Things you have recently learnt

surrey_commuter said:

TheBigBean said:

surrey_commuter said:

TheBigBean said:

briantrumpet said:

TheBigBean said:

briantrumpet said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

pblakeney said:

Curious.
Is displaying a cleavage now flashing?

Not if you don't look at it.

It is well meaning simpleton wokey politics. A bit like the clusterfcuk they are making about male/female spaces.

Fancy hanging out in women's toilets or changing rooms at the gym? Well then, identify as a woman for a day.

Not sure equating people in the background of photographs of other things with some bloke perving on a crowded train is that useful. Criminal law seems to be able to distinguish intentional harm from accident in plenty of other complex areas so not sure you need to worry so much.

Also, they are proposing to extend existing legislation in E&W, too. Are you saying Patel is woke?

Oh well if Priti Patel is doing it, it must be good.

Read what I wrote. The idea is fine - basically to stop revenge porn, but if the consequences is to inadvertently capture lots of things that are perfectly reasonable, it might be a problem.

No, but I don't think anyone would accuse her of being woke. I am suggesting the consequence is entirely imaginary. The law already exists: they are just proposing to tweak the definition. For a start the justice system has all but ground to a halt so amending the definition of one crime is not going to lead to a flood of wrongful prosecutions.

There's a whole debate there about overuse of secondary legislation.

And no, it's not terribly important in the grand scheme of things. And no, Priti Patel is not woke. But the SNP are trying to be (except when supporting MPs accused of sexual misconduct).

But someone somewhere will fall foul of a badly written piece of legislation eventually. It is in the nature of bad legislation to cause this.

It is more likely to have a similar noticable effect as the one that prevents you from filming the school play your child is in. In that case, to prevent abusive images, all images of children become problematic. Although it wasnt intended that someone filming the school play might be considered to be acquiring paedophilic images, best be on the safe side now....

That was the sort of thing that I was thinking of, along with the more recent GDPR requirement for individual opt-in photo permission. Sooner or later, someone will see how far they can test the law's specifics.

Nothing wrong with that. I don't think schools should be publishing photos of any kids, but if other parents are happy to consent, so be it.

It's an interesting one. Try telling parents that they can't take a snap of their child in the angel costume in the nativity play.

And try taking photos of a stadium concert without showing audience faces.

As ever, somewhere in the middle, between outright ban and complete freedom, there's a woolly happy medium. Writing that into enforcible statute is hard. And enforcing it is even harder.

I don't have a problem with other parents taking pictures. I have a problem with a school doing it and publishing the photos.

we had a consent form so it was our choice if the school published pics of our kids

So do we, but they don't seem to have a fool proof mechanism in place to ensure compliance as it relies on the teachers remembering who is on the no photo list.

Apparently, the reason they are so keen to publish photos of kids is because it forms part of OFSTED's assessment. Sadly, I don't get to argue with OFSTED about this.

in one class we must have been in a tiny minority to approve as she was in nearly every photo

Pross said:

That there were 9 years between 1900 and 2002 were the UK had temperatures above 35 degrees but since 2003 we have already had 7 years where that temperature has been reached.

kingstongraham said:

TheBigBean said:

Pross said:

That there were 9 years between 1900 and 2002 were the UK had temperatures above 35 degrees but since 2003 we have already had 7 years where that temperature has been reached.

How many were in the 90s?

Two.

1906, 1911, 1923, 1932, 1948, 1957, 1976, 1990, 1995.

Then 2003, 2006, 2015, 2018, 2019, 2020 plus 2022 next week?

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

TheBigBean said:

Pross said:

That there were 9 years between 1900 and 2002 were the UK had temperatures above 35 degrees but since 2003 we have already had 7 years where that temperature has been reached.

How many were in the 90s?

Two.

1906, 1911, 1923, 1932, 1948, 1957, 1976, 1990, 1995.

Then 2003, 2006, 2015, 2018, 2019, 2020 plus 2022 next week?

Thanks. Interesting. My memory is that the 90s were hot and the summers have been rubbish for a long time. Highly likely to be an age related observation.

First.Aspect said:

It is just sun spot activity.

I remember 28-30 being fairly common, but 35+ not. The climate up here now is not dissimilar to the climate in the SE 40 years ago, in my experience. We used to get snow, but not for long, frost on the inside of single glazed windows and mis 20s temperatures.
In the summer. Other than it being windier, that's like Edinburgh now.

Now I the SE 30-35 is routine in the summer and snow is so rare I imagine you need to explain what it is to 8 year olds who've never seen it before.

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

First.Aspect said:

It is just sun spot activity.

I remember 28-30 being fairly common, but 35+ not. The climate up here now is not dissimilar to the climate in the SE 40 years ago, in my experience. We used to get snow, but not for long, frost on the inside of single glazed windows and mis 20s temperatures.
In the summer. Other than it being windier, that's like Edinburgh now.

Now I the SE 30-35 is routine in the summer and snow is so rare I imagine you need to explain what it is to 8 year olds who've never seen it before.

I've certainly experience a lot more snow in the last 15 years than in the 15 years before that.

Easy to forget how far north Europe is compared to say the US/Canada.

TheBigBean said:

First.Aspect said:

It is just sun spot activity.

I remember 28-30 being fairly common, but 35+ not. The climate up here now is not dissimilar to the climate in the SE 40 years ago, in my experience. We used to get snow, but not for long, frost on the inside of single glazed windows and mis 20s temperatures.
In the summer. Other than it being windier, that's like Edinburgh now.

Now I the SE 30-35 is routine in the summer and snow is so rare I imagine you need to explain what it is to 8 year olds who've never seen it before.

I've certainly experience a lot more snow in the last 15 years than in the 15 years before that.

TheBigBean said:

Who can forget the beast from the east?

It's definitely a subject matter that would be helped by stats, but I can't find any.

First.Aspect said:

I looked at Jan and Feb averages for Heathrow for 1961-1990, and 1991-2020.

Ave max temp up by about 1.5C, rainfall slightly higher, days of frost down from about 10 each month to 7.

It is possible that you are seeing fewer more extreme weather events, but overall unquestionably milder.

surrey_commuter said:

kingstongraham said:

Since I bought some Yaktrax I've not seen any snow. Been several years now.

Do you live in Jamaica?