Maybe you should've also included the following in your "summary":
The Declaration starts by forbidding "any discrimination on the basis of race, colour, language, belief, sex, religion, political affiliation, social status or other considerations". It continues on to proclaim the sanctity of life, and declares the "preservation of human life" as "a duty prescribed by the Shariah". In addition the CDHRI guarantees "non-belligerents such as old men, women and children", "wounded and the sick" and "prisoners of war", the right to be fed, sheltered and access to safety and medical treatment in times of war. If affirmed, this would indicate that acts of terrorism are violations of human rights.
The CDHRI gives men and women the "right to marriage" regardless of their race, colour or nationality, but not religion. In addition women are given "equal human dignity", "own rights to enjoy", "duties to perform", "own civil entity", "financial independence", and the "right to retain her name and lineage", though not equal rights in general. The Declaration makes the husband responsible for the social and financial protection of the family. The Declaration gives both parents the rights over their children, and makes it incumbent upon both of them to protect the child, before and after birth. The Declaration also entitles every family the "right to privacy". It also forbids the demolition, confiscation and eviction of any family from their residence. Furthermore, should the family get separated in times of war, it is the responsibility of the State to "arrange visits or reunions of families".
Don't single out Muslims for this. I am not a muslim, but an evangelical christian, but I do recognise hypocrisy when I see it (usually). Having something in writing (and signed) does not mean that it is being followed. So, as you can see, it seems a lot of muslim countries don't follow their own stated declarations. But, believe it or not, neither some bastions of freedom in the Western World. An example is the US and their segregation laws which contravened the UN UDHR or South Africa's Apartheid regime which flouted a few provisions. Or maybe the Australian goivernment denying citizenship rights to their indigenous population even after being signatories to the UDHR.
1. To maintain international peace and security, to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
3. To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and
4. To be a center for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.
Chapter 1, Article 2 of the UN Charter states
The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles:[1]
1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
2. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.
3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
5. All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the present Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance to any state against which the United Nations is taking preventive or enforcement action.
6. The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members of the United Nations act in accordance with these Principles so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security.
7. Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.
Two phrases: 1- "Peace and Security" and 2- "the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members." define and determine why it is so slow to act and is usually ineffective when it comes to "sovereignty" issues. It's technical arms (which usually don't threaten any sovereignty) tend to be quite good.
I was going to moderate, but decided to respond to this instead.
You got your apology to a dead man from a man who did not wrong him. I hope you (the petitioners) feel better, because it certainly accomplishes nothing else.
An apology never "changes" anything. Harm done is not undone by saying "I am sorry". But an apology is an admission that "I" if I'm the one who did the wrong, or "We" if it is an entity that still exists (such as a company, country etc) recognise the action committed by people like us is wrong and shameful. An apology is always humbling, and one is humbled they end to listen better.
We recently had an, admittedly symbolic, apology to the "Stolen Generation" (http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2008/s2162035.htm) A lot of people in the previous Government scoffed at it as symbolic and will not change the plight of the indigenous peoples, but they completely missed the point. The point to the Indigenous Peoples is a "recognition of wrongs done". The apology itself was didn't wind back time or give, now adults, the time they lost with their parents!
I was not born (I was not even a twinkle in my parents' eyes!) when these "legal" actions were taken, but I felt proud that we acknowledge wrong done to others by my country.
A previous post mentioned: Justice delayed is justice denied. This, imho, is BS. Justice should always be sought and welcomed when it is offered.
Fact remains that doing honest and hard work brings you NOTHING. You must be a quack, a liar and just basically leech everything out of the company that you possibly can. Then you go to the next and rinse and repeat. It's what the managers do and it's what is expected of you. Being a carpenter is starting to sound bloody perfect just about now.
I've learned that on my first year in this profession (also IT).
The belief that many of us gifted "techies" have that technical excellence, skill and hard-working will make us stand out from the mediocre crowds, be noticed and promoted is one big fat illusion more often than not kept alive by manipulative managers wanting to get extra free hours from us (so that THEY get fat bonuses).
Well, I don't know where you work, but I am on my 3rd IT job in the last 10 years. Currently I am the only one in the IT department, but in my previous two jobs I was selected (promoted) based on my skills and work ethic. You see, I worked for a manager who valued that, and this in a group consisting of over 70 people. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it's the norm for everyone.
Even in the technical areas, the professional world out there is never a pure meritocracy based on one's technical excellence.
In truth, non-technical skills are often also important (guess who's more useful: the guy that gets the requirements right from the client and implements them in a competent way or the guy that gets the wrong requirements and implements the wrong thing but with an exceptionally good design and code?) and those that evaluate one's abilities during the selection/bonus-evaluation/promotion-evaluation process are often not technically skilled enough to evaluate technical skills above a certain level (they're management, usually not technical, not-good enough techies or simply too far out from their technical days) or will simply outwit the less negotiation-experience techies into taking a lower pay.
Consider the simple example of two equally good programmers: - One is quiet and reserved: the kind of guy that finds a critical bug, fixes it and checks it in source control without telling anybody - The other one is loud and outgoing: he'll tell to whomever is willing to listen that he found a critical bug, proceed to fix it and check the fix in source control and then let everybody know that the issue is fixed.
Guess who will get the next promotion!!!?
Ummm. How can one respond to this example? Maybe I should give you another example, but that'll start a tit-for-tat thread. I will tell you that this is a specific manager's problem. I have worked for both kinds of managers: the ones that listen to the loudest, and the ones that looked at results. you can always tell the difference by looking at how the general employees respond to their managers. One manager I worked for at one of the top global IT firms was so out of it that in a space of 2 months a third of his team resigned (including myself) because he was inconsiderate of our needs (not pay wise, because he offered me a pay increase). A few months after I left I heard that he's been shuffled to another group, and those who stayed in the team became happier.
Another example would be two equally good programmers, both known in their company for the quality of their work. They both feel that they are being underpaid in their company: - One starts looking at other opportunities, maybe gets one or two good proposals, goes to management and asks for a salary raise saying that he "likes to work there but feels that he's not being fairly rewarded for the work he's doing there versus other professionals in the same area". - The other one just accepts its and wallows in the misery of being underpaid.
Guess who will get the (biggest) raise!!!?
So, who's fault is this? The manager or the employee?
In the end, th
Re:How many soldiers die if 187 F-22s aren't enoug
on
F-22 Raptor Cancelled
·
· Score: 1
Do you really believe that the world will stop hating America if America stops meddling in other nations' affairs?
Well, actually, this is the most likely result of this kind of action. When the general population sees you as partial to one side of the equation (usually the bully side) then they will hate you.
What are your thoughts on interfering when a state-sponsored genocide is in progress?
This has only ever happened once, and only because NATO's Europeans were involved: The Balkans wars in the early 90s. None of the African genocides were addressed while in progress.
Large portions of the world are going to hate the United States of America no matter its foreign policy......It would not surprise me to see America the target of more hatred and violent attacks after returning to isolationism than in its most internationally-meddling times.
Unfortunately, since WWII this hypothesis has never been tested; however, contrasting the relations that most European countries (with the exception of the UK and France) have with the rest of the world, you can see that a country can be quite open, involved and very non-isolationist and still have good relations with most of the rest of the world.
The reason why most people "hate America" has nothing to do with culture but more to do with the way "America" (ie, the government and it's supporters) trample on these people's choices by supporting "pro-western" dictators.
This is a practice that is probably still going on to these days. My mum, who is from the Middle East and in her early 70s has had self-applied tattoos made out of soot since she was a teenager. They're not like the tattoos one would be used to, but are just simple and crude symbols, one of them a cross. I am sure this is a practice still in many countries, especially 3rd world countries.
I've used Vista for a short while and also some users (bought new PCs preloaded). I, as the support person, hated it because it took me longer to find my way around it. It is not intuitive for people used to where MS used to place things. I'd say it was similar to going from OS9 to OSX in Mac userland. After a handful to users buying into Vista and then coming to lots of problems in terms of figuring out how to use it, I started recommending downgrades for their and mine sanity's sake. Then I landed a corporate job, and our policy (I set my own, with advice from HQ in the UK) is to stick with XP. My primary reason is that my users are mostly set in their ways, and Vista from UI perspective will be a disaster. The other reason in that some legacy apps will probably cause problems to run. They even cause problems in XP. So, when I order a PC from Dell, I always specify XP as the OS. It comes pre-installed. On a side note, I also downgrade Office 2007 to 2003 Pro, again for usability reasons. I have Select Licenses, so I am "legally" entitled to. Long live XP.
A lot of my family and friends complain about the compulsory voting in Australia, but I tend to agree with the notion. I think everyone needs to take a stand on how things are run; yes, like in Canada, the options are not always compelling, but there is still an option.
Also, I find it strange that in Canada you can't vote for an "individual" but have to vote for a party. In Australian (even local council) election, each ballot paper has two options: above the line=vote for one party only and below the line=vote for an individual by preference. For lower house I usually vote for party even though the candidate options are quite small, but for Senate voting, I usually vote below the line (out of a choice of about 50+). I usually start with the least wanted candidates and then move up.
Now, back on topic: Electronic voting without a paper trail is wrong, but paper voting in australia (a country of 20 million people) is quite efficient. We know the results of an election by midnight usually (except for close seats) which is only a 6 hour gap. I can't see Canada being so different, so why the rush to electronic voting?
Granted, I haven't coded since Uni days, but the best way, on my many projects, to progress was to get some of my colleagues to comment on my progress so far. It works wonders. They always pick on something or find a bug that I've passed over many times without noticing. Once the minor niggly bits get discovered, the project usually progressed very well. I am a strong believer that shared projects are much better than "single handed" projects.
We're an old engineering company, and our products last decades, so we need to keep lots of records. Recently, we started scanning old documents (a warehouse full of them) to make room for expansion. It is a very tedious process, because we can't risk shredding the old files unless we know for sure that the scans are correct. Amyway, for storage, we decided to go for an in house web-based system (some one developed it for us) that is quite basic, and does two important things for us: 1- it references the file in it's location, rather than store the file in a database and copy it to the webserver 2- gives us the ability to change meta data (the document indexes) as we find errors in them
By referencing a file in it's "physical" location gives us two layers of access control: 1- through the database permissions, and the other one through file system permissions. this is important for restricted files...
Obviously, searching is the important part. and indexing is absolutely critical and the most time consuming process.
Someone suggested to us Google appliance, but non of the scanned documents can be searched. they are all images.
The actual application is pretty basic concept (nice interface features, but the concept is simple) 1- A database to hold the info 2- a table per document type containing teh meta data and the filename and filepath 3- a web interface to search and re-search to narrow down the list.
It looks like quite a few people are making the assumption that Boeing does include manual over ride but Airbus does not. Having worked in the Aerospace industry for a while, I can tell you two things: 1- Aircraft have to adhere to certain rules which are almost (but not quite 100%) identical across the world. So much so, that since the late 80s or early 90s, everyone seems to have renamed and restructured their regulations to be inline: for example, FAR 23 is the same as JAR 23 (even up to the same sub paragraph). In general as well, if an aircraft is certified under FAR23 it is usually a formality to re-certify under JAR23 and vica versa. 2- Safety, redundancy and overrides are some of the most stringent requirements that can't be bypassed, so those putting forward the argument don't know jack.
Well, this is also something I use quite regularly. I checked it out on bing, and it looks like it works like on the other search engines. Same queries for google, yahoo and bing returned almost the same results (bing rounds to 6 digits, yahoo doesn't do complex equations):
The calculation is: 200 AUD in CAD Bing returned: 200 AUD = 177.00 CAD after a sponsored site Yahoo returned nothing in terms of calculations Google returned: 200 Australian dollars = 176.673866 Canadian dollars with no sponsored sites preceding it wolfram Alpha returned C$176.72 with a historical graph of exchange rates as well as other exchange rates against the AUD!
I did another set of calculations: 500+100*5 Bing returned: 500+100*5 = 1,000 with no sponsored sites followed by a lot of search results Yahoo returned: 500+100*5 = 1,000 followed by a lot of search results Google returned: 500 + (100 * 5) = 1 000 with no search results wolfram Alphs returned 1000 as expected, but also spelled it out and gave me the SI prefix kilo for it
I did a SQRT(9) and sin(90) calculation, only yahoo didn't return a calculation, bing and google did (sin (90) = 0.89...). Wolfram Alpha also went "above and beyond" a simple answer by spelling out the answer (three) to the SQRT question, but also gave a visual representation (***). For the sin(90)it recognised that it is in degrees, and gave me the correct answer of 1.
"The tarantulas are fatal to dogs and cats; they bite people quite regularly; they're quite a painful bite." No one is believed to have been harmed during the recent unusually high presence of the arachnoid in Bowen.
Source is from the ABC report on the story The thing is, I live in Sydney, and I only herd about this story when I checked/.
Care to back up your statement with some references?
I don't know of any sites being shutdown willy nilly. I do recall one site around 5 or 6 years ago being shut down after a police investigation into racial vilification abuse (not an Internet specific law) but apart from that I'm not aware of any others.
I think the point that is being made, unsuccessfully, by the minister is that whoever leaked it or published it added lots of URLs that were not added by ACMA (his key word is that lots of URL "were not the subject of investigation or complaint" which means they wouldn't have been on any list.
It's good to argue against censorship and ISP level internet filters etc, but let's not turn to "faking the evidence" to make a point. An example is the "dentist's website". I find it hard to believe that the site would make it past ACMA scrutiny unless it: 1) actually had specific content to be filtered and 2) someone submitted the site to be reviewed by ACMA.
My gut feeling is that this is one of the sites that "are not on the ACMA list" to try to discredit the list. But I still reckon it's the wrong approach to discredit ISP level filtering.
"There are some common URLs to those on the ACMA blacklist. However, ACMA advises that there are URLs on the published list that have never been the subject of a complaint or ACMA investigation, and have never been included on the ACMA blacklist," he [the minister] said.
Also, one of the ISPs involved in the testing confirmed that this list is not the ACMA list. More news coverage here on the ABC
A more apt description is that the Piratebay (BTW the name itself lends them to be suspicious) is that they are more like a phonebook or yellowpages for a stolen goods stores. they don't hold the goods, they just point you in that direction!
I call fud on this. Today I received a brand new laptop from Dell which I ordered last week. It came with Windows XP Pro. DellI thnk have the "consumer" hardware not available with XPPro as an option, but all of the business model PCs come with XPPro as an option.
I posted to this thread too early, otherwise I would've modded you up.
If the story sounds fishy, smells fishy and looks fishy and too sensationalist to be true (with no other corroborating evidence) then it is most likely not true.
Let me get this straight. This whole story is based on someone's blog post with no other supported information or even a "school district" to try and verify the story.
I scanned the story for a mere one minute, and it sounded so fishy that I am more inclined to assume it is a made up story. Even the most non-technical people I know who have heard of linux (many of my non-technical friends have not heard of it) know that it is free.
I call this bogus!
Also there was another post above complaining about how ICT teachers who don't understand software licensing. I am a 10 year sys admin veteran, and I have a hard time understanding the licensing of the software that I support. Can you imagine what a teacher who doesn't have to deal with licensing would go through?
I'd say. A very nice hit and discussion generator, but let move along. Nothing to see here.
I have to agree with you there. Also, look at the definition of a recession: a contraction in the "growth". So, the economy shrinks by 0.1% or even 1% or worst case scenario 5%. If I earn 5% less tomorrow than I did today, I will still survive. I may need to go to the movies less or have less cash to spend on luxuries, but it is not the end of the world as we know it. The last recession we "had to have" in Australia, didn't really do much. Unemployment went up a bit, but we still got through, and we still went on holidays.
It's FUD at it's best.
Ignore the fear mongering and get on with your life.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for the Link to the article.
Maybe you should've also included the following in your "summary":
Don't single out Muslims for this. I am not a muslim, but an evangelical christian, but I do recognise hypocrisy when I see it (usually). Having something in writing (and signed) does not mean that it is being followed. So, as you can see, it seems a lot of muslim countries don't follow their own stated declarations. But, believe it or not, neither some bastions of freedom in the Western World.
An example is the US and their segregation laws which contravened the UN UDHR or South Africa's Apartheid regime which flouted a few provisions. Or maybe the Australian goivernment denying citizenship rights to their indigenous population even after being signatories to the UDHR.
From the UN Charter (the treaty that established it in the 1940s) as a successor to the League of Nations:
This is from Wikipedia
Two phrases: 1- "Peace and Security" and 2- "the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members." define and determine why it is so slow to act and is usually ineffective when it comes to "sovereignty" issues. It's technical arms (which usually don't threaten any sovereignty) tend to be quite good.
I was going to moderate, but decided to respond to this instead.
An apology never "changes" anything. Harm done is not undone by saying "I am sorry". But an apology is an admission that "I" if I'm the one who did the wrong, or "We" if it is an entity that still exists (such as a company, country etc) recognise the action committed by people like us is wrong and shameful.
An apology is always humbling, and one is humbled they end to listen better.
We recently had an, admittedly symbolic, apology to the "Stolen Generation" (http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2008/s2162035.htm) A lot of people in the previous Government scoffed at it as symbolic and will not change the plight of the indigenous peoples, but they completely missed the point. The point to the Indigenous Peoples is a "recognition of wrongs done".
The apology itself was didn't wind back time or give, now adults, the time they lost with their parents!
I was not born (I was not even a twinkle in my parents' eyes!) when these "legal" actions were taken, but I felt proud that we acknowledge wrong done to others by my country.
A previous post mentioned: Justice delayed is justice denied. This, imho, is BS. Justice should always be sought and welcomed when it is offered.
Well, I don't know where you work, but I am on my 3rd IT job in the last 10 years. Currently I am the only one in the IT department, but in my previous two jobs I was selected (promoted) based on my skills and work ethic. You see, I worked for a manager who valued that, and this in a group consisting of over 70 people.
Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it's the norm for everyone.
Ummm. How can one respond to this example? Maybe I should give you another example, but that'll start a tit-for-tat thread. I will tell you that this is a specific manager's problem. I have worked for both kinds of managers: the ones that listen to the loudest, and the ones that looked at results. you can always tell the difference by looking at how the general employees respond to their managers. One manager I worked for at one of the top global IT firms was so out of it that in a space of 2 months a third of his team resigned (including myself) because he was inconsiderate of our needs (not pay wise, because he offered me a pay increase). A few months after I left I heard that he's been shuffled to another group, and those who stayed in the team became happier.
So, who's fault is this? The manager or the employee?
Do you really believe that the world will stop hating America if America stops meddling in other nations' affairs?
Well, actually, this is the most likely result of this kind of action. When the general population sees you as partial to one side of the equation (usually the bully side) then they will hate you.
What are your thoughts on interfering when a state-sponsored genocide is in progress?
This has only ever happened once, and only because NATO's Europeans were involved: The Balkans wars in the early 90s. None of the African genocides were addressed while in progress.
Large portions of the world are going to hate the United States of America no matter its foreign policy......It would not surprise me to see America the target of more hatred and violent attacks after returning to isolationism than in its most internationally-meddling times.
Unfortunately, since WWII this hypothesis has never been tested; however, contrasting the relations that most European countries (with the exception of the UK and France) have with the rest of the world, you can see that a country can be quite open, involved and very non-isolationist and still have good relations with most of the rest of the world.
The reason why most people "hate America" has nothing to do with culture but more to do with the way "America" (ie, the government and it's supporters) trample on these people's choices by supporting "pro-western" dictators.
This is a practice that is probably still going on to these days.
My mum, who is from the Middle East and in her early 70s has had self-applied tattoos made out of soot since she was a teenager.
They're not like the tattoos one would be used to, but are just simple and crude symbols, one of them a cross. I am sure this is a practice still in many countries, especially 3rd world countries.
Amen to that.
Damn you Corel for destroying a perfectly good and lean product.
I've used Vista for a short while and also some users (bought new PCs preloaded).
I, as the support person, hated it because it took me longer to find my way around it. It is not intuitive for people used to where MS used to place things. I'd say it was similar to going from OS9 to OSX in Mac userland. After a handful to users buying into Vista and then coming to lots of problems in terms of figuring out how to use it, I started recommending downgrades for their and mine sanity's sake.
Then I landed a corporate job, and our policy (I set my own, with advice from HQ in the UK) is to stick with XP. My primary reason is that my users are mostly set in their ways, and Vista from UI perspective will be a disaster. The other reason in that some legacy apps will probably cause problems to run. They even cause problems in XP.
So, when I order a PC from Dell, I always specify XP as the OS. It comes pre-installed.
On a side note, I also downgrade Office 2007 to 2003 Pro, again for usability reasons. I have Select Licenses, so I am "legally" entitled to.
Long live XP.
A lot of my family and friends complain about the compulsory voting in Australia, but I tend to agree with the notion. I think everyone needs to take a stand on how things are run; yes, like in Canada, the options are not always compelling, but there is still an option.
Also, I find it strange that in Canada you can't vote for an "individual" but have to vote for a party. In Australian (even local council) election, each ballot paper has two options: above the line=vote for one party only and below the line=vote for an individual by preference.
For lower house I usually vote for party even though the candidate options are quite small, but for Senate voting, I usually vote below the line (out of a choice of about 50+). I usually start with the least wanted candidates and then move up.
Now, back on topic: Electronic voting without a paper trail is wrong, but paper voting in australia (a country of 20 million people) is quite efficient. We know the results of an election by midnight usually (except for close seats) which is only a 6 hour gap. I can't see Canada being so different, so why the rush to electronic voting?
Granted, I haven't coded since Uni days, but the best way, on my many projects, to progress was to get some of my colleagues to comment on my progress so far. It works wonders. They always pick on something or find a bug that I've passed over many times without noticing. Once the minor niggly bits get discovered, the project usually progressed very well.
I am a strong believer that shared projects are much better than "single handed" projects.
We're an old engineering company, and our products last decades, so we need to keep lots of records.
Recently, we started scanning old documents (a warehouse full of them) to make room for expansion.
It is a very tedious process, because we can't risk shredding the old files unless we know for sure that the scans are correct. Amyway, for storage, we decided to go for an in house web-based system (some one developed it for us) that is quite basic, and does two important things for us:
1- it references the file in it's location, rather than store the file in a database and copy it to the webserver
2- gives us the ability to change meta data (the document indexes) as we find errors in them
By referencing a file in it's "physical" location gives us two layers of access control: 1- through the database permissions, and the other one through file system permissions. this is important for restricted files...
Obviously, searching is the important part. and indexing is absolutely critical and the most time consuming process.
Someone suggested to us Google appliance, but non of the scanned documents can be searched. they are all images.
The actual application is pretty basic concept (nice interface features, but the concept is simple)
1- A database to hold the info
2- a table per document type containing teh meta data and the filename and filepath
3- a web interface to search and re-search to narrow down the list.
It looks like quite a few people are making the assumption that Boeing does include manual over ride but Airbus does not.
Having worked in the Aerospace industry for a while, I can tell you two things:
1- Aircraft have to adhere to certain rules which are almost (but not quite 100%) identical across the world. So much so, that since the late 80s or early 90s, everyone seems to have renamed and restructured their regulations to be inline:
for example, FAR 23 is the same as JAR 23 (even up to the same sub paragraph). In general as well, if an aircraft is certified under FAR23 it is usually a formality to re-certify under JAR23 and vica versa.
2- Safety, redundancy and overrides are some of the most stringent requirements that can't be bypassed, so those putting forward the argument don't know jack.
Well, this is also something I use quite regularly. I checked it out on bing, and it looks like it works like on the other search engines. Same queries for google, yahoo and bing returned almost the same results (bing rounds to 6 digits, yahoo doesn't do complex equations):
The calculation is: 200 AUD in CAD
Bing returned: 200 AUD = 177.00 CAD after a sponsored site
Yahoo returned nothing in terms of calculations
Google returned: 200 Australian dollars = 176.673866 Canadian dollars with no sponsored sites preceding it
wolfram Alpha returned C$176.72 with a historical graph of exchange rates as well as other exchange rates against the AUD!
I did another set of calculations: 500+100*5
Bing returned: 500+100*5 = 1,000 with no sponsored sites followed by a lot of search results
Yahoo returned: 500+100*5 = 1,000 followed by a lot of search results
Google returned: 500 + (100 * 5) = 1 000 with no search results
wolfram Alphs returned 1000 as expected, but also spelled it out and gave me the SI prefix kilo for it
I did a SQRT(9) and sin(90) calculation, only yahoo didn't return a calculation, bing and google did (sin (90) = 0.89...). Wolfram Alpha also went "above and beyond" a simple answer by spelling out the answer (three) to the SQRT question, but also gave a visual representation (***). For the sin(90)it recognised that it is in degrees, and gave me the correct answer of 1.
They sure don't identify users, but they sure identify locations!
This is a story of murder not cannibalism.
"The tarantulas are fatal to dogs and cats; they bite people quite regularly; they're quite a painful bite."
No one is believed to have been harmed during the recent unusually high presence of the arachnoid in Bowen.
Source is from the ABC report on the story /.
The thing is, I live in Sydney, and I only herd about this story when I checked
Care to back up your statement with some references?
I don't know of any sites being shutdown willy nilly. I do recall one site around 5 or 6 years ago being shut down after a police investigation into racial vilification abuse (not an Internet specific law) but apart from that I'm not aware of any others.
I think the point that is being made, unsuccessfully, by the minister is that whoever leaked it or published it added lots of URLs that were not added by ACMA (his key word is that lots of URL "were not the subject of investigation or complaint" which means they wouldn't have been on any list.
It's good to argue against censorship and ISP level internet filters etc, but let's not turn to "faking the evidence" to make a point.
An example is the "dentist's website". I find it hard to believe that the site would make it past ACMA scrutiny unless it: 1) actually had specific content to be filtered and 2) someone submitted the site to be reviewed by ACMA.
My gut feeling is that this is one of the sites that "are not on the ACMA list" to try to discredit the list. But I still reckon it's the wrong approach to discredit ISP level filtering.
Also, one of the ISPs involved in the testing confirmed that this list is not the ACMA list. More news coverage here on the ABC
A more apt description is that the Piratebay (BTW the name itself lends them to be suspicious) is that they are more like a phonebook or yellowpages for a stolen goods stores. they don't hold the goods, they just point you in that direction!
Hmmm.
"We can't buy XP from DELL,
I call fud on this. Today I received a brand new laptop from Dell which I ordered last week. It came with Windows XP Pro.
DellI thnk have the "consumer" hardware not available with XPPro as an option, but all of the business model PCs come with XPPro as an option.
I posted to this thread too early, otherwise I would've modded you up.
If the story sounds fishy, smells fishy and looks fishy and too sensationalist to be true (with no other corroborating evidence) then it is most likely not true.
Let me get this straight. This whole story is based on someone's blog post with no other supported information or even a "school district" to try and verify the story.
I scanned the story for a mere one minute, and it sounded so fishy that I am more inclined to assume it is a made up story. Even the most non-technical people I know who have heard of linux (many of my non-technical friends have not heard of it) know that it is free.
I call this bogus!
Also there was another post above complaining about how ICT teachers who don't understand software licensing. I am a 10 year sys admin veteran, and I have a hard time understanding the licensing of the software that I support. Can you imagine what a teacher who doesn't have to deal with licensing would go through?
I'd say. A very nice hit and discussion generator, but let move along. Nothing to see here.
I have to agree with you there.
Also, look at the definition of a recession: a contraction in the "growth". So, the economy shrinks by 0.1% or even 1% or worst case scenario 5%. If I earn 5% less tomorrow than I did today, I will still survive. I may need to go to the movies less or have less cash to spend on luxuries, but it is not the end of the world as we know it.
The last recession we "had to have" in Australia, didn't really do much. Unemployment went up a bit, but we still got through, and we still went on holidays.
It's FUD at it's best.
Ignore the fear mongering and get on with your life.
War is hell.
War is ugly.
War is dirty.
War is painful for the victor.
War is devestating for the loser.
War is an act of hate.
No argument about the above. They are true through and through. I know. I grew up in a war zone.
War is an act of desparation.
This is usually true to some extent, but not always. War is usually opportunistic because it is selfish, especially on the aggressor side.
War is that which results from a lack of options.
This is not true. There are always other options. Capitulation is one of them. Who is willing to take it? Who is willing to suggest it?
War is fought for land, resources, women, gods, and pride.
Too true.
War is the last desparate act when all other options fail and there is no time to think of any new options.
Again, this is not entirely true. see my comments on the lack of options above.
No one desires war, but many choose to profit from it.
Sadly, this also is not true. There are many people who desire war because they perceive a benefit.
War is inevitable so long as we want for things.
Hmmm. There are many countries who want many things, yet they trade for them. This is how most of the world operates.
When you take away the horrors of war you no longer have war, you have a professional sport.
What happens when the horrors are still there, but they are hidden from the population?