...but if you're checking your email every day you won't be going for the GBP 2 per day option, you'll go for the GBP 20 per month option. I can see the 2 quid a day option being useful for frequent business trips; use regular land-line ADSL for regular use, and buy 6 quid's worth of mobile broadband for that trip to London.
...and 20 quid a month for 3GB? I'm paying about that ($50 NZ) for 1GB (that's 1GB per month). Damn Vodafone NZ.
Wow, I didn't know that. Tried just now on 3.0.1 and yes, you can.
It's one of the things I really like with Chrome; I think Chrome does it slightly better (FF replaced the content of the the open tab in the destination window with the page from the source window and left the source tab open - Chrome creates a new tab in the destination window and closes the source tab). I'm still firmly in the Firefox camp so it'd be great if 3.1 more closely mirrors Chrome's tab moves.
I didn't actually vote Lib Dem - I voted Scottish Scoialists, IIRC. But in hindsight a vote for the Lib Dems would have been a pure protest vote against Labour. By the same token, a number of my friends have recently voted for the Scottish National Party purely as an anti-Labour vote - Labour actually lost a bye-election in Glasgow recently, which I suspect is not entirely unrelated;-)
The Lib Dems in the UK aren't necessarily anti-socialists; historically they've entered into pacts with socialists - the first socialists in parliament stood as Lib/Lab candidates - and the first "purges" in the Labour party were against Liberals! I just see the Lib Dems as being more progressive than Labour. It does depend, however - where I live is basically a one-party state (recent bye-elections not-withstanding...) but in parts of the country where Labour have strong competition they can be quite decent.
Hell yeah! I'm not in the UK at the moment, so ironically I *will* be voting Labour the next time I vote (New Zealand Labour, not *quite* as bad as New Labour). In the UK it would depend on which parties were standing - last General (UK) Election I probably should have voted Liberal Democrat, as they were quite close to beating Labour (I lived in a relatively safe Labour stronghold). The most recent election I voted in was to the Scottish Parliament; I had two votes - constituency and list (Scottish Parliament elections are "Mixed Member Proportional", as is New Zealand) - and voted in both - a range of parties on the list, and a totally different party for the constituency. In the end, the party that one in Holyrood (the SNP) was one I hadn't voted for...
They can claim to be whatever they want, but they are no longer socialist. The "democratic socialist" claim was a sop to appease members disgusted at the ditching of Clause 4, and even then it was added only reluctantly by Blair.
New Labour under Blair openly looked to Thatcher for its role model. Internal debate about repealing anti-union laws was suppressed. I tore up my party membership card in 1996 and voted Labour for the last time in 1997.
Correct; Hitler never claimed to be a liberal. the AC's quote was "New Labour [isj.org.uk] are to socialism what Hitler was to liberalism!" The point they were making was that Hitler wasn't a liberal; New Labour are not socialist. I apologise for muddying the waters by trying to explain it to you.
I believe our anonymous comrade's point was that the relationship New Labour have with socialism is that they mention it in their constitution. The idiom is akin to "chocolate is to dieting as water is to fire-starting". Or "Darling is to fiscal prudence as Thatcher was to industrial relations".
Thanks - the stats I were looking at lumped all/most of Europe together on 6.9%.
Incidentally, a more recent figure is 3.8% for NZ - and Denmark, the Netherlands and (South?) Korea [1] all beat NZ (and presumably Iceland too). I believe NZ has been more affected by the current economic crisis that many other OECD countries, as it's very reliant on trade and tourism. Not sure how this affects IT (as I'm not currently job-hunting) but I'd guess that businesses may be scaling back recruitment.
[1] North Korea isn't an OECD member, and I'd imagine that the unemployment rate in North Korea is in negative figures and everyone is gloriously happy in their jobs;-)
Continuing the outside-Europe-theme, Australia and New Zealand could be worth considering. New Zealand has the lowest unemployment in the OECD and is there's plenty of demand for IT people. In Australia the demand is even greater. Tax is roughly on a par with the UK (maybe slightly better in Australia, slightly worse in NZ).
You could also try asking US firms - particularly in the finance sector big US financials will tend to have EMEA (London, Paris, Frankfurt, etc) and APAC (Sydney, Melbourne, Auckland - plus Tokyo, Singapore, etc) offices, with significant regional IT needs. Speak to someone locally about work globally, and you'll have good contacts when/if you return to the US.
They have a distinct legal system from the rest of Canada.
No, I'm not kidding.
I'm not sure why you'd consider this odd. I can think of at least two OECD countries with varying internal legal systems, besides Canada. In the USA, Louisiana is the only U.S. state partially based on French and Spanish codes and ultimately Roman law, as opposed to English common law. In the UK, Scotland has its own unique legal system - right down to three possible verdicts in a jury trial ("Not proven"). I believe, though I can't find a reference right now, that New York had a feudal-based system of property law until the late 19th century (unlike Scotland, where the feudal system gasped its last breath in 2006 or so... I got a letter from my "feudal superior" a year or so back)
I use SLF4J (as a wrapper around Log4J, usually), and consider Commons Logging deprecated. This is a blog post from the author of Commons Logging:
I'll come right out and admit it: commons-logging, at least in its initial form, was my fault...If you're building an application server, don't use commons-logging. If you're building a moderately large framework, don't use commons-logging. If however, like the Jakarta Commons project, you're building a tiny little component that you intend for other developers to embed in their applications and frameworks, and you believe that logging information might be useful to those clients, and you can't be sure what logging framework they're going to want to use, then commons-logging might be useful to you.
Most of the time I'm *not* building a Commons-style component, so JCL's dependencies hinder more than help. SLF4J, however, is very light-weight and very useful. One feature I like is a built in String.format function that won't evaluate if logging is disabled.
I was in a car in Malaysia in the 1970s that was shot at by a Marxist terrorist. Had the bullet not glanced off the windscreen it would have killed my mother. Sadly, that experience doesn't make me disagree with you in the slightest. I just count myself lucky to have - mostly - lived in the sole two countries where police don't normally carry guns.
I think it depends on the force. I lived in London in the aftermath of a big corruption-in-the-Met debacle, and the Metropolitan Police *were* by and large pretty good. I've also lived in Glasgow (for way too long) and Strathclyde Police were largely corrupt bastards. There were good cops in Strathclyde Police, but I'd trust them a lot less than I trust the Met.
There's a story - hopefully apocryphal - about a journalist interviewing various forces about corruption. The PR wonk for the Met says that corruption is probably something that you can never eliminate from a large force, but they'll clamp down on it whenever and wherever they find it. The PR bod for Greater Manchester Police is more optimistic, saying that he's not aware of any corruption in GMP, but of course if its found it'll be stamped on hard. The PR robot for Strathclyde Police says that, for 100 pounds, he'll say whatever the journalist wants.
Did he run from them? My understanding was that he was completely unaware of the pursuit until he was confronted on the tube, at which point he was shot immediately. During the "pursuit" he even phoned a colleague, Gesio de Avila, to explain that he'd be late for work due to the disruption on the Underground caused by the events of the previous day. Hardly the actions of someone running away from the police.
I don't know, to be honest. My dad was RN back in the 1960s/early 1970s, and I always thought of the RM as being part of the RN, so I was surprised when you said that and checked on their site. It is quite possible that at some point over the last 2-3 decades they've been re-organised a few times - their history seems to be one of re-organisation, after all. I hadn't realised, for example, that their commando role only stemmed from the Second World War - I assumed that it dated to the Boer War, for some reason.
Just out of curiousity, how many Arab or Muslim nations actually have religiously-derived laws? I lived in the Sultanate of Oman for 9 years in the 80s, and the laws there seemed to owe more to Civil Law than Sharia. Female Police Officers carried guns and patrolled un-chaperoned; Non-Muslims could buy alcohol; I wore swimming trunks at the beach; Theft resulted in a prison sentence, not loss of a hand. Oman was/is by no means the most liberal Arab nation (and certainly not the most liberal Muslim nation).
Most crime was carried out by the underclass (low-wage Arabs and Asian construction workers), not Western expatriates.
It's the same - though with a slight lag - in the UK and New Zealand. I'm not completely sure I agree with the AC's point about investment, but if you're buying a house to live in it has to be better than renting over the long term. Even with the sub-prime crisis and property prices falling, buying a house and living in it has to be better than giving money to a landlord, money that you won't see any part of and is only useful while you continue to live in the landlord's house. Falling house prices should be seen as an opportunity - at least for people who are still able to get mortgages...
Slashdot Mirror
...but if you're checking your email every day you won't be going for the GBP 2 per day option, you'll go for the GBP 20 per month option. I can see the 2 quid a day option being useful for frequent business trips; use regular land-line ADSL for regular use, and buy 6 quid's worth of mobile broadband for that trip to London.
...and 20 quid a month for 3GB? I'm paying about that ($50 NZ) for 1GB (that's 1GB per month). Damn Vodafone NZ.
Pah! It's still cheaper than AT&T! *And* you get a hotel thrown in!
Wow, Slashdot's on fire tonight! That's the second top tab tip I've got. Thanks, bytta! Thanks, SLOviper!
I tried tabbar to tabbar, too, and it works *exactly* as I'd expect - source tab closes, content appears in new tab at destination. Awesome!
Wow, I didn't know that. Tried just now on 3.0.1 and yes, you can.
It's one of the things I really like with Chrome; I think Chrome does it slightly better (FF replaced the content of the the open tab in the destination window with the page from the source window and left the source tab open - Chrome creates a new tab in the destination window and closes the source tab). I'm still firmly in the Firefox camp so it'd be great if 3.1 more closely mirrors Chrome's tab moves.
I didn't actually vote Lib Dem - I voted Scottish Scoialists, IIRC. But in hindsight a vote for the Lib Dems would have been a pure protest vote against Labour. By the same token, a number of my friends have recently voted for the Scottish National Party purely as an anti-Labour vote - Labour actually lost a bye-election in Glasgow recently, which I suspect is not entirely unrelated ;-)
The Lib Dems in the UK aren't necessarily anti-socialists; historically they've entered into pacts with socialists - the first socialists in parliament stood as Lib/Lab candidates - and the first "purges" in the Labour party were against Liberals! I just see the Lib Dems as being more progressive than Labour. It does depend, however - where I live is basically a one-party state (recent bye-elections not-withstanding...) but in parts of the country where Labour have strong competition they can be quite decent.
Hell yeah! I'm not in the UK at the moment, so ironically I *will* be voting Labour the next time I vote (New Zealand Labour, not *quite* as bad as New Labour). In the UK it would depend on which parties were standing - last General (UK) Election I probably should have voted Liberal Democrat, as they were quite close to beating Labour (I lived in a relatively safe Labour stronghold). The most recent election I voted in was to the Scottish Parliament; I had two votes - constituency and list (Scottish Parliament elections are "Mixed Member Proportional", as is New Zealand) - and voted in both - a range of parties on the list, and a totally different party for the constituency. In the end, the party that one in Holyrood (the SNP) was one I hadn't voted for...
They can claim to be whatever they want, but they are no longer socialist. The "democratic socialist" claim was a sop to appease members disgusted at the ditching of Clause 4, and even then it was added only reluctantly by Blair.
New Labour under Blair openly looked to Thatcher for its role model. Internal debate about repealing anti-union laws was suppressed. I tore up my party membership card in 1996 and voted Labour for the last time in 1997.
Correct; Hitler never claimed to be a liberal. the AC's quote was "New Labour [isj.org.uk] are to socialism what Hitler was to liberalism!" The point they were making was that Hitler wasn't a liberal; New Labour are not socialist. I apologise for muddying the waters by trying to explain it to you.
I believe our anonymous comrade's point was that the relationship New Labour have with socialism is that they mention it in their constitution. The idiom is akin to "chocolate is to dieting as water is to fire-starting". Or "Darling is to fiscal prudence as Thatcher was to industrial relations".
Thanks - the stats I were looking at lumped all/most of Europe together on 6.9%.
Incidentally, a more recent figure is 3.8% for NZ - and Denmark, the Netherlands and (South?) Korea [1] all beat NZ (and presumably Iceland too). I believe NZ has been more affected by the current economic crisis that many other OECD countries, as it's very reliant on trade and tourism. Not sure how this affects IT (as I'm not currently job-hunting) but I'd guess that businesses may be scaling back recruitment.
[1] North Korea isn't an OECD member, and I'd imagine that the unemployment rate in North Korea is in negative figures and everyone is gloriously happy in their jobs ;-)
Continuing the outside-Europe-theme, Australia and New Zealand could be worth considering. New Zealand has the lowest unemployment in the OECD and is there's plenty of demand for IT people. In Australia the demand is even greater. Tax is roughly on a par with the UK (maybe slightly better in Australia, slightly worse in NZ).
You could also try asking US firms - particularly in the finance sector big US financials will tend to have EMEA (London, Paris, Frankfurt, etc) and APAC (Sydney, Melbourne, Auckland - plus Tokyo, Singapore, etc) offices, with significant regional IT needs. Speak to someone locally about work globally, and you'll have good contacts when/if you return to the US.
I'm not sure why you'd consider this odd. I can think of at least two OECD countries with varying internal legal systems, besides Canada. In the USA, Louisiana is the only U.S. state partially based on French and Spanish codes and ultimately Roman law, as opposed to English common law. In the UK, Scotland has its own unique legal system - right down to three possible verdicts in a jury trial ("Not proven"). I believe, though I can't find a reference right now, that New York had a feudal-based system of property law until the late 19th century (unlike Scotland, where the feudal system gasped its last breath in 2006 or so... I got a letter from my "feudal superior" a year or so back)
I use SLF4J (as a wrapper around Log4J, usually), and consider Commons Logging deprecated. This is a blog post from the author of Commons Logging:
Most of the time I'm *not* building a Commons-style component, so JCL's dependencies hinder more than help. SLF4J, however, is very light-weight and very useful. One feature I like is a built in String.format function that won't evaluate if logging is disabled.
I was in a car in Malaysia in the 1970s that was shot at by a Marxist terrorist. Had the bullet not glanced off the windscreen it would have killed my mother. Sadly, that experience doesn't make me disagree with you in the slightest. I just count myself lucky to have - mostly - lived in the sole two countries where police don't normally carry guns.
I think it depends on the force. I lived in London in the aftermath of a big corruption-in-the-Met debacle, and the Metropolitan Police *were* by and large pretty good. I've also lived in Glasgow (for way too long) and Strathclyde Police were largely corrupt bastards. There were good cops in Strathclyde Police, but I'd trust them a lot less than I trust the Met.
There's a story - hopefully apocryphal - about a journalist interviewing various forces about corruption. The PR wonk for the Met says that corruption is probably something that you can never eliminate from a large force, but they'll clamp down on it whenever and wherever they find it. The PR bod for Greater Manchester Police is more optimistic, saying that he's not aware of any corruption in GMP, but of course if its found it'll be stamped on hard. The PR robot for Strathclyde Police says that, for 100 pounds, he'll say whatever the journalist wants.
Did he run from them? My understanding was that he was completely unaware of the pursuit until he was confronted on the tube, at which point he was shot immediately. During the "pursuit" he even phoned a colleague, Gesio de Avila, to explain that he'd be late for work due to the disruption on the Underground caused by the events of the previous day. Hardly the actions of someone running away from the police.
I don't know, to be honest. My dad was RN back in the 1960s/early 1970s, and I always thought of the RM as being part of the RN, so I was surprised when you said that and checked on their site. It is quite possible that at some point over the last 2-3 decades they've been re-organised a few times - their history seems to be one of re-organisation, after all. I hadn't realised, for example, that their commando role only stemmed from the Second World War - I assumed that it dated to the Boer War, for some reason.
They are not a separate organisation, they are part of the Royal Navy. From their website:
Are the Royal Marines part of the Army?
No. The Royal Marines are an amphibious force and are therefore part of the Royal Navy.
Probably the same as they'll feel when they learn it was misattributed to Voltaire, and was actually coined by an English-woman!
She wrote the phrase, which is often mis-attributed to Voltaire, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it," as an illustration of Voltaire's beliefs.
More pictures here. It's a Slashdot article from Thursday entitled "First Images of Russian-European Manned Spacecraft".
I'm not as familiar with US law as I am with UK and NZ law (and IANAL, yada yada) but isn't this how prosecutions in the US usually work? She's being charged with anything and everything (three counts of accessing protected computers without authorization to obtain information to inflict emotional distress, and one count of criminal conspiracy) in the hope that at least one charge will stick. To me at least, Criminal Conspiracy seems fair enough and I'd imagine that that would be the charge that stuck. Have faith in the defense, the jury and the judge...
And why do you think it was called The Weather Underground? (Hint: The Weathermen went by numerous names, including the Weather Underground)
Bah, kids these days. Can't remember the time before they were born.
Weatherman, known colloquially as the Weathermen and later the Weather Underground Organization
Cite
This post brought to you by Citizens Who Can Be Arsed Following More Than One Link
Just out of curiousity, how many Arab or Muslim nations actually have religiously-derived laws? I lived in the Sultanate of Oman for 9 years in the 80s, and the laws there seemed to owe more to Civil Law than Sharia. Female Police Officers carried guns and patrolled un-chaperoned; Non-Muslims could buy alcohol; I wore swimming trunks at the beach; Theft resulted in a prison sentence, not loss of a hand. Oman was/is by no means the most liberal Arab nation (and certainly not the most liberal Muslim nation).
Most crime was carried out by the underclass (low-wage Arabs and Asian construction workers), not Western expatriates.
It's the same - though with a slight lag - in the UK and New Zealand. I'm not completely sure I agree with the AC's point about investment, but if you're buying a house to live in it has to be better than renting over the long term. Even with the sub-prime crisis and property prices falling, buying a house and living in it has to be better than giving money to a landlord, money that you won't see any part of and is only useful while you continue to live in the landlord's house. Falling house prices should be seen as an opportunity - at least for people who are still able to get mortgages...