Fair enough I agree with that, not recognising your enemy is the root cause can be the root cause of not doing anything about your enemy but you can also arrive at a "fighting the wrong enemy" scenario even if you have recognised your enemy but have decided it's better for your short term interests to do something else instead.
Cynical people might think that worries about Irans nuclear program are in fact just being circulated as a way of providing a 'reason' to invade Iran at some point in the same way that WMD were used to invade Iraq.
Statements from the US that they have 'no plans to attack Iran at this point' only reinforce that belief.
I think they are actually fairly ineffective and except in a few highly favourable ( and unlikely ) conditions the actual explosion is by far the most dangerous aspect of them.
Of course thanks to the media they are likely to have a far greater PR effect than they warrant.
I think in fact US emigration consisted of a couple of seperate groups; religious nutcases who we were glad to be shot of, people looking to make a quick shilling and sundry other people who's land had been appropriated for important ventures such as sheep farming or deer stalking.
None of these people were especially missed and we don't want them back !
Yeah well, Sky is a bag of shite anyway. Channel 4 is an excellent channel and seems to be experimenting with periods where they have very short ad breaks of maybe 1 or 2 ads and then back to the program.
"And like it or not, non-tech savvy users are going to deal with XP's UI better than Gnome's"
I don't think that's true. I am working at the moment on the helpdesk of a company which sells bespoke software for the motor trade, there are 2 versions of the software one which runs on windows and one which runs on SCO Unix ( yes I know ).
In general because the Unix system is the older one which is only now being replaced by the windows one the users are perfectly comfortable using their terminals and operating the system in general.
However large numbers of the users are very confused by the newer windows version, half a dozen have quesitoned what I mean by "Close down the window" and I have had to resort to "You see that big red X in at the end of the blue bar above the bit where you were typing ?". Almost none of them can manage their printers, user profiles are an absolute mystery etc etc
So in effect non-tech savvy people don't care what operating system they are using, provided they have been trained to use it and it works it will do them fine. When I last used it Gnome worked fine so should be perfectly fine for anyone to use.
AFAIK the druids were around at the time of the Romans which was 1000's of years after Stonehenge was built so just because they may have used a prexistant thing for religious purposes isn't evidence that that is what it was built for.
I'm not saying it is not a religious monument but I think scientifically the best thing you can say is that we don't know why it was built.
I am not sure what kind of evidence there is to suggest it was used for religious purposes. It seems to me that almost any archaelogical object which people don't understand the purpose of is labelled as a "religious artefact"
Damn right, Chemistry was the both the most boring and the most exciting lesson at school.
Most exciting when they said "Right, you need to design an experiment to investigate this... give the lab assistant a list of the equipment you think you will need and it will be ready for next lesson"
The most boring bits where the rest of it, balancing equations yuck !
Thing is it's not even politicians who are pushing this thing forward, it's the European Commission who I certainly don't remember ever electing to do anything.
"You make it sound like this is inevitable. The inherent weakness of any corporation is the need for money & profit - it's we, the cattle-like consumers, that have the power to rally together and simply boycott the products from corporations that don't act in a fashion we deem acceptable."
And that's where the government comes in, the most successful corporations make sure they don't sell anything directly to the people but to the government on behalf of the people instead. It's just another layer of insulation between them and responsibility.
Slashdot Mirror
Fair enough I agree with that, not recognising your enemy is the root cause can be the root cause of not doing anything about your enemy but you can also arrive at a "fighting the wrong enemy" scenario even if you have recognised your enemy but have decided it's better for your short term interests to do something else instead.
Cynical people might think that worries about Irans nuclear program are in fact just being circulated as a way of providing a 'reason' to invade Iran at some point in the same way that WMD were used to invade Iraq.
Statements from the US that they have 'no plans to attack Iran at this point' only reinforce that belief.
And not bothering to do anything about your enemy whilst tying your resources up in unrelated activities elsewhere is even worse than that.
I think they are actually fairly ineffective and except in a few highly favourable ( and unlikely ) conditions the actual explosion is by far the most dangerous aspect of them.
Of course thanks to the media they are likely to have a far greater PR effect than they warrant.
I think in fact US emigration consisted of a couple of seperate groups; religious nutcases who we were glad to be shot of, people looking to make a quick shilling and sundry other people who's land had been appropriated for important ventures such as sheep farming or deer stalking.
None of these people were especially missed and we don't want them back !
In theory sure, but in practice you can just interpret it how you like can't you.
Yeah but that constitution is more of a guideline than anything else though isn't it ?
Yeah well, Sky is a bag of shite anyway. Channel 4 is an excellent channel and seems to be experimenting with periods where they have very short ad breaks of maybe 1 or 2 ads and then back to the program.
Nathan Barley tonight looks good
Could we wait until the study is actually published because I think the highlights in that article were far too sketchy to form an opinion either way.
"And like it or not, non-tech savvy users are going to deal with XP's UI better than Gnome's"
I don't think that's true. I am working at the moment on the helpdesk of a company which sells bespoke software for the motor trade, there are 2 versions of the software one which runs on windows and one which runs on SCO Unix ( yes I know ).
In general because the Unix system is the older one which is only now being replaced by the windows one the users are perfectly comfortable using their terminals and operating the system in general.
However large numbers of the users are very confused by the newer windows version, half a dozen have quesitoned what I mean by "Close down the window" and I have had to resort to "You see that big red X in at the end of the blue bar above the bit where you were typing ?". Almost none of them can manage their printers, user profiles are an absolute mystery etc etc
So in effect non-tech savvy people don't care what operating system they are using, provided they have been trained to use it and it works it will do them fine. When I last used it Gnome worked fine so should be perfectly fine for anyone to use.
Do you think that might be because you don't live in China but in a society which has much closer links to the US, maybe you are American ?
In the long run I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing.
Everyone involved should be made aware of the risks and rewarded appropriately.
I think at this stage it's better to "just do it" rather than trying to develop some non existant risk free system.
It just flashes "Windows"
"Windows"
"Windows"
"Windows"
I think they will need to fix this.
He means what would the U.S. do if they thought that Kyoto was a sure way of saving the planet and the rest of the world wouldn't comply.
US Good / US Bad ./ will decide
AFAIK the druids were around at the time of the Romans which was 1000's of years after Stonehenge was built so just because they may have used a prexistant thing for religious purposes isn't evidence that that is what it was built for.
I'm not saying it is not a religious monument but I think scientifically the best thing you can say is that we don't know why it was built.
I am not sure what kind of evidence there is to suggest it was used for religious purposes. It seems to me that almost any archaelogical object which people don't understand the purpose of is labelled as a "religious artefact"
And if Einstein told you to jump off a cliff would you do it ?
I am hoping yes.
I think you must have meant stoan 'enge
No, he is much more stupid than that.
I don't think it is the same word, that's why it's spelt differently.
What's hockey ? Is that the game which is like rounders or the ice skating one ?
Damn right, Chemistry was the both the most boring and the most exciting lesson at school.
... give the lab assistant a list of the equipment you think you will need and it will be ready for next lesson"
Most exciting when they said "Right, you need to design an experiment to investigate this
The most boring bits where the rest of it, balancing equations yuck !
Thing is it's not even politicians who are pushing this thing forward, it's the European Commission who I certainly don't remember ever electing to do anything.
"You make it sound like this is inevitable. The inherent weakness of any corporation is the need for money & profit - it's we, the cattle-like consumers, that have the power to rally together and simply boycott the products from corporations that don't act in a fashion we deem acceptable."
And that's where the government comes in, the most successful corporations make sure they don't sell anything directly to the people but to the government on behalf of the people instead. It's just another layer of insulation between them and responsibility.