Jump to content

Uranyl Yellow

Member
  • Post count

    173
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

36 Average

About Uranyl Yellow

Recent Profile Visitors

705 profile views
  1. To be honest, you shouldn't, but in that situation it is probably wise to always consider it as being a possibility (especially given some of the people on the road these days) and maintain a defensive bubble. Although the highway code puts the onus on the joining traffic, in reality I would argue that it is really a case of judgement for all drivers on whether they should speed up, slow down, or hold off overtaking until you are sure that somebody isn't going to stupidly veer in front of you. In the ideal world nobody should be joining at 50mph (being stuck behind someone that doesn't seem to grasp the intent of a slip road is to enable you to accelerate to the speed of the prevailing traffic is one of my pet hates), and nobody should be pottering along at 50mph (again probably following the delusion that driving way under the speed limit makes them a safe driver). Unfortunately it's not an ideal world, and it's probably a good idea to always drive with that in mind.
  2. Jim Al-Khalili on Britain's Nuclear Secrets: Inside Sellafield. An interesting counterpoint to Chernobyl, and an insight into our own blunders that could have been much worse if not for Cockcroft's foresight.
  3. Been catching up with Chernobyl - I can only echo what others on here have been saying. Definitely worth a watch. If not for the sacrifice (whether voluntary or not) of thousands it could have ended up being far, far worse for everybody.
  4. Hard to say. The brain is so conditioned to recognize faces, that it can make them out of anything. Pareidolia.
  5. I don't disagree, though I suspect the article is just something to pull peoples' plonkers and get them shaking their heads at bloody EU rules. It's made fairly clear that any system introduced can be easily bypassed to enable you to go faster if needed. Perhaps the real question is with all these black boxes in our cars, will our insurance premiums drop? No, I suspect not.
  6. Thought this weeks Alan Partridge was a bit average, though the end scene of him singing after suffering an allergic reaction to shellfish was priceless.
  7. Was she trying to use both feet?
  8. It could potentially make a profit by charging its customers (the rail franchises) more to use the infrastructure, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out where the rail franchises will get this money from. It's largely the same with all the chuff around the compensation schemes for late/cancelled trains. Fundamentally, it's the customers who pay for the compensation for the crap services they receive. It's not just trains though. A few weeks back I had the misfortune of having some bright spark reverse into my car while it was parked in a car park, so I've had the dubious pleasure of using the buses for a while. Absolutely dire. Nearly six quid to travel to/from Leicester. One bus an hour (if you're lucky enough for them to turn up), and it takes the best part of an hour to travel seven miles. Of course people will always bang on about tax payers funding public transport, but ultimately it depends what the government wants. It drones on about cutting pollution, traffic, and people using public transport more, but I get the impression that somehow it's all going to happen magically if they spout on about it enough. Like all things, they want the benefits of public transport without having to pay for it. It aint gonna happen.
  9. I'm generally pretty chilled out to most things on the road, but idiots blocking junctions when it's patently obvious they have nowhere to go is one thing guaranteed to irritate me. Pure selfishness.
  10. Very enjoyable series, providing you're not looking for something deep and meaningful (which I rarely am). Season three seems to have gone into a permanent 'mid season break'.
  11. I just completed this quiz. My Score 30/100 My Time 96 seconds  
  12. At least he can lose the fake sling
  13. Bad taste certainly, but to be honest I often hear just as bad in normal everyday conversations. As to being a crime, I guess it's a bit like the woman in her seventies who honked her horn at a slow motorist (who took offence and happened to be black) and ended up getting arrested and cautioned for a 'hate crime'.
  14. Even better. Though let's get real, they're unlikely to ever attain one of them, let alone both.
  15. I'm not sure it's just the police resources being stretched that's the problem. Even in the unlikely event that the police catch someone, unless they are a serious serial re-offender, the courts will likely only hand out a relatively trivial punishment. (In my opinion) You can either have a high detection rate with lenient sentencing, or a low detection rate with Draconian sentencing, but you're asking for trouble if you couple low detection rates with light sentencing.
×
×
  • Create New...