UK PLC stocks plenty of chocolate from Switzerland, Belgium, France and has a few authentic chocolatiers of its' own.
What you might be missing out on is a high cocoa content single bean derived chocolate that doesn't give a sugar high as a cop-out instead of the beneficial feelings from the Good Stuff(TM) - try a Val Rhona...
Nearest thing to cannabis that's legal!
Back on topic I also eat organic food, for the taste and lack of added crap. The report specifically excludes the effects of ingesting pesticides, herbicides and 'growth promoters' (antibiotics) and the 'scientists' refuse to say which foodstuffs they eat.
The Chinese government said that the Green Dam Youth Escort software, as it is known, was intended to push forward the "healthy development of the internet" and "effectively manage harmful material for the public and prevent it from being spread."
Surely "effectively managing", as they do with the economy, growth in "harmful material" might limit said growth to, say, only 5% per annum - well within the the scope of our fine Western tradition of the "healthy development of the internet":-) Hiweed anyone?
Good point about complexity.
Can I suggest that it's the 'doting' you mention that's a part of the problem here? It's pretty much the same in Catholic countries where the elevation of women (you could call it the Cult of Mary) onto a pedestal is one side of a coin that is opposed by, for example, truly abhorent behaviour against women who fall short of the 'ideal'.
It's not only in arabic countries where women who breach the social, often unwritten, rules are humiliated and possibly raped in the knowledge that the raped woman is unlikely to complain and lose what private dignity remains. Being in Japan you'd know more about bukake than I but that might be a red herring.
I quite agree that the expendability model of maleness is robust - particularly, I would argue, in societies where males are kept from seeing women as 'people'. Porn also helps, I think (and I know that this is/.), to infantilise men with unrealistic notions of female sexuality.
As it happens my GF is a Professor of Statistics at an English Red Brick university while I garden, make wine and look after the house. She faces problems at work from two directions - one set of male colleagues spend time telling her how pretty and young (she's as old as many of them) she is - those are the bastards to watch.
Others unwittingly exclude her by not allowing that the sexes use language in different ways whilst claiming that her usage is inferior. Her flexibility in language does seem to make her a better teacher, though, as she notices who is not understanding her point and switches to different analogues until all present 'get it'. I know that some men do this as well and the difference seems encultured. Anyhow, thanks for an interesting post.
I always had problems with Greenpeace - they once wanted me to organise a protest vigil at a UN convention meeting (about fishing quota allocations) to add credit to the suits they were sending.
The most patronising guy I'd met in a long time arrived with a cheque book and asked a friend of mine whether she could roll him a cigarette as he hadn't had a home-rolled one in a long time. It was the way he said it that nearly cost him a broken arm.
We did the protest in our usual way - almost zero cost but plenty of coverage and didn't bother Greenpeace.
As to your thinking us retards wot with the way we spell an' all...;-)
Not necessarily true; I won all my criminal court cases (breaking into US and UK military facilities in the UK) - with only 'A'-level law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Level_(UK)) and a bit of luck (which is essential when it comes to law).
One of the more famous similarly fought cases was two individuals against the might of McDonald's (http://www.mcspotlight.org/case/) - this makes informative reading.
Not US law, I know, but 'the tricks of the trade' aren't that different from 'cunning' and some people have an abundance from the start.
Experience isn't always used (no end of people cannot gain one whit from even their own - let alone other peoples'), I reckon that wisdom is experience multiplied by intellect - if you haven't got the intellect, then no amount of experience will do you any good.
Sure thing - however; the phrase stands and was one that I grew up hearing, being quite common in Britain.
The flatulence reference is a red herring here.
Ooops, you have heard that phrase?;-)
Patenting the troll's parts would leave them (at least morally and the question of finances would be up to us at that point) unable, I suggest, to gain by them patenting ours.
Yup, you're quite right there. Never let a fact get in the way...etc.
I found myself going veggie in the early 70's when I started travelling outside the UK and noticed that what we were getting from supermarkets and in most restaurants was hardly worth eating compared to the stuff eaten in continental europe.
I enjoyed the meat, but couldn't consistently get good stuff in the UK so eventually gave it up completely - if there had been a few organic butchers around then I might still be eating it once in a while. It's not something that I miss and my GF has been veggie all her life, so it doesn't come up.
Anyway, thanks for taking me to task - 50 lines before sunset!
...what's happening is that most countries are funding the wrong questions WRT climate.
I'm mainly with Dr Jay on this.
The European Geosciences Union meeting in Vienna a couple of weeks back highlighted this point: funding bodies are interested in, say, 'what the climate will be like' in twenty years in a specific place (probably a country) - typically no mention is made of the numerous uncertainties involved.
You are unlikely to get that grant if you point out that what is being asked is the wrong sort of question and that what should be happening is internationally co-operative, team-based and includes mathematicians (preferably Bayesian statisticians) qualified to wrangle the data and develop new stats methodologies.
I say wrangle the data as actually getting RAW data from scientists can be a very difficult and frustrating process - often you get binned averages and the declaration that this is the raw data. Yeah, I know, picky!
There's a frequent cry of 'but we are scientists and, therefore, co-operative' from people who, of course, have had to compete for funding and many of whom privately admit to being intensely competitive individuals: "That's how I got the job in the first place" as one of them said to me at the conference.
Often, as with much funding, you simply find that people who have been previously successful in getting funding see a new gravy train rolling into town and jump on - difficult to compete with the established egos if you are an unassuming but cheap and ideally suited researcher.
At the EGU meeting (http://meetings.copernicus.org/egu2009/) a late addition of a session concerned with uncertainty was packed out and a fair number of scientists heard, many for the first time, that the classical maths tools that they've typically been using are simply not up to snuff.
So, is this proposal a Good Thing(TM)? I reckon that it is - I hope so as well as the clock is most definitely ticking.
As a fun aside, with methane being the number one greenhouse gas, the biggest difference we can make (in the medium term - pause for fart gags) as individuals is to go veggie:-)
And even then the cotton was a poor substitute for the hemp that it replaced - it did have the advantage of boosting the nascent chemical industry, though;-)
Slashdot Mirror
What you might be missing out on is a high cocoa content single bean derived chocolate that doesn't give a sugar high as a cop-out instead of the beneficial feelings from the Good Stuff(TM) - try a Val Rhona...
Nearest thing to cannabis that's legal!
Back on topic I also eat organic food, for the taste and lack of added crap. The report specifically excludes the effects of ingesting pesticides, herbicides and 'growth promoters' (antibiotics) and the 'scientists' refuse to say which foodstuffs they eat.
Sieg Heil, mein fuhrer!
Blair which?
The Chinese government said that the Green Dam Youth Escort software, as it is known, was intended to push forward the "healthy development of the internet" and "effectively manage harmful material for the public and prevent it from being spread."
Surely "effectively managing", as they do with the economy, growth in "harmful material" might limit said growth to, say, only 5% per annum - well within the the scope of our fine Western tradition of the "healthy development of the internet" :-) Hiweed anyone?
It must be fluid - how else could it end up down the drain?
But can it predict superfluity? :P
Well economics really should, the current economic climate is fairly fluid, no?
----------
Court Philosopher to our Robotic - and never stingy - Overlords!
----------
Court Philosopher to our Robotic - and never stringy - Overlords!
Can I suggest that it's the 'doting' you mention that's a part of the problem here? It's pretty much the same in Catholic countries where the elevation of women (you could call it the Cult of Mary) onto a pedestal is one side of a coin that is opposed by, for example, truly abhorent behaviour against women who fall short of the 'ideal'.
It's not only in arabic countries where women who breach the social, often unwritten, rules are humiliated and possibly raped in the knowledge that the raped woman is unlikely to complain and lose what private dignity remains. Being in Japan you'd know more about bukake than I but that might be a red herring.
I quite agree that the expendability model of maleness is robust - particularly, I would argue, in societies where males are kept from seeing women as 'people'. Porn also helps, I think (and I know that this is /.), to infantilise men with unrealistic notions of female sexuality.
As it happens my GF is a Professor of Statistics at an English Red Brick university while I garden, make wine and look after the house. She faces problems at work from two directions - one set of male colleagues spend time telling her how pretty and young (she's as old as many of them) she is - those are the bastards to watch.
Others unwittingly exclude her by not allowing that the sexes use language in different ways whilst claiming that her usage is inferior. Her flexibility in language does seem to make her a better teacher, though, as she notices who is not understanding her point and switches to different analogues until all present 'get it'. I know that some men do this as well and the difference seems encultured. Anyhow, thanks for an interesting post.
Note how everyone flocks to agree with you?
Guess you're out of tune - move right along...
...and how many that American (I presume you mean the entire continent?) people killed?
The most patronising guy I'd met in a long time arrived with a cheque book and asked a friend of mine whether she could roll him a cigarette as he hadn't had a home-rolled one in a long time. It was the way he said it that nearly cost him a broken arm.
We did the protest in our usual way - almost zero cost but plenty of coverage and didn't bother Greenpeace.
As to your thinking us retards wot with the way we spell an' all... ;-)
One of the more famous similarly fought cases was two individuals against the might of McDonald's (http://www.mcspotlight.org/case/) - this makes informative reading.
Not US law, I know, but 'the tricks of the trade' aren't that different from 'cunning' and some people have an abundance from the start.
Experience isn't always used (no end of people cannot gain one whit from even their own - let alone other peoples'), I reckon that wisdom is experience multiplied by intellect - if you haven't got the intellect, then no amount of experience will do you any good.
Good luck to them both.
The flatulence reference is a red herring here. ;-)
Ooops, you have heard that phrase?
Patenting the troll's parts would leave them (at least morally and the question of finances would be up to us at that point) unable, I suggest, to gain by them patenting ours.
I reckon you mean vegemite - the national dish of Australians (the world over).
I wouldn't like to get between an Ocker and you if he finds out you've said his fave grub was from Kiwi-land!
my thrust was intended to be:-
i) the small piece of ordnance,
ii) double-entendre for bollocks
iii) reference to 'hoist by one's own petar[d]
so I missed off the possessive apostrophe to be slightly vague about meaning - but you might well have a better idea or different angle?
Surely if you patent the trolls parts instead then you've got them by their own petards :-)
I found myself going veggie in the early 70's when I started travelling outside the UK and noticed that what we were getting from supermarkets and in most restaurants was hardly worth eating compared to the stuff eaten in continental europe.
I enjoyed the meat, but couldn't consistently get good stuff in the UK so eventually gave it up completely - if there had been a few organic butchers around then I might still be eating it once in a while. It's not something that I miss and my GF has been veggie all her life, so it doesn't come up.
Anyway, thanks for taking me to task - 50 lines before sunset!
I'm mainly with Dr Jay on this.
The European Geosciences Union meeting in Vienna a couple of weeks back highlighted this point: funding bodies are interested in, say, 'what the climate will be like' in twenty years in a specific place (probably a country) - typically no mention is made of the numerous uncertainties involved.
You are unlikely to get that grant if you point out that what is being asked is the wrong sort of question and that what should be happening is internationally co-operative, team-based and includes mathematicians (preferably Bayesian statisticians) qualified to wrangle the data and develop new stats methodologies. I say wrangle the data as actually getting RAW data from scientists can be a very difficult and frustrating process - often you get binned averages and the declaration that this is the raw data. Yeah, I know, picky!
There's a frequent cry of 'but we are scientists and, therefore, co-operative' from people who, of course, have had to compete for funding and many of whom privately admit to being intensely competitive individuals: "That's how I got the job in the first place" as one of them said to me at the conference.
Often, as with much funding, you simply find that people who have been previously successful in getting funding see a new gravy train rolling into town and jump on - difficult to compete with the established egos if you are an unassuming but cheap and ideally suited researcher.
At the EGU meeting (http://meetings.copernicus.org/egu2009/) a late addition of a session concerned with uncertainty was packed out and a fair number of scientists heard, many for the first time, that the classical maths tools that they've typically been using are simply not up to snuff.
So, is this proposal a Good Thing(TM)? I reckon that it is - I hope so as well as the clock is most definitely ticking.
As a fun aside, with methane being the number one greenhouse gas, the biggest difference we can make (in the medium term - pause for fart gags) as individuals is to go veggie :-)
Unless you use the crappy calibration software that the Oxford lab produces! Seriously, check out the methodology :-(
And even then the cotton was a poor substitute for the hemp that it replaced - it did have the advantage of boosting the nascent chemical industry, though ;-)