Yeah but no but yeah because…

Second one could even be “I am putting coffee on my ice cream >”. Let’s get prepositions in on the act.

Leicester Square To Reopen To Cars And Buses By September Just as part of Oxford Street is pedestrianised.

This one amused me too. londonist.com/london/news/...

Looks very interesting. Have only read the abstract so far, but… In theory, looks like these ought not be radical suggestions, given that the dominant paradigm in road safety is the “safe system”. But (personal view) that’s usually unpacked as an engineering system, not a human one, so…

Is It Safe? Why Different Perspectives on Risk Matter for a Safer System - Claremont Collaborator and friend of Claremont Dr Simon Christmas asks whether we need to think more broadly when we’re evaluating what we really mean by “safe”… Is it safe? Is it risky? Ask yourself those ques...

claremontcomms.com/2026/03/is-i...

You’ve seen the stuff on “motonormativity”, yes?

This is a good point and one I’ve not thought about enough. In some cases, I think govt/state doesn’t even really want us to change: it just wants to be able to claim it’s not to blame when some of us are then killed.

PS - a key complaint I’d have about this particular intervention is that it risk reinforcing the idea that speeding is only *really* a problem outside schools. (And old people’s homes: you’re not allowed to kill old people either.)

Can’t help but wonder (gently) if the target of your (justified) irritation should perhaps be not “behaviour change” but “badly done behaviour change”. Reminds me of Frank McKenna’s critique of “education”, which I always felt missed out the same words.

And no one in genuine danger could want to go to university.

They also seem to assume that someone “genuinely fleeing danger” is thereby disqualified from also wanting to go to university and better themselves. So … only safe people are allowed to have aspiration?

A persistent feature of Home Office messaging under Keir Starmer + Shabana Mahmood - to strongly prefer to reinforce public hunches over the principle of asylum itself.

Eg: students who UK finds have valid asylum claim can't be "genuinely fleeing persecution" [not what the UK has signed up to]

Hatzola ambulances set alight in Golders Green arson attack CCTV footage circulating on social media shows three men approaching the vehicles and then fleeing the scene as flames appear

I grew up in this community and I have a few thoughts I want to share.

A short thread.

www.jewishnews.co.uk/breaking-hat...

This looks incredibly interesting.

Oh dear. That doesn’t reflect well on me at all!

I’m on a bus trying to work out if I even understand what it’s all about! I’m sure it’s spot on - always is - but brain being a bit slow.

Interesting to see that final question framed not just as a matter of will (determination) but also *imagination*.

"My name may be forgotten when it comes, but the time will arrive when great outbreaks of cholera will be things of the past. And it is the knowledge of the way in which the disease is propagated which will cause them to disappear"

Happy birthday to John Snow! His name & his work is not forgotten.

This statement applies equally to technology in vehicles. Road safety as a microcosm of geopolitics.

My humble submission to the new Bank of England with concepts for the new bank notes to please both sides.

Also make sense for pacifist zombies

It’s utterly bizarre. Why is anyone still expending ink on what the man happens to have said today when we know he’ll say something else tomorrow? (Even less comprehensible to me is anyone reposting his latest absurdities.)

Monty Python - silly YouTube video by McNickler

We’ve reached the point in history where Telegraph and Mail headlines are praying in aid Tony Blair’s views on American wars. Where’s Graham Chapman’s army officer when you need him? m.youtube.com/watch?v=3ANu...

It just needs David Attenborough narrating

When someone says „Scientists do not want you to know“ you can dismiss everything from there on. Scientists want you to know. They are desperate that you know. They can’t shut up about what they found out and want you to know.

Is there any other way?

I will need to think harder about this. I’ve not followed your work, I’m afraid, but find this all really interesting and actually very relevant to my day job. Are the references in this paper the best ones to find out more about your Worldview concept?

This should have said “model of the world AND themselves in it”. 🤦‍♂️

… Ascribers are of course also human, and their ascriptions types of belief which need unpacking in the same way. Which I suspect isn’t just an added complexity, but fundamental to really understanding what we’re doing when we talk about individual psychology. But I’ll stop there.

… are not out ascriptions of beliefs etc not a kind of model of a model? I ask in part because you talk about choosing the scripting that best fits when more than one is offered, which suggests a very rational ascriber using evidence only to align their own standing states to reality. Whereas…