Here in Spain we have eight political parties with seats in at least one of the two houses. Now, some of them are regional parties, but even though we're not locked into a two-party system there are three major newspapers, two for the right and one for the left.
Fox may not deal in news, but the Times (or, for non-Brits, the London Times) is a serious newspaper, and has a well-implemented website. I will be sad to have to find an alternative.
Not really, cyclists hate everybody else because they tend to be self righteous pricks.
This makes them different to everyone else how?
Drivers hate cyclists because they're self righteous pricks that don't obey the traffic laws.
This makes cyclists different to drivers how?
I refer you to the part of my GP post which says "people dislike other road-users". This dislike is intensified by things like differences in acceleration and speed - I could have added "people who drive at the speed limit" as another subclass. The main reason drivers hate cyclists is because they're slow and hold you up; the main reason cyclists hate drivers is because some of them are too impatient to wait when the law says that the cyclist has priority / right of way.
So are pedestrians. And some cyclists (whether legally or not varies by jurisdiction). They still end up crossing a lot of roads, unless they just go in circles.
Or it could just be a special case of a more general rule: people dislike other road-users, and especially other classes of road-users. Drivers, cyclists, motorcyclists, and pedestrians all hate each other. Cyclists who use lights at night hate cyclists who don't because they're letting the side down. Cyclists who don't probably think those who do are stuck-up twits. Other subclasses (particularly taxi-, bus-, and lorry-drivers) also attract particular enmity. So why should Segway-riders expect to be different?
Allow me to highlight some key words in your quote (and correct a misplaced apostrophe - not your fault, I know):
A century ago, the possession and carrying of firearms was perfectly normal here. Firearms were sold without licence in gunshops and ironmongers in virtually every town in the country, and grand department stores such as Selfridge's even offered customers an in-house range. The market was not just for sporting guns; there was a thriving domestic industry producing pocket pistols and revolvers, and an extensive import trade in the cheap handguns that today would be called "Saturday Night Specials." Conan Doyle's Dr. Watson, dropping a revolver in his pocket before going out about town, illustrates a real commonplace of that time. Beatrix Potter's journal records a discussion at a small country hotel in Yorkshire, where it turned out that only one of the eight or nine guests was not carrying a revolver.
It might be fair to say that the upper and upper-middle classes typically owned guns, but they accounted for a pretty small proportion of the population. I didn't observe in the article any evidence that the working or lower-middle classes typically owned firearms.
Orwell fought in the Spanish civil war with the republicans against the fascists. In his time there were dictators like Mussolini, Franco, Stalin, Hitler,... so it is easy to understand where the inspiration and fear came from.
To be precise, he fought with the Marxists - not because he chose to, but because his letter of recommendation was from the Independent Labour Party. As a result of that arbitrary quirk of fate, he was denounced as a "confirmed Trotskyist" and had to flee for his life from the Stalinists, who were nominally on the same side. He certainly wasn't a fan of Franco, but it might be appropriate to emphasise Stalin a bit more in your list.
However, your phrasing "fought... against the fascists" is very appropriate, as that's where he put the emphasis. For the purposes of the wider discussion, though, it's interesting to note his answer to the hypothetical question he might have been posed as to for what he was fighting: "common decency". It's an interesting yardstick against which to measure "what's best for the people": anything which fails the common decency test probably isn't.
That's only ten. And "pressclipping" isn't a word so it doesn't count. Mind you, the court made a similar mistake. Observe the example given in the ruling of an 11-word extract (5 words either side of TDC):
"a forthcoming sale of the telecommunications group TDC which is expected to be bought"
Nothing to do with the "intarweb". They were taking dead-tree newspapers, scanning, OCRing, extracting snippets from the resulting text, and printing them. Actually if this had been entirely electronic the ruling would have been different, because one of the two rulings is that the last step of making a physical print-out is non-transient, and thus one exemption is ruled not to apply.
The other ruling is that an 11 word extract is not automatically incapable of being worthy of copyright protection: (my emphasis)
An act occurring during a data capture process, which consists of storing an extract of a protected work comprising 11 words and printing out that extract, is such as to come within the concept of reproduction in part within the meaning of Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society, if the elements thus reproduced are the expression of the intellectual creation of their author; it is for the national court to make this determination.
This isn't entirely unreasonable, because otherwise haiku authors be rather unprotected.
Finally, to answer your original question of why they don't want this: I think it's because the purpose here isn't to create an index for people in general to use but to create a resource for Infopaq's researchers to then write original content summarising the news.
Digital Fortress is as real as the sequels to The Matrix and the prequels to Star Wars. It has never existed and never will. For your own safety, shut up now.
Does the analogy "Using an armoured car to transport money beween two cardboard boxes in the street" ring any bells? It doesn't matter how secure your connection is if the person at the next table can read your screen.
It might be interesting to know whether this constitutes a valid contract. In English law, at least, you need "consideration" (both parties benefit), and you have situations whereby someone with a property which is effectively worth negative amounts (e.g. a house which would cost more to repair that it could be sold for once repaired) has to sell for a token amount (usually one pound) because giving it away wouldn't actually transfer ownership. Does having your paper published qualify as consideration?
Speaking as a left-hander who writes in L2R languages, I must say that ball-point pens were a great invention. Nowadays I use roller-ball pens with ink which dries fast enough not to cause me problems, but roller-balls are a development from the ball-point. Three cheers for Mr Biro.
It doesn't matter how cool the name is: once the winner is picked it will be SHA-3, in the same way that Rijndael became AES. In fact, the name Rijndael had slipped my memory and I had to Google it - and I'm interested in crypto.
Besides, the general public might be able to name WEP and WPA as "types of encryption", but to hope for more than that, no matter how cool the name, is optimistic.
While the stuff all the reports are picking up on is certainly not good, the most shocking bit is near the end of the article:
Meanwhile, at Evnova Computers in Barbican the loose memory chip was also spotted and fixed. But the company also told us we needed a new motherboard. We declined the offer and collected our laptop. When we examined it, we discovered technicians had soldered the memory bus pins together to recreate the original fault. Evnova later claimed it believed we were from a rival repair company.
So they catch onto the fact that it's not a genuine customer and they think that a bit of criminal damage is the best thing to do?
Slashdot Mirror
Here in Spain we have eight political parties with seats in at least one of the two houses. Now, some of them are regional parties, but even though we're not locked into a two-party system there are three major newspapers, two for the right and one for the left.
Fox may not deal in news, but the Times (or, for non-Brits, the London Times) is a serious newspaper, and has a well-implemented website. I will be sad to have to find an alternative.
Depends. Is it by Arthur Dent?
And you think it's a pain in the backside having to take your shoes off at the airport now.
Not really: I wear slip-ons to fly. When it comes to flying, the pain is the backside is the queueing.
Notice that this story is in the Entertainment section? You're supposed to point and laugh.
Not really, cyclists hate everybody else because they tend to be self righteous pricks.
This makes them different to everyone else how?
Drivers hate cyclists because they're self righteous pricks that don't obey the traffic laws.
This makes cyclists different to drivers how?
I refer you to the part of my GP post which says "people dislike other road-users". This dislike is intensified by things like differences in acceleration and speed - I could have added "people who drive at the speed limit" as another subclass. The main reason drivers hate cyclists is because they're slow and hold you up; the main reason cyclists hate drivers is because some of them are too impatient to wait when the law says that the cyclist has priority / right of way.
So are pedestrians. And some cyclists (whether legally or not varies by jurisdiction). They still end up crossing a lot of roads, unless they just go in circles.
Or it could just be a special case of a more general rule: people dislike other road-users, and especially other classes of road-users. Drivers, cyclists, motorcyclists, and pedestrians all hate each other. Cyclists who use lights at night hate cyclists who don't because they're letting the side down. Cyclists who don't probably think those who do are stuck-up twits. Other subclasses (particularly taxi-, bus-, and lorry-drivers) also attract particular enmity. So why should Segway-riders expect to be different?
Just wait until they create a Ministry for Desperate Housewives.
Ah - I thought it was a list of people who made Orwell fear authoritarian government.
Allow me to highlight some key words in your quote (and correct a misplaced apostrophe - not your fault, I know):
A century ago, the possession and carrying of firearms was perfectly normal here. Firearms were sold without licence in gunshops and ironmongers in virtually every town in the country, and grand department stores such as Selfridge's even offered customers an in-house range. The market was not just for sporting guns; there was a thriving domestic industry producing pocket pistols and revolvers, and an extensive import trade in the cheap handguns that today would be called "Saturday Night Specials." Conan Doyle's Dr. Watson, dropping a revolver in his pocket before going out about town, illustrates a real commonplace of that time. Beatrix Potter's journal records a discussion at a small country hotel in Yorkshire, where it turned out that only one of the eight or nine guests was not carrying a revolver.
It might be fair to say that the upper and upper-middle classes typically owned guns, but they accounted for a pretty small proportion of the population. I didn't observe in the article any evidence that the working or lower-middle classes typically owned firearms.
Orwell fought in the Spanish civil war with the republicans against the fascists. In his time there were dictators like Mussolini, Franco, Stalin, Hitler,... so it is easy to understand where the inspiration and fear came from.
To be precise, he fought with the Marxists - not because he chose to, but because his letter of recommendation was from the Independent Labour Party. As a result of that arbitrary quirk of fate, he was denounced as a "confirmed Trotskyist" and had to flee for his life from the Stalinists, who were nominally on the same side. He certainly wasn't a fan of Franco, but it might be appropriate to emphasise Stalin a bit more in your list.
However, your phrasing "fought ... against the fascists" is very appropriate, as that's where he put the emphasis. For the purposes of the wider discussion, though, it's interesting to note his answer to the hypothetical question he might have been posed as to for what he was fighting: "common decency". It's an interesting yardstick against which to measure "what's best for the people": anything which fails the common decency test probably isn't.
Yes, they are. Fair comment and justification, respectively.
That's only ten. And "pressclipping" isn't a word so it doesn't count. Mind you, the court made a similar mistake. Observe the example given in the ruling of an 11-word extract (5 words either side of TDC):
"a forthcoming sale of the telecommunications group TDC which is expected to be bought"
Nothing to do with the "intarweb". They were taking dead-tree newspapers, scanning, OCRing, extracting snippets from the resulting text, and printing them. Actually if this had been entirely electronic the ruling would have been different, because one of the two rulings is that the last step of making a physical print-out is non-transient, and thus one exemption is ruled not to apply.
The other ruling is that an 11 word extract is not automatically incapable of being worthy of copyright protection: (my emphasis)
An act occurring during a data capture process, which consists of storing an extract of a protected work comprising 11 words and printing out that extract, is such as to come within the concept of reproduction in part within the meaning of Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society, if the elements thus reproduced are the expression of the intellectual creation of their author; it is for the national court to make this determination.
This isn't entirely unreasonable, because otherwise haiku authors be rather unprotected.
Finally, to answer your original question of why they don't want this: I think it's because the purpose here isn't to create an index for people in general to use but to create a resource for Infopaq's researchers to then write original content summarising the news.
Digital Fortress is as real as the sequels to The Matrix and the prequels to Star Wars. It has never existed and never will. For your own safety, shut up now.
Does the analogy "Using an armoured car to transport money beween two cardboard boxes in the street" ring any bells? It doesn't matter how secure your connection is if the person at the next table can read your screen.
Nothing is slowed down. Light always goes at the same speed. Guess its name.
Fred? John? Amelia? Wait, how many guesses do I get?
(As an aside, the speed of light depends on the medium through which it's travelling).
Were the energy weapons in Star Wars actually called lasers? That sounds uncharacteristically unimaginative.
It might be interesting to know whether this constitutes a valid contract. In English law, at least, you need "consideration" (both parties benefit), and you have situations whereby someone with a property which is effectively worth negative amounts (e.g. a house which would cost more to repair that it could be sold for once repaired) has to sell for a token amount (usually one pound) because giving it away wouldn't actually transfer ownership. Does having your paper published qualify as consideration?
Speaking as a left-hander who writes in L2R languages, I must say that ball-point pens were a great invention. Nowadays I use roller-ball pens with ink which dries fast enough not to cause me problems, but roller-balls are a development from the ball-point. Three cheers for Mr Biro.
You're assuming that the human appendix is useless, which isn't necessarily the case. There are at least two open suggestions as to its function.
It doesn't matter how cool the name is: once the winner is picked it will be SHA-3, in the same way that Rijndael became AES. In fact, the name Rijndael had slipped my memory and I had to Google it - and I'm interested in crypto.
Besides, the general public might be able to name WEP and WPA as "types of encryption", but to hope for more than that, no matter how cool the name, is optimistic.
While the stuff all the reports are picking up on is certainly not good, the most shocking bit is near the end of the article:
Meanwhile, at Evnova Computers in Barbican the loose memory chip was also spotted and fixed. But the company also told us we needed a new motherboard. We declined the offer and collected our laptop. When we examined it, we discovered technicians had soldered the memory bus pins together to recreate the original fault. Evnova later claimed it believed we were from a rival repair company.
So they catch onto the fact that it's not a genuine customer and they think that a bit of criminal damage is the best thing to do?
Biscuits? No no no: tea and cucumber sandwiches.