domjg
Member
Posts: 5,138
|
Post by domjg on Feb 7, 2024 11:00:12 GMT
Old and tired is good enough though without needing a medical assessment- also possible that better video clip is using a teleprompter however well delivered it was? We see various politicians here making serious slips ups- the Diane Abbott one when she had low sugars, the Lib Dem by election candidate stuttering through her first media appearance, but honestly there's no comparison to that Biden clip and if Sunak or Starmer did even one media appearance like that one are we seriously saying their parties wouldn't be desperately considering an alternative PM/LOTO? That's why it's so dangerous to have Biden being the one facing up to Trump because, whatever anyone on here might warn about amateurs making dementia diagnoses, a lot of the general public won't and quite clearly there are a lot of undecided voters (10% plus) who may be swung by things like that even before the Republicans go to town on it. I think many of us would have discussed elderly family relatives and might be saying "showing signs of dementia" which is of course a gradual thing anyway so no reason American voters wouldn't be saying the same. The thing is Trump is a mere three years younger and pretty obviously not in great shape mental or physical! Perhaps part of the issue is that Trump has never sounded coherent so it's like what's the difference, it almost gives him a way to hide it. |
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Feb 7, 2024 11:00:55 GMT
domjg 'Part of what allows this is the breakdown of trusted information.' I agree and I think the importance of the seismic upheaval in the media landscape tends to get overlooked. I can't see effective content regulation being introduced - I'm not sure it's feasible, even in theory - so we have to do a much better job of teaching people to evaluate sources of information and the informaton itself. To me the really troubling development is that so many people seem to have responded to the proliferation of unreliable sources by becoming universally sceptical - they don't trust anything anyone says, even demonstrably credentialled experts speaking on the area of expertise. I can understand how this happens. When you are not knowledgeable about a field, it is not really possible to evaluate an expert presentation critically. In my own scientific field I could give two completely different, entirely accurate presentations of the same topic and thus direct an intelligent lay audience to different conclusions. I'd probably be reasonably successful even if forced to use the same data for both presentations. I wouldn't need to lie or distort the data. I'm very much aware of this when I listen to an expert making an argument - if s/he is any good at all then what s/he says will be intellectually coherent, with relevant evidence adduced, so it'll sound plausible. But because I don't have deep background knowledge I won't be able to spot the problems. If I then get to hear from Expert 2, who takes the contrary position, s/he'll pull apart what Expert 1 said - and again, it'll be coherent and seem plausible - but I still won't know who is offering the stronger, more credible account. All I can do is evaluate their credentials (even that's not necessarily straightforward) or try to work out what the consensus is (ditto). By way of an aside, I think an important battle was lost when Facebook et al. were allowed to define themselves as platforms, rather than publishers and thus largely evade responsibility for content. AI may reduce the task of reviewing and moderating all online content to manageable proportions (final oversight needs to rest with humans, due to well-publicised shortcomings in the algorithmic approach), so I suppose it's possile this could be revisited eventually. I mentioned life in the state of nature the other for different purposes, but it is worth remembering that we are a hunter/gatherer ape species that, in evolutionary terms relating to brain size, has not progressed far beyond that. However, in technological terms we are living in an environment where expertise has become more and more specialised and, therefore, the further an individual is from involvement in a specialism the less likely they are to understand its intricacies. For example, whilst a surgeon was once considered one specialism, surgery is now broken down into various sub-specialisms. Whilst each surgeon and many medics are likely to have some understanding of what a specialist cardiothoracic surgeon does there will be aspects which they are unaware of and the further removed from that specialism the less the understanding will be. This is a continuing process and has significant implications for the problem you refer to. I don't think domjg 's reliance on consensus is a safe approach either consider the treatment of Semmelweis by the medical establishment. I am not sure I have even the beginnings of an answer, but accurate information is a must, the problem is analysing that information as Terry Pratchett wrote: " LET ME PUT FORWARD ANOTHER SUGGESTION: THAT YOU ARE NOTHING MORE THAN A LUCKY SPECIES OF APE THAT IS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE COMPLEXITIES OF CREATION VIA A LANGUAGE THAT EVOLVED IN ORDER TO TELL ONE ANOTHER WHERE THE RIPE FRUIT IS." |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Feb 7, 2024 11:01:54 GMT
Great to see the National Trust trolling their 'anti-woke reformist' critics - Whats shameful about kinky dogging? That's what Crofty often asks me too. I usually try and move the subject on as soon as I can when he asks me this question. Especially when he mentions he has a spare dog and lead. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,512
|
Post by Danny on Feb 7, 2024 11:03:11 GMT
By way of an aside, I think an important battle was lost when Facebook et al. were allowed to define themselves as platforms, rather than publishers and thus largely evade responsibility for content. Its not possible to rationally assess the masive quantities of posted content. You just pointed out how even experts can be contradictory. But that being so, if you place a legal requirement on sites to take formal responsibility for everything posted, they would be immediately bankrupted by lawsuits and cease to exist. The population would not accept this as a solution. Wikipedia seeks to get round the problem of fake content by requiring professional sourcing of anything posted. But this is first policed by masses of volunteer editors, and second is still subject to the problem where respectable sources disagree. Leading to huge wars about content posting. Plus of course some content which is pretty certainly wrong, but is a majority view. Wikipedia is utterly unprofitable as a private venture and relies upon donations to stay operating. Its not realistic to have that level of skilled time input on general websites to seek to avoid even the more exteme untruths. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,512
|
Post by Danny on Feb 7, 2024 11:06:08 GMT
Agreed, but this misses the point. The NHS is, if anything, much worse than the US system for dealing with long covid. At least in the US, if you have symptoms and a decent insurance policy, you will get a battery of tests which are simply not available on the NHS. No, you are missing the point. The NHS spends its money for the greatest good. The US divides its money between those with excellent insurance who can get any test possible, and those who have no health care at all. I doubt it is. But in general their health service is better funded, so they will be able to afford more of the less benefical interventions. |
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Feb 7, 2024 11:07:31 GMT
shevii Biden is clearly in the not-so-early stages of dementia. The alternative is deranged. With some people Altzheimer's makes them very aggressive in my experience though I'm happy to be corrected by any of our many medical experts. If the US election ends up being between those two expect a big move from China whoever wins. They may be a little more cautious if Trump wins because he's so unpredictable. I thpught his hesitancy in that clip was him being aware of treading on eggshells and being very careful to think before he answered in case he inflamed the very difficult situation. He actually said, 'Let me frame my words carefully.' We should also remember that Biden has a stammer. Pausing before speaking is one way to overcome that. From CNN: "Biden has talked about how as a young boy he practiced in the mirror for hours on end reciting poetry written by Irish poets like William Butler Yeats to overcome his stutter. At a CNN town hall last year, Biden described how he marks up his speeches to show where he can take breaks in between words to help his delivery. "You know, stuttering, when you think about it, is the only handicap that people still laugh about. That (they) still humiliate people about. And they don't even mean to," Biden said at a CNN town hall last year. "Biden has talked about how as a young boy he practiced in the mirror for hours on end reciting poetry written by Irish poets like William Butler Yeats to overcome his stutter. At a CNN town hall last year, Biden described how he marks up his speeches to show where he can take breaks in between words to help his delivery. "You know, stuttering, when you think about it, is the only handicap that people still laugh about. That (they) still humiliate people about. And they don't even mean to," Biden said at a CNN town hall last year." |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,512
|
Post by Danny on Feb 7, 2024 11:14:25 GMT
I thpught his hesitancy in that clip was him being aware of treading on eggshells and being very careful to think before he answered in case he inflamed the very difficult situation. He actually said, 'Let me frame my words carefully.' We should also remember that Biden has a stammer. Thats also why Winston Churchill had such an odd delivery of speeches. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2024 11:16:25 GMT
colin - really interesting to see the EU backtrack on those agricultural emissions targets. I have a sense that this is another expression of governments faith in market economics falling short. Much of the time, these regulations are drafted with two factors in mind. Firstly, the objective that it is desired to achieve, and secondly, the idea that once given the target, the competitive market will find a way to deliver it. It's the latter that so often falls down and creates the problem. In reality, I think we need a far more interventionist approach. Like in the UK, where once upon a time a state owned monopoly was task with, and delivered magnificently, the job of converting the entire gas network to natural gas, the job of converting from fossil fuels to renewable heating is largely left to the market place, and it's been an abject failure. Reliance on market solutions is yet another of the neoliberal mantras that has been demonstrated to have failed time and time again, yet policy makers continue to see it as the only viable option. I think , in one sense you are right. The energy transition project is so huge that the State needs to be an active part of it. But the costs are so massive- somewhere between £1 trillion and £2 trillion for UK -that the State can't really fund it alone. So what is happening is management by dictat-we WILL change all gas boilers/petrol cars etc etc by some ridiculous arbitrary date. Only to discover that voters either can't afford , or are unwilling/unable to take part in that timetable & plan. Politicians are now backpeddling like mad on their dictats because the public never agreed to them. Remember also that the EU backtracks include environmental ideals like setaside and pesticide withdrawal. Its a lesson to us all that what seem like eminently desirable and sensible changes for the health of the planet incur a cost to someone somewhere. And those someones resent not being consulted. |
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Feb 7, 2024 11:18:07 GMT
The European Commission has announced it will scrap a 30 per cent reduction target in methane, nitrogen and other gases linked to farming from a new “road map” on how to hit overall emissions goals. Ursula von der Leyen, announced the decision in Strasbourg. she said that farmers had not been adequately consulted over the proposals . She also announced that Brussels will withdraw a proposal to slash the use of pesticides by 2030 saying “The proposal has become a symbol of polarisation,” Under its European Green Deal, the EU has targeted a 50 per cent cut in the overall use of pesticides and other hazardous substances by the end of the decade. The EU had already backtracked on a requirement for farmers to leave about 5 per cent of their land aside for nature restoration.VdL said “Farmers need a worthwhile business case for nature-enhancing measures. Perhaps we have not made that case convincingly,” So the EU farmers have stopped decarbonising & environmental priorities in their tracks. Whether this will be enough to stop the protests by farmers , and by voters at upcoming elections remains to be seen. But its a lesson in the political consequences of rapid change without consensus. Sunak was doing something similar when he altered the energy transition timetable-and it hasn't saved him. Tactical withdrawal. All these measures will come back, one way or the other, in due course, because they are necessary, and mostly popular, particularly reducing pesticides and pollution. Farmers are indeed under economic pressure, but are too used to special treatment. A combination of divide and rule, generational change, and bribery, will do the trick. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Feb 7, 2024 11:25:38 GMT
I thpught his hesitancy in that clip was him being aware of treading on eggshells and being very careful to think before he answered in case he inflamed the very difficult situation. He actually said, 'Let me frame my words carefully.' We should also remember that Biden has a stammer. Pausing before speaking is one way to overcome that. From CNN: "Biden has talked about how as a young boy he practiced in the mirror for hours on end reciting poetry written by Irish poets like William Butler Yeats to overcome his stutter. At a CNN town hall last year, Biden described how he marks up his speeches to show where he can take breaks in between words to help his delivery. "You know, stuttering, when you think about it, is the only handicap that people still laugh about. That (they) still humiliate people about. And they don't even mean to," Biden said at a CNN town hall last year. "Biden has talked about how as a young boy he practiced in the mirror for hours on end reciting poetry written by Irish poets like William Butler Yeats to overcome his stutter. At a CNN town hall last year, Biden described how he marks up his speeches to show where he can take breaks in between words to help his delivery. "You know, stuttering, when you think about it, is the only handicap that people still laugh about. That (they) still humiliate people about. And they don't even mean to," Biden said at a CNN town hall last year." Yes, like you probably, I'm a bit uncomfortable with all this keyboard neurology, the observations often tinged with political bias too. I think Biden and Trump are both overaged to be vying for four years as US President, but it is what it is and however deeply flawed the US political system may be (is), they are the candidates, thus far, that are emerging from it. I think we ought to steer clear of pseudo neurology and mocking belittlement of the two candidates. The mitigations are these for me. I don't think Trump is going to make it on to the ballot paper. If that insurrection charge makes it to court by the summer, as anticipated, he's in desperate trouble. As for Biden, should he gain another term, I think it will be a short term regency with a team of advisers and key government appointments likely to do the governing heavy lifting. 18 months into his second term and he may well find an excuse to pack it all in. The other interesting factor of course is that if Trump drops out to spend some penitentiary time, or is shamed into withdrawal as a convicted felon, the Republicans then come up with another candidate who beats Biden in November. I don't think Trump can or would beat Biden. Haley might though. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2024 11:39:26 GMT
David Smith in today's Times writes about the recent ONS “Impact of reweighting on Labour Force Survey (LFS) indicators 2024”, which showed -"a lower unemployment rate towards the end of last year, 3.9 per cent, and one that was falling not rising, despite an absence of economic growth." He goes on to highlight the record numbers of economically inactive people -including " a record 2.8 million people are inactive due to ill-health." |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2024 11:51:29 GMT
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Feb 7, 2024 12:17:12 GMT
Interesting listening to James O'Brien he's just been interviewing Ed Davey on his pod cast full disclosure.
Haven't heard the interview don't think it's broadcast yet but O'Brien seemed very impressed and said it wasn't like any politician he's interviewed before. Davey's non political life is objectively interesting he's been through some genuinely tough times.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Feb 7, 2024 12:22:17 GMT
There's a whole bunch of technological change going on. And no one is accountable. Least of all elected politicians ! Isn't that to do with ownership more than anything else? Take TV, for example. You could argue that the government is responsible for Freeview, but, while there are basic rules in place, you couldn't really argue that the government - any government - is responsible for sports channels / film channels / Netflix etc - that are provided by Sky and others. An era where there is a lot of technolgical change has happened to co-incide with one where government relinuished ownership - and therefore control of some services and utilities, or, didn't have it in the first place. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Feb 7, 2024 12:25:09 GMT
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,138
|
Post by domjg on Feb 7, 2024 12:27:21 GMT
domjg 'Part of what allows this is the breakdown of trusted information.' I agree and I think the importance of the seismic upheaval in the media landscape tends to get overlooked. I can't see effective content regulation being introduced - I'm not sure it's feasible, even in theory - so we have to do a much better job of teaching people to evaluate sources of information and the informaton itself. To me the really troubling development is that so many people seem to have responded to the proliferation of unreliable sources by becoming universally sceptical - they don't trust anything anyone says, even demonstrably credentialled experts speaking on the area of expertise. I can understand how this happens. When you are not knowledgeable about a field, it is not really possible to evaluate an expert presentation critically. In my own scientific field I could give two completely different, entirely accurate presentations of the same topic and thus direct an intelligent lay audience to different conclusions. I'd probably be reasonably successful even if forced to use the same data for both presentations. I wouldn't need to lie or distort the data. I'm very much aware of this when I listen to an expert making an argument - if s/he is any good at all then what s/he says will be intellectually coherent, with relevant evidence adduced, so it'll sound plausible. But because I don't have deep background knowledge I won't be able to spot the problems. If I then get to hear from Expert 2, who takes the contrary position, s/he'll pull apart what Expert 1 said - and again, it'll be coherent and seem plausible - but I still won't know who is offering the stronger, more credible account. All I can do is evaluate their credentials (even that's not necessarily straightforward) or try to work out what the consensus is (ditto). By way of an aside, I think an important battle was lost when Facebook et al. were allowed to define themselves as platforms, rather than publishers and thus largely evade responsibility for content. AI may reduce the task of reviewing and moderating all online content to manageable proportions (final oversight needs to rest with humans, due to well-publicised shortcomings in the algorithmic approach), so I suppose it's possile this could be revisited eventually. I mentioned life in the state of nature the other for different purposes, but it is worth remembering that we are a hunter/gatherer ape species that, in evolutionary terms relating to brain size, has not progressed far beyond that. However, in technological terms we are living in an environment where expertise has become more and more specialised and, therefore, the further an individual is from involvement in a specialism the less likely they are to understand its intricacies. For example, whilst a surgeon was once considered one specialism, surgery is now broken down into various sub-specialisms. Whilst each surgeon and many medics are likely to have some understanding of what a specialist cardiothoracic surgeon does there will be aspects which they are unaware of and the further removed from that specialism the less the understanding will be. This is a continuing process and has significant implications for the problem you refer to. I don't think domjg 's reliance on consensus is a safe approach either consider the treatment of Semmelweis by the medical establishment. I am not sure I have even the beginnings of an answer, but accurate information is a must, the problem is analysing that information as Terry Pratchett wrote: " LET ME PUT FORWARD ANOTHER SUGGESTION: THAT YOU ARE NOTHING MORE THAN A LUCKY SPECIES OF APE THAT IS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE COMPLEXITIES OF CREATION VIA A LANGUAGE THAT EVOLVED IN ORDER TO TELL ONE ANOTHER WHERE THE RIPE FRUIT IS." I read a book a while back about the origin of complex language and language change over periods of time. Long story short the idea is that every expression of a higher, abstract or time based concept comes back down ultimately to building blocks used to describe the most basic physical movements and actions. It's where we started and we've just retooled the parts of our brains that have always dealt with those to higher purposes with almost everything in language being a metaphor traceable back down to those descriptions of basic actions, names for parts of the body and basic objects in the natural environment. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2024 12:29:06 GMT
There's a whole bunch of technological change going on. And no one is accountable. Least of all elected politicians ! Isn't that to do with ownership more than anything else? Take TV, for example. You could argue that the government is responsible for Freeview, but, while there are basic rules in place, you couldn't really argue that the government - any government - is responsible for sports channels / film channels / Netflix etc - that are provided by Sky and others. An era where there is a lot of technolgical change has happened to co-incide with one where government relinuished ownership - and therefore control of some services and utilities, or, didn't have it in the first place. Do you really think that State ownership of BT would make them more responsive ? And given the Horizon revelations do you really think that state ownership produces more accountability ? |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,498
|
Post by neilj on Feb 7, 2024 12:37:34 GMT
Yougov, Tories would win back only 31% of Reform UK defectors if Reform doesn't stand in their constituency
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Feb 7, 2024 12:38:47 GMT
I'm inclined to cut Sunak some slack on this. I've watched the exchange with Morgan and while Sunak's response was typically awkward and maladroit, he was railroaded into the handshake and probably wasn't fully aware that he was taking part in Morgan's bet. He shook a hand that was offered him. He didn't wager the bet nor did he mention £1000. He allowed himself to be drawn into a moronic exchange on a serious subject where Morgan, a consummate self-publicist, was going to be the only winner. A foolish and naive lapse from Sunak but I detected nothing else behind it. Certainly no intention to belittle the subject or zeal for a careless and callous gamble. That was Morgan's game. Sunak was drawn into it. If it revealed anything very much it was to highlight once again the imbecilic level of much of our political discourse. You are a generous person, but it doesn't explain in a later interview in trying to downplay it by saying he's not a betting person. But on spread betting last July he said “I was doing next wicket partnership, next wicket fall, innings total. I just discovered this thing and it was great.” Seems a tad disingenuous... Whether or not Sunak took the ctual bet with Morgan seriously or not (and on that you could cut him some slack if you were being very generous), what it says to me is that Sunak lacks some of the gravitas that's needed in a prime minister. You couldn't really imagine a Labour PM such as Gordon Brown, or a Tory PM such as Thatcher, or even May, being railroaded in this fashion. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Feb 7, 2024 12:45:19 GMT
Talk about being totally disconnected from reality.
Sunakared chose to make a transphobic comment in PMQ's whilst the mother of a murdered transgender girl was in the public gallery
What a dickhead
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,498
|
Post by neilj on Feb 7, 2024 12:47:33 GMT
Probably the worse example yet of Sunak being terrible under pressure.
Making a trans joke in front of Esther Ghey, mother of murdered transgender girl Brianna takes it to a whole new level
|
|
|
|
Post by alec on Feb 7, 2024 13:07:45 GMT
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,512
|
Post by Danny on Feb 7, 2024 13:13:22 GMT
And given the Horizon revelations do you really think that state ownership produces more accountability ? Good question. What it seems to have given rise to is a culture of governments succesively seeking to distance themselvs from all sorts of responsibility for any organisation operated by government. However, that doesnt mean they should not be held responsible. To have organised matters so you dont know what is going on is itself culpable neglect of your responsibility. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,512
|
Post by Danny on Feb 7, 2024 13:18:20 GMT
I wonder if anyone has thoughts on the recent cancer diagnosis for King Charles?
There seems to be a total clearing of the decks in terms of his schedules, scramble by relatives. Obviously we are not being told the whole picture, and would not be even if the issue has a positive outlook. But the question must arise whether there is now the prospect of the electoral season this year being punctuated by another death of monarch and a fortnights propaganda to support the state and government?
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Feb 7, 2024 13:28:54 GMT
Regarding the Horizon scandal
Tory media attack Ed Davey but they would wouldn't they. Others dismissed Ed Davey's part which isn't entirely accurate either.
Reality
He was the first to meet the principle campaigner on the issue and raised the issue with all concerned. The Post Office & the representative body lied to him as they did to everyone else and it was backed up by Civil Servants. Between these bodies and judges, as well as paid industry experts in court, we need to realise how the establishment in the UK, covers for it's own and refuses to believe ordinary people.
It transpires that Ed Davey asked the right questions to the appropriate people and was lied to as these people lied to everyone else. Lots of others did his job before and after him with presumably the same result , who are they why aren't they being singled out?
Rhetorical question as we've seen demonstrated here it's partisan attack by Tories and their enablers.
|
|
|
|
Post by bendo on Feb 7, 2024 13:54:38 GMT
Whats the issue? Its 2024, copper phone lines are a dated concept in the modern world. For the majority the only change will be to plug in the phone line to the router instead of the existing faceplate. Its a process that will be managed by peoples existing provider. Technology moves on, would you rather we still had black and white TV etc? |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,498
|
Post by neilj on Feb 7, 2024 14:02:15 GMT
Ipsos Scotland
Scottish Westminster Voting Intention:
SNP: 39% (-1)
LAB: 32% (+2)
CON: 14% (-1)
LDM: 6% (=)
GRN: 4% (+1)
Via
@ipsosscotland
, 25-31 Jan.
Changes w/ 20-26 Nov.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2024 14:03:10 GMT
I can't see Sunak still being Tory leader when the general election comes around. Far too weak, out of touch and clumsy. Hunt might step in as caretaker, or Mordaunt, although she's likely to lose her seat.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Feb 7, 2024 14:27:29 GMT
Jeremy Hunt
General election 2019: South West Surrey
Conservative Jeremy Hunt 32,191 53.3 Decrease2.4
Liberal Democrats Paul Follows 23,374 38.7 Increase28.8,
He's toast
|
|
|
|
Post by alec on Feb 7, 2024 14:30:12 GMT
bendo - "Whats the issue?" I have concerns regarding resilience. I've related my own story of a total and prolonged failure of the power grid, which also dropped all mobile communications for a significant geographical area. The only comms remaining was the fixed landline. These systems failures are not particularly rare, although the longevity of my recent experience was unusual, as was the twin issue of both power and mobile systems falling over simultaneously. I do, however, feel that we are building in an additional vulnerability to our day to day lives, just at the point when general issues of business continuity as well as civil (and military defence) are increasingly challenged by external threats. In functional terms, broadband based digital is probably better (although the need to dial the local code regardless is a step backwards) but it is probably more systemically vulnerable, to both accidental and deliberate disruption. Maybe I'm being a little old fashioned here, and I am speaking as someone who keeps paper copies of all my bank statement for at least 3 years, just in case the world of online banking keels over one day, but the time will come when we recognise that maximising efficiency is not the same thing as maximising resilience.
|
|
