'The iPhone still has a bigger share, at 15.4 percent (up 5 points), but Android is catching up fast with 9.6 percent (up 8 points). All other smartphones lost relative share during the quarter, even RIM Blackberries, although they still grew in absolute numbers.' - http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/19/iphone-android-25-percent/
"I am always worried about my citations in college because of the EVIL PLAGIARISM which has all the consequences including failing the class. If the professor was a real dick, they will find a error in your process and then fail you because of this."
What institution do you go to? I'm astonished that they'd look at technical errors in citation format (is this what you're referring to?) rather than if the intent of the student was to claim credit for the work of others. I certainly couldn't imagine any major institution failing someone due to a mere technical error.
Please explain, I'm especially curious what you mean by 'error in your process'.
"Sinn Fein MPs make a point of *NOT* attending Parliament as a political statement, but if they thought they could control the balance of power they could always change that!"
This is very unlikely; it would require them to swear fealty to the British Crown.
I'd miss Locale a lot - it adjust settings based on location and time. It's very handy to me to always know that my phone is off in the lecture theatre but loud on busy roads, or silent whilst I'm sleeping.
Aside from that, the notification bar is a killer app for me - I have widgets to add the iphone style number indicator to my email, phone and messaging icons but the little summary in the top bar is unobtrusive and works in whatever app I'm in.
Oh, good voice dictation and free tethering without worrying that updates will trash my ability to do that. And cyanogen's updates, which improve my phone immeasurably in a few ways - for instance undervolting has given me a 2 day battery life.
I used to have an iPhone, so it wasn't that I hate Apple. I just chose what was better for me and got a Nexus One.
That's a misquotation, you cock. It's a misquotation in that Churchill never said that, in that what you are misquoting is from Orwell's On Nationalism in the first place, and in that the form of words is wrong in any case.
Is this indicative of your general level of research on the topic? Or was it not so much thinking as 'what you reckon'?
"And the problem with withdrawal from the EU would be, er, what?"
a) The fact that much of UK business depends on membership of it; b) That we attract inward investment largely due to our EU membership; c) That it provides much of our system of law; d) Large amounts of UK nationals working abroad might have to come home; e) UK nationals with houses in the EU might not easily be able to reside in them; f) A possible move of EU companies from the London stock exchange to Frankfurt, leading to less City revenue....for a few random points.
"The problem is that not everyone is as tolerant as you. Racism isn't an exclusively white thing, no matter what the BBC might say. To understand what MikeRT and benjfowler are actually talking about, visit one of the parts of England where multiculturalism hasn't worked, where there are real, obvious divisions along ethnic lines. You will find areas that are exclusively Muslim, and other areas that are exclusively white."
Gah. I have lived in areas like that. But problems aren't solved by both sides closing down.
"Why would you want more? I want my country to be my country , not some tower of babel style zoo.
The wonders of multiculturalism is a load of BS. Its a tired old mantra that gets wheeled out like a wheezing geriatric whenever some lefty (and more often that not a young one with fuck all life experience) wants to put a positive spin on separate cultures living apart in the same country.
Well I live in london mate , i was born here and IMO multicuturalism is NOT a benefit. The majority of english (whats left of us in this city) do NOT like it, do NOT want it and never asked for it. If I want to see foreign cultures and languages I can get on a plane. I don't need it in my street with people who can barely communicate with me."
This seems a different point. Specifically, it's a shift from the alleged threat of anti-Western views to just disliking foreigners in general. I guess my point of disagreement is that I don't think having a diversity of views and backgrounds makes a country less my own.
"The British government has two choices: either solve it now by harshly cutting out any part of the Muslim population that looks even remotely likely it sympathizes with Islamists, or face the prospect that in 20 years as demographics shift, a group like the BNP will stage a coup and take matters into its own hands militarily."
This is an attempt to shift the blame to those you wish to expel for the actions against them. You state that you wish to 'cut out' any part of the Muslim population that might be 'remotely likely' to sympathise with extremist Islamic views. You have also stated that 40% of the UK Islamic population support Sharia law. Do the people you wish to cut out include that 40%?
I would conjecture that that this would in fact radicalise many more people as the UK state apparently undertook a war against versions of Islam it disliked. It would also be a direct breach of ECHR rights to free speech. I am curious what specific actions you would call for to cut out people from the population, especially given that incitement to terrorism is illegal already. Are you referring to deportation?
"The British government should infiltrate radical mosques and monitor them. Over time, if the agents feel that the congregation is too radical, identify the non-citizens and mark them for deportation."
We do this. MI5 has experience infiltrating the IRA, and certainly runs agents in the more extreme anti-Western mosques. However you appear to have stated that anyone that might be remotely likely to sympathise should be cut out. Does this then include citizens?
Please note when suggesting solutions that a) you cannot make a mere opinion that the state should change legal system (even to Sharia law) punishable without a breach of the ECHR Art.9 and b) this would arguably also breach ECHR Art.6(1) as the state action would itself be illegal, and so the trial would be unfair due to ultra vires actions.
"Nice strawman. Do you realize that you just validated the grandparent's point? He talks about deporting immigrants who've expressed hostility towards their host culture, some to the point of committing crimes, even murder, and you come out and call him a nazi. That gives him the option of either giving up - which, in his view, results in his nation getting destroyed - or moving towards more radical methods."
No, no he doesn't. He says:
"The British government has two choices: either solve it now by harshly cutting out any part of the Muslim population that looks even remotely likely it sympathizes with Islamists, or face the prospect that in 20 years as demographics shift, a group like the BNP will stage a coup and take matters into its own hands militarily."
How is that immigrants? It's limited by religion only. He also states that:
"There was even a survey done of the British Muslim population that said that about 40% of the young Muslims in the country want to live under Sharia."
So how is this not advocating deporting 40% of the population?
Slashdot Mirror
Julian Assange, pale hair, mid 40s. I don't think he's a fame whore though, I respect the guy. He has cahones.
You assume wrongly.
You are; the whole concept of a patent is to prevent reimplementation of an idea for a limited period in return for documentation of that idea.
'The iPhone still has a bigger share, at 15.4 percent (up 5 points), but Android is catching up fast with 9.6 percent (up 8 points). All other smartphones lost relative share during the quarter, even RIM Blackberries, although they still grew in absolute numbers.' - http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/19/iphone-android-25-percent/
How is this a 'a large majority of people'?
Yes, but Scroogle has recently been shut down by Google, so this is their alternative.
http://www.scroogle.org/scrapen8.html - well, it certainly didn't take much research to work out that isn't true.
"The new bacteria replicated over a billion times, producing copies that contained and were controlled by the constructed, synthetic DNA." - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/science_and_environment/10132762.stm
Yes, it really is life.
"I am always worried about my citations in college because of the EVIL PLAGIARISM which has all the consequences including failing the class. If the professor was a real dick, they will find a error in your process and then fail you because of this."
What institution do you go to? I'm astonished that they'd look at technical errors in citation format (is this what you're referring to?) rather than if the intent of the student was to claim credit for the work of others. I certainly couldn't imagine any major institution failing someone due to a mere technical error.
Please explain, I'm especially curious what you mean by 'error in your process'.
"Sinn Fein MPs make a point of *NOT* attending Parliament as a political statement, but if they thought they could control the balance of power they could always change that!"
This is very unlikely; it would require them to swear fealty to the British Crown.
"That could change with Windows Phone 7." It could. However, I suspect it won't.
"Also, did Google ever do anything about serving malware through their image search?"
My shill-sense, it tingles.
Where off in the lecture theatre==silent in the lecture theatre, to be clear.
I'd miss Locale a lot - it adjust settings based on location and time. It's very handy to me to always know that my phone is off in the lecture theatre but loud on busy roads, or silent whilst I'm sleeping.
Aside from that, the notification bar is a killer app for me - I have widgets to add the iphone style number indicator to my email, phone and messaging icons but the little summary in the top bar is unobtrusive and works in whatever app I'm in.
Oh, good voice dictation and free tethering without worrying that updates will trash my ability to do that. And cyanogen's updates, which improve my phone immeasurably in a few ways - for instance undervolting has given me a 2 day battery life.
I used to have an iPhone, so it wasn't that I hate Apple. I just chose what was better for me and got a Nexus One.
Count another one right here.
...no. Android does a similar, but propitiatory thing.
"I am also sold on Matt Smith now after being initially disappointed that it wasn't Simon Pegg."
Oh my word. That would have been awesome.
That's a misquotation, you cock. It's a misquotation in that Churchill never said that, in that what you are misquoting is from Orwell's On Nationalism in the first place, and in that the form of words is wrong in any case.
Is this indicative of your general level of research on the topic? Or was it not so much thinking as 'what you reckon'?
"Does the resulting CO2 from burning methane contribute less to greenhouse effect then the pure methane?"
Very much so. It really is a win win.
JIT produces similar improvements in the Google JVM, although it is not currently turned on.
JIT is indeed faster. I am not shocked that a Googleplex full of PhDs is already moving in this direction. Google details are at http://groups.google.com/group/android-platform/browse_thread/thread/331d5f5636f5f532?pli=1
"That used to be one of the great selling points of Sarajevo. Didn't work out too well, did it?"
Are you suggesting this is likely in London? Because the BNP can muster 12000 members nationwide in a population of 60 million. A short war, then.
"And the problem with withdrawal from the EU would be, er, what?"
a) The fact that much of UK business depends on membership of it; ...for a few random points.
b) That we attract inward investment largely due to our EU membership;
c) That it provides much of our system of law;
d) Large amounts of UK nationals working abroad might have to come home;
e) UK nationals with houses in the EU might not easily be able to reside in them;
f) A possible move of EU companies from the London stock exchange to Frankfurt, leading to less City revenue.
"The problem is that not everyone is as tolerant as you. Racism isn't an exclusively white thing, no matter what the BBC might say. To understand what MikeRT and benjfowler are actually talking about, visit one of the parts of England where multiculturalism hasn't worked, where there are real, obvious divisions along ethnic lines. You will find areas that are exclusively Muslim, and other areas that are exclusively white."
Gah. I have lived in areas like that. But problems aren't solved by both sides closing down.
"Why would you want more? I want my country to be my country , not some tower of babel style zoo. The wonders of multiculturalism is a load of BS. Its a tired old mantra that gets wheeled out like a wheezing geriatric whenever some lefty (and more often that not a young one with fuck all life experience) wants to put a positive spin on separate cultures living apart in the same country. Well I live in london mate , i was born here and IMO multicuturalism is NOT a benefit. The majority of english (whats left of us in this city) do NOT like it, do NOT want it and never asked for it. If I want to see foreign cultures and languages I can get on a plane. I don't need it in my street with people who can barely communicate with me." This seems a different point. Specifically, it's a shift from the alleged threat of anti-Western views to just disliking foreigners in general. I guess my point of disagreement is that I don't think having a diversity of views and backgrounds makes a country less my own.
OK...a more reasoned response for you.
"The British government has two choices: either solve it now by harshly cutting out any part of the Muslim population that looks even remotely likely it sympathizes with Islamists, or face the prospect that in 20 years as demographics shift, a group like the BNP will stage a coup and take matters into its own hands militarily."
This is an attempt to shift the blame to those you wish to expel for the actions against them. You state that you wish to 'cut out' any part of the Muslim population that might be 'remotely likely' to sympathise with extremist Islamic views. You have also stated that 40% of the UK Islamic population support Sharia law. Do the people you wish to cut out include that 40%?
I would conjecture that that this would in fact radicalise many more people as the UK state apparently undertook a war against versions of Islam it disliked. It would also be a direct breach of ECHR rights to free speech. I am curious what specific actions you would call for to cut out people from the population, especially given that incitement to terrorism is illegal already. Are you referring to deportation?
"The British government should infiltrate radical mosques and monitor them. Over time, if the agents feel that the congregation is too radical, identify the non-citizens and mark them for deportation."
We do this. MI5 has experience infiltrating the IRA, and certainly runs agents in the more extreme anti-Western mosques. However you appear to have stated that anyone that might be remotely likely to sympathise should be cut out. Does this then include citizens?
Please note when suggesting solutions that
a) you cannot make a mere opinion that the state should change legal system (even to Sharia law) punishable without a breach of the ECHR Art.9 and
b) this would arguably also breach ECHR Art.6(1) as the state action would itself be illegal, and so the trial would be unfair due to ultra vires actions.
"So how is this not advocating deporting 40% of the population?"
Islamic population, to be clear.
"Nice strawman. Do you realize that you just validated the grandparent's point? He talks about deporting immigrants who've expressed hostility towards their host culture, some to the point of committing crimes, even murder, and you come out and call him a nazi. That gives him the option of either giving up - which, in his view, results in his nation getting destroyed - or moving towards more radical methods."
No, no he doesn't. He says:
"The British government has two choices: either solve it now by harshly cutting out any part of the Muslim population that looks even remotely likely it sympathizes with Islamists, or face the prospect that in 20 years as demographics shift, a group like the BNP will stage a coup and take matters into its own hands militarily."
How is that immigrants? It's limited by religion only. He also states that:
"There was even a survey done of the British Muslim population that said that about 40% of the young Muslims in the country want to live under Sharia."
So how is this not advocating deporting 40% of the population?