That's right. And opening an Appstore to third parties would absolutely prevent Microsoft from bundling free awesome games, because... wait, it's on the tip of my tongue.
Microsoft's Zune HD, set to go on sale Tuesday, will not feature a tightly controlled by control freaks with degrees in control freakery application store like its competitor the iPod Touch. Instead any Seattle based company called Microsoft will be allowed to place applications on the device with no restrictions
Being somewhat devils advocatish - what about all those people who find that their CDs stop working after a few years due to small scratches? Should they be allowed to demand free replacement in perpetuity?
I'm not quite sure what you are arguing. As far as I am aware, to be sold in the UK as "Organic" it has to be certified by the Soil Association, which sets the standards for care etc.
I quite agree that the supermarkets don't have any particularly warm and fuzzy agenda on this though, it's simply a question of maximising shareholder value.
Good catch on my sloppy wording with regard to continuously-fed antibiotics. Antibiotics cannot increase growth, as you say. However the general effect of feeding antibiotics continuously is faster growth and lower husbandry costs since bacterial infections are squelched before the animal can go off its food.
Yes. As I pointed out in my original message, antibiotic resistance is a real problem when they are used to promote growth rather than to fight disease. The use in agriculture is implicated in resistance in human pathogens too.
As for John Emsley's analysis. The man takes things to extremes. Am I suggesting that organic methods be foisted on sub-Saharan Africa to retain biodiversity? No (although they do get higher export prices for export crops) I'm explaining why there are ratioanal reasons in the UK to favour UK organic farmers. I hope that helps your comprehension.
The report specifically doesn't look into the main reasons why I tend to buy organic - which aren't do to with health issues primarily, but to do with environmental and animal husbandry factors.
In the UK at least, organic farmers do practice lower intensive farming, leaving hedgerows in and wider strips for wildlife to flourish, they're not allowed to use antibiotics to promote growth in cattle (though they can use antibiotics to treat disease).
I've never taken the health issues seriously, but I do take biodiversity (and antibiotic resistance) very seriously and I'm more than willing to pay a little more to farmers who take additional care to help protect the country's wildlife.
There is one exception to this: I do buy organic carrots with health mind. Various studies have shown that carrot skins do retain a fair amount of insecticide and other pesticide residue. I'm a lazy bugger who likes to eat carrots raw without peeling them and so feel marginally happier choosing organic.
Not entirely. We're seeing climatic changes and we are supposing that the raw tonnage of CO2 which is being pumped into the atmosphere each day by the population is having more that zero effect. Shocking I know, but a reasonable supposition.
Who on earth came up with the crazy idea of some sort of stable weather-utopia where the climate of 1988 (or whatever) is the "true" climate of the world?
You did. Just then.
Constructing straw men does not aid the sceptic cause. No one claims that massive climate change has not happened in the past. No one claims that natural processes do not cause climate change. The claim is that this time human activity is having a significant influence on climate change.
Yes, talk about bad summary. How does: "Locals feared a rave was to take place at Sowton, near Exeter, on Saturday and called the police" get transmogrified in the Slashdot summary into:
Apparently the police like to spend their time trawling our private information on Facebook looking for criminals
Knee-jerk stupidity, that's how - rather like apparently displayed by the police in this case.
I had a look at the site that got pulled before it got pulled. The contents clearly were potentially causing harm to people. That's what the crime of incitement requires. Whether the people posting the views were "just being dicks" is open to interpretation.
On point 2, presumably the NPG would argue that the revenue raised from the use of the picture would go on the upkeep of the collection, supporting staff, extending the collection, etc.
You will notice that the already have the ability to disseminate high quality repro via the Internet - which they do at their own site.
Let's see. In this case, the "corporate power elites" appear to be (1) a commissioned photographer (2) a museum, which is open, free to the public and which is funded by a mixture of government grant and private donations.
What the UK government want is to assign a compulsory primary key to every UK citizen and then make the hand-over of that key compulsory. What the anti-campaign wants to do is be allowed to leave that as 'null'.
Giving ever UK citizen a primary key is tremendously useful to a government. It makes a number of administrative tasks much simpler. Unfortunately in the hands of an oppressive totalitarian regime, ownership of the database becomes a nasty weapon against freedom.
On a more pragmatic level. The scheme was very expensive, cumbersome and there was no expectation that the government would be able to successfully control who had access to your intimate details.
Hell, the UK is the only place I ever heard of where those wrongfully imprisoned are then forced to reimburse the government for the cost of their imprisonment.
Slashdot Mirror
That's right. And opening an Appstore to third parties would absolutely prevent Microsoft from bundling free awesome games, because... wait, it's on the tip of my tongue.
You missed a bit:
Microsoft's Zune HD, set to go on sale Tuesday, will not feature a tightly controlled by control freaks with degrees in control freakery application store like its competitor the iPod Touch. Instead any Seattle based company called Microsoft will be allowed to place applications on the device with no restrictions
He was of course right. America is a continent, not a country.
Hmmm, no. They voted for him as their member of parliament. He was chosen as leader by the party members, including the elected MPs.
You forgot the other option: Aged Ripley sitting in a wheelchair, reminiscing about "how it all started" ... cue screen to go wavy.
I bet you send the guys at the electricity generating station a thank-you every year, don't you? And the guys who run the local silicon fab.
Yes! Yes! you're all right damnit. The devil withdraws from the field.
Being somewhat devils advocatish - what about all those people who find that their CDs stop working after a few years due to small scratches? Should they be allowed to demand free replacement in perpetuity?
I'm not quite sure what you are arguing. As far as I am aware, to be sold in the UK as "Organic" it has to be certified by the Soil Association, which sets the standards for care etc.
I quite agree that the supermarkets don't have any particularly warm and fuzzy agenda on this though, it's simply a question of maximising shareholder value.
Good catch on my sloppy wording with regard to continuously-fed antibiotics. Antibiotics cannot increase growth, as you say. However the general effect of feeding antibiotics continuously is faster growth and lower husbandry costs since bacterial infections are squelched before the animal can go off its food.
Yes. As I pointed out in my original message, antibiotic resistance is a real problem when they are used to promote growth rather than to fight disease. The use in agriculture is implicated in resistance in human pathogens too.
As for John Emsley's analysis. The man takes things to extremes. Am I suggesting that organic methods be foisted on sub-Saharan Africa to retain biodiversity? No (although they do get higher export prices for export crops) I'm explaining why there are ratioanal reasons in the UK to favour UK organic farmers. I hope that helps your comprehension.
The report specifically doesn't look into the main reasons why I tend to buy organic - which aren't do to with health issues primarily, but to do with environmental and animal husbandry factors.
In the UK at least, organic farmers do practice lower intensive farming, leaving hedgerows in and wider strips for wildlife to flourish, they're not allowed to use antibiotics to promote growth in cattle (though they can use antibiotics to treat disease).
I've never taken the health issues seriously, but I do take biodiversity (and antibiotic resistance) very seriously and I'm more than willing to pay a little more to farmers who take additional care to help protect the country's wildlife.
There is one exception to this: I do buy organic carrots with health mind. Various studies have shown that carrot skins do retain a fair amount of insecticide and other pesticide residue. I'm a lazy bugger who likes to eat carrots raw without peeling them and so feel marginally happier choosing organic.
.
Nope, if I had wanted to make it sound like a lot I would have said " the 10s of billions of tonnes per year".
Not entirely. We're seeing climatic changes and we are supposing that the raw tonnage of CO2 which is being pumped into the atmosphere each day by the population is having more that zero effect. Shocking I know, but a reasonable supposition.
You did. Just then.
Constructing straw men does not aid the sceptic cause. No one claims that massive climate change has not happened in the past. No one claims that natural processes do not cause climate change. The claim is that this time human activity is having a significant influence on climate change.
Interesting hypothesis. Is it falsifiable?
Yes, talk about bad summary. How does: "Locals feared a rave was to take place at Sowton, near Exeter, on Saturday and called the police" get transmogrified in the Slashdot summary into:
Knee-jerk stupidity, that's how - rather like apparently displayed by the police in this case.
You forgot the obligatory 'NO CARRIER' half way through the sentence.
I had a look at the site that got pulled before it got pulled. The contents clearly were potentially causing harm to people. That's what the crime of incitement requires. Whether the people posting the views were "just being dicks" is open to interpretation.
But the U.S doesn't have perfect freedom of speech either. See "Fire", crowded theatres, passim.
It's the latter. And yes you're right it is censorship. But censorship that a richly multicultural society has decided that is necessary to function.
On point 2, presumably the NPG would argue that the revenue raised from the use of the picture would go on the upkeep of the collection, supporting staff, extending the collection, etc.
You will notice that the already have the ability to disseminate high quality repro via the Internet - which they do at their own site.
Let's see. In this case, the "corporate power elites" appear to be (1) a commissioned photographer (2) a museum, which is open, free to the public and which is funded by a mixture of government grant and private donations.
What the UK government want is to assign a compulsory primary key to every UK citizen and then make the hand-over of that key compulsory. What the anti-campaign wants to do is be allowed to leave that as 'null'.
Giving ever UK citizen a primary key is tremendously useful to a government. It makes a number of administrative tasks much simpler. Unfortunately in the hands of an oppressive totalitarian regime, ownership of the database becomes a nasty weapon against freedom.
On a more pragmatic level. The scheme was very expensive, cumbersome and there was no expectation that the government would be able to successfully control who had access to your intimate details.
[citation needed]
Interesting. Citation, please?