doesn't seem to back that up. It's highly possible the a liberal British tabloid might be sensationalize something more reasonable, or at least making one of the TSAs outrageous intrusive hare-brained ideas even more outrageous and intrusive than it is.
The Independent isn't a tabloid, it's one of the four large, respected daily newspapers. (Times, Telegraph, Guardian, Independent).
Not really angry, more like depressed. The winters are long, cold, and dark
The winters in Scotland are about as long, almost as cold, about as dark and damp. (I've been in both countries in the winter. Sweden is nicer: lying snow at least makes things look brighter, I don't like the mist and mud in Scotland. I've only spent about two weeks in each (in winter), though.)
Roman cities were actually designed like this, with all of a particular type of shop being on the same street. You can still see some street names that are relics of this, being corruptions of the latin for 'street of butchers' or 'street of bakers'.
Just look at the City of London for examples of this: Poultry, Cannon Street, Ironmonger Lane, Milk Street, Bread Street, Shoe Lane, Ropemaker Street, Silk Street,...
Not only is the British government determined by the votes of about a million people in the Midlands, but they 'voted the bastards out' in the last election only to discover that the other bastards were just the same.
And then did what those bastards said, and voted against changing the voting system. Madness.
Give me an appetizer, a main meal including meat, a dessert and some fruit. 2 dollars. DOLLARS, not pounds.
$2 ~= £1.60.
The cheapest main course would be something like this (1.1g salt). Looks awful. A cheap apple will be about 16p. I'm now bored looking, you can spend the other 53p;-)
(I haven't bought a readymeal for ages, over a year. They're a lot better than they used to be, and better than the description here of typical American airline food, but they still taste like factory food -- the ones that aren't healthy are often oily or sugary, the ones that are "healthy" taste of starch. Plus, I'm pretty active, so one "portion" isn't enough -- and eating two or three portions worth is a lot of salt, and is quickly more expensive.)
There's no way in hell the recommended amount of daily sodium is 6000mg, are you freaking insane? People with high blood pressure must limit their DAILY intake to 1500mg!
I wrote "salt", and quoted the value for salt. The value for sodium on that ready meal is 0.6g.
Processed food doesn't have to be oversalted and overspiced.
Pick any product on here. Say, Tesco Finest Chicken Pancetta & Mozzarella -- 1.5g salt per portion, which seems reasonable for a main meal (daily recommended maximum is 6g). However, others do have a lot of salt.
The government is still in the process of asking/hoping food manufacturers to further reduce salt content of processed food. (If they don't, they'll eventually make a law/official guidelines. Or, more likely, mandate a big red sticker on anything containing to much salt).
I haven't flown with a US airline, so I can't compare, but my experience of BA food is very positive. I think it comes from the *massive* increased popularity of "ready meals" (microwave meals?) in the UK in the last decade. All supermarkets now have a whole aisle of them, including the luxury ones -- Marks & Spencer were behind it, and their ready meals cost at least £5 a portion.
I think it's entirely possible that this happens a lot more in Europe (which has relatively easily-crossed land borders with "third world hellholes") than the USA. I see articles about in in the news fairly regularly.
I know quite a few people who've visited the Middle East. It can be a cheap stop-off on the way to the far east (from Europe), or a close-ish place that's not European, but still has plenty of culture, history etc.
Does Turkey count? Loads of people visit Turkey. Just looking at one budget airline (Easyjet), they have flights to Turkey, Isreal and Jordan.
bd is a non-starter for so many of us. if you are young, you may be impressed by it; but as you get older, your vision degrades and the 'greatness' of bd isn't all that great.
Are you sure? My grandma bought a new TV, and a few months later I visited and changed the channel to BBC1 HD. She remarked that the nature programme looked really good, and asked why -- she didn't know what she'd bought, but saw the difference. A quick test showed the others in the room could tell between BBC1 and BBC1 HD, and they were all at least 55.
(I don't know if BBC1 HD is better or worse than Bluray quality. I once worked for an electronics company, so I do know BBC1 (DVB) is better than DVD quality -- but something like BBC News 24 is worse. The BBC don't allocate bandwidth equally between all their channels, the major ones have more.)
Everybody complains about region restrictions. I don't like region restrictions but the reality is different regions have different laws and some movies aren't allowed there. I think region restrictions are primarily about making sure legal behinds are covered.
They have nothing to do with that, since in lots of countries outside the US it's easy to buy a "region free" DVD player, and in none that I know does the region of the DVD make any difference to its legality.
Notice that Europe, Japan and most of the Middle East have the same DVD region (2), and Australia and South America (4), yet those regions have the biggest differences in censorship laws.
Just like the Appalachian coal that gets shipped to China. To me, that is almost the most despicable part of the whole mess. If we produce cheap oil or cheap coal, it gets shipped out of the country.
Not all of it, of course, but enough to ensure that domestic oil drilling effectively only reduces the international price of oil, where it is comparatively far less effective.
The Appalachian coal really gets my goat. I regularly see the trains heading to the nearby port, loaded over with coal getting shipped out. We are stripping OUR OWN MOUNTAINS and shipping them to China.
Meanwhile, half the middle east is stripping their land of oil and shipping it to the USA.
In my opinion, you should be taxing (90%, or something like that) mineral extraction, including oil, and investing the profit in the country (infrastructure, education, everything). It's despicable that a private company gets to make so much money from selling a national resource.
Of course, Saudi should also be doing this. (I just checked: they do: income tax is 85% for oil companies).
To add to what necro81 said, petrol (for cars) costs more or less the same in the UK as in France (about $8/USgal). Most of the price is tax -- around 80%.
However, petrol for non-vehicle uses (e.g. chemical manufacture), where there isn't any tax, actually costs less in the UK than it does in the USA. It makes sense: the UK is nearer the middle east, and has refinery capacity as production from its own oil fields is decreasing.
It probably helps that in many place in Europe (as far as I know) "school buses" don't exist -- students who need to use a bus to get to school use a normal bus.
That means many parents have an interest in keeping the system safe and convenient, even if they hardly ever use it themselves.
1) Slightly to a lot (depending on the country) better social systems, so there are less junkies, nuts, filthy hobos etc. 2) More expensive private transport, including the cost of vehicle, fuel, insurance, and parking (which is often limited) 3) More frequent service (worse than every 20 minutes puts a lot of people off)
(2) and (3) together make the bus/train a better (or at least less-bad) option.
Buses aren't always pleasant to ride on. At 3:30 in the morning on Sunday in London they can be rammed full with tired and/or drunk people, which isn't fun if you're on your way to work. However, that does reflect the average person who's around at that time of night.
I just cycled for about 20 minutes to get to work, mostly on a cycle path past a line of stopped cars on a primary route in London. The time to drive is about 30 minutes during the day (cars have a slightly less direct route and more traffic lights), the time for cars at night is about 15 minutes, the time for cars at rush hour is probably more like 45, but I've never tried.
It's a little annoying if it's raining (so I bought waterproofs), and more annoying if it's very windy, but not as annoying as it is for drivers who see the electronic signs saying something like "accident on M40, expect delays" and completely stopped traffic. Those used to be the days when some of my colleagues would show up an hour late, but I don't think any of them drive any more.
If I liked hiking I probably would get a car, and then I could use it for the few cases which alone don't justify one. But I still wouldn't commute with it.
Countries with a real investment in public transport have these at most bus stops.
You exaggerate with "most", but they do exist at many stops in London. 2,500 according to the TfL website, out of 19,500 bus stops (!) used by 700 routes.
The interesting bit here is 1) The information is also on the web. 2) There's an API so people can access the data and use it themselves 3) He put it in a model bus
(But even after seeing all those pictures, I was still amazed at how huge the TBM was when I happened to see it -- 95% assembled -- from a train on my way into London.)
That's sincerely reassuring then, and I thank you. I hadn't thought they could successfully reinforce tunnels a tenth of a kilometer wide.
Um, what?
The tunnel diameter is 6.2 metres, i.e. a bit bigger than the cross section of a train + emergency walkway. The new, underground station platforms will be 250 metres long (wow!) but still only ~18m diameter (my guess from the mock-up video). Presumably they've planned for enough space for most of the "some 1,500 passengers... carried in each train at peak periods" to get off at a single station.
Tunnelling can cause problems though. For example, London's local Quake II level (see picture) required some special work to avoid the Houses of Parliament collapsing.
Slashdot Mirror
doesn't seem to back that up. It's highly possible the a liberal British tabloid might be sensationalize something more reasonable, or at least making one of the TSAs outrageous intrusive hare-brained ideas even more outrageous and intrusive than it is.
The Independent isn't a tabloid, it's one of the four large, respected daily newspapers. (Times, Telegraph, Guardian, Independent).
Not really angry, more like depressed. The winters are long, cold, and dark
The winters in Scotland are about as long, almost as cold, about as dark and damp. (I've been in both countries in the winter. Sweden is nicer: lying snow at least makes things look brighter, I don't like the mist and mud in Scotland. I've only spent about two weeks in each (in winter), though.)
Yet, although Scotland currently has a higher suicide rate than England, this wasn't the case 50 years ago: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-16950313
I think the other points you make are more important than the weather.
Roman cities were actually designed like this, with all of a particular type of shop being on the same street. You can still see some street names that are relics of this, being corruptions of the latin for 'street of butchers' or 'street of bakers'.
Just look at the City of London for examples of this: Poultry, Cannon Street, Ironmonger Lane, Milk Street, Bread Street, Shoe Lane, Ropemaker Street, Silk Street, ...
LOL. You've clearly never lived in the UK.
Not only is the British government determined by the votes of about a million people in the Midlands, but they 'voted the bastards out' in the last election only to discover that the other bastards were just the same.
And then did what those bastards said, and voted against changing the voting system. Madness.
Give me an appetizer, a main meal including meat, a dessert and some fruit. 2 dollars. DOLLARS, not pounds.
$2 ~= £1.60.
The cheapest main course would be something like this (1.1g salt). Looks awful. A cheap apple will be about 16p. I'm now bored looking, you can spend the other 53p ;-)
(I haven't bought a readymeal for ages, over a year. They're a lot better than they used to be, and better than the description here of typical American airline food, but they still taste like factory food -- the ones that aren't healthy are often oily or sugary, the ones that are "healthy" taste of starch. Plus, I'm pretty active, so one "portion" isn't enough -- and eating two or three portions worth is a lot of salt, and is quickly more expensive.)
The meal I linked to contains 0.6g of *sodium*, or 1.5g of *salt* (or salt equivalent).
Typical *sodium* intake is ~5g/day, typical *salt* intake is (with that figure) 12g. I saw 9-11g earlier, but that was a British article.
There's no way in hell the recommended amount of daily sodium is 6000mg, are you freaking insane? People with high blood pressure must limit their DAILY intake to 1500mg!
I wrote "salt", and quoted the value for salt. The value for sodium on that ready meal is 0.6g.
Processed food doesn't have to be oversalted and overspiced.
Pick any product on here. Say, Tesco Finest Chicken Pancetta & Mozzarella -- 1.5g salt per portion, which seems reasonable for a main meal (daily recommended maximum is 6g). However, others do have a lot of salt.
The government is still in the process of asking/hoping food manufacturers to further reduce salt content of processed food. (If they don't, they'll eventually make a law/official guidelines. Or, more likely, mandate a big red sticker on anything containing to much salt).
I haven't flown with a US airline, so I can't compare, but my experience of BA food is very positive. I think it comes from the *massive* increased popularity of "ready meals" (microwave meals?) in the UK in the last decade. All supermarkets now have a whole aisle of them, including the luxury ones -- Marks & Spencer were behind it, and their ready meals cost at least £5 a portion.
Link contains a referral ID, so Shikaku is earning from this, but not willing to say so.
Eventually, it ends up at http://www.backblaze.com/
I think it's entirely possible that this happens a lot more in Europe (which has relatively easily-crossed land borders with "third world hellholes") than the USA. I see articles about in in the news fairly regularly.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/6459369.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-14857004
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-14732841
I know quite a few people who've visited the Middle East. It can be a cheap stop-off on the way to the far east (from Europe), or a close-ish place that's not European, but still has plenty of culture, history etc.
Does Turkey count? Loads of people visit Turkey. Just looking at one budget airline (Easyjet), they have flights to Turkey, Isreal and Jordan.
Also this was easy to find, but I knew to go straight to http://www.statistics.gov.uk/
bd is a non-starter for so many of us. if you are young, you may be impressed by it; but as you get older, your vision degrades and the 'greatness' of bd isn't all that great.
Are you sure? My grandma bought a new TV, and a few months later I visited and changed the channel to BBC1 HD. She remarked that the nature programme looked really good, and asked why -- she didn't know what she'd bought, but saw the difference. A quick test showed the others in the room could tell between BBC1 and BBC1 HD, and they were all at least 55.
(I don't know if BBC1 HD is better or worse than Bluray quality. I once worked for an electronics company, so I do know BBC1 (DVB) is better than DVD quality -- but something like BBC News 24 is worse. The BBC don't allocate bandwidth equally between all their channels, the major ones have more.)
Everybody complains about region restrictions. I don't like region restrictions but the reality is different regions have different laws and some movies aren't allowed there. I think region restrictions are primarily about making sure legal behinds are covered.
They have nothing to do with that, since in lots of countries outside the US it's easy to buy a "region free" DVD player, and in none that I know does the region of the DVD make any difference to its legality.
Notice that Europe, Japan and most of the Middle East have the same DVD region (2), and Australia and South America (4), yet those regions have the biggest differences in censorship laws.
You might be interested in this: http://traintimes.org.uk/map/
(I think that's the same thing you're going to do, but for trains in the UK.)
Just like the Appalachian coal that gets shipped to China. To me, that is almost the most despicable part of the whole mess. If we produce cheap oil or cheap coal, it gets shipped out of the country.
Not all of it, of course, but enough to ensure that domestic oil drilling effectively only reduces the international price of oil, where it is comparatively far less effective.
The Appalachian coal really gets my goat. I regularly see the trains heading to the nearby port, loaded over with coal getting shipped out. We are stripping OUR OWN MOUNTAINS and shipping them to China.
Meanwhile, half the middle east is stripping their land of oil and shipping it to the USA.
In my opinion, you should be taxing (90%, or something like that) mineral extraction, including oil, and investing the profit in the country (infrastructure, education, everything). It's despicable that a private company gets to make so much money from selling a national resource.
Of course, Saudi should also be doing this. (I just checked: they do: income tax is 85% for oil companies).
To add to what necro81 said, petrol (for cars) costs more or less the same in the UK as in France (about $8/USgal). Most of the price is tax -- around 80%.
However, petrol for non-vehicle uses (e.g. chemical manufacture), where there isn't any tax, actually costs less in the UK than it does in the USA. It makes sense: the UK is nearer the middle east, and has refinery capacity as production from its own oil fields is decreasing.
Some of the music I listen to samples (or recreates) "old" (some not really that old) sounds.
Eisenfunk - Pong
X-Dream - We Interface
Noisuf-X - Please Hang Up
It probably helps that in many place in Europe (as far as I know) "school buses" don't exist -- students who need to use a bus to get to school use a normal bus.
That means many parents have an interest in keeping the system safe and convenient, even if they hardly ever use it themselves.
1) Slightly to a lot (depending on the country) better social systems, so there are less junkies, nuts, filthy hobos etc.
2) More expensive private transport, including the cost of vehicle, fuel, insurance, and parking (which is often limited)
3) More frequent service (worse than every 20 minutes puts a lot of people off)
(2) and (3) together make the bus/train a better (or at least less-bad) option.
Buses aren't always pleasant to ride on. At 3:30 in the morning on Sunday in London they can be rammed full with tired and/or drunk people, which isn't fun if you're on your way to work. However, that does reflect the average person who's around at that time of night.
That depends completely on the city.
I just cycled for about 20 minutes to get to work, mostly on a cycle path past a line of stopped cars on a primary route in London. The time to drive is about 30 minutes during the day (cars have a slightly less direct route and more traffic lights), the time for cars at night is about 15 minutes, the time for cars at rush hour is probably more like 45, but I've never tried.
It's a little annoying if it's raining (so I bought waterproofs), and more annoying if it's very windy, but not as annoying as it is for drivers who see the electronic signs saying something like "accident on M40, expect delays" and completely stopped traffic. Those used to be the days when some of my colleagues would show up an hour late, but I don't think any of them drive any more.
If I liked hiking I probably would get a car, and then I could use it for the few cases which alone don't justify one. But I still wouldn't commute with it.
Countries with a real investment in public transport have these at most bus stops.
You exaggerate with "most", but they do exist at many stops in London. 2,500 according to the TfL website, out of 19,500 bus stops (!) used by 700 routes.
The interesting bit here is
1) The information is also on the web.
2) There's an API so people can access the data and use it themselves
3) He put it in a model bus
Tracking foreign transactions is old.
Try buying three or four low-value things, followed by a high-value one. That may well trip the fraud detection system.
Try buying things from shops too far away from each other in short succession.
etc, etc.
There are better pictures on this blog:
http://www.londonreconnections.com/2011/in-pictures-the-crossrail-tbms/
http://www.londonreconnections.com/2012/in-pictures-crossrails-tbms-at-westbourne-park/
(But even after seeing all those pictures, I was still amazed at how huge the TBM was when I happened to see it -- 95% assembled -- from a train on my way into London.)
That's sincerely reassuring then, and I thank you. I hadn't thought they could successfully reinforce tunnels a tenth of a kilometer wide.
Um, what?
The tunnel diameter is 6.2 metres, i.e. a bit bigger than the cross section of a train + emergency walkway. The new, underground station platforms will be 250 metres long (wow!) but still only ~18m diameter (my guess from the mock-up video). Presumably they've planned for enough space for most of the "some 1,500 passengers ... carried in each train at peak periods" to get off at a single station.
Tunnelling can cause problems though. For example, London's local Quake II level (see picture) required some special work to avoid the Houses of Parliament collapsing.