People don't look at the moment BECAUSE current petrol cars make a lot of noise! As soon as you get enough electric cars around, people will learn fast to look before stepping out!
Well the smart ones will anyway. In fact that'd be a cool marketing slogan: "Electric cars... evolution in action!"
The tube would cost a FORTUNE to improve. The jubilee line extension cost £2 billion for instance. Even allowing that the clay in south london makes work harder, it isn't likely that we're going to see a major tube overhaul anytime soon.
Buddy riding is possible, but I think the answer is buses.... As I've mentioned above we (londoners) are due to get several hundred extra each year.
I agree that the tube can't cope but there are alternatives though. For instance London has got an extra 1200 buses from April 2000 to May 2002 (see tfl website here). That's a LOT of extra buses!
Currently, using a bus in the daytime is a nightmare - for instance the 295 from Clapham Junction to Ladbrooke Grove takes 30-45mins at night, and well up to 2 hours in the daytime! Less traffic and buses would be usable (the 295 isn't the best example, since its route is outside the controlled zone, but it's the bus I know)
Personally I'd cycle through London if there was less traffic - as it is I've done it twice and I'll never do it again. It's incredibly dangerous!
There are currently new rules being made which allow almost any government department, QUANGO, or local council to overrule the privacy laws for almost any reason.
Er. No there aren't. They've been scrapped (and were scrapped very publicly, after the home secretary's son(!) Hugh told him it was a bad idea.)
Did you even READ the article you linked to? There is no proof at all that Dan Corry planned to "smear" the Paddington Survivor's group, that phrase came from the Tories. All he did was enquire about the political alliegances of a the members of a group causing problems for the government. Since it is hardly unheard of for the Tories (or Labour) to hijack issues for political means I think this is an understandable query, and frankly I'm bemused by all the media noise about the issue.
NB - Before you accuse me of bias, I vote Lib Dem and certainly won't be voting for this government.
Much as I dislike the current UK government's obsession for "spin" I think the reaction to this "smear" campaign (typified by you) is bizarre.
Look here: bbc story There's no actual proof that Dan Corry planned to "smear" anyone! All the government advisor did was to inquire whether this group was run by political adversaries of Labour. Now I accept that if you're a politically-neutral victim of paddington, only interested in safety for future passengers, even the suggestion that you're motivated by politics is likely to offend.
However Labour were only being unreasonable if it was extremely unlikely that the Tories would stoop so low as to hijack a serious issue like this... I believe that not only would the Tories stoop so low, most modern political parties would. So what on earth are we all getting so excited about this for? The advisor was just doing his job!
No, if you actually read what the poster wrote he *also* wants the option to only install parts of mozilla, but objects to stubs because you have to download the stub for each machine you have. This quickly becomes a pain. He has a point.
Now, if you were to live in a regular home and commute to a regular job in that same city, things would be very different. You'd be going from one suburb to another, probably having to change train or bus at the center. It would take at least twice as long as going by car, quite likely
Well I live in London, which has a rotten public transport system, and there is no way I'd ever thinkabout DRIVING to work! Quite apart from the difficulty of parking, it takes much longer (and would take even longer still if everyone did the same) and I can read on the tube/bus/train.
I also think you completely overrate the difficulty of putting good transport into american cities: european cities are markedly worse (small, narrow streets) for cars than american cities in general, which is why you guys have got by so long with the automobile. But that does NOT mean that putting a decent transport system in from scratch is harder - why would it? You tend to have more space for a start, and in fact one of the biggest problems with have in london is maintaining ancient systems: starting from scratch would be expensive, but far, far easier. A while back there was a report on how some of the London Underground's cabling was over a 100 years old and insulated with paper.
This case is a little weird, since the site proprietor is saying that filing the counterclaim would put him under U.S. jurisdiction. I'm not sure if that's a legal interpretation, or if the DMCA says that, or what. I don't see how just affirming that the contents of your site do not infringe on the DMCA somehow automatically renders you liable to suit under U.S. law, but maybe that's just me.
I am also not a lawyer, but don't you think it's likely that if you want to counterclaim it has to be done in a US court, since google is american? In which case you are allowing the court to rule on the case, and so opening yourself up to US law. In those circumstances your native legal system may well decide you have to abide with the DMCA, since it was your choice.
Google aren't in the business of taking on religious organisations: they provide links. What they have done is entirely appropriate. You can still find the anti-scientology websites, google aren't getting sued, and a wider audience gets to see how crazy the DMCA is.
I don't really understand your point: I think it's extremely clear what Google did. They were put in a difficult situation by an ill-thought-out law and responded in a way that was both elegant and appropriate: they removed any possibility of legal action towards them, and yet made it possible for people to still find the information... which is after all the whole point of google. I'm impressed.
It's bad enough that biggish cities like Poole and Bournemouth struggle to get broadband cable, but look at London! It's almost entirely ex c&w or videotron and so far only very small sections can get anything other than (expensive) ADSL. I got NTL phone/TV because I was assured that we'd have bb within 3 months - that was 2 years ago. This is not uncommon...
"Broadband Britain" is a sick joke, and Oftel should be forced to watch streaming media over dialup for 10 years (with the occasional flash demo of "always-on" internet performance for variety).
There's Wifi and there's wifi. That may be true for 802.11b but NTL are currently trialling line-of-sight radio internet in london, with connection speeds >10Mbit (if you're lucky). I was accepted for the free trial, only to find a THE TOP F**KING LEAVES OF A TREE blocked me. Pants.
You're being extremely unfair to compare Higgs Boson advocates with Pokletnov. The Higgs mechanism (which explains mass regimes and not gravity) is a very, very neat theory that explains some weird stuff we have seen experimentally, whereas these "antigravity" experiments produce results that contradict known science and (more damningly) appear unreproducible.
Ahhhh! That probably explains why so many UK books have "not for sale in the US" on them. You haven't explained why the Berne Convention isn't considered constitutional in the US though... (as an aside, I hope US publishers of Peter Pan do the honourable thing and give some cash to St. Ormond's Street Hospital even if the "statutory perpetual copyright" isn't recognised)
Is the US Constitution strictly relevant to a book by a British author?
Re:Please, let's not spread the DivX
on
The Hype of the Rings
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I think you'll find the family aren't getting a penny: Tolkien sold the film rights to pay off a mortgage.
Onto your wider point: I think the system we have, with copyright expiring after a while, is the correct system: that way the artist knows his immediate family profit from his work and not faceless corporations.
For god's sake, we get a couple of films before you guys and people start whinging! Now you start to realise how annoying these staggered launches are....
Seriously, Tolkien wrote the books partly to replace the "lost" english mythology. Under the circumstances I'm sure he would have wanted the films to open here, and Jackson seems to be sensitive enough to realise it.
Oh, and Tolkien and Rowling are about as similar as Steinbeck and Clancy. The latter are telling "good yarns" whilst the former have a deeper point to make.
I would humbly suggest that since Quake and its ilk are hugely popular, the problems you have with it are not fundamental problems with "a 3d world"
Oh, and Quake requires fine motor control largely because it's an arcade game - that's the whole point! You'd obviously want something a bit different for a mass-market browser...
You're slightly missing the point I'm afraid.... Lego *have* to stop Noma calling his code LegOS or they risk losing their trademark. That (unfortunately) is the way TM law works (in the UK at the least): say Mattel produce a LegOS compatible toy (which is legal)... if Lego leave Noma alone then Mattel could start calling their toy "LegOS" compatible... and then "Legos" etc.
As far as I'm being concerned Lego have bent over backwards to accomodate the hackers (as they should!) and Noma is being a dick forcing them to go to the courts. Why doesn't he call it NomOS if he wants to use his name? He's trying to provoke a refreshingly rational company into being oppressive, which isn't good for anybody.
There was a discussion about this on the guardian website here.
Some of the replies are quite interesting (most aren't!). I liked that "The Philospher's Stone" has at least 3 different titles:
As many of you implied it really has to do with the countries' values. For instance here in The Netherlands it is 'HP and the stone of the Wise' Being a wise person is a bigger value then being a philosopher here.
Dorine, Amsterdam the Netherlands
I absolutely agree. The HP stories are great fun, but Pullman gives the impression that he's really trying to discuss the "fundamental truths" (though it's not surprising if his books are more pedagogical seeing as he used to be a teacher).
I think it's actually the 4th biggest now (saw newsnight a while back and remember being astounded), but after a bit of trawling I can't find anything to back this up. Any economists out there?
Slashdot Mirror
Well the smart ones will anyway. In fact that'd be a cool marketing slogan: "Electric cars ... evolution in action!"
Buddy riding is possible, but I think the answer is buses.... As I've mentioned above we (londoners) are due to get several hundred extra each year.
Currently, using a bus in the daytime is a nightmare - for instance the 295 from Clapham Junction to Ladbrooke Grove takes 30-45mins at night, and well up to 2 hours in the daytime! Less traffic and buses would be usable (the 295 isn't the best example, since its route is outside the controlled zone, but it's the bus I know)
Personally I'd cycle through London if there was less traffic - as it is I've done it twice and I'll never do it again. It's incredibly dangerous!
There are currently new rules being made which allow almost any government department, QUANGO, or local council to overrule the privacy laws for almost any reason.
Er. No there aren't. They've been scrapped (and were scrapped very publicly, after the home secretary's son(!) Hugh told him it was a bad idea.)
Less of the FUD please.
Ed
NB - Before you accuse me of bias, I vote Lib Dem and certainly won't be voting for this government.
Look here: bbc story
There's no actual proof that Dan Corry planned to "smear" anyone! All the government advisor did was to inquire whether this group was run by political adversaries of Labour. Now I accept that if you're a politically-neutral victim of paddington, only interested in safety for future passengers, even the suggestion that you're motivated by politics is likely to offend.
However Labour were only being unreasonable if it was extremely unlikely that the Tories would stoop so low as to hijack a serious issue like this ... I believe that not only would the Tories stoop so low, most modern political parties would. So what on earth are we all getting so excited about this for? The advisor was just doing his job!
Sheesh yourself!
Well I live in London, which has a rotten public transport system, and there is no way I'd ever thinkabout DRIVING to work! Quite apart from the difficulty of parking, it takes much longer (and would take even longer still if everyone did the same) and I can read on the tube/bus/train.
I also think you completely overrate the difficulty of putting good transport into american cities: european cities are markedly worse (small, narrow streets) for cars than american cities in general, which is why you guys have got by so long with the automobile. But that does NOT mean that putting a decent transport system in from scratch is harder - why would it? You tend to have more space for a start, and in fact one of the biggest problems with have in london is maintaining ancient systems: starting from scratch would be expensive, but far, far easier. A while back there was a report on how some of the London Underground's cabling was over a 100 years old and insulated with paper.
I am also not a lawyer, but don't you think it's likely that if you want to counterclaim it has to be done in a US court, since google is american? In which case you are allowing the court to rule on the case, and so opening yourself up to US law. In those circumstances your native legal system may well decide you have to abide with the DMCA, since it was your choice.
Google aren't in the business of taking on religious organisations: they provide links. What they have done is entirely appropriate. You can still find the anti-scientology websites, google aren't getting sued, and a wider audience gets to see how crazy the DMCA is.
I don't really understand your point: I think it's extremely clear what Google did. They were put in a difficult situation by an ill-thought-out law and responded in a way that was both elegant and appropriate: they removed any possibility of legal action towards them, and yet made it possible for people to still find the information ... which is after all the whole point of google. I'm impressed.
It's bad enough that biggish cities like Poole and Bournemouth struggle to get broadband cable, but look at London! It's almost entirely ex c&w or videotron and so far only very small sections can get anything other than (expensive) ADSL. I got NTL phone/TV because I was assured that we'd have bb within 3 months - that was 2 years ago. This is not uncommon ...
"Broadband Britain" is a sick joke, and Oftel should be forced to watch streaming media over dialup for 10 years (with the occasional flash demo of "always-on" internet performance for variety).
There's Wifi and there's wifi. That may be true for 802.11b but NTL are currently trialling line-of-sight radio internet in london, with connection speeds >10Mbit (if you're lucky). I was accepted for the free trial, only to find a THE TOP F**KING LEAVES OF A TREE blocked me. Pants.
You're being extremely unfair to compare Higgs Boson advocates with Pokletnov. The Higgs mechanism (which explains mass regimes and not gravity) is a very, very neat theory that explains some weird stuff we have seen experimentally, whereas these "antigravity" experiments produce results that contradict known science and (more damningly) appear unreproducible.
Oh, and it's Professor Higgs by the way.
Ahhhh! That probably explains why so many UK books have "not for sale in the US" on them. You haven't explained why the Berne Convention isn't considered constitutional in the US though... (as an aside, I hope US publishers of Peter Pan do the honourable thing and give some cash to St. Ormond's Street Hospital even if the "statutory perpetual copyright" isn't recognised)
You're absolutely right though - it appears the estate are getting money from it (in which case I can't see why they're being so snooty about it all).
Is the US Constitution strictly relevant to a book by a British author?
Onto your wider point: I think the system we have, with copyright expiring after a while, is the correct system: that way the artist knows his immediate family profit from his work and not faceless corporations.
Seriously, Tolkien wrote the books partly to replace the "lost" english mythology. Under the circumstances I'm sure he would have wanted the films to open here, and Jackson seems to be sensitive enough to realise it.
Oh, and Tolkien and Rowling are about as similar as Steinbeck and Clancy. The latter are telling "good yarns" whilst the former have a deeper point to make.
Oh, and Quake requires fine motor control largely because it's an arcade game - that's the whole point! You'd obviously want something a bit different for a mass-market browser...
As far as I'm being concerned Lego have bent over backwards to accomodate the hackers (as they should!) and Noma is being a dick forcing them to go to the courts. Why doesn't he call it NomOS if he wants to use his name? He's trying to provoke a refreshingly rational company into being oppressive, which isn't good for anybody.
Some of the replies are quite interesting (most aren't!). I liked that "The Philospher's Stone" has at least 3 different titles:
I absolutely agree. The HP stories are great fun, but Pullman gives the impression that he's really trying to discuss the "fundamental truths" (though it's not surprising if his books are more pedagogical seeing as he used to be a teacher).
you're not very bright are you?
I think it's actually the 4th biggest now (saw newsnight a while back and remember being astounded), but after a bit of trawling I can't find anything to back this up. Any economists out there?