Andie Hallihan
@hooli.bsky.social
Builds new factories and improves older ones. Engineering & psychology. Star sailing, greyhounds rescuing & reading.
We need to reduce inequality and build a better society. Good homes, food, healthcare and education work well for everyone!
We need to reduce inequality and build a better society. Good homes, food, healthcare and education work well for everyone!
Stage 5 warning!
Stage 5 warning!
This is a Stage 5 warning!
Stage 5 warning!
This is a Stage 5 warning!
December 16, 2025 at 7:06 PM
Stage 5 warning!
Stage 5 warning!
This is a Stage 5 warning!
Stage 5 warning!
This is a Stage 5 warning!
Every system (for which read society and economy) is perfectly designed for the results that it gives.
A fertility rate of 1.41 in the UK drives the ageing of the population.
We need to build a system, society and economy that takes the birth rate from 1.41 to just above 2.
Or face the consequences.
A fertility rate of 1.41 in the UK drives the ageing of the population.
We need to build a system, society and economy that takes the birth rate from 1.41 to just above 2.
Or face the consequences.
December 15, 2025 at 11:15 AM
Every system (for which read society and economy) is perfectly designed for the results that it gives.
A fertility rate of 1.41 in the UK drives the ageing of the population.
We need to build a system, society and economy that takes the birth rate from 1.41 to just above 2.
Or face the consequences.
A fertility rate of 1.41 in the UK drives the ageing of the population.
We need to build a system, society and economy that takes the birth rate from 1.41 to just above 2.
Or face the consequences.
No thought.
No empathy.
No leadership.
No empathy.
No leadership.
December 15, 2025 at 7:36 AM
No thought.
No empathy.
No leadership.
No empathy.
No leadership.
The unthinking (unchallenged) drivel of knowing about 2 people, 4 people, 8 people, 16 people, 32 people, 64 people, etc is so vacuous.
What is the threshold? 64 out of 64? Good luck with that.
Because how would you assess the Englishness of each of the 64?
All it needs to one interviewer. One.
What is the threshold? 64 out of 64? Good luck with that.
Because how would you assess the Englishness of each of the 64?
All it needs to one interviewer. One.
December 15, 2025 at 2:02 AM
The unthinking (unchallenged) drivel of knowing about 2 people, 4 people, 8 people, 16 people, 32 people, 64 people, etc is so vacuous.
What is the threshold? 64 out of 64? Good luck with that.
Because how would you assess the Englishness of each of the 64?
All it needs to one interviewer. One.
What is the threshold? 64 out of 64? Good luck with that.
Because how would you assess the Englishness of each of the 64?
All it needs to one interviewer. One.
The idea that the mail is reporting in good faith is bewildered.
The mail would be delighted to suggest that any fringe interest is a material split - because division is their intent.
Don’t credit the mail with any valuable insight or good intent.
The mail would be delighted to suggest that any fringe interest is a material split - because division is their intent.
Don’t credit the mail with any valuable insight or good intent.
December 15, 2025 at 1:47 AM
The idea that the mail is reporting in good faith is bewildered.
The mail would be delighted to suggest that any fringe interest is a material split - because division is their intent.
Don’t credit the mail with any valuable insight or good intent.
The mail would be delighted to suggest that any fringe interest is a material split - because division is their intent.
Don’t credit the mail with any valuable insight or good intent.
Why spend time engaging with a bad faith platform?
If something wants to sink then the right thing is to let it sink.
Anyone who wants to engage in conversation will find others prepared to support or challenge on here.
Bye bye Twitter. RIP.
If something wants to sink then the right thing is to let it sink.
Anyone who wants to engage in conversation will find others prepared to support or challenge on here.
Bye bye Twitter. RIP.
December 15, 2025 at 1:37 AM
Why spend time engaging with a bad faith platform?
If something wants to sink then the right thing is to let it sink.
Anyone who wants to engage in conversation will find others prepared to support or challenge on here.
Bye bye Twitter. RIP.
If something wants to sink then the right thing is to let it sink.
Anyone who wants to engage in conversation will find others prepared to support or challenge on here.
Bye bye Twitter. RIP.
ICE pass an academy?
Pardon?
You mean there is a selection process?
No. That cannot be right.
Pardon?
You mean there is a selection process?
No. That cannot be right.
December 14, 2025 at 9:02 AM
ICE pass an academy?
Pardon?
You mean there is a selection process?
No. That cannot be right.
Pardon?
You mean there is a selection process?
No. That cannot be right.
Your forefathers built the nation on immigration.
They would be turning in their graves.
They would be turning in their graves.
December 14, 2025 at 8:39 AM
Your forefathers built the nation on immigration.
They would be turning in their graves.
They would be turning in their graves.
Scenario 7: the daily mail has no plausible path or insight on how Burnham becomes PM but knows it does not need one.
Enough headlines and column inches repeated again and again spreads division.
Resulting in a happy daily mail and a divided government. T’da!
Enough headlines and column inches repeated again and again spreads division.
Resulting in a happy daily mail and a divided government. T’da!
December 14, 2025 at 3:29 AM
Scenario 7: the daily mail has no plausible path or insight on how Burnham becomes PM but knows it does not need one.
Enough headlines and column inches repeated again and again spreads division.
Resulting in a happy daily mail and a divided government. T’da!
Enough headlines and column inches repeated again and again spreads division.
Resulting in a happy daily mail and a divided government. T’da!
Protect the kids?
So for clarification and the removal of all reasonable doubt, social media is toxic and we don’t want to require the billionaire tech-bros to make their toxic product safe.
I mean, why else do we feel the need to protect the kids?
So for clarification and the removal of all reasonable doubt, social media is toxic and we don’t want to require the billionaire tech-bros to make their toxic product safe.
I mean, why else do we feel the need to protect the kids?
December 14, 2025 at 3:18 AM
Protect the kids?
So for clarification and the removal of all reasonable doubt, social media is toxic and we don’t want to require the billionaire tech-bros to make their toxic product safe.
I mean, why else do we feel the need to protect the kids?
So for clarification and the removal of all reasonable doubt, social media is toxic and we don’t want to require the billionaire tech-bros to make their toxic product safe.
I mean, why else do we feel the need to protect the kids?
Hannan. Still not worked out that Brexit is an awful idea.
I feel sorry for whoever has to sit next to him. The train. A plane. Can you imagine?
I feel sorry for whoever has to sit next to him. The train. A plane. Can you imagine?
December 13, 2025 at 11:30 PM
Hannan. Still not worked out that Brexit is an awful idea.
I feel sorry for whoever has to sit next to him. The train. A plane. Can you imagine?
I feel sorry for whoever has to sit next to him. The train. A plane. Can you imagine?
Okay. Death to AI it is.
Unlike the people spending billions want to pay for what they’re using.
Unlike the people spending billions want to pay for what they’re using.
December 13, 2025 at 7:41 PM
Okay. Death to AI it is.
Unlike the people spending billions want to pay for what they’re using.
Unlike the people spending billions want to pay for what they’re using.
Where does his self-questioning kick in?
I mean. We all make mistakes. But not all of us ignore the signs. And he is ignoring them. He sees them. He lists them. And does not question himself at any point!
I mean. We all make mistakes. But not all of us ignore the signs. And he is ignoring them. He sees them. He lists them. And does not question himself at any point!
December 13, 2025 at 10:26 AM
Where does his self-questioning kick in?
I mean. We all make mistakes. But not all of us ignore the signs. And he is ignoring them. He sees them. He lists them. And does not question himself at any point!
I mean. We all make mistakes. But not all of us ignore the signs. And he is ignoring them. He sees them. He lists them. And does not question himself at any point!
Agree with Trump?
Yuk!
Yuk!
December 13, 2025 at 10:11 AM
Agree with Trump?
Yuk!
Yuk!
December 13, 2025 at 8:56 AM
The appeasement is genuinely eye-opening. Agreed!
More than happy to be calm and ruthless back.
My last two discussions with MPs/parliamentary candidates left them unhappy and unhinged.
And so it shall continue.
More than happy to be calm and ruthless back.
My last two discussions with MPs/parliamentary candidates left them unhappy and unhinged.
And so it shall continue.
December 13, 2025 at 8:27 AM
The appeasement is genuinely eye-opening. Agreed!
More than happy to be calm and ruthless back.
My last two discussions with MPs/parliamentary candidates left them unhappy and unhinged.
And so it shall continue.
More than happy to be calm and ruthless back.
My last two discussions with MPs/parliamentary candidates left them unhappy and unhinged.
And so it shall continue.
Turns out I can read greyhounds better than I can read lurcher! 🤣
December 13, 2025 at 8:08 AM
Turns out I can read greyhounds better than I can read lurcher! 🤣
Whoa!
Yes, but!
Artemisia’s interpretation was also stunning. I’d say more so. It looks like how a female artist would envisage a murder. Not trying the same as Caravaggio who makes it look like the assailants are trying to stop getting blood on their clothes.
Sorry Caravaggio. It’s stunning.
Yes, but!
Artemisia’s interpretation was also stunning. I’d say more so. It looks like how a female artist would envisage a murder. Not trying the same as Caravaggio who makes it look like the assailants are trying to stop getting blood on their clothes.
Sorry Caravaggio. It’s stunning.
December 13, 2025 at 7:47 AM
Whoa!
Yes, but!
Artemisia’s interpretation was also stunning. I’d say more so. It looks like how a female artist would envisage a murder. Not trying the same as Caravaggio who makes it look like the assailants are trying to stop getting blood on their clothes.
Sorry Caravaggio. It’s stunning.
Yes, but!
Artemisia’s interpretation was also stunning. I’d say more so. It looks like how a female artist would envisage a murder. Not trying the same as Caravaggio who makes it look like the assailants are trying to stop getting blood on their clothes.
Sorry Caravaggio. It’s stunning.
Well, I could have just said “Life’s a mess”, but I wanted to try and be more specific. 😜
December 13, 2025 at 7:36 AM
Well, I could have just said “Life’s a mess”, but I wanted to try and be more specific. 😜