Slashdot Mirror

And look who is benefitting (hope it doesn't need a login outside the UK).

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-21478 64.html

In my opinion, this "zero-sum game" model of economics is fallacious. But it's the one that the nay-sayers have to keep going back to, to make us think we're all getting poorer.

Why do I care how many billions Gates has, as long as I'm free to pursue happiness in my way?

I think for many people (myself included), the problem is not the ID card but the gigantic government-run database that backs them. What we don't want is for the government to amass so much data on us that they can manipulate us.

Bing! We have a winner!

That's exactly the point. And taking the UK ID Card scheme as an example, in the list of data elements scheduled for inclusion on the database (according to Clause 4(i) of the Schedule to the Act) is:

the number of any designated document which is held by him and is a document the number of which does not fall within any of the preceding sub-paragraphs;

Do I need to spell it out? That's Foreign Keys to every single other government database.

And quite besides the Civil Liberties argument, the UK Scheme is going to cost upwards of UKP19bn in setup costs on current scope (and we're already getting feature creep), and no-one's yet come up with a genuine reason for it that can't be achieved through other means, or frankly isn't worth the money (of the financial benefits predicted, only UKP35m is robust).

The solution is Jackie Fisher who are you dreadnought. Explanation in the solution secion at smithycode also here

After a few hours' excruciating scribbling, The Times finally decoded the judge's message. It should read: "Smithy Code Jackie Fisher who are you Dreadnought." Admiral John "Jackie" Fisher is widely regarded as the second most significant figure in the Royal Navy's history, after Nelson. He revolutionised sea warfare by introducing the first modern battleship, HMS Dreadnought.

The thing that's nagging at me is its 'smithycode', not 'smithcode'. Why? It makes it ten characters long which makes me wonder if smithycode is an anagram of anything.

From another article

Mr Justice Smith confirmed Mr Tench's suspicions when he said the pattern was "something more than a typo". The judge, who is 53 and lists some of his hobbies as reading military history and the sinking of the Titanic, said that paragraph 52 of his judgment would give readers a clue to the puzzle.

That paragraph reads: "I have set out at some length what in my opinion is an overall analysis of HBHG [The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail]. I have done that and will do the same further in this judgment in respect of DVC [The Da Vinci Code] because that is essential in my view to deciding this case."The paragraph ended: "The key to solving the conundrum posed by this judgment is in reading HBHG and DVC."

In Mr Justice Smith's coded judgment, the first nine digits obviously spell Smith Code:
s,m,i,t,h,c,o,d,e,J,a,e,i,e,x,t,o,s,t,p,s,a,c,g,r, e,a,m,q,w,f,k,a,d,p,m,q,z.

Beyond that is anyone's guess.

Widely unnoticed by the general public, which is all caught up in Peak Oil yes-or-no discussions, Uranium faces the very same problems as fossil fuels, but they seem to be worse.

From this article: In 2001 the European Commission said that at the current level of uranium consumption, known uranium resources would last 42 years. With military and secondary sources, this life span could be stretched to 72 years. Yet this rate of usage assumes that nuclear power continues to provide only a fraction of the worlds energy supply.

And here is the actual development of Uranium price over the last century:
http://www.uranium.info/prices/monthly.html (note that the peak around '78 about coincides with the peak of the US and Soviet nuclear arsenal during the Cold War)

And here you have, again, the development of Uranium prices over the past 4 years:http://www.cameco.com/investor_relations/ux_ history/historical_ux.php(flash required for the small graphic, but the numbers are there in plain text)

Now if not only China builds dozens of reactors, but the western industrialized world as well, nuclear (i.e. fission) energy stops looking to be very attractive in the long run. Give us fusion (hot or cold), or give us renewable energy as our main source, but don't try to balance two resources which are ultimately limited and might well be seeing their practical end within our century. Don't floor the gas pedal if you know you will have to stop eventually, either by slowing down yourself or by being slowed down by a concrete wall.

France requested the extradition of a well know islamist terrorist called Rachid Ramda. He was involved in a wave a terrorist attacks (bomb in the tube killing 8 people) which occured in France around 1995. He was a member of the GIA a group of islamist from Algeria and the suspected mastermind behind these terrorist attacks.
Rachid Ramda was located in London and France requested its extradition in 1995.
However it took 10 years (and maybe 9/11) to get the UK to accept to extradite him. He was handed over to french authorities in 2005.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-2109 596.html

So if a islamist terrorist involeved in a bombing killing 8 people can wait 10 years before being extradited, how long a scot hacker will have to wait for tqmpering with US government computers. Or will US get special treatment and priority ?

Actually UK has been pretty complacent to islamist in the last 15 years. Did you know that Moussaui is french but he lived and studied in London. This is during this time he really became an islamist. Finsbury Park mosque leaders have been very open and well known for preaching Jihad (holly war against non muslem basically). It has been a recruiting and brainwashing center. They usually try to convice recruits by showing them that muslem are victims (Afganistan, Chechnia) and how you could be a hero if you take some action (showing filmed attacks on Russians troops in Chechnia for instance). UK police knew about it, watched it (even policemen with DV cam filming leaders speeches and preaches in the street). Why ? Because UK felt it was in control and for freedom of speech. Look at the result (Moussaoui, Richard Reed, etc... and 9/11).
Only recently they started to take action and arrest some people (suspected to be Al Quaeda agents in Europe).

Note : when France extradite a person to the US (or any other country I believe), it will do so on the condition that person will have a fair trial won't be executed.

No connections? Perhaps you should read more.

THIS is a forcefield!

Either way, both concepts are relatively old; I'm surprised the articles are only showing up now on slashdot.

The nonsense about AdSense

Remember how in US airports a person could be denied to take a flight, but due to "national security" wasn't allowed to see which law was applied? "National security". Um... yeah. Right.

Well, Google can remove your membership because of "Click fraud", but due to "trade secret" you weren't allowed to see the fraudulent traffic.

Um... yeah. Right.

You mean like this?

Typical of the UK too. We have all the advantages of a parliamentary democracy with a constitution that's mostly unwritten and/or easily changeable: the government can do pretty much whatever the hell they like, including recently passing some of the most draconian, illiberal legislation ever. It's not long now before they just abolish parliament completely and just set themselves up as rulers for life (see http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1072-20497 91,00.html, The Abolishment of Parliament Act as it's been nicknamed).

Yeah, they might as well have joked that the UK Government want to pass their very own Enabling Act, allowing them to change laws without going through Parliament. Only a total muppet could believe that.

> You haven't lived long enough.

Maybe you're just too old to care about the future?

Since you invaded Iraq there is no "bright idea"-way left. You fucked it up. You invaded your buddies (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/) country although you knew that there were no WMD (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593 607,00.html).
You lied to everyone and nobody trusts you anymore. You did this purely for economical reasons (Enron et al.).
Now you're spending your childrens educational and healthcare future and consitutional rights on a war you cannot win.
Meanwhile educating every other evil empire that they a) neeeeed nuclead wapons b) haaaate the US and will support any stupid suicide bomber.

Obese bunker busters are the last thing that will help your country but the hammer that makes you see everything as a nail.

And no, there really is no bright solution to the problems left. And no, you are not really bright.

k2r

Actually, I think you'll find Tamiflu is useless against bird flu!

People go to work for money. If that isn't your goal, you have some catching up to do.

I go to work to make some money and get fun/satisfaction/challenges/socialising/etc. I work enough hours each week that I don't want to waste them not enjoying it unless I have to.

Above a minimum money does not buy happiness and anybody who thinks so needs a reality check. The time of your life is the most important thing you have - don't waste it trying to put an extra zero on your bank account.

---

Beware deceptive astroturfers.

This is old news. A memo from July 2002 discovered by the Times (of London) last year shows that the desicion to go to war was already taken back then.

Concerning Sudoku: I got hooked on this around last April. I immediately loved it (I, like most slashdotters I imagine, enjoy number games). Then pretty quickly you notice that Sudoku actually has nothing at all to do with numbers. I rarely do any more traditional Sudokus these days but I must say that I've been doing quite a bit of Killer Sudoku: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,18209-2098 336,00.html check the third puzzle for an exmaple

This adds some arithmetics to the puzzle solving but these are extremely basic (such as in Kakuro).

Yep, I remember http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,9075- 2023600,00.html

> it just won't be in America. Countries like China, and to a lesser
> extent India, will soon become the hubs

Bah. China has got its own set of problems, for example, they're busy limiting the names of newborn babies.

And if by "religious fundamentalists" you mean people like Donald Knuth and John Vlissides, I think we're doing OK.

They say money doesn't buy you happiness? Well, it sure makes misery a whole lot easier to live with I can tell ya. I like the things money enables me to do with my life...

The science disagrees with you. Above a minimum money does not buy happiness.

---

Creating simple artificial scarcity with copyright and patents on things that can be copied billions of times at minimal cost is a fundamentally stupid economic idea.

Opposition editorial in the Times by a member of Parlament.

"The Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill has been called the "Abolition of Parliament Bill" by several leading lawyers because it appears to give the Government an unrestrained ability to rewrite laws as it chooses without passing them through Parliament."

Biological Intelligence is defined as: "The organism having produced the greatest number of viable reproducing offspring."

See how that works: Someone might have a billion dollars and a big IQ, but the guy with 'five kids to feed' is way smarter than the brainy guy.
(If the rich, brainy guy buys 10,000 clones of himself - well, that would count!)

I've seen families with 5 kids, 30 grand kids, and bunches more great grand kids on the way.

When it comes to evolution and populations, the bigger numbers with the best variations wins.

The World Health Organization believes blondes will go extinct in 200 years.

(Also on the BBC.)

So, save an endangered species - the true blondes, mate with one right away and make many children!

Evolution isn't as neat and simple as "better mammal wins" or "better gene gets selected".

Obviously not. Blondes are going to be extinct by 2202. So hoard up on blondes now!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-20586 88,00.html

"According to the study, north European women evolved blonde hair and blue eyes at the end of the Ice Age to make them stand out from their rivals at a time of fierce competition for scarce males."

If you assume mere physical ability is the measure of one's evolutionary ability, then yes, this is the outcome. But it seems at least somewhat likely that with the evolution of cognitive thought that the human species should not be measured in its ability to have healthy teeth (via your citation of dentistry) or be able to walk naturally (via your citation of wheelchairs). If the human intellect can overcome these physical limitations, we have succeeded in being evolutionarily adaptable to not only our environment but the setbacks which are inherent within each of us.

Excuse me if your post was not meant to connote, a very naive concept IMO of, social Darwinism. I'll grant that surely there are idiots who are both physical incapable and mentally incapable of adaptability that survive via human inventions, but do you really think the net outcome has been negative?

Additionally, for those interested, here is an fascinating article about people who naturally walk on all-fours discovered in Turkey. Even if the discovery does not amount to much scientifically speaking, it is fascinating to read about such oddities of the animal kingdom.

(Are you sure we're still at war with the British? I thought it was someone else Oh well, here goes...)

Et pendant ce temps la, the European Trade Commissioner was drinking champagne with Paul Allen... http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-1580 068,00.html http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/ 22/1550217

Considering the findings recently that soft drinks in the UK contain cancer causing Benzene - I haven't heard of the drinks being pulled off of the shelves yet.

What if cell phones are lnked to cancer? Are they going to expose the cells to triple the duration? Too much of anything can be dangerous. The electromagnetic fields that we live in daily are possibly harmful - will they stop microwave communications?

...the scary part is, if they do cause ill effects...we're giving mobile communications devices to children younger and younger.

A fair number of those immigrants where born here. We have a history of allowing dissent and the voicing of unpopular views, you know it's called 'free speech'

Unless, of course, those unpopular views involve race or religion (with an exception for Muslims; they can call for Sharia and Jihad as desired). Then the government locks you up, as they're currently trying to do with the head of the BNP. Or, apparently, if you deny the Holocaust in Austria (a belief that is surely silly, but I don't think being an idiot ought to be illegal).

But those evil racists deserve to be suppressed, right? I'm sure a few enlightened Europeans can reply and describe exactly how the speech of racists isn't really speech at all, but a nebulous, evil force that must be eliminated at any cost, thus justifying this bizarre and totally false claim that they enjoy the right of "free speech".

The problem I see is that they take down legal content in the pursuit of pirated DVDs. Why should the BT community that isn't pirating DVDs be paying for the abuse of a few?

It's also at least the 5th most popular name in England and Wales as of 2004 (probably even higher by now). Link.

Time for the English and Welsh to learn a real life lesson about exponential functions.

I'm afraid to link to my blog entry on this topic but there are a few articles I think you should read. I'll post links for you.

First of all, millions have protested the cartoons and only a very small minority of hoodlums have gone through and committed acts of violence. When we in the United States try to focus on these minorities, we further alienate Muslims around the world. Why? Muslims are forced onto their heels to defend themselves against a rampaging minority much like what we had to do post-9/11 with terrorism. It hits squarely on the idea that Muslims are guilty until proven innocent wherever they are. I think the right course of action is to recognize the millions who protested peacefully around the world and understand our grievances. The best analogy I can give you is that after Hurricane Katrina there was severe lawlessness in New Orleans but it was a minority of people. Some took advantage of the situation but that didn't make the plight of the people dealing with the aftermath any less important. Trying to smear all Muslim protests with the they-are-evil-and-violent brush is just like neglecting to give aide to the thousands in New Orleans because of a few idiots. I hope that makes some sense.

In terms of the Taliban, they support a minor interpretation of Islam. It is akin to what Christian nutcases like Pat Robertson sound like when they say Prime Minister Sharon deserves what he gets because he gave up land to the Palestinians. I doubt any sane majority in the US would ever think that and you don't see Muslims labeling all Christians as fanatics.

By the way, I believe that many ancient Greek and Roman texts were translated into Arabic and then re-translated to English during the Renaissance.

This video from "Newshour with Jim Lehrer" provides a great explanation on this topic. Focus on what Ali Abunimah says. His viewpoint is right in line with 95% of Muslims worldwide.

1. EI on PBS's "Newshour with Jim Lehrer" (Flash based video player)

Here are the articles:

1. Conscience or commerce: that is the question By Roy Greenslade
2. These cartoons don't defend free speech, they threaten it by Simon Jenkins

Let me know if you want to continue.

I agree with you in the main. However, the british navy is having ipod docking stations installed on it's latest over-priced, gold-plated kill machines. So, if you ask me, anything is possible.

An interesting op-ed piece I read today suggested that this is a war between Freedom and Fundamentalism. As we are seeing with the current Congressional Hearing involving Google, Yahoo, MSN, etc, Capitalism doesn't much care either way for Freedom or Fundamentalism, but is calculated solely on risk and reward - even if you purport to "do no evil". To look at Western politics around the world, and more topically the effects of those Danish cartoons which are not being published, most people don't have much of an opinion here either.

As has been said here previously, free speech only continues to exist when people exercise it. There is much uninformed opinion in the world, and even our leaders are increasingly elected on the basis of limited amounts of tightly controlled information. Does this lead us closer to Freedom and Democracy?

The Fundamentalist has a narrow agenda, is easily inflamed, readily invokes fear to reinforce their message, and has little respect for all who disagree. Those who favour Freedom will always suffer at the hands of Fundamentalists - Freedom is Fundamentalism's single worst enemy, and the uninformed Free will happily trade minor freedoms for any illusion of security against perceived threats. Against this slow but steady onslaught, Freedom's only weapon is exercising available freedoms - even to risk one's own life if necessary.

While it is the duty of the Free to selflessly attempt to liberate the oppressed, Capitalism guides us to minimise risk now and build short-term rewards. In the face of rising global Fundamentalism (whether Christian or Muslim, Capitalist or Socialist), Freedom dies by a thousand cuts.

It will do us all good to see more fearless initiatives like this one from Canada.

when you consider the fact that the UK is very close to having a national ID card

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_national_iden tity_card
and
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-6039076.html
and
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2039223, 00.html

this kind of thing, while dissapointing, should come as no surprise. The UK has been big on "security" for some time. Cameras are everywhere, especially in the larger cities. The plan to have a back door into windows boxes is dissapoining because of the hole it can leave for exploits and the fact that those who are very interested in keeping information on their computers hidden from prying eyes (e.g. actual terrorists - or at least the smarter ones) will be able to do so until the information is no longer useful (i.e. people are dead).

Welcome to another part of our brave new world.

Outrageous! How unlike other MPs in other communities who pay no heed of what their constituents think! It's this kind of sneaky "keeping on the good side of your voters" that's ruining our country!

The problem is, the MP's or the local government have appeared to react quickly to a complaint from a mosque, than from a church. One example would have been explicit advertising beside a bus stop shelter. Members of a church complain - nothing happens. Members of a mosque complain - the identical advert is immediately taken down.

This is an unfounded statement. What evidence do you have that this is planned, and what evidence exists to connect Hanza to the bombings?

Here's the BBC news report. The police themselves believe he was linked to many terrorist plots:

BBC Home Editor Mark Easton said police believed the mosque, which is now under new management, was "linked to literally dozens of terrorist plots around Europe and beyond".

And another news report

BBC Home Affairs Correspondent Margaret Gilmore said: "If you look at those transcripts, you will see what a close relationship Abu Hamza had with MI5. ...

The Times has reported that the cleric had links to those responsible for the 7 July bomb attacks. ...
But BBC Security Correspondent Frank Gardner said Whitehall officials did not have any intelligence to suggest that any connection existed.

The Times
Another article

Outrageous! How unlike other MPs in other communities who pay no heed of what their constituents think! It's this kind of sneaky "keeping on the good side of your voters" that's ruining our country!

The problem is, the MP's or the local government have appeared to react quickly to a complaint from a mosque, than from a church. One example would have been explicit advertising beside a bus stop shelter. Members of a church complain - nothing happens. Members of a mosque complain - the identical advert is immediately taken down.

This is an unfounded statement. What evidence do you have that this is planned, and what evidence exists to connect Hanza to the bombings?

Here's the BBC news report. The police themselves believe he was linked to many terrorist plots:

BBC Home Editor Mark Easton said police believed the mosque, which is now under new management, was "linked to literally dozens of terrorist plots around Europe and beyond".

And another news report

BBC Home Affairs Correspondent Margaret Gilmore said: "If you look at those transcripts, you will see what a close relationship Abu Hamza had with MI5. ...

The Times has reported that the cleric had links to those responsible for the 7 July bomb attacks. ...
But BBC Security Correspondent Frank Gardner said Whitehall officials did not have any intelligence to suggest that any connection existed.

The Times
Another article

The science agrees with you. e.g. Lottery winners, one year after, are no happier than they were before. What makes people happy long term are experiences, not pay increases, and with a bit of lateral thinking and creativity experiences don't have to cost much.

---

Creating simple artificial scarcity with copyright and patents on things that can be copied billions of times at minimal cost is a fundamentally stupid economic idea.

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,, 14929-2013698_1,00.html

The fact is that just about any religion is going to have people who take such extreme views that they can find argument to kill people (though I will admit I haven't heard about any Buddhist car bombings recently). Islamic extremists embody the beliefs and practices of the majority of Muslims just as much as the Klu Klux Klan embodied the beliefs and practices on main stream Christianity. I don't invoke the name of the KKK in any attempt to be inflammatory but to use them to illustrate a very real point. Just as Islamic extremists center their rhetoric around the beliefs of Islam the KKK wrapped its own rhetoric in the beliefs of Christianity. Even today we have Christian extremists who use bombs against people who do not support their views or who call for the assassination of foreign heads of state.

Does this mean that the religion itself is to blame simply because a few individuals attempt to co-opt bits and pieces of that religion to justify their own skewed world view? Do we assume that because one preacher claims that the stroke suffered by Ariel Sharon is divine retribution all Christians must believe such a thing is true? I should certainly hope that we don't.

Blaming Christianity for the actions of a few extremists is no less fair than blaming Islam (as your post seems to suggest) for the actions of a few of its extremists.

Here some interesting stuff about these no-fly zones.

It seems that there is no need to fool all the people all the time. You just need a majority.

You cannot talk intelligently about politics because most discussions are framed around questions like "Do you support Democrats or Republicans?" instead of substantive commentary like these on the Iraq War or the U.S. use of torture around the world, ignorance of public officials, and ignorance of the American people about the facts of the current administration. I don't support either majority party, and even if I did, its not even the point.

It's like being in a crowd with half screaming "Less Filling!" and the other half screaming "Tastes Great!" - and neither side aware that there isn't a drop of beer in sight. Wake up folks.

Times online article on this story.

No Tibet or Tiananmen on Google's new Chinese site
By Dan Sabbagh, Media Editor

GOOGLE will today cave in to pressure from the Chinese Government by launching a local website that strips out information not approved by the Communist authorities. The company, whose motto is "Don't be evil", is launching a version of its site that restricts Chinese people from searching for information about Tibetan independence or the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre.

"In order to operate from China, we have removed some content from the search results available on Google.cn, in response to local law, regulation or policy," the internet company said in a statement issued yesterday.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13132 -2008576,00.html

"Think of the savings we'll make. Shorter production time, no need for storage, no need to invest in barrels," he said.

Somehow people who would never think of stealing a candy bar from a convenience store become completely immoral when they are part of a corporation.

Original article with more info

Here.