Partly “owning the libs” I think. As climate change is increasingly impossible to deny, the idea of solving it, but in a way that the Greens will really, really hate instead of just doing what the Greens want is psychologically attractive to the right.
LibDem/Greens coalition minority government tolerated by the SNP, it will be fine.
Those Legitimate Concerns™ are getting pretty intense, huh
I suspect if you're not push-polling and ask properly, public opinion ends up pretty much where the law currently is: in principle, if you were fleeing a dangerous situation and that danger goes away, you should go back; but if you've been here for years with no problems, we should waive that.
Yes, that question was about the Labour proposal to extend that from 5 to 20.
And Green voters were -7 net unfavorable on the question if it should be treated as temporary for twenty years instead of five.
There's a lot being hidden here in the flexible definition of the word "temporary".
It's not, MiC have the data available for open download. It's technically true that Green voters were net favorable on temporary status – but at +20.
The other parties were net favorable at +66 to +78! Relatively speaking, Green voters hate this.
The layoff mania of the last few years in tech is, in large part, the non-technical leadership tier of these companies furiously screaming at tech workers to stop having opinions and demanding things.
They want to go back to, we pay big salaries but you STFU.
Didn't know her, had to close Wikipedia in pain where she started publicly ranting about uncontrolled migration and then immediately moved to Portugal.
Why are all of these the same person.
Is there even a single example of a significant Democratic candidate actually talking about pronouns?
I can't remember it ever coming up except when scolding everyone to stop talking about pronouns, which nobody was.
Worth noting that for 99% of employees, “I gave a shitty Python script I randomly found on GitHub and didn't read total access to my corporate user account” would be an instant firing.
Current Big Tech leadership combines immense stupidity with total unaccountability.
Eine Lösung ist das natürlich auch nicht. Wenn BER die harte Grenze von 00:00 auf 00:15 legt, dann wird der Ryanair-Heulsusendienst halt einberufen, wenn Flüge um 00:20 angekommen wären. „Es waren doch nur fünf Minuten 😭“ etc
Die Toleranz sollten 60 oder 45 oder 90 Minuten sein, nicht 30 – kann man meinetwegen alles fordern.
Aber „Wir waren doch nur 5 min zu spät 🥺“ wenn es mindestens 35 waren: einfach nur gelogen.
Es nervt mich sehr, dass selbst Fachmedien nicht den Hinweis schaffen, dass Ryanair lügt. Verspätete Flüge dürfen am BER noch landen, sogar bis zu 30 Minuten nach dem regulären Betriebsende.
Ryanair's Behauptung, es ginge ja nur um ein paar Minuten, ist grob irreführend.
Remember the wave of startups a few years back that were “using AI” to help with travel expenses? You take a photo of the receipt and it figures out all the stuff like category, vendor, currency, amount, date?
Yeah that's all remote workers. The ML models were garbage and they couldn't fix them.
“Hey EASA, can you recertify our jets please? They're physically the same, it's just they now run custom firmware we bought from NATOHaX0r69 on Telegram. No we don't know what's in it but it's probably fine.”
Some of them get this, that's why the same people talk about various ideas for mandatory service.
Maybe one in a thousand Marketplace of Ideas weirdos actually means it, and that's me feeling generous this morning.
It's almost always just “freedom for speech I agree with”.
The real reason will be because it's not built by Alstom, but I wonder what excuses they're using.
This might be the first company I'll fully believe when they claim this has not made their customer service any worse.
The simple, three steps Labour plan to get what you want:
1. Work hard every day to create the exact opposite of what you want
2. ???
3. Get what you want
One thing I love about Claire North novels is the moment when you think, “Well that was quite a ride but now the story is clearly coming to an end” and then you look down and your device says you're 23% through the book.
It's impossible to know anything, you can only he said / they said it. 🤷♂️
Literally hundreds of experts: You have to close the building for full repairs.
One Tory idiot: No we don't.
I love that even on something this unimportant, the BBC can't stop themselves from pretending these are viewpoints of equal weight and validity.
“He helped me change the Labour Party” is technically true
For example, from winning to catastrophically losing
Hier ist es relativ üblich, dass Cafés es an der Kasse haben, zumindest wenn es eine größere Kette ist. Schon oft das Schild gesehen.
Ich weiß nicht, ob es tatsächlich funktionieren würde, oder Kategorie vor Jahren mal eingebaut und nie getestet.
At the time, it was simply not possible to know about the bad stuff.
Please don't fact check this though.
It's also funny how the official booster line has quietly shifted from "IT WILL REVOLUTIONIZE LITERALLY EVERYTHING" to "But some people say it's good at coding 🥺"
Like do you know we can see you?
Not at all bizarre to me that someone whose paid full time job is pretending AI is real still thinks there's something there.
In music, you can see an unknown band for £20 and a superstar for £400.
In comedy, seeing a nobody live is £20 and seeing a well known comedian with a bunch of TV appearances live is £20.
Which is nice if you enjoy live comedy.
