Your question is confused. Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales are still a part of the United Kingdom along with England. The Parliament at Westminster is soverign and can make any law it chooses with application extended only to England or the whole Kingdom or any other part thereof. England itself has no Parliament nor Government and has not since the unification of Great Britain in the early 1700s. Before the union, England and Scotland had the same government — the Monarch in both was the same person and combined the two roles[*] and lived in and was more concerned with England — but separate Parliaments. Scotland nowadays has a Parliament and its own Government again, which can pass many laws, but is not fully independent nor indeed sovereign in the sense that an American or Australian state is; the Scottish government has no existence apart from what Westminster gives it. Wales does not have a proper Parliament or Government but does have some degree of self-rule. The situation in Northern Ireland is too likely to change for me to know where it is.
Now while England was a republic, the Commonwealth of England was able to control Scotland and Ireland. But aside from this, while government might have been — and still is — from England, it was never in Scotland by England.
As for Ireland and Wales, yes, after they had been taken by force by England, they were ruled by England. But the reason one might not say today that (Northern) Ireland and Wales are governed by England is because the UK and as integral parts, people in Northern Ireland and Wales get to vote.
[*]: Note that presently the Monarch of the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia is the same person but does not combine the roles. This is because the Monarch has no political influence and acts solely on the advise of the relevant ministers.
People from Northern Ireland are Irish and British so what I said was correct. Obviously I wasn't talking about the Irish who aren't British because they weren't relevant to the conversation.
Same reason people confuse Holland and the Netherlands. England's the bigger part with the stronger economy and has been for long and consistently enough that that's all that counts. Also, "England" (and "Holland") has the advantage of being much less of a mouthful and much more of a normal country name than "the United Kingdom". See also the US being called "America".
Also, for the same reason people called roads "roads" and turnips "turnips": Because that's what people in our society do. It's not intended as a slight against the Scots, the Irish or the Welsh, but it's merely the convention.
There was something in the news a while back about a cargo ship crossing the Atlantic with a sail. Not, however, a sail like a conventional one; it was somehow raised very high up in the air and connected to the front of the vessel rather than to masts in the middle. Apparently it was meant to be competitive with engine-powered vessels although I heard nothing about it after the initial "hey look what we're going to do!" news reports.
If antimatter behaves backwardsly, and this is the reason there's not that much antimatter around earth (as they suggest), then shouldn't there be antimatter galaxys which exert antigravity on matter? If so, why can't we see any?
Not that I know anything about antimatter. Well, I've heard that the reason there's no antimatter around is because there's more than enough matter to anihilate the antimatter that randomly comes up. But I'm completely not a physicist; I don't think it solves any of life's important questions so I'm content to leave it to other people who find it more interesting.
My suggestion: Use focus follows mouse. Then you can just unthinkingly move the mouse pointer around to follow your eyes. It takes a short period of adjustment, and then you realise it's the next best thing to a computer reading your mind. If you're using Windows, try True X-Mouse. If you're using the Mac, tough. Macs don't read your mind; you adjust to them.
Actually you're only wrong inasmuch as Rush Limbaugh is Reagan and Thatcher's legitimate child. They were married on an obscure Russian island far above the Arctic Circle; I was the only witness. They wiped my camera on the trip home when going through one of those supposedly safe X-Ray machines at the airport. It is all a part of the Conspirital Cabal of Cartographers' plan to make me look like an insane conspiracy theorist so that no-one will believe either that they exist or that they rule the world.
Why do people make it out as if Slashdot's biased towards the left? I've seen at least as many people arguing from the right here. I would say, if anything, that Slashdot is a cross-section of the political spectrum, more so than many other places on the net.
Weird Americans. You go to such lengths to set up the imagery of a state eminating from its people, not having a separate Soverignperson or parliamentand then you go off and rally behind the term "Citizen" which really puts you in your place as much as "Consumer".
You're a person, mate, and a freedom-loving one at that. If you had any sense you'd do well to remember that. Keep no allegience to your state because your state keeps no allegience to you, but instead try to make sure your friends and your family and your neighbors are best off because that's what they want too.
Hence why we bother having Universities and Governments. As a proportion of their total spending, keeping a diversity of bananas growing, not for commercial reasons, but for research and the benefit of the citizenry in the future.
On the other hand, as far as I know there's plenty of other banana species out there, just none that are the sort we're most used to. The real problem is probably that you can't use the banana's seeds to create comparable bananas, much as the seed of apples and the stone of nectarines won't make a tree that'll produce the same fruit. In that case, we might lose the current bananas, like we did before, but the world will go on and at worst when we're 80 year old codgers will be saying "oh my they don't make things like they used to. why, i remember back in the day when our cars ran on petrol. now that was mighty impressive. you could go as far and as fast as you wanted before filling up, and it only cost tuppence per gallon. do you remember when they raised the price to thruppence per gallon? oh weren't their riots in the streets then! and oh, do you remember the old bananas we used to have oh my yes,...".
I dunno. Anyone who puts the "Insert Footnote" feature (previously in Insert) somewhere other than Insert is just screwing with my brain. Sure, some people use them for references (history I think does it?), but I've only incredibly rarely seen footnotes used as references or references used as footnotes. This is really just an irritation, but I had to use the help for it, and Word's help is incredibly bad. (Actually I've had to use Help an awful lot with this version, and frequently I just end up asking someone else or poking at every icon until I come up with what I want.) And anyway, I reckon that you should just choose "Insert Reference" and format the reference as a footnote or APA style or whatever at a later stage, coming from a LaTeX background:)
There's a bunch of other things like this too. Of course, it's generally pretty good, and I guess there's no way they could've made it perfect for all users, but by making the changes bigger than they had to it's become worse. (In the case of footnotes, I think it doesn't much help that footers are in the insert page, even though footers are *basically* always there, just sometimes blank.)
The other big problem I have with it is that there's a bunch of elements which don't have text some of the time --- right now I'm looking at the "Review" page and I can see six icons with no caption. I have no idea what they do. Three of them are disabled, but I'm delighted to see the tooltip still works. Thing about the tooltip is, is that it takes a long time to come up, and it takes a long time to come up with every single option. A lot of programs I use (maybe it's a Linux thing? I'm not sure) will have a delay before the first tooltip comes up, but after that they come up instantly as soon as you move the mouse to the next icon. If you want to find something but don't know where it is, you have to contend with these effectively invisible options. What they need here is some automatic browsing mode that shows mini-tooltips automatically.
Lastly I've found most people think the little arrow in the group caption to pull up a dialog box is confusing and unintuitive; certainly someone had to point it out to me. It's also very hard to describe.
Try a flight like Europe - Australia doing that --- not eating for ten to twelve hours is one thing. You do it every night! Not eating for twenty-four or more hours is killer.
Do you find the direction makes a difference? I flew from Melbourne to London last year, then back again. Melbourne to London was fine --- I went to bed a few hours early the first night (9.30 pm) and then then the second night on I was on my normal schedule i.e. bed at midnight, awake at eight. When I came home again, after about three days when I appeared fine I suddenly couldn't get to sleep until three or four in the morning and struggled to wake up on time. Lots of people reckon it's the same --- going to Europe's fine, it's coming to Australia kills them.
Did you read the article ? If you had, you would've realised that this study acknowledged that the alternate body clock was already accepted, and this was merely trying to find out more information about it. Just because Slashdot reported it badly doesn't mean it's worthless.
Losing your qualifications is a risk you take whenever you move from one country to another. Even with moving from one state to another in Australia or America there can be difficulties with some qualifications, although big fields like medicine and teaching are fine. I wouldn't expect your fiancée to be able walk into a teaching job over here, either. (I was talking the other day to a German dentist; she's settled for teaching at a university for the time being until she can get her qualifications recognised. Fortunate that she's educated enough a university would employ her...)
Largely so I could live in other parts of Europe;) Also, the fact that their former enemies in France and Germany get treated like locals but their cousins in Australia get treated like foreigners strikes me as... offensive.
By allowing entry into Britian to anyone with a British passport (which is to say anyone from any of current and former the British colonies) the British have lost control of their own land and country.
Huh! I wish! I was born in what was, at the time, a self-governing colony of Great Britain. A couple of years later, it became independent of Great Britain (the only significant change was that the government was appointed directly by the Queen on the advice of the the Victorian Premier, instead of on the advice of the British Foreign Office). However, neither before "independence" (Victoria of course remains a state of Australia, so it's not independent, merely independent of Great Britain), nor after it, was I entitled to a British passport.
And even of the former British colonies which have become practically independent of the United Kingdom more recently than my country, most people don't have access to a British passport.
And even of the present British colonies, or people who did whatever was necessary to retain a British passport in former British colonies, the mere possession of a British passport does not grant you right of abode in Britain. You need to have British Citizenship for that i.e. an association with Great Britain proper --- not just an association with a British colony.
France, on the other hand, is much more like you describe. You should check it out if you want scary weirdness.
But it's not. Firefox intergrates poorly into the Linux desktop, with for instance a toolkit that neither looks nor feels like a proper Linux program. Even though it attempts to borrow the appearence of the current Gtk+ theme, the buttons and other form widgets in the actual webpage area look like shite on Linux, but have an excellent native appearance on Windows. In terms of feel, pretty much every feature of Gtk+ that normal Windows programs don't have, Firefox doesn't support.
Firefox has improved on Linux---it used to follow Windows interface standards like Tools/Options even on Linux---but not much faster than its general improvements. It is certainly not a successful Linux program; it is simply a successful piece of free software that happens to have been ported from Windows.
Mozilla needs competition on Linux. I watch WebKit from a distance with hope, but I am not a C++ coder so I can't join in.
What? Nonsense. Being the main player means you don't care because you don't need to care. What did Microsoft do when Netscape was dead and Mozilla was still a niche player? They rested on their laurels. That's been Mozilla's behavior towards Linux too. Software, even free software, does not work without competition.
What makes you think Mozilla gives a toss about Linux/Linux distributions' release schedules? Mozilla's main growth market is Windows and that's all they care about.
In an Australian state and a territory, electronic voting has been trialled:
The voting machines are required to allow a voter to cast an informal (i.e. invalid) vote. This is important because it's a legal requirement for every eligible voter living in Australia to enrol, and for every enrolled voter to vote, unless they're too old or ill. Voting informally is used as a way to avoid stating an opinion you don't have, although technically it's illegal.
The voting machines print out paper ballots which are then hand counted along with all non-electronic votes.
The machines are only available for use by blind people, as the purpose is to allow the blind to cast secret ballots.
I am honestly amazed that Australia's managed to do something right in this modern day, although we did set the world standards for voting systems back in the 19th adn early 20th century. I have only two questions: Are the machines verified in exactly the same state as they're deployed in, e.g. are the dates and times the same, so that the machine can't contain deliberate bugs only visible on election day? And, why isn't the source code available for independent verification by all and sundry? Nothing beats total transparency.
My god how wrong are you! Group 1 and Group 2 are not mutually exclusive. Many good Christians believe in evolution and the Big Bang, and indeed both theories were created by Christians. In fact, it used to be the case that it was religious bigots who believed in the Big Bang (hence the name), and all right-thinking scientists believed the universe had always been and will always be.
So --- you can believe that God created us in his image, and also believe in the Big Bang and evolution at the same time. (Also, your sentence "Sul isn't that uncommon a sun type" should read "The sun isn't that uncommon a star type".)
I was always of the beliefe that when man was made in God's likeness (and angels are not so described), the difference is that we have free will, like God. Thats why we get to sin and overcome it, and angels don't.
Slashdot Mirror
Pedestrians and vehicles don't mix well (or pedestrians are far too miscible by vehicles, if you prefer that point of view)
Yet not nearly missable enough!
Your question is confused. Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales are still a part of the United Kingdom along with England. The Parliament at Westminster is soverign and can make any law it chooses with application extended only to England or the whole Kingdom or any other part thereof. England itself has no Parliament nor Government and has not since the unification of Great Britain in the early 1700s. Before the union, England and Scotland had the same government — the Monarch in both was the same person and combined the two roles[*] and lived in and was more concerned with England — but separate Parliaments. Scotland nowadays has a Parliament and its own Government again, which can pass many laws, but is not fully independent nor indeed sovereign in the sense that an American or Australian state is; the Scottish government has no existence apart from what Westminster gives it. Wales does not have a proper Parliament or Government but does have some degree of self-rule. The situation in Northern Ireland is too likely to change for me to know where it is.
Now while England was a republic, the Commonwealth of England was able to control Scotland and Ireland. But aside from this, while government might have been — and still is — from England, it was never in Scotland by England.
As for Ireland and Wales, yes, after they had been taken by force by England, they were ruled by England. But the reason one might not say today that (Northern) Ireland and Wales are governed by England is because the UK and as integral parts, people in Northern Ireland and Wales get to vote.
[*]: Note that presently the Monarch of the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia is the same person but does not combine the roles. This is because the Monarch has no political influence and acts solely on the advise of the relevant ministers.
People from Northern Ireland are Irish and British so what I said was correct. Obviously I wasn't talking about the Irish who aren't British because they weren't relevant to the conversation.
Same reason people confuse Holland and the Netherlands. England's the bigger part with the stronger economy and has been for long and consistently enough that that's all that counts. Also, "England" (and "Holland") has the advantage of being much less of a mouthful and much more of a normal country name than "the United Kingdom". See also the US being called "America".
Also, for the same reason people called roads "roads" and turnips "turnips": Because that's what people in our society do. It's not intended as a slight against the Scots, the Irish or the Welsh, but it's merely the convention.
There was something in the news a while back about a cargo ship crossing the Atlantic with a sail. Not, however, a sail like a conventional one; it was somehow raised very high up in the air and connected to the front of the vessel rather than to masts in the middle. Apparently it was meant to be competitive with engine-powered vessels although I heard nothing about it after the initial "hey look what we're going to do!" news reports.
If antimatter behaves backwardsly, and this is the reason there's not that much antimatter around earth (as they suggest), then shouldn't there be antimatter galaxys which exert antigravity on matter? If so, why can't we see any?
Not that I know anything about antimatter. Well, I've heard that the reason there's no antimatter around is because there's more than enough matter to anihilate the antimatter that randomly comes up. But I'm completely not a physicist; I don't think it solves any of life's important questions so I'm content to leave it to other people who find it more interesting.
My suggestion: Use focus follows mouse. Then you can just unthinkingly move the mouse pointer around to follow your eyes. It takes a short period of adjustment, and then you realise it's the next best thing to a computer reading your mind. If you're using Windows, try True X-Mouse. If you're using the Mac, tough. Macs don't read your mind; you adjust to them.
Actually you're only wrong inasmuch as Rush Limbaugh is Reagan and Thatcher's legitimate child. They were married on an obscure Russian island far above the Arctic Circle; I was the only witness. They wiped my camera on the trip home when going through one of those supposedly safe X-Ray machines at the airport. It is all a part of the Conspirital Cabal of Cartographers' plan to make me look like an insane conspiracy theorist so that no-one will believe either that they exist or that they rule the world.
Why do people make it out as if Slashdot's biased towards the left? I've seen at least as many people arguing from the right here. I would say, if anything, that Slashdot is a cross-section of the political spectrum, more so than many other places on the net.
Weird Americans. You go to such lengths to set up the imagery of a state eminating from its people, not having a separate Soverignperson or parliamentand then you go off and rally behind the term "Citizen" which really puts you in your place as much as "Consumer".
You're a person, mate, and a freedom-loving one at that. If you had any sense you'd do well to remember that. Keep no allegience to your state because your state keeps no allegience to you, but instead try to make sure your friends and your family and your neighbors are best off because that's what they want too.
Nationalism in any of its guises is best avoided.
Hence why we bother having Universities and Governments. As a proportion of their total spending, keeping a diversity of bananas growing, not for commercial reasons, but for research and the benefit of the citizenry in the future.
...".
On the other hand, as far as I know there's plenty of other banana species out there, just none that are the sort we're most used to. The real problem is probably that you can't use the banana's seeds to create comparable bananas, much as the seed of apples and the stone of nectarines won't make a tree that'll produce the same fruit. In that case, we might lose the current bananas, like we did before, but the world will go on and at worst when we're 80 year old codgers will be saying "oh my they don't make things like they used to. why, i remember back in the day when our cars ran on petrol. now that was mighty impressive. you could go as far and as fast as you wanted before filling up, and it only cost tuppence per gallon. do you remember when they raised the price to thruppence per gallon? oh weren't their riots in the streets then! and oh, do you remember the old bananas we used to have oh my yes,
I dunno. Anyone who puts the "Insert Footnote" feature (previously in Insert) somewhere other than Insert is just screwing with my brain. Sure, some people use them for references (history I think does it?), but I've only incredibly rarely seen footnotes used as references or references used as footnotes. This is really just an irritation, but I had to use the help for it, and Word's help is incredibly bad. (Actually I've had to use Help an awful lot with this version, and frequently I just end up asking someone else or poking at every icon until I come up with what I want.) And anyway, I reckon that you should just choose "Insert Reference" and format the reference as a footnote or APA style or whatever at a later stage, coming from a LaTeX background :)
There's a bunch of other things like this too. Of course, it's generally pretty good, and I guess there's no way they could've made it perfect for all users, but by making the changes bigger than they had to it's become worse. (In the case of footnotes, I think it doesn't much help that footers are in the insert page, even though footers are *basically* always there, just sometimes blank.)
The other big problem I have with it is that there's a bunch of elements which don't have text some of the time --- right now I'm looking at the "Review" page and I can see six icons with no caption. I have no idea what they do. Three of them are disabled, but I'm delighted to see the tooltip still works. Thing about the tooltip is, is that it takes a long time to come up, and it takes a long time to come up with every single option. A lot of programs I use (maybe it's a Linux thing? I'm not sure) will have a delay before the first tooltip comes up, but after that they come up instantly as soon as you move the mouse to the next icon. If you want to find something but don't know where it is, you have to contend with these effectively invisible options. What they need here is some automatic browsing mode that shows mini-tooltips automatically.
Lastly I've found most people think the little arrow in the group caption to pull up a dialog box is confusing and unintuitive; certainly someone had to point it out to me. It's also very hard to describe.
Try a flight like Europe - Australia doing that --- not eating for ten to twelve hours is one thing. You do it every night! Not eating for twenty-four or more hours is killer.
Do you find the direction makes a difference? I flew from Melbourne to London last year, then back again. Melbourne to London was fine --- I went to bed a few hours early the first night (9.30 pm) and then then the second night on I was on my normal schedule i.e. bed at midnight, awake at eight. When I came home again, after about three days when I appeared fine I suddenly couldn't get to sleep until three or four in the morning and struggled to wake up on time. Lots of people reckon it's the same --- going to Europe's fine, it's coming to Australia kills them.
Did you read the article ? If you had, you would've realised that this study acknowledged that the alternate body clock was already accepted, and this was merely trying to find out more information about it. Just because Slashdot reported it badly doesn't mean it's worthless.
America: Could you please include the Bill of Rights in your next treaty? We could use one here in Australia.
Losing your qualifications is a risk you take whenever you move from one country to another. Even with moving from one state to another in Australia or America there can be difficulties with some qualifications, although big fields like medicine and teaching are fine. I wouldn't expect your fiancée to be able walk into a teaching job over here, either. (I was talking the other day to a German dentist; she's settled for teaching at a university for the time being until she can get her qualifications recognised. Fortunate that she's educated enough a university would employ her...)
Largely so I could live in other parts of Europe ;) Also, the fact that their former enemies in France and Germany get treated like locals but their cousins in Australia get treated like foreigners strikes me as ... offensive.
By allowing entry into Britian to anyone with a British passport (which is to say anyone from any of current and former the British colonies) the British have lost control of their own land and country.
Huh! I wish! I was born in what was, at the time, a self-governing colony of Great Britain. A couple of years later, it became independent of Great Britain (the only significant change was that the government was appointed directly by the Queen on the advice of the the Victorian Premier, instead of on the advice of the British Foreign Office). However, neither before "independence" (Victoria of course remains a state of Australia, so it's not independent, merely independent of Great Britain), nor after it, was I entitled to a British passport.
And even of the former British colonies which have become practically independent of the United Kingdom more recently than my country, most people don't have access to a British passport.
And even of the present British colonies, or people who did whatever was necessary to retain a British passport in former British colonies, the mere possession of a British passport does not grant you right of abode in Britain. You need to have British Citizenship for that i.e. an association with Great Britain proper --- not just an association with a British colony.
France, on the other hand, is much more like you describe. You should check it out if you want scary weirdness.
But it's not. Firefox intergrates poorly into the Linux desktop, with for instance a toolkit that neither looks nor feels like a proper Linux program. Even though it attempts to borrow the appearence of the current Gtk+ theme, the buttons and other form widgets in the actual webpage area look like shite on Linux, but have an excellent native appearance on Windows. In terms of feel, pretty much every feature of Gtk+ that normal Windows programs don't have, Firefox doesn't support.
Firefox has improved on Linux---it used to follow Windows interface standards like Tools/Options even on Linux---but not much faster than its general improvements. It is certainly not a successful Linux program; it is simply a successful piece of free software that happens to have been ported from Windows.
Mozilla needs competition on Linux. I watch WebKit from a distance with hope, but I am not a C++ coder so I can't join in.
What? Nonsense. Being the main player means you don't care because you don't need to care. What did Microsoft do when Netscape was dead and Mozilla was still a niche player? They rested on their laurels. That's been Mozilla's behavior towards Linux too. Software, even free software, does not work without competition.
What makes you think Mozilla gives a toss about Linux/Linux distributions' release schedules? Mozilla's main growth market is Windows and that's all they care about.
In an Australian state and a territory, electronic voting has been trialled:
I am honestly amazed that Australia's managed to do something right in this modern day, although we did set the world standards for voting systems back in the 19th adn early 20th century. I have only two questions: Are the machines verified in exactly the same state as they're deployed in, e.g. are the dates and times the same, so that the machine can't contain deliberate bugs only visible on election day? And, why isn't the source code available for independent verification by all and sundry? Nothing beats total transparency.
My god how wrong are you! Group 1 and Group 2 are not mutually exclusive. Many good Christians believe in evolution and the Big Bang, and indeed both theories were created by Christians. In fact, it used to be the case that it was religious bigots who believed in the Big Bang (hence the name), and all right-thinking scientists believed the universe had always been and will always be.
So --- you can believe that God created us in his image, and also believe in the Big Bang and evolution at the same time. (Also, your sentence "Sul isn't that uncommon a sun type" should read "The sun isn't that uncommon a star type".)
"Man mad in God's likeness."
;)
Heh. Nifty typo
I was always of the beliefe that when man was made in God's likeness (and angels are not so described), the difference is that we have free will, like God. Thats why we get to sin and overcome it, and angels don't.