OK, choice as such wasn't taken away, but why didn't they keep the default (was there a mass uprising of existing users demanding spatial nautilus?) and make you hack gconf (tell me again why linux won't break the desktop market) to enable spatial nautilus?!
Whilst writing a 1000 word rant on a single feature is a nice way to earn one's money I can't help but agree with him.
This so-called 'paradigm shift' of spatial browsing should not be enforced on users. We like Linux. We like choice. Stop being fascists and give us a 'turn off spatial browsing' button.
I think you'll find that for quick hops around town the bicycle wins. As fast as a car in rush hour, burns off those calories, strengthens the heart, and cheaper to run. After a year of cycling around town, a 20 mile commute won't be so bad.
Next time, make sure both yourself and the buyer contacts ebay to change the feedback. It's in the interests of all parties to make sure feedback is at least correct.
In the UK, you're most likely to hear it said "5th of June." I don't think the traditional Guy Fawkes night poem works well with "Remember, remember, November 5th."
It's always made sense to me to use D/M/Y as it's in some sort of order: Day is smaller than Month is smaller than Year. You wouldn't say 15:00:10 to represent quarter-past ten would you?
Yes. Lets clear out the British Museum returning all of the artefacts housed within. And whilst we're at it, let's do the same for the national museums in Paris, Belin, Madrid, New York &c.
Oh, and we should levy a charge for preserving the Parthenon friezes for 100 years. Or maybe just rot it with fumes from traffic pollution like the rest of the parthenon.
Maybe it's because there people, like many other primitive cultures, used to think daft things like you have to sacrifice people and animals to make the sun come up again at certain times of year etc?
There's no evidence whatsoever of sacrifice taking place at Stonehenge. These monuments were all about taking control and ownership of the landscape at about the same time as society was transforming from a mobile hunter-gatherer one to a sedentary farming based one. It was about establishing control of the land.
Clue...they weren't interested and didn't even try to invade. The only reason Britain was invaded was because Claudius needed a military victory to give him, a distinctly non-military man, some kudos with the army.
Why do you suppose Stonehenge is about superstition. Stonehenge, and the many associated monuments in the Wiltshire landscape (Silbury Hill, Avebury, West Kennet etc) were as much to do with a show of power - these were the first peoples in this country who were able to change the landscape in this way.
No, paganism is quite clearly linked to northern climates
Not really. Early Christians described those who worshipped the Roman (and by extension, Greek and Egyptian) gods as being pagan. It's just a word for those who are non-believers. Depends of course, who you believe in though!
From that article: But there is no evidence of any burials near Stonehenge, Perks adds. 'There is little sign of death; there are no tombs, because Stonehenge was a place of life and birth, not death, a place that looked to the future.'
YACT - Yet Another Crackpot Theory. Nice try, but Stonehenge is surrounded by hundreds of burial mounds.
You still don't get it, though. What requirement is there for societies do go through this thing called 'advancement?' Are you really that sure that all societies need to 'advance?' How do you measure 'advancement' - in terms of how peaceful a society is maybe?
Are you referring to the continent we now call Africa? Perhaps, I am not familiar with the history of carbon steel.
Yup. By the same people we call Africans. Reference is Science magazine, published in late 1979 IIRC. I can get the journal/page's etc on the original peer-reviewed journal if you like.
Sedentary is an inappropriate word.
Not in this context. The move from thee hunter-gatherer societies of the mesolithic to the farming societies of the neolithic is marked by an incresed sedentism.
Bad form, I know, replying to one's own post, but if you ever get the chance to watch this programme make sure you do. It's one of the funniest things you'll see!
I'll bet that Hancock knows how to spell "Manhattan" correctly though.
C'mon, it wasn't a bad attempt at spelling a foreign placename. Talk about nit-picking!
Also please link to this apocryphal BBC documentary of yours that depicts Hancock "visibly squirming in his seat."
Any good?. It's the science programme called Horizon and has won awards in many countries. The transcript is available here.
From the transcript:
NARRATOR: But whether or not the Egyptians cared about matching north and south in the sky and on the ground there are other problems. There are 13 other stars in Orion. None of them match pyramids. There are over 75 other pyramids in Egypt and among them all there are no convincing matches with stars, but Hancock and Bauval still stand by their theory.
GRAHAM HANCOCK: I don't need every pyramid in Egypt to map a star in the sky. The people who built these monuments were making a grand symbolic statement that was supposed to be understood on an intuitive and spiritual level.
...and...
NARRATOR: Unfortunately, Ancient Egypt and Cambodia are Hancock's most important pieces of evidence, that monuments mirror an ancient blueprint of the stars. His claim seems flawed and Horizon has made a discovery which further questions his basic theory. It links a group of unique monuments with a pattern of stars. Here are the monuments on the ground looking north. The pattern matches one of the great constellations: Leo the Lion. These are the monuments: Grand Central Station, the New York Public Library, Macey's, Madison Square Gardens, the Central Post Office, a theatre, a university, Times Square, the Rockefeller Centre and a police station. The monuments are, of course, in Manhattan. The Leo master plan doesn't account for every Manhattan landmark, but using Hancock's criteria it doesn't have to. As long as you have enough points and you don't need to make every point fit, you can find virtually any pattern you want. But Hancock does offer other kinds of evidence for his theory.
Hancock put in a total of 8 complaints about this programme to the Broadcast Standard Agency. Just one was upheld. If you look on Hancocks website he holds this up as a victory for him. He doesn't mention that this complaint was dismissed: The programme had created the impression that he was an intellectual fraudster who had put forward half baked theories and ideas in bad faith, and that he was incompetent to defend his own arguments.
Adjudication: [The Commission] finds no unfairness to Mr Hancock in these matters.
Until you do, you are no more than a common naysayer with absolutely nothing but empty accusations hiding behind the opinions of others.
Well, I've now done that and Hancock is still a charlatan, fraudster and practices bad science. Please - next time don't post anonymously. There's no need to hide!
Your argument suffers from a fundamental flaw, namely that of the underlying misapprehension that all societies will move from a 'primitive' to an 'advanced' state.
The OP was quite correct in his assertion that, in Europe at least, a move to sedentism brought on technological innovations. It's known as the 'neolithic revolution.' Essentially we stopped being hunter-gatherers and started domesticating animals - we became farmers. Once you make the transition from moving around to settling in a permanent location you require a different set of tools (pots to store things, permanent housing to live in etc) and this is impetus for technological innovations which helped found our societies. Incidentally this stuff started not in Asia Minor, not Europe.
Some things about African society may surprise you. For instance, Africans were producing carbon steel approximately 800 years before Europeans had mastered the skill of doing so.
Hancock is a charlatan and his theories are based on multiple false premises. He's just a new von Daniken, peddling bad science to the uneducated masses. That's why you find his theories in books sold at Borders rather than in peer-reviewed journals.
In one of his books he 'proved' the existence of an ancient civilization c.10,000 years old by the location of 'sacred' sites which mirrored constellations. Of course, he selectively picks the sites (ignoring inconveniently located ones) to match the star patterns.
An excellent BBC documentary debunked his theories showing how you could use the same technique to plot locations of sites in Manhatten against similar 10,000 year old constellations. When questioned on screen about this he was visibly squirming in his seat. Priceless!
Don't tell me, it was a friend of a friend of someone you met in a bar?
Care to tell me how the government process every single frame of film from every single government owned CCTV camera identifying and cataloging everyone?
Given successive UK governments appalling record in implementing IT systems, your claim is frankly ridiculous.
If it sounds like BS, smells like BS, then it probably is.
Slashdot Mirror
This is nothing new, even in mainstream press. It was even published in Dilbert Future which came out about 5 years ago!
Always reminds me of the Dilbert sketch 'what's a paradigm?'
OK, choice as such wasn't taken away, but why didn't they keep the default (was there a mass uprising of existing users demanding spatial nautilus?) and make you hack gconf (tell me again why linux won't break the desktop market) to enable spatial nautilus?!
This so-called 'paradigm shift' of spatial browsing should not be enforced on users. We like Linux. We like choice. Stop being fascists and give us a 'turn off spatial browsing' button.
I think you'll find that for quick hops around town the bicycle wins. As fast as a car in rush hour, burns off those calories, strengthens the heart, and cheaper to run. After a year of cycling around town, a 20 mile commute won't be so bad.
Agreed but the principle is still the same - check the feedback. It's what holds the system together.
Next time, make sure both yourself and the buyer contacts ebay to change the feedback. It's in the interests of all parties to make sure feedback is at least correct.
Always works for me. Have bought/sold hundreds of items from many countries. Only use people with 100% feedback.
If the seller had less than 100% positive feedback then shame on you for buying from them.
I hope you left negative feedback.
No, I just said that it was in some sort of order. One is ascending, the other descending. But in order nevertheless.
It's always made sense to me to use D/M/Y as it's in some sort of order: Day is smaller than Month is smaller than Year. You wouldn't say 15:00:10 to represent quarter-past ten would you?
Oh, and we should levy a charge for preserving the Parthenon friezes for 100 years. Or maybe just rot it with fumes from traffic pollution like the rest of the parthenon.
Maybe it's because there people, like many other primitive cultures, used to think daft things like you have to sacrifice people and animals to make the sun come up again at certain times of year etc?
There's no evidence whatsoever of sacrifice taking place at Stonehenge. These monuments were all about taking control and ownership of the landscape at about the same time as society was transforming from a mobile hunter-gatherer one to a sedentary farming based one. It was about establishing control of the land.Clue...they weren't interested and didn't even try to invade. The only reason Britain was invaded was because Claudius needed a military victory to give him, a distinctly non-military man, some kudos with the army.
Why do you suppose Stonehenge is about superstition. Stonehenge, and the many associated monuments in the Wiltshire landscape (Silbury Hill, Avebury, West Kennet etc) were as much to do with a show of power - these were the first peoples in this country who were able to change the landscape in this way.
Not really. Early Christians described those who worshipped the Roman (and by extension, Greek and Egyptian) gods as being pagan. It's just a word for those who are non-believers. Depends of course, who you believe in though!
YACT - Yet Another Crackpot Theory. Nice try, but Stonehenge is surrounded by hundreds of burial mounds.
You still don't get it, though. What requirement is there for societies do go through this thing called 'advancement?' Are you really that sure that all societies need to 'advance?' How do you measure 'advancement' - in terms of how peaceful a society is maybe?
Are you referring to the continent we now call Africa? Perhaps, I am not familiar with the history of carbon steel.
Yup. By the same people we call Africans. Reference is Science magazine, published in late 1979 IIRC. I can get the journal/page's etc on the original peer-reviewed journal if you like.
Sedentary is an inappropriate word.
Not in this context. The move from thee hunter-gatherer societies of the mesolithic to the farming societies of the neolithic is marked by an incresed sedentism.
Bad form, I know, replying to one's own post, but if you ever get the chance to watch this programme make sure you do. It's one of the funniest things you'll see!
C'mon, it wasn't a bad attempt at spelling a foreign placename. Talk about nit-picking!
Also please link to this apocryphal BBC documentary of yours that depicts Hancock "visibly squirming in his seat."
Any good?. It's the science programme called Horizon and has won awards in many countries. The transcript is available here.
From the transcript:
Hancock put in a total of 8 complaints about this programme to the Broadcast Standard Agency. Just one was upheld. If you look on Hancocks website he holds this up as a victory for him. He doesn't mention that this complaint was dismissed:
The programme had created the impression that he was an intellectual fraudster who had put forward half baked theories and ideas in bad faith, and that he was incompetent to defend his own arguments.
Adjudication: [The Commission] finds no unfairness to Mr Hancock in these matters.
Until you do, you are no more than a common naysayer with absolutely nothing but empty accusations hiding behind the opinions of others.
Well, I've now done that and Hancock is still a charlatan, fraudster and practices bad science. Please - next time don't post anonymously. There's no need to hide!
The OP was quite correct in his assertion that, in Europe at least, a move to sedentism brought on technological innovations. It's known as the 'neolithic revolution.' Essentially we stopped being hunter-gatherers and started domesticating animals - we became farmers. Once you make the transition from moving around to settling in a permanent location you require a different set of tools (pots to store things, permanent housing to live in etc) and this is impetus for technological innovations which helped found our societies.
Incidentally this stuff started not in Asia Minor, not Europe.
Some things about African society may surprise you. For instance, Africans were producing carbon steel approximately 800 years before Europeans had mastered the skill of doing so.
Speaking as an ancient historian of course.
In one of his books he 'proved' the existence of an ancient civilization c.10,000 years old by the location of 'sacred' sites which mirrored constellations. Of course, he selectively picks the sites (ignoring inconveniently located ones) to match the star patterns.
An excellent BBC documentary debunked his theories showing how you could use the same technique to plot locations of sites in Manhatten against similar 10,000 year old constellations. When questioned on screen about this he was visibly squirming in his seat. Priceless!
In Soviet Russia the lost city of Atlantis doesnt't give a **** about you.
Yes you do. That's what an acronym is.
Care to tell me how the government process every single frame of film from every single government owned CCTV camera identifying and cataloging everyone?
Given successive UK governments appalling record in implementing IT systems, your claim is frankly ridiculous.
If it sounds like BS, smells like BS, then it probably is.