On 2023-01-23 16:16:09 +0000, Rolf Mantel said:

> Am 23.01.2023 um 16:44 schrieb Clive Page:
>> On 23/01/2023 11:48, Bob wrote:
>>> There's more to Schengen than just the open borders. There are various
>>> information sharing schemes designed to assist in catching bad people
>>> whom the previous restricted borders might have caught. Pre-Brexit, the
>>> UK and Ireland (presumably still in the latter case) participated in
>>> those aspects of Schengen but retained an opt out of the open border
>>> aspect. Vatican, San Marino and Monaco have open borders, but do not
>>> participate in the other aspects of Schengen. Monaco is the only one of
>>> the three for which that actually matters, as the other two are
>>> entirely inaccessible other than by passing through Italy (I suppose
>>> technically one could parachute in, or perhaps land a helicopter within
>>> the Vatican). Given Monaco's status, it may be that France handles
>>> things like entry formalities for eg people arriving in a private yacht
>>> from somewhere like Turkey or north Africa.
>>
>> What's the status of Andorra?   Not in the EU, but you can't get there
>> (except by air perhaps) without going from France or Spain.   Last time
>> I was there a petrol station was doing a roaring trade from those
>> visiting from France.   Sadly I didn't know and had a nearly full tank
>> of petrol.
>
> The German Wikipedia deals carefully with each of these special situations
>
> <https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schengener_Abkommen#Liste_der_Teilnehmer_sowie_weitere_davon_betroffene_Gebiete>
>
>
> Andorra seems to have border controls towards both her neighbours while
> the other three micro-states do not (Liechtenstein has border controls
> towards Austria but not Switzerland and has signed all
> Schengen-agreements together with Switzerland).

Depends on what you mean by border controls. CH and LI are in customs
union with one another but not with the EU, so the CH borders with DE,
FR, IT and AT all have customs controls but not passport controls, and
likewise LI with AT, but there are no controls between LI and CH.

Robin

On 23/01/2023 15:59, Sam Wilson wrote:
> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>> On 2023-01-23 11:40:56 +0000, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com said:
>>
>>> On Mon, 23 Jan 2023 12:35:46 +0100
>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2023-01-22 20:22:41 +0000, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk said:
>>>>
>>>>> On 22/01/2023 11:01, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <tqh29k$2li2i$5@dont-email.me>, at 16:01:56 on Sat, 21 Jan
>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <95tnsh988a8d91cuu7fp7hke6b3kl8fqhu@4ax.com>, at 14:22:05 on
>>>>>>>>> Sat, 21 Jan 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 21 Jan 2023 13:44:18 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <tqels6$260vk$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:17:42 on Fri, 20 Jan
>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 20/01/2023 17:42, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> As expected, the new system has been delayed till the autumn:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3e4425ae-98d1-11ed-91ab-4070465550b
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a?shareToken=9665026f771578c64329c002f4e050f0>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> That is old news, The Times asleep again? Even the Beeb had it on
>>>>>>>>>>>> 17th Jan.
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64311737>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have no idea why any of this is a surprise....
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The delay: most big government IT projects, most governments.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The need in the first place: either something people who voted for
>>>>>>>>>>> Brexit forgot to take into account, or did they say "it was worth it,
>>>>>>>>>>> to get a black passport, annoy the DUP, create tens of thousands
>>>>>>>>>>> of jobs at freight forwarding companies".
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how much this is a consequence of Brexit. It's a new EU
>>>>>>>>>> scheme that applies to all non-Schengen passport holders, so we might
>>>>>>>>>> have been subject to a version of it as well, even without Brexit.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My impression was that if still members of the EU Brits would have
>>>>>>>>> had a waiver for the border [data gathering] formalities if they
>>>>>>>>> had applied in advance online, giving minimal information such as name,
>>>>>>>>> DoB and passport number.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That may have been facilitated by data-sharing agreements between the UK
>>>>>>>>> and the EU which are no longer possible now we are a Third Country.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It would still have not been automatic entry, but the decision at the
>>>>>>>>> border would only require producing the non-expired passport, with the
>>>>>>>>> prediction that would suffice (without further delay) for 95% of
>>>>>>>>> travellers.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think they'd still need
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you mean "would have needed" in the hypothetical case of us still
>>>>>>> being in the EU? In which case, what evidence is available for that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> to collect the fingerprints. The real test would be what an Irish
>>>>>>>> passport holder needs to do at the Eurostar border.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you mean at the border in London, then as an EU citizen I would not
>>>>>>> expect them to be subjected to the same procedures as third-country
>>>>>>> citizens like Brits.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But they might be delayed in a general queue if there isn't an "EU
>>>>>>> citizens" fast-lane.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's not that simple. Not all EU countries are in the Schengen area, and
>>>>>> not all Schengen countries are in the EU.
>>>>>
>>>>> Non-EU Schengen members: CH, LI, IS and NO?
>>>>
>>>> Non-Schengen EU members: RO, BG, IE and CY.
>>>>
>>>> Vatican, San Marino and Monaco all have open borders to their Schengen
>>>> neighbours, but to not formally participate in the scheme.
>>>
>>> If their borders are open then they're de-facto in Schengen anyway. Perhaps
>>> they just like to leave their options open by not officially joining.
>>
>> There's more to Schengen than just the open borders. There are various
>> information sharing schemes designed to assist in catching bad people
>> whom the previous restricted borders might have caught. Pre-Brexit, the
>> UK and Ireland (presumably still in the latter case) participated in
>> those aspects of Schengen but retained an opt out of the open border
>> aspect. Vatican, San Marino and Monaco have open borders, but do not
>> participate in the other aspects of Schengen. Monaco is the only one of
>> the three for which that actually matters, as the other two are
>> entirely inaccessible other than by passing through Italy (I suppose
>> technically one could parachute in, or perhaps land a helicopter within
>> the Vatican). Given Monaco's status, it may be that France handles
>> things like entry formalities for eg people arriving in a private yacht
>> from somewhere like Turkey or north Africa.
>
> I don’t know San Marino and the Vatican, but it would be pretty disruptive
> to secure the land border between France and Monaco, given that much of it
> runs down the middle of streets.
>

The Vatican is effectively a walled city so technically possible to
secure the border with Italy.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
> On 2023-01-23 16:16:09 +0000, Rolf Mantel said:
>
>> Am 23.01.2023 um 16:44 schrieb Clive Page:
>>> On 23/01/2023 11:48, Bob wrote:
>>>> There's more to Schengen than just the open borders. There are various
>>>> information sharing schemes designed to assist in catching bad people
>>>> whom the previous restricted borders might have caught. Pre-Brexit, the
>>>> UK and Ireland (presumably still in the latter case) participated in
>>>> those aspects of Schengen but retained an opt out of the open border
>>>> aspect. Vatican, San Marino and Monaco have open borders, but do not
>>>> participate in the other aspects of Schengen. Monaco is the only one of
>>>> the three for which that actually matters, as the other two are
>>>> entirely inaccessible other than by passing through Italy (I suppose
>>>> technically one could parachute in, or perhaps land a helicopter within
>>>> the Vatican). Given Monaco's status, it may be that France handles
>>>> things like entry formalities for eg people arriving in a private yacht
>>>> from somewhere like Turkey or north Africa.
>>>
>>> What's the status of Andorra?   Not in the EU, but you can't get there
>>> (except by air perhaps) without going from France or Spain.   Last time
>>> I was there a petrol station was doing a roaring trade from those
>>> visiting from France.   Sadly I didn't know and had a nearly full tank
>>> of petrol.
>>
>> The German Wikipedia deals carefully with each of these special situations
>>
>> <https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schengener_Abkommen#Liste_der_Teilnehmer_sowie_weitere_davon_betroffene_Gebiete>
>>
>>
>>
>> Andorra seems to have border controls towards both her neighbours while
>> the other three micro-states do not (Liechtenstein has border controls
>> towards Austria but not Switzerland and has signed all
>> Schengen-agreements together with Switzerland).
>
> Depends on what you mean by border controls. CH and LI are in customs
> union with one another but not with the EU, so the CH borders with DE,
> FR, IT and AT all have customs controls but not passport controls, and
> likewise LI with AT, but there are no controls between LI and CH.
>
> Robin
>
>

And to add to the mix, Gibraltar is going to be sort of in/out/shake it all
about part of Schengen.

https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-and-spain-close-in-on-post-brexit-deal-for-gibraltar/

https://www.etias.info/gibraltar-joins-schengen-after-brexit/

In message <tqjt9n$36tt9$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:55:03 on Sun, 22 Jan
2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <042cnQNTP7ySjFD-nZ2dnZfqnPcAAAAA@brightview.co.uk>, at
>> 10:33:51 on Sun, 22 Jan 2023, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>> remarked:
>>> On 22/01/2023 08:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> I rather suspect getting a tourist visa for Russia (OK, let's ignore
>>>> the war for a second) would cost more than £50, and they are only
>>>> valid for the duration of one short trip.
>>
>> It was reasonably long ago (15yrs maybe) but my business visa for Russia
>> had a very short validity. As I don't read Russian I can't tell if it
>> was for more than one entry (of whichever kind).
>
>I can thoroughly recommend the Google Translate app which can use your
>phone’s camera to replace foreign-looking text with English (or different
>foreign looking text) in an image.

*Another* new app! This is becoming a daily phenomenon.
--
Roland Perry

In message <d0fqshlmorkh56p6mq13im00l6btl2sk0i@4ax.com>, at 13:38:20 on
Sun, 22 Jan 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>On Sun, 22 Jan 2023 11:59:42 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <tqj7bd$33blt$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:40:29 on Sun, 22 Jan
>>2023, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>On 22/01/2023 08:03, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <tqhtn3$2q1ni$5@dont-email.me>, at 23:49:55 on Sat, 21 Jan
>>>>2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 21 Jan 2023 17:01:44 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> It wouldn't have applied to us while a member as we then had the
>>>>>>>> unrestricted right to travel and live in any EU country.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not quite (all EU citizens have the right to enter and live in
>>>>>>>another EU
>>>>>>> member state for up to three months, not indefinitely).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In any case, the new system is about checking who enters and
>>>>>>>leaves the Schengen zone, which would still have applied to us. So
>>>>>>>we'd probably still have the new fingerprinting requirement and
>>>>>>>have our passports checked by the machines, but wouldn't have
>>>>>>>needed to apply for the new ETIAS. I don't think we'd have needed
>>>>>>>to have our passports stamped, as we currently do, but won't
>>>>>>>when the new ETIAS comes in.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not sure why they need ETIAS and EES, couldn't they just roll them
>>>>>>into one?
>>
>>>>>> Unless ETIAS is little more than a revenue raising exercise.
>>>>>
>>>>> EU ETIAS: lasts three years, costs €7, but only for travellers
>>>>>between 18
>>>>> and 70,
>>
>>>> Are older and younger free of charge, or banned from the scheme?
>>>
>>>Free, as 1 minutes googling showed
>>
>>Or ten seconds of typing by the person making the earlier non-exhaustive
>>statement.
>>
>>Or zero had it been drafted: "free for travellers under 18 and over 70"
>
>You'd then have complained that I didn't say what it would cost people
>between those ages.

I wasn't proposing you deleted the "Costs £7".

--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <tqjt9n$36tt9$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:55:03 on Sun, 22 Jan
> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <042cnQNTP7ySjFD-nZ2dnZfqnPcAAAAA@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>> 10:33:51 on Sun, 22 Jan 2023, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>> remarked:
>>>> On 22/01/2023 08:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> I rather suspect getting a tourist visa for Russia (OK, let's ignore
>>>>> the war for a second) would cost more than £50, and they are only
>>>>> valid for the duration of one short trip.
>>>
>>> It was reasonably long ago (15yrs maybe) but my business visa for Russia
>>> had a very short validity. As I don't read Russian I can't tell if it
>>> was for more than one entry (of whichever kind).
>>
>> I can thoroughly recommend the Google Translate app which can use your
>> phone’s camera to replace foreign-looking text with English (or different
>> foreign looking text) in an image.
>
> *Another* new app! This is becoming a daily phenomenon.

Keep up - it’s not hard.

On 23/01/2023 17:30, Graeme Wall wrote:
> On 23/01/2023 15:59, Sam Wilson wrote:
>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>> On 2023-01-23 11:40:56 +0000, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com said:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 23 Jan 2023 12:35:46 +0100
>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2023-01-22 20:22:41 +0000, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 22/01/2023 11:01, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <tqh29k$2li2i$5@dont-email.me>, at 16:01:56 on Sat,
>>>>>>>> 21 Jan
>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <95tnsh988a8d91cuu7fp7hke6b3kl8fqhu@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>> 14:22:05 on
>>>>>>>>>> Sat, 21 Jan 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 21 Jan 2023 13:44:18 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.uk>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <tqels6$260vk$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:17:42 on
>>>>>>>>>>>> Fri, 20 Jan
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 20/01/2023 17:42, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As expected, the new system has been delayed till the autumn:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3e4425ae-98d1-11ed-91ab-4070465550b
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a?shareToken=9665026f771578c64329c002f4e050f0>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is old news, The Times asleep again? Even the Beeb had
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 17th Jan.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64311737>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I have no idea why any of this is a surprise....
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The delay: most big government IT projects, most governments.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The need in the first place: either something people who
>>>>>>>>>>>> voted for
>>>>>>>>>>>> Brexit forgot to take into account, or did they say "it was
>>>>>>>>>>>> worth it,
>>>>>>>>>>>> to get a black passport, annoy the DUP, create tens of
>>>>>>>>>>>> thousands
>>>>>>>>>>>> of jobs at freight forwarding companies".
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how much this is a consequence of Brexit. It's a
>>>>>>>>>>> new EU
>>>>>>>>>>> scheme that applies to all non-Schengen passport holders, so
>>>>>>>>>>> we might
>>>>>>>>>>> have been subject to a version of it as well, even without
>>>>>>>>>>> Brexit.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> My impression was that if still members of the EU Brits would
>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>> had a waiver for the border [data gathering] formalities if they
>>>>>>>>>> had applied in advance online, giving minimal information such
>>>>>>>>>> as name,
>>>>>>>>>> DoB and passport number.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> That may have been facilitated by data-sharing agreements
>>>>>>>>>> between the UK
>>>>>>>>>> and the EU which are no longer possible now we are a Third
>>>>>>>>>> Country.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It would still have not been automatic entry, but the decision
>>>>>>>>>> at the
>>>>>>>>>> border would only require producing the non-expired passport,
>>>>>>>>>> with the
>>>>>>>>>> prediction that would suffice (without further delay) for 95% of
>>>>>>>>>> travellers.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think they'd still need
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you mean "would have needed" in the hypothetical case of us
>>>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>> being in the EU? In which case, what evidence is available for
>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> to collect the fingerprints.  The real test would be what an Irish
>>>>>>>>> passport holder needs to do at the Eurostar border.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you mean at the border in London, then as an EU citizen I
>>>>>>>> would not
>>>>>>>> expect them to be subjected to the same procedures as third-country
>>>>>>>> citizens like Brits.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But they might be delayed in a general queue if there isn't an "EU
>>>>>>>> citizens" fast-lane.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's not that simple. Not all EU countries are in the Schengen
>>>>>>> area, and
>>>>>>> not all Schengen countries are in the EU.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Non-EU Schengen members: CH, LI, IS and NO?
>>>>>
>>>>> Non-Schengen EU members: RO, BG, IE and CY.
>>>>>
>>>>> Vatican, San Marino and Monaco all have open borders to their Schengen
>>>>> neighbours, but to not formally participate in the scheme.
>>>>
>>>> If their borders are open then they're de-facto in Schengen anyway.
>>>> Perhaps
>>>> they just like to leave their options open by not officially joining.
>>>
>>> There's more to Schengen than just the open borders. There are various
>>> information sharing schemes designed to assist in catching bad people
>>> whom the previous restricted borders might have caught. Pre-Brexit, the
>>> UK and Ireland (presumably still in the latter case) participated in
>>> those aspects of Schengen but retained an opt out of the open border
>>> aspect. Vatican, San Marino and Monaco have open borders, but do not
>>> participate in the other aspects of Schengen. Monaco is the only one of
>>> the three for which that actually matters, as the other two are
>>> entirely inaccessible other than by passing through Italy (I suppose
>>> technically one could parachute in, or perhaps land a helicopter within
>>> the Vatican). Given Monaco's status, it may be that France handles
>>> things like entry formalities for eg people arriving in a private yacht
>>> from somewhere like Turkey or north Africa.
>>
>> I don’t know San Marino and the Vatican, but it would be pretty
>> disruptive
>> to secure the land border between France and Monaco, given that much
>> of it
>> runs down the middle of streets.
>>
>
> The Vatican is effectively a walled city so technically possible to
> secure the border with Italy.
>

St. Peter's Square?

On Mon, 23 Jan 2023 19:00:40 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <tqjt9n$36tt9$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:55:03 on Sun, 22 Jan
>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <042cnQNTP7ySjFD-nZ2dnZfqnPcAAAAA@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>> 10:33:51 on Sun, 22 Jan 2023, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>> remarked:
>>>>> On 22/01/2023 08:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> I rather suspect getting a tourist visa for Russia (OK, let's ignore
>>>>>> the war for a second) would cost more than £50, and they are only
>>>>>> valid for the duration of one short trip.
>>>>
>>>> It was reasonably long ago (15yrs maybe) but my business visa for Russia
>>>> had a very short validity. As I don't read Russian I can't tell if it
>>>> was for more than one entry (of whichever kind).
>>>
>>> I can thoroughly recommend the Google Translate app which can use your
>>> phone’s camera to replace foreign-looking text with English (or different
>>> foreign looking text) in an image.
>>
>> *Another* new app! This is becoming a daily phenomenon.
>
>Keep up - it’s not hard.
>
The trouble with unwanted new apps is the storage on the 'phone might
not be able to keep up with them if you get too many of them. My
'phone has more than the basic storage but e.g. I have had to dump 2
out of 4 different parking apps to stop them and other apps
constipating it.

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <tqjt9n$36tt9$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:55:03 on Sun, 22 Jan
>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <042cnQNTP7ySjFD-nZ2dnZfqnPcAAAAA@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>> 10:33:51 on Sun, 22 Jan 2023, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>> remarked:
>>>>> On 22/01/2023 08:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> I rather suspect getting a tourist visa for Russia (OK, let's ignore
>>>>>> the war for a second) would cost more than £50, and they are only
>>>>>> valid for the duration of one short trip.
>>>>
>>>> It was reasonably long ago (15yrs maybe) but my business visa for Russia
>>>> had a very short validity. As I don't read Russian I can't tell if it
>>>> was for more than one entry (of whichever kind).
>>>
>>> I can thoroughly recommend the Google Translate app which can use your
>>> phone’s camera to replace foreign-looking text with English (or different
>>> foreign looking text) in an image.
>>
>> *Another* new app! This is becoming a daily phenomenon.
>
> Keep up - it’s not hard.

It's also not a new app — it's been around for quite a few years.

On 23/01/2023 19:27, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 23/01/2023 17:30, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> On 23/01/2023 15:59, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2023-01-23 11:40:56 +0000, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com said:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 23 Jan 2023 12:35:46 +0100
>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2023-01-22 20:22:41 +0000, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 22/01/2023 11:01, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <tqh29k$2li2i$5@dont-email.me>, at 16:01:56 on Sat,
>>>>>>>>> 21 Jan
>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <95tnsh988a8d91cuu7fp7hke6b3kl8fqhu@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>>> 14:22:05 on
>>>>>>>>>>> Sat, 21 Jan 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 21 Jan 2023 13:44:18 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.uk>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <tqels6$260vk$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:17:42 on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fri, 20 Jan
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 20/01/2023 17:42, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As expected, the new system has been delayed till the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> autumn:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3e4425ae-98d1-11ed-91ab-4070465550b
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a?shareToken=9665026f771578c64329c002f4e050f0>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is old news, The Times asleep again? Even the Beeb
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had it on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 17th Jan.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64311737>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have no idea why any of this is a surprise....
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The delay: most big government IT projects, most governments.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The need in the first place: either something people who
>>>>>>>>>>>>> voted for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Brexit forgot to take into account, or did they say "it was
>>>>>>>>>>>>> worth it,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get a black passport, annoy the DUP, create tens of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> thousands
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of jobs at freight forwarding companies".
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how much this is a consequence of Brexit. It's
>>>>>>>>>>>> a new EU
>>>>>>>>>>>> scheme that applies to all non-Schengen passport holders, so
>>>>>>>>>>>> we might
>>>>>>>>>>>> have been subject to a version of it as well, even without
>>>>>>>>>>>> Brexit.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> My impression was that if still members of the EU Brits would
>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>> had a waiver for the border [data gathering] formalities if they
>>>>>>>>>>> had applied in advance online, giving minimal information
>>>>>>>>>>> such as name,
>>>>>>>>>>> DoB and passport number.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> That may have been facilitated by data-sharing agreements
>>>>>>>>>>> between the UK
>>>>>>>>>>> and the EU which are no longer possible now we are a Third
>>>>>>>>>>> Country.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It would still have not been automatic entry, but the
>>>>>>>>>>> decision at the
>>>>>>>>>>> border would only require producing the non-expired passport,
>>>>>>>>>>> with the
>>>>>>>>>>> prediction that would suffice (without further delay) for 95% of
>>>>>>>>>>> travellers.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think they'd still need
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Do you mean "would have needed" in the hypothetical case of us
>>>>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>>> being in the EU? In which case, what evidence is available for
>>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> to collect the fingerprints.  The real test would be what an
>>>>>>>>>> Irish
>>>>>>>>>> passport holder needs to do at the Eurostar border.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you mean at the border in London, then as an EU citizen I
>>>>>>>>> would not
>>>>>>>>> expect them to be subjected to the same procedures as
>>>>>>>>> third-country
>>>>>>>>> citizens like Brits.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But they might be delayed in a general queue if there isn't an "EU
>>>>>>>>> citizens" fast-lane.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's not that simple. Not all EU countries are in the Schengen
>>>>>>>> area, and
>>>>>>>> not all Schengen countries are in the EU.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Non-EU Schengen members: CH, LI, IS and NO?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Non-Schengen EU members: RO, BG, IE and CY.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Vatican, San Marino and Monaco all have open borders to their
>>>>>> Schengen
>>>>>> neighbours, but to not formally participate in the scheme.
>>>>>
>>>>> If their borders are open then they're de-facto in Schengen anyway.
>>>>> Perhaps
>>>>> they just like to leave their options open by not officially joining.
>>>>
>>>> There's more to Schengen than just the open borders. There are various
>>>> information sharing schemes designed to assist in catching bad people
>>>> whom the previous restricted borders might have caught. Pre-Brexit, the
>>>> UK and Ireland (presumably still in the latter case) participated in
>>>> those aspects of Schengen but retained an opt out of the open border
>>>> aspect. Vatican, San Marino and Monaco have open borders, but do not
>>>> participate in the other aspects of Schengen. Monaco is the only one of
>>>> the three for which that actually matters, as the other two are
>>>> entirely inaccessible other than by passing through Italy (I suppose
>>>> technically one could parachute in, or perhaps land a helicopter within
>>>> the Vatican). Given Monaco's status, it may be that France handles
>>>> things like entry formalities for eg people arriving in a private yacht
>>>> from somewhere like Turkey or north Africa.
>>>
>>> I don’t know San Marino and the Vatican, but it would be pretty
>>> disruptive
>>> to secure the land border between France and Monaco, given that much
>>> of it
>>> runs down the middle of streets.
>>>
>>
>> The Vatican is effectively a walled city so technically possible to
>> secure the border with Italy.
>>
>
> St. Peter's Square?

On 23/01/2023 16:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> On 23/01/2023 15:44, Clive Page wrote:
>> On 23/01/2023 11:48, Bob wrote:
>>> There's more to Schengen than just the open borders. There are various information sharing schemes designed to assist in catching bad people whom the previous restricted borders might have caught. Pre-Brexit, the UK and Ireland (presumably still in the latter case) participated in those aspects of Schengen but retained an opt out of the open border aspect. Vatican, San Marino and Monaco have open borders, but do not participate in the other aspects of Schengen. Monaco is the only one of the three for which that actually matters, as the other two are entirely inaccessible other than by passing through Italy (I suppose technically one could parachute in, or perhaps land a helicopter within the Vatican). Given Monaco's status, it may be that France handles things like entry formalities for eg people arriving in a private yacht from somewhere like Turkey or north Africa.
>>
>> What's the status of Andorra?   Not in the EU, but you can't get there (except by air perhaps) without going from France or Spain.   Last time I was there a petrol station was doing a roaring trade from those visiting from France.   Sadly I didn't know and had a nearly full tank of petrol.
>>
>
> I wouldn't be surprised if it was the same as Vatican City and San Marino.
>
> How much lower is petrol per litre in Andorra than in France, I wonder?

According to autotraveler.ru (a no doubt reliable source :-) for E95 the prices in Euro/litre are
Andorra 1.49, France 1.92, Spain 1.64.

But apparently: Russia 0.69.

--
Clive Page

On 23/01/2023 21:00, Charles Ellson wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jan 2023 19:00:40 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
> <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <tqjt9n$36tt9$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:55:03 on Sun, 22 Jan
>>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <042cnQNTP7ySjFD-nZ2dnZfqnPcAAAAA@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>> 10:33:51 on Sun, 22 Jan 2023, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>> On 22/01/2023 08:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> I rather suspect getting a tourist visa for Russia (OK, let's ignore
>>>>>>> the war for a second) would cost more than £50, and they are only
>>>>>>> valid for the duration of one short trip.
>>>>>
>>>>> It was reasonably long ago (15yrs maybe) but my business visa for Russia
>>>>> had a very short validity. As I don't read Russian I can't tell if it
>>>>> was for more than one entry (of whichever kind).
>>>>
>>>> I can thoroughly recommend the Google Translate app which can use your
>>>> phone’s camera to replace foreign-looking text with English (or different
>>>> foreign looking text) in an image.
>>>
>>> *Another* new app! This is becoming a daily phenomenon.
>>
>> Keep up - it’s not hard.
>>
> The trouble with unwanted new apps is the storage on the 'phone might
> not be able to keep up with them if you get too many of them. My
> 'phone has more than the basic storage but e.g. I have had to dump 2
> out of 4 different parking apps to stop them and other apps
> constipating it.

iPhone will offload some apps that have not seen use in a while.

On 23/01/2023 23:38, Clive Page wrote:
> On 23/01/2023 16:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> On 23/01/2023 15:44, Clive Page wrote:
>>> On 23/01/2023 11:48, Bob wrote:
>>>> There's more to Schengen than just the open borders. There are
>>>> various information sharing schemes designed to assist in catching
>>>> bad people whom the previous restricted borders might have caught.
>>>> Pre-Brexit, the UK and Ireland (presumably still in the latter case)
>>>> participated in those aspects of Schengen but retained an opt out of
>>>> the open border aspect. Vatican, San Marino and Monaco have open
>>>> borders, but do not participate in the other aspects of Schengen.
>>>> Monaco is the only one of the three for which that actually matters,
>>>> as the other two are entirely inaccessible other than by passing
>>>> through Italy (I suppose technically one could parachute in, or
>>>> perhaps land a helicopter within the Vatican). Given Monaco's
>>>> status, it may be that France handles things like entry formalities
>>>> for eg people arriving in a private yacht from somewhere like Turkey
>>>> or north Africa.
>>>
>>> What's the status of Andorra?   Not in the EU, but you can't get
>>> there (except by air perhaps) without going from France or Spain.
>>> Last time I was there a petrol station was doing a roaring trade from
>>> those visiting from France.   Sadly I didn't know and had a nearly
>>> full tank of petrol.
>>>
>>
>> I wouldn't be surprised if it was the same as Vatican City and San
>> Marino.
>>
>> How much lower is petrol per litre in Andorra than in France, I wonder?
>
> According to autotraveler.ru (a no doubt reliable source :-) for E95 the
> prices in Euro/litre are
> Andorra 1.49, France 1.92, Spain 1.64.
>
> But apparently: Russia 0.69.
>
That's likely because the latter have plenty of it. I would also imagine
that it is not subject to the same degree of taxation.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 23/01/2023 19:27, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> On 23/01/2023 17:30, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>> On 23/01/2023 15:59, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2023-01-23 11:40:56 +0000, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 23 Jan 2023 12:35:46 +0100
>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2023-01-22 20:22:41 +0000, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 22/01/2023 11:01, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <tqh29k$2li2i$5@dont-email.me>, at 16:01:56 on Sat,
>>>>>>>>>> 21 Jan
>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <95tnsh988a8d91cuu7fp7hke6b3kl8fqhu@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>>>> 14:22:05 on
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sat, 21 Jan 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 21 Jan 2023 13:44:18 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.uk>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <tqels6$260vk$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:17:42 on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fri, 20 Jan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 20/01/2023 17:42, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As expected, the new system has been delayed till the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> autumn:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3e4425ae-98d1-11ed-91ab-4070465550b
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a?shareToken=9665026f771578c64329c002f4e050f0>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is old news, The Times asleep again? Even the Beeb
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had it on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 17th Jan.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64311737>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have no idea why any of this is a surprise....
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The delay: most big government IT projects, most governments.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The need in the first place: either something people who
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> voted for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Brexit forgot to take into account, or did they say "it was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worth it,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get a black passport, annoy the DUP, create tens of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thousands
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of jobs at freight forwarding companies".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how much this is a consequence of Brexit. It's
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a new EU
>>>>>>>>>>>>> scheme that applies to all non-Schengen passport holders, so
>>>>>>>>>>>>> we might
>>>>>>>>>>>>> have been subject to a version of it as well, even without
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Brexit.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> My impression was that if still members of the EU Brits would
>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>> had a waiver for the border [data gathering] formalities if they
>>>>>>>>>>>> had applied in advance online, giving minimal information
>>>>>>>>>>>> such as name,
>>>>>>>>>>>> DoB and passport number.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> That may have been facilitated by data-sharing agreements
>>>>>>>>>>>> between the UK
>>>>>>>>>>>> and the EU which are no longer possible now we are a Third
>>>>>>>>>>>> Country.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It would still have not been automatic entry, but the
>>>>>>>>>>>> decision at the
>>>>>>>>>>>> border would only require producing the non-expired passport,
>>>>>>>>>>>> with the
>>>>>>>>>>>> prediction that would suffice (without further delay) for 95% of
>>>>>>>>>>>> travellers.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think they'd still need
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Do you mean "would have needed" in the hypothetical case of us
>>>>>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>>>> being in the EU? In which case, what evidence is available for
>>>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> to collect the fingerprints.  The real test would be what an
>>>>>>>>>>> Irish
>>>>>>>>>>> passport holder needs to do at the Eurostar border.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If you mean at the border in London, then as an EU citizen I
>>>>>>>>>> would not
>>>>>>>>>> expect them to be subjected to the same procedures as
>>>>>>>>>> third-country
>>>>>>>>>> citizens like Brits.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But they might be delayed in a general queue if there isn't an "EU
>>>>>>>>>> citizens" fast-lane.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's not that simple. Not all EU countries are in the Schengen
>>>>>>>>> area, and
>>>>>>>>> not all Schengen countries are in the EU.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Non-EU Schengen members: CH, LI, IS and NO?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Non-Schengen EU members: RO, BG, IE and CY.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Vatican, San Marino and Monaco all have open borders to their
>>>>>>> Schengen
>>>>>>> neighbours, but to not formally participate in the scheme.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If their borders are open then they're de-facto in Schengen anyway.
>>>>>> Perhaps
>>>>>> they just like to leave their options open by not officially joining.
>>>>>
>>>>> There's more to Schengen than just the open borders. There are various
>>>>> information sharing schemes designed to assist in catching bad people
>>>>> whom the previous restricted borders might have caught. Pre-Brexit, the
>>>>> UK and Ireland (presumably still in the latter case) participated in
>>>>> those aspects of Schengen but retained an opt out of the open border
>>>>> aspect. Vatican, San Marino and Monaco have open borders, but do not
>>>>> participate in the other aspects of Schengen. Monaco is the only one of
>>>>> the three for which that actually matters, as the other two are
>>>>> entirely inaccessible other than by passing through Italy (I suppose
>>>>> technically one could parachute in, or perhaps land a helicopter within
>>>>> the Vatican). Given Monaco's status, it may be that France handles
>>>>> things like entry formalities for eg people arriving in a private yacht
>>>>> from somewhere like Turkey or north Africa.
>>>>
>>>> I don’t know San Marino and the Vatican, but it would be pretty
>>>> disruptive
>>>> to secure the land border between France and Monaco, given that much
>>>> of it
>>>> runs down the middle of streets.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The Vatican is effectively a walled city so technically possible to
>>> secure the border with Italy.
>>>
>>
>> St. Peter's Square?
>
> Is in the Vatican but has a well-defined, relatively short, open border
> with Italy. IIRC there is a row of bollards, connecting the two
> encircling colonnades, that marks the border.

On Tue, 24 Jan 2023 00:41:52 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
<hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>On 23/01/2023 21:00, Charles Ellson wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Jan 2023 19:00:40 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
>> <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <tqjt9n$36tt9$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:55:03 on Sun, 22 Jan
>>>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <042cnQNTP7ySjFD-nZ2dnZfqnPcAAAAA@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>> 10:33:51 on Sun, 22 Jan 2023, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>> On 22/01/2023 08:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>> I rather suspect getting a tourist visa for Russia (OK, let's ignore
>>>>>>>> the war for a second) would cost more than £50, and they are only
>>>>>>>> valid for the duration of one short trip.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It was reasonably long ago (15yrs maybe) but my business visa for Russia
>>>>>> had a very short validity. As I don't read Russian I can't tell if it
>>>>>> was for more than one entry (of whichever kind).
>>>>>
>>>>> I can thoroughly recommend the Google Translate app which can use your
>>>>> phone’s camera to replace foreign-looking text with English (or different
>>>>> foreign looking text) in an image.
>>>>
>>>> *Another* new app! This is becoming a daily phenomenon.
>>>
>>> Keep up - it’s not hard.
>>>
>> The trouble with unwanted new apps is the storage on the 'phone might
>> not be able to keep up with them if you get too many of them. My
>> 'phone has more than the basic storage but e.g. I have had to dump 2
>> out of 4 different parking apps to stop them and other apps
>> constipating it.
>
>iPhone will offload some apps that have not seen use in a while.

Android (in my experience) will *suggest* the user might consider
removing/unenabling same

On 2023-01-23 18:27:59 +0000, Roland Perry said:

> In message <tqjt9n$36tt9$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:55:03 on Sun, 22 Jan
> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <042cnQNTP7ySjFD-nZ2dnZfqnPcAAAAA@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>> 10:33:51 on Sun, 22 Jan 2023, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>> remarked:
>>>> On 22/01/2023 08:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> I rather suspect getting a tourist visa for Russia (OK, let's ignore
>>>>> the war for a second) would cost more than £50, and they are only
>>>>> valid for the duration of one short trip.
>>>
>>> It was reasonably long ago (15yrs maybe) but my business visa for Russia
>>> had a very short validity. As I don't read Russian I can't tell if it
>>> was for more than one entry (of whichever kind).
>>
>> I can thoroughly recommend the Google Translate app which can use your
>> phone’s camera to replace foreign-looking text with English (or different
>> foreign looking text) in an image.
>
> *Another* new app! This is becoming a daily phenomenon.

FSVO "new". The Google Translate app was released 13 years ago on
Android and 12 years ago on iOS.

Robin

Nobody <jock@soccer.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jan 2023 00:41:52 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 23/01/2023 21:00, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>> On Mon, 23 Jan 2023 19:00:40 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
>>> <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <tqjt9n$36tt9$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:55:03 on Sun, 22 Jan
>>>>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <042cnQNTP7ySjFD-nZ2dnZfqnPcAAAAA@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>>> 10:33:51 on Sun, 22 Jan 2023, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On 22/01/2023 08:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I rather suspect getting a tourist visa for Russia (OK, let's ignore
>>>>>>>>> the war for a second) would cost more than £50, and they are only
>>>>>>>>> valid for the duration of one short trip.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It was reasonably long ago (15yrs maybe) but my business visa for Russia
>>>>>>> had a very short validity. As I don't read Russian I can't tell if it
>>>>>>> was for more than one entry (of whichever kind).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can thoroughly recommend the Google Translate app which can use your
>>>>>> phone’s camera to replace foreign-looking text with English (or different
>>>>>> foreign looking text) in an image.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Another* new app! This is becoming a daily phenomenon.
>>>>
>>>> Keep up - it’s not hard.
>>>>
>>> The trouble with unwanted new apps is the storage on the 'phone might
>>> not be able to keep up with them if you get too many of them. My
>>> 'phone has more than the basic storage but e.g. I have had to dump 2
>>> out of 4 different parking apps to stop them and other apps
>>> constipating it.
>>
>> iPhone will offload some apps that have not seen use in a while.
>
> Android (in my experience) will *suggest* the user might consider
> removing/unenabling same
>

And phones come with lot more storage these days than they used to. The
space taken by apps really mattered when phones only had 16GB, but few
phones come with less than 64GB these days, and 128GB is common now, even
on budget phones. So, having a couple of GB of apps hardly matters any
more.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <tqjt9n$36tt9$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:55:03 on Sun, 22 Jan
> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <042cnQNTP7ySjFD-nZ2dnZfqnPcAAAAA@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>> 10:33:51 on Sun, 22 Jan 2023, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>> remarked:
>>>> On 22/01/2023 08:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> I rather suspect getting a tourist visa for Russia (OK, let's ignore
>>>>> the war for a second) would cost more than £50, and they are only
>>>>> valid for the duration of one short trip.
>>>
>>> It was reasonably long ago (15yrs maybe) but my business visa for Russia
>>> had a very short validity. As I don't read Russian I can't tell if it
>>> was for more than one entry (of whichever kind).
>>
>> I can thoroughly recommend the Google Translate app which can use your
>> phone’s camera to replace foreign-looking text with English (or different
>> foreign looking text) in an image.
>
> *Another* new app! This is becoming a daily phenomenon.

I think you have a typo, and meant to say, "Thank you for reminding me that
I have a powerful, free translation service included in my phone!".

On 24/01/2023 00:51, Recliner wrote:
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 23/01/2023 19:27, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>> On 23/01/2023 17:30, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>> On 23/01/2023 15:59, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2023-01-23 11:40:56 +0000, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, 23 Jan 2023 12:35:46 +0100
>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-22 20:22:41 +0000, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk said:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 22/01/2023 11:01, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <tqh29k$2li2i$5@dont-email.me>, at 16:01:56 on Sat,
>>>>>>>>>>> 21 Jan
>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <95tnsh988a8d91cuu7fp7hke6b3kl8fqhu@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 14:22:05 on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sat, 21 Jan 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 21 Jan 2023 13:44:18 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.uk>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <tqels6$260vk$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:17:42 on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fri, 20 Jan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 20/01/2023 17:42, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As expected, the new system has been delayed till the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> autumn:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3e4425ae-98d1-11ed-91ab-4070465550b
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a?shareToken=9665026f771578c64329c002f4e050f0>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is old news, The Times asleep again? Even the Beeb
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had it on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 17th Jan.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64311737>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have no idea why any of this is a surprise....
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The delay: most big government IT projects, most governments.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The need in the first place: either something people who
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> voted for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Brexit forgot to take into account, or did they say "it was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worth it,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get a black passport, annoy the DUP, create tens of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thousands
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of jobs at freight forwarding companies".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how much this is a consequence of Brexit. It's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a new EU
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> scheme that applies to all non-Schengen passport holders, so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we might
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have been subject to a version of it as well, even without
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Brexit.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> My impression was that if still members of the EU Brits would
>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>>> had a waiver for the border [data gathering] formalities if they
>>>>>>>>>>>>> had applied in advance online, giving minimal information
>>>>>>>>>>>>> such as name,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> DoB and passport number.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> That may have been facilitated by data-sharing agreements
>>>>>>>>>>>>> between the UK
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the EU which are no longer possible now we are a Third
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Country.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It would still have not been automatic entry, but the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> decision at the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> border would only require producing the non-expired passport,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> prediction that would suffice (without further delay) for 95% of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> travellers.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think they'd still need
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Do you mean "would have needed" in the hypothetical case of us
>>>>>>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>>>>> being in the EU? In which case, what evidence is available for
>>>>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> to collect the fingerprints.  The real test would be what an
>>>>>>>>>>>> Irish
>>>>>>>>>>>> passport holder needs to do at the Eurostar border.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If you mean at the border in London, then as an EU citizen I
>>>>>>>>>>> would not
>>>>>>>>>>> expect them to be subjected to the same procedures as
>>>>>>>>>>> third-country
>>>>>>>>>>> citizens like Brits.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But they might be delayed in a general queue if there isn't an "EU
>>>>>>>>>>> citizens" fast-lane.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's not that simple. Not all EU countries are in the Schengen
>>>>>>>>>> area, and
>>>>>>>>>> not all Schengen countries are in the EU.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Non-EU Schengen members: CH, LI, IS and NO?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Non-Schengen EU members: RO, BG, IE and CY.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Vatican, San Marino and Monaco all have open borders to their
>>>>>>>> Schengen
>>>>>>>> neighbours, but to not formally participate in the scheme.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If their borders are open then they're de-facto in Schengen anyway.
>>>>>>> Perhaps
>>>>>>> they just like to leave their options open by not officially joining.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's more to Schengen than just the open borders. There are various
>>>>>> information sharing schemes designed to assist in catching bad people
>>>>>> whom the previous restricted borders might have caught. Pre-Brexit, the
>>>>>> UK and Ireland (presumably still in the latter case) participated in
>>>>>> those aspects of Schengen but retained an opt out of the open border
>>>>>> aspect. Vatican, San Marino and Monaco have open borders, but do not
>>>>>> participate in the other aspects of Schengen. Monaco is the only one of
>>>>>> the three for which that actually matters, as the other two are
>>>>>> entirely inaccessible other than by passing through Italy (I suppose
>>>>>> technically one could parachute in, or perhaps land a helicopter within
>>>>>> the Vatican). Given Monaco's status, it may be that France handles
>>>>>> things like entry formalities for eg people arriving in a private yacht
>>>>>> from somewhere like Turkey or north Africa.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don’t know San Marino and the Vatican, but it would be pretty
>>>>> disruptive
>>>>> to secure the land border between France and Monaco, given that much
>>>>> of it
>>>>> runs down the middle of streets.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The Vatican is effectively a walled city so technically possible to
>>>> secure the border with Italy.
>>>>
>>>
>>> St. Peter's Square?
>>
>> Is in the Vatican but has a well-defined, relatively short, open border
>> with Italy. IIRC there is a row of bollards, connecting the two
>> encircling colonnades, that marks the border.
>
> I think this is the main Vatican border:
>
> <https://maps.app.goo.gl/CYUxK6dtQqiZmY6V6?g_st=ic>
>
> Obviously, there are many smaller roads and doorways, and even a railway
> line.

On 24/01/2023 08:03, Bob wrote:
> On 2023-01-23 18:27:59 +0000, Roland Perry said:
>
>> In message <tqjt9n$36tt9$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:55:03 on Sun, 22 Jan
>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <042cnQNTP7ySjFD-nZ2dnZfqnPcAAAAA@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>> 10:33:51 on Sun, 22 Jan 2023, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>> remarked:
>>>>> On 22/01/2023 08:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> I rather suspect getting a tourist visa for Russia (OK, let's ignore
>>>>>> the  war for a second) would cost more than £50, and they are only
>>>>>> valid for  the duration of one short trip.
>>>>
>>>> It was reasonably long ago (15yrs maybe) but my business visa for
>>>> Russia
>>>> had a very short validity. As I don't read Russian I can't tell if it
>>>> was for more than one entry (of whichever kind).
>>>
>>> I can thoroughly recommend the Google Translate app which can use your
>>> phone’s camera to replace foreign-looking text with English (or
>>> different
>>> foreign looking text) in an image.
>>
>> *Another* new app! This is becoming a daily phenomenon.
>
> FSVO "new". The Google Translate app was released 13 years ago on
> Android and 12 years ago on iOS.
>

iOS now comes with its own translate app.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 24/01/2023 00:51, Recliner wrote:
>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 23/01/2023 19:27, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>> On 23/01/2023 17:30, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>>>> On 23/01/2023 15:59, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2023-01-23 11:40:56 +0000, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 23 Jan 2023 12:35:46 +0100
>>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-22 20:22:41 +0000, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk said:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 22/01/2023 11:01, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <tqh29k$2li2i$5@dont-email.me>, at 16:01:56 on Sat,
>>>>>>>>>>>> 21 Jan
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <95tnsh988a8d91cuu7fp7hke6b3kl8fqhu@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 14:22:05 on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sat, 21 Jan 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 21 Jan 2023 13:44:18 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.uk>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <tqels6$260vk$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:17:42 on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fri, 20 Jan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 20/01/2023 17:42, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As expected, the new system has been delayed till the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> autumn:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3e4425ae-98d1-11ed-91ab-4070465550b
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a?shareToken=9665026f771578c64329c002f4e050f0>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is old news, The Times asleep again? Even the Beeb
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had it on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 17th Jan.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64311737>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have no idea why any of this is a surprise....
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The delay: most big government IT projects, most governments.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The need in the first place: either something people who
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> voted for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Brexit forgot to take into account, or did they say "it was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worth it,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get a black passport, annoy the DUP, create tens of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thousands
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of jobs at freight forwarding companies".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how much this is a consequence of Brexit. It's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a new EU
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> scheme that applies to all non-Schengen passport holders, so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we might
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have been subject to a version of it as well, even without
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Brexit.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My impression was that if still members of the EU Brits would
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had a waiver for the border [data gathering] formalities if they
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had applied in advance online, giving minimal information
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> such as name,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DoB and passport number.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That may have been facilitated by data-sharing agreements
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between the UK
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the EU which are no longer possible now we are a Third
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Country.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It would still have not been automatic entry, but the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decision at the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> border would only require producing the non-expired passport,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prediction that would suffice (without further delay) for 95% of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> travellers.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think they'd still need
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you mean "would have needed" in the hypothetical case of us
>>>>>>>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>>>>>> being in the EU? In which case, what evidence is available for
>>>>>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to collect the fingerprints.  The real test would be what an
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Irish
>>>>>>>>>>>>> passport holder needs to do at the Eurostar border.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> If you mean at the border in London, then as an EU citizen I
>>>>>>>>>>>> would not
>>>>>>>>>>>> expect them to be subjected to the same procedures as
>>>>>>>>>>>> third-country
>>>>>>>>>>>> citizens like Brits.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But they might be delayed in a general queue if there isn't an "EU
>>>>>>>>>>>> citizens" fast-lane.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It's not that simple. Not all EU countries are in the Schengen
>>>>>>>>>>> area, and
>>>>>>>>>>> not all Schengen countries are in the EU.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Non-EU Schengen members: CH, LI, IS and NO?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Non-Schengen EU members: RO, BG, IE and CY.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Vatican, San Marino and Monaco all have open borders to their
>>>>>>>>> Schengen
>>>>>>>>> neighbours, but to not formally participate in the scheme.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If their borders are open then they're de-facto in Schengen anyway.
>>>>>>>> Perhaps
>>>>>>>> they just like to leave their options open by not officially joining.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There's more to Schengen than just the open borders. There are various
>>>>>>> information sharing schemes designed to assist in catching bad people
>>>>>>> whom the previous restricted borders might have caught. Pre-Brexit, the
>>>>>>> UK and Ireland (presumably still in the latter case) participated in
>>>>>>> those aspects of Schengen but retained an opt out of the open border
>>>>>>> aspect. Vatican, San Marino and Monaco have open borders, but do not
>>>>>>> participate in the other aspects of Schengen. Monaco is the only one of
>>>>>>> the three for which that actually matters, as the other two are
>>>>>>> entirely inaccessible other than by passing through Italy (I suppose
>>>>>>> technically one could parachute in, or perhaps land a helicopter within
>>>>>>> the Vatican). Given Monaco's status, it may be that France handles
>>>>>>> things like entry formalities for eg people arriving in a private yacht
>>>>>>> from somewhere like Turkey or north Africa.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don’t know San Marino and the Vatican, but it would be pretty
>>>>>> disruptive
>>>>>> to secure the land border between France and Monaco, given that much
>>>>>> of it
>>>>>> runs down the middle of streets.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The Vatican is effectively a walled city so technically possible to
>>>>> secure the border with Italy.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> St. Peter's Square?
>>>
>>> Is in the Vatican but has a well-defined, relatively short, open border
>>> with Italy. IIRC there is a row of bollards, connecting the two
>>> encircling colonnades, that marks the border.
>>
>> I think this is the main Vatican border:
>>
>> <https://maps.app.goo.gl/CYUxK6dtQqiZmY6V6?g_st=ic>
>>
>> Obviously, there are many smaller roads and doorways, and even a railway
>> line.
>
> Is the railway still in use?

Am 23.01.2023 um 18:40 schrieb Tweed:
> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>> On 2023-01-23 16:16:09 +0000, Rolf Mantel said:
>>
>>> Am 23.01.2023 um 16:44 schrieb Clive Page:
>>>> On 23/01/2023 11:48, Bob wrote:
>>>>> There's more to Schengen than just the open borders. There are various
>>>>> information sharing schemes designed to assist in catching bad people
>>>>> whom the previous restricted borders might have caught. Pre-Brexit, the
>>>>> UK and Ireland (presumably still in the latter case) participated in
>>>>> those aspects of Schengen but retained an opt out of the open border
>>>>> aspect. Vatican, San Marino and Monaco have open borders, but do not
>>>>> participate in the other aspects of Schengen. Monaco is the only one of
>>>>> the three for which that actually matters, as the other two are
>>>>> entirely inaccessible other than by passing through Italy (I suppose
>>>>> technically one could parachute in, or perhaps land a helicopter within
>>>>> the Vatican). Given Monaco's status, it may be that France handles
>>>>> things like entry formalities for eg people arriving in a private yacht
>>>>> from somewhere like Turkey or north Africa.
>>>>
>>>> What's the status of Andorra?   Not in the EU, but you can't get there
>>>> (except by air perhaps) without going from France or Spain.   Last time
>>>> I was there a petrol station was doing a roaring trade from those
>>>> visiting from France.   Sadly I didn't know and had a nearly full tank
>>>> of petrol.
>>>
>>> The German Wikipedia deals carefully with each of these special situations
>>>
>>> <https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schengener_Abkommen#Liste_der_Teilnehmer_sowie_weitere_davon_betroffene_Gebiete>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Andorra seems to have border controls towards both her neighbours while
>>> the other three micro-states do not (Liechtenstein has border controls
>>> towards Austria but not Switzerland and has signed all
>>> Schengen-agreements together with Switzerland).
>>
>> Depends on what you mean by border controls. CH and LI are in customs
>> union with one another but not with the EU, so the CH borders with DE,
>> FR, IT and AT all have customs controls but not passport controls, and
>> likewise LI with AT, but there are no controls between LI and CH.
>>
>> Robin
>>
>>
>
> And to add to the mix, Gibraltar is going to be sort of in/out/shake it all
> about part of Schengen.
>
> https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-and-spain-close-in-on-post-brexit-deal-for-gibraltar/
>
> https://www.etias.info/gibraltar-joins-schengen-after-brexit/

Gibraltar issues 'national ID cards'? I'm shocked.

Rolf 'When will UK national ID cards be introduced? SNCR'

On 24 Jan 2023 at 10:12:40 AM EET, "Recliner" <recliner.usenet@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Nobody <jock@soccer.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 Jan 2023 00:41:52 +0000, "<hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk>"
>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 23/01/2023 21:00, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>>> The trouble with unwanted new apps is the storage on the 'phone might
>>>> not be able to keep up with them if you get too many of them. My
>>>> 'phone has more than the basic storage but e.g. I have had to dump 2
>>>> out of 4 different parking apps to stop them and other apps
>>>> constipating it.
>>>
>>> iPhone will offload some apps that have not seen use in a while.
>>
>> Android (in my experience) will *suggest* the user might consider
>> removing/unenabling same
>>
>
> And phones come with lot more storage these days than they used to. The
> space taken by apps really mattered when phones only had 16GB, but few
> phones come with less than 64GB these days, and 128GB is common now, even
> on budget phones. So, having a couple of GB of apps hardly matters any
> more.

Indeed. I have a hundreds of apps on my phone, and while they do all add up to
about 50GB, it's not the travel apps that are consuming all the space - it's
the likes of Netflix, Spotify, Audible, and (somewhat deranged, but I guess
I've never cleared its download cache - 1.83GB!) The Times that occupy the top
positions.

A quick check suggests that for travel specificially I have around 32 airline
apps, 20 rail/metro apps, 16 taxi apps, and perhaps another dozen random local
information type apps; let's round up to 80 - the heaviest of them is "Bonjour
RATP" at 230 MB, the lightest FlixBus at a mere 26 MB. But even if every one
of them was the weight of RATP's baroque mobile ticketing implementation, it'd
still be all of 18 GB or so.

I was actually an 'early adopter', as one correspondent might say, of pkpass
ticketing, and in the past made fairly heavy use of passwallet. But these days
I don't bother much, I much prefer to just use the dedicated operator apps.
Having all my tickets in one place is actually quite confusing when there's a
lot of them, and the dedicated apps are better placed to be able to join
everything you need to know - more than just the ticket - in a way that makes
sense ("your trip to XXX"), as well as usually integrating things like baggage
tracking in a way that a generic wallet doesn't.

If your phone has a decent app selection/organisation/launcher mechanism -
which all the current mobile OSes do, naturally - there is zero inconvenience
of having separate apps specialised for the task at hand,

[As an aside, this is where I think the likes of Zuckerberg and Musk are
thoroughly misguided; they look at China and think "wow, WeChat is so
successful, that must mean people want to be able to do everything from a
single app, we need to invent a Facebook currency and a Twitter payment system
and we'll be as big as them!" But they fail to graps that the integration of
everything into a single app isn't a consequence of /people/ wanting their
dating platform to also control their travel tickets and their instant
messaging - it's a consequence of the Chinese Communist Party wanting all that
data in a single place and only blessing one or two companies accordingly.
Without that external pressure, nobody needs everything in one app -
particularly now federated 'login with X' and password manager solutions have
reduced the friction of creating an account - and there are considerable
downsides to putting all your eggs in that basket. We already have an
"everything app", it's the phone itself.]

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <tqjt9n$36tt9$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:55:03 on Sun, 22 Jan
> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <042cnQNTP7ySjFD-nZ2dnZfqnPcAAAAA@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>> 10:33:51 on Sun, 22 Jan 2023, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>> remarked:
>>>> On 22/01/2023 08:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> I rather suspect getting a tourist visa for Russia (OK, let's ignore
>>>>> the war for a second) would cost more than £50, and they are only
>>>>> valid for the duration of one short trip.
>>>
>>> It was reasonably long ago (15yrs maybe) but my business visa for Russia
>>> had a very short validity. As I don't read Russian I can't tell if it
>>> was for more than one entry (of whichever kind).
>>
>> I can thoroughly recommend the Google Translate app which can use your
>> phone’s camera to replace foreign-looking text with English (or different
>> foreign looking text) in an image.
>
> *Another* new app! This is becoming a daily phenomenon.

And to add to the other parallel answers, I’d just say that it does things
that I’m not aware of being able to do any other way, in particular Google
Translate via a web browser doesn’t have the same capability. If you want
to unlock this capability then get the app. Or don’t, and join the goat
herders.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <tqjt9n$36tt9$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:55:03 on Sun, 22 Jan
>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <042cnQNTP7ySjFD-nZ2dnZfqnPcAAAAA@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>> 10:33:51 on Sun, 22 Jan 2023, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>> remarked:
>>>>> On 22/01/2023 08:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> I rather suspect getting a tourist visa for Russia (OK, let's ignore
>>>>>> the war for a second) would cost more than £50, and they are only
>>>>>> valid for the duration of one short trip.
>>>>
>>>> It was reasonably long ago (15yrs maybe) but my business visa for Russia
>>>> had a very short validity. As I don't read Russian I can't tell if it
>>>> was for more than one entry (of whichever kind).
>>>
>>> I can thoroughly recommend the Google Translate app which can use your
>>> phone’s camera to replace foreign-looking text with English (or different
>>> foreign looking text) in an image.
>>
>> *Another* new app! This is becoming a daily phenomenon.
>
> And to add to the other parallel answers, I’d just say that it does things
> that I’m not aware of being able to do any other way, in particular Google
> Translate via a web browser doesn’t have the same capability. If you want
> to unlock this capability then get the app. Or don’t, and join the goat
> herders.

"Join" the goat herders? You do Roland a disservice!