Rayvin

The BBC does exceptional documentaries, no complaints there. I don't watch any of the other programming so I can't comment on those. Including Hans Zimmer on this project was a masterstroke. I went to see him in concert last year and it was probably the best live event I've ever been to. The only complaint I have with the BBC's wildlife programming is that it flits around too much these days. When I was young I used to watch Wildlife on 2 religiously. It would dedicate a full half an hour to a single species, and I really felt like I was learning a lot. In these more modern day documentaries, they're spending about 3-4 minutes per animal. I get why they do this, to appeal to a broader audience (and because the series' they're doing have a much broader scope), but I miss the old format too.

Think the statute of limitations might apply on that one

That sounds awesome actually, I really have to finish the series off.

It was in the fallout of the Tory porn ban It's one of the things they took off us. Not that it's one of my go to themes, but it's mainstream enough that it was worth noting at the time

I haven't actually, I'm about half-way through that series at the moment. I'll look forward to it though. I think I heard about this anyway though in the papers at one point. Was the idea that the sides of buildings will be entirely covered in plants or something to that effect?

Amazed you don't have establishment in there...

:lol: Agree with basically all of it... squirting though? Don't rememb--oh wait, yeah. And I've only mentioned libertarians in response to HF and Parky

Admittedly I only see the Alt-Right through one specific channel (Milo, Breitbart, etc) but I think a substantial part of it was formed through internet counter culture and resistance to political correctness (and i note the title of that skit is political incorrectness, but even so). Islamophobia is another key aspect. I've not seen as much from them about big government. I do think they're distinct from the tea party. I'm not even sure how patriotic the Alt Right are, I think they're about cultural identity rather than national. But obviously, I only look at them through one lens.

Um... I would have said it traces right back to Thatcher and Reagan instituting Neoliberalism more than some guy laughing at some people being killed. Why do you think this is the moment?

Is it a stand up routine he's doing at City Hall, or is it political commentary? The latter might be funnier.

It's a nice idea, a vertical city. If it was done without 60s monolithic crap.

Yeah the whole thing continues to be a farce. The best Labour can hope for is that their amendments are ignored and the resulting deal is so shit that the public tear the Tories a new one. Or that economic armageddon is on the horizon if we get no deal at all. This whole process has to be one of the biggest, costliest wastes of time that this country has ever embarked upon.

Starmer is considered to be a good choice for the party generally, but is he 'on the left'? He might be, but I don't know. I expect he'll be who the established leftwing (Guardian) press throw their weight behind. Unless a woman runs anyway. That said, maybe it would shut the progressives up if we did have a 'left wing' female candidate running. Which would be fine if she had the same sorts of ideas as Sanders or Corbyn.

Ah fair enough. I mean it's obvious that Jones is very right wing, but I had him nearer to the Alt-Right than the Libertarians.

Alex Jones is a libertarian??

They might not need to in the Trump era. Although it's certainly clear that the US couldn't take both if it did come to that. Not without the EU. And the EU is on the ropes now anyway.

I don't think the Chinese could stand in the face of the wholesale might of the US navy, no matter their tech. Plus the US would get buy in from every other country actively resisting Chinese imperialism in that area. But I take your point - entrenched missile battery placements in their fake islands will make it difficult and it would be extremely costly for both sides. My point was more that the Chinese look concerned. This isn't a normal statement from them, to see them trying to calm things down rather than using current events for domestic bravado. It suggests that they don't fully trust that the US government won't attack them, or force their hands in something they don't want to do.

China looking concerned here - they're considered a much bigger military force than they actually are IMO. Sure if it came to land invasions they'd be able to repel anyone, but naval fights over the South China Sea, the US would win comfortably. They'll also be looking to keep a lid on domestic nationalism here. If the Chinese people see that the US is provoking them, they'll judge their government on its response. If the CCP look weak, they'll lose power. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/07/steve-bannon-china-plays-down-predictions-of-war-with-us-wang-yi I reckon the US might fancy their chances, disastrously.

I think that's quite a common problem actually. Being good technically isn't the same as being a good manager. Where things become difficult is that career progression becomes difficult once you've hit 'senior whatever' in your technical field. Then you either try your hand at management or... I dunno, stay where you are.

I'm really not trying to make a point about the virtues of private vs public, I was just lamenting NCC's incompetence. But fwiw, they hire a lot of private consultants to make up the shortfall in competence. EDIT - to be fair, private companies often do this too. As I say, the public v private argument wasn't the point.

Quiet, you.

I think the private sector is full of incompetence but that these people only rise so high. I think it's called the Peter principle. People only rise until they get found out as incompetent, and then don't go further. The need to maximise shareholder wealth ensures this to a greater degree than public sector concerns, I would guess. But look, I was just talking about NCC. I've heard similar things from colleagues working in hospitals as well, and think to myself that some manner of competent management would save a great deal of money. The problem often sounds like you have people with vested interests in resisting such change in positions of power. In the private sector, new management can come in and ride roughshod over those people. In public sector, I'd expect they can't. Peter Principle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle

I'm referring to Newcastle City Council only here, not that I'd be surprised to see it happen elsewhere. And it's based on nothing more than my dad's 30 years working there. The Tories made this problem infinitely worse with all the cuts; experienced people were asked to take on unreasonable amounts of work, left (quite often in large numbers), and were replaced by people beneath them who were patently unqualified to do the jobs. My dad had this issue - his department and another department were being merged - he was heading up his own department and was told he'd have to apply for the job to run both. The guy heading up the other department was told the same thing. The idea was that this would save management costs. The problem was, it was a fucking stupid idea. They were asking for a lot more work to be done and were driven only by the need to cut costs. So the fallout was that both my dad and this other guy simply quit. They had to promote someone from further down, ended up having to pay them more as well, as this guy was reluctant to take it on - and then discovered that it did need two people. So had to hire another person anyway, on a matching inflated salary. Also, they now pay my dad to consult for them at a rate higher than they would have had to if he worked there, because the two people they hired can't do the job. That would not happen in my company. Not sure about anywhere else in the private sector but it's fucking hard to imagine.