I love it too, though sometimes I feel like the ads shouldn't be totally blocked (I won't say it's "conscience" because what many advertisers do is unconscionable).
I know how you feel, I've solved that moral problem by white listing sites that I find valuable enough to visit regularly. If they have non-annoying ads I leave them on my white list, but if they have some god-awful flash monstrosity or other eye sore they go straight back onto my ad black-list.
Yes, there are examples when people speak the same language but belong to different cultures. However people who speak different languages always belong to different cultures. You picked up an excellent example yourself - North and South of Belgium...
OTOH there are people who speak Welsh and Scots Galic that belong to the same culture as their English speaking neighbours...
And why do we have to completely redesign the way games are played because people are too tight assed to pay for your entertainment?
Not that I advocate this solution, but we could do it the way they did in "olden times" where a rich benefactor commissioned a painting\poem\other artistic work and was then free to do what he wanted with the finished product. In modern times that would probably translate to a group of people getting together and hiring programmers to code a game for them; if they've paid for it, why shouldn't they be able to give it away?/devils advocate
It was the fact that you wrote a whole paragraph justifying yourself (and why having children is a valid argument) after the bit I quoted that made me think you were serious; sometimes you can be too subtle.;p
If you look at a dictionary definition of "harassment", you will see it means to trouble or torment a person persistently or repeatedly. Since this was a once-off incident, it does not qualify as harassment; at least not under the law in England
Wrong. If I make a sexist joke (for example) it can qualify as sexual harassment if someone complains, even if it's the first time I've done such a thing. Check the "dignity at work" or similarly named policy in your workplace; I suggest it contains similar employee protections. The reason for this is to protect your employer from industrial tribunal. So if the offended person decides to sue they would have to sue the individual rather than the employer. IANAL and I'm just going from memory; I don't know how case law has gone on this issue.
Amazingly enough so is gun crime in the United States but you never hear the advocates of gun control acknowledge that. You are more likely to have a heart attack in the United States than you are to be shot -- deliberately or accidentally. Clearly we need fast food control;)
That doesn't surprise me one little bit, personally I think that UK gun laws are way too strict, and am in favour of liberalising them somewhat* as they seem to be ineffective, and that just about any criminal who wants a gun can get one anyway.
*I don't go as far as some of you guys in the states with my ideas, I just think that we should move back to a controlled licensing system, with mandatory training and testing with specialist trainers at a gun club before you get a licence.
Actually something like speeding that has no direct victim shouldn't be illegal in the first place.
The reason speeding is a crime is that the faster you are going the more likely you are to kill someone when you hit them. It also takes longer to stop when you see that person crossing the road at the bottom of the hill, so you're both more likely to both hit someone and kill them by going faster. Speed does kill, if you hit someone at 20 they'll probably live, if you hit them at 40, they get 4 times the force (due to physics, remember ke = 1\2MV ^2) and will probably die.
I agree with some of what you say, but we have to blame our own UK politicians for many of the problems they blame on the EU, EU directives tend to be gold plated by Westminster. Especially the ones that the French just ignore... On that note, the real reason we stay in the EU is best explained by Sir Humphry
Ah, good catch, I had indeed forgotten the history of the ECHR. So in that case, is there anything really worthwhile in practice that's come out of the EU legislative process as far as the UK is concerned?
Personally I like the EU working time directive. Also the charter of fundamental rights has some good stuff in it, but the UK government has an opt-out of that. I also support the free movement of goods & labour brought about by the EU. As to other EU directives, I can't think of any off-hand, but good laws seldom come to public attention anyway, and when they do, do you think that UK politicians would give credit to Brussels, or take it themselves?
About the only really worthwhile thing we have had out of the EU in legislative terms is the ECHR via the Human Rights Act, and even that has frequently been a screw-up in practice even if the intent behind it might have been good.
The ECHR is under the auspices of the council of Europe, an older body that's nothing to do with the EU. Secondly you realise that the ECHR was almost entirely written by British lawyers on behalf of Chirchill anyway; we gave it to Europe, not the other way around.
So what your saying is that only English votes should count towards who governs the UK? Lets just ignore Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. What do they know, eh?
No, the problem is that Scottish (and Welsh) MPs are able to vote on things that won't affect their constituents due to the devolved parliament and assemblies. In other words the Labour party is able to impose things on England by using Scottish and Welsh MPs but these things never get imposed on the Scots or Welsh. I'm sure you've heard of the West Lothian question
as seems to be the case over in the states judging by previous/. posts complaining about unions
Most states aren't "union shop" states where the union can force everyone to join or quit. Several states don't even let unions take your money if you're not a member (some states let the unions take a "negotiation fee" from non-members).
Here in the UK the unions have no rights at all over people who are non-members. The Unions in the UK were emasculated by Margret Thatcher, ironically I think that they are better organisations for it.
I would (obviously) do whatever it takes to make sure that prospective employees are not and never have been union-affiliated.
Then you would be acting unlawfully, here in the UK you have a right to be represented by a Union, not employing someone because of union related activities would be illegal in itself. Similarly, you can't refuse to employ someone if they refuse union membership (as seems to be the case over in the states judging by previous/. posts complaining about unions)
Which part of India are you in? I was born and brought up here in the UK, but my family is of Punjabi origin; what you're describing doesn't fit with the stories of corruption and nepotism in Indian politics that I've heard. If it's true that India has really started to get rid of it's corruption problems that's great news, and I'll probably retire there in 30 years or so.
Yep, there's an 'old' Jersey as well. You Americans weren't very imaginative in coming up with names, a lot of American cities also have counterparts here in the old world.
I don't have an account myself, bu a lot of people rave about Steam, and I have to say that I can see why people like it. Unlike most DRM, it actually helps people play games they've bought.
Yet they stil managed to block Wikipedia. Fail much?
Actually, they only blocked the wikipedia page for "Virgin killer" furthermore, IIRC they failed to block the image server that the picture was on (not realising that wikipedai hosts images separately), so all that was actually blocked was the text of the Virgin killer article.
from reading at wikipedia (so must be true!) the block happens at the routing level, so simply using a different DNS server like open dns doesn't help.
* Enable https (you can't filter on secure traffic because it is encrypted browser to server and any hops in between cannot see the content.).
* Enable dynamic URLs or Round robin DNS - the user doesn't know any different but he URL won't match the list so won't be blocked.
* Peer to peer type applications - can't block those and the IWF list cannot block any site offering such a program for download as it would breach their mandate.
* Use a port other than 80 - the IWF list doesn't include traffic on any other port and the filtering solutions don't check other ports either.
* Use a proxy server in another country
Slashdot Mirror
People have been saying that for hundreds of years
I love it too, though sometimes I feel like the ads shouldn't be totally blocked (I won't say it's "conscience" because what many advertisers do is unconscionable).
I know how you feel, I've solved that moral problem by white listing sites that I find valuable enough to visit regularly. If they have non-annoying ads I leave them on my white list, but if they have some god-awful flash monstrosity or other eye sore they go straight back onto my ad black-list.
Yes, there are examples when people speak the same language but belong to different cultures. However people who speak different languages always belong to different cultures. You picked up an excellent example yourself - North and South of Belgium...
OTOH there are people who speak Welsh and Scots Galic that belong to the same culture as their English speaking neighbours...
how do video games work as a service industry?
And why do we have to completely redesign the way games are played because people are too tight assed to pay for your entertainment?
Not that I advocate this solution, but we could do it the way they did in "olden times" where a rich benefactor commissioned a painting\poem\other artistic work and was then free to do what he wanted with the finished product. In modern times that would probably translate to a group of people getting together and hiring programmers to code a game for them; if they've paid for it, why shouldn't they be able to give it away? /devils advocate
"Stop it. Please. April Fools is pants."
Gotta ask...what the hell does that mean? Something is 'pants'?? Never heard that one before.
It's a colloquialism in British English that's used as a rough synonym for bollocks\crap\rubbish\arse.
Pants in British English are underwear instead of trousers, hence the negative connotations.
It was the fact that you wrote a whole paragraph justifying yourself (and why having children is a valid argument) after the bit I quoted that made me think you were serious; sometimes you can be too subtle. ;p
iv) Come back in a few years and re-read your comment after you've had children.
I think you just proved his point. "I have children therefore I'm right" is not a valid argument.
If you look at a dictionary definition of "harassment", you will see it means to trouble or torment a person persistently or repeatedly. Since this was a once-off incident, it does not qualify as harassment; at least not under the law in England
Wrong. If I make a sexist joke (for example) it can qualify as sexual harassment if someone complains, even if it's the first time I've done such a thing. Check the "dignity at work" or similarly named policy in your workplace; I suggest it contains similar employee protections. The reason for this is to protect your employer from industrial tribunal. So if the offended person decides to sue they would have to sue the individual rather than the employer. IANAL and I'm just going from memory; I don't know how case law has gone on this issue.
Amazingly enough so is gun crime in the United States but you never hear the advocates of gun control acknowledge that. You are more likely to have a heart attack in the United States than you are to be shot -- deliberately or accidentally. Clearly we need fast food control ;)
That doesn't surprise me one little bit, personally I think that UK gun laws are way too strict, and am in favour of liberalising them somewhat* as they seem to be ineffective, and that just about any criminal who wants a gun can get one anyway.
*I don't go as far as some of you guys in the states with my ideas, I just think that we should move back to a controlled licensing system, with mandatory training and testing with specialist trainers at a gun club before you get a licence.
Knife. Crime.
Is blown way out of proportion by the UK media.
Actually something like speeding that has no direct victim shouldn't be illegal in the first place.
The reason speeding is a crime is that the faster you are going the more likely you are to kill someone when you hit them. It also takes longer to stop when you see that person crossing the road at the bottom of the hill, so you're both more likely to both hit someone and kill them by going faster. Speed does kill, if you hit someone at 20 they'll probably live, if you hit them at 40, they get 4 times the force (due to physics, remember ke = 1\2MV ^2) and will probably die.
I agree with some of what you say, but we have to blame our own UK politicians for many of the problems they blame on the EU, EU directives tend to be gold plated by Westminster. Especially the ones that the French just ignore... On that note, the real reason we stay in the EU is best explained by Sir Humphry
Ah, good catch, I had indeed forgotten the history of the ECHR. So in that case, is there anything really worthwhile in practice that's come out of the EU legislative process as far as the UK is concerned?
Personally I like the EU working time directive. Also the charter of fundamental rights has some good stuff in it, but the UK government has an opt-out of that. I also support the free movement of goods & labour brought about by the EU. As to other EU directives, I can't think of any off-hand, but good laws seldom come to public attention anyway, and when they do, do you think that UK politicians would give credit to Brussels, or take it themselves?
Precisely. Keep your money, make your own laws, don't invade the continent,
There's a very good reason that we stay in the EU; so we don't have to invade. Divide and rule has been British European policy for centuries...
About the only really worthwhile thing we have had out of the EU in legislative terms is the ECHR via the Human Rights Act, and even that has frequently been a screw-up in practice even if the intent behind it might have been good.
The ECHR is under the auspices of the council of Europe, an older body that's nothing to do with the EU. Secondly you realise that the ECHR was almost entirely written by British lawyers on behalf of Chirchill anyway; we gave it to Europe, not the other way around.
So what your saying is that only English votes should count towards who governs the UK? Lets just ignore Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. What do they know, eh?
No, the problem is that Scottish (and Welsh) MPs are able to vote on things that won't affect their constituents due to the devolved parliament and assemblies. In other words the Labour party is able to impose things on England by using Scottish and Welsh MPs but these things never get imposed on the Scots or Welsh. I'm sure you've heard of the West Lothian question
as seems to be the case over in the states judging by previous /. posts complaining about unions
Most states aren't "union shop" states where the union can force everyone to join or quit. Several states don't even let unions take your money if you're not a member (some states let the unions take a "negotiation fee" from non-members).
Here in the UK the unions have no rights at all over people who are non-members. The Unions in the UK were emasculated by Margret Thatcher, ironically I think that they are better organisations for it.
the entire premise is that people have to unite against the aliens in order to not blow themselves apart.
That still happens, it's just not aliens that they unite against; personally I think that the movie ending works better than the one in the book.
I would (obviously) do whatever it takes to make sure that prospective employees are not and never have been union-affiliated.
Then you would be acting unlawfully, here in the UK you have a right to be represented by a Union, not employing someone because of union related activities would be illegal in itself. Similarly, you can't refuse to employ someone if they refuse union membership (as seems to be the case over in the states judging by previous /. posts complaining about unions)
Which part of India are you in? I was born and brought up here in the UK, but my family is of Punjabi origin; what you're describing doesn't fit with the stories of corruption and nepotism in Indian politics that I've heard. If it's true that India has really started to get rid of it's corruption problems that's great news, and I'll probably retire there in 30 years or so.
(not sure about Jersey).
Yep, there's an 'old' Jersey as well. You Americans weren't very imaginative in coming up with names, a lot of American cities also have counterparts here in the old world.
I've yet to see a working DRM system.
I don't have an account myself, bu a lot of people rave about Steam, and I have to say that I can see why people like it. Unlike most DRM, it actually helps people play games they've bought.
Yet they stil managed to block Wikipedia. Fail much?
Actually, they only blocked the wikipedia page for "Virgin killer" furthermore, IIRC they failed to block the image server that the picture was on (not realising that wikipedai hosts images separately), so all that was actually blocked was the text of the Virgin killer article.
From what I've heard they block by URL in order to avoid blocking innocent sites that are on shared servers that may share an IP.
please share - how can we avoid this block?
from reading at wikipedia (so must be true!) the block happens at the routing level, so simply using a different DNS server like open dns doesn't help.
From the comments here:
* Enable https (you can't filter on secure traffic because it is encrypted browser to server and any hops in between cannot see the content.).
* Enable dynamic URLs or Round robin DNS - the user doesn't know any different but he URL won't match the list so won't be blocked.
* Peer to peer type applications - can't block those and the IWF list cannot block any site offering such a program for download as it would breach their mandate.
* Use a port other than 80 - the IWF list doesn't include traffic on any other port and the filtering solutions don't check other ports either.
* Use a proxy server in another country