Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
4.05pm
APPS ARE GREAT, but they do have a habit of overwhelming you with push notifications, which isn’t helpful if you’re waiting for a text or email and are interrupted by a notice to play Clash of Clans instead.
This is the case with games and other freemium apps that want you to open them daily (if not more). You can silence them completely or reduce the ways in which they can appear, depending on how much importance you place on them, and it’s simple to do.
When you install an app, notifications are automatically switched on but here’s how you can check which ones are on.
iPhone/iPad
How to access it: Settings > Notifications
iOS allows you a good range of customisation when it comes to alerts and is easier to filter through since active apps are placed at the top of the list.
As well as controlling the number of notifications you see, you can choose the alert style as well, giving important notifications (like reminders for example) an alert style when unlocked.
Android
How to access it: Settings > Sound & Notification > App Notifications
While there are fewer options available on Android compared to iOS, they’re a little bit smarter.
Limiting it to three main options: block (no notifications), priority (places them at the top of the list) and sensitive (hides private content), it’s easier to figure out which one is right for each app.
The only problem is that apps are displayed in alphabetical order so it’ll take a bit longer to filter through them properly.
Alternatively, you could use a third-party app like Smart Notifications to help streamline notifications.
Windows Phone
How to access it: Settings > Notifications & Actions
Finding a middle ground between iOS and Android, Windows Phone allows you to modify four things: whether it appears in the action centre, whether banner alerts appear, what sound it makes and whether it vibrates or not. Straightforward and to the point.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
They’re here for our water.
And robbing your fish. Another natural resource the EU took from Ireland. Our only natural resource. 10s of billions taking out of Irish water every year.
Mike
Think there is a slight difference between fishing vessels and warships (minesweepers) do you seriously believe they are fishing? Or are you just trolling?
In fairness they didn’t ”take” anything, Ireland had a vote on every EU treaty and every time they said yes, they knew what was in them at the time it was made quite clear, they still voted yes.
If Ireland left the EU tomorrow, the boundaries of fishing use wouldn’t change.
The reddest of herrings
Plus, the off mentioned 10′s of billions requires a fishing fleet multiples bigger than is currently there.
Actually Cat that’s not true.
There is the concept of a UN “exclusive economic zone”.
Iceland has one which stretches 200 nautical miles from her coast.
If Ireland left the EU we could legally declare an exclusive economic zone prohibiting any foreign trawlers fishing our territorial water within 200nm of the Irish western coast.
The issue of a fishing fleet and increased military naval presence is a separate one,
EEZ specifically excludes fishing…. As fish move about they are deemed ‘transboundry’
It pertains to mineral rights.
As I said, red herring.
EEZ includes fishing.
Transboundary just means fish that migrate across multiple EEZs.
It’s the continental shelf (350nm) that excludes fishing.
I think you’re out of your depth here cat! Pun intended.
I recall the Lisbon treaty being a resounding NO from Ireland but then we got to vote again cause apparently we voted wrong the first time…
Remind me again how we voted the second time.
Yeah .. and when we said no they kept coming back until we said yes… the eu were backed by every political party here .. all of them used scare mongering tactics to get a yes vote…
Steve,
Mike is a fishing troller…
Well John given its only 120 km from Dublin to fishgaurd I’d say the 200 mile exclusion zone is well out of the equation
Bullied & spin put on issues to get a yes though!
Not all political parties were a YES to Lisbon. Maybe you mean parliamentary parties at that time?
More jobs so
We have more than one coast for fishing, Tom.
Shhh, we’re invading Wales don’t tell England.
The story was, Ireland did so well out of the EU. That story was a myth.
A few wealthy Irish farmers got even wealthier from subsidies, the rest of us paid for their lifestyle, not the EU.
Ireland is a net contributor to the EU and Ireland always has been.
Facts about Ireland and the EU
A estimated 200 billion in fish taken from Irish waters since Ireland joined the EEC in 1973.
Ireland’s fish is the second biggest indirect contributor to EU coffers.
Official European Union statistics reveal that Ireland’s past image as one of Europe’s largest financial beneficiaries is largely a myth.
Statistics covering the period from 1974 to 2004 throw some light on the true cost of Ireland’s EU membership to date, and the enormous financial contribution Ireland has made to the European Union.
When Ireland first joined the EEC it provided almost 44% of the total EU fishery waters but when quotas were established, we were awarded only 4% of the total catch. On average, more than five million tonnes of edible fish varieties are removed from EU waters every year, 40 per cent or two million tons of which originates from Irish waters.
By way of comparison, the Mediterranean produces less than 500,000 tonnes of fish yearly.
As a result, EU fishermen – since our accession.
This means, that the €58 billion which the government claims Ireland has received from the EU, has been offset by an estimated €600 billion worth of fish landed from what pre – EU were Irish fishing grounds.
Back in the 90’s, Irish fishermen were putting to sea and when they had their holds full, instead of returning to land their catch in Ireland, they headed out to sea to sell their catch to Spanish factory ships, because under the quota system it was illegal to land Irish fish in Ireland!
The reality is that while Ireland produces 40 per cent of the EU’s edible fish, the country’s fishermen are only entitled to catch less than ten percent of that.
The rest is fished by foreign trawlers. These fish could and should have created badly needed jobs in peripheral areas of Ireland, jobs would have been based on our own natural resources and could not be re-located at the whim of a New York boardroom to China or wherever.
It has even reached the ludicrous stage where the EU is now insisting that any fish caught by sea anglers fishing from a boat, must be counted against Ireland’s commercial catch quota,though under the original proposal, fish caught by Sea Anglers fishing from the shore, were also to be counted against our quota!
Under UN Law, Ireland presently can claim approximately 700,000 square kilometres of continental shelf. Ireland has the largest area of marine territory in the EU and it is well in excess of ten times Ireland’s land area. This gives Ireland a seabed more than fourteen times the European average, a seabed that contains proven mineral and natural gas reserves, and possibly oil reserves.
Iceland, Norway & Switzerland are members of the European Economic Area (EEA) and have preferential trading arrangements with the EU. Iceland is a particular case in point, because Iceland’s population is only 300,000!
The reason Iceland exports more into the EU than Ireland is simple, Iceland controls its own coastal fishery waters. Surely it’s time we reclaimed ours!
Great post Mike.
Mike that is a very interesting very selective and very distorted presentation of the “facts”. One might even call it post modernist. I would appeal to your rapt readers to do a bit of their own research, consider the case put by all sides (of which Mike is one) and look at real statistics (not those simply invented to suit a story) and look at the reality of Ireland’s maritime territory. You might be surprised to discover that Mike is talking through his transom.
Excellent piece. Reclaim our country!
…could you be a bit more specific aHippo?
In case the water protests get out of hand
A while ago i would have laughed at the idea…not now
They’ll need a bigger Armada.
They were doing a mine-hunting exercise. We had them to stay in Belfast last week.
Please drop in & pick up our clowns i.e. John Tierney, Enda & the gov
The Vladivistok warship pictured is a Russian mistral class which hasn’t been even handed over to the Russians. It’s not a NATO ship so not sure why it’s in the article!
It’s not Russian yet. There is talk of NATO buying it off the French instead.
It’s funny that the Russian can’t build anything bigger than a destroyer. Minor power that they are its a bit embarrassing.
Italy has the same size economy and can build small aircraft carrier.
NATO can’t buy it off the French seeing that the Russians would sue them for millions and the back third of the ship was built in Russia. They would literally have to saw off a sizable chunk of the ship if NATO wanted to buy it. Also, Italy doesn’t have the burden of maintaining a fleet of nuclear strike submarines so that’s probably why they can build a small aircraft carrier. Russia doesn’t have a huge strategic need for an aircraft carrier or else they would have more than one.
The Russian military is based on aviation and a nuclear deterrent.
They are actually the largest arms exporter in the world as of 2013.
I honestly think it’s France who would be embarrassed by her inability to adhere to her contractual obligations. The current sanctions imposed on Russia have absolutely no bearing on the mistral contract. If the French renege on it due to US pressure they will be forced to compensate the Russians and there are penalty clauses which will be activated.
I wonder will the French try to rob the Russians of their deposit like the Brits tried to do after a Chieftain tank contract collapsed over the 79 coup.
The Vladivostok warship is the ship that the US and EU are warning the French not to deliver to Russia even though the French are under contract to deliver., If the French don’t deliver the ship on time then they will have to pay billions in fines to Russia, half the ship was also built in Russia and that will have to given back so the French end up with half a ship built to Russian spec which is no good to anyone else and billions of euro out of pocket.
This is the price they pay for being a poodle of USA
Billions?
Yes billions, Russia was expecting two Mistral ships – the first one in October.
A French diplomat earlier said the contract was suspended until November, and the delay “could cost us 1bn euros”.
The deal is worth 1.2bn euros – and Russia is reported to have paid most of it, so breach of contract would mean France having to reimburse that money.
In addition, France would be liable for an extra 251m-euro penalty payment, French news website LCI reports.
1.2 billion plus 250 million is not billions!
The delay until Nov could cost 1 billion euros + the deal itself 1.2bn + fines 250m. The longer the delay the bigger the fines
Hate to point this out to you but for it to be billions it would have to be at least 2 billion.
1 billion + 1.2 billion + 250 million = 2.450 billion…
Did they not set off from Belfast?
I don’t think so. Only heard them mentioned once on the news.
Because they want to.
Just like the US does when it uses Irish airports to launch bombers and fighter aircraft.
Irish governments can refuse, but then what?
The US has never launched bombers or fighter jets from an Irish airport. That has never happened once, not a single time, ever.
What has passed through are:
-CIA Rendition flights (which we have politely told to p1ss off, the US has stopped this programme anyway one of the few policies from Bush Obama actually stopped)
-Chartered Civilian passenger flights containing military personnel
-Unarmed jets participating in air shows (the last one of these was the year 2000 at Baldonnel)
Our neutrality might be a joke and a cop out (it always has been) but we’ve never allowed NATO planes to launch strikes from our territory and they’d never need to anyway, we’ve nowhere near us they’d be trying to hit.
The only scenario under which they’d want access to our ports and air bases would be in a Russia-NATO war, and in that kind of scenario, every military expert agrees, Irish neutrality would be a ”non starter” anyway.
The US multinationals don’t care if we throw out Military flights, they are here because were a tax laundrette, they don’t care much about politics they just wanna make the money.
and hundreds of US military planes and a much lesser amount from other nations
that’s just one story.
don’t be naive
You’re confusing planes passing through with planes being LAUNCHED from our territory, you are also confusing them carrying guns on board with missiles on their wing.
ACTUAL transcript of a US naval ship with Canadian authorities off the coast of Newfoundland in October, 1995. This radio conversation was released by the Chief of Naval Operations on 10-10-95.
Americans: “Please divert your course 15 degrees to the North to avoid a collision.”
Canadians: “Recommend you divert YOUR course 15 degrees to the South to avoid a collision.”
Americans: “This is the captain of a US Navy ship. I say again, divert YOUR course.”
Canadians: “No, I say again, you divert YOUR course.”
Americans: “THIS IS THE AIRCRAFT CARRIER USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN, THE SECOND LARGEST SHIP IN THE UNITED STATES’ ATLANTIC FLEET. WE ARE ACCOMPANIED BY THREE DESTROYERS, THREE CRUISERS AND NUMEROUS SUPPORT VESSELS. I DEMAND THAT YOU CHANGE YOUR COURSE 15 DEGREES NORTH. THAT’S ONE-FIVE DEGREES NORTH, OR COUNTER MEASURES WILL BE UNDERTAKEN TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THIS SHIP.”
Canadians: “This is a lighthouse. Your call.”
Funny story but that all it is, a funny story.
Vladivostok NATO.?
They seem well off the Irish Coast, are they actually in Irish waters.
The clue is in the name!!
Willie o dea can,t get answers from Irish water so being an ex minster of defence he,s called in a favour me,s thinks.
Oceanic manoeuvres in the dark ?
No doubt these ships are on their way to bring democracy to Syria
A ‘world war z’ scenario possibly, maybe the world health organisation are preparing for the worst!
Seen one in skerries Bay today!slightly of course I would have thought.
A brown one?
Are they looking for that Russian Submarine, that’s missing.?I only see one Nato ship off the Wexford coast..
What a non story…. Well done journal.
The Irish should not worry about Nato or US ships in the Irish sea, should be happy they are not ISIS boats, and by the way the Irish allowed Nazi subs in Irish waters during WW2 when they were sopposed to be neutral
Youve got to be kidding, the biggest threat to the human race right now is nato/us who seem determined to start wwiii if they havent done so already. Go educate yourself as to where isis/al qaeda etc came from
I agree. US are the terrorists. Our politicians have been paid off.
I see Ahippo is another one fooled. Statistics from Europe. Fact!!
hopefully these terrorists ships sink
Helping the Swedes look for the Russian ghost submarine
Interesting bit is that the Norwegian ship always stays between all the others and the Irish coast, the remainder travel in formation all day long …
To keep Viking ranger from invading our island
Would you rather have Russian ones?
How can a “warship” have innocent passage… It wasn’t designed to go to mass
have your say