of redibility in that fiscal stance). Also, the strong Putin ties are beginning to sit wrong with some populist voters, their cultural heritage just doesnt sit well with aggressors. Finally brexiteerism will have lost 1/6 of its voters to old age by 2029.

    All in all there are multiple structural reasons why the future is bad for right wing populism in the UK.


    https://www.newstatesman.com/comment/2025/03/americans-arent-loving-trump-2-0

    We can but hope. Sadly it'll probably be too late for me, but bodes well for my grandchildren.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,249
    Dura_Ace said:

    You can have a modestly successful career in local politics by opposing the construction of absolutely everything by any means necessary. I should know, I've done it. I once got a standing ovation at a parish council by saying I would hang myself from a proposed 5G tower if it got built.
    You might not quite be making the point that you think you are making.
  • eekeek Posts: 29,397

    Nah, I don't think they will. Not in any appreciable numbers. Labour won't be getting credit for any good thing they do from here on in I don't think. The die is cast. Even if 'immigration goes down' that won't mean less migrants, just like 'inflation going down' doesn't mean prices fall.
    The problem with immigration is that it’s 2 different things

    Legal immigration and Illegal immigration and a lot of people focused on the illegal (boat) kind as a proxy for the real story.

    I suspect total immigration will depend on the economy and a willingness for locals to do the type of job that we are currently bringing people in to do.
  • eek said:

    Not my job to decide that.

    But I note that you can’t grasp the difference between something horizontal where it’s hidden from view due to existing buildings and something vertical which would be visible over the existing buildings so it’s not going to be worth arguing the issue.

    I’m curious to see how much your keep things as cheap as possible and screw every other consideration applies to other items though
    Let me ask you a very simple question, what if there aren’t any buildings around the area you want to cover?

    Networks will always try and use existing structures because frankly it’s cheaper.

    I can’t recall if that was the case for the one you said but if they can use them, they will. They probably didn’t because they won’t support the required coverage.

    As I said, I think you want to build masts and sites where you can’t see them. That’s impossible. Panels are massive things, even on a building. Go and stand next to one.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,907

    The decline of reform requires a multicausal analysis. Sure internal strife is unpleasant to voters, but voters are also looking at the consequences of the reform style policies in the US and finding that it would not actually appeal to them (their old favourite Truss was at cpac just in time to associate herself brand with yet another economic meltdown and sellout of the working class... remember when the express described her fiscal event as the first true brexit budget. Reality is hammering home the lack of redibility in that fiscal stance). Also, the strong Putin ties are beginning to sit wrong with some populist voters, their cultural heritage just doesnt sit well with aggressors. Finally brexiteerism will have lost 1/6 of its voters to old age by 2029.

    All in all there are multiple structural reasons why the future is bad for right wing populism in the UK.


    https://www.newstatesman.com/comment/2025/03/americans-arent-loving-trump-2-0

    Decline? Is there any evidence of this. I haven't seen any new opinion polls from the last few days.
  • BatteryCorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorse Posts: 4,664
    edited March 10
    Hidden from view = won’t deliver coverage. I really think you fundamentally don’t understand that if you hide a mast where nobody can see it, it won’t provide much usable coverage.

    If that wasn’t the case, networks would have no need to pick this fight. But that’s reality. They look visible because they have to be. They can try and hide the physical equipment and if they can they do but it’s not as simple as you make out.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,769
    JJ Cullough on the new Canadian Prime Minister, Mark Carney

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PT1922ye1w (21 mins)
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,049

    Has he told his leader, the 47th President? He seems to miss out on quite a few.
    Maybe, as in Animal Farm, Louisianans will wake up from time to time with the nagging suspicion that one of the commandments on the wall has been edited or removed.

    Anyway, as any fule kno, freedom of religion is for my good religion, not your evil cult.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,766

    I know a few people who sacrifice quite a bit for private education for their children. The question is proportion.

    As to how many will switch? - it will take several years to work through the system. Moving a child on the "in years" is very disruptive and hence uncommon. So people will be trying to stay till the end of primary, for example.
    The how many will switch question was a really bad argument against putting VAT on school fees because it was dependent on an outcome that wasn't particularly likely to happen. Those implementing the policy had numbers to back them up, which seem to be panning out.

    All this could be deducted. Almost anyone who could afford £LOTS would be able to afford £LOTS + 20%.

    Should add the other main argument that VAT on school fees was an attack on aspiration was even worse. It implies anyone who can't afford £LOTS doesn't deserve aspiration.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,142
    https://x.com/skynews/status/1899072687646929223

    BREAKING: Russia has accused the UK of being the "main instigator" of global conflict - and has appeared to blame the Second World War on Britain
Sign In or Register to comment.