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.
Hasn't this been suggested as a reason to steer clear of MG, LTi, BYD, Jaecoo, Omoda etc, and not just the EVs. Western gridlock ensues as all these Chinese cars are turned of via GPS. The technology is very basic. There is a guy in Bridgend who operates a 'pay as you drive" lease arrangement. If your monthly payments stop he turns off the car safety, whilst it is stationary at the home address. I can open and close my car windows from New York whilst my car is in T5 at Heathrow, so setting off the ghost immobiliser from Shanghai shouldn't be too difficult.
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.
The polling is not yet showing a decline in Reform voting and whilst they may decline in popularity they remain the NOA party
As for killing off brexit voters by 2029, apart from being unpleasant, you seem to ignore just how much has changed in just a few weeks
It's no longer Brexit, but a complete changed order with the EU struggling to agree defence policy and the obvious need to draw close not only to the UK but nots let us forget Canada, Iceland, Norway and others
The future lies with a new settlement where all these countries come together for defence, including Ukraine , probably in an amended NATO and an opportunity for a completely new trading arrangement that is not membership of the EU but is an association of all those adversely affected by the Trump disaster
Also do not rule out closer cooperation in both defence and trade with Australia, New Zealand, Japan and Asia more generally
The EU that we belonged to has gone, but a golden opportunity has arisen to create something far better and far more comprehensive as long as our politicians can grab the moment
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.
Carney will hopefully get a honeymoon, call a quick election, and win for the Liberals, and my 11/1 bet will come in….
I wonder if it will be longer than the 40 minute honeymoon Starmer got on July 5th. Despite blowing up the US economy and the World during his honeymoon Trump remains remarkably popular, do maybe the North Americans view from a different perspective.
Actually, in the context of the American Revolution, Freedom of Religion was a big part of the reasoning behind the First Amendment. And the provisions for the state being neutral in religion.
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
Quite right too. We could have sued for peace as Halifax stridently demanded. We'd lost a big chunk of the Army in France but still had the strength of the Royal Navy and our airforce.
Herr Hitler would definitely have also chosen to leave the Soviet Union in peace had the war in the west ended in a peace deal. Its obvious really...
Carney will hopefully get a honeymoon, call a quick election, and win for the Liberals, and my 11/1 bet will come in….
My family in Vancouver are very concerned by Trump, not least as the border is 32 miles away, and they expected a Carney landslide but seem cynical of all the politicians
However, it does seem he may win the election which pre Trump was not going to happen
I assume it will depend on when he calls the election and the actual circumstances with Trump at that time
He certainly has a far better chance than Trudeau ever did
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.
Hasn't this been suggested as a reason to steer clear of MG, LTi, BYD, Jaecoo, Omoda etc, and not just the EVs. Western gridlock ensues as all these Chinese cars are turned of via GPS. The technology is very basic. There is a guy in Bridgend who operates a 'pay as you drive" lease arrangement. If your monthly payments stop he turns off the car safety, whilst it is stationary at the home address. I can open and close my car windows from New York whilst my car is in T5 at Heathrow, so setting off the ghost immobiliser from Shanghai shouldn't be too difficult.
Back on topic, one thing the sovereignty loons never seem to have noticed is the extent of our technology sovereignty (not quite nil, but not far off).
Carney will hopefully get a honeymoon, call a quick election, and win for the Liberals, and my 11/1 bet will come in….
I doubt he'll win the election. The Liberals have already been in power for 10 years and most voters will want a change.
A change... to being incorporated into the US?
This election was going to be about a decade of Liberal government and the various excesses of Trudeau. Now? Its do you want to vote for the people that Trump wants you to vote for? How would you like to become Americans instead of Canadians?
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
Quite right too. We could have sued for peace as Halifax stridently demanded. We'd lost a big chunk of the Army in France but still had the strength of the Royal Navy and our airforce.
Herr Hitler would definitely have also chosen to leave the Soviet Union in peace had the war in the west ended in a peace deal. Its obvious really...
We could probably even had got a share of Poland, rather than Germany and the Soviet Union just partitioning it between them.
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
Oh dear. How long before your Orange idol starts to parrot that one?
That said, WW2 was partly our fault if you view the world the way Trump does. I suspect he thinks Churchill should have "done a deal" with the Nazis
I'm sure that Trump would blame the Jews for provoking the Nazis into gassing them.
“There’s a guy in London. Very smart guy. They call him ‘Ken’. He says they could have done a deal. They could have had the Golan Heights but instead they had to wait all that time for me to give them Golan.”
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
Oh dear. How long before your Orange idol starts to parrot that one?
That said, WW2 was partly our fault if you view the world the way Trump does. I suspect he thinks Churchill should have "done a deal" with the Nazis
I'm sure that Trump would blame the Jews for provoking the Nazis into gassing them.
They should have done a deal
It would have been a big, beautiful deal for Britain to relocate all Jews to Madagascar. Hitler and Stalin would have carved up the world, and that guy Edward VIII, he was really great, he would have kept Britain great.
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
Quite right too. We could have sued for peace as Halifax stridently demanded. We'd lost a big chunk of the Army in France but still had the strength of the Royal Navy and our airforce.
Herr Hitler would definitely have also chosen to leave the Soviet Union in peace had the war in the west ended in a peace deal. Its obvious really...
We could probably even had got a share of Poland, rather than Germany and the Soviet Union just partitioning it between them.
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
What does JD say ?
God alone knows. Come on, this is madness on stilts. Hitler wanted living space in the east. That's you my Russian friends. With France and Britain at war he had no choice but to take over France and the low countries so that he was free to do what he actually wanted - Russia.
Which bit of WWII is Vlad blaming on us? Because we started a war in September 1939? OK, lets say that we'd turned the Munich agreement into a full blown Eden-Ribbentrop pact and there was no war in the west. How does that save Russia from a version of Barbarossa?
Or is Vlad suggesting that the only reason Barbarossa happened is because we didn't fight hard enough in 1940? But if so how does that square up with us being the instigator?
Its laughable. But MAGA will probably find a way to agree with it.
Carney will hopefully get a honeymoon, call a quick election, and win for the Liberals, and my 11/1 bet will come in….
My family in Vancouver are very concerned by Trump, not least as the border is 32 miles away, and they expected a Carney landslide but seem cynical of all the politicians
However, it does seem he may win the election which pre Trump was not going to happen
I assume it will depend on when he calls the election and the actual circumstances with Trump at that time
He certainly has a far better chance than Trudeau ever did
To get to Vancouver though they’d need to march through Washington state or sail / fly from West coast ports where the likely (hopeful) anti Trump mutiny would be underway. Toronto via Southern Ontario, and the prairie states from red strongholds in the US would be easier first targets.
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
Quite right too. We could have sued for peace as Halifax stridently demanded. We'd lost a big chunk of the Army in France but still had the strength of the Royal Navy and our airforce.
Herr Hitler would definitely have also chosen to leave the Soviet Union in peace had the war in the west ended in a peace deal. Its obvious really...
We could probably even had got a share of Poland, rather than Germany and the Soviet Union just partitioning it between them.
Halifax actually thought that, after the Battle of France, we should apply the strategy that the British government planned, if the Germans had broken through in WWI and reached the Channel.
A neutral peace and build up the Navy.
The slight problem was that the Nazis were far worse than Kaiser Fuckwit and chums.
My guess is that such a peace would have held for a while. Hitler wasn't especially interested in conquering the UK. The Channel meant that invasion was problematic, to say the least.
The real issue (apart from morality) was after Hitler finished War! War! with everyone else.
Trump will NOT resume military aid to Ukraine until Zelensky leaves the presidency — BILD
Fucking outrageous. Americans should all hang their heads in shame. They need to atone for a generation at least for inflicting this traitorous moron upon the world.
@RochdalePioneers I do work in the industry and have worked with Starlink and others on deploying their technology to sites without other backhaul options. So I am talking purely from experience.
As I already said, I am not a Tesla or Starlink hater. I literally held Tesla stock for over five years, did very well out of it. Believed in what Elon and co were doing. I sold when he started becoming unhinged.
Nothing I have said is wrong.
I said the latency is terrible. It is. You posted one anecdotal example. I told you it is not consistent. It isn’t.
You said FTTP is not ubiquitous. It will be. It will cover 99%+ of premises by 2030. Will Starlink have a place to cover the minority of premises left behind. Yes but it is not a replacement.
Can it work on trains. I didn’t say it couldn’t, I said it was inferior in every way to trackside infrastructure and doesn’t work where there are obstructions. I also pointed out that Network Rail already has assessed it’s a non-starter and hence went for DAS and other trackside 4G/5G neutral host instead.
I have no issues with Starlink beyond pointing out its technical deficiencies. Now to be fair that is just the case for OneWeb which if you’d said that, I would have said the same things.
So what do you want from me? You said that Starlink was useless for business use because the latency was terrible and wouldn't work for meetings. I'm literally sat on a Teams meeting as I type this. I've just run speed test several times. Consistently 30ish MS latency and 100MB down speed.
I can't get maybe a third of that from 4G. There is no 5G. And FTTC broadband was woefully inconsistent where sitting in meetings like this I would get thrown out as it buffered. I have never had any buffer issues with Starlink.
So ok, from your technical perspective "latency is terrible". From mine it is great. You insisted that I can't do what I am doing. But I can...
I forget what BCH does for a living but I remember all his wailing about not being allowed to put phone masts anywhere and everywhere. So I assume, based solely on that and his current obsession with dissing Starlink at every opportunity, that he has some connection with the mobile industry.
I can diss OneWeb too if you’d like. It’s equally shite at scale.
Do you oppose my suggestion that planning should be liberalised especially for key infrastructure?
In the way you suggest, yes.
You are one of those who apparently knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
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.
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.
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
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
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!
Good Morning!
I see the Graun - or at least one columnist - is today in agreement with BigG.
I am very busy at the moment, so can somebody write a thread comparing Mark Carney to The Earl of Home.
I don't recall that Harold Wilson - having seen off his Earlness - then got on the phone to Moscow to invite them to take us over as the next Soviet republic.
If Carney is Home, then the Canadian Tory is Wilson. And the Canadian Tories need to decide if they want to stay a sovereign nation or not - being strongly promoted by the guy who wants your country can't be good for electoral chances.
@RochdalePioneers I do work in the industry and have worked with Starlink and others on deploying their technology to sites without other backhaul options. So I am talking purely from experience.
As I already said, I am not a Tesla or Starlink hater. I literally held Tesla stock for over five years, did very well out of it. Believed in what Elon and co were doing. I sold when he started becoming unhinged.
Nothing I have said is wrong.
I said the latency is terrible. It is. You posted one anecdotal example. I told you it is not consistent. It isn’t.
You said FTTP is not ubiquitous. It will be. It will cover 99%+ of premises by 2030. Will Starlink have a place to cover the minority of premises left behind. Yes but it is not a replacement.
Can it work on trains. I didn’t say it couldn’t, I said it was inferior in every way to trackside infrastructure and doesn’t work where there are obstructions. I also pointed out that Network Rail already has assessed it’s a non-starter and hence went for DAS and other trackside 4G/5G neutral host instead.
I have no issues with Starlink beyond pointing out its technical deficiencies. Now to be fair that is just the case for OneWeb which if you’d said that, I would have said the same things.
So what do you want from me? You said that Starlink was useless for business use because the latency was terrible and wouldn't work for meetings. I'm literally sat on a Teams meeting as I type this. I've just run speed test several times. Consistently 30ish MS latency and 100MB down speed.
I can't get maybe a third of that from 4G. There is no 5G. And FTTC broadband was woefully inconsistent where sitting in meetings like this I would get thrown out as it buffered. I have never had any buffer issues with Starlink.
So ok, from your technical perspective "latency is terrible". From mine it is great. You insisted that I can't do what I am doing. But I can...
I forget what BCH does for a living but I remember all his wailing about not being allowed to put phone masts anywhere and everywhere. So I assume, based solely on that and his current obsession with dissing Starlink at every opportunity, that he has some connection with the mobile industry.
I can diss OneWeb too if you’d like. It’s equally shite at scale.
Do you oppose my suggestion that planning should be liberalised especially for key infrastructure?
In the way you suggest, yes.
You are one of those who apparently knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
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.
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.
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
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
People object to them wherever they are placed. That’s literally the point I am making.
And pylons. If you are in the infrastructure game, Nimby's are a great way of extending the life of your core technologies, increasing prices due to 'capacity' issues and preserving your income stream for a long time.
Starlink (other products are available) is no doubt good but it is up against the sunk costs of infrastructure providers - and any legislation they have managed to sneak in to nobble emerging technologies.
@RochdalePioneers I do work in the industry and have worked with Starlink and others on deploying their technology to sites without other backhaul options. So I am talking purely from experience.
As I already said, I am not a Tesla or Starlink hater. I literally held Tesla stock for over five years, did very well out of it. Believed in what Elon and co were doing. I sold when he started becoming unhinged.
Nothing I have said is wrong.
I said the latency is terrible. It is. You posted one anecdotal example. I told you it is not consistent. It isn’t.
You said FTTP is not ubiquitous. It will be. It will cover 99%+ of premises by 2030. Will Starlink have a place to cover the minority of premises left behind. Yes but it is not a replacement.
Can it work on trains. I didn’t say it couldn’t, I said it was inferior in every way to trackside infrastructure and doesn’t work where there are obstructions. I also pointed out that Network Rail already has assessed it’s a non-starter and hence went for DAS and other trackside 4G/5G neutral host instead.
I have no issues with Starlink beyond pointing out its technical deficiencies. Now to be fair that is just the case for OneWeb which if you’d said that, I would have said the same things.
So what do you want from me? You said that Starlink was useless for business use because the latency was terrible and wouldn't work for meetings. I'm literally sat on a Teams meeting as I type this. I've just run speed test several times. Consistently 30ish MS latency and 100MB down speed.
I can't get maybe a third of that from 4G. There is no 5G. And FTTC broadband was woefully inconsistent where sitting in meetings like this I would get thrown out as it buffered. I have never had any buffer issues with Starlink.
So ok, from your technical perspective "latency is terrible". From mine it is great. You insisted that I can't do what I am doing. But I can...
I forget what BCH does for a living but I remember all his wailing about not being allowed to put phone masts anywhere and everywhere. So I assume, based solely on that and his current obsession with dissing Starlink at every opportunity, that he has some connection with the mobile industry.
I can diss OneWeb too if you’d like. It’s equally shite at scale.
Do you oppose my suggestion that planning should be liberalised especially for key infrastructure?
In the way you suggest, yes.
You are one of those who apparently knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
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.
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.
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.
Oh I wouldn't even try to. But you are like those extremists who claim we should leave the ECHR because some stupid decisions are made in its name, or scrap welfare because some people abuse the system. The way to deal with that is better guidance and better enforcement, not just scrapping the whole system. The system works very well 99.9% of the time. You just want to highlight the cases where it doesn't because you hate the idea of anyone stopping what you want to have happen.
If 99 people wanted something stopped and you wanted it to happen you would still think it was an unwarrented infringement of your rights.
OK, Coalition of the Willing - you now know what you have to do.
Zelenskyy can confirm to the Saudis this week that given a few more months, they will have taken out the necessary oil storage and refining capacity to take RUssian oil off world markets.
Assume that will provide a welcome boost to Saudi oil revenues...
I am very busy at the moment, so can somebody write a thread comparing Mark Carney to The Earl of Home.
I don't recall that Harold Wilson - having seen off his Earlness - then got on the phone to Moscow to invite them to take us over as the next Soviet republic.
If Carney is Home, then the Canadian Tory is Wilson. And the Canadian Tories need to decide if they want to stay a sovereign nation or not - being strongly promoted by the guy who wants your country can't be good for electoral chances.
In fairness, that's not really the case. Polieviere has come out very strongly against Trump (slow off the mark, mind), but other Tories, most notably Doug Ford (the most powerful Tory, as PM of Ontario) was first up. And has just won re-election on that basis. Trump has been rude about Pierre, too. So it isn't true that the Tories are pro-Trump. However. All pro-Trumpists vote Tory.
Trump will NOT resume military aid to Ukraine until Zelensky leaves the presidency — BILD
Fucking outrageous. Americans should all hang their heads in shame. They need to atone for a generation at least for inflicting this traitorous moron upon the world.
It does reflect very poorly on 49% of Americans, who knowingly elected an evil man, simply in order to “own the Libtards.”
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.
Hasn't this been suggested as a reason to steer clear of MG, LTi, BYD, Jaecoo, Omoda etc, and not just the EVs. Western gridlock ensues as all these Chinese cars are turned of via GPS. The technology is very basic. There is a guy in Bridgend who operates a 'pay as you drive" lease arrangement. If your monthly payments stop he turns off the car safety, whilst it is stationary at the home address. I can open and close my car windows from New York whilst my car is in T5 at Heathrow, so setting off the ghost immobiliser from Shanghai shouldn't be too difficult.
It's a reason why internet connectivity to cars should have been banned by the regulators at the outset - it's far too dangerous a technology to have been allowed out into the wild.
It's probably ten years since someone demonstrated that you could attack a Jeep model across the Internet via the infotainment system merely by knowing it's IP address, and take remote control of the throttle, brakes and steering. That should have been a massive wake-up call, but it wasn't.
@RochdalePioneers I do work in the industry and have worked with Starlink and others on deploying their technology to sites without other backhaul options. So I am talking purely from experience.
As I already said, I am not a Tesla or Starlink hater. I literally held Tesla stock for over five years, did very well out of it. Believed in what Elon and co were doing. I sold when he started becoming unhinged.
Nothing I have said is wrong.
I said the latency is terrible. It is. You posted one anecdotal example. I told you it is not consistent. It isn’t.
You said FTTP is not ubiquitous. It will be. It will cover 99%+ of premises by 2030. Will Starlink have a place to cover the minority of premises left behind. Yes but it is not a replacement.
Can it work on trains. I didn’t say it couldn’t, I said it was inferior in every way to trackside infrastructure and doesn’t work where there are obstructions. I also pointed out that Network Rail already has assessed it’s a non-starter and hence went for DAS and other trackside 4G/5G neutral host instead.
I have no issues with Starlink beyond pointing out its technical deficiencies. Now to be fair that is just the case for OneWeb which if you’d said that, I would have said the same things.
So what do you want from me? You said that Starlink was useless for business use because the latency was terrible and wouldn't work for meetings. I'm literally sat on a Teams meeting as I type this. I've just run speed test several times. Consistently 30ish MS latency and 100MB down speed.
I can't get maybe a third of that from 4G. There is no 5G. And FTTC broadband was woefully inconsistent where sitting in meetings like this I would get thrown out as it buffered. I have never had any buffer issues with Starlink.
So ok, from your technical perspective "latency is terrible". From mine it is great. You insisted that I can't do what I am doing. But I can...
I forget what BCH does for a living but I remember all his wailing about not being allowed to put phone masts anywhere and everywhere. So I assume, based solely on that and his current obsession with dissing Starlink at every opportunity, that he has some connection with the mobile industry.
I can diss OneWeb too if you’d like. It’s equally shite at scale.
Do you oppose my suggestion that planning should be liberalised especially for key infrastructure?
In the way you suggest, yes.
You are one of those who apparently knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
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.
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.
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.
Oh I wouldn't even try to. But you are like those extremists who claim we should leave the ECHR because some stupid decisions are made in its name, or scrap welfare because some people abuse the system. The way to deal with that is better guidance and better enforcement, not just scrapping the whole system. The system works very well 99.9% of the time. You just want to highlight the cases where it doesn't because you hate the idea of anyone stopping what you want to have happen.
If 99 people wanted something stopped and you wanted it to happen you would still think it was an unwarrented infringement of your rights.
The ECHR *problem* is particularly stupid - just see how the French deal with it.
Entirely predictable. There is, of course, zero guarantee of its being resumed even if Zelensky resigned.
Trump has learned from his mate in the Kremlin how to negotiate. Get a concession, ask for more; repeat.
(And they apparently have shared aims, too.)
The only way to deal is to say no.
It makes GOP claims that they’re the real defenders of democracy even more laughable.
Who do they propose takes Zelenskyy’s place? Medvedchuk? Yanukovich?
The Chocolate King maybe. Who has probably been in contact with Team DJT.
I wonder where Z will end up. There is a decent chance he'll be killed if he stays in Ukraine. I could see a heel turn where he ends up back in Moscow. It's that or the UK and probably presenting HIGNFY and sniffing his brew for polonium.
Carney will hopefully get a honeymoon, call a quick election, and win for the Liberals, and my 11/1 bet will come in….
My family in Vancouver are very concerned by Trump, not least as the border is 32 miles away, and they expected a Carney landslide but seem cynical of all the politicians
However, it does seem he may win the election which pre Trump was not going to happen
I assume it will depend on when he calls the election and the actual circumstances with Trump at that time
He certainly has a far better chance than Trudeau ever did
To get to Vancouver though they’d need to march through Washington state or sail / fly from West coast ports where the likely (hopeful) anti Trump mutiny would be underway. Toronto via Southern Ontario, and the prairie states from red strongholds in the US would be easier first targets.
Isn't this a ridiculous conversation but Trump and his bullies unfortunately are very real
I am very busy at the moment, so can somebody write a thread comparing Mark Carney to The Earl of Home.
I don't recall that Harold Wilson - having seen off his Earlness - then got on the phone to Moscow to invite them to take us over as the next Soviet republic.
If Carney is Home, then the Canadian Tory is Wilson. And the Canadian Tories need to decide if they want to stay a sovereign nation or not - being strongly promoted by the guy who wants your country can't be good for electoral chances.
In fairness, that's not really the case. Polieviere has come out very strongly against Trump (slow off the mark, mind), but other Tories, most notably Doug Ford (the most powerful Tory, as PM of Ontario) was first up. And has just won re-election on that basis. Trump has been rude about Pierre, too. So it isn't true that the Tories are pro-Trump. However. All pro-Trumpists vote Tory.
Poilievre isn't MAGA but a fair few in his party are and need dealing with.
More importantly, Poilievre has built up a powerful message over the past year or so about Canada being broken, which isn't so compelling anymore. So he needs to pivot to a new message.
Having said that the numbers who have made the decision to vote Tory are probably greater than the number who weren't at all keen on the Liberals but think they need a vote in this time of crisis.
@RochdalePioneers I do work in the industry and have worked with Starlink and others on deploying their technology to sites without other backhaul options. So I am talking purely from experience.
As I already said, I am not a Tesla or Starlink hater. I literally held Tesla stock for over five years, did very well out of it. Believed in what Elon and co were doing. I sold when he started becoming unhinged.
Nothing I have said is wrong.
I said the latency is terrible. It is. You posted one anecdotal example. I told you it is not consistent. It isn’t.
You said FTTP is not ubiquitous. It will be. It will cover 99%+ of premises by 2030. Will Starlink have a place to cover the minority of premises left behind. Yes but it is not a replacement.
Can it work on trains. I didn’t say it couldn’t, I said it was inferior in every way to trackside infrastructure and doesn’t work where there are obstructions. I also pointed out that Network Rail already has assessed it’s a non-starter and hence went for DAS and other trackside 4G/5G neutral host instead.
I have no issues with Starlink beyond pointing out its technical deficiencies. Now to be fair that is just the case for OneWeb which if you’d said that, I would have said the same things.
So what do you want from me? You said that Starlink was useless for business use because the latency was terrible and wouldn't work for meetings. I'm literally sat on a Teams meeting as I type this. I've just run speed test several times. Consistently 30ish MS latency and 100MB down speed.
I can't get maybe a third of that from 4G. There is no 5G. And FTTC broadband was woefully inconsistent where sitting in meetings like this I would get thrown out as it buffered. I have never had any buffer issues with Starlink.
So ok, from your technical perspective "latency is terrible". From mine it is great. You insisted that I can't do what I am doing. But I can...
I forget what BCH does for a living but I remember all his wailing about not being allowed to put phone masts anywhere and everywhere. So I assume, based solely on that and his current obsession with dissing Starlink at every opportunity, that he has some connection with the mobile industry.
I can diss OneWeb too if you’d like. It’s equally shite at scale.
Do you oppose my suggestion that planning should be liberalised especially for key infrastructure?
In the way you suggest, yes.
You are one of those who apparently knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
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.
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.
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
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
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!
Good Morning!
I see the Graun - or at least one columnist - is today in agreement with BigG.
Watch out for any delay in Europe receiving this for the F35.
If/when the TR-3 software package that enables full combat capabilities is released **this year**, weapons like JSM on the Norwegian fleet and SDB-II on F-35B/C will be fully cleared, amongst other capabilities unless those faces further delays... https://x.com/Doha104p3/status/1899084721218596891
About 15 years ago I was on a Norwegian rig in absolute calm seas - mirror seas we used to call them. Every rig has a standby vessel to aid in emergencies and ours spent the day doing square circuits of the rig. chug along until they were a couple of hundred yards north of the rig, turn 90 degrees. Chug West, turn 90 degres chugs south etc.
At about 3pm on this glorious afternoon the captain for some inexplicable reason turned too early and ploughed straight into one of he legs of the rig. Slightly damaged the rig and severely damaged the standby boat. Never did find out why. Visibility was miles and miles. And a rig is a bloody big thing to miss (or not miss), especially when your job is to just sail around it for 4 weeks at a time.
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
I said here a looooong time ago that Russia's blaming of 'perfidious Albion' for everything was bad news, and left the way for Russia to actually get back into the USA's good graces and end up shafting us. Even though it has patently been us acting under US auspices, not the other way round.
UK leaders have been happy to make the most intemperate statements of all the major powers on 'Putin' (he doesn't get a first name, like 'Assad'), just like they've been happy to make the biggest environmental commitments on our behalf - because they want to show off to the room.
It's all personal with Trump. Nothing to do with national interest, policy, strategy. Zelensky failed to debauch himself when Trump was after dirt on Biden, and this is payback.
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
I said here a looooong time ago that Russia's blaming of 'perfidious Albion' for everything was bad news, and left the way for Russia to actually get back into the USA's good graces and end up shafting us. Even though it has patently been us acting under US auspices, not the other way round.
UK leaders have been happy to make the most intemperate statements of all the major powers on 'Putin' (he doesn't get a first name, like 'Assad'), just like they've been happy to make the biggest environmental commitments on our behalf - because they want to show off to the room.
Potentially a technical failure giving rise to loss of control over steering? It does seem remarkable given there are presumably various backups.
Satellite image does suggest it might have been foggy this morning. It was foggy inland in the Flatlands and satellite images show the western North Sea was also affected.
Looks like the Solong was entirely at fault according to what I've seen on X. Stena Immaculate anchored I think judging by it's (lack of) speed.
I don't know how much stall to set by the exact radar details on ship orientations etc, but it seems to show Solong, coming from the North, t-boned the Immaculate at fair speed and at mid ship.
It's all personal with Trump. Nothing to do with national interest, policy, strategy. Zelensky failed to debauch himself when Trump was after dirt on Biden, and this is payback.
Yeah, what a fuck up that was. I hope Ukraine thinks Hunter Biden was worth it.
Carney will hopefully get a honeymoon, call a quick election, and win for the Liberals, and my 11/1 bet will come in….
My family in Vancouver are very concerned by Trump, not least as the border is 32 miles away, and they expected a Carney landslide but seem cynical of all the politicians
However, it does seem he may win the election which pre Trump was not going to happen
I assume it will depend on when he calls the election and the actual circumstances with Trump at that time
He certainly has a far better chance than Trudeau ever did
There certainly won't be a Carney landslide. If he wins it'll be by a small margin, probably a minority.
"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" (£)
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?"
What failing by senior people do you think would be exposed by an inquiry?
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
I said here a looooong time ago that Russia's blaming of 'perfidious Albion' for everything was bad news, and left the way for Russia to actually get back into the USA's good graces and end up shafting us. Even though it has patently been us acting under US auspices, not the other way round.
UK leaders have been happy to make the most intemperate statements of all the major powers on 'Putin' (he doesn't get a first name, like 'Assad'), just like they've been happy to make the biggest environmental commitments on our behalf - because they want to show off to the room.
No the Russians have always been weirdly obsessed with the UK and ts supposed unlimited global reach. The Iranians have this too. I don't think it's down to anything we actually do, certainly not in the present or recent past.
It's all personal with Trump. Nothing to do with national interest, policy, strategy. Zelensky failed to debauch himself when Trump was after dirt on Biden, and this is payback.
And the future of the world turned on that payback.
Europe is working out how to rapidly rearm themselves and keep Ukraine’s fight going while working out what else has changed now the most fundamental part of for the past 80 years international politics has disappeared overnight
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
I said here a looooong time ago that Russia's blaming of 'perfidious Albion' for everything was bad news, and left the way for Russia to actually get back into the USA's good graces and end up shafting us. Even though it has patently been us acting under US auspices, not the other way round.
UK leaders have been happy to make the most intemperate statements of all the major powers on 'Putin' (he doesn't get a first name, like 'Assad'), just like they've been happy to make the biggest environmental commitments on our behalf - because they want to show off to the room.
No the Russians have always been weirdly obsessed with the UK and ts supposed unlimited global reach. The Iranians have this too. I don't think it's down to anything we actually do, certainly not in the present or recent past.
It's all personal with Trump. Nothing to do with national interest, policy, strategy. Zelensky failed to debauch himself when Trump was after dirt on Biden, and this is payback.
Trump would have throusands of deaths on his conscience for that.
About 15 years ago I was on a Norwegian rig in absolute calm seas - mirror seas we used to call them. Every rig has a standby vessel to aid in emergencies and ours spent the day doing square circuits of the rig. chug along until they were a couple of hundred yards north of the rig, turn 90 degrees. Chug West, turn 90 degres chugs south etc.
At about 3pm on this glorious afternoon the captain for some inexplicable reason turned too early and ploughed straight into one of he legs of the rig. Slightly damaged the rig and severely damaged the standby boat. Never did find out why. Visibility was miles and miles. And a rig is a bloody big thing to miss (or not miss), especially when your job is to just sail around it for 4 weeks at a time.
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
I said here a looooong time ago that Russia's blaming of 'perfidious Albion' for everything was bad news, and left the way for Russia to actually get back into the USA's good graces and end up shafting us. Even though it has patently been us acting under US auspices, not the other way round.
UK leaders have been happy to make the most intemperate statements of all the major powers on 'Putin' (he doesn't get a first name, like 'Assad'), just like they've been happy to make the biggest environmental commitments on our behalf - because they want to show off to the room.
I am struggling to understand your point
I think his point is that we should surrender to Putin.
"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" (£)
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?"
What failing by senior people do you think would be exposed by an inquiry?
The same as all the other scandals - they were so busy polishing their portfolios of 6 figure jobs that they hadn't the time, knowledge or actual inclination to actually fucking do any of them.
At least that's their excuse.
"I know so little about the organisation I run, I can hardly be expected to know about the blatant fraud/illegality/fuckwittery going on. Actually read memos? Next you'll be asking me to read the accounts!"
I think if people want to get insight into how Trump thinks and works they need to watch the Mr McMahon documentary on Netflix. Trump is a huge fan of WWE and the president persona really came into being during WWE when I think he realised just how powerful having that larger than life personality was with the audiences.
I've been watching it with the wife and you can really see how much Trump has taken from the world of WWE into his approach to politics.
Carney will hopefully get a honeymoon, call a quick election, and win for the Liberals, and my 11/1 bet will come in….
My family in Vancouver are very concerned by Trump, not least as the border is 32 miles away, and they expected a Carney landslide but seem cynical of all the politicians
However, it does seem he may win the election which pre Trump was not going to happen
I assume it will depend on when he calls the election and the actual circumstances with Trump at that time
He certainly has a far better chance than Trudeau ever did
There certainly won't be a Carney landslide. If he wins it'll be by a small margin, probably a minority.
The landslide was last night win for Carney by his party members text to me by my Canadian daughter in law in real time
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
I said here a looooong time ago that Russia's blaming of 'perfidious Albion' for everything was bad news, and left the way for Russia to actually get back into the USA's good graces and end up shafting us. Even though it has patently been us acting under US auspices, not the other way round.
UK leaders have been happy to make the most intemperate statements of all the major powers on 'Putin' (he doesn't get a first name, like 'Assad'), just like they've been happy to make the biggest environmental commitments on our behalf - because they want to show off to the room.
They’ve been blaming perfidious Albion since the year dot. Back in 2014 Lavrov was claiming Britain is Russia’s most implacable geopolitical enemy, which rather undermined his other comment that were a tiny island nobody cares about.
When they “unveiled” their magic giant nuclear torpedo guess which country they decided they would drown in a vast tsunami. Remember too which country is their preferred location for the execution of dissidents.
Looks like the Solong was entirely at fault according to what I've seen on X. Stena Immaculate anchored I think judging by it's (lack of) speed.
I don't know how much stall to set by the exact radar details on ship orientations etc, but it seems to show Solong, coming from the North, t-boned the Immaculate at fair speed and at mid ship.
Here's the link. The scale marker after the last zoom in is about 500m, so Solong travels very roughly 3km in around 10 minutes before collision, so perhaps about 10 knots.
"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" (£)
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?"
What failing by senior people do you think would be exposed by an inquiry?
The same as all the other scandals - they were so busy polishing their portfolios of 6 figure jobs that they hadn't the time, knowledge or actual inclination to actually fucking do any of them.
At least that's their excuse.
"I know so little about the organisation I run, I can hardly be expected to know about the blatant fraud/illegality/fuckwittery going on. Actually read memos? Next you'll be asking me to read the accounts!"
Firstly, you generally argue that inquiries generally fail to go after such people, so why do you think an inquiry in this case would?
And secondly, is there some particular person or inaction that you think is applicable in this case?
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
I said here a looooong time ago that Russia's blaming of 'perfidious Albion' for everything was bad news, and left the way for Russia to actually get back into the USA's good graces and end up shafting us. Even though it has patently been us acting under US auspices, not the other way round.
UK leaders have been happy to make the most intemperate statements of all the major powers on 'Putin' (he doesn't get a first name, like 'Assad'), just like they've been happy to make the biggest environmental commitments on our behalf - because they want to show off to the room.
They’ve been blaming perfidious Albion since the year dot. Back in 2014 Lavrov was claiming Britain is Russia’s most implacable geopolitical enemy, which rather undermined his other comment that were a tiny island nobody cares about.
When they “unveiled” their magic giant nuclear torpedo guess which country they decided they would drown in a vast tsunami. Remember too which country is their preferred location for the execution of dissidents.
Elections in Greenland tomorrow, will a strong focus on Trunp's declaration of his intent to "take over" the country, supposedly for the sake of US security. How long before the mini-Trump in Argentina applies the same logic to the Falkland Islands?
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.
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.
Subsequently, the vote in favour of building a 5G tower was carried, with only one dissenter.
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
I said here a looooong time ago that Russia's blaming of 'perfidious Albion' for everything was bad news, and left the way for Russia to actually get back into the USA's good graces and end up shafting us. Even though it has patently been us acting under US auspices, not the other way round.
UK leaders have been happy to make the most intemperate statements of all the major powers on 'Putin' (he doesn't get a first name, like 'Assad'), just like they've been happy to make the biggest environmental commitments on our behalf - because they want to show off to the room.
They’ve been blaming perfidious Albion since the year dot. Back in 2014 Lavrov was claiming Britain is Russia’s most implacable geopolitical enemy, which rather undermined his other comment that were a tiny island nobody cares about.
When they “unveiled” their magic giant nuclear torpedo guess which country they decided they would drown in a vast tsunami. Remember too which country is their preferred location for the execution of dissidents.
If ever we needed a signal to start decoupling our nuclear deterrent from the US then we've clearly just been given one.
We can't be unsure as to whether we can rely on Lockheed to maintain our missiles when Trump is buying whatever the Russkis are selling.
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
I said here a looooong time ago that Russia's blaming of 'perfidious Albion' for everything was bad news, and left the way for Russia to actually get back into the USA's good graces and end up shafting us. Even though it has patently been us acting under US auspices, not the other way round.
UK leaders have been happy to make the most intemperate statements of all the major powers on 'Putin' (he doesn't get a first name, like 'Assad'), just like they've been happy to make the biggest environmental commitments on our behalf - because they want to show off to the room.
No the Russians have always been weirdly obsessed with the UK and ts supposed unlimited global reach. The Iranians have this too. I don't think it's down to anything we actually do, certainly not in the present or recent past.
Hence Lebedev being present for Johnson's decision on Brexit, thr Kremlin openly welcoming Lebedev"s peerage, and Putin personally honouring the Russian Ambassador of the time.
Comments
As for killing off brexit voters by 2029, apart from being unpleasant, you seem to ignore just how much has changed in just a few weeks
It's no longer Brexit, but a complete changed order with the EU struggling to agree defence policy and the obvious need to draw close not only to the UK but nots let us forget Canada, Iceland, Norway and others
The future lies with a new settlement where all these countries come together for defence, including Ukraine , probably in an amended NATO and an opportunity for a completely new trading arrangement that is not membership of the EU but is an association of all those adversely affected by the Trump disaster
Also do not rule out closer cooperation in both defence and trade with Australia, New Zealand, Japan and Asia more generally
The EU that we belonged to has gone, but a golden opportunity has arisen to create something far better and far more comprehensive as long as our politicians can grab the moment
That said, WW2 was partly our fault if you view the world the way Trump does. I suspect he thinks Churchill should have "done a deal" with the Nazis
Which is being trashed, now, of course.
Herr Hitler would definitely have also chosen to leave the Soviet Union in peace had the war in the west ended in a peace deal. Its obvious really...
However, it does seem he may win the election which pre Trump was not going to happen
I assume it will depend on when he calls the election and the actual circumstances with Trump at that time
He certainly has a far better chance than Trudeau ever did
This election was going to be about a decade of Liberal government and the various excesses of Trudeau. Now? Its do you want to vote for the people that Trump wants you to vote for? How would you like to become Americans instead of Canadians?
Trump will NOT resume military aid to Ukraine until Zelensky leaves the presidency — BILD
Which bit of WWII is Vlad blaming on us? Because we started a war in September 1939? OK, lets say that we'd turned the Munich agreement into a full blown Eden-Ribbentrop pact and there was no war in the west. How does that save Russia from a version of Barbarossa?
Or is Vlad suggesting that the only reason Barbarossa happened is because we didn't fight hard enough in 1940? But if so how does that square up with us being the instigator?
Its laughable. But MAGA will probably find a way to agree with it.
@WarMonitor3
·
20m
Trump will not resume military aid to Ukraine until Zelensky leaves office-BILD
Crazy…
https://x.com/WarMonitor3/status/1899074628070363223
A neutral peace and build up the Navy.
The slight problem was that the Nazis were far worse than Kaiser Fuckwit and chums.
My guess is that such a peace would have held for a while. Hitler wasn't especially interested in conquering the UK. The Channel meant that invasion was problematic, to say the least.
The real issue (apart from morality) was after Hitler finished War! War! with everyone else.
I see the Graun - or at least one columnist - is today in agreement with BigG.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/10/smartphones-steal-film-extra-device-screen
338 has it's weekly update as 156-143 seats to the Tories. That's 14 short of a majority.*
*Canada has no experience of coalition government. The Party with most seats forms the government. Minority if necessary.
If Carney is Home, then the Canadian Tory is Wilson. And the Canadian Tories need to decide if they want to stay a sovereign nation or not - being strongly promoted by the guy who wants your country can't be good for electoral chances.
Starlink (other products are available) is no doubt good but it is up against the sunk costs of infrastructure providers - and any legislation they have managed to sneak in to nobble emerging technologies.
If 99 people wanted something stopped and you wanted it to happen you would still think it was an unwarrented infringement of your rights.
There is, of course, zero guarantee of its being resumed even if Zelensky resigned.
Trump has learned from his mate in the Kremlin how to negotiate. Get a concession, ask for more; repeat.
(And they apparently have shared aims, too.)
The only way to deal is to say no.
Zelenskyy can confirm to the Saudis this week that given a few more months, they will have taken out the necessary oil storage and refining capacity to take RUssian oil off world markets.
Assume that will provide a welcome boost to Saudi oil revenues...
Both were outsiders.
Neither had sought the job. Both arrived to find a complete mess.
Both had awkward public images.
The British public was, understandably, sceptical.
Both were accused of not really understanding the 'common man.'
Both inherited situations where their predecessors had made a complete hash of things.
Both tried to bring stability — and both had mixed results.
Both were seen as transitional figures.
Both were haunted by their predecessors.
Both had oddly short stints despite being critical figures.
Both men did the job. Neither man is remembered for it.
Both, if we’re honest, never quite felt British enough.
In the end, both retreated to what they really were: Carney: A finance guy; Home: A feudal lord.
Trump has been rude about Pierre, too.
So it isn't true that the Tories are pro-Trump. However. All pro-Trumpists vote Tory.
Who do they propose takes Zelenskyy’s place? Medvedchuk? Yanukovich?
The King offers Commonwealth membership to Ukraine, as Trump arrives.
There are habitats along this coast that really don't need an oil spill though - Spurn Point for example.
It will also cause trouble for Immingham.
Hit whilst at anchor? That's really poor. Any Russians on board MV Solong?
There's also the matter of the fuel oil for the ship.
Visibility good apparently
It's probably ten years since someone demonstrated that you could attack a Jeep model across the Internet via the infotainment system merely by knowing it's IP address, and take remote control of the throttle, brakes and steering. That should have been a massive wake-up call, but it wasn't.
I wonder where Z will end up. There is a decent chance he'll be killed if he stays in Ukraine. I could see a heel turn where he ends up back in Moscow. It's that or the UK and probably presenting HIGNFY and sniffing his brew for polonium.
More importantly, Poilievre has built up a powerful message over the past year or so about Canada being broken, which isn't so compelling anymore. So he needs to pivot to a new message.
Having said that the numbers who have made the decision to vote Tory are probably greater than the number who weren't at all keen on the Liberals but think they need a vote in this time of crisis.
If/when the TR-3 software package that enables full combat capabilities is released **this year**, weapons like JSM on the Norwegian fleet and SDB-II on F-35B/C will be fully cleared, amongst other capabilities unless those faces further delays...
https://x.com/Doha104p3/status/1899084721218596891
At about 3pm on this glorious afternoon the captain for some inexplicable reason turned too early and ploughed straight into one of he legs of the rig. Slightly damaged the rig and severely damaged the standby boat. Never did find out why. Visibility was miles and miles. And a rig is a bloody big thing to miss (or not miss), especially when your job is to just sail around it for 4 weeks at a time.
UK leaders have been happy to make the most intemperate statements of all the major powers on 'Putin' (he doesn't get a first name, like 'Assad'), just like they've been happy to make the biggest environmental commitments on our behalf - because they want to show off to the room.
Sadly, didn't knock the bridge down.
0900:
https://zoom.earth/maps/satellite/#view=53.170577,1.260626,9z/date=2025-03-10,09:00
1000: (Plume now visible)
https://zoom.earth/maps/satellite/#view=53.170577,1.260626,9z/date=2025-03-10,10:00
As for the rest of the western world we’re back to that old newspaper headline: very well, alone.
Europe is working out how to rapidly rearm themselves and keep Ukraine’s fight going while working out what else has changed now the most fundamental part of for the past 80 years international politics has disappeared overnight
If he had a conscience.
Worth saying that Zelenskyy is in Saudi today meeting them before they hold the “peace” talks later this week
At least that's their excuse.
"I know so little about the organisation I run, I can hardly be expected to know about the blatant fraud/illegality/fuckwittery going on. Actually read memos? Next you'll be asking me to read the accounts!"
I've been watching it with the wife and you can really see how much Trump has taken from the world of WWE into his approach to politics.
When they “unveiled” their magic giant nuclear torpedo guess which country they decided they would drown in a vast tsunami. Remember too which country is their preferred location for the execution of dissidents.
https://x.com/MarineTraffic/status/1899083260946223465?t=BdN6XrwclsUcZZ3D3veY_g&s=19
And secondly, is there some particular person or inaction that you think is applicable in this case?
We've lived in their heads, rent free, ever since.
We can't be unsure as to whether we can rely on Lockheed to maintain our missiles when Trump is buying whatever the Russkis are selling.