Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

ianvisits.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 158 posts

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#41

Post by lmm »

CPLX wrote: post #39
guerrilla wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In case anyone else forgot what that means. > The "brown M&M clause" was a specific contract requirement by Van Halen that demanded all brown M&Ms be removed from a bowl of M&Ms provided backstage before their performances. This clause was not a frivolous demand but a way to test if the concert promoters had read the entire contract carefully. If brown M&Ms were found, it indicated that other important technical deta…

You know I’ve seen this explanation a million times for decades and it’s always just a tiny bit wrong. It’s a small distinction, but actually if the band showed up and found all the brown M&Ms still there the plan would have already been a failure. The reason it was in the contract was to make sure the promoter had read the contract before signing it and understood what they were getting into. Band riders are almost…

Roth's own statements in his autobiography ( as quoted on https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/brown-out/ ) contradict that; they were playing in universities and the like that weren't used to hosting big technical band shows and probably didn't have dedicated band promoters in that era.

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#42

Post by os2warpman »

philipwhiuk wrote: post #33
dismalpedigree wrote: post #10

This is why laws should have sunset clauses

[flagged]

Criticizing rationally acting rational actors on hn is discouraged because it is "low value" or "uncivil".

When the rationally acting rational actors are pressed for answers about how their vision of the world would work they tend to reply with either examples from science fiction space fantasy novels or something that is just a simple dictatorship.

In order to add to the conversation you should sprinkle some effusive praise about the AI/Crypto/Fintech/Quantum scam du jour (or criticism of Apple) into your comments to throw them off the scent.

Something like:

"Oh boy I really get what you're saying! Here at my quantum fintech startup we're using LLMs to turboencabulate novertrunnions. By the way did you know that safety regulations are written in blood and after years of working effectively the public may forget why they were implemented in the first place but the underlying issue will just return absent the regulation and a newer generation will just have to rediscover why the regulation was created and that's something we should avoid?"

The initial tease excites the techbro-- they start daydreaming about being a billionaire dictator of a mars colony and that floods their brain with pleasure hormones which lower their defenses.

This leaves a small, but existent, chance that you can hammer some reality into their antisocial brains.

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#43

Post by bombcar »

iainmerrick wrote: post #3
ianbooker wrote: post #2

The article states that the purpose of this is "lost to time". I can image that by now its function is equivalent to a "brown M&M clause".

I'm a bit bemused at that "lost to time", as immediately before that it says: The law requires a bale of straw to be hung from a bridge as a warning to mariners whenever the height between the river and the bridge’s arches is reduced, as it is at Charing Cross at the moment. That seems clear enough! OK, the reason why it specifically has to be a bale of straw isn't obvious, but apart from that it seems very reasonabl…

Why does everyone think it’s something to run into?

At night it’s a light. It’s obviously a notification system. You visibly see the bale of straw before you get to the bridge and you know to slow down and stop and investigate what the clearance issue is.

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#44

Post by maratc »

dghf wrote: post #37
maratc wrote: post #14

That's the British system working as designed. If there's a law, no matter how ancient, the British should comply. If a law needs to be changed, that's the Parliament's job. Even the British courts, in sharp contrast to many other places, "deliver the law as it is, and not as we wish it to be" -- see for example [0] or [1]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashford_v_Thornton [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owens_v…

In what places do courts ignore or modify law to deliver the result they prefer? (To be precise: where is that accepted practice, rather than aberrant behaviour by some judges?)

Usually the judges do not "ignore or modify" the law, but rather "interpret" it in a creative manner. You might use, as an example, the question of "does the US Constitution guarantee the women a right to abortion." Some judges decided that it does, later some other judges decided that it does not. Considering the opposing outcomes to the same question, it's clear some of these were wrong.

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#46

Post by maratc »

ipsin wrote: post #29
breggles wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, the full clause reads: "When the headroom of an arch or span of a bridge is reduced from its usual limits but that arch or span is not closed to navigation, the person in control of the bridge must suspend from the centre of that arch or span by day a bundle of straw large enough to be conspicuous and by night a white light." Does that mean the law is not being complied with, in this case, since the bales are han…

Thanks, I was annoyed that the article didn't cite the actual law in question, but the BBC comes in with "Port of London Thames Byelaws, clause 36.2" https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cmlrx89jdv2o

The BBC also didn't call it "ancient," which would be questionable considering that the law is from 2012.

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#47

Post by DocTomoe »

radiorental wrote: post #40
DocTomoe wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Often, these things are utilitarian, not mystical. So my educated guess: Back in the day, the main problem was river mariners getting hurt by bridge arches that were lower than expected, and the bale of straw was a 'soft buffer' - better to get your head hit by a swinging bale of straw than a rock-solid bridge.

I was wondering about that but it would only work for the sailor standing in the right place on a boat sailing dead center of the river where there is typically two way traffic. This doesn't seem like a utilitarian solution, more of a signal with a symbolic intention?

Hm, I guess arches were lower back then, and a lot of the riverboats were actually the staked kind (think: Venetian gondolieri)? With different arches for different directions?

Honestly, this is all guesswork. But I can imagine something like that to be the case.

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#48

Post by krapp »

andrepd wrote: post #18
jajko wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

[flagged]

Ironically, reading the context of Marx's quote about religion being an "opium of the masses" would have provided some necessary insight[0]. There's more to it than just being a quippy zing against religion.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_of_the_people

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#49

Post by alexbilbie »

maratc wrote: post #46
ipsin wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, I was annoyed that the article didn't cite the actual law in question, but the BBC comes in with "Port of London Thames Byelaws, clause 36.2" https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cmlrx89jdv2o

The BBC also didn't call it "ancient," which would be questionable considering that the law is from 2012.

Its an ancient practise, codified into law in 2012 when the regulatory framework was re-codified from multiple laws like Port of London Act 1908 as well as time immemorial acts like this.

Re: Ancient law requires a bale of straw to hang from Charing Cross rail bridge

#50

Post by potato3732842 »

philipwhiuk wrote: post #33
dismalpedigree wrote: post #10

This is why laws should have sunset clauses

[flagged]

I think you've unintentionally created a great example of how and why public discourse and lawmaking are so broken.

You invoke "safety" in the same manner that peddlers of all sorts of evil invoke terrorism or think of the children and then you cap it off with a straw man, as if there's serious money to be made with or without this mundane and niche law or comparable ones.

Bridge height postings more or less stand on their own merit and probably don't need laws to continue to exist. The fact that they are legislated at all is mostly a reflection of the fact that the state was the only entity positioned to deal with such an issue when they first became of enough value to be worth doing basically all the time.

Post reply on HN