.png.5ff10cca1d0967e44a17e4a2edde2a80.png)
Meantime
-
Posts
4,128 -
Joined
-
Days Won
50
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by Meantime
-
-
But was it issued with a FPN
-
25 minutes ago, Paul said:
Having looked as sties like which, what etc they all offer advice on the ideal machine, and they all cost in excess of £750, a cost I don't see as necessary given the limited duty list for her machine. Any suggestions or advice, especially on chromebooks which I know little about, benefits, limitations etc gratefully received
The problem in my experience is not in finding a machine that is suitable for what you want to use it for today, but to ensure that it is still suitable for the same job in three or four years time. Each new release of Windows, major or minor introduces more bloat into the OS. The same with all the apps and browsers etc. So if you buy a machine that is just about capable of running what you want to do today, it will more than likely be severely struggling in two years time. Often in the past I have reloaded a PC with the base version of Windows that it shipped with and found it to be quite nippy again. Then watched as it proceeded to play catch up and download the 100 or so updates and quality improvements and finally when it done all that, its back to running slow again!. Frustrating but Microsoft and others seem to build in the need for hardware upgrades with each release of software.
My advice would be to set a budget first that you can comfortably live with and then purchase the most powerful spec you can find to meet your budget. It may be more powerful than you need now, but OS and app upgrades will always eat into that capacity, but hopefully it will be longer before you find you need to replace it.
My last three devices have been Dell. I always stick to Intel processors and I would make sure you buy something with a SSD drive. SSD drive and more RAM are probably of more use than an out and out top of the range processor. Perhaps consider going to the top of your budget with a PC that you could look to add extra RAM to later if your start to struggle. One last thing to consider is physical size, especially for portable devices. I take my laptop to site a lot and have gone for the most powerful and small device within my budget for the convenience of carrying it around. This means that I also have to budget for a docking station and extra screens as I couldn't live with the laptop small screen for any long period of time. Smaller devices and packaging generally come at a much higher financial premium than their larger counter parts due to the cost or trying to keep them cooled efficiently and mange to fit all the parts in. Light weight also often means more money. If you can live with a larger heavier device it will generally be more powerful and cheaper.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, Paul said:
I seem to be missing a thread, has it slipped down the back of the sofa?
Ditto, oh well, I'm off to get a coffee and go for a walk!
-
Just now, Paul said:
So that will now be the golfers after a rule change too
This is starting to feel like groundhog day! I'm keeping out of this debate, or the thread might get locked.
-
1 minute ago, Paul said:
not the case, angling is not a permitted exercise, the absence of water is irrelevant
I thought the Angling Trust had sorted that one! Apparently it is now!
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Mouldy said:
I wonder how far anglers will travel to exercise sitting on a stool. I might buy a rod and reel and sit on a bench in the park behind our house to practice as there isn’t a river nearby!
As long as you don't take a hot drink with you, you should be ok!
-
2
-
-
Interesting extract from the above story. I believe it was Wales that set a legal limit on travel of 5 miles. Removes much of the ambiguity in the current legislation. I suspect those two will have their FPNs overturned fairly soon.
How far can you travel for exercise?
Guidance issued by the Cabinet Office states that people can leave their homes for exercise but should not travel outside their "local area".
However, the actual legislation does not specify a maximum distance that people are allowed to travel for exercise.
Both the guidance and legislation state people can exercise with one other person, as Jessica Allen and Eliza Moore did.
Human rights barrister Adam Wagner said: "There is no law against travelling to exercise. The guidance is not legally binding and the police have no power to enforce it unless it is reflected in the lockdown regulations which in this case it is not."
-
That's off course assuming there is a limit of 1hr. The legislation and guidance suggests you should minimise time spent outside of your home, and that exercise should be limited to once per day.
-
1
-
-
Today's scam. Just got my bill from BT and there is a 50p charge for a call to 123. I have checked and I wasn't even at home on the day and time the call was made. I only use my landline for the Broadband and never use it to make calls. Turns out that it is not uncommon for BT engineers testing faults on the line to test your line by dialing 123, this does not have to be from your house, but could be at the cabinet down the road and can happen even if you haven't had a fault or reported a fault.
-
2 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:
Are you sure?
Source gov.uk
You cannot leave home for recreational or leisure purposes (such as for a picnic or a social meeting).
This was the source of a lot of complaints during the first lockdown with benches having hazard tape on them etc. You are allowed to exercise, walking is good exercise, but the moment you stop and sit to take in the surroundings or to rest, or read a book, or picnic, you are no longer exercising, it becomes recreation which is not allowed, unless you happen to be sitting in front of water with a rod in your hand.
-
15 minutes ago, Jemaki said:
“Cabinet Office have now officially confirmed that angling / fishing (incl. sea fishing off private boats, water sports)
That may have opened a can of worms? Does that mean that if you live local you can now water ski, or even wake board again on The Broads, but you wouldn't be allowed to just cruise?
I think the government has probably made a mistake in removing the recreation element as an exemption, when there are a lot of other outdoors recreational activities other than fishing, which allow one to enjoy the outdoors alone.
The farce now is that you can walk 10 mins along a river bank and sit down and fish, yet you shouldn't walk 10 mins along the river bank and sit down and read a newspaper or book, or eat a picnic alone or with your household.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:
That seems like a common sense approach by the government and good news for anglers, but I can see there being a lot of upset golfers who could reasonably argue that walking around 18 holes alone, dragging a golf trolley is good exercise, or at least more exercise than sitting on a river bank fishing!
-
1
-
-
43 minutes ago, grendel said:
but the speed limits and their locations are not written into the law, so they are guidance, much the same as travel is permitted.
QuoteLeaving your home to exercise is permitted once a day provided relevant guidelines are followed.
so the guidelines say travel locally only for exercise.
And therein lies the problem, you have used a quote from the BA website which is not official legislation. The phrase "Leaving your home to exercise is permitted once a day provided relevant guidelines are followed" does not appear in the Corona Virus legislation. It does not even appear on the .gov.uk guidance page. The official guidance states;
"You can continue to exercise alone, with one other person or with your household or support bubble. This should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area.You should maintain social distancing. See exercising."
Is states you "should", it doesn't state you "must only" and is guidance. There is also not a time limit as others elsewhere are suggesting of an hour. Again the guidance states "You should minimise time spent outside your home," It doesn't set limits.
The gist of the BA advice and the .gov.uk guidance are similar, but subtly different and people should be following the legislation and guidance from the Government. The use of the word permitted, rather than should is key. In the government guidance they often use the word should, which is what you ought to do, or in other words a suggestion, they also could use the word "must" which would be what you've got to do, or permitted which is what you may do.
So should only exercise once per day is a suggestion. An active person may choose to exercise more than once.
You must not exercise more than once per day would put an absolute upper limit on the amount of times you could exercise.
You are permitted (the BA's version) means you are allowed to once per day. It is more restrictive than the government legislation or guidance.
-
3
-
-
9 minutes ago, grendel said:
the law may not say, but the guidance is clear on that point,
remember most traffic offences are prosecuted under the guidance not the law, the offence of speeding, the law doesnt set down the actual limits, its the guidance that does that, so if you are fined for speeding in a 30mph limit, that is set seperately to the law, which will just state travelling in excess of the speed limit in force,.
travel other than locally is set in the guidance, so all the law has to say is authorised travel, they will look to the guidance when deciding whether to bring charges, i wouldnt want to try and argue contrary.
Speed limits signs in a Red circle are not guidance, they are the maximum speed limit. Speed limit signs in a Black circle are guidance and you do not break the law by exceeding them. They are generally a warning of an impending reduction in speed limit.
-
30 minutes ago, rightsaidfred said:
While I totally agree with that sentiment and could go fishing in seclusion within 5-10 mins from where I live the problem is many would use it as a licence to travel outside of their immediate locality, we saw that last time with people driving many miles using the excuse of exercising which everyone can do within their own vicinity even if its not scenic.
Fred
The legislation has been updated via a statutory instrument and whilst some items have been removed, such as recreation or amended to ban the use of or exercise in outdoor sports grounds, and things like golf courses have now been added to the list of venues that must close, the method of transport or distance you can travel have still not been limited in law, just the number of exemptions for being outside your home have been reduced.
National Trust gardens, many of which are not near populous areas and therefore "local" for a very small number of people are still staying open, presumably now for exercise, but not for recreation. You can walk or run around the gardens, but shouldn't sit and read a book.
This would mean that if you had a mind to, you presumably could still use your boat as the mode of transport to access for instance How Hill moorings, for the purpose of exercise in How Hill gardens, but you shouldn't use your boat just purely for recreation as you could under the previous provisions.
-
Just now, JennyMorgan said:
The distance factor is surely relevant. Fishing locally for example. I note that sailing is allowed.
Sailing is allowed because it is exercise and you must still be local to complete it. Fishing is not exercise but recreation, unless off course you want to go fishing then I'm sure some will argue it is exercise.
I do look at and follow the legislation and quite a few on here seem to interpret that as wanting to bend the rules or looking for loopholes. I do that to stick within the rules, not to bend them when it suits me. There are some very outspoken forthright comments on this thread including what you should do if you know someone is breaking the rules.
Some of that actually sticks in the craw.
I know for instance that if I cannot complete my work at home, I would be allowed to travel to complete that work on site, even if that was in the clients house. I also know that working in someone's house you must observe Covid workplace restrictions. If that client happened to be a friend it would be irrelevant, I would still need to work in a Covid secure way, which would also mean not staying there overnight if they are present. I know that if working a distance away from home I could stay at a hotel but would have to observe the tier restrictions for the area I normally live. That would mean that if the area I normally live is under tier 3 restrictions and the area where I am working comes out of lock down under tier 2 restrictions, I wouldn't be able to use that as an excuse to drive a long distance to go and inspect my boat, or retrieve items from it, followed by a long drive through the night back home feeling incredibly tired. That's probably irresponsible even without a Covid 19 outbreak. That would not just be bending the rules, that would be stretching them to breaking point.
-
Just now, JennyMorgan said:
An additional thought, we are, at best, many months away from a return to a degree of normality. Stress will be a growing problem, angling could well be a solution rather than being a problem.
Therefore it could be argued that cruising down the river solo, or with your family is also a stress reliever as is golf for some. So where do you draw the line? Which stress relieving recreation thats good for the mind do you allow and which ones don't you allow.
This time around the aspect of recreation has been removed from the legislation and the list of exemptions for being away from home.
I agree though there are many reason why some activities should be allowed, but that will only bring back the chorus of stay at home, what's not to understand etc. etc.
-
1 hour ago, grendel said:
well today is my mothers 90th Birthday, and while she is able to get around at home, I think she would need transport to get to the drs for a jab, neither her nor my father have easy access locally to relatives with transport, I am over 30 minutes away and am probably the nearest with a car in the family, so the question comes down to do they risk a taxi ride to get the jab.
You don't know who else has been in the taxi before. I personally would go and collect her and take her to the doctors for the jab. It might be a 30 min journey, but is allowed for essential medical needs and far safer than a taxi.
-
2
-
-
31 minutes ago, Hylander said:
The problem is you and the majority do carry on sensibly but there is an element that does not.
Anybody seen the scenes of the press outside Westminster Court this morning for the Julian Assange bail hearing. Not much evidence of social distancing there. Round them up, confiscate their press cards and hand them back in a few weeks.
-
4
-
-
15 minutes ago, Paul said:
If I were you I would get ready for them to be extended further, then it might not come as a shock.
What makes you think it would come as a shock to me. I would however be far more appreciative of the Government being far more realistic in it's ambitions and not sneaking such extensions in quietly.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Paul said:
and thank heavens it has, allowing the restrictions to be released into the public domain and become effective instantly. The last thing we need is to watch infection rates soar and the death toll skyrocket whilst the wheels of government grind out the necessary actions.
I'd still much rather our MPs were given notice last week, that they were being recalled to parliament last Monday 4th and that the powers were democratically passed on Monday, rather than at 4:30pm Tuesday 5th via an SI.
-
9 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said:
Clearly neither we nor HMG have time to follow the more usual niceties of Parliamentary procedure.
Borris is not empire building, very clearly he is trying to save lives.
Yes I realise that, but the point is that despite the smoke and mirrors good news distraction of 16 million being vaccinated by mid February and things should start to get better, the legislation has been extended quietly till the end of March, which speaks volumes for how long the Government is really thinking the latest measures are going to last.
-
2
-
-
Perhaps what hasn't been so clear is that this latest set of National restrictions are for the second time being enacted via a statutory instrument, again bypassing parliamentary democracy. It is actually a modification of the existing Tier legislation with Tier 4 being made more restrictive and being made National be moving every area of the country into Tier 4.
What has been very quietly slipped in is that the Tier legislation was due to expire automatically on the 2nd February, but has now been extended till the 31st March.
-
1
-
2
-
-
9 minutes ago, grendel said:
its clear, leaving home for recreation is specifically mentioned in the government release as not allowed, exercise or essential only, angling is hardly exercise, so as such cannot be done. unless you are lucky enough to have the stream, pond or river on your property.
But that is my point exactly. Why do all these other organisations have to come out of the woodwork to repeat and in some cases put forward their own version of the governments message. Listen to the government, not the organisation for shrimp keepers, the photographic society of Bedford or any other body that happens to represent an interest.
-
2
-
More Covid Restrictions Announced.
in Broads Chat
Posted
A very sad incident and condolences to Scrumpycheddar as I said on the other thread, but if you look at the unfortunate timing the full three weeks to achieve full protection would have been last Tuesday 5th Jan. They tested positive on the 30th, having had the vaccine on the 15th. Assuming up to 5 days for the virus symptoms to show and they probably caught it around a week after the first dose of the vaccine.
BBC news were reporting a similar case of a nurse who caught Covid shortly after being given the vaccine, who then took it home to her family who have also caught the virus. Again though the timescales didn't allow for full protection.