Search results for:

Just had to pull off a dead big toenail, fuck me that’s not something I ever want to experience again

a crystal sharp focus on RE

We could definitely all do with a bit more spirituality in our lives ;)

the devs planned for a female protagonist and the marketing dept said "People don't buy games with female leads"

This is so dark

I’m quite sad to be getting rid of it, but our place is too small… 🙁

I'm selling this shelving unit if anyone fancies it?
https://www.lfgss.com/conversations/399791/

A custom-built shelving unit, oak veneer, but with solid edge banding, so feels very solid and well finished.

They measure 244cm long, 32cm deep and 84.5cm high.

Some minor scuffs from moving.

Looking for £200, with collection in SE10.

I'm curious about what the progressive answer is to what I'd say has been my most common experience of crime

I’ve been punched in the face for shits and giggles by a guy pretending to be an aeroplane, just while walking down the street. Not a great experience, despite it actually being quite funny in retrospect, but generally there are reasons for this behaviour.

You could lock the guy up to protect others, or you could do a number of other things which dissuade him from doing it again. Maybe compulsory therapy, fines, anger management, community service, a violence register with various consequences in the public realm, and I’m sure there are lots of other methods too.

Aside from the obvious corruption point, fuck me that’s a lot of social events. You couldn’t pay me to have a calendar like that.

Over what time period is it?

Donations are far less problematic because they're in the public record

It just means it’s legitimised, as we’re seeing with some commentary at the moment pretending that this is all okay and very normal.

Limiting donations doesn’t magically fix politics, but at least it would become enforceable, and those that receive them would be (well, should be) under greater scrutiny.

1). There should be no donations of entertainment and holidays allowed. I can't see any justification for an MP being given tickets to a Taylor Swift concert, or holiday flight to New York. The sole purpose is to buy access and influence.

100%. I'd restrict it to just cash — no loans, no property, or anything else.

Would you be happy for political parties, including those you disagree with, being solely funded by the state?

This happens already to some degree, but it’s not much. Can’t quite remember the details but it’s not just a £X/seat funding, it’s something more proportional to votes I believe.

I’d be in favour of capping donations by some multiple of the median wage, and upping the party funding per vote, for what it’s worth.

(Edit: I don't think businesses should be able to donate either, just individuals, to maintain at least some sense that democracies are about people, not money)

(Edit 2: and not to individual MPs, just parties)

damn, that's pretty good actually

Sort-of memes that are confusing you me at the moment

That’s actually quite a surprise!
Damn, I need a pay rise

Isn’t it wonderful to know that at least some wages are adjusted for inflation

Lovely, ta
Mostly because I’m a cheap cunt but like nice things, and generally fret about purchases for months

They do, yeah, hard to see what the finish is like though. I'm curious to see if anyone else has them on a fancy dadbike just to see if they'll look alright?

I've been get annoying neck pain on even short rides, so I think I'm done with drop bars. Wouldn't mind something that looks half decent though, because, well, aesthetics > bike fit

Why is there no canonical bar discussion thread? (Or am I being stupid?)

If anyone has used any of the Ergotec 'Trekking', 'Ladytown', or 'Climber' bars, can you post up some photos?

Thanks for posting this, always loved these buildings / the Segal method, and finally got a look at a couple today 🙂

I wish more stuff was built this way, even the maintenance of services and whatnot behind replaceable panels is just such a great touch.

Amazing.

Kinda surprised they went straight in for a cuddle though. Once upon a time I helped stop a guy jumping off a bridge in Paris, where he'd have landed on an open-top boat beneath, presumably to a grizzly end or at least some very serious injuries.

All he said to me was "Maybe next time", in English, and quickly fucked off.

Nice to see this kind of analysis in the Guardian. The centre now appears to be realising that Labour’s orthodox position is becoming a problem:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/sep/10/keir-starmer-rachel-reeves-britain-pensioners-winter-fuel-allowance

In their own way, Reeves and Starmer are as stereotypically Labour as their more left-leaning colleagues, but they are statist technocrats rather than merchants of social change: their shared quest, it seems, is to put the government machine back in working order and cling on to its orthodoxies in the hope that they can be restored, while somehow sparking renewed economic growth.

This is really a bureaucrat’s prospectus, all about such apolitical concepts as competence and efficiency.

And its most vivid illustration is the three-pronged insistence that will define the immediate political future: that supposed fiscal rectitude must prevail, that no really ambitious thinking can be brought to the tax system and, as a consequence, that meaningfully lifting the country out of the hole it has been stuck in for 14 years is going to have to wait. Treasury spreadsheets, it seems, have decided our fate – and the national malaise may be about to deepen even further.

I disagree with his framing of ‘efficiency as an apolitical concept’, but you can’t have everything I suppose

That sounds bonkers!
Thanks for sharing

Oo interesting, can you speak more about that?

Why shouldn't a lender make a fair return?

Not to get all woo woo about it, but that's been a fairly big moral question in various societies throughout history, and any interest whatsoever has been outlawed quite a few times.

If you have a look at the wiki pages on usury and riba, it's quite a fun rabbit hole if you're into that sort of thing. It gives a nice but weird philosophical background to why a state might be seen as a preferred provider of finance.

In many historical societies including ancient Christian, Jewish, and Islamic societies, usury meant the charging of interest of any kind, and was considered wrong, or was made illegal. During the Sutra period in India (7th to 2nd centuries BC) there were laws prohibiting the highest castes from practicing usury. Similar condemnations are found in religious texts from Buddhism, Judaism (ribbit in Hebrew), Christianity, and Islam (riba in Arabic). At times, many states from ancient Greece to ancient Rome have outlawed loans with any interest. Though the Roman Empire eventually allowed loans with carefully restricted interest rates, the Catholic Church in medieval Europe, as well as the Reformed Churches, regarded the charging of interest at any rate as sinful (as well as charging a fee for the use of money, such as at a bureau de change).

A loud news cycle and shouting from minority fringe extremists don't make a government.

Has anything I've said even come close to suggesting this?

Anyway, the Rental Reform Bill is getting its first reading today. Will be interesting to see what comes of it.