njee20

A sample size of 20-22 a year makes extrapolation of F1 driver injuries difficult, but you could argue that the risk of serious injury is higher in football, and if that’s how we’re assigning validity it then surely motorcycling (and even cycling) far outranks F1 in the ‘worthiness’ stakes? You can’t really draw parallels across sports, LH’s accomplishment is clearly phenomenal, but how much is raw talent and how much is the car? Would Andy Murray still win matches with a different racquet? Of course he would. Would LH be a 4-time world champ in a Sauber? Of course not! Does that make Andy Murray ‘better’? Who knows! I think LH is as ‘worthy’ of recognition as any sportsperson, I think he’s a great ambassador for sport, among the best actually from any sport, but I still wouldn’t put his name on the list if I were drawing it up

And very few footballers receive honours. Which surely proves the point?

But that’s exactly what sportspeople do, with the added advantage of £40m salaries...?

There have been 3 knighted cyclists, is that enough to constitute a “tedious list”? Chris Hoy and Bradley Wiggins were both honoured after their retirement from the top flight. Sarah Storey still competes in the Paralympics. By comparison there have been 7 motor racing drivers. I’m not suggesting there’s no benefit from what they do, just don’t think they need honours personally.

To be fair it's hard to imagine what antics he could get up to in his career which would justify the removal of an honour. Far more likely any dubious antics be away from the race course, which would suggest that honours should only be posthumous, but then even that didn't work out for Jimmy Saville! I'm never sure about sports people receiving knighthoods etc, they're doing their jobs. They're very good at them, yes, but they're hansomely (incredibly so in the case of Lewis) rewarded financially, and they're doing something they love. They get enough recognition as it is I say.

Apple changed to the Lightning connector about 5 years ago, to much wailing and gnashing of teeth. I'm inclined to agree with you, although you can get Lightning to 30-pin connectors if you have lots of legacy devices. It's not really much different to the prolieration of mini-USB to micro-USB to USB-C among Android devices, although I accept they've been more stable. We're on a tangent of a tangent now! Re: dismissing something without trying it, you're right, people can make such value judgments, where I take issue is then taking those potentially poorly informed opinions and either using them to influence others or to pass them off as fact. How can you be fully informed about something without having tried it? I've no desire to visit New Zealand. That's a decision I have made based on a set of criteria relevant only to me. I will never dissuade anyone from visiting New Zealand however, because I simply don't have the experience. I'm not going to wade into a "should I visit New Zealand?" thread and say "no way, it's full of sheep and they all talk strangely", but that's what's happening here; "smart home devices are pointless you just end up talking to that instead of real people". Maybe one day I'll visit New Zealand, and it'll be lovely, and I'll tell people about it then.

Likewise, sorry boss!

I've never really asked myself those questions, because I don't really need to rank or in any way prioritise the things in my life based on their added value, nor convince others of them. I've not bought any wifi sockets or smart light bulbs because for me, the current financial cost exceeds their added value, although it's something I am watching very closely. Friends have them, and rave about them, but it's obviously only a small improvement in the grand scheme of things. I was an early adopter of iPods, because I thought they offered a real benefit over a portable CD player, whilst others no doubt don't see the point. I've tried not to say "people should use X" here, I don't think I've recommended anything, rather I wish people were more open-minded. If they said "I've tried x, it was dreadful", then sobeit, but all too often what actually happens is a real sneering or derision about "the youth of today being caught up bullying others on social media" or "people slavishly talking to their Echo rather than socialising" - indeed we've had both of those comments today on this thread. There's no real basis for it. Those same 'youths' are consuming more data than ever before, they're more technologically aware, and will facilitate all sorts of new things in the decades to come, which we can't even imagine yet. Smart homes, whilst hardly revolutionary, have the potential to make life easier, and that's all it is. No one's really suggesting an Echo is a good alternative to friends (they're not called "Alexas", in the same way an iPad isn't called a "Siri"), but it's a common criticism levelled at them. Indeed as I believe I said, I won mine, and saw little point in it (it wasn't a competition I actively entered), yet I like it, and have bought two "Echo Dots" for other rooms of the house. The music analogy is quite a good one, I like that, and I agree entirely. I'm not sure it stacks up in this debate though, unless you dismiss entire genres without having ever heard them. For me that's the nub - people see no value in something, so they dismiss it out of hand. Imagine where we'd be if people didn't design products we didn't know we needed? After all, toilets worked fine for hundreds of years without flushing

That often seems to be the connotation; "I don't concern myself with such banale trivialities..."

But what if things that seem trivial to you are significant to others? What makes something "earth-shattering", or even anything beyond trivial? If you have no interest in product design then the development of CAD isn't overly exciting to you. If you work in product design then it's pretty massive. If you live in the middle of the rain forest then the internet and mobile phones are insignificant, whilst they've totally changed my life. There is virtually no element of my life that would be the same were I living 50 years ago, or even 20 years ago actually. Others will eschew all technology and just shout about how rude it's made young people and how they don't need it. There really isn't any animosity, I'm just bemused by people's stance, surely you can see the hypocrisy in a dismissive statement about social media whilst lauding social media...? But what if things that seem trivial to you are significant to others? What makes something "earth-shattering", or even anything beyond trivial?

Oops, double post

It's there again! Why the animosity? It's a world you are, by admission, a part of. It's a very odd psychology. "I consume tech as I want, but I'll still be disparaging to others consuming identically".

Or wonderful that we have so many budding photographers, experimenting with photo editing, and being more connected then people have ever been in the past? If you believe some on here they'd be holed up in their rooms talking to an inanimate box rather than socialising.

But surely you know the answer? I can't, aside from anecdotal information like yours, as you well know. I did spend 30 seconds Googling for number of account holders, but realised I couldn't be bothered, and actually it would just be absurd extrapolation. That means at best your question was rhetorical, at worst it's just petty point scoring? Either way, my point holds true, and is being lost in daft bickering: - if you have a PayPal account and use a credit card (or debit card), don't expect your card issuer/bank to help if a transaction goes awry - if you don't have a PayPal account and use them just as a payment gateway, like Worldpay or PayPoint then your contract is between your bank/card issuer and the retailer (not the payment gateway provider).

Nope, coins only, until RingGo. Admittedly you had to phone originally, but it was still easier than cash. Card in the machine is still an interim step, particularly if you're a long way from the machine (and thus have to walk back to put the ticket in the car), there's a queue etc etc. Making it mobile is far easier IMO (as I said), others may disagree. I think that's about the most eloquent way of putting it. We are, by and large, into incremental improvements now, until someone improves some facet of our life that we didn't know needed improving. Even electric cars don't really offer much aside from a warm fuzzy glow that you're only destroying the planet through the rampant consumption of natural resources via battery production. If anything the day-to-day impact on your life is detrimental, as you'll need to charge it more often than you fill a car (presently at least). There is a certain reticence towards certain types of technology which amuses me (as I tried to explain above), it's a bit like some attitudes toward driving - anyone faster than you is a maniac, anyone slower is a moron. Technology you see a use for? Why yes, essential. Technology you don't? Ridiculous, a total waste of time.

Yes, I think it's much easier. Woking station car park was up to £13 a day IIRC, and the machine didn't accept notes. Do you regularly have £13 of change on you? What about if there's a queue of 5 people waiting to put their £13 of change in the machine? I have a phone in my pocket, in the time it takes to walk to the platform, or once on the train, I can purchase parking. That's far easier to me. I didn't say how much better technology made things, just said it was better. Of course it's negligible effort to turn the radio on, check the weather and the train times, but it's even less effort when something will tell me. I didn't say "they're the best thing ever", so ridiculous examples about flushing toilets are just that. I merely said that it makes things slightly easier, and that's nice, who wouldn't want that? See also TV remote controls, cordless phones, electric kettles. They're all just better than things that went before. Could we do without them? Of course we could! Do they just make life a little bit nicer? Yes, they do. YMMV. There's certainly a glorious irony that the grumpy codgers are writing on the internet, probably on a nice slim laptop, tablet or HD TFT screen, using super fast broadband about technology being rubbish.

No. I can't, in just the way you can't either. The point is still valid, you can be pedantic with my choice of language if you want, but the rather more salient point is that knowing where you stand significantly reduces your risk of losing out financially.

I love paying for parking with my phone. I go weeks without using cash, and never have change, so it's far easier. Particularly at stations when you can just hop on the train and sort it there. I do always have my phone with me. I think you misunderstand, I fully welcome a 'smart' society. I'd happily do away with cash, and have everything in my house controlled by wifi and my phone. So you're saying technology is great as long as you want to use it? Why is it inherently better to look around you, rather than consume information via the internet? I don't think anyone is actually suggesting they sit at home and 'talk' to their Echo, it's just something that enhances daily life a bit. I walk into the kitchen of a morning and say "Alexa, is my train on time? What's the weather doing? Play Radio 2". By extension of your logic you're saying that using a sat nav is stupid because it means you'll never talk to local people and ask for directions, just be told by a screen where to go? Technology augments facets of daily life, it doesn't replace them.

But as a significant majority of people have a PayPal account then they're not just acting as a payment gateway, and the point previously made that your credit card provider is unlikely to help is valid - the card company know only that they've paid PayPal, who in turn are paying the vendor. With Worldpay/Paypoint they're just payment gateways as has been said as the card company are effectively paying the vendor direct. I'd also go to PayPal in event of an issue (assuming you have a PayPal account), if they fail to resolve I'd go to your credit card company for a section 75/chargeback, depending on the value, but there's no guarantee they'll help as they've successfully completed the transaction with the vendor (PayPal). If you've paid via PayPal with a debit card then again I'd go to PayPal, failing that I'd try a chargeback, but you're on slightly more ropey ground and you've not got section 75 protection. That said, I work for a finance company and we can receive chargebacks from the bank up to 18 months after the initial transaction. Basically... pay direct on a credit card, or pay via PayPal with whatever means you want, but it's not a given you'll be able to escalate any claim beyond them.

I won an Echo, and it is pretty good actually. Hardly changed my life, but I like it. Like all these things, no one’s forcing you to use them...

Hi Mike, Like many I received premature third invoices when I paid my second ones - will these be re-sent when the third instalment is actually due, or do I need to keep half an eye on things to make sure I’m not delinquent?!

Yes, he certainly seems unusually self aware for someone in his position, not nearly as self obsessed as you'd perhaps expect someone of that ilk to be. Seems to do a quite a lot of community and philanthropic work too. A far better ambassador for sport than some (not thinking of F1 specifically).

Even spell checkers don’t spot random capitals though... On ultra rare 1920s Bassett-Lowke maybe. A modern mass produced model...? Less so I’ll wager!

Too early to tell for me. Hartley does seem like a slightly odd choice given his more advanced years, I wonder if Ericsson would be better there given his drive yesterday and the uncertainty about his future at Sauber (and the terrible car). But then he’s been around for a couple of years too. I don’t follow the lower formulas enough to know who’s coming up through the ranks.

Nope, he was beyond hope!