Britain deregulated telecoms in the mid-eighties (all telecoms,
not just long distance), at first trying to get competition by promoting
a second competitor and giving that competitor advantages (Mercury),
and in the early nineties, when that clearly wasn't working, opening everything
up and encouraging participation by the cable companies.
What's the difference between Elton John and British
Telecom?
Geee, when they ran out of area codes because of the explosion of the wireless phones, why did they split existing area-code regions in two or more, instead of assigning new area codes for the mobiles, instead???
The Queen is an extremely important part of the British
Constitution.
Britain has **NO** constitution.
1)For a Bill of Parliament to become Law, it has to be signed
by the Queen. This means that in the event of some Adolf Hitler type being
elected, the Queen has the capacity to frustrate his ambitions.
So, the queen can block the democratically-expressed will of the people.
2
)The Army, Air Force, Navy, Police Force etc etc all swear
loyalty to the Queen, not to an elected official. This is extremely important
and stabilising. In the event of instability in the country, an attempted
coup or whatever, the Queen can call on the forces to obey her, and not
some tyrant. In a day to day sense, it means that the forces can be more
impartial. Can you imagine if they sweared loyalty to Ken Livingstone?
Yuk.
So the army does not defend the people and their belongings, but
only the queen.
3)The Queen is the fount of soveriegnty in Britain - all
power flows from her and is exercised in her name. This is extremely useful
in the light of encroachments from the EU and such bodies, so expect it
to be challenged at some point by the Liberals. Of course they will provide
arguments involving 'Democracy' and 'Modernity' and such nonsense, but
that is just a front. They really want to submerge Britain and the British
Identity into a European superstate.
The british never saw themselves as mere humans; they think they are above
all other nations and always flouted their arrogant snobbishness, never
backing-off from the concept that they oughta rule the whole world. They
can't play by any other rules than theirs, and they keep changing the rules
so they always win. For them, a "level" playing field is always tilted
to advantage them.
That's why the britshit are considered little more than troublemakers
in Europe.
An example of the usefulness and stabilising influence of
a Monarchy can be found in Spain in 1974(?), when an attempted coup was
foiled by the King, who rallied rebel troops and beurocrats who were supposed
to be loyal to him, and him alone, not some rabble rousing general.
A poor analogy. The "macho"/scatholic national character found in latin
countries is biased towards such things, which doesn't happen
You may say "But that would never happen in Britain - we
haven't had a revolution since 1688" but have you ever wondered why we
have had such a stable governance, while Frenchies and Germans seem to
revolt every ten years?
When was the last revolt in Germany? Were there any?
The french adapt to changing circumstances. The french are also unencumbered
by the fallacies you find in trashy tabloïds (a british specialty)
such as the magna-carta. They don't have revolutions by barons who rebel
against their kings so they can have more power. Rather, their revolutions
have an habit of giving more power to the people (see below)
For the french, all power flows up from the people and is exercised
by the State and the Government in it's name. The french will put most
of it's trust in the State, and since no one believe that the State will
screw the people, the State is careful about NOT doing that.
And if it evers does it, the people just have another revolution. At
least, one one gets gray hairs thinking about what the State (which is
improperly called "the government" in the US and other anglo-saxon countries)
will do next.
And who know what things may be like in one or two hundred
years.
Hopefully more democratic.
I just wish the Queen would exercise some of her powers
now, and thwart some of Blairs more outrageous suggestions.
Who's that queen, usurping the people's power? Who does she think she is?
And you'll see the queen being de-monarchized faster than you can say "beefeater",
so she'll flee to seek refuge in Canada, and she will end her days in a
Toronto low-income housing (there was actually a theater play with that
story, some time ago)...
Now, if the States pay for worker education, companies no longer have to worry about employees jumping ship once trained to competitors who, not having to pay for the training, can afford to pay the employees more, and thus prey on better intentioned companies...
The role of the State is to make a level playing field for everybody, so no one is disadvantaged for being "nice". Since every company (cough) pays taxes, everyone will pay for the training, and everyone will benefit.
(Impossible is not french) - attributed to Napoléon
Bonaparte.
So, just let them figure out HOW to do it, both legally AND technically...
Why should Yahoo bother? French law doesn't extend past the borders of
France anymore than american laws don't extend past the USA's borders...
For generations, big-blue big iron rigs have been merrily running
VM in their dinosaur pens, where many OSes (DOS, CMS,
CICS, etc.) could coexist merrily on the same machine, without
having to worry about silly details such as resource contention and the
like, which was good when you ran one of the more lame-brained ones where
you had to access your data by specifying the actual cylinder and sector...
It's only natural that the same thing be finally done on microcomputers.
Back in (MS-)DOS days, Desqview did it pretty cleanly, too. But Windoze
pretty well screwed up the whole scheme with it's hare-brained design.
What was most annoying with House Atréides was that the authors could have consulted the Dune Encyclopedia, because there are annoying discrepancies here and there.
And the baron being a fitness freak seems just a cheap way to think of a Bene Gesserit punishment...
If governments really did value the value of taxpayer's dollars, they
would only allow companies to demand fixed-schedules only in exceptional
circumstances. For example, teams that ABSOLUTELY need to be
together to do their jobs, like assembly-line work.
But less and less work is assembly line work, and more and more intellectual
work.
Having everybody coming to work and leaving at the same time puts an
extraordinary burden on the transportation infrastructure, the more so
if the type of infrastructure is environmentally wasteful (such as cars).
Roads have to be designed for their peak usage, peaks that only happen
twice a day for a few hours, where their users waste their time stranded
in traffic. Likewise, public transit users are crowded in vehicles
that are always insufficient in numbers. I have seen bus and train systems
where some vehicles make exactly a grand total of TWO trips a
day. At $120,000 a bus or $2,000,000 an engine and $1,000,000 a car
(10 car train = $12M), the bill gets kinda expensive pretty soon.
Some commuter railroads (LIRR) and bus operators (NJT)
even employ ordinary people (who are specially trained to meet regulations)
to drive buses and run trains to their "ordinary" work, because it is senseless
to have drivers and engineers and conductors sit idle through the day,
while the trains and buses crowd downtown terminals (or are expensively
deadheaded back to suburbia, thus choking even more roads and rails).
Having people going/coming to work at different time would spread out
the peak traffic throughout the day, allowing a much more efficient use
of transportation infrastructure and facilities.
The oft-used argument that "presence is necessary for proper communication"
is total bunk. It means that the companies are poorly organized,
and the management is unable to communicate effectively. Physical meetings
should be a last-resort solution, where e-mail, voice-mail, messaging and
bulletin-board discussions have failed.
In fact, physical meetings are the hallmark of poor organizers,
of people who don't have better to do with their time.
When I started my company, I thought flextime would be a great
way to go. Unfortunately, in any company with more than one employee, they
do have to meet. The bigger you get, the more people have to have meetings
to get in sync and discuss things. Flex time was hampering that ability.
People just weren't around when you needed them, and it was frustrating.
We eliminated Flex Time, and I think it helped productivity, communication,
and so forth.
If you are so poor at scheduling, you're doing a very lousy job managing
your company, and so, you don't even deserve to have employees working
for you!!!!
I still don't want my children exposed to such pornographic
material. Why shouldn't I, as the parent and legal guardian of a developing
minor, have the right to control what my child is exposed to?
You, indeed, have not only the right but the duty to make sure your
children does not get to inappropriate material. But who will you entrust
that job to?
You, while supervising your child's surfing and at the
same time teaching what is proper or not, or some stupid dumb software
that blocks legitimate site and still lets through inappopriate ones?
Slashdot Mirror
None.
They both have been screwed by Mercury ...
--
Game over, 2000!
Just rewrite the bug report from scratch, using only the facts and, when needed, fair use.
--
Game over, 2000!
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
That's why the britshit are considered little more than troublemakers in Europe.
A poor analogy. The "macho"/scatholic national character found in latin countries is biased towards such things, which doesn't happen When was the last revolt in Germany? Were there any?The french adapt to changing circumstances. The french are also unencumbered by the fallacies you find in trashy tabloïds (a british specialty) such as the magna-carta. They don't have revolutions by barons who rebel against their kings so they can have more power. Rather, their revolutions have an habit of giving more power to the people (see below)
For the french, all power flows up from the people and is exercised by the State and the Government in it's name. The french will put most of it's trust in the State, and since no one believe that the State will screw the people, the State is careful about NOT doing that.
And if it evers does it, the people just have another revolution. At least, one one gets gray hairs thinking about what the State (which is improperly called "the government" in the US and other anglo-saxon countries) will do next.
Hopefully more democratic. Who's that queen, usurping the people's power? Who does she think she is? And you'll see the queen being de-monarchized faster than you can say "beefeater", so she'll flee to seek refuge in Canada, and she will end her days in a Toronto low-income housing (there was actually a theater play with that story, some time ago)...--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
The role of the State is to make a level playing field for everybody, so no one is disadvantaged for being "nice". Since every company (cough) pays taxes, everyone will pay for the training, and everyone will benefit.
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
So, just let them figure out HOW to do it, both legally AND technically... Why should Yahoo bother? French law doesn't extend past the borders of France anymore than american laws don't extend past the USA's borders...
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
It's only natural that the same thing be finally done on microcomputers.
Back in (MS-)DOS days, Desqview did it pretty cleanly, too. But Windoze pretty well screwed up the whole scheme with it's hare-brained design.
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
And the baron being a fitness freak seems just a cheap way to think of a Bene Gesserit punishment...
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
If governments really did value the value of taxpayer's dollars, they would only allow companies to demand fixed-schedules only in exceptional circumstances. For example, teams that ABSOLUTELY need to be together to do their jobs, like assembly-line work.
But less and less work is assembly line work, and more and more intellectual work.
Having everybody coming to work and leaving at the same time puts an extraordinary burden on the transportation infrastructure, the more so if the type of infrastructure is environmentally wasteful (such as cars). Roads have to be designed for their peak usage, peaks that only happen twice a day for a few hours, where their users waste their time stranded in traffic. Likewise, public transit users are crowded in vehicles that are always insufficient in numbers. I have seen bus and train systems where some vehicles make exactly a grand total of TWO trips a day. At $120,000 a bus or $2,000,000 an engine and $1,000,000 a car (10 car train = $12M), the bill gets kinda expensive pretty soon.
Some commuter railroads (LIRR) and bus operators (NJT) even employ ordinary people (who are specially trained to meet regulations) to drive buses and run trains to their "ordinary" work, because it is senseless to have drivers and engineers and conductors sit idle through the day, while the trains and buses crowd downtown terminals (or are expensively deadheaded back to suburbia, thus choking even more roads and rails).
Having people going/coming to work at different time would spread out the peak traffic throughout the day, allowing a much more efficient use of transportation infrastructure and facilities.
The oft-used argument that "presence is necessary for proper communication" is total bunk. It means that the companies are poorly organized, and the management is unable to communicate effectively. Physical meetings should be a last-resort solution, where e-mail, voice-mail, messaging and bulletin-board discussions have failed.
In fact, physical meetings are the hallmark of poor organizers, of people who don't have better to do with their time.
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
If you are so poor at scheduling, you're doing a very lousy job managing your company, and so, you don't even deserve to have employees working for you!!!!
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
& amp;nbsp; Flex time = Happy workers
Shift time = Unhappy workers
Happy workers = Boss who feels he doesn't do his job properly.
Unhappy workets = Boss who feels he does a good job.
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
You, while supervising your child's surfing and at the same time teaching what is proper or not, or some stupid dumb software that blocks legitimate site and still lets through inappopriate ones?
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.
--
Americans are bred for stupidity.