EU referendum, brexit and the aftermath

Does he have a twin?
https://www.lfgss.com/comments/14515078/

It's just really a fundamental problem, this. There is no 'compromise' that would actually work.

It reminds me of a thread about a decade ago on a forum about historic sailing ships, where there was some disagreement over how long some 18th century vessel actually was - one guy said something like 21.5m, based on some set of old plans, the other guy was of the opinion that it must have been 25m or so, based on some other plans. These are people that build wooden models of those sailing vessels, from scratch, so they are both extremely anal about such things, and they have the patience to argue this out over literally years.

In any case, at some point the mods tried to calm the waves a bit and suggested a compromise... and much like May with the current 'deal', this was shot down eagerly from both sides, with the prevailing argument being "compromise how, just average the numbers? That way, it's just guaranteed to be wrong..."

Brexit is in a way even worse, because at least with the sailing ships you have a sorta agreed process: Examine plans, get the length.

The problem was that the plans didn't agree, and not sure why they couldn't say "ok, but depending on the ship the lenght was x or y, perhaps we need to examine the validity of the plans..." but at least there was a "shared reality".

Whenever facts come up on Brexit it goes to
1: Not facts cos that person...
2: Nobody can predict the future
etc...

I can totally envision the two boat hobby fans arguing! :):)

I don't 'read' threads... far too busy.

and not sure why they couldn't say "ok, but depending on the ship the lenght was x or y, perhaps we need to examine the validity of the plans..."

Well as you can imagine, the data on plans from the 18th century is a bit... unreliable. For example, they seem to have often built the actual ships slightly different from what the plans would indicate, or they changed something later on but didn't document it, etc.

Oh, and the measurements will have been in some semi-antique 'ell' measurement, which differed by 10% easily between countries, without it always being super clear which one was being used...

(Btw: this is the kind of level of detail to which those models were built, it takes a certain kind of person to persevere with that... the kind that will not accept 25m as a possible length when they're convinced it's 21.5m. ;)

In any case, you raise a good point: the positions are extra irreconcilable as they're not even starting off from the same plane of reality, because it's based on projected future and opinions rather than stuff that is actually there.

And even when experts butt in a projected futures "nobody can predict the future"

Sure, sure, let's throw all the modelling we use for complex projects / the NHS out of the window too.

But in a way it is an educational issue, nothing in life can be predicted to 100% certainty, and most people don't accept that a shifting model with 80% accuracy assuming 60% of things stay the same is not exactly the same as somebody pulling hot air out of their ass.

But you don't get that stuff as school either.

But you don't get that stuff as school either.

Why would you say this?

A gammonesque comment if I ever saw one.

Beware anyone who is confidently predicting what happens next;

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2018/11/23/week-in-review-brexit-chaos-means-anything-is-possible

But in a way it is an educational issue, nothing in life can be predicted to 100% certainty, and most people don't accept that a shifting model with 80% accuracy assuming 60% of things stay the same is not exactly the same as somebody pulling hot air out of their ass.

Oh god yes, this kind of thing regularly drives me up the walls. Especially when it's applied to science-based stuff. E.g. on the 'hyperloop' topic, engineers say "Yeah maintaining a huge vacuum is going to be an issue for these reasons", and then some idiots come along and go "oh but people in 1800 thought it was impossible to fly, so what you just said isn't worth anything, and everything is possible". Like, yeah, people have been wrong before, but it comes in different 'intensities', you know? A text on that I would always recommend is "The relativity of wrong" by Isaac Asimov (the scifi author, 'Foundation' etc. - but he also wrote 'science-y' books and other stuff).

^ there's no way you're not jeez.

I have met both Jeez and Swisschap in real life. They are not the same person.

who are you, why do you have DJ's login and where is the corpse?

#dibs

Yeah, but has anyone ever seen Jeez and greenhell in the same room?

No idea who that is, but from what I can find on this forum, it seems like I should take that as an insult... (but seriously who is that?)

which is EXACTLY what jeez would say.

also the self regarding guff about asimov etc.

self regarding guff

Care to explain what problem you have with Asimov's text?

yeah no i'm good professor calculus.

I don't get it, most schools before A-level don't seem to teach critical thinking to that extent.
I didn't even get it a uni here at a bSc computer science, checking sources, yes.
Checking bias, yes.
Estimating complex scenarios like Brexit, nope.

Happy to be wrong here though!

yeah no i'm good professor calculus.

Why are you so touchy? I wasn't even talking to you and somehow you sound personally insulted by that post. Are you a hyperloop fanboy or something? Genuinely wondering what your problem is.

'Professor calculus'? Sick burn, dude.

Quick tip. Put @greenhell on ignore. The world instantly becomes a more pleasant, polite, tolerant and generally nicer place. There is literally no downside.

Why are you so touchy?

Hyper-sensitive overly-precious troll who dishes it out but can't take it in return. Like I said, there is no downside to hitting the Ignore button in this case.

lol

Thanks for the tip. He does sound a bit like someone pissed in his breakfast cereal.