That depends. Is it really in the interest of democracy to decide such a decision within a margin of error? I mean many other referendum outcomes on such important topics require a much higher certainty to pass.
Also, the UK isn't one 'country', there are three involved in this, all bound together in the United Kingdom. One of those steamrolled the other two by virtue of higher population. In the context of a union of states thats not really very democratic. Something like this should require a quorum.
The UK is a parliamentary democracy. The "elite ruling counsel" here is the Tory government trying to impose a massive constitutional change without authority of parliament.
The Tory government plus masses of elderly or uneducated or poor English people... I usually thought of the Torys as being the party of the educated and rich not the other way around.
A great many Britons will be very happy if parliament ignores this vote including more than a few that voted out in protest thinking that it'd never win.
A great many ENGLISH people will be very UNHAPPY if parliament ignores this vote. Not so much the rest of the UK.
This is an interesting moment for the UK, where any pretense of "democracy" gets put to the REAL test. The people have spoken and they've gone counter to the powers-that-be. So, will the powers-that-be respect that decision, or will they merely find some sleazy way to subvert it? I would say the odds are about 8-2 for the latter. But I would love to be proven wrong.
The thing is, 'UK' stands for 'United Kingdom'. Its made up of multiple entities. One of those entities has a larger population than the rest combined. By a slight majority, that larger entity voted to leave the EU. By a somewhat larger majority the other 2 entities voted to remain. Their populations may as well not have bothered to vote. They feel disenfranchised.
If things worked like this in the EU the trade deal with Canada would have been a foregone conclusion as Belgiums opinion wouldn't have mattered. The EU would probably have broken up by now if things worked like that. The UK might well break up; Ireland and Scotland have more in common than either have with England.
I for one now see why all the Brexiteer crowd have piped up saying how fantastically wonderful Brexit will be for the economy, and how "leading think tanks" (still to find out who and or what was put in the tank) have come to the conclusion that Brexit will allow Britain to be better positioned, essentially having access to the EU market, whilst not being bound by EU rule.
The truth of the matter is that although the economy is somewhat rebounding like a dead cat does, Britain has not yet Brexited.
Ladies and gentlemen, reality is yet to come. Until now it is but pure speculative noise.
Dropping from 5th largest economy in the world to 7th sure looks great for the UK economy!
Unless they don't come the conclusion that we want them to, then it's OK to just ignore what they say.
I'm sure that literally every poster who thinks this is wonderful would have also been OK with an elite ruling counsel deciding to overturn.. oh I dunno... Obama's election to be president. Or maybe Obamacare.
Actually in the UK its power to the English. Due to their larger population they get to steamroll over the other 'Kingdoms' and get whatever they want.
That sure is a nice UNITED Kingdom you have over there, shame if it got broken up because the other 'kingdoms' got sick of being pushed around by the English. When Scotland and Northern Ireland leave you'll have to strip out their flags from the Union Jack and you'll be left with a red cross on a white background. Then the International Red Cross will have a word with you about 'intellectual property' and trademark issues...
Vending machines that dispense precious metals, bitcoins or whatever do so are usurious rates. You'd have to be fucking stupid to want to use them. Especially for bitcoin.
If you are happy handing over volumes of sensitive personal information to buy bitcoins online, sure. Usually the bitcoin seller will want all kinds of shit like copies of your passport, drivers license, banking details, fingerprints, proof of your address via a scan of a recent service bill which was mailed to your address. This is the main reason I've stayed away from bitcoin; the vendors basically want everything that can be used for identity theft.
I mean ignoring the easy ability to manipulate a photo, or change your vote and then sign next to the vote "Changed my mind". A law against selfies does nothing to prevent someone from doing it discreetly. It's not like you go through a metal detector or are waved for bugs.
Prosecute vote buyers and sellers. Not the technology which enables it. If someone even offers to buy your vote they would face tens of thousands of dollars in fines plus jail time. It's not worth the risk, someone will blab.
If you blackmail someone into doing it and then prove it... I guarantee that person will find a way.
Thats what mail in ballots are for, which are apparently becoming more and more popular and widespread. Mark the ballot at home, with a goon watching over you, mail the ballot in.
The ironic thing is Macs are pushed as productivity machines for professionals. That is one of the reasons they are supposed to fetch a premium price is because they aren't just "home" machines for the masses.
Macs are for professionals... just not your sort of profession!
My local Apple afficionado tells me that Apple users have better things to do with their time than play games, watch movies or, apparently, pretty much anything that normal people do.
You never turn off your devices. You will be constantly be consuming monetized content.
Including the surf noise it plays while you're sleeping.
Someone who wants to turn it off must, obviously, be deviant and need intervention.
Some time in the future, watching old episodes of "The IT Crowd" with my kid.
"Have you tried turning it off and on again? You do know how to work a button?"
and my kid asks "What does he mean 'turn it off and on again?'" "Well in the old days people used to be allowed to turn their computers off." "What do you mean? Why would you do that?" "Because sometimes computers would go wrong and it might fix them." "Sssshhh daddy, we don't want anyone to hear you say anything bad about computers."
Yup. When the Apple watch came out, I took my Rolex purchased in the 70s to a jeweler for cleaning and refurbishment which cost 2x what an Apple watch would have cost. I gave it to my son as a graduation gift. The current value on that watch was 5x what I paid for it. Might be a wash with changes to the value of a dollar, but that item will still have value in 2-3 years when the Apple watch would have been dropped into a bin as junk. The HP-01 watch from the 70's was a better product than the Apple watch, by the way I also had an HP-01 back then. Kind of sorry I didn't keep it. I wonder if an Apple watch buyer will every feel the same way after 40 years?
Also, when Apple decide they don't care about the Apple watch any more and shut down the servers that enable it to work, it could well stop functioning altogether; many pieces of modern tech are like this. If their servers are offline they just don't work any more. This isn't going to happen with your Rolex.
Also preference for 1's over 0's due to the 1's taking up less space is causing problems for database administrators and designers.
Larry Ellison is reported to be pushing a new industry standard in which entire Oracle databases will be compressed into nothing but 1's thus saving billions globally in storage costs.
And the only conclusion you can reach is that women are incompetent and "not interested". Have you ever pondered that people with attitudes like yours might be part of the problem?
I'm a guy. I can program competently. But I hate doing it so I don't have a programming job. In my life experience men and women tend to enjoy different things and in different ways, the two genders are equal but obviously different. What if the majority of women who could be competent programmers just don't want to do that job because (like this guy) they find programming uncomfortable and unpleasant? How do we find the truth of the matter (especially with so much political correctness muddying things up)?
Football is slowed down so much for the sake of advertising with these huge breaks between plays while the players just wander about and slowly slowly organize themselves for the next play.
That's why i like the non-stop action of soccer. 22 people randomly kicking a ball around until eventually someone accidentally kicks it into the goal.
Or theres Rugby LOL. Soccer vs Rugby; Soccer is 90 minutes spent pretending you are hurt. Rugby is 80 minutes pretending you aren't hurt!
Ice hockey is pretty good too for non stop action.
It's a product placement, not an actual solution.The NFL is counting it as advertising revenue. Therefore, no one cares what the end users and support staff think about it.
If they can reduce reliance on ads maybe they will be allowed to reduce the turnaround time on plays and not have 6 second plays followed by 5 minutes of advertising?
Theres a joke: Football players run miles in training; they run for 6 seconds, have a 5 minute break, run another 6 seconds and so on until they've run a mile!
Football is slowed down so much for the sake of advertising with these huge breaks between plays while the players just wander about and slowly slowly organize themselves for the next play.
(...) even people who have done nothing wrong (...). And anybody who has done something wrong should (...)
The problem is that everyone has some something wrong. There is some kind of law, statute or rule that you broke... or didn't follow strictly. This day and age there are so many rule, such broad law, that everyone had some something. Even if it as minor as jaywalking. Or driving over the speed limit for a couple minutes. Or parking a little too far from the sidewalk. Or something else completely different that in a given place is a misdemeanor.
I'm not screaming "evil big government here". I'm actually a law student and an intern in a attorney office. We all break some law several times every day. But these are such minor things that the legal system simply don't care. Maybe it is not a criminal law, but only enough for a civil lawsuit. But we are still breaking the rules.
In the eyes of the law, no one is 100% guiltless, even if they are innocent.
This is one of the problems why the legal system doesn't work. We punish too many things, so we punish badly. And, in that scenario, when the policing forces (local, state or federal) get increased powers and broader mandates, they get carte blanche to so pretty much what they want to anyone they want. After all, everyone is guilty of something.
Things are only getting scarier.
"Give me 6 folders of porn from the most innocent of men and I shall find something in there to hang him."
In some places it might be porn with wrinkled 60 year old women in school uniforms. In other places, porn featuring women whose breasts are too small.
Why would WikiLeaks be out of play? Assange isn't WikiLeaks. The organization's perfectly capable of accepting and releasing data without their leader. There's already been at least one release since Assange went silent, possibly via deadman switch. Persecuting Assange is just assaulting the public face of WikiLeaks, not affecting what it can do.
Yes, Assange probably had a 'dead mans switch' set up so that if he didn't keep updating something it would assume that he'd been handed over to the UK authorities by the Ecuadorians and then leak some files that would be very damaging to the Ecuadorian government.
I kind of hope this is what he's done because he hasn't actually been handed over to the UK authorities and when the files go public the Ecuadorians are going to kick him out of the embassy in his pajamas.
Slightly but the GP is right in claiming that Corals existed when CO2 was higher. So let's assume that he's right and that Corals are not related to CO2. That leaves us with two options:
1. He believes corals aren't sensitive to temperature (this has been proven without a doubt to be false and you're more than happy to try this at home with a fishtank and overheat your water by only a couple of degrees). 2. He believes CO2 isn't related to global warming which at this point is about as big of a WTF as you can get on a site that is supposed to have an intelligent tech minded readership which embraces science rather than politifiction.
I like that point about raising the temperature of the fish tank by a couple of degrees. If you raised the temperature by a couple of degrees over enough generations of fish I'm sure they'd be fine. How many generations is required, now thats the question.
As well we should. I mean, I do take solace that something like the GBR will probably form at some other place millions of years in the future, but that's not really a substitute for being able to see what they once were in my lifetime.
Then you better move fast and check things out. Many wonderful things in this world are temporary. Check out New Zealands 'pink and blue terraces', oops earthquake.
Slashdot Mirror
That depends. Is it really in the interest of democracy to decide such a decision within a margin of error? I mean many other referendum outcomes on such important topics require a much higher certainty to pass.
Also, the UK isn't one 'country', there are three involved in this, all bound together in the United Kingdom. One of those steamrolled the other two by virtue of higher population. In the context of a union of states thats not really very democratic. Something like this should require a quorum.
they could bring in curry chefs from Mumbai rather than having to take on and train Polish chefs.
Glonka, bigos and schab vs curry... yeh I think I'll go with the fatty, delicious Polish food.
The UK is a parliamentary democracy. The "elite ruling counsel" here is the Tory government trying to impose a massive constitutional change without authority of parliament.
The Tory government plus masses of elderly or uneducated or poor English people... I usually thought of the Torys as being the party of the educated and rich not the other way around.
A great many Britons will be very happy if parliament ignores this vote including more than a few that voted out in protest thinking that it'd never win.
A great many ENGLISH people will be very UNHAPPY if parliament ignores this vote. Not so much the rest of the UK.
This is an interesting moment for the UK, where any pretense of "democracy" gets put to the REAL test. The people have spoken and they've gone counter to the powers-that-be. So, will the powers-that-be respect that decision, or will they merely find some sleazy way to subvert it? I would say the odds are about 8-2 for the latter. But I would love to be proven wrong.
The thing is, 'UK' stands for 'United Kingdom'. Its made up of multiple entities. One of those entities has a larger population than the rest combined. By a slight majority, that larger entity voted to leave the EU. By a somewhat larger majority the other 2 entities voted to remain. Their populations may as well not have bothered to vote. They feel disenfranchised.
If things worked like this in the EU the trade deal with Canada would have been a foregone conclusion as Belgiums opinion wouldn't have mattered. The EU would probably have broken up by now if things worked like that. The UK might well break up; Ireland and Scotland have more in common than either have with England.
I for one now see why all the Brexiteer crowd have piped up saying how fantastically wonderful Brexit will be for the economy, and how "leading think tanks" (still to find out who and or what was put in the tank) have come to the conclusion that Brexit will allow Britain to be better positioned, essentially having access to the EU market, whilst not being bound by EU rule.
The truth of the matter is that although the economy is somewhat rebounding like a dead cat does, Britain has not yet Brexited.
Ladies and gentlemen, reality is yet to come. Until now it is but pure speculative noise.
Dropping from 5th largest economy in the world to 7th sure looks great for the UK economy!
Unless they don't come the conclusion that we want them to, then it's OK to just ignore what they say.
I'm sure that literally every poster who thinks this is wonderful would have also been OK with an elite ruling counsel deciding to overturn.. oh I dunno... Obama's election to be president. Or maybe Obamacare.
Actually in the UK its power to the English. Due to their larger population they get to steamroll over the other 'Kingdoms' and get whatever they want.
That sure is a nice UNITED Kingdom you have over there, shame if it got broken up because the other 'kingdoms' got sick of being pushed around by the English. When Scotland and Northern Ireland leave you'll have to strip out their flags from the Union Jack and you'll be left with a red cross on a white background. Then the International Red Cross will have a word with you about 'intellectual property' and trademark issues...
Vending machines that dispense precious metals, bitcoins or whatever do so are usurious rates. You'd have to be fucking stupid to want to use them. Especially for bitcoin.
If you are happy handing over volumes of sensitive personal information to buy bitcoins online, sure. Usually the bitcoin seller will want all kinds of shit like copies of your passport, drivers license, banking details, fingerprints, proof of your address via a scan of a recent service bill which was mailed to your address. This is the main reason I've stayed away from bitcoin; the vendors basically want everything that can be used for identity theft.
I mean ignoring the easy ability to manipulate a photo, or change your vote and then sign next to the vote "Changed my mind". A law against selfies does nothing to prevent someone from doing it discreetly. It's not like you go through a metal detector or are waved for bugs.
Prosecute vote buyers and sellers. Not the technology which enables it. If someone even offers to buy your vote they would face tens of thousands of dollars in fines plus jail time. It's not worth the risk, someone will blab.
If you blackmail someone into doing it and then prove it... I guarantee that person will find a way.
Thats what mail in ballots are for, which are apparently becoming more and more popular and widespread. Mark the ballot at home, with a goon watching over you, mail the ballot in.
I sent them email pointing this out. They should remove these download links and only provide them to customers. Otherwise the terrorists have won.
I hope that email was strongly worded!
Macs are for professionals ... just not your sort of profession!
My local Apple afficionado tells me that Apple users have better things to do with their time than play games, watch movies or, apparently, pretty much anything that normal people do.
New "1984" ad: "There is no escape!"
and only the very privileged get to turn their viewscreens off!
You never turn off your devices. You will be constantly be consuming monetized content.
Including the surf noise it plays while you're sleeping.
Someone who wants to turn it off must, obviously, be deviant and need intervention.
Some time in the future, watching old episodes of "The IT Crowd" with my kid.
"Have you tried turning it off and on again? You do know how to work a button?"
and my kid asks
"What does he mean 'turn it off and on again?'"
"Well in the old days people used to be allowed to turn their computers off."
"What do you mean? Why would you do that?"
"Because sometimes computers would go wrong and it might fix them."
"Sssshhh daddy, we don't want anyone to hear you say anything bad about computers."
shades of 'Paranoia!'
I stopped wearing a wristwatch 10+ years ago. It was annoying to wear while using a laptop.
There's clock on my phone, computer, car, radio, egg timer.. I don't see the point in carrying extra one on my wrist.
Smartwatches seem even more pointless to me, redundant and limited functionality and horrible battery life.
This is what kills the wristwatch for me.
Even when I had a wristwatch, half the time I kept it in my pocket because having something strapped to my wrist is just too bloody annoying.
Yup. When the Apple watch came out, I took my Rolex purchased in the 70s to a jeweler for cleaning and refurbishment which cost 2x what an Apple watch would have cost. I gave it to my son as a graduation gift. The current value on that watch was 5x what I paid for it. Might be a wash with changes to the value of a dollar, but that item will still have value in 2-3 years when the Apple watch would have been dropped into a bin as junk. The HP-01 watch from the 70's was a better product than the Apple watch, by the way I also had an HP-01 back then. Kind of sorry I didn't keep it. I wonder if an Apple watch buyer will every feel the same way after 40 years?
Also, when Apple decide they don't care about the Apple watch any more and shut down the servers that enable it to work, it could well stop functioning altogether; many pieces of modern tech are like this. If their servers are offline they just don't work any more. This isn't going to happen with your Rolex.
Also preference for 1's over 0's due to the 1's taking up less space is causing problems for database administrators and designers.
Larry Ellison is reported to be pushing a new industry standard in which entire Oracle databases will be compressed into nothing but 1's thus saving billions globally in storage costs.
And the only conclusion you can reach is that women are incompetent and "not interested". Have you ever pondered that people with attitudes like yours might be part of the problem?
I'm a guy. I can program competently. But I hate doing it so I don't have a programming job. In my life experience men and women tend to enjoy different things and in different ways, the two genders are equal but obviously different. What if the majority of women who could be competent programmers just don't want to do that job because (like this guy) they find programming uncomfortable and unpleasant? How do we find the truth of the matter (especially with so much political correctness muddying things up)?
Football is slowed down so much for the sake of advertising with these huge breaks between plays while the players just wander about and slowly slowly organize themselves for the next play.
That's why i like the non-stop action of soccer. 22 people randomly kicking a ball around until eventually someone accidentally kicks it into the goal.
Or theres Rugby LOL. Soccer vs Rugby; Soccer is 90 minutes spent pretending you are hurt. Rugby is 80 minutes pretending you aren't hurt!
Ice hockey is pretty good too for non stop action.
It's a product placement, not an actual solution.The NFL is counting it as advertising revenue. Therefore, no one cares what the end users and support staff think about it.
If they can reduce reliance on ads maybe they will be allowed to reduce the turnaround time on plays and not have 6 second plays followed by 5 minutes of advertising?
Theres a joke: Football players run miles in training; they run for 6 seconds, have a 5 minute break, run another 6 seconds and so on until they've run a mile!
Football is slowed down so much for the sake of advertising with these huge breaks between plays while the players just wander about and slowly slowly organize themselves for the next play.
ISPs that don't implement rfc2827
Vendors that don't ship secure devices
The people that did it
Egress filtering would be nice too. If the source address of packets coming out of your network is not in your address space, don't let it out.
(...) even people who have done nothing wrong (...). And anybody who has done something wrong should (...)
The problem is that everyone has some something wrong. There is some kind of law, statute or rule that you broke... or didn't follow strictly.
This day and age there are so many rule, such broad law, that everyone had some something. Even if it as minor as jaywalking. Or driving over the speed limit for a couple minutes. Or parking a little too far from the sidewalk. Or something else completely different that in a given place is a misdemeanor.
I'm not screaming "evil big government here". I'm actually a law student and an intern in a attorney office. We all break some law several times every day. But these are such minor things that the legal system simply don't care. Maybe it is not a criminal law, but only enough for a civil lawsuit. But we are still breaking the rules.
In the eyes of the law, no one is 100% guiltless, even if they are innocent.
This is one of the problems why the legal system doesn't work. We punish too many things, so we punish badly. And, in that scenario, when the policing forces (local, state or federal) get increased powers and broader mandates, they get carte blanche to so pretty much what they want to anyone they want. After all, everyone is guilty of something.
Things are only getting scarier.
"Give me 6 folders of porn from the most innocent of men and I shall find something in there to hang him."
In some places it might be porn with wrinkled 60 year old women in school uniforms. In other places, porn featuring women whose breasts are too small.
15 minutes? That would be an infinite improvement over the current settlement system response time.
If 15 minutes is an infinite improvement over some other time then surely that other time must be converging on infinite?
Why would WikiLeaks be out of play?
Assange isn't WikiLeaks. The organization's perfectly capable of accepting and releasing data without their leader. There's already been at least one release since Assange went silent, possibly via deadman switch.
Persecuting Assange is just assaulting the public face of WikiLeaks, not affecting what it can do.
Yes, Assange probably had a 'dead mans switch' set up so that if he didn't keep updating something it would assume that he'd been handed over to the UK authorities by the Ecuadorians and then leak some files that would be very damaging to the Ecuadorian government.
I kind of hope this is what he's done because he hasn't actually been handed over to the UK authorities and when the files go public the Ecuadorians are going to kick him out of the embassy in his pajamas.
Slightly but the GP is right in claiming that Corals existed when CO2 was higher. So let's assume that he's right and that Corals are not related to CO2. That leaves us with two options:
1. He believes corals aren't sensitive to temperature (this has been proven without a doubt to be false and you're more than happy to try this at home with a fishtank and overheat your water by only a couple of degrees).
2. He believes CO2 isn't related to global warming which at this point is about as big of a WTF as you can get on a site that is supposed to have an intelligent tech minded readership which embraces science rather than politifiction.
I like that point about raising the temperature of the fish tank by a couple of degrees. If you raised the temperature by a couple of degrees over enough generations of fish I'm sure they'd be fine. How many generations is required, now thats the question.
[
As well we should. I mean, I do take solace that something like the GBR will probably form at some other place millions of years in the future, but that's not really a substitute for being able to see what they once were in my lifetime.
Then you better move fast and check things out. Many wonderful things in this world are temporary. Check out New Zealands 'pink and blue terraces', oops earthquake.