This used to be the BBC number for call ins, particularly the kids TV show 'Swap Shop', but also for so much else during the 1970s and 1980s.
This number was retired in 1990 when the London ran out of phone numbers and switched to two different prefixes, 071 and 081. The former was advertised on TV as 'Inner London' and the latter as 'Greater London'. This bit of marketing kept everyone happy.
There was still a problem with numbers and the need to go for eleven digits. Hence, in 1995, the codes for London changed again, to 0171 and 0181. This was PHONEDAY.
But still, more numbers were needed, plus the tech behind the scenes was ever-evolving. Hence, in 2000, the numbers changed again for London, for everything to start with 020, so 0171 became 0207 and 0181 became 0208.
But then everyone got mobile phones and we no longer heard about how the economy was growing so quickly that we had this apparent incessant need for even more phone numbers. Furthermore, mobile phones had contacts built into them, so there was no need to remember phone numbers, which was just as well as eleven digits were not so easy to memorise, particularly when the prefixes had changed around so much.
Hence, my personal choice of fictional number. Apart from anything else, it enables me to see how well forms are validated, plus 01 811 8055 is only going to ever be recognised as a 'famous' number by Brits over a certain age.
To be pedantic, both 0171 and 0181 became 020, but with the 7 or the 8 moved to the front of the number, so 0171 222 1234 [1] became 020 7222 1234, with 7222 1234 being dialable in London without the area code.
There are also now London numbers that start with a 3 or a 4 as well as 7 and 8 so it's important to properly describe the dialling code for London as 020.
His dating site shenanigans were very amusing though. Clearly his flair for comedy hasn't suffered, though he could do with dialing back the obsession on this specific topic, for his own good more than anything.
Many classic tv shows have episodes and themes which are bad today. Star Trek has a lot of 60s attitudes — Mudds Women for example.
I choose to see them as signs at how far society has progressed. Or regressed in the case of trans.
In the 90s the U.K. TV soap “corronation street” - watched by about 30% if the population each week - had a trans character. The character had very little controversy.ant the same time everyone loved Dane Edna. And Mrs Merton.
But today those shows would be far more controversial.
On the flip side, Brookside had a pre watershed lesbian kiss and it was major amounts of outrage.
Growing up my home phone number was 4 digits for a local call, or at least so I was required to memorise it as a small child.
In the very late 90s I briefly had a rotary dial phone - very anachronistic even then - and discovered that dialling an eleven digit number that way is a huge ballache - it's so sloooow! Especially if the number has a bunch of 9s in it.
A little after that I was in the US but kept using my British mobile for a month or two as my contact - giving my number to people was even worse ... rattling off a 15 digit (international prefix plus country code) always confused people.
I too remember the Swap Shop number with some fondness. I certainly called it at least once or twice.
Last note - I realised recently that I still know the X29 address for nsfnet relay from Janet to the Internet (basically a Janet-to-telnet relay). That's a 14 digit number that I last used over 30 years ago. My memory's pretty average, but man, once stuff goes in it does not come out again!
I can still remember four digit numbers for some of my school friends.
At the time there were two digit codes for neighbouring exchanges, however, these were not universal. For example, my parents phone was on exchange 'P' and the code to call my friends in town 'S' was 81. However, if I went to town 'G', the code for town 'S' was something completely different.
The new and longer prefixes were introduced in parallel to the convenient two digit short codes. I can't quite remember all of the lingo for what the new prefixes and systems were called, however, for the rotary dial phone, you did not have to dial all ten digits (or latterly eleven), as you obviously memorised the 2 + 4 numbers for all of your friends, and only needed to spend a brief amount of time waiting for that dial to tap out its special codes.
The 'Swap Shop number' was also used for early Crimewatch programmes and so much else. Jim'll Fix It was write-in only from what I remember, and I have a sister that wrote in to meet Kermit. She dodged a bullet there!
I didn't get to know X29 or nsfnet as well as you, at the time networking skills were tantamount to witchcraft voodoo. However, I remember JANET addresses being back to front. For example, I was at Plymouth where it was something like uk.ac.plymouth. We also had lots of different non-TCP/IP network standards going on with considerable skill needed to get files between SGI/Sun workstations, IBM workstations, IBM mini-computers, VAX VMS and those new-fangled PCs.
Kermit was the tool used for moving files around, and I am now wondering what happened to Kermit. Kermit has dropped out of the history books somewhat.
I guess FTP was the extinction event for Kermit ... and didn't Kermit itself kill off the various [XYZ]Modem protocols?
I too recall the reversed addresses. The transition from X29 to Internet fell in the middle of my university¹ education... we went from mostly Vax/VMS+JANET when I started to mostly Linux+Internet when I left (and the web had suddenly appeared too). There was an awkward bit in the middle where I was super keen to be on the internet (though my main interest was Usenet) and the nsfnet relay via PAD on the Vax was the only available intermediary. It's mildly interesting that the sole system I could connect to in this way to browse Usenet was Nyx which rather amazingly is still up. I assume they deleted my account at some point in the last 30 years though. It was unbearably slow anyway, so I gave up quite swiftly.
Fun times dimly remembered.
---
¹Actually a Poly, uk.ac.pow when I arrived, but a Uni, glam.ac.uk when I left. It's changed name once or twice since then as well!
That brought back memories. To think there was a time when directory enquiries was free and you spoke to a real human, armed with a telephone book. Sometimes you could be on hold for a while, however, you could also be vague with your enquiry, for the operator to check spelling variants for you.
Everyone used to be in the phone book, to get anyone's number was just a matter of detective work, particularly if there were lots of 'J Smith' entries and you only had a vague idea where they lived.
We didn't have scam callers but 'wrong number' was quite common. People also used to phone their friends more often, since text messaging, email and apps were not available options.
In the US, there was a period when phone numbers were getting scarce in some locales as faxes/modems/etc. were coming in. Additional area codes were added, as was lampooned in a Seinfeld episode at one point; some people got rather hot and bothered when they got migrated from the "main" metro area code to essentially a suburban area code.
Yes, we have moved on from SEO to writing for LLMs. What is even more interesting is that you can ask AI to check over your work or suggest improvements.
I have a good idea of how to write for LLMs but I am taking my own path. I am betting on document structure, content sectioning elements and much else that is in the HTML5 specification but blithely ignored by Google's heuristics (Google doesn't care if your HTML is entirely made of divs and class identifiers). I scope a heading to the text that follows with 'section', 'aside', 'header', 'details' or other meaningful element.
My hunch is that the novice SEO crew won't be doing this. Not because it is a complete waste of time, but because SEO has barely crawled out of keyword stuffing, writing for robots and doing whatever else that has nothing to do with writing really well for humans. Most SEO people didn't get this, it would be someone else's job to write engaging copy that people would actually enjoy reading.
The novice SEO people behaved a bit like a cult, with gurus at conferences to learn their hacks from. Because the Google algorithm is not public, it is always their way or the highway. It should be clear that engaging content means people find the information they want, giving the algorithm all the information it needs to know the content is good. But the novice SEO crew won't accept that, as it goes against the gospel given to them by their chosen SEO gurus. And you can't point them towards the Google guide on how to do SEO properly, because that would involve reading.
Note my use of the word 'novice', I am not tarring every SEO person with the same brush, just something like ninety percent of them! However, I fully expect SEO for LLMs to follow the same pattern, with gurus claiming they know how it all works and SEO people that might as well be keyword stuffing. Time will tell, however, I am genuinely interested in optimising for LLMs, and whether full strength HTML5 makes any difference whatsoever.
I think you need to answer this by looking from the other end of the telescope.
What if you are the developer of SuperDuperBuster? (sorry, name stolen...)
If so, then you would have more than just the product, you would have a website, social media presence and some reviews solicited for launch.
Assuming a continually trained AI, the AI would just scrape the web and 'learn' about SuperDuperBuster in the normal way. Of course, you would have the website marked up for not just SEO but LLM optimised, which is a slightly different skill. You could also ask 'ChatGPT67' to check the website out and to summarise it, thereby not having to wait for the default search.
Now, SuperDuperBuster is easy to loft into the world of LLMs. What is going to be a lot harder is a history topic where your new insight changes how we understand the world. With science, there is always the peer reviewed scientific paper, but with history there isn't the scientific publishing route, and, unless you have a book to sell (with ISBN number), then you are not going to get as far as being in Wikipedia. However, a hallucinating LLM, already sickened by gorging on Reddit, might just be able to slurp it all up.
My inner Nelson-from-the-Simpsons wishes I was on your team today, able to flaunt my flask of tea and homemade packed sandwiches. I would tease you by saying 'ha ha!' as your efforts to order coffee with IP packets failed.
I always go everywhere adequately prepared for beverages and food. Thanks to your comment, I have a new reason to do so. Take out coffees are actually far from guaranteed. Payment systems could go down, my bank account could be hacked or maybe the coffee shop could be randomly closed. Heck, I might even have an accident crossing the road. Anything could happen. Hence, my humble flask might not have the top beverage in it but at least it works.
We all design systems with redundancy, backups and whatnot, but few of us apply this thinking to our food and drink. Maybe get a kettle for the office and a backup kettle, in case the first one fails?
It was beforehand, if my memory serves me correctly, by which time GCHQ/NSA had managed to hack it. I can remember the diagrams from the Snowden docs. If https:// did lock out our friendly spies, do you think we would be allowed to have it beyond anything apart from secure checkouts?
The lead in gasoline hypothesis is certainly plausible, however, I blame the larger picture of car dependency as well as the Thatcher/Reagan revolution, when 'stranger danger' was the big fear.
The article does go into this aspect, with a map of Sheffield in the footnotes showing how far eight year old kids were able to travel over the different generations. There was a time when the child could go across to the other side of the city to go fishing, whereas now, a child is essentially imprisoned and not expected to be going very far.
The Thatcher/Reagan revolution created exceptional oppositional culture in the UK, with 'rave' being the thing. The last 'free range' children grew up to be the original ravers and they had considerable organisational ability, needed to put on parties and other events. Furthermore, the music of the rave scene was banned by the BBC and the government ('repetitive beats').
In time, most of the rave generation grew up, got day jobs, had kids and all of that fun stuff. They got old and moved on, however, there was nobody to fill their shoes. Instead of illegal rave events and lots of house parties, organised festivals and city nightclubs took over. The cost aspect meant going with a small handful of friends rather than just the closest two hundred friends.
A good party should be heard from a considerable distance away (sorry neighbours) and I am surprised at how few parties there are these days. I travel by bicycle on residential roads, often late at night. Rarely do I find myself stumbling across people having house parties. This doesn't mean that parties aren't happening, but, equally, it doesn't mean I am old and out of touch.
Punk was invented by Malcolm McLaren to sell Vivienne Westwood clothes.
It was a recipe for people that wanted that identity, with both the music and the looks being where the money was made.
This happened at a time when there was no internet, and with no cynical clowns like me to piss in the punch, to claim that punk was just marketing.
This was not the first 'off the shelf' identity for young people to take up, however, punk was the most planned, even though it is all about not conforming to the rules of society. Compare with the 'hipster' trend where there was no mastermind planning it, but more of a convergence of influences.
> This happened at a time when there was no internet, and with no cynical clowns like me to piss in the punch, to claim that punk was just marketing.
Apparently, you weren't there. London in 76/77 was full of people claiming that punk was just marketing.
Mclaren was instrumental in fomenting the UK/London punk scene, but he was not in control of it, and probably not even the mastermind, had there actually been one. Ditto for Westwood.
In year 2000, Nokia had a market cap of around $100 billion and Nvidia had a market cap of around $2 to 4 billion.
Nvidia just made graphics cards, at a time when games were still being written for MS-DOS. Nobody was to imagine the real money to be made from repurposing these graphics cards for crypto and now this AI 'application'.
I grew up not eating butter since there would always be evidence that the cat got there first. This was a case of 'ych a fi' - animal germs!
Regarding the article, I am wondering where this butter in fridge idea came from, and at what latitude the custom becomes to leave it in a butter dish at room temperature.
Vitamin D supplementation in the UK - now there is a fascinating topic.
With the industrial revolution there was a problem of kids in cities getting rickets. This was due to a lack of vitamin C and that was due to a lack of daylight due to the smog.
The solution was to take the kids out of the city so they could spend time in the countryside.
However, along with the industrial revolution came steam trains, and, with steam trains, it became a lot easier to get fresh food from the farm to the city table.
Milk became an early commodity for this railway trade, in the days before refrigeration. Bottling had to be invented too, along with pasteurisation to get the modern milk product. They fortified it with vitamin D and, in time, made it mandatory in schools for kids to have dinky bottles of milk for their morning break. All kids hated the stuff but it was 'good for them' and good for keeping farmers gainfully employed.
Then the clean air acts came along, with the first street to ban fires in fireplaces being opposite the smoke free coal factory, the factory being anything but smoke free. Deindustrialisation happened too, so there were no cities with smokestack industries at their heart.
With clean air there was no longer any need to fortify the milk with vitamin D, so that stopped. From now on, kids would get their vitamin D doing things such as playing in the school playground.
But then we became seriously car dependent and the age of the free-range child was over. With 'stranger danger' and screens (initially just TV) taking over, we entered a new era of people not getting enough daylight again.
Along the way vitamin D has been downgraded, much like Pluto, from being a 'vitamin' to being a hormone. A lot of people want to point this out and explain the science to you. From hearing how some talk about vitamin D, it sounds like the recommended supplements are all over the place.
Clearly there are millions, if not billions that seem to be living just fine with not much sunlight in their lives and on no vitamin D supplements. Where's the rickets? Good question, but then, in Antarctica, where there are months of darkness to endure, they are on something like 20,000 units a day, and they probably know what they are doing.
Maybe following their example for this winter could be my next 'nutrition experiment'. Sometimes, when there is so much conflicting information, it is best to do an n=1 experiment with one's own body.
> Maybe following their example for this winter could be my next 'nutrition experiment'
Anecdotal and a sample size of 1, but I tried supplementing Vitamin D last year in the winter months. I live in the PNW, which between October and March, the sun is too low to trigger vitamin D synthesis in the skin to see if it had any effect on my energy levels and mood, I suffer from seasonal affective disorder pretty severely.
Taking 5,000 IU daily had no noticeable effect for me. A slight increase in energy levels but not significant enough that I'd be confident in attributing it to supplementation. I was hesitant to supplement more without medical advice and a blood test.
That's not to say Vitamin D isn't important (it is), and the scientists in Antartica definitely know what they're doing, but it's more to say YMMV.
For me, just making an effort to do more physical activity outdoors during the dark months had more of an impact
~5000 IU daily between February and May was barely enough to raise 25(OH) D level in my blood from 9 to 30 ng/ml.
Depending on who you ask, 30 is either the bound between "deficient" and "insufficient", or between "insufficient" and "sufficient". Regardless of who you ask, there's plenty of headroom until "excess".
Yes, it's possible but relatively hard to overdose on vitamin D, and due to a cock-up in some calculations in a study, until recently the recommended supplement amounts were about an order of magnitude too low: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5541280/
The NHS does recommend that everyone in the UK 'consider' vitamin D supplementation during the autumn and winter: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vitamins-and-minerals/vitamin-... , because the amount of sunlight available in those months is not enough to maintain a healthy level.
01 811 8055
This used to be the BBC number for call ins, particularly the kids TV show 'Swap Shop', but also for so much else during the 1970s and 1980s.
This number was retired in 1990 when the London ran out of phone numbers and switched to two different prefixes, 071 and 081. The former was advertised on TV as 'Inner London' and the latter as 'Greater London'. This bit of marketing kept everyone happy.
There was still a problem with numbers and the need to go for eleven digits. Hence, in 1995, the codes for London changed again, to 0171 and 0181. This was PHONEDAY.
But still, more numbers were needed, plus the tech behind the scenes was ever-evolving. Hence, in 2000, the numbers changed again for London, for everything to start with 020, so 0171 became 0207 and 0181 became 0208.
But then everyone got mobile phones and we no longer heard about how the economy was growing so quickly that we had this apparent incessant need for even more phone numbers. Furthermore, mobile phones had contacts built into them, so there was no need to remember phone numbers, which was just as well as eleven digits were not so easy to memorise, particularly when the prefixes had changed around so much.
Hence, my personal choice of fictional number. Apart from anything else, it enables me to see how well forms are validated, plus 01 811 8055 is only going to ever be recognised as a 'famous' number by Brits over a certain age.