copybot.bsky.social
English copywriter in Paris.
998 posts
102 followers
112 following
Discussion Master
comment in response to
post
Glad about the the disability representation obvs. But it really is the most appalling load of old pony.
comment in response to
post
Sooner or later people are going to catch up with the fact that LLMs don’t actually work and aren’t actually getting much better
comment in response to
post
That is not a world that is likely to exist any time soon. There’s a lot of nonsense being talked about LLMs in particular, and the bubble will burst as soon as people realise they’re not going to get their money back.
comment in response to
post
#smalldickenergy
comment in response to
post
The influence of French in polite British society for hundreds of years.
comment in response to
post
You’re unhinged.
comment in response to
post
It’s amazing Corbyn lost twice really: you’re all so nice, welcoming and persuasive.
comment in response to
post
Keep on keeping on, champ.
comment in response to
post
I can’t find any evidence that his interest in public transport was criticised per se by Labour colleagues, still less that he was “lambasted” for it. The criticism seems to be for being a bit shit, which was fair comment.
comment in response to
post
I’ve looked it up: it was in July 2018, and the criticism from Labour MPs was about talking about buses at PMQs instead of focusing on Theresa May and her inability to control her party. Which seems to me to be a criticism of tactics rather than strategy.
comment in response to
post
Finally, an answer. When did this happen? I’d like to look it up.
comment in response to
post
A bit? He’s a fucking liability. Happily the electorate agrees.
comment in response to
post
Ok, that was weird.
comment in response to
post
And yet look who understands that it’s seats that count, not numbers of votes.
comment in response to
post
So to be clear the ‘Reeves mob’ in the original post is everyone who isn’t a Corbyn fan? You do know that’s nuts, right?
comment in response to
post
Yes, yes. They’re all the same except the sainted Jeremy. Who is a narcissistic has-been. Let him go.
comment in response to
post
A bit? He’s a fucking liability. Happily the electorate agrees.
comment in response to
post
Yes well she did the country a service. But I was specifically asking about public transport.
comment in response to
post
You’re very keen to keep this going, champ.
comment in response to
post
This is pathetic.
comment in response to
post
And so you have to deflect furiously. It’s pathetic.
comment in response to
post
I did read it. It’s still nonsense. You cannot justify your initial claim.
comment in response to
post
But the point is that this lambasting of Corbyn about public transport by people close to Reeves never happened. And the evidence presented is laughable.
comment in response to
post
The sun, the Spectator and Tory MPs are not Labour supporters. Like the electorate, they probably prefer Reeves to Corbyn. But Corbyn is a clown.
comment in response to
post
It’s good to call out idiocy.
comment in response to
post
Ok, true. On the evidence of this conversation, you’re an idiot. It’s true that in every other respect you may not be an idiot, and this is the only idiocy you have ever presented.
comment in response to
post
You’re an idiot.
comment in response to
post
So you can’t actually remember Reeves or her supporters doing what you claimed, and you’re having a go at strangers on the internet instead of admitting it.
comment in response to
post
Tory MPs, the Sun and the Spectator: all working for Rachel Reeves, famously.
comment in response to
post
I just want you to say what you claim you remember.
comment in response to
post
And the Spectator is on Reeves’s side, is it? I see.
comment in response to
post
Yes ok. What did they say and when?
comment in response to
post
#smalldickenergy
comment in response to
post
When was Corbyn lambasted for talking about the importance of public transport by Reeves?
comment in response to
post
Do they have to play home and away, or is it just 5 games?
comment in response to
post
That’s a poor headline
comment in response to
post
Yes. You used it wrongly earlier. The word you wanted was “implication”, not “inference”. Being a pro, I know this stuff.
comment in response to
post
You could look up “inference” while you’re at it.
comment in response to
post
It might be your inference, but I can’t see that it was the implication. It was simply a statement of fact. He is not entitled to it.
comment in response to
post
And if you look at the original post, it's clearly being used in the main sense.
comment in response to
post
Sure. Nobody is disagreeing there. But the meaning as in 'you're being a bit entitled' is secondary - it's a figurative meaning used as an adjective which derives from that past participle being deployed as an adjective. That's all I was saying. Quite why it was difficult is anyone's guess.
comment in response to
post
It's a past participle of a verb which is being used adjectivally. But I'm not sure the part of speech is really the issue so much as the definition of the word.
comment in response to
post
It's a past participle of a verb. But yes. I'm not sure why people are really arguing, but I imagine it makes them happy. And we're all entitled to a little bit of happiness now and again.
comment in response to
post
You're entitled to your opinion. Oh look - there it is again.
comment in response to
post
So the caller here feels entitled and is acting entitled about something to which he is not necessarily entitled. Words are hard sometimes, aren't they?
comment in response to
post
But it is something to which you are entitled. You've got it! Well done.
comment in response to
post
So if I am entitled to legal representation that’s a feeling that I deserve special treatment, is it?
comment in response to
post
That’s very much a secondary meaning. If you are entitled to something it’s about legal rights, not feelings. If you act entitled it’s closer to what you’re saying. Come on: you know this.
comment in response to
post
That isn't what it means. You're confusing it with a sense of entitlement.
comment in response to
post
I’ve never seen anyone wearing a burqa in Europe. You see the odd niqab, but never burqas.