Most gun crime in the UK is between criminal gangs and circumscribed to well know problem areas in some towns (Mostly Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow and London). They don't go around randomly robing and executing unsuspecting passers by.
As for your definition of growing up rapidly, well, from 0.000001% to 0.000002% is a 100% increase, which you could sensationalize it to high heavens, so go on, show us your numbers.
Anybody coming from a really violent place (US, Mexico, Southafrica, Colombia) knows that the UK is a very safe place to live.
That is the case in the completely dysfunctional, racist, US jails.
In other countries convicted criminals still have rights and can sue the government if they are not accorded the protection they deserve while incarcerated.
A civilized state never threatens with violence their citizenry.
Manhandling somebody that needs to be summoned to a court of law is not violent if handled properly.
In the UK for example police do not use weapons in general, and I am pretty sure would never dream to do so to drag a tax dodger to a court. Even in some cases when a criminal is armed, violence is not the defacto response.
I think you guys have lots to learn about how violence is used or misused (I could drag Iraq into the conversation here, but I wont).
That "explanation" of why Linux (and Macs, ans Solaris, and BSD, etc) are more secure only because they are "smaller" targets is ludicrous.
Macs are now between 5% and 10% of desktop computers depending on locality and who you wish to believe, Linux are around 1%. But in the server arena Linux and Solaris are big. There are obbvious vectors of attack since they are the gateways to full networks (of dumber securitywise Windows machines).
Linux (and Macs and Solaris and all the rest) machines are not more secure because there are fewer of them. They are more secure because several early design decisions of those OSes make implementing security easier.
They should help Nokia, Sony-Ericcson (Sony, does that ring an music industry bells for you?) fix their phones that allow our bloody unfair use of their sacred IP, for which we have already paid.
Us, bunch of thieves, have no bloody shame, wanting to use music we have paid for already.
There is such a thing as a good plot, where on scene in the movie is there for a reason that helps to develop it.
In the original movies (and here I include Ewoks and all) the plot moves along from a beginning to a middle tense point and to a satisfactory resolution, this is completely and abjectly absent in the first 2 prequels and completely convoluted in the last one (where Lucas had got enough flak for the 2 previous failures that if felt like he was trying to make for it).
Where the first 3 movies may have been corny, they wore this with gusto and sense of awe. The prequels are far too knowingly, they take the politics far too seriously (sorry Mr Lucas, there are filmakers that know how to do that, that ain't you) and the pseudo spiritual aspects that gave some unspecified backbone to the good vs evil saga in the first three movies is completely misused by taking it too seriously to the point of self parody.
The time when the films were made matters. there was never before a movie with such majestic intentions so well put in screen. The first scene in the first movie still astonishes if watched in a cinema, as well as the scenes of space fights. The clinical labyrinth like nature of the empire's cuartels (Death Star, etc) is creepy and futuristic and the uniforms used in both sides look credible and polished. Compare all this with the lame CGI hickery pockery of the last three movies. Where there was real craftsmanship in the first movies (were attention to detail was paid to every character, spaceship and scene) in the last movies all is passed through the CGI churning machine forgetting about the soul of the movie: the bloddy damn plot.
There are good ways and bad ways to do corny stuff. The frist three movies are a text boo case of how to do it properly, the last three are text book cases of exactly the opossite.
This is easy to explain: in the first movies we have a director desperate to build a good history not knowing if he would ever be able to go beyond the first movie.
In the last movies we have a Director that knows he can rest on his laurels and milk the franchise for all what is worth.
It shows, and anybody that knows two things about film making can see this, the nostalgia would not cloud the judgment of anybody that has studied even lightly how a good movie is built.
I paid money to watch those movies. It took 3 movies for Lucas to destroy his reputation as a film maker.
I do have the right to complain and make a fuss about it, I gave him at the very least the equivalent of $120 in today's money.
I do have damn right to complain and ensure as many people as possible know about this so they are forewarned in case he tries to pull another one on us ( the talk of "postquels" is unnerving,...)
All boils down to conservation of energy. Saying the contrary is just coating the truth.
You can surely choose what to eat to affect your hunger, but at the end if you eat too much while doing precious little, you will still get fat.
Fat people should be told in no uncertain terms that they should move their asses of the couch and go for a walk at the very least (buy a pedometer, do 5000 steps a day).
Conceding for the sake of argument that this will not contribute to weight loss (as if), the benefits of physical activity are fully documented, and frankly it stands to reason that if you do nothing somehow magically you will lose weight by eating as many calories as you wish, as long as they are the ones that don't make you hungry.
What you say would be great if it applied to the European and Asian markets, but in Europe forcing you to sign with one carrier goes from distasteful to illegal depending on the locality.
Apple didn't need to do that, but that just shows what the flawed business model is (even if they succeed, this would send costumer choice back 10 years or more).
Now the player is unusable unless you can make it call the mother ship via one of the Official OSes.
If that is not a jibe against Linux then nothing one can show you will convince you otherwise (after all the other 2 major OSes in the desktop are fully supported out of the box).
The BBC is a public institution, answerable to tax payers (license payer is an euphemism: the license is a tax enforced by the governemtn and the judicial system). As such it has to fullfil certain obligations, like not screwin Linux users.
NBC is a private company, if they are stupid enough to dismiss OSX and Linux that is their prerogative.
Slashdot Mirror
Most gun crime in the UK is between criminal gangs and circumscribed to well know problem areas in some towns (Mostly Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow and London). They don't go around randomly robing and executing unsuspecting passers by.
As for your definition of growing up rapidly, well, from 0.000001% to 0.000002% is a 100% increase, which you could sensationalize it to high heavens, so go on, show us your numbers.
Anybody coming from a really violent place (US, Mexico, Southafrica, Colombia) knows that the UK is a very safe place to live.
Females are not attracted to violent individuals. They are attracted to powerful ones.
I will let you as homework to figure out the difference.
That is the case in the completely dysfunctional, racist, US jails.
In other countries convicted criminals still have rights and can sue the government if they are not accorded the protection they deserve while incarcerated.
A civilized state never threatens with violence their citizenry.
Manhandling somebody that needs to be summoned to a court of law is not violent if handled properly.
In the UK for example police do not use weapons in general, and I am pretty sure would never dream to do so to drag a tax dodger to a court. Even in some cases when a criminal is armed, violence is not the defacto response.
I think you guys have lots to learn about how violence is used or misused (I could drag Iraq into the conversation here, but I wont).
Next:
- Ford, Toyota, Hundai et all enforce speed limits.
- Bacardi, Budweiser enforce amounts of alcohol you drink before getting behind the wheel.
- Gun companies enforce gun laws.
Did you get it or should I throw more analogies at you to remark how idiotic is for MS to be enforcing the wishes of content producers?
That "explanation" of why Linux (and Macs, ans Solaris, and BSD, etc) are more secure only because they are "smaller" targets is ludicrous.
Macs are now between 5% and 10% of desktop computers depending on locality and who you wish to believe, Linux are around 1%. But in the server arena Linux and Solaris are big. There are obbvious vectors of attack since they are the gateways to full networks (of dumber securitywise Windows machines).
Linux (and Macs and Solaris and all the rest) machines are not more secure because there are fewer of them. They are more secure because several early design decisions of those OSes make implementing security easier.
They should help Nokia, Sony-Ericcson (Sony, does that ring an music industry bells for you?) fix their phones that allow our bloody unfair use of their sacred IP, for which we have already paid.
Us, bunch of thieves, have no bloody shame, wanting to use music we have paid for already.
Apple got design authority over the device?
Really Batman?
Who would have guessed that one....
Then why didn't you just leave at 3:00PM?
Honestly, were they pointing a gun at you or what?
Anybody remotrly familiar with IT issues knows that Linux is pretty much mainstream now.
600 users in a country of millions (discounting any foreign visitors) was clearly and idiotic estimation.
But do not think for a second that you look cleverer.
There is such a thing as a good plot, where on scene in the movie is there for a reason that helps to develop it.
In the original movies (and here I include Ewoks and all) the plot moves along from a beginning to a middle tense point and to a satisfactory resolution, this is completely and abjectly absent in the first 2 prequels and completely convoluted in the last one (where Lucas had got enough flak for the 2 previous failures that if felt like he was trying to make for it).
Where the first 3 movies may have been corny, they wore this with gusto and sense of awe. The prequels are far too knowingly, they take the politics far too seriously (sorry Mr Lucas, there are filmakers that know how to do that, that ain't you) and the pseudo spiritual aspects that gave some unspecified backbone to the good vs evil saga in the first three movies is completely misused by taking it too seriously to the point of self parody.
The time when the films were made matters. there was never before a movie with such majestic intentions so well put in screen. The first scene in the first movie still astonishes if watched in a cinema, as well as the scenes of space fights. The clinical labyrinth like nature of the empire's cuartels (Death Star, etc) is creepy and futuristic and the uniforms used in both sides look credible and polished. Compare all this with the lame CGI hickery pockery of the last three movies. Where there was real craftsmanship in the first movies (were attention to detail was paid to every character, spaceship and scene) in the last movies all is passed through the CGI churning machine forgetting about the soul of the movie: the bloddy damn plot.
There are good ways and bad ways to do corny stuff. The frist three movies are a text boo case of how to do it properly, the last three are text book cases of exactly the opossite.
This is easy to explain: in the first movies we have a director desperate to build a good history not knowing if he would ever be able to go beyond the first movie.
In the last movies we have a Director that knows he can rest on his laurels and milk the franchise for all what is worth.
It shows, and anybody that knows two things about film making can see this, the nostalgia would not cloud the judgment of anybody that has studied even lightly how a good movie is built.
I paid money to watch those movies. It took 3 movies for Lucas to destroy his reputation as a film maker.
,...)
I do have the right to complain and make a fuss about it, I gave him at the very least the equivalent of $120 in today's money.
I do have damn right to complain and ensure as many people as possible know about this so they are forewarned in case he tries to pull another one on us ( the talk of "postquels" is unnerving
Lets save "US jobs" by screwing US costumers.
Great logic that of yours pal.
Er, uhm, whatever....
Which other way is there to look at a person that voted for Bush and perpetrates mindless nationalism/patriotism in the rese of us?
Look down on them as you say, is the only rational answer, in the context of your post that is.
You may be correct that they will make the Linux revolution go mainstream, but that does not make them heroic figures.
I would be glad if Linux remained a minority OS if these people have not voted for Bush, thus saving hundreds of thousands of innocent lives.
All boils down to conservation of energy. Saying the contrary is just coating the truth.
You can surely choose what to eat to affect your hunger, but at the end if you eat too much while doing precious little, you will still get fat.
Fat people should be told in no uncertain terms that they should move their asses of the couch and go for a walk at the very least (buy a pedometer, do 5000 steps a day).
Conceding for the sake of argument that this will not contribute to weight loss (as if), the benefits of physical activity are fully documented, and frankly it stands to reason that if you do nothing somehow magically you will lose weight by eating as many calories as you wish, as long as they are the ones that don't make you hungry.
Google for it.
European intelligence that is.
What you say would be great if it applied to the European and Asian markets, but in Europe forcing you to sign with one carrier goes from distasteful to illegal depending on the locality.
Apple didn't need to do that, but that just shows what the flawed business model is (even if they succeed, this would send costumer choice back 10 years or more).
Sorry matey, that should contemplate the little inconvenience of connecting the damn thing at an affordable price.
...
And thanks to Apple's deal with AT&T it is not like one would have an option to chose a good carrier, is it?
The word fanboy is coming to my fingertips as I type, I don't know why
The way to hell is paved with good intentions.
Get involved in local politics, forget about grandiose idiotic ideas. You can implement those only when you have a real power base.
All previous iPods didn't need this.
Now the player is unusable unless you can make it call the mother ship via one of the Official OSes.
If that is not a jibe against Linux then nothing one can show you will convince you otherwise (after all the other 2 major OSes in the desktop are fully supported out of the box).
Your political landscape is so far biased towards the right that the democrats would be rabid right wingers in any other country.
It wasn't always so, but it is now.
The BBC is a public institution, answerable to tax payers (license payer is an euphemism: the license is a tax enforced by the governemtn and the judicial system). As such it has to fullfil certain obligations, like not screwin Linux users.
NBC is a private company, if they are stupid enough to dismiss OSX and Linux that is their prerogative.
This is it: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4223938.stm
Now tell us being a blind fan is any good.