Slashdot Mirror

There's an article in The Guardian about how the authorities asked the plane manufacturers to take part in discussions about volcanic ash safety levels but they weren't interested.

Well yeah, because if they give estimates, and they're wrong, planeloads of people die, and they have a PR disaster and a pile of lawsuits. Balanced against that is a nice thank-you note. Tough call.

While this may work from a pure operant conditioning standpoint, but they fail to realize the problem. THE PARENTS. The kid screams and moans for McDonalds, so the give him McDonalds. The fatty foods lipids are the real addictive, so once hooked, Micky D's has got their childish love. It is the parents that are the problem. Who is the government to say that a piece of plastic in a bag can't be given away with a meal? Its the damn bad parents that allow their lardsacks children to accumulate mass that should be punished. So now when little Johnny screams for a happy meal and a toy, what are the parents going to do, "sorry johnny, but the county officials have made it illegal, no toys for you". So instead they still go get the happy meal (since there aren't any ramifications for that, yet) and then just buy the kid a damn toy elsewhere, completely sidestepping the actual problem.

And California wonders why their state is ready to self-implode. Treating the symptoms, not the problems. And really, is this a problem? If the parents choose to give their kids fast food, then its their choice! GTFOML. But there are a 1000 better things they could do with the taxpayers time to curb obesity other than just straight banning stuff. Reminds me of the salt ban that could be coming.

For those that don't follow graffiti news, Banksy articles are appearing in media all over the world right now as his pieces (or imitations of the original, Blek le Rat , and Banksy style) appear as promotion for his movie Exit Through The Gift Shop

Banksy pieces showing up in San Francisco
Banksy in Seattle
Banksy feud with King Robbo

For those of you who might think that this is an exaduration, here's a snapshot (and associated article) from the BBC's coverage.

I'm fucking disgusted.

The motto of MGM is ars gratia artis, or art for art's sake - sometimes I wonder when this became "art for the sa[k]e of money" (ars gratia divitis, anyone?).

This article might give a hint :-)

I agree with all your points, though - we have a sucky system that gave us this Act (and probably many others) without proper scrutiny

This coming after we just heard a study finding that letting your baby cry is bad for their health.

***I can't believe it's possible to get anything bigger than a football close enough to a cruiser, bypassing all anti-missile systems.***

Believe it. You may be correct about the open ocean under wartime conditions against an unsophisticated opponent. But major vessels have been taken out by clever opponents in training exercises. Here's a quote from the Guardian's story on Operation Millenium Challenge -- a major war game conducted in 2002.

***In the first few days of the exercise, using surprise and unorthodox tactics, the wily 64-year-old Vietnam veteran sank most of the US expeditionary fleet in the Persian Gulf, bringing the US assault to a halt.***

And here's a link to the Guardian story. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/sep/06/usa.iraq

And, of course, islamic fundamentalists did put a pretty big hole in the USS Cole in 2000 using half their navy (one small boat -- their other boat sank when they overloaded it with explosives). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Cole_bombing

And NPR told me the other day the US Navy is lugging some Somali pirates back to the US for trial after the pirates attempted to board and loot not one, but two, US destroyers. These may not be the smartest pirates in the Red Sea. But they did apparently manage to get into close proximity to the ships.

The Vatican has been trying frantic spin control lately. They've tried blaming the press, gays, politicians, the previous Pope, and now the Internet. It's not working. The coverup has been coming unglued for over a decade, and the latest revelations (Ireland, Belgium, Holland) make it look even worse. There are calls from US Catholics for the Pope to resign, and pressure to prosecute him in the UK.

Bruy The Vatican has no experience dealing with this. They're not used to the democratic tradition that leaders who screw up badly lose their jobs. The Vatican is still an absolute monarchy. No Pope has ever been fired.

The BA passengers stuck in Mumbai until May 6 -- even though holding paid-for return tickets -- who get to watch those able to cough up £2000 fly out today might argue that "greedy" pretty much fits the bill. (Small lie there: since you can't enter the airport without a boarding pass or a bribe, it might be hard to spot departing flights ;-)

There's an article in The Guardian about how the authorities asked the plane manufacturers to take part in discussions about volcanic ash safety levels but they weren't interested.

Parent is modded interesting for 'Islam is dangerous'?

Have you studied the Torah? Or the Christian Bible? There are rules laid out in those as well. And FUNDAMENTALISTS interpreting any ancient text are dangerous. There are Christians who believe they'd be first in line after the rapture who also believe they have the holy right to burn gays, hang pagans or kill other 'non-believers'. They don't because society says no, but as soon as society says it's ok, the witch hunts begin. Hitler used Christianity and an Aryan Jew hating Jesus to incite his fellow Christians. I think the death toll scoreboard shows Muslim Fundamentalists trailing to hard hitter Christianity, and probably others as well.

The truth is, anyone literally interpreting anything as 'Gods Infallible Word' is dangerous. The USA needs it's religious fanatics curbed probably more than most other counties. Remember them? They were the ones that invaded the Islamic country because their commander-in-chief said 'God told him to end the tyranny'.

But before speculators get too carried away, Arm's chief executive Warren East reminds everyone to look at the economics. With ARM's market capitalisation at more than £3bn why fork out a fortune to own it when Apple and others can license the designs at a fraction of that?
"Exciting though it is to have the share price pushed up by these rumours, common sense tells us that our standard business model is an excellent way for technology companies to gain access to our technology. Nobody has to buy the company," East told the Guardian.

The ICAO has been trying to address this issue for several years now. Up until a week ago, the airlines never showed the slightest bit of interest:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/21/airlines-flights-ban-airspace

From the perspective of the airlines, volcanoes have been a rare occurrence that results in the occasional flight being cancelled, meaning that it has been cheaper to just tolerate the occasional cancellation or emergency landing than to research the issue (the engine manufacturers have no incentive to do so unless potential customers start caring).

After years of not giving a damn about the issue (the zero-ash rule was introduced after the incident with BA flight 9 in 1982, 28 years ago), suddenly it's the government's fault that there hasn't been any research and/or that they can't do the research in a few days.

Even if they do the research, it's entirely possible that the results could show that even very low quantities of ash pose an unacceptable hazard. If that's the case, I wouldn't like to be in the shoes of the government officials responsible for aviation.

It's interesting to note that, in spite of not being bound by the CAA/NATS restrictions, the USAF also ceased most operations from its UK bases over the last week, diverting a number of flights coming from Afghanistan.

This request for information for a safe level has been going on for a few years, since 2008 at least. Its interesting that it seems like lawyers were the ones saying no figure could be quoted as if it does turn out wrong we'll be sued to hell. As soon as the bottom line starts being affected...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/21/airlines-flights-ban-airspace

Going back into the history of attempts to set a safe level of ash, minutes of a Paris meeting in 2008 show the industry at odds with regulators. The ICAO meeting concluded that improved measurement techniques should allow progress "with regard to the definition of the lower limit on safe ash concentrations".

The ICAO complained it had "proven difficult to get formal aviation representation" at workshops on the issue organised by the UN's World Meteorological Organisation. It suggested "input of the aviation industry to this problem may have to be sought" through its sub-group on volcanoes, which has industry representatives. It asked several groups, including the International Air Transport Association, Iata, representing 230 airlines, to prepare reports for the volcano group's next meeting at Lima in Peru last month.

Minutes for that meeting show the industry did not deliver. "Iata informed the group about the strong efforts made in order to get representation from the industry ... but unfortunately these efforts had not been successful, to the disappointment of the group.

From what I can tell via google,

- Ash melts at 1100 degrees, below operating temperature of jet engines, and fuses into the engine
- Windshields can be abraded so badly you cannot see out of them
- Ash is dry and doesn't show up on radar, so new sensors are needed so pilots can discover it
- There are no standards for how much ash is allowed or how to test aircraft against it.
- Possibility that propellor planes and helicopters are safer

So my conclusions for now are:
- Need better rules, and government should pay for the experimentation
- Need better intelligence, so we can be sure a route is safe
- Need to examine flying propellor planes slowly at very low altitudes below the ash
- Nobody has thought about ash bothering ground transportation. Does it?
- Need alternative transportation
    o Trains, buses, boats
    o Slower aircraft.. hovercraft or balloons? (they still have engines though)
    o Need a closed engine design. (chemical or hydrogen powered electric closed engine?)
    o This is a common problem, more needs to be done for global transportation security. I even found a volcanic explosion in Japan yesterday at the ash advisory center, though it is not in the news at all.
http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/svd/vaac/data/TextData/20100420_SAKU_0403_Text.html

Links:
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/412103-ash-clouds-threaten-air-traffic.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/apr/15/volcanic-ash-bad-for-planes
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=2055888944
http://www.ssd.noaa.gov/VAAC/vaac.html

Stopping flights, all over Europe? Pull the other one, mate. It's got bells on it. This is another dubious modeling outcome from the MET's GIGO simulations.

There was only one source that managed to stop the entire air-traffic in Europe. It was a mere computer simulation that came from the same jerks who are trying to convience the public of the CO2-scam since years.

The British MET-office took some data from the first hours(!)of the outbrak -- proceeded with their usual "gigo" (garbage in -- garbage out) -- and made one of their usual "predictions" -- that rarely turns out to be reality.

During all those next days this first data-set never got adapted, updated with actual data or even checked again.

Yesterday some European airline-managers were beginning to smell the rat and undertook first test-flights -- where they experienced no harm at all.

Stopping flights, all over Europe? Pull the other one, mate. It's got bells on it. This is another dubious modeling outcome from the MET's GIGO simulations.

There was only one source that managed to stop the entire air-traffic in Europe. It was a mere computer simulation that came from the same jerks who are trying to convience the public of the CO2-scam since years.

The British MET-office took some data from the first hours(!)of the outbrak -- proceeded with their usual "gigo" (garbage in -- garbage out) -- and made one of their usual "predictions" -- that rarely turns out to be reality.

During all those next days this first data-set never got adapted, updated with actual data or even checked again.

Yesterday some European airline-managers were beginning to smell the rat and undertook first test-flights -- where they experienced no harm at all.

Indeed. In fact the height the ash plume reached has changed from Wednesday to Saturday from 8 miles down to 3:

In Iceland, the volcano continued to erupt, but volcanologists said was it less explosive than at the beginning of the eruption on Wednesday, which blasted glassy abrasive ash, destructive to jet engines, eight miles into the sky. The plume was now rising to a height of just three miles, and the volcanologists said this would deposit ash only in Iceland and in the surrounding waters. It was not high enough to travel thousands of miles across Britain and the rest of Europe.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/16/volcanic-ash-air-travel-europe

I wonder how many slashdotters drive Volkswagen or Porsche cars or voted for George Bush (who's grandfather actively helped finance the party)?

Simon's original article is now back online at the Guardian website, where it was originally published. Many many more people will read it, or have read about it, than originally read it. More people will know that chiropractic adjustments have killed people. Due to BCA's actions, people looked at the advertisements of chiropractors and reported those claiming to treat colic. One in four chiropractors are being investigated, including senior members of the BCA. The GCC, who are legally required to investigate have had to hire 6 new members of staff to investigate.

This is well beyond the Streisand effect, this is into Scientology levels of foot bulletry.

You and I might have different opinions of what constitutes "stupid shit to provoke these outcomes". A schoolyard bully with the force of law behind him might have an even more different one.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2010/apr/01/george-monbiot-police-trial-by-jury

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/g20-police-assault-ian-tomlinson

On a lighter note: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BO8EpfyCG2Y

You and I might have different opinions of what constitutes "stupid shit to provoke these outcomes". A schoolyard bully with the force of law behind him might have an even more different one.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2010/apr/01/george-monbiot-police-trial-by-jury

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/g20-police-assault-ian-tomlinson

On a lighter note: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BO8EpfyCG2Y

I thought Thailand was also one of the kiddie-fucker destinations. Of course, I could be confused, as my grasp of geography and child molestation destinations are not all that good.

Your geography is off. You're thinking of Belgium.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/jan/25/worlddispatch.dutroux

it would be a matter of a simple lookup since all the "grunt" work has been done already.

Not quite. There are no tables that exist, nor can they exist, that have 16 character passwords with the given qualifications. Assuming you could generate the tables, which as my comment above shows as being not possible, let's find out just how much space that table would require to store.
MD5 hashes are 128 bits. The corresponding password, assuming 8 bits per character, is also 16*8=128bits. Assuming no overhead, that means we have 256 bits, or 32 bytes per password. Using the calculation in my previous post, 16 character passwords with those qualifications have 1.24*10^30 combinations. That means 3.96*10^31 bytes would be required to store this. How much is that? Let's put it this way - SI prefixes don't go up that high. Why? Because it's such an astronomically large number that there is no reason (yet) to have naming conventions that high. The entire internet is estimated to have 5*10^20 bytes. The amount of hard drive storage in every computer ever made by man combined doesn't have the necessary storage to hold that rainbow table.

you respond with a grand conspiracy theory

Well it can be best summed up by this 2004 quote of Dr Michael Fernex formerly of the University of Basel who worked for the WHO;

"Six years ago we tried to have a conference. The proceedings were never published. This is because in this matter the organisations at the UN are subordinate to the IAEA. Since 1986 the WHO did nothing about studying Chernobyl. It's a pity. The interdiction to publish which fell upon the WHO conference came from the IAEA. The IAEA blocked the proceedings; the truth would have been a disaster for the nuclear industry"

So you can see the difference between theory and practice, I've provided you with the actual text of the agreement.

and an allegation about "slow agonising death" for which of course you have no evidence whatsoever.

Oh you don't have to believe me. Even the hamstrung report from the World Health Organisation said;

"The international experts have estimated that radiation could cause up to about 4000 eventual deaths among the higher-exposed Chernobyl populations, i.e., emergency workers from 1986-1987, evacuees and residents of the most contaminated areas. This number contains both the known radiation-induced cancer and leukaemia deaths"

Imagine, based on the actual evidence I've provided you, what the WHO may have been able to uncover had they been allowed to actually reveal the actual truth of the disaster. The Guardian however points out that the IAEA is ignoring the evidence of the volume of deaths occurring as a result of the Chernobyl disaster, so it's unlikely that you will examine them fairly either, of course if no one is actually collecting the data how can it be presented?

The UNICEF report "Human consequences of the Chernobyl nuclear accident" summarised it neatly;

"Life expectancy for men in Belarus, Russia and Ukraine, for example, is some ten years less that Sri Lanka, which is one of the twenty poorest countries in the world and is in the middle of a long drawn out war"

Maybe dying of cancer just isn't what you class as a "slow and agonising death".

Time is on the side of truth.

The truth of the matter is that cancer takes years to incubate, thus premature deaths and birth defects will manifest over time. After this generation, the next generation and long after this disaster has passed into lore it will still be well within the toxic half-life of radioactive isotopes such as cesium 137, strontium 90 and plutonium 239.

The reality is that direct exposure killed less than a hundred

The reality is the genetic abnormalities and diseases caused by this accident are generations away and unlikely to be seen by anyone alive today. direct exposure will occur as long as there is a food chain to absorb these isotopes and people to eat that food.

Nuclear Power just isn't as dangerous as the images of an A-bomb denotation would suggest.

Of course, it's much worse. An A bomb may release more radiation in the form of gamma radiation but much less material in terms of radioactive isotopes than a nuclear reactor - especially in these circumstances.

You "point" doesn't stand because you never made one.

Perhaps you just missed it. Hopefully the information presented here will help you understand it.

...make up scary nonsense...your respo

you respond with a grand conspiracy theory

Well it can be best summed up by this 2004 quote of Dr Michael Fernex formerly of the University of Basel who worked for the WHO;

"Six years ago we tried to have a conference. The proceedings were never published. This is because in this matter the organisations at the UN are subordinate to the IAEA. Since 1986 the WHO did nothing about studying Chernobyl. It's a pity. The interdiction to publish which fell upon the WHO conference came from the IAEA. The IAEA blocked the proceedings; the truth would have been a disaster for the nuclear industry"

So you can see the difference between theory and practice, I've provided you with the actual text of the agreement.

and an allegation about "slow agonising death" for which of course you have no evidence whatsoever.

Oh you don't have to believe me. Even the hamstrung report from the World Health Organisation said;

"The international experts have estimated that radiation could cause up to about 4000 eventual deaths among the higher-exposed Chernobyl populations, i.e., emergency workers from 1986-1987, evacuees and residents of the most contaminated areas. This number contains both the known radiation-induced cancer and leukaemia deaths"

Imagine, based on the actual evidence I've provided you, what the WHO may have been able to uncover had they been allowed to actually reveal the actual truth of the disaster. The Guardian however points out that the IAEA is ignoring the evidence of the volume of deaths occurring as a result of the Chernobyl disaster, so it's unlikely that you will examine them fairly either, of course if no one is actually collecting the data how can it be presented?

The UNICEF report "Human consequences of the Chernobyl nuclear accident" summarised it neatly;

"Life expectancy for men in Belarus, Russia and Ukraine, for example, is some ten years less that Sri Lanka, which is one of the twenty poorest countries in the world and is in the middle of a long drawn out war"

Maybe dying of cancer just isn't what you class as a "slow and agonising death".

Time is on the side of truth.

The truth of the matter is that cancer takes years to incubate, thus premature deaths and birth defects will manifest over time. After this generation, the next generation and long after this disaster has passed into lore it will still be well within the toxic half-life of radioactive isotopes such as cesium 137, strontium 90 and plutonium 239.

The reality is that direct exposure killed less than a hundred

The reality is the genetic abnormalities and diseases caused by this accident are generations away and unlikely to be seen by anyone alive today. direct exposure will occur as long as there is a food chain to absorb these isotopes and people to eat that food.

Nuclear Power just isn't as dangerous as the images of an A-bomb denotation would suggest.

Of course, it's much worse. An A bomb may release more radiation in the form of gamma radiation but much less material in terms of radioactive isotopes than a nuclear reactor - especially in these circumstances.

You "point" doesn't stand because you never made one.

Perhaps you just missed it. Hopefully the information presented here will help you understand it.

...make up scary nonsense...your respo

All I can say is Jackass!

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/07/business/canadian-lumber-penalized.html?pagewanted=1

Canadian Lumber penalized

http://www.google.ch/search?hl=en&ei=J0PES87yPOiXOP3XjdkP&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&ved=0CAcQBSgA&q=American+steel+tariffs&spell=1

"American steel tarriffs"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2004/apr/28/brazil.usnews

"American Cotton Subsidies illegal"

My point is that America is neither better nor worse with respect to breaking the trade rules games.

But because of jackass's like you, you think that it is poor poor America that always suffers! BS!

Again I am not saying America is good, nor bad. America is dealt bad cards at times, and deals bad cards as well. So if you are going to complain please keep the argument to Google and the ISP's and not "America" and "Europe"

"I mean sure, they COULD just send their snipers off big game hunting, but that might not play so well."

They have been doing that since WW1. The recent shooting of 6000 terrorist camels hardly raised an eyebrow over here.

Heroin is pretty fucking toxic. We're not talking Marijuana toxic here (I'd rather cigarettes and weed be gone too, though cigarettes are more like alcohol but with EVERYONE that drinks being a huge alcoholic drinking contaminated booze). We're talking a chemical with no benefit, that makes you literally need it all the time to even stay on a normal level once you're hooked; and if you cut it off completely after a certain point, you die from withdrawal.

Here's a good ranking of the relative danger levels of various drugs. In fact, it was so good that the guy who published it was forced to resign from his job as chairman of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs in the UK because it didn't jibe with current politics.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/nov/02/david-nutt-dangerous-drug-list

"First off, the Army gets to be pretty picky about who it lets in."

WHAT!? They are letting in convicted felons, non U.S. citizens, gang bangers, all kinds of malcontents these days just to get BODIES to go fight in Afganistan and Iraq. I know - I have friends and family SERVING in the Army right now (no none of them are in the above list - they know people who are though). We have PYCHOS's in the Army killing kids FOR FUN, killing dogs FOR FUN, killing reporters and kids FOR FUN! Read the news watch the videos WIkileaks released!

Here is just a few for you:

Wikileaks reveals video showing US air crew shooting down Iraqi civilians
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/05/wikileaks-us-army-iraq-attack
"Footage of July 2007 attack made public as Pentagon identifies website as threat to national security"

Wikileak'd video shows U.S. troops firing on Reuters reporters and Iraqi children
http://www.infowars.com/wikileakd-video-shows-eager-to-kill-troops-firing-on-reuters-reporters-and-children/

http://www.collateralmurder.com/

Neo-Cons Defend Massacre Of Iraqi Journalists, Children
http://www.infowars.com/neo-cons-defend-massacre-of-iraqi-journalists-children/

Wikileaks leaked video of Civilians killed in Baghdad -- Full video
http://www.infowars.com/wikileaks-leaked-video-of-civilians-killed-in-baghdad-full-video/

Wikileaks Video Exposes Apache Murders of Journalists, Children In Iraq
http://www.prisonplanet.com/wikileaks-video-exposes-apache-murders-of-journalists-children-in-iraq.html

Alex Jones Covers the WikiLeaks Pentagon Snuff Video
http://www.infowars.com/alex-jones-covers-the-wikileaks-pentagon-snuff-video/

WikiLeaks VIDEO Exposes 2007 'Collateral Murder' In Iraq
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/05/wikileaks-exposes-video-o_n_525569.html

Mainstream media ignores Wikileaks video and pays more attention to Tiger Woods
http://snardfarker.ning.com/group/MainstreamMediaAndMindControl/forum/topics/rt-video-mainstream-media?commentId=2649739%3AComment%3A167787&xg_source=activity&groupId=2649739%3AGroup%3A134445

Wikileaks Iraq Video Authenticated By Senior Military Officer
http://news.firedoglake.com/2010/04/06/wikileaks-iraq-video-authenticated-by-senior-military-officer/

Leaked U.S. video shows deaths of Reuters' Iraqi staffers
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6344FW20100406?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

36 Still Images - WikiLeaks Iraq Video (Dial-Up Warning and UPDATE from Wikileaks
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8095770

Violence in Video Games and the Baghdad Massacre

_All_ governments want to restrict some information, and a lot of that is valid. Some sensitive information about military operations, and covert agents, for example should be censored and restricted IMO, at least while they are operational. The question is firstly which information should be witheld, and secondly (and most importantly) : how can we set up government withholding of information so that they do not withold information they have no right to?

No one has got even close to answering that second question. Basically all current major governments have the ability to withold any information that they see fit, whether it be sensitive or in the public interest to know. There should be no need for websites like wikileaks (at least in terms of governments, companies are different beasts) - _anything_ that does not potentially compromise current or future operations that is owned by the government should be released. No quibbles. No matter if it shows someone in a bad light.

The trouble is the nature of governments, and the nature of people. No one ever wants anything released that makes them look bad, and governments very very rarely relinquish powers they gain.

Having said all that, by _far_ the best thing that New Labour did for us in the UK was introduce the Freedom of Information act, which Labour has been bitten itself by in a couple of cases, and which is what actually was used to expose the entire expenses scandal recently. That is a very important piece of legislation, and a great one, though I'll wager now they wished they never introduced it. Unfortunately the FOI act only applies to information about governmental institutions, and not about privately held stuff. The data protection act is a pretty good act too - it allows any individual to request of _any_ organisation any information that they hold on that individual. Though I personally didn't know they essentially had to pass that legislation to come into compliance with the EU until just now.

I'm not saying those laws are perfect - far from it, there are exceptions to the FOI act, and it can be vetoed by government ministers (which has happened twice). They do need to go further. However, before their implementation, there was basically no formal requirement for information transparency at all in the UK... Hopefully, some future government will give the FOI act a few more teeth (though it has already been proven very useful).

I'm not a New Labour apologist by any means, detention without trial is 100% wrong in my opinion. The Surveillance State is getting worse. The DNA database for people who have not ever been convicted of a crime is utterly wrong, and is truly questionable even for those (like myself) who have been convicted of minor offences. And for me, personally the absolute worst thing, especially coming from a "Labour" government, is that the wealth gap has become far worse. The wealth gap is a very good indicator of societal happiness in western societies : bigger gap = more unhappiness. This was a major pledge, to narrow it, from New Labour, and they've widened it. Anyway, I just started this paragraph to show I wasn't a Labour apologist, and I've ended up ranting. Oh well...

Of course, the UK government has a track record of completely ignoring the ECHR.

Sigh. The UK government has never ignored a ECHR ruling. Not once. It can be a little slow getting round to enforcing a judgement that it doesn't like; that is sadly common, in that the court lacks effective ways of enforcing it itself. Not unique to the UK though.

On the ever so slightly bright side, there is still some question if the provisions to disconnect users purely on the basis of an accusation (which is essentially all that is required, given the poor standards of "evidence" required) would stand up to scrutiny in the European courts.

Of course, the UK government has a track record of completely ignoring the ECHR, so don't count your chickens.

"Well my experience in a number of different arenas suggests otherwise. JVMs consistently lag in speed, memory used and CPU utilisation compared to a compiled binaries (written in any language) not to mention I/O throughput, poor memory mapping functionality"

Sorry, that's simply not true. I'll explain below in response to your other comment.

"no forking, virtually non existent process control (yes , process, not thread) ability, no interprocess pipes, no tty control and in general just lame support for OS APIs."

A lot of this is really irrelevant to the discussion, as I don't disagree if you want to do systems level stuff that Java and .NET are probably not the best options. Languages like Java and .NET language implementations abstract things away specifically so they are portable, if you need to be working with OS level APIs then you're right, Java and the likes of C# are not the tool for you, but most people do not need these things for many applications. That said, if you really do want it, there's still the option of JNI in Java and unmanaged code in C# regardless so you can still keep the unmanaged benefits where possible without the disadvantages throughout your entire codebase.

"So you're saying it only optimises based on the type of OS, not the type of CPU. Yes , I can see how that would be better. Not."

No, that's not what I'm saying. This is the issue again, you do not seem to understand how managed languages work and why they perform well now. The issue is this, C/C++ compilers can optimise a binary they compile only for a generic architecture, because they cannot tell what platform they will be run on. JIT compilers like those underlying Java and .NET nowadays still compile applications down to native code just like C compilers do, but as they compile JIT they can optimise for the exact machine that the application is being run on taking into account specific processor, RAM availability and so forth- they can do a much more specific set of optimisations than a C/C++ compiler. This is the reason Java performs as well as C/C++ in the vast majority of cases, and even performs better in some cases nowadays. The performance problem for managed languages is largely a solved issue nowadays.

"And you're the typical kind of arrogant know-it-all who just goes by what he's been told rather than first hand experience. So any views you have to offer are worthless frankly IMO."

This makes no sense, you're talking Java down with a clear lack of understanding about it, yet I'm responding to correct you precisely because I have actually got experience in multiple different languages including all those being discussed. The point is I do have first hand experience, whilst your lack of understanding about managed languages shows you simply do not.

"Well that blows any credibility you had out the water. WHy not google the fun the London Stock Exchange had with .NET and why they eventually ditched it along with Windows."

Ah, that's probably a bad example. LSE had .NET problems because of bad development, and not because of any inherent issue with .NET. You see, the reason I state that's a bad example, is because a few months back, the LSE ran into exactly the same set of issues with their shiny new Linux based implementation, oops-

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/nov/26/london-stock-exchange-crashes

Really, you couldn't have picked a worse example. Besides, I'm not doing HPC stuff at the moment, I'm using .NET simply because it fits the bill for the current projects perfectly, and because it offers the most rapid development, testing and maintenance tools for the job. I don't see how using the most sensible tool for the job blows my credibility out the water, you'd be hard pressed to justify using something like Java for the sort of work I

It's quite possibly related to this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/askjack/2010/apr/01/tiscali-blocking-guardian-emails

• BBC
• Reuters
• Guardian
• Telegraph

I think you underestimate how difficult it is to get a handgun in the UK. So what about enthusiasts? They're a small number of nut-jobs, and gun possession isn't a divine right.

I think you overestimate how difficult it is to get a handgun in the UK. Google for "handgun violence UK" and spend some time reading what comes up.

As for the enthusiasts, why should their freedom be restricted to no purpose? Perhaps we should take your hobby away, too, just because we feel like it? Free societies don't arbitrarily restrict their members without compelling reason, and no real research has shown gun control to have a significant positive impact on violent crime, anywhere in the world.

Oh, and I disagree that gun possession isn't a natural right. But I'm sure we'll just have to agree to disagree on that point.

I remember that Robert J. Sawyer's Neanderthal Paralax books mentioned that religious experiences can be triggered by electrical fields as well, kind of a reverse MRI i think? I'm pretty sure that part was based on actual research.

Hmmm, a quick google search turns up this article on reading such experiences with an MRI, but i think there was a way to trigger them too.

The US as a shining beacon of opportunity seems to be, for some time, a convenient lie that's fed to you...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_mobility#Social_system
Despite this formal opportunity for social mobility, recent research suggests that Britain and particularly the United States have less social mobility than the Nordic countries and Canada.[6][7] These authors state that "the idea of the US as the land of opportunity persists; and clearly seems misplaced."
[6] http://www.suttontrust.com/reports/IntergenerationalMobility.pdf
[7] http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2005/apr/25/socialexclusion.accesstouniversity

Though I guess the myth will persist..."nanny states" leading as the Land of Opportunity?! Can't be...

It's exactly the same in the UK, though it's a little worse. The BAE Saudi deal was rife with hundred of millions worth of bribes, and the investigation was stopped due to "national security". Gagging orders were placed on media, notably the Grauniad, and then super gagging orders, which prevented all newspapers from reporting that a question was even asked in the house of commons. It turns out national security wasn't really at risk, but another big contract was.

You guys are so lucky. Actually I think you have a generally cool country and I think I'd happily try living in Finland if I wasn't so rubbish at languages! - thoroughly enjoyed my visits to Helsinki.

So this junk mail problem. Until recently the post workers had to deliver "unaddressed mail" to houses - junk mail/spam which is addressed "Dear Householder/ To The Owner" etc. Usually this is from insurance companies, double glazing companies etc, people selling us stuff. They don't even know who lives in the house.

Currently, the cap on the number of these items is three per house per day. But with the ratification of the new agreement between the Communications Workers Union (CWU) and the Royal Mail, that cap will be lifted. The postal workers represented by their unions weren't happy about this, they don't like carry the extra weight on their backs every day and know that they aren't popular with house owners for delivering junk mail. If they didn't have to carry so much junk mail they could carry more real mail and get round more houses in the same time.

So already you can get 18 junk mails a week (no Sunday deliveries) but now we might get as many as the junk companies want to post us.

We do have a junk mail opt-out system you can sign up for "Mail Preference Service" but this only stops you from receiving *addressed* mail, stuff with your name on it (so if you joined a competition for a prize and gave them your name and address and they send you junk afterwards). It doesn't stop the *unaddressed* mail.

I think Finland sounds a more civilised country than the UK in this respect.

The problem is our country is short of money so the national services like the post are looking to find ways of making money and being paid to deliver junk mail is something they will do...

You forgot the opart when he says democracy should be put "on hold" for awhile while we 'deal with' gthis crisis.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/mar/29/james-lovelock-climate-change

Looks like Lovelock himself thinks otherwise.

an end result that looks like Sharia Law more than anything else.

Yeah, the copyright punishments are totally "an eye for an eye" - for every song you pirate, the studios get to distribute one of your songs.

Lovelock is being taken out of context. A more full quote:

But it can't happen in a modern democracy. This is one of the problems. What's the alternative to democracy? There isn't one. But even the best democracies agree that when a major war approaches, democracy must be put on hold for the time being. I have a feeling that climate change may be an issue as severe as a war. It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while.

From the slightly-less-badly-edited interview at:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/mar/29/james-lovelock

In other words, he's not calling for putting democracy on hold. He's predicting that it's going to reach a point where it's an obvious, impending crisis, like a war, and people aren't going to respond democratically to it.

He doesn't believe people are going to take climate change seriously until it's too late. Or at least, not enough people. There will continue to be arguments and finger-pointing until it finally becomes obvious. Not that it's a good thing, just a thing he expects.

Read the rest of the interview, and Lovelock sounds less like a monster than the article is trying to make him out to be. He's still elitist, proudly so:

Science was always elitist and has to be elitist. The very idea of diluting it down [to be more egalitarian] is crazy. We're paying the price for it now.

but he's not calling for an end to democracy. He's simply telling everybody they'll be sorry if they don't listen to him.

Related to mental illness: http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/treatment.shtml
Also lack of community:
http://www.amazon.com/Surviving-Americas-Depression-Epidemic-Community/dp/1933392711
Also poor diet:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2006/oct/17/prisonsandprobation.ukcrime

Um, yes they have. Their first priority was to apply DRM to the metadata, but they requested OFCOM to review whether encryption should be allowed. Read their original request.

While it first did indeed look as if OFCOM would stop the BBC's treacherous plans, they have since softened and it currently looks as if DRM is well on it's way.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/feb/09/ofcom

and they can't because it would break millions of deployed set-top boxes.

The BBC has a few sneaky tricks up their sleeve for that. They would start by applying it to all HD channels.
And then they'll do what they did to encourage people to switch to digital receivers in the first place: launch new channels and water down your previous service so much that everyone upgrades. As long as they still show the news they're still doing their job right?

Does this help?

The Israelis, yet again, demonstrate that their nation is part of the West. Israel is a Western democracy that safeguards civil rights and, in general, human rights. Wafa Sultan, a prominent American of Syrian ancestry, correctly and firmly praises the achievements of the Israelis.

Israel, not Turkey, deserves to be a member of the European Union (EU).

The Turks have long attacked human rights. In Turkey, suppressing free speech on and off the Internet is almost a national sport. You can be arrested and imprisoned for claiming that the Turks are responsible for the Armenian genocide.

After a Congressional committee approved a resolution ascribing responsibility for the genocide to the Turks, the Turks withdrew their ambassador from the USA.

This sort of behavior is not what we Westerners want to see in the European Union. The Israelis act more like Europeans than the Turks and deserve EU membership far more than the Turks.

ah ?!

Israel is a racist country which violets human rights and international law.
Our army top officers ordered solders to ignore our Bagats (which is the highest authority in our court system.) orders and to ignore the law.

As one that live in Israel I can say FUCK NO, my country doesn't deserve to even be called a democracy, my friends has been arrested for saying stuff like what I write to Israelis.

Israel, not Turkey, deserves to be a member of the European Union (EU).

The Turks have long attacked human rights. In Turkey, suppressing free speech on and off the Internet is almost a national sport. You can be arrested and imprisoned for claiming that the Turks are responsible for the Armenian genocide.

After a Congressional committee approved a resolution ascribing responsibility for the genocide to the Turks, the Turks withdrew their ambassador from the USA.

This sort of behavior is not what we Westerners want to see in the European Union. The Israelis act more like Europeans than the Turks and deserve EU membership far more than the Turks.

So in Israel's case where the genocide is ongoing, it's somehow better, not worse, than a genocide that happened in the past?