Imagine if you suddenly heard the Pope was dead. Or Kim Jong Il. Or Bill Gates. Some are good, some are bad, the only connection is that they're huge public figures known throughout the world.
It's all too complex, the fact is that all the public need to know is that there were a LOT OF TWEETS. I think it's clearest to say that there was a virtual chorus of birdsong at the time.
Trouble is, the speed limits are fucking bullshit. As I alluded to in my post before, there are lots of areas where speed limits are ludicrously slow as a means of revenue generation, but all our politicians are too spineless to say soemthing along the lines of "raise the speed limits, because they're too fucking slow" for fear of the road safety Nazis coming after them.
I'd seriously love to move to work and live in Canada, have wanted to for ages, but can't because finding a job there as a UKian is spectacularly difficult (anyone have any suggestions, by the way? I'm a skilled programmer with good working knowledge of things like C#, C, Perl, SQL Server, MySQL, (X)HTML, Javascript, etc.)
I thought I'd enumerate a list of reasons I hate the UK so much I want to emigrate, which I'm sure some people will partially disagree with, but which I think that the UK really *is* that bad, alas.
* Surveillance. We're the most watched country in the world, and the majority of people don't have too much of a problem with it. This sucks. * Speed cameras. They're regularly used, all over the place, by local authorities as a means of revenue generation. Get caught going 57 MPH in a 50MPH zone 4 times (these zones can be and frequently are dual-carriageways), and you're banned from driving for half a year. North America would respect a lot more that cars are downright necessary for many people and would not ban you for such frivolous infringements. * Apalling electoral system. Ours is one of the most antiquated, useless electoral systems in the Western world... not surprising considering it's one of the oldest and hasn't been reformed much at all. It's widely accepted that a one-MP-per-constituency system is a Good Thing and somehow makes MPs more accountable, precluding the possibility of us ever getting a decent system of proportional representation. This sucks. * Soft drugs are illegal. This is generally the case in the Western world, but at least there are pro-cannabis movements in Canada and the US. Over here, there's very little debate about this matter, it's just generally 'accepted' that (soft) drugs are guaranteed to be a bad thing for society, in large part because of... * The BBC. Yeah, this one's gonna be contraversial, but I personally strongly object to being forced to pay a licence fee because of one fucking broadcaster that I consider mediocre at best, and certainly very biased with its news output. It chooses what to report very selectively, not to mention how it reports it, and has quite a few agendas (it tends to be in favour of big government, ever-more police, banning as much as possible including soft drugs, and just generally being apologists for the government-du-jour's authoritatian policies). As far as I'm concerned, the BBC is to some extent responsible for a lot of the bullshit opinions many people in the UK hold, because they have so much sway over people's opinions and use it to make people think stupid things.
I could go on, but I feel this post has gotten long enough. Suffice it to say... if anyone knows how I could get a half-decent programming job (I'll be a team leader too! I wouldn't mind trying management!) in Canada, please contact me.:-)
Finland has the best privacy laws in the world, and Finns enjoy a lot of rights, such as "right to roam" [wikipedia.org]. Finland also had women's suffrage in 1906, much earlier than most countries. Finland is also a highly technological nation, which since you post on slashdot, is probably a plus.
Out of interest, I just thought I'd point out that Finland has, in my opinion, the best electoral system in the world. Open-list Proportional Representation, with a unicameral parliament (IMHO, the only reason you ever need a second chamber is because the first one is so shit it needs to be slapped down occasionally - make the first better, and you don't need a second one). Maybe a coincidence, but I doubt it. Anyone who says first-past-the-post is better is, well, wrong.
"You need youngsters who are deep into this stuff... If they have been slightly naughty boys, very often they really enjoy stopping other naughty boys," he said.
I'd rather stop the government getting ever-more control over and intrusion into my life.
If Panasonic was concerned about 3rd party suppliers selling unsafe batteries, it could sell licenses with strict requirements or set up a certification program to test the safety of the batteries sold by these suppliers.
This would definitely work. I know a genuine Panaphonics when I see one.
There, fixed that for you. All I have to do to save a Flash video to my hard drive is play it. My browser will automatically save it to ~/.mozilla/firefox/Cache
I seriously doubt that live FMS-style (I use Red5) streams get saved to your hard drive in a handy dandy FLV file. You'll need to work a lot harder to rip them.
I'm not sure each window of IE8 is a separate process. We've recently discovered a bug at work where it seemed that different IE8 windows were sharing ASP.net sessions. This would seem to suggest that they share cookies, and so presumably aren't separate processes.
I have a Green Day album and a couple Aerosmith albums. I figure to send it back with a suitably sardonic letter referencing the fact that I no longer want their music, and if they are in such financial hardship, they can re-sell it to help them put food on the table.
It's like watching that scene in Saving Private Ryan, in which a cowardly character hides rather than walking up the stairs, thus allowing his fellow soldier to be killed. We know what that character should do. We can scream at the screen all we like, but it won't change a thing.
But, he did eventually kill that German soldier near the end.
This is why your doing a few minor things to slightly reduce your CO2 footprint will make fuck all difference. Also, I seriously question the science behind the notion that non-recyclable shopping bags use significantly less CO2 overall. Care to justify it?
She's lost in court a second time. This time, she was caught being blatantly dishonest. The jury is almost certainly looking at this seeing someone try to mislead them, who's wasted their time with a pointless retrial over something she's clearly guilty of.
And so they use that as justification to pass damages that will utterly destroy a person's life for a relatively non-serious crime.
Sorry, but I think this kind of jury behaviour is extremely good justification for scrapping their right to award damages. It's ridiculous. Let them decide guilt (although I have my reservations about average Joe's ability to do that), and leave the experienced, hopefully-more-cool-headed judge, to determine liability. We do that here in the UK, and actually, I'm not sure whether any other countries have juries deciding damages, do they?
When people sign up for broadband, one of the main things they want it for in this country is iPlayer.
I just thought I'd remind the audience at this point that this is an incredibly presumptuous statement. The internet was not invented with the iPlayer in mind, and it is very possible to use the internet for years in end whilst never touching the iPlayer.
So please, BBC fanbois; please stop assume that everyone loves and wants to use the BBC on their fucking internet connection.
Not believing that there is a god is different from believing that there is no god. The latter is atheism, the former is 'not believing in God(s)'. So no I'm not saying that that is a religion. That is, in fact, agnosticism.
Atheism is a religion to the same extent that not collecting stamps is a hobby.
I have some time to burn, so I thought I'd comment on your sig and why it's wrong. In this analogy, the collecting of stamps would be the *practicing* of religion, not the belief in its being worthwhile. The stamp collectors believe that stamp collecting is worthwhile; the belief is the religion, the stamp collecting itself is all that happens as a result of that belief... the, erm, collecting of stamps.
Whereas, atheism would equate to those who believe that stamp collecting is not worthwhile. Naturally, they're not going to bother collecting stamps, as they would see it as a waste of time. The non-belief is the atheism, the non-collecting of stamps is what results from that belief; the non-practicing of religion is what results from atheism.
Maybe atheism isn't a religion (depending on your definition), but it is a belief system that I'd place in the same category as religion.
Slashdot Mirror
Imagine if you suddenly heard the Pope was dead. Or Kim Jong Il. Or Bill Gates. Some are good, some are bad, the only connection is that they're huge public figures known throughout the world.
Which are bad?
It's all too complex, the fact is that all the public need to know is that there were a LOT OF TWEETS. I think it's clearest to say that there was a virtual chorus of birdsong at the time.
Trouble is, the speed limits are fucking bullshit. As I alluded to in my post before, there are lots of areas where speed limits are ludicrously slow as a means of revenue generation, but all our politicians are too spineless to say soemthing along the lines of "raise the speed limits, because they're too fucking slow" for fear of the road safety Nazis coming after them.
I'd seriously love to move to work and live in Canada, have wanted to for ages, but can't because finding a job there as a UKian is spectacularly difficult (anyone have any suggestions, by the way? I'm a skilled programmer with good working knowledge of things like C#, C, Perl, SQL Server, MySQL, (X)HTML, Javascript, etc.)
I thought I'd enumerate a list of reasons I hate the UK so much I want to emigrate, which I'm sure some people will partially disagree with, but which I think that the UK really *is* that bad, alas.
* Surveillance. We're the most watched country in the world, and the majority of people don't have too much of a problem with it. This sucks.
* Speed cameras. They're regularly used, all over the place, by local authorities as a means of revenue generation. Get caught going 57 MPH in a 50MPH zone 4 times (these zones can be and frequently are dual-carriageways), and you're banned from driving for half a year. North America would respect a lot more that cars are downright necessary for many people and would not ban you for such frivolous infringements.
* Apalling electoral system. Ours is one of the most antiquated, useless electoral systems in the Western world... not surprising considering it's one of the oldest and hasn't been reformed much at all. It's widely accepted that a one-MP-per-constituency system is a Good Thing and somehow makes MPs more accountable, precluding the possibility of us ever getting a decent system of proportional representation. This sucks.
* Soft drugs are illegal. This is generally the case in the Western world, but at least there are pro-cannabis movements in Canada and the US. Over here, there's very little debate about this matter, it's just generally 'accepted' that (soft) drugs are guaranteed to be a bad thing for society, in large part because of...
* The BBC. Yeah, this one's gonna be contraversial, but I personally strongly object to being forced to pay a licence fee because of one fucking broadcaster that I consider mediocre at best, and certainly very biased with its news output. It chooses what to report very selectively, not to mention how it reports it, and has quite a few agendas (it tends to be in favour of big government, ever-more police, banning as much as possible including soft drugs, and just generally being apologists for the government-du-jour's authoritatian policies). As far as I'm concerned, the BBC is to some extent responsible for a lot of the bullshit opinions many people in the UK hold, because they have so much sway over people's opinions and use it to make people think stupid things.
I could go on, but I feel this post has gotten long enough. Suffice it to say... if anyone knows how I could get a half-decent programming job (I'll be a team leader too! I wouldn't mind trying management!) in Canada, please contact me. :-)
Finland has the best privacy laws in the world, and Finns enjoy a lot of rights, such as "right to roam" [wikipedia.org]. Finland also had women's suffrage in 1906, much earlier than most countries. Finland is also a highly technological nation, which since you post on slashdot, is probably a plus.
Out of interest, I just thought I'd point out that Finland has, in my opinion, the best electoral system in the world. Open-list Proportional Representation, with a unicameral parliament (IMHO, the only reason you ever need a second chamber is because the first one is so shit it needs to be slapped down occasionally - make the first better, and you don't need a second one). Maybe a coincidence, but I doubt it. Anyone who says first-past-the-post is better is, well, wrong.
I give myself a little pep talk. I tell myself that if Michael Jackson can keep going so can I.
Enough with the black humour. Or, is it white humour...
"You need youngsters who are deep into this stuff... If they have been slightly naughty boys, very often they really enjoy stopping other naughty boys," he said.
I'd rather stop the government getting ever-more control over and intrusion into my life.
If Panasonic was concerned about 3rd party suppliers selling unsafe batteries, it could sell licenses with strict requirements or set up a certification program to test the safety of the batteries sold by these suppliers.
This would definitely work. I know a genuine Panaphonics when I see one.
I swear this is this most asinine thing around in the man made climate change circles.
I'd say it's more bovine.
How difficult/easy was it to find a translation for "default" for user manuals in, say, [...] fr?
'Default' actually COMES from french. The translation is défaut. Surely you could've found that out pretty easily.
There, fixed that for you. All I have to do to save a Flash video to my hard drive is play it. My browser will automatically save it to ~/.mozilla/firefox/Cache
I seriously doubt that live FMS-style (I use Red5) streams get saved to your hard drive in a handy dandy FLV file. You'll need to work a lot harder to rip them.
Thank you, very informative answer. :-)
I'm not sure each window of IE8 is a separate process. We've recently discovered a bug at work where it seemed that different IE8 windows were sharing ASP.net sessions. This would seem to suggest that they share cookies, and so presumably aren't separate processes.
Bad example.
You shouldn't be holding 300 pound gorillas in a zoo enclosure in the first place. How would you like it?
I have a Green Day album and a couple Aerosmith albums. I figure to send it back with a suitably sardonic letter referencing the fact that I no longer want their music, and if they are in such financial hardship, they can re-sell it to help them put food on the table.
Don't forget to rip it to MP3 first.
It's like watching that scene in Saving Private Ryan, in which a cowardly character hides rather than walking up the stairs, thus allowing his fellow soldier to be killed. We know what that character should do. We can scream at the screen all we like, but it won't change a thing.
But, he did eventually kill that German soldier near the end.
That's nonsense.
This is why your doing a few minor things to slightly reduce your CO2 footprint will make fuck all difference. Also, I seriously question the science behind the notion that non-recyclable shopping bags use significantly less CO2 overall. Care to justify it?
She's lost in court a second time. This time, she was caught being blatantly dishonest. The jury is almost certainly looking at this seeing someone try to mislead them, who's wasted their time with a pointless retrial over something she's clearly guilty of.
And so they use that as justification to pass damages that will utterly destroy a person's life for a relatively non-serious crime.
Sorry, but I think this kind of jury behaviour is extremely good justification for scrapping their right to award damages. It's ridiculous. Let them decide guilt (although I have my reservations about average Joe's ability to do that), and leave the experienced, hopefully-more-cool-headed judge, to determine liability. We do that here in the UK, and actually, I'm not sure whether any other countries have juries deciding damages, do they?
Are they going to suspend Virgin Corporation's internet access if one of their employees downloads an MP3 using it?
Of course not. They're going to suspend it if Universal alleges that they did.
Prosecutor, judge, jury.
I'm posting from a Commodore 64, you insensitive clod.
When people sign up for broadband, one of the main things they want it for in this country is iPlayer.
I just thought I'd remind the audience at this point that this is an incredibly presumptuous statement. The internet was not invented with the iPlayer in mind, and it is very possible to use the internet for years in end whilst never touching the iPlayer.
So please, BBC fanbois; please stop assume that everyone loves and wants to use the BBC on their fucking internet connection.
Not believing that there is a god is different from believing that there is no god. The latter is atheism, the former is 'not believing in God(s)'. So no I'm not saying that that is a religion. That is, in fact, agnosticism.
--
Atheism is a religion to the same extent that not collecting stamps is a hobby.
I have some time to burn, so I thought I'd comment on your sig and why it's wrong. In this analogy, the collecting of stamps would be the *practicing* of religion, not the belief in its being worthwhile. The stamp collectors believe that stamp collecting is worthwhile; the belief is the religion, the stamp collecting itself is all that happens as a result of that belief... the, erm, collecting of stamps.
Whereas, atheism would equate to those who believe that stamp collecting is not worthwhile. Naturally, they're not going to bother collecting stamps, as they would see it as a waste of time. The non-belief is the atheism, the non-collecting of stamps is what results from that belief; the non-practicing of religion is what results from atheism.
Maybe atheism isn't a religion (depending on your definition), but it is a belief system that I'd place in the same category as religion.
And don't forget that if a butterfly byte flaps its wings in South Dakota, it can cause a tornado over the national elections.
Boeing wins :-)