I think Signal is getting tarred unfairly here. The thing that made that channel insecure was their ineptitude, not verifying who was in the group.
They gave a journalist the encryption key to their secure channel.
There's other, record keeping related, concerns with them using signal for communicating, but I don't think the security of Signal is being called into question when used properly.
I suspect you're still negative. There's so much nasty stuff that's going to get released and you're already one set of construction/mining costs in the hole.
It is likely that KSI collisions and casualties in 2023 are affected by Dyfed Powys police force migrating to Crash. This is further discussed in our quality report.
(KSI is "Killed or seriously injured". Crash is the new collection method)
100 people is about a 10% variance. To call that "striking" when there's also a change in record keeping is bullshit. You need more data.
To give you a less conspiratorial answer than other, because those that stood against it were labelled as being against "the will of the people". Basically even though it was non-binding, those that were pro-brexit clothed themselves as following democracy, and those who opposed them as anti-democratic.
There were several problems with the referendum:
It was called to try to quell a split within the conservative party. Not because of any real movement in the country.
It never specified what "leaving the EU" meant. When, how fast, what remaining relationship? So the debate was nebulous. Positives were extremely optimistic and negatives were dismissed as pessimistic (despite being true).
The non-binding nature meant that no margin of certainty was set. It should have needed a majority of the voting public, or > ⅔ to be taken as something we really wanted to do. It was too major a change to enact on 52-48.
We don't govern by referenda in the UK. They go against the principle that parliament is sovereign because they place the people's voice above parliament's. We're a representative democracy and not a direct one. The only other ones we've had are
2011: The Alternative Vote voting system held a few year before. Also called by David Cameron and also a complete sham of a process.
1975: Continued membership of the European Community. Called by Edward Heath to quell the same split in the conservative party.
Hence the rules that surround referenda are poorly specified.
Right, but sometimes you just need to say "I've read what you said. Sounds good to me. No need to keep discussing.", especially when organising things.
I'm just saying it's unremarkable.