It's Green too!
Being made mostly from wood and canvas, the stringbag would be biodegradable and have a much smaller carbon footprint than any jet equivalent.
188 posts • joined 18 Oct 2007
Being made mostly from wood and canvas, the stringbag would be biodegradable and have a much smaller carbon footprint than any jet equivalent.
Even if they were able to get 100 KWh from every footstep, they'd only get about enough power to run a small bedside lamp.
It's a firework display. Go to somewhere near where it is. Look up.
The martians are building a wall...
So the BBC are looking to replace three presenters on a much-loved show. One older one and two younger ones. The show's mostly about larking about and innuendo between the presenters, rather than being a serious treatment of the subject of the show.
Mary Berry, Mel and Sue will soon be available...
"However, not all approved coatings are necessarily listed in WARPAINT as paint manufacturers’ are constantly striving to improve their current paint systems"
Paint manufacturers' ?
That petanque ball had rounded corners
There's a marvellous new invention I've heard of called a "pocket." Maybe you could get into the habit of keeping a bag in one?
Paper bags - surprisingly - have a worse environmental impact than plastic: they take more energy, and cause more pollution, to make; and they don't actually biodegrade much faster than plastic. Source: http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/paper-plastic1.htm
That's why it's best to have plastic bags which you re-use.
"Puzzlingly, according to the report, 69.5 per cent of respondents said they had never eaten dog meat – which leaves a chunky majority who either have or are simply unsure."
Do Tesco operate in China, by any chance?
When sorrows come, they come not single spies
But in battalions.
Hamlet Act 4, Scene 5
Not much has changed since 1602.
> Difficulties with Prince aside, there’s little doubt that agile is going to be the way forward.
Speaking as one of those 50+ dinosaurs (though I've not touched COBOL for twenty years), I can tell you that agile will be identified as "the way forward" for couple of years, and then be replaced by some other half-arsed methodology invented by MBA-toting idiots and imposed by people who don't really understand it on the poor sods who actually have to do the work.
The fact is that there's no magic universal approach that works in all situations, you have to blend different approaches to suit your own particular case. Sometimes that might be pure waterfall, somtimes agile, most of the time somewhere in the middle.
Accoding to Polydore Vergil
[Edward III] appoynted his souldiers to wear white Coats or Jackets, with a red Crosse before and behind over their Armoure, that it was not onely a comely, but a stately sight to behold the English Battles, like the rising Sunne, to glitter farre off in that pure hew; when the souldiers of other nations in their baser weedes would not be discerned.
So the whole St George cross thing has nothing to do with crusaders (kicking the crap out of the muslims, and then having the crap kicked out of them a few decades later), and more to do with the 100 years war (kicking the crap out of the French, and then having the crap kicked out of them a few decades later).
"Strutter: ‘Kind of obvious you weren't coming out front. Not even with that clever disguise you're wearing.’
Strutter: ‘White face in Harlem, good thinking Bond!’
-- Live and Let Die
"I know of no state where you could legally be shot for doing this"
That depends on whether or not he's black.
"Taking millions of dollars of money that's not yours, systematically over a long period of time, because someone else has obviously screwed up, knowing that you'll never be able to pay it back is another matter entirely"
Bad news for the Greek Government then...
Never mind Gucci, is there an Apple handbag? A lot of them seem to have rounded corners.
HM has already seen off the hostile attentions of the Luftwaffe, so I doubt that a few drones bother her much.
"Good sense may prevail in the Land of the Free"
Artist formally known as Czech Republic
I Can't Believe it's not Bohemia
If they're so keen to come up with a name that isn't offensive, maybe it shouldn't begin with a TLA that'll be pronounced "Arse"?
RRS Kicker anyone?
Looks like a load of bollox to me!
"Statistically just one airplane will be damaged every 1.87 million years, says study"
No it doesn't, it says that one will be damaged for every 1.87 million years of drone flight time. Since there are (apparently) a million drones in the US, let's suppose they are actually airborne for a couple of hours a week on average - about 1% of the year - you're looking at a collision every 187 years or so. Still a pretty low risk, but not the one-in-two-million shot that you suggest.
"Google can provide their own maps (and other embellishments), but they need to provide the means so that if I want to use Bing, Streetmap, Apple etc. for my geographic search results I can."
You can now. By *going* to Bing, Streetmap, Apple etc. Nobody's stopping you, least of all Google.
I'm searching for a physical location - a local coffee shop - on Google.
Google provide me with their address (physical and/or website) but also - evilly - the put up a map with the location of the place highlighted. And no ordinary map, but one which they built and funded themselves (the bastards). That might appear pretty useful to me, the seeker of coffee shops, but actually it isn't because... reasons.
So, if they see the light, what should Google be doing instead? Not including a map, but putting in a link to Streetmap instead? That doesn't sound very competitive-market-friendly. How about a huge block of links, in random order, to all possible providers of maps in that part of the world? It would be no use to Google's users, but it would keep their competitors happy.
I have no doubt that Google do all manner of unspeakable things, and I'm glad people are calling them out on them, but it's not enough to say "this is wrong", you have to add "this would be better". And it has to actually *be* better too.
Google shouldn't be allowed to give away maps for free, because they are only doing so to attract people to their site to click on adverts. This is unfair competition with Streetmap who... wait for it... give away maps for free, to attract people to their site to click on adverts.
""We’ve spent a lot of time listening to what people using Google+ had to say."
Wait... there are people actually *using* Googlle+ ?!?
That sounds like the Ann Elk (Miss) Theory of Republic Strength.
"Some of us think he's doing a better job than Trump could."
To be fair, a potato would do a better job than Trump could.
I've always assumed that my ISP has a complete record of every page I visit
Really? Why would you assume that? Could you be falling for the line that "internet connection records" are just the modern equivalent of phone bills?
The phone company have always had to keep records of who we called, and when, and for how long - because that's (usually) the basis of how they bill us. Those records have also proved pretty useful to Mr Plod over the years, so there are well established mechanisms of gaining access to them.
Your ISP has no particular reason to care which pages you visit. They probably keep some record of your bandwidth usage, but browsing history or "connection records" are of no relevance to them - you pay the same whatever sites you visit. Indeed - it seems to me - that creation and retention of such records would be in breach of the Data Protection Act as being excessive.
Plenty more like this, just take a look at @_FloridaMan
Sports Personality of the Year
Which one is Mary Berry flying?
Looking through that Independent article, there seem to be quite a mixed bag of scams going on.
At least some of them appeared to be of the form "victim approached by somebody claiming to be from Wikipedia, paid them to get an article added/edited, and didn't get what they paid for." It's hard to see what Wikipedia could do about that scam, unless Andrew's suggesting that they be granted the right to vet every email sent in the world to check it doesn't make such false claims.
Wikipedia is big, it's high profile, and it's going to attract a lot of scumbags trying to make money off it. I don't see how changing the anonymity rules is going to change that. Any "wedding photographer in Dorset" who knows enough about wikipedia to identify an editor from their putative non-anonymous id should know enough to know that a page about a wedding photographer in Dorset is likely to be rejected for lack of notability - it's an encyclopedia, not the yellow pages.
PS. Since we're in the territory of "oh noes! wikipedia publishes untrue and unproven things about people," how about a credible source for "one Wikipedian who reported another Wikipedian to the police for serious sexual charges found herself vilified by members of the community”? I'm not saying it isn't true but, well, .
Most of the people searching this database will be schoolkids checking out their peers' parents.
School bullies clearly have a significantly greater work ethic these days (not to mention a much improved grasp of technology). In my day they just singled out a kid with the wrong hair colour/physique/aptitude for sport/accent/whatever else they chose to pick on, instead of trawling through a 9.6GB database to find potential victims.
Don't you "simply ignore or delete" spam that comes to you? Mail that purports to come from some dubious dating site that you never signed up for sounds pretty spammy to me. I certainly wouldn't have done anything more with it if it had come to me.
Quote from original article:
"The new Apple encryption would not have prevented the N.S.A.’s mass collection of phone-call data or the interception of telecommunications, as revealed by Mr. Snowden. There is no evidence that it would address institutional data breaches or the use of malware."
So what are you complaining about, Mr Vance et al? If encryption doesn't stop the NSA snooping on our data, it won't stop law enforcement bodies doing so either. Sounds like phones aren't encrypted *enough*!
That's the story in El Mundo, what does El Sol have to say?
What law do ICANN think Vox Populi are breaking? From what I can see, they're just charging a vastly inflated price for the goods they are selling (in order to recoup the large sum demanded by ICANN in the first place, one might add).
If that's against the law, then there are other companies that should be a long way ahead of them in the queue to the courthouse. Starting with one from Cupertino.
...followed by carving a few bullet points on a big block of stone and, oh, hang on...
"Apple has a clumsy workaround in iOS 8 for its giant iPhone 6 Plus that allows you to pull top of the display nearer your thumbs."
The "clumsy workaround" being that you can bend it in two.
> One copper told me years ago the reason they had not implemented a computerized system was because paper is tangible - it's simply harder to lose a piece of paper
His experience of the losability of pieces of paper is different to mine.
Even if you agree that paper is harder to lose, it's also harder to find. If you're trying to find out about a particular firearm, it's not a lot of use to know that the information you seek is on an unlosable piece of paper in one of 50 filing cabinets spread across the country.
We seem to have learned to store quite a lot of important information on these new-fangled computers over the last half-century, without the needing the backup of "paper forms." Why should firearms licences be any different?
Your mummy was right about that one!
"You look like you're attempting to dispose of a body..."
I'll apologise to Mr Asshat when you've finished apologising to the whole population for describing them as the "unwashed masses."
And I'd be happy to call him a wanker to his face, were he not skulking in an embassy at considerable expense to the taxpayers of the UK and of Ecuador. Maybe, when he gets out, he could get a gig presenting this show:
Try sitting on a committee, constantly disagreeing with points that everybody else agrees with, and threatening that soon you might leave altogether. See how much notice anybody takes of your views.
Christians shouldn't be playing the Wizard character anyway:
Regard not them that have familiar spirits, neither seek after wizards - Leviticus 19:31
So the pentagram acts as a handy reminder.
Unless it's just a game, of course
Oh, they do now. But, unless my memory is playing tricks, their original scheme was to nick the data and they were pushed to change when various site's owners made exactly the point I'm making.
To be fair, Döpfner wasn't any better on the other side of the argument. At one point he suggested that sites should be ordered on the basis of "traffic". Even setting aside the point that search engines don't actually know how much traffic a given site has, it's a colossally bad idea.
Since Google must have a colossal amount of traffic, such a change would probably cement their place at the top of the rankings forever. And woe betide any new entrant to any market - no traffic no ranking, and no ranking no traffic.
I don't think Google is perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but until its critics pony up with:
a) Actual search terms that they find unsatisfactory
b) A set of search results that they think preferable, with the reasons why
c) Some coherent suggestions as to how such results might be achieved
I'm not going to pay them much heed.
Apparently, according to most of the people on here, environment scientists are corrupt - willing to falsify their results, interpret them in bizarre ways, and god knows what else in return for large sums of money.
The Oil industry has truly colossal amounts of money, way more than any possible green conspiracy could muster.
Why does the Climate Change message make any headway at all, when the oil guys could simply buy up all the scientists?
Also, in my experience, it's very much easier to get heard (and to get funded) when you're telling people what they want to hear. So the message "Climate change isn't happening ... or if it is happening, it isn't our fault ... or if it is our fault, there's nothing we can do about it" should be easier to deliver than its opposite. That being the case, it's odd that the opposite side is in the ascendency.
Unless, of course, it's because that's the way the vast majority of the evidence points...
Doesn't this rather miss the point?
If you've been training with and using ball X over a long period to hone your skills, it's clearly going to affect your performance if you have to start using ball Y for a particular tournament - even if its performance is objectively better.
Why can't FIFA establish a solid, detailed specification for footballs that is applied and stuck to world-wide over a long period, rather than coming up with a new "improved" ball every four years? It's almost as if the people in charge were quietly being paid wads of cash by sports equipment manufacturers to improve their sales figures.
Oh, hang on...