473 posts • joined Thursday 19th April 2007 09:27 GMT
Re: English Taxpayers
A stupid comparison if there ever was one. This is the result of a capital city doing what a capital city is supposed to do. If there wasn't a concentration of money and resources, and therefore taxes, in London it would be failing in its role as a capital.
I've no problem with London getting more money spent on it. It's a huge capital city, so no surprise it takes the lion's share of investment . But the line needs to be drawn when those in London start bleating about how they're paying money out to the rest of the country. You're living in the capital. That's your job. If London doesn't want to be the capital any more, I'm sure there would be other cities happy to take on the responsibility and the perks.
As usual, a multinational plays one country off against another, and the petty minded in both fall for it _every_ _single_ _time_. This only twist in this is that its both countries in the United Kingdom.
HP laugh all the way to the bank with their subsidised profit, while the blind nationalists on both sides argue between themselves. I hope those flags you're wrapping yourselves in are warm, because a multinational has fleeced you, yet again.
Re: I prefer to think that he has...
Except dying is nothing like subliming, and its a mistake to consider the two as in any way comparable.
Banks did not introduce the concept of subliming into his Culture models just to make up for there not being a heaven. I suspect he'd be disappointed if people thought he'd used such a lazy plot device.
What I'd like is that his mindstate had been stored and could be uploaded to a sympathetic ship's Mind to tour the galaxy at his leisure. Unfortunately we can't do that. :(
Except where it won't grow back. Or maybe not for another two hundred years when he and his bride are long dead and forgotten. What a fitting memorial that'll be for them.
They are not talking about erosion from wedding guests, they are talking about erosion from the fleet of bulldozers etc that it took to build this vulgar circus of a wedding.
Otherwise this is just fine. Rich people can get what they want and ignore the laws the rest of us have to live by, just as long as they say sorry afterwards and throw some pocket change. He'll produce an app? Great! Here, kids, be nice to the environment. Do as I say, not as I do, because I'm special.
He should be fined every single day until the entire area is back exactly as he found it. Then another massive fine to round it off for being an arrogant knob head.
Way to ruin the end of the trilogy guys.
Re: Perhaps a little research ?
Which only goes to show just how badly MS have gone wrong with Windows 8 compared to previous versions.
(Yes, Vista was a mess too, but for different reasons.)
Re: Perhaps a little research ?
"do *not* expect end-users to magically become smarter because it suits you."
Re: Perhaps a little research ?
Thanks Chemist, for illustrating perfectly what has held Linux back.
Noob User: "I can't get this to work. It's too complicated and I can't find any proper documentation I can understand to help me."
Linux Guru: "You are doing it wrong and it's your own fault it doesn't work for you. It works fine for me and has done for simply ages."
Microsoft won easily because it understood that blaming the end-user is not a solution. If the end user doesn't understand the OS, then it is the OS's problem, not the user's. Make it easier and clearer. And for god sake, write proper end-user documentation.
Most of all, do expect end-users to magically become smarter because it suits you. Users are not ever going to change. That's the OS's job.
Re: Desktops will never disappear
There's no point in looking at things as a either/or scenario. Tablets will not replace laptops or desktops. All that is going to happen is that touch screens will become an addition input device.
Sometimes they'll be on tablets and held horizontally, sometimes they will be on desktops and be used vertically. Users will continue to use whatever input device is most convenient for the task and circumstances. That includes keyboards and mice.
I've already caught myself using a "touch screen" where one does not in fact exist, (on a camera display) simply because it seemed to be the most natural thing to use at the time. In the near future it will be normal switch between them as suits.
One of Windows 8 failings is it has jumped to touch screen use before most people were used to the idea and, more damningly, at the expense of the other input devices. The "Start Screen", for instance, is not an efficient way to access things by either keyboard or mouse, but perfect for touch screen. So what Microsoft have failed at realising is that users wish to *add* to their input devices, not throw out the ones everyone's used for the last 40 years.
Re: Nothing that will convince a kid that's never worn glasses or a band to wear one.
"I hope to never need them."
Keep telling yourself that. One day you'll be late middle aged and you'll discover, amazingly, that you're not immune to the inevitable fallibilities of the human body.
Re: No loss
The apps verify that you have an appropriate broadband contract, permitting access to the WiFi.
I don't know exactly how it works, because I uninstalled it after getting near constant freezes due to it attempting, and failing, to connect.
Re: Nothing that will convince a kid that's never worn glasses or a band to wear one.
If those who haven't worn glasses, won't ever wear glasses, how did those who do wear glasses start out? No-one is born wearing glasses, there always has to be a first time.
If there's a distinct benefit to wearing glasses (like being able to see things) then people will wear them. Same applies to Google glasses or any other augmented reality tech.
Sure, the first adopters will be get odd looks and comments in the street. But so did those using mobile phones.
O2 Wifi access has always been crap, so this is no loss.
Their current Wifi app contains within its terms and conditions an agreement that O2 can profile your Wifi use, and then sell that on to third parties, along with your phone number. Can't wait to get me some of that!
And BT Openzone is not much better. The BT wi-fi app constantly bombs out, and rarely successfully connects to anything.
Re: "I could care less for the button itself"
""I could care less ?" -- is simply an ironic inversion of "could I care less ?"."
Interesting point, but irrelevant. "I could care less" in this context is not posed as a rhetorical question. The speaker is not asking if they could care less (the implied answer being "No"). They are stating that they could care less, which can only leave the listener inferring that they must care some. Isn't it amazing what the difference a single question mark and reordering of the words can make?
Grammar : it's important if you want to be understood.
How much less could you care?
Excellent rant spoilt by use of "could care less", which means the exact opposite of what you think it means.
Yes, I know, grammar nazi..pedant.. etc.. etc. But thoughtless use of the language offends me.
Re: Tax Laws
I think the point is that no-one fully understands all muti-national tax laws. There are thousands of them, are insanely complex and can be combined in an infinite number of ways to be exploited. Close one loop hole, and you more than likely open another.
The real outrage is that many of the treasury consultants who helped designed our taxes work for companies who, simultaneously, offer advice to the likes of Google on how to avoid paying them.
So they are paid to design the maze, and then paid again to show people where they left the holes in it.
Does the Chelsea flower show actually do "buzzes of excitement", on Twitter or anywhere else?
It all sounds rather undignified and vulgar for such a genteel affair. How about ripples of appreciation? Or does Twitter not do them?
Re: Scientific Theory
"Popular Technology blog has two of those scientists pointing out that their papers were classified as supporting AGW when in fact they were pointing out big errors in it."
What the papers were doing isn't the point. It would be folly to try to determine a simple yes/no consensus based on interpretation of papers. So the study wrote directly to the authors of each paper and asked them, directly ; "Humans are causing Global Warming: yes or no". That is what they based their results on.
And there is a huge difference between suggesting global warming, the theory, has holes in it, and proving global warming, the phenomenon, isn't happening.
Re: Scientific Theory
Simply slagging off people we disagree with is "the worst form of debate" ... but 97.1% of those in the debate are "all stupid". Hmmm....
I don't believe I did "slag off" anyone. But I generally find if 97.1% of experts in a field are agreed on one thing, and 2.9% say other things, it's very, very usual for the 97.1% to be right. Harking on about times when the majority have been wrong is a red-herring. Most of the time they are right, that's what makes the times they have been wrong particularly notable. There is nothing yet to suggest that this is one of these times.
The idea that you have noticed the effect of methane and water vapour, while 97.1% of climatologists either haven't considered this, or are wilfully ignoring it for their own selfish purposes, is insulting, ludicrous and very implausible. But I guess it might make sense if you believe they are "all stupid".
Re: Scientific Theory
There are no "two camps".
There are the vast majority of scientist who have actually studied climate and should know a thing or two about it. And then there are a number of people who haven't studied it, have no qualifications to demonstrate their opinion is of value, and base their proclamations on wishful thinking and guessing.
A recent study that looked at published climate research over the last 20 years (you know, people actually studying actual climate facts) found that 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.
Pretending there are "two camps", with evenly matched opinions worth consideration, would be laughable if it wasn't so desperately wrong.
Re: "nobody thus far has taken account of that"
Amazingly, no-one is suggesting that "life" is threatened in any way by climate change.
Your life, and human life in general, however, may not find things quite so comfortable. Most think that is worth worrying about, despite it not being an apocalypse. But rest assured, "life" will be fine.
Nice straw man you have there though. Will it keep you warm and dry?
Re: Two years baby
Kies - a horrible turd of an application. It tries to be Sumsung's equivalent of iTunes and miraculously manages to be worse than even it.
I spent a month trying to get it to do what it advertised it could do, yet was totally incapable of doing. Never ever going to waste time on it again.
This is not printer ink
This will fail simply because it relies on constant refills to work.
If phone users couldn't be bothered to be constantly switching batteries for their phones to work (early battery powered phones without recharge were of very limited use), why will they be bothered to keep constantly purchasing, storing, refilling and switching smells?
I predict a few curious adopters, single use until the smells run dry, and then left in the cupboard with the other "was fun for a while" junk.
A shocking case of selfish and extravagant self-interest
I have it on good authority that Bill Gates once bought sticking plasters for a paper cut on his hand. That $2.49 he squandered on his own health care could have contributed to cancer research. So Page is not the only one whose priorities are wrong! What a couple of selfish gits!
Re: This is not a Google Glasses problem
Not quite totally against your consent. Your mother can't tag you without a Facebook account. Log into your account, go to all the photos your mother has tagged you in and remove them. Ask your mother to quit doing it.
Now upload a couple of dozen photos of random people. Tag them all as you.
There you go. Facebook now has no idea how you look.
This is not a Google Glasses problem
Whether it is going to be ok or not, it's something society is going to have to come to terms with. Cameras have being getting smaller for decades. Digital storage is increasingly physically smaller and more expansive. The time will inevitably come (if it hasn't already) that people will be able to photograph/video everything that ever happens to them without giving any indication that they are doing it.
We cannot wind back the clock on this. What are you going to do? You could make it illegal to film in a private place without consent (good luck enforcing that). But unless you want to make all cameras illegal, or make it a legal requirement that you wave a big flag and announce on megaphone every time you are about to take a photo, you are never, ever going to stop this happening in public places.
I don't care for the idea of being covertly filmed by some weirdo any more than anyone else. But we all have to comes to terms with it. It's gonna happen, and it may not only be the weirdo's doing it. It may become commonplace.
There is no balance or regulation
There is no "regulation". No "balance". Such silly concepts are based on the idea that there is an ideal norm that the planet's ecology strives to return to when it moves away from it.
There is no norm. There are two states that are of any relevance to us; That which suits human life, that which does not. The latter state is far larger and has much greater variations. The planet doesn't care which state it has, that's just us.
Re: When my mother died
The issue here is not the bill, it's the fine Virgin Media issued which was dumb and insensitive.
If someone is provided a service and subsequently dies, that doesn't mean the provider of the service doesn't get paid. They are still owed by the person's estate. You probably had probate on your mother's estate, so they were entirely correct to send the bill to you.
It's not pleasant during a difficult time, but it has to be done.
Re: ...was this the site...
What of the ones that have very particular and specific password requirements, for no obvious reason, that make your usual default one impossible to use?
Not that they tell you what the very particular and specific password requirements are. No. They wait until you have failed to meet the secret requirements, then they tell you off for not meeting them. And then again for the next one when you try again. And again. And again. And oops, you forgot about the first requirement, didn't you? Try again. Until you are screaming at the screen "NO-ONE IS GOING TO HACK YOUR WEBSITE TO ORDER TAKE-AWAY IN MY NAME! YOU DO NOT NEED THIS LEVEL OF SECURITY!"
Re: Call me sceptical if you will, but...
Reddit failed because anyone with half a brain knew where this would end up. The same way they have done for centuries. That's why they call them "witch hunts". They knew, but they did nothing to stop it. Probably because it was exciting and good for the hit counts.
That's why people may question the sincerity of their apology.
And as for lawsuits; give 'em time. They will come.
"do we really need a hurt feelings police?"
Trolling can cause far more than "hurt feelings", especially of the type which is essentially online bullying. People have committed suicide. Others have live in very real fear of anonymous threats becoming real. "Hurt feelings" can be far more damaging than a physical "hurt nose". So if you can be prosecuted for punching someone in the street, then why not for mentally torturing them online? It's all hurt.
My main problem with the CPS is that they pursued the wrong people simply because they were easier to catch. Like someone saying something stupid on twitter that everyone knows is just hot air.
Re: April fools day way weeks ago.
Woohoo! I can see the automated Facebook statuses now!
Apple Fanboi ... has spent 45 minutes in a jam at the same set of traffic lights and unlocked "Who phased these b******ds?" achievement. Sent from my iBeetle.
Apple Fanboi ... has just parked across two disabled parking bays and won the "Handicap by crippling stupidity and selfishness" achievement. Sent from my iBeetle.
Apple Fanboi .. has just died in a fiery ball of flame by not paying attention to the ro@d and unloc+ed the "Game Over" ac4ievement. Se^t fr&$ m@ !i} ..... .. .
Ain't big enough for the both of them
Of course you won't get Home on the iPhone. There is only room for one overlord of your phone (and, no, one of the options isn't you). If Apple have already gone to the trouble of hooking you, they are hardly likely to hand the fishing rod over for Facebook to reel you in. These companies wish to embed themselves on your devices and monopolise any money that flows within its reach. Sharing is not part of the plan.
Re: Face it, vinyl sucks
People who believe they can hear a greater dynamic range on vinyl are either;
- deluding themselves
- concentrating so much on the sound that they're not listening to the music
And if it's the later, then they also must be hearing all the wow, flutter, warps, rumbles, crosstalk and scratches. Now they might find that part of the fun of being an audiophile, but I just want to listen to the music.
Re: Why would anyone want this?
Want to know the scary thing? Now that Facebook has done this, you can bet all the other operators/manufacturers are going to attempt to follow all the more. We can all look forward to even more compulsory crapware pre-installed on our smartphones that attempt to lock us into their share of the markets and snaffle our personal data. All to enhance your "experience", of course. Nothing to do with making them more money.
All the more reason to root your phone and ditch the stuff they force on you.
You are not a number plate
I'm usually the first to complain about this sort of thing, but this is all a fuss about nothing.
Your licence plates are not private information. Anyone on the street can see them, and photograph them. They are under no requirement to blur/remove them if publishing these photos, any more than they are obliged if they photographed you in the street.
The crucial fact is that your licence number does not identify who you are, or where you live, or what your name is. And this website is not providing a speculative "look up a registration number" search. So all you are getting is a picture of a car, owned by no-one but the DVLA knows. No different from what you'd get if you'd hung out your window and taken the photo yourself.
The only possible person you'd identify would be those with a known personalised vanity plate. And they only have themselves to blame if people recognise them. That's what happens if you insist of drawing attention to yourself and your property.
Re: Hate speech not the best indicator
"What happened in Rwanda was as much caused by vast numbers of people who couldn't even afford to be tenant farmers, as it was by racial hatred."
Sometimes cause and effect works the other way around from what you might expect. Racial hatred is a symptom, not a cause.
So... having all these sites tagged and easy to locate through google, SourceForge has now told everyone how to access them. They don't say they fixed the file permissions, so until the owners of the sites do anything they are effectively wide-open to anyone.
Perhaps not a good idea. Hmm?
Here's your "Get Out Of Jail Free" card
"To those who ask "why should they", the answer is simple: it would save time and cost less money"
I don't think you follow how the law works. This special shortcut, saving time and money in this case, would become a precedent that could be used to challenge all future extraditions. Pretty soon anyone charged with any crime at all in Sweden could flee to the UK, and then demand that a condition of their return is that they are not allowed to be charged for anything else that they may, or may not have, done in the past.
No legal system is going to grant that privilege to anyone.
Re: What about our copyrights?
It's not rocket science people. If you do not want people to take a copy of your website content then do not put it on a publicly accessible website. It's how browsers work. They have caches, they take copies.
Copyright has nothing to do with it, as no-where is it said that the British Library will be re-publishing your website. It has a copy. It will let others see that copy, just like it already does for millions of books.
Re: THE HONEY TRAP @AC 8:15
"No, that should be a punishment reserved for Child mollesters and rapists..."
Did your mother never teach that two wrongs don't make a right?
Rape is a horrible crime. Rape as a implicit punishment included with jail time is inhuman, has no place in any civilised society and makes everyone involved accomplices. Barely better than the criminal themselves. Is that the person you want to be?
Re: Facebook, google+, the gubermint...
You do realise your data pollution tactic doesn't work when you post as a Anonymous Coward?
And I *am* the Information Commissioner (as far as you know, sometimes, prove me wrong), so quit doing that!
Re: THE HONEY TRAP
I don't follow "Bubba"'s involvement in this. He's not mentioned in any legislation or penal system I know of, so I'm unclear how prosecuting him could ever ensure he shares a cell with Assange.
You're not saying he *deserves* institutionalised rape, I hope? That would be illegal, and you claim to be very concerned about laws and justice.
Re: NZ Has No TV Tax
"I charged you a tax for using my washing machine regardless of whether you used it or not? Sound fair? Sounds ludicrous?"
Sounds fine. You get charged for schools whether you use them or not. The police, whether you use them or not. The NHS, whether you use it or not. The RAF, whether you use it or not. You have no choice. You are paying for a service that everyone benefits from being there, whether you use it directly or not.
Without the BBC the entire broadcasting media in the UK would be run by commercial companies for profit, dominated by the multi-national behemoth that is Sky. Do you really have no idea how bad that would be?
Puerile TV, like "Strictly Come Dancing", has always been on BBC TV. Unfortunately a great many people who pay their TV licence *like* puerile TV, and they have as much a right to get programmes made for them as anyone else. If you don't like them, don't watch them. There's plenty other BBC output you've paid for that you could be watching.
The BBC is not perfect, and the way it is funded is not perfect, but it is streets ahead of the alternatives.
"Strictly Come Dancing" - I don't mind the dancing, which can be moderately entertaining, it's the aeons of banal chat that surrounds it that makes me want to slit my wrists.
Sure a script-kiddy could have done this
Sure a script-kiddy could have done this: badly and in such a way that it would have failed to work on half the targeted boxes, or broken them, or made its presence obvious. And they'd also have it all traceable back to their bedroom.
Doing it so no-one noticed, over such a long period. Well it's maybe not brilliance, but evidence of an excellent professional who really knew what they were doing. Ethically however.... dodgy ground indeed.
This error is second only in my list of annoyances to the polar opposite of people who say things like; "Me and <friend's name> went to the pub."
Take out the "and <friend's name> and you're left with "Me went to the pub." They sound like a self-centred 4 year old, in which case they shouldn't be getting served at the pub.
Just because I'm a Grammar Nazi doesn't mean I'm not right.
Re: Ancient news.
This has to cut both ways; French mobiles picking up English masts. Yet somehow the French manage.
One can only conclude that the Daily Mail thinks its South English readers are too thick to know how to turn off roaming on their phone.