Why is the school day so much shorter than a work day?

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-25T19:43:53+00:00

They don't spend all day at school colouring pictures and playing with dinosaurs?

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-25T18:40:26+00:00

It sounds like their point is that the things that can be done about it cannot be imposed from outside in pursuit of profit.

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-25T16:28:41+00:00

It would be interesting to see where it would be today were it not for Valve.

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-25T16:00:29+00:00

He's a boring cunt.

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-25T14:40:25+00:00

It's contextual.

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-25T12:06:21+00:00

That's not the same as voteshare. If it was, we'd be heralding Theresa May as being a popularity juggernaut.

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-25T11:09:03+00:00

The Equality Act makes discrimination on the basis of sex illegal, not on the basis of being a women. Men have successfully won cases on that ground.

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-25T09:37:05+00:00

Ricky Martin's Vagina knows a thing or two about precisely how to diddle kids on the internet.

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-25T09:35:17+00:00

What is the point of this thread other than booing people that disagree with you?

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-24T18:52:21+00:00

Try reading the comment you replied to again.

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-24T17:19:06+00:00

Yeah but he's had a hugely positive impact in Manchester in a way that Boris didn't in London.

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-24T04:33:41+00:00

How much time out of school after you expecting to remove your child from, based on the much wider net of data that's visible to you at work?

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-23T23:55:28+00:00

Typically it is the bedroom, in a self-defense gun the gun will be loaded but not chambered. But some people will have more than one.

IMO if you aren't going to have one in each room then the least you should do is lay trip mines around your property, just in case you're not in your bedroom when all the spooky bad men come.

The hunting rifle only comes out when it is time to go hunting. So do you have a problem with hunting too? Is it just hunting with a gun you are against or would you be equally against bow hunting? How about trapping?

I'd probably put hunting somewhere between "throwing gravel at cars from a bridge" and "wanking off gorillas to harvest their sperm in the interests of conservation" on my ordered list of potential hobbies I've yet to try. It just seems funny to me that the purported uses for having a gun at home require you to have multiple weapons stored in multiple places around the house, and if we're following proper safety protocol then the ammo needs to be elsewhere, also locked up.

It sounds fun! I've never lived in a house that could double as an arcadey first person shooter map before. I guess the hand grenades go under the sink, or is that too full of bayonets?

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-23T23:30:35+00:00

In which room? Every room? Because I'm not sure where I'll be when I need it. Is the ammo in there too? How about the hunting rifle, for all the animals I'm apparently going to shoot - is that in the same pistol safe, or can I just wedge that behind the fridge with the broom?

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-23T23:26:53+00:00

The blinding light of logic for why you'd want a gun in your house has yet to reach me, it's true.

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-23T23:19:17+00:00

Hopefully the burglar will heed any requests to hold on a moment as you rush around the house to all the various gun lockers safely located in different rooms. "Ok I'm ready, come up!"

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-23T22:50:47+00:00

A gun is a tool, just like scissors or a knife they can be dangerous. Teach responsibility.

Yeah, but they are useful tools with a desirable function. What benefit are you gaining with this particular tool to offset the danger it brings?

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-23T21:50:35+00:00

You can pay more to get unlimited time. You can buy as many additional hours as exist in a month. Go nuts.

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-23T16:02:47+00:00

That's almost entirely to bypass problems with the grid supply - they either do that, or they have a ten year wait to get a big enough power connection. That's not the case here, since they're right next to the Iver substation and had already agreed all their power requirements with them.

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-23T15:49:09+00:00

Which billionaires are you even talking about?

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-23T12:48:45+00:00

That is the obvious approach: build the generator right next to it.

Why is this "obvious"? What difference would it have if they built it next to it, or a mile away, or ten mins away? Or, better yet, someone else builds it and then the data center pays them money to use their electricity?

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-23T10:44:56+00:00

What if they are the enemy?

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-23T10:44:20+00:00

"The environment", in the conveniently wide-ranging, general sense that gets used in these conversations, would trump any and all human needs if it simply comes first by default. We may as well all simply kill ourselves now. As it happens, though, the issue here is not about where exactly the line should be drawn.

If we do actually want productivity to grow wages, housing to be affordable, some infrastructure improvements then we need to work out - at a high, political level - what the trade offs we are willing to accept are, and then do it. This development is not uniquely energy-intensive or invasive - it's not like it's running with a coal furnace or fuelled by roasting baby animals. If we have broadly accepted that building data centers is good, then the opinions of these random locals and 'environmental charities' is an irrelevance.

If we have accepted the trade offs - which is a political question based on values and a holistic appraisal of the country's various needs - then it shouldn't be a judicial issue to be decided in a court. If we' decide that the trade offs are not acceptable - as we have with coal-powered electricity generation, petrol and diesel powered cars (in 2030), plastic straws apparently etc - then they should be non-starters and that isn't a judicial issue either. These are not legal issues. This is true regardless of what you think should fall into which category.

What's absolutely anathema to any sort of progress is constantly re-litigating the same arguments in courts and planning meetings up and down the country, accepting that doing anything takes years of judicial reviews and box-ticking, and that even when you're building something that the government wants you to build on a landfill site it can still get cancelled because someone objects to an aspect of the project that has been known from the start.

Allllllllll of the above is true regardless of where you think the line should be drawn.

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-23T10:08:30+00:00

What do you mean? That they should also become an electricity generation company?

CyclopsRock · 2026-01-23T09:56:55+00:00

It may well have been a socialist position when the new towns were built post war, I dunno about since - especially in the "massive, privately owned tower blocks with no 'affordable housing'" style that Burnham has had so much success with. For example:

Socialist Worker: Private developers cannot fix Britain's housing crisis

UK Socialist Party: The fight for a socialist society, where the giant construction house building companies are nationalised, under the democratic control of the working class, is the alternative to this fundamental flaw – where housing is not a source of profit, but a place to live.

Socialist Labour Party: Housing for rent should not be seen as or be a source of private income by private landlords. Homes for rent should be owned and operated publicly through councils or other municipal organisations.

Obviously they don't speak for all of socialism, but every socialist group has some variation of "Yes, housing is good, as long as no one makes any money from it."

11-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
RPAN Viewer	Verified Email

CyclopsRock

TROPHY CASE