It seems to me that humans were designed very well for adapting to almost any kind of condition. If the conditions are too extreme we adapt them to suit our needs or move to more suitable areas.
Which is fine for Homo Sapiens as a whole. But speaking personally this particular example of the species is quite accustomed to the area and conditions it has at the moment, and would like to avoid or mitigate radical changes if possible. I don't think I'm alone in this.
heh, take a glance over a British military forum someday. I *think* they're mostly joking, but it seems to be the general group fantasy to receive orders from The Palace to march on the House of Commons with bayonets fixed:) The current government is not popular in military circles, to put it mildly; if Gordon Brown says to the Queen "you and what army", she'd have a ready answer..
Obama hates the Brits. Clean and simple. Started with that bust of Churchill he sent back when he moved in.
My guess (and it's a guess) it has something that the British did to his father in Africa.
Obama really doesn't strike me as the sort of guy who bears grudges through 2 generations.. lets face it he'd have some bigger axes to grind than against Britain if he did.
That said Obama is obviously no anglophile, doesn't mean he hates Britain, just that he has about us much knowledge of and interest in Britain as the average educated American - in other words not a great deal of either.
Not necessarily a bad thing from a British perspective. There have been anglophile presidents before and I can't remember an occasion when that meant Britain got something it wanted that wasn't in American interests. Relations between the US and UK have always been founded on cultural links and shared interests, the attitude of the incumbent president isn't irrelevant but isn't that big an influence as far as I can see.
Well I'm not being very serious:) The USA is way ahead on per capita GDP and military power, which makes it still the only real superpower. It just seemed a little odd that the AC was quoting land area as an indication of global dominance, so I thought I'd post some numbers that were about as relevant.
Anyway I'm British, we are not in any position to lecture people about deficits:(
oh come on, I live several thousand miles away and even I know the ACORN thing was a deliberate attempt to mislead. In short, yes there were a lot of ACORN employees fraudulently registering voters. No these fraudulent registrations could not lead to fraudulent votes. Just a bunch of people bilking the public purse for unearned income, no threat to democracy (unless you happen to be in the middle of an election and have an axe to grind).
Copious amounts of supporting evidence can be found on the interwebs.
Yeah, it's a constant problem from my perspective: Even when I want to buy something, often companies don't want my money.
If it's happened once or twice then you've probably just dealt with some stupid companies or lazy employees. If it happens a lot... well any retailer will tell you that some (a few) people are just nightmares waiting to happen, and the best thing to do is get them out the door as quickly as possible and avoid any contractual relationship with them. You don't make enough per sale in retail to make it worth dealing with a real twat if you can possibly avoid it.
This *is* the free market. Problem (ads) appears, solution (adblock) is developed, and becomes popular.
Advertisers have no more right to force me to view their ads than coke has to force me to by fizzy drinks.
This only works because only a small percentage of people do it. If everyone used a truly effective adblocker then all you'd do is destroy the reasonable compromise we have at the moment between independent content and clearly delineated advertising, and replace it with product placement and disguised advertorials.
Personally I don't mind ads as long as they don't move. I use flashblock and turn off animated gifs, and then use adblock on anything (not just ads) that still manages to move. Blocking all ads seems pointless and selfish to me, and ultimately it won't work if everyone does it.
Though the activity is likely to have been technically illegal,
Robertson said that it is unlikely that the corporation will be
punished for it.
"The maximum penalty for this offence is two years'
imprisonment. But it is very unlikely that any prosecution will
follow because the BBC's actions probably caused no harm. On the
contrary, it probably did prompt many people to improve their
security," he said.
A blog posting from security firm
Sophos suggests that the BBC has committed an offence of making
unauthorised modifications to a computer. Robertson said that that
is unlikely.
"The offence of unauthorised modification requires a
recklessness or an intent that I don't think the BBC has
displayed," he said.
Section three of the Computer Misuse Act describes the need for
an intent to impair the operation of a computer or to hinder access
to data. Such intent is not required for the section one offence of
unauthorised access, said Robertson.
The BBC did not respond to OUT-LAW's request for comment.
However, a message on the programme's Twitter account suggests that the
team did consult lawyers. "We would not put out a show like this
one without having taken legal advice," it said.
Really? Show me an advertisement where a business points out the downsides as well as the upsides to their product. Because that would be "informative". Otherwise, it is "manipulative", because it implies that the product only has upsides.
When I drive home from work I pass a man in a van parked up with a sign reading "Fresh flowers - £2" I think that gives you all the relevant up sides and downsides of his merchandise, ie plus point they are fresh flowers, downside you have to give him two quid to get him to part with them:)
On a more serious note, I really fundamentally disagree with your point about independent review/comparison services being adequate, mainly because I don't think I've ever engaged in manipulative advertising but (like anyone who's ever been rung up by someone calling themselves a journalist looking for free products to review) I've certainly manipulated review sites/magazines in a small way (eg providing a set of products for a comparison which only included ones we want to sell).
The problem with what you suggest is that if you only have editorial rather than advertising content, all you will do is force the two together. And since everyone who is in the business of providing editorial content gets their money via advertising you would create a situation where these review sites are both earning no money, and driving a vast amount of cash towards the products they endorse. I don't think I'd have a great deal of trust in the independence of review sites in that sort of situation.
Much better IMO to have open advertising that is clearly demarked from editorial content. It kind of reminds me of the paid-for search engine marketing that was around before Google introduced Adwords. I never participated myself but I was reading a lot of forums in 2001/2002 dealing with these issues, you had companies like FAST and Inktomi who were supplying search for the major portals and trying desperately to monetise by using combinations of paid for inclusion (ie you pay them to have your pages spidered) and pay for position (eg in the main results positions 1-3 would be (unmarked) adverts, 4-7 would be organic results and 8-10 would be more disguised ads). And this is only the standard advertised business, God knows what they were offering that wasn;t being discussed on open forums. Unsurprisingly Google blew them away with honest search results, and then cracked the search monetisation problem brilliantly with Adwords - clearly defined ads that are in no way mistakable for organic results, but are relevant to the search.
Sorry, something of a ramble, what I am trying to say is that advertising in some shape or form will always happen, much better, and much less manipulative, to have the open system we have now rather than the disguised "advertorial" situation that is the only alternative.
Advertising exists to manipulate you into making choices that you would not otherwise. If they are able to target ads at me, that just means they're better at manipulating me. I don't want that. You can show me all the monistat commercials you want, it's not going to affect me. Show me ads for something I want, and it will probably interfere with my decision making process. I'd rather do my own research and make my own decisions, and not be affected by manipulation.
That's just crap, let me guess: government employee? or you work for such a large company you are completely divorced from the money making bit? Advertising exists to generate sales, period. There are a huge number of different methods, and some are manipulative certainly, others are simply informative.
Try starting your own business sometime. You know you can offer products/services at a price people will be willing to pay, but you'll sell jack shit unless people are aware of this fact, so what do you do? You advertise of course.
This all out anti-advertising stance is just fucking ignorant.
Got to say I agree with this, if I'm in a queue I'm always hoping people ahead of me pay cash since it certainly feels a lot quicker to me.
Of course there is always the woman (and it is always a woman), who is obviously surprised to be asked to pay for her goods and doesn't start rooting around in her bag for cash until after the bill has been presented. But then she'll do exactly the same thing with card, AND then get her pin number wrong and pull the card out before the transaction is completed...
But the AI in ETW is a complete disappointment. I see no enhancement compared to MTW2. The opposite is true, there are so many AI bugs that battles agains the AI are close to pointless.
You know I don't think it's as bad as you make out. Sure I agree that it does do stupid things and I'm sure it will be better after a patch or two, but in the right situation (and really this is most battles I've played) it seems capable of good solid play. The problems I've seen tend to be where it tries to do something clever (like split its forces) and ends up weakening its position, but it hasn't happened very often and certainly isn't game breaking.
I dunno, I guess I tend to be a glass-half-full type of player when it comes to AI - I don't expect miracles and I'm willing to accept that there will be situations where it does something stupid. People who listen to computer game publishers' marketing and judge the AI against human intelligence are always going to be doomed to disappointment, but I'm happy enough with the Empire AI at the moment, in comparison with other games I've played.
Bang on. I bought Empire:Total War from Amazon for about £25 all in. On Steam it's £39.99! And I'd still be waiting for that fricking 15GB to download..
I like Steam a lot, or at least I did and I want to. But a combination of sluggish downloads, waiting around a week extra for patches, the massive size of current games and the now insane pricing is putting me right off.
Also, the Chinese holding trillions of dollars in U.S. treasuries
You know I've been hearing this for years, so I actually looked it up. As far as I can see China "only" has about $700 billion of US government debt. A huge amount certainly, but really enough to cause the kind of financial armageddon that people talk about?
Those that work at companies that are entirely family or employ owned, do you feel that your company is in better shape than those public stock corporations?
Well we have no debt and about 4 months worth of costs in savings, does that answer your question?:)
Agree with most of that, but I think you have to add Sim City and Civilization as genre spawning games. And Star Craft simply due to its massive longevity and player base.
WRONG. If another player is playing poorly, he is affecting how the cards come out of the deck. For instance, if another player "hits" on a 20, and takes the Jack that would have (should have) accompanied your Ace, he has most definitely played in a way that affect your odds of winning.
That doesn't make sense to me (although admittedly most statistical things don't unless they are explained in words of one syllable). Surely it's just as likely that the other guy takes the 6 you would have got and gives you the Jack that was underneath it?
Putting them away for life just makes them a taxpayer burden. They aren't a threat to the public in any way.
But containment is only one reason to imprison criminals. The others are rehabilitation, deterrence and retribution. Dunno how rehabilitation plays here, but I think deterrence requires them to be punished severely as an example to other judges who might consider doing something like this. And as for retribution...
Shit, this story on slashdot is the first I've heard of this and I'm genuinely shocked. These kids got put into prison by corrupt judges, they have a right to see these criminals punished in the same way they were, and the state has a duty to do so, both to these kids and to justice itself.
I also ANASubmariner, but I have read several Tom Clancy books:) I think by "tracking", grandparent was talking about one sub following the other - playing war games essentially - rather than just taking note of it on passive sonar. Apparently (according to Tom Clancy) this is something a sub who's purpose is to launch land-attack nuclear missiles would never do. If they detect another sub they piss off as quickly and quietly as possible and carry on waiting for someone to tell them to start blowing things up.
Also, what's the betting that this is mainly a "for the sake of the children, hide the tiny, brief flashes of flesh" idea (which you're less likely to know about) rather than a "for the sake of the children, stop the massed bloodshed" idea (which generally tends to be obvious from the format of the game).
Probably not actually, since this is a proposal for a piece of misguided European legislation, rather than misguided US legislation.
The EU has many many faults, but thankfully over-regulating the human nipple isn't often one of them.
Slashdot Mirror
Which is fine for Homo Sapiens as a whole. But speaking personally this particular example of the species is quite accustomed to the area and conditions it has at the moment, and would like to avoid or mitigate radical changes if possible. I don't think I'm alone in this.
heh, take a glance over a British military forum someday. I *think* they're mostly joking, but it seems to be the general group fantasy to receive orders from The Palace to march on the House of Commons with bayonets fixed :) The current government is not popular in military circles, to put it mildly; if Gordon Brown says to the Queen "you and what army", she'd have a ready answer..
No I'm not being serious.
Obama really doesn't strike me as the sort of guy who bears grudges through 2 generations.. lets face it he'd have some bigger axes to grind than against Britain if he did.
That said Obama is obviously no anglophile, doesn't mean he hates Britain, just that he has about us much knowledge of and interest in Britain as the average educated American - in other words not a great deal of either.
Not necessarily a bad thing from a British perspective. There have been anglophile presidents before and I can't remember an occasion when that meant Britain got something it wanted that wasn't in American interests. Relations between the US and UK have always been founded on cultural links and shared interests, the attitude of the incumbent president isn't irrelevant but isn't that big an influence as far as I can see.
Well I'm not being very serious :) The USA is way ahead on per capita GDP and military power, which makes it still the only real superpower. It just seemed a little odd that the AC was quoting land area as an indication of global dominance, so I thought I'd post some numbers that were about as relevant.
:(
Anyway I'm British, we are not in any position to lecture people about deficits
Russia 6.6million square miles.. guess maybe that's not a good measure after all.
How about population? US 306 million, EU 495 million.. obviously not
Let's try GDP: US 13.8 trillion USD, EU 16.9 trillion GDP.
Damn it numbers! Why will you not co-operate and support the position I already know to be true!
Ah, I have it! National debt! USA! USA USA!
What a stupid thread.
As Lessig put it: "fair use in America simply means the right to hire a lawyer to defend your right to create."
oh come on, I live several thousand miles away and even I know the ACORN thing was a deliberate attempt to mislead. In short, yes there were a lot of ACORN employees fraudulently registering voters. No these fraudulent registrations could not lead to fraudulent votes. Just a bunch of people bilking the public purse for unearned income, no threat to democracy (unless you happen to be in the middle of an election and have an axe to grind).
Copious amounts of supporting evidence can be found on the interwebs.
If it's happened once or twice then you've probably just dealt with some stupid companies or lazy employees. If it happens a lot... well any retailer will tell you that some (a few) people are just nightmares waiting to happen, and the best thing to do is get them out the door as quickly as possible and avoid any contractual relationship with them. You don't make enough per sale in retail to make it worth dealing with a real twat if you can possibly avoid it.
This only works because only a small percentage of people do it. If everyone used a truly effective adblocker then all you'd do is destroy the reasonable compromise we have at the moment between independent content and clearly delineated advertising, and replace it with product placement and disguised advertorials.
Personally I don't mind ads as long as they don't move. I use flashblock and turn off animated gifs, and then use adblock on anything (not just ads) that still manages to move. Blocking all ads seems pointless and selfish to me, and ultimately it won't work if everyone does it.
When I drive home from work I pass a man in a van parked up with a sign reading "Fresh flowers - £2" I think that gives you all the relevant up sides and downsides of his merchandise, ie plus point they are fresh flowers, downside you have to give him two quid to get him to part with them :)
On a more serious note, I really fundamentally disagree with your point about independent review/comparison services being adequate, mainly because I don't think I've ever engaged in manipulative advertising but (like anyone who's ever been rung up by someone calling themselves a journalist looking for free products to review) I've certainly manipulated review sites/magazines in a small way (eg providing a set of products for a comparison which only included ones we want to sell).
The problem with what you suggest is that if you only have editorial rather than advertising content, all you will do is force the two together. And since everyone who is in the business of providing editorial content gets their money via advertising you would create a situation where these review sites are both earning no money, and driving a vast amount of cash towards the products they endorse. I don't think I'd have a great deal of trust in the independence of review sites in that sort of situation.
Much better IMO to have open advertising that is clearly demarked from editorial content. It kind of reminds me of the paid-for search engine marketing that was around before Google introduced Adwords. I never participated myself but I was reading a lot of forums in 2001/2002 dealing with these issues, you had companies like FAST and Inktomi who were supplying search for the major portals and trying desperately to monetise by using combinations of paid for inclusion (ie you pay them to have your pages spidered) and pay for position (eg in the main results positions 1-3 would be (unmarked) adverts, 4-7 would be organic results and 8-10 would be more disguised ads). And this is only the standard advertised business, God knows what they were offering that wasn;t being discussed on open forums. Unsurprisingly Google blew them away with honest search results, and then cracked the search monetisation problem brilliantly with Adwords - clearly defined ads that are in no way mistakable for organic results, but are relevant to the search.
Sorry, something of a ramble, what I am trying to say is that advertising in some shape or form will always happen, much better, and much less manipulative, to have the open system we have now rather than the disguised "advertorial" situation that is the only alternative.
That's just crap, let me guess: government employee? or you work for such a large company you are completely divorced from the money making bit? Advertising exists to generate sales, period. There are a huge number of different methods, and some are manipulative certainly, others are simply informative.
Try starting your own business sometime. You know you can offer products/services at a price people will be willing to pay, but you'll sell jack shit unless people are aware of this fact, so what do you do? You advertise of course.
This all out anti-advertising stance is just fucking ignorant.
Got to say I agree with this, if I'm in a queue I'm always hoping people ahead of me pay cash since it certainly feels a lot quicker to me.
Of course there is always the woman (and it is always a woman), who is obviously surprised to be asked to pay for her goods and doesn't start rooting around in her bag for cash until after the bill has been presented. But then she'll do exactly the same thing with card, AND then get her pin number wrong and pull the card out before the transaction is completed...
If you've has that many problems then I can see why your disappointed. However one thing I can't agree with:
That's got to be a rose tinted view :) Man that passive AI bug was a pain...
You know I don't think it's as bad as you make out. Sure I agree that it does do stupid things and I'm sure it will be better after a patch or two, but in the right situation (and really this is most battles I've played) it seems capable of good solid play. The problems I've seen tend to be where it tries to do something clever (like split its forces) and ends up weakening its position, but it hasn't happened very often and certainly isn't game breaking.
I dunno, I guess I tend to be a glass-half-full type of player when it comes to AI - I don't expect miracles and I'm willing to accept that there will be situations where it does something stupid. People who listen to computer game publishers' marketing and judge the AI against human intelligence are always going to be doomed to disappointment, but I'm happy enough with the Empire AI at the moment, in comparison with other games I've played.
Bang on. I bought Empire:Total War from Amazon for about £25 all in. On Steam it's £39.99! And I'd still be waiting for that fricking 15GB to download..
I like Steam a lot, or at least I did and I want to. But a combination of sluggish downloads, waiting around a week extra for patches, the massive size of current games and the now insane pricing is putting me right off.
You know I've been hearing this for years, so I actually looked it up. As far as I can see China "only" has about $700 billion of US government debt. A huge amount certainly, but really enough to cause the kind of financial armageddon that people talk about?
Well we have no debt and about 4 months worth of costs in savings, does that answer your question? :)
Agree with most of that, but I think you have to add Sim City and Civilization as genre spawning games. And Star Craft simply due to its massive longevity and player base.
Sir Humphrey: It is so difficult for me you see, as I am wearing two hats.
Jim: Yes, isn't that rather awkward for you.
Sir Humphrey: Not if one is in two minds.
Bernard: Or has two faces.
Really? Sweet. Sheep-shagger was getting kind of old.
That doesn't make sense to me (although admittedly most statistical things don't unless they are explained in words of one syllable). Surely it's just as likely that the other guy takes the 6 you would have got and gives you the Jack that was underneath it?
But containment is only one reason to imprison criminals. The others are rehabilitation, deterrence and retribution. Dunno how rehabilitation plays here, but I think deterrence requires them to be punished severely as an example to other judges who might consider doing something like this. And as for retribution...
Shit, this story on slashdot is the first I've heard of this and I'm genuinely shocked. These kids got put into prison by corrupt judges, they have a right to see these criminals punished in the same way they were, and the state has a duty to do so, both to these kids and to justice itself.
I also ANASubmariner, but I have read several Tom Clancy books :) I think by "tracking", grandparent was talking about one sub following the other - playing war games essentially - rather than just taking note of it on passive sonar. Apparently (according to Tom Clancy) this is something a sub who's purpose is to launch land-attack nuclear missiles would never do. If they detect another sub they piss off as quickly and quietly as possible and carry on waiting for someone to tell them to start blowing things up.
Probably not actually, since this is a proposal for a piece of misguided European legislation, rather than misguided US legislation.
The EU has many many faults, but thankfully over-regulating the human nipple isn't often one of them.