If the government don't want people smoking then ban it. I don't have time for all of this "Ooo, it's so bad, people shouldn't do it. But we won't ban it."
And leave vaping alone, it's safe and fun for all.
So far the UK government is claiming that GCHQ wouldn't dream of doing anything as evil as the NSA and that everything they do is all above board and legal like.
Were evidence to materialise to the contrary it would be very embarrassing for the government, especially people like William Hague who's been assuring us that he knows exactly what goes on and we have nothing to worry about.
I'd say there's a possibility that the government, or organs of the government, are worried this evidence may exist and would like to know what it could show were it to be released.
I've followed Groklaw since the beginning, it was a brilliant site because of the dedication, insight and attention to detail brought to it by PJ and it is, needless to say, a tragedy that she is forced to take this action by the behaviour of the Government.
It's really a double tragedy because it's people like her whom we need more than ever right now. The US and other Governments are highly unlikely simply to stop this behaviour on their own, they will only do so if forced to do so by us, their citizens, and someone with the qualities and platform which PJ has could play a useful part in that ( not I think she should be forced to do this against her will and absolutely not that I'd hold anything against her if she doesn't want to do that )
I'd guess that people pirated it because that's the easiest and most convenient way of watching it.
I know my friends have been going on and on about this series for months but so far as I know it wasn't generally released here in the UK ( maybe just on Sky or something ? )
If the entertainment companies want us to get content from them directly then they need to make it a lot more easy and convenient than it is now.
No it's not, the post is actually quite an good description of what the poster appears to have been doing and offers the poster some good advice into the bargain.
I don't think so, Didn't the British lay waste to Peking at the end of the 1800's due to a disagreement between the Chinese Emperor and themselves over whether they should kow-tow to the Emperor ?
I see one fault in your logic. Rewarding warlords with "peace-time hush-money" only sets precedence for other countries at conflict with the United States
Almost certainly true but nevertheless exactly what the US is already doing. You can clearly see in these documents that the local warlords are more than happy to accept "compensation" when the US accidentally slaughters there people. It's higly likely they are equally willing to accept large monetary gifts in order to not offer support the Taliban, or stop growing poppies etc etc.
The British were trying specifically to not conquer Afghanistan for a number of reasons. All they really wanted was a buffer state between India and Russia ruled by interests sympathetic to the British. Unfortunately the first attempt was commanded by an incompetant and aged buffoon who was scared of refusing ridiculous requests from their Afghan proxy to pay out bribes and keep the British troops well out of the way of Kabul in a makeshift encampment at the mercy of elements and with insufficient food.
The second attempt was much more successful and Russian plans for invasion of India scuppered for good.
Even with ID cards you still need to provide proof of address to open a bank account. One of the people who did buy one explained this on Radio 4 this morning. He used his driving licence so in fact it turns out that having an ID card did not make opening bank accounts any easier.
Guess what, people designing systems on which peoples lives actually directly depend do not simply rip out some old box from an office when they need a new server.
Likewise any system like the stock exchange, in situations like that companies don't care how much money they throw at stuff and since it's their money they're going to be losing if it goes wrong they are generally very careful indeed about randomly hooking up critical infrastructure to the internet.
Accenture and the other big consulting companies have a horrendous track record [yafla.com] for building failed projects at a very high cost. The moment someone says "let's hire Accenture to build this" is the moment the costs go up dramatically.
Indeed they do and one of the reasons for this is their reliance on subpar Microsoft technolgies which they seem to be tied to even when, as in this case, much more effective technology exists elsewhere.
Is there anything wrong with being proud of the country you live in ?
Both you and the other guy do seem to think we live in some of sort of ideal world which, as I pointed out, we don't. If you completely open the borders and let anyone in who wants to come then what you're going to end up with is a massive underclass unable to function properly in the country their living in whilst the countries they came from are completely emptied as everyone leaves. That is surely far far away from any sensible method of building an ideal world yet one which, curiously, you and the other guy seem quite keen on. Basically I think you're both just unrealistic and are having difficulty seeing the things the way they are rather than the way you'd like them to be,
Yes those ones, the ones in the back of the trucks are, when they are discovered by the police told to report immediately to their nearest immigration centre for processing and then left to go on their way with the police trusting to the immigrants honour that they will do as instructed. Needless to say a lot of them subsequently go missing never to be seen again.
If people want to come here and work then fair enough, although I think we should follow the lead of other countries and only allow them to work in those jobs if there are actual shortages of people here already who can do the job.
The UK is only so big and until we can get back to annexing other areas and rebuild the Empire can only support a finite number of people so the difference between someone coming from abroad as opposed to people moving about between counties is that there is one more person here who wasn't here before and my point is that we ought to value the extra spaces we have available to grant to foreigners and make sure they are the best sort of people we can before we give that space to some far less desirable idle layabout who hangs around on the dole and forms an underworld criminal gang.
I'm sure there are lots of people like your next door neighbour who we would want to come to the UK but equally there are many people who aren't like your neighbour that we don't particulary want to come here and there does have to be some sort of system to sort out one from the other.
This proposed system clearly isn't going to work and the current system is probably not very efficient, partly no doubt to the number of people it needs to process and the amount of money available to do the processing.
There's clearly a massive difference between people moving from Yorkshire to Lancashire and people moving from Tajikistan to the UK. Those moving from Yorkshire to Lancashire are already British citizens whereas people from Tajikistan probably aren't and people from Yorkshire have an excellent understanding of British cultural values and behaviour ( excepting maybe those of Londoners ) whereas people from Tajikistan could conceivably have a much harder fitting in and getting themselves a job.
In an ideal world people would be free to go where they would but this isn't an ideal world and people do have a natural inclination to hold on to their own cultural values no matter how misaligned they may be with those of their host country, people do tend to stick together and form insular communities and mistrust those from other communities and people do want to have an easy a life as possible even if someone else is picking up the bill.
This is our country and we should have the right, and the mechanisms, to decide who we want to come and join us living here.
I think, from what I've read somewhere, that another reason the Maoris didn't come off as badly as some of the other indigenous people the British came across is that they were excellent fighters. Since they did spend most of their spare time fighting each other they had had a lot of practice when it came to fighting the British.
Despite the fact the colonists had naval guns and firearms the Maoris were able to devise tactics which completely negated the advantage they would have otherwise provided and dealt out a couple of fairly comprehensive beatings to the colonists so much so that during WWI the British actually recruited Maori elders to advise them how to conduct effective trench warfare.
So you're saying that democracy at work consists of some PR drone cherry picking the agenda of the government based on the views of a tiny minority of the voting population and only taking action when it involves the government not actually having to do anything significant but which makes it look good ?
Sadly I think Labour share, have always shared, this view and that is the tragedy that faces this country today.
Slashdot Mirror
I know that I for sure like nothing better than playing some Candy Crush and then going down the local boozer to whup some ass.
If the government don't want people smoking then ban it. I don't have time for all of this "Ooo, it's so bad, people shouldn't do it. But we won't ban it."
And leave vaping alone, it's safe and fun for all.
Yes, this is a good question.
So far the UK government is claiming that GCHQ wouldn't dream of doing anything as evil as the NSA and that everything they do is all above board and legal like.
Were evidence to materialise to the contrary it would be very embarrassing for the government, especially people like William Hague who's been assuring us that he knows exactly what goes on and we have nothing to worry about.
I'd say there's a possibility that the government, or organs of the government, are worried this evidence may exist and would like to know what it could show were it to be released.
I've followed Groklaw since the beginning, it was a brilliant site because of the dedication, insight and attention to detail brought to it by PJ and it is, needless to say, a tragedy that she is forced to take this action by the behaviour of the Government.
It's really a double tragedy because it's people like her whom we need more than ever right now. The US and other Governments are highly unlikely simply to stop this behaviour on their own, they will only do so if forced to do so by us, their citizens, and someone with the qualities and platform which PJ has could play a useful part in that ( not I think she should be forced to do this against her will and absolutely not that I'd hold anything against her if she doesn't want to do that )
I think these are two separate incidents; the detention of David and the confiscation of his stuff and the destruction of the Guardian disk drives.
I don't know what law entitles them to destroy private property like that though.
I'd guess that people pirated it because that's the easiest and most convenient way of watching it.
I know my friends have been going on and on about this series for months but so far as I know it wasn't generally released here in the UK ( maybe just on Sky or something ? )
If the entertainment companies want us to get content from them directly then they need to make it a lot more easy and convenient than it is now.
No it's not, the post is actually quite an good description of what the poster appears to have been doing and offers the poster some good advice into the bargain.
I don't think so, Didn't the British lay waste to Peking at the end of the 1800's due to a disagreement between the Chinese Emperor and themselves over whether they should kow-tow to the Emperor ?
It sounds to me like you need to get yourselves a Maggie Thatcher, she was able to sort out the corrupt mining unions here in the UK good and proper.
You seriously took 30Kg of gear for a one day hike ? WTF for you masochist.
That sounds like a pretty reasonable offer, given the success the US has had capturing Bin Laden in the years since.
Almost certainly true but nevertheless exactly what the US is already doing. You can clearly see in these documents that the local warlords are more than happy to accept "compensation" when the US accidentally slaughters there people. It's higly likely they are equally willing to accept large monetary gifts in order to not offer support the Taliban, or stop growing poppies etc etc.
The British were trying specifically to not conquer Afghanistan for a number of reasons. All they really wanted was a buffer state between India and Russia ruled by interests sympathetic to the British. Unfortunately the first attempt was commanded by an incompetant and aged buffoon who was scared of refusing ridiculous requests from their Afghan proxy to pay out bribes and keep the British troops well out of the way of Kabul in a makeshift encampment at the mercy of elements and with insufficient food.
The second attempt was much more successful and Russian plans for invasion of India scuppered for good.
Even with ID cards you still need to provide proof of address to open a bank account. One of the people who did buy one explained this on Radio 4 this morning. He used his driving licence so in fact it turns out that having an ID card did not make opening bank accounts any easier.
Yeah, ramp up that TERROR, turn the dial to PANIC !
Are you scared yet citizen ? Are you ...
I'd like to second this opinion.
You'll be bored out of your mind after a week in London, never mind two, so get out and explore the rest of the British countryside.
Perhaps avoid the Lake District at the moment though.
No chance.
Guess what, people designing systems on which peoples lives actually directly depend do not simply rip out some old box from an office when they need a new server.
Likewise any system like the stock exchange, in situations like that companies don't care how much money they throw at stuff and since it's their money they're going to be losing if it goes wrong they are generally very careful indeed about randomly hooking up critical infrastructure to the internet.
Indeed they do and one of the reasons for this is their reliance on subpar Microsoft technolgies which they seem to be tied to even when, as in this case, much more effective technology exists elsewhere.
Reeks of nationalism !
Is there anything wrong with being proud of the country you live in ?
Both you and the other guy do seem to think we live in some of sort of ideal world which, as I pointed out, we don't. If you completely open the borders and let anyone in who wants to come then what you're going to end up with is a massive underclass unable to function properly in the country their living in whilst the countries they came from are completely emptied as everyone leaves. That is surely far far away from any sensible method of building an ideal world yet one which, curiously, you and the other guy seem quite keen on. Basically I think you're both just unrealistic and are having difficulty seeing the things the way they are rather than the way you'd like them to be,
Yes those ones, the ones in the back of the trucks are, when they are discovered by the police told to report immediately to their nearest immigration centre for processing and then left to go on their way with the police trusting to the immigrants honour that they will do as instructed. Needless to say a lot of them subsequently go missing never to be seen again.
If people want to come here and work then fair enough, although I think we should follow the lead of other countries and only allow them to work in those jobs if there are actual shortages of people here already who can do the job.
The UK is only so big and until we can get back to annexing other areas and rebuild the Empire can only support a finite number of people so the difference between someone coming from abroad as opposed to people moving about between counties is that there is one more person here who wasn't here before and my point is that we ought to value the extra spaces we have available to grant to foreigners and make sure they are the best sort of people we can before we give that space to some far less desirable idle layabout who hangs around on the dole and forms an underworld criminal gang.
I'm sure there are lots of people like your next door neighbour who we would want to come to the UK but equally there are many people who aren't like your neighbour that we don't particulary want to come here and there does have to be some sort of system to sort out one from the other.
This proposed system clearly isn't going to work and the current system is probably not very efficient, partly no doubt to the number of people it needs to process and the amount of money available to do the processing.
There's clearly a massive difference between people moving from Yorkshire to Lancashire and people moving from Tajikistan to the UK. Those moving from Yorkshire to Lancashire are already British citizens whereas people from Tajikistan probably aren't and people from Yorkshire have an excellent understanding of British cultural values and behaviour ( excepting maybe those of Londoners ) whereas people from Tajikistan could conceivably have a much harder fitting in and getting themselves a job.
In an ideal world people would be free to go where they would but this isn't an ideal world and people do have a natural inclination to hold on to their own cultural values no matter how misaligned they may be with those of their host country, people do tend to stick together and form insular communities and mistrust those from other communities and people do want to have an easy a life as possible even if someone else is picking up the bill.
This is our country and we should have the right, and the mechanisms, to decide who we want to come and join us living here.
Not really, we were less hopeless than the Germans for example.
I think, from what I've read somewhere, that another reason the Maoris didn't come off as badly as some of the other indigenous people the British came across is that they were excellent fighters. Since they did spend most of their spare time fighting each other they had had a lot of practice when it came to fighting the British.
Despite the fact the colonists had naval guns and firearms the Maoris were able to devise tactics which completely negated the advantage they would have otherwise provided and dealt out a couple of fairly comprehensive beatings to the colonists so much so that during WWI the British actually recruited Maori elders to advise them how to conduct effective trench warfare.
So you're saying that democracy at work consists of some PR drone cherry picking the agenda of the government based on the views of a tiny minority of the voting population and only taking action when it involves the government not actually having to do anything significant but which makes it look good ?
Sadly I think Labour share, have always shared, this view and that is the tragedy that faces this country today.