1387 posts • joined Monday 5th March 2007 21:42 GMT
David Icke wrote the bible?
Oh but to be serious, the bible isn't a metaphor. It contains a great deal of metaphor (neatly buggering up the still annoyingly popular "metaphor was only invented in the last 400 years" belief that I keep seeing EVERYWHERE), but it isn't one in total. It's a collection of sociological and historical documents charting the evolution of a set of religious beliefs over approximately 3000 years. Once understood in a correct historical context - and when parts are understood within the context of other parts - it becomes much less obtuse and much more readable.
Well, not readable... but at least understandable. Frankly, the sheer number of misconceptions people have about scripture still stagger me. I' often staggered by how much of it I completely misread.
And now back to Arkham City. Batman keeps dying for my sins, poor chap.
"And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd."
And if you think "made in God's image" means "looks like a monkey" you're really not thinking very hard. This may be remarkably demonstrative.
Of course they aren't. Diet drinks contain nasty chemicals that are known to the state of california to cause cancer and brain disease and all sorts of other nasty things, including hydroxilic acid and oxidane, not to mnetion carbonic acid. They release dangerous amounts of CO2 as well - a typical can contains CO2 at levels that would suffocate an adult male in minutes if they were in a room with the same percentage of the stuff in the air.
Besides, you really think they'd let a little thing like a drink not containing the thing they're taxing prevent them from taxing it?
The ship is in orbit. It doesn't turn as it orbits in order to maintain the position of the panels. If it had been the right way around it would have had those panels facing towards the sun. As it stands, they're facing away from the sun and, since the ship doesn't turn, they aren't going to face the sun. Ever.
Yet anther etc, piracy on the high seas doesn't *have* any jurisdictional issues. If a suitably capable vessel comes across another vessel being seized on the high eas they're entirely within their rights to act to prevent it, no matter where either vessel is flagged and then dispose of the malefactors however they wish. The reason te navy are releasing captures pirates isn't jurisdictional but legal; if they are brought back to the UK for trial they'll be able to claim all sorts of rights under the human rights act and get away with their piracy essentially scot-free so, because of that, there's no benefit in bringing them to trial and they may as well just be released.
That said, you're right, there's no link between physical piracy and copyng music.
That won't last forever. When the inevitable split with the lib dems happens, Cameron won't have Clegg to stand on.
"making an iPad app for David Camerons."
CameronS? One is more than enough, thanks.
Given the conspiracists propensity to see any nearly-straight-edged object as CONCLUSIVE PROOF OF ALIENS (see, for example, the "5 sided pyramid" on Mars that looks almost symmetrical until you actually pay attention) and a constant drone of "it's a city!" every time someone spots a jpeg artefact on a picture, I'm not sure this is going to produce anything particularly useful.
I initially misread that as astronaut and was about to ask a silly question...
Easy to say. They get most of their funding from international sales of their intellectual property, EU grants and other such funding channels. The license only counts for a very small part of the BBC's income these days. They could survive without it, they're just addicted to the free cash.
Well, it's better than being called a paid shill I suppose.
What part of "I don't watch tv" don't you understand? Top be frank I wouldn't watch anything from sky, either; it's all shite too now. My point, which you spectacularly failed to understand, was that the BBC is funded by people who don't want to watch or pay for it's output but may want to watch other channels, but who don't have any choice in the matter. Its funding is gathered by a set of odficious thugs who use the power of the state as a ckub to extact money from people who can't afford it. It regularly brings prosecutions against people who watch teelvision but never watch the BBC.
explain how that is in any way just.
There's a project to get Ubuntu (and presumably any other debian distro) on the TF101 that's been very successful. I think there might be some driver issues. Go look on the XDA forum for more info.
@Robert Carnegie, really you're demonstrating my point (and I know MS tried it, that's why I mentioned them in the first place). There are some differences of course: a phone with data capabilities is an essential piece of equipment, even when you're a sparky, whilst watching TV is a luxury and largely pointless but, in both cases, the injustice of one party using the power of the state to extort money from others to pay for a service those others don't desire is the same. In that sense the BBC is marginally better inasmuch as they do at least provide a service of some sort, but I'll be damned if I'm going to pay so someone else can watch television.
My phone, however, is a Sony Ericsson. Unless I'm mistaken, Sony-Ericsson has no licensing deal with MS so for now I'm in the clear.
Except for the whole "it's made by Sony" thing, which is another issue...
And, for the record, there are far better things to do in a pub that watch TV. They only show football anyway.
The thing about the BBC is, if you refuse to pay the license fee, you get fined and potentially sent to prison. If you refuse to pay the SKY fee they... cancel your service. That's it. You have a choice with SKY and other subscriber-based services but you have no choice at all with the BBC. If you watch TV, you pay for their output whether you like it or not, whether you watch it or not. I don't watch it, but if I were to choose to watch just the toss on ITV (which apparently not many people do these days given their collapsing viewing figures) I'd still have to pay for the BBC. I object to the BBC on that principle alone: they provide output I don't want or need and use threat of force to extract the funds to pay for it. I don't care how "efficient" they are, how much "value for money" they provide, they have no right to that money because I don't *want* to watch the BBC and I don't want to pay what is actually a significant amount of money when you're on a low income for a service I don't use, just so some middle class twat can feel smug about the "quality" of the BBC's output.
As a consequence I don't pay a license fee on principle. It means I can't watch television but, to be honest, it's not much of a loss.
But think about that... if I don't want to pay for the BBC, I can't watch live television without breaking the law. How is that in any way moral, ethical or fair? If it were Microsoft in the same position with computers you'd all be screaming moral outrage but, because it's Auntie and the goggle-box, suddenly it's perfectly okay to extort money from single mothers and the working poor to pay for a bunch of never-had-a-real-job trust-fund babies to prance around on TV and pretend they're worth listening to.
It wouldn't surprise me if they argue that the popularity of Transformers-themed mods for the TF101 is proof that Asus are passing off. There have been crazier arguments.
On the face of it, there's no case to answer. Transformer and Prime are both generic terms that have a multitude of uses similar to but distinct from Optimus Prime the Transformer. Manufacturers of electrical transformers aren't being sued by Hasbro (not even when those transformers are manufactured by Prime Electric Ltd), and nobody raises an eyebrow when someone uses a Mellin transform to prove a Prime.
Now for the mandatory Apple conspiracy: Obviously Ha$bro are deep in the pocket of Apple and Steve Jobs is personally directing their actions from beyond the grave. It's likely their entire management team now has brand new iPads and iPods whilst the legal team are being paid secret billions by Apple's marketing department. BILLIONS I TELL YOU!
No, that's what the BBC is for. Sky has to actually work and sell itself for the money, whilst Auntie just has to sit on her bloated arse and have it handed over for nothing.
Blair never said he got an answer. I doubt he would have heard one over the sound of his own ego anyway.
Yes, I think I'd rather pull the gun. It creates enough time to mediate a more peaceful solution.
So let me get this straight... they have record unemployment, thousands of people literally hanging around in parks crying for jobs* that apparently just aren't there, and their solution is to... bring in EVEN MORE people? Am I the only one that sees the fundamental problem with this plan?
Reality time: a bunch of corporations and politicians see advantage in importing cheap labour: the former because they can pay them a pittance, the latter because they can turn them into a fairly reliable voting block to stay in power.
Yes I am a cynic, why do you ask?
(*Of course some of them quit jobs to go hang around in the park, which is a stupid idea if you ask me, and some of the refuse any jobs they're offered because... well, they're dumb enough to think you can get a job just hanging around in a park. But the majority I'm sure would take any job they could get.)
"That slower lap time translates directly to lack of concentration on actually driving."
That' there is where you make an unwarranted leap of logic. Running is not the same as driving, slowing down is not the same as "distraction". If you were talking to someone running with you, you'd slow down as well - should we then ban people from having conversations in a car or listening to the radio?
Jay, the strongest tornado recorded in the UK was no more than an F0. That's the smallest they bother to record. Typically we'll get one or two a year at most.
A minor F0 will do a little bit of damage. Suck off a few tiles, blow over a wall maybe.not much more.
Now, think about how many tornadoes the US gets in a year. Most of those will be greater than F1, and a good (and dangerous) number will be F5, the quarter-mile wide monsters that destroy everything in their path. An F5 would turn a brick terrace into a neat pile of rubble on the other side of the street, turn every tree on the road upside down and pile all the cars on top of each other just for fun.
Compare like with like.
Now, as for why we use brick, I'll tell you: weather and resources. We're a wet country and we have lots and lots of clay, whereas the south-western united states is a dry country that has lots of timber. In cool, wet environment the most appropriate materials are those that keep out moisture, require little maintenance to avoid rain damage, and which still provide decent insulation. Brick fulfils all three requirements very well.
I've said the same elsewhere. Apparently some people don't like the idea of freedom if it requires them to consider the consequences of their actions.
75% eh? I'd say that compares well to the Daily Mail (80%), Independent (82%), Mirror (90%) and Sun (102%)*
Twitter is mostly full of noise, it's true.But, so is the rest of the mainstream media, which these days seems to largely rely on what's trending on twitter when it isn't copy-pasting Reuters and AP straight from the wire. Given that they're acting largely as a relay of what the public are nattering about, why do we need them any more?
And given that newspaper circulation figures are nosediving, and television news figures are in similar decline, it seems evident to me that a great many people agree with my stance.
*Like you I am, of course, making all of that up...
As the Chinese have long proven, one man's rubbish is another man's highly desirable commodity. Those sub-£100 tablets are perfect for cheap and cheerful uses. Nout wrong with a resistive screen either. A tablet like this makes a very good, inexpensive browser, ebook reader and media player, and you can use it with your gloves on in cold weather too.
That said, I'm writing this on a tf101, so...
They've been predicting the games console would kill off PC gaming for about 20 years but it hasn't happened. Now handhelds are supposed to kill off consoles? And presumably PC gaming as well, for that matter...
They will coexist, filling their own niche. Only idiots and Lord British assume that One Big Thing will kill off everything else to which it is slightly similar.
To be honest, I think he's still bitter about Ultima Online being superseded...
I know one aspect of my life that's improved immensely!
In fact, if you count "easily reading The Register whilst on the toilet", I know two aspects.
Oh thanks, I was wondering how I'd make a cappuccino on here.
They're forcing me to do what? Well the joke's on them! I linked my youtube and google accounts years ago! HAHAHAHAHAHA...ha...wait...
I said "But google is not perfect". Did you miss that? The inability to appreciate understatement is a woeful lack. I choose android nt because it *is* the idea, but because it's a step closer. For me it's actually a leap backwards compared to my previous phone (n900, which still works but was starting to fall apart) and I would have got the N9 if I could have afforded it, but I can't. I make do.
At least there's the option to replace th stock firmware with something more free. That's another step in the right direction.
By and large I have the abiity to do what I want with my phone with relatively little fuss. Without even having to go through the palaver of rooting I have an sshd, web server and numerous other applications that you can't get on the iphone without jailbreaking. I can take the risk of instaling apps from elsewhere. I can do a great deal of tinkering.
Google is not perfect. Android is closer to the ideal.
Given the choice between no freedom and allegedly illusory freedom that is, nevertheless, closer to the ideal, I still choose the latter.
It's not the content, it's the presumption. They have no right to assume they can record my blathering innanities to my wife. The "it's in public" defence doesn't work - there is no logic in assuming that all phone calls take place in a public space.
The illustrious lineage of the Cowards deserves recognition, if only because of Nöel.
A quick google leads me to believe it's only installed on handsets (not just android handsets either) sold in the US. Lucky them...
Ah well, it's a concept car. Interesting to look back in 15 years and see what features from it have actually ended up in production models. I sometimes compare cars now to the concepts that were bandied around in the early 90s and find, strangely, that the only feature they managed to actually predict was the weird bumpy shape a lot of headlights have now.
Capitalism presents you with the option to use a "more efficient" method, assuming you can afford it. Stalinism presents you with a similar choice, for free, but with the alternative being "or death".
And they're all out of cake at the moment...
So this twine thing is capitalist. It would become Stalinist if the company somehow engineered a way to prevent you from living without their service.
These days? Facebook.
Have no fear, the landing will be perfectly executed. The subsequent dismantling by a Sorn and use of the bits as spears by the Hrossa may be a little embarrassing though...
What's that? Weston, you animal, bring back my trousers!
Aye, so much of the bible makes a lot more sense with even a little understanding of the cultural milieu it was written in.
Sony ericsson xperia mini pro. Just works. :)
Struck *with* a ship?
Forget the whale, I'm more worried about the creature lurking in the ocean that uses a ship as a club.
- Xmas Round-up Ghosts of Christmas Past: Ten tech treats from yesteryear
- Special Report How Britain could have invented the iPhone: And how the Quangocracy cocked it up
- Analysis Microsoft's licence riddles give Linux and pals a free ride to virtual domination
- Massive! Yahoo! Mail! outage! going! on! FOURTH! straight! day!
- Bring it on, stream biz Aereo tells TV barons – see you in Supreme Court