Well, you've got another one here. My family spans the changeover - I'm 27 and was taught 100% metric units at school, whereas my older (+10 yrs) sisters had the misfortune of having to learn both. I have no clue about metric units beyond what's needed for those still superficially in use, i.e. miles and pints.
I say superficial because a) there are very few examples left and they're all dying out, and b) UK 'imperial' measurements were all re-defined as multiples of metric units a while ago anyway - for instance a pint is legally defined as 0.568 litres (usually rounded up to 570ml for obvious reasons).
I think the point about things like miles and pints is that the unit is really disconnected from the quantity - even in 100% metric Ireland you still buy a pint of beer. We might still drive miles but and until someone justifies spending x100 odd million to change the road signage - the real barrier I think - it doesn't really matter. The real last vestige of imperial units are stones, pounds and ounces for weight and they'll take care of themselves.
Of course, there are the occurrences where we've long since forgotten what the numbers actually mean - for instance, it always amuses me that you can go to the local builder's merchants and buy 10 metres of 4x2.
AIUI, it's not that the data hasn't been published before - there are well established lists of downloaded tracks in the UK. It's that they're being included in the 'official' charts, i.e. those published by the BPA (our version of the RIAA). So it's actually quite progressive.
I've always thought Apple could steal a march on the labels by turning iTunes into a virtual label itself - get new bands online without central contracts. A way to scare the RIAA into being a little less the bully boy if it takes off, surely? I stand to be corrected as to why that is in fact a bad idea (other than they'd get sued by Apple Records *again*).
Q. When will Firefox be based on XULRunner? A. See the XULRunner roadmap. This is scheduled for Firefox 3 (XULRunner 1.9), in the first quarter of 2007.
While we do have many excellent restaurants, and the old cliches about British food are as out of date as a map of the world with the important bits coloured pink (and mostly have an origin in WWII-era shortages anyway), I think a big problem here is that food is not truly ingrained into popular culture like in, say, France or Italy.
Sure, we can enjoy a good meal out, but as a country we seem to see day-to-day eating more as a chore than anything else - something we have do do, which is a shame, because good food is such a pleasure. You'd think a nation obsessed by TV cookery programmes would do better.
On the one hand, there is hope in the growing slow food and organic movements and the likes of farmers markets re-connecting people with wonderful ingredients and physical suppliers, but then on the other hand we seem to be refusing to teach kids about healthy eating and nutrition in school; the average spend per saturated fat-tastic state school meal was 35p a head until very recently when celebrity chef Jamie Oliver started a campaign for reform. Even now it's not all that much higher; compare to France where food is a religion and the spend is between UKP1.50 and 4.00.
It really isn't, you know. GCHQ is developing an intelligence asset; Silicon Valley is developing something it can sell. The two are hardly competing ideologies.
You're probably thinking of RSA, but what you actually mean is Diffie-Hellman, which is similar but a little earlier. It's the kind of thing that happens when you work for the security services; just think what fundamental mathematical discoveries are right now hushed up in the name of national security. Clue: the American NSA claims to be the largest employer of mathematicians in the world (according to its own web site).
As for 'unfortunately nowadays we seem useless' - I'm never one to credit the state with too much but we mere plebs would hardly be party to the latest research at GCHQ! These things are secret for a reason; I'm reminded of the Falklands war when a careless on-the-record remark from an ex-defence minister (something along the lines of 'when we were in government the argentine navy was an open book to us' - sure the exact quote is in Google) led to the Royal Navy loosing key signals intelligence assets, specifically the ability to track Argentine sub(s), right at the crunch point. The RN then had to spend significant fleet time hunting a sub that may or may not have put to sea. What an idiot that man was.
> One of the worst things Churchil did was not allowing the continuation of this project
Well, he did allow continuation, it's just that it was under ultratight security in a department that would become today's GCHQ (Government Communications HQ - our equivalent of the NSA). The reason for that security is obvious; he wanted Britain to keep the competitive advantage of being able to spy on friends and allies without anyone being aware of that ability. Go and read up on the history of British SIGINT during the post war years if you're interested. There's a fair bit on Wikipedia about GCHQ and it's precedessor, the Government Code and Cipher School (Bletchley Park to you and me).
There are plenty of outdated laws still on the statute books, not quite the same thing as laws which are just nonsensical from their very introduction.
For example, it's supposedly still legal for me, as a resident of the city of York, to shoot a Scotsman within the city walls after dark with a bow-and-arrow from horseback! Of course whether it would stand up in court or not is another thing entirely.
IIRC it was because they tried to cut corners by modifying a nuclear plant originally designed for a sub rather than starting for scratch - makes sense on paper, but sub reactors solve a significantly different set of engineering challenges - as a result they ended up with the worst of both worlds, an overly complex and underpowered carrier barely capable of leaving port for the first few years of its service life.
Political pressures and cost overruns added to the problems, for example the novel propeller design never worked properly and the Charles de Gaulle is now fitted with props from its predecessor, the Foch. To add insult to injury, this actually make the Charles de Gaulle slower than the (conventionally powered) Foch.
This is an interesting background article on the current situation.
Yes. Because the French are perfectly capable of building an effective nuclear powered aircraft carrier. With a long enough flight deck and everything.
> the valve gear came from George Stephenson (the Englishman who also invented the steam engine)
Right country, wrong guy - see Richard Trevithick. Though Stephenson was of course a hugely important engineer - most famously for Rocket (which famously won the Rainhill trials), but don't forget that most railways in the world still use 1435mm Stephenson gauge rails.
No, RTFA; the scramjet on this launch is designed by Qinetiq (stupid bloodly name - pronounced Kinetic; the privatised version of the old British DERA - Defense Evaluation Research Agency). Each Hy launch, managed by the University of Queensland, carries a different design from one of the participating international agencies.
No, 3 is Hutchinson Telecom, who were also the original people behind Rabbit (remember them?) and Orange (which is now France Telecom). Though they use O2 as a fallback network outside of the range of their 3g coverage, it's nothing more than a business relationship with them.
I felt the same as you, so did a little digging. The questions asked are, IMHO, the very definition of 'loaded'. The fact that they defined each term in just a few words is very disingenuous. I wonder how many people questioned had never heard of ID and made a simple value judgement based on the description given?
Participants in the survey were read three statements and asked which best described their view of the origin and development of life.
The statements were:
- the 'evolution theory' says that human kind has developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life. God had no part in this process;
- the 'creationism theory' says that God created human kind pretty much in his/her present form at one time within the last 10,000 years;
- and the 'intelligent design' theory says that certain features of living things are best explained by the intervention of a supernatural being, eg God.
Of those surveyed, 48 per cent said evolution theory most closely describes their view; 22% chose creationism; and 17% chose intelligent design.
Perhaps I'm doing TP a disservice -- I know lots of people will disagree, but I just didn't think CoM was that good. Some great ideas but not nearly as well written as later books. Plus, I think a big problem was that I was familiar with a more evolved version of the characters (Death is a very different character in later books, for instance).
I used to be in your position too - really wanted to get in to Pratchett but was pretty daunted by the sheer weight of his main contribution to literature, the Disc World - it's such a massive series of books. You say you're not sure if he writes series so I'll assume you're not too familiar with DW. If it helps, don't think of it as one simple, linear series; across 30 books, it's grown to be more than that, littered with dozens of different sub plots and characters that pop up incidentally in one book but form key plot points in others. Sometimes there's pure fantasy, sometimes there's lots of sci fi; he's big on allegory and parody. YMMV but in my opinion he's right up there with DNA (and I don't say that lightly - Adams is my all time favourite author).
Eventually I realised that it really doesn't matter where you start - though there is complex interplay of concepts and ideas between each and every book set in the Disc World Universe, each book can pretty much stand by itself and you can build up the full, rich tapestry over time. In fact, I'd say start later on in the series and catch up with the earlier books later on - I think that if I'd started with Colour of Magic, which isn't actually that great, I might not have bothered going on - and that would have been a crying shame.
What's your favourite SFF genre? Pick a story accordingly. For example, if you're into time travel (like me) pick Theif of Time - one of my favourite Disc World stories. Alternatively, you really can't go wrong with any of the Watch novels (Night Watch, Monstrous Regiment).
Outside of DW, well, I quite liked the Gaiman book but horses for courses and all that. These days my main problem is remembering which books I've read when I'm standing in the SFF section at Waterstones!
Slashdot Mirror
Well, you've got another one here. My family spans the changeover - I'm 27 and was taught 100% metric units at school, whereas my older (+10 yrs) sisters had the misfortune of having to learn both. I have no clue about metric units beyond what's needed for those still superficially in use, i.e. miles and pints.
I say superficial because a) there are very few examples left and they're all dying out, and b) UK 'imperial' measurements were all re-defined as multiples of metric units a while ago anyway - for instance a pint is legally defined as 0.568 litres (usually rounded up to 570ml for obvious reasons).
I think the point about things like miles and pints is that the unit is really disconnected from the quantity - even in 100% metric Ireland you still buy a pint of beer. We might still drive miles but and until someone justifies spending x100 odd million to change the road signage - the real barrier I think - it doesn't really matter. The real last vestige of imperial units are stones, pounds and ounces for weight and they'll take care of themselves.
Of course, there are the occurrences where we've long since forgotten what the numbers actually mean - for instance, it always amuses me that you can go to the local builder's merchants and buy 10 metres of 4x2.
AIUI, it's not that the data hasn't been published before - there are well established lists of downloaded tracks in the UK. It's that they're being included in the 'official' charts, i.e. those published by the BPA (our version of the RIAA). So it's actually quite progressive.
I've always thought Apple could steal a march on the labels by turning iTunes into a virtual label itself - get new bands online without central contracts. A way to scare the RIAA into being a little less the bully boy if it takes off, surely? I stand to be corrected as to why that is in fact a bad idea (other than they'd get sued by Apple Records *again*).
From the XULRunner FAQ:
Q. When will Firefox be based on XULRunner?
A. See the XULRunner roadmap. This is scheduled for Firefox 3 (XULRunner 1.9), in the first quarter of 2007.
While we do have many excellent restaurants, and the old cliches about British food are as out of date as a map of the world with the important bits coloured pink (and mostly have an origin in WWII-era shortages anyway), I think a big problem here is that food is not truly ingrained into popular culture like in, say, France or Italy.
Sure, we can enjoy a good meal out, but as a country we seem to see day-to-day eating more as a chore than anything else - something we have do do, which is a shame, because good food is such a pleasure. You'd think a nation obsessed by TV cookery programmes would do better.
On the one hand, there is hope in the growing slow food and organic movements and the likes of farmers markets re-connecting people with wonderful ingredients and physical suppliers, but then on the other hand we seem to be refusing to teach kids about healthy eating and nutrition in school; the average spend per saturated fat-tastic state school meal was 35p a head until very recently when celebrity chef Jamie Oliver started a campaign for reform. Even now it's not all that much higher; compare to France where food is a religion and the spend is between UKP1.50 and 4.00.
Is that the Eye of Thundera I see before me?
But what is the air speed velocity of an unladen swallow?
Or even his Precious Bodily Fluids...
It really isn't, you know. GCHQ is developing an intelligence asset; Silicon Valley is developing something it can sell. The two are hardly competing ideologies.
You're probably thinking of RSA, but what you actually mean is Diffie-Hellman, which is similar but a little earlier. It's the kind of thing that happens when you work for the security services; just think what fundamental mathematical discoveries are right now hushed up in the name of national security. Clue: the American NSA claims to be the largest employer of mathematicians in the world (according to its own web site).
As for 'unfortunately nowadays we seem useless' - I'm never one to credit the state with too much but we mere plebs would hardly be party to the latest research at GCHQ! These things are secret for a reason; I'm reminded of the Falklands war when a careless on-the-record remark from an ex-defence minister (something along the lines of 'when we were in government the argentine navy was an open book to us' - sure the exact quote is in Google) led to the Royal Navy loosing key signals intelligence assets, specifically the ability to track Argentine sub(s), right at the crunch point. The RN then had to spend significant fleet time hunting a sub that may or may not have put to sea. What an idiot that man was.
> One of the worst things Churchil did was not allowing the continuation of this project
Well, he did allow continuation, it's just that it was under ultratight security in a department that would become today's GCHQ (Government Communications HQ - our equivalent of the NSA). The reason for that security is obvious; he wanted Britain to keep the competitive advantage of being able to spy on friends and allies without anyone being aware of that ability. Go and read up on the history of British SIGINT during the post war years if you're interested. There's a fair bit on Wikipedia about GCHQ and it's precedessor, the Government Code and Cipher School (Bletchley Park to you and me).
There are plenty of outdated laws still on the statute books, not quite the same thing as laws which are just nonsensical from their very introduction.
For example, it's supposedly still legal for me, as a resident of the city of York, to shoot a Scotsman within the city walls after dark with a bow-and-arrow from horseback! Of course whether it would stand up in court or not is another thing entirely.
It turned me into a newt!
I got better.
What you need is a tool like this.
Have you tried jEdit?
Or even, a 1,1,2,3 business plan...
IIRC it was because they tried to cut corners by modifying a nuclear plant originally designed for a sub rather than starting for scratch - makes sense on paper, but sub reactors solve a significantly different set of engineering challenges - as a result they ended up with the worst of both worlds, an overly complex and underpowered carrier barely capable of leaving port for the first few years of its service life.
Political pressures and cost overruns added to the problems, for example the novel propeller design never worked properly and the Charles de Gaulle is now fitted with props from its predecessor, the Foch. To add insult to injury, this actually make the Charles de Gaulle slower than the (conventionally powered) Foch.
This is an interesting background article on the current situation.
Yes. Because the French are perfectly capable of building an effective nuclear powered aircraft carrier. With a long enough flight deck and everything.
</sarcasm>
> the valve gear came from George Stephenson (the Englishman who also invented the steam engine)
Right country, wrong guy - see Richard Trevithick. Though Stephenson was of course a hugely important engineer - most famously for Rocket (which famously won the Rainhill trials), but don't forget that most railways in the world still use 1435mm Stephenson gauge rails.
No, RTFA; the scramjet on this launch is designed by Qinetiq (stupid bloodly name - pronounced Kinetic; the privatised version of the old British DERA - Defense Evaluation Research Agency). Each Hy launch, managed by the University of Queensland, carries a different design from one of the participating international agencies.
If anyone was ever holding their breath for Vista, they asphyxiated a long time ago...
No, 3 is Hutchinson Telecom, who were also the original people behind Rabbit (remember them?) and Orange (which is now France Telecom). Though they use O2 as a fallback network outside of the range of their 3g coverage, it's nothing more than a business relationship with them.
You could present the options in such a way to make Intelligent Design sound like an attractive middle ground.
o ries/2006/01_january/26/horizon.shtml
That is *exactly* what happened. I've already posted but see this link for some loaded questions:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/st
I felt the same as you, so did a little digging. The questions asked are, IMHO, the very definition of 'loaded'. The fact that they defined each term in just a few words is very disingenuous. I wonder how many people questioned had never heard of ID and made a simple value judgement based on the description given?
o ries/2006/01_january/26/horizon.shtml
From http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/st
Participants in the survey were read three statements and asked which best described their view of the origin and development of life.
The statements were:
- the 'evolution theory' says that human kind has developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life. God had no part in this process;
- the 'creationism theory' says that God created human kind pretty much in his/her present form at one time within the last 10,000 years;
- and the 'intelligent design' theory says that certain features of living things are best explained by the intervention of a supernatural being, eg God.
Of those surveyed, 48 per cent said evolution theory most closely describes their view; 22% chose creationism; and 17% chose intelligent design.
Might be worth something one day ;)
Perhaps I'm doing TP a disservice -- I know lots of people will disagree, but I just didn't think CoM was that good. Some great ideas but not nearly as well written as later books. Plus, I think a big problem was that I was familiar with a more evolved version of the characters (Death is a very different character in later books, for instance).
I used to be in your position too - really wanted to get in to Pratchett but was pretty daunted by the sheer weight of his main contribution to literature, the Disc World - it's such a massive series of books. You say you're not sure if he writes series so I'll assume you're not too familiar with DW. If it helps, don't think of it as one simple, linear series; across 30 books, it's grown to be more than that, littered with dozens of different sub plots and characters that pop up incidentally in one book but form key plot points in others. Sometimes there's pure fantasy, sometimes there's lots of sci fi; he's big on allegory and parody. YMMV but in my opinion he's right up there with DNA (and I don't say that lightly - Adams is my all time favourite author).
Eventually I realised that it really doesn't matter where you start - though there is complex interplay of concepts and ideas between each and every book set in the Disc World Universe, each book can pretty much stand by itself and you can build up the full, rich tapestry over time. In fact, I'd say start later on in the series and catch up with the earlier books later on - I think that if I'd started with Colour of Magic, which isn't actually that great, I might not have bothered going on - and that would have been a crying shame.
What's your favourite SFF genre? Pick a story accordingly. For example, if you're into time travel (like me) pick Theif of Time - one of my favourite Disc World stories. Alternatively, you really can't go wrong with any of the Watch novels (Night Watch, Monstrous Regiment).
Outside of DW, well, I quite liked the Gaiman book but horses for courses and all that. These days my main problem is remembering which books I've read when I'm standing in the SFF section at Waterstones!