Olive

Is there any need for this nastiness? Heaven help all those poor ladies who are actually called Karen, whose name's now associated with any women-shaming insult you can spit out.

There is no difference between this and any other clinical trial in terms of compensating study participants for their inconvenience and covering expenses. As petemcewan says, it's unethical to do otherwise.

Yeah, just gotta get through it the best we can.

It's not very honest is it? It's clearly not possible to stop virus particles circulating in that situation, should someone be carrying the infection, and I'm sorry your partner and others have to deal with this situation day in, day out. I don't know what the answer is, but I do think that claiming something is safe when it's simply impossible that it can be safe, is not getting us anywhere.

Well, to some extent, until infection rates come down and the immunisation programme starts making an impact. Until then we ought to be more aware of/realistic about where the real transmission risks are. We've spent a long time obsessing about relatively inconsequential issues - how what counts as local exercise, whether or not you should be allowed to sit on a park bench. Earlier on in the pandemic we put the majority of focus on handwashing and surface transmission. Hopefully the message is finally getting through that the biggest risk is breathing the same air as an infected person, especially when you're in an enclosed, poorly ventilated space, even more so over a prolonged period.

The term 'Covid safe' is, and always has been, a nonsense. 'Covid a bit safer' might be a better description. Covid is a respiratory disease, spread primarily through the air in droplets and aerosols. If you have a room, with people in it, who are breathing in and out, then you have transmission risk. Proximity and time spent in the room effects risk. You can mitigate to an extent with ventilation to get any virus filled air and replace it with fresh air. Wearing masks will have some limited effect. But really, pubs, schools, workplaces, anywhere people spend any kind of significant time indoors with other people, are always going to be a problem, no matter how many one way systems are put in place.

Humberside Police, on the other hand are showing that when necessary they can think things through to reach sensible solutions. They have announced that they will not be taking draconian measures agains people travelling for exercise, but will speak to people they believe have stretched the guidance too far. No need for heavy handed tactics like other forces have tried, which has only made things worse. Travelling for exercise isn't a big issue after all.

Absolutely. This obsession with how far can you go for a bike ride, what's local and what isn't, whether or not it's OK to drive somewhere to go for a walk - it's such a red herring. It takes the focus away from behaviours that really do constitute transmission risks. I also worry that if people think they might get into trouble meeting a friend for a walk, they might be more tempted to meet up indoors. Even people meeting in legitimate bubbles are better off doing this outdoors if they can.

Lovely pictures Hillsbro. There's quite often a grim and grimey quality to places in pictures of this era, but I think in Hillsborough Corner's case, it definitely looks shabbier now, even with the improvement work on the bridge area. A lot to do with traffic I suppose, but there's also some pretty uninspiring later 20th century buildings which don't help.

Ah, now it makes sense. Time hasn't been kind to Hillsborough Corner has it?

Now you point it out I can. In my defence...small screen. 😀

Great picture Hillsbro, but I'm damned if I can figure out which direction it's looking at! Hillsborough Corner has certainly changed a lot, I can't get my bearings at all! What does the tower in the middle of the picture belong to?

What's unrealistic to me is how both characters seem to have had personality transplants. Now that Corrie has decided it wants a coersive control storyline they have had to pick a couple of characters to graft it onto. It's a common problem with soap plots - characters following plots rather than the other way round. Also, contrary to popular opinion, I think often plots are more believable if they allowed to develop more gradually. I'm sure that the Corrie of years ago would have had this one brewing over months, if not years. Now they've got to fill hours of TV per week, they need a huge story turnover. So we have ever more outlandish plots and diminishing returns. Still watch it though 😁

If you wanted to go Full Sheffield, and live in the city centre, that's always an option too. The great thing about Middlewood is the excellent tram service. You can be in town in 15 minutes on the tram from Middlewood. Lots of rental accommodation to choose from, in the West Street area in particular if you want city centre hubbub.

That was a brilliant one, wasn't it? The work they put into that renovation was so impressive. Still one of the best episodes, all these years later.

The OP would have had a fit it they'd been swimming at Zest a few years ago. The changing cubicles around the pool itself. The outrage!!

Anne SLister's a fascinating character. She grew up in Market Weighton, where I'm from. We went to Shibden Hall a couple of years ago, it's an interesting place to visit. I just think the series could have been structured better. I wouldn't have expected Sally Wainwright to stretch it out over so many episodes, given how compact her writing normally is. Even if it's based on real events, a drama still needs a decent structure, story arc etc. The series isn't bad, just not as well written as I'd have expected.

I've been watching it and it's OK, but very slow. Sally Wainwright normally packs a ridiculous amount of plot into her writing. Too much sometimes - the second series of Happy Valley went bananas on the plot-front, to the extent that some of the sub plots got a bit lost. With Gentleman Jack she's gone to the other extreme.

That does ring a bell, not sure if it's true though. I was talking more generally of having your image captured when you're out and about, whether it's cctv or just another member of thepublic taking pictures.

I think this is a good summary. Personally (and I know I"m at odds with the current law), when I go outside, I expect to be seen by other people, with their eyes . Obviously. If I'm walking down the street I expect to be seen by passers by. If I'm in the supermarket I expect to be seen by other people who are in the supermarket. What I don't expect is for images of me to be taken and broadcast who knows where. Digital images don't stay contained on the device they're taken on. You've got no control over where that image ends up, let alone what happens to your recorded data. I know I've no right to stop anyone from taking a picture of me in a public place (not that anyone would want to). But actually, I'd really prefer it if they didn't. I've absolutely nothing to hide, apart from my own privacy. And that's really important to me.

Moving On Up, by Primal Scream

Exactly, and if you're unemployed and have to meet a minimum job search / application quota, then you're going to find it tricky to do that when you're relying on public internet access. Don't kids get their homework set via on line systems these days as well?

It's not the photo itself that's the issue. Like you say, the problem is being photographed, recognised, recorded, timed, tracked, databased.......all without your consent. I recently had to update my GDPR training at work. And thinking about it, I really can't see why image data isn't included, since GDPR says that any information that can be used to identify a person needs to have their active consent. The sole purpose of these facial recognition systems is to identify a person.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48315979 This guy's launched a test case.

No, I know, currently you don't have a legal right, but don't you have a reasonable expectation? Is it time the law was revisited to bring people's images in line with other forms of information? GDPR frowns on the holding of personal information without consent and good reason. Why is this any different?