blabyboy

My brother in law bought a shitload of gold and hid it under his bath. We looked after his house when they went on holiday and I took a golden shower knowing what what was underneath. We never could relax in that break..

You can use gold as a hedge (counterbalance) in case you have any shares that take a bath on the stock market. Consider any purchase as part of a diverse basket of items that you buy to help mitigate loses you might make elsewhere. Gold is generally seen as safe when other parts of the stock market are tanking, but remember that the opposite applies here as well. If you only buy gold, then you are in the same position as if you only bought shares or only saved cash in an account i.e. at some point the price will dip and at another it will rise. It is not a guaranteed safe bet on its own. If you do want to buy gold, try an ETF (exchange traded fund) as an easier path into that particular item and market as it spreads the risk within the fund as to which bullion dealer(s) provide the actual gold behind the fund. If you're thinking of buying real gold sovereigns or ingots, you have the additional cost of security and storage amongst other downsides. The old adage of "buy gold first, buy shotgun and shells next" applies here. If you're interested in metals, you may also want to explore metals such as palladium, copper, lithium and silver amongst others. This is not financial advice. Please do conduct your own research before making any investment decisions.

First win under the belt. We push on

Hahahaha There is no justice in this world

There's is a documentary on bbc4 on iPlayer called Atomic People, that was aired at the weekend. Very poignant, very graphic at times, but an interesting look at the impact of the bombs and the legacy from the people that were in those cities at the time of the drops. Some of the footage I hadn't seen before, really makes you think about you and yours if it happened here.

Hmmm, now where have I seen that image before 🤔 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cev2dylxv74o

Which one? The orange one, or the stats guy who should've known who he was presenting to and just got the stats to say something nice for the orange one?

I was taking the figures from Our World in Data (https://ourworldindata.org/) and their classifications based on the reports they aggregate. I was surprised by the amount of decrease that has happened both in Natural Disasters and in Malaria that have occurred since the early 2000's alone - in part, due to humans getting better at prediction, prevention and mitigation. One hopes that we can apply the same in other areas in the years to come.

Globally, 720,000 people died from suicide last year. Approximately 40,000 - 50,000 people died from natural disasters. The biggest threat to humans is the human mind and the dissonance that its own existence doesn't matter anymore.

Was in two minds whether to post this in here or the Stocks and Shares topic.. https://www.marathonfusion.com Seems like a great way to pay for itself and provide other elements at a much cheaper cost. Could they have the Midas touch at last..

Beware Cordyceps!

The stock is a “bargain for adventurous investors”. 🤔

Geo-engineering goes on, just not via contrails. There has been some supposition that aircraft could contribute to geo-engineering due to hazing of sunlight caused as the trail dissipates, but I have not read, or heard of a report that definitely confirms any geo-engineering via contrails results in a successful/ probable manipulation of the weather system.

Another first for UK if true. Fusion reactor generating more fuel than needed to start the reaction using Tritium. https://interestingengineering.com/energy/uk-firm-commercial-tritium-breakthrough?utm_source=tldrnewsletter CEO also has a great name. Probably looking for a buyout in a year's time and it'll go overseas 😔

I was making the point (perhaps too subtly) that the grant was cut because it was researching into a general area where another party has found the possible solution, so it would make good economic sense to cut the grant and push the money elsewhere. There is a benefit to not pushing money into a losing bet, albeit not for those in the grant programme affected. So it's economics making the decision here over anything else. I'm not making any point that it's an example of positive attitude towards scientific research.

The first message says that the grant was to study gene therapy for hearing loss.

Maybe the NIH have decided this is the better way? https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2025/07/250702214148.htm

Looking forward to when Anderson has to write a letter to remove the whip from himself.

DOH! Think I need to return this neuralink implant. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/record-breaking-results-bring-fusion-power-closer-to-reality/?utm_source=tldrnewsletter

Thought I'd post a good news story for both funding in the US and fusion engineering.

Will the full report have all the raw data as well? ...Whilst I love a graph, I'm always conscious that that is just one person's view of how they want to present the data.

Trump doesn't appoint senators to committees, they are appointed by their peers. The senators for Texas and Alabama seem to have been robust in making sure the space based industries remain and are funded for their constituencies.

Yeah..be interesting to see if it gets some serious traction and mop up the disaffected left in the same way that Reform has taken the right.

Thank you. That works for part of the article. I guess my question back to you would be which horse to back? The authoritarian censoring one, the underfunded one, the one we can't join because we're not fully signed up to their group? There are some points in that article which I think are moot. Getting together for example is easily mitigated by technology and there are plenty of places to share ideas and comment on others. The jobs side, we've already seen the EU trying to entice US scientists over the water with a steady brain drain. Money is being invested by more and more private investors too across different sectors. Maybe I'm more optimistic here, I don't think the US will cut all grants and subsidies, they may dip for sure, but Trump is not going to get away with eradicating it all, there is too much pork in the science funding barrel that senators rely on for that to happen.

US still has a massive off world platform that does a lot of science, not only on the ISS, but NOAA satellites. NRO donate a lot of 'old' kit e.g mirrors for telescopes. This old kit is still very usable compared to academic and private offerings. 5 Billions in grant to tackle climate change: https://www.epa.gov/inflation-reduction-act/climate-pollution-reduction-grants#:~:text=The Climate Pollution Reduction Grants,and other harmful air pollution. to cite just one programme as I know you're a climate advocate. The US outspends everyone else on R&D and a significant proportion of that is from private spend, almost as much as government spending. China is second with a significant gap back to Europe in third. Depending upon how you classify R&D there really is no comparison, being friendly with the US when it comes to science is still the best/safest bet out there. I've tried several times to access the archive link you've provided but it just times out for me.