mike carey

Yes, there are people who disagree with statements of objective reality. Whether gender neutral programs are confusing is not an objective fact, it is a subjective assessment that each individual makes.

Yup!

Lol, I have to check myself and remember to say RT in here rather than talk about a return fare!

The penny just dropped as to why the TV report I saw today on this event had a chyron referring to it as 'gelatinous'. AI strikes again.

Not confusing at all.

It's worth bearing in mind that you can't (or rather shouldn't) judge whether it's been 'successful' only on what happens to the entity that was spun off. You need to consider the total value of the spin-off and the parent company and also what the stated (or perhaps unstated) aims of the board were in splitting the company. The spin off may have operated in different market segments or had a different risk profile to the main company. Either of those could have made it difficult to manage the combined entity. If the proposal to spin off a division into a new company is touted as increasing the value of the residual company you can reasonably be cautious about what that means for the spin-off. Still, it's possible for both to do better apart than they would together. After any split, you still own the same proportion of the total assets of the separate companies as you did of the original combined entity. BUT they are now separate companies and you should consider their place in your portfolio on their separate merits, and not let their history of being the one company influence you.

I can't imagine how!

Or indeed, to meet gentlemen of a certain age when a reversal of those roles is contemplated.

Moderator's Note For those that were not aware, and a reminder to those who were, that when we lock a thread discussion of the topic is closed and won't be resumed in another thread. Accordingly I'm locking this thread. Thank you all for your cooperation. Mike

It was theatre. Satirising homophobic tropes. Trolling. Pure and simple.

Umm, was it not clear that the question was a joke prompted by the use of the word for a female massage therapist, and not asking a serious question about their gender identity?

You only had to ask!

Thanks for that info. If I'm reading their articles on line, I prefer to use a larger screen than my phone. But worth knowing about the app.

You don't give up, do you. You can spout wild generalities to advance your various arguments, and some retrospective analysis here of what had been suspected (strongly suspected in some cases I accept) but later confirmed as having been accurate suspicions. You are entitled to, and do cite Expert Witness A to support your case. You are not entitled to demand, as you regularly do, that those who disagree tick every box in a list of criteria that you deem necessary for them to make their case, nor to demand that others produce a list of their own of who said what and when. The review of the incident time line, which the US and Canadian authorities will undertake when not under the pressure that a critical incident generates, will determine what could have, or should have (not the same thing) been understood from the available data. Sometimes there is confusion in the heat of the moment, sometimes through lack of information, at other times through timidity in interpreting the information at hand. But for you, it's always evidence of some grand political conspiracy, and you don't hesitate to assert here that that is the case.

@Simon Suraci is an active, and insightful participant in the forum, and you would do well to search for his content in here. It may take you some time to read it all, but it would not be time wasted. IIRC he is moving to the city of Saint James. That is, San Diego. I make no comment as to whether I would go there on account of his being there.

Indeed, it's reported that they did, and also that there were assessments in certain circles as to whether that meant that the submersible was lost. There was still doubt about whether that was conclusive. Many Monday morning quarterbacks say that it was.

In case it wasn't obvious, attributing political motives to how the Canadian and US authorities handled the situation is political and therefore outside the scope of discussion in the Lounge.

A reminder to stay on topic. We've deleted some posts but left others that make relevant points and also include off-topic points. Don't reply to them unless what you are saying is in response to one of the relevant points.

Gentlemen, enough of the personal sniping. You know the drill!

I'd say more than 'a bit extreme', rather that the conspiracy theory is a calculated and wilful misrepresentation of the information. The navy detected an acoustic signal consistent with the implosion but had no way to be definitive as to what it was or what it meant. People may recall that during the search, regular tapping sounds were detected at one stage, and there was speculation that it came from the submersible. It turned out that the speculation as to what those acoustic signals meant was wrong. It's entirely understandable that there was no public announcement and speculation of that earlier acoustic signal. That doesn't a conspiracy make. There's a military maxim that first reports are always wrong.

Moderator's note to stay on topic, we'll remove commentary that's not about the incident itself or the responses to it.

Bon anniversaire!

There was a report on ABC radio's The Law Report about a case in New York (?) where a lawyer had asked ChatGPT for information on cases similar to his action against an airline claiming negligence after his client was injured by being hit my a service trolley. It did, and came up with a variety of cases as precedent, involving several airlines in different jurisdictions. The lawyer presented the brief to the court. Turned out the AI had made up the cases. It knew what a judgment looked like and just fabricated the data in that format. The judge wasn't aware of the cases (surprisingly!) and checked. He then took two hours to take the offending lawyer, who may now lose his licence, to task.

The issue had been discussed in this thread: