In any properly governed nation, you have an airport fire brigade at any airport where you regularly operate large jets with lots of passengers. If you only get the occasional large jet with lots of passengers -- if you're a likely diversion airport, for instance -- then it might not be worth having a standing fire brigade and just pulling in support from the town when you are expecting a big jet.
The roads on the airfield are much easier for a firetruck (fire engine in the UK) to drive on than city streets -- most of them are built for aircraft and are pretty wide, and even those designed solely for ground vehicles are designed for pretty big ground vehicles. If the airport is operating then non-airport vehicles would need a radio-vehicle escort to deal with ATC, but when because the airport was closed they could have driven around no problem. (I've done it, though not in a fire engine).
This is slashdot. They make their money by threatening people with videos of us showering and going to the toilet. They'd threaten people with videos of us having sex, too, if slashdotters had sex.
You don't have to wait. The law abiding would have nothing to fear from this surveillance provided all those with access to the data can be guaranteed to be completely benign (your point, and enough cause to worry in itself) and completely competent: no possibility of misinterpretation of data, no possibility of Buttle/Tuttle data errors, no possibility of that data leaking out to those who shouldn't have it and who might use it for nefarious purposes. But hey, we're safe on that last point, at least. There's no possibility of information leaks from any government department, is there?
There have been lots of suggestions for retconning the 12 regens rule to allow for more regens. The one I find most credible is that the 12 regen rule was enforced by the time lords themselves, and now that The Doctor is the only one left it's pretty much up to him. Chances are they won't bother retconning it, just ignore it and let the fans do their own retconning.
Mark Bridger is 47. I doubt he would have taken much notice of his parents telling him not to surf porn.
This isn't about preventing children watching porn, this is about preventing everyone watching (certain) porn. If we could be confident that it would only be child porn that would be blocked then I'd be content with that (I don't want to stumble on that stuff by accident), But I don't think we can be confident.
Not just Amazon. I can read stuff I download from the Google Play store on my Android phone and tablet (and possibly my laptop too -- haven't tried) without an internet connection.
The "Self-Hating Jew" myth is just a version of the No True Scotsman fallacy, weasel words to try to avoid the truth that Jewish != Zionist and to try to exclude anybody who disagrees with you from the discussion.
So, instead of asking why "we aren't rethinking how government works" let's ask why we have a populace so ignorant and superstitious that WANT their leaders and politicians to enact such horseshit.
Because the education system put in place by those leaders keeps the population so ignorant and superstitious etc...?
I'm not sure the LibDems have the relevant balance of power. Both Labour and Conservative get wet dreams about strong State control of the population, and the LibDems don't have any power at all if Labour and Conservatives work together. The only hope is that Labour are more keen to cause embarrassment to the Conservatives than they are to get the bill they'd love.
hopefully nerds have the basic social skills to know not to view porn in Starbucks. Maybe I'm wrong.
I think you're over-optimistic. But it doesn't matter, because the sort of nerd who doesn't know better still isn't going to be doing it. At least, not until Starbucks open a branch in his mom's basement.
I take it jonbryce means "illegal" in the sense a compiler might complain of an illegal instruction or a shell prompt might complain of an illegal operation. Not against the law of the land or the laws of physics, but rendered impossible by local constraints. A command that's illegal in Java might be perfectly legal in C, and an operation that's illegal on 3G might be legal on WiFi.
Language is like that: sometimes words have multiple meanings.
Slashdot Mirror
I was wondering that too.
In any properly governed nation, you have an airport fire brigade at any airport where you regularly operate large jets with lots of passengers. If you only get the occasional large jet with lots of passengers -- if you're a likely diversion airport, for instance -- then it might not be worth having a standing fire brigade and just pulling in support from the town when you are expecting a big jet.
The roads on the airfield are much easier for a firetruck (fire engine in the UK) to drive on than city streets -- most of them are built for aircraft and are pretty wide, and even those designed solely for ground vehicles are designed for pretty big ground vehicles. If the airport is operating then non-airport vehicles would need a radio-vehicle escort to deal with ATC, but when because the airport was closed they could have driven around no problem. (I've done it, though not in a fire engine).
This is slashdot. They make their money by threatening people with videos of us showering and going to the toilet. They'd threaten people with videos of us having sex, too, if slashdotters had sex.
Sounds about right :)
You are Rupert Murdoch, and I claim my £5.
You don't have to wait. The law abiding would have nothing to fear from this surveillance provided all those with access to the data can be guaranteed to be completely benign (your point, and enough cause to worry in itself) and completely competent: no possibility of misinterpretation of data, no possibility of Buttle/Tuttle data errors, no possibility of that data leaking out to those who shouldn't have it and who might use it for nefarious purposes. But hey, we're safe on that last point, at least. There's no possibility of information leaks from any government department, is there?
There have been lots of suggestions for retconning the 12 regens rule to allow for more regens. The one I find most credible is that the 12 regen rule was enforced by the time lords themselves, and now that The Doctor is the only one left it's pretty much up to him. Chances are they won't bother retconning it, just ignore it and let the fans do their own retconning.
Mark Bridger is 47. I doubt he would have taken much notice of his parents telling him not to surf porn.
This isn't about preventing children watching porn, this is about preventing everyone watching (certain) porn. If we could be confident that it would only be child porn that would be blocked then I'd be content with that (I don't want to stumble on that stuff by accident), But I don't think we can be confident.
Not just Amazon. I can read stuff I download from the Google Play store on my Android phone and tablet (and possibly my laptop too -- haven't tried) without an internet connection.
Nobody actually drinks fosters ..
Yeah, they drink VB, which actually manages to be worse.
Isn't there a lag in communications?
Negligible compared to the latency involved in trying to use a DAW with recent Windows sound drivers.
Dang. Triangles are a problem?
They certainly turned out to be for the BBC.
The "Self-Hating Jew" myth is just a version of the No True Scotsman fallacy, weasel words to try to avoid the truth that Jewish != Zionist and to try to exclude anybody who disagrees with you from the discussion.
So, instead of asking why "we aren't rethinking how government works" let's ask why we have a populace so ignorant and superstitious that WANT their leaders and politicians to enact such horseshit.
Because the education system put in place by those leaders keeps the population so ignorant and superstitious etc...?
Er ... no. A protocol isn't math.
The implementation might be in software, but the article says that the patents relate to the protocol, not the implementation of the protocol.
And I'll expect that BT will point out that these aren't software patents.
This is about British Telecom. They've probably only just heard of VOIP.
But apparently the judge didn't, otherwise there would have been a mistrial declared and either perjury or contempt of court charges.
Only if you need it to remind yourself. It seems everybody else has no trouble understanding this.
I'm not sure the LibDems have the relevant balance of power. Both Labour and Conservative get wet dreams about strong State control of the population, and the LibDems don't have any power at all if Labour and Conservatives work together. The only hope is that Labour are more keen to cause embarrassment to the Conservatives than they are to get the bill they'd love.
Then perhaps your claim that "Something is illegal or it's not" is also not quite as unambiguous as it could be?
hopefully nerds have the basic social skills to know not to view porn in Starbucks. Maybe I'm wrong.
I think you're over-optimistic. But it doesn't matter, because the sort of nerd who doesn't know better still isn't going to be doing it. At least, not until Starbucks open a branch in his mom's basement.
I take it jonbryce means "illegal" in the sense a compiler might complain of an illegal instruction or a shell prompt might complain of an illegal operation. Not against the law of the land or the laws of physics, but rendered impossible by local constraints. A command that's illegal in Java might be perfectly legal in C, and an operation that's illegal on 3G might be legal on WiFi.
Language is like that: sometimes words have multiple meanings.