Slashdot Mirror

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

Interestingly, he has no Wikipedia article; I'm off out to dinner with friends, but if some kind soul could kick things off, let me know and I'll contribute tomorrow.
Deserves a link to/from the "Enigma" page at least.

UK is a BIG english-speaking market, where people buy more goods online than in any other country in the world ( http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new... ).

Your statement is inaccurate. What your source says is that a higher proportion of Britons buy things online than any other OECD country, but the UK does not buy more goods online than any other country. Per capita, possibly (although the graph didn't show amount spent, only proportion who bought anything), but the US still spends far more as a whole. Furthermore, these five companies - with the exception of Microsoft - don't really sell much *to* people. They'd lose money pulling out of the UK, certainly, but it might still be more cost-effective in the long run.

UK is a BIG english-speaking market, where people buy more goods online than in any other country in the world ( http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new... ). right now, these companies are just trying to save faces before they start applying lubricant to all orifices. by the time UK government says "bend over", they'll be waiting in line with pants around their ankles.

65 purchases, according to one account, including $2,200 in one hour.

the most famous example in recent history: the Savile coverup. Other famous examples: the priest and a small boy in relief with his cock hanging out above the main entrance to the BBC London headquarters at Broadcasting House (NSFW). Building 7 WTC falling on its own footprint twenty six minutes earlier than it actually did (1:17 in, it's RIGHT THERE as she's pointing to the spot where it "was"!).

Plenty of high performing schools have large class sizes. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/edu...

Maybe not 60 kids per class, but if we bump our average from 24 to 30 that would take a lot of teachers off the payroll (or alternately, let us stop hiring new teachers for a while and let it change gradually) and open up money for other things that might help kids more than class size politics.

Supposedly, 75% of intelligence is determined by genes

Only in young children it goes down to 40% by the end of school and 0% by the end of university.

Supposedly, 75% of intelligence is determined by genes. The results reported in TFA would seem to explain the reasons of poverty in the US — the poor aren't too smart to begin with. Their children — despite going to the same schools as others — remain stupid.

If other countries do not demonstrate an effect so profound, that may mean, being intelligent is not as rewarding over there and smart people may remain poor.

Maduro is trying to create a whole new parliament from scratch to suit his needs and deny his people any semblance of democracy: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

That's a new one, AFAIK not even african dictators had pulled that off before. Your people have voted you out of their assembly ? Decree yourself a brand new "people's assembly" in its place !

Because Trump was the Darling of the SNP for quite a while.

Alex Salmond, famous for his supposed love of Scotland and it's people overruled a local ruling and a local man who refused to sell his farm for Trump's golf course because what Alex Salmond actually gives a shit about is power and money, not Scottish people and he saw Trump as a path to that. This is also why he has courted Murdoch on numerous occasions.

But then Murdoch got into phone hacking and Trump got pissed about wind energy, and became quite embarrassing, so Salmond instead decided to pretend he hated these hard right types that he'd been courting so hard for so long at the expense of the Scottish people.

The only travesty is that Scots with a nationalist leaning hate England and in particular Westminster so much because they're so full of nationalist bile that they're willing to fall hook line and sinker for the myth that Salmond and co. give a shit about anything other than themselves and their own thirst for power. The idea they give a shit about Scotland or the average Scotsman is laughable given how close Salmond and the SNP were to people like Trump to the point of being willing to fuck over Scottish people to Trump's benefit. Scottish nationalism is mostly about a racist hate for the English by people who naively thought Braveheart was a factual documentary, because the SNP have shown many a time they have no problem selling parts of Scotland and it's people down river to anyone else, like Trump.

So there's your answer. They awarded it to him because for some time he was the darling of the SNP, which shows what a fucking joke the SNP are to anyone with half a brain as much as they may claim to hate and want to distance themselves from him now. But here is old Alex with his mates that he now likes to pretend were never any such thing, because, as they say, a picture paints a thousand words:

http://cdn2.spectator.co.uk/fi...

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multi...

http://www.heraldscotland.com/...

1. Not news. Story reheated too many times. Older articles:
http://www.theotherside.co.uk/...
http://www.voanews.com/content...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/his...

2. The Russians did it too.
https://books.google.de/books?...

3. The Germans/Axis did it too:
http://www.track-link.com/foru...
This is also mentioned in the monumental 1970s British documentary "The World At War", which I strongly suggest to watch instead of reading this drivel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

So is the US when it did this to the poor poor Kennedy: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

Have onboard Sync send emails with truck's GPS location to IhateTerrorists@CIA.gov every day

But why? The CIA already knows where many of them are- they literally sponsor them or their allies:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...
http://www.reuters.com/article...
http://www.theguardian.com/wor...
Just google for more: https://www.google.com/search?...
http://www.washingtonsblog.com...
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
All this because the US Gov wanted to destroy/weaken the Syrian Gov:
http://www.theguardian.com/com...
http://www.washingtonsblog.com...

Plus the pesky old Flynn effect. At this point all of our children are above average, at least relative to 1900.

Average intelligence is more than sufficient to provide common sense, by the way. The difficulty isn't that the entire population doesn't consist of rocket scientists. The real problems are poverty, poor education leading to ignorance, trauma associated with things like poverty and military experience, mental illness in general, and above all religion. A person of average intelligence or even slightly lower than average intelligence as measured by IQ tests per se can still be plenty clever and sensible enough to come in out of the rain; if they have a weakness it is that they may lack the critical thinking skills to reject religious indoctrination and separate fantasy that they have been taught as fact from the real thing. They may also be more susceptible (on the same basis) to a cleverly constructed lie.

But there are plenty of people with I.Q. above 110 who have the exact same problems, or who have their own special set of problems. Sanity, as opposed to knowledge or problem solving capability, is distributed fairly sparsely across any population because our brains and perceptions do not work perfectly and because it is pretty much a truism that we are blind to our own failures. I am nominally pretty bright, myself, and teach physics and higher math to one of the most highly selected subgroups of human on the planet, and am confronted with my own failures in ratiocination, those of my also very bright colleagues, and those of the enormously bright students we teach on literally a daily basis.

This truly is a case where one should worry about the splinter in one's own eye (metaphorically) before worrying about that in everybody else's. Who knows what the real motivation is behind the idiocy posted above (or even what the real truth is, as the article doesn't reveal who had the energy to push for the ban or what their real motivation is). This is a country where a substantial number of people still think that high voltage power lines cause leukemia and that cell phones cause brain damage when you hold them next to your ear, and not just in North Carolina. It is a country where (according to at least some polls) roughly half the population still believe that the world is less than 10,000 years old and that Noah really did build a species-preserving ark:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/n...

Again, they don't all live in rurlal NC. Every state has its share of them, and if you pick the right community in almost any state or interview the right members of that community you can support the assertion that any state has small towns that are insane. There are members of congress that believe this tripe. Some of the readers of this reply on /. believe some fraction of tripe. Even as a theoretical physicist and hence an ultimate rationalist, I probably believe something that is tripe, or at least I almost certainly believe some things that are objectively false. A degree of humility is very definitely in order, even among the best and brightest of us, for the scale of our errors is determined as much by power and persuasiveness of the mind making the error as it is by the error itself, and the brightest of us often have the strongest opinions and can be quite persuasive of our errors.

rgb

that the copyright on a song whose melody was composed in 1893 and lyrics in the 30s is _still_ being contested. IIRC nothing has lapsed into the public domain since 2010, and that's not likely to change. Anyone remember when the Mouse is up for another extension?

Times being what they are, Mein Kampf is becoming public domain and will be published again:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

So, publishing helps you get funding - keeps you employed, so to speak. I assume publishing a bogus paper doesn't help so much does it? Or one that says everyone else is wrong, and the organization funding your research is wrong as well? Not a popular paper I suppose...

As far as Hansen et al. cooking the books, here's one good source but you can literally go through the raw data, and see how it's been adjusted many times, and it happens regularly. Interesting that nearly all the adjustments tend to make the temperature increase "higher" than what the actual data said, too...

Of course, the adjustments warning of massive calamity that can only be saved by huge "investments" and control by Big Government - the same entity that provides all those NIH and other grants - have no financial impact on those who do the adjustments, right?

Continues to push bad science. Along with Michael Mann. Their data is shown to be highly manipulated, not what was claimed, and the models built don't follow realit - but they insist they are correct and must be used for setting political policies. Real science wouldn't hide data, wouldn't support models that continue to be in error, and wouldn't constantly "readjust" past, good data to make the models work. Not to mention using his children as foils to sue the Government over his beliefs.

Everyone is doing this is everyone else; USA bugs aircraft bought by Chinese:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

http://www.airforcemag.com/Mag...

I amazes me that so few people can see that, except for the brazen world conquest thing, Saudi Arabia is not very different at all from ISIS.

And even that is starting to change, as noted even by this obvious fanboi.

I have heard anecdotes (<-- disclaimer) that Type Twos do well on a (very) low-carb die

There's scientific evidence now, too.

Found one:
  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foo...

. false positives are guaranteed to happen.

Like the Paediatrician attacked by semi-literate vigil-antis who thought that it meant the same as Paedophile!

in NYC you can find a basement to rent in a private home for cash and a lot of times a minimal background check.

Can you really? In the UK the checks that landlords must provide are far form minimal. I'm pretty sure you could find places to rent that didn't do this, but I don't think they'd be in the best parts of town!

Section 3.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.

So, are you saying that he is not adhering to Russia, or giving aid and comfort to any of the US's enemies? I am not sure of the definition of adhering in this context, but it is quite easy to see how exposing the methods used to spy would be giving aid to the US's enemies, it after all led directly to Crimea being invaded and annexed.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

Well, there is all that smog in London that is mainly caused by diesel by-products. Last year practically the entire country was under a smog alert at one point.

Yes but he doesn't propose banning the main source of diesel polution: Heavy vehicles. He is only proposing banning an insignificant source of diesel polution, the source that already has the strictest rules and best filters.

Well, there is all that smog in London that is mainly caused by diesel by-products. Last year practically the entire country was under a smog alert at one point.

There is obviously a correlation between being dateless and becoming a terrorist.

It probably isn't especially high. It isn't hard to find examples of suicide bombers that were married.

Couple planned Isil suicide bombing of Westfield or Tube, court hears
Married to monster
Saddam Rewards Suicide Bombers' Families

Ah yes, the typical "progressive" downward spiral in all of their arguments that go poorly: just start calling people Nazis, racists, xenophobes, or references to Hitler.

You have lost the argument at this point, but I will post for the sake of others reading this thread that intelligence agencies have estimated the number of radical Islamists at approximately 20%, which equates to a number which is near the entire population of the USA. There is also stats that show 20% of Muslims in the UK showed support for the bombing attacks in London, and that 40% of them want Sharia law. Just because not every one of them picks up a weapon or blows themselves up, doesn't mean they aren't materially contributing towards this end.

I'm sure you'll just claim this is a lie, but you'll have to come up with something better than "lolz hitlar!" or "i don't like your source, therefore i'll just ignore it instead of refuting details."

Maybe you don't work in a country that speaks English.

https://jobs.telegraph.co.uk/j...
https://sjobs.brassring.com/TG...
http://acre.com/jobs/internati...
https://jobs.royalmailgroup.co...
https://www.london.edu/about/j...
https://www.london.edu/about/j...

The Bank of England chief economist recently argued that if we needed negative interest rates cash might have to be abolished. Add a security angle and it might yet happen.

The UK Conservative Party wants a higher nationwide "Living Wage"...so it ends up being on the liberal side of the US spectrum.

Twitter, BAH! If you want to be effective, follow their finances and arms deals, but be careful, you will find out things you don't want to know. Or you could file an FOIA request for the receipts at the state department. There you will find what makes this ride go 'round and 'round.

With any luck we can get "Syrian refugees" to confuse "Europa" with "Europe".

I'm betting Angela Merkel just changed her mind about letting more "Syrian refugees" into Germany...

I agree that it would be naive to think that trained operational terror cells do not use a variety of techniques to hide from intelligence services. Technically it would be an unwinnable war to defeat encryption so the noise about it is largely ill informed political hubris.

Mass surveillance of un-encrypted communications and web browsing can detect people who have an interest in Daesh. It will certainly catch a lot of teenagers and put them on watch lists, which is probably the actual intention of mass surveillance.

Having made the commons of the internet unsafe for actual operational terror cells, governments will be free to concentrate on the uncommon internet, all VPN and Tor users will be on watch lists.

I wouldn't use Tor if I were you, it signals you as a potential criminal or terrorist. It will probably become illegal to use if it has not already been compromised by the intelligence services.

One act that would protect Westerners from Daesh would be to prevent Western teenagers from going there and being trained to use weapons. Removing the passport from anyone who reads a Wikipedia article on Daesh would achieve that objective more easily than patrolling the border. (Protecting Europe's external boarder will prove difficult, not least because it would be against the 1951 UN refugee convention to stop taking Syrian refugees - who we should remind ourselves are fleeing from years of Daesh violence far in excess of the Paris attack last week).

Unfortunately detecting terrorist sympathizers will be only a transient use of mass surveillance as once the resource is created it will eventually be abused - there are already morons who want to give random bureaucrats access to it, with no comprehension that this would rapidly get out of control and criminalize the entire population. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

(It irritates me intensely that the BBC continues to call this Khawaarij cult the Islamic State - a cult which is described by most Muslims as "people who recite the Qur’an, but it will not go past their collarbones").

As for annual physicals, I'm pretty sure that's only a thing in countries with privatised healthcare. I don't think the NHS has ever proposed such at thing.

I guess they aren't annual in the UK, but every 5 years or so...

Apollo was well worth the money spent on it. Not the lunar rocks, but the many other scientific advances advances that resulted from engineering a Moon landing. Including the computer you are using.

HadCRUT? You mean the data set that is full of glaring errors and manipulated data?

Climate alarmists, if you want to continue to frighten children and the mentally slow with your tales of woe, please at least to to source data people not so obviously desperate to craft a scary fairy-tale.

Going dark is the solution, not the problem.

It appears there are some externalities with that solution.

Reports: Britons might have 'helped construct the bomb'
The unconfirmed reports suggesting British jihadists were involved in the bombing claim that Britons trained in Syria with an "electronics background" might have helped to construct the bomb that brought down the Russian jet. "Chatter" picked up by GCHQ reportedly featured jihadists with London and Birmingham accents celebrating in Egypt after the explosion.

I am curious about the bit where it says "allowance of rape culture."

I must have missed some headlines or something. What events are prompting that concern?

How about this? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

"The hacking group Anonymous has threatened to make public the identities of four boys accused of gang-raping a Canadian teenager who later killed herself after images of the attack went viral."

Or this? http://www.rollingstone.com/cu...

A summary of all the things above states essentially that Anonymous will defend the weak and preyed upon by exposing their tormentors.

Yes, but the salient point is that absent a birth defect or genetic mutation, the body is not what is broken. The body is fine. The issue is with the brain, and I've never seen any evidence of any "Trans" person having a brain which is physically at odds with the body.

If you haven't seen evidence, maybe you haven't looked too hard, or have been looking in the wrong places (confirmation bias)? As just one example of how genes and the uterine environment combine to contribute to being transsexual, please consider this: 90% of the population are right-handed, but the majority of transsexuals are lefties. This is relatively old news for anyone who bothered to look, but it agrees with studies that show a difference in the ratio of the lengths of the 2nd and 4th finger (2d-4d ratio) where M2F women have ratios similar to genetic women instead of genetic men, and that one structure of the brain more closely resembles that of our target, rather than birth, sex. Both of those are caused by genes expressing themselves differently, and the 2d/4d ratio is genes expressing themselves under hormonal effects in the uterine environment. So, I hope you can see why we say we're "born that way, and with all the problems it brings, it's certainly not a choice unless you are extremely masochistic.

Given that it has its basis on genes and epigenetics, why not consider the surgeries as corrective, not mutilation?

So, not a delusion, not a psychological disease, but a variant of human biology. And as time goes on, the evidence continues to accumulate that this has been the case for hundreds, if not thousands, of years.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men...

That's the study. I misquoted. 2x increase in ASD for infant circ.

about left/right????

I only mentioned "left" (not "right") because THEY are the ones currently pushing speech codes, complaining that any speech they dislike is "hate speech" that must be suppressed, showing up at speeches and rallies (by many different speakers of many different political stripes) to shout-down the speakers, hijack the microphones, etc.

As for it being "hypocritical" - well you seem to like to troll using that accusation but you seem not to know what the word means. I should not need to cite left wing suppression of speech when it's in the news on a nearly daily basis and is all over the web and is currently the subject of another active thread RIGHT HERE ON SLASHDOT. How about liberal rag Slate DEFENDING speech codes. Even the ACLU has had to recognize the plague of liberal speech suppression on the campus. Here's the left-leaning The Atlantic defending the suppression of free speech. It's happening in all the formerly Judeo-Christian nations as they become more secular and more left-wing as can be seen at The Telegraph

The following actual or publicly-thought-of-as right-of-center people have been attacked while speaking at public events by leftists wielding pies: William F. Buckley, Phyllis Schlafly, G. Gordon Liddy, Anita Bryant, Rupert Murdoch, Ann Coulter, David Horowitz. While pie attacks have been used by leftists against other leftists for not being left enough, I have never heard of a right-winger attacking a left-winger with a pie on stage in an attempt to shut-down the speech of the left-winger.

Of course there are also the incidents where people like Condoleezza Rice, first black female Sec of State was disinvited to speak. How about this: list of stuff leftists have banned from various colleges? Here is a Harvard Crimson editorial in favor of junking free speech in favor of "social justice". If you are so inept that you cannot ferret-out even a tiny bit of evidence from the publicly-available tidal wave of evidence that the left is responsible for most of the speech suppression these days then you are the last person who should be labeling other people as trolls - apparently simply because they disagree with you (Making yourself an example of the phenomena)

Please cite the most recent 5 examples of a US College or University event where a left-of-center speaker was shut down (speech blocked/microphone seized/Pies thrown/etc) by a bunch or college Republicans or TEA Partiers. Please cite any occasions in the past 20 years when any right-leaning group has demanded a left-leaning speaker be shut up (and please exclude those very few cases where such a plea was made as part of a call for balance AFTER left-wingers successfully block right-leaning speakers) on a university campus. The university USED to be the place where all speech was welcome. This is no longer the case

Forced abortion seems to be one of the ways they enforce the law (though probably not so publicly): http://mobile.nytimes.com/2012...

I understand that to be an isolated incident. Horrible, no doubt, but hardly the 'regular' action taken. I'm asking what the usual, regular action is.

336 million abortions and 196 million sterilizations according to China's own Ministry of health.

So not so much what one might class as 'isolated incidents'.

It still is especially when you consider actual results.

The actual result was matching the population to the food supply and eliminating famine.

336 million forced abortions and 196 forced sterilizations according to China's own Ministry of health.

People in the west don't understand that for most Chinese, the one child policy doesn't have effect. Because there are so many exceptions.

1) If you and your partner were single kids, you can have two kids.
2) Ethnic minorities have higher limits, and foreigners, including Hong Kong and Taiwan can have unlimited
3) Rich people just pay the tax and have another child, because they are so rich from corruption money is nothing for them.
4) Some provinces had already lifted the ban, or lessened it greatly.
5) Children born outside China, including HK and Taiwan, don't count. Hence the large amount of birth tourism.

So this is pretty much a symbolic act, but at least it's the communists admitting they can't control everything. I wonder how this will be spun off in China, since there the communists are still treated as nearly perfect, the thing everyone should aspire to be.

According to China's Health Ministry, the one child policy had forced 336 million abortions as of 2013. It also had forced the sterilization of 196 million men and women.

In the grand scheme of things, this is something it's worth making a big deal about. Certainly more worthy of a mention than female stereotypes in media and other injustices against women that get a lot more coverage. But yeah, they've been relaxing the restrictions for awhile now.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men...

Still calling bullshit, or just spouting it?

The former wife of Paul Frampton, the Oxford-educated scientist in prison in Argentina accused of smuggling cocaine, says in her first full interview that he is a "naïve fool".

Women do lots of unpleasant and dangerous jobs. Let's look at the most dangerous jobs, shall we?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/fin...
http://www.mirror.co.uk/featur...

Teachers, librarians and estate agents all make the top 10. There are plenty of female farming staff as well, of course, although less than there used to be due to automation. Going back further women's work used to be extremely dangerous, e.g. working in cloth making factories with primitive machinery.

There reason there isn't much effort to get more women into mining because no-one is trying to force people into jobs they don't want. I know it's a common straw man argument against these programmes, that they are forcing women into STEM when they just want to play with ponies and become nurses and hair dressers, but actually there are women saying they want to study certain subjects but find that there are gender based barriers. So in response to that there are efforts to correct the problem.

If you can find some women who want to become miners but find gender based barriers in their way, you can expect support for their cause.

.. spout some degenerate knuckle-dragging nonsense that condemns over 1.6 billion people with a single sentence, .

You make it sound like there is a small minority when 7% on Muslims in the UK or about 200,000 support ISIS and 27% sympathised with the charlie hebdo and Jewish supermarket attacks. I suggest you read the Qur'an some day instead of just believing the lie that it is all love and peace.

You can try to solve violence with the violence you seem to profess to hate with one side of your mouth but I don't really think that's a solution. Well, at least as far as I can tell, it's an unlikely solution. You probably felt pretty smart typing out that reply, didn't you? *sighs* I suppose you just want to be the new boss because, you know, you're way is so much better. After all, you're just suggesting we kill more people for a cause you think is just.

Well, that was an odd response. Written under the influence of too little caffeine or too much alcohol? This isn't a hard subject for me....I'm as opposed to the Syrian organ eaters as I am to Obama's drone murders. But I'm also aware that the organ eater is there because of American policy ("regime change"), and that he's not assassinating people on the other side of the planet from him.

Well, I'm pretty pissed off with my government which is why I am running for State office - it's a start.

Just about any needed, massive change has arrived in spite of electoral politics, not because of it. Gays didn't win marriage equality through Congress, but the courts. Women didn't gain the right to vote by voting. Etc, etc.