It's hard to tell.

At first i thought the rocker sounded fake. Reminds me of the sort of hard rock sound that people trying to rip off GNR did after their success..or the sort of slightly hair rock bands that just arn't GNR even though I like them. The cinderella type sounding bands out there. Then again...the bass is a lot like duff...and its a decent Axl sound on the rocker....it kinda sounds like RNDTH was in a threesome with YCBM and WTTJ and this is the baby...which I dunno if that makes it real and out of ideas, or old and before ideas became the things they became in other songs...or if its a copy putting together a lot of GNR traits into the one song. I think i'd like a studio version of it from GNR though lol.

The ballad is interesting. The clean voice didn't sound all that much like Axl - but maybe thats his natural tone these days - we don't hear it too often and this was recorded through a diswasher afterall. The rasp in places sounded very authentic. Something about the vibe of this song felt like him too - like although it's sort of simple its also got an insanely catchy melody in the middle...and from what I could make out of the lyrics sounded like it could be one of his contemplative sort of pieces.

I dunno i might have been sucked in hard but I can kinda hear some possiblity that it could be real in there.

This I love is one of my favourite songs and I do enjoy the solo...but there's a part of me that feels it's robin aping the classic GNR solo style...Given the song dates from the 1990s apparently, I would have been interested to hear what 90s Slash might have done with it.

I know we've heard Slash do it on the NITL tour but at that point he's basically covering the studio version with a bit of improvisation each night...so I think it's a different outcome to what we might have heard if he'd come into the song raw and with no existing guitar ideas to replicate.

I say 90s Slash because although modern Slash is epic and shreds like a mother in a way I love...there was something about the creativity that 90s Slash had where his solos would elevate the themes of songs to new levels...ie Estranged, November Rain etc.

So i would be curious about what UYI era slash might have done with the track if they'd been getting on properly etc.

yeah I think social media in a few ways is a problem.

It gives a voice to everyone to express opinions on things. This is both its blessing and its curse. The trouble is some subjects require formal training or education to properly understand - and on those topics the voices of the few who understand them properly can get lost amongst the many voices of people who only half understand it. Old technologies were gate kept to avoid this problem - but to do that on social media requires a distasteful amount of censorship. The solution to this previously was to have freedom of speech but there's reputable sources to contrast crackpot views against. Unfortunately as traditional media has also gone bad we're left with a situation where there's a lot of noise and very few trusted sources to check it against.

Secondly I think the nature of social media encourages binary thinking. Do I hit the like button or not? I know now there's also the other buttons - but essentially it usually boils down to expressing approval or disapproval of statements. Over time this polarises people as a lot of the real issues in life the answer should be "it depends" as opposed to yes/no.

Thirdly - As a recent documentary that we've probably all seen points out - the algorithms designed to continue and maximise your engagement tend to work by feeding you more of whatever is working. Long term this has the effect of pushing you down a rabbit hole of thinking - as if you express approval to either a moderate left or right wing idea you get force fed so much more from that side that you can end up radacalised pretty easily.

Fourthly people tend to be more rude and agressive online than they would in person. That's not helping either.

So we're all addicted to time in this hostile online world, where rubbish is given the same weighting as truth, where everyone either loves or hates us, and where every issue is divided into two opposing teams and whichever side you choose the system works to deepen your resolve to that way of thinking. It's really quite a mess.

So as I understand it with the oxford one:

- 90% effective when given with a 1/2 dose followed by a full dose.
- 62% effective when given with two full doses.

However it turns out that the half dose system above was only tested on people below 55.

Other interesting thing is that apparently the half dose tests were actually an accident - but when they realised they got approval to continue studying at that dosage and seem to have discovered that it's actually a better dose (pending what the next test shows).

I don't think these results are cause for alarm though - just grounds to keep looking into it - as given older people respond less well to vaccine generally it might be that the half dose system would not be as effective for them. So we might end up with something where you take more if you are older and get a lesser effect, while people who are younger need to take less and get a stronger effect from it.

But obviously we need to know. But it's good that so far it's been free from too many worrying side effects.