Careful. A lot of people object to the Daily Mail because of a mistake a subeditor made with a headline in 1934. The best response to this is to say "WHAT'S THE MATTER? TOO TRUE FOR YOU?"
Actually, a lot of people object to the Daily Mail because it is a right-wing, xenophobic troll publication masquerading as a newspaper. The whole "Hurrah for the Blackshirts" thing is not considered anymore, because gay paedophile immigrants who hate the queen are destroying society.
Aside: for any non-UK Slashdotters wondering about UK politics and religion, we tend to keep the two separate. You'll sometimes hear a politician refer to god (as Blair somewhat infamously did over Iraq), and there is a lot of "god" in our legal and political oaths etc, but the electorate (even the religious ones) don't much care for "I'm voting like this because god says so", we prefer our leaders to keep their faith in a place of worship and their politics in the House of Commons.
Yet Cameron public stated that the UK is a Christian country.
Games should exist to provide experiences you just can't have in real life. Notch games are just crappy versions of thing you already can experience in real life.
So Call of Duty sucks because you can just join the army?
If you think SecureBoot is a crime, then you're a fool. SecureBoot is a way to solve one particular class of security attacks -- boot sector malware. And if you understood the specs, you would understand that it is all under the user's control. Linux is *not* shut out of SecureBoot; you would love to believe this is some sort of conspiracy to kill Linux, but it simply isn't. And if you think a person who is going to *install* Linux is too stupid to boot to BIOS and turn off one option, then you really have contempt for everyone but Linux kernel committers.
If you think that BIOS option will exist once SecureBoot is a de-facto standard, you are a fool or you havent paid attention to how Microsoft has behaved for the past 20 years. Microsoft already bans that option on ARM systems that run Win RT. They will ban it on x86 too.
Good for you, I will not settle for ambigous mediocrity.
But you are happy with meaningless pedantry?
A marketing example - It really bothers me how people SO good at English cannot figure out that "new and improved" is an oxymoron. If something is new then there is no previous version to improve upon.
While this seems a bit poorly thought out, if (and only if) it makes the parents *legally* responsible for anything objectionable their children might find, not the ISPs, not other websites, etc., but leaves all the responsibility squarely on parental supervision, then I could get behind this. Shielding ISPs and web hosting companies from frivolous lawsuits from stupid, irresponsible parents is actually positive.
If, if (and only if) it puts the 'think of the children' squarely on the responsibility of the parents while offering them the tools/filters/guidance to supervise computer use, that could be good. Less "How could you put that up where children might find it?" and more "Why are you not being responsible for your children's activities? You were warned, given the tools, shown how to watch them. Why are you not responsible?"
If this does not provide any additional legal protections for ISPs or such from stupid parents, then, no. This is worthless.
Dont be daft. This law is to prevent parents from having to be parents, so there is no way they will be held responsible. There are plenty filters available, but as parents are too lazy or stupid to bother investigating, the government has decided to blanket-ban the entire country.
And yet you can get married at 16. You people have your priorities so arse backwards it's amazing you survive.
In most jurisdictions in the U.S., marriage under the age of 18 requires parental consent. The marrying age being lower than the drinking age has at least one benefit: You're less likely to show up drunk for your wedding.;)
I think it's much more of a scandal that the driving age is lower than the drinking age. I would rather kids get some experience with alcohol's effects (moreso than just sneaking alcohol from their parents' liquor cabinet) before they started driving. It seems like a bad idea to me to have kids driving around without experience of how alcohol can affect them if they decide to get behind the wheel.
How old do you have to be to buy and carry a handgun in the US?
Well if you had more than half a brain, you would have voted. It is your only power to prevent the things you do not like in politics.
How, exactly? You only get to pick from a bunch of politicians. Its like picking whether you want to be fucked in the ass by a red or a blue dildo while laughing at the people who say no to both.
The Judaic Law (I am Catholic) tolerated teen fornication provided the couple got married afterward, yet in the U.S. an 18-year-old having sex with a 16-year-old is considered rape.
Unless both is famous... Justin Bieber was 16 and Selena Gomez 18 when they were papped making out (just tongue kissing but still). Both are California residents and it happened in California, whose statutory rape law clearly make this illegal (misdemeanor fine), yet no charges were ever filed as far as I know.
No. In this case the "offender" is a woman. That is fine. If it was an 18 year old male and a 16 year old female, it would be statutory rape.
Double standards.
If you had consensual sex with someone when you were a teenager, you are not a victim of anything except your own decision. Like you said, keep your pussy put the fuck away. That's good advice.
If it was non-consensual, or earlier than that, then your experiences have no bearing on the issue of consensual underage sex.
The only problem is that legally a child cannot give consent.
The really fucked up thing is when kids are tried as adults for the "crime" of under-age sex.
According to http://www.pbs.org/benfranklin/l3_citizen_abolitionist.html he did own two slaves. However, his opinions evolved to the point that later in life he was the president of the Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery and the Relief of Negroes Unlawfully Held in Bondage
"This movie cost $3.50 per person watching, we noticed you have 3 people watching, your account with be charged $10.50 plus appropriate taxes for this movie."
What I see is an excuse for more price gouging.by the media companies.
More likely:
"You are only licensed to watch this movie with 1 other person. We noticed you have 3 people watching. This is piracy and we are automatically serving our lawsuit for $150,000."
It may be legally permissible for paedophiles to demonstrate in favour of paedophile rights outside my child's school, I'm still going to go out and attack the fuckers with a cricket bat if the police don't come and truncheon them for me.
How about this version, then: It may be legally permissible for gays to demonstrate in favour of gay rights outside my church, I'm still going to go out and attack the fuckers with a cricket bat if the police don't come and truncheon them for me.
Don't like something? Use violence! The solution to all of life's problems.
I've sung "The Good Ship Venus" a few times, myself.
'Venus' is a head-turner/head-scratcher in the same way a person always looks at a Yorkshire Terrier doing #2 and wonders how it doesn't have its backside matted with dung.
1. It just does not look like it will be a good "sea-keeper", even with a slight turn near the bow.
2. The upright windows seem as though they will be hit bluntly by big seas, so must be quite strong.
3. There does not appear to be a way to wipe/wash the bridge windows, but they must have thought of that, surely.....
It's almost Halloween... I would just hook one up to a battery pack and make it part of my costume somehow. It could display the blue screen of Death! Or you could just get the t-shirt.
Maybe load a few pictures of evil-looking eyes, and hang them out in a dark corner of the yard.
Or load a few pictures of x-rays on it.. with a little rehearsal and good timing (or maybe it just has a "next photo" button). Then you can hold it in front of various 'ahem' parts of your body, and show off or something.
There are so many crappy old laptops around with nicer displays and better functionality to waste time hacking a photo frame, though.
Or load 100 or so jpegs of someone with a few skull pictures randomly scattered through the sequence, so that it appears to flicker between the two.
Or do a Tyler Durden and put in 1 penis picture in the sequence.
Slashdot Mirror
and one police officer.
Who is one day away from retirement.
Careful. A lot of people object to the Daily Mail because of a mistake a subeditor made with a headline in 1934. The best response to this is to say "WHAT'S THE MATTER? TOO TRUE FOR YOU?"
Actually, a lot of people object to the Daily Mail because it is a right-wing, xenophobic troll publication masquerading as a newspaper. The whole "Hurrah for the Blackshirts" thing is not considered anymore, because gay paedophile immigrants who hate the queen are destroying society.
Aside: for any non-UK Slashdotters wondering about UK politics and religion, we tend to keep the two separate. You'll sometimes hear a politician refer to god (as Blair somewhat infamously did over Iraq), and there is a lot of "god" in our legal and political oaths etc, but the electorate (even the religious ones) don't much care for "I'm voting like this because god says so", we prefer our leaders to keep their faith in a place of worship and their politics in the House of Commons.
Yet Cameron public stated that the UK is a Christian country.
Games should exist to provide experiences you just can't have in real life. Notch games are just crappy versions of thing you already can experience in real life.
So Call of Duty sucks because you can just join the army?
I guess they are going for the home run, get every other retailer to go out of business, then jack up the prices.
At least in the UK Amazon are seldom the cheapest for anything, except silly offers like the current Kindle Fire for 99 quid.
In general people here use them for their convenience and no-quibble customer services.
Amazon UK are cheapest for games usually. COD:Black Ops 2 is on Amazon for £37, Game are selling it for £45.
If you think SecureBoot is a crime, then you're a fool. SecureBoot is a way to solve one particular class of security attacks -- boot sector malware. And if you understood the specs, you would understand that it is all under the user's control. Linux is *not* shut out of SecureBoot; you would love to believe this is some sort of conspiracy to kill Linux, but it simply isn't. And if you think a person who is going to *install* Linux is too stupid to boot to BIOS and turn off one option, then you really have contempt for everyone but Linux kernel committers.
If you think that BIOS option will exist once SecureBoot is a de-facto standard, you are a fool or you havent paid attention to how Microsoft has behaved for the past 20 years. Microsoft already bans that option on ARM systems that run Win RT. They will ban it on x86 too.
'the geeky way to fuck'
With a Beowulf cluster of partners, covered in hot grits.
Good for you, I will not settle for ambigous mediocrity.
But you are happy with meaningless pedantry?
A marketing example - It really bothers me how people SO good at English cannot figure out that "new and improved" is an oxymoron. If something is new then there is no previous version to improve upon.
"which allowed for large cavities where someone would be able to hide items"
That's a worrying precedent. The human body also has these...
While this seems a bit poorly thought out, if (and only if) it makes the parents *legally* responsible for anything objectionable their children might find, not the ISPs, not other websites, etc., but leaves all the responsibility squarely on parental supervision, then I could get behind this. Shielding ISPs and web hosting companies from frivolous lawsuits from stupid, irresponsible parents is actually positive.
If, if (and only if) it puts the 'think of the children' squarely on the responsibility of the parents while offering them the tools/filters/guidance to supervise computer use, that could be good. Less "How could you put that up where children might find it?" and more "Why are you not being responsible for your children's activities? You were warned, given the tools, shown how to watch them. Why are you not responsible?"
If this does not provide any additional legal protections for ISPs or such from stupid parents, then, no. This is worthless.
Dont be daft. This law is to prevent parents from having to be parents, so there is no way they will be held responsible. There are plenty filters available, but as parents are too lazy or stupid to bother investigating, the government has decided to blanket-ban the entire country.
And yet you can get married at 16. You people have your priorities so arse backwards it's amazing you survive.
In most jurisdictions in the U.S., marriage under the age of 18 requires parental consent. The marrying age being lower than the drinking age has at least one benefit: You're less likely to show up drunk for your wedding. ;)
I think it's much more of a scandal that the driving age is lower than the drinking age. I would rather kids get some experience with alcohol's effects (moreso than just sneaking alcohol from their parents' liquor cabinet) before they started driving. It seems like a bad idea to me to have kids driving around without experience of how alcohol can affect them if they decide to get behind the wheel.
How old do you have to be to buy and carry a handgun in the US?
GNOME which has paid far more attention to usability.
By "paid attention to usability" you mean "forced the developers' One True Way on to everyone and removed all the options".
Well if you had more than half a brain, you would have voted. It is your only power to prevent the things you do not like in politics.
How, exactly? You only get to pick from a bunch of politicians. Its like picking whether you want to be fucked in the ass by a red or a blue dildo while laughing at the people who say no to both.
A spanking! A spanking! Sorry, wrong scene.
No, no. Please continue...
The Judaic Law (I am Catholic) tolerated teen fornication provided the couple got married afterward, yet in the U.S. an 18-year-old having sex with a 16-year-old is considered rape.
Unless both is famous... Justin Bieber was 16 and Selena Gomez 18 when they were papped making out (just tongue kissing but still). Both are California residents and it happened in California, whose statutory rape law clearly make this illegal (misdemeanor fine), yet no charges were ever filed as far as I know.
No. In this case the "offender" is a woman. That is fine. If it was an 18 year old male and a 16 year old female, it would be statutory rape. Double standards.
If you had consensual sex with someone when you were a teenager, you are not a victim of anything except your own decision. Like you said, keep your pussy put the fuck away. That's good advice.
If it was non-consensual, or earlier than that, then your experiences have no bearing on the issue of consensual underage sex.
The only problem is that legally a child cannot give consent. The really fucked up thing is when kids are tried as adults for the "crime" of under-age sex.
According to http://www.pbs.org/benfranklin/l3_citizen_abolitionist.html he did own two slaves. However, his opinions evolved to the point that later in life he was the president of the Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery and the Relief of Negroes Unlawfully Held in Bondage
So in other words, he was a flip-flopper. :)
How about a hypothetical candidate who said "Scrap the TSA and kill everyone's firstborn", verses one who said "keep the status quo".
Which would you campgain for?
The first one. I dont have kids.
"This movie cost $3.50 per person watching, we noticed you have 3 people watching, your account with be charged $10.50 plus appropriate taxes for this movie."
What I see is an excuse for more price gouging.by the media companies.
More likely:
"You are only licensed to watch this movie with 1 other person. We noticed you have 3 people watching. This is piracy and we are automatically serving our lawsuit for $150,000."
It may be legally permissible for paedophiles to demonstrate in favour of paedophile rights outside my child's school, I'm still going to go out and attack the fuckers with a cricket bat if the police don't come and truncheon them for me.
How about this version, then: It may be legally permissible for gays to demonstrate in favour of gay rights outside my church, I'm still going to go out and attack the fuckers with a cricket bat if the police don't come and truncheon them for me.
Don't like something? Use violence! The solution to all of life's problems.
I've sung "The Good Ship Venus" a few times, myself.
'Venus' is a head-turner/head-scratcher in the same way a person always looks at a Yorkshire Terrier doing #2 and wonders how it doesn't have its backside matted with dung.
1. It just does not look like it will be a good "sea-keeper", even with a slight turn near the bow.
2. The upright windows seem as though they will be hit bluntly by big seas, so must be quite strong.
3. There does not appear to be a way to wipe/wash the bridge windows, but they must have thought of that, surely.....
Im sure it is designed to sail on the iSeas.
Congratulations for invoking the "Muslim Equivalent" to the Godwin Rule
The Allahwin Rule?
Hell, I bet they don't even know how to compike a kernel.
I don't, but I can tuna system for optimum performance.
The Ceefax service to mainland UK shut off in February this year, leaving Northern Ireland as the only area left with coverage.
Oh, and the original ad for Ceefax claimed "it is made up of two words: Cee and Fax." But of a silly one, that.
I think they meant "See" and "Facts". Also, its from the BBC, so [BB]CeeFax seemed a good name.
Heh, I like that!
It's almost Halloween... I would just hook one up to a battery pack and make it part of my costume somehow. It could display the blue screen of Death! Or you could just get the t-shirt.
Maybe load a few pictures of evil-looking eyes, and hang them out in a dark corner of the yard.
Or load a few pictures of x-rays on it.. with a little rehearsal and good timing (or maybe it just has a "next photo" button). Then you can hold it in front of various 'ahem' parts of your body, and show off or something.
There are so many crappy old laptops around with nicer displays and better functionality to waste time hacking a photo frame, though.
Or load 100 or so jpegs of someone with a few skull pictures randomly scattered through the sequence, so that it appears to flicker between the two. Or do a Tyler Durden and put in 1 penis picture in the sequence.