Not only I am voting Labour at the next election I am joining the Labour Party, this has won me over.
‘Disrespectful’ Labour drops HM title from Government communications
Rebrand raises ‘serious questions’ about Labour’s attitude towards monarchy, Tories say
Labour has been accused of disrespecting the King after the HM title was dropped from official Government communications.
In a controversial rebrand, the Government now refers to itself as the UK Government, rather than HM Government.
The Tories accused Labour of trying to “quietly obliterate tradition”, pledging to reverse the move if they returned to power.
Previous guidelines from the Government Communication Service stated that HM Government should always be used in official branding “unless there is a specific reason not to”.
But Labour changed the rules, making UK Government the new “primary identity” of its branding.
I'm not about to throw a strop about it, but with these kind of rebrands I'm somewhat at a loss as to whether anyone was confused by it to necessitate a change.
Does SKS still bother to meet the King every week or has that gone too, I wonder.
I think that transitioned to phone calls years ago.
It was phone calls during the pandemic, I believe.
Was that because Bozza was too pissed to stagger to the Palace?
Do other countries with ornamental constitutional monarchies get their PM to do a weekly consultation or is it just the UK?
Reducing social media use decreases loneliness regardless of gender or level of social comparisons in youth with anxiety and depression: A randomized controlled trial
Loneliness and feeling socially isolated is especially problematic in youth experiencing anxiety and depressive symptoms. Social media use (SMU) was designed to promote social connection, but correlational studies suggest it is often associated with greater loneliness and mental health problems, with girls and those who engage in more frequent upward social comparisons being more negatively impacted by SMU. However, experimental studies are needed to gain insights into causality, especially in a vulnerable population of youth with affective distress. The present study experimentally investigated the effects of voluntarily reducing SMU to 1 h/day on loneliness, and whether intervention effects were moderated by gender and/or baseline levels of social comparisons in youth with pre-existing symptoms of anxiety and/or depression. After completing a baseline survey and providing daily screenshots of SMU for one week, 260 participants were randomly assigned to an intervention (reduce SMU to 1 h/day) or control group (no SMU restriction) for the next three weeks. A total of 219 participants completed the study and were included for analysis. Mixed models indicated a significant group x time interaction whereby the intervention group showed significantly greater reductions in loneliness compared to controls (β = −0.11, 95% CI [−0.21, −0.005]). However, neither gender (β = 0.23, 95% CI [−0.16, 0.63]) nor baseline social comparison (β = −0.04, 95% CI [−0.24, 0.15]) moderated these intervention effects. These findings suggest that reducing SMU may represent an important intervention component in a comprehensive approach to combating loneliness among a vulnerable population of youth presenting with affective distress.
I found this article yesterday after you had said ivermectin had no effect on cancer, but didn’t link to it as I thought sciencedirect would turn out to be some kind of site for quacks!
Someone flagged my post, as if I were giving malicious advice out of badness. I did say I wasn't claiming to be a medical expert of any kind, and was just relating the story of the relative of a friend who has defied the doctors predictions to stay alive, and possibly recover from a "terminal" diagnosis. I was trying to give some hope to @Cyclefree, who seemed very down. I am pleased to read the conclusion of that Science Direct article
There are some odd people on here
I did not read Cyclefree's posts - I am assuming that she disclosed very difficult medical prognoses.
Without wishing to upset or anger anyone, especially Cyclefree, I remain very firmly of the view that if a body can get cancer (or any illness) when certain stimuli are applied, it can also reverse cancer when those are reversed. To believe otherwise would be unscientific.
All the very best Cyclefree.
Bodies are weird and difficult to predict things. Advanced cancers can go into remission, but it is exceedingly unlikely. New treatments can be successful, and that is a bit more likely. My aunt was given a few months to live in 2018, but is fortunately still with us and doing fairly well. I hope for the same for other cancer sufferers and we have made big strides in treating cancer over my professional lifetime. (My first proper job was for the Imperial Cancer Research Fund, as then was,)
Hope is important for people facing difficult prognoses. However, remember that false hope can also be damaging.
My friend’s brother is taking ivermectin behind the doctors back, so is still having chemo. Perhaps the chemo is what’s killing the cancer, but that raises the question of why they gave him six months to live.
Anyway, as I said, I just wanted to share a positive story to Cyclefree. I wasn’t trying to con her into having false hope. I’m not on an earner if people buy ivermectin, I don’t even know what it is!
The occasion when, having enjoyed a wine enema, Kenneth Tynan thought "let's try that, but with vodka" springs to mind. I can't find the diary entry online, but it didn't go well.
Reducing social media use decreases loneliness regardless of gender or level of social comparisons in youth with anxiety and depression: A randomized controlled trial
Loneliness and feeling socially isolated is especially problematic in youth experiencing anxiety and depressive symptoms. Social media use (SMU) was designed to promote social connection, but correlational studies suggest it is often associated with greater loneliness and mental health problems, with girls and those who engage in more frequent upward social comparisons being more negatively impacted by SMU. However, experimental studies are needed to gain insights into causality, especially in a vulnerable population of youth with affective distress. The present study experimentally investigated the effects of voluntarily reducing SMU to 1 h/day on loneliness, and whether intervention effects were moderated by gender and/or baseline levels of social comparisons in youth with pre-existing symptoms of anxiety and/or depression. After completing a baseline survey and providing daily screenshots of SMU for one week, 260 participants were randomly assigned to an intervention (reduce SMU to 1 h/day) or control group (no SMU restriction) for the next three weeks. A total of 219 participants completed the study and were included for analysis. Mixed models indicated a significant group x time interaction whereby the intervention group showed significantly greater reductions in loneliness compared to controls (β = −0.11, 95% CI [−0.21, −0.005]). However, neither gender (β = 0.23, 95% CI [−0.16, 0.63]) nor baseline social comparison (β = −0.04, 95% CI [−0.24, 0.15]) moderated these intervention effects. These findings suggest that reducing SMU may represent an important intervention component in a comprehensive approach to combating loneliness among a vulnerable population of youth presenting with affective distress.
I found this article yesterday after you had said ivermectin had no effect on cancer, but didn’t link to it as I thought sciencedirect would turn out to be some kind of site for quacks!
Someone flagged my post, as if I were giving malicious advice out of badness. I did say I wasn't claiming to be a medical expert of any kind, and was just relating the story of the relative of a friend who has defied the doctors predictions to stay alive, and possibly recover from a "terminal" diagnosis. I was trying to give some hope to @Cyclefree, who seemed very down. I am pleased to read the conclusion of that Science Direct article
There are some odd people on here
I did not read Cyclefree's posts - I am assuming that she disclosed very difficult medical prognoses.
Without wishing to upset or anger anyone, especially Cyclefree, I remain very firmly of the view that if a body can get cancer (or any illness) when certain stimuli are applied, it can also reverse cancer when those are reversed. To believe otherwise would be unscientific.
All the very best Cyclefree.
Bodies are weird and difficult to predict things. Advanced cancers can go into remission, but it is exceedingly unlikely. New treatments can be successful, and that is a bit more likely. My aunt was given a few months to live in 2018, but is fortunately still with us and doing fairly well. I hope for the same for other cancer sufferers and we have made big strides in treating cancer over my professional lifetime. (My first proper job was for the Imperial Cancer Research Fund, as then was,)
Hope is important for people facing difficult prognoses. However, remember that false hope can also be damaging.
My friend’s brother is taking ivermectin behind the doctors back, so is still having chemo. Perhaps the chemo is what’s killing the cancer, but that raises the question of why they gave him six months to live.
Anyway, as I said, I just wanted to share a positive story to Cyclefree. I wasn’t trying to con her into having false hope. I’m not on an earner if people buy ivermectin, I don’t even know what it is!
Not only I am voting Labour at the next election I am joining the Labour Party, this has won me over.
‘Disrespectful’ Labour drops HM title from Government communications
Rebrand raises ‘serious questions’ about Labour’s attitude towards monarchy, Tories say
Labour has been accused of disrespecting the King after the HM title was dropped from official Government communications.
In a controversial rebrand, the Government now refers to itself as the UK Government, rather than HM Government.
The Tories accused Labour of trying to “quietly obliterate tradition”, pledging to reverse the move if they returned to power.
Previous guidelines from the Government Communication Service stated that HM Government should always be used in official branding “unless there is a specific reason not to”.
But Labour changed the rules, making UK Government the new “primary identity” of its branding.
I'm not about to throw a strop about it, but with these kind of rebrands I'm somewhat at a loss as to whether anyone was confused by it to necessitate a change.
Does SKS still bother to meet the King every week or has that gone too, I wonder.
I think that transitioned to phone calls years ago.
It was phone calls during the pandemic, I believe.
Was that because Bozza was too pissed to stagger to the Palace?
Do other countries with ornamental constitutional monarchies get their PM to do a weekly consultation or is it just the UK?
This is your occasional reminder that Boris caught COVID and nearly died.
Not only I am voting Labour at the next election I am joining the Labour Party, this has won me over.
‘Disrespectful’ Labour drops HM title from Government communications
Rebrand raises ‘serious questions’ about Labour’s attitude towards monarchy, Tories say
Labour has been accused of disrespecting the King after the HM title was dropped from official Government communications.
In a controversial rebrand, the Government now refers to itself as the UK Government, rather than HM Government.
The Tories accused Labour of trying to “quietly obliterate tradition”, pledging to reverse the move if they returned to power.
Previous guidelines from the Government Communication Service stated that HM Government should always be used in official branding “unless there is a specific reason not to”.
But Labour changed the rules, making UK Government the new “primary identity” of its branding.
I'm not about to throw a strop about it, but with these kind of rebrands I'm somewhat at a loss as to whether anyone was confused by it to necessitate a change.
Does SKS still bother to meet the King every week or has that gone too, I wonder.
I think that transitioned to phone calls years ago.
It was phone calls during the pandemic, I believe.
Was that because Bozza was too pissed to stagger to the Palace?
Do other countries with ornamental constitutional monarchies get their PM to do a weekly consultation or is it just the UK?
This is your occasional reminder that Boris caught COVID and nearly died.
Which was his own fault for not taking the advised precautions and a hospital bed was reserved specially for him, which probably means that someone else did die. Apologies if I've misunderstood and you were suggesting that he was such a huge infection liability they kept him away from HRH
Reducing social media use decreases loneliness regardless of gender or level of social comparisons in youth with anxiety and depression: A randomized controlled trial
Loneliness and feeling socially isolated is especially problematic in youth experiencing anxiety and depressive symptoms. Social media use (SMU) was designed to promote social connection, but correlational studies suggest it is often associated with greater loneliness and mental health problems, with girls and those who engage in more frequent upward social comparisons being more negatively impacted by SMU. However, experimental studies are needed to gain insights into causality, especially in a vulnerable population of youth with affective distress. The present study experimentally investigated the effects of voluntarily reducing SMU to 1 h/day on loneliness, and whether intervention effects were moderated by gender and/or baseline levels of social comparisons in youth with pre-existing symptoms of anxiety and/or depression. After completing a baseline survey and providing daily screenshots of SMU for one week, 260 participants were randomly assigned to an intervention (reduce SMU to 1 h/day) or control group (no SMU restriction) for the next three weeks. A total of 219 participants completed the study and were included for analysis. Mixed models indicated a significant group x time interaction whereby the intervention group showed significantly greater reductions in loneliness compared to controls (β = −0.11, 95% CI [−0.21, −0.005]). However, neither gender (β = 0.23, 95% CI [−0.16, 0.63]) nor baseline social comparison (β = −0.04, 95% CI [−0.24, 0.15]) moderated these intervention effects. These findings suggest that reducing SMU may represent an important intervention component in a comprehensive approach to combating loneliness among a vulnerable population of youth presenting with affective distress.
I found this article yesterday after you had said ivermectin had no effect on cancer, but didn’t link to it as I thought sciencedirect would turn out to be some kind of site for quacks!
Someone flagged my post, as if I were giving malicious advice out of badness. I did say I wasn't claiming to be a medical expert of any kind, and was just relating the story of the relative of a friend who has defied the doctors predictions to stay alive, and possibly recover from a "terminal" diagnosis. I was trying to give some hope to @Cyclefree, who seemed very down. I am pleased to read the conclusion of that Science Direct article
There are some odd people on here
I did not read Cyclefree's posts - I am assuming that she disclosed very difficult medical prognoses.
Without wishing to upset or anger anyone, especially Cyclefree, I remain very firmly of the view that if a body can get cancer (or any illness) when certain stimuli are applied, it can also reverse cancer when those are reversed. To believe otherwise would be unscientific.
All the very best Cyclefree.
Bodies are weird and difficult to predict things. Advanced cancers can go into remission, but it is exceedingly unlikely. New treatments can be successful, and that is a bit more likely. My aunt was given a few months to live in 2018, but is fortunately still with us and doing fairly well. I hope for the same for other cancer sufferers and we have made big strides in treating cancer over my professional lifetime. (My first proper job was for the Imperial Cancer Research Fund, as then was,)
Hope is important for people facing difficult prognoses. However, remember that false hope can also be damaging.
My friend’s brother is taking ivermectin behind the doctors back, so is still having chemo. Perhaps the chemo is what’s killing the cancer, but that raises the question of why they gave him six months to live.
Anyway, as I said, I just wanted to share a positive story to Cyclefree. I wasn’t trying to con her into having false hope. I’m not on an earner if people buy ivermectin, I don’t even know what it is!
In reality Kemi would become PM because of tactical voting by centrists.
Of course she wouldn't.
Why would left leaning Centrists vote for a party who's leader has just told Centrists they are not welcome, and Badenoch doesn't want their vote. A vote they are unlikely to lend to a Reform -lite alternative.
On those numbers Reform are home and hosed and Badenoch becomes Nick Clegg to Farage's Cameron.
Reducing social media use decreases loneliness regardless of gender or level of social comparisons in youth with anxiety and depression: A randomized controlled trial
Loneliness and feeling socially isolated is especially problematic in youth experiencing anxiety and depressive symptoms. Social media use (SMU) was designed to promote social connection, but correlational studies suggest it is often associated with greater loneliness and mental health problems, with girls and those who engage in more frequent upward social comparisons being more negatively impacted by SMU. However, experimental studies are needed to gain insights into causality, especially in a vulnerable population of youth with affective distress. The present study experimentally investigated the effects of voluntarily reducing SMU to 1 h/day on loneliness, and whether intervention effects were moderated by gender and/or baseline levels of social comparisons in youth with pre-existing symptoms of anxiety and/or depression. After completing a baseline survey and providing daily screenshots of SMU for one week, 260 participants were randomly assigned to an intervention (reduce SMU to 1 h/day) or control group (no SMU restriction) for the next three weeks. A total of 219 participants completed the study and were included for analysis. Mixed models indicated a significant group x time interaction whereby the intervention group showed significantly greater reductions in loneliness compared to controls (β = −0.11, 95% CI [−0.21, −0.005]). However, neither gender (β = 0.23, 95% CI [−0.16, 0.63]) nor baseline social comparison (β = −0.04, 95% CI [−0.24, 0.15]) moderated these intervention effects. These findings suggest that reducing SMU may represent an important intervention component in a comprehensive approach to combating loneliness among a vulnerable population of youth presenting with affective distress.
I found this article yesterday after you had said ivermectin had no effect on cancer, but didn’t link to it as I thought sciencedirect would turn out to be some kind of site for quacks!
Someone flagged my post, as if I were giving malicious advice out of badness. I did say I wasn't claiming to be a medical expert of any kind, and was just relating the story of the relative of a friend who has defied the doctors predictions to stay alive, and possibly recover from a "terminal" diagnosis. I was trying to give some hope to @Cyclefree, who seemed very down. I am pleased to read the conclusion of that Science Direct article
There are some odd people on here
I did not read Cyclefree's posts - I am assuming that she disclosed very difficult medical prognoses.
Without wishing to upset or anger anyone, especially Cyclefree, I remain very firmly of the view that if a body can get cancer (or any illness) when certain stimuli are applied, it can also reverse cancer when those are reversed. To believe otherwise would be unscientific.
All the very best Cyclefree.
Bodies are weird and difficult to predict things. Advanced cancers can go into remission, but it is exceedingly unlikely. New treatments can be successful, and that is a bit more likely. My aunt was given a few months to live in 2018, but is fortunately still with us and doing fairly well. I hope for the same for other cancer sufferers and we have made big strides in treating cancer over my professional lifetime. (My first proper job was for the Imperial Cancer Research Fund, as then was,)
Hope is important for people facing difficult prognoses. However, remember that false hope can also be damaging.
My friend’s brother is taking ivermectin behind the doctors back, so is still having chemo. Perhaps the chemo is what’s killing the cancer, but that raises the question of why they gave him six months to live.
Anyway, as I said, I just wanted to share a positive story to Cyclefree. I wasn’t trying to con her into having false hope. I’m not on an earner if people buy ivermectin, I don’t even know what it is!
Visiting him on day release! Not even after having paid his debt to society, but part way through!
“Peter will be staying at 71 st over weekend,” wrote Mr. Epstein, who at the time was allowed after his conviction to leave his cell during the day and work from his office. “Do you want to organize either you, or you and jamie, quietly…up to you.”
Comfortable Plaid win in Pembrokeshire, Reform not competitive this time, everyone ekse in a nice little bunch really with the LDs perhaps regaining a bit of that old Ceredigion shine in second
Fishguard North East (Pembrokeshire) Council By-Election Result:
Good God. A night of whiny, grumpy PB Tories. Come on lads you've just taken your first big win since December 2019. "Look 'appy you stupid bastards! We won didn't we?"*
* With thanks to the Italian Job.
Its laughable that anyone is likely to.pay attention to such a trail . and more unlikely anyone likely to be tuned in desperate to find out. I will be walking my dog. She has about as much interest as me.
It is a well known facts that all dogs love LibDem politicians. Even if they couldn't eat a whole one.
Comfortable Plaid win in Pembrokeshire, Reform not competitive this time, everyone ekse in a nice little bunch really with the LDs perhaps regaining a bit of that old Ceredigion shine in second
Fishguard North East (Pembrokeshire) Council By-Election Result:
Reducing social media use decreases loneliness regardless of gender or level of social comparisons in youth with anxiety and depression: A randomized controlled trial
Loneliness and feeling socially isolated is especially problematic in youth experiencing anxiety and depressive symptoms. Social media use (SMU) was designed to promote social connection, but correlational studies suggest it is often associated with greater loneliness and mental health problems, with girls and those who engage in more frequent upward social comparisons being more negatively impacted by SMU. However, experimental studies are needed to gain insights into causality, especially in a vulnerable population of youth with affective distress. The present study experimentally investigated the effects of voluntarily reducing SMU to 1 h/day on loneliness, and whether intervention effects were moderated by gender and/or baseline levels of social comparisons in youth with pre-existing symptoms of anxiety and/or depression. After completing a baseline survey and providing daily screenshots of SMU for one week, 260 participants were randomly assigned to an intervention (reduce SMU to 1 h/day) or control group (no SMU restriction) for the next three weeks. A total of 219 participants completed the study and were included for analysis. Mixed models indicated a significant group x time interaction whereby the intervention group showed significantly greater reductions in loneliness compared to controls (β = −0.11, 95% CI [−0.21, −0.005]). However, neither gender (β = 0.23, 95% CI [−0.16, 0.63]) nor baseline social comparison (β = −0.04, 95% CI [−0.24, 0.15]) moderated these intervention effects. These findings suggest that reducing SMU may represent an important intervention component in a comprehensive approach to combating loneliness among a vulnerable population of youth presenting with affective distress.
I found this article yesterday after you had said ivermectin had no effect on cancer, but didn’t link to it as I thought sciencedirect would turn out to be some kind of site for quacks!
Someone flagged my post, as if I were giving malicious advice out of badness. I did say I wasn't claiming to be a medical expert of any kind, and was just relating the story of the relative of a friend who has defied the doctors predictions to stay alive, and possibly recover from a "terminal" diagnosis. I was trying to give some hope to @Cyclefree, who seemed very down. I am pleased to read the conclusion of that Science Direct article
There are some odd people on here
I did not read Cyclefree's posts - I am assuming that she disclosed very difficult medical prognoses.
Without wishing to upset or anger anyone, especially Cyclefree, I remain very firmly of the view that if a body can get cancer (or any illness) when certain stimuli are applied, it can also reverse cancer when those are reversed. To believe otherwise would be unscientific.
All the very best Cyclefree.
It’s can’t really “reverse cancer” but where the stimuli are removed you can get PFS (progression free survival). You then combine this with surgery to remove exant tumours and you are in good shape.
... he added: “My perspective from being a major employer in this country is that far fewer people are at work than they could be. This means instead of investing in parts of national life that might stimulate investment and growth into the wider economy, we are spending an ever increasing proportion of our national income on our out-of-work benefits.
“We have been sleepwalking into a quiet epidemic that is keeping millions of people out of work,” Prasad said.
Prasad did not say what out of work benefits he was referring to in his claims. The government has said the number of people claiming health-related benefits that enable them not to work has increased by 800,000 since 2019-20, while the number claiming a personal independence payment (Pip) to help cover the additional living costs of their disability is forecast to double this decade from 2 million to 4.3 million.
However, Pip is not an out-of-work benefit, and economists have pointed out that overall out-of-work benefits have not risen.
Reducing social media use decreases loneliness regardless of gender or level of social comparisons in youth with anxiety and depression: A randomized controlled trial
Loneliness and feeling socially isolated is especially problematic in youth experiencing anxiety and depressive symptoms. Social media use (SMU) was designed to promote social connection, but correlational studies suggest it is often associated with greater loneliness and mental health problems, with girls and those who engage in more frequent upward social comparisons being more negatively impacted by SMU. However, experimental studies are needed to gain insights into causality, especially in a vulnerable population of youth with affective distress. The present study experimentally investigated the effects of voluntarily reducing SMU to 1 h/day on loneliness, and whether intervention effects were moderated by gender and/or baseline levels of social comparisons in youth with pre-existing symptoms of anxiety and/or depression. After completing a baseline survey and providing daily screenshots of SMU for one week, 260 participants were randomly assigned to an intervention (reduce SMU to 1 h/day) or control group (no SMU restriction) for the next three weeks. A total of 219 participants completed the study and were included for analysis. Mixed models indicated a significant group x time interaction whereby the intervention group showed significantly greater reductions in loneliness compared to controls (β = −0.11, 95% CI [−0.21, −0.005]). However, neither gender (β = 0.23, 95% CI [−0.16, 0.63]) nor baseline social comparison (β = −0.04, 95% CI [−0.24, 0.15]) moderated these intervention effects. These findings suggest that reducing SMU may represent an important intervention component in a comprehensive approach to combating loneliness among a vulnerable population of youth presenting with affective distress.
I found this article yesterday after you had said ivermectin had no effect on cancer, but didn’t link to it as I thought sciencedirect would turn out to be some kind of site for quacks!
Someone flagged my post, as if I were giving malicious advice out of badness. I did say I wasn't claiming to be a medical expert of any kind, and was just relating the story of the relative of a friend who has defied the doctors predictions to stay alive, and possibly recover from a "terminal" diagnosis. I was trying to give some hope to @Cyclefree, who seemed very down. I am pleased to read the conclusion of that Science Direct article
There are some odd people on here
I did not read Cyclefree's posts - I am assuming that she disclosed very difficult medical prognoses.
Without wishing to upset or anger anyone, especially Cyclefree, I remain very firmly of the view that if a body can get cancer (or any illness) when certain stimuli are applied, it can also reverse cancer when those are reversed. To believe otherwise would be unscientific.
All the very best Cyclefree.
Bodies are weird and difficult to predict things. Advanced cancers can go into remission, but it is exceedingly unlikely. New treatments can be successful, and that is a bit more likely. My aunt was given a few months to live in 2018, but is fortunately still with us and doing fairly well. I hope for the same for other cancer sufferers and we have made big strides in treating cancer over my professional lifetime. (My first proper job was for the Imperial Cancer Research Fund, as then was,)
Hope is important for people facing difficult prognoses. However, remember that false hope can also be damaging.
My friend’s brother is taking ivermectin behind the doctors back, so is still having chemo. Perhaps the chemo is what’s killing the cancer, but that raises the question of why they gave him six months to live.
Anyway, as I said, I just wanted to share a positive story to Cyclefree. I wasn’t trying to con her into having false hope. I’m not on an earner if people buy ivermectin, I don’t even know what it is!
It’s a generic parasiticide for livestock and a dewormer in dogs.
People talk about it because there was a shaky trial in Covid that appeared to show improvement.
How on further investigation it turned out that the trial was in India and that many of the patients who improved had undiagnosed parasitic infestations…
Comfortable Plaid win in Pembrokeshire, Reform not competitive this time, everyone ekse in a nice little bunch really with the LDs perhaps regaining a bit of that old Ceredigion shine in second
Fishguard North East (Pembrokeshire) Council By-Election Result:
Comfortable Plaid win in Pembrokeshire, Reform not competitive this time, everyone ekse in a nice little bunch really with the LDs perhaps regaining a bit of that old Ceredigion shine in second
Fishguard North East (Pembrokeshire) Council By-Election Result:
Given that Reform have been polling so well in Wales, this seems a surprisingly ho-hum result for them. I am wondering whether their ground game isn't too patchy to deliver an even set of results. Perhaps they will be so regional in their strength that FPTP will leave them a lot weaker in candidates elected, unless in really strong core areas- a sort of reverse Lib Dem result.
The only redeeming feature of Coutinho is that she is matginally less useless than Atkins, Trott and Whataley in that order of risibility, and seems an infinitely more pleasant human being than the awfulbPritti, Kemi and Suella in that order.
Lopez would be head and shoulders the most competent and personably friendly Tory female MP of importance at the moment.
Reducing social media use decreases loneliness regardless of gender or level of social comparisons in youth with anxiety and depression: A randomized controlled trial
Loneliness and feeling socially isolated is especially problematic in youth experiencing anxiety and depressive symptoms. Social media use (SMU) was designed to promote social connection, but correlational studies suggest it is often associated with greater loneliness and mental health problems, with girls and those who engage in more frequent upward social comparisons being more negatively impacted by SMU. However, experimental studies are needed to gain insights into causality, especially in a vulnerable population of youth with affective distress. The present study experimentally investigated the effects of voluntarily reducing SMU to 1 h/day on loneliness, and whether intervention effects were moderated by gender and/or baseline levels of social comparisons in youth with pre-existing symptoms of anxiety and/or depression. After completing a baseline survey and providing daily screenshots of SMU for one week, 260 participants were randomly assigned to an intervention (reduce SMU to 1 h/day) or control group (no SMU restriction) for the next three weeks. A total of 219 participants completed the study and were included for analysis. Mixed models indicated a significant group x time interaction whereby the intervention group showed significantly greater reductions in loneliness compared to controls (β = −0.11, 95% CI [−0.21, −0.005]). However, neither gender (β = 0.23, 95% CI [−0.16, 0.63]) nor baseline social comparison (β = −0.04, 95% CI [−0.24, 0.15]) moderated these intervention effects. These findings suggest that reducing SMU may represent an important intervention component in a comprehensive approach to combating loneliness among a vulnerable population of youth presenting with affective distress.
I found this article yesterday after you had said ivermectin had no effect on cancer, but didn’t link to it as I thought sciencedirect would turn out to be some kind of site for quacks!
Someone flagged my post, as if I were giving malicious advice out of badness. I did say I wasn't claiming to be a medical expert of any kind, and was just relating the story of the relative of a friend who has defied the doctors predictions to stay alive, and possibly recover from a "terminal" diagnosis. I was trying to give some hope to @Cyclefree, who seemed very down. I am pleased to read the conclusion of that Science Direct article
There are some odd people on here
I did not read Cyclefree's posts - I am assuming that she disclosed very difficult medical prognoses.
Without wishing to upset or anger anyone, especially Cyclefree, I remain very firmly of the view that if a body can get cancer (or any illness) when certain stimuli are applied, it can also reverse cancer when those are reversed. To believe otherwise would be unscientific.
All the very best Cyclefree.
Bodies are weird and difficult to predict things. Advanced cancers can go into remission, but it is exceedingly unlikely. New treatments can be successful, and that is a bit more likely. My aunt was given a few months to live in 2018, but is fortunately still with us and doing fairly well. I hope for the same for other cancer sufferers and we have made big strides in treating cancer over my professional lifetime. (My first proper job was for the Imperial Cancer Research Fund, as then was,)
Hope is important for people facing difficult prognoses. However, remember that false hope can also be damaging.
My friend’s brother is taking ivermectin behind the doctors back, so is still having chemo. Perhaps the chemo is what’s killing the cancer, but that raises the question of why they gave him six months to live.
Anyway, as I said, I just wanted to share a positive story to Cyclefree. I wasn’t trying to con her into having false hope. I’m not on an earner if people buy ivermectin, I don’t even know what it is!
Visiting him on day release! Not even after having paid his debt to society, but part way through!
“Peter will be staying at 71 st over weekend,” wrote Mr. Epstein, who at the time was allowed after his conviction to leave his cell during the day and work from his office. “Do you want to organize either you, or you and jamie, quietly…up to you.”
Here is the same point made on Private Eye's Page 94 podcast, with the magazine from 30th March 2009 and again in 2011:-
What is the point of vetting if the spooks don't even read Private Eye? It gives the lie to the notion that this was new information from the Epstein files.
Reducing social media use decreases loneliness regardless of gender or level of social comparisons in youth with anxiety and depression: A randomized controlled trial
Loneliness and feeling socially isolated is especially problematic in youth experiencing anxiety and depressive symptoms. Social media use (SMU) was designed to promote social connection, but correlational studies suggest it is often associated with greater loneliness and mental health problems, with girls and those who engage in more frequent upward social comparisons being more negatively impacted by SMU. However, experimental studies are needed to gain insights into causality, especially in a vulnerable population of youth with affective distress. The present study experimentally investigated the effects of voluntarily reducing SMU to 1 h/day on loneliness, and whether intervention effects were moderated by gender and/or baseline levels of social comparisons in youth with pre-existing symptoms of anxiety and/or depression. After completing a baseline survey and providing daily screenshots of SMU for one week, 260 participants were randomly assigned to an intervention (reduce SMU to 1 h/day) or control group (no SMU restriction) for the next three weeks. A total of 219 participants completed the study and were included for analysis. Mixed models indicated a significant group x time interaction whereby the intervention group showed significantly greater reductions in loneliness compared to controls (β = −0.11, 95% CI [−0.21, −0.005]). However, neither gender (β = 0.23, 95% CI [−0.16, 0.63]) nor baseline social comparison (β = −0.04, 95% CI [−0.24, 0.15]) moderated these intervention effects. These findings suggest that reducing SMU may represent an important intervention component in a comprehensive approach to combating loneliness among a vulnerable population of youth presenting with affective distress.
I found this article yesterday after you had said ivermectin had no effect on cancer, but didn’t link to it as I thought sciencedirect would turn out to be some kind of site for quacks!
Someone flagged my post, as if I were giving malicious advice out of badness. I did say I wasn't claiming to be a medical expert of any kind, and was just relating the story of the relative of a friend who has defied the doctors predictions to stay alive, and possibly recover from a "terminal" diagnosis. I was trying to give some hope to @Cyclefree, who seemed very down. I am pleased to read the conclusion of that Science Direct article
There are some odd people on here
I did not read Cyclefree's posts - I am assuming that she disclosed very difficult medical prognoses.
Without wishing to upset or anger anyone, especially Cyclefree, I remain very firmly of the view that if a body can get cancer (or any illness) when certain stimuli are applied, it can also reverse cancer when those are reversed. To believe otherwise would be unscientific.
All the very best Cyclefree.
Bodies are weird and difficult to predict things. Advanced cancers can go into remission, but it is exceedingly unlikely. New treatments can be successful, and that is a bit more likely. My aunt was given a few months to live in 2018, but is fortunately still with us and doing fairly well. I hope for the same for other cancer sufferers and we have made big strides in treating cancer over my professional lifetime. (My first proper job was for the Imperial Cancer Research Fund, as then was,)
Hope is important for people facing difficult prognoses. However, remember that false hope can also be damaging.
My friend’s brother is taking ivermectin behind the doctors back, so is still having chemo. Perhaps the chemo is what’s killing the cancer, but that raises the question of why they gave him six months to live.
Anyway, as I said, I just wanted to share a positive story to Cyclefree. I wasn’t trying to con her into having false hope. I’m not on an earner if people buy ivermectin, I don’t even know what it is!
It's a sheep worming drug.
Ivermectin has been a brilliant drug for controlling a couple of human parasitic diseases in africa, but it is a bit weird how it has become such a panacea in the online world.
I would not recommend covertly taking anything in conjunction with chemo and immunotherapy due to the potential of drug interactions with the allopathic drugs. Declare everything to the oncologist as a matter of safety.
Visiting him on day release! Not even after having paid his debt to society, but part way through!
“Peter will be staying at 71 st over weekend,” wrote Mr. Epstein, who at the time was allowed after his conviction to leave his cell during the day and work from his office. “Do you want to organize either you, or you and jamie, quietly…up to you.”
Here is the same point made on Private Eye's Page 94 podcast, with the magazine from 30th March 2009 and again in 2011:-
What is the point of vetting if the spooks don't even read Private Eye? It gives the lie to the notion that this was new information from the Epstein files.
The problem with Private Eye (and I'm a subscriber) is that it gets some things very right and others horribly wrong (e.g. Andrew Wakefield).
The problem with vetting is that it's more than a bit rubbish.
Visiting him on day release! Not even after having paid his debt to society, but part way through!
“Peter will be staying at 71 st over weekend,” wrote Mr. Epstein, who at the time was allowed after his conviction to leave his cell during the day and work from his office. “Do you want to organize either you, or you and jamie, quietly…up to you.”
Here is the same point made on Private Eye's Page 94 podcast, with the magazine from 30th March 2009 and again in 2011:-
What is the point of vetting if the spooks don't even read Private Eye? It gives the lie to the notion that this was new information from the Epstein files.
Anyone with a passing interest in politics has known Mandelson is a wrong'un who wouldn't pass normal vetting for a couple of decades now.
Normal vetting was not applied because HMG and Starmer specifically wanted a wrong'un as US Ambassador to deal with US wrong'uns.
None of this can be said publicly by the people involved so we end up with this absurd debate.
Visiting him on day release! Not even after having paid his debt to society, but part way through!
“Peter will be staying at 71 st over weekend,” wrote Mr. Epstein, who at the time was allowed after his conviction to leave his cell during the day and work from his office. “Do you want to organize either you, or you and jamie, quietly…up to you.”
Here is the same point made on Private Eye's Page 94 podcast, with the magazine from 30th March 2009 and again in 2011:-
What is the point of vetting if the spooks don't even read Private Eye? It gives the lie to the notion that this was new information from the Epstein files.
Anyone with a passing interest in politics has known Mandelson is a wrong'un who wouldn't pass normal vetting for a couple of decades now.
Normal vetting was not applied because HMG and Starmer specifically wanted a wrong'un as US Ambassador to deal with US wrong'uns.
None of this can be said publicly by the people involved so we end up with this absurd debate.
There's much truth to that. But I genuinely was shocked Mandelson was forwarding market sensitive briefing to Epstein automatically. I would have thought that unlikely. They need to throw the book at him imo - long prison sentence required.
Visiting him on day release! Not even after having paid his debt to society, but part way through!
“Peter will be staying at 71 st over weekend,” wrote Mr. Epstein, who at the time was allowed after his conviction to leave his cell during the day and work from his office. “Do you want to organize either you, or you and jamie, quietly…up to you.”
Here is the same point made on Private Eye's Page 94 podcast, with the magazine from 30th March 2009 and again in 2011:-
What is the point of vetting if the spooks don't even read Private Eye? It gives the lie to the notion that this was new information from the Epstein files.
The problem with Private Eye (and I'm a subscriber) is that it gets some things very right and others horribly wrong (e.g. Andrew Wakefield).
The problem with vetting is that it's more than a bit rubbish.
MI5 and MI6 will have had a whole box of documents on Peter Mandelson, which they really should have left on the PM’s desk when it was first proposed to employ him in a key ambassadorial role. He’s been a public figure for more than three decades.
Visiting him on day release! Not even after having paid his debt to society, but part way through!
“Peter will be staying at 71 st over weekend,” wrote Mr. Epstein, who at the time was allowed after his conviction to leave his cell during the day and work from his office. “Do you want to organize either you, or you and jamie, quietly…up to you.”
Here is the same point made on Private Eye's Page 94 podcast, with the magazine from 30th March 2009 and again in 2011:-
What is the point of vetting if the spooks don't even read Private Eye? It gives the lie to the notion that this was new information from the Epstein files.
Anyone with a passing interest in politics has known Mandelson is a wrong'un who wouldn't pass normal vetting for a couple of decades now.
Normal vetting was not applied because HMG and Starmer specifically wanted a wrong'un as US Ambassador to deal with US wrong'uns.
None of this can be said publicly by the people involved so we end up with this absurd debate.
No - even if Starmer wanted to employ a wrong’un, the deep dive was required. So they would know the extent and nature of the wrongness.
Things like selling state secrets and advising people on how to defeat the policies of your own government.
Whining about how it’s jolly unfair because you wanted plausible deniability about Mandy’s sins is bollocks.
Visiting him on day release! Not even after having paid his debt to society, but part way through!
“Peter will be staying at 71 st over weekend,” wrote Mr. Epstein, who at the time was allowed after his conviction to leave his cell during the day and work from his office. “Do you want to organize either you, or you and jamie, quietly…up to you.”
Here is the same point made on Private Eye's Page 94 podcast, with the magazine from 30th March 2009 and again in 2011:-
What is the point of vetting if the spooks don't even read Private Eye? It gives the lie to the notion that this was new information from the Epstein files.
Anyone with a passing interest in politics has known Mandelson is a wrong'un who wouldn't pass normal vetting for a couple of decades now.
Normal vetting was not applied because HMG and Starmer specifically wanted a wrong'un as US Ambassador to deal with US wrong'uns.
None of this can be said publicly by the people involved so we end up with this absurd debate.
No - even if Starmer wanted to employ a wrong’un, the deep dive was required. So they would know the extent and nature of the wrongness.
Things like selling state secrets and advising people on how to defeat the policies of your own government.
Whining about how it’s jolly unfair because you wanted plausible deniability about Mandy’s sins is bollocks.
Why vet? We know he’s made mistakes but he’s a good chap underneath it all, after all he’s a Mason Fabian.
Visiting him on day release! Not even after having paid his debt to society, but part way through!
“Peter will be staying at 71 st over weekend,” wrote Mr. Epstein, who at the time was allowed after his conviction to leave his cell during the day and work from his office. “Do you want to organize either you, or you and jamie, quietly…up to you.”
Here is the same point made on Private Eye's Page 94 podcast, with the magazine from 30th March 2009 and again in 2011:-
What is the point of vetting if the spooks don't even read Private Eye? It gives the lie to the notion that this was new information from the Epstein files.
Anyone with a passing interest in politics has known Mandelson is a wrong'un who wouldn't pass normal vetting for a couple of decades now.
Normal vetting was not applied because HMG and Starmer specifically wanted a wrong'un as US Ambassador to deal with US wrong'uns.
None of this can be said publicly by the people involved so we end up with this absurd debate.
No - even if Starmer wanted to employ a wrong’un, the deep dive was required. So they would know the extent and nature of the wrongness.
Things like selling state secrets and advising people on how to defeat the policies of your own government.
Whining about how it’s jolly unfair because you wanted plausible deniability about Mandy’s sins is bollocks.
Why vet? We know he’s made mistakes but he’s a good chap underneath it all, after all he’s a Mason Fabian.
Indeed. One Of Us.
The thing is, plausible deniability only works, if what you are denying is plausible. And not really stupid.
And giving a serial liar and resigner-over-ethics a government job without knowing the truth is stupid.
Visiting him on day release! Not even after having paid his debt to society, but part way through!
“Peter will be staying at 71 st over weekend,” wrote Mr. Epstein, who at the time was allowed after his conviction to leave his cell during the day and work from his office. “Do you want to organize either you, or you and jamie, quietly…up to you.”
Here is the same point made on Private Eye's Page 94 podcast, with the magazine from 30th March 2009 and again in 2011:-
What is the point of vetting if the spooks don't even read Private Eye? It gives the lie to the notion that this was new information from the Epstein files.
Anyone with a passing interest in politics has known Mandelson is a wrong'un who wouldn't pass normal vetting for a couple of decades now.
Normal vetting was not applied because HMG and Starmer specifically wanted a wrong'un as US Ambassador to deal with US wrong'uns.
None of this can be said publicly by the people involved so we end up with this absurd debate.
No - even if Starmer wanted to employ a wrong’un, the deep dive was required. So they would know the extent and nature of the wrongness.
Things like selling state secrets and advising people on how to defeat the policies of your own government.
Whining about how it’s jolly unfair because you wanted plausible deniability about Mandy’s sins is bollocks.
Why vet? We know he’s made mistakes but he’s a good chap underneath it all, after all he’s a Mason Fabian.
Funny enough, that was exactly the approach the security services took with Kim Philby, apart from the Fabian bit.
More In Common have done their accidentally updating a bit early on the website trick, so tomorrow's VI is
Ref 30 (=) Lab 23 (+2) Con 21 (+1) Ld 12 (-2) Grn 10 (=) SNP 2 (=)
Starmers approval drops to just above his low of -51 at -50
Sleazy Lib Dem’s on the slide. The Rennard effect, due to the lack of action in 13 years perhaps?
I have been mildly interested in polls for a few years now, and not been aware of a situation before where the VI seemed to disengage with the the leaders' approval ratings and other key indicators so completely. It could be that the VI is a lagging indicator in this case, or I suppose that with significant questions about the PM's future in the early part of the survey, some feel that they have registered their disapproval to a satisfactory degree, and are then free to return to their traditional vote in the latter part. Or my theory yesterday that it is a post-Starmer bounce manifesting itself in advance of us being post-Starmer. There are further, more conspiratorial angles also.
If the situation continues, it will mean choosing between the weighted VI and the unweighted approval ratings, and maybe money will be made by those who choose wisely.
Comfortable Plaid win in Pembrokeshire, Reform not competitive this time, everyone ekse in a nice little bunch really with the LDs perhaps regaining a bit of that old Ceredigion shine in second
Fishguard North East (Pembrokeshire) Council By-Election Result:
-48% and -32% for the two tired old parties? That’s the spirit!
Whilst these are classic "kick em when they're down" By Election type results that we see in almost every Government cycle, what will be most interesting will be the Senedd elections of course.
If the "kick em when they're down" mentality is the theme there, even for full governance over several years , then it will likely be a battle for 3rd , 4th , 5th Labour, Tories ; Green and of course a few hot spots possibly for LD.
When are these investments going to start to generate proper returns ?
At the moment, it seems to me, it’s like the gold rush where more people, allegedly, made money from supplying the kit like the shovels than actually from the gold
OpenAI's biggest problem is that they can't shift users into paying for it.
Not surprising because if you want particular jobs done there are better more specialised jobs for it. And the free version is good enough for all the freeloaders...
More In Common have done their accidentally updating a bit early on the website trick, so tomorrow's VI is
Ref 30 (=) Lab 23 (+2) Con 21 (+1) Ld 12 (-2) Grn 10 (=) SNP 2 (=)
Starmers approval drops to just above his low of -51 at -50
Sleazy Lib Dem’s on the slide. The Rennard effect, due to the lack of action in 13 years perhaps?
I have been mildly interested in polls for a few years now, and not been aware of a situation before where the VI seemed to disengage with the the leaders' approval ratings and other key indicators so completely. It could be that the VI is a lagging indicator in this case, or I suppose that with significant questions about the PM's future in the early part of the survey, some feel that they have registered their disapproval to a satisfactory degree, and are then free to return to their traditional vote in the latter part. Or my theory yesterday that it is a post-Starmer bounce manifesting itself in advance of us being post-Starmer. There are further, more conspiratorial angles also.
If the situation continues, it will mean choosing between the weighted VI and the unweighted approval ratings, and maybe money will be made by those who choose wisely.
I did wonder, and I have no evidence either way, if the reason labours poll numbers fell away so badly during the election was the more people saw of SKS the more they didn’t like what they saw.
Again. I’ve no evidence, but surely leadership ratings must end up having some impact on votes especially in a campaign.
When are these investments going to start to generate proper returns ?
At the moment, it seems to me, it’s like the gold rush where more people, allegedly, made money from supplying the kit like the shovels than actually from the gold
Well NVidia’s results suggest they’re making more money than anyone else at the moment, and their share price is up more than 50% YoY.
Reducing social media use decreases loneliness regardless of gender or level of social comparisons in youth with anxiety and depression: A randomized controlled trial
Loneliness and feeling socially isolated is especially problematic in youth experiencing anxiety and depressive symptoms. Social media use (SMU) was designed to promote social connection, but correlational studies suggest it is often associated with greater loneliness and mental health problems, with girls and those who engage in more frequent upward social comparisons being more negatively impacted by SMU. However, experimental studies are needed to gain insights into causality, especially in a vulnerable population of youth with affective distress. The present study experimentally investigated the effects of voluntarily reducing SMU to 1 h/day on loneliness, and whether intervention effects were moderated by gender and/or baseline levels of social comparisons in youth with pre-existing symptoms of anxiety and/or depression. After completing a baseline survey and providing daily screenshots of SMU for one week, 260 participants were randomly assigned to an intervention (reduce SMU to 1 h/day) or control group (no SMU restriction) for the next three weeks. A total of 219 participants completed the study and were included for analysis. Mixed models indicated a significant group x time interaction whereby the intervention group showed significantly greater reductions in loneliness compared to controls (β = −0.11, 95% CI [−0.21, −0.005]). However, neither gender (β = 0.23, 95% CI [−0.16, 0.63]) nor baseline social comparison (β = −0.04, 95% CI [−0.24, 0.15]) moderated these intervention effects. These findings suggest that reducing SMU may represent an important intervention component in a comprehensive approach to combating loneliness among a vulnerable population of youth presenting with affective distress.
I found this article yesterday after you had said ivermectin had no effect on cancer, but didn’t link to it as I thought sciencedirect would turn out to be some kind of site for quacks!
Someone flagged my post, as if I were giving malicious advice out of badness. I did say I wasn't claiming to be a medical expert of any kind, and was just relating the story of the relative of a friend who has defied the doctors predictions to stay alive, and possibly recover from a "terminal" diagnosis. I was trying to give some hope to @Cyclefree, who seemed very down. I am pleased to read the conclusion of that Science Direct article
There are some odd people on here
I did not read Cyclefree's posts - I am assuming that she disclosed very difficult medical prognoses.
Without wishing to upset or anger anyone, especially Cyclefree, I remain very firmly of the view that if a body can get cancer (or any illness) when certain stimuli are applied, it can also reverse cancer when those are reversed. To believe otherwise would be unscientific.
All the very best Cyclefree.
Bodies are weird and difficult to predict things. Advanced cancers can go into remission, but it is exceedingly unlikely. New treatments can be successful, and that is a bit more likely. My aunt was given a few months to live in 2018, but is fortunately still with us and doing fairly well. I hope for the same for other cancer sufferers and we have made big strides in treating cancer over my professional lifetime. (My first proper job was for the Imperial Cancer Research Fund, as then was,)
Hope is important for people facing difficult prognoses. However, remember that false hope can also be damaging.
My friend’s brother is taking ivermectin behind the doctors back, so is still having chemo. Perhaps the chemo is what’s killing the cancer, but that raises the question of why they gave him six months to live.
Anyway, as I said, I just wanted to share a positive story to Cyclefree. I wasn’t trying to con her into having false hope. I’m not on an earner if people buy ivermectin, I don’t even know what it is!
It's a sheep worming drug.
Bizarre, because cancers are more common in dogs than humans, and it’s not really known why. Among the ‘popular’ hypotheses is that it’s a consequence of the harsh medication for worms and fleas that they regularly get given.
Visiting him on day release! Not even after having paid his debt to society, but part way through!
“Peter will be staying at 71 st over weekend,” wrote Mr. Epstein, who at the time was allowed after his conviction to leave his cell during the day and work from his office. “Do you want to organize either you, or you and jamie, quietly…up to you.”
Here is the same point made on Private Eye's Page 94 podcast, with the magazine from 30th March 2009 and again in 2011:-
What is the point of vetting if the spooks don't even read Private Eye? It gives the lie to the notion that this was new information from the Epstein files.
Anyone with a passing interest in politics has known Mandelson is a wrong'un who wouldn't pass normal vetting for a couple of decades now.
Normal vetting was not applied because HMG and Starmer specifically wanted a wrong'un as US Ambassador to deal with US wrong'uns.
None of this can be said publicly by the people involved so we end up with this absurd debate.
There's much truth to that. But I genuinely was shocked Mandelson was forwarding market sensitive briefing to Epstein automatically. I would have thought that unlikely. They need to throw the book at him imo - long prison sentence required.
So was the government, before the recent release of files. Unless the US had shared that with us earlier (which seems unlikely) then more thorough vetting wouldn't have picked that up last year.
When are these investments going to start to generate proper returns ?
At the moment, it seems to me, it’s like the gold rush where more people, allegedly, made money from supplying the kit like the shovels than actually from the gold
Indeed. In this case Nvidia are the shovels and are making money hand over fist
After that it gets a bit more complicated
The Nvidia chips need to go in servers. Those are made by companies outside the US which has totally skewed their balance of trade
And the servers need to go in data centers that don't exist, fueling a massive property speculation bubble
It is all going to end in tears
Abandoned data center projects littering the landscape like gold rush era ghost towns...
When are these investments going to start to generate proper returns ?
At the moment, it seems to me, it’s like the gold rush where more people, allegedly, made money from supplying the kit like the shovels than actually from the gold
Indeed. In this case Nvidia are the shovels and are making money hand over fist
After that it gets a bit more complicated
The Nvidia chips need to go in servers. Those are made by companies outside the US which has totally skewed their balance of trade
And the servers need to go in data centers that don't exist, fueling a massive property speculation bubble
It is all going to end in tears
Abandoned data center projects littering the landscape like gold rush era ghost towns...
And those date centers need power that doesn’t exist either.
Between fast EV charger networks and data centres, the US is expected to need more power stations by the end of this year. There’s even talk of recommissioning old nuclear facilities to meet the demand.
When are these investments going to start to generate proper returns ?
At the moment, it seems to me, it’s like the gold rush where more people, allegedly, made money from supplying the kit like the shovels than actually from the gold
Well NVidia’s results suggest they’re making more money than anyone else at the moment, and their share price is up more than 50% YoY.
Be the guy selling shovels.
Nvidia is the guy taking future orders for shovels processors that might not be fulfilled or paid for, and that goes all the way up to so far unbuilt datacentres.
When are these investments going to start to generate proper returns ?
At the moment, it seems to me, it’s like the gold rush where more people, allegedly, made money from supplying the kit like the shovels than actually from the gold
Indeed. In this case Nvidia are the shovels and are making money hand over fist
After that it gets a bit more complicated
The Nvidia chips need to go in servers. Those are made by companies outside the US which has totally skewed their balance of trade
And the servers need to go in data centers that don't exist, fueling a massive property speculation bubble
It is all going to end in tears
Abandoned data center projects littering the landscape like gold rush era ghost towns...
Six states have already imposed a moratorium on new data centres.
I’m not too concerned, the S&P 500 now has the other 493 companies now starting to perform whereas the magnificent 7 has been sluggish this year.
When are these investments going to start to generate proper returns ?
At the moment, it seems to me, it’s like the gold rush where more people, allegedly, made money from supplying the kit like the shovels than actually from the gold
Well NVidia’s results suggest they’re making more money than anyone else at the moment, and their share price is up more than 50% YoY.
Be the guy selling shovels.
There's also a lot of vendor financing going on, especially by Nvidia. I think OpenAI and Oracle are in trouble for sure. I'm interested to see what kind of raise OpenAI will go for this summer or if they go public. Oracle are borrowing money like idiots to pay for data centres that OpenAI will never be able to pay for because they aren't able to get anyone to pay for ChatGPT or Sora other than MS who get hugely preferential rates due to their investment.
Elon Musk has cynically merged xAI with SpaceX so he sidesteps having to actually make money from AI and Anthropic seem like the only AI specific company that has serious corporate penetration to last out the bubble burst.
My guess is that OpenAI goes under and MS picks up the pieces for cheap and then they do what they always do and shit it up like they have with Activision.
Visiting him on day release! Not even after having paid his debt to society, but part way through!
“Peter will be staying at 71 st over weekend,” wrote Mr. Epstein, who at the time was allowed after his conviction to leave his cell during the day and work from his office. “Do you want to organize either you, or you and jamie, quietly…up to you.”
Here is the same point made on Private Eye's Page 94 podcast, with the magazine from 30th March 2009 and again in 2011:-
What is the point of vetting if the spooks don't even read Private Eye? It gives the lie to the notion that this was new information from the Epstein files.
Anyone with a passing interest in politics has known Mandelson is a wrong'un who wouldn't pass normal vetting for a couple of decades now.
Normal vetting was not applied because HMG and Starmer specifically wanted a wrong'un as US Ambassador to deal with US wrong'uns.
None of this can be said publicly by the people involved so we end up with this absurd debate.
No - even if Starmer wanted to employ a wrong’un, the deep dive was required. So they would know the extent and nature of the wrongness.
Things like selling state secrets and advising people on how to defeat the policies of your own government.
Whining about how it’s jolly unfair because you wanted plausible deniability about Mandy’s sins is bollocks.
Why vet? We know he’s made mistakes but he’s a good chap underneath it all, after all he’s a Mason Fabian.
I would imagine being a Zionist is a more reliable sign of a good chap than Fabianism in Labour nowadays. I mean Rachel Reeves even said it out loud.
OpenAI's biggest problem is that they can't shift users into paying for it.
Not surprising because if you want particular jobs done there are better more specialised jobs for it. And the free version is good enough for all the freeloaders...
I'm one of the freeloaders in my personal life, and use AI for answering fairly trivial questions on a daily basis.
90% of my questions would have previously been answered via Google. And successfully. AI speeds up the process - I might pay a fiver a month for it if the free option wasn't there (including from alternatives) , but not enough to make my usage profitable for them.
At work there are some more time saving use cases. And I assume my company pays for the privilege. So I suspect commercial sales will be the way to profitability, whichever AI platforms manage that (probably Microsoft Copilot, given Office integration, then a bunch of specialist applications). Google will undercut the business model of any consumer focussed businesses via providing Gemini for free to protect its search business.
The cry babies can’t even whinge that it’s Find Out Now
Forced choice head to head on preferred prime minister. 🌹Starmer v.narrowly edges Farage and Polanski but loses to Davey and Badenoch 🌳Badenoch wins all four head to heads 🔶Davey beats Starmer & v.narrowly Farage, but loses to Badenoch ➡️ Farage narrowly beats Polanski and loses to Badenoch & v.narrowly Starmer and Davey 💚Polanski loses to Badenoch & more narrowly Farage & v narrowly Starmer
Everyone says 'we needed a wrong 'un' or variations on this theory, but what did we actually want Mandelson to do? Bribe Trump - with what? Blackmail Trump? Very dangerous. Flatter and appease Trump? Sure, but any toady could have done that. The only real reason I can see for Mandelson is to try to get Chagos through.
The cry babies can’t even whinge that it’s Find Out Now
Forced choice head to head on preferred prime minister. 🌹Starmer v.narrowly edges Farage and Polanski but loses to Davey and Badenoch 🌳Badenoch wins all four head to heads 🔶Davey beats Starmer & v.narrowly Farage, but loses to Badenoch ➡️ Farage narrowly beats Polanski and loses to Badenoch & v.narrowly Starmer and Davey 💚Polanski loses to Badenoch & more narrowly Farage & v narrowly Starmer
The cry babies can’t even whinge that it’s Find Out Now
Forced choice head to head on preferred prime minister. 🌹Starmer v.narrowly edges Farage and Polanski but loses to Davey and Badenoch 🌳Badenoch wins all four head to heads 🔶Davey beats Starmer & v.narrowly Farage, but loses to Badenoch ➡️ Farage narrowly beats Polanski and loses to Badenoch & v.narrowly Starmer and Davey 💚Polanski loses to Badenoch & more narrowly Farage & v narrowly Starmer
Comments
Two-party-preferred
🟥 ALP: 54% (-1)
🟦 L/NP: 46% (+1)
ALP vs ONP
🟥 ALP: 55% (-2)
🟧 ONP: 45% (+2)
Do other countries with ornamental constitutional monarchies get their PM to do a weekly consultation or is it just the UK?
Apologies if I've misunderstood and you were suggesting that he was such a huge infection liability they kept him away from HRH
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/feb/10/uk-sleepwalking-into-joblessness-epidemic-tesco-boss-unemployment
Why would left leaning Centrists vote for a party who's leader has just told Centrists they are not welcome, and Badenoch doesn't want their vote. A vote they are unlikely to lend to a Reform -lite alternative.
On those numbers Reform are home and hosed and Badenoch becomes Nick Clegg to Farage's Cameron.
https://www.nytimes.com/
“Peter will be staying at 71 st over weekend,” wrote Mr. Epstein, who at the time was allowed after his conviction to leave his cell during the day and work from his office. “Do you want to organize either you, or you and jamie, quietly…up to you.”
... he added: “My perspective from being a major employer in this country is that far fewer people are at work than they could be. This means instead of investing in parts of national life that might stimulate investment and growth into the wider economy, we are spending an ever increasing proportion of our national income on our out-of-work benefits.
“We have been sleepwalking into a quiet epidemic that is keeping millions of people out of work,” Prasad said.
Prasad did not say what out of work benefits he was referring to in his claims. The government has said the number of people claiming health-related benefits that enable them not to work has increased by 800,000 since 2019-20, while the number claiming a personal independence payment (Pip) to help cover the additional living costs of their disability is forecast to double this decade from 2 million to 4.3 million.
However, Pip is not an out-of-work benefit, and economists have pointed out that overall out-of-work benefits have not risen.
People talk about it because there was a shaky trial in Covid that appeared to show improvement.
How on further investigation it turned out that the trial was in India and that many of the patients who improved had undiagnosed parasitic infestations…
10 dead at residential school in BC.
Lopez would be head and shoulders the most competent and personably friendly Tory female MP of importance at the moment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnCe3H6RcBs&t=619s
What is the point of vetting if the spooks don't even read Private Eye? It gives the lie to the notion that this was new information from the Epstein files.
I would not recommend covertly taking anything in conjunction with chemo and immunotherapy due to the potential of drug interactions with the allopathic drugs. Declare everything to the oncologist as a matter of safety.
The problem with vetting is that it's more than a bit rubbish.
https://arthursnell.substack.com/p/the-vetting-myth
Normal vetting was not applied because HMG and Starmer specifically wanted a wrong'un as US Ambassador to deal with US wrong'uns.
None of this can be said publicly by the people involved so we end up with this absurd debate.
Things like selling state secrets and advising people on how to defeat the policies of your own government.
Whining about how it’s jolly unfair because you wanted plausible deniability about Mandy’s sins is bollocks.
The thing is, plausible deniability only works, if what you are denying is plausible. And not really stupid.
And giving a serial liar and resigner-over-ethics a government job without knowing the truth is stupid.
Trump sought - and failed - to bring criminal charges against six members of Congress who said things that displeased him.
Charles I’s attempt to do similar with five MPs in 1642 preceded a civil war.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/10/us/politics/trump-democrats-illegal-orders-pirro.html
If the situation continues, it will mean choosing between the weighted VI and the unweighted approval ratings, and maybe money will be made by those who choose wisely.
@labuzamovies.com
Sora 2 apparently cost something like $5 billion to run every year and so far made OpenAI around $1.4 million.
https://bsky.app/profile/labuzamovies.com/post/3mek2c2xipk2o
I’m so excited
I just can’t hide it
I’m about to lose control
And I think I like it !
If the "kick em when they're down" mentality is the theme there, even for full governance over several years , then it will likely be a battle for 3rd , 4th , 5th Labour, Tories ; Green and of course a few hot spots possibly for LD.
At the moment, it seems to me, it’s like the gold rush where more people, allegedly, made money from supplying the kit like the shovels than actually from the gold
Not surprising because if you want particular jobs done there are better more specialised jobs for it. And the free version is good enough for all the freeloaders...
Again. I’ve no evidence, but surely leadership ratings must end up having some impact on votes especially in a campaign.
Be the guy selling shovels.
Unless the US had shared that with us earlier (which seems unlikely) then more thorough vetting wouldn't have picked that up last year.
After that it gets a bit more complicated
The Nvidia chips need to go in servers. Those are made by companies outside the US which has totally skewed their balance of trade
And the servers need to go in data centers that don't exist, fueling a massive property speculation bubble
It is all going to end in tears
Abandoned data center projects littering the landscape like gold rush era ghost towns...
Between fast EV charger networks and data centres, the US is expected to need more power stations by the end of this year. There’s even talk of recommissioning old nuclear facilities to meet the demand.
shovelsprocessors that might not be fulfilled or paid for, and that goes all the way up to so far unbuilt datacentres.NEW THREAD
I’m not too concerned, the S&P 500 now has the other 493 companies now starting to perform whereas the magnificent 7 has been sluggish this year.
Elon Musk has cynically merged xAI with SpaceX so he sidesteps having to actually make money from AI and Anthropic seem like the only AI specific company that has serious corporate penetration to last out the bubble burst.
My guess is that OpenAI goes under and MS picks up the pieces for cheap and then they do what they always do and shit it up like they have with Activision.
90% of my questions would have previously been answered via Google. And successfully. AI speeds up the process - I might pay a fiver a month for it if the free option wasn't there (including from alternatives) , but not enough to make my usage profitable for them.
At work there are some more time saving use cases. And I assume my company pays for the privilege. So I suspect commercial sales will be the way to profitability, whichever AI platforms manage that (probably Microsoft Copilot, given Office integration, then a bunch of specialist applications). Google will undercut the business model of any consumer focussed businesses via providing Gemini for free to protect its search business.
It’s meh for both Farage and Davey
It’s poor for Polanski