• 0 Posts
  • 69 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 6th, 2023

help-circle



  • Depends on if you’re using water to include types of water (if, like a maniacal madman, you have mixed Evian, Buxton and Harrogate mineral water into one jug). Then ‘i mixed fewer waters’ or ‘there are fewer waters in that glass’ would be valid.

    To be clear: I’m not the person you replied to, just someone who finds it quite interesting (in the same way that the plural fishes is valid if you’re talking about different species of fish).

    And yes, I know prescriptivism is bad, but also it is quite fun.








  • History podcasts I like:

    Revolutions. Well known; Mike Duncan goes through various revolutions through history in an excellent, detailed narrative.

    American History Too!: two academics from the university of Glasgow have various guests on to discuss different topics from American history. They know their stuff and are really charismatic.

    In Our Time: BBC podcast that’s been going since the early 2000s. A panel of academics are interviewed and discuss a topic on which they are all experts. Incredibly well researched and interesting, though not especially humorous.


  • It’s also just commonly done in UK newspapers. Age and familial status is always given. Terry Pratchett made a joke about it in one of his books, though I can’t remember the quote.

    Edit: found one (not exactly the gag I wanted but CBA to look further)

    ‘Exc–’ he began. But the citizen’s eyes had already detected the notebook. ‘I saw it all,’ he said. ‘Did you?’ ‘It was a ter-ri-ble scene,’ said the man, at dictation speed. ‘But the watch-man made a deathdefying plunge to res-cue the old lady and he de-serves a med-al.’ ‘Really?’ said William, scribbling fast. ‘And you are–’ ‘Sa-muel Arblaster (43), stonemason, of The Scours,’ said the man. ‘I saw it too,’ said a woman next to him, urgently. ‘Mrs Florrie Perry, blonde mother of three, from Dolly Sisters. It was a scene of car-nage.’







  • Coming from a transport modeller, the title of this article is incredibly flawed, and the write up should row back a bit.

    The study itself seems great; looking in detail at the carbon cost of a transport mode throughout its lifecycle. However, it emphatically shouldn’t be used to inform transport policy on its own.

    This will have a focus on the UK, as this is what I’m familiar with.

    Rail schemes, particularly heavy rail, has massively high start up costs due to all the engineering that has to go in place (because if rail goes wrong, it tends to go very wrong, and so the rail industry and legislation is naturally very cautious).

    We don’t just need to get to net zero; we need to get to net zero fast. Bus rapid transit is much faster to get off the ground, and can be electrified by putting batteries in and having quick charging at certain stops and, crucially, has a capx that a cash strapped local government is more likely to swallow.