461 posts • joined Wednesday 17th June 2009 13:33 GMT
After practising it for 4000 years
You'd think they'd be a bit better at it by now.
They're not managing to predict the lottery numbers.
Hell, they weren't even able to predict the sex of my mates baby and that's 50/50.
Blackadder goes Forth
I saw the show they're talking about and the comments, weren't actually that funny but neither were they offensive.
It's not as if anyone said Japan was dressed like a tart and she was asking for it.
At some point you have to make light of these things, to point out the ridiculousness of it all. A prime example is Blackadder goes Forth, an entire series dedicated to making light an event in which Millions died.
Perhaps we should just stop exporting comedy shows, nobody gets us.
It took me longer to figure out what was meant by advacting, my primary thought was to acting, but second thoughts made me realise it was not. That's why I singled it out, but yes, I should if I'm going to go grammar nazi do a better job. For that reason I will be downvoting my own post.
Tounge is a good one, it was used twice.
and it's pr0n.
Nobody knows and there's no way of finding out.
Internet & Girls
Back when I moved into the internet about 18 years ago there weren't really many girls there, not real ones anyway, plenty of the virtuals, the pretenders and the few nerdy ones. As a result I have a kind of "dr. house" mentality that everyone on the internet is lying.
I met quite a few people who I knew online and they were on the whole ordinary people, but I can't say I found it anything other than surreal. Internet persona's don't tend to be exactly like a real persona.
The film sounds intreaguing, but I might end up getting irritated because I'd be thinking he was stupid for taking anything on the internet as gospel.
I don't think I can't be fooled, but I wouldn't emotionally invest myself in any online relationship.
I'll probably wait for the post cinema release, good review anyway.
Is there a wikipedia page for humour?
Perhaps you could look it up.
In the meantime, allow me to explain, the comment you replied to was a pun.
Suspended -> Hanging
Team America World Police
Do they watch these films and think "yeah! That's how it should be" completely missing the humour?
that isn't a real world?
oh gods how will I indicate a person, thing, idea, state, event, time, remark, etc., as pointed out or present, mentioned before, supposed to be understood, or by way of emphasis?
an arm and a leg given the people you'll have to deal with.
Wait and see.
Are we talking about a passive wait and see where nobody actually does anything, or the active wait and see which means scientists (who have to be paid) monitor the situation and speculate, experiment and recommend?
Because without the shouty part you end up with the former, with the shouty part you end up with the latter. As I've pointed out, without the shouty part the majority of the populace couldn't give a stuff and these are the people paying taxes, and ultimately they make the decision as to whether anything gets done about an issue or not. And by something being done I mean it being studied, with real (paid) scientists actively doing stuff (like counting bees for instance)
Should we do the same regarding climate change? I think that's been hyped and shouty. Where do you stand on that one?
How do you judge "worth" given that worthiness is a matter of opinion? Popular opinion governs worth (and you could argue vive-versa), if a cause is popular then the shoutiness gets louder.
So has the worthiness of the save the bee campaign become shouty because of popular opinion or has the issue been exaggerated from the start? My guess (and that's all it is) is that it's driven by popular opinion in this case, on account of my bias towards liking bees.
I am also not particularly keen on the resilience of species argument (humans recovering from black death etc.) if that argument was followed every time there was an outbreak of a new virus then there would most likely be very few people around today. (HIV - who cares, we've survived plagues before, we'll do it again.) It may be accurate but it doesn't actually help us evolve as a species. You could equally point to dutch elm disease, or perhaps more appropriately potato blight.
We'll survive, but at what cost? (Should we stand idly by to wait and see?)
We've already manipulated the human population to be significantly greater than would be the case if we ignored plagues, it stands to reason that we need to do the same with the species we depend upon, hence industrialised farming.
I like bees
Much like global warming and other various subjects which are hyped, people hype them because they are important and without that hype large swathes of the population couldn't give a toss.
So it is done as a social manipulation tool, to draw attention to the fact it's done, to decry it makes the assumption that everyone else on the planet is as clued up and as good at critical thinking as you are. And you're an expert, so how is that going to be true?
Just because something is hyped up to be a bigger issue than it actually is in the eyes of an expert doesn't necessarily mean that the issue should be ignored.
I'd have thought the gun thing was relevant
When it comes to a threat.
It's one thing to say "I'm a gonna shoot you" when all you have is a beebee gun at most.
Another thing to say "I'm a gonna shoot you" whilst having access to an actual firearm with real bullets that go through people making lots of blood and such.
One is an empty threat, the other can be considered to be a genuine threat of real physical violence, with a gun.
And guns are bad mmm'kay
because you'd never pick up a virus from warez </sarcasm>
Go open source
I count 1
That's the one where people are paying me the bribe.
Is that possibly the best tactic for getting rid of the press? By attempting to "punish" England?
Won't that just make the English press hurl more accusations around? Some of the accusations might even be based in fact, I don't think that really matters much to the press though.
I'd say he's
Smart for figuring it out, stupid for talking about it.
That's vanity for you.
Well it's quite simple maths really
You take the number of places where there are phosphorous, count them.
Then you take that same number of places and here's the critical part, you "add" the number of places where there is arsenic.
I'm no expert of course, but I reckon and I could be going out on a limb here, but the second number is bigger than the first number.
Less interested in the iPad than "the Rules"
For my records can anyone let me know what the figure is for "a single-spouse decision"?
I may need to berate my wife over her opinion of what that figure is when it comes to buying shoes.
Or it may afford me greater freedom to expand my NAS.
Not a crime against a person?
No, it's not a crime against an individual.
It's a crime against the entire tax paying population of the UK.
Consider the services funded by 40m tax, isn't the NHS funded by the taxpayer?
I wonder if any underfunded NHS hospitals have had anybody die in them because a drug wasn't available or a neo-natal unit didn't have the equipment it needed, there'll be some individuals affected there, hope you don't end up being one of them.
re: Unfair split
Considering they've asked him to pay back £40m and two other gang members £3.8m and £4.7m.
I'd be assuming it was a very uneven split and this guy was the ringleader, directors get paid in the millions while people working for a company get less than 10% a directors salary, why do you assume that criminals do not operate on a similar sliding scale?
It's not like this was the great train robbery, there wasn't a bundle of cash with some crooks round it saying one for you, one for me, one for you, one for you etc.
And as for the did he refuse or did he simply not have the money, he's a criminal.
By what means are you going to detemine "He doesn't have the money", you can easily appear to have no money whilst having a crapload of stuff and a crapload of money, particularly if you're a criminal (which this guy is, if it wasn't clear) if he turns around and says "I'd really love to pay you back, but I don't have the money (my dog ate it)" are you going to believe him? (Just to be absolutely clear, he's a CRIMINAL)
Here's the logic in the request -
"Tell us where the fucking money is so we can take it back and we might let you out of jail"
Or would you prefer the guy to walk free and then suddenly find £40m quid (it was down the back of the sofa, never knew it was there, how lucky is that)?
So.. is that enough slapping down?
I say well done for the amount of informmation you're sharing and have shared. I'm glad that you haven't tried to monetize the whole thing, which would be something I would expect from the traditional press.
Clearly from this project we can determine you are fans of the open source development model, at least as far as paper plane construction is concerned :-)
I've been following the whole thing from the start and it's been brilliant.
Thanks for the entertainment, long may it continue.
To answer the question.
Do any Reg readers know what the first .uk domain was?
I'm guessing that's because neither of them have anything you could call "customer service".
You buy/rent the thing(s) you want and as far as they're concerned you can fuck off after that, they'd rather not talk to you.
Still I much prefer Amazon's method which is to just refund/replace based on the input from an online form than Lovefilms Indian call centre who I'd say are probably the rejects from all the other indian call centres.
Who actually writes "Tsk." and more to the point what does it actually mean?
Incidentally I heard to make the new iPad it takes an average of 4 orphans to produce the shattered dreams and 12 angels tears to distill the magic they put into the device.
I thoroughly agree
Could the same argument not also be applied to internet gambling?
America has decided to make gambling online illegal, whilst domestic casinos are okay?
From what I can gather the prohibition isn't working anyway, perhaps it's time they got their own firewall to protect them from the dangers of free trade.
I wouldn't trust anything expensive in the hands of a 5 year old.
But then I wouldn't trust my 5 year old into the hands of a christian school either.
(the joke would probably have been better if it was described as a catholic school, but thems the breaks)
I'd say a lot of people don't know how lucky they are. I was getting away with using Outlook at work until recently when they made up some bullshit about security policy meaning that people working on certain accounts have to use the internal servers, so I've been forced to use Lotus Notes. I say the policy is bullshit, it's not about security, the Notes servers and our laptops are all managed by people in Mumbai anyway, and as such can't be used for government restricted information anyway.
Lotus Notes is possibly the worst piece of shit email client I've ever had the misfortune to use. That's all it's used for, mail and calendar, I know it's more than all that, but who gives a crap when all you want is mail and a calendar?
The guy goes all txt speaky and then chooses to add an additional letter to a word.
I really hate that typo.
Other than that it's clear monumental stupidity is still prevalent in some sectors of the populace
I'm calling them all nutjobs.
Although the French less so, how is the banning of this symbol not religious suppression? It's suppression by a religious organisation. They believe the symbol to be one of religious significance otherwise they wouldn't be trying to SUPPRESS it.
The subtle difference is one's the suppression OF religion and the other is suppression BY religion. In my opinion the latter justifies the former.
I am not particularly religiously tolerant, I'd prefer a world where there were no believers in spaghetti monsters from space. Where people didn't threaten to kill people for drawing cartoons of fictitious or real people. A world free from the my god's better than your god crap.
An educated world where people don't need to believe, they're allowed to think for themselves.
There have been a lot of good things done in the name of various religions, there have also been a vast number of atrocities done in the name of religions too. It's time to stop that sort of rubbish.
Science isn't a religion.
Developers own the copyright to software unless the developer is the client's employee or the software is part of a larger work made for hire under a written agreement. In order to own the copyright, the client must have an agreement transferring ownership from the developer to the client.
verbatim from http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/article-29584.html
I'm not sure that this is what's involved here though. I'd say it's to do with the investment of $1000 and the contract surrounding that investment (as TFA states in the last paragraph)
The replacement of "I" with "We" is a common indicator of a lie being told though.
I love to see the mighty fall
Mainly because the mighty are a bunch of self obsessed wankers who lie cheat and steal to profit themselves.
There is an opinion that this by definition means they are "clever", my opinion is different.
- Geek's Guide to Britain INSIDE GCHQ: Welcome to Cheltenham's cottage industry
- 'Catastrophic failure' of 3D-printed gun in Oz Police test
- Game Theory Is the next-gen console war already One?
- Analysis Spam and the Byzantine Empire: How Bitcoin tech REALLY works
- Apple cored: Samsung sells 10 million Galaxy S4 in a month