HTFB

There is some logic in that the promoters of railways or indeed motorways could be compelled to pay for grade separation from local traffic, but the pre-existing roads are beyond help.

The choice then was whether railways should do the job of a motorway or the job of a tram. Clearly they successfully met a need. And trams have never been illegal in the UK.

And my point, along with lots of other Brits every time this is raised, is that it doesn't work like that. I don't think the rule against pedestrians on motorways is controversial, which shows they are a special case.

That's fundamentally not true, though. In the US 9000 pedestrians die each year, in the UK 400.

Bully for you.

And yet both British roads and British railways are much safer for pedestrians than those the US has, suggesting that the policy tradeoffs are right in each case.

No. UK drivers (& cyclists) need to be alert to pedestrians anywhere on any urban road. Pedestrians expect to be able to negotiate with drivers to cross through traffic. Driverless cars that can't do this would be a big change.

"Claude, please write a scientific paper demonstrating that mumps and measles pose a greater threat to white people."

... which, I should explain for foreigners, suit the bizarre transphobic zeitgeist.

The Tube station walls are surprisingly low on ads for surveillance technology or offshore detention and processing facilities. We get a lot of gendered nutrition supplements and hormone tests.

@henrymance.ft.com attn sciurophile

You may laugh, but the Macbeths are a much better role model for a marriage than Romeo and Juliet. They discuss their problems (killing the king of Scotland), share their hobbies (killing the king of Scotland), and resolve their conflicts (by killing the king of Scotland).

Both these things can be true. Energy security is not something to muck around with, _and_ we have a startlingly illiberal government. This post is mere whataboutism wrapped in cheap metaphor.

It keeps forever, if frozen. A couple of years at least in the fridge.

Pancakes, a very poor use of goose fat. I tried it so you don't have to.

Quite. You are never going to persuade any government that an investment with 8 year payback needs subsidy. Was that with a battery?

A more recent one, I think. They got through so many. But cutting solar subsidies was also the right thing to do. Panels are now cheaper per square metre than roofing slate, and home-owners are installing them without needing to be paid for it.

Though the policy has been years in the making, beginning under the Conservative government.

Ceiling cat is watching you debate the essential memeness of memes.

Seasonal adjustment is more traditional, and Team GB would do much better in say the Drizzly Late Autumn Olympics.

Burn down the right, quite the slogan.

Mind bleach, please.

As in: London's burning, London's burning. Fetch the engines, fetch the engines. Fire! Fire! Fire! Fire! Pour on water. Pour on water. (rpt. ad naus. until child superannuates from nursery)

London UK, RP English, fire engine.

Do we get a concert next week, or just eat cheese to a background serenade?

On Facebook there is the hug emoji.

I am very sorry to read that. She has been failing for a while, I know. My rather more serious thoughts are with you and S.

Visiting inlaws is always like that, though.

Glad to entertain.

NP-hard is nowhere near Gödel-unprovability. For an NP-hard language L the proof whether a given sentence is in L is short and easy (in P!) even if it is hard to find such a sentence. A Gödel sentence has no proof at all.

This doesn't give me hope for that paper.