Fresh Adages // Embra, Scotland
218 followers 668 following 2,896 posts
view profile on Bluesky 
one way to understand why very rich people so often go mad is to realize they have long been surrounded by the kind of persuasive but truth-indifferent sycophantic affirmers that OpenAI and its peers have only recently made accessible to the rest of us.
Possibly you meant to link a different one of BT's starter packs? He has several. First one is focused on public comms really.... go.bsky.app/MBL7PrE
Reading seems pretty optional for the folk on here TBH
(I look forward to dan coming along to explain that I'm basically wrong, and it's even more complicated than I expect)
And we'd potentially be even lower if were feasible to compare like-for-like (because single-payer healthcare such a big expense), right?
Villa should have been all over that (tho maybe wages too high)
I'm Team Hung Parliament myself.
The point, as was obvious to most, is that these are standard and almost 'boring' sounding foods, not exotic at all, not spicy at all, but which have a lot of flavour. It's to illustrate the bit that followed: "Americans have this weird idea that anything which doesn't have chili in it is bland"
chancing bastards
Bill Date Days since previous 19/8/24 30/9/24 42 new cap? 20/12/24 81 from 1st October 11/3/25 81 31/5/25 81 20/8/25 81
Scottish Power claim to bill me 'quarterly' but have nonetheless managed to send me four bills covering the period 1/10/24 to 20/8/25. Obviously not getting them any extra money, but maybe a trick to make bills look lower than they are? Because only paying for 81 days' worth instead of 91-ish?
From what people tell me it is a far more pleasant place to be if you are, for example, black, or trans, than xitter. If the flipside is it's a slightly less pleasant place to be conservative I would think that overall is a net good thing.
Ah man
Yeah the yanks are convinced they are 'punching up' as well, hence the speed with which 'coloniser' always comes up in these discussions. Despite... you know. Anyway, I think there are *some* symmetries but overall the Brits' view of America is a bit more accurate and current than the converse.
“It’s absurd that a flight from Barcelona to London can cost just €15 while the train on the same route is up to 26 times more expensive.” www.railtech.com/all/2025/08/... Yes, it absolutely is, but let's also remember that the cost of your flight is not €15, once you've added all the extras.
There's a lot going on here and a lot this guy doesn't know but I would like to venture that 'how come the southwestern united states has such strong Mexican influences on cuisine etc' might be on the list as well.
If you forgot to take the dog with you that would be worse
I mean, the mainstream media *does* have massive biases! But it's not usually 'simply omitting stuff that is indisputibly important' kind of blatant. Similar to the urge whereby some people think they can solve decades-old cold cases after five minutes' googling.
With a very occasional 'give it an hour because the only places reporting yet are the ones who just copied and pasted the announcement straight in and hit 'publish'.
Football commentators are more obsessed with men’s height than straight women on The Apps
I live beside a junction and there are more than ten outbreaks of honking because someone hasn't noticed the light going green in an average day. At just one junction. And that's just the ones who were *totally* engrossed.
[If you're reading this and thinking 'that man sounds like his football team just got cuffed in a home derby' then congratulations and fuck you]
The arctic is the new great game, dontyaknow
You can't win this game. You can only lose quickly, or lose slowly.
The real problem is the massive apparatus designed to exploit people's most base tendencies by roiling them up to incandescent fury over spurious grievances, in order to gull them into voting for parties and policies they could never be persuaded to support on their own actual merits.
issue' by moving towards them and they just move further right. After fifteen iterations we're now at 'the right are calling for mass deportations' and labour are still trying to 'address people's reasonable concerns'. It's insanity!
benefits so we made them NRPF. Then the problem was 'free riding the NHS' so we bring in health surcharge. Then it was 'no control of our borders' so you leave the EU. Then it was 'not enough council homes' so you put them in hotels. Etc etc etc. The right talk tough, you try and 'neutralise the >
Anyone who thinks there is a strategy available to labour on immigration that involves 'fixing the problem' needs to be clear about what the problem actually is. You can fix 'small boats' or 'asylum hotels'. But the tiger moves on. Neither of those was the problem before. The problem was 'people on>
Discovering at 17 i had been saying 'banal' wrong a particularly highlight for me.
Ps 'lying' was just the classic example of a strategy that works really well for a bit but when it stops working goes really bad really fast. I was just using in abstract sense. Not making accusations.
compromise. Once your voter coalition is remain-dominated there's nobody to compromise with so no point in acceoting weak sauce. Perfectly rational to vote lib dem at that point,since they are actually offering what you actually want.
Labour could hold on to leavers in a world where the tories weren't 'delivering brexit' and were telling people the kind of deal mattered. As soon as tories went 'brexit or bust' labour was gonna lose a lot of them. And labour's only value to remain was if it could bring leavers on board with a >
May trying to get a deal that respected the 'red lines', and was slightly less bad than the worst possible deal. Not much to you and me but a massive betrayal to a lot of leavers (who obvs never trusted her anyway). The alternative was going 'full boris', getting out asap even if no deal etc
But yeah. It was, for the party and the country, a bad strategy. The same thing that boosted lab in 17 sowed the seeds of downfall in 2019. Not to absolve the wreckers etc. But labour's own strategy was enough to fuck them (and all of us) on its own.
Made selfish sense if you wanted to gamble everything on 2017 because doubted you'd get another GE of course. Probably nobody really gave much weight to a scenario in which Labour lost but didn't change leader.
I mean, *just lying* can be an incredible strategy in the short term. Promising incompatible things to different groups, likewise. Hedging worked as long as the other party in near-duopoly hedged too. But it was inevitable that either tories would go full brexit or duopoly would break.
I haven't signed up. Might, might not. Probably would have done if I lived in England.
Well, won't be long, either way. But I think everyone knows he's the only one who has the opportunity to do this and potentially get it the profile/ coverage it will need to survive the first couple of years.
Broke: shower beer Woke: bath rüm
Not specific to JC *at all*, to be clear. Lot of it about. But inability to even concieve of how other people might see things differently from you is a pretty significant political failing, yeah.
of a 'debate' that you think is just a distraction. Totally blind to possibility that other people do care, often a lot, about this stuff, and so by 'keeping both sides on board' you lose a lot more people than you gain.
Mostly this, yeah. But it's also a weird ideology/solipsism thing. Was a bit the same with him trying to hold brexiters and rwmainers together in labour. Because *he* doesn't think it's the important question, it seems *obvious* that you shouldn't reduce your potential vote by ruling out one side >
The prosecution rests
There's an average of over thirty private jet flights every day, taking off or landing in Scotland. 12 thousand a year. I'm guessing Taylor Swift is probably two of those. (Sorry for taking too seriously, I know, I know)
Moment of zen
(* But yeah, agree that there are a lot of things that could make our democracy function much better which don't require a totally new paradigm. Let's start with 'adopt the standard international best practice' and see how far that gets us, first. )
Don't think this necessarily refutes your main point*, but i really think the things they have aren't really *parties* in a meaningful sense though. It's just labels that anyone can use if/when they choose.
It's all SOOOO long ago.....
There were less than three months of the 90s left when it started so he must have become emblematic pretty fast :-) (I definitely did Google to check before nitpicking. This isnt some amateur operation here)
I hate to nitpick* but Simon Pegg is the most early 2000s emblem of cool imaginable.
oh no
Well, forgive me for being a little pedantic, but when people on demos are being locked up all over the country every weekend, the distinction between violent and non-violent forms of protest or political action seems quite an important line to hold fast on. 'Vandalised' would have done fine.
do fine, is a choice that implies something more serious. I note that a lot of publications avoid 'attacked' entirely in this sort of case, instead describing inanimate objects as being 'targeted' by protestors. Presumably to avoid implying violence when there was none.
Of course. One can do violence to the English language. Or harm to one's own reputation. But in the context of a report of a workplace being attacked, a situation which at some times might involve harm to people and other times not, describing it as 'violently attacked' when just 'attacked' would>
harm results.
Unless qualified, 'violently attacked' would be understood by any normal reader as referring to 'violence against a person'. Fraud may be a serious crime but it is not 'violent crime'. Laws may be attacks on civil liberties but they only become violent attacks on civil liberties when personal >
Obviously not condoning vandalism in general, but describing this incident as them being "violently attacked" is clearly beyond 'opinion' and into 'deliberately misleading'. A distinction which might be relevant here in more than one way.
One of the best things about the internet is that you can just make shit up. It's one of the reasons I invented it
So now your libertarian wing is dead or dying, and people who were previously pretty-far-out outriders in a direction best characterised as 'racism' are not far from conservative party central.
legitimately described as far more extreme on social issues. But probably/arguably are less extreme ie more mainstream on economics that a lot of what went before in con circles. Compared to electorate. Outriders in all directions always existed, but *whole party* has moved 'north and a bit west'.
The right has always been a coalition that included economic liberals and social conservatives. No surprise that neoliberal economics blowing up in 2008 has seen RW parties moving emphasis towards social authoritarianism, for electoral advantage if nothing else. Current tory party and Reform are >
opinions from right wing bubble love telling you their opinions in real life. Capital is good at making sure its interests are well represented in general. Cultural americocentrism. FPTP. Baby Boom demography. Retirees have lots of time to phone LBC. I would happily live in a bubble if I could.
I think it's really difficult, maybe impossible, to actually live in a left/liberal bubble. Possible reasons include: traditional media skew right, and still play a big role in setting the agenda (even for those who don't consume them directly). 'Balance' on tv. Lots of people who get all their >
Subjective I admit! But feels like it used to be much more common that a club could have a good few years then sink down again. Feels like it's gone from 80% bad times/20% good times for a lot of clubs to 80% good times/ 20% bad times for a much narrower group.
I suppose I'd want to count 'how predictive is a top four finish one year of a top four finish the next year?' At work now but might look later. My feeling is based on clubs like chelsea or city, who used to be occasionally near top but mostly not, now being near top much more consistently.
England having five or six behemoths is obvs in a much better place than countries who only have one club of that calibre (eg france/Germany). But it's still fair to point out that there's been a lot less movement in and out of the 'top tier' than there used to be. Man U an exception!
It is more competitive than a lot of other European leagues but they are almost all much less competitive than they used to be. Uefa money is the massive difference. Effect less dramatic in England because league revenues are so much higher that uefa money is relatively less distortionary.
Love the original as well but this version is perfecto. youtu.be/IQ_UKs-YhI8?...
When two words sound the same but have a different meaning it’s called a
OTOH it does suggest they *could* be in league 1 now if the previous system still existed.
#Tram consultation There's 100s of pages! Here's a summary relevant to 🚲👩🦼🚶, useful links & drop-in dates --> www.spokes.org.uk/2025/08/tram... @edi.bike @chdot.bsky.social @edfoc.bsky.social @thecockburn.bsky.social @edinreporter.bsky.social @edinburghminute.bsky.social @edcriticalmass.bsky.social
Hearing reports Kier Starmer is discussing a ban on pizzas with straight edges and/or sharp corners
Sadly a lot of pertinent stuff in thread and replies. Suspect there's also a weird generation thing hoing on as well, because its the difference between the internet being part of your reality and the internet being all you have ever known reality to be.
Was gonna say, that's some mobility scooter!
If you do get close to the big ton, could try and track these down. Guy was churning the albums out at this point:
Sadly current leadership only have one record to play so turning up the volume is all they have. I hope i'm wrong but I can't see any way things will change unless new Labour leader. And I can't see a new Lab leader unless there's an electoral implosion first. Fingers crossed for a hung parliament..
Yeah but that's what i mean! Blair/Brown prioritised Higher Ed and that took good students, funding and prestige away from further education colleges etc etc. Agree a total cultural shift needed, not like govt can just press a button. But ultimately we do need skilled workers of all sorts.
I'm pretty sure they do want to grow revenues and the club, they are just banking on a better option than the scottish league coming along sooner or later, and so the only thing to do in the meantime is to 'build global profile' and make sure you get an invite.
(And probably means they have to give up on chasing euro super league or whatever it is they think they are currently banking on as a growth strategy)
The lack of domestic competition is a hindrance, not a help. Until the big two realise they need a stronger league, and let the revenue allocation reflect that, it's gonna be ever-decreasing circles. Have to be willing to take hit in short term to prioritise long term though, and not an easy sell.
a job or your benefits get stopped' has ever really worked to be honest. Ultimately people have to want to do the job, or they'll do a bad job. Probably some liberal waffle about more money for further education is the best answer I have. Gives people a couple of years to grow up, at least....
There's just a lot of folk who don't suit school, don't suit service sector, don't suit care work. Used to be more manual labour jobs that folk got into cause their dad did the same. Or friend of a friend. Still exists, of course. But lot less than used to be. No easy solutions, tbh. Not sure 'take>
(IE the visa changes already happened, immigration is way down, and if you can't persuade anti-imm voters you've done that, there's no reason to believe doubling down is gonna make it better. So even if you think current policy is a reasonable compromise, talking tougher *now* defeats that too.)
I mean, whether they believe it or not isn't really the important thing. If it costs them lots of votes from people who disagree with it, and it's not winning them votes from people who want much harsher action, and always will, it's suicidal to crank it up harder and more.
This is also a fantastically transparent example of her saying (and possibly even believing) literally any bullshit, provided it is the most convenient thing for her to say or think at any given moment.
In a year of Labour putting major restrictions on legal immigration to appease immigration focussed voters they have gone from 35% to 19% in polls, immigration is now a higher profile issue, and both right opposition parties have moved to calling, either as leaders or as MPs, for mass deportations.
interest in doing. So there is obviously an economic downside, even if there is also a potential benefit in terms of reduced unemployment.
*(Sponsoring visas is expensive and complicated, so basically no employer is gonna do it if there are perfectly capable and willing domestic candidates. We'll be forcing employers to hire people they would currently judge unsuitable, or forcing young people to take jobs they currently have no >
economy*, and making itself unpopular with a lot of other voters, for no particular gain with most of the supposed target voters.
Yeah the problem is that if anti-imm voters aren't actually motivated by youth unemployment then the government taking steps to reduce youth unemployment isn't going to put a dent in support for reform. Or in the amount of media coverage given to demonising migrants. So govt is taking a hit to the>
That would mean taking on the right-wing press/media. And *at least* half these guys owe their current positions to working *with* the right-wing press/media to regain control of labour. It's not impossible to do as you say. But if these guys were likely to, they prob wouldn't be where they are.
Unemployment actually is starting to tick up a bit now. But most of the people who want less immigration had the exact same opinion even when unemployment was at all-time lows. So I just don't believe that is part of the reason, for most of them. (It may be for you, of course!)
I think a lot of people expected this government to be bad, and maybe dangerous. The extent to which they are mad is the only surprising part.
Not sure if your misreading here is deliberate, but just in case not: No, the position that most government critics hold is just that restricting visas has exactly zero effect on the salience of the issue, and close to zero effect on how anti-imm voters rate the govt vs their opponents.
And I was talking in more general terms, of course. 'Stop the fascists' is a perfectly acceptable anti-Reform slogan, for me. Maybe the best one.
Well, you don't want to have to register a new domain name when Vance is the candidate in a couple of years (though i'm sure he'll be promising to be just a paper candidate pending the outcome of all the court cases....)
'Stop the fascists!' has more rhetorical power than 'Stop the Authoritarians!' so I suspect (linguistic) resistance would be futile.
Of course there's a narrower meaning of 'fascism' which is more tightly bound to the specific C20th regimes but most people today use it more broadly. What starts out as simile gradually becomes part of the meaning of the word. Same for eg communism, and probably most such terms. >
A hundred and twenty five years and FINALLY someone has the guts to say it!!!!