Slashdot Mirror

Yeah, but however far off the rails the US has gone, Russia is reaping what it has sown because whilst it's crying wolf about America abducting one of it's citizens for breaking the law and carrying out crimes against US citizens and companies Russia is abducting Ukrainians for doing absolutely nothing illegal in defending their country against Russian terrorists:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/worl...

So you'll have to excuse me if my response to Russia is "Boo fucking hoo, cry more you fascist pricks" whatever the merits or demerits of Americas actions in this case.

Russia, recently broke a treaty regarding Ukraine's nuclear disarmament when it annexed the Ukraine so right now any complaints about America breaching treaties is small fry compared to the fascists dictatorship of Russia's actions.

Who really gives a fuck what happens to Russian citizens? They're only getting what they deserve and reaping what they do to others.

At least America got him for actually doing something wrong, which is a far cry from Russia's abductions of people who were doing something right - i.e. defending their country against fascist invaders.

This source seems to think differently. In either event, explosives aren't something you really want passengers to have, and multiple passengers could have multiple shoes. Are you seriously suggesting that they not screen shoes now?

The linked source agrees with me, 50g would not be enough to do serious damage, you need to have 100g to do serious damage to a car, which (for explosives as opposed to impact) is not much stronger than an airplane fuselage. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/854...

Being required to check your own bag is OK. Although some of the searches bags are subject to is questionable, but that's a slightly different topic.

Shoe screening has never been acceptable, especially because it's ineffective.

There was BBC story a couple of years ago about the Met police in London recording the frequency of UK mains so that they can analyse the mains hum from recordings and compare the fingerprint against their records to accurately place the recording in time.

'Extremism' is an evil concept. An 'extremist' implies someone on the edges of the bell curve of belief - but guess what - most people think of themselves as being in the middle of that curve, no matter what their own beliefs. So in practice 'extremist' means 'extremely different from me'.
The purpose of law enforcement should be to stop acts of violence, terrorism, subversion, whatever - but never to stop mere difference. In a violent society, peace is extremist. In a dictatorship, freedom is extremist. In a racially segregated society, equality is extremist.
It's no wonder authorities love the word 'extremism', it's a slur for any kind of dissent.
Remember, the direct opposite of 'extremism' is 'conformism'.

and today Google has reinstated some links

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/tech...

"We are learning as we go," Peter Barron, head of communications for Google in Europe, told the BBC.

Speaking to Radio 4's Today programme, he dismissed claims made on Thursday that the company was simply letting all requests through in an attempt to show its disapproval at the ruling.

uh-huh.

Anyway, the new dude is Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and he's assimilating Irag, Syria and probably Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Somalia, Nigeria... you name it... into his all new "proper" Islam state.

A number of armies in the region are already squaring up, including Iran and Saudi. There have been some murders of Israeli and Palestinian teenagers by terrorists too, probably trying to goad each side into action.

It's a bloody miserable state of affairs.

...like the BBC? All you need to do is search there instead of Google: http://www.bbc.co.uk/search/?q... Or even frikkin' Bing: http://www.bing.com/search?q=S...

And there is the ridiculousness of this law. It's not about "being forgotten" it's about breaking Google's market dominance. Either way, it's complete bullshit and should never have been made into a law.

Is Google responsible for "forgetting" all possible path to this BBC article? E.g., will this Slashdot article turn up in a Google search in the EU? How about this comment, if I include a link to the original BBC article?

Aren't requests effective-dated? If Mr. O'Neal requested at date X to remove searches against his name, that can't be future-effective can it? That would truly be onerous if it was some "standing order" that no searches should result in his name.

On the other hand, why delist an entire article? Can't they just remove that article from the keywords? I get a sense that Google is trying to obey the letter, but not the spirit of the law.

They didn't remove the article entirely.

we are no longer able to show the following pages from your website in response to certain searches on European versions of Google:

They don't say which searches, but the wording implies that searches for Stan O'Neal will be affected. But searches for the former CEO of Merril Lynch should work just fine.

They didn't remove the article entirely.

we are no longer able to show the following pages from your website in response to certain searches on European versions of Google:

They don't say which searches, but the wording implies that searches for Stan O'Neal will be affected. But searches for the former CEO of Merril Lynch should work just fine.

Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
etc.

Pass the word.

Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
etc.

Pass the word.

Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
etc.

Pass the word.

Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
etc.

Pass the word.

Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
etc.

Pass the word.

Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
etc.

Pass the word.

Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
Stan O'Neal, you will not be forgotten.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/leg...
etc.

Pass the word.

Is Google responsible for "forgetting" all possible path to this BBC article? E.g., will this Slashdot article turn up in a Google search in the EU? How about this comment, if I include a link to the original BBC article?

Where I live we have a twirly thing that works well for blind and other disabilities:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blog...

Just needs scaling up so 5+ pedestrians waiting to cross can check one while the motorists have no clue (until they upgrade their Google LightChange App of course -- there is no end to this escalating lights war).

At least then its your own countries option.

I sympathise with the sentiment, but the well-now-it-just-doesn't-work-at-all problem is real. A large proportion of IT projects fail. Government IT projects are no different. (If anything I assume they're worse, but I don't have numbers.) Pursuing a low-risk route, even if it means depending on Microsoft, isn't necessarily a mistake.

Other nations do not all fail at complex math, code, design or funding.

I presume you are writing as an American. You are quite mistaken.

Other nations may try to keep 5+ other countries out of a networked product as delivered.

What?

>Yes, I think it's the same sack of shit that was involved in directing funds to the IRA in the 80's.

And so part of the scum who tried to kill my mother. She's still alive and well by the way, but many others died.

Excluding Chernobyl, I dont think theres been a single death (actual or projected) from nuclear power-- certainly none in the last 20 years.

I'm sure everyone working for JCO in Tokaimura is happy to hear that, as are the residents of the town.

'Flesh Eating Spiders' would have made this story worth posting.

What do you think fish are made of, tofu?

One of these spiders was going around telling people "Actually, I'm a vegetarian."

When I pointed out that it was eating a fish, the spider replied "Oh yeah, I can eat fish, that doesn't count."

"Also, I'm permitted to eat Carrot Top."

I wonder if that's why UK prime minister David Cameron used to think that LOL meant "Lots of Love"? Perhaps he'd been given a similar list by the UK spooks based on the US one?

Will this do?

http://www.publications.parlia...

The graph finishes early, but the trend has continued downwards (i.e. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-2...)

The problem is the article you cite uses The Daily Mail as it's source, I'm almost inclined to say that automatically makes it wrong, because on average if you take a Daily Mail article and say it's wrong to at least some degree you'll more often be right than not as The Daily Mail exists purely to push a political agenda that often runs against the grain of reality - more recent examples being gay marriage, when the law was going through parliament they published polls saying the majority opposed it, but that ran contrary to every other poll in existence. One of The Daily Mail's past articles (in fact it's the one linked at the bottom of the second article you linked I believe) even conflates crimes and violent crime, so it doesn't even get the absolute most basic comprehension of the numbers right but jumps to conclusions anyway.

Part the issue in comparing firearms offences in the UK is the fact that firearms offence can mean anything from a kid carrying a realistic looking toy gun in public and being told by the police you can't carry realistic looking weapons around, to someone going on a massacre. Whilst firearms themselves are defined in law as non-air weapons - i.e. what most people would see as "proper guns" a firearms offence can involve something that isn't a firearm but looks like one, through to air rifles, through to actual proper guns.

This doesn't contrast well to nations like the US and South Africa where many such offences are kept well away from firearms statistics, but in The Daily Mail's comparisons often ignore this sort of disparity because it doesn't paint the picture they want to paint. Or in other words, many UK firearms offences are actually completely non-violent crimes. Even illegal poaching leads to such offences, for example, carrying a shotgun on private farm land without permission would be an offence under the firearms act.

UK murder rates are even more encouraging now, the UK's homicide rate is below that of nations often seen as some of the most peaceful on earth:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...

If you don't trust Wikipedia, the World Bank provides the same data, but the presentation is much more awful IMO:

http://data.worldbank.org/indi...

Well yes, that's probably because the accounts you've heard are the same accounts that everyone desperate to try and claim that the UK is an ultra-violent place grasp on to. Unfortunately:

- You need to read the date on the article, even if true it's from 2003 (hint: that's 11 years ago)

- Firearms offences in the UK include air rifles, imitation firearms and so forth, so it's possible for firearms offences to increase whilst actual shootings and violence go down. A kid carrying a realistic immitation pistol or rifle down the high street reported to the police would class as a firearms offence. Few firearms offences actually include discharging of real actual bullets.

- Increases are still trivial for a single year, a 32% increase in firearms murders is listed as a mere 23 cases total so a once in a decade case of family annihilation in a year can massively distort the stats for a single year when compared to the overall trend

- It's the Daily Mail so probably isn't entirely true in the first place. You have to understand that The Daily Mail is probably the least trustworthy paper in the UK, they don't just put a spin on things, they often outright lie about things. It's not uncommon for them to take a number everyone else is reporting on their front page and double it just to make it look like they have some edge to the story that no one else does but then completely fail to justify their figure precisely because it's a lie. As an example, The Daily Mail when trying to defame the government of the time made the claim that the UK is the most violent country in Europe and more violent than the US and South Africa, they did this by comparing crime rates in the UK, against violent crime rates elsewhere. Yes, that's right, they determined things like speeding tickets to be violent crime in the UK but nowhere else.

- Real actual modern stats will help clarify the truth of the matter (e.g. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-2... or from the previous year and different study http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-2...). Homicide rates even before these drops (from 2011/2012) show an even more glaring disparity putting the UK below even commonly seen as relatively murder-free nations like Norway: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...

Long story short, the only place that seems to consistently claim the UK is more violent than ever is The Daily Mail, they've been doing this for some time, but official statistics from both police reporting, and the national crime survey, as well as third parties show a completely opposite story. As an aside, official statistics come from an organisation that's independent from government, and that has on numerous occasions criticised serving governments for mis-representing their statistics so it's a very trustworthy organisation. The Daily Mail is pretty much alone in it's claims, and again, given it's propensity to lie I'd rather take multiple sources with much better reputations over an agenda based lie piece.

Well yes, that's probably because the accounts you've heard are the same accounts that everyone desperate to try and claim that the UK is an ultra-violent place grasp on to. Unfortunately:

- You need to read the date on the article, even if true it's from 2003 (hint: that's 11 years ago)

- Firearms offences in the UK include air rifles, imitation firearms and so forth, so it's possible for firearms offences to increase whilst actual shootings and violence go down. A kid carrying a realistic immitation pistol or rifle down the high street reported to the police would class as a firearms offence. Few firearms offences actually include discharging of real actual bullets.

- Increases are still trivial for a single year, a 32% increase in firearms murders is listed as a mere 23 cases total so a once in a decade case of family annihilation in a year can massively distort the stats for a single year when compared to the overall trend

- It's the Daily Mail so probably isn't entirely true in the first place. You have to understand that The Daily Mail is probably the least trustworthy paper in the UK, they don't just put a spin on things, they often outright lie about things. It's not uncommon for them to take a number everyone else is reporting on their front page and double it just to make it look like they have some edge to the story that no one else does but then completely fail to justify their figure precisely because it's a lie. As an example, The Daily Mail when trying to defame the government of the time made the claim that the UK is the most violent country in Europe and more violent than the US and South Africa, they did this by comparing crime rates in the UK, against violent crime rates elsewhere. Yes, that's right, they determined things like speeding tickets to be violent crime in the UK but nowhere else.

- Real actual modern stats will help clarify the truth of the matter (e.g. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-2... or from the previous year and different study http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-2...). Homicide rates even before these drops (from 2011/2012) show an even more glaring disparity putting the UK below even commonly seen as relatively murder-free nations like Norway: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...

Long story short, the only place that seems to consistently claim the UK is more violent than ever is The Daily Mail, they've been doing this for some time, but official statistics from both police reporting, and the national crime survey, as well as third parties show a completely opposite story. As an aside, official statistics come from an organisation that's independent from government, and that has on numerous occasions criticised serving governments for mis-representing their statistics so it's a very trustworthy organisation. The Daily Mail is pretty much alone in it's claims, and again, given it's propensity to lie I'd rather take multiple sources with much better reputations over an agenda based lie piece.

I don't understand why we keep following elon around like lost puppies when he really doesn't do anything for the average person.

Well, he's making a lot of advances in electric car technology and is dropping strong hints that he plans to share those with the rest of the industry on a fairly generous basis. Selling premium-priced cars to the rich is a good way to bankroll that - in 5-10 years time the rest of us may well be benefitting from this work. I can respect that.

What he hasn't done yet is created a compelling alternative to the gas-powered car. The Tesla has a very clear niche where it might be practical if cash were no object: private garages and long, regular commutes of 50-100 miles: long enough to make you want to travel in a luxurious car, short enough to fall comfortably within the Tesla's range, home-based so you can recharge overnight.

I'd be OK with that if the Tesla website didn't try and push things like economy (no, you're not going to save money unless you conveniently ignore the extra cost of the car - but if you have that sort of money why would you care?) and how easy it was to make a road trip (...just start driving, then have lunch at a supercharger! On the newly-localised British site this advice is followed by a map that shows no superchargers in the UK)

I think they're on the verge of getting there: make that mileage '250 miles minimum)' rather than 'up to 265 miles (unless you get stuck in slow traffic and need lights, heat or air con)' and have supercharger stations every 50 miles or so (otherwise your useful range gets reduced because you have to recharge early or detour to charge) and you might have a viable care replacement.

There's also a scaling issue with chargers: I was looking at (non-Tesla) chargers in the UK and, superficially, its not too bad. Look closer, however, and most of those stations only have 1 or 2 bays - often one slow and one fast (with different connectors). Arrive there and find the bay in use (with the owners off having lunch somewhere), or out-of-order, and you'd be stuffed. You'd have to be so cautious about how soon to recharge that it would decimate the useful range of an EV.

There's a link to Maker Magazine there. And the original link. And somewhere here is a link to the BBC program ... ahh, here 'tis. This program inspired us to offer a "huge" version for schools.

We can but hope that goverments in charge see it's better to spend $$$ on looking after people, rather than killing them. I remember wondering why on earth Obama got one but I guess it shows how the people that decide on this are not really basing it on reality. I mean he got it a month after taking office! I guess people were just relieved that the bushy war machine has been decommissioned (although Obama has his work cut out as the military use up a fair proportion of taxes and seem to have a lot of control on American politics.. a good slice of the pie see me ).

Removing regulation can work if everyone plays fair. But that isn't the case.

For a good example, many years ago the UK went through the 'Bread Wars.' Supermarkets aggressively priced bread low to lure in customers, because every family buys a weekly loaf. The market worked nicely: Prices were driven down as each supermarket tried to go lower than their competitors. Then it went wrong - they started selling bread at a loss, making up the money on other things people purchased while buying it. Supermarkets could afford to throw money away on promotional bread, but it seriously hurt smaller retailers.

Here's a BBC article from the time: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/bus...

In your case, those mom and pop stores are going to have a very hard time even without regulations in their way. They couldn't hope to compete with a big chain store on price - not only does the chain have economy of scale, but they have the buying power to negotiate lower prices from wholesalers. Nor can they achieve the convenience of scale, the diversity of products in one store that lets a person do their entire weekly shop in one trip. Plus Walmart could use dirty tricks - if a local competitor becomes a serious threat, they could massively lower prices to the point they are losing money in that area - hurting themselves, but driving the competitor to bankruptcy. Or they can enter into exclusive agreements with wholesalers so the mom-and-pop store can't get stock.

According to this article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/tech... the C&C servers will be replaced by new ones, so there is only a 2 week window until the network is back up and running.

and minding that all the gold ever mined on Earth fits into like a 2 km cube

It would loosely fit, the latest estimates are a few orders of magnitude less: 20-50m on each side. Then again, nobody really knows.

Like I am going to accept wisdom from a bunch of osteopaths???

My thoughts exactly. In 2010 the British Chiropractic Association sued Dr. Simon Singh for libel for suggesting (on his blog) that some of their claims and practices were dubious at best. The courts (which have tended to be quite plaintiff friendly in UK libel cases) initially found against Dr. Singh, though his legal team managed to get that overturned on appeal on the basis that his article was "fair comment". This smells like something similar.

That article you linked to is nonsense. The EU tests require production spec cars, unmodified and operated by staff at the test centre.

Its on the BBC site as well (Also multiple other sites, google search. The claim is they find loopholes that don't count as modification.

The whole of the nightmare in the middle east right now is the fault of the united states.

The USA inherited a dysfunctional situation in the Middle East.
The British and French were happy to leave the problem to someone else, as their empires were waning.

But the main reason the Middle East is so ungovernable is a direct results of the British and French drawing arbitrary lines on a map and declaring "these are the borders of the countries."

This article is relatively short and explains what happened 100 years ago and the consequences since:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25299553

I have a series of math text book from the 50's that I bought at a garage sale for $10, when I was homeless high school drop out. I used them to brush up on Algebra Trig and Calculus as preparation for teaching myself higher mathematics, compiler theory, and etc. CS theory. They are far superior to today's mathematics books.

A few years after me, my younger brother became a sophomore in high school and was struggling with mathematics. I tried to help him with his homework, but the terminology was wickedly alien. I said, "Is this even algebra? What the hell are they on about?" I showed him how to solve the problems using the methods that worked for me but he said, "No, you don't get it, I can't do it that way I have to do it the way my teacher wants or it doesn't count." That's asinine, if the solution fits then it's equivalent. However, I had experience with such oppressive systems myself, so I knew the only thing to do was start from the first chapter and re-learned their bullshit terminology so I could show him the book's particular way of performing and wording the calculation. I realized that the textbook sellers changed the wording and methods of teaching mathematics over the years, not only to yield more book sales for newer curriculum and re-assert copyright anew, but also to make mathematics more in line with the (supposed) way girls learn.

It's unconscionable for teachers to remain willfully ignorant that boys and girls think differently in general; Only a complete moron would think that brains were immune to sexual dimorphism that had such drastic effects on the rest of the human body. It was common knowledge that men and women have different personalities in general, but strangely research was lacking in the area of sex differences in behavior. However, the feminist mantra that men and women are not different drowns out opposing facts. Strange when you consider that they lobbied for changes to the way mathematics and sciences were taught to make them more easy for girls to learn them. Drop the damn stereotyped learning, everyone goes at different rates and different methods are better for different folks, and yes, sexual dimorphism will cause a trend in certain graphs, but that doesn't mean we can't embrace outliers too. Just consider the student as individuals for once: If a boy or girl is having trouble learning via one method, then teach them the other. If that means you wind up more girls or boys in the class that teaches more event based and auditory methods vs visual and hands-on methods then THAT'S OK. If you want to end sexism, racism, homophobia, etc. you have to consider the individual's experience regardless of any group you classify them as being; Stop using identity politics, they only create more inequality in the name of equality.

The feminists leveraged their sexist ideology and identity politics quite effectively by pointing to the disparity in female enrollment and graduation from college, especially in STEM fields. What they failed to realize is that my mom was in the slide-rule club in high school, and she didn't need sex tailored teaching. Their changes didn't help girls to learn, they merely made it harder for some to learn than others. The textbooks I have from the 50's and 60's teach mathematics in concise and plain terms. They don't use too many ridiculous analogies and mental gymnastics. Word problems weren't a focal point past elementary levels. It wasn't that all girls learn different than all boys, it was that there are different methods to teaching that individuals are better at understanding, and there is a trend in which methods boys and girls favor. However, these changes just muddled the methods and muddied the waters.

Another problem has been brewing in education for a wile now too: Standardized Testing AKA Poor Penalization.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_...

I doubt too many miscreants will be put off by a window decal advising them that you own a glockenspiel.

Wait a minute, he may be on to something. Notice how "Gangsta Rap" is prevalent among thieves, but you've never heard of "Glockenspiel Rap". Perhaps it serves as a really effective deterrent.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_...

Actually classical music has been used as a repellent against young thugs with some success.

Well, the BBC listed some examples (some good, some shit) the other day in answer to that very question as to who would want this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/maga...

On a recent poll about 1/3 in the USA believe in a young earth (10,000 years or less) and do not believe in natural evolution[1]. About half of the Christian believe that Jesus will come back in the next 40 years[2]. This is pure asinine to any reasonable long term policy and if not tamed could very well doom us all, especially because those believes comes from a first world country, that is military and economically superior. In addition, you have millions of delusional Christians that think WWIII will speed up the second coming of Jesus[3][4].

Moreover, if being religious is deeply ignorant, you should be able to provide strong evidence against the existence of a God. Not just point to a lack of evidence you like, but evidence against it.

First, that proves for me your ignorance of logic. You demand to prove a negative, which is a logical fallacy. Second, absence of evidence is evidence for absence. For example, if I make the claim that I have a cat in my house and you come over and look everywhere for my cat and you don't find anything, that is strong evidence that I lied and that I have no cats. The same is for God or for gods.

[1] http://www.reuters.com/article...
[2] http://www.alternet.org/survey...
[3] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/ame...
[4] http://www.washingtonsblog.com...

The look of the default themes is very 10 years ago.

Might give it a go. Because it seems that "now" is either dark grey text on black except for the radioactive pink bits or "invisible controls until you click them" a la gmail.

Are you one of UX dribbletards?

This link points to a search of the BBC news site for the text 'Mario Costeja Gonzalez'. The search results contain links to articles on the BBC news site that mention the fact that Mario Costeja Gonzalez had financial difficulties in 1998.

Is Slashdot responsible for the content of the link ?
Is the BBC responsible for their search results ?

The ruling seems to suggest that the BBC can publish a news article that mentions the fact that Mario Costeja Gonzalez had to auction his house, but they have to prevent the article from appearing in the search results on their own site ?

agreed, this is a new device that meets the unique needs of a military nuclear submarine (the target environment). Plenty of things to rag on the military about, but I don't think this is one of them. BTW the summary would be better if it included a link to more information to the actual product:LINK

Well, it looks like either you are well put of date, or those sailors are flouting the rules...

"At this time only submarines will receive devices," explained Nellie Moffitt, manager of the Navy General Library Program.

"[There will be] five per submarine, with a total of 355 for the submarine force. Eventually, we will send NeRDs to all vessels in the active fleet - it will take time as each collection will be tailored for specific audiences," Ms Moffitt told the BBC.

Traditional e-readers are not permitted on many Navy vessels as their GPS, wi-fi and roaming data features can give away their position to the enemy.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/tech...

If you read my post, you will see that I disagree about countries that print their own currency. It's tantamount to a default if you spool up the presses and pay it off with worthless hyperinflated currency.

I read your post and I completely disagree with this point.

Printing money has nothing to do with a default. Default is failure to pay your debt. It says nothing about exchange rates and/or value of the said currency in the future. If you want guarantees on that, you need to enter into some forward swaps or similar.

As it has been shown over and over again, printing money does not necessarily result in hyperinflation. In today's world, it does not even cause sufficient inflation to stimulate the economy properly.

FYI, you should read about what typically happens with sovereign debt denominated in another currency. The government may not control the printing presses, but they control the laws and judiciary of the nation. Surprise unilateral contract modification.

AKA, default.

Greece "surprise modified" their sovereign debt that was issued under Greek law

Yes, they defaulted on their debt. "Surprise modified" is default.

It does not matter what one calls it, not adhering to original debt is default. You can come to some agreement with debt holders so the change is mutual and does not trigger default, but it only takes 1 dissident bond holder for the default to be triggered.

When "we need X% of bond holders to agree" simply means that these will bite the bullet and the rest is dealt some other way, be it paid off or ignored, or whatever. See Argentina's debt default over a decade ago. There are dissident bondholders that are trying to reclaim their assets to this day and so Argentina has to tread very carefully internationally if they don't want their international assets seized.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/worl...

Facepalm! Good idea, let's build a tunnel on the sea floor that crosses tectonic plates, what could go wrong? http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media...

I think it is unlikely that police would deactivate it without good reason. Where cameras have been used they have resulted in a large reduction in complaints against police . If they were widely used then switching them off would be seen as suspicious if a complaint was received.

There are some times when an officer might want to switch it off - for example when taking a toilet break or dealing with a vulnerable victim. Ideally switching on should be easy; a "one touch" operation, but switching off harder (hold two buttons for 10 seconds) so it cannot be done (or claimed to have been done) accidentally.

You need to turn them on first...

From BBC article: "The force said officers taking part in the pilot must comply with guidelines about when cameras are to be used, but that they will not be permanently switched on."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-e...

it is not in our best ... interest to weaken Russia further with ... sanctions

Interestingly, I would have agreed with you several weeks ago, when I thought that they would simply be ineffective. However since that time the strong focus of the Kremlin sock puppets on the BBC HYS and other forums trying to question the justification of sanctions has set me thinking the opposite, which is that sanctions will actually be extremely effective at the moment since the Kremlin is very afraid of them.

... defuse the crisis and ... try and repair relations

That doesn't appear to be Lavrov's current tactic.