Off Topic Thread 4.0

troyzer

Buer wrote: »

A €3bn project that will serve hundreds of thousands for generations will be thrown in the bin because one road and its inhabitants will be discommoded for a portion of the project?

It's f*cking bonkers.

It's not just one street through. It's the only crossing point for KMs for loads of people either side of the Luas. I'm not saying they should be allowed to dictate the entire city but at the same time, it also seems mad to effectively build a wall down huge sections of south Dublin.

Podge_irl wrote: »

It will be open to pedestrians in some manner. Anyway, the only real relevant distance is the distance to Charleston Road which is quite a bit less than 1km. The "community" they are so desperate to maintain without the "Berlin Wall" of the metro will do just fine - communities are based on walking and you can still do that. A community is not defined by the ability to drive through somewhere.

Totally agree, this is the proper counter argument. Still, you'd imagine that a bit of tweaking could make everyone happy. It shouldn't be insurmountable.

awec

troyzer wrote: »

Lads just getting back to this Metro thing.

They do have a bit of a point regarding Dunville avenue. It seems to be the only crossing point across the current track from Charleston road down to Milltown road. That's a decent 3km.

it's 3km of housing estates, not through roads. There's no need for a crossing.

troyzer

troyzer wrote: »

Lads just getting back to this Metro thing.

They do have a bit of a point regarding Dunville avenue. It seems to be the only crossing point across the current track from Charleston road down to Milltown road. That's a decent 3km.

Bit confused by this. There was never any road access along that stretch even before the luas. Unless they want to redo the cowper stop to allow a path through to the back of gonzaga.

Zzippy

troyzer wrote: »

They can certainly contaminate the wild population but they can't drive them to extinction via cross breeding. That's not how it works.

Any farmed breed be it fish, cow or crop are genetically inferior to the wild population.

I have no dog in this fight, I can be convinced either way. But it seems to me that Zippy is against fish farming in general as an industry.

troyzer wrote: »

Whatever about the rest of it but this is not how evolution works. ^

Actually, it is. Incremental incursion of foreign genes into a population weakens genetic fitness. I'm not going to bother looking for you, but there are quite a few scientific papers on this. Basically salmon populations where genetic contamination has occurred from farmed fish display reduced survival. It may be only a couple of percent, but with low enough survival as it is, that is enough to deplete populations to extinction level within 20-50 generations. It is a recent occurrence so the eventual extinction events are based on mathematical modelling of populations, they haven't happened yet, but the genetic pollution certainly has. One study found 18% of salmon in the Crana River in Donegal had genetic material from farmed fish. Every escape of farmed fish increases that risk.

I'm not against fish farming in general. I am against farming salmonid fish in cages in the open sea in bays that are close to our wild salmon rivers. I want salmon farming to move to closed circulation systems, where the risk of disease and parasite transfer is eliminated, escapes are not possible, and where salmon farmers have to bear the cost of waste disposal like all other farmers, and not pollute our bays with their pesticide-contaminated faeces.

troyzer

Zzippy wrote: »

troyzer wrote: »

They can certainly contaminate the wild population but they can't drive them to extinction via cross breeding. That's not how it works.

Any farmed breed be it fish, cow or crop are genetically inferior to the wild population.

I have no dog in this fight, I can be convinced either way. But it seems to me that Zippy is against fish farming in general as an industry.

troyzer wrote: »

Whatever about the rest of it but this is not how evolution works. ^

Actually, it is. Incremental incursion of foreign genes into a population weakens genetic fitness. I'm not going to bother looking for you, but there are quite a few scientific papers on this. Basically salmon populations where genetic contamination has occurred from farmed fish display reduced survival. It may be only a couple of percent, but with low enough survival as it is, that is enough to deplete populations to extinction level within 20-50 generations. It is a recent occurrence so the eventual extinction events are based on mathematical modelling of populations, they haven't happened yet, but the genetic pollution certainly has. One study found 18% of salmon in the Crana River in Donegal had genetic material from farmed fish. Every escape of farmed fish increases that risk.

I'm not against fish farming in general. I am against farming salmonid fish in cages in the open sea in bays that are close to our wild salmon rivers. I want salmon farming to move to closed circulation systems, where the risk of disease and parasite transfer is eliminated, escapes are not possible, and where salmon farmers have to bear the cost of waste disposal like all other farmers, and not pollute our bays with their pesticide-contaminated faeces.

The individuals which don't interbreed will be selected and thus survive. That's how evolution works.

I'm not disputing that sub populations which hybridise won't struggle, but it's unlikely that the entire wild population would hybridise which is what you'd need to wipe out the entire wild population.

How much extra is it have a closed system of farming? What you're saying sounds reasonable but there has to be a catch.

Zzippy

troyzer wrote: »

The individuals which don't interbreed will be selected and thus survive. That's how evolution works.

I'm not disputing that sub populations which hybridise won't struggle, but it's unlikely that the entire wild population would hybridise which is what you'd need to wipe out the entire wild population.

How much extra is it have a closed system of farming? What you're saying sounds reasonable but there has to be a catch.

When you have a wild population that is already very low, as it is in many rivers, it only takes a few fish to introduce farmed genes to a large portion of the next generation. When you already have 95% mortality at sea, it's not at all certain that the purely wild individuals in a small population will survive at the expense of those with introduced genes. The farmed fish have been selectively bred for fast growth, so at the freshwater stage they can outcompete wild juveniles for food and territory, so wild fish don't even survive as far as getting to sea.
I'm not a geneticist, I'm a zoologist by training, but I work with fisheries scientists and statistical modellers and talk to these people about these issues, and the intrusion of foreign genes into a small wild population is certainly a very large existential threat.
Closed containment is the technological edge of the industry - it is the next big thing but currently it requires higher capital investment and running costs. And as long as the real costs of marine open cage systems are not factored in - the environmental costs to wild fish and the environment - it struggles. But marine systems have problems that are growing - sea lice resistance to pesticides is increasing, increased sea temps causing jellyfish blooms and amoebic gill disease, etc - such that in 20/30 years the marine systems may not even be sustainable economically. I just hope that tipping point comes before our wild salmon are gone.

mfceiling

I have now decided (whether he likes it or not) that Zzippy is my new best friend.

thomond2006

mfceiling wrote: »

I have now decided (whether he likes it or not) that Zzippy is my new best friend.

Ye need a podcast.

Squidgy Black

Zzippy, do you like fish sticks?

CatFromHue

Buer wrote: »

A €3bn project that will serve hundreds of thousands for generations will be thrown in the bin because one road and its inhabitants will be discommoded for a portion of the project?

It's f*cking bonkers.

when you look at some of the objections to housing projects being built regularly they include increased traffic, trucks usually, on our road during the construction phase.

it really is appalling carry on.

troyzer

Well, I got told.

swiwi_

Ah. Trapped is back on TV. Thought Series 1 was one of the greatest shows ever. The watching of Series 2 shall be begun.

pickarooney

troyzer wrote: »

As far as I know it's not that much more expensive on a per unit basis to produce RHD but when you're talking about massive factories, 1% gains here and there makes the difference. Anybody who's played that factory simulator game on Steam knows the craic.

There will always be a glut of RHD cars from Europe. Over a third of the planet uses RHD and they're mostly countries which are growing rapidly.

The trend is likely to actually increase towards RHD as Southern Africa and the Indian subcontinent get their **** together.

I'd love it for the opposite reason. Buy a cheap second hand car in Ireland and bring it to France.

swiwi_

Fair play to yiz with the Worlds best gin. Anyone tried it?

Bazzo

swiwi_ wrote: »

Fair play to yiz with the Worlds best gin. Anyone tried it?

Dingle? Yeah it's nice enough though to be honest my gin palette can distinguish ****e, ok and good and that's about it. Fairly sure someone told me before that they only started doing gin to bring some money in while they were ageing their whiskey.

Stone Gossard

Bazzo wrote: »

Dingle? Yeah it's nice enough though to be honest my gin palette can distinguish ****e, ok and good and that's about it. Fairly sure someone told me before that they only started doing gin to bring some money in while they were aging their whiskey.

That's correct... Irish whiskey needs 5 years to be saleable...gin is good to go in months, so they got that motoring along with the vodka...whisky is going for daft money now though

Bridge93

Bunsen voted 7th best burger in Europe.

errlloyd

swiwi_ wrote: »

Fair play to yiz with the Worlds best gin. Anyone tried it?

I was down at the distillery a few months ago. It's good, usually half the price of Gunpowder or Mor too, so I was impressed it won in a blind taste test and not some 20-30 pound category.

b.gud

Stone Gossard wrote: »

That's correct... Irish whiskey needs 5 years to be saleable...gin is good to go in months, so they got that motoring along with the vodka...whisky is going for daft money now though

3 years I believe is the minimum for it to be considered Irish whiskey. But yeah you're right all those gin places are brewing it to keep them going until their whiskey comes of age, can't wait.

Stone Gossard

b.gud wrote: »

3 years I believe is the minimum for it to be considered Irish whiskey. But yeah you're right all those gin places are brewing it to keep them going until their whiskey comes of age, can't wait.

I did say saleable
5 years is the minimum for any major brand....3yo whiskey here is normally rushed for a market...ala Bushmills and Proper 12

Dave_The_Sheep

Bizarre scenes. Chelsea keeper Arrizabalaga refuses to be subbed off, after being/feigning injured/injury twice in a few minutes, for a sub keeper who is a renowned penalty kick saver, just before extra time finishes.

https://streamable.com/3eutt

Goes on to the shootout to let in 4 penalties, including 1 he really should have saved. Sarri has to crucify him, surely, after this. Stick him in the reserves for a few years, until his contract expires, and fine the everliving **** out of him.

(Obviously money will talk and as a 70 million pound investment, they won't let him expire, which is disgraceful)

troyzer

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

Bizarre scenes. Chelsea keeper Arrizabalaga refuses to be subbed off, after being/feigning injured/injury twice in a few minutes, for a sub keeper who is a renowned penalty kick saver, just before extra time finishes.

https://streamable.com/3eutt

Goes on to the shootout to let in 4 penalties, including 1 he really should have saved. Sarri has to crucify him, surely, after this. Stick him in the reserves for a few years, until his contract expires, and fine the everliving **** out of him.

(Obviously money will talk and as a 70 million pound investment, they won't let him expire, which is disgraceful)

It's pretty funny. Sarri has to go, there's clearly no respect for him left from the players.

In other news, the Irish Times et al are driving me insane calling the Favourite an "Irish production" without any qualification. It had five production companies involved, one of which is an Irish company. We're getting as bad as the Brits calling Saoirse Ronan British.

I'm delighted that First Man won best special effects, it's the most visually stunning movie I've seen in years.

irishbucsfan

troyzer wrote: »

It's pretty funny. Sarri has to go, there's clearly no respect for him left from the players.

In other news, the Irish Times et al are driving me insane calling the Favourite an "Irish production" without any qualification. It had five production companies involved, one of which is an Irish company. We're getting as bad as the Brits calling Saoirse Ronan Irish.

I'm delighted that First Man won best special effects, it's the most visually stunning movie I've seen in years.

Two main production companies throughout, one of which was Lanthimos' who was brought on to the project by Ed Guiney. Without Element that film would never have been made. That's why it's considered an Irish production.

troyzer

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Two main production companies throughout, one of which was Lanthimos' who was brought on to the project by Ed Guiney. Without Element that film would never have been made. That's why it's considered an Irish production.

It's not an Irish production. It's an Irish co-production. We'd be pretty pissed off if any number of films we consider to be Irish were called British productions because most of them were co-produced with British production companies.

irishbucsfan

troyzer wrote: »

It's not an Irish production. It's an Irish co-production. We'd be pretty pissed off if any number of films we consider to be Irish were called British productions because most of them were co-produced with British production companies.

Meh, it really does not matter whatsoever, but that film wouldn't have existed, let alone been acclaimed, without the Irish producers who rescued that script convinced Lanthimos to direct it.

troyzer

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Meh, it really does not matter whatsoever, but that film wouldn't have existed, let alone been acclaimed, without the Irish producers who rescued that script convinced Lanthimos to direct it.

I'm not disputing that, just pointing out that we're getting as bad as the Brits when it comes to labels.

By the way, calling it a British film/production would equally be as wrong. I'm sure loads of British newspapers are calling it that today.

In any case, Olivia Colman's speech was class. So genuine. Enough of this myopic, rehearsed ****e.

Podge_irl

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

Bizarre scenes. Chelsea keeper Arrizabalaga refuses to be subbed off, after being/feigning injured/injury twice in a few minutes, for a sub keeper who is a renowned penalty kick saver, just before extra time finishes.

https://streamable.com/3eutt

Goes on to the shootout to let in 4 penalties, including 1 he really should have saved. Sarri has to crucify him, surely, after this. Stick him in the reserves for a few years, until his contract expires, and fine the everliving **** out of him.

(Obviously money will talk and as a 70 million pound investment, they won't let him expire, which is disgraceful)

Says as much about the lack of authority of the ref/officials also. Ref should have just told him to get off the pitch and that be the end of it.

swiwi_

swiwi_ wrote: »

Fair play to yiz with the Worlds best gin. Anyone tried it?

Was thinking of getting a bottle as a gift for the misses albeit she only ever has it with tonic and I'm not sure if it's worth getting good quality liquor when it's just going into a mixer.

Personally think gin is one of those drinks that is so noxious I actually find myself questioning the people that drink it. Tastes horrific to me.

Zzippy

Deleted User wrote: »

Was thinking of getting a bottle as a gift for the misses albeit she only ever has it with tonic and I'm not sure if it's worth getting good quality liquor when it's just going into a mixer.

Personally think gin is one of those drinks that is so noxious I actually find myself questioning the people that drink it. Tastes horrific to me.

It's vile. Give me a good whiskey any day.

connemara man

Zzippy wrote: »

It's vile. Give me a good whiskey any day.

That's why there's so much gin these days. A lot of companies made whiskey and kinda realised after the fact that they won't base any return for 3-5+ years so started making gin in the meantime as its stupid fast to make and keeps profit coming in

errlloyd

Deleted User wrote: »

swiwi_ wrote: »

Fair play to yiz with the Worlds best gin. Anyone tried it?

Was thinking of getting a bottle as a gift for the misses albeit she only ever has it with tonic and I'm not sure if it's worth getting good quality liquor when it's just going into a mixer.

Personally think gin is one of those drinks that is so noxious I actually find myself questioning the people that drink it. Tastes horrific to me.

Dingle is pretty cheap tbh. At 36e a bottle before a sale (O Briens) its probably a tenner cheaper than Hendricks, 20 cheaper than Gunpowder and 30 cheaper than Monkey 47 (and 200ml larger). If she likes her G&Ts and she drinks at home a lot go to the whiskey shop in the powerscourt centre. Buy her the gin and behind the counter they have jars of botannicals. Candied Ginger, Pink Peppercorns, Rose Petals. Big bags of notions basically. Get two or three of them too.

I've found it's a winner for gin people.

errlloyd

errlloyd wrote: »

and she drinks at home a lot

Why don't you just come right out and say it ?

Yeah_Right

troyzer wrote: »

In other news, the Irish Times et al are driving me insane calling the Favourite an "Irish production" without any qualification. It had five production companies involved, one of which is an Irish company. We're getting as bad as the Brits calling Saoirse Ronan British.

Its like when you Paddies try to claim Daniel Day-Lewis. He's a Brit.

troyzer

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Its like when you Paddies try to claim Daniel Day-Lewis. He's a Brit.

He's both. There's always been a weird thing when it comes to the Irish diaspora. No other country in the world has anything like the size of our diaspora relative to our current population. There's not as clear a distinction between being born in Ireland and being born abroad to Irish parents because such a huge number of people have done it.

Just like New Zealand has it's own quirks with white people and the Māori.

Yeah_Right

Deleted User wrote: »

Why don't you just come right out and say it ?

I'll say it : The only way someone could live you with you, is if they were drunk. A lot. Permanently. Wasted. Hammered.

Now go buy her a bottle of Beefeater. She won't be able to tell the difference.

Buer

It's all marketing and rubbish. This gin should only be drank with rasberries and elderflower tonic. That gin should be drank with a sprig of rosemary and lime.

No. It's gin. It's from juniper berries. Drink it with tonic and some ice if you'd like. Last year, Aldi's home brand won best in the world in a similar award. This year, Dingle won it. The biggest difference between them all is the price tag.

errlloyd

Buer wrote: »

It's all marketing and rubbish. This gin should only be drank with rasberries and elderflower tonic. That gin should be drank with a sprig of rosemary and lime.

No. It's gin. It's from juniper berries. Drink it with tonic and some ice if you'd like. Last year, Aldi's home brand won best in the world in a similar award. This year, Dingle won it. The biggest difference between them all is the price tag.

I agree with you, but almost everything is the same. People pay more for Evian than they do for Ballygowan. The differences between the most expensive top shelf Gin (Monkey 47) and Beefeater is 200% of so. Which isn't too much of a range for products.

I find Whiskey to be the worst for that ****e. "This was aged in a cask that was once used for Bourbon, then used for wine from the Burgundy region, you can still just about taste the grain particles adsorbed from the air kicked up by the farms in Kentucky".

troyzer

errlloyd wrote: »

I agree with you, but almost everything is the same. People pay more for Evian than they do for Ballygowan. The differences between the most expensive top shelf Gin (Monkey 47) and Beefeater is 200% of so. Which isn't too much of a range for products.

I find Whiskey to be the worst for that ****e. "This was aged in a cask that was once used for Bourbon, then used for wine from the Burgundy region, you can still just about taste the grain particles adsorbed from the air kicked up by the farms in Kentucky".

I'll never forget the day about this time last year when I was taking the dog for a walk and asked if anyone wanted anything in Spar and my little sister said "Can you you get me a 125 centilitrebottle of Evian please?".

I got her the Spar water out of spite. She didn't drink it.

stephen_n

errlloyd wrote: »

I find Whiskey to be the worst for that ****e. "This was aged in a cask that was once used for Bourbon, then used for wine from the Burgundy region, you can still just about taste the grain particles adsorbed from the air kicked up by the farms in Kentucky".

Yep and it still tastes like ****e even after all that.

Zzippy

stephen_n wrote: »

Yep and it still tastes like ****e even after all that.

Whiskey? You philistine...

stephen_n

Zzippy wrote: »

Whiskey? You philistine...

Whiskey and coffee are two tastes I’ve never and will never acquire. Also whiskey doesn’t agree with me or rather it makes me (more) disagreeable.

Dave_The_Sheep

Thinking of getting a hotel or AirBnB down the south of France for a week or two in September, myself and the girlfriend.

Anyone got any recommendations for what city to go for/in around?

I've heard Marseilles is a bit dodge, but any one spent much time down around that area?

Squidgy Black

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

Thinking of getting a hotel or AirBnB down the south of France for a week or two in September, myself and the girlfriend.

Anyone got any recommendations for what city to go for/in around?

I've heard Marseilles is a bit dodge, but any one spent much time down around that area?

Personally I'd say Nice, you've day trips to Antibes/Juan Les Pins or Cannes further west, and then Monaco to the east.

thomond2006

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

Thinking of getting a hotel or AirBnB down the south of France for a week or two in September, myself and the girlfriend.

Anyone got any recommendations for what city to go for/in around?

I've heard Marseilles is a bit dodge, but any one spent much time down around that area?

Stay in Aix-en-Provence. I can't recommend it enough and it's a half hour bus from Marseille. Definitely go to Marseille for a day trip or two to the Vieux Port and Notre Dame de la Garde.

You've the pick of places to go on the Cote d'Azur and surrounds really. Avignon is worth a day trip as well.

mfceiling

Yeah Nice here as well. All the little hilltop villages are a bus ride away and are beyond lovely.
Carcassonne is another area to consider.

troyzer

I'm a bit perplexed by this George Pell case. Let me just start by saying I'm not a member of any religion and I'm not a religious person, so I'm not coming at it from that perspective.

But is it really possible to convict someone of something so awful based on a victim's statement? I'm not familiar with the law but is it really possible to go to prison because someone said you did it without any supporting evidence?

irishbucsfan

troyzer wrote: »

I'm a bit perplexed by this George Pell case. Let me just start by saying I'm not a member of any religion and I'm not a religious person, so I'm not coming at it from that perspective.

But is it really possible to convict someone of something so awful based on a victim's statement? I'm not familiar with the law but is it really possible to go to prison because someone said you did it without any supporting evidence?

You certainly can’t convict someone based on a statement with no supporting evidence. That’s why other cases against him have been dropped due to a lack of evidence.

Podge_irl

irishbucsfan wrote: »

You certainly can’t convict someone based on a statement with no supporting evidence. That’s why other cases against him have been dropped due to a lack of evidence.

I think that what counts as "evidence" is a lot looser then what people expect though.

troyzer

irishbucsfan wrote: »

You certainly can’t convict someone based on a statement with no supporting evidence. That’s why other cases against him have been dropped due to a lack of evidence.

But that's what happened here. The other victim died a few years ago and the prosecutor said that the case hinged on whether or not the jury found the still living victim to be a trustworthy witness.

I've read a couple of articles on this and none of them allude to supporting evidence. It's just one person's word against another. This is from the Guardian article:

In his closing address, the crown prosecutor Mark Gibson told the jury their verdict would come down to whether they believed the complainant beyond reasonable doubt. They should find the complainant an honest witness, Gibson said.

irishbucsfan

Podge_irl wrote: »

I think that what counts as "evidence" is a lot looser then what people expect though.

Yeah, I think people just misunderstand the concept.

They didn’t just sit there for over a month listening to the same statement on repeat.