Income tax will be dead within five years as AI jobs crisis grows, says Monzo founder

https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/income-tax-dead-five-years-ai-jobs-crisis-5HjdXdg_2/

The oldest known evidence of stitched clothing

https://refractor.io/history/oldest-evidence-stitched-clothing-fabric-prehistoric-oregon/

13 hours ago, lenny said:

Austerity creates fascism

https://pluralistic.net/2026/04/12/always-great/

I REALLY hate the bone headed stupidity of people who abuse the term fascism by applying it to anyone a bit further right than the UK Labour Party. It is SO historically and factually ignorant that I am at a loss to understand how anyone can be that thick.

The article refers to Victor Orban as a 'dictator'.

WHAT?

I never liked or agreed with Orban, but he was repeatedly elected by the people of Hungary, and when he lost the election a few days ago, , he gracefully stood down. As if that is not enough to dismiss the source and the writer as terminally stupid and ignorant, the article thinks Orban was a 'fascist'. They don't know what fascism is.

Fascism has certain very strong and instantly recognisable characteristics:

It uses state sanctioned violence to repress dissent.

It is militaristic. The leadership use the armed forces to retain total control of society.

Political dissent is punished by law.

Freedom is restricted and the rights of the individual are suppressed.

The state controls the economy and the media.

Examples of fascist-like societies in our modern world are Russia and Iran.

Articles like this one just show the parlous ignorance of the writers and much of the political left - especially unfortunately many of our young student class who believe that anyone who does not want mass migration or penal taxation of business and success is a fascist and a nazi.

Edited April 15Apr 15 by Tony1951

45 minutes ago, Tony1951 said:

never liked or agreed with Orban, but he was repeatedly elected by the people of Hungary, and when he lost the election a few days ago, , he gracefully stood down.

He couldn't do anything else. Peter Magyar won a landslide. In any case, both of them are rightwingers, from the same Fidesz so no reason not to be graceful in losing.

What is more important is how tge new pm handle the Israeli issue. Over the last 30 years, the number of Muslim countries involved in conflict with Israel are the sources of millions of refugees who head to Europe.

5 hours ago, Woosh said:

He couldn't do anything else. Peter Magyar won a landslide. In any case, both of them are rightwingers, from the same Fidesz so no reason not to be graceful in losing.

What is more important is how tge new pm handle the Israeli issue. Over the last 30 years, the number of Muslim countries involved in conflict with Israel are the sources of millions of refugees who head to Europe.

No they are not both of the Fidesz party.

The new PM is leader of the Tisza Party.

Summary Comparison Table

Issue	Tisza Party	Fidesz Party
EU Stance	Pro-integration; seek Euro adoption	Sceptical; favor intergovernmentalism
Corruption	Priority; join European Prosecutor	View investigations as political attacks
Russia/Ukraine	"Cold shoulder" to Moscow; aid Ukraine	"Peace camp"; maintain energy ties to Russia
Governance	Term limits; independent judiciary	Centralized power; state-led media
Migration	Secure borders via EU cooperation	Hardline "no" to EU migration

What does a small country in Eastern Europe have to do with Israel?

I think they probably have enough to do in their own country.

Edited April 15Apr 15 by Tony1951

This is an interesting podcast altogether, but it is quite long.

I was especially interested in the discussion with a CIA officer, Sean Wiswesser, about Putin, which begins just after minute 30.

Quite fascinating on the mafia state and Putin's paranoia. Putin hangs onto power because he is surrounded by 'Yes Men' - the Siloviki. They owe him everything and they are well rewarded, so they take their job seriously.

1 hour ago, Tony1951 said:

No they are not both of the Fidesz party.

The new PM is leader of the Tisza Party.

I know that, but do you know that Peter Magyar was Fidesz until 2024 when he left his government job and started the new party, a bit like Macron. Magyar does not promise any big change in policies. He just claims he's not like his predecessor.

1 hour ago, Tony1951 said:

What does a small country in Eastern Europe have to do with Israel?

Do you know that EU's foreign policy is currently subject to vetoes? That is why Orban was such a big problem for the EU.

What the EU wants is to make a treaty change to decisions on foreign policy be subject to qualified majority voting.

That will result in EU taking Ukraine 's side and sanctioning Israel for inhuman treatment of Palestinians in Gaza and illegal war in Lebanon and Iran.

UK prepares for food shortages in worst case scenario as Iran war continues

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpvxp4xnrwdo

Sperm Whales Speak With a Complex Alphabet and Even Have ‘Vowels,’ Study Finds

Linguists hope to be conversant in rudimentary-level sperm whale in the next five years.

https://gizmodo.com/sperm-whales-speak-with-their-own-unique-alphabet-scientists-found-they-even-have-vowels-2000746968

Device found near Bali and Lombok identified as Chinese undersea monitoring system

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-04-17/chinese-undersea-monitoring-system-lombok-strait/106569388

UFO-linked scientist who warned 'my life is in danger' before she was found dead at 34 becomes ELEVENTH mysterious case

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-15738699/ufo-scientist-amy-eskridge-death-huntsville.html

Have I been wrong on the economy the whole time?

Edited April 19Apr 19 by lenny

Why Your Living Standards Are Falling - The Squeeze Out

Edited April 19Apr 19 by lenny

Have We Overestimated the Probability of Alien Life in the Universe?

Once I grasped the sheer number of stars and galaxies in the universe, it seemed almost inevitable that life must be common. It was easy to imagine that the “little green men” of science fiction—or perhaps something larger and more menacing—might inhabit planets orbiting countless stars. Looking up at the night sky felt like looking at a vast collection of potential civilisations we might one day communicate with.

It’s an appealing idea. But is it realistic?

How likely is it that alien life exists on planets orbiting the stars we can see with the naked eye?

My partner, an optimistic soul, dismisses my doubts. To her, it’s simply a numbers game. The Milky Way alone contains roughly 400 billion stars, so it seems unlikely that our Sun and its planets are anything special.

I understand that argument. Statistically, it feels improbable that we are unique. But that intuition may be misleading. If very specific conditions are required for life to begin, for it to persist, and for it to evolve into complex, intelligent forms capable of building technological civilisations, then rarity—not abundance—may be the more realistic conclusion.

It is extraordinarily difficult for simple life to evolve into complex organisms such as animals. It is even rarer for those organisms to develop behaviours that extend beyond survival—beyond eating and reproducing—towards intelligence, culture, and technology. And it is harder still for a species like Homo sapiens to progress from hunter-gatherers to builders of machines capable of exploring or communicating across the stars. Our own history makes this clear: it took nearly 300,000 years for our species to reach that point.

Why emphasise how difficult these steps are?

Because Earth’s history demonstrates just how long and improbable they appear to be.

The Earth formed around 4.5 billion years ago as a molten, hostile world, battered by collisions during the chaotic early solar system. A massive impact—likely with a Mars-sized body—created the Moon and left the young Earth a seething, molten sphere. It took millions of years to cool.

Nearly a billion years later, life emerged. Not animals, but simple single-celled organisms—algae, slime-like colonies, and microscopic cells drifting in the oceans.

For roughly two to two-and-a-half billion years, life on Earth remained single-celled. Then, in what appears to have been a singular event, complexity arose. One cell engulfed another and, instead of digesting it, formed a symbiotic relationship. This partnership—an evolutionary breakthrough—gave rise to more complex cells. It happened, as far as we can tell, only once.

From that point, evolution continued its slow work. Yet it was not until about 500 million years ago—four billion years after Earth formed—that plants first colonised land. Animals followed tens of millions of years later.

And humans? We arrived astonishingly late: roughly 4.4 billion years after the planet formed. We are newcomers on an ancient world.

Even then, technological civilisation is a very recent development. The first crude steam engine appeared in 1712, improved later by James Watt. Radio communication dates back only about 130 years, to experiments by Guglielmo Marconi—a blink of an eye compared to Earth’s 4.5-billion-year history.

All this suggests that the path from chemistry to intelligent, technological life is not straightforward. It is long, fragile, and contingent on many unlikely steps.

Even on Earth, only one species out of millions has developed advanced technology.

And Earth itself may be unusually well-suited for life. It orbits a stable, long-lived star. Of the eight planets in our solar system, only one supports life today. The others are either scorched or frozen, barren worlds.

Habitability requires more than just a comfortable “Goldilocks” temperature. A planet must retain a dense atmosphere to keep water liquid—and that atmosphere must be protected.

Here lies a crucial factor: a strong magnetic field.

Stars emit radiation and charged particles capable of stripping away planetary atmospheres. Even our relatively calm Sun has done this to both Mercury and Mars. Mercury has no atmosphere at all, and Mars retains only a thin remnant of what was once a much thicker one.

Mars likely had liquid water for up to a billion years or more. We can see evidence in its river valleys, deltas, and sedimentary rocks. But as the planet cooled, its internal dynamo shut down, its magnetic field weakened, and its atmosphere was gradually stripped away. Without sufficient pressure, liquid water could no longer exist on its surface.

If this can happen in our own solar system, it raises a sobering point: many planets may begin with favourable conditions, only to lose them.

Worse still, our Sun is relatively gentle. A large proportion of stars in the galaxy—particularly red dwarfs—are far more volatile, producing intense flares capable of stripping atmospheres from nearby planets with ease.

Taken together, these factors suggest that while stars and planets may be abundant, the conditions required for life—and especially intelligent, technological life—are exceptionally demanding.

For all the vastness of the cosmos, we may not be surrounded by thriving civilisations. Instead, life may be rare, fragile, and fleeting.

On this remarkable planet, only one species has crossed the threshold into technology—and even we spent almost our entire existence using simple tools, struggling to survive.

Perhaps the universe is full of worlds.

But worlds like ours may be few.

Edited Tuesday at 19:374 days by Tony1951

Universe Today

Which Types of Civilizations Collapse and Which Can Endure?

New research examines 10 different types of global technological civilizations, how they govern themselves, how they use resources, and other factors, to determine which types may endure and which may

Do you remember that we discussed this subject before? You should consider that our current civilisation is sub liminal, that is our understanding is limited by the speed of light, information cannot travel any faster. This is important because other civilisations may have ftl technologies. Subluminal worlds cannot talk to one another, ftl worlds can. Time traveling is also possible if you have ftl.

Edited Wednesday at 07:593 days by Woosh

There is a big difference between science fact and science fiction.

Physics makes it clear that nothing can exceed the speed of light.

You speak of ftl worlds - faster than light worlds, but physics makes it very clear that this is a nonsense. Not even supernovae - the most violent and energetic events in the universe can eject matter at light speed. Only electromagnetic radiation can travel at the speed of light and no faster. This means that the idea of faster than light civilisations is a ridiculous conjecture, and a fiction.

My essay was about factors we KNOW which will limit the possibility that the majority of planets can retain their liquid water, and a liquid solvent such as water is essential to the development of life

It points out that even on a planet which is perfect for developing life and has had life on it for the majority of its long existence, most life forms are very unintelligent, and only one of them has developed technology.

It took 3 billion years of life existing for that life to develop beyond single celled organisms.

Science on one hand and fiction on the other. They are not the same.

Edited Wednesday at 09:253 days by Tony1951

You don't understand quantum physics.

In the world we know, time goes only foward. Faster than light is theoretically possible but we have no idea how to do it at present. Other civilisations may have cracked it.

I put a few often asked questions to chatGPT for you.

https://chatgpt.com/s/t_69e8a7a2fdd48191b9fd337e9efe4d48

Edited Wednesday at 10:503 days by Woosh