eldergill.bsky.social
Ex Lab GE Candidate. @joecguinan.bsky.social "With such cognitive firepower, rapier wit & winning personality difficult to believe that you didn't make it into Parliament"
219 posts
76 followers
34 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
“Perfect” reply ✅
comment in response to
post
There are good things here but noting “They are not emotionally intelligent or smart in any meaningful or recognizably human sense of the word” the article unhelpfully conflates intelligence with consciousness and sentience.
comment in response to
post
🧐
comment in response to
post
We already have ID cards and identification
They’re just fragmented, inefficient and often privatised.
Having a sensible way to identify myself seems a very good idea so long as it’s correctly regulated
comment in response to
post
West Ham awaits
comment in response to
post
youtu.be/aCVvdqJ6gxM?...
comment in response to
post
Instapaper?
comment in response to
post
I liked it Brian. I didn’t agree with much of it tbh but I liked that you answered the questions politely and factually 👍
comment in response to
post
I think the problem with this type of analysis is (a) Given last election Labour is guaranteed to lose some seats, votes & popularity (b) Any pundit can claim that this is because of their pet theory (c) They will appear right because of the old correlation vs causation thing
comment in response to
post
Incredible 👍
comment in response to
post
Kind of true. But focussing on reducing cost in countries and companies is ironically the simple target. Actually companies need to focus on being profitable and sovereign counties need to improving Debt-to-GDP; both harder targets.
Both use cost/debt reduction as a smokescreen.
comment in response to
post
That rather suggests the problem is with the supporters then and not the leader.
comment in response to
post
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
comment in response to
post
Well assuming this assertion is true then it’s clearly a call for AV or AV+
comment in response to
post
The conflict of interest thing is just a stick to hit him with
The nature of his role and organisation will always mean he gets donations from people in the areas his organisation writes reports about. The same charge was made on his view of small nuclear reactors
comment in response to
post
Playing the man not the ball there. Also the article’s construction of the report isn’t very accurate
comment in response to
post
I’m not very convinced by this. Essentially you say (1) the facts are projections. Er yes all such statements are really projections (2) No one energy source will be sufficient in its own which is where you violently agree with him
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
You’re just valuing cakeism and magic thinking over proactiveness and realism
comment in response to
post
Perhaps praise proactiveness and pragmatism a bit more and cakeism / magic thinking a bit less
comment in response to
post
The Vatican City blinking on this one is a cardinal error
comment in response to
post
Looks like the return of cakeism
comment in response to
post
It’s a Labour Party negotiation and nothing about Brexit
comment in response to
post
This is why we don’t deserve nice things
comment in response to
post
Time for a companion volume? The Brexit Party After Brexit: Reform and Turmoil