Slashdot Mirror

It seems that mead is the beverage of choice for pirates too.

You only lost 10kph. If you had let it slow down to 0 your calculations would account for the whole speed of the vehicle, as it is they account for a minute fraction which you then take as the figure for the whole. The calculations maybe correct, your conclusion is not. At best 2.4kW is the extra energy needed to get from 90 to 100kph, although I suspect on the way up it would require more.

Read more. Most figures that I can find say you need between 10 and 30hp (depending on size/type of car) to maintain 60mph which for 30hp is 22.4kW. You also neglected to account for the alternator which can use 4 hp by itself, and the radiator fan which can use another 4 hp if it's belt driven. Were your lights on, the radio ? How heavy are you ? How were you tyres inflated ? Was a window open ? You coasted when you slowed down, which is not the same as constant drive which requires power. When the throttle is closed there is very little air being mixed with the fuel, which makes it look inefficient, but you never normally drive with the throttle closed.

Your figures are far too simplistic.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fnightjack.wordpress.com&btnG=Search&meta=

google cache to the rescue

Dude, I linked you to an article that is exclusively for Office 2007. Office 2007 does not have menus and does not have the Office 2003 interface. You're talking gibberish.

I happen to actually use the software here,

Microsoft Office InfoPath 2007, Microsoft Office OneNote 2007, Microsoft Office Project Professional 2007, Microsoft Office Project Standard 2007, Microsoft Office Publisher 2007, Microsoft Office SharePoint Designer 2007, Microsoft Office Visio Professional 2007, Microsoft Office Visio Standard 2007 do not use the Ribbon interface (Additional note: Outlook uses it partially for only certain windows).

How do I know this? I use these applications. Don't believe the Google image results? Then why don't you believe the article you linked:

Note This option is only available in applications which do not use the Ribbon user interface.

Dude, I linked you to an article that is exclusively for Office 2007. Office 2007 does not have menus and does not have the Office 2003 interface. You're talking gibberish.

I happen to actually use the software here,

Microsoft Office InfoPath 2007, Microsoft Office OneNote 2007, Microsoft Office Project Professional 2007, Microsoft Office Project Standard 2007, Microsoft Office Publisher 2007, Microsoft Office SharePoint Designer 2007, Microsoft Office Visio Professional 2007, Microsoft Office Visio Standard 2007 do not use the Ribbon interface (Additional note: Outlook uses it partially for only certain windows).

How do I know this? I use these applications. Don't believe the Google image results? Then why don't you believe the article you linked:

Note This option is only available in applications which do not use the Ribbon user interface.

Dude, I linked you to an article that is exclusively for Office 2007. Office 2007 does not have menus and does not have the Office 2003 interface. You're talking gibberish.

I happen to actually use the software here,

Microsoft Office InfoPath 2007, Microsoft Office OneNote 2007, Microsoft Office Project Professional 2007, Microsoft Office Project Standard 2007, Microsoft Office Publisher 2007, Microsoft Office SharePoint Designer 2007, Microsoft Office Visio Professional 2007, Microsoft Office Visio Standard 2007 do not use the Ribbon interface (Additional note: Outlook uses it partially for only certain windows).

How do I know this? I use these applications. Don't believe the Google image results? Then why don't you believe the article you linked:

Note This option is only available in applications which do not use the Ribbon user interface.

Dude, I linked you to an article that is exclusively for Office 2007. Office 2007 does not have menus and does not have the Office 2003 interface. You're talking gibberish.

I happen to actually use the software here,

Microsoft Office InfoPath 2007, Microsoft Office OneNote 2007, Microsoft Office Project Professional 2007, Microsoft Office Project Standard 2007, Microsoft Office Publisher 2007, Microsoft Office SharePoint Designer 2007, Microsoft Office Visio Professional 2007, Microsoft Office Visio Standard 2007 do not use the Ribbon interface (Additional note: Outlook uses it partially for only certain windows).

How do I know this? I use these applications. Don't believe the Google image results? Then why don't you believe the article you linked:

Note This option is only available in applications which do not use the Ribbon user interface.

Dude, I linked you to an article that is exclusively for Office 2007. Office 2007 does not have menus and does not have the Office 2003 interface. You're talking gibberish.

I happen to actually use the software here,

Microsoft Office InfoPath 2007, Microsoft Office OneNote 2007, Microsoft Office Project Professional 2007, Microsoft Office Project Standard 2007, Microsoft Office Publisher 2007, Microsoft Office SharePoint Designer 2007, Microsoft Office Visio Professional 2007, Microsoft Office Visio Standard 2007 do not use the Ribbon interface (Additional note: Outlook uses it partially for only certain windows).

How do I know this? I use these applications. Don't believe the Google image results? Then why don't you believe the article you linked:

Note This option is only available in applications which do not use the Ribbon user interface.

Dude, I linked you to an article that is exclusively for Office 2007. Office 2007 does not have menus and does not have the Office 2003 interface. You're talking gibberish.

I happen to actually use the software here,

Microsoft Office InfoPath 2007, Microsoft Office OneNote 2007, Microsoft Office Project Professional 2007, Microsoft Office Project Standard 2007, Microsoft Office Publisher 2007, Microsoft Office SharePoint Designer 2007, Microsoft Office Visio Professional 2007, Microsoft Office Visio Standard 2007 do not use the Ribbon interface (Additional note: Outlook uses it partially for only certain windows).

How do I know this? I use these applications. Don't believe the Google image results? Then why don't you believe the article you linked:

Note This option is only available in applications which do not use the Ribbon user interface.

Dude, I linked you to an article that is exclusively for Office 2007. Office 2007 does not have menus and does not have the Office 2003 interface. You're talking gibberish.

I happen to actually use the software here,

Microsoft Office InfoPath 2007, Microsoft Office OneNote 2007, Microsoft Office Project Professional 2007, Microsoft Office Project Standard 2007, Microsoft Office Publisher 2007, Microsoft Office SharePoint Designer 2007, Microsoft Office Visio Professional 2007, Microsoft Office Visio Standard 2007 do not use the Ribbon interface (Additional note: Outlook uses it partially for only certain windows).

How do I know this? I use these applications. Don't believe the Google image results? Then why don't you believe the article you linked:

Note This option is only available in applications which do not use the Ribbon user interface.

Dude, I linked you to an article that is exclusively for Office 2007. Office 2007 does not have menus and does not have the Office 2003 interface. You're talking gibberish.

I happen to actually use the software here,

Microsoft Office InfoPath 2007, Microsoft Office OneNote 2007, Microsoft Office Project Professional 2007, Microsoft Office Project Standard 2007, Microsoft Office Publisher 2007, Microsoft Office SharePoint Designer 2007, Microsoft Office Visio Professional 2007, Microsoft Office Visio Standard 2007 do not use the Ribbon interface (Additional note: Outlook uses it partially for only certain windows).

How do I know this? I use these applications. Don't believe the Google image results? Then why don't you believe the article you linked:

Note This option is only available in applications which do not use the Ribbon user interface.

I'll try not to overburden your cognitive facilities with complicated terms to name this type of lingual phenomenon. Suffice to say, it's not uncommon.

What's odd is that Android not only allows the playing of .ogg files, all of the included ringtones are in the .ogg format.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Android+ogg

'co-founder Sergey Brin is so rattled by the launch of Microsoft's rival search engine that he has assembled a team of top engineers to work on urgent upgrades to his Web service'

What did Sergey Brin say when he was contacted by the NY Post. Did he confirm that he was 'rattled'? Did he deny he has 'assembled a team of top engineers' in response to Bing? Where and when exactly did this meeting take place. Who exactly attended?

'While Bing is presented differently from Google -- with a colorful home page and easy-to-navigate search categories compared with Google's stark white page and search box -- there is little difference between the two when it comes to searching for simple terms'

I can't for the life of me see how he describes Google as lacking easy-to-navigate search categories and Bing not having a search box. Across the top of Google.com I see Web, Images, Video, Maps, News, Shopping, Mail and more.

As compared to BINGs .. Web, Images, Videos, Shopping, News, Maps and More. Apart from the layout, I can see little difference. What must have happened is that Sergey invented time travel and went forward in time and stole Bings innovation .. :)

--
slashdot, you have disgraced yourselves yet again

Agree in principle that the Recording Industry (Saleable Copyright model) is not working, but the "pay for creative work up-front" seems to have major drawbacks - principly that you have no idea if a creative person is any good until they've delivered the goods, creating chicken and egg.

I think you're missing a trick though: live performances.

I've read up on the subject as a former MP3.com artist myself, from talking to upcoming bands like Silverman and from the widespread public writings of established artists. All say that recording artists rarely make any money from sales though their record company; in fact they normally end up heavily in debt (the famous record label "tab").

Let me say that again: most artists do not profit from music sales. Only the record labels (and industry quangos like the RIAA) profit from music sales. Instead, most current artists make their money from live gigs, merchandise, appearance fees, etc - the good old fashioned "goods/services for cash" model.

As soon as you appreciate this, you realise you can ditch the record label altogether, "open source" your music (allow to be freely distributed on a non-profit basis, with distribution channels allowed to charge a small fee to cover their costs if they wish) and make money from gigs, etc, instead as your popularity grows.

This is not a new idea: numerous bug names in music are advocating the idea. Here's a quote from an excellent 2007 Wired feature by former label boss David Byrne:

"What is called the music business today, however, is not the business of producing music. At some point it became the business of selling CDs in plastic cases, and that business will soon be over. But that's not bad news for music, and it's certainly not bad news for musicians. Indeed, with all the ways to reach an audience, there have never been more opportunities for artists."

"The fact that Radiohead debuted its latest album online and Madonna defected from Warner Bros. to Live Nation, a concert promoter, is held to signal the end of the music business as we know it. Actually, these are just two examples of how musicians are increasingly able to work outside of the traditional label relationship. There is no one single way of doing business these days. There are, in fact, six viable models by my count. That variety is good for artists; it gives them more ways to get paid and make a living. And it's good for audiences, too, who will have more - and more interesting - music to listen to. Let's step back and get some perspective."

Wise words. Full article (well worth a read):

    http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/magazine/16-01/ff_byrne

If that's not enough for you, plenty of similar reading at:

    http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/record-label.htm/printable
    http://www.sourban.net/The-Future-Of-Music-How-Real-Artists-Will-Save-Music-From-The-Music-Industry
    http://www.magnatune.com/info/musicians
    http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/magazine/16-01/ff_yorke
    http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=music+artists+make+money+live+performances+record+label

Cheers, Ben

So if Windows wasn't popular, it wouldn't be a problem to bundle IE in?

Windows isn't popular in the generally accepted sense. It has a de facto monopoly, which means that because it has been dominant for so long, people just expect to use windows. They don't agonise over whether windows is any good, they just buy a computer and expect it to have it. Part of that is its dominance in the workplace which is also due to having historical dominance.
If microsoft don't like EU law, then they can fuck off and take their business elsewhere. Instead they deliberately twist the EU decision to make things seem as bad and as inconvenient as possible. Same as with the ODF debacle. Instead of being part of a solution, they twist things to their benefit and try to lock others out. I would be interested to learn exactly how much of the fines awarded against them have actually been paid. I would not be surprised if they haven't actually paid a penny. In which case all the whining about how they are constantly being punished is so much hot air. Why should we forget the past on the grounds that they have already been punished, when they never underwent any punishment or paid their dues ?

Hah, I just googled for "microsoft eu fines paid" and the best result was this - notice the bottom line on that page. Sometimes it writes itself ...

I drive to Cornwall (Helston) regularly, and in an otherwise cloudless day, the only visible clouds are directly over the (military) airport. Always.

I'm going to leave aside the wisdom of doing this, and focus on the practical aspects.

Has anyone built anything like this?

An Android phone hooked up to Google Latitude would meet most of your requirements - small, accessible anywhere you've got an internet connection, accessible on mobile phones, phone can be turned off, phone is linux based.

Is there an open source solution?

There's OpenGTS, an Open GPS Tracking System. However, it's not obvious from their website what trackers it works with.

How would I go about building my own?

People have home-made basic versions. GPS modules can be purchased which give a reasonably accurate location once per second, or on demand, over a serial, usb, or bluetooth link; many mobile phones have gps modules already built in. Most tracking systems communicate over the cell phone system, either by SMS or mobile data connections. Of course, many mobile data connections are firewalled/NATed, so the benefit of SMS is you can transmit a query to the tracker. The disadvantage is the per-message cost, especially if you want regular location updates, and that it's easier to program the PC end of a mobile data connection. Cell companies also offer "machine to machine" data plans, but it's unlikely they'll want to deal with you if you're making a one-off homebrew system.

You could get a separate cell phone and GPS and make a homebrew device, like the one linked above, but you're unlikely to get things much more compact than buying a mobile phone with both built in.

If you're a programmer, my suggestion would be a mobile phone running Android, and using the GPS APIs to read the location and send it off to your server.

How does a tinfoil hat wearer engineer such a device to make sure Big-Brother isn't watching too?

Pretty much every mobile tracking system uses the cell phone network for connectivity, because it's more widely available than WiFi, and more affordable than a satellite connection. If you're paranoid about privacy, you should be worried about cell phone triangulation, as that would be the most practical way for "big brother" to track people; so to be paranoid, you can't use a cell phone connection, which will make your design task substantially more difficult. It would be far easier to get a mobile phone, set it up with Google Latitude, turn it off, and tell your daughter to turn it on if she gets lost.

Amagad!

I fail at linking: 3.7Gbps

hp = ft * lbs / min

W = N * m / sec

All of these units convert directly. I call your Wolfram and raise you a Google.

However, even if one could remove everything from these ships down to the rivets, and obtain optimal values, there is likely substantially less than a million dollars worth of value on one of the Destroyers. Then there would be the very substantial cost of disassembly, likely more than what all the scrap is worth. On the other hand, sinking them as artificial reefs creates jobs, and millions of dollars of income for the tourism industry, year after year after year. I mentioned earlier that, in 1989, the total value of dive tourism in BC was $2.3 million annually. I the past 11 years, it has about quadrupled, and we know that the "Saskatchewan", alone, is worth over two and a half million dollars a year. This growth can be largely attributed to our artificial reef program.

Oh, wait! That's our guys! So, I guess it's OK then.

It's time Americans started to realize that the reason (some) Iranians hate America is that the US (and Britain) toppled their democratically elected president, Mohammed Mosaddeq, to get their hands on their oil. And then installed a brutal dictator that abused his power for 26 years.

Don't believe me? Then Google "Operation Ajax" and get educated.

Deep linking when linking to an external website, is just good etiquette and stops me wasting time

According to this you shouldn't even *talk* to the police - ever!

The argument is that it's ridiculous to suggest that backwards compatibility is "THE REASON" for MS's success - particularly without presenting evidence of competitors who losing market share due to poor performance in this area.

Backwards compatibility isn't even that strong for MS. Windows XP broke plenty of apps (do a few searches the 'Why Applications Break' section of http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=HFd8VyyU0e0C&pg=PA272&lpg=PA272&dq=%22windows+xp+breaks+apps%22&source=bl&ots=17EPij89Oa&sig=w9JKvyFhrcftGtww5SSha3qGyi8&hl=en&ei=qd8WSs2jMs-MjAfwppTwDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4 is a good place to start). Ditto Vista. Windows 7 is so bad at it they're suggesting you continue to run some apps in Windows XP. Would that be two VM's for Windows 8? What a mess.

Lot's of things go into making MS and Windows in particular a successful platform.

Reticent

Reluctant

Get it right, people!

Reticent

Reluctant

Get it right, people!

If they are going to use the pornography argument, at least cite something like "Fannie Hill" (at least cite the *good* stuff!) So what are they going to ban now:
1. web browsers -- I can search the web, including Guttenberg. Oh and "The internet is for porn" http://www.avenueq.com/videoclips.html, http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=5430343841227974645
2. music players -- 'cause I can listen to libravox's reading of "Fannie Hill"
3. etext readers -- c.f. TFA
4. image viewers -- for obvious reasons
5. video players -- also, for obvious reasons
6. everything!
7. ???
8. not profit!!

Who said enemy casualties are a bad thing?

General David Petraeus. See here.

A-52. Achieving success means that, particularly late in the campaign, it may be necessary to negotiate with the enemy. Local people supporting the COIN operation know the enemy's leaders. They even may have grown up together. Valid negotiating partners sometimes emerge as the campaign progresses. Again, use close interagency relationships to exploit opportunities to co-opt segments of the enemy. This helps wind down the insurgency without alienating potential local allies who have relatives or friends among insurgents. As an insurgency ends, a defection is better than a surrender, a surrender better than a capture, and a capture better than a kill.

True, it's an order of magnitude more complicated than building the belt. The iPhone has GPS and an accelerometer now, and is apparently getting a magnetometer in the next revision.

But you're right, there is a problem with the orientation of the armband being different to that of the iPhone. It would have to be a belt with a pocket in it for the iPhone which would make the whole thing just as big (and far more complex) than the one you built. Unless you put more electronics in the armband itself, by which point there'd be so much duplication between the two that the iPhone would be redundant.

I am not a millionaire.

its a bit late,

google images already says there are 286,000 pictures of gnomes already online.

http://images.google.co.uk/images?q=garden%20gnome Results 1 - 20 of about 286,000

Seriously the standard of developers these days seems to have plummeted. If you want to provision for a device go and get the manual for that device, find out that H264 is what you need for the iPhone and that YouTube most certainly does NOT stream flash to iPhones.

I'm going to put my grumpy old bloke hat on here, but its the same hat I wore when I was 25 and someone asked me how to run Windows apps on an IBM RS6000. That person's excuse was that they just "thought it would work" which was a woeful statement from someone who had a degree in IT. This AskSlashdot is at the same level in that the question boldly states something that ISN'T TRUE (YouTube stream flash) and thinks there is some magic secret.

There is no magic secret, there is something that shouldn't be considered a secret at all. That thing is called RESEARCH, hell I'm not even asking you to hit the books in a library but just Google YouTube iPhone to find a FREE converter that talks about the video differences or YouTube iPhone video codec. It really is trivial. And if you can't do that then have a thought about just giving up and using Google Apps Premier Edition for your business and using the commercial version of YouTube that it supplies.

Seriously the standard of developers these days seems to have plummeted. If you want to provision for a device go and get the manual for that device, find out that H264 is what you need for the iPhone and that YouTube most certainly does NOT stream flash to iPhones.

I'm going to put my grumpy old bloke hat on here, but its the same hat I wore when I was 25 and someone asked me how to run Windows apps on an IBM RS6000. That person's excuse was that they just "thought it would work" which was a woeful statement from someone who had a degree in IT. This AskSlashdot is at the same level in that the question boldly states something that ISN'T TRUE (YouTube stream flash) and thinks there is some magic secret.

There is no magic secret, there is something that shouldn't be considered a secret at all. That thing is called RESEARCH, hell I'm not even asking you to hit the books in a library but just Google YouTube iPhone to find a FREE converter that talks about the video differences or YouTube iPhone video codec. It really is trivial. And if you can't do that then have a thought about just giving up and using Google Apps Premier Edition for your business and using the commercial version of YouTube that it supplies.

Oh, it is totally legal. I was not trying to demonize Google in the least; just trying to come up with a good car analogy.

Google is providing a public service and funding it with advertising. In some situations, the ads could even be something the searcher wants. The only place that Spangenberg can expect to expunge competitors is on her own web site. (This crossed my mind within minutes of posting the above... :c/ )

As I Google, presently, I find it very interesting that a query for FirePond produces no ads. I wonder if Google supresses those sponsored links now because of the threat of the lawsuit. I wonder if FPX asked nicely, first...

Really? Then you might like to try opening your eyes, since I have heard that this improves the efficiency of the reading process. Women's magazines have been under fire since approximately forever; in the last decace or so the same complaints have begun to appear against men's magazines too.
 
...the disparity between the media's view of women and women's real lives is still in some ways present. While adopting a veneer of feminism, women's magazines are actually extremely reactionary, oppressive and old-fashioned.

Within the trade press a common complaint was that women's magazines failed to appeal to professional women. .... many titles were still 'obsessed with the stereotyped image of women - that they live for home, babies, cooking, clothes and sex'.

For what it's worth I happen to agree with the Google Book link above that it is extremely difficult to market items for professional women beyond their early 20s - there's so much variation that there is nothing to aim at.

Speaking for myself, I buy Lenovo and high-spec business phones. Virtually every piece of electronics I own is black or, on rare occasions, metallic silver. I haven't bought a "women's magazine" in four years, and that was only because I'd forgotten my umbrella and the magazine was bundled with a freebie. I've got a subscription to New Scientist, though. I've never bought a Dell (my experience with the hardware has suggested to me that they aren't too reliable), but have ordered and administrate several rackmount servers, mostly Sun. This bullshit isn't going to stop me buying Dell, because I wasn't going to do it anyway, for sound business reasons. I do think that Dell are dumb as fuck for this stunt, but this should not be news to anybody who was paying attention.

I was going to suggest UNIQLO, since their t-shirts are all in really bright colours, but their shirts are mostly blue, white and grey. And you're probably looking for something smart.

My fancy school required me to wear a shirt and tie of my choosing (age 16-18). I didn't want to wear a white or blue shirt, like 95% of the rest, or black, like the other 4%. I eventually found shirts in bright orange, turquoise, yellow and lime green from Asda (i.e. Walmart) and Matalan (discount clothes store). They were crap quality, but then they did only cost £3 or so. They went well with the purple, blue or black ties.

In Britain at the moment there's a fashion/subculture called "New Rave" that's mostly about dressing in very bright clothes. Some of the specialist shops for that fashion have really bright shirts, but the fabric/cut is going to be quite casual.

I was very unimpressed with every USB stick I used until I bought a Titanium one. Though I had to pay about 5 times that price to get mine, I'm extremely happy with it as hardware.

I'm less impressed by the US software... and neither TruCrypt nor PortableApps are really make the mark as far as I'm concerned. 7zip archives with AES encryption works OK for transfer of data... but I'd really like to abandon the notion of a traditional file system... it simply fails to help me organise my data in a logical way in the context of portable drives.

Full Regexp would be very hard but Google does have basic abilities to do exact matching and conditional matching. Just hit the "advanced" button.

Hardly something that is tough to find out.

Then you don't know your British history. For a long time "inner cities" was a code-word in the political caste for black Britons.

This got so out of hand that it led to the joke "Inner cities of both sexes..."

I visited Rottnest Island, just off the coast of Perth WA, and was happily wandering about when I saw what looked like a spiders web. It was pretty big, maybe 10 feet across, stretched between 2 bushes. So I went over to have a closer look. Imagine my surprise when I found the resident.
This bugger was about 18 inches across (leg span) and pretty mean looking. I would have put my hand in the photo for scale, but, well you know ...

So 6 cm (< 2.5 inches) is not a big spider.

Ummm...

So, wait.. how do you eat grapefruits?

I hope everyone realises that's a joke: http://www.google.co.uk/products?q=grapefruit+spoon

(...and now I know what a grapefruit spoon is. Pity I don't like grapefruit.)

Karma be damned, but..

No one cares about a new search engine. Really, Google suits all my needs.

I thought that when I saw a TV commercial for Searchers.co.uk last night at prime time (I've never heard of it before). I'd completely forgotten about it until I saw this article.

I have now gone to the home page and seen that it's a UK specific search engine (fair enough) and claims to do natural language processing. I wasn't expecting my first search, tube map , to give me a porn site as number 1 match.

Any new search engine will need to be at least as good as Google for at least some kinds of query for me to use it. Wolfram might be interesting, but I'll decide that when it emerges from beta.

Couldn't Google et al just block the UK instead of paying the tax?

Google has server farms all over the world. Google even has a .uk domain.

Falcon

Things ministers have "considered" and things the Daily Mail in particular reports they have considered. No point here, it's just interesting how often the term is used, especially when it's something controversial. Like science, it's never "John Smith", the newspapers preferring to imply that the entire profession says/thinks so.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=uk+medical+tourism

It is easier to switch providers than governments.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=uk+health+insurance
As you can see, there are plenty of companies offering health insurance in the UK.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=uk+private+hospital
You also have a wide choice of private hospitals, which are nicer (more luxurious) than the NHS hospitals.

http://www.nhs.uk/
And there's the NHS, for those that can't afford, or don't want, private treatment. (Or have insurance, but choose not to claim on it.)

It is easier to switch providers than governments.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=uk+health+insurance
As you can see, there are plenty of companies offering health insurance in the UK.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=uk+private+hospital
You also have a wide choice of private hospitals, which are nicer (more luxurious) than the NHS hospitals.

http://www.nhs.uk/
And there's the NHS, for those that can't afford, or don't want, private treatment. (Or have insurance, but choose not to claim on it.)

I regretfully inform you that all communication with Honorable gentlemen should consist soley of cheers OR jeers , any dialogue that a child aged 10 isn't capable off understanding would require the Honorable gentleman to actually engage his brain more than 30% of the time and this is an unneeded stress and will soon be outlawed all together.