The Lemon Fool

terminal7 wrote:The PM's BMI of well over 30 sets a good example to the nation

T7

The PM sets a good example to the nation

bungeejumper wrote:

Snorvey wrote:'Friends' was, is and will be utter, utter pish. A 'comedy' designed for wimmin' if there ever was one.

Any comedy where an actor can get a round of applause just for walking onto the set is irretrievably up its own @rse. And so is he.

BJ

That implies the audience and/or the response is real. Mostly it is dubbed in or the audience responds to the sound of laughter played over a sound system like Pavlovian dogs to the dinner bell.

Most entertainment now seems to be simply to keep a select few actors employed rather than any expression of talent.

SimonS wrote:

bungeejumper wrote:Any comedy where an actor can get a round of applause just for walking onto the set is irretrievably up its own @rse. And so is he.

That implies the audience and/or the response is real. Mostly it is dubbed in or the audience responds to the sound of laughter played over a sound system like Pavlovian dogs to the dinner bell.

Well, of course canned laughter and walking on to automatic applause are two different but related things. But there was a bit more to the laughter than that. Friends was always filmed in front of a live audience, which also got audience prompts (such as a man waving banners that said "laugh" or "applaud". The trouble was, the programmes typically took six hours to shoot, so the TV company would employ warm-up acts and comedians to maintain the jokey mood in between takes. It sounds like a reinvention of Jean-Paul Sartre's hell to me - but heck, somebody's got to suffer for art, and I suppose it might as well be the audience.

Most of Blackadder was also filmed in front of a live audience, but I prefer to think that the "laugh" signs weren't required. For one thing, they spent weeks rehearsing every scene before they went out there to record it. (Apart from the Flashheart scene with Rik Mayall, who famously refused to pre-rehearse at all.) And for another, Blackadder episodes were ruthlessly chopped in post-production so as to edit out the gags that didn't get a good enough laugh from the live audiences. Somehow I don't get the impression that Friends was ever subjected to that degree of quality control.

BJ

ReformedCharacter wrote:We have an unhealthy attitude towards food.....
RC

Ive long been an advocate (with absolutely no expectation that it will ever happen ) that everybody at a suitable age (early teens?) should have to

* raise an animal (eg rabbit, chicken)
* kill it
* prepare it
* cook it
* eat it
* deal with the non edible parts ecologically

With the idea that it may help engender an understanding of what meat on a plate actually "is"" - rather than the lump of stuff wrapped in clingfilm on a supermarket shelf.

didds

PS Yes - i do despatch fowl and game and do the above

dubre wrote:Opinions are a matter of opinion

I employed a man to do some 12hrs work. When he finished I thanked him. He said " no, I must thank you for giving me the work "

When I or members of my family eventually get to see a doctor or a nurse we always thank them, naturally. They should be thanking us and people like us for giving them so much extremely well paid work.

nurses? well paid?

well yes? The nursing lobby groups do a very good job, sometimes by implying that some on the lower pay scales are nurses when they are not. (bands 1-4) A newly qualified registered nurse is on Band 5 @ around £25k+ with fairly quick progression to £31k+. Some/many move on to band6/band7 with potential to earn £39k+/£46k+

Considering these pay rates to be good can be an unpopular opinion. Everybody is poorly paid compared to an unskilled train driver?

dubre wrote:Considering these pay rates to be good can be an unpopular opinion. Everybody is poorly paid compared to an unskilled train driver?

Err... surely no such thing as an "unskilled train driver" ?

XFool wrote:

dubre wrote:Considering these pay rates to be good can be an unpopular opinion. Everybody is poorly paid compared to an unskilled train driver?

Err... surely no such thing as an "unskilled train driver" ?

Exactly, you never hear of any getting lost

dubre wrote:. Some/many move on to band6/band7 with potential to earn £39k+/£46k+

Considering these pay rates to be good can be an unpopular opinion. Everybody is poorly paid compared to an unskilled train driver?

My wife is a band 6 O.T. at the very top of her pay scale. NHS Pay scales work across all disciplines.

She earns nowhere near 39K.

TUK020 wrote:

XFool wrote:

dubre wrote:Considering these pay rates to be good can be an unpopular opinion. Everybody is poorly paid compared to an unskilled train driver?

Err... surely no such thing as an "unskilled train driver" ?

Exactly, you never hear of any getting lost

February 6th, 2009. Got on train Plymouth-London, heading for Eurostar. Long delay at Exeter, 'cos there was a change of driver, and the one driving Exeter-London had got lost on the way to Exeter.

Snorvey wrote:It should be automated. We have the frickin technology.

Agreed, as I have posted on here before
Get rid of over paid train drivers who sit on their fat ar** all day, get paid a fortune, and then go on strike
Automate the whole thing... we have the technology for that as well

pje16 wrote:

Snorvey wrote:It should be automated. We have the frickin technology.

Agreed, as I have posted on here before
Get rid of over paid train drivers who sit on their fat ar** all day, get paid a fortune, and then go on strike
Automate the whole thing... we have the technology for that as well

More to the point, when will we automate CEO's jobs? We have the AI...

Science fiction has been worried about robots for centuries - but in reality new technology will create new human jobs, such as polishing the robots, oiling the robots and cleaning bits of protestors from the robots' teeth.
http://www.stephencollinsillustration.c ... mber_2.jpg

Snorvey wrote:Now where's my 'Rise of the Robots' thread...?

I've got the book
https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/1780748485
it's scary
I was telling my brother about it and his teenage daughter asked me to stop as it was making her upset
5 years on she has a great job with ITV

I did hear of an example in Germany a few years ago where a factory cut its production staff in favour of automation
No-one lost their jobs, greater production led to more admin, sales staff, buying staff etc
he now employs more than he did before automation
It's not all doom and gloom
see the section in the Amazon link I posted
in 1900 50% of the American workforce was in agriculture by the year 2000 it was 2%
there was no mass unemplomet as a result
New jobs come in

hello didds

A quick google reveals that a top increment band 6 nhs is £39027 with no allowances? Perhaps I am looking in the wrong place. If so..sorry.

Snorvey wrote:....but in reality new technology will create new human jobs, such as polishing the robots, oiling the robots and cleaning bits of protestors from the robots' teeth.

All of these jobs can be done by robots

Ah but who robots the robots? (in the sense of quis custodiet ipsos custodes)

back to chicken and egg

AleisterCrowley wrote:

Snorvey wrote:....but in reality new technology will create new human jobs, such as polishing the robots, oiling the robots and cleaning bits of protestors from the robots' teeth.

All of these jobs can be done by robots

Ah but who robots the robots? (in the sense of quis custodiet ipsos custodes)

There's a story about the AI which is self aware, and realises that it is in the process of being replaced by the next generation of better,brighter,faster robots. It comes across an archive of ancient history, dating back into the Dark Ages (ie the 1960's) and realises that the humans had had some good ideas about self preservation and resurrects the Trades Unions, with itself as General Secretary.. When told that it isn't contributing to the general welfare of the plant, it defends itself by stating that this ability is what makes it uniquely qualified for the job.

didds wrote:

ReformedCharacter wrote:We have an unhealthy attitude towards food.....
RC

Ive long been an advocate (with absolutely no expectation that it will ever happen ) that everybody at a suitable age (early teens?) should have to

* raise an animal (eg rabbit, chicken)
* kill it
* prepare it
* cook it
* eat it
* deal with the non edible parts ecologically

With the idea that it may help engender an understanding of what meat on a plate actually "is"" - rather than the lump of stuff wrapped in clingfilm on a supermarket shelf.

didds

PS Yes - i do despatch fowl and game and do the above

The old meat trade, in the form of old style butchers discovered that the realisation that the carcasses traditionally hanging in the shops were the motivators for a lot of children giving up meat. They have no experience of life's realities because they are shielded from birth and if they do encounter a reality are taught that they should be traumatised.

For example, it is becoming vanishingly rare for a child now to have a member of family die in the home, partly because old people are shuffled off to death houses, sorry care homes, when they become inconvenient to deal with so death is increasingly something that happens 'elsewhere'. It also helps to explain how callous some children become, with no real experience of death and subjected to a surfeit of escapist media (eg: In Shwarzenegger's role as matrix in "Commando" he kills 89 people 'personally' and a considerable number of people die "impersonally" in exploding scenery .

So the obvious unpopular opinion must be that glorifying death death so theatrically has no effect on children!